How much better is Nikon AF-S II to AF-S ?

I'm thinking of buying a used 500 f4 or 600 mm f4 lens for wildlife
(mainly bird) photography. Some are AF-S and some are AF-S II. Does
anyone know if the AF-S II is much better than AF-S?

VR is out of my price range, so that is not a consideration.

It's to be used on a Nikon D3 body. (That is an invitation for David to
post one of his silly comments).

Rita Berkowitz wrote:
Dave wrote:

I'm thinking of buying a used 500 f4 or 600 mm f4 lens for wildlife
(mainly bird) photography. Some are AF-S and some are AF-S II. Does
anyone know if the AF-S II is much better than AF-S?

The AF-S II is the much better and faster AF motor that is used in latest
generation VR super-teles and last generation non-VR. Plus the AF-S II
lenses are a bit lighter as well.

Thanks. The much faster was what I was hoping to hear. If it was a bit
faster, then I would not bother paying the extra.

VR is out of my price range, so that is not a consideration.

And not needed! Keep a keen eye open and you should be able to snag a mint
condition with all accessories 500/4 for $5,000 or a 600/4 for $6,000 tops.

VR for that money? I've yet to see a VR go for that. If you mean a
non-VR, AF-S II, then I would agree. There's a 600mm on for auction on
eBay at the minute, but the seller will not ship outside the USA, which
is annoying as I'm in the UK. Given the high shipping costs and the fact
I'm likely to pay VAT when a lens is imported to the UK, I will pay a
bit more for one in the UK.

You will definitely want to get a TC. The 600/4 would be a nice choice,
but
is a real bear to shoot handheld compared to the 500/4. The 500 is the
perfect compromise. Either one will make you extremely happy. I use
the 2x
TC which is nice, but will slow AF speed down a bit on the D3.

I have both the 1.4x TC-14EII and the 2x too (TC-20EII I think). I was
looking at getting the 1.7x, as I believe it is better quality than the
2x. The 1.4x is nice, but a bit short on focal length. I think the 1.7x
might be a better compromise.

It's to be used on a Nikon D3 body. (That is an invitation for David
to post one of his silly comments).

It's all good, we're all family

"Rita Berkowitz" wrote in message
m...
[snip]
Sorry, I was referring to the latest non-VR versions. As for the 600 you
are looking at on eBay this seller is a piece of **** and should be
avoided.
I wouldn't buy from any scumbag that adds surcharges for using PayPal.
This idiot is asking for 4% in hopes of persuading you to pay in a method
that saves them paying PayPal fees and forfeits the buyer's protections of
using a credit card.

I don't blame him for wanting to cover his expenses, which PayPal is most
definitely a part of. A $6000 dollar sale would cost $150. 4% does go
beyond what is needed, however.

bino wrote:

I don't blame him for wanting to cover his expenses, which PayPal is
most definitely a part of. A $6000 dollar sale would cost $150. 4%
does go beyond what is needed, however.

By that logic, when you use a credit card, does the restaurant or store
charge you 2.5% (their CC processing fee)?

Nope. And neither should e-bay sellers.

[time was when I could haul out the AMEX card, and the vendor would go
pale (say after negotiating $5000 worth of furniture). AMEX charged a
hefty fee, about 4% in those days. So then I could negotiate another
bit off to pay by cheque ... doesn't work now, the CC co's have
stringent policies against such trading..]

--
-- r.p.e.35mm user resource: http://www.aliasimages.com/rpe35mmur.htm
-- r.p.d.slr-systems: http://www.aliasimages.com/rpdslrsysur.htm
-- [SI] gallery & rulz: http://www.pbase.com/shootin
-- e-meil: Remove FreeLunch.
-- usenet posts from gmail.com and googlemail.com are filtered out.

In article , Alan Browne
wrote:

I don't blame him for wanting to cover his expenses, which PayPal is
most definitely a part of. A $6000 dollar sale would cost $150. 4%
does go beyond what is needed, however.

By that logic, when you use a credit card, does the restaurant or store
charge you 2.5% (their CC processing fee)?

some do, however, they call it a 'cash discount' because the merchant
agreement prohibits charging extra for using the card. nevertheless, i
have seen some places charge extra when using a credit card.

Nope. And neither should e-bay sellers.

it's against paypal's rules to charge extra for using paypal, but i've
seen that happen too.

[time was when I could haul out the AMEX card, and the vendor would go
pale (say after negotiating $5000 worth of furniture). AMEX charged a
hefty fee, about 4% in those days. So then I could negotiate another
bit off to pay by cheque ... doesn't work now, the CC co's have
stringent policies against such trading..]

some places will discount a non-credit card price.

nospam wrote:
In article , Alan Browne
wrote:

I don't blame him for wanting to cover his expenses, which PayPal is
most definitely a part of. A $6000 dollar sale would cost $150. 4%
does go beyond what is needed, however.
By that logic, when you use a credit card, does the restaurant or store
charge you 2.5% (their CC processing fee)?

some do, however, they call it a 'cash discount' because the merchant
agreement prohibits charging extra for using the card. nevertheless, i
have seen some places charge extra when using a credit card.

Nope. And neither should e-bay sellers.

it's against paypal's rules to charge extra for using paypal, but i've
seen that happen too.

[time was when I could haul out the AMEX card, and the vendor would go
pale (say after negotiating $5000 worth of furniture). AMEX charged a
hefty fee, about 4% in those days. So then I could negotiate another
bit off to pay by cheque ... doesn't work now, the CC co's have
stringent policies against such trading..]

some places will discount a non-credit card price.

I haven't tried in a while. When I got a good quote for my scanner
(CAD$2700 ish) I asked "how much for cash instead of credit card" and
the fellow (quick on his feet) said, "oh, that's the price if you pay be
cheque."

IOW, you have to play this game in person at the cash register...

Prior to that (a couple sofa's) they simply wouldn't play at all (it was
during a major sale, so that may be part of it...)

During a recent trip in the S/W US, I did buy gasoline with cash as it
was 10 or 15 cents/gallon cheaper (on 15 gallons, worth it).

--
-- r.p.e.35mm user resource: http://www.aliasimages.com/rpe35mmur.htm
-- r.p.d.slr-systems: http://www.aliasimages.com/rpdslrsysur.htm
-- [SI] gallery & rulz: http://www.pbase.com/shootin
-- e-meil: Remove FreeLunch.
-- usenet posts from gmail.com and googlemail.com are filtered out.

In article , Alan Browne
wrote:

During a recent trip in the S/W US, I did buy gasoline with cash as it
was 10 or 15 cents/gallon cheaper (on 15 gallons, worth it).

i know of a gas station that consistently has the lowest price around.
they are 'cash only.'

Rita Berkowitz wrote:

Sorry, I was referring to the latest non-VR versions. As for the 600 you
are looking at on eBay this seller is a piece of **** and should be
avoided.
I wouldn't buy from any scumbag that adds surcharges for using PayPal.
This idiot is asking for 4% in hopes of persuading you to pay in a method
that saves them paying PayPal fees and forfeits the buyer's protections of
using a credit card. Anyway, that's the older version I AF-S and isn't
worth $6,000 in that condition. It shouldn't take long before ebay pulls
this auction.


You must mean another auction. I see this one

http://cgi.ebay.com/ws/eBayISAPI.dll...m=280259855291

which is AFS-S, but not AF-S II. The seller is not adding any surcharge
on. However, she would not accept my bid from the UK.

I also had my eyes on a 500 mm AF-S II f4 on ebay.co.uk

As a matter of interest, what do you think about this sellers tactics.

http://cgi.ebay.co.uk/FREE-POSTAGE-P...mZ330265426188

He offers 'cash-back' after one leaves *postive* feedback. That I feel
is equivalent to buying postitive feedback, but eBay seem to think it is
ok, since I reported this seller over a week ago, but his tactics remain
the same.


I have both the 1.4x TC-14EII and the 2x too (TC-20EII I think). I was
looking at getting the 1.7x, as I believe it is better quality than
the 2x. The 1.4x is nice, but a bit short on focal length. I think
the 1.7x might be a better compromise.

I would skip the 1.7X TC as it performs equally to the 2X. You'll be
impressed with the 2X TC on either lens.



Rita


I've seen a few places say the 1.7x is sharper than the 2x.

"Alan Browne" wrote in message
...
bino wrote:

I don't blame him for wanting to cover his expenses, which PayPal is most
definitely a part of. A $6000 dollar sale would cost $150. 4% does go
beyond what is needed, however.

By that logic, when you use a credit card, does the restaurant or store
charge you 2.5% (their CC processing fee)?

Nope. And neither should e-bay sellers.


Not openly, anyway--it's called shipping and handling fees. Nobody in the
business world who's got any sense is giving anything away for free.

Alan Browne writes:

By that logic, when you use a credit card, does the restaurant or store
charge you 2.5% (their CC processing fee)?

Restaurants don't do that. But for many years, Mountain Equipment Co-op
offered a 2% discount for using cash/cheque instead of credit card.
Apparently the CC companies wouldn't let them charge extra for credit,
but they could phrase it as a discount for cash.

And even today, all the local computer system builders charge a few
percent extra for credit card payment. Their advertised prices are for
cash/debit, and they note that these are "already discounted" prices.
They've been doing it for years.

Dave