NEW ZF-WHAT LENSES/

K

ktmrider

Well-known
Local time
10:25 PM
Joined
Dec 12, 2007
Messages
1,363
I purchased a Nikon Zf at the end of April with the 40 kit lens. I am planning a trip around the world this winter and trying to figure out which lenses to purchase. As a Leica user I have not owned many zooms but they sure look attractive except for the slower f stops. I am thinking either the 24-120f4 Nikon Z lens or 26f2.8, 40f2. and 85f1.8 Nikon Z lenses.

When I travel with my Leica M, it is usually with the 35/90 focal lengths or just a Leica M with a 50. Of course, f stops are more important with film due to the inherent limitations of film ISO. And I have 21,35,50, 90 and 135 focal lengths in Leica M mount and could buy an adopter. I could use your thoughts.

Thanks, RDN
 
Most Nikon Z mount lenses are big and heavy and don't pair well with the retro ZF body. 1.4 lb / 630 g for the 24-120, and 1.03 lb / 470 g for the 85. I'd go with the M-mount lenses. For the days you don't want to focus manually, consider the Techart Pro TZM-02 adapter. Cheers, OtL
 
Leica user? Get a M -> Z adapter and use your Leica glass and don't look back.

If you need really need something with a longer reach, there is the 70-180/2.8 but it is big and heavy though with a 2x teleconverter it should give you fairly good reach beyond what your M mount lenses can handle.
 
Out to Lunch said:
Most Nikon Z mount lenses are big and heavy and don't pair well with the retro ZF body. 1.4 lb / 630 g for the 24-120, and 1.03 lb / 470 g for the 85. I'd go with the M-mount lenses. For the days you don't want to focus manually, consider the Techart Pro TZM-02 adapter. Cheers, OtL
Click to expand...
The Nikon Zf is 700+ g itself. It is not a tiny or light camera. It is heavier than the Z6 and people use that camera with those lenses.
 
I have the 26, and it's a nice light little thing. Perfect for travel. There are three kinds of M-adapter to look at: A straight-up "dumb" adapter. Pros: simple and relatively inexpensive, Cons: the M lenses don't focus closer than three feet or so. The solution? Adapter type 2: a helical focus adapter. These ooch out a bit on a helical coil and let you extend your M lens' focusing range on the near end of things. I have one from Fotodiox and it is well made and no problems with infinity focus. If there is any "con" to this it is that it adds a bit of weight, and of course, more moving pieces means more stuff to break. Although, that said, I expect years of service from mine. Slightly more expensive than the "dumb" adapter. Third choice: The Techart v2 autofocus adapter. Incorporates a motor so that you can use your M lenses on your Z-mount camera. I have one and it works.

I have the Z8, not the Zf. But I think that this kind of solution can work, particularly if you have the wide-angle end of things covered with the native Z glass. You should know that the 26 vignettes a little bit -- nothing that has put me off, but the on-line reviewers make a lot of it. The Leica 21 will vignette too, FWIW.
 
Out to Lunch said:
Yep, which is why the Z6 has a much bigger grip. The ZF is so heavy that most people buy a separate grip with it -which in my opinion defeats the retro styling of that camera.
Click to expand...
I'm not a fan of grips at all, and I can use heavier lenses. I mean, before things like the Nikon F4, people used a lot of cameras without big grips.
 
JohnGellings said:
I'm not a fan of grips at all, and I can use heavier lenses. I mean, before things like the Nikon F4, people used a lot of cameras without big grips.
Click to expand...
Whereas I considered the grip to be one of the big steps forward of the T90/F4 era in cameras.

6 of one/half a dozen of the other.
 
I started photography in 1966 and did it professionally for a few years in the mid 1970's. I used two motorized Nikon F's so this idea about grips and not being able to use squared off cameras with big lenses is pretty silly to me. And I doubt it weighs more than a MP with it's brass body. Now as a newspaper photographer, my back started to hurt after lugging a Domke F2 with two motorized Nikon F bodies, 24, 85, 180 and 300mm lenses, film and a electronic flash. Granted I am not in my 20's anymore. I am thinking 26 or 28, 40 and 85. I think I like the faster lenses vice the ease of use of a zoom (24-120f4).

Depth of field aside, is the limitation of a f4 aperture noticeable in a mirrorless cameras viewfinder compared to a lens with f2 or f2.8 like it would be with an SLR? I am asking because I honestly do not know as my main camera for years has been a Leica M film camera (primarily due to the brightness of the optical finder).

Of course, the 24-120 f4 zoom would make a very attractive option when teamed with the 40f2 which I purchased with the camera. Have to wait a week until I get back to Anchorage and take the Zf to the camera store and can actually put the larger lenses on the camera.
 
Last edited:
Get the Z 26mm 2.8! Great travel lens and tiny. Classic pancake concept.

Another lens to consider for traveling is the original 24-70 F4. It is pretty small and light which is not neccessarly a common feature of the Z lenses.
 
I think it depends on your route and mode of transport to be honest, as well as the purpose of the trip. For me, photography would be an adjunct to such a journey, but for someone else it could the sole purpose.

One thing I would observe is that switching from primes to zooms can be a bit confusing if you can’t invest time before the trip. I have a couple of zooms for one system, which serve a very specific purpose - usually on a tripod - but don’t really like them as walk around lenses. I’d rather live with the missed opportunities/forced alternative compositions resulting from having one prime lens with me than get confused by the zoom. Obviously, your view might be different and the importance of photography to the trip will be part of that.

Hope you have a great time and to see some photos later:)
 
Well, I finally got back to Anchorage and recharged the batteries in my new Zf. I purchased a defective camera which would not allow me to load SD cards. I left the camera at the condo and had to catch a midnight flight to the lower 48. The wife took the camera to the dealer and he exchanged the body.

I visited the dealer today and picked up a 24-120f4S. It fits well into a very small Think Tank Retrosprective 4 with the Zf body with 40 attached on one size and the zoom on the other. This will be my round the world kit for this fall. I have 6 M lenses and debating an adopter. The only focal length I would gain is the 21f2.8 Zeiss but all the M lenses are faster than f4 including a 50f1.2.

Thoughts?
 
JohnGellings said:
No, you are in the majority, I'm the weirdo. Clearly, based on camera design these days. That said, I truly like cameras without grips.
Click to expand...
Real majority is whom you have actually seen with cameras. To me and most I have seen grip is gearheads forums prerogative.
Silver M11 weight is less than one hundred grams difference from ZF.

For word round I would get single and light lens to have no hassle, but consistency.
40 you have is perfect rounder. Heavier lenses causing nose diving, which could cause pain for real.
 
If I had a Zf, I'd get the 40mm f2 and 28mm f2.8, or the 26mm f2.8 from Nikon. I'd also look at the Z mount lenses from Voigtlander, as they would balance perfectly on the Zf and also really look the business! Not to mention, the image quality of those lenses is tops.
 
I’ve been using the Zf lately. I use the 40, 50 and 85mm. I do not mind the size much. They all balance fine on the camera since the Zf is 700g. They seem to be great lenses for a great camera. Nothing is ever perfect in digital, so I’m not going to stress out over it. I think using Fuji GFX a lot has changed my perspective on needing to use small cameras. When I truly need small, I have the Ricoh. I think this means that I probably will no longer use Fuji X. I haven’t liked the cameras they’ve released lately and they are hard to buy now.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom