DownUnder
Nikon Nomad
Bloody (+ f-word + ing) system logged me out while I was finishing my (above) post, autoposted my entire draft in so doing, and now I find I can't get back into it to do some editing. Thanks a lot, RFF!!
My third last paragraph was meant to read as follows - "Next year when I return to Southeast Asia to trek across a few countries, or if I can go back, well - then I may look at the smaller Z range of Nikons. Which will be it for me. Smaller is better. Kiss is the way."
RFF still has a long way to go before those damn 'Invalid Server Response' messages stop popping up every minute OR your server post while I'm writing but then doesn't let me log into the post again. Thanks heaps - for the sake of my blood pressure, I'll do what I earlier wrote that I would and stay away from here longer.
My third last paragraph was meant to read as follows - "Next year when I return to Southeast Asia to trek across a few countries, or if I can go back, well - then I may look at the smaller Z range of Nikons. Which will be it for me. Smaller is better. Kiss is the way."
RFF still has a long way to go before those damn 'Invalid Server Response' messages stop popping up every minute OR your server post while I'm writing but then doesn't let me log into the post again. Thanks heaps - for the sake of my blood pressure, I'll do what I earlier wrote that I would and stay away from here longer.
farlymac
PF McFarland
I don't think Nikon went the mirrorless route just to make money, as they really bungled their first attempts. Mainly they are following the market which is shifting away from SLR style cameras. It makes all the sense in the world to go mirrorless as it reduces a lot of the complexity of designing a camera. And there are certain features that would not be possible if using a traditional shutter-and-mirror type arrangement. Nikon has even completely abandoned the shutter in the Z9, and most likely will in all future models. Think of the development costs they will save on by eliminating an item that was holding them back on improving the dynamics of the camera. My main reason for switching to the Z system is my hands aren't holding up all that well, and I need something lighter and smaller to handle. The D610 is fine with the older lenses, but the D300s' are a bit long in the tooth, and after finding a Z50 2 lens kit I just figured I might as well upgrade the FX side too.
As to the forum issues, well, it's a work in progress. As much as we all wanted it to be completely working with no bugs, the budget just wasn't there to be able to fully test it out, and there have been many changes requested by the membership (myself included). It will take some time, but it's getting there. I hope you don't stay away too long a time. There is no other forum like this in the world (which you can interpret any way you want to). It will get better.
PF
farlymac
PF McFarland
Well the Z5 arrived on Tuesday, and I finally got some time to take it on a test run. Using the FTZ adapter I mounted a non-Ai Nikkor-S 35mm 1:2.8, made a couple of setting changes, and headed out to capture some scenery.
Using Ken Rockwell's advice of setting the JPG image at Vivid with a +3 saturation made for less work in post. I'll have to do that with the Z50 too as it does look a bit flat. Focus Peaking is on 1 as anything else seems to just overload the image in the viewfinder with red. It's bad enough on the lowest setting especially when photographing trees. I noticed that IBIS and VR are two completely separate things as the VR is Off while using this combo of lens and adapter (I was confusing that setting with the IBIS which I guess is always on). The VR settings are mainly for when you are shooting with VR type lenses with the camera mounted on a tripod. You don't find this out unless you download the Reference Manual (Refurb units don't come with manuals of any kind, and the User Manual is quite lacking in many areas).
Other than the Focus Peaking issues, I find the combination easy to use. It's forcing me to pay more attention to the readouts in the finder, something I kind of have gotten away from by using Aperture Priority most of the time. However, none of the photos came out as sharp as I expected them to. Some I couldn't even find an in-focus area on closer inspection. I don't know if this is a matter of the lens IQ, or something else. It's not an IBIS problem because none of the images exhibit the smearing associated with that. There is quite a bit of aberration, and I just wonder if that is confusing the Focus Peaking system. I'm going to try another lens of the same type and see if that solves the issue.
I've also got the other two lenses from my F/F2 day bag (50/1.4 and 105/2.8 non-Ai Nikkor) to check out. Could be some of my images were taken wide open on the 35mm which might not have been a good idea. Also, I do have one AF-S D lens (28-70mm 1:2.8 with no VR) that I can use the AF on with the FTZ, so will see how that pans out. I'd hate to have to the send the camera back if it's not going to make decent images.
PF
Using Ken Rockwell's advice of setting the JPG image at Vivid with a +3 saturation made for less work in post. I'll have to do that with the Z50 too as it does look a bit flat. Focus Peaking is on 1 as anything else seems to just overload the image in the viewfinder with red. It's bad enough on the lowest setting especially when photographing trees. I noticed that IBIS and VR are two completely separate things as the VR is Off while using this combo of lens and adapter (I was confusing that setting with the IBIS which I guess is always on). The VR settings are mainly for when you are shooting with VR type lenses with the camera mounted on a tripod. You don't find this out unless you download the Reference Manual (Refurb units don't come with manuals of any kind, and the User Manual is quite lacking in many areas).
Other than the Focus Peaking issues, I find the combination easy to use. It's forcing me to pay more attention to the readouts in the finder, something I kind of have gotten away from by using Aperture Priority most of the time. However, none of the photos came out as sharp as I expected them to. Some I couldn't even find an in-focus area on closer inspection. I don't know if this is a matter of the lens IQ, or something else. It's not an IBIS problem because none of the images exhibit the smearing associated with that. There is quite a bit of aberration, and I just wonder if that is confusing the Focus Peaking system. I'm going to try another lens of the same type and see if that solves the issue.
I've also got the other two lenses from my F/F2 day bag (50/1.4 and 105/2.8 non-Ai Nikkor) to check out. Could be some of my images were taken wide open on the 35mm which might not have been a good idea. Also, I do have one AF-S D lens (28-70mm 1:2.8 with no VR) that I can use the AF on with the FTZ, so will see how that pans out. I'd hate to have to the send the camera back if it's not going to make decent images.
PF
ZivcoPhoto
Well-known
AFD lenses don’t AF with the FTZ adapter. The 35mm F2.8 non AI is really not the lens to make a send it back decision …. It was never anything special with film let alone a current digital camera. I do own one (even used it once for wedding reception photos on my Nikon F with Vivitar 285 )and 2 x 50mm F1.4 non AI and a 105mm F2.5 P, pre AI. The 105mm and the 50mm’s mentioned give great results on my Z6. I use the focus peaking though it can be shut off and one can use the “rangefinder” dot (located bottom left) as with many previous Nikon DSLRS. Never tried the 35mm on the Z6 as I have other, better, 35’s to use.
farlymac
PF McFarland
I also thought all D lenses had the screw drive, but there are two different types, AF and AF-S. The AF-S ones are kind of a bridge between AF D and AF-S G so they do work on the FTZ because they have the Silent Wave Motor (SWM) AF which is what the S stands for. And my AF-S 28-70/2.8D is a magnificent (if not a little large and heavy) lens to use.
As for the Nikkor-S 35mm 1:2.8 non-Ai I have two of those, and quite a few years ago I determined that one of them was junk compared to the other one. Somewhere along the line I forgot about that, so I then grabbed the one sitting on my F with the eye level prism, and after inspecting the 82 images I took today, I can say that the second 35/2.8 non-Ai is a winner. That's probably why I left it on the F. I still have some issues with focusing when there are lots of branches in the trees and bushes, but once I learn how to bring up the magnifier that should make things easier.
One other thing I determined today is I have a problem with my horizon sight. This is not the first camera I've used where it's noticeable, but the Z5 seems to acerbate the issue. I'd take a photo looking through the viewfinder, then one looking at the back screen with the horizon gauge working (does not show in the viewfinder) and that photo would have a nice level horizon, while the viewfinder one would be tilting to the left. I must have been dropped on my head when I was very little!
Anyway, I've got some 96 images to post process and catalog so I'll be busy for a day or two as I only have DSL for the Internet connection, and it takes forever to upload to Flicker now with these larger files. Plus I still don't have all the ones from the Z50 posted yet. Good thing I'm retired and can do this stuff whenever I get the time to.
PF
farlymac
PF McFarland
Here's a panoramic stitch (fifteen images) taken with the second non-Ai NIKKOR-S 35mm 1:2.8, FTZ, and Z5. Affinity Photo had problems with the background, so please excuse all the extra tree images.
Work Weary by P F McFarland, on Flickr
Click on the title for a full size version, and to enlarge it for pixel peeping.
PF
Work Weary by P F McFarland, on Flickr
Click on the title for a full size version, and to enlarge it for pixel peeping.
PF
farlymac
PF McFarland
The Z DX 18-140mm f/3.5-6.3 VR lens was in stock yesterday at B&H so I ordered one. But here's the catch. No one, and I do mean no one in the world, has the hood in stock. Just what the heck was Nikon thinking by either not packaging the hood in with the lens, or at least including the same amount of hoods with the lens shipments. I don't think it's a supply chain issue, but a stupid bean counter issue.
PF
PF
DownUnder
Nikon Nomad
Agree with all your comments. Yours is an excellent rational analysis of Nikon's woes - a good antidote to my usual off-the-keyboard, well - rants.
I too have been reconsidering the Z series of late. My main reason being I now need a smaller, lighter camera body. My D800 and two D700s are now getting very heavy to be carried around my 74-year old neck. What holds me back is twofold: 1 the need to invest in the new range of lenses or make do with an adaptor that still limits my using the lovely D series lenses I've accumulated, and 2 my three now-ancient Nikon Ds are still doing entirely what they were built to do. The D800 is all I really need in a DSLR. This latter point I suspect is one that many photographers in my age bracket are also realising. Hence fewer sales for Nikon.
I'm still also tempted by a Df, mostly as it reminds me of the 1960s and 1970s Nikons and Nikkormats I used. More deja vu. Nostalgia and all that. Knowing myself, it will most likely depend entirely on what I find when I go camera shop browsing.
So I'll wait for the January sales in Australia, and decide then which way to go.
Of course all my comments reflect basically 'human' concerns, more so than technical matters.
Oh, and BTW - just logged in for the first time since my last post - no problems, got in just fine, all looks to be working well - at least I'll find out when I hit the magic button...!
I most certainly agree that RFF is by far the best we have out there. I for one cherish it, and I accept we must do all we can to preserve it.
But like most, I dislike arbitrary censorship.without explanation...
peefeeniz
Never Again
I know you jumped and bought a Z but given your situation it seems to me at least that a bargain priced D500 would give you the best DX camera ever made and if you want "Z-lens quality" perhaps a Zeiss ZF prime would give you that 3-D rendering and extra crisp detail should you want it. You might even be able to afford a used D850 which still is the best all around DSLR imho. Saw a low milage D810 for $700 and it's hard to beat that in terms of bang for buck either.
Having gone back and forth and owned almost everything, I don't find the differences between the Z6/Z7 and Z6ii/Z7ii to be all that significant (using the latest firmware) and to be nil if you plan to manually focus. True the Auto Focus wasn't well documented but after tearing around the internet and seeing how different kinds of photographers have set up their camera (sports, portrait, night, etc.) I feel pretty confident and my results are comparable to the D780/D850 only with lighter, better and less expensive native Z lenses.
The Z50 is a solid camera, owned two, adult kids have them. One of the big advantages of mirrorless is that the EVF doesn't have to be any smaller or worse than a full frame camera - only that when it is downgraded it's for price and marketing reasons, they need to leave you something to upgrade to. But there is no tech reason a high quality DX mirrorless couldn't have the best EVF of all.
The MB-D11 or whatever they call the Z battery grip isn't worth the money imho and that's coming from someone with XL hands whose primary complaint about the Z is the tiny ergonomics and hand crimping. I'll live with it, I prefer the lighter weight in the end. The grip locks on tight enough but never quite feels integrated with the body. No wobble, just a weird psychological feeling it is.
Having gone back and forth and owned almost everything, I don't find the differences between the Z6/Z7 and Z6ii/Z7ii to be all that significant (using the latest firmware) and to be nil if you plan to manually focus. True the Auto Focus wasn't well documented but after tearing around the internet and seeing how different kinds of photographers have set up their camera (sports, portrait, night, etc.) I feel pretty confident and my results are comparable to the D780/D850 only with lighter, better and less expensive native Z lenses.
The Z50 is a solid camera, owned two, adult kids have them. One of the big advantages of mirrorless is that the EVF doesn't have to be any smaller or worse than a full frame camera - only that when it is downgraded it's for price and marketing reasons, they need to leave you something to upgrade to. But there is no tech reason a high quality DX mirrorless couldn't have the best EVF of all.
The MB-D11 or whatever they call the Z battery grip isn't worth the money imho and that's coming from someone with XL hands whose primary complaint about the Z is the tiny ergonomics and hand crimping. I'll live with it, I prefer the lighter weight in the end. The grip locks on tight enough but never quite feels integrated with the body. No wobble, just a weird psychological feeling it is.
farlymac
PF McFarland
[QUOTE peefeeniz;n4758471]I know you jumped and bought a Z but given your situation it seems to me at least that a bargain priced D500 would give you the best DX camera ever made and if you want "Z-lens quality" perhaps a Zeiss ZF prime would give you that 3-D rendering and extra crisp detail should you want it. You might even be able to afford a used D850 which still is the best all around DSLR imho. Saw a low milage D810 for $700 and it's hard to beat that in terms of bang for buck either.
Having gone back and forth and owned almost everything, I don't find the differences between the Z6/Z7 and Z6ii/Z7ii to be all that significant (using the latest firmware) and to be nil if you plan to manually focus. True the Auto Focus wasn't well documented but after tearing around the internet and seeing how different kinds of photographers have set up their camera (sports, portrait, night, etc.) I feel pretty confident and my results are comparable to the D780/D850 only with lighter, better and less expensive native Z lenses.
The Z50 is a solid camera, owned two, adult kids have them. One of the big advantages of mirrorless is that the EVF doesn't have to be any smaller or worse than a full frame camera - only that when it is downgraded it's for price and marketing reasons, they need to leave you something to upgrade to. But there is no tech reason a high quality DX mirrorless couldn't have the best EVF of all.
The MB-D11 or whatever they call the Z battery grip isn't worth the money imho and that's coming from someone with XL hands whose primary complaint about the Z is the tiny ergonomics and hand crimping. I'll live with it, I prefer the lighter weight in the end. The grip locks on tight enough but never quite feels integrated with the body. No wobble, just a weird psychological feeling it is.
[/QUOTE]
Okay, I'm going to assume this is addressed to me. There is another reason or two as to why I wanted to upgrade to the Z system, and one of them has to do with the tilting screens. I at first thought I'd rather have an articulated one like on the P7700, but after checking it out again it just was better to have a flip screen. Now the three-way flip on the Z9 is even better, but I don't see Nikon incorporating that into any other body for quite a while.
Noise is another factor, with the Z's being much quieter than any mirrored camera I've ever owned, and that's quite a few.
@ zivcoPhoto: The rangefinder feature doesn't work on non-AF lenses, so I'm stuck with focus peaking or viewfinder enlargement for most of the adapted lenses.
PF
Having gone back and forth and owned almost everything, I don't find the differences between the Z6/Z7 and Z6ii/Z7ii to be all that significant (using the latest firmware) and to be nil if you plan to manually focus. True the Auto Focus wasn't well documented but after tearing around the internet and seeing how different kinds of photographers have set up their camera (sports, portrait, night, etc.) I feel pretty confident and my results are comparable to the D780/D850 only with lighter, better and less expensive native Z lenses.
The Z50 is a solid camera, owned two, adult kids have them. One of the big advantages of mirrorless is that the EVF doesn't have to be any smaller or worse than a full frame camera - only that when it is downgraded it's for price and marketing reasons, they need to leave you something to upgrade to. But there is no tech reason a high quality DX mirrorless couldn't have the best EVF of all.
The MB-D11 or whatever they call the Z battery grip isn't worth the money imho and that's coming from someone with XL hands whose primary complaint about the Z is the tiny ergonomics and hand crimping. I'll live with it, I prefer the lighter weight in the end. The grip locks on tight enough but never quite feels integrated with the body. No wobble, just a weird psychological feeling it is.
[/QUOTE]
Okay, I'm going to assume this is addressed to me. There is another reason or two as to why I wanted to upgrade to the Z system, and one of them has to do with the tilting screens. I at first thought I'd rather have an articulated one like on the P7700, but after checking it out again it just was better to have a flip screen. Now the three-way flip on the Z9 is even better, but I don't see Nikon incorporating that into any other body for quite a while.
Noise is another factor, with the Z's being much quieter than any mirrored camera I've ever owned, and that's quite a few.
@ zivcoPhoto: The rangefinder feature doesn't work on non-AF lenses, so I'm stuck with focus peaking or viewfinder enlargement for most of the adapted lenses.
PF