D700 screw drive performance vs. in-lens motor

Hi there folks,

I've found some good bargains of some Sigma and Nikon lenses that utilize the built-in screw drive but don't have the motor built in to themselves, I was wondering that I'd ask you guys:

How do the screw drive and built in-lens motors compare against each other? I know there's some variation between brands, but if somebody could point me into the right direction that would be most greatly appreciated. I would need some pretty quick AF response, something comparable to the Sigma HSM for example.

I'm on the verge of upgrading to a Nikon D700 dSLR and I've been trying to find a good approx. 24-28-80mm (and up) F2.8 lens for it. My budget is somewhere between 400-600€ ($600-900, though here in Europe US prices translate almost directly to Euros just by switching the currency sign....)

I haven't owned any Nikon gear before and I'm totally new to the whole system (though not to photography).

(also good suggestions for a wide angle zoom lenses would be very highly regarded)

With kind regards,
Kimmo Virtanen

--
kvirtanen.deviantart.com

Good question, I'll add my name to the list of folks who'd like to know this.

Is the torque motor in the D700 the same as the D3? And is the focus speed as quick as the D3 or not? I'd assume not, as higher voltage batteries would provide more wattage - but there's precious little info about the screw drive out there on the web.

I'm a little disappointed in the focus speed of my D80 with the 85 1.4 [although it's a lot of glass to move around, and I wasn't expecting 50/1.8 type speeds..

I did not really make an intense test but i am pretty sure that even my old D1x ist faster in screw mode than a D300 and D700 at least without Grip. For me it ist logical cos Nikon doesnt want you to work with a D50-D700 on a screw-driven 300/2,8 or others like the 105/2 DC or 135/2 DC. Such oldtimer Lenses want a D3/D2x/h/D1x/h

fibbo

Small lenses with minimal glass movement (ie. wide ange to normal focal lengths) work very well with screw drive focusing. Speed and accuracy are pretty much the same as AF-S lenses. However, longer telephoto lenses are noisy and slower to focus.
--
Steve

Mach Schnell said:

Small lenses with minimal glass movement (ie. wide ange to normal
focal lengths) work very well with screw drive focusing. Speed and
accuracy are pretty much the same as AF-S lenses. However, longer
telephoto lenses are noisy and slower to focus.
--
Steve

Click to expand...

--

Hi Steve

I disagree. My old 28-105 lens was S-L-O-W and L-O-U-D. Sounded like a sheep in it's death throes. AFS is vastly superior and I will never buy a screw lens ever again. The speed is phenomenal. So quick you can hardly see it happening through the viewfinder.

Now, that manual 50mm 1.2 on the other hand.........

I don't think your 28-105 lens qualifies as the type of lens that Mach Schnell claims would be nearly as fast as AF-S lens.
--
Mike Dawson

michaeladawson said:

I don't think your 28-105 lens qualifies as the type of lens that
Mach Schnell claims would be nearly as fast as AF-S lens.
--
Mike Dawson

Click to expand...

--
Hi Mike

Thanks, you're right - my speed reading has tripped me up again - apologies Steve.

However, I stand by the fact that AFS blows the doors off the screw types. Normal or otherwise.

Cheers
AJ

I, too, am a big fan of AF-S lenses. However, I stand by what I said on short focal lengths. There just isn't much of a difference. And I believe this is why it has taken Nikon so long to finally replace the 50mm f/1.4 with an AF-S version.

My 50mm f/1.8 screw drive lens focuses much, much faster than my AF-S 70-200VR f/2.8. And my 300mm f/4 AF-S is slower still. It all boils down to how much glass has to move and how far it has to move.
--
Steve

Thank you all, this is very helpful information ..! I guess the weight of the mechanics inside the lens make a good rough estimation of the screw drive performance.

• Kimmo

--
kvirtanen.deviantart.com

KVirtanen said:

How do the screw drive and built in-lens motors compare against each
other? I know there's some variation between brands, but if somebody
could point me into the right direction that would be most greatly
appreciated. I would need some pretty quick AF response, something
comparable to the Sigma HSM for example.

Click to expand...

The AF-S lenses (with built-in motors) focus more quietly and securely than AF lenses (which use the motor in the body). I am not sure about actual focus speed; it would depend on the specific lenses at hand. But in general AF-S is a bit faster. Most AF-S lenses also allow easier and more precised manual focusing (no switch needed, just use AF-ON on the body to autofocus, and manual focus from the ring if needed) than most AF lenses, not quite the level of actual manual focus lenses though.

HSM may be similar to AF-S - or maybe not. Some 3rd party lenses hunt a bit more than Nikon's own.

KVirtanen said:

I'm on the verge of upgrading to a Nikon D700 dSLR and I've been
trying to find a good approx. 24-28-80mm (and up) F2.8 lens for it.
My budget is somewhere between 400-600€ ($600-900, though here in
Europe US prices translate almost directly to Euros just by switching
the currency sign....)

Click to expand...

I would recommend the 24-70 for the D700. It's not a perfect lens but it's really good as a general purpose zoom. It is outside of your quoted budget though. As an alternative I recommend e.g. a kit of primes such as the 28/2.8 manual focus (Ai-S), the 50/1.4 AF-S (which is soon coming out; Nikon says it's an improvement optically over the existing, quite respectable Nikon 50mm lenses), and the AF-D 85/1.8. These are great lenses and can be had for a reasonable price.

KVirtanen said:

(also good suggestions for a wide angle zoom lenses would be very
highly regarded)

Click to expand...

Again, I am afraid I am going to suggest something outside of your budget. 24mm is quite wide on FX already, so rather than getting a separate wide angle and f/2.8 standard zooms from a 3rd party maker, I suggest just getting Nikon's 24-70 and then later the 14-24, the latter has obtained universal acclaim for superb optics. These cost a bundle but I've always regretted when I first bought what I though I could afford and later upgraded with a loss.

If you're determined to stay within your budget and stay with the zoom approach, then I am not sure if you will get much benefit from going with the D700. You should budget several times the cost of the body for lenses, for the setup to make much sense, IMO.

Adman222820 said:

I disagree. My old 28-105 lens was S-L-O-W and L-O-U-D. Sounded

Click to expand...

On which camera? I used mine on F5 and it focused very fast and not loud at all.

Adman222820 said:

AFS is vastly superior and I will
never buy a screw lens ever again.

Click to expand...

That sounds like a poor plan, considering how much better many of the AF-D tele primes are compared to the AF-S zooms.

Adman222820 said:

The speed is phenomenal. So
quick you can hardly see it happening through the viewfinder.

Click to expand...

So-so optics will render a so-so image no matter how fast it's focused.
And a 200/2 sure is expensive.

Adman222820 said:

Now, that manual 50mm 1.2 on the other hand.........

Click to expand...

Very difficult to focus, low contrast. Get a 50/1.4 Zeiss instead.

I went from a D200 to a D700 and the screw drive lenses I have seem to be faster, still not afs speed but faster than on the D200. I have a 17-55 afs and a 24-80 tokina screw drive. On my D200 the 24-80 was very slow so I only used the 17-55 but I like the 24-80 much better on the D700. I will be getting the 24-70 nikon as soon as I can afford it but until then the 24-80 is working well. I also have seen an improvement on my other screw drive lenses but once you get use to afs it’s hard to go back. Also I have a sigma 70-200 hsm that seems to be no faster than my Nikon 180 screw drive, But quieter.

When I returned to Nikon after my fling with the Canon 5D, I thought to myself, "Oh yeah, return of the screw." But I have to say the performance is quite good -- certainly good enough.

All of my AF lenses are currently screw driver and the 80-200 AFD even focuses snappy to say nothing of the 35mm F2, which is super fast.

The only drawback to the screw I can see is having to manually shift the lens to MF if you are so inclined to use it that way.

But otherwise, great deals can be had on "the screw", not to mention manual focus lenses -- of which the AIS primes are still amazing decades later.
--
Phil Flash
SF, CA USA

It's not the camera. It's you.

Stuff I own in my profile.

Thanks, really good advice. What you said about the three primes sounds interesting.

--
kvirtanen.deviantart.com

Mach Schnell said:

I, too, am a big fan of AF-S lenses. However, I stand by what I said
on short focal lengths. There just isn't much of a difference. And
I believe this is why it has taken Nikon so long to finally replace
the 50mm f/1.4 with an AF-S version.

My 50mm f/1.8 screw drive lens focuses much, much faster than my AF-S
70-200VR f/2.8. And my 300mm f/4 AF-S is slower still. It all boils
down to how much glass has to move and how far it has to move.
--
Steve

Click to expand...

--

Hi Steve...

Agree with you 100% - you can't argue with the law of physics!

And I'm not saying there is anything wrong with the screw-type lenses (the glass is superb), I just prefer the AFS ones. Much like I prefer a good 1985 930 over any of the newer models any day!!!

G'day Ilkka......

Interesting name, are you Finnish?

Ilkka Nissilä said:

Ilkka Nissilä said:

I disagree. My old 28-105 lens was S-L-O-W and L-O-U-D. Sounded

Click to expand...

On which camera? I used mine on F5 and it focused very fast and not
loud at all.

Click to expand...

On both the D100 and F100. when you compare it focusing noise to an AFS (which you can hardly hear) it's loud.

Ilkka Nissilä said:

Ilkka Nissilä said:

AFS is vastly superior and I will
never buy a screw lens ever again.

Click to expand...

That sounds like a poor plan, considering how much better many of the
AF-D tele primes are compared to the AF-S zooms.

Click to expand...

That's why I'm waiting for the NEW afs primes to be released.

Ilkka Nissilä said:

Ilkka Nissilä said:

The speed is phenomenal. So
quick you can hardly see it happening through the viewfinder.

Click to expand...

So-so optics will render a so-so image no matter how fast it's focused.
And a 200/2 sure is expensive.

Click to expand...

I can't believe you really think the new 24-70 and 14-24 offer a so-so image. I find both lenses to be fantastic. "Expensive" is relative to your earnings.

Ilkka Nissilä said:

Ilkka Nissilä said:

Now, that manual 50mm 1.2 on the other hand.........

Click to expand...

Very difficult to focus, low contrast. Get a 50/1.4 Zeiss instead.

Click to expand...

Ah, finally - we are in agreement! That new 28?mm Zeiss coming out looks very very tempting!

Cheers
AJ

I don't think you can generalize and say that AF-S is always faster..

It is always quieter , but I've got some old screwdriver lenses that really snap into focus amazingly quickly (albeit fairly noisily- lots of gear whine), and on the converse, a number of AF-S lenses that seem to really take their time focusing.. Perhaps it's a "placebo" effect from the noise, the sound of the movement giving the psychological feeling that it's working faster, but I routinely use screwdriver lenses for action shots and have never had any complaints about speed of focus..

I don't notice any difference between screwdriver motor power on my D2Hs vs. my D300; even my old D1 an D1H are pretty similar in speed on screwdriver lenses, in fact, I swear that the D1/D1H can sometimes focus significantly faster with the same screwdriver lens than the D2Hs, which was pretty darned snappy..

All in all, personally, I prefer the screwdriver lenses vs. AF-S; if you're in situations such as wildlife photography where silence is golden, then AF-S is probably a better choice..

and get the new Sigma 24-70 2.8 HSM EX

O.
--
http://www.flickr.com/photos/ollivr/
http://www.flickriver.com/photos/ollivr/popular-interesting/
http://seen.by.spiegel.de/ollivr-1

C_4 wrote:
I swear that the D1/D1H can sometimes

C_4 said:

focus significantly faster with the same screwdriver lens than the
D2Hs, which was pretty darned snappy..

Click to expand...

Same here. D2Hs is very fast with screwdriver lenses...but D1H is even faster. I believe the D1 series has the strongest AF motor.

Adman said:

G'day Ilkka......

Interesting name, are you Finnish?

Click to expand...

Yes.

Adman222820 said:

On both the D100 and F100. when you compare it focusing noise to an
AFS (which you can hardly hear) it's loud.

Click to expand...

Right, there is a difference. In outdoor conditions the wind and the sound of traffic usually make it almost inaudible. Indoors it can be annoying, but I don't really mind that much - I carefully point my sensor to a contrasty spot so that I don't have to hear whirring, just a quick focusing op.

Adman222820 said:

Adman222820 said:

AF-D tele primes are compared to the AF-S zooms.

Click to expand...

That's why I'm waiting for the NEW afs primes to be released.

Click to expand...

I am waiting for them too, I would like a 35/2 or 28/2 in AF-S. Hopefully they'll be good.

Adman222820 said:

I can't believe you really think the new 24-70 and 14-24 offer a
so-so image.

Click to expand...

The 14-24 is excellent but I don't need such a wide angle.

The 24-70 is surprisingly soft at infinity at 24mm, and at f/8 the sharpness isn't as good as it should be, either. At f/2.8 & close range, it's super sharp though. Low contrast in backlight. Very resistant to ghosting though. I guess this is all relative - what the expectations are.

However, another AF-S lens, the 105 VR gives an image which has excellent bokeh but the range of sharp rendition around the focused plane is very, very shallow e.g. compared to 100mm Zeiss. I think the DOF difference is about 2/3-1 stops when compared at effective apertures. This shouldn't be if you trust the theory, but it's consistent and other people have made similar observations. This makes a big practical difference - the 105 VR gives very good results with 2D test charts, but softish rendition of 3D objects. At 1:1 & wide apertures, the 105 VR is soft. At portrait distances it has > 1 stop of vignetting on FX - so it's more like an f/4 lens really. It's a very ambitious lens but I think the problems, especially with the lack of sharp rendition of 3D objects, are serious.

The 70-200 has poor corner sharpness and at many focal lengths needs to be stopped down to f/5.6 to clear vignetting on FX. None of my AF-D primes has such problems.

I just think that several AF-S lenses have been introduced which are a bit disappointing when it comes to the final image quality. This is why I cannot avoid screw drive lenses.

Adman222820 said:

Ah, finally - we are in agreement! That new 28?mm Zeiss coming out
looks very very tempting!

Click to expand...

I haven't used the 28mm. I have the 35/2 ZF and 25/2.8 ZF, of which the former is fantastically sharp & contrasty throughout the aperture range but it's a bit unflattering for people shots due to its high contrast, I think. The 25 is great for landscapes but not as good as the 24-70 for low light shots.

Ilkka