Comments on: Q and A: Is it worth upgrading to digitally optimized lenses? http://www.photocrati.com/q-and-a-is-it-worth-upgrading-to-digitally-optimized-lenses/ Photo Wordpress Themes Tue, 17 Jan 2012 19:45:06 +0000 hourly 1 http://wordpress.org/?v=3.3 By: Moshe ben-Shahar http://www.photocrati.com/q-and-a-is-it-worth-upgrading-to-digitally-optimized-lenses/comment-page-1/#comment-7472 Moshe ben-Shahar Tue, 16 Nov 2010 08:53:58 +0000 http://www.photocrati.com/?p=4045#comment-7472 There is one very good reason for changing to digitally optimised lenses - not just because they work better on digital cameras, but because being more modern, they are generally better in every way (in addition to the factors mentioned in the article). In many cases the new lenses have VR, a feature I find extremely valuable as I do a great deal of (un-)available light photography, AND are vastly more resisitant to flare. A few months ago I was offered the chance of upgrading my old 60/2.8 Micro-Nikkor to the new internal-focus AFS version. While the new lens is less useful for really close macro work, due to the far more limited working distance, what decided me was the vastly better resistance to flare. I compared the two lenses in contra-jour light, with the sun just outside the field of view. First the old 60/2.8, which has a front element deep inside the lens body, PLUS a deep long lenshood, and despite this, there was STILL a huge amount of flare. I then tried the new lens, the front elememt of which is not recessed at all, WITHOUT a hood, and lo and behold, there was no flare whatsovever! Truly remarkable. Since available-light photography frequently entail working under such conditions, that decided me. I There is one very good reason for changing to digitally optimised lenses – not just because they work better on digital cameras, but because being more modern, they are generally better in every way (in addition to the factors mentioned in the article). In many cases the new lenses have VR, a feature I find extremely valuable as I do a great deal of (un-)available light photography, AND are vastly more resisitant to flare. A few months ago I was offered the chance of upgrading my old 60/2.8 Micro-Nikkor to the new internal-focus AFS version. While the new lens is less useful for really close macro work, due to the far more limited working distance, what decided me was the vastly better resistance to flare. I compared the two lenses in contra-jour light, with the sun just outside the field of view. First the old 60/2.8, which has a front element deep inside the lens body, PLUS a deep long lenshood, and despite this, there was STILL a huge amount of flare. I then tried the new lens, the front elememt of which is not recessed at all, WITHOUT a hood, and lo and behold, there was no flare whatsovever! Truly remarkable. Since available-light photography frequently entail working under such conditions, that decided me.

I

]]> By: Moshe ben-Shahar http://www.photocrati.com/q-and-a-is-it-worth-upgrading-to-digitally-optimized-lenses/comment-page-1/#comment-7471 Moshe ben-Shahar Tue, 16 Nov 2010 08:51:18 +0000 http://www.photocrati.com/?p=4045#comment-7471 There is one very good reason for changing to digitally optimised lenses - not just because they work better on digital cameras, but because being more modern, they are generally better in every way (in addition to the factors mentioned in the article). In many cases the new lenses have VR, a feature I find extremely valuable as I do a great deal of (un-)available light photography, AND are vastly more resisitant to flare. A few months ago I was offered the chance of upgrading my old 60/2.8 Micro-Nikkor to the new internal-focus AFS version. While the new lens is less useful for really close macro work, due to the far more limited working distance, what decided me was the vastly better resistance to flare. I compared the two lenses in contra-jour light, with the sun just outside the field of view. First the old 60/2.8, which has a front element deep inside the lens body, PLUS a deep long lenshood, and despite this, there was STILL a huge amount of flare. I then tried the new lens, the front elememt of which is not recessed at all, WITHOUT a hood, and lo and behold, there was no flare whatsovever! Truly remarkable. Since available-light photography frequently entail working under such conditions, that decided me/ I There is one very good reason for changing to digitally optimised lenses – not just because they work better on digital cameras, but because being more modern, they are generally better in every way (in addition to the factors mentioned in the article). In many cases the new lenses have VR, a feature I find extremely valuable as I do a great deal of (un-)available light photography, AND are vastly more resisitant to flare. A few months ago I was offered the chance of upgrading my old 60/2.8 Micro-Nikkor to the new internal-focus AFS version. While the new lens is less useful for really close macro work, due to the far more limited working distance, what decided me was the vastly better resistance to flare. I compared the two lenses in contra-jour light, with the sun just outside the field of view. First the old 60/2.8, which has a front element deep inside the lens body, PLUS a deep long lenshood, and despite this, there was STILL a huge amount of flare. I then tried the new lens, the front elememt of which is not recessed at all, WITHOUT a hood, and lo and behold, there was no flare whatsovever! Truly remarkable. Since available-light photography frequently entail working under such conditions, that decided me/

I

]]> By: Q and A: Is it worth upgrading to digitally optimized lenses … | u n i n d y | p r o j e c k http://www.photocrati.com/q-and-a-is-it-worth-upgrading-to-digitally-optimized-lenses/comment-page-1/#comment-3407 Q and A: Is it worth upgrading to digitally optimized lenses … | u n i n d y | p r o j e c k Tue, 09 Jun 2009 06:53:02 +0000 http://www.photocrati.com/?p=4045#comment-3407 [...] the rest here:  Q and A: Is it worth upgrading to digitally optimized lenses … Tags: Camera, category, days, dealer, dealer-said, diverse-fields, foster-discussion, [...] [...] the rest here:  Q and A: Is it worth upgrading to digitally optimized lenses … Tags: Camera, category, days, dealer, dealer-said, diverse-fields, foster-discussion, [...]

]]> By: PeterKBurian http://www.photocrati.com/q-and-a-is-it-worth-upgrading-to-digitally-optimized-lenses/comment-page-1/#comment-3400 PeterKBurian Mon, 08 Jun 2009 20:17:11 +0000 http://www.photocrati.com/?p=4045#comment-3400 P.S. Some AF lenses originally designed for the 35mm Nikon DSLRs also included the distance detector chip. Lenses with this feature were designated with a D (and called D-type). The D designation eventually disappeared because ALL new Nikon DX lenses -- as well as the larger FX series (multi-platform) Nikon AF lenses -- include the necessary chip. Of course, the person who wrote the question seemed to have very old Nikon AF lenses and those were probably not the D-type. Peter Burian P.S. Some AF lenses originally designed for the 35mm Nikon DSLRs also included the distance detector chip. Lenses with this feature were designated with a D (and called D-type).

The D designation eventually disappeared because ALL new Nikon DX lenses — as well as the larger FX series (multi-platform) Nikon AF lenses — include the necessary chip.

Of course, the person who wrote the question seemed to have very old Nikon AF lenses and those were probably not the D-type.

Peter Burian

]]>