Nikon vs Canon (motorised lens question)

TheDriver · 25-05-2009 12:03pm #1

I know the debate has been done to death but finalising purchasing an entry level slr but wondering about the whole Nikon D60 thing about having to get AF-s lenses whereas Canon can fit the EF or EFS lens all the time making add on lenses cheaper in the long run. The Canon 1000d is 399 pounds in jessops while d60 is 359 pounds on offer but the AFS lenses seem both non numerous and also expensive. I know I could get af lens and focus manually but thats a pain in the arse.
Anyone have views on it regarding the motorised lens question. And yes, I am a newbie but have tried some lenses from friends and love the 50mm nd also 12-24mm lenses etc so my apetite has been wet!

Stephen · 25-05-2009 12:13pm

Most of Nikon's current range is AF-S now. If you're after a (relatively) cheap prime that will AF with the D60 the new 35mm AF-S f/1.8 seems to be the way to go. Where you might encounter problems is if buying used or more exotic stuff. I can't comment on the Canon gear as I have no experience with it.

TheDriver · 25-05-2009 12:19pm

I was looking at 2nd hand etc and seems nothing afs out there to be honest

Stephen · 25-05-2009 2:49pm

Might be worth getting a used camera as well then! A D80 or D50 will work with non-motor lenses. Or a new D90.

TheDriver · 25-05-2009 4:36pm

thought d90 was afs only? D90 is about 1k though whereas 450d canon is 520 in argos at moment on offer (I know, argos of all places!)

punchdrunk · 25-05-2009 5:47pm

good luck finding an argos with it in stock though...

micdug · 26-05-2009 12:18am

TheDriver wrote: »

thought d90 was afs only? D90 is about 1k though whereas 450d canon is 520 in argos at moment on offer (I know, argos of all places!)

D90 has a AF motor. The reason that plenty of "non AFS" lens are on sale compared to "AFS" is simple - demand! Most disappear very quickly from the camera shops as they tend to be more appropriate (not better, just more appropriate) for DX cameras. All FX cameras have the motor but they are irrelevant in your price range.
All DX lens autofocus (never seen on that didn't). If you are getting a prime etc don't forget to multiply by 1.6 i.e. you 50mm becomes an 80mm - a short zoom or portrait lens. You may want to look at a 35mm which is €200 for the Nikon new so unlikely to be worth much less. Ultra wide lens are in high demand and keep their value, but Nikons new 10-24 might mean a few of the older 12-24 appearing on sale over the next couple of months. Don't expect major discounts from new for good examples.
If I were you, I'd pick the brand your friends use, so you can try out their Lens from time to time. Also, bear in mind, Lens are an investment, digital camera bodies are consumables, worthless after two years (don't believe camera store prices for second hand bodies).

TheDriver · 26-05-2009 9:07am

I borrowed a 50mm from a friend who uses both a d80 and a d200, af lens. Put it on my work d60 and it worked fine but had to manually focus which was grand initially but got annoying after a while.

CabanSail · 26-05-2009 9:30am

It's only the D40 & D60 bodies which do not have the internal AF motor. All the other bodies are fine.

I believe that all Canon EOS lenses have the AF Motor & they don't have one in body.

If you are getting a prime etc don't forget to multiply by 1.6

The Crop Factor for Canon is 1.6, for Nikon DX it's 1.5

Thirdfox · 26-05-2009 11:33am

Cabansail - add the Nikon D5000 to the list too

Nikon are doing what Canon did in the 70s... though more gradually to keep the pros and those with investment in lenses happy.

I'm guessing in the next two years the D90 and maybe even D300 level of cameras may require motors in-lens for autofocus too.

TheDriver · 26-05-2009 12:06pm

Sounds like someone like myself who is geting into it with an entry level model but would like to purchase one or 2 lenses would be better off getting a canon as the lenses seem so much more cheaper and available than afs lenses.
Think this is actually something important in the nikon vs canon for newbies like myself as the usual threads on the subject would suggest nothing different. between them which is true for the most part

CabanSail · 26-05-2009 12:14pm

I forgot about the D5000 & had not looked into that much, so did not realise that it had no AF Motor either.

Personally I think that Nikon have done themselves no favours by dropping the AF Motor as it seems to deterring some from the entry level market. I do like the fact that my D300 will take just about any lens that Nikon have produced since the 1950's.

Thirdfox · 26-05-2009 12:31pm

But you forget by dropping the motor the D40,60,5000 can take more lenses than the ones with in-body motors... you're able to mount pre-AI lenses and take photos with those now (some of those lenses have great optical quality, and all have fantastic mechanical construction).

They're also cheap as chips. So while the D300 only takes lenses from 1970-80 onwards, the D40 takes all the f-mount (except for those requiring MLU) - from the 1950s onwards.

CabanSail · 26-05-2009 12:48pm

I thought I could use all F Mount lenes, but as I don't have any older lenses at the moment I have not looked too far into it.

I do have some primes in storage in Australia that I want to use again. They are from the late 60's early 70's and are with my FTn.

Nikon vs Canon (motorised lens question)

Comments