NikonGear'23
Gear Talk => Lens Talk => Topic started by: Luc on February 03, 2021, 21:22:05
-
Thom Hogan is well informed and not one to post wild rumours. In this recent article https://www.zsystemuser.com/nikon-z-system-news-and/for-those-with-sony-paranoi.html (https://www.zsystemuser.com/nikon-z-system-news-and/for-those-with-sony-paranoi.html) he mentions the possibility of a forthcoming screw-mount lens adapter. I quote "I think we'll also see the missing screw-mount lens adapter, too. I know that Nikon has heard the screams on that.". Of course, no certainty but it sure would be great if Nikon were to introduce such an adapter.
-
I don't think an FTZ AF will be successful.
Why ?
#1- It's to late. Only old Nikon fans would be interested, and only if they own several AFD lenses. 3 3
#2- This device already exists and allows any lens to auto-focus, which means all kind of lenses, all vintage lenses, any optical system with mount.
#3- FTZ price : 290€ just to use a Nikon lens without AR, except AFS leses. So. how much will it cost with a screwdriver for AFD ? ???
Wait and see, but I made my choice already If I come back to autocus...
FD.
-
Not sure it's too late!
From 18 to 50mm alone there are already 5 Mio. units (AF and AF-D) around... This number includes primes only! Don't forget all the zoom lenses.
Nikon rarely is first but once they are marketing a product it is usually superior
I wouldn't judge them so quickly 8)
-
P.S. the user base jumps to an impressive 14.3 Mio units when including all AF/AF-D zoom lenses starting from up to 50mm
-
P.P.S. the number increases to 20+ Mio lenses (AF,AF-D) when you include zoom lenses and DX (only the 10.5mm fisheye)
I dare to say that the numbers on Roland Vink's site represent less than 50% of the actually shipped units
Can Nikon at their currently challenging financial situation even afford to not tap into this huge potential???
-
All those existing adapters don't give you the Exif-information a Nikon adapter would, so I think there's a market for it. But it will be an expensive one (> €400 I guess)
-
I'd like to see an screw-drive FTZ, even if it would only be to use my 105DC with the Z6!
I've been trying to figure out how such a device would work, can't see it tbh
John
-
I dare to say that the numbers on Roland Vink's site represent less than 50% of the actually shipped units
:o :o :o
For pre-AI, AI and AI-S lenses, I have serial numbers within 100s or 10s of the known starting point. These are the lenses I have the best information on, because I like them the most and spent more time (25+ years) researching them, and there is a base of collectors and enthusiasts who are willing to share new information with me. In theory I have the same chance of of finding serials just as close to the last lens made as the first, so for most if not all lenses, my numbers should be close to 100% of the units shipped.
For older AF lenses, photographers tend to send me early serial numbers when a new lens comes to market. After that interest tends to drop off so I get less frequent updates. Like the manual lenses, I also spent a lot of time collecting more serial numbers from pictures on auction sites. Most of these lenses don't interest me quite as much, so my numbers may not be as complete, maybe within 1000s of the starting and end points. I'd still say my numbers are well above 90% of units shipped.
The high volume kit zooms are hardest to keep track of, they are churned out so fast it is hard to keep up with production numbers. Plus they are of less interest to me and others in general so I am less inclined to spend time trying to find new serial numbers. So where production of some lenses may be in the millions, my numbers could be hundreds of thousands short, but I would say in most cases my numbers are still well above 50% and probably much higher.
For recent lenses that are in current production, the numbers on my site can be quite mixed. A photographer may send me the serial number of their shiny new lens, so for the moment my numbers are probably close to 100%. But then I may not get another update for a year or two while production keeps going so the numbers for that lens get progressively more out of date. But even here I'd say my figures are still pretty good. On my site I flag lenses which are new within the last 6 months so you have some indication of how up to date the serial numbers are.
For cameras, my numbers are less accurate. Some of the older professional cameras are well covered, the cheaper high-volume cameras are less so for the same reasons as the high-volume lenses. Also, Nikon have a bad practice of splitting up the serial numbers into multiple regional zones, which makes it much harder to keep track serial numbers in each zone. For some camera models it is possible that I have missed some smaller regions completely. I can only work with the information that I am given (I don't have any inside knowledge from Nikon) but the aim of that page is more to give an overview of specifications and an indication of the regional serial numbers, not the complete picture.
-
I would buy one
Preferably it shouldhave AI support as well -probably it won't have but who knows
I guess a new adapter might accompany the Z9 release
-
I'd like to see an screw-drive FTZ, even if it would only be to use my 105DC with the Z6!
I've been trying to figure out how such a device would work, can't see it tbh
John
Mechanically the FTZ is rather large and it should be not too difficult to work in a small screw drive motor, even if it makes it a bit lumpier.
Then there would just be firmware updates to identify the lens and execute the proper focus mode (which is already known and implemented in the earlier cameras).
Power to the motor would be through the power supply contacts already in the mount.
-
I have an AF 300/2.8 ED-IF where such an adapter would bring new life to the lens.
A screwdriver adapter is needed here. The Megadap principle does not work with such heavy lenses.
-
For older AF lenses, photographers tend to send me early serial numbers when a new lens comes to market. After that interest tends to drop off so I get less frequent updates. Like the manual lenses, I also spent a lot of time collecting more serial numbers from pictures on auction sites. Most of these lenses don't interest me quite as much, so my numbers may not be as complete, maybe within 1000s of the starting and end points. I'd still say my numbers are well above 90% of units shipped.
The high volume kit zooms are hardest to keep track of, they are churned out so fast it is hard to keep up with production numbers. Plus they are of less interest to me and others in general so I am less inclined to spend time trying to find new serial numbers. So where production of some lenses may be in the millions, my numbers could be hundreds of thousands short, but I would say in most cases my numbers are still well above 50% and probably much higher.
By no means any criticism of your great database Roland! Especially since I am a regular contributor for many years 8)
I was only referring to the older AF, AF-D lenses and am still hesitant regarding your high percentage estimate. There are millions of casual shooters around the world who have no idea or even interest in NikonGear, Nikon rumors, or your great site. In my own "space" alone I know tons of "photographers" who couldn't care less about serial numbers. How could you take into account these numbers?
I believe your data set of pre-Ai to AiS lenses is much more precise - for these I would agree with 90%.
For the AF / AFD primes and zooms a 75% coverage appears much more realistic. In the end the numbers don't matter I just wanted to point out the significant potential for a new FTZ adapter ;D
-
I checked the database for the largest lens Nikon made with "AF screwdriver" and it seems it is the one I have......the AF 300/2.8 ED-IF?
I even have the latest N-version.....so lens is a bit of Nikon history......unless I have missed a larger Nikkor using "AF-screw" method?
-
Mechanically the FTZ is rather large and it should be not too difficult to work in a small screw drive motor, even if it makes it a bit lumpier.
Then there would just be firmware updates to identify the lens and execute the proper focus mode (which is already known and implemented in the earlier cameras).
Power to the motor would be through the power supply contacts already in the mount.
It's an interesting thought - I wonder what the chances are? Seems like a lot of engineering for a fairly small customer base though, but maybe they thought the same about the Df?
-
All those existing adapters don't give you the Exif-information a Nikon adapter would, so I think there's a market for it. But it will be an expensive one (> €400 I guess)
I have an AF 300/2.8 ED-IF where such an adapter would bring new life to the lens.
A screwdriver adapter is needed here. The Megadap principle does not work with such heavy lenses.
I agree with all points expressed here.
Mostly about the exifs information Chris pointed out.
Also about the potentiel weakness of megadap system with heavy lenses.
However , not sure screwdriver (geared system) will focus as fast as the megadap system, but I may be wrong.
Once again, my opinion isn't to bash an accessory, as I admit this screwdriver will be very useful for those wishing to use their heavy AFD lenses, but most of Z users will go toward the magadap/techard system thanks its wider range of usable lenses.
FD
-
I checked the database for the largest lens Nikon made with "AF screwdriver" and it seems it is the one I have......the AF 300/2.8 ED-IF?
I even have the latest N-version.....so lens is a bit of Nikon history......unless I have missed a larger Nikkor using "AF-screw" method?
I think 300 is the upper limit for screwdriver AF. The 400 and 500 had internal motors if memory serves.
-
I have an AF 300/2.8 ED-IF where such an adapter would bring new life to the lens.
A screwdriver adapter is needed here. The Megadap principle does not work with such heavy lenses.
I would expect that the Megadap would be less optimal with lenses which have internal focusing and longer lenses which need greater extension to close focus. I suppose for the latter you could use a combination of manual focus to set approximate range, then rely on the adapter to focus within that range.
-
I think 300 is the upper limit for screwdriver AF. The 400 and 500 had internal motors if memory serves.
Nikon was long time lacking to provide superteles with AF, the 300/2,8 remained the only one for a significant amount of time
IIRC there was a prototype of a 600/4 AF lens that never made it into a release- probably this design did not work and showed the limit of screwdrivers AF
Canon hat its ultrasonic motors and NIkon wasnt able to compete (patent reasons?) announced to bring something better
the AF-I series came out with 300,400,500 and 600 mm lenses the first with internal motors - not too convincing, until NIkon finally managed to bring out ultrasonic motors as well in the firs AF-S series.
-
If a "screwdriver" adapter is made then the AF 300/2.8 ED-IF could be a good buy as in the moment prices are low on these? .....about 1000 USD for a near mint?
Then with a Z-body and "screwdriver" adapter both VR (in body) and AF is achieved?
When I got my 300/2.8 years back used price was like 2000 USD and when they where sold as new is was about 5000 USD here in DK.
Yes, Canon took over totally. 90% white Canon lenses at sports games etc......now it is more even.
It also took a long time for Nikon to develop VR. Canon had its "IS" and this was also a reason to go with Canon teles.
The optical quality of Canon long teles was very good......is my understanding.
-
I had the AF 300/2.8 ED-IF for a while. The image quality was good but not outstanding. The subsequent AFS models clearly surpassed it in optical excellence.
-
Then with a Z-body and "screwdriver" adapter both VR (in body) and AF is achieved?
That's how I'd understand it
Yes, Canon took over totally. 90% white Canon lenses at sports games etc......now it is more even.
It also took a long time for Nikon to develop VR. Canon had its "IS" and this was also a reason to go with Canon teles.
The optical quality of Canon long teles was very good......is my understanding.
This was the times of the F5 when Nikon lost ground on the Pro-Level and never gained back its former importance (the D3 had some impact)
When Nikon was starting to introduce silent wave motors, canon had it's full fast supertele lineup with IS ready
And Nikon (who actually had IS- first but only in a compact camera) finally came out with a slow 80-400 Telezoom, with first generation VR (but with screwdriver AF not AF-S! - which also shows that an Aperture ring is not an obstacle for a VR unit) and then 24-120 was the next with VR I think. Did not understand this then and still now.
BTW that appears to be the same with hybrid AF,which saw thelight in the Nikon 1 System, now Sony is way ahead and Nikon behind again.
-
I had the AF 300/2.8 ED-IF for a while. The image quality was good but not outstanding. The subsequent AFS models clearly surpassed it in optical excellence.
When I used the AF 300/2.8 there was a good improvement when stopped down to 4 or 5.6. It was good at 2.8 but very good at 4 or 5.6......as I remember the lens.
It has been locked down for many years in its big flight case. Could be fun to try it out again and see what it can do. It will require a tripod.......
-
I think 300 is the upper limit for screwdriver AF. The 400 and 500 had internal motors if memory serves.
Indeed, the first AF versions of the 400 and 500mm (and the 600mm) were of the type AF-I with internal focus motor before starting with AF-S
-
Focusing of AFD Nikkors in L'view on the D850 and D780 works - Nothing more to add IME. This is using 85 f1.4AFD, 28-105 AFD and 70-180 Micro-Nikkor. The D780, as we all know, is built around the Z6 sensor. [I've read somewhere, that some years back, Sony included s'driver AF support in an adapter.]
Far more pertinent is the release of Fringer's new NF-FX adapter. It supports AFD Nikkors fully (ie it supports 'driver AF) on Fuji X MILCs. When we acknowledge their older EF-NZ adapter also works well on Nikon Zeds, this confirms their engineers not only rvs engineered the Z AF successfully, but they continue to upgrade the firmware for this adapter. Priced at $324.00, the Fuji adapter is slightly more than the EFNZ ($300) plus shipping. A no brainer if one needs to use even just one favourite AFD Nikkor.
https://www.fringeradapter.com/blog/fringer-nf-fx-smart-adapter-is-released (https://www.fringeradapter.com/blog/fringer-nf-fx-smart-adapter-is-released)
Thus, Fringer possess both "sides" of the code etc for a fully functional NF-NZ. This would fix what's missing in the FTZ. And including EXIF data with AI/AIS Nikkors cannot be difficult. 3rd party extension rings (eg Kenko) do this (+ G and E support).
Much ink has been split, justifying a "FTZd"; it is strange how forum posts on the question catalyze negativity and worse. Those no longer using older F-Mount lenses can ignore any such adapter (as just another Accessory). Nikon's neglect of their installed user base must rate as one of the company's biggest strategic blunders with the Z System, by alienating so many loyal clients. Only recently, Nikon did officially discontinue the latest cohort of AFD lenses. Arguably, a FTZd would have sold Nikon a pile more Z cameras, and further at least some of these new owners to try Z glass.
How ironic should Fringer show up Nikon! But perhaps Thom sources are correct and we will hear something soon
-
So how is the LV AF of screwdriver Nikkors on the D780? Have you used it a lot? How does it compare with native Z Nikkors on Z cameras in live view and on the other hand the viewfinder AF on the D780 (or other DSLR cameras)? I am sure the issue here is the added complexity vs. the results that might be expected, and whether it would truly work for users of these lenses.
I think Sony's new adapter ("LA-EA5") which is skinny and supports screwdriver AF lenses for Minolta/Sony A-mount is a remarkable achievement. I wouldn't have thought it possible to make it so small without considerable external protrusions like their previous and Nikon's current adapters.
-
Yes, Canon took over totally. 90% white Canon lenses at sports games etc......now it is more even.
It also took a long time for Nikon to develop VR. Canon had its "IS" and this was also a reason to go with Canon teles.
The optical quality of Canon long teles was very good......is my understanding.
Yes, MEPER but...Nikon was first to introduce VR...in it's compact zoom touch 105 VR camera in 1994. It was the first camera and lens with VR. A few months after that Canon released first 75-300 (non L) IS zoom.
Then came 4/300 L IS (1997) and 28-135 IS (1998)...and a lot more.
But NIKON was indeed the first to use a VR in a compact camera..and why Nikon needed many years (6 years) before its 4,5-5,6/80-400 VR came out (in 2000) is a mystery for me ! What a pity !
-
I know the Danish Nikon importer asked the same question.
Maybe Nikon was so "old school technical" that putting something that could move the lens elements around into a professional tele was "too much".....
I have sometimes wondered if VR is switched off if lens elements are centered as precise as in a "non-VR" lens.
Leica and Zeiss is still very old school it seems?
Maybe Nikon was just "too German"? ....if you can say so? :-)
-
Yes, MEPER but...Nikon was first to introduce VR...in it's compact zoom touch 105 VR camera in 1994. It was the first camera and lens with VR. A few months after that Canon released first 75-300 (non L) IS zoom.
Then came 4/300 L IS (1997) and 28-135 IS (1998)...and a lot more.
But NIKON was indeed the first to use a VR in a compact camera..and why Nikon needed many years (6 years) before its 4,5-5,6/80-400 VR came out (in 2000) is a mystery for me ! What a pity !
Zoom 700VR / 700VR QD =Zoom Touch 105 VR QD
https://imaging.nikon.com/history/story/0035/index.htm
-
Hi Ilkka
I found some time earlier this morning to compare 28-105 f3.5/4.5 AFD, 85 f/1.4 AFD, 70-180 Micro-Nikkor and my 58 f1.4G 'Neo-Noct' on the D780. Using AF-On, I compared each focusing from up close on pot plants and patio-bricks, canvas etc within 10-20 feet at most, and then out to large trees and clouds on the horizon at ~50m and more. A Bright sunny day here today warming up to a max forecast of 27 C.
In the test of all 3 s'driver AF in Liveview [Dynamic AF-Mode] in a "Full Refocus" from the MFD to infinity, each AFD lens has tendency to only find its focus at infinity, after a single hunt cycle before it grabs the focus. This is mostly with the 70-180. All three lenses have no problem to maintain focus if engaging AF-On while scanning from the closest leaves to infinity.
In typical usage using D780 Lv, I find this zoom and the 85 'Cream-Machine' focus at about about the same speed as the Neo-Noct - very fast. None causes any delay for my subjects. Neither is discernably slower and certainly any difference is irrelevant for my needs. The 70-180 is a notorious tortoise, with very slow AF in either OVF or LV refocusing to a new subject. But I find its AF is more than fast enough for insects, snakes etc when refocusing over a shorter range (within only a few centimetres usually). This is using Df, D850, D500 and D780.
kind regards
So how is the LV AF of screwdriver Nikkors on the D780? Have you used it a lot? How does it compare with native Z Nikkors on Z cameras in live view and on the other hand the viewfinder AF on the D780 (or other DSLR cameras)? I am sure the issue here is the added complexity vs. the results that might be expected, and whether it would truly work for users of these lenses.
I think Sony's new adapter ("LA-EA5") which is skinny and supports screwdriver AF lenses for Minolta/Sony A-mount is a remarkable achievement. I wouldn't have thought it possible to make it so small without considerable external protrusions like their previous and Nikon's current adapters.
Focusing of AFD Nikkors in L'view on the D850 and D780 works - Nothing more to add IME. This is using 85 f1.4AFD, 28-105 AFD and 70-180 Micro-Nikkor. The D780, as we all know, is built around the Z6 sensor. [I've read somewhere, that some years back, Sony included s'driver AF support in an adapter.]
Far more pertinent is the release of Fringer's new NF-FX adapter. It supports AFD Nikkors fully (ie it supports 'driver AF) on Fuji X MILCs. When we acknowledge their older EF-NZ adapter also works well on Nikon Zeds, this confirms their engineers not only rvs engineered the Z AF successfully, but they continue to upgrade the firmware for this adapter. Priced at $324.00, the Fuji adapter is slightly more than the EFNZ ($300) plus shipping. A no brainer if one needs to use even just one favourite AFD Nikkor.
https://www.fringeradapter.com/blog/fringer-nf-fx-smart-adapter-is-released (https://www.fringeradapter.com/blog/fringer-nf-fx-smart-adapter-is-released)
Thus, Fringer possess both "sides" of the code etc for a fully functional NF-NZ. This would fix what's missing in the FTZ. And including EXIF data with AI/AIS Nikkors cannot be difficult. 3rd party extension rings (eg Kenko) do this (+ G and E support).
Much ink has been split, justifying a "FTZd"; it is strange how forum posts on the question catalyze negativity and worse. Those no longer using older F-Mount lenses can ignore any such adapter (as just another Accessory). Nikon's neglect of their installed user base must rate as one of the company's biggest strategic blunders with the Z System, by alienating so many loyal clients. Only recently, Nikon did officially discontinue the latest cohort of AFD lenses. Arguably, a FTZd would have sold Nikon a pile more Z cameras, and further at least some of these new owners to try Z glass.
How ironic should Fringer show up Nikon! But perhaps Thom sources are correct and we will hear something soon
-
Okay, thanks for the information, it's good to know.
How is autofocus in live view in lower light, e.g., indoors in available light?
-
Dark corner of a bookcase - 1/15, f5.6, ISO25600.
The 70-180 Micro-Nikkor hunts until it manages to 'find' the lettering on the spines. AF of the 85 f1.4AFD is far better
Okay, thanks for the information, it's good to know.
How is autofocus in live view in lower light, e.g., indoors in available light?
-
Zoom 700VR / 700VR QD =Zoom Touch 105 VR QD
https://imaging.nikon.com/history/story/0035/index.htm
Yes I know, Eric, (thanks for information): I once had the 700VR as a notebook-camera, not bad at all (with 200 or 400 Iso C41 Fuji Xtra 200 or 400) !
-
Dark corner of a bookcase - 1/15, f5.6, ISO25600.
The 70-180 Micro-Nikkor hunts until it manages to 'find' the lettering on the spines. AF of the 85 f1.4AFD is far better
I would say the camera hunts with the 70-180 Micro, guess the speed of the lens makes the difference to the 85mm f/1,4 D AF
-
Some highly prized Nikkor lenses such as the AF-S 105 f1.4 do not have the real fastest (and expensive) ultrasonic ring motors, they use relatively cheaper and smaller gear motors. This one is even shared with a budget zoom lens of Nikon (I don't remember right now), and I've read of some less sought Nikkor AF-S lenses that have much better and faster motors than the one used by the expensive AF-S 105 f1.4.
The teardown that clarifies some hypes of Nikon advertising being untrue is here
https://www.lensrentals.com/blog/2016/12/taking-apart-the-new-nikon-105mm-f1-4e-ed-af-s/
All in all, it's not always true that AF-S is so much better than the old screwdriver AF ;)
-
I prefer the screw-drive as it's one less thing that gets broken in the long run :o :o :o
-
Some highly prized Nikkor lenses such as the AF-S 105 f1.4 do not have the real fastest (and expensive) ultrasonic ring motors, they use relatively cheaper and smaller gear motors. This one is even shared with a budget zoom lens of Nikon (I don't remember right now), and I've read of some less sought Nikkor AF-S lenses that have much better and faster motors than the one used by the expensive AF-S 105 f1.4.
The teardown that clarifies some hypes of Nikon advertising being untrue is here
https://www.lensrentals.com/blog/2016/12/taking-apart-the-new-nikon-105mm-f1-4e-ed-af-s/
All in all, it's not always true that AF-S is so much better than the old screwdriver AF ;)
The 105/1.4 AF-S does focus very consistently (partly because it has less LoCA, I believe, and a sharp image) on D5/D6, but on my (earlier D810) and D850 it is a bit sluggish and doesn't keep up with a moving subject all that well; on a standing or sitting person either works well. With earlier lenses such as 105 DC or 85/1.4 AF-S or 85/1.4D AF, I don't get such high consistency of in-focus images at f/1.4 as I do with the 105/1.4. I've even had as high percentages as 99% of images in focus on the eye (I counted) with the D5.
But yes, the motor isn't as fast as e.g. the AF-S f/2.8 zooms. What I'm more interested is "are the images in focus?" And for that the 105/1.4 does very well for me, I would say it's one of the best lenses I've used in that respect. AF fine tuning, however, is required on all these fast primes.
I don't know what it is about the D8x0 that it can't keep up with a person walking towards a camera with fast primes, but this is my experience, whereas with the single-digit bodies it can with the 105/1.4 specifically. With the f/2.8 telezooms, all my cameras keep up with a approaching subject quite easily, even at 45 MP level I've had excellent results with the 70-200/2.8 E in the case of the D850.
-
I prefer the screw-drive as it's one less thing that gets broken in the long run :o :o :o
For me I've observed a dramatic improvement in having eyes in focus in head and shoulder portraits going from 85/1.4 D to 85/1.4 G AF-S to 105/1.4, each step being substantially more consistent than the previous. I also found that with the AF-S lenses, it's easier to avoid the camera focusing on the eyeglasses and get focus on the eye itself, without too much trouble. I have never had an SWM fail so far.
Other than precise focus, I did love the 85/1.4 D AF Nikkor, it gives wonderful, richly coloured, beautiful images. However, the improvement in the consistency of AF led me to use and prefer the newer lenses.
-
The 'focus speed' of the f/1.4 lenses are on purpose set to focus at a relative slow pace as to be able to catch a precise focus.
The fast Pro zooms f/2.8 and long Pro type tele lenses have more depth of focus so a little more forgiving to achieve precise enough focus wide open.
When attached the TC-20E also forces the camera to focus at a more slow pace. This can be disabled by 'breaking' the last of the pin connections.
-
The 'focus speed' of the f/1.4 lenses are on purpose set to focus at a relative slow pace as to be able to catch a precise focus.
The fast Pro zooms f/2.8 and long Pro type tele lenses have more depth of focus so a little more forgiving to achieve precise enough focus wide open.
When attached the TC-20E also forces the camera to focus at a more slow pace. This can be disabled by 'breaking' the last of the pin connections.
that's the reason why the 50/1.4G is so slow...I hated that lens, never owned one. tried one from a friend when it first came out and stayed with my 50/1.4D :o :o :o
-
that's the reason why the 50/1.4G is so slow...I hated that lens, never owned one. tried one from a friend when it first came out and stayed with my 50/1.4D :o :o :o
Yes a perfect example where the old AF-D version is superior to a later AF-S version for; AF speed, usability and fully on par with IQ
-
Yes a perfect example where the old AF-D version is superior to a later AF-S version for; AF speed, usability and fully on par with IQ
bokeh is cleaner, too. that was the first thing i noticed :o :o :o
-
With earlier lenses such as 105 DC or 85/1.4 AF-S or 85/1.4D AF, I don't get such high consistency of in-focus images at f/1.4 as I do with the 105/1.4.
Well, Ikka, seems normal to me for the AFD 105 that you can't get high consistency of in-focus images at 1,4...because it's a 2/105 ! ;)
But, it's true for these AFD 2/105 and 1,4/85 that in-focus consistency is far from 100% (I've got some 10% images more or less that are not precisely in-focus at full aperture).