Jump to content
NWDiver

Old Nikon 60mm VS. New 60mm

Recommended Posts

So is the new Nikon 60mm worth the extra US$100 over the older version? This is a lens used mainly underwater.

 

Thanks

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

While I don't have any answers, I'm glad you asked the question as I've wondered the same thing myself. I look forward to hearing what others have to say about this.

 

Ellen

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The new one is quieter. That may not seem like a big deal, but I've lost some shots when fishes were panicked by the sound of the autofocus. That doesn't happen with the new one.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Both are sharp and excellent lenses. The new focuses faster and when I first tried it underwater I was hoping not to see any difference with the old one. Since I already owned two. Sadly I did and bought a AFS 60mm soon after.

 

That said not everybody likes the AFS focusing on macro - it can be too fast and a little difficult to control at times.

 

My conclusion is that if you don't use the 60mm that much and already have the old one , then an upgrade is not worth the money. But if you are starting from scratch, I'd suggest the new one.

 

The last 5-6 photos in this gallery were all taken with the 60m AFS on FX camera:

http://www.amustard.com/?page=D70008_gal&subpage=photo

(if you put your mouse over the image, the file name gives away the lens used)

 

Alex

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I had the old AFD 60mm and promptly sold it when the AFS 60mm was announced, and then had to borrow the AFD version when the AFS version didn't show up in time for my trip...

 

Pros for AFS

- silent AF

- beautiful bokeh, good for land use portrait as well

- fast

 

Cons for AFS

- too fast, can't tap-tap pseudo manual focus, the lens simply focus pass the point and back pass it again. Very frustrating.

- won't AF with any TC I know, not Nikon, not Kenko

 

If you are using it mostly topside - it is a no-brainer, get the AFS.

 

If you are using it underwater mostly, it is a toss up. I have yet to go back to the old AFD to have another go with it. Some use the Kenko 2x TC to replace the 105mm, and the AFS will not work this way.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Used the AFD until this year. Bought the AFS because it did not need the special gears the AFD did require to flip between AF and manual focus. Turned out that my best half ended up using the AFS and she landed more keepers due to faster autofocus (she's the one who will swim a mile with a fish to get a picture).

 

End of the story: She OWNS the AFS and wouldn't part from it. Fast autofocuse might be a curse but we found out she had more success with that lens than the AFD. Your mileage may vary.

 

As for me, I am considering moving from the AFD 105 to the AFS 105... still debating though.... with myself.

 

.... and I will probably use the AFD :)

My $0.02

 

Michel

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
if you are starting from scratch, I'd suggest the new one.

 

I agree, I shot with the old one and now I have the new one.

Both great lenses, sometimes I miss the old one doing macro (greater working distance).

But since I am shooting DX, most of my macro/small fish is done with the 105mm and I use the 60mm more as a "fish" lens.

 

Good Luck

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

the new 60mm extends 0.4" less than the old when at 1:1.

If you have a setup for the older 60mm and switch to the new, you lose 0.4" of working space from the port glass.

 

Nikon claims 3.56" working distance on the D lens. Ken Rockwell claims he measures it as 2 7/8" on the D lens.

Ken Rockwell claims to have measured only 1 7/8" working distance on the new 60mm.

 

If you have extensions/port set for the D lens and switch to the new lens, the front of the port will be 1.4" closer to the subject than before - when shooting 1:1.

 

All assuming K. Rockwell measurements are accurate.

 

The 0.4" can be recovered by using a shorter extension/port combination. The 1" would seem lost.

 

For what its worth...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I agree, I shot with the old one and now I have the new one.

Both great lenses, sometimes I miss the old one doing macro (greater working distance).

But since I am shooting DX, most of my macro/small fish is done with the 105mm and I use the 60mm more as a "fish" lens.

 

Good Luck

 

I think both have the same working distance (both are 1:1 with 39 degrees, the triangle should be the same...).

 

One thing to take into account is that the new does NOT autofocus with teleconverters, while the older one does for versatile combinations.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Below is info from Nikon's web page, copied/pasted. Both min. working is for 1:1.

The angle of view is the same with different working distances.

 

'D' lens: Minimum Focus Distance 0.66 ft. (0.22m) Angle of View 39° 40'

 

'AF-S' lens: Minimum Focus Distance 0.6 ft. (0.185m) Angle of View 39°40'

 

They also extend differently, the 'D' lens being longer at 1:1 suggesting a different extension/port combination for each to maximize distance from port to subject.

 

K. Rockwell claims different working distances, both being shorter and the difference between the lenses being 1".

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
<snip>

K. Rockwell claims different working distances, both being shorter and the difference between the lenses being 1".

 

For underwater photography, 1:1 with either 60mm is almost a moot point.

-subjects have to be brain dead to get that close

-very difficult to light the subject with the flat port pretty close to squishing it against the glass/plexiglass

 

I did a quick experiment with my D200 and the 60mm AF-D

-set the 60mm to 1:1 (manual focus)

-move camera perpendicular to a flat vertical surface

result:

minimum focal distance = 8.5" (216mm)

--focal distance is from film plane to subject

 

minimum working distance = 2.875" (73mm)

--working distance is from front element of lens to subject

 

subtract another 15-20mm for your port and you're down to 53mm (about 2")

 

--ChrisS

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I think both have the same working distance (both are 1:1 with 39 degrees, the triangle should be the same...).

One thing to take into account is that the new does NOT autofocus with teleconverters, while the older one does for versatile combinations.

 

It is 48mm on the new one vs. 73mm on the old one. You can see it visually here.

And the lens is shorter than the longest setting of the old one, if your housing maker did not change the port configuration (like Sea&Sea) the new lens sits about 20mm inside the port at 1:1.

Which makes an UW working distance of about 30mm...

 

It should do AF at least with the new TCs from Nikon.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Aaaaaaaaaaah! you were referring to distance between the end of the lens and the subject while I was talking about minimal focal distance (which it seems to be also different :) maybe due to the different mechanics of the lenses). As I have both AFD and AFS I will try it myself.

 

Regarding working TCs, it does not work with any kenko/sigma and I would kiss anyone :) if it worked with one TC! but I am pretty hopeless even with nikon TCs...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Aaaaaaaaaaah! you were referring to distance between the end of the lens and the subject while I was talking about minimal focal distance (which it seems to be also different :) maybe due to the different mechanics of the lenses). As I have both AFD and AFS I will try it myself.

 

Regarding working TCs, it does not work with any kenko/sigma and I would kiss anyone :) if it worked with one TC! but I am pretty hopeless even with nikon TCs...

 

Yeah... the name is "working distance".

At least in the Nikon folder pages it states that the new TCs work on every AF-S but the new AF-S 105mm.

 

I will try it out at a shop near here one day and post it here...

Wish me luck!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

HI Mariózi,..

 

I just bought the new Nikon TC 1.7 and is working very well with the 105VR.

I do not know, why Nikon annouced that the AF could not work or am I missing something ?

 

Regards

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
HI Mariózi,..

I just bought the new Nikon TC 1.7 and is working very well with the 105VR.

I do not know, why Nikon annouced that the AF could not work or am I missing something ?

Regards

Yeah,

 

That was in a Nikkor folder, maybe for the old model.

Newest info on Nikon's site is that:

 

"Compatible with AF-S and AF-I NIKKOR lenses except:

AF-S 17-35mm f/2.8D IF-ED,

AF-S 24-85mm f/3.5-4.5G IF-ED, VR

AF-S 24-120mm f/3.5-5.6G IF-ED,

AF-S 28-70mm f/2.8D IF-ED

and DX NIKKOR lenses."

 

Thanks for the info!

Abraço!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

New Nikon TC 1.7 II works very well with 105VR (also kenkos 1.4x and 2x) but cannot even be attached to the new 60AF-S (kenkos can, but won´t focus)...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Yeah,

 

That was in a Nikkor folder, maybe for the old model.

Newest info on Nikon's site is that:

 

"Compatible with AF-S and AF-I NIKKOR lenses except:

AF-S 17-35mm f/2.8D IF-ED,

AF-S 24-85mm f/3.5-4.5G IF-ED, VR

AF-S 24-120mm f/3.5-5.6G IF-ED,

AF-S 28-70mm f/2.8D IF-ED

and DX NIKKOR lenses."

 

Thanks for the info!

Abraço!

 

From the 60AFS manual p. 23 (which you can download here: http://support.nikontech.com/app/answers/detail/a_id/13948 ):

 

"17. Incompatible accessories

• Teleconverters"

 

By "folder", do you mean the folding manual for the TCs? I have Nikon and Nikkor folders on my computer, which are something altogether different! The 60AFS is not listed there, also any other newer lens, in the copy I downloaded a few months ago.

The web page you refer to seems out of date; note the absence of newer lenses like the 14-24, 24-70, as well as 60AFS. In general TCs work best with longer focal lengths so one would expect these other newer lenses to be included. One needs to check the manual for each lens as it comes out to update the TC manual.

Tom ;)

BTW I have both the 60D and 60AFS, both are excellent lenses. You will need different set-ups to take them underwater and this may be your deciding factor

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I have the D version of the lens. In clear tropical waters I'll use it in a flat port but with the generally poorer viz around Sydney I use it in a dome port with a +4 diopter. I found using the flat port too frustrating if the water wasn't clear as I had to move to far away to fit anything that wasn't tiny. Even relatively small cuttlefish I found difficult to photograph with the flat port as I got too much water between the port and the cuttlefish.

 

I often shoot at 1:1 (nudibranchs, sea star macros) and still find I have sufficient working distance for lighting.

 

I don't have the AF-S lens, but I suspect it would be more difficult like this.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
By "folder", do you mean the folding manual for the TCs?

 

Sorry, I meant brochure.

I have one in my hands that clearly states "except AF-S105mm/2.8VR".

I guess it's a typo as the TC work with those lenses.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Yeah... the name is "working distance".

At least in the Nikon folder pages it states that the new TCs work on every AF-S but the new AF-S 105mm.

 

I will try it out at a shop near here one day and post it here...

Wish me luck!

 

Hello Mariozi,

 

Since 1.7x is not even able to be attached to the new nikon 60 AFS, please have us updated if you finally try it with nikons 1.4x and/or 2x...

 

Good luck!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The 60mm is my most oft-used lens. I really like the faster focusing of the new 60mm over my old one. Since I use it as a fish lens the faster focusing is a blessing.

 

I also got it because it fits in the same Ikelite 8" dome system port extension I use for the 12-24mm lens in combination with the flat port. This justifies the extra $100 because I save it on port extensions and I travel with less. the old 60mm because of the extension during focusing does not fit and needs a bigger port.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Sponsors

Advertisements



×
×
  • Create New...