NetNews Usenet Archive 1992 #31/NN_1992_31.iso/spool/rec/photo/22442

Internet Message Format | 1992-12-23 | 4.7 KB

Path: sparky!uunet!cs.utexas.edu!torn!utcsri!csri.toronto.edu!acs
Newsgroups: rec.photo
From: [e-mail] (Alvin Chia-Hua Shih)
Subject: Re: Canon 10s Vs Nikon N90, Which one?
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
References: <[e-mail]> <[e-mail]> <[e-mail]>
Date: 23 Dec 92 14:09:00 GMT
Lines: 85

In <[e-mail]> [e-mail] (Duan-Shin Lee) writes:

>>and, in my mind, Nikon has basically orphaned it now that they realize
>>Canon was right to put the motors in the lenses all along.  With the
>>money you save, you could add another lens to your system, like the
>>100-300 USM.

>I don't understand why it is right to put moters in the lenses.
>If you have 10 lenses, it is more economical to have one motor in
>the camera body than to have 10 motors, one in each lense.
>I suppose that the advantage to put the motor in a lense is
>that this way the motor produces more torque to move
>the glass.  If so, only BIG lenses need motors in them, such as
>the 600mm/f4.  For wide angle to short telephoto lenses, the F4,
>N90 or even the 8008s do not focuse perceivably (at lease to me)
>more slowly than the Canon's.  However, the extra motor in the
>Canon lenses (wide angles to short telephotos) is going to cost
>more for the buyers.

So what you're saying is that Nikon should cater to the "budget shooter
group" rather than design the best possible AF for professionals?  Why
talk about a professional camera and economics in the same breath?

The advantage of having motors as a part of the lens is to have the
motor closest to where it will do the most good.  Thus, you win in
efficiency since you don't have to run power from a fixed point on the
body to some distant group of elements in the lens.  I imagine the cost
of adding a flaky transmission to be not substantially less than a
small motor.

It's hard to compare AF speeds since the optical construction of the
lens plays a big role.  It's laughable to compare a lens with internal
focusing to one that is not.  In addition, I have to think that the
reason so few people actually notice the AF speed is because it is
somewhat fascinating to watch everything come into focus.  And for
most people, fast focus isn't a big deal.  But when you need it you
won't be so fascinated.  Put a 100-300 USM on an Elan sometime.
Show me that there's a lens on for N8008s that can be focused that
quickly.

And, for your information, the AF-D series lenses are supposed to have
motors in them.  On top of that, the "plain" AF series is no longer
being manufacturered.  So, you now get to pay the extra money for the
motors, and not get to benefit from them *unless* you get an F4 or N90.
(Real economical that is!)

Even if you *do* get an F4 or N90, unless you're a pro, there is still
no guarantee that Nikon will treat you like a decent human being.
There have been reports on the net of Nikon warrantee repairs taking 4
to 6 WEEKS.  And still other reports of Nikon REFUSING to honor
warranties unless specifically threatened (yes, even on F4s!).

So tell me, how do *I* get to enjoy the benefits of Nikon Professional
Services?  Most of the "what camera should I buy?" type questions are
coming from ENTHUSIASTS.  They probably have other jobs to pay their
bills and will never get to benefit from the "Legendary Service" that
Nikon offers its pros.

In summary:
  - Body intergral AF is inferior.  For Nikon boosters to deny this is
     to contradict the direction in which Nikon.
  - There is no cost savings to Nikon owners due to lens-integral motors
     because Nikon no longer makes AF lenses without motors in them
  - It is a contradiction to talk about "economical" and "professional"
     at the same time.
  - It is irresponsible to push Nikon based on its "Professional Services"
     because the majority of people shopping for cameras on rec.photo
     will never benefit.
  - It is irresponsible to push Nikon based on its "Professional Services"
     because the majority of people shopping for cameras on rec.photo
     will never benefit.
  - It is irresponsible to push Nikon based on its warranty coverage
     (2 years in Canada) because they have hassled (mere) amateurs over
     legitimate repairs and have such a poor turnaround time.

And that's the way I see it.

ACS

--
 ___ ___ ___ ______________________________________________________________
|   |   | __|      Democracy is not a way of getting better solutions.     |
| - | --|__ |           It's just a way to spread the blame.               |
|_|_|___|___|______________________________________________________________|
[e-mail]______________________|