Nikon Z* mirrorless

JasonPC said:
I was a big fan of the Nikon 70-200f4 when I had my D750, really sharp copy. I’ve currently got the 70-300 for my Z5 and it works fine via the adapter. I much preferred the 70-200 of the two.

I was thinking about this while walking the dog this morning. I seem to have a problem with using an adapter and I don’t know why. I’ve got the 14-30 on back order but common sense says I should cancel it and get a Tamron via the adapter and save myself 500 quid. :runaway:
Click to expand...

Most of my lenses are vintage lenses from way back so always need adapters. Partly for that reason I got rid of the FTZ and AFS lenses and will only get AF lenses in Z mount. I do appreciate the size and weight of the F4 Z lenses. Something like a 17-35mm on the FTZ adapter makes for a fairly large lens sticking out the front of a Z6. Why not go for the 24-200 Z lens, Dave?
 
Last edited:
I've got the 70-300 and it's hard to say much against it. Unlike many consumer lenses of that type, it definitely can be very sharp, including in the corners. Since getting the old 80-200 f2.8D, I find the rendering more natural and richer and am tending to take it out more for landscape, despite the weight. I'm another who would like a 70-200 f4 but now begin to wonder if there's much point unless Nikon really produce a cracker which could replace both the above. The of course I'd lose my extra stop.
 
THIRTYFIVEMILL said:
Why not go for the 24-200 Z lens, Dave?
Click to expand...
Well, I have the 24-70 which is excellent and it feels a bit like I’m doubling up on focal lengths to a degree.

Must admit I am favouring the 70-300, but the call of the 70-200 f4 is quite compelling.

If I go with either of these I would need to add an FTZ which would open up the odd F lens or two as well.
 
wibbly said:
Well, I have the 24-70 which is excellent and it feels a bit like I’m doubling up on focal lengths to a degree.

Must admit I am favouring the 70-300, but the call of the 70-200 f4 is quite compelling.

If I go with either of these I would need to add an FTZ which would open up the odd F lens or two as well.
Click to expand...

I have to say I love the 24-70 and would struggle to give that up. That said, most are saying the 24-200 is right up there with IQ. Keep in mind that the FTZ only works with certainly legacy lenses, mostly AF-S. The AF-D lenses won't AF with the FTZ.
 
chris321 said:
A couple from the British Wildlife Centre, with the Z6 and 24-200:

DSC_3669e by Chris Willetts, on Flickr

DSC_3740e by Chris Willetts, on Flickr
Click to expand...

Very nice.

My 24-200 arrived a few days back. I’m off work for a week now so I’ll be off up a mountain in Wales to make sure the lens is all good. If it’s working as it should then the 24-70 and 70-300 will be up for re-homing. I had a walk around the local hills when it arrived the other day and taking just one lens was such a pleasant change.
 
THIRTYFIVEMILL said:
Got notification today that Amazon had shipped my 14-30. My heart skipped a beat!! It then sank when I realised they'd just handed the ruddy lens to Hermes.. :sorry:
Click to expand...

Good luck. I’ll bet that lens will get a thorough check over when it arrives. My 24-200 was just shoved in an Amazon box with a single piece of bubble wrap on one side of the lens box. I mean, putting bubble wrap on just one side? What’s the point. May as well not bother.

edit. That’s f*****g spooky. My email just tinged. Update from Amazon, my 14-30 now due on June 9th instead of end of July.
 
Last edited:
THIRTYFIVEMILL said:
Got notification today that Amazon had shipped my 14-30. My heart skipped a beat!! It then sank when I realised they'd just handed the ruddy lens to Hermes.. :sorry:
Click to expand...
Amazon send a lot of stuff through Hermes. I've not had any problems so far and it looks like it's arrived safe and sound. Not a bad space-saving combination, actually :)
 
lunar22 said:
Amazon send a lot of stuff through Hermes. I've not had any problems so far and it looks like it's arrived safe and sound. Not a bad space-saving combination, actually :)
Click to expand...

Arrived safe and sound at 14.35 today. Hermes are fine when everything goes smoothly but if something goes wrong you’re on your own.
 
JasonPC said:
The 14-30 has just arrived. Thanks to this forum thread for the heads-up on the Amazon sale. Two things. 1) what a dinky little lens. 2) 14mm is going to be fun!

14-200mm covered with two lenses, lightweight and weather sealed. (y)
Click to expand...

You’re welcome mate. What time did yours arrive? Sincerely hope it was after mine! :D
 
Some great shots from the Z cameras!

I think this is the best place to ask.... I am considering going for a Z6ii, over a used D5....

Although I primarily shoot sport, I enjoy portrait photography much more. I have a 1dx ii for sport as well, so this body would be for my buddy to second shoot at sporting events.

I have a load of f-mount lenses and I was hoping the af performance was good via the ftz adapter.

The lenses I'd adapt to the z6ii are the following:

70-200 fl e
105 f1.4
85 f1.8
200 f2
35 f1.4

I was planning on using the 70-200 for sport and can see the deep buffer plus xqd/cfx card would be great for sport shooting, but how is the camera for that use with adapted lenses? I have been looking for reviews but can't find anything current or loads of people review the ftz with 3rd party lenses.

Thanks
Chris
 
I've carefully read the various posts on the 24-200 Z lens. I've currently got the 24-70 f/4 Z, and I was about to buy the 70-200 f/4 G lens to complement it. Am I going to miss much image quality if I just go for the 24-200mm lens instead? I print my stuff A4 and scrutinise every pixel.
 
Neilmack said:
I've carefully read the various posts on the 24-200 Z lens. I've currently got the 24-70 f/4 Z, and I was about to buy the 70-200 f/4 G lens to complement it. Am I going to miss much image quality if I just go for the 24-200mm lens instead? I print my stuff A4 and scrutinise every pixel.
Click to expand...

If you’re a pixel-peeper, then comparing a super zoom with an 8.3x focal length range to a professional-quality lens widely regarded as being one of the sharpest around is never going to come out well for the former!

For me, I’d still take the 24-200 every time. But I don’t pixel peep, or print photos. And I’m ok with the fact that I need to use higher ISOs and deal with the noise. It’s very, very sharp still, but I’m sure if you did a 100% comparison with the 70-200 f/4, I’m sure it would lose!
 
chris321 said:
Love these shots! How easy are the reds to see at Mount Stewart? Spending a few weeks in NI soon and was wondering if it’s worth a trip there?
Click to expand...
They have a large wooden dedicated hide for the Red squirrels and they have a number of feeding stations. So you're almost guaranteed sightings. The numbers of reds are flourishing there. The best times are early morning or late afternoon, but they visit frequently throughout the day. Mount Stewart is a beautiful spot with a large lake with breading swans with cygnets at the moment. Definitely worth a visit.
 
chris321 said:
If you’re a pixel-peeper, then comparing a super zoom with an 8.3x focal length range to a professional-quality lens widely regarded as being one of the sharpest around is never going to come out well for the former!

For me, I’d still take the 24-200 every time. But I don’t pixel peep, or print photos. And I’m ok with the fact that I need to use higher ISOs and deal with the noise. It’s very, very sharp still, but I’m sure if you did a 100% comparison with the 70-200 f/4, I’m sure it would lose!
Click to expand...

I too have taken a punt as a user of the 24-200 and currently have no other lenses. I use mine on a Z6ii but unlike Steven i do print mine out at A3+. I have just been away in Scotland and have just started printing out some of the photos I took and I have to say they look good enough to me. Sure the 24-70 F2.8 is a superior lens QA wise and the 24-70 F4 maybe slightly sharper than the 24-200. I bought the 24-70 F2.8 for my daughters wedding but I couldn’t wait to get rid of it afterwards as it is such a lump. As for adding the 70-200 F2.8... Nah. I found the all in one 24-200 rather liberating. I just had to worry about getting the shot rather than which lens I should be using... Still cant take a photo worth its salt but one day :)
 
Last edited:
Got my 24-200 from Grays of Westminster during the week and finally got it out for a trial today around a local pond.
I must say it's great to only carry one lens when the utmost quality isn't a necessity. It's certainly good enough for a carry everywhere solution.SFP_1609.jpgSFP_1651-2.jpgSFP_1682.jpgSFP_1918.jpg
 
Neilmack said:
I've carefully read the various posts on the 24-200 Z lens. I've currently got the 24-70 f/4 Z, and I was about to buy the 70-200 f/4 G lens to complement it. Am I going to miss much image quality if I just go for the 24-200mm lens instead? I print my stuff A4 and scrutinise every pixel.
Click to expand...
wibbly said:
I think you guys are slowly convincing me to go for a 24-200 :LOL:
Click to expand...

I agree 100% with what ND says in his latest YT video. Sometimes, especially when mountains and hiking are involved, it’s not a bad choice even if printing big, just know where it’s at it’s best. I’m happy to have the sharper 14-30 for my most used focal length and 24-200 for everything else.

View: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aS7MKsE6Va4
 
Last edited:
wilt said:
AF speed and accuracy is good, using the 70-200mm f2.8 VRII via FTZ. All my F-mount adapted lenses work as they should.
Click to expand...
Thank you @wilt
When you say ‘good’ does that mean it works? What I’m trying to determine is, is af speed slower than on a dslr? Or via the ftz does the lens focus as fast as it should but acquisition is determined by the camera / firmware?

I’m concerned the ftz may throttle the 70-200 fl and the 200 f2 both of which I purchased because of their fast af
 
toohuge said:
Thank you @wilt
When you say ‘good’ does that mean it works? What I’m trying to determine is, is af speed slower than on a dslr? Or via the ftz does the lens focus as fast as it should but acquisition is determined by the camera / firmware?

I’m concerned the ftz may throttle the 70-200 fl and the 200 f2 both of which I purchased because of their fast af
Click to expand...
From my experience, using the FTZ hasn't negatively impacted the AF compared to using it on a DSLR. It works as expected. I can only say this about the lenses I have used.
 
Last edited:
Had a really long walk, (12 hrs or so, excluding dash to the chip shop!), around Snowdonia today. No backache after taking the 14-30 and 24-200. Took a fair few shots with the 14-30. First impressions are that it’s an outstanding bit of glass. Small, light and really, really sharp. 14mm is insane and allowed me to make shots that I’d seen before but couldn’t get even with 12mm on the Fuji. I think I’m going to enjoy this two lens set-up.
 
Expected new Z lens tomorrow with leaked photos 105/2.8 macro and a 50/2.8

Nikon Rumors

NikonRumors: where there’s smoke there’s fire
nikonrumors.com nikonrumors.com
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top