AF or AFS

Mozziephotography

Mozziephotography

Suspended / Banned
Messages
1,850
Name
Stephen
Edit My Images
Yes
Please be gentle if I appear stupid. I'm ONLY trying to learn!

I have a D7000 and take sports shots - running and cycling. One lens - 50mm prime f1.8 (love it) Occasionally use other half's 105mm (magic)

There are times when I need a wide angle lens to "fit" people and bikes in due to restricting walls etc.

Can I use an AF lens on my camera as opposed to an AF -S? Is the quality of the AF 28mm as good as the AF-S model?

Don't SHOUT at me. Be gentle.

Just read somewhere that the 24mm is better...?
 
Last edited:
Yes you can use older non AF-S lenses on a D7000. Any Nikon that has a built-in AF motor can use older AF and AF-D lenses.

The quality of the lens optically is not linked to whether it's AF-S or not. Some older AF-D lenses are superb.. some new AF-S lenses are crap :)
 
I can't comment on the quality but I suspect it is more than adequate for a 16mp sensor body.

To answer your other question, yes, you'll be fine with All AF variant lenses on the D7000 as it has an in body motor.
 
@mossienet

Nikon made a few 28mm lenses. If it's the Nikkor AF-D 28mm f2.8 it's pretty good. Certainly perfectly fine with your camera, as the older AF and AF-D lenses were designed for full frame 35mm film cameras, so your D7000 is only using the centre part of the image area, which is always sharper, even on rubbish lenses.
 
It's a nightmare reading reviews. Money is tight and I can't afford to buy the wrong lens. Someone has recommended a Sigma 30mm and the reviews for this range fro 5 star to 2 star.
 
If you're going to 30mm you may as well get the Nikon AFS 35mm f/1.8 which is an excellent lens.

The Sigma can be a cracker but if I remember correctly it can suffer badly from front/back focus but as long as you get a good copy then it is blinding.
 
:agree: I have a d7000 and a 35mm 1.8g and it's great. For £100 or so, you really can't go wrong
 
Just found a 35mm 1.8 at MPB. It says it has light dust etc DOES dust in the lens affect optical performance? How does dust get INSIDE the lens? What does INSIDE the lens actually mean?
Sorry to appear stupid (I am) but this forum is a good place for acquiring a bit of knowledge.
 
mossienet said:
Just found a 35mm 1.8 at MPB. It says it has light dust etc DOES dust in the lens affect optical performance?
Click to expand...

No. Will make no difference unless it's horrendous. You'd be amazed at how bad a lens has to be before things start to affect your image quality.

http://kurtmunger.com/dirty_lens_articleid35.html


mossienet said:
How does dust get INSIDE the lens? What does INSIDE the lens actually mean?
Sorry to appear stupid (I am) but this forum is a good place for acquiring a bit of knowledge.
Click to expand...

It means literally what it says. It has some dust inside. It gets in from the back. They're not airtight or anything... they can't be as there are moving elements inside, which when you focus in or out, effectively work like a piston, forcing air in, or out of the lens respectively. It's impossible to completely stop dust getting in, so don't start down a OCD path :)

I wouldn't buy from MPB though... you'll pay over the odds. There will be a million of them on Ebay. Buy from UK sellers with completely positive feedback and you'll be OK.
 
Last edited:
Pookeyhead said:
No. Will make no difference unless it's horrendous. You'd be amazed at how bad a lens has to be before things start to affect your image quality.

http://kurtmunger.com/dirty_lens_articleid35.html




It means literally what it says. It has some dust inside. It gets in from the back. They're not airtight or anything... they can't be as there are moving elements inside, which when you focus in or out, effectively work like a piston, forcing air in, or out of the lens respectively. It's impossible to completely stop dust getting in, so don't start down a OCD path :)

I wouldn't buy from MPB though... you'll pay over the odds. There will be a million of them on Ebay. Buy from UK sellers with completely positive feedback and you'll be OK.
Click to expand...


Actually from what I have experienced MPBs used prices are great even compared to eBay certainly when you consider 6 month warranty also included
 
The warranty is nice, yeah. I'd still compare before buying though. I've seen them go for as little as £80 in auctions... as new (apparently), fully boxed etc. Ignore Buy It Now.... they're always ridiculous.
 
mossienet said:
I have a D7000 and take sports shots - running and cycling. One lens - 50mm prime f1.8 (love it) Occasionally use other half's 105mm (magic)

There are times when I need a wide angle lens to "fit" people and bikes in due to restricting walls etc.
Click to expand...

I'd check if 35mm going to give you sufficient additional width over 50mm before jumping in because they're cheap.
 
Well... it's wider than a 50mm, but it's a "normal" lens on a D7000, so it's not wide angle, no.
 
Just occasionally I can't get back far enough to include the whole of the bike or runners on a narrow road (side view wanted).
Keep thinking about a small range zoom BUT ... price, quality compared to prime lens etc.
Probably just stick to my two lenses.
Unless of course .... you have a cunning plan?
 
I'm not very cunning. :( My rule of thumb is better a not so sharp 28mm lens than a pin sharp 35mm if the 35mm won't get the picture and a 28mm will.

My choice to complement a 50 and a 105 would be a 24, but your mileage, as the saying goes, may vary. ;)
 
My mate has a Sigma along those sort of lines. Loss of quality compared to prime lens?

Just found this review

Anyways, buyer beware! This lens is great for still life & landscapes, but not wedding/event photography. My advice is if you're really serious about making photography a career - just suck it up and get a lens you know with certainty will work well. I plan on purchasing a better lens soon.
 
Last edited:
i have a 35mm f1.8 and a tamron 17-50 f2.8. You'd really really have to examine the photos closely to tell any difference...and then you probably still wouldn't be able to tell and certainly no one looking at them would. The Tamron is excellent and I'm extremely picky

@minnnt is selling one in the classifieds - take a look at the boxing pics in his Flickr stream for examples.

EDIT - just realised you may not be able to see the classifieds yet
 
Last edited:
Bit frustrating not being able to see classifieds. Just need to be patient. Rather buy from someone on the forum than ....
 
Sigma 17-50 or Tamron 17-50? Which is better?


I'm sorted with the answer to this. Not sure how to DELETE
 
Last edited:
Not sure how many days I have left. The nerves will be on edge until my release ... :confused:
 
25 posts and 60 days are the rules. So you're 6 weeks off
 
There are plenty on eBay and wex/mpb etc. the non VC tamron ones are supposed to be superior in optical quality than the VC ones. Also they are extremely cheap now. Some are going for just over £100 on auction.
 
There's one on ebay at the moment. Not sure what to go up to and not sure if it is non vc.
 
I'm selling my VC for £150 but it does have 2 tiny marks on the front element which I think is a fair price so getting a non VC for £100 is a real steal. Can't really say I have ever had any issues with sharpness from mine, infact I have always been amazed at just how good it is for the price point. It has been my go to lens for all kinds of things. Shot a wedding with it at the weekend and it performed superbly on my D7k.
 
Bidding for this one - I'm a bit unsure now, will it fit Nikon D7000
Tamron SP AF 17-50 mm f/2.8 XR LD ASpherical (IF) Lens Nikon Fit
 
Thanks. I'm learning bit by bit. It's all the letters after the lens, some I can guess at .. is there a list somewhere?

LD - light dust? XR - xceptional radius? aspherical - a spherical object
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top