Who has moved to the Nikon ZF?

I’ve really been thinking hard about a ZF. I know it’s totally different but I keep going back and forth between that and a Q2. I get they are totally different animal but the AF is my main motivation and the Q2 would preventable from going down the rabbit hole of lens acquisition like I’ve done with the M bodies. 😬
 
Its obvious of course, but you have to be super sure 28mm is the focal length you love. I owned a number of the Ricoh GR cameras... 28mm fixed lens like the Q's. I love the GR's and the 28, but I always ended up getting some other camera system with interchangeable lenses because 28mm didn't satisfy all my visual 'needs'.
 
Jbennett68 said:
I’ve really been thinking hard about a ZF. I know it’s totally different but I keep going back and forth between that and a Q2. I get they are totally different animal but the AF is my main motivation and the Q2 would preventable from going down the rabbit hole of lens acquisition like I’ve done with the M bodies. 😬
Click to expand...
I'll say you cannot go wrong either way... except if 28mm really isn't your focal length. There is a rumored Q3 with a 43mm lens coming out very soon too...supposedly.
 
JohnGellings said:
I'll say you cannot go wrong either way... except if 28mm really isn't your focal length. There is a rumored Q3 with a 43mm lens coming out very soon too...supposedly.
Click to expand...
What’s super frustrating is I live in Memphis. Metropolitan area is well over a million people and not a single store I can actually go put either camera in my hands.
 
Jbennett68 said:
What’s super frustrating is I live in Memphis. Metropolitan area is well over a million people and not a single store I can actually go put either camera in my hands.
Click to expand...
Yeah, I get that. The Zf is available to buy through say Walmart online, but probably not to touch in person before you buy.
 
I made the move but sent the camera back to BH. It was a complicated move. My primary cameras are the Z9 for stills and a brief experiment with the Z8 for video. Obviously very different cameras and ultimately a canceled trip to Europe forced me to realize the ZF has no place in my life. It’s a cool concept and paired with the 40 1.2, it’s a powerful duo.
 
Once again, I'm looking at the Zf as a potential (gasp) replacement for my M9.

Don't get me wrong, I adore my M9, but the rangefinder window coating has almost completely peeled, making focusing more difficult. The rangefinder may be misaligned, too. Also, my vision isn't what it used to be, so I'm finding precise focusing more tricky with a rangefinder. Autofocus and perhaps a jumbo EVF for manual focus would be of benefit here.

Alternatives include the Leica SL2S with its sensor more suited to M mount lenses and its huge EVF, and another Panasonic S5 or S1 body. The upside of those options over the Zf is that I already have a Panasonic S5, L mount lenses and a L-M adapter. Particularly, another S5 body would allow me to use the same batteries as the S5, although the EVF isn't optimal. The S1 is huge but has a superb EVF, and aftermarket batteries are widely available.

(Edited to add: technically, the S5 I already own is an alternative body to the M9, but I'd like another full frame body to use in tandem with my S5.)

The SL2S brings its own pitfalls, like super expensive batteries, and a used price almost double what a brand new discounted Zf costs right now. It's also considerably larger and heavier than the M9, Zf or S5 II. But damn, I love the colours I've been able to get from SL2S files, and SL2S handling overall is just mmmwah. ❤️ 😘

The extra expensive option would be to buy a secondhand M10 with Visoflex, which isn't in my current budget.

The Zf brings compact lenses like the 40/2, excellent autofocus, relatively compact size, and that fantastic set of controls.

Sigh.
 
Last edited:
I didn’t move to the Zf, but added one to my bag. I use my Z9 for action and the Zf for most everything else, replacing my original Z6.
 
With a D750 and D-Lux Type 109 in the bag with my Ms, a Z would be superfluous for me right now. That said, I do find the idea of using my legacy Wezlar glass on a modern sensor interesting. The thought of a 21mm f/4 Color-Skopar with an LTM adapter plugged into a Z adapter intrigues me. But ... I don't see the benefit of jumping from one 25mpix Nikon to another, or at least I don't see a compelling case for it..

But first I need to do further herd thinning.
 
Last edited:
chuckroast said:
With a D750 and D-Lux Type 109 in the bag with my Ms, a Z would be superfluous for me right now. That said, I do find the idea of using my legacy Wezlar glass on a modern sensor. The thought of a 21mm f/4 Color-Skopar with an LTM adapter plugged into a Z adapter intrigues me. But ... I don't see the benefit of jumping from one 25mpix Nikon to another, or at least I don't see a compelling case for it..

But first I need to do further herd thinning.
Click to expand...
I dabbled with adapted lenses on my Zf, but found I’m happiest with my native Z Voigtlander 40/1.2 and adapted Sony mount Voigtlander 21/3.5. Having a data connection is very important to me, both for focus confirmation and EXIF.
 
Sonnar Brian said:
I never "move" to a new camera/system, just assimilate more of them like the Borg.
Last year I picked up a Z5, and am amazed by the ease of use with manual focus lenses.
This year- I'll add a Zf to have a two-body system to handle a couple hundred manual focus lenses. I bought most of the required adapters already.
I might even get the "kit" with the 40/2, it's cheap. Will be my retirement present to myself.
Click to expand...

bolded: I resemble that remark! :)

I haven't really 'bonded' with any Nikon since the F3/FM2n/FE2 came and went; I used that Nikon kit for about 22 years, and none of the later models ever really did anything for me. Into the digital era, I tried one of the DSLRs in the 2015 time period and it just left me cold, I sold it when I bought the Leica SL. So far, I have not even seen any of the Nikon Z models in the flesh. Perhaps I'll hunt one up once I get to somewhere a real brick'n'mortar camera shop exists.

That said, my current in-use digital cameras all have 40-50 Mpixel sensors, and this 'new' Df has a 24 Mpixel sensor from what I see on the Nikon website. Is there some reason why they haven't moved to a more recent, higher resolution sensor?

G
 
@Godfrey- When Nikon came out with the Df they used the 16MPixel sensor from the D4. The reasoning- the camera would be used with older, manual focus lenses. The 16MPixel sensor is a better match for most older lenses. I suspect the same is true for the Zf: use with older lenses, no need for more than 24MPixels.
 
Sonnar Brian said:
@Godfrey- When Nikon came out with the Df they used the 16MPixel sensor from the D4. The reasoning- the camera would be used with older, manual focus lenses. The 16MPixel sensor is a better match for most older lenses. I suspect the same is true for the Zf: use with older lenses, no need for more than 24MPixels.
Click to expand...

Hmm. It's an interesting question mark. I use lenses from as long ago as the 1950s on my 40Mpixel Leicas, and my '60s to '80s V-system Hassy lenses with the CFVII 50c back on my Hasselblad 500CM bodies. I don't see anything wrong with their performance on these high resolution sensors. What could be different about these older, manual lenses used on these Nikon Z?

G
 
Brian, what is the result of over-sampling, i.e.: what differences would I expect to see in a print made with the Zf and, say, a 60's Ai 50mm f2 lens, vs. using, say, my Nikkor Z MC 50mm f2.8 lens?
 
Sonnar Brian said:
Once you get much past 24MPixels- you are out-resolving the optics. It's over-sampling.
Click to expand...

I don't know about that. Concentrating on the Leica M and R lenses, I've used the same lenses on several generations of cameras with sensors from 12 Mpixel (Ricoh GXR M-module), then 18, then 24, to now 40 Mpixel (Leica M10-M/-R). With each incremental improvement in the sensor resolution, I've seen more detail and better dynamic range appear in the captures. All of these lenses are easily capable of resolution numbers in the 110-150 lpmm range, or higher, so I seriously doubt that even a 40 Mpixel sensor is out-resolving the lenses.

EG: To a first order approximation ... The M10-M sensor nets about 218 pixels/mm, which means it can record a maximum of about 109 lpmm (one black and one white pixel make a pair). That says to me that the resolution capability of the lens is significantly higher than that of the sensor. ... Unless I'm completely misunderstanding what a LP per MM resolution number means.

G
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom