dcristofor

<p>Gary, the process described by you is fairy correct. With such a wide lens, the depth of field is very large and it is very difficult to assess precise focus even with big and bright pentaprism viewfinders. That's why having focus confirmation in viewfinder is very useful no matter what body you use.<br>

<br /> The large depth of field also makes the "focus and recompose" technique very appropriate, but one must not forget that the chosen focus point has an important role in the exposure calculations made by matrix metering algorithms; if you don't' use manual exposure or exposure lock before recomposing, you may end up with different results than you had expect. Not to mention here about the weird chip put in Cosina-Voigtlander SLII series, which overexpose by over 1 stop when using matrix metering (anyhow, that's the case with Nikon).<br /> <br /> <br /> However, the procedure described is useful when you want something in focus and you're not interested in anything else; that is generally the case with close subjects and/or open apertures, but hardly the common use of a 20mm f/3.5. If you use the 20mm for landscape shots, for which in general you're after bringing as much in focus as possible, from close foreground to distant background, then I suggest you make use of the depth of field to shoot at hyperfocal distance.<br>

Of course, you must first establish a circle of confussion suitable for the final output (monitor/web view of different print formats); the general reccomandation for FF is to use a CoC of 0.025mm and for a 1.5crop sensor to use a CoC of 0.016mm (the Zeiss formula is sensor diagonal in mm divided by 1730). The DoF scales are somewhat different between brands, but the CoC by which the scale is manufactured is between 0.030 and 0.035mm, helas not quite adapted since the film era. For a crop-sensor body, you'll probably have to set the infinity mark to 5.6 but shoot at f/11.<br /> <br /> For me, this is the way I use the 20mm almost all the time. I adapt these calculations based on the importance of the foreground/background elements in the frame and then I compose the frame, keeping a close eye only on exposure and not care about focus confirmation.</p>

<p>Also: http://www.pentaxforums.com/forums/pentax-slr-lens-discussion/46479-review-samyang-85mm-f1-4-aspherical-if.html</p>

<p>Not K-mount comparisons but still useful:<br>

http://www.jsvfoto.com/Home/faqs/nikkor85mmf14aisvspolar85mmf14/nikkorpolarreview<br>

<em>and</em><br>

http://www.slrclub.com/bbs/vx2.php?id=slr_review&no=87<br>

(you can relax and watch the images for this one :)</p>

<p>I'd say pretty good at f/1.4 for the price <strong>IF</strong> you can manually focus at f/1.4. Although for Canon/Nikon owners the competition is even stronger, considering the small price difference compared with 85mm f/1.8 (with autofocus).<br>

And one more thing: it apears that these OEM lens are different in more characteristics than only the names written on top of them - different glass quality, different coatings, different barrel construction and polycarbonate quality. So caution is necessary when extrapolating these results for Samyang/Bower/Polar/Phoenix/Vivitar/... 85mm f/1.4</p>

<p >For high-end bodies like Dx00/Dx I think the focus speed of the current 85mm f/1.4 is not an issue. Nor is the absence of VR, particularly if we are talking about full-frame sensors.</p>

<p > </p>

<p >I think that the benefits of adding AF-S or/and VR could easily be overwhelmed by disadvantages:</p>

<p >- much greater weight and size to a lens already not too light or small</p>

<p >- Nikon could do it wrong again with a similar type of AF-S like the one they chose for the 50mm f/1.4G – quite slow for the Nikon Dx00/Dx owners</p>

<p >- my impression is that adding too much new technology to a lens brings degradation to that ethereal notion called “bokeh”, which by the way isn’t very appreciated in Nikon lens line (with a few exceptions, including the current 85mm f/1.4D)</p>

<p >- and yes, there will always be the question of money, particularly considering that 85mm f/1.8D is a very good performer for the price</p>

After you have selected the proper mode (Lv) and options (via menu), you'd have to press the shutter release all the way down (mirror will flip-up and the image will appear on the back LCD, Then half-press the release button to focus (image will temporary dissapear as the mirror goes down again) and finally press it all the way (again) to take the photo.

It's a 3-steps method, as oppose to the 2-steps method involved in tripod mode. And yes, I agree Nikon could just spear us of the first step; ideally the image would appear the moment we access the Lv Mode.

Welcome to the"lens creep" problem area of Nikkor 18-200mm VR! Some new models seem to work better. You can

find plenty of information about this problem:

http://www.photo.net/nikon-camera-forum/00P1ga

or just search "18-200 creep" (this forum and forums.dpreview)

I can't say if this could be fixed via Nikon's service - as it is the rule, not the exception with this particular lens - but I

don't personally own it, so what do I know? Good luck.

"I am totally an amateur. I can afford a D300. The D700 would be a stretch. What would you recommend?"

If you have no particular reason for upgrading, thinking only it would make a big difference photographing with a D300/D700 because these are last generation bodies, then my advice is to continue shooting with D200. The difference between D200-D300 vs D70-D200 is much smaller, but again, as said before, you'll have to explain why you feel limited by D200 in your kind of photography. Is there a reason you want full-frame again? (good old F100 days...) :)