@bwv812 wrote:
I don't know what point you're trying to make.
AF-S was initially an expensive feature limited to high-end lenses. AF itself was also a high-end feature when introduced. This doesn't mean that they are out of place on entry-level products introduced later... especially when making bodies without focus motors allows you to make them cheaper. Were the 300/2.8 and 600/4 AF-S lenses made to pair with entry-level bodies from 10 years later that would not be able to focus lenses without motors? Obviously not. In fact, these AF-S lenses were actually incompatible with contemporaneous entry-level bodies, as the F60—introduced after these lenses—lacked the circuitry to drive AF-S lenses.
I also like how you describe a $5,500 300/2.8 (the 600/4 is $10,000) as only "rather" expensive, yet describe the lack of affordable options amongst Amazon's 20 best-selling lenses as "slim pickings"—even though, at the instant I write this, none of the top 20 costs more than 10% of this "rather" expensive lens.
Maybe Nikon recognizes that although they would like to sell lenses (especially fast, expensive lenses) by the bushel to every DSLR owner, most owners of entry-level bodies are unlikely to ever buy additional lenses. I mean, if they thought the bayonets of entry-level lenses were going to get significant use, and be swapped out frequently, why would they make them in plastic?