Nikon Z* mirrorless

the black fox said:
Update in the end I went for the 300mm f4 having had one before , it’s light ,sharp takes t,c’s well and has good close focus plus the price is now rock bottom.
Just been through my old photos on Flickr from when I previously had one of these lenses all 350 plus of them and there’s a lot that made explore back then , some of my all time fave shots in there , just hoping it’s as good on mirrorless as the reports say it is
Click to expand...
I think that changing bodies Z to F or vice versa is just a false decision making point. My D850 produces just as good images as my Z8/Z9 with similar AF speed so ultimately ....... WTF did I buy a Z camera?
Well I bought the Z7 as I thought (maybe foolishly) that it would be the same as my D850. It was different but not better and the AF was less sure than the D850. The Z8 and Z9 levelled the D850 and Z camera AF speed concerns I had. So the move to Z was not that bad a move but it cost me compared to what I had with the D3S, D500, D810 and D850.

Then we/I look at the size of the Z lenses.
On a one by one basis for the lenses I have still and the ones I sold that were AFD the new Z range produce me equivalence but at a big cost. From a ROI business perspective I would say that unless you are earning £30k+ from a photo business and can offset the extra cost then the Z range is a cost sink and just a way to spend money feeding the Nikon machine.

This may seem a cynical post if you are a person who really wants the best and latest gear but I do feel that Nikon have sold us/me a pup as I see no advantage in the wonderful Z range other than having some really nice featureful mirrorless cameras. The same could have been achieved with the F mount lenses.
The FTZ adapter that is required to use AFS lenses on a Z camera is essentially an extension tube. This FTZ allows AF but only with AFS lenses, if you have AF or AFD lenses you are limited to manual focus unless have a MonsterAdapter LA-FZ1 adapter which is essentially an FTZ with an AF motor incorporated.

So for me a long term Nikon user since 1973 the move to Z is not the greatest thing since sliced bread but a way for Nikon to extract more money from me, for some, but not huge performance advantage.

What I will say is that the AF features added in the Z range are a real advance for wildlife and sports photographers.
The video features are a boon I am sure for those doing photojournalism but video holds little interest for me.
 
Last edited:
jknights said:
I think that changing bodies Z to F or vice versa is just a false decision making point. My D850 produces just as good images as my Z8/Z9 with similar AF speed so ultimately ....... WTF did I buy a Z camera?
Well I bought the Z7 as I thought (maybe foolishly) that it would be the same as my D850. It was different but not better and the AF was less sure than the D850. The Z8 and Z9 levelled the D850 and Z camera AF speed concerns I had. So the move to Z was not that bad a move but it cost me compared to what I had with the D3S, D500, D810 and D850.

Then we/I look at the size of the Z lenses.
On a one by one basis for the lenses I have still and the ones I sold that were AFD the new Z range produce me equivalence but at a big cost. From a ROI business perspective I would say that unless you are earning £30k+ from a photo business and can offset the extra cost then the Z range is a cost sink and just a way to spend money feeding the Nikon machine.

This may seem a cynical post if you are a person who really wants the best and latest gear but I do feel that Nikon have sold us/me a pup as I see no advantage in the wonderful Z range other than having some really nice featureful mirrorless cameras. The same could have been achieved with the F mount lenses.
The FTZ adapter that is required to use AFS lenses on a Z camera is essentially an extension tube. This FTZ allows AF but only with AFS lenses, if you have AF or AFD lenses you are limited to manual focus unless have a MonsterAdapter LA-FZ1 adapter which is essentially an FTZ with an AF motor incorporated.

So for me a long term Nikon user since 1973 the move to Z is not the greatest thing since sliced bread but a way for Nikon to extract more money from me, for some, but not huge performance advantage.

What I will say is that the AF features added in the Z range are a real advance for wildlife and sports photographers.
The video features are a boon I am sure for those doing photojournalism but video holds little interest for me.
Click to expand...
Have to also remember that Nikons reluctance to embrace mirrorless (full frame ) had the company on its knees. For some, the technology is a game changer. For others, not so much. Nikon did need to move forward to survive and I’m glad they are now thriving again.
 
Hmmmm as you well know Julian over the years I have had multiple cameras in various brands and iterations. Plus more lenses than I care to think about plus being able to try out ones my son buys , so I consider myself pretty well versed in most genres and models . From dslr to mirrorless . Shooting mainly wildlife also brings its own wants and needs , speed ,quick AF , the ability to focus both far and close quickly as birds animals insects don’t stay still for long .
I have retained my long term Olympus om1 as it’s served me well and on paper is a good match for the Z8 but in use the Nikon leaves it standing they both have high frame rate and bird I.d and electronic shutters I have both cameras set to 20fps burst shooting for general use but the Nikon feels faster in use ,it also gives a more consistent hit rate with a far higher percentage of keepers ,the other day for instance I took 80+ shots and every single one was a keeper that’s unusual in itself .
The Nikon bird I.d is also very accurate but not infallible I have noticed for instance if the bird is close then it will grab eye focus but if more distant it tends to be the head or sometimes a wing but still give acceptable results. .
All I can add is having the choice available I will pick up the camera / lens combo that best suits where I intend to go that day and it’s mostly the Z8 and lenses even though the Olympus often gives more alleged reach with less weight penalty
 
I agree that having a good toolset (set of cameras and lenses) is important if you want consistently good results.
I am very pleased that Nikon is doing well again as it means they have the finances to plough in new and different R&D for new products.
I have the two DC lenses 105mm f2 DC and 135mm f2 DC as well as the 105mm f1.4 AFS.
To say that these three lenses are sharp is a woeful understatement.
Would I buy these lenses again in Z mount, probably not as I dont shoot commercially any more. Also I have the Nikon FTZ2 and MonsterAdapter LA-FZ1 adapters which provides me the lenses in full AF modes.

I am more concerned about the current Nikon lens design strategy which seems to be .... Let us make a big lens as it will be perceived as giving better value. Compare the 85mm lens series in Z and F mount and one has to say that either they are using the same optical design but rebadging in a Z lens tube! The new Z lenses are obscenely large! However they do produce fine results but is this down to the new coatings and fine manufacturing process or better optical design. I think it is the former. When you look at the small Olympus lenses and their rendering it does make me wonder what Nikon is attempting.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top