Where to get parts for a Nikon D5000 SLR, with DX VR: AF-S Nikkor 18-55mm 1:3.5-5.6G lens?

Page 2 of 5  
On Tue, 10 Jul 2012 21:01:30 -0700, nospam wrote:

Ah, I see. a) My Nikon D5000 & D60 do not have the mechanical coupling pin b) But, I can clearly see the coupling hole for my D50
Here is a shot, taken by the D5000, of the D50 and D60 side by side:

Thanks for that. I will continue reading on!
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
On Tue, 10 Jul 2012 21:01:30 -0700, nospam wrote:

True.
All my Nikon (Nikkor?) lenses are from Nikon camera kits at Costco.
So I wouldn't have any older lenses or cameras that don't 'know' about AF- S.
It seems I received two lenses with each of the three Nikon SLRs so I have six lenses, two of which are non AF-S, the rest are AF-S.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
wrote:

"Common knowledge" is what everyone knows. This guy doesn't. I suspect there are hundreds of cameras that require AF-S lenses sold every year to people who like Arklin have no idea that the motor is in the lens. Ask the people in Coach.
--
Tony Cooper - Orlando, Florida

Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

that's why he asked how others knew it.

and almost all of them don't give a crap where the motor is. as long as it focuses and takes pictures, they're happy.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
On Tue, 10 Jul 2012 22:45:15 -0400, tony cooper wrote:

I concur. I had no idea where the motor was in any of my Nikon SLRs from Costco.
I now realize why my Nikon D50 is so much heavier than my Nikon D60 and D5000! And, why the lenses didn't work when I tried using them initially.
It wasn't common knowledge to me but I never did any research. Just like when I bought my BMW, I just 'assumed' it was designed well. (The BMW is a whole 'nother story because it breaks so much that I was forced to learn how to fix it.)
The Nikons broke but I didn't know how to fix them.
Now, with the new bayonet mounts on their way, I can at least fix the most common breakage of the lenses!
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

You are not paying attention!
Back on 7/6/2012 you pretty much asked the same question. Here is what was said back then. Note: if you are not going to read answers given sincerely to your questions, you are in effect telling us that all you are doing bitching about the results of your abusive use of your equipment. Now read the information again, and pay attention to what is being said.
I don't want to think that I have just been wasting my time with this thread.

You really aren't trying very hard. first RTFM! If you still don't get it read the specs, in each case scroll down to "Compatible Lenses": D50: < http://www.nikonusa.com/Nikon-Products/Product-Archive/Digital-SLR-Cameras/25216/D50.html#tab-ProductDetail-ProductTabs-TechSpecs
D60 <
http://www.nikonusa.com/Nikon-Products/Product-Archive/Digital-SLR-Cameras/25438/D60.html#tab-ProductDetail-ProductTabs-TechSpecs
D5000 <
http://www.nikonusa.com/Nikon-Products/Product-Archive/Digital-SLR-Cameras/25452/D5000.html#tab-ProductDetail-ProductTabs-TechSpecs
Each

Irrelevant.
--
Regards,

Savageduck
  Click to see the full signature.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
On Wed, 11 Jul 2012 01:31:08 +0000 (UTC), "Arklin K."

Research on the web is quick, easy, and free.

Yes, the "AF-S" stands for Auto Focus - Silent Wave Motor. As far as I know, all AF-S lenses will fit all three cameras. Some non-AF-S lenses will attach, but you will lose the autofocus feature. Some of the non-AF-S lenses will autofocus on bodies with the motor drive in the body. Not all camera bodies and lenses were designed for autofocus.
I will say that you need to order an AF-S lens if you intend to use it on your D40/D60/D5000 bodies if you want the camera to autofocus (And I'm sure you do, and you should).
You can Google for AF-S lenses, or for lenses compatible with any of those bodies (if compatible for one, it's compatible for all three), but I see no place in any tech sheet that tells you if the bayonet mount is plastic or metal.
Your best bet is to Google for AF-S lenses, pick out the ones you want based on price and specifications, and then go to a real camera store that sells new merchandise and look at the damn thing to see if the flange is plastic or metal. Forget Costco. They don't have the selection of lenses only on display that a real camera store has.
You may want to make the actual purchase from Adorama or B&H photo, but know what you want and need before you order.
Other brands of lenses have the AF-S feature. I have a Tamron AF-S 18/270mm zoom lens that I use. A good walk-about lens with a wide range, but not as sharp at any setting as a prime lens. ("Prime" being a non-zoom lens) Sigma makes AF-S lenses, but I haven't heard good things about Sigma lenses. Tamron makes AF-S lenses for both Nikon and Canon bodies, so you have to check to see which it is.
I'm not even going to address that "war camera" idea. It's ridiculous. No camera is impervious to damage. You don't buy a camera in order to be able to drop it or treat it carelessly. You either buy the least expensive camera/lens combo you can find and figure you will replace whatever you break, or you learn to take more care.
--
Tony Cooper - Orlando, Florida

Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

nope. only nikon makes af-s lenses.
other brands of lenses may have internal motors, but they call it something else. tamron calls it bim (built-in motor) or pzd (piezo drive). sigma calls it hsm (high speed motor). it doesn't look like tokina has a designation so you just have to check.
just about all lenses these days have internal motors because there are so many nikon cameras without motors, so it's very likely it will have one. canon eos never had a motor, so all the lensmakers really need to do is change the mount and the lens firmware to work with nikon.
older lenses may or may not have motors, depending on how old the lens is, so for someone buying used lenses, it's very important to check for compatibility.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
wrote:

You are correct. I should have written "AF-S comparable". The "AF-S" is Nikon's designation, and only Nikon's designation. However, other companies make lenses that work with the D40/D60/D6000 bodies in the same way that the AF-S lenses work.
Actually, it's just the "S" that other brands omit. B&H's specs for Tamron's AF-S-style lenses describe them as "Piezo drive AF motor".
--
Tony Cooper - Orlando, Florida

Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

the word you want is 'compatible'.

that's correct, other than the non-existent d6000.

tamron has two types of internal motors. the piezo version is new and is what they call their ultrasonic motor and the other motor is a less expensive and noisier micro-motor.
nikon's acronyms are here: <http://imaging.nikon.com/lineup/lens/glossary.htm
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
wrote:

No, "compatible" means they work together. "Comparable" means they work alike. We don't say lenses work together with other lenses. They work alike in that they work with the same bodies.
--
Tony Cooper - Orlando, Florida

Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

exactly! tamron's internal focus motor lenses are compatible with nikon cameras that require af-s lenses. they work together.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
wrote:

Yes, they are compatible with certain Nikon bodies. But, I didn't use it that way. I said they are comparable to certain Nikon lenses. They are not compatible with other lenses.
I know this is deep thinking for you, but try think of the "comparable to" and "compatible with" in order to choose the right word. It is a more complex thought process than the usage of capitalization.
--
Tony Cooper - Orlando, Florida

Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

I think "nospam" missed the point of your correct use of "comparable" when he was expecting to see "compatible". Context is everything! It can certainly be true that there are lenses from Nikon and third party manufacturers which are "compatible" with contemporary Nikon DSLR bodies. It can also be argued that some of these lenses, when compared, deliver "comparable" performance and/or construction. Then there are some lenses, which while being "compatible" for use on Nikon bodies, including some from the Nikkor stable, which cannot be described as in anyway "comparable" in performance or construction.
Try this:
Compatible: (of two things) able to exist or occur together without conflict. (of device) able to be used with a specific piece of equipment without special adaptation or modification.
Comparable: (of a person or thing) able to be likened to another; similar of equivalent quality; worthy of comparison
--
Regards,

Savageduck
  Click to see the full signature.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
On Wed, 11 Jul 2012 06:55:02 -0700, Savageduck

Yes, he missed "comparable to" another lens as opposed to "compatible with" a camera body. A lens can be both comparable to another lens and compatible with a particular type of body, but that wasn't the context.

--
Tony Cooper - Orlando, Florida

Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

yes they are and that's what is important.

they're comparable to nikon afs lenses but that's not what matters. a lens can be comparable but not compatible. canon lenses are comparable to nikon lenses and will obviously not work. lenses without motors (e.g., 1st version of tokina 12-24 for nikon) are comparable to lenses with motors (e.g., 2nd version of tokina 12-24 for nikon), but only the latter one will work.
what matters is that the lenses are *compatible* with the camera bodies he owns or will own because they include a focus motor.

the proper word is compatible. in fact, if you google "nikon comparable lenses", google will show results for "nikon compatible lenses". maybe you should go tell google they're wrong.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
wrote:

The comment I made was "Other brands of lenses have the AF-S feature", and you corrected me - properly - that "AF-S" is Nikon's proprietary term. I replied that I should have said other lenses were AF-S comparable.
This compares lenses. It does not address comparability with bodies, although the other lenses are also compatible with certain bodies.
The "proper" word depends on context. Nikon's usage refers to compatibility to bodies. My usage refers to comparability of the motorized focus feature in each. Nikon would not use "comparable" because Nikon does not feel that any other maker's lens is comparable to theirs. They, as you would expect a manufacturer to do, ignore the fact the comparability is based on the availability of the function.
In fact, Tamron makes lenses that are comparable in function to the AF-S lenses, but are not compatible to Nikon bodies. They are compatible only to Canon bodies. That's why you don't use the wrong word as you suggest.
Don't try to struggle further understanding this distinction. You aren't mentally equipped for it.
Google, by the way, is neither right nor wrong in any search. Google merely turns up instances of term you are searching for. Google does not initiate an instance. This seems to be another area of ignorance on your part.
--
Tony Cooper - Orlando, Florida

Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
On Wed, 11 Jul 2012 12:45:45 -0400, tony cooper

Ouch. That should be "compatibility" there.

--
Tony Cooper - Orlando, Florida

Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

actually it does not 'merely turn up instances of the term you are searching for.' this is yet another instance of you talking out your ass.
google interprets what you mean when searching for something. it looks at the context of your search phrase and also your search history to decide what links are likely to be the ones you are most interested in. two people searching for the same thing may (and probably will) get different results.
google will also correct spelling errors and usage errors and may use location data. it's actually *very* sophisticated and they have an entire team dedicated to tweaking results.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
wrote:

Searching for the phrase "the world is flat" results in 43,400,000 hits. Is Google right or wrong? Is the world flat?
--
Tony Cooper - Orlando, Florida

Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

Related Threads

    HomeOwnersHub.com is a website for homeowners and building and maintenance pros. It is not affiliated with any of the manufacturers or service providers discussed here. All logos and trade names are the property of their respective owners.