Infinity on Nikkor lenses?

Discussion in 'Digital Photography' started by B.A.S., May 6, 2004.

  1. B.A.S.

    B.A.S. Guest

    I've got a pretty significant case of backfocus (very evident in all
    photos, even at smaller apertures with wide depth of field) with my new
    D70 and 24-85 ED G.

    I'm going to head to the dealer on Friday to try and determine if its
    the body or the lens.

    One oddity I've noticed is the focus setting when the lens is set all
    the way to infinity. When set all the way up against the infinity stop,
    the lens reads out with the far edge of the infinity symbol lined up
    with the focus mark. Every other SLR lens I've owned over the last 30
    years has lined up with the *center* of the infinity, 'figure 8' mark.

    Does every Nikkor lens work this way (this is my first Nikkor), or is
    this lens defective?
    B.A.S., May 6, 2004
    #1
    1. Advertising

  2. B.A.S.

    B.A.S. Guest

    B.A.S. wrote:

    > I've got a pretty significant case of backfocus (very evident in all
    > photos, even at smaller apertures with wide depth of field) with my new
    > D70 and 24-85 ED G.
    >
    > I'm going to head to the dealer on Friday to try and determine if its
    > the body or the lens.
    >
    > One oddity I've noticed is the focus setting when the lens is set all
    > the way to infinity. When set all the way up against the infinity stop,
    > the lens reads out with the far edge of the infinity symbol lined up
    > with the focus mark. Every other SLR lens I've owned over the last 30
    > years has lined up with the *center* of the infinity, 'figure 8' mark.
    >
    > Does every Nikkor lens work this way (this is my first Nikkor), or is
    > this lens defective?


    Here's a link to a pic of the lens set at infinity:

    http://home.nc.rr.com/thesimms/DSCN3121.JPG

    To Infinity and Beyond!
    B.A.S., May 6, 2004
    #2
    1. Advertising

  3. B.A.S.

    Mxsmanic Guest

    B.A.S. writes:

    > Does every Nikkor lens work this way (this is my first Nikkor), or is
    > this lens defective?


    A fair number of Nikkors will focus past infinity, mainly to allow for
    thermally-induced changes in infinity focus under differing
    environmental conditions.

    --
    Transpose hotmail and mxsmanic in my e-mail address to reach me directly.
    Mxsmanic, May 6, 2004
    #3
  4. On Thu, 06 May 2004 02:30:28 GMT, "B.A.S."
    <> wrote:

    >I've got a pretty significant case of backfocus (very evident in all
    >photos, even at smaller apertures with wide depth of field) with my new
    >D70 and 24-85 ED G.


    I've been a photographer since the 50s and I never heard the term
    "back focus" until recently on this group. What the devil is back
    focus? I'm guessing it has to do with infinity, but why call it back
    focus.

    Many Nikon lenses used to have dual markings for regular film and IR
    film. So with them there were to infinities.

    >
    >I'm going to head to the dealer on Friday to try and determine if its
    >the body or the lens.
    >
    >One oddity I've noticed is the focus setting when the lens is set all
    >the way to infinity. When set all the way up against the infinity stop,
    >the lens reads out with the far edge of the infinity symbol lined up
    >with the focus mark. Every other SLR lens I've owned over the last 30
    >years has lined up with the *center* of the infinity, 'figure 8' mark.


    It's a broad mark and I can't remember having a lens that focused
    properly against the stop. Then again I don't pay much attention to
    that sort of thing. That's the nice part about SLRs, you focus for a
    sharp image and not to any distance setting on the lens. The only
    thing I've ever used those for was to set the flash.

    Roger Halstead (K8RI & ARRL life member)
    (N833R, S# CD-2 Worlds oldest Debonair)
    www.rogerhalstead.com

    >
    >Does every Nikkor lens work this way (this is my first Nikkor), or is
    >this lens defective?
    Roger Halstead, May 6, 2004
    #4
  5. In article <>,
    Roger Halstead <> wrote:
    >On Thu, 06 May 2004 02:30:28 GMT, "B.A.S."
    ><> wrote:
    >
    >>I've got a pretty significant case of backfocus (very evident in all
    >>photos, even at smaller apertures with wide depth of field) with my new
    >>D70 and 24-85 ED G.

    >
    >I've been a photographer since the 50s and I never heard the term
    >"back focus" until recently on this group. What the devil is back
    >focus? I'm guessing it has to do with infinity, but why call it back
    >focus.


    Back focus is important for video. If you have a zoom lens, it is very
    important that the lens stays in-focus when zooming. (For still picture
    photography it is nice, but not required).

    So, what you do is you vary the distance between the lens and the body
    until you find the right back-focus distance.

    I have no idea what that has to do with still picture photography. Focusing
    problems are caused by a screen/AF-sensor that is out of alignment compared
    to the sensor/film plane.

    If a lens is too far from the body, focusing at infinity might be impossible,
    but that is not what people are complaining about.


    --
    Everyone I've met who had any experience with the phenomenon have confirmed my
    opinion that if a Ph.D. in computer science knows anything at all about
    computers, it's probably pretty much an accident. -- J.D. Baldwin, in asr
    Philip Homburg, May 6, 2004
    #5
  6. B.A.S.

    B.A.S. Guest

    Roger Halstead wrote:
    >
    > I've been a photographer since the 50s and I never heard the term
    > "back focus" until recently on this group. What the devil is back
    > focus? I'm guessing it has to do with infinity, but why call it back
    > focus.
    >


    The term has apparently been coined by camera users to describe the
    problem where the camera's AF system says an image is in focus when in
    fact the in-focus area is a bit (or in my case, a lot) 'in back of' the
    subject supposedly focused upon. With my D70 if I take an outdoor pic of
    someone standing 25 feet away, at 85mm and wide open with my 24-85 ED G
    3.5-4.5, with their face in the AF sensor area, their face will be out
    of focus, and the grass a foot or two behind them will be in focus. This
    is with the camera in single area AF-S mode, and the central AF sensor
    locked on. Happens every time.

    It's far enough out of whack that stopping down to say f8 in the same
    situation still doesn't give you a really sharp result. If I move the
    focus a tick closer manually in either case after the camera has
    focused, I get tack sharp results, so I'm sure it's just a calibration
    thing. Most likely it's the body, but I need to try some other lenses to
    make sure.

    I'm inclined to hold off sending it in to Nikon for a few weeks (I'm
    past the store return date), until I see posts from others with the
    problem indicating whether Nikon was able to fix theirs.

    If at least some users manage to get theirs fixed, I will send the
    camera in, and then if there's still a problem, sell my camera body and
    lens and move on to another brand. I have this option as I've just
    started to build my AF DSLR kit, and it's not too late to change
    directions.

    Most of my previous experience has been with Contax/Zeiss MF 35mm, and I
    have to say I'm not too impressed at first blush with Nikon build
    quality. But Nikon components sure weigh a lot less, and cost a lot less
    (at least the mid-grade bodies and lenses I've begun buying into), both
    of which is OK with me. I really don't expect the same 'hewed from
    stone' look and feel I got with Zeiss lenses. Bottom line is, if the
    performance is acceptable, I can live with the consumer-grade build
    quality.

    Overall I like the D70, and have gotten used to the two-ring zoom on the
    24-85. If the rig could just focus properly, I'd be eager to buy several
    more Nikkor lenses and stick with this kit for a good long while...

    B.A.S.

    P.S. Before I get slammed for whining and daring to complain in the face
    of those who haven't experienced this problem, let me assure you it is
    real, at least with my body/lens. I can supply pics to anyone interested
    in viewing them. I have 30+ years of experience in the field, with
    everything from large format (Linhoff, Calumet) to medium format
    (Pentax, Mamiya, Yashica, Bronica) to 35mm (Konica, Pentax, Yashica,
    Contax).
    B.A.S., May 6, 2004
    #6
  7. B.A.S.

    Chris Berry Guest

    "B.A.S." <> wrote in message
    news:Zkpmc.15420$...
    >
    > P.S. Before I get slammed for whining and daring to complain in the face
    > of those who haven't experienced this problem, let me assure you it is
    > real, at least with my body/lens. I can supply pics to anyone interested
    > in viewing them. I have 30+ years of experience in the field, with
    > everything from large format (Linhoff, Calumet) to medium format
    > (Pentax, Mamiya, Yashica, Bronica) to 35mm (Konica, Pentax, Yashica,
    > Contax).


    OK... so you know what you're on about...
    The only thing I can think of with my very limited experience is that the AF
    sensor isn't the same optical distance from the lens as the film plane.
    Definitely a case for sending it back though.
    You didn't mention if it was the viewfinder or the actual "prints" that are
    out of focus - or what model body you're using.
    My Experience with Nikon's digital products is that they just don't
    compete - no matter how good the lenses are.
    BTW, your problem seems to have nothing to do with the mounting distance
    between the lens and the "film plane" - just an af sensor and film plane
    discrepancy.
    The again it could be software...
    I don't think it's the lens either b/c the af sensing is through the lens.
    cb
    Chris Berry, May 6, 2004
    #7
  8. Some long focal length lenses can focus past the infinity setting to allow
    for changes in the focal length or the lens mechanics with temperature.

    Cheers,
    David
    David J Taylor, May 6, 2004
    #8
  9. B.A.S.

    B.A.S. Guest

    Chris Berry wrote:
    > "B.A.S." <> wrote in message
    > news:Zkpmc.15420$...
    >
    >>P.S. Before I get slammed for whining and daring to complain in the face
    >>of those who haven't experienced this problem, let me assure you it is
    >>real, at least with my body/lens. I can supply pics to anyone interested
    >>in viewing them. I have 30+ years of experience in the field, with
    >>everything from large format (Linhoff, Calumet) to medium format
    >>(Pentax, Mamiya, Yashica, Bronica) to 35mm (Konica, Pentax, Yashica,
    >>Contax).

    >
    >
    > OK... so you know what you're on about...
    > The only thing I can think of with my very limited experience is that the AF
    > sensor isn't the same optical distance from the lens as the film plane.
    > Definitely a case for sending it back though.
    > You didn't mention if it was the viewfinder or the actual "prints" that are
    > out of focus - or what model body you're using.


    It's a D70. The digital image upon close inspection on-screen or printed
    is out of focus. I find the viewfinder image so small and dim, and
    lacking manual focus aids like microprism or split-image, that I'm
    unable to tell whether or not it's in focus through the viewfinder. Hey,
    that's why I moved to AF in the first place - between my eyes and early
    onset arthritis, manual focus was becoming hit or miss, even with the
    great viewfinders on my Contax's.

    > My Experience with Nikon's digital products is that they just don't
    > compete - no matter how good the lenses are.
    > BTW, your problem seems to have nothing to do with the mounting distance
    > between the lens and the "film plane" - just an af sensor and film plane
    > discrepancy.


    I suspect you're right, though it may just be a calibration thing
    (either physical or firmware).

    > The again it could be software...
    > I don't think it's the lens either b/c the af sensing is through the lens.
    > cb
    >
    >


    I too suspect it's not the lens...

    B.A.S.
    B.A.S., May 6, 2004
    #9
  10. B.A.S.

    B.A.S. Guest

    David J Taylor wrote:

    > Some long focal length lenses can focus past the infinity setting to allow
    > for changes in the focal length or the lens mechanics with temperature.
    >
    > Cheers,
    > David
    >
    >


    Thanks David and mxsmanic - I'm coming to the conclusion that the 'past
    infinity' issue is a non-issue with this lens.

    B.A.S.
    B.A.S., May 6, 2004
    #10
  11. B.A.S.

    Don Guest

    "Back Focal Distance" is a term historically used to define the distance
    between the rear-most point of the rear element (usually the center of the
    element) and the focal plane, not to be confused as the distance between the
    lens mount plane and the focal plane. I don't know exactly what the term
    "backfocus" means, but it is confusing, at best.

    Don


    "B.A.S." <> wrote in message
    news:8rhmc.8997$...
    > I've got a pretty significant case of backfocus (very evident in all
    > photos, even at smaller apertures with wide depth of field) with my new
    > D70 and 24-85 ED G.
    >
    > I'm going to head to the dealer on Friday to try and determine if its
    > the body or the lens.
    >
    > One oddity I've noticed is the focus setting when the lens is set all
    > the way to infinity. When set all the way up against the infinity stop,
    > the lens reads out with the far edge of the infinity symbol lined up
    > with the focus mark. Every other SLR lens I've owned over the last 30
    > years has lined up with the *center* of the infinity, 'figure 8' mark.
    >
    > Does every Nikkor lens work this way (this is my first Nikkor), or is
    > this lens defective?
    Don, May 6, 2004
    #11
  12. On Thu, 06 May 2004 11:30:01 GMT, "B.A.S."
    <> wrote:

    >Roger Halstead wrote:
    >>
    >> I've been a photographer since the 50s and I never heard the term
    >> "back focus" until recently on this group. What the devil is back
    >> focus? I'm guessing it has to do with infinity, but why call it back
    >> focus.
    >>

    >
    >The term has apparently been coined by camera users to describe the
    >problem where the camera's AF system says an image is in focus when in
    >fact the in-focus area is a bit (or in my case, a lot) 'in back of' the
    >subject supposedly focused upon. With my D70 if I take an outdoor pic of
    >someone standing 25 feet away, at 85mm and wide open with my 24-85 ED G
    >3.5-4.5, with their face in the AF sensor area, their face will be out
    >of focus, and the grass a foot or two behind them will be in focus. This
    >is with the camera in single area AF-S mode, and the central AF sensor
    >locked on. Happens every time.
    >
    >It's far enough out of whack that stopping down to say f8 in the same
    >situation still doesn't give you a really sharp result. If I move the
    >focus a tick closer manually in either case after the camera has
    >focused, I get tack sharp results, so I'm sure it's just a calibration
    >thing. Most likely it's the body, but I need to try some other lenses to
    >make sure.
    >
    >I'm inclined to hold off sending it in to Nikon for a few weeks (I'm
    >past the store return date), until I see posts from others with the
    >problem indicating whether Nikon was able to fix theirs.
    >
    >If at least some users manage to get theirs fixed, I will send the
    >camera in, and then if there's still a problem, sell my camera body and
    >lens and move on to another brand. I have this option as I've just
    >started to build my AF DSLR kit, and it's not too late to change
    >directions.
    >
    >Most of my previous experience has been with Contax/Zeiss MF 35mm, and I
    >have to say I'm not too impressed at first blush with Nikon build
    >quality. But Nikon components sure weigh a lot less, and cost a lot less
    >(at least the mid-grade bodies and lenses I've begun buying into), both
    >of which is OK with me. I really don't expect the same 'hewed from
    >stone' look and feel I got with Zeiss lenses. Bottom line is, if the
    >performance is acceptable, I can live with the consumer-grade build
    >quality.
    >
    >Overall I like the D70, and have gotten used to the two-ring zoom on the
    >24-85. If the rig could just focus properly, I'd be eager to buy several
    >more Nikkor lenses and stick with this kit for a good long while...
    >
    >B.A.S.
    >
    >P.S. Before I get slammed for whining and daring to complain in the face
    >of those who haven't experienced this problem, let me assure you it is
    >real, at least with my body/lens. I can supply pics to anyone interested
    >in viewing them. I have 30+ years of experience in the field, with
    >everything from large format (Linhoff, Calumet) to medium format
    >(Pentax, Mamiya, Yashica, Bronica) to 35mm (Konica, Pentax, Yashica,
    >Contax).


    I don't call this whining. From your description there is something
    wrong. You should return the camera.

    I have used an F5 for four years, and hundreds of rolls of film. I
    have occasionally got an action shot where I got the focus in the
    wrong place, but never outside the indicated spot. It ws just that I
    had moved the camera, or the action had moved.

    In the nature of the AF mechanism, it seems to me it must be the body,
    but I would certainly try another lens just to be sure.

    I use three AF lenses and a couple of MF.


    Rodney Myrvaagnes J36 Gjo/a


    Ask not with whom the buck stops . . .
    Rodney Myrvaagnes, May 6, 2004
    #12
  13. B.A.S.

    Roger Guest

    On Thu, 06 May 2004 02:30:28 +0000, B.A.S. wrote:

    > I've got a pretty significant case of backfocus (very evident in all
    > photos, even at smaller apertures with wide depth of field) with my new
    > D70 and 24-85 ED G.
    >
    > I'm going to head to the dealer on Friday to try and determine if its
    > the body or the lens.
    >
    > One oddity I've noticed is the focus setting when the lens is set all
    > the way to infinity. When set all the way up against the infinity stop,
    > the lens reads out with the far edge of the infinity symbol lined up
    > with the focus mark. Every other SLR lens I've owned over the last 30
    > years has lined up with the *center* of the infinity, 'figure 8' mark.
    >
    > Does every Nikkor lens work this way (this is my first Nikkor), or is
    > this lens defective?


    I use the 24-85 f3.5-4.5 G AF-S lens on a F100 and F5 film camera without
    any problem. I use it in manual, AF and predictive-AF mode; all with no
    misses. That said, I have had two instances of bad AF with this lens and
    both times it was solved by taking the lens off the camera and then
    re-installing it with a firm and positive mounting motion finished with a
    distinctive audible click of the lens seating against the stopping flange
    on the body. I think my problems were due to incomplete electrical contact
    on the focusing.

    It is possible to physically manual focus my lens past the infinity
    marking and thus get an oof result.

    I just checked on my F100. Using AF mode, at the 24mm focal length the
    camera focuses on an object at infinity and the distance index of the lens
    appears just at the low footage side of the infinity symbol. At the 85mm
    focal length, when the camera focuses on an object at infinity the
    distance index appears dead center on the infinity loop. For both
    situations, the image of the infinity object is crisp in the viewfinder
    and the focus "dot" is illuminated.

    Regards,
    Roger
    Roger, May 6, 2004
    #13
  14. B.A.S.

    Roger Guest

    On Thu, 06 May 2004 11:30:01 +0000, B.A.S. wrote:

    > If at least some users manage to get theirs fixed, I will send the
    > camera in, and then if there's still a problem, sell my camera body and
    > lens and move on to another brand. I have this option as I've just
    > started to build my AF DSLR kit, and it's not too late to change
    > directions.


    I know it's frustrating to have paid a lot of money for a camera and then
    be immediately hit with some problems, been there - done that. However,
    don't give up on this too soon. The 24-85mm f3.5-4.5 G AF-S Nikkor is a
    very, very solid performer and that's said from a film user who doesn't
    have the advantage to taking the center cut. IMO the lens is one of the
    reasonable priced gems in the Nikkor linup. It's one of about 20 that I
    use and it's become the one that gets the most use for travel and general
    photography. I've tested the build quality in practical usage and I'm very
    pleased. I'm used to the bullet proof Nikkors of the MF era and while not
    the same, this is indeed durable. The hood nicely soaks up shocks and
    given the 24mm wide end, does a good job of mechanically protecting the
    lens. I wasn't an avid zoom fan till I used this lens.

    Good luck,
    Roger
    Roger, May 6, 2004
    #14
  15. B.A.S.

    Guest

    On Thu, 06 May 2004 02:30:28 GMT, "B.A.S."
    <> wrote:

    >I've got a pretty significant case of backfocus (very evident in all
    >photos, even at smaller apertures with wide depth of field) with my new
    >D70 and 24-85 ED G.


    [Snip]

    There are lengthy discussions of this issue in the D70 forum on
    DPReview.com. There is evidently something wrong with some D70's, and
    Nikon will fix it.

    HTH
    Duncan
    , May 6, 2004
    #15
  16. "B.A.S." <> writes:

    > I've got a pretty significant case of backfocus (very evident in all
    > photos, even at smaller apertures with wide depth of field) with my
    > new D70 and 24-85 ED G.
    >
    > I'm going to head to the dealer on Friday to try and determine if its
    > the body or the lens.
    >
    > One oddity I've noticed is the focus setting when the lens is set all
    > the way to infinity. When set all the way up against the infinity
    > stop, the lens reads out with the far edge of the infinity symbol
    > lined up with the focus mark. Every other SLR lens I've owned over the
    > last 30 years has lined up with the *center* of the infinity, 'figure
    > 8' mark.
    >
    > Does every Nikkor lens work this way (this is my first Nikkor), or is
    > this lens defective?


    That's a zoom or varifocal lens. My experience is that the markings
    are pretty much random and meaningless on that kind of lens.
    --
    David Dyer-Bennet, <mailto:>, <http://www.dd-b.net/dd-b/>
    RKBA: <http://noguns-nomoney.com> <http://www.dd-b.net/carry/>
    Photos: <dd-b.lighthunters.net> Snapshots: <www.dd-b.net/dd-b/SnapshotAlbum/>
    Dragaera/Steven Brust: <http://dragaera.info/>
    David Dyer-Bennet, May 6, 2004
    #16
  17. On Thu, 06 May 2004 11:30:01 GMT, "B.A.S."
    <> wrote:

    >Roger Halstead wrote:
    >>
    >> I've been a photographer since the 50s and I never heard the term
    >> "back focus" until recently on this group. What the devil is back
    >> focus? I'm guessing it has to do with infinity, but why call it back
    >> focus.
    >>

    >
    >The term has apparently been coined by camera users to describe the
    >problem where the camera's AF system says an image is in focus when in
    >fact the in-focus area is a bit (or in my case, a lot) 'in back of' the
    >subject supposedly focused upon. With my D70 if I take an outdoor pic of
    >someone standing 25 feet away, at 85mm and wide open with my 24-85 ED G
    >3.5-4.5, with their face in the AF sensor area, their face will be out
    >of focus, and the grass a foot or two behind them will be in focus. This
    >is with the camera in single area AF-S mode, and the central AF sensor
    >locked on. Happens every time.
    >


    First, thanks for the definition.

    I have a D-70 but I purchased the body only and then the 12 to 24 wide
    angle zoom. I also have a set of Nikon D lenses including the 24 to
    120. It's right on with both the 12 to 24 and the 24 to 120 (at 120).

    Auto focus works just fine for portraits and for close ups.
    OTOH when it comes to close up work I still resort to manual focus
    most of the time. The diopter adjustment comes in handy there.


    Roger Halstead (K8RI & ARRL life member)
    (N833R, S# CD-2 Worlds oldest Debonair)
    www.rogerhalstead.com

    >It's far enough out of whack that stopping down to say f8 in the same

    <snip>
    Roger Halstead, May 6, 2004
    #17
  18. B.A.S.

    B.A.S. Guest

    Was Re: Infinity on Nikkor lenses? UPDATE

    I checked my D70 out today with two new fast primes - a 50/1.4 and a 35/2.

    Shooting wide open with both lenses, it was clear in every shot that the
    camera was focusing on a point beyond what it was pointed at (just as it
    does with my 24-85 ED G). So the focus problem is consistent across 3
    different lenses - obviously it's the body that has a problem.

    It will be going to Nikon service shortly...

    Thanks for the replies regarding the infinity setting on the 24-85 - I'm
    confident there's no problem there (I'm very happy with this lens'
    performance when focused correctly).

    B.A.S.
    B.A.S., May 6, 2004
    #18
  19. On Thu, 06 May 2004 14:43:03 -0500, David Dyer-Bennet <>
    wrote:

    >"B.A.S." <> writes:
    >
    >> I've got a pretty significant case of backfocus (very evident in all
    >> photos, even at smaller apertures with wide depth of field) with my
    >> new D70 and 24-85 ED G.
    >>
    >> I'm going to head to the dealer on Friday to try and determine if its
    >> the body or the lens.
    >>
    >> One oddity I've noticed is the focus setting when the lens is set all
    >> the way to infinity. When set all the way up against the infinity
    >> stop, the lens reads out with the far edge of the infinity symbol
    >> lined up with the focus mark. Every other SLR lens I've owned over the
    >> last 30 years has lined up with the *center* of the infinity, 'figure
    >> 8' mark.
    >>
    >> Does every Nikkor lens work this way (this is my first Nikkor), or is
    >> this lens defective?

    >
    >That's a zoom or varifocal lens. My experience is that the markings
    >are pretty much random and meaningless on that kind of lens.


    I think you will find that on the Nikon lenses they are pretty close.
    At least mine are.

    Roger Halstead (K8RI & ARRL life member)
    (N833R, S# CD-2 Worlds oldest Debonair)
    www.rogerhalstead.com
    Roger Halstead, May 7, 2004
    #19
  20. Roger Halstead <> writes:

    > On Thu, 06 May 2004 14:43:03 -0500, David Dyer-Bennet <>
    > wrote:
    >
    >>"B.A.S." <> writes:
    >>
    >>> I've got a pretty significant case of backfocus (very evident in all
    >>> photos, even at smaller apertures with wide depth of field) with my
    >>> new D70 and 24-85 ED G.
    >>>
    >>> I'm going to head to the dealer on Friday to try and determine if its
    >>> the body or the lens.
    >>>
    >>> One oddity I've noticed is the focus setting when the lens is set all
    >>> the way to infinity. When set all the way up against the infinity
    >>> stop, the lens reads out with the far edge of the infinity symbol
    >>> lined up with the focus mark. Every other SLR lens I've owned over the
    >>> last 30 years has lined up with the *center* of the infinity, 'figure
    >>> 8' mark.
    >>>
    >>> Does every Nikkor lens work this way (this is my first Nikkor), or is
    >>> this lens defective?

    >>
    >>That's a zoom or varifocal lens. My experience is that the markings
    >>are pretty much random and meaningless on that kind of lens.

    >
    > I think you will find that on the Nikon lenses they are pretty close.
    > At least mine are.


    They are on the primes, anyway. I've never actually used a zoom lens
    made by the same manufacturer as the body, in any format (even the
    Arriflex had a Zeiss lens on it :) ).
    --
    David Dyer-Bennet, <mailto:>, <http://www.dd-b.net/dd-b/>
    RKBA: <http://noguns-nomoney.com> <http://www.dd-b.net/carry/>
    Photos: <dd-b.lighthunters.net> Snapshots: <www.dd-b.net/dd-b/SnapshotAlbum/>
    Dragaera/Steven Brust: <http://dragaera.info/>
    David Dyer-Bennet, May 8, 2004
    #20
    1. Advertising

Want to reply to this thread or ask your own question?

It takes just 2 minutes to sign up (and it's free!). Just click the sign up button to choose a username and then you can ask your own questions on the forum.
Similar Threads
  1. FRbud35

    mounting nikkor lenses

    FRbud35, Aug 11, 2003, in forum: Digital Photography
    Replies:
    1
    Views:
    417
  2. ArtKramr

    DSLR' that take Nikkor lenses?

    ArtKramr, Dec 9, 2003, in forum: Digital Photography
    Replies:
    21
    Views:
    718
    Ron Hunter
    Dec 13, 2003
  3. GTO

    Nikon D100 and older Nikkor lenses

    GTO, Jan 31, 2004, in forum: Digital Photography
    Replies:
    8
    Views:
    648
    Proctor
    Feb 1, 2004
  4. GTABuySell
    Replies:
    5
    Views:
    8,131
    GTABuySell
    Jun 7, 2004
  5. =?iso-8859-1?Q?Rita_=C4_Berkowitz?=

    Nikon Micro Nikkor 105mm f/2.8 VR vs. Micro Nikkor 105mm f/2.8D

    =?iso-8859-1?Q?Rita_=C4_Berkowitz?=, Jun 17, 2006, in forum: Digital Photography
    Replies:
    3
    Views:
    827
Loading...

Share This Page