Home

Please support mflenses.com if you need any graphic related work order it from us, click on above banner to order!
SearchSearch MemberlistMemberlist RegisterRegister ProfileProfile Log in to check your private messagesLog in to check your private messages Log inLog in

Manually focusing Nikon AF-D lenses
Post new topic   Reply to topic
Home   Manual Focus Lenses
View previous topic :: View next topic  


PostPosted: Sat Sep 14, 2024 8:47 am    Post subject: Manually focusing Nikon AF-D lenses Reply with quote
A question with respect to Nikon's AF / AF-D (screw focus) lenses. I own one example, a very cheap zoom. I know they will work on a standard Nikon F adapter. They do have a real, mechanical aperture ring.

The thing is about focusing. These have the screw focusing mechanism, so the focus ring is mechanically attached to the lens, no power required. But my impression of the one (cheap) example I have is that they were really not designed to be manually focused. On the one I have the focus throw is only 90 degrees with almost no resistance. The Minolta A mount lens I have is the same way: no resistance to speak of. For me this lack of resistance is what prevents me from using them. It feels like the slightest touch will throw off the focus.

So my question is: are all of Nikon's AF-D lenses this way with respect to resistance? I assume the reason for the low resistance is to reduce strain on the screw motor in the camera?

Regards, C.


PostPosted: Sat Sep 14, 2024 9:10 am    Post subject: Reply with quote
I can't speak for Nikon's AF / AF-D lenses specifically, but more in general this is the main reason I don't use autofocus lenses.

I like to work in manual focus and I find autofocus lenses in general are not designed to be used that way. To little resistance on the focus grip, too little travel on the focus grip from infinity to MFD (and I prefer mechanical aperture control on the lens; something many AF lenses lack).

And I have also always thought this is to reduce the power needed to focus the lens fast enough to satisfy AF use (more to preserve battery capacity rather than motor strain I suspect).


PostPosted: Sat Sep 14, 2024 9:23 am    Post subject: Reply with quote
RokkorDoctor wrote:

I like to work in manual focus and I find autofocus lenses in general are not designed to be used that way. To little resistance on the focus grip, too little travel on the focus grip from infinity to MFD (and I prefer mechanical aperture control on the lens; something many AF lenses lack).


I completely agree, same for me. I do have a (cheap) Nikon AF-D and Minolta A lens for the purpose of curiosity/exploration, but hardly ever use them for the exact same reason. An additional thing about the Minolta lens is that indeed it does not have an aperture ring. The adapter for it has a ring to do that so you can stop down but it gives you no idea what aperture you are at. It's a fine lens but unpleasant to use.

RokkorDoctor wrote:
And I have also always thought this is to reduce the power needed to focus the lens fast enough to satisfy AF use (more to preserve battery capacity rather than motor strain I suspect).


Yes, on second thought this is the more likely reason.

Regards, C.


PostPosted: Sat Sep 14, 2024 9:30 am    Post subject: Reply with quote
I haven’t used an AF lens yet that has very pleasant manual focusing.


PostPosted: Sat Sep 14, 2024 9:53 am    Post subject: Reply with quote
[quote="connloyalist"]
RokkorDoctor wrote:

An additional thing about the Minolta lens is that indeed it does not have an aperture ring. The adapter for it has a ring to do that so you can stop down but it gives you no idea what aperture you are at. It's a fine lens but unpleasant to use.

I can only guess that cost is the reason they don't make A-mount adapters with stop indications.

In Minolta's own cameras the lens communicates the max. aperture to the camera, and the camera then uses a gear mechanism with rotational encoder to stop the lens down a desired number of stops. That could be replicated on an adapter if they wanted to: one manually adjustable f-stop indicator ring to set the maximum aperture of the lens, and then an aperture-coupled ring with indicator mark that sets the required stop-down. Add an extra adjustable minimum stop-limit and they could even give the adapter aperture pre-set facility. It would cost quite a bit though.


PostPosted: Sat Sep 14, 2024 11:21 am    Post subject: Reply with quote
RokkorDoctor wrote:

I like to work in manual focus and I find autofocus lenses in general are not designed to be used that way. To little resistance on the focus grip, too little travel on the focus grip from infinity to MFD (and I prefer mechanical aperture control on the lens; something many AF lenses lack).


Using AF lenses in manual mode is - at least for me - a very rare exception. The only real use of the MF mode, fo me, is taking IR images with my IR-converted Sony A100. AF lenses simply are designed for AF operation - the same as MF lenses are designed for MF operation (even though some adapters exist allowing AF on Sony E cameras).

That said I do use AF lenses in MF mode on Sony E cameras if I want to compare them with vintage MF lenses. Some AF lenses are pretty easy to use in MF mode. In addition to the two points mentioned by RokDoc

1) Too little resistance on the focus grip
2) Too little travel on the focus grip from infinity to MFD

I would add two more:

3) Narrow MF ring on early Minolta / Nikon AF lenses
4) Clutch for de-coupling the MF ring if the lens is used in AF mode (on some "screw drive" lenses only; not a problem with USM/SSM lenses)

This latter mechanism always results in an annoying play when using the lens in MF mode. That's actually the most annoying problem for me, and therefore I usually prefer the early AF lenses (with narrow focusing ring) as well as the more recent Minolta/Sony AF lenses with SSM (=USM) motors. Manual focusing on my Zeiss ZA 2.8/16-35 and ZA 2.8/24-70mm lenses is nearly as smooth as with goood vintage MF lenses (and certainly better compared to a dried out MF Nikkor ...); in addition the focus ring is large and broad, and the focus throw is sufficiently "long". So yes: Modern AF lenses usually are better suited for MF operation than older ones from the 1985-2000 time frame.

There are a few Minolta AF zooms from the 1990s which are both optically and mechanically excellent (including MF mode), though (e. g. Minolta AF 3.5/17-35mm G, Minolta AF 2.8/28-70mm G, Minolta AF 2.8/80-200mm G).

S


PostPosted: Sat Sep 14, 2024 7:35 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
stevemark wrote:

There are a few Minolta AF zooms from the 1990s which are both optically and mechanically excellent (including MF mode), though (e. g. Minolta AF 3.5/17-35mm G, Minolta AF 2.8/28-70mm G, Minolta AF 2.8/80-200mm G).


What does the "G" stand for?

Regards, C.


PostPosted: Sat Sep 14, 2024 7:45 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
connloyalist wrote:
stevemark wrote:

There are a few Minolta AF zooms from the 1990s which are both optically and mechanically excellent (including MF mode), though (e. g. Minolta AF 3.5/17-35mm G, Minolta AF 2.8/28-70mm G, Minolta AF 2.8/80-200mm G).


What does the "G" stand for?

Regards, C.


Same as "L" for Canon ... maybe "gold" or "great" or whatever ... probably "gold" as the Minolta "G" lenses had a golden stripe, similar to the (less prestigious) red stripe of the Canon "L" lenses Wink

BTW Sony these days still has "GM" lenses ("G Master"). Those are considered even more prestgious than the earlier Sony/Minolta G series. And what most people don't know: The Sony GM still are genuine Minolta lenses.

S


PostPosted: Sun Sep 15, 2024 3:35 am    Post subject: Reply with quote
What cheap zoom is it? Is it a nikon lens, or a 3rd party lens?

I've only had one experience with A/F lenses, and that was the Nikkor A/F-d 50mm 1.8.

Horrid, loose, grinding focusing ring on manual focus with far too short a focus throw.
I cared not a bit for the aperture control lock-out, or said aperture system's user interface.
It worked well in A/F mode, but I was less than impressed- it doesn't do anything image-wise that any of my stable of m/f 50mm normal lenses can do.
The modern, hyper-critical rendering is definitely not to my tastes.

I had bought it used, and it was in my possession for less than 3 weeks.
I won't be buying any A/F lens, new or used after that experience.

-D.S.


PostPosted: Sun Sep 15, 2024 3:47 am    Post subject: Reply with quote
stevemark wrote:
connloyalist wrote:
stevemark wrote:

There are a few Minolta AF zooms from the 1990s which are both optically and mechanically excellent (including MF mode), though (e. g. Minolta AF 3.5/17-35mm G, Minolta AF 2.8/28-70mm G, Minolta AF 2.8/80-200mm G).


What does the "G" stand for?

Regards, C.


Same as "L" for Canon ... maybe "gold" or "great" or whatever ... probably "gold" as the Minolta "G" lenses had a golden stripe, similar to the (less prestigious) red stripe of the Canon "L" lenses Wink

BTW Sony these days still has "GM" lenses ("G Master"). Those are considered even more prestgious than the earlier Sony/Minolta G series. And what most people don't know: The Sony GM still are genuine Minolta lenses.

S


"G" in Nikonese is for gelded -no aperture ring.

-D.S.


PostPosted: Sun Sep 15, 2024 6:00 am    Post subject: Reply with quote
Doc Sharptail wrote:
What cheap zoom is it? Is it a nikon lens, or a 3rd party lens?


It is an "AF Nikkor 28-80mm 3.5-5.6 D". With a plastic mount, so perhaps a kit lens? The focusing ring is very narrow (although I have seen worse), hard plastic with zero dampening. Now that I am looking at it the focus throw is quite a bit less than 90 degrees, probably somewhere around 60 degrees?

Regards, C.


PostPosted: Sun Sep 15, 2024 9:29 am    Post subject: Reply with quote
connloyalist wrote:
Doc Sharptail wrote:
What cheap zoom is it? Is it a nikon lens, or a 3rd party lens?


It is an "AF Nikkor 28-80mm 3.5-5.6 D". With a plastic mount, so perhaps a kit lens? The focusing ring is very narrow (although I have seen worse), hard plastic with zero dampening. Now that I am looking at it the focus throw is quite a bit less than 90 degrees, probably somewhere around 60 degrees?

Regards, C.


You may find that different lens enthusiast interpret the term "focus throw" differently; there seem to be two schools of thought:

1. Focus throw is the amount of rotation of the focus grip required to focus it from infinity to the MFD
2. Focus throw is the difference between the maximum focus distance (usually infinity) and the MFD

Maybe this confusion originates from photography vs. cinematography use; I don't know and I am just speculating here. Personally I find 1.) makes more sense, as for the majority of photographic lenses 2.) is just more complicated way of saying MFD, given that most start at infinity.

I always interpreted the focus throw as per 1.), but I have seen some members on this forum complain about 1.) not being the correct interpretation.

In any case, some of my earliest Minolta ROKKOR and AUTO-ROKKOR lenses have a "focus throw" of over 270 degrees, some probably approaching 300 degrees.


PostPosted: Sun Sep 15, 2024 9:52 am    Post subject: Reply with quote
connloyalist wrote:
Doc Sharptail wrote:
What cheap zoom is it? Is it a nikon lens, or a 3rd party lens?


It is an "AF Nikkor 28-80mm 3.5-5.6 D". With a plastic mount, so perhaps a kit lens? The focusing ring is very narrow (although I have seen worse), hard plastic with zero dampening. Now that I am looking at it the focus throw is quite a bit less than 90 degrees, probably somewhere around 60 degrees?

Regards, C.


I don't know a lot about that lens.
The D 50mm lens I had here still had a metal bayonet foot for mounting, and plastic everything else.
There has been one A/F-d 28-80mm sitting at a local camera shop for over a year, quite cheaply priced, and it has not moved.
Mixed reviews on it on the internet.
If it was intended as a kit lens, it was probably for a film camera.

I do have the 28-80mm m/f precursor to that lens, and find it at least capable in most situations, with very good performance at the wider focal settings. The "telephoto" end of it tends to be a bit soft, unless well stopped down.
It's focus throw tends to be slightly on the short side, but nothing really un-manageable.
It too suffers from a somewhat sour reputation, for which the life of me, I cannot quite figure out.
I guess more power to me then- it's a lens that I've become comfortable using. Wink

-D.S.

Last edited by Doc Sharptail on Sun Sep 15, 2024 10:12 am; edited 3 times in total


PostPosted: Sun Sep 15, 2024 9:54 am    Post subject: Reply with quote
I have the Minolta Apo 200mm 2.8 and I find it very easy to use, except the aperture where I use shutter speed to measure the real aperture ,starting from wide open. For portraits and landscape that's fine I guess. I did use Nikkor Ed 80-200mm 2.8 afD first version ,but it was too heavy for my taste , at least that one had a real aperture ring.
If I`d have to choose, i prefer manual focus , but this apo lens came to me very cheap and with some issues that got fixed in part. Besides, is not easy to get a manual APO/L/ED/UD fast lens cheap nowadays.


PostPosted: Tue Sep 17, 2024 5:54 pm    Post subject: Re: Manually focusing Nikon AF-D lenses Reply with quote
connloyalist wrote:
A question with respect to Nikon's AF / AF-D (screw focus) lenses...are all of Nikon's AF-D lenses this way with respect to resistance?


The quality of manual focus on Nikon's AF-D lenses depends entirely on which models you're talking about. Generally speaking the cheap ones have rather poor, loose manual focus like you describe. On the other hand, the more expensive models have good manual focus.

I own the 180mm f2.8 AF-D Nikkor and the 105mm f2 DC Nikkor, and both of those have good manual focusing - not as good as their pure-manual AiS counterparts, but still good. In both cases manual focus was more than an afterthought.

I've tried some other D-series Nikkors that weren't nearly as nice though - the 85mm f/1.8 for example. That one's not terrible, but it's not great.


PostPosted: Wed Sep 18, 2024 12:56 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
I'm fine with manually focusing all of my AF-D lenses, but yes, it does require some recalibration of mind and fingers. My wife is always complaining about using my computer because my mouse is set so it flies across the screen if you just look at it, and it's the same type of skill. The only unpleasant one is the one that really needs to be lubed because it's gotten sticky-jumpy. The hardest is the 60/2.8 Micro, but I manage.


PostPosted: Wed Sep 18, 2024 1:03 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
[quote="RokkorDoctor"]
connloyalist wrote:
RokkorDoctor wrote:

An additional thing about the Minolta lens is that indeed it does not have an aperture ring. The adapter for it has a ring to do that so you can stop down but it gives you no idea what aperture you are at. It's a fine lens but unpleasant to use.

I can only guess that cost is the reason they don't make A-mount adapters with stop indications.


I suppose that's because lenses have different apertures with different sizes, steps etc. But one could make some custom markings at least.
Post new topic   Reply to topic
Home   Manual Focus Lenses
Page 1 of 1