Nikon Lens-Mount Terminology & Compatibility

Overview

Quick Links: What Lenses Will My Camera Work With?    Database of Nikon Lenses   External Links

It's a well-known fact that, within the realm of interchangeable-lens cameras, the design tends to be to where only lenses made by the same manufacturer as the camera, or with its "mount" adapted, will fit the given camera. In other words, Pentax lenses won't fit onto Canon cameras, Nikon lenses only fit on Nikon cameras, etc. Manufacturers like Sigma make lenses for many of the given brands, but any one lens will only fit whichever brand's "mount" it's designed to fit. Thus, a Sigma 50mm f/1.4 in Canon mount only fits Canon cameras, if you wish for a Sigma 50mm f/1.4 to work on your Nikon, you have to buy one that's manufactured in "Nikon mount."

There have been some steps taken towards helping make lenses "cross-compatible" in terms of being capable of being mounted on several brands of cameras, most notably by the usage of adapters, but even then, certain features like autofocus or metering often-times get compromised in the process. Thus, as a general rule, Nikon lenses only work on Nikon cameras, and if you want a certain Sigma, Tokina, Tamron etc lens for your Nikon, you have to buy one that's made with the Nikon mount.

It gets even crazier than that, though. Even within brands, you have differences. In this article, I seek to explain how Nikon lenses work in this regard. This is important, because at the least certain lenses will give reduced features vs what the body is capable of, while in some cases certain lenses can even damage the camera.

First, I will detail the terminology that differentiates the different lenses, then I will list the Nikon DSLRs & give a run-down on how the different lenses work with them.

Explanation of Nikon Lens Terminology

These are my explanations & they're relatively short & brief. This link, also the first one shown under "external links," goes into much greater detail. Do not consider my article to be a comprehensive & thorough in-depth explanation, it's merely an "overview." Also, if you need help identifying your lens, this page will help, it contains a database of practically every Nikon lens ever made.

Pre-AI
Simply put, these are lenses created from 1959 to pre-1977. You can tell them by how there is 1 row of aperture-numbers near the mount, whereas later versions of the lenses have TWO sets of numbers. These are the lenses to watch out for. Many recent Nikon DSLR cameras will actually incur damage if you attempt to mount these lenses. The entry-level models, (Nikon D40/D40x/D60/D3000/D5000/D3100/D5100/D3200), the ones which require AF-S lenses for autofocusing, will accept these lenses without damage, due to slight differences in the mechanics of their mount (I don't know the specific details beyond that) but besides obviously having to focus the lenses, you also have to meter with a hand-held meter with them, or guess.

Also: sometimes you may have a lens that isn't "pre-AI," it will be "AI" etc on its own and be okay to that extent, but may have things like "extension tubes" added to them which may have pre-AI characteristics. In that case, the shortcomings (and the dangers!) inherent in pre-AI lenses themselves will be relevant in the event you use this add-ons, even if the add-ons are mounted to a non-pre-AI lens that would otherwise be okay.

AI
These are manual-focus lenses which were introduced around 1977. You can tell them by the presence of TWO ROWS of aperture-numbers near the mount, one set which is larger & another which is smaller. These will MOUNT on any recent camera but only more advanced models like the D7000, D300 etc, models with an "aperture coupling prong" (a plastic concentric ring around the lens mount), will meter with them; with the others, you will have to set the camera in full-manual mode & set the f-stops/shutter speeds based on a hand-held meter's reading (or guessing).

AF-D
These are autofocus lenses introduced in the mid 1980s or 1990s which haven't been replaced by "AF-S" lenses yet (below). They autofocus by a mechanical linkage between camera body & lens. They work fine on most current DSLRs except for entry-level models (D40/D40x/D60/D3000/D3100/D3200/D5000/D5100) without an autofocus motor in the body; with those, you will have to manually focus. Once you get to "mid-level" models like the D300 or D7000, you don't run into this limitation. As an example, for a long time, the 50mm f/1.8 lens was only available as an AF-D type (until 2011).

AF-S
Almost all current Nikon lenses are of this designation. They work fully 100% on all current models. The kit lenses like the 18-55mm VR and 18-105mm VR are AF-S. Some lenses in Nikon's current line-up haven't yet been updated to AF-S and remain AF-D, but most current lenses are AF-S.

DX
Some AF-S lenses are designated as "DX" lenses. This means they are designed for "DX" (non-full-frame) DSLRs which have a 1.5x crop factor. They will work on "FX" or "full-frame" bodies (like the D700 or D3s) but with limitations. Examples include the 55-200mm (VR or non-VR) and the 18-55mm "kit" lenses you see on the entry-level DSLRs.

FX
Any lens besides an AF-S lens designated as DX will be an "FX" lens, meaning simply enough it isn't designed specifically with "DX" DSLRs in mind. The 50mm f/1.8 AF-S and 50mm f/1.8 AF-D, for instance, are "FX" lenses simply by the fact that they're not labeled as being "DX."

VR
Certain AF-D and AF-S lenses contain optical image stabilization to help reduce image shake brought on by hand-held tremblings. These lenses are called "VR"for "vibration reduction." Canon calls their "IS" (for image stabilization). Other brands use similar designations. 

Camera Compatibility Overview

This section will give an overview on what the lens compatibility situation looks like with various Nikon DSLRs. I got some help with this section from this link (the 2nd link in the "external links" section).

Nikon D1, D1h, D1x
Pre-AI lenses--DO NOT USE!!
AI-Lenses--Will mount & meter (center-weighted metering, aperture-priority or manual modes)
AF-D--Full functionality
AF-S--Full functionality
DX--work as intended (with a 1.5x crop factor present)
FX--1.5x crop factor

Nikon D2-series, D3-series, D4-series, D200, D300/D300s, D700, D7000, D800/D800e
Pre-AI lenses--DO NOT USE!!
AI-Lenses--Will mount & meter (aperture-priority or manual modes), will also display the f-stop in the finder & allow "matrix" metering once you enter lens info in the "Shooting" menu
AF-D--Full functionality
AF-S--Full functionality
DX--work as intended (with 1.5x crop factor present) for all but D3/D4 series, no crop factor present but other limitations imposed with those
FX--no crop factor with D700, D800(e) & D3/D4 series, 1.5x crop factor present with others

Nikon D50, D70/D70s, D80, D90, D100 
Pre-AI lenses--DO NOT USE!!
AI-Lenses--Will mount but will not meter, manual-mode only
AF-D--Full functionality
AF-S--Full functionality
DX--work as intended (with a 1.5x crop factor present)
FX--1.5x crop factor

Nikon D40, D40x, D60, D3000, D3100, D3200, D5000, D5100
Pre-AI lenses--Will mount but will not meter, manual-mode only
AI-Lenses--Will mount but will not meter, manual-mode only
AF-D--Manual focus, all metering functioning available
AF-S--Full functionality
DX--work as intended (with a 1.5x crop factor present)
FX--1.5x crop factor

External Links

Again, this is just a "cursory" explanation of the differences. Below are links which can help you understand this more, the 1st one especially.

A Great Link That Explains The Differences in Detail, also has a camera/lens compatibility chart
Useful Camera Compatibility Article Which Helped/Inspired Me With the "Camera Compatibility" Overview Section
DPreview Posting, mounting a pre-AI 55mm f/3.5 on a D7000
Flickr Discussion on the topic
VERY handy link: Lens Database, This Page Is a HUGE Database of Practically Every Nikkor Lens Ever Made

Aspect Ratios and Image Cropping

A common question I see asked is regarding the making of prints and the cropping that can result. Basically, what happens is this: someone carefully frames a scene a certain way in the viewfinder (or on the LCD in "live view" mode) based on their intended artistic representation of the scene, takes a photograph, this image continues to look the same way on the computer with regards to the elements included in the scene. However, when they order prints of this image, elements near the edge are chopped off and the integrity of the original image, with regards to including everything as was photographed originally, is compromised.

If you print "full-frame" on paper that doesn't match
your image's aspect ratio, you will have "letterbox" borders
like this, but no edge detail will be lost.

This is commonly called cropping and it is the result of two things: (a) the mismatch of the "aspect ratio" of the original image vs the resulting print and (b) priority tending to being placed on having a print without borders versus the priority being placed on maintaining all of the original details, because the mismatch of aspect ratios means if you wish to maintain all of the details, there will be "letterbox" borders extending down the long-end of the print, which most people find undesirable.

Allow me to expand on this a bit. My expansion is probably not the best explanation, and so I will link to other articles I have found on this topic which may expand on this better than I have.

What Are Aspect Ratios Anyway?

The sensor in every camera tends to be of a rectangular shape, and tends to have what is referred to as a "3:2" aspect ratio. This means that when you measure the length of the sensor & the width of the sensor and then express these measurements as a fraction as in Length / Width, the measurements, broken down to the lowest common denominator (as in 12 / 4 = 3 / 1), results in a 3/2 or 3:2 ratio. This dates back to when 35mm film cameras produced images on the film which measured 24x36mm (width-length) or 36x24mm (length-width), which resulted in a 3:2 aspect ratio (36 / 24 = 3 / 2). As DSLR camears sought to replicate the 35mm SLR experience as much as possible, these aspect ratio characteristics, on a smaller scale, were maintained. If you express this 3:2 aspect ratio in decimal format, the number would be 1.3333 (3 divided by 2 with the .3 repeating endlessly into infinity).

3:2 vs 2:3 (L/W vs W/L)

It becomes confusing insomuch that most articles, when referring to the aspect ratio of the camera's output, quote the image in length by width format, which would be 3:2, but print sizes (5x7, 8x10 etc) are commonly quoted the other way, in width by length format, which would make the aspect ratio 2:3 (the numbers have been "flipped"). In order to keep things clear and to be consistent, so as to prevent confusion and getting "lost in the numbers"--from this point forward, I will refer to the aspect ratios in width by length, which would be expressed as 2:3, regardless of whether I'm discussing the camera's output or the resulting print itself. (The decimal format of this number, 2 divided by 3, would be 0.66666667.)

Priority of Borderless vs "Full Frame"

On the other hand, if you print "borderless" on
paper that doesn't match your image's aspect ratio,
you lose detail on the edges, shown here in blue-green.
(Both photo via 1st link, bottom of page.)

The trouble occurs due to the fact that common popular print sizes, like 5x7, 8x10, 11x14, 16x20 etc are not the same 2:3 aspect ratio as the original image. In order for a 2:3 (or 0.66666667) image to print correctly, without any borders and also without any edge detail being lost, the paper it's outputted onto needs to match this aspect ratio. 4x6 prints do (4/6 = 2/3 = 0.66666667), so you have no problem there, the same goes for certain other sizes such a 12x18 and 16x24. However, most other common print sizes don't match up to the 2:3 (or 0.66666667) aspect ratio, so you have a mismatch, a "square peg on a round hole" situation as it were. Converted to decimal format: 5x7 (5 divided by 7) is 0.714 (which actually isn't that far off). 8x10 (8 divided by 10) is 0.8. 11x14 is 0.786. 16x20 is 0.80.

Most people don't want borders in their images, and so in order for an image with 2:3 ratios to print, say, to an 8x10 sheet of printing paper (which has an aspect ratio of 8 / 10 = 4:5, or 0.80) without any borders, you have to keep enlarging past to where the respective lengths (image to paper) match up in order for the width dimensions to "fill up." Thus, edge detail length-wise tends to be lost. In other words, when you enlarge the original image of a 2:3 image to 8 inches wide, the actual image will be 12 inches long. (The way you calculate this figure: convert the image's 2:3 aspect ratio to decimal format {0.66667} and then DIVIDE the width (8) by this number to get the length (12). Or, "flip" the 2:3 number to 3:2, which would be 1.5 in decimal format, and then MULTIPLY this by the width (8) to get the length (12).)

Thus, in the case of an 8x10 print, you are actually outputting an 8x12 IMAGE onto 8x10 PAPER, thus losing 1" of detail alongside each edge, or 2" total out of the 12 inches that actually exist. (Those you're losing about 17% of the image length-details speaking.) Here are some common print sizes & what things look like if you print "borderless" or if you print "full-frame" (I clarify the terms in greater detail below):

Print Size	Aspect Ratio (Vs 2:3)	Actual Image Size "Borderless"	Actual Image Size "Full-Frame"	Comments
8x10	2.4 / 3 (0.80)	8x12	6.7x10	The "borderless" print will lose 1" of detail on each side length-wise; the "full-frame" print will be smaller than the paper by 0.65 inches width-wise & a border will run the "long way" top & bottom on account of this.
11x14	2.3571 / 3 (0.7857)	11x16½	9.33x14	The "borderless" print will lose 1.25" of detail on either side length-wise; the "full-frame" print will have an image 0.835" smaller than the paper & a border will run the "long way" top & bottom on account of this.
16x20	2.4 / 3 (0.80)	16x24	13.333x20	The "borderless" print will lose 2" of detail on each side length-wise; the "full-frame" print will be smaller than the paper by 1.333 inches width-wise & a border will run the "long way" top & bottom on account of this.

Since few labs offer these unorthodox print sizes, as 5x7/8x10/11x14 etc have long been established as "norms," most people print to these sizes and accept the compromises that result from the mismatches. This is commonly referred to as borderless printing. Also, it's not uncommon for photographers, anticipating this mis-match, to compensate for it when they compose their image to start with, leaving extra room around the edges so that, when this is done, no heads are chopped off & the like. (Some photographers, like me, insist on NOT taking this into account when composing & insisting that the resulting image match the composition, which the "full-frame" option, coming up next, tends to address.)

However, some labs DO offer print sizes such as 8x12, 12x18 or 16x24 which are 2:3 and thus do not create any mismatches. The trouble is, it's difficult to find picture frames that size, since 8x10/11x14 et have become so common. (To a lesser extent, 12x18 has become a common size so finding frames for it may not be as difficult.) Finally, print sizes such as 20x30 and 4x6 are 2:3 to start with, so you have no issues there. 

The other option is to enlarge to where the length matches up (instead of the width) and the result will be the width of the paper is greater than the width of the original image, thus you will have white borders on the edge. Thus, in the case of an 8x10 print, you are actually outputting a 6.7 x 10 print to 8 x 10 paper (10 MULTIPLIED by the 0.66667 decimal number). Many persons find these white borders objectionable, as they closely resemble the "letterbox" viewing experience once sees when watching a wide-screen DVD on a non-wide screen television. This is commonly referred to as full-frame printing.

It's worth noting that, with borderless printing, often-times the compromise isn't obvious, you don't notice the edge detail being lost unless you compare the image & print side-by-side, or unless the edge detail lost is something obvious, like a chopped-off head in a portrait. By contrast, with full-frame-printing, the borders are obvious. Thus, many people choose borderless, often-times not realizing what's going on.

In Short

To work around these headaches, you basically have these options:

Print "borderless" & accept some edge detail (length-wise) will be lost versus your initial composition

Print "full-frame" & accept the white borders along the edges (resembles a "letter-box" DVD viewing experience), this is the one I tend to do

Output your images to paper sizes that match the 2:3 ratio exactly, such a 4x6, 8x12, 11x16½, 16x24 etc, and accept that you will have difficulty, greater expense, or both in finding picture frames that size

Compensate for this in your initial composition, so that printing "borderless" will still result in an acceptable image (what most photographers probably do)

PS
Some cameras, most notably smartphone cameras or point & shoot cameras, tend to have a different aspect ratio altogether, more along the lines of 3:4 (decimal format 0.75), commonly expressed as 4:3 (again width x length vs length x width), in which case all the numbers change, although the principle remains the same. Thus, in the case of an 8x10, a "borderless" print will have an 8 x 10.677 image (8, the width, DIVIDED by 0.75), a "full-frame" one would have a 7.5 x 10 inch image (10, the length, MULTIPLED by 0.75).

More Links On this  

http://bit.ly/NRr64V 

http://bit.ly/NnKVW7

Photo Tip, Landscapes: Polarizing Filters

My "first love" of photography, the type of photography I like the most--taking landscapes. Few things excite me more than a nice landscape photograph I've managed to capture.

Without polarizing filter (L), with polarizing filter (R)
(Image via Wikipedia.Org)

One tool which has been used for many years towards helping make landscape shots as vibrant as possible, a tool from the film-days which is still in usage even in this digital era: a polarizing filter.

An image I took July 2012 during my trip to Jaser ARK.
I credit the usage of a CPL polarizing filter as a large
reason why the clouds stand out so much & the colors
are so rich, this is an un-altered shot.
(20120727_124915_rsf_epl1)

A polarizing filter (here is another article on the subject, which goes in great detail) is a filter which screws onto the front of a camera's lens (provided that camera's lens accepts screw-on attachments, which most "enthusiast" or pro/amateur-grade cameras & their lenses will). It acts much as polarized sunglasses (this Wikipedia article explains it in more detail) in filtering out certain elements of light--in doing so, reflections on water are minimized, edge detail can be rendered in more crisp detail, and colors are deeper & richer. Clouds in the photo tend to stand out more. The photo above illustrates this effect very clearly.

Once you attach the filter, you rotate the concentric ring and look through your camera's viewfinder (or the back of the LCD) until you get the effect you want. Typically, at some point, you will see the skies darken & you will also see the f-stop/shutter speeds change reflecting a reduction in light. This is normal, as polarizing filters tend to reduce light by about 1 f-stop.

Older polarizing filters were "linear," newer ones are "circular." I'm not aware of the technical differences, except for this important consideration: autofocus cameras must use the circular type. Often-times the filter will have "CPL" embossed somewhere to designate it being this type. You also have to make sure the filter is the right size for your lens, look for the filter size on your lens, usually designated in millimeters (mm); often-times you will see the "Ø" symbol, as in "Ø 52mm," (in this case, 52mm), designating the filter-size.

Polarizing filters run for $20-30 depending on where you get them (I've been able to find them for $8 on occasion at sites like Fred Miranda).