1. Welcome to NikonCafe.com—a friendly Nikon camera & photography discussion forum!

    If you are thinking of buying a camera or need help with your photos, you will find our forum members full of advice! Click here to join for free!

How much slower is the 300 2.8 afd than the afs?

Discussion in 'Lens Lust' started by RACING_RYAN, Jul 19, 2007.

  1. RACING_RYAN

    RACING_RYAN

    35
    Jan 29, 2007
    Stockton, CA
    I'm thinking about getting a 300 2.8 and price wise the afd is appealing to me. I have never used the afd, and only rented an afs for a weekend. I will be using it on a d200.

    I have the 80-200 afd two ring and I think it is a little slow auto focusing.

    Anyone with some experience please help.
     
  2. CAJames

    CAJames

    Sep 6, 2006
    Lompoc, CA
    When I was in the same situation a while back people pointed me to the the AF-I version, and I'm glad they did. While the AF-D is very nice I think the AF-I is better optically and focuses faster. It also works great with the Nikon teleconverters (the AF-D is not compatiable). While they cost more than AF-D they are a lot cheaper than AF-S, I think they are the best value for a 300 f/2.8.
     
  3. Really depends on the body, D1/D2 series has super fast AF sensors and motors that I swear will rip inferior lenses apart - these bodies will drive the AF-D versions very fast and closer to the AF-S speed.
    The D200 is not as strong and I suggest you get a AF-S version.
     
  4. I am so satisfied with my AF 300/2.8 that I would not be interested in an AF-S version (at current pricing) though I will concede that I might (and do) occasionally miss a few BIF shots, especially when I get surprised. The jury is still out on VR as far as I'm concerned.
     
  5. eng45ine

    eng45ine

    May 11, 2005
    Chicago, IL
    There is a huge difference in focusing speeds between these two lenses, but you may be perfectly happy with the non-AFS version depending on what you are shooting. If you expect to capture a third basemen fielding a ground ball, then you want to re-focus on the second baseman making the tag on second base, you are probably going to be disappointed due to slow focusing. The non-AFS lens is a fine piece, but the new technology is amazing.
     
  6. Faceman

    Faceman

    260
    Aug 19, 2006
    LI, NY
    I propose a race between the AF-I and AF-S!
     
  7. Well I could never see any difference in the speed between the two, owning both at one time in fact I got the impression that the af-i seemed a little faster, the real differences are the motor, the weight, the optical make up is the same but the af-i had one extra ED element, and the af-i motor isn't as quiet as the AF-s.

    Phillip.

    :smile::biggrin::smile:
     
  8. RACING_RYAN

    RACING_RYAN

    35
    Jan 29, 2007
    Stockton, CA
    I'm thinking I should save a little extra and get the afs.
     
  9. Faceman

    Faceman

    260
    Aug 19, 2006
    LI, NY
    I've never used the 300 2.8 AF-S but the I do known a AF-I and that thing does focus pretty fast. Like you mentioned, the motor is a bit loud on the AF-I. If you can't afford the AF-S, the AF-I is still a great deal and probably the extra bucks for the AF-S isn't really worth it unless you're getting paid alot of money to cover sporting events or the like for a newspaper/magazine.
     
  1. This site uses cookies to help personalise content, tailor your experience and to keep you logged in if you register.
    By continuing to use this site, you are consenting to our use of cookies.