> Do people out the really think AF-S is necessary in the 20-35 range? I
> don't own this lens (yet), but I did try it at a store recently, and thought
> the AF speed was great. Would the AF-S really be needed here, or would it
> just jack the price up to $2K+? Just wondering what the opinions are?
Greater AF speed is not the only advantage of AF-S lenses. The ability to
override AF manually at any time is a big advantage, especially for a lens
widely used by photo-journalists. AF-S lenses are also quieter. This would
be especially useful where the photographer has be be very close to the
action, as you often are when using a wide angle lens.
A lens due for upgrading is the AF 300/4. Heck this lens is not even "D"
yet! An AF-S 300/4 with the TC-14E would produce a useable 420/5.6 which
would also fill the gap caused by the lack of an AF 400/5.6. It would be nice
if it had 77mm filters in line with the 80-200/2.8 and 28-70/2.8.
Speaking of non-D lenses, there are only 3 AF lenses which are still non-D:
50/1.8, 300/4 and 300/2.8.
The first two are long overdue for upgrading to D type. The AF 300/2.8
probably lingers as a low-cost (!) alternative to the AF-S lens. It's also
available as an AIS lens.
I noticed that the last non-D AF zooms seem to have quietly disappeared
from the latest lens catalogue:
75-300/4.5-5.6 (replaced by 70-300 ED)
28-85/3.5-4.5 (replaced by the new 28-105, AIS version still available)
35-135/3.5-4.5 (replaced by 24-120 and 28-200??, AIS version still available)
A few more AIS lenses have also gone. The latest catalgue does not list:
6/2.8 fisheye
8/2.8 fisheye
16/2.8 fisheye
13/5.6
600/4
2000/11 reflex
35-105/3.5-4.5
80-200/4
100-300/5.6
180-600/8
1200-1700/5.6-8
The loss of the fisheye seems a little disturbing, or are these still available
as special order items? If not, it leaves nikon without any circular fisheye
lenses, the only fisheye is the full-frame 16mm AF lens.
The loss of the 13mm lens means Nikon has lost its claim to the widest lens
for an SLR, unles this lens available on special order (as it was before?)
If so, the widest lens in the Nikon program is (only!) 15mm, and the widest
for AF users is 18mm (not counting the fisheye). Has Nikon given up the
extreme wideangle ground to Tokina's 17mm, and Tamron and Sigma's new
14mm lenses??
However, the catalogue lists an AIS lens I haven't seen before: 70-210/4.5-
5.6. I suspect this is a low-cost lens introduced for the FE-10 and FM-10.
Has anyone out there tried this lens?
Roland
