whocares said:
I don't personnaly see this as a change in mount, merely as an evolution. The biggest step was the introduction of AI lenses that no longer worked with previous SLRs. Second would be the introduction of the DX lenses... but then backward compatibility is less important IMHO.
I am more middle of the road on whether Nikon has changed their mount or not. I gave what I did as a historical perspective. And for those that might feel Nikon, "right or wrong". ChrisA has possibly the strongest argument about the "success" of Canon moving towards the EOS mount.
But Canon is not without its warts on the issue. There are EOS lenses that do not communicate the distance info needed for E-TTL II. And IIRC there have been a few lenses even from Canon that needed to be rechipped. But the Canon track record is pretty good since the EOS introduction in 1987. Probably pretty equal (save that Canon has used some sort of motor for AF, but Nikon did provide better compatibility with the AI lenses with AF bodies - while Canon abandoned their FD users - lets call it a draw).
It is still possible today - with some limitation, to mount any AI lense on the latest DSLR. These limitations are:
1. Loss of metering on DSLR like the D70. This is merely a firmware crippling. It should work.
Actually this is a hardware issue. The D70 (like the N70 and N80 IIRC) lack the AI ring around the lens mount to communicate the aperture info.
2. No focusing information. Again firmware limitations.
I will have to test this out (unless you have), IIRC the "electronic RF" AKA the AF confirmation dot, I thought worked as long as the lens had a 5.6 aperture or better.
3. No matrix metering due to lack of max. aperture coupling prong. "Overcome" with D200.
Since we just got a display unit of the D200, I will have to check this out. Under other AI compatible AF cameras, AI lens limited exposure to center weighted. If this changed under the D200, this is good news. since before under the AI system mount, this feature required the AI-S series.
There is no technical/mechanical reason why AI lenses shouldn't let you use all the fancy things on new cameras, apart obviously from AF. It's just Nikon trying to push their new lenses. Hence I don't believe the F-mount has changed.
Adding a CPU to the AI-P, and AF, AF-D, and AF-S lenses is a requirement for the dual command wheel structure.
I think a better statement that has been echoed since the N70, is why not have compatibility with the AI mount on the newer AF bodies, other than the likes of the D1 and D2 series, and with the new D200.
In some ways it was the failure or neglect of Nikon to recognize that there is a blurring between the pro and consumer markets.
Look at image stabilization. Any Canon EOS mount camera can benefit from IS technology. But for Nikon it demands a camera with at least the Nikon five focus points as a minimum for their VR technology.
Except for prime lenses perhaps, lenses have improved. No way would I want most other 17-35 zooms of the 1980's or 1990's compared to what we have today. Look at the rave reviews of the 18-200VR.
There are fine points along the way that Nikon chose the path they took. Some of it makes sense, some don't. Maybe Nikon did try to push people to buy new lenses. Maybe they looked at how they tried to accommodate the pros as they saw it, and felt the others would benefit in the long term.
Canon did take the opposite path, and tried to be all things to the best they could with their switch to the EOS mount.
The mount is not so much an issue(save for those with major $ invested in lenses). It is the "crop" factor. I personally have seen long time Nikon users making the switch to Canon because of the choice between the 1x, 1.3x, and 1.6x "crop" factors. It gives them a choice based on their needs.
Likewise, look at your newest and greatest AF lenses (non DX or G), they still sport the pilot holes for installing the aperture coupling fork to work with the early Fs and F2s etc.
LOL, I just picked up a used 35/2.0 AF-D and had to look!
Right you are. But you say the newest and greatest AF lenses(excluding DX lenses) according to to the Nikon USA web site (
http://www.nikonusa.com/template.php?cat=1&grp=5), their newest lenses are all G mounts (including the acclaimed 200-400VR). Excluding prime lenses, there are seven G series zoom lenses {plus two G series zoom lenses} (excluding DX lenses). All of these represent the newest and greatest offering in the Nikon line.
I personnally think Nikon have done a great job at mainting their F-mount for this long (c. 50 years), and there's no technical reason they can't keep-it for as long as the format lasts. Indeed, the F-mount is big enough for all the necessary electrical contacts for modern lense coupling to live alongside the old mechanical coupling prongs. The new AF-Gs almost prove this*. Sure they don't work on older bodies, but the new bodies (D200) can use ALL your old glass (even converted pre-AI in theory).
Nikon does deserve credit for trying to keep things going. But the G mount seems to the way they are going. I just looked at my 18-200VR and there no prong indents. And even if it were there, it would serve no purpose on any Nikon that could use (except to shot at a constant 5.6 perhaps.
Yes, the D200 nods to the Nikon past with AI lenses. But even wit it great screen, I a not sure that I would want to use the EAF dot by itself.
And the AF-Gs must have some crazy electronics in them. My D70s can fully operate them with 7 contacts, but the 18-70 AF-S G has 10 contacts. Unless by camera is missing something
AF-S lenses use the three extra contacts in some way to signal the built-in AF motor. But as a Nikon fan-boy you must have known this already.
Sorry, but you went out of your way to totally defend Nikon and their mount. In teh end I think I might have shown that both mounts since the advent of AF in the SLR market have their place.
