BasilG

Neither of these is a very good choice for sports. Possibly, getting a D7200 or D7500 will solve some of your issues. I don't really see how a budget macro lens will solve the problem.

Thousands and thousands and thousands of people use AF for subjects like these all the time. The lens is very clearly defective (even if it can be focused on some subjects some of the time).

I suggest more research. Both of these were for MF lenses. You can mount AF lenses of course, if you so desire, but neither one is able to drive the lens' AF. The TC-16A has some sort of pseudo-AF ...

At the infinity focus setting on the 28, the magnification with a PK-13 (27.5 mm) would be 1:1. Which might place the focus plane inside the lens. :)

What's a "normal Nikon screw drive TC"? As far as I know the TC14E/17E/20E TCs are AF-S/AF-I only?

I don't think there's a viable solution for this within the Nikon brand.

Unless this is the only lens in your collection that'll be affected, have you considered the D7200?

Yes. Why?

Congrats on the 14-24/2.8! Now go out, shoot, and be happy - these forums will only make you want to spend more money. :)

Sorry, I thought you had the f/4. Don't know where I got the idea.

Not sure what you want to shoot, and more importantly, not sure how mobile you need to be. Are you undertaking overnight hikes to the backcountry (carrying tent and food)? Or stay in camper van ...

My problem with his post is that he did not state "I want to do X, and I can't because Nikon doesn't offer the lenses I need". It was more of a rant about how Nikon's macro lenses are not really ...

It's restrictive. Being restricted isn't fun (unless you impose the restriction onto yourself as a challenge, but this is not the case here). And I say that as someone who's using primes a lot.

Yeah. Fun doesn't preclude learning. However, losing interest does, for sure.

I agree. "Learn the pure form of composition first" - remember that at that age, it's about having fun with the new hobby. They greatest "risk" here is not that they will end up with subpar ...

Not weird. For nature/landscape photography, I've been doing this for a while. Either wide or long, leaving out the middle (though sometimes I plugged the gap with a 50/1.8, which costs and weighs ...

I'm very relaxed. Just pointing out that in most cases this: is nothing to worry about. In all but the rarest of cases, you can count on the 20mm delivering excellent sun stars.

The 20/1.8 is known for great sun stars. Probably your *rental* model had seen too much use/abuse.

Depends on the degree of perfection of the perfect lens. :) But yes. For all realistic purposes, certainly. I think some manufacturers (Sigma?) provide both geometric and diffraction MTF on their ...

I think we understand the quote you posted in fundamentally different ways. Plotted "against a perfect lens that would transmit 100% of the light" means that this is the reference for MTF = 1, ...