Pages: 1 [2] 3   Go Down

Author Topic: New Rantatorial Just Published - My Thoughts On The NEW Nikon Z6 and Z7 Cameras  (Read 5123 times)

kers

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 2256
    • Pieter Kers

I'm personally quite intrigued by a 24-70 f4 lens.  I'm the type of shooter who usually uses f11 or f 16.  However, it is a bit disappointing to hear how cheaply made it is.  I hope it proves itself.
i hope this does not mean:
plastic is light  & cheap.
metal is heavy & strong.

i don't think so- it is an old fashion idea.
On the other side: we like to have lightweight carbon tripods while in that case weight has a stabilizing function.
There are many different suitable qualities found in plastics, that make them often more suitable than metal.
Logged

Alan Goldhammer

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 3600
    • A Goldhammer Photography

There are over 40 pages of comments on the Z cameras over on the compact systems camera section of LuLa with ample discussion of the lens choice by Nikon.  Thom Hogan, a very reputable reviewer, has already discussed the Nikon lens strategy for the mirrorless Z system.  We cannot adhere to the fact that the use of engineered materials leads to 'cheaper' construction.  It may be that materials costs are lower but one needs to look at construction standards and lens performance.  For a lot of us a lightweight zoom is important.  I refuse to haul my heavy 24-120 F4 zoom around on vacations any longer (camera is a d810) and got a variable aperture 24-85 that gives me all the performance I need.  Any lens presents some type of trade-off but let's not hurl around pejoratives until the lens has actually been field tested.

EDIT ADDED:  If one has a stable of Nikon lenses, the adapter to the Z series makes them all usable (though size and weight may affect the camera's balance.
Logged

D Fuller

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 486
    • AirStream Pictures

My thoughts too. It makes sense that an initial launch with a limited selection of lenses does not try to be everything to everyone from day 1, but instead target a sector of 36x24mm format users most inclined to switch to an EVF. And people seeking a balance between performance and size seems is a good first target.

Anyway, I am a long-time fan of good quality mid-speed lenses, now that far higher ISO speeds are usable than in the past. I would have made it 24-105/4 though: point to Canon there!

Yes. And I could wish for the Leica 24-90 range, but its combination of IQ, focus speed and zoom range make it pretty massive. It balances well on the SL, but the Nikons are significantly smaller cameras.
Logged
business website: www.airstream.pictures
blog: thirtynineframes.com/blog

D Fuller

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 486
    • AirStream Pictures

That comes across to me as a bit exclusionary: why should there be some stigma to ownership or desire for fast optics? One of the pleasures of the reflex system is using fast, long lenses and actually enjoying the kick in the focussing of them, the almost tangible pleasure in looking at focus changing as you move the mechanism. Of course, af robs you of that foreplay-like, sensory visual pleasure.


Rob, I see no one stigmatizing the desire for fast optics, quite the opposite. Rather, I am reading people calling lenses "crap" or "cheaply made" because they're f/1.8 or f/4.0. That's nonsense! A Leica Noctilux is a wonderful lens, but so is a Sumicron.
Logged
business website: www.airstream.pictures
blog: thirtynineframes.com/blog

Rob C

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 21969

Rob, I see no one stigmatizing the desire for fast optics, quite the opposite. Rather, I am reading people calling lenses "crap" or "cheaply made" because they're f/1.8 or f/4.0. That's nonsense! A Leica Noctilux is a wonderful lens, but so is a Sumicron.

" One reason to go mirrorless is to get a smaller and more portable system and it makes sense to have high quality f/1.8 and f/4 lenses rather than the f/1.4 and f/2.8 apertures often associated with high grade lenses.

Regards,

Bill"

Well, we see different things in the same statement, then.

Rob

D Fuller

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 486
    • AirStream Pictures

" One reason to go mirrorless is to get a smaller and more portable system and it makes sense to have high quality f/1.8 and f/4 lenses rather than the f/1.4 and f/2.8 apertures often associated with high grade lenses.

Regards,

Bill"

Well, we see different things in the same statement, then.

Rob

Well, I guess for my part I'd modify that just a bit to say, "it makes sense to have high quality f/1.8 and f/4 lenses in addition to the f/1.4 and f/2.8 apertures often associated with high grade lenses, and to have them first in a system that targets people who likely own many of the larger, faster lenses already."
Logged
business website: www.airstream.pictures
blog: thirtynineframes.com/blog

Rob C

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 21969

Well, I guess for my part I'd modify that just a bit to say, "it makes sense to have high quality f/1.8 and f/4 lenses in addition to the f/1.4 and f/2.8 apertures often associated with high grade lenses, and to have them first in a system that targets people who likely own many of the larger, faster lenses already."

That makes perfect political sense!

It highlights the immense advantage to Nikon of keeping onboard the many with an existing armoury of Nikkors, and makes the new body and coming system available to new Nikon buyers at an initially lower cost because of the less-expensive new lenses.

That owners of old Nikkors are tempted does not mean they will not, themselves, upgrade their lenses if they come to believe that the new range is ultimately offering something better.

I wish Nikon well, have been a Nikon user since the F, but have no intentions of buying new cameras because what I do doesn't warrant it. I am already oversupplied with seldom-used goodies. Buying equipment as a collector strikes me as a form of low-level insanity.

D Fuller

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 486
    • AirStream Pictures

That makes perfect political sense!

It highlights the immense advantage to Nikon of keeping onboard the many with an existing armoury of Nikkors, and makes the new body and coming system available to new Nikon buyers at an initially lower cost because of the less-expensive new lenses.

That owners of old Nikkors are tempted does not mean they will not, themselves, upgrade their lenses if they come to believe that the new range is ultimately offering something better.

I wish Nikon well, have been a Nikon user since the F, but have no intentions of buying new cameras because what I do doesn't warrant it. I am already oversupplied with seldom-used goodies. Buying equipment as a collector strikes me as a form of low-level insanity.

Yes, insanity seems to have many faces.

Iím really a perfect customer for these cameras. I own a good set of fast manual Nikkors, and the prior generation of f/2.8 zooms (plus a few other exotic things), and I shoot video. I love the old manual lenses, because of their faults, but the zooms are neither charming nor good enough, so Iím looking to update the modern lenses in any case. I looked hard at the Leica SL and like those lenses a lot, but to get a decent set of lenses for that is just too much money. Enter the Nikon Z.

If the new lenses are as good as people seem to be saying, it works for me on a lot of levels: a leica-sized package for Ďeverydayí, the ability to use my old manual F lenses, excellent modern lenses for both still and video, and it should work nicely with my Profoto strobe stuff. If I really like the Z7 camera body, Iíll surely buy the faster lenses in time (not the .95, thatís itís own take on insanity) Iíd like the 50mm 1.2, and weíll see what else gets released.
Logged
business website: www.airstream.pictures
blog: thirtynineframes.com/blog

bdbender4

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 16

From what I can tell from the announcements on-line - as distinct from the psuedo-reviews - Canon did a good job of releasing their new RF camera and lenses.  This is well reflected here on LULA and in other places.  Whereas Nikon did a terrible job with the release, as they have been with their marketing in general.  I am not sure if LULA was particularly ill-treated for some reason or if you are a victim of some general Nikon marketing malaise.

Thom Hogan, whom I respect regarding all things Nikon (and for his expertise about the overall camera market) has been tearing his hair out about how Nikon's marketing has been basically just not there in many ways in the past few years, as one effect of top-level management cost-cutting.

* * * 

Personally, I went from large heavy Canon EF to smaller lighter Fuji X for a number of years, but I got frustrated with the endless Fuji software and firmware updates.  (My repeated experience was that, frankly, despite the PR that you hear, they are not very good at it.)  So I have also been using a Canon M5 and waiting - for going on two years now - for Canon to release some lenses for that system beyond the consumer convenience level. But it seems clear that the Canon EF-M mount is pretty darn incompatible with the new RF mount, so I think my hopes for EF-M becoming anything more than an "entry level feeder system" will not bear fruit.

My point: looking just at announced specs, for my uses, the Nikon Z6 and lens roadmap interests me more than the Canon RF initial offering.  I don't think either company would put out a lousy product.  It may not be exactly what one hoped for, but it will do what they say it will do, and will have good ergonomics from their respective decades of experience. I am in a position to order one or the other.  Personally I have pre-ordered the Nikon Z6 and f/4 24-70 and am ignoring the youtube shrillness. The 50mm prime looks interesting, as well.  I am sure I would be happy with the Canon R and 24-105 plus primes, too, but among other things it is $800 more expensive for something that is pretty equivalent.
Logged

Zathras

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 5

My impressions are that the list of negatives is typical Internet nonsense.

Poor kit lens? Not from the MTF charts, or from what real reviewers have seen so far. The other two lenses are being compared to Zeiss Otus lenses in terms of image quality.

Has anyone saying these negative comments, shot the Z cameras at high ISOs and seen how close they compare to the A7Mark III? Essentially, from my view, the differences are negligible.

Poor battery performance. So, real reports I've heard are 1,200 to 1,700 shots per charge. Is that poor performance? My trips to Colombia, Africa, India, and spending time out in the bush, I've been happy with batteries in my Canons lasting for about the same. My 1DX last a long time. But to expect it to go much longer than that? Nope.

It's wise to wait to test and not repeat the hate-generated link baiters on Youtube, etc. Sorry Nikon has ignored you. That's their loss.
Logged

BernardLanguillier

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 12530
    • http://www.flickr.com/photos/bernardlanguillier/sets/

I shot a few images with the lens but couldn't keep them. I refer to the feel of the lens compared to the Nikon 24-70 2.8 lens.  In my opinion and I believe I stated this that the 24-70mm 2.8 and 70-200mm 2.8 at launch would have really made a serious difference.  Maybe the 24-70 Z mount lens will be able to produce good images.  As I read across the web though I do hear otherwise.  When we get these cameras and lenses we will shoot with them.

The first result published shows the 24-70 f4 Z to be excellent... it appears to be maching at f4 the best 24-70 f2.8, including the most recent one, the Sony GM.  ;D I couldn't believe my eyes when I saw the sample images shot at 70mm f4 on the edges... it is simply perfect and 70mm appears to be the weakest focal length.

https://www.digitalcameraworld.com/reviews/nikon-nikkor-z-24-70mm-f4-s-review

Talk about cheap kit lenses... the 35mm f1.8 and 50mm f1.8 have Otus like MTF charts as well. I have just come across this post that calls the 35mm f1.8 "possibly the best 35mm lens ever on FX"... https://www.dpreview.com/forums/post/61670158

One major value of mirrorless is compactness. Launching the Z6/Z7 with high quality compact lenses makes perfect sense. Weight is an important part of the equation and that means leveraging the right materials.

Nikon has been very clear about their design objective of the Z system, optical image quality came as the top criteria to the extend that they went through the trouble of speccing a new lensmount and defining a new line of lenses with the S mark... then they simply built the most compact/lightweight possible f1.8 prime/f4 zoom lenses without hurting image quality.

I remember vividly Kevinís initial reactions to mirrorless cameras in terms of how liberating a lighter kit was.

I have to say that I am surprised by Kevin's current reaction to the Z because knowing his love for Leica, I was expecting him to find the Z to be exactly what he needed.

This is probably also the first time I read an article as LL that starts by a list of all the negative comments made by others about a camera... some of them having been proven since then to be factually wrong btw (the EVF blackout, the actual battery life,...). Why not focus on the many very positive comments made by others, starting by Thom Hogan?
 
Cheers,
Bernard
« Last Edit: September 18, 2018, 01:19:25 am by BernardLanguillier »
Logged

Alan Goldhammer

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 3600
    • A Goldhammer Photography

This is probably also the first time I read an article as LL that starts by a list of all the negative comments made by others about a camera... some of them having been proven since then to be factually wrong btw (the EVF blackout, the actual battery life,...). Why not focus on the many very positive comments made by others, starting by Thom Hogan?
 
Cheers,
Bernard
Unconscious bias because of being snubbed by Nikon?  I guess we need to wait and see what Kevin's full scale review is like when he has the camera in hand to see if he is in line with what others have reported.
Logged

BernardLanguillier

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 12530
    • http://www.flickr.com/photos/bernardlanguillier/sets/

Unconscious bias because of being snubbed by Nikon?  I guess we need to wait and see what Kevin's full scale review is like when he has the camera in hand to see if he is in line with what others have reported.

To be clear, I have zero issues with Kevin not being super interested in a camera he will probably not add to his line up since he is invested in the excellent Sony a7 system, that's coherent with his clearly stated policy.

But I don't get the negativity about the Z.

And I get even less the 3 articles about the Canon R that Kevin will most certainly not use either and that is even less appealing than the Nikon by a pretty wide margin... ;)

Cheers,
Bernard

davidgp

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 757
    • davidgp fotografia


And I get even less the 3 articles about the Canon R that Kevin will most certainly not use either and that is even less appealing than the Nikon by a pretty wide margin... ;)


Well, he has the camera in his hands and he is reporting about it... he already said he ordered a copy of Z7... when he gets his hands on it, I'm assuming he will also publish some articles... or maybe just one, since first one was about the event he was invited (like the ones that he does when Sony or other brands invites LuLa), and the third one he had a Canon representative at hand to explain things...

Manoli

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1546


... the 3 articles about the Canon R that Kevin will most certainly not use either and that is even less appealing than the Nikon by a pretty wide margin... ;)

Bernard, you crack me up ... :) :)  - does it really matter to you THAT much ?
Logged

Rado

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 240

It's true, as a Canon user I was planning to buy the R but I don't want to cause Bernard having sleepless nights or nightmares about people using subpar sensors or not having otus-level corner sharpness... so I'll just sell everything I own and get the Z7 instead ;-)
Logged

BernardLanguillier

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 12530
    • http://www.flickr.com/photos/bernardlanguillier/sets/

It's true, as a Canon user I was planning to buy the R but I don't want to cause Bernard having sleepless nights or nightmares about people using subpar sensors or not having otus-level corner sharpness... so I'll just sell everything I own and get the Z7 instead ;-)

Much appreciated!  ;D

Cheers,
Bernard
« Last Edit: September 20, 2018, 06:35:19 pm by BernardLanguillier »
Logged

bjanes

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 3350

Well, he has the camera in his hands and he is reporting about it... he already said he ordered a copy of Z7... when he gets his hands on it, I'm assuming he will also publish some articles... or maybe just one, since first one was about the event he was invited (like the ones that he does when Sony or other brands invites LuLa), and the third one he had a Canon representative at hand to explain things...

If read the Z7 rantatorial you will see that the Nikon event was not to an exotic location (Las Vegas, Hawaii--Canon and Sony) with all expenses paid plus helicopter tours of the Hoover dam but merely an event at his hometown camera store in Indianapolis. If Nikon flew him to Kyoto with a helicopter ride over Mount Fuji, perhaps his review would be more favorable. I do think Kevin is an honest guy, but goodwill bias could easily creep in.

The situation is similar to that in my own profession, medicine. Freebies from drug companies to doctors have been markedly curtailed in recent years, but studies have shown that gratuities as little as $20 can affect prescribing patterns. See here. I think physicians are no less honest than photographers. We are all human.

Cheers,

Bill
Logged

Christopher

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1444
    • http://www.hauser-photoart.com

I really donít get why Nikon is taking so much crap about there lens choices. Honestly, if I would even be considering any of these cameras and not being fixed with phase one and Fuji, the Nikon would be the only interesting camera. Why? Because it looks like someone actually thought about something different.

I do understand that there is a huge variation of subjects being photographed and a lot of people love fast glass, however, for me such a camera would be a hiking and traveling camera and I would love to have perfect f4 lenses. Itís a point that made me pissed at Sony all the time, as I didnít see the point in going mirrorless and than having to put up with their huge 2.8 lenses as their f4 ones are pretty much crap.....




Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Logged
Christopher Hauser
[email=chris@hauser-p

Kevin Raber

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1345
  • Kevin Raber
    • Kevin Raber

Bill, Goodwill bias could creep in, but it doesn't.  Canon paid my way to Hawaii as I fully stated and I certainly didn't show goodwill there.  I reported my Hits and Misses review.  I tell it as I see it.  So far, Nikon is going to cost me thousands of dollars just so I can get a camera to report on.  Let's see how that goes.
Logged
Kevin Raber
kwr@rabereyes.com
kevin@photopxl.com
rockhopperworkshops.com
photopxl.com
Pages: 1 [2] 3   Go Up