Focus motors: In-body vs in-lens

Started Apr 15, 2013 | Discussions
Shop cameras & lenses ▾
WildSammy Senior Member • Posts: 1,057
Re: Focus motors: In-body vs in-lens

Pentax uses in-body motors and their lenses have MF override too.. so MF override isn't dependent on in-lens-motor.. Pentax calls it Quickshift and it works the same as on Nikon lenses with AF-S

-- hide signature --

~S.

 WildSammy's gear list:WildSammy's gear list
Panasonic Lumix DMC-LZ8 Nikon D700 Nikon AF-S Nikkor 24-70mm f/2.8G ED Nikon AF-S Nikkor 85mm f/1.4G Apple Aperture +1 more
Leonard Shepherd
Leonard Shepherd Forum Pro • Posts: 10,675
Re: Focus motors: In-body vs in-lens (AF-S, not micro motor here)

photoreddi wrote:

In the Nikon lenses brochure Nikon only say "extremely quiet, smooth and comfortable auto focusing"  - whatever that means!

It means what it says and it says what it means.

But what does "comfortable auto focussing" mean?

maybe because for whatever reasons you try to avoid skipping Marianne's replies, such as this oldie.

Marianne Oelund wrote:

It is in fact slower than the AF-D, at least on the D3. The trade-off is that you achieve a little better precision. In all of my tests so far, the consistency of focus is better with the 1.4G.

I am not sure what your second point is. I think many agree that whilst many AF-S lenses focus faster than older lens versions the f1.4 G focuses slower than the D.

-- hide signature --

Leonard Shepherd
Many problems turn out to be a lack of intimate knowledge of complex modern camera equipment.

 Leonard Shepherd's gear list:Leonard Shepherd's gear list
Nikon Coolpix P7700 Nikon D800 Nikon D7100 Nikon D810 Nikon D750 +24 more
photoreddi Veteran Member • Posts: 6,558
Re: Focus motors: In-body vs in-lens (AF-S, not micro motor here)

Leonard Shepherd wrote:

photoreddi wrote:

In the Nikon lenses brochure Nikon only say "extremely quiet, smooth and comfortable auto focusing"  - whatever that means!

It means what it says and it says what it means.

But what does "comfortable auto focussing" mean?

You should be old enough and wise enough to know that ad copy doesn't have to mean anything. All it has to do is make you comfortable enough with the idea of said product that you'll open your wallet and buy! Would anyone you know ever really walk a mile for a Camel? Was Wheaties really ever the breakfast of champions? Has anyone ever put a tiger in their tank? What does Heineken refreshes the parts other beers cannot reach. mean?

Many problems turn out to be a lack of intimate knowledge of complex modern camera equipment.

Not succinct. "Avoid problems. RTFM" hath pith.

Charles Currey Contributing Member • Posts: 772
Re: Focus motors: In-body vs in-lens

I have lots of experience with the 70-200 VRI with the AFs lens motor and the 135 AF D that uses the camera motor to focus the lens. I use both lenses in the same circumstances and shoot close to a million frames per year. Over the 10 years or so that I have used these lenses together I have used the D50, D200, D2Hs, D3 and currently a D3s. Probably I did not shoot a million frames per year with the D50 and D200 just because they shot fewer frames per second. During all that time and over all those years I never repaired or replaced the camera focus motor and never had the 135 repaired. The 70-200 worked well for the first six years or so, but over the most recent two or three years it has been in for repairs twice for focus failure. The most recent time the motor was replaced. I would guess I shot about equally with each lens.

Many might consider the 70-200 performance to be perfectly satisfactory, but for me it is very frustrating to be without this lens for a couple of weeks while it is repaired, and then there is the cost of repair, about $450.00. I am seriously considering the 80-200 f2.8 D as an alternative. I just don't know if it will focus fast enough. The 135 does focus fast enough, but it is much lighter and with many fewer glass elements than the 80-200 lens.

So, that's my experience for what it is worth. Yours may be different.

-- hide signature --

Chuck Currey

 Charles Currey's gear list:Charles Currey's gear list
Nikon D3S Sony a6000 +1 more
Ringwraith69
Ringwraith69 Senior Member • Posts: 2,501
Re: Focus motors: In-body vs in-lens

Dirk W wrote:

I think the problem is you see a case highlighted because it went wrong but the many many users who don't have a problem are not likely to start a post saying 'my lens works as it should even afer 'x' years'. Your view gets warped by the minority because the majority have no need to speak out.

-- hide signature --

www.andrewsandersphotography.co.uk

Yes I know, that can really happen. Anyway the two 18-135s are my own ones and I have read that it happened to quite a number of people but that is an old and cheap AF-S lens anyway. I bought the screwdriver 300f4 btw and am VERY happy about that lens.

I had the screwdriver 4/300mm. AF-D and while image quality was exceptional, I did replace it with  the 4/300mm. AF-S. Why? Because of the really huge difference in focussing speed. I'd rate the AF-S focussing speed with say 8.5/10 against 6.0/10 for the AF-D.

But on some lenses it can be just the opposite. My old 1.8/50mm. AF-D focussed a heck of a lot faster than my current 1.4/50mm. AF-S. And my 2.8-4/24-85mm. AF-D isn't slow, either. It just depends on the lens. But in the end I do prefer bodies with built in motors because they will allow me to choose between AF-D and AF-S lenses.

-- hide signature --

/'We are only immortal for a limited time'/

 Ringwraith69's gear list:Ringwraith69's gear list
Sigma DP1 Fujifilm FinePix X100 Fujifilm X10 Fujifilm X-S1 Epson R-D1 +6 more
Keyboard shortcuts:
FForum MMy threads