Nikon Z6 and Z7 mirrorless

Messages
14,377
Edit My Images
No
I bought a 64Gb card at the end of Feb having shopped around (including e-infinity) £152. Now down to £110 for the same card. I guess they are moving in the right direction but how much lower remains to be seen.
I picked up a 128gb from foto specialist (I think it was) for £129 but it was the 440/150mb/s Sony rather than the 440/400mb/s one.
 
Messages
1,057
Name
Dan
Edit My Images
Yes
The other thing i was worried about is, as i'll only have 1 memory card which will probably be 64gb, is what to do when i run out of space and im away from home or a pc. For instance, i'm going on holiday in August and always bring my camera, but in the past ive had plenty of SD cards if i run out of space, rarely did but i had them just incase.

If the file size is like my D750 i know i'll get about 1k of raw files on there but i'm looking to dabble in some 4k video and fear that will soon eat up space on a 64gb card. I don't really want to bring a laptop, would much rather something more portable, i've seen wireless drives but seem pricey, but i guess there aren't many alternatives really?
 
Messages
14,377
Edit My Images
No
The other thing i was worried about is, as i'll only have 1 memory card which will probably be 64gb, is what to do when i run out of space and im away from home or a pc. For instance, i'm going on holiday in August and always bring my camera, but in the past ive had plenty of SD cards if i run out of space, rarely did but i had them just incase.

If the file size is like my D750 i know i'll get about 1k of raw files on there but i'm looking to dabble in some 4k video and fear that will soon eat up space on a 64gb card. I don't really want to bring a laptop, would much rather something more portable, i've seen wireless drives but seem pricey, but i guess there aren't many alternatives really?
I used to use the verbatim media share and backed up onto USB sticks, but now I have both an iPhone and iPad with plenty of storage so just back up onto those. However, I still keep the original images on the cards, you can never have too many backups ;) My EM1-II is my travel camera though so that has dual SD's, and SD's are much cheaper (unless you go for UHS-II).
 
Messages
1,057
Name
Dan
Edit My Images
Yes
I used to use the verbatim media share and backed up onto USB sticks, but now I have both an iPhone and iPad with plenty of storage so just back up onto those. However, I still keep the original images on the cards, you can never have too many backups ;) My EM1-II is my travel camera though so that has dual SD's, and SD's are much cheaper (unless you go for UHS-II).
So, if i connect a usb harddrive to one of these, would i be able to transfer straight from the camera, raw and video files etc wirelessley ?
 
Last edited:
Messages
14,377
Edit My Images
No
So, if i connect a usb harddrive to one of these, would i be able to transfer straight from the camera, raw and video files etc wirelessley ?
The Verbatim? I've never tried a hard drive and not sure whether it would have the power to do so tbh. However, I've just thought of another issue so you might have to scrap that idea. The verbatim that I had had one SD slot and one USB slot, which was fine for me as I put the SD card in and then an empty USB stick into the USB slot and transferred the images. The Z's are XQD though so you'd have to put this in the USB slot (assuming you buy and XQD reader) and then backup to an SD card. All this is controlled by an app on your phone.

There are dedicated photo storage drives that you can buy but AFAIK they are only SD and CF, plus they are quite pricey.
 
Messages
3,872
Name
Stephen
Edit My Images
Yes
The Verbatim? I've never tried a hard drive and not sure whether it would have the power to do so tbh. However, I've just thought of another issue so you might have to scrap that idea. The verbatim that I had had one SD slot and one USB slot, which was fine for me as I put the SD card in and then an empty USB stick into the USB slot and transferred the images. The Z's are XQD though so you'd have to put this in the USB slot (assuming you buy and XQD reader) and then backup to an SD card. All this is controlled by an app on your phone.

There are dedicated photo storage drives that you can buy but AFAIK they are only SD and CF, plus they are quite pricey.
My understanding is that at the very least you would need an external power supply for a portable hard drive, as the Nikon’s USB port cannot supply enough power itself.
 
Messages
281
Name
David Bayley
Edit My Images
Yes
One thing to mention which may get over looked, buy the correct series card reader for the xqd card. I believe they are on G series now and the older card readers wont read the newer cards. I went for the sony one with the USB pig tail.
 
Messages
14,377
Edit My Images
No
Messages
3,872
Name
Stephen
Edit My Images
Yes
Just looked and the pictures show it with an external drive plugged in so I can only assume that it can power the drive?
https://www.amazon.co.uk/Verbatim-9...ords=verbatim&qid=1560793920&s=gateway&sr=8-4
It’s not plugged into a camera. Plus, its built-in card reader is SD only, not QXD. The Z6/7 does not supply sufficient power to supply it. Yes, you could plug it into, say, a car USB port for the power but you would have to use wireless transfer, which would be horrendously slow for raw files (according to reviews). If it had an internal battery that could be different.

Edit: yes it does have an internal battery. I missed that.

Edit 2: it doesn’t support raw files, and it only works with Android devices.
 
Last edited:
Messages
14,377
Edit My Images
No
It’s not plugged into a camera. Plus, its built-in card reader is SD only, not QXD. The Z6/7 does not supply sufficient power to supply it. Yes, you could plug it into, say, a car USB port for the power but you would have to use wireless transfer, which would be horrendously slow for raw files (according to reviews). If it had an internal battery that could be different.

Edit: yes it does have an internal battery. I missed that.

Edit 2: it doesn’t support raw files, and it only works with Android devices.
The one I have works with the iphone and does allow transfer of raw files (y)
 
Messages
14,377
Edit My Images
No
Which model? The instructions on the one you linked say it doesn’t.
In the description it states several times it works with iOS, can’t see anything regarding whether it does or doesn’t transfer raw but from my experience it transfers raw, jpeg, tiff, .mp4 and .mov. I’m sure it will transfer more I just haven’t tried (y)

Just checked and mine is the same model.
 
Last edited:
Messages
236
Name
David
Edit My Images
Yes
just a couple of shots from my new Irix Firefly 15mm f/2.4. I've no idea how it would do for astrophotography as the focussing point seems critical to get useable results wide open for infinity (there certainly seems to be some field curvature) but for the things I do, it's a clear step up from the even more budget Samyang.

DSC_1569.jpg
DSC_1626.jpg
 
Messages
14,377
Edit My Images
No
E-mount to Z adapter is a reality - https://m.dpreview.com/news/2358400...rld-s-first-sony-e-to-nikon-z-af-lens-adapter

Even if AF is not up to scratch it opens up very interesting (manual) options from Zeiss, voigtlander and laowa.
I’ll take it with a pinch of salt as they say AF may even be better than native :rolleyes: But yes, if you can afford it and you like manual lenses it does open up more possibilities. As for the rest of the Sony E-mount stuff why you’d choose that over the Nikon AF-S lenses I’m not sure?
 
Messages
12,698
Name
Keith
Edit My Images
No
I’ll take it with a pinch of salt as they say AF may even be better than native :rolleyes: But yes, if you can afford it and you like manual lenses it does open up more possibilities. As for the rest of the Sony E-mount stuff why you’d choose that over the Nikon AF-S lenses I’m not sure?
I don't get it either, I know Sony users love to imagine everyone is dying to use their over priced lenses, but Nikon have many more very good to even great lenses in their back cat already.
 

nandbytes

I owe Cobra some bacon
Messages
6,477
Edit My Images
Yes
I’ll take it with a pinch of salt as they say AF may even be better than native :rolleyes: But yes, if you can afford it and you like manual lenses it does open up more possibilities. As for the rest of the Sony E-mount stuff why you’d choose that over the Nikon AF-S lenses I’m not sure?
I don't get it either, I know Sony users love to imagine everyone is dying to use their over priced lenses, but Nikon have many more very good to even great lenses in their back cat already.
The main reason would be size and availability of certain lenses, mainly in (ultra) wide angle region.
Also there isn't anything like Sony 24-105 or tamron 28-75 on Nikon yet.

For me personally it means I can use UWA primes like my current laowa 15 or voigtlanger ones.
 
Messages
14,377
Edit My Images
No
The main reason would be size and availability of certain lenses, mainly in (ultra) wide angle region.
Also there isn't anything like Sony 24-105 or tamron 28-75 on Nikon yet.

For me personally it means I can use UWA primes like my current laowa 15 or voigtlanger ones.
Yep there will always be some that will use it, but again I don't know why someone would switch from the Sony system to the Nikon one to then use Sony lenses, YMMV of course.

Nikon don't do a 24-105mm but they do the 24-120mm f4 which would be my preference due to the extra reach, but then you also have the option of Sigma 24-105mm. Again there's no 28-75mm f2.8 but there's the 24-70mm f2.8 which again would be my choice due 24mm at the wide end making much more difference than 5mm at the long end. Again YMMV (y)
 

nandbytes

I owe Cobra some bacon
Messages
6,477
Edit My Images
Yes
Yep there will always be some that will use it, but again I don't know why someone would switch from the Sony system to the Nikon one to then use Sony lenses, YMMV of course.

Nikon don't do a 24-105mm but they do the 24-120mm f4 which would be my preference due to the extra reach, but then you also have the option of Sigma 24-105mm. Again there's no 28-75mm f2.8 but there's the 24-70mm f2.8 which again would be my choice due 24mm at the wide end making much more difference than 5mm at the long end. Again YMMV (y)
Why I care I already mentioned, for UWA primes like my laowa 15mm which is there no alternative for on Nikon.

Don't get me started on Nikon 24-120. It sucks past 70-80mm and it's lot bigger. The latest 24-105mm lenses from canon, Sony and Panasonic are actually rather sharp over the entire zoom range at f4. The Panasonic even focuses down to 0.5x macro too bad there isn't an adapter for it or else that'd be my preference. Nikon on the other hand is the worst of its kind.

Again 24-70mm is huge and not everyone wants to carry a huge zoom all the time. Tamron is smaller and more travel friendly. Many people shooting mirrorless still appreciate this.
 
Messages
14,377
Edit My Images
No
Why I care I already mentioned, for UWA primes like my laowa 15mm which is there no alternative for on Nikon.

Don't get me started on Nikon 24-120. It sucks past 70-80mm and it's lot bigger. The latest 24-105mm lenses from canon, Sony and Panasonic are actually rather sharp over the entire zoom range at f4. The Panasonic even focuses down to 0.5x macro too bad there isn't an adapter for it or else that'd be my preference. Nikon on the other hand is the worst of its kind.

Again 24-70mm is huge and not everyone wants to carry a huge zoom all the time. Tamron is smaller and more travel friendly. Many people shooting mirrorless still appreciate this.
As I said, YMMV. I also said that I get why 'some' will want it and hence why it's available (y). Is there a reason you'd swap from the Sony system to the Nikon though? Other than ergonomics I'm not sure what Nikon can offer over Sony?

I must have had a good 24-120mm as it produced good images right through the range (y)
 
Last edited:

nandbytes

I owe Cobra some bacon
Messages
6,477
Edit My Images
Yes
As I said, YMMV. I also said that I get why 'some' will want it and hence why it's available (y). Is there a reason you'd swap from the Sony system to the Nikon though? Other than ergonomics I'm not sure what Nikon can offer over Sony?

I must have had a good 24-120mm as it produced good images right through the range (y)
Current Nikon Z bodies may be not... But ergonomics are important :)
Also it has other lenses I fancy - the 14-30 and 300mm PF :)

I like how you always the best copies of lenses - z24-70, F 24-120 :D
 
Last edited:
Messages
12,698
Name
Keith
Edit My Images
No
Why I care I already mentioned, for UWA primes like my laowa 15mm which is there no alternative for on Nikon.

Don't get me started on Nikon 24-120. It sucks past 70-80mm and it's lot bigger. The latest 24-105mm lenses from canon, Sony and Panasonic are actually rather sharp over the entire zoom range at f4. The Panasonic even focuses down to 0.5x macro too bad there isn't an adapter for it or else that'd be my preference. Nikon on the other hand is the worst of its kind.

Again 24-70mm is huge and not everyone wants to carry a huge zoom all the time. Tamron is smaller and more travel friendly. Many people shooting mirrorless still appreciate this.
Laowa have a 12mm 2.8 Zero-D for Nikon mount
 

nandbytes

I owe Cobra some bacon
Messages
6,477
Edit My Images
Yes
Laowa have a 12mm 2.8 Zero-D for Nikon mount
Have you seen the size of it especially after you add the adapter, no filter ring, and laowa is a stop faster. UWA is one of the areas where mirrorless really makes huge savings.

Though I'd be personally interested in bringing across my Sony 24-105mm too. Use z14-30 and PF 300mm with teleconverters
 
Messages
12,698
Name
Keith
Edit My Images
No
Have you seen the size of it especially after you add the adapter, no filter ring, and laowa is a stop faster. UWA is one of the areas where mirrorless really makes huge savings.

Though I'd be personally interested in bringing across my Sony 24-105mm too. Use z14-30 and PF 300mm with teleconverters
No, just checked the their web site, had a feeling they had an UWA for Nikon. The 15mm is as small then as the 9mm for APSC and 7mm for M43? that thing is tiny alright
 
Messages
12,698
Name
Keith
Edit My Images
No
Unfortunately large sensor = large lens. :(
But the 15mm for Sony FE is the same as the one for the smaller sensors I think

Not always the case that the lenses are much smaller for the smaller sensors, I'm expecting delivery today of the Fuji 16-55 2.8, and it's not much smaller or lighter than a 24-70 for FF. I'm not sure how I'll get on with that as I hated the 24-70 2.8 for Nikon, it just felt too big and bulky for what it is. The Olympus 12-40 2.8 I had recently was a joy to use on the other hand because it's tiny for a lens that does the same job. The Fuji is in between but veers more to being a FF size - Got a great deal on it though so if I don't like, it shouldn't be too hard sell on
 
Last edited:
Messages
20,805
Name
Alan
Edit My Images
No
I don't get it either, I know Sony users love to imagine everyone is dying to use their over priced lenses, but Nikon have many more very good to even great lenses in their back cat already.
Sony price bashing again?

I suppose it's pointless to say that some of the later good lenses from just about everyone tend to be on the expensive side? I've just looked at Wex and five Nikon Z lenses are listed priced at £1229 for a 14-30mm f4, £659 for the 35mm f1.8, £419 for the 50mm f1.8 £2019 for the 24-70mm f2.8 and £809 for the f4. Looking at the Sony prices it's swings and roundabouts. Yes there are cheaper DSLR and older lenses you can adapt but the trend with newer native lenses does seem for some of them to be better and more expensive ones no matter what the badge on them.

I know reality sometimes gets in the way of a bit of brand bashing or brand promotion but looking at it without any brand bias it does seem to be a case of swings and roundabouts with some brands being a couple of hundred £ cheaper than the competition with one lens but more expensive with another.

PS.
I'm a Sony, Panasonic, Canon, Nikon, Voigtlander, Minolta, Miranda, Sigma etc user and I really couldn't give a flying if anyone else buys the same kit as me or not :D
 
Messages
14,377
Edit My Images
No
Current Nikon Z bodies may be not... But ergonomics are important :)
Also it has other lenses I fancy - the 14-30 and 300mm PF :)

I like how you always the best copies of lenses - z24-70, F 24-120 :D
Haha, you've clearly not followed my history of lenses and cameras then ;) Off the top of my head in the last 5 or 6 years at least 5 lenses have had to go back due to poor IQ and/or focussing issues (leading to soft images), and three camera bodies. I think I deserved at least two good copies :p
 
Messages
12,698
Name
Keith
Edit My Images
No
Sony price bashing again?

I suppose it's pointless to say that some of the later good lenses from just about everyone tend to be on the expensive side? I've just looked at Wex and five Nikon Z lenses are listed priced at £1229 for a 14-30mm f4, £659 for the 35mm f1.8, £419 for the 50mm f1.8 £2019 for the 24-70mm f2.8 and £809 for the f4. Looking at the Sony prices it's swings and roundabouts. Yes there are cheaper DSLR and older lenses you can adapt but the trend with newer native lenses does seem for some of them to be better and more expensive ones no matter what the badge on them.

I know reality sometimes gets in the way of a bit of brand bashing or brand promotion but looking at it without any brand bias it does seem to be a case of swings and roundabouts with some brands being a couple of hundred £ cheaper than the competition with one lens but more expensive with another.

PS.
I'm a Sony, Panasonic, Canon, Nikon, Voigtlander, Minolta, Miranda, Sigma etc user and I really couldn't give a flying if anyone else buys the same kit as me or not :D
Again? Doubt you'll find me guilty of it before now, their pricier lenses wouldn't be anywhere on my budget list! You know I'm talking about their G lenses only, otherwise why would anyone want to be adapting? Nikon have a match for anything else Sony produce.
 
Last edited:
Messages
20,805
Name
Alan
Edit My Images
No
Again? Doubt you'll find me guilty of it before now, their pricier lenses wouldn't be anywhere on my budget list! You know I'm talking about their G lenses only, otherwise why would anyone want to be adapting? Nikon have a match for anything else Sony produce.
I just get tired of posts that appear to be bashing marques for shaky reasons. The G lenses are aiming at the top end of the market and are roughly in line with other top end lenses from other camera makers. Sigma and the other 3rd party makers will possibly undercut the camera makers but looking at the camera makers lenses it seems to be swings and roundabouts to me.

The DSLR lens back catalogues are going to be cheaper and this isn't surprising as they'll be older lenses and the development costs have possibly been largely or completely recouped. This isn't even just a mirrorless issue, wasn't there a Canon 85mm f1.2 DSLR lens that came out recently that's £1.8k or so? How much will that be on sale for if it's still being made 10 years from now? Less in real terms I'd guess.
 
Messages
14,377
Edit My Images
No
I just get tired of posts that appear to be bashing marques for shaky reasons. The G lenses are aiming at the top end of the market and are roughly in line with other top end lenses from other camera makers. Sigma and the other 3rd party makers will possibly undercut the camera makers but looking at the camera makers lenses it seems to be swings and roundabouts to me.

The DSLR lens back catalogues are going to be cheaper and this isn't surprising as they'll be older lenses and the development costs have possibly been largely or completely recouped. This isn't even just a mirrorless issue, wasn't there a Canon 85mm f1.2 DSLR lens that came out recently that's £1.8k or so? How much will that be on sale for if it's still being made 10 years from now? Less in real terms I'd guess.
TBH most of the modern lenses from the 'big boys' are getting silly money now imo. The new Nikon Z lenses are silly money, as are the EOS R and of course G master and the good FE mount. We've had so many hikes in prices over the last few years and then I think they've used these new mounts to hike the prices up even more. Yes I get that they're supposed to be superior quality but still.....
 
Messages
12,698
Name
Keith
Edit My Images
No
I just get tired of posts that appear to be bashing marques for shaky reasons. The G lenses are aiming at the top end of the market and are roughly in line with other top end lenses from other camera makers. Sigma and the other 3rd party makers will possibly undercut the camera makers but looking at the camera makers lenses it seems to be swings and roundabouts to me.

The DSLR lens back catalogues are going to be cheaper and this isn't surprising as they'll be older lenses and the development costs have possibly been largely or completely recouped. This isn't even just a mirrorless issue, wasn't there a Canon 85mm f1.2 DSLR lens that came out recently that's £1.8k or so? How much will that be on sale for if it's still being made 10 years from now? Less in real terms I'd guess.
I'm not sure why it should bother you because someone says they are expensive, because they are! I don't know why anyone defends any of these companies anymore tbh because they're all greedy little piggies IMO. But they'll continue over pricing so long as people keep paying. I'll stick to the lower end used market no matter
 
Messages
236
Name
David
Edit My Images
Yes
Sony price bashing again?

I suppose it's pointless to say that some of the later good lenses from just about everyone tend to be on the expensive side? I've just looked at Wex and five Nikon Z lenses are listed priced at £1229 for a 14-30mm f4, £659 for the 35mm f1.8, £419 for the 50mm f1.8 £2019 for the 24-70mm f2.8 and £809 for the f4. Looking at the Sony prices it's swings and roundabouts. Yes there are cheaper DSLR and older lenses you can adapt but the trend with newer native lenses does seem for some of them to be better and more expensive ones no matter what the badge on them.

I know reality sometimes gets in the way of a bit of brand bashing or brand promotion but looking at it without any brand bias it does seem to be a case of swings and roundabouts with some brands being a couple of hundred £ cheaper than the competition with one lens but more expensive with another.

PS.
I'm a Sony, Panasonic, Canon, Nikon, Voigtlander, Minolta, Miranda, Sigma etc user and I really couldn't give a flying if anyone else buys the same kit as me or not :D
lenses do seem to be improving technically though there are those who find the modern look, if there is such a thing, somewhat dull and sterile. Expensive I would agree on though I guess all the fancy elements probably has something to do with it. I'm glad I bought my Fuji when I did, the majority 5-6 years ago second hand, as the prices now are crazy for the better stuff. The Nikon Z stuff has plummeted in price since the cashback started in particular. OK, the 35mm S we've been talking about recently is around £150 more than the G version but every review says it's quite a bit better. When real 2nd hand copies become available, it will be pretty reasonable but who knows if there will be any more permanent significant reductions on new after the cashback ends. I don't see the 50mm being cheaper (in the eurozone where it's priced much lower than the UK) for quite some time. The 14-30 will drop pretty soon, I expect.
 
Last edited:
Messages
14,377
Edit My Images
No
Been out with the 24-70mm f4 again today, I'm really impressed with this lens (y)
 
Top