fotojeff

A recent thread was asking about legacy lenses. Well I love them and have quite a collection. They are built strong, made to last and I expect to pass mine down to my children in great working order.

Recently I’ve been thinking about adding a few new lenses to my collection such as the Nikon 17-35 and the 14-24. As I was researching as well as looking at some used ones I noticed that there seems to be an issue with the motors going out. If I bought a new one it wouldn’t be an issue as it would be covered under warranty for 5 years but on a used one it could go out the next day. I’ve also heard that in one case (the first version of the 24-70) the motors are not even available to repair that lens.

Just wanted to see what your experience has been regarding the longevity of these new lenses? Anyone had to replace the motors? What’s the cost involved? And of course there’s the old argument about us vs import lenses and the ability to get them repaired.

Now my 2 cents. I love technology and I’ve used the newer lenses, they are fantastic, but this notion that a 2000.00 lens isn’t going to last my lifetime really bugs me. I’m also quite sure nikon at some point will make a camera that will no longer even work with the old legacy lenses. Any thoughts or rumors on that?

Thanks for your feedback

Steve Perry Loc: Sylvania, Ohio

I think you're looking for things to worry about :) I've been shooting with AF-S lenses for a long time and only once had to send one in because it was squeaky (I think it was sitting too long). You just don't see any kind of rampant complaints or patterns of older AF-S lenses failing. That, and I don't think it's that costly to fix.

Truthfully, I've worn out more than a few lenses in my time (two 24-70s in fact) and none have died of a broken AF-S motor.

pesfls Loc: Oregon, USA

I can't directly answer your question about the longevity of the newest Nikon lenses as I only own one of the latest generation (16/35). I can say I've had a couple of the AF/D models that gave up the ghost after a few years and Nikon told me they would not repair/work on them. However, none of my AI, AI/S, or AF/S lenses have every failed to perform perfectly. Is touted progress really progress? Makes one wonder.

As to your final point about compatibility, I don't know, but they do have a long track record of working hard at maintaining compatibility. Will they continue with that in this declining market? I don't know, but that has been a basic tenant of their business. Good luck.

nikonbrain Loc: Crystal River Florida

I did not buy a 17 - 35 because of that reason , most of all I read about on eBay said the motor squeals a word of advice do not buy any lens that squeals , I called Nikon repair in Miami Florida they said the motor will fail maybe not today but it will fail....not repairable the motor that is . New motor on a 17- 35 f2.8 $ 550.00 plus tax. So I bought the 14-24 f 2.8 on a year end Nikonusa REFURBISHED sale for $ 1379.00 ...that 17- 35 motor issue seems to be common problem for me to believe it is a fluke. .

mas24 Loc: Southern CA

A $2000 lens should last you a lifetime, and thereafter, if you don't abuse it. You are correct about Nikon giving you a total of 5 years of warranty with registration. That almost competes with Tamron's 6 year warranty. AF-S lenses will autofocus on Nikon bodies that have an internal motor, and those without an internal motor, such as the D3xxx and D5xxx Series. I don't own any AF-D lenses. Or Nikon legacy manual only lenses. The difference, between AF-D and AF-S is that the D lenses have aperture rings, and the S lenses do not. Both are quality lenses though. The Nikon G lenses superseded the D lenses.

nikonbrain Loc: Crystal River Florida

The af-d designation stands for " distance information transmitted to the camera " ,the G designation is for Gelded meaning no aperture ring ....

fotojeff

Steve your probably right and i’m over thinking it. I just really love those older lenses they feel good, they are built solid, and even on the newer cameras produce great images.

I may have mislabeled my title, I didn’t mean to get into a discussion regarding g,d, and other distinctions I understand those differences.

nikonbrain Loc: Crystal River Florida

I am still using my 55 mm f1.2 nikkor predecessor to the "Noct" for nocturnal I bought it used in 1972 it was built in 1969. I also have my 85mm 1.8 from the same time period ...the third is my 180mm 2.8 with the metal screw lens cap....not the ED ...so don't be worried about longevity...

mas24 Loc: Southern CA

Thanks, I didn't know that. You picked the right username, nikonbrain.

jerryc41 Loc: Catskill Mts of NY

True! They have a new DSLR lens that does not work on all DSLRs. I don't recall the name offhand, but they are moving that direction. Still, there are millions of Nikon bodies and lenses that work fine together.

BlackRipleyDog

The difference, between AF-D and AF-S is that the D lenses have aperture rings, and the S lenses do not. Both are quality lenses though. The Nikon G lenses superseded the D lenses.[/quote]

The most significant difference is the focusing system. The D's run off the drive motor mounted in the body while the S's have the Silent-Wave motor incorporated into the lens instead. That plus zoom and VR built-into the lens makes for a significantly more complex lens and may impact long-term endurance. Plus modern cameras are capable of sustained high frame-rates. The lens aperture and focus has to cycle just as fast and for potentially 200 to 300k exposures as well. That alone will explain the high cost of new glass just for the engineering.

fuminous Loc: Luling, LA... for now...

I have both the 17-35 and 14-24- never a problem with either... and I "use" my lenses (especially the 17-35), that is, they're in the field, camera mounted, flaying about on a strap, while climbing ladders, jumping off/in/out of things, squeezing through construction sites, mud, rain, sand, dust, chemicals... in short, I don't 'baby' my equipment- don't abuse it, but it must at least keep up with me... Nikon lenses are tough, dependable and pretty darn good. Come to think of it, if the servo motor went out in either lens... I'd still use the things.

camerapapi Loc: Miami, Fl.

I have a mix of AF-S and AF-D lenses. I have NEVER sent a lens to have the motor repaired but I am no professional photographer so lets call my shooting casual.
The AF-D lenses are slower because they use a screw but if not shooting action they do pretty good. I shoot wildlife in the Everglades with my old 80-400 VR that uses screw driving for the AF. I do that perhaps once a year so using the new lens with AF-S will be more money for something I do not do everyday. In the heat of South Florida I am more concerned about my comfort in an air conditioned environment than on photographing wildlife.

wingclui44 Loc: CT USA

I have a Nikon 300mm f4.0 AF-s "D" ED IF prime lens, it's an AF-s lens with built in motor but it also is a "D" type lens with aperture ring.

billnikon Loc: Pennsylvania/Ohio/Florida/Maui/Oregon/Vermont