SonyBug

Actually, I had forgotten that we had such tough childhoods. Sign of age I guess, being 76 now.

Architect1776 Loc: In my mind

Personally I believe you will be very disappointed very quickly. You got af for its accuracy and speed. Play with your current lenses manual and imagine doing this for every shot. Difficult to focus with an AF camera through the viewfinder. Do you want to waste your time in live view in the bright sun? You most likely will regret the purchase quickly unless you enjoy hassles and extra work to get the same or worse photo that you could have gotten otherwise.

Gene51 Loc: Yonkers, NY, now in LSD (LowerSlowerDelaware)

Can I assume that you are using a Nikon 3xxx or 5xxx camera, or similar, without an internal focus drive?

If such is the case, then as others have stated, it depends on how you use it. The biggest problem with manual focus lenses on digital bodies is that the focusing screens are plain ground glass, and have neither the microprism nor the split image focus aids like the old cameras used to have. So focusing is going to be a bit harder. Also, as Apaflo pointed out, the ramp on the focusing ring is much shorter, making it hard to perform slight adjustments.

But like everything, you can develop the necessary motor skills to be accurate with manual focus lenses on your camera. It's just going to take extra time. If the lens is a good AF-D lens, and you are getting it for a decent price, it is probably worthwhile. I still have an 80-200 F2.8 AF-D, with the two rings - one for zoom the other for focus - that I bought a number of years ago for a film camera with no AF drive. On a digital body with a robust motor, like a D300, D700, D800, D3, D4, D5 - it is nearly as fast as an AF-S lens in AF mode. I've used mine to do intercollegiate soccer, championship table tennis (very fast action), LaCrosse, and other situations where it is not supposed to be good. But it was more than adequate. The 70-200 F2.8 would be faster, but not so much that you'd be missing a lot of shots with the 80-200 that you would be getting with the 70-200.

If you plan to get a better body at some point, and the price is right - why not?

Leitz Loc: Solms

I agree with what Apaflo and Gene51 have said concerning the inconvenience of a short-throw focusing ring and AF focusing screens, but for landscapes and much street photography, you can set the lens at its hyperfocal distance and forget it. A benefit here is that you can concentrate more on the subject without the distraction of trying to focus.

amfoto1 Loc: San Jose, Calif. USA

Do some research and find out if the particular lens model is "varifocal" or "parfocal".

Many modern autofocus zooms are varifocal, which means that when you change the focal length, focus IS NOT retained. The lens needs to be refocused any time the focal length is adjusted. This design is less complicated and less expensive to build and maintain, allowing the manufacturer to offer the lens more affordably.

A parfocal zoom maintains precise focus even when the focal length is changed. Of course it takes a more complex design and precise calibration to be able to do that.

With autofocus, it's not a big deal which type of zoom it is. The AF can be set up to immediately correct any focus error after zooming, that a varifocal zoom might cause.

But, when manual focusing it's another story. Varifocal lenses are slower and harder to use. You have to be very careful to always re-focus after zooming, and not to accidentally bump and change the focal length before taking the shot. It's possible, of course... Just a difference you need to be aware of and take a bit more care with, when manually focusing.

Also, modern DSLRs are designed with AF in mind. They typically do not have a lot of the features designed to aid in manual focusing, such as focus screens with split image and micro-diaprism areas. They also tend to have smaller and dimmer viewfinders, also making MF a little more difficult.

OTOH, some can optionally be fitted with focus screens that have these features, some have bigger and brighter viewfinders than others.... And most have some means of "live viewing" the shot on the rear LCD, with the capability of enlarging what's seen there to more closely check focus accuracy. This is something that wasn't possible with manual focus film cameras.

And, many modern DSLRs have some form of "focus confirmation" that can work even with manual focus lenses. The AF system is able to detect when something is in focus, even if there is no means of driving the lens automatically. In at least some focus modes, the camera can light up an LED and/or give an audible "beep" to confirm that focus has been achieved.

Other things that can help include viewfinder magnifiers and angle finders. Optical versions of these have been available for decades. Now there also are digital electronic versions, with 5" and larger screens.

Another way with some cameras is "tethered" control. This may be wired or wireless, depending upon the camera. In most cases it might be done with a laptop or pad computer. In some cases even a Smartphone might be used.

All these can make manual focus "doable" with modern cameras designed to be more reliant upon auto focus.



That's true.... especially with prime lenses and shorter focal lengths that have greater depth of field (such as a street or landscape photog is more likely to be using).

However, in this case the original poster is asking about rather powerful telephoto zooms, in particular. Considerably shallower depth of field makes it a lot more difficult to accurately preset focus with telephotos. Also, some zooms don't even have a distance scale (or if they do, it's not all that accurate). Most zooms don't have a corresponding aperture scale, either... such as is used to set hyperfocal distances. So you'd have to do the calculations separately, or just take a wild-a** guess.

Edit: OP, it occurred to me that unless you look at really old ones, most THIRD PARTY lenses for Nikon do include a focus motor in the lens and would be fully AF-capable on all Nikon bodies... "AF-S" style. The only ones that didn't I can recall off hand are a couple older Tokina ultrawides, both of which were offered motorless at as bit lower cost, but now have been superseded by models with built-in motors.

Maybe there are some others... I don't know. But most 3rd party lenses are designed to be sold for use with assorted systems in addition to Nikon... Sony and Canon especially both rely on in-lens AF motors. It typically doesn't make much sense for the 3rd party lens maker to design a different, motorless lens just for Nikon. Instead they offer basically the same lens, though with different bayonet mount, connectivity and probably firmware, to work on each of the competing systems. It's different than a camera manufacturer's own lens line... such as Nikkors for Nikons.... who are only designing and building lenses to fit their own cameras.

So, you might want to look at 3rd party autofocus lenses for your camera, and not have to worry about manual focusing.

Whew! Kinda makes me glad I'm using Canon... all 110 million EF and EF-S lenses made since 1987 will fit, work and autofocus on my APS-C cameras (though with my FF camera I'm limited to only EF lenses....and there have been some older 3rd party lens on newer Canon camera compatibility issues).

ddetloff Loc: Fair Haven, MI

...we walked to school, both ways in the snow and uphill both ways and with luck we had shoes...

... but we were so poor, my brother and I only had one pair of shoes. I wore them on the way to school in the morning and my brother wore them on the way home.

foathog Loc: Greensboro, NC

Amphoto, you're my hero. you write an answer and it takes up the whole page. LOL

wj cody Loc: springfield illinois

afraid i must disagree. i use the af nikon 300mm f2.8 af-d lens and have had the flex circuits stripped out. it is therefore strictly manual focus. large focusing ring and if you know what you are doing, it works just as it should. for the life of me, i cannot see any advantage in a telephoto lens used in an auto focus mode. all you need to do is enhance your skills at "follow focus".

BobbyT Loc: Southern California

... and there were times that we could use Manual Focus and not see blurry images!

amfoto1 Loc: San Jose, Calif. USA

LOL!

Real story... one of my ancestors lost a leg in the American Revolution. A friend and neighbor of his lost the opposite leg. Being of good solid, Scottish ancestry, they'd buy a pair of shoes and each take the one they needed. They also each had sons who married one of the other's daughters.

Another true story... My Dad was in the Air Force and for a few years was assigned to a radar station in the middle of nowhere in Montana, a few miles south of the Canadian border, where I attended a two room school house serving 1st through 8th grades. There was a bus, though it was only a few miles so we sometimes walked... or rode a horse to school (which had a corral out back just for that purpose). I was fortunate because my sister is 10 years older than me and she had to ride a bus to Cut Bank, MT to attend high school... about 40 miles each way, if I recall. I don't remember ever having a "snow day" off, either... Even though we saw really nasty winter blizzards with seriously cold temps that sometimes froze up all the plumbing in the school. -56 F on one occasion... often cold enough that you couldn't directly breathe the air, had to cover your face and breathe through a scarf.

Moose Loc: North Carolina

Thanks to all for your comments. You've given me a lot to consider.

jimmya Loc: Phoenix

The only problem you'll have is trying to actually see through the view finder if your lens is actually in focus unless, that is, you have owl's eyes - I don't. I'm a Canon guy and every one of their lenses has an in lens focus motor.

Moose Loc: North Carolina

Thank Jimmya for your comments. I'm really thinking I should spend the extra money and get the AF-S lens.

MW

If you need to ask, get the autofocus lens. I say this since manual focus with a 100-300mm is no picnic. I would only suggest the manual focus version to someone who is already experienced enough with MF to know that is truly what they want - in which case they would not be asking.

PS: ask the same question about a 20mm lens and I'll give a different answer😄😄😄

Moose Loc: North Carolina

Thanks MW. I ordered the AF lens.