Greetings. I am thinking about picking up an autofocus body, specifically for use with longer glass (Nikkor 300 f4 AF) and I don't really have any options that seem too attractive except the F70 (N70) and the F90(x) [N90(s)]. I currently use manual bodies (FE and F2) so I am used to doing my own exposure compensation and adjustments on the fly, so all the auto functions are irrelevant for the time being. I just want the body for the AF. I am also aware in the issues of user interface between theses bodies, but since I plan to use the spot meter and manual exposure, that shouldn't be that much of an issue. If I need DOF or MLU, I will just use my F2.

I know the 70 has the CAM 274 AF module and the 90x has the CAM 246, but I was wondering how much difference there actually is in the field between these two. I can get the 70 now, but I was wondering if it would be worthwhile waiting until I can afford the 90 based on improvement in autofocus speed. Battery life is also a consideration. I guess overall cost is the main thing. As a student, I find that my budget is tight and shows strong biases to expensive habits other than photography (you know: eating, rent, tuition, etc!) so I only want to buy one body.

Thanks for your input.

-- Daryl Hiebert (dhiebe@po-box.mcgill.ca), February 21, 1999

Answers

I'm clueless about the used market in Montreal, but here in TO the number of used N90Xs seems to be growing, with the expected downward drift in prices. Thanks to the F5 and F100, many (former)N90x owners are trading up. Not to say that used N90Xs are spilling out of camera shop doors onto the street. Still,with some patience, you might be able to find a clean one at a decent price.

-- Gary Watson (cg.watson@sympatico.ca), February 21, 1999.

Daryl, I have seen the N90s with the MB10 grip go for as cheap as $600 used on the net. Considering that you couldn't find an N90s body only for under $800 a year ago, I'd advise you to consider looking at some of these used bodies...

-- Bill Meyer (william_meyer@stortek.com), February 22, 1999.

Daryl,

Two years ago, I asked myself the same question. I am also a student (Universiti of Montrial, the other University!) so I also on a budget. I saved my money and got the F90x and I am very happy with it.

From what I saw in magazines and concluded from my own tests, the F90x is MUCH faster than the 70 even if they got the same AF sensor. In fact, there is much more than sensors in AF performance. The algorythm is a major factor. That is the difference between the old F90 and the current F90x, a twice faster AF algorythm.

The french magazine Chasseur d'Image have conduct tests to evaluate AF performance a few months ago. I don't have the results here but I recall that the F70 wasn't as fast as the F90x in the same situation (send me a e-mail if you want the exact test results). There results also showed that the F90x was faster than the Canon EOS 5.

So if you want my opinion, this is a no brainer, especially and the current price. The F90x is a much better camera, not only AF-wise. It is more rugged, feel better and the interface is much more intuitive than the F70.

Best regards,

Louis-Philippe

P.S.: I don't find the battery consumption to be a problem.

-- Louis-Philippe Masse (phisa@generation.net), February 22, 1999.

Daryl:

With the same logic you can get a N70 for $300-$350 used. I believe that the differences in autofocus are minimal. I have used both cameras and can tell you that the N70 can autofocus as fast as the N90s. Their main difference is the fact that the N70 can go up to 3.1fps with lock-on, whereas the N90s can go up to 4.1fps. This difference is solely due to the more powerful motor-drive in the N90s.

The N70 also has autobracketing and a built in flash which may be useful for fill, whereas the N90s need the databack and a dedicated flash for fill which will add to the price. Since you are a student you should go for an N70 since you will find that you will get more bang for your limited bucks. I am also a student and now that I will graduate (May) I plan to replace my N70 with an F100. If I had an N90s+back ($1100 when I bought my camera) I would have sold it for $650 max. The N70 cost me $450. You cant find any N70 bodies for $100. Simply put, camera cost doesn't come close to scale linearly with features. You do not see a lot of people paying >$800 for a used camera which doesn't have professional-type construction (F5, EOS-1N) and is not a Leica or a Contax.

Good luck.

-- Costas Dimitropoulos (costas@udel.edu), February 22, 1999.

hello. i've pondered the same question. i have a N70 and "tested" the AF speed using my friend's N90x. i couldn't really tell the difference. in fact, it seemed to me that the N70 might be a little faster. i tried with my nikkor 24, 50, 85, and 80-200 AF-D lenses under various light situations and targets. my bias is to get the N70 new, spend the money saved for lenses and flash. when you make your $ then get an upgrade in the future and relegate the N70 as a light travel/backup camera.

-- picshooter (picshooter@juno.com), February 22, 1999.

Daryl, I owned an N70 and used it with the 50/1.8, 85/1.8D, 80-200/2.8D (new tripod mount) and 300/4 AF Nikkors. It's a very capable body with good fast autofocusing on the smaller lighter lenses and mediocre autofocus speed on the larger heavier lenses. I began shooting a lot of sports (lacrosse) and found the N70 autofocus too slow with the 80-200 and way too slow w/ the 300/4. I upgraded to an N90S. It's much faster with both of these bigger lenses. Theres very little difference on the shorter lenses, which were fast anyway. The 300/4, despite being internal focus, is not particularly fast at autofocusing, even with the N90S. It's marginally quick enough for the action I'm shooting now. The N70 autofocus speed with this lens was pretty slow.. Unless you plan on shooting fast moving things, I'm sure the N70 would suffice. Buy one used and try it. Sell it if it doesn't work out. You won't lose much.

-- George Hunt (georgeh@erols.com), February 23, 1999.

Thanks everybody for the help with my little dilemma. I have e- mailed a couple of you outside of the forum and Louis-Philippe Masse has translated and sent me the test results from the Chasseur d'Image test of the bodies in question. I am going to post the info here for anyone who is interested.

Here is a summary of the Chasseur d'Image test: ________________________________

The test subject was a car passing by at 100km/h. Each camera was set on continuous AF and the motordrive at maximum speed. When the car reach a certain point, the testers press the shutter and followed the car until each body couldn't focus anymore. Each body was tested with AF 300 f/4 and AF-S 300 f/2.8 lenses.

Camera | Lens: # of sharp images out of # images taken, distance at which the last shap image was taken. ------------------------------------------------- Nikon F5 with 300 f/4: 13 / 13 6m. Nikon F5 with 300 f/2.8: 13 / 13 6m. Nikon F90x with 300 f/4: 7 / 7 9m. Nikon F90x with 300 f/2.8: 7 / 7 9m. Nikon F70 with 300 f/4: 5 / 7 27m.

EOS1n with 300 f/4: 7 / 9 20m. EOS1n with 300 f/2.8: 8 / 10 17m. EOS3 with 300 f/4: 8 / 9 15m. EOS3 with 300 f/2.8: 10 / 11 13m. EOS5 with 300 f/4: 4 / 5 22m. EOS5 with 300 f/2.8: 4 / 4 20m. ______________________________________

For those of you who are wondering how my little story ends up, stay tuned. So far I have decided to wait until I can afford an F90x. Maybe I can hit my folks up for a grad present (yeah, right) or maybe I can wait until I get a real job and start making some dough and get my student debts paid off (again, no time soon!). However, I think if a good deal happens to come up on a used F70 I might go for it. Of course, I still want to hear what people have to say on these 2 nodies (and any others out there).

-- Daryl Hiebert (dhiebe@po-box.mcgill.ca), February 24, 1999.

Whoah. Let's try that again!!!

Body	Lens	# sharp pics	# taken	Distance of last sharp pic
F5	300/4	13	13	6m
F5	300/2.8	13	13	6m
F90x	300/4	7	7	9m
F90x	300/2.8	7	7	9m
F70	300/4	5	7	27m
EOS 1n	300/4	7	9	20m
EOS 1n	300/2.8	8	10	17m
EOS 3	300/4	8	9	15m
EOS 3	300/2.8	10	11	13m
EOS 5	300/4	4	5	22m
EOS 5	300/2.8	4	4	20m

-- Daryl (dhiebe@po-box.mcgill.ca), February 24, 1999.

I have some questions on this test:

Is the Nikon 300/2.8 the AF-S version?

Do they say why they do not report a figure for the N70 with the 300/2.8?

Have the EOS-1n and the EOS-3 been tested with their external motordrives?

Canon seems to have gotten whipped in this test. I am very surprised with the results for the 300/4 since the Nikon version is for sure not a USM/SWM lens! The F5 seems to perform the same irrespective of the lens. This is also very surprising!

There is a graphic in the F100 site at Nikon-Japan's site which shows how close the F100 can autofocus on a moving target. You may want to look at that.

Daryl, if you have to save up for a camera be patient and get a F100. In a few months it will just a little over $1000 and I think it will be worth it compared to the N90s.

-- Costas Dimitropoulos (costas@udel.edu), February 25, 1999.

I just noticed that the Nikon 300/2.8 is the AF-S. I am still not sure whether the EOS-3 has the external 7fps booster. I am starting to believe that the EOS-1N did. What about the EOS-1N RS?

-- Costas Dimitropoulos (costas@udel.edu), February 25, 1999.

I have some questions on this test:

Is the Nikon 300/2.8 the AF-S version?

Yes it is.

Do they say why they do not report a figure for the N70 with the 300/2.8?

Yes. They said it is unlickly that someone with an N70 would buy a AF- S 300mm f/2.8. Maybe they are right...

Have the EOS-1n and the EOS-3 been tested with their external motordrives?

Yes. Also, the F5, EOS 1n and EOS 3 were tested with 8 lithium AA's (Energizer Hi-Energy Lithium). The F90x was tested with the MB-10 with 4 Li AA's. And finally, the EOS 5 and N70 used compact lithium batteries (2CR-5).

Canon seems to have gotten whipped in this test. I am very surprised with the results for the 300/4 since the Nikon version is for sure not a USM/SWM lens! The F5 seems to perform the same irrespective of the lens. This is also very surprising!

I was surprized too since I thaught that Canon had the best AF (except maybe the F5). Apparently, the AF Nikkor 300 f/4 doesn't suffer much from being driven by the camera AF motor, that was another surprise for me!

Anyway, I really believe all those tests shouldn't be taken too seriously even if I have an high opinion of Chasseur d'Image. The best brand or model is the best for your application and personal taste.

If someone has any specific question regarding the C.I. test, I would be happy to answer them.

Regards,

lp

-- Louis-Philippe Masse (phisa@generation.net), February 26, 1999.

Sorry for the bad spelling. After midnight, my english and my typing degrade seriously!

lp

-- Louis-Philippe Masse (phisa@generation.net), February 26, 1999.

Well, since they did have the AF-S 300/2.8 handy at the time and when they made the test it probably was the cheapest AF-S they should have tested it on the N70 for many reasons:

It is nice to see if the AF-S motor will actually make a difference on the focusing performance of a Nikon rig. It didn't with the F5, F90x when using a long telephoto! Why would anybody want to pay so much extra money for a SWM lens if it doesn't make a difference. Why should I believe that the AF-S 80-200 is faster than the old version after looking at that test?

It wasn't a big deal to try to see how a body like the N70 performs with respect to one of its features (full support for SWM lenses). There are probably many people that have the N70 as a simple body to use for casual shooting. A guy I know puts on the 85/1.4 and the 28/1.4 and shoots picnics because he likes the built in flash for fill. The lenses cost more than $2000 together. He doesn't have an N90s because he has an F5 and sees no advantage in having an N90s for his purpose. He also carries the N70 loaded with faster film for backup. I'm sure there are others like him.

If someone had the cash for a Canon 300/2.8 they probably would have an EOS-1N instead of an EOS-5 as well. It is really annoying when magazines do a sloppy job and start making excuses based on arbitrary assumptions regarding what consumers really want.

-- Costas Dimitropoulos (costas@udel.edu), February 26, 1999.

The reason the AF-S lenses are desirable is that they work with the TC- 14E and TC-20E teleconverters, providing excellent AF and optical performance at 1.4x and 2x. The tests show that you don't have to use AF-S lenses to have good AF performance, so if you don't plan to use these TC's, the standard lenses are still a good choice.

-- Danny Weber (danny_weber@compuserve.com), February 26, 1999.

The fact that the AF-S lenses are compatible with the teleconverters for AF operation and good quality is definitely a plus. However, the price difference is still too large (that's another story though) given that optical and AF performance will degrade at least a little with any TC.

Assuming that the test is accurate, it seems that body AF technology is at a stage where these USM/SWM motors are basically of little use with a modern body like the F5/F90x. USM/SWM technology exists primarily to provide faster AF and not for FTM (which can be achieved though a properly programmed body), TC compatibility (again it is a choice of the manufacturer) or more silent operation (which is useful in various situations but not critical in the vast majority of cases). This is surprising to me and that's why I got so interested with this test.

My only logical conclusion is that the USM/SWM lenses should have AF speed advantages in shooting situations that this test doesn't cover. Nevertheless, the number of such cases is probably very small.

Have nice weekend.

-- Costas Dimitropoulos (costas@udel.edu), February 26, 1999.

So, any speculation about how the F100 would fit in with the CI test?

-- Daryl Hiebert (dhiebe@po-box.mcgill.ca), February 27, 1999.

I would guess that the F100 should be clearly better than the N90s, a little better than the F5 if the motor drive is set to the same speed and slower than the F5 when each camera is set at its maximum motordrive speed. It should be better than the EOS-3 as well.

-- Costas Dimitropoulos (costas@udel.edu), February 27, 1999.

This months Chasseur d'Image features a comparative test between the F100 and EOS-3. As soon that I will have the magazine in my hands, I will post the results here. Stay tuned!

lp

-- Louis-Philippe Masse (phisa@generation.net), February 28, 1999.

My tests show that the 80-200/2.8 AF-S is sharper than the non-AF-S version wide open right to the edges at 200mm. It has less linear distortion, less fall-off and a smaller amount of chromatic aberration. It performs substantially better on a TC than the standard 80-200.

-- Danny Weber (danny_weber@compuserve.com), March 02, 1999.

Hmmmmm, the more I think about this little dilemma, and after corresponding with several of you outside of this forum, I think my choices have changed a little. I am considering the F100 vs the F90x now. Good thing I will have to wait until I have money, as this forces me to research the available options. As LP put it, the F100 is more like the little brother of the F5, rather than a F90x on steroids... (or something like that)

Thanks to everybody for the help and solid advice. Please feel free to contribute more if you have any comparisons or advice to offer.

-- Daryl (dhiebe@po-box.mcgill.ca), March 08, 1999.