msmoto said: If Squamish says the 200mm f/2 is extremely fast, I suspect it has to do with the mount of light entering along with the design of the lens.

Bigger aperture doesn't always mean faster focus, but it can offer better AF in low light. My D3/50mm f/1.4 combo can auto focus in places where I can barely see, but it doesn't do it very fast.

In contrast, my 80-200mm AF-S will focus right where I want it to before I've even realized where I want it to!

Focus speed has a lot to do with the particular lens, camera body, etc.

My D3 drives my AF-S lenses a touch faster then my D7000. It drives AF-D lenses WAY faster.

Also, some lenses (like the 50mm f/1.4G) have a longer focus "throw" to them and are just plain slow. It's all in the AF gearing. However, they are much easier to control when manual focusing - they are less twitchy. (a nice thing to have with razor-thin DOF)

The 70-200mm VRII for example has a very short throw to the AF, and what seems to be a hot-rodded AF-S motor inside. It actually kinda sucks for manual focus but for AF it's crazy quick.

Thanks Guys for the great information! I guess I'll probably have to wait a couple years. That 135mm-f/1.8-VR patent looks very promising though if they think of it as a potential sports lens and not just a portrait lens. Squamish...exactly my feelings too!

I guess I am missing something with the issue of focus speed. And, I suspect this is a result of my previous experience with manually focusing the lenses and this taking some time. In shooting portraits, I place the focus point on the eye I want, and shoot. As I am usually shooting and chat tin with my models, I also tend to shoot at 4-8 FPS to catch the eye wide open and exactly the expression I am looking for.

If Squamish says the 200mm f/2 is extremely fast, I suspect it has to do with the mount of light entering along with the design of the lens. I have never noted my 135mm f/2 to be a problem, possibly due to my shooting style. Maybe some day the 200mm f/2.....but the 6 large in the US will have to be after I win the lotto :-)

Yeah, same here, many of my AF-S lenses don't really have that great autofocus (the 85/1.4 is ok, but the 35/1.8 is terrible) while older lenses (like the aforementioned 135/2 DC or the 50/1.8D) are actually pretty good. Of course, I'd expect the 70-200VR and the 200/2 to be much better, but that's a given.

I think the 135/2 would benefit a lot more from VR than from AFS, and of course, if they fixed the longitudinal chromatic aberration like on the 200/2, that would be even better (although this is extremely unlikely). If they released an update, I might be tempted to get one, even though I happy with what I already have. Still, it's been almost 20 years since the 135/2 came out, and its not a popular lens compared to something like a 70-200, so I wouldn't hold my breath.

It's funny because I find the focus speed on some AF-D lenses are much faster than their AF-S counterparts. Depends on each lens, of course. The 35/1.4G and 85/1.4g are pretty slow...i know that.

I own the 200mm and have used the 135mm f2 and can say that the focus speeds are worlds apart. Space age versus stone age. The really amazing thing to realize is that the 200mm f2 AF speed even makes the 70-200 f2.8 look slow, which it surely isn't. :]

There was a patent for a 135mm f/1.8 AF-S VR a few months ago: http://nikonrumors.com/2012/03/09/nikon-135mm-f1-8-lens-patent.aspx/

I use the Nikkor 135 mm f/2 on a D700 and I think it does focus pretty fast. But as it is not AF-S I think the focus speed will depend on the camera body - at least I think that the higher end bodies have got a stronger, faster motor build in than the lower end bodies.

Nikon does make a 135mm F2.

It may not be AF-S, and it probably won't focus as quickly.

I've been shooting volleyball with a 200mm f/2 AF-S VR and it works great...but god, what I would give for a 135mm f/2 prime with the same image quality and focus speed as the 200mm f/2. Any nikon rumors about such an animal?