Nikon Z* mirrorless

Nice to get back out there and shoot a wedding after 8 months of delays, first use of the Z5s at a wedding (and by extension, the Nikon 35mm 1.8 and Viltrox 85mm 1.8), performed brilliantly. AF hit rate ever so slightly down on my old Sony a7III but not by enough to be of concern. Also nice that the regular shutter is basically quiet enough in 99% of conditions that the silent shutter wasn't required, although for the times I did use it I didn't experience any banding at all.

Both of these with the Viltrox...

51234154791_89da528db8_b.jpg

51233443077_74028bb59b_b.jpg


Anyone using prime Z lenses? I like the flexibility of the zooms but thinking a Z prime would be fun to shoot with.

Potentially either the 35mm or 50mm. Anyone have any thoughts having shot either?

I love the 35mm 1.8, my go-to for most of my day-to-day photography. Performed flawlessly at this wedding too. I'd own the 50mm 1.8 with no hesitation if I actually had a need for it!
 
Last edited:
Introduced my 14-30 to Wales on Bank Holiday Monday. We headed off for a walk up Moel Eilio, away from the hordes that would descend upon Snowdon. Driving through Capel Curig found the lake still and calm so a short stop for Wales' ultimate 'chocolate box' shot. My first images with the 14-30.


Llynnau Mymbyr
by Jason, on Flickr

Chocolate box or not - that is one of the best Snowdonia pictures ever taken. Supreme stuff.
 
First outing with the 14-30, its a great lens but you really need to know how to compose a wide shot in order to get great results. This is a skill I may be lacking :LOL:

It was a nice sunset with us yesterday so I popped out to see what we could capture:

DSC_1108-X2.jpg


Is it a real no-no to get sunstars in sunsets?
 
How is everyone getting on with the 24-200? My copy seems soft to me, I used to have a 70-200 and a 24-85 and it isn't as sharp as those. Maybe I'm doing something wrong?
 
Love my 24-200mm, I'm no pixel peeper but it seems fine to me. Used it an awful lot on Skye this week...

Z5A_4249 by Chris Harrison, on Flickr

Also been playing with the Viltrox 20mm 1.8, seems like a pretty solid lens (and is lovely to use manually)

DSC_2353 by Chris Harrison, on Flickr
 
How is everyone getting on with the 24-200? My copy seems soft to me, I used to have a 70-200 and a 24-85 and it isn't as sharp as those. Maybe I'm doing something wrong?

Mine is sharper than my previous 24-85.
At the long end it is a bit softer than my 70-300 AF-P but you can't have everything.
Might be copy variation?
 
Mine is sharper than my previous 24-85.
At the long end it is a bit softer than my 70-300 AF-P but you can't have everything.
Might be copy variation?
That's interesting, I'm looking at the examples on here and they all seem great, I'm a bit of a pixel peepers but I can definitely notice a difference. Is there anywhere I can share an example with someone, email or google drive maybe? I don't have Flickr anymore
 
I think I'm going back to my 24-85 and will also get the 70-300 af-p if it's good, haven't used that one before, with my ftz adaptor. I just think the 24-200 is too soft in the corners at 24mm, it isn't as sharp as my 70-200 F4 either. I guess it's the sacrifice you make with this type of lens but it feels like a step back on image quality as far as I can see.
 
If you want tack sharp in that range get the Z 24-70 f/4. It's a bargain at its price point, too.

I'm not sure I have the equipment to pixel peep, and my photos are all cut down for sharing online, but I've been very happy with the 24-70. I bought my Z5 with the kit 24-50 lens, which I sold and bought the 24-70. I managed to get it for £399 at the time.

I have at times regretted not getting the 24-200 for the extra reach, but will no doubt buy some additional lenses later. I'd particularly like some of the long lenses not yet released, if the price isn't eye-watering.
 
I'm not sure I have the equipment to pixel peep, and my photos are all cut down for sharing online, but I've been very happy with the 24-70. I bought my Z5 with the kit 24-50 lens, which I sold and bought the 24-70. I managed to get it for £399 at the time.

I have at times regretted not getting the 24-200 for the extra reach, but will no doubt buy some additional lenses later. I'd particularly like some of the long lenses not yet released, if the price isn't eye-watering.
I'm waiting for the 24-105 and 100-400, but I'm expecting both to be expensive
 
Love my 24-200mm, I'm no pixel peeper but it seems fine to me. Used it an awful lot on Skye this week...

Z5A_4249 by Chris Harrison, on Flickr

Also been playing with the Viltrox 20mm 1.8, seems like a pretty solid lens (and is lovely to use manually)

DSC_2353 by Chris Harrison, on Flickr
ive checked out your Flickr and it’s good to see what is possible from the combo. You have some really nice photos on there.

After a week away I’m currently re-evaluating my camera gear (been think of it for a while). If I’m honest with myself I need to look at reducing the amount and value of kit I have. I’m no longer a prolific photographer and I can’t really justify having so much money tied up in camera kit that isn’t used enough (pretty much used when away on holiday for some landscapes and a bit of wildlife such as deer and red squirrels).

I’ve come across the the Nikon Z5 and I’m having a long think about whether it would suit me for the photography I actually do. Cost wise its much better and looks like it with the 24-200 would suit landscape photography. I’m not sure what wildlife lens options there would be.
 
I’ve come across the the Nikon Z5 and I’m having a long think about whether it would suit me for the photography I actually do. Cost wise its much better and looks like it with the 24-200 would suit landscape photography. I’m not sure what wildlife lens options there would be.

The 24-200 is my favourite do-it-all lens of the ones I've owned on various systems. Not sure on longer focal lengths, it would have to be something attached via the FTZ at the moment, I hear the 200-500mm f5.6 works well, I loved that lens on my lld D750.
 
After a week away I’m currently re-evaluating my camera gear (been think of it for a while). If I’m honest with myself I need to look at reducing the amount and value of kit I have. I’m no longer a prolific photographer and I can’t really justify having so much money tied up in camera kit that isn’t used enough (pretty much used when away on holiday for some landscapes and a bit of wildlife such as deer and red squirrels).

I’ve come across the the Nikon Z5 and I’m having a long think about whether it would suit me for the photography I actually do. Cost wise its much better and looks like it with the 24-200 would suit landscape photography. I’m not sure what wildlife lens options there would be.

I am really liking the Z5. I like to shoot Nature and Wildlife, oh and my cats lol. I absolutely love the little 24-50mm that comes as a kit lens. It's very sharp as well as silent and fast AF. The Z5 itself is plenty impressive for the price - so many cool features. For nature I eventually decided to leave the Nikon 200-500mm and get the Tamron 150-600mm G2 instead as it's lighter and cheaper. I managed to get the FTZ adaptor so just waiting on the Tamron to arrive this week...

I admit that if I had the budget then I would have gone for the Z6 MkII for its better low-light focusing and 12fps, but then again as an amateur I can deal with the 4.5fps of the Z5.
 
Back
Top