Jump to content


Photo

Evolution To The "G" Series Lenses


  • Please log in to reply
4 replies to this topic

#1 pendennis

pendennis

    Planet Citizen Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 85 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Southeast Michigan
  • Interests:Photography -nature, still life, architectural. Shooting sports - shotgun, rifle, pistol.

    The body politic.

Posted 01 July 2016 - 06:59 PM

For years, I insisted that all my lenses have aperture rings on them.  It's always been a part of my photography "shtick", and I felt that aperture rings should be on the lens, just like focusing rings, and zoom controls (when necessary).  Since I was "away" from the changes brought about by Nikon, and the evolution to the "G" lens, it seems as though I've missed out on something.

 

I've been lens shopping, trying to figure out just what I'd like to add.  I already have a good battery of zooms, and fixed focal length lenses, so there's no real rush add a new one..., well, maybe just because I really, really need one.

 

I've done some research, and it appears that most of the lenses, regardless the price range, are now "G" models, sans aperture ring.  For instance, B&H showed 97 lenses which were A/F.  Only 34 weren't "G" series, so it would seem that the changes are in place.  I fully understand the fact, that it's far cheaper to manufacture lenses without aperture rings.

 

I've read several articles on the subject, and since I now use only a D200 and a D500, it would seem that the traditional aperture ring is just no longer needed.  I don't own any "G" series yet, but it seems that my "fears" are unfounded.

 

 


Best,

Dennis


#2 Dennis

Dennis

    Eon Timewave Master Member

  • Moderators
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 15787 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Colorado
  • Interests:Photography, music, hiking (part of photography).

Posted 01 July 2016 - 07:07 PM

Well, other then the cost to Nikon, whitch seems not to have filtered down to the consumer. If you have older camera bodies, then it would matter, as the G lenses won't work. They say it's lighter, ok I guess.

It's said that the electronic aperture is more precise, ok.

Thanks, Dennis.

Photography: 100 percent art, 100 percent technical. It takes a photographer to blend them into an image.

​Film: That tangible image that you can see and hold.

My Web Site.
My 500px page.

My Instagram.
Member; Colorado Springs Creative Photography Group, NPS member.

Nikon Z7 (My wifes, but I'm allowed to use it once a quarter), Z6, D4, D850, D200, Fm2, FM, Mamiya RB67.
 


#3 Art

Art

    Eon Timewave Master Member

  • Moderators
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 22013 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Toronto, Ontario
  • Interests:I have way too many interests and they include: Photography, My 2014 Mustang, Military History, Strategy Games, Computer Devices, Science Fiction, Movie Buff, Bad Science Fiction Movies of all types, Military Strategy Game Collector, Nikon Film Camera Collector, WWI 1/144 scale Plane collector, Wings of Glory and more... :). Nikon NPS Member. Professional Photographer.

Posted 02 July 2016 - 08:08 AM

I am a throwback to film photography and manual cameras and all I can say is ....

Go G!

It's the only thing I can honestly say I don't miss! I shoot manual everything, but I don't like to focus, mostly because my eye sight is non existent, and, fiddling with the aperture ring. Both are advancements in photography custom made for .... ME!

As Dennis points out, G is not compatible with many older cameras, but that shouldn't be an issue with you.

An advantage is ... You can still get older glass at better prices, if you don't want to move to G.

Personally, I wouldn't give it a second thought. Find the focal length you need and jump in with both feet. You won't regret it.
Signature_Line_V4

#4 LightMeter

LightMeter

    Galactic Hero Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 2720 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Houston, Texas
  • Interests:I enjoy photography(of course)and I'm a gadget freak, especially if it can be used in photography.

Posted 05 July 2016 - 11:45 PM

The only G lenses I have are DX lenses. They can't be used on film bodies anyway, so it's not an issue. I tend to have older lenses because they could be bought much cheaper than their modern counterparts. But the 50 1.8G sure is tempting! I have a 50 1.4 AI'd I can use on the older bodies, so I may upgrade my 50 1.8D to the G and sell the D.


Bill

Still shooting DX digital and don't plan on going full frame.

D7100, D7000, D40, Canon M50, and a few 35mm film bodies

 

"I support capital punishment. Everyone in the capital should be punished".---Fred Sanford(Redd Foxx)


#5 Keith M

Keith M

    Planet Hero Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 977 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Gettysburg, Pa. USA

Posted 12 July 2016 - 10:20 AM

I do have a couple of  G lenses.

I always reach for the aperture ring on those and have to stop to think which wheel to turn.

(mussel memory?) most are DX so I'm not tempted to put them on one of my film bodies.

I only have one FX G lens, the 28-80mm  f3.3-4.5, it's sharp enough on a D700 to tempt me into getting an F100 so I can use it on film.


"First we have to make you pretty"

 

Pixels are like beans, it doesn't matter how many you put in the pot, it's how well you can cook that counts.





0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users