Nikon now seems to be producing more SW lenses. At the same time they just introduced the N60 which cannot drive the SW lenses. They also have many older cameras in use by Nikon owners that cannot drive the SW lenses. The new 28-105 lens is not a SW lens but uses the traditional body motor to drive the lens.

Is Nikon going to a two tier lens system? A less expensive tier for begginer camera bodies, and simple lenses that don't benefit much from SW technology and can't support the higher cost. And a more expensive "pro" tier that is made up of AF-S lenses that are big, expensive, and work only with the top level bodies??

Could they be doing this to not abandon the current owners of older equipment while moving to a more modern technology?

What do you think?

-- Stanley McManus (stanshooter@yahoo.com), January 20, 1999

Answers

In a sense, Nikon already has a two tier lens system. After the Nikon Series E fiasco of the early eighties, I don't think you'll see Nikon going out of their way to make this clear. Unlike Cannon, there's no easy indentifiers (e.g. L series). I guess the AF-S lenses will all be expensive but right now that has more to do with the lenses being large telephotos, I guess the new 80-200 2.8 and the 28-70 2.8 maight change that, but the curent versions still aren't exactly cheap.

I don't think Nikon is worried about losing their MF following. Ever see the used prices on MF 20 2.8 and MF 80-200 2.8 lenses. These often sell for more than new AF versions. The 100-300 5.6 often sells for more than either 70(75)-300 AF lens. If the AF-S lenses have a better MF feel than their AF counterparts (and once the prices drop as expected in the next year or so), I have a feeling that AF-S would be in fact cheaper than designing a new MF lens and worth a little extra. Besides, it's not like Contax and Leica are cheaper ;) !

As for users of older AF technology... I don't think that Nikon newbies are going to defect to the Canon Rebel G because the N60 won't AF the 600 4 AF-S. And if Nikon replaces the N70 with something that shares the interface of the new N60, F100 and Pronea S (and has DOF preview I hope), maybe all the N8008 and N6006 users will finally upgrade (or maybe the N90s will become cheap enough once the F100 has been on the market 6 months or so).

BTW, right now the most expensive 35mm Nikkor lenses (6 2.8, 13 5.6, 1200-1700 5.6-8 & 2000 11) are all MF and only one is ED (the 1200-1700 5.6-8).

I won't pretend to understand Nikon's marketing philosphy, and I doubt anyone can really predict it, so please take the above with a grain of salt... --Jeff

-- Geoffrey S. Kane (grendel@pgh.nauticom.net), January 20, 1999.

Can't answer the question but...

The "L" designator on Canon lenses isn't really the key to their lens system. It's complex. "L" lenses have either aspheric elements or use LD glass of fluorite. But not every lens with aspheric elements is an "L" lens. Some lenses don't need either fluorite or apheric elements, so they don't have an "L" designation, even though by performance criteria they are up there with the best (in performance and price). Examples the 90/2.8 T/S lens isn't an "L", neither is the 45/2.8 T/S, though the 24/2.8 T/S is an "L" lens! The 50/1.4 isn't an "L", neither is the 85/1.8, but both are comparable in quality and build to "L" series lenses.

The plastic lens mount is a givaway though. If it has a plastic lens mount, it's a low end lens (but still may perform quite well, e.g. the 50/1.8II).

As for Nikon, who knows. Their much praised step of keeping everything compatible seems to generate endless forum questions about which TCs work with which lenses, which lenses will mount on which bodies, which lenses work with which metering systems and so on. All things Canon owners don't have to worry about since Canon made them give up their FD lenses!

-- Bob Atkins (bobatkins@hotmail.com), January 20, 1999.

Here is my 2 cents.:)

The ideal strategy for Nikon is to incorporate SW motors in almost every lens like Canon EOS. Thus, how quickly (or if) Nikon can learn to mass produce SW motors cheaply will be key in shaping this two tier lens system in the future.

Since no one that I have spoken with (including Nikon Reps) can provide me any details on SW motors in terms of cost, complexity and design similarities with Canon USM (I read that Canon adopted USM from University Experiments), I will have to take a speculative approach.

This speculative approach is to examine Canon's motor progress from a relative cost basis and predict Nikon's strategy. Since 1987, Canon has basically 5 types:

1. AFD eg. 80-200L 2. USM ring type with electronic MF eg. 600 f4 85 f1.2 (it fits only large diameter lenses) 3. MM (Mirco Motor) eg. 100 f2.8 Marco 4. USM (ring type) eg. 28-70 f2.8 5. USM MM eg. 50 f1.4 I am going to assume based on the lenses that they are incorporated in the following cost structure: USM with ele. MF > USM > USM MM. Because of these three types of motors, USM is available to lenses with broad pricing points.

Now, based on the AF preformance of the AFS lenses(300,400,500,600), I am going to assume that SW motor cost => USM with ele. MF. If Nikon can not produce a different and cheaper version of SW motor, then, there will be a distinct two tier lens system with SW lenses costing a premium. However, if Nikon can overcome this technical feat, the stage is set for cheaper AFS lenses in the future. Perhaps AFS 180 f2.8 costing only $150 more than EF 200II F2.8L is possible.

Since I have not inspected the new AFS zooms, I do not know whether they incorporate a different type of SW motor than that of AFS600.

Apart from a technical breakthrough, I doubt that we will see SW motors in consumer grade lenses any time soon.

Again, I think the development of SW motor technology will set the course for Nikon's two tier lens system's future.

-- Andrew Hsiai (ah@nylaic.com), January 20, 1999.

Our buddy Bob wrote:

"As for Nikon, who knows. Their much praised step of keeping everything compatible seems to generate endless forum questions about which TCs work with which lenses, which lenses will mount on which bodies, which lenses work with which metering systems and so on. All things Canon owners don't have to worry about since Canon made them give up their FD lenses!"

Putting on GOOD NATURED Canon vs. Nikon rivalry hat.....

Ok, I will explain to my buddy who purchased a rather substantial FD system in the mid 80's just how lucky he was and how Canon did him a huge favor. The last time I checked there were a few Canon bodies that required exposure compensation be entered into the body if certain TC's were used. The 500mm f/4.5 won't autofocus with the 1.4x TC on most Canon EOS bodies. I also seem to recall some flash incompatibilities. Maybe Canon should give up and license the K-mount from Pentax. :)

Taking off Canon vs. Nikon hat.......

The variety that we the photgraphic public have in these various systems is, I believe, worth the differences and the rivalry. Our needs and desires are different and it is foolish to assume that the gal who buys a new EOS3 body and 100-400mm IS lens is identical to the fellow who picks up a used Nikon FE with a manual 80-200 f/4 zoom.

I am grateful we have the variety in equipment and in film.

-- Stanley McManus (stanshooter@yahoo.com), January 21, 1999.

True, Canon's not perfect and there are a couple of examples of small "glitches" in the EOS system, like needing a small amount of EC with some lenses on some bodies. However I don't think anyone would argue that the Canon EOS system isn't more of a "system" than Nikon's attempts at catch up, with their "USM" equivalent lenses only working on some bodies, still no decent TC system after 10 years, still no 400/5.6 AF and so on.

On the other hand you can mount most of the vast number of MF lenses on most of the AF bodies and get some sort of operation, wich FD users couldn't do on EOS bodies without resorting to adapters. You win some, you lose some I guess.

Good photographers would be happy with either system, but I'm betting a lot of Nikon users are wishing Nikon would get their act togther and come up with a few items like an AF 2x TC (do they have an AF 1.4x TC yet?). I'm sure Nikon will eventually have IS lenses too, if you wait long enough, though who can guess which bodies thay will work on....

-- Bob Atkins (bobatkins@hotmail.com), January 21, 1999.

Honest, I'm not trying to turn this into a C vs N thread....

After getting confused by the L thing, I'm clearly not an authority on Canon's lens lineup. However, it's my understanding that although all EOS lenses have some sort of motor in them, not all of them give you the benifits of "full-time manual focus". That said (optics aside), is there any advantage in a cheap Canon lens (let's say the 35-80 4-5.6) having an internal motor, and the Nikon equiv. not having one? I guess what I'm really saying is that it makes no sense for Nikon to bother to re-design their cheap lenses so that they have motors if now new functionality is gained.

It would of course be nice if some of Nikon's better lenses (20 2.8, 24 2.8, 180 2.8, etc.) were AF-S and had the same full-time manual focus features that the comparable Canon's have (they do right? I really don't know this for sure).

As far as compatiblilty goes, the only AF Nikon SLRs that don't support AF-I and AF-S lenses fall into two categories. Either they pre-date the technology (N2020, N4004, N5005, N6006, N8008, N8008s) or they are entry level bodies (N50, N60 & Pronea S). Seeing how the N70 (hardly a "pro" camera) is fully compatible, I would expect it's successor (N80 ???) to be compatible.

-- Geoffrey S. Kane (grendel@pgh.nauticom.net), January 22, 1999.

First, to address Bob's question about the 2X TC, I believe that the TC20e is a 2x TC that autofocuses with the AF-S and AF-I lenses and passes along the matrix metering and "D" technology information.

The TC situation helps my case about a two tier Nikon lens system. I believe that the consumer lenses will continue to miss certain features such as fully functional TC's. I doubt if we will ever see an autofocus TC14b convertor, for example. If you want that feature Nikon's answer will be to upgrade to the "pro" AF-S lenses and the TC14E/TC20E convertors.

Even Canon does not offer all of its lenses with manual/auto focus control. When it comes to low mm lenses such as a consumer 28-105 or a 35mm f/2.8 I am not sure that a lens motor that doesn't let one instantly switch from manual to auto focusing offers much over a lens that needs a motor in the body. Again, this seems to be more support for a two tier lens system in my view. Nikon has too many older bodies out their that can't use AF-S lenses.

The N60 is an interesting body. I suspect that this body was so far along that they could not change it in time to reflect the newer AF-S way of doing things. I believe that the Pronea - S will drive the AF- S lenses. I doubt if we will see another non AF-S 35mm slr body.

The gap in the 400mm line is huge and one does wonder why Nikon doesn't do something about it. Hopefully, Sigma or Tokina will if Nikon doesn't.

I think if one still has a stable of older Nikkor manual focus lenses the strategy makes sense. But many new Nikon owners are not saddled with the older manual focus lenses and for them the compromises may become too much to bear (growl!). But then I know Canon owners who would kill for a 500mm f/4 that would still autofocus with the 1.4x TC.

-- Stanley McManus (stanshooter@yahoo.com), January 22, 1999.

a couple of points, i'll bet noone cares about, but who knows...

>>>When it comes to low mm lenses such as a consumer 28-105 or a 35mm f/2.8 I am not sure that a lens motor that doesn't let one constantly switch from manual to auto focusing offers much over a lens that needs a motor in the body.

the 28-105 (consumer lens that it is) has one of the "good" motors that let's you do the manual/auto focus trick. as do the consumer 20-35, 24-85, 28-135, 35-135, 70-210, 100-300.

>>>The 500mm f/4.5 won't autofocus with the 1.4x TC on most Canon EOS bodies.

this isn't really a glitch. no aperture smaller then 5.6 will AF. (escept on the eos where the cutoff is f8) 500 4.5 becomes 700 6.7. so no AF. you don't get AF with the 400 5.6 and 1.4 TC either. or ANY lens slower then f4.

at least canon only makes 1 TC of each magnification. ;-)

-- Sean Hester (seanh@ncfweb.net), January 22, 1999.

The two tier system has been in place for quite some time. Take a look at some of the duplicate focal length zooms like the 80-200. You have variable aperture and fixed, one is directed at the consumer market the other pro. After all, a working pro is more likely to select a lens for it's speed (max aperture) and focal length coverage, since most of the modern AF cameras are already quite adequate in focus speed. Take a look at an N60 Kit and notice the plastic mounts that come equipped on the Nikon lens. These lenses are obviously not designed for the working demands of a pro.

Another example would be the production of Nikon products by Cosina. Most people would probably look at that as the "third tier" of Nikon products. Strictly a profit driven venture, without the cost of paying for the huge overhead to manufacture products in Japan, Nikon can slap their name on an FM10 and rake in the profits. With all of this taking place you can bet that future "pro zooms" made by Nikon will go up in price due to the decreased demand and cost of production. Look at the price of a new MF 35-105 or 35-135 then compare to the autofocus counterpart. The MF lens costs about 60% more, which also happens to be true of most of the AIS MF primes as well. You're not paying for better optics, just the increased cost to produce them and they are a bit more rugged. Why do you think a Pentax 80-200 2.8 costs almost twice as much as the Nikon?

-- Ron Stecher (stecherr@vafb5a.vafb.af.mil), January 22, 1999.

Ron, the Pentax 80-200 f/2.8 zoom has the motorized zoom feature. That is why it is so very expensive. Motorized zoom has not caught on and I don't believe Pentax has introduced any new lenses with this feature. But I believe that it is one cause of the higher price of this lens.

I had forgotten about the Cosina produced Nikon bodies. They obviously are another tier in the Nikon body line and thus will cause Nikon to keep producing cheaper lenses. However, these are manual focus bodies, are they not? Therefore, they can use any autofocus lens including the AF-S lenses. Obviously, they won't autofocus with AF-S or any other lens!

Bye the way, I used to own the plastic mount 35-80mm f/4-5.6 lens. While it doesn't have the nice feel of the more expensive lenses, and the lack of a decent focusing ring is a pain as is the lack of any focusing scale, I have to say the optically, the lens was a jewel. Very sharp center and edges. The pictures made with it had that mysterious quality calle 'pop'. It also focused very fast on the N90s.

-- Stan McManus (Stanshooter@yahoo.com), January 22, 1999.

The F60 certainly was developed during the period of time when they knew about how to drive an AF-S lens. Even the F4 (from 1988) can use the AF-S autofocusing. The AF-I interface is the same.

Nikon seems to be dropping any reasonable compatibility with manual focus lenses (AI and AI-S) in all but the most expensive bodies. The F100 brochure very clearly states that with AI/-S lenses, an exposure compensation may be needed. This is reality with those F90x bodies that I've tried (+1/2 stops) and older F70's (+1 stop, newer only +1/3 stop). Now they're admitting it and putting it in fine print on the brochure. There is absolutely no reason for them to be doing this (since even the F-601 could expose AI lenses perfectly with cw or spot metering), except that they don't want people actually to use old lenses, but rather buy new ones.

I was seriously considering an F100, but now, I'm thinking about buying into Minolta or Contax. I don't consider Canon an option since they don't have high-eyepoint viewfinders. (I wear glasses.) Still, it's probably most sensible to just sell my remaining manual focus lenses, it would be a reasonably inexpensive way out of this problem. (I would feel like a fool by buying an F5 just to carry on with the compatibility.)

I quite can understand what Bob has been saying recently about how difficult it is to know which lenses are compatible to what extent with which bodies in the Nikon system. Personally, I think that spot metering and center-weighted in manual (+ aperture priority) mode is sufficient compatibility, if it were consistent. But it's not.

Ilkka

-- Ilkka Nissild (ilkka.nissila@hut.fi), January 23, 1999.

>>>There is absolutely no reason for them to be doing this (since even the F-601 could expose AI lenses perfectly with cw or spot metering), except that they don't want people actually to use old lenses, but rather buy new ones.

i REALLY doubt they're doing this on purpose. actually going out of their way to make the exposure wrong. it's more likely that for cost saving reasons on the cheaper bodies they are stuck with this "problem". it would make the camera more expensive to fix it and they figure low price is more important to people that will but the cheaper cameras. and they're probably right!

-- Sean Hester (seanh@ncfweb.net), January 23, 1999.

I realize that the N60 was developed at a time that Nikon knew how to make cameras that drive AF-S lenses. The F4, N90s, F5 prove that. But I believe that the overall design of the N60 may have been finalized BEFORE Nikon decided that it would begin moving Silent Wave motors down into the lower mm lenses such as the 28-70 and 80-200 zooms. At some point in the last year or two they made the decisin to implement SW motors in these lenses. I am guessing that the N60 was far enough along that it was not practical to design this ability into the camera. A viable entry level camera body is important to hook people into a system. I hope that the N60 is the last autofocus slr we see from Nikon that can't use SW motors.

-- Stan McManus (stanshooter@yahoo.com), January 26, 1999.