From: ben_wen@athena.mit.edu (Benson Wen)
Subject: Re: Canon 10s Vs Nikon N90, Which one?
Organization: Massachusetts Institute of Technology
	<1992Dec21.233050.15308@jarvis.csri.toronto.edu>
	<1992Dec22.190513.10742@research.nj.nec.com>
	<1992Dec23.090900.19842@jarvis.csri.toronto.edu>
Date: Wed, 23 Dec 1992 21:42:57 GMT

Whoa! Whoa! Whoa! Whoa! Whoa! Whoa! No more napalm!!  (well, just a
wee bit more....)

Sorry, Alvin, I'm a staunch Canon supporter and EOS shooter, but geez,
let's get some facts straight!

In article <1992Dec23.090900.19842@jarvis.csri.toronto.edu> acs@csri.toronto.edu (Alvin Chia-Hua Shih) writes:

   In <1992Dec22.190513.10742@research.nj.nec.com> lds@ccrl.nj.nec.com (Duan-Shin Lee) writes:

   >>and, in my mind, Nikon has basically orphaned it now that they realize
   >>Canon was right to put the motors in the lenses all along.  With the
   >>money you save, you could add another lens to your system, like the
   >>100-300 USM.

   >I don't understand why it is right to put moters in the lenses.
   >If you have 10 lenses, it is more economical to have one motor in
   >the camera body than to have 10 motors, one in each lense.
   >I suppose that the advantage to put the motor in a lense is
   >that this way the motor produces more torque to move
   >the glass.  If so, only BIG lenses need motors in them, such as
   >the 600mm/f4.  For wide angle to short telephoto lenses, the F4,
   >N90 or even the 8008s do not focuse perceivably (at lease to me)
   >more slowly than the Canon's.  However, the extra motor in the
   >Canon lenses (wide angles to short telephotos) is going to cost
   >more for the buyers.

   So what you're saying is that Nikon should cater to the "budget shooter
   group" rather than design the best possible AF for professionals?  Why
   talk about a professional camera and economics in the same breath?

   The advantage of having motors as a part of the lens is to have the
   motor closest to where it will do the most good.  Thus, you win in
   efficiency since you don't have to run power from a fixed point on the
   body to some distant group of elements in the lens.  I imagine the cost
   of adding a flaky transmission to be not substantially less than a
   small motor.

   It's hard to compare AF speeds since the optical construction of the
   lens plays a big role.  It's laughable to compare a lens with internal
   focusing to one that is not.  In addition, I have to think that the
   reason so few people actually notice the AF speed is because it is
   somewhat fascinating to watch everything come into focus.  And for
   most people, fast focus isn't a big deal.  But when you need it you
   won't be so fascinated.  Put a 100-300 USM on an Elan sometime.
   Show me that there's a lens on for N8008s that can be focused that
   quickly.

   And, for your information, the AF-D series lenses are supposed to have
   motors in them.  On top of that, the "plain" AF series is no longer
   being manufacturered.  So, you now get to pay the extra money for the
   motors, and not get to benefit from them *unless* you get an F4 or N90.
   (Real economical that is!)

Well, that's not true.  The AF-D lenses *DON'T* have motors in them,
it's only the AF-I (where I stands for Internal)  AF-D simply return
distance information to the body (whoo, whoo, gotta love those serial
lines!) 

Even so, the only present AF-I lenses are the 300f2.8AF-I and
600f4AF-I which might as well be made out of gold.  Still there are
three lenses that AF with the F3AF that are lens integral motor'd...
200f?, 50f1.?, and 85f?  VERY smooth focusing, but waaaaay slow, and
with the F3AF just damn wrong: hunt, hunt, hunt.  The F4 will AF them
(yo! Nikon's powerful backward compatibility), tho'.

   Even if you *do* get an F4 or N90, unless you're a pro, there is still
   no guarantee that Nikon will treat you like a decent human being.
   There have been reports on the net of Nikon warrantee repairs taking 4
   to 6 WEEKS.  And still other reports of Nikon REFUSING to honor
   warranties unless specifically threatened (yes, even on F4s!).

Well, everybody has their horror stories.  I've never used NPS, or
CPS, or hell, had anything repaired....but I've *HAVE* heard bad
things about NPS from several used Nikon dealers at camera shows...but
I was fondling one of their EOS bodies at the time!  I used to work in
a camera store, and Nikon service wasn't any worse than any
other...which isn't saying much since I thought they ALL could stand
for improvement.  Never saw any EOS come into the shop... ;)

   So tell me, how do *I* get to enjoy the benefits of Nikon Professional
   Services?  Most of the "what camera should I buy?" type questions are
   coming from ENTHUSIASTS.  They probably have other jobs to pay their
   bills and will never get to benefit from the "Legendary Service" that
   Nikon offers its pros.

   In summary:
     - Body intergral AF is inferior.  For Nikon boosters to deny this is
	to contradict the direction in which Nikon.

Actually, the jury is still out... Nikon seems to have a good
engineering sense, have *BOTH* available.  Body integral for small
light lenses (IF's included,) lens integral for the massive
jobs.  With the N90's support of this philosophy, it looks like the
way Nikon is headed.  Let's all bow our heads a moment and thank the
gods that neither Nikon nor Canon has dipped into the lens-integral-
motor-for-zooming camp (well, okay, Canon transgressed once, but
they've repented).  

I think the major win of lens integral motors for Canon is USM's...
whooo!  Didja hear that!  Nope!  Nx00x(s) and F4's and N90's are
NOISY.  And yeah, they ain't slow...but, since we're talking about
non-trivial glass (the 300 and 600 AF-I's) take a gander at the EF85f1.2L
and EF50f1.0L...urk.  The F3AF 200f? is almost as fast, and just about
as noisy.

And of course, the corallary of USM is on the fly, on demand MANUAL
FOCUS, a non-trivial win.

     - There is no cost savings to Nikon owners due to lens-integral motors
	because Nikon no longer makes AF lenses without motors in them

Not true, so nope.

     - It is a contradiction to talk about "economical" and "professional"
	at the same time.

A professional is subject to economics too!  Just because it's how you
earn your living doesn't mean you can spend an infinite amount of $$$!
In fact it might be just the opposite, you'd be even more careful
in how your photo dollars go, with such a vested interest.

     - It is irresponsible to push Nikon based on its "Professional Services"
	because the majority of people shopping for cameras on rec.photo
	will never benefit.

Well, okay.

     - It is irresponsible to push Nikon based on its "Professional Services"
	because the majority of people shopping for cameras on rec.photo
	will never benefit.

Maybe.  But it's sort of the prestige thing, I guess.  That someone
somewhere out there is shooting the same stuff you do and has C/NPS
behind them adds to the allure, n'est pas?

     - It is irresponsible to push Nikon based on its warranty coverage
	(2 years in Canada) because they have hassled (mere) amateurs over
	legitimate repairs and have such a poor turnaround time.

Maybe.

   And that's the way I see it.

   ACS

   Alvin_C._Shih____________________acs@csri.utoronto.ca______________________|

Let's not forget the N90's most glorious, if a bit complicated, flash
system.  DISTANCE!  Hah!  What an idea...I wonder if Canon is thinking
"duuuuuh, why didn't I think of that?!"  Actually Canon *DID* think of
it for it's FD system... it was called CAT for Canon Auto Tuning.
You stuck a dedicated potentiometer on the front of your lens, coupled
to the focusing ring.  A wire ran to the flash and cut it off as a
function of distance.  You selected the aperture as a function of ASA.
And FP sync is nothing new, check out the Olympus OM-4(T)...1/4000
wimp-sync, also.

And, Nikon's AM200 focuses in MUCH LOWER LIGHT AND CONTRAST than
anyone.  I'm curious as to whether the CAM246 is as good.

*F-O* 

(hah, I just got added to a few more kill files!)

-Ben
--

|| Benson Wen
|| ben_wen@athena.mit.edu
|| queeph@hing.lcs.mit.edu
Newsgroups: rec.photo