Well! I am NOT going to learn all that crap!
I'm taking the DX-1 off the F3AF and sticking with a DE-3.
I'm taking the DX-1 off the F3AF and sticking with a DE-3.
I borrowed an Auto focus lens for my Nikon D200 (up to now I had only used manual focus lenses) and a DVD explaining how to use the auto focus system on the D200. 30 minutes long. More confused than when I started. Unbelievable!! Total confusion. Forget it. What gives?
Nikon has refused to accept that lesson and has consistently crippled their AF system. This might come off as partisan nikon/canon bickering, but the reality is that I was one of those with FD glass that felt raped by Canon in the day. It's taken a long effing time to accept that what they did was the right thing.
William
I was screwed by Canon in 1984 as well. So I am completely in bed with Nikon now. I don't even like their cameras that much. But they do what I need, so I use 'em.Crippled? CRIPPLED? What planet are you living on? Both Nikons and Canons AF systems are excellent and work very well. The difference is that the Canon consumer line, 450D, 1000D (dunno about 500D) has some AF issues whereas Nikons cheap offerings mostly work fine. They don't exactly have 51 focus points and stuff though. Canons low-end AF have a tendency to be blistering fast, but sometimes not all that accurate. Nikons is a tiny bit slower (milliseconds) but more certain. The high-end AF systems of both manufactorers are both designed to do one thing in particular: track moving targets all across the frame, and allowing flexible composition. Be that racecars, birds, 4 year olds or kangaroos.
Nikon are still klinging to the F-mount, surely not always practical, but I really fail to see how that limits the performance of the AF, and their present-day glas is no worse than Canons. The F-mount do for instance make adaption of lenses from other manufactorers tricky though, but that really haven't got anything with AF to do. ...
Which compares better or worse with Olympus owners? Actually, as an Olympus owner, I don't know.Canon pissed off every FD owner by throwing out backwards compatibility.
I guess the history and rationale is interesting at some level. However, I think I'd take issue with the very general nature of your statement. I can't comment on pro-level cameras but can say that at even one step down Canon's cameras aren't quite so good (I have a 50D and a 5D, which I'm told the 5DmkII doesn't much improve on in the AF department). While I've not worked with them, the AF system on the Nikon D300 and above looks to have advantages over the non-pro Canons. I don't have a dog in this fight (I'm a Canon owner) but I'm just saying...But the T80 proved, to them, how bad the path eventually taken by Nikon could be. Instead, they built the best autofocus system available. Period.
Nikon has refused to accept that lesson and has consistently crippled their AF system.
[...]
In the end, if you need real AF on a professional level, you will, like the rest, buy a Canon.
But I do consider the recent change to two levels of AF-S, SWM and non-SWM, to be a crippling of their autofocus for the basic consumer lenses. Some newer Nikkor lenses, particularly kit lenses for new cameras, have internal motor autofocus that does not use Nikon's "silent wave motor" technology. These lenses are bulkier, louder and slower than they would have been if swm had been used.
This says nothing about the decision to obsolete their camera motor driven lenses. While this older technology is loud - and slow on the lower priced cameras - it keeps the lens design simple, and really zooms on the top end cameras. There is not an AF-S lens that can beat a similar AF lens on my F5. But I understand how increasing the cost of the camera is worse to the company's profitability than leaving AF out of the camera body. Nikon had already figured that out with the VR decision.
But do these decisions leave us with the best possible photographic instruments?
I was screwed by Canon in 1984 as well.
I think you got a bit overwhelmed. Basically you sset the cam to 51 point 3D (and forget) and switch between AF Auto (works just fine mostly) or use AF-S for stationary targets and AF-C for continuous tracking (also work fine if you lock focus on a stationary target with the center focus point and recompose). Alternatively if you want more direct control, AF-S and using the thumbpad to set focus point is also a very valid technique. It's not that difficult 😉 I do not see much reason to use less than the full potential of the exceptional AF system Nikons top line has.
/Mac
As for Nikons decisions regarding the whole AF-S, VR, SWM shebang, this is even more complicated than it seems. There are "grades" of both VR and SWM, obviously the higher end lenses (typically the F/2.8s and 2.0s) have a slight edge here. I can hardly advocate their decisions, but fact remains that the Canon (or any other brands) lenses are compromises too and come in different grades/classes. Basically, you get what you pay for. While backwards compatibility is preferable, I'm thinking the most important thing is that there are in fact lenses available for your brand/camera that works and does the job.
Now, Nikons present day kit lenses are the
18-55vr
55-200vr
18-105vr
and to a lesser extent the
16-85vr
70-300vr
All these are "G" SWM VR lenses, pretty compact and fairly cheap (relatively speaking). One or more of these are the lenses a D5000, D60, D90 or D300 will be sold with if it's a kit. The lack of in-body motor in the low-end bodies is of course a PITA, no question about it, but there's mostly always a Nikon or 3rd party option in any given focal length/speed with in-lens motor (if not necessarily SWM/HSM) available.
/Mac
.. I really like nikon cameras but that AF system put me off big time, and I can sympathize with the OP - that and the lack of afs primes.
More precisely, they are all AF-S lenses, but the 18-55 and 55-200 are not SWM lenses. Both have no manual focus override in AF mode. There's also the sound that gives it away.. there's a profound difference in how the 18-55 churns like a little lego motor, and the 70-300 hisses its way to focus...
18-55vr
55-200vr
18-105vr
and to a lesser extent the
16-85vr
70-300vr
All these are "G" SWM VR lenses