Primes and digital

[css9450]

I prefer primes, but my DX Nikon has only one dedicated prime lens made for it. If I want to use other focal lengths I need to use FX lenses.

The one being the 35/f1.8 I believe?

If I'm not mistaken, Nikon makes 20mm, 24mm and 28mm AFS primes. Are they usable on your camera?

I have 20 and 28mm old-style AF Nikkors which I use on my DX bodies but I realize they won't autofocus with all cameras. But they're terrific performers and tiny and light. I'm happy.

 

[Godfrey]

Well, despite your protestations, it's my considered opinion that Nikon never wanted to make DX cameras and lenses in the first place. They did so because for a long time it was the only way to make a DSLR at a consumer saleable price point, and they continue to do so for the similar reason that there are people who want the smaller, less expensive bodies. This is my opinion, and it's one I've held since 2003 when the first reasonably accessible price DSLRs first appeared.

There is a place even in an FX system for a DX body too ... speed, more reach with a telephoto, etc. DX and other small format cameras are really best at telephoto use because they net more DoF at a given f/number.

If I were shooting with Nikon gear, I'd buy an FX body and FX lenses only. They're what Nikon wants to make.

If you want APS-C compactness, Fuji and Pentax do a better job of it. The whole reason to buy Nikon lens mount is to have access to Nikon's lenses, so if they don't make the lenses for what you want, why go there?

G

 

[michaelwj]

Well, despite your protestations, it's my considered opinion that Nikon never wanted to make DX cameras and lenses in the first place. They did so because for a long time it was the only way to make a DSLR at a consumer saleable price point, and they continue to do so for the similar reason that there are people who want the smaller, less expensive bodies. This is my opinion, and it's one I've held since 2003 when the first reasonably accessible price DSLRs first appeared.

There is a place even in an FX system for a DX body too ... speed, more reach with a telephoto, etc. DX and other small format cameras are really best at telephoto use because they net more DoF at a given f/number.

If I were shooting with Nikon gear, I'd buy an FX body and FX lenses only. They're what Nikon wants to make.

If you want APS-C compactness, Fuji and Pentax do a better job of it. The whole reason to buy Nikon lens mount is to have access to Nikon's lenses, so if they don't make the lenses for what you want, why go there?

G

You hit the nail on the head, but it doesn't mean that it's the best (or even a good) strategy. Times move on, new competitors arrive, and you either react, or you don't. You say "we make really good lenses, let's add two more DX lenses for folks that have a D7xxx so they don't buy a Fuji" or you say "we will make what we want, not what the customer wants, take it or leave it". Nikon had the choice, and we know what they're saying and many people chose to leave it.

The thing is that Canon is not making any better "DX" lenses, and Pentax, while I'm sure is a great camera, just don't have the visibility. I don't think I've ever seen a digital Pentax in real life.

 

[Godfrey]

You hit the nail on the head, but it doesn't mean that it's the best (or even a good) strategy. ...

Without wanting to sound dismissive, I don't care what some company's strategy might be, good or bad. It's their job to figure out how to make and sell equipment at a profit, whatever that means to them. I just care what equipment they're making, for my uses, and if they're not making what I want or need ... well, there are plenty of other choices in the marketplace.

I vote with my wallet.

G

 

[Solinar]

I use a DX Nikon for web photos and agree that Nikon probably didn't jump in with both feet with regards to supporting APS-C cameras.

Nearly all of current Nikon's DX line up will not auto focus any of the older AF-D primes, of which there is an abundance in the second hand market.. That's a shame, because using a lens designed for FF 35mm on APS-C body mitigates some of the vignetting issues and resolution issues towards the corners when shooting with the aperture wide open. This one time that the APS-C crop factor is a plus not a minus. Also, the primes are nice when an extra stop or two are needed.

To my knowledge, only the ancient D50, D70, D80, D90, D200, D300 and the current D500 have a focusing motor built into the camera body, which is need to fully support an AF-D lens. Since the release of the D90, the only Nikon APS-C camera that will auto focus with an AF-D lens is the current D500.

The above situation may have been good for selling a new line of lenses with built-in focusing motors, but the roll out of a full spectrum of AF-G primes to replace their AF-D predecessors has been slow.

While Canon kept busy updating their DX offerings - Nikon took their sweet time to replace the D300 with a D500.

 

[Oren Grad]

To my knowledge, only the ancient D50, D70, D80, D90, D200, D300 and the current D500 have a focusing motor built into the camera body, which is need to fully support an AF-D lens. Since the release of the D90, the only Nikon APS-C camera that will auto focus with an AF-D lens is the current D500.

That's not correct. The D7xxx-series cameras, which are the successors to the D50/70/80/90 series, also support the old screw-drive lenses.

I've used older screw-drive AF primes as manual focus lenses on the D60 and D3200 cameras, with the "electronic rangefinder" in the viewfinder. I eventually gave up on that - it's slow, fiddly and not always accurate, and between speed and accuracy problems I was losing too many pictures that I would have gotten with an AF lens.

 

[Skiff]

How many of you who shoot a DSLR full-frame use primes as your main lens choice? I prefer primes, but my DX Nikon has only one dedicated prime lens made for it. If I want to use other focal lengths I need to use FX lenses. Zooms are OK for some things, but the usual caveats about zooms apply. I like my Nikon, but the fact that I can't find a classic trio (24-50-85) of primes is causing me to think long and hard about ditching DX and moving to FX for just this reason, even though DX is fine in other respects.

Thank you for your time.

With best regards,

Pfreddee

Just relax and have a little patience. Nikon has just released the D500.
The next step in the coming years will be Nikon DX primes. And Sigma will certainly also extend their range of APS-C prime lenses.

Adding a Nikon FX DSLR to your set-up nevertheless won't hurt you at all 🙂.
Can also wonderfully supplement a nice Nikon 35mm film SLR.

 

[Contarama]

Df user with a dozen mf primes 20 through 180. One af lens. Extremely pleased with the kit.

 

[Solinar]

That's not correct. The D7xxx-series cameras, which are the successors to the D50/70/80/90 series, also support the old screw-drive lenses.

That's good to know. Nikon still makes a consumer grade DSLR with an internal focus motor to allow the full use of the older AF-D lenses. It my fault on the omission - because I haven't really kept up with any of the D7000 series.

In other news, totally unrelated to this thread, I just purchased a N80 for 20 bucks.

 

[PKR]

The one being the 35/f1.8 I believe?

If I'm not mistaken, Nikon makes 20mm, 24mm and 28mm AFS primes. Are they usable on your camera?

I have 20 and 28mm old-style AF Nikkors which I use on my DX bodies but I realize they won't autofocus with all cameras. But they're terrific performers and tiny and light. I'm happy.

Nikon makes a series of AF-S Primes. They are big and heavy, but lighter than most of the FX zooms.

http://imaging.nikon.com/lineup/lens/index.htm#single-focal

 

[michaelwj]

The one being the 35/f1.8 I believe?

If I'm not mistaken, Nikon makes 20mm, 24mm and 28mm AFS primes. Are they usable on your camera?

I have 20 and 28mm old-style AF Nikkors which I use on my DX bodies but I realize they won't autofocus with all cameras. But they're terrific performers and tiny and light. I'm happy.

You're not mistaken. They also make a 1.8/18mm AFS prime. On a DX body this gets you to a whopping 29mm wide angle. the next widest is the massive and expensive (and lacklustre) 2.8/14mm AFS prime, which gets you to 21mm.

But the OP was after the 24-50-85 trio, which you can't get on Nikon DX (or Canon EF-S, or Pentax, or any crop body with an optical VF). You can't even get to 85mm, you're at 75mm using a 50mm or 90mm with a 2.8 macro.

 

[michaelwj]

Without wanting to sound dismissive, I don't care what some company's strategy might be, good or bad. It's their job to figure out how to make and sell equipment at a profit, whatever that means to them. I just care what equipment they're making, for my uses, and if they're not making what I want or need ... well, there are plenty of other choices in the marketplace.

I vote with my wallet.

G

You actually do care what their strategy is.

"I just care what equipment they're making"
"if they're not making what I want or need ... there are plenty of other choices"

Here's the rub though. There aren't any choices. What crop sensor DSLR can you get the equivalent set of 24-35-50-85? You of course might say that crop sensors are not for serious use, but then what's the D500 (or the equivalent Canon) doing?

At some point no one makes the product you want or need, despite being so close and having everything else in place. I think you can see how it would be frustrating.

 

[shawn]

But the OP was after the 24-50-85 trio, which you can't get on Nikon DX (or Canon EF-S, or Pentax, or any crop body with an optical VF). You can't even get to 85mm, you're at 75mm using a 50mm or 90mm with a 2.8 macro.

Fuji does. X Pro 1 and X Pro 2 both have an optical VF and the XP2 lets you have optical viewfinder and live view at the same time. 16mm f1.4 is your 24mm FOV, either 35mm (f1.4 or f2) gives you the 50mm FOV and the 56mm 1.2 gives you the 85mm FOV.

Shawn

 

[michaelwj]

Fuji does. X Pro 1 and X Pro 2 both have an optical VF and the XP2 lets you have optical viewfinder and live view at the same time. 16mm f1.4 is your 24mm FOV, either 35mm (f1.4 or f2) gives you the 50mm FOV and the 56mm 1.2 gives you the 85mm FOV.

Shawn

It's a stretch, as it's not an optical SLR TTL view, but I wasn't that specific 🙂

In my opinion, Fuji has a very nice set of lenses. If only Nikon and Canon would follow suit...

 

[kb244]

I only use primes on my digital... but it's not a full frame, nor is it a DSLR, but rather an Olympus E-M5 (Mirrorless).

 

[stompyq]

What a stupid piece of advice

Don't ditch DX - ditch Nikon. Fuji has what you need.

 

[Ronald M]

24 Ai and 24 AF work well on DX. They do not stretch well to FX.

12/24 with the gold ring is better than decent in DX. 10/24 is plastic junk. 40 2.8 is good lens. My 55 3.5 Ai is spectacular DX or FX

To tell the truth, I have moved on to FX.

Maybe think about Fuji something.

 

[BlackXList]

I shoot FF and almost entirely primes, I just don't get along with zooms.

When I use APS-C I just swap those primes over, although I do have the Canon 24mm EF-S Pancake too when I really want a compact kit.

 

[shawn]

It's a stretch, as it's not an optical SLR TTL view, but I wasn't that specific 🙂

In my opinion, Fuji has a very nice set of lenses. If only Nikon and Canon would follow suit...

True, it is more like a rangefinder (everything always in focus and wider view than the lens) with TTL live view. It is its own thing.

Fuji has *very* nice primes that are dramatically lighter than Nikon's. I had FF Nikon before moving to Fuji.


Shawn

 

[roscoetuff]

I shoot 99% of my stuff with primes. I bought a short zoom (35-70mm) for travel, but it's currently in rehab. I've found Zeiss Contax CY mount lenses work great on a Sony A7RII and saved some dough. After dating a number of camera systems, I opted out of that rat race to adopt Zeiss lenses and marry them off to various different cameras that'll get it done with an adaptor or two. If you do the same with either Nikon and Canon, you'll be happy.