Bille
Well-known
I am using the 35/1.4 AI and 55/1.2 AI on a D800 equipped with the DK17M (http://www.nikonusa.com/en/Nikon-Products/Product/Eyepieces/DK-17M-Magnifying-Eyepiece.html).
To my surprise, the green dot is very accurate, even at f1.2.
ray*j*gun
Veteran
I have also found the green dot to be very helpful but not as accurate as the Katz Eye screen.
johannielscom
Snorting silver salts
Huh? I'd think the DOF on the 2.0/135mm would be significantly more shallow. Usually I have about an inch and a half of DOF to work with when shooting at a 6 ft range.
Anyway, I can always easily pull it off with my 1.4/35mm when I set that to 2.8. The 35mm has almost 2 ft DOF when focused at 6 ft!
At 1.4, focusing the 35mm admittedly gets trickier for close-up shots but the lens wasn't designed for that in the first place since the whites and highlights will bloom when you do...
I'm thinking that most of the issue can be solved easily when the shooter uses a tripod. And if refusing to do so he's effectively requesting the manufacturer to comply to parameters that cannot be dealt with in a financially acceptable scenario.
willie_901
Veteran
Liveview focusing is wonderful when the DSLR is on a tripod and you're not in a hurry.
I should have mentioned this.
Coincidentally, for a relatively brief period of time I also used a F3 and D200 together.
I should have mentioned this.
Coincidentally, for a relatively brief period of time I also used a F3 and D200 together.
Luke_Miller
Established
I have a bunch of AI & AIS lenses from my SLR days and have been looking for a good DSLR host for them. By good I mean a body where they function and focus properly and do not look out of place. With my D700 I get two of the three. With the stock focus screen and DK-17M magnifying eyepiece I can focus them reasonably well using the image on the focus screen. Not quite as well as with my F3 or F4, but good enough. I don't use the green dot since I prefer to concentrate on the subject. The lenses function fine, but just don't look like they belong on the D700. It is purely a personal esthetic, but I would love to have a DSLR that resembled my F3.
I have never seen a Df other than in pictures, but it could be my solution if it will allow me to focus well. The internet reports are all over the map in this regard. At one end of the spectrum are comments that the list of features/specification make no mention of anything to aid in manual focus, so it doesn't exist. At the other end is Bjørn Rørslett's comment that the surface of the Df focus screen is indeed different and manual focus is much improved over prior bodies. Some who have shot with the Df claim there is no improvement in one's ability to manually focus while others report the opposite. Why the disparity?
I don't know, but perhaps it resides in one's vision. Before my cataract surgery I struggled with manual focus. I could do OK with my Leica rangefinder, but DSLRs were a real challenge. The surgery that removed my cataract also corrected my astigmatism and has made a dramatic difference in my ability to see when the subject is in focus. I'm sure had I tried out a Df with my old vision I would be dissatisfied with manual focus. Now I'm optimistic and look forward to the experience.
I have never seen a Df other than in pictures, but it could be my solution if it will allow me to focus well. The internet reports are all over the map in this regard. At one end of the spectrum are comments that the list of features/specification make no mention of anything to aid in manual focus, so it doesn't exist. At the other end is Bjørn Rørslett's comment that the surface of the Df focus screen is indeed different and manual focus is much improved over prior bodies. Some who have shot with the Df claim there is no improvement in one's ability to manually focus while others report the opposite. Why the disparity?
I don't know, but perhaps it resides in one's vision. Before my cataract surgery I struggled with manual focus. I could do OK with my Leica rangefinder, but DSLRs were a real challenge. The surgery that removed my cataract also corrected my astigmatism and has made a dramatic difference in my ability to see when the subject is in focus. I'm sure had I tried out a Df with my old vision I would be dissatisfied with manual focus. Now I'm optimistic and look forward to the experience.
ray*j*gun
Veteran
Not personal experience but a trusted friend has a Df and has had very good results with Ais lenses including the wonderful 105. I wish I could afford one but for now I'll use my D7000.
BillBingham2
Registered User
I do wonder why Nikon hasn't made a APS-C DSLR with a viewfinder as good as say the FM/FE series at a medium size and price. Make it work with all the old glass, forget Program and Shutter Preferred AE, perhaps even the autofocus. Yes they wouldn't sell any glass for it, but I bet there isn't a person on this site that would not buy at least one.
B2
B2
daveleo
what?
Having just sold off every Nikkor manual focus lens I had, I would be seriously pi$$ed off if Nikon did this
... but happy for you guys who hung on !
Ranchu
Veteran
You were right Dave, imo, I did the same. I was going to say just buy that little D40 kit lens and be done with it, but..
wakarimasen
Well-known
This is fascinating for me: a Canon EOS user (digital) with Nikon MF cameras and lenses. I've been hankering for a D3 to simply unify with one lens mount, and had considered buying just Nikon AF one lens (initially) for sports (the 80-400 AF-S VR) and stick with the manual AF lenses for everything else. However, if the 'green dot' is really not that reliable, then that theory goes out the window!
oneANT
Established
The green dot is for low light or low contrast, it is a focus aid for when you cannot see the scene and is not the focus system. For focus you use your eyes and the user experience is only different because of this and many of us with fresh or old eyes have no trouble with manual focus on a dslr. I know some have trouble with longer lenses, some with wides but many of us have no trouble at any focal length and with manual focus on a nikon dslr.
It should even be said that there are things that only a manual focus lens can do and anyone that uses one and encounters these situations knows this as well. I use Nikon (D700 F100 FM3a) and Leica (M7 viewfinder upgrade) and both with zeiss lenses that include 21 28 35 50 100 135. Many of us don't use live view, don't zone focus and don't own tripods. There are lots of us but there should be more...
The only negative I have is a Beattie split focus screen and the web is a funny place and tells no one that it is an absurd thing that blocks the viewfinder until the object is in focus which is a bit like playing 'murder in the dark' but I bet I can even find someone that likes it.
The accuracy of the dot; is understood for many of us, we know where it is accurate because we can see the matching focus and understand it in relation to the objective of the photo and the dof. It is used to support a decision that the focus is right and we even have a sense for what part of the green dot rangefinder it is right because we have experience of its range. On lenses that have a hard stop like the zeiss we even know to wind it back a tad. We know because we use them and more importantly know what to use them for and if some here thinks that chasing kids around a yard is an ideal use then we would advise them to buy an AF lens.
It should even be said that there are things that only a manual focus lens can do and anyone that uses one and encounters these situations knows this as well. I use Nikon (D700 F100 FM3a) and Leica (M7 viewfinder upgrade) and both with zeiss lenses that include 21 28 35 50 100 135. Many of us don't use live view, don't zone focus and don't own tripods. There are lots of us but there should be more...
The only negative I have is a Beattie split focus screen and the web is a funny place and tells no one that it is an absurd thing that blocks the viewfinder until the object is in focus which is a bit like playing 'murder in the dark' but I bet I can even find someone that likes it.
The accuracy of the dot; is understood for many of us, we know where it is accurate because we can see the matching focus and understand it in relation to the objective of the photo and the dof. It is used to support a decision that the focus is right and we even have a sense for what part of the green dot rangefinder it is right because we have experience of its range. On lenses that have a hard stop like the zeiss we even know to wind it back a tad. We know because we use them and more importantly know what to use them for and if some here thinks that chasing kids around a yard is an ideal use then we would advise them to buy an AF lens.
Luke_Miller
Established
dasuess
Nikon Freak
If you are concerned about MF on a modern DSLR, do what I did. I packed up all my non-AI glass purchased back in the '70s and headed off to the local camera store. I tried each lens on a Nikon Df, taking pictures with my own SD card. Then I took the card home and pulled the pics up on my 27-inch monitor.
I called the store and ordered a black Df.
[Edit] I did order the Df with the new 50/f1.8G lens so I can have my cake and auto-fucus it if I so choose ;-)
I called the store and ordered a black Df.
[Edit] I did order the Df with the new 50/f1.8G lens so I can have my cake and auto-fucus it if I so choose ;-)
GarageBoy
Well-known
Its not the thin DOF, its that everything is smaller and less magnified
Ranchu
Veteran
Hey, you know some of us think the 50mm f1.4 AF-S is a good lens too, better than the other 50's though they haven't used the 1.2's. Some of us also heard modern Nikon AF bodies are calibrated for manual focus at 5.6 with a 50mm lens, and some of them figure that seems about right. There's also some who understand that modern AF bodies are designed and built for AF, not MF, and they can need a lot of modification and adjustment to even be adequate. We really don't like to make excuses for the green dot, us'n, we just don't use it.