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-
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.
"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.
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
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!
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":
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
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
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
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".
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:
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.
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
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.
(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.
(of a person or thing) able to be likened to another; similar
of equivalent quality; worthy of comparison
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
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.
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
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.
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
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
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.
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.