Nikon 60mm f/2.8 AF-D or the Nikon 60mm AF-S G...?

Please register or login

Welcome to ScubaBoard, the world's largest scuba diving community. Registration is not required to read the forums, but we encourage you to join. Joining has its benefits and enables you to participate in the discussions.

Benefits of registering include

  • Ability to post and comment on topics and discussions.
  • A Free photo gallery to share your dive photos with the world.
  • You can make this box go away

Joining is quick and easy. Log in or Register now!

lsorenson

Contributor
Scuba Instructor
Divemaster
Messages
797
Reaction score
106
Location
North Carolina
# of dives
500 - 999
Hey guys… I have decided to choose the 60mm over the 105mm however; I could really use some advice between the Nikon 60mm f/2.8 AF-D and the Nikon 60mm AF-SG.

I know with the AF-D I can get an inch more working space from the object but unsure if there are any “got-ch’s if I went with the D vs the S…


My equipment is the D90 using the Aquatica housing with twin Inon 240Z strobes.


If anyone has first hand experience with both would be best however this is not always the case… Can someone shed some light on this for me…?

Regards, lee
 
Dont know if you've seen this but check out:

Nikon 60mm AF-S Micro

Nikon 60mm AF-D Micro

Personally I'd go with the D if I was looking for a 60mm macro lens again. Its less expansive too. I do own the D and find it to be outstanding for optical quality and sharpness. If I was taking macro shots on land I would go with the 105 macro. As Ken says in his articles, with the 60mm you cant easily light your subject as the lens gets in the way. Underwater with strobe arms you can almost put the light where ever you want/need it.
 
Thanks Coral...

Yes, I have read Ken's write up and as much as I can find regarding these two lenses (the 60mm)... I know about the advantages and disadvantages regarding 105mm and you are right about using it on land where the tripod can be utilized but have found little to nothing in the diving world regarding these two lenses, again the 60mm...

I pleased to find you are satisified with the D and is the way I am leaning, actually it is the way I am leaning but wanted to make sure I did not misread the documentation... I have a bad habit of looking and not reading...!!!

Mind if I ask what your shooting with?

lee
 
Im shooting with a Nikon D90 in a Nauticam housing, Sea & Sea strobes and either the Nikon 60mm f/2.8 AF-D or the Tokina 10-17mm fisheye depending on what Im after of course.

Have a peek at: Andrew Hosking Photography

Everything underwater on the Grand Cayman 2011 page was shot with the 60mm f/2.8 AF-D.
 
Coral... Thanks so much for the input! I was hoping for more input by others but sometimes you just have to work with what you gotlll Between you and the reading I have done, I believe, puts me into a position to go ahead and feel comfortable in purchasing the D...!

Many thanks for your input!

lee
 
I have the Nikkor 60mm AF-D and I recommend it over the AF-S 60mm as it is cheaper and you can also add a Kenko 1.4x Teleconverter and shoot super macro (turns the 60mm into a 85mm but with 1.4x image size). The AF-S 60mm doesnt AF with a TC.

Regards Mark
 
Like Mark said, if you are interested in supermacro read this article on teleconverters and get the "old" 60mm. If not, get the slightly faster focusing new AF-S one. - Scott
 
From what it seems to me, there are upsides and downsides to both. I was set on buying the "old" 60mm because of the cheaper price + teleconverter option... but then I realized that the AF-D does not internally focus. I already have a Nauticam port that has 67mm threading for a diopter... and using a diopter with the AF-D doesn't seem compatible, since the lens will vary in distance from the diopter when focusing, which should cause image degradation, maybe even some vignetting? ( I have not experimented so please correct me if I am wrong here).

And since I really like the port with the 67mm option, esp for the 105 VR which I currently use, it seems I must buy the newer AF-S version. The downside of course is a higher price with no teleconverter option.

So the main difference seems to me: tele vs diopter, and what you might feel more comfortable using should you choose to gain a bit more magnification from the 60mm. The diopter option is more convenient for my current setup.
 
Haven't heard it from others, and I haven't used the AF-S, but my AF-D hunts something fierce on my D300, slamming from minimum focus to infinity and back if there's any kind of crap in the water. I've used it with and without focus light. Hunts less often with focus light, but if the water is crappy, it still hunts like a bloodhound.
 

Back
Top Bottom