Nikon Z* mirrorless

[AZ6]

But even in those examples above, the XQD cards are still more expensive. And as pointed out; there's no 'slower' cheaper alternative. No choice. Like Stephen L, I don't rattle off loads of fups, so I don't need such fast speeds. I'm not reliant on getting one good shot from a 'spray and pray' 10fups burst. Praps it's cos I learned how to do photography properly.

The SD cards in my D600 are 30Mbps. Thirty. Not three hundred; thirty. That's fine. 16Gb as well; this has been limiting once or twice I admit. I could have done with a bit more storage. But then, I don't tend to shoot thousands of pics at a time, even on holiday for a couple of weeks. Meh. I bought them some years ago when they were a bit more expensive than they are now, but even then, they weren't extortionate, like £20-25 each or summat. XQD cards are a rip off because nobody else makes them and Sony can take the pee with prices.

Some of us don't need a Ferrari; a Nissan Micra is adequate.

My Z6 came with a 64GB XQD card. Which wasn't mentioned in any info I read on the retailer's website. So I'd ordered a 120GB card anyway. I was almost annoyed when I opened the box and saw the card included ( I suspect it was a mislabeling at the lower price, as the boxes are almost identical; I had that once with an Apple Mac.. ). Still, at least I have a spare...

 

[Sootchucker]

I agree somewhat AZ6, if you look at the choice that SD gives you and the therefore the cheaper slower speed cards available, it does make XQD seems expensive. But also don't forget that part of the "increased" price for XQD is the much steardier construction and reliability. I know XQD can fail but over the years I've lost track at how many SD cards I've had that have either failed or have just fallen apart (with the cases splitting).

I know the next part is subjective and potentially downright contentious, but there's not a cheap camera body that uses XQD on the market, so you would have to spend typically £1500 north to purchase just a camera body that uses XQD, so is another £150 or so on a spare 64gb really out of the question ? especially if they last ? (goes and hides for cover )

 

[Stephen L]

I’ve never had an SD card fail, but then again, being a frugal shooter (I still shoot as if it’s film), I’ve never changed a card in the field.
I do certainly appreciate your second point though. It’s like paying upwards of £2k on kit then baulking at £9 a month on a complete software suite (dodges the Adobe haters).

 

[Luftwalk]

The 300/2.8 as a walk around lens I just can't stop using it...sorry

Scouting ahead by luftwalk, on Flickr

Is that a deer?!? by luftwalk, on Flickr

 

[trevorbray]

The 300/2.8 as a walk around lens I just can't stop using it...sorry

Scouting ahead by luftwalk, on Flickr

Is that a deer?!? by luftwalk, on Flickr

#2 Really does it for me.

 

[kingo15]

Stop it with that 300mm your going to cost me money

 

[Luftwalk]

#2 Really does it for me.

Thanks, it's my preferred of the series as well

Stop it with that 300mm your going to cost me money

Sorry I've had the Sigma 120-300mm f2.8 Sport before, but the tracking was nowhere near this one...The sharpness at 300/2.8 was good, but the prime just takes it to another level. I've read reports that the Nikon 120-300mm f2.8 is even sharper, but it's 10 grand

 

[lunar22]

gorgeous bokeh!

 

[Sootchucker]

What’s you settings for tracking the dogs please ?

 

[Luftwalk]

Hey,

for this shot I used AF-C, Wide-S mode, 12 FPS shooting and AF Lock On setting set to 4 (towards delayed). I have to say though that subject tracking works decently as well and is definitely easier to use.

 

[Doug]

How're people finding the 14-30 f4 lens? I was initially really excited but there seems to be some variations in the copies reviewed.

 

[Sootchucker]

Hey,

for this shot I used AF-C, Wide-S mode, 12 FPS shooting and AF Lock On setting set to 4 (towards delayed). I have to say though that subject tracking works decently as well and is definitely easier to use.

Cheers.

 

[lunar22]

Big day yesterday! I was in a proper zoo for the first time ever with a digital camera and realised just how difficult it is to take pictures of animals in harsh lighting, often through glass and/or wire, some of which even had the audacity to move around a lot, without a specialist wildlife lens (or camera for that matter). Still, even with the AF-P 70-300 I got more passable shots than I might have expected and I attach a couple of the more characterful ones

 

[Stephen L]

How're people finding the 14-30 f4 lens? I was initially really excited but there seems to be some variations in the copies reviewed.

Love it.

 

[lunar22]

I had seriously thought about it but it was (and probably still is) too expensive unless I could get one second hand. To be honest, there's probably no such thing as a perfect copy of an UWA and certainly the 14-30 has had a few lukewarm reviews among the largely positive ones. In the end I finished up with an IRIX 15mm which is a somewhat bulky beast but is f2.4 and a more than acceptable copy unless you expect the impossible from it. Still, it's possible my arm could be twisted a little way down the road.

 

[Stephen L]

I had seriously thought about it but it was (and probably still is) too expensive unless I could get one second hand. To be honest, there's probably no such thing as a perfect copy of an UWA and certainly the 14-30 has had a few lukewarm reviews among the largely positive ones. In the end I finished up with an IRIX 15mm which is a somewhat bulky beast but is f2.4 and a more than acceptable copy unless you expect the impossible from it. Still, it's possible my arm could be twisted a little way down the road.

No. I'm not selling mine - yet!

 

[Graham]

My 1st real big day out for something that is bigger than a butterfly. I`m really delighted with the Focus compared to my D500.
Some big Birds.

Griffon Vulture 2020 by Provence Photography 83, on Flickr

Griffon Vulture by Provence Photography 83, on Flickr

 

[Sootchucker]

Graham, lovely captures. You rate the AF in the same league as the D500 ? That hasn't been my findings, specially in AF-C and tracking modes for both my Z6 and Z7 ?

AF-S is superb though.

 

[Graham]

Graham, lovely captures. You rate the AF in the same league as the D500 ? That hasn't been my findings, specially in AF-C and tracking modes for both my Z6 and Z7 ?

AF-S is superb though.

Thanks,
I actually meant how sharp the shots are compared to the D500 and the same lens, The keeper rate is much better.
I guess I got a D500 that wasn`t as good as others.

 

[snerkler]

Thanks,
I actually meant how sharp the shots are compared to the D500 and the same lens, The keeper rate is much better.
I guess I got a D500 that wasn`t as good as others.

The keeper rate of the Z6 is much better? I think your D500 was broken

 

[Graham]

The keeper rate of the Z6 is much better? I think your D500 was broken

A duff one I think.

 

[twist]

The keeper rate of the Z6 is much better? I think your D500 was broken

Perhaps its a higher keeper rate because of the advantage of OSPDAF.

 

[Sootchucker]

I've certainly noticed that the speed of AF on my Native Z mount lenses is appreciably quicker than any of my other F mount lenses connected via the FTZ adaptor. It's not that they are slow, its just that I can feel they aren't quite as quick as native.

I therefore remain cautiously optimistic that when they flesh out the Z lens line, (if Nikon are still in business ), that the Z mount 100-400 and 200-600 proposed lenses will help the Nikon Z bodies in the focus speed stakes.

 

[snerkler]

Perhaps its a higher keeper rate because of the advantage of OSPDAF.

But then that would still suggest the D500 AF was 'duff', at least in combo with the lens being used When I had the D500 it nailed pretty much everything, focus accuracy was the best of any DSLR I've used.

 

[lunar22]

No. I'm not selling mine - yet!

Now whatever made you think I was offering???

 

[Graham]

But then that would still suggest the D500 AF was 'duff', at least in combo with the lens being used When I had the D500 it nailed pretty much everything, focus accuracy was the best of any DSLR I've used.

The 200-500, well my copy anyhow, I found it a bit slow for a nikkor lens and it's also been said on a Facebook group that some are slower than most.

 

[AZ6]

I've certainly noticed that the speed of AF on my Native Z mount lenses is appreciably quicker than any of my other F mount lenses connected via the FTZ adaptor. It's not that they are slow, its just that I can feel they aren't quite as quick as native.

I have no idea how you can tell, I started off with a Nikon F801s, glacially slow AF by today's standards (yet still much faster than I can manually focus). There can't be more than a few 1/100ths of a second difference with modern lenses though, surely? I did notice that the AF-P kit lens on my old D3300 seemed to focus almost instantaneously though, and the Z lenses are sposed to incorporate the same technology. Either way, they're all bloody quick these days!

 

[Sootchucker]

It’s when I do things like tracking that the lenses seem to be slower to respond (albeit only a little bit) than the native Z lenses.

i will concede though, as I have no F mount bodies to compare it against it’s just from memory when I had my D series bodies.

 

[kingo15]

Red kites by Mark Kingston, on Flickr

The fox family 2 by Mark Kingston, on Flickr

I think im going to like this z6

 

[snerkler]

It’s when I do things like tracking that the lenses seem to be slower to respond (albeit only a little bit) than the native Z lenses.

i will concede though, as I have no F mount bodies to compare it against it’s just from memory when I had my D series bodies.

I think it will depend on the lenses tbh. For example I did a side by side comparison of my D850 with 24-70mm f2.8 vs the Z6 and 24-70mm f4 and the D850 combo was noticeably quicker, however you’re comparing an f2.8 ‘pro’ lens vs an f4 ‘kit’ lens.

I think it’s fair to say that on the whole the Z mount lenses are a step up from the comparable f-mount lens and I would expect the z lenses to have faster AF than the af-s and earlier lenses. When these are paired with an equivalently fast body I think we will see faster AF on the z mount than we ever did with F-mount, although the D5/6 will take some beating to be fair.

 

[twist]

I think it will depend on the lenses tbh. For example I did a side by side comparison of my D850 with 24-70mm f2.8 vs the Z6 and 24-70mm f4 and the D850 combo was noticeably quicker, however you’re comparing an f2.8 ‘pro’ lens vs an f4 ‘kit’ lens.

I think it’s fair to say that on the whole the Z mount lenses are a step up from the comparable f-mount lens and I would expect the z lenses to have faster AF than the af-s and earlier lenses. When these are paired with an equivalently fast body I think we will see faster AF on the z mount than we ever did with F-mount, although the D5/6 will take some beating to be fair.

Depends, its not just about the body, how many linear motors are Nikon using in their lenses? Sony for e.g. are using 4 in the 135gm and others AFAIK.

 

[snerkler]

Depends, its not just about the body, how many linear motors are Nikon using in their lenses? Sony for e.g. are using 4 in the 135gm and others AFAIK.

Yeah that's kind of what I was getting at. I believe that the Z lenses will have faster motors on the whole compared to their equivalent AF-S lenses, so when the AF on the bodies is up to par they system should (in theory) be faster to focus than F-mount. Of course, this is all just theory

 

[AZ6]

I think it will depend on the lenses tbh. For example I did a side by side comparison of my D850 with 24-70mm f2.8 vs the Z6 and 24-70mm f4 and the D850 combo was noticeably quicker, however you’re comparing an f2.8 ‘pro’ lens vs an f4 ‘kit’ lens.

I think it’s fair to say that on the whole the Z mount lenses are a step up from the comparable f-mount lens and I would expect the z lenses to have faster AF than the af-s and earlier lenses. When these are paired with an equivalently fast body I think we will see faster AF on the z mount than we ever did with F-mount, although the D5/6 will take some beating to be fair.

Would be interesting* to see a comparison between the Z and F f2.8 zooms. On my old film cams, the AF with the same lens, is noticeably quicker on my F4 than my F801s, then quicker again on my F5 and F100. I always thought the F801 s AF was amazing, until I started using more modern cams. I'm not a sports photographer, but I do photograph a fair bit of 'action' I spose, so AF speed is still fairly important, and I don't feel any cams have ever really let me down.

*It's really not that interesting.

 

[kingo15]

Must I'm very impressed with the dynamic range of the camera. I thought the d750 was good.

 

[AZ6]

Must I'm very impressed with the dynamic range of the camera. I thought the d750 was good.

No it's good, isn't it? I've got shots at ISO 51,200, that I can still pull a bit out of the shadows. 'Grainy', but still useable, particularly in B+W. There' so much to play with, in the RAW files.

 

[kingo15]

No it's good, isn't it? I've got shots at ISO 51,200, that I can still pull a bit out of the shadows. 'Grainy', but still useable, particularly in B+W. There' so much to play with, in the RAW files.

Yeah the red kite shot was shot at iso 100 and 1/1250 as id forgot to put auto iso back on so was well under exposed and dark as dark can be. Even pulling the shadows up 100 % on one shot it was still clean.

 

[snerkler]

Must I'm very impressed with the dynamic range of the camera. I thought the d750 was good.

Impressive isn't it as the Z6 actually has 0.2 less ev overall but they have managed to improve DR over the D750 at ISOs above 600

 

[kingo15]

Impressive isn't it as the Z6 actually has 0.2 less ev overall but they have managed to improve DR over the D750 at ISOs above 600

I suppose when you look at it logically. It was no different from when the d750 1st came out there wasnt alot at the time that could touch that for dr

 

[Stephen L]

Just another shot from up the road. Trow Gill, on the approach to Ingleborough from Clapham.

Trow Gill by Stephen Lee, on Flickr

 

[snerkler]

I suppose when you look at it logically. It was no different from when the d750 1st came out there wasnt alot at the time that could touch that for dr

The Z6 is about on par (give or take) with the A7RIV above 800 ISO too. We're really spoilt with these cameras, especially when you consider the noise handling and relative lack of colour shift with the high ISOs.