Pages: 1 ... 19 20 [21]   Go Down

Author Topic: Z mount native lenses  (Read 35427 times)

kers

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 3545
    • Pieter Kers
Re: Z mount native lenses
« Reply #400 on: September 17, 2020, 07:03:31 am »

I am really intersted in the  new 14-24 mm. I still used the good old one. It has been a milestone lens.
what could be improve mechanically : weight, use of filters_ they have done it. Robustness we will have to see.
Optically: Flare, corner sharpness, and a bit clearer view (abberations).
Looking forward to see some serious testing of all these new pro S-lenses.
Logged

armand

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 4861
    • Photos
Re: Z mount native lenses
« Reply #401 on: September 17, 2020, 09:03:07 pm »

I am really intersted in the  new 14-24 mm. I still used the good old one. It has been a milestone lens.
what could be improve mechanically : weight, use of filters_ they have done it. Robustness we will have to see.
Optically: Flare, corner sharpness, and a bit clearer view (abberations).
Looking forward to see some serious testing of all these new pro S-lenses.

I forgot, not much coma would be nice. The main reason for me would be astrophotography. I do very little of it but would like to do more; because I don't do it enough I don't feel like upgrading my basic Samyang 14 F2.8, but I can see investing in the 14-24 F2.8 vs 15-30 F4 just for this benefit.

BernardLanguillier

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 13725
    • http://www.flickr.com/photos/bernardlanguillier/sets/
Re: Z mount native lenses
« Reply #402 on: September 18, 2020, 05:58:10 pm »

I forgot, not much coma would be nice. The main reason for me would be astrophotography. I do very little of it but would like to do more; because I don't do it enough I don't feel like upgrading my basic Samyang 14 F2.8, but I can see investing in the 14-24 F2.8 vs 15-30 F4 just for this benefit.

The claims of optical excellence of Nikon has so far always been backed up by facts, so it seems reasonable to believe them when they claim that coma is low, at least by design.

The only question for me is whether they can manufacture these lenses according to spec, but I haven't heard of any particular complains about the quality of S lenses, they seem to be built to the highest standards.

So coma is very likely to be very low. ;)

Cheers,
Bernard

armand

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 4861
    • Photos
Re: Z mount native lenses
« Reply #403 on: September 19, 2020, 09:03:00 am »

We shall see.

Interestingly the Fuji 8-16 F2.8 is heavier and almost as expensive.

I think the main competition for it right now is the mirrorless Sigma 14-24 F2.8 which can be used with an adapter and the decrease in focus speed is less important for this focal range. It is heavier by 150g (805 vs 650), it might not be as good optically BUT if it's close enough than the huge price difference we'll gain a lot of customers.

armand

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 4861
    • Photos
Re: Z mount native lenses
« Reply #404 on: October 22, 2020, 12:38:02 pm »

A review of the 24-200 by Thom Hogan: https://www.zsystemuser.com/z-mount-lenses/nikkor-lenses/nikon-z-mount-lens-reviews/nikon-24-200mm-f4-63-lens.html
It's close to what I expected, if you don't pixel peep and use a 24MP camera it's fine, but you can do better with a little effort. It makes the point of waiting for the 24-105 F4 which would be a better fit with a 45MP sensor and get similar quality pixels up to ~ 150mm equiv.

As a side note I started to use more the 70-200 F4 with the FTZ adaptor and I think this is as heavy as I would be willing to carry for dedicate photo outings. I'm looking at the time when Nikon can release a 70-300Z that's as light or even lighter than the current 70-300. I'm willing to take F5.6 everywhere as it will likely be combined with the 24-70 F4 which will provide the F4 @ 70mm. Beyond that, for my landscape use I don't anything brighter than a F5.6.

langier

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1315
    • Celebrating Rural America, the Balkans and beyond
Re: Z mount native lenses
« Reply #405 on: October 22, 2020, 05:54:41 pm »

I'm shooting the 14-30mm (since the middle of last year) and was lucky to grab a 24-200mm. Most of my experience with this scarce lens confirms all the good reviews I've read about it.

Comparted to my 14-24 2.8, the f/4 version is less prone to flare and shooting into the sun makes great stars at small apertures shooting landscape. My 2.8 even ghosted when the sun was behind me and forget about filters easily. The 14-24 2.8 was a great lens in its day on the F-system, IMO.

Since I'm older and hate packing as much stuff around, I opted originally to shoot with the 24-70 f/4 and 70-200 f/4 w/ftz adapted lenses and was quite happy until I lucked into the 24-200. That lens has replaced the other two though it's slow and the mid-to-long end compared to either.

For several years I was shooting m43 with a 14-150 and a 7-14. The IQ was fine and the video easy to do with that system and the size and weight were liberating! But out of 6-7 bodies I shot during these 4-5 years, only three are still working as they all had issues of one kind or another and several died. The build of the bodies just isn't as good as any of my Nikon bodies... And then there's the low-light I'm always shooting under. The files took a lot of work but still the photos came out fine. So I found that it was time to upgrade back to a more robust platform, though size and weight increased in the equation.

Now with a pair of Z 6 bodies and two lenses, I'm a very happy camper! Both lenses are more than capable of great image quality for 24mp and I'm not missing the higher res of the 800-810-850 and Z 7 bodies. I'd love it if the Z 6 had a sensor-shift like the Olympus EM-5 II which worked great when I needed more pixels for a few shots now and then, but overall, the 24mp files I get is pretty darn nice overall. I'd like a little more speed with my lenses, but even shooting higher ISOs, the IQ is fine even with these slower lenses. It's a little sacrifice for smaller and lighter hardware.

I've printed up to 60x40 with the Z 6 and have made some larger prints with the newer 24-200. I probably wouldn't image quality issues doing a 60x40 from it from what I've seen so far.

This week, I went retro on one Z 6 shooting with a vintage Elmarit-M 28mm f/2.8 zone focused and high-tech on the other with the 24-200. A small family vineyard and a hand-harvest of the grapes was my domain from the morning until early afternoon. It was nice simply putting both bodies on A, setting the ISO for "Tri-X" and just shooting away. At the end of the day, I was covered with dust and the grape juice from picking leaves from the bins crated a layer of mud on both cameras. I was perpetually blowing the dust off the front elements of both!

From the day's shooting 1/3 got tagged and overall, about 10% made the loose edit. From there seven rose to the top and five were from the Elmarit-M set for point-and-shoot. The other two were with the 24-200 at either end of the focal length. Overall, I was pleased with the results.

Since getting the 24-200, it has seldom come off the Z 6. I've photographed a few weddings, all outdoors, a baptism and betrothal, both starting outside then continuing into a historic church with a dark interior, photographed lots of landscape and fall colors in the Sierra Nevada. So far, little not to like about this lens and the 14-30. I've seldom used a tripod with the image stabilization with either lens, making me more mobile. I wish the 24-200 had a little more reach, like on my m43 all-in-one zooms, but I've got the long covered with the FTZ and lots of glass from years shooting the Nikon F system.

And then there's the ability to use nearly any vintage lens on the Z bodies is such a great joy especially this week's shooting with a nearly 40 year old lens and other opportunities I've taken shooting Leica glass from the 1950s that hasn't aged too well! Yet, with the key focal lengths now covered, many with redundancy and longer lenses on the way, it's down right fun again to go out and shoot!
Logged
Larry Angier
ASMP, ACT, & many more! @sacred_icons
https://angier-fox.photoshelter.com

Peter McLennan

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 3920
Re: Z mount native lenses
« Reply #406 on: October 22, 2020, 07:06:03 pm »

Great post, Larry. Thanks. I'm torn between a Z6 and a Z7 and you're providing a lot of valuable experience. There are a lot of pros and cons. 

Z6: I have an HP Z3200 that loves printing large.  I'm a retired cinematographer drooling over the video Z6's capabilities. Low light is fun and the Z6 rules here.  Stitching gives me basically free megapixels. I'll nearly always have a tripod with me because video.  Z6 is nearly a grand cheaper, ie I get another lens for the same dollars as a Z7.

Z7: My D800's sold me on the value of lots of pixels; the extra cropping available from the Z7 means that I'm getting a "free" tele. Video is much improved with the "II" version.

The 24-200 looks like the perfect all round video lens.  Can you MF with It?  In my experience, "focus-by-wire" has been impossible in the past.
Logged

armand

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 4861
    • Photos
Re: Z mount native lenses
« Reply #407 on: October 29, 2020, 10:17:05 pm »

Good review of the 24-200: https://www.cameralabs.com/nikon-z-24-200mm-f4-6-3-vr-review/
Kind of F8 and be there. I thought the winner of the review was actually the Tamron 28-200, particularly if you have another lens to cover the 24mm and you can leave a stop or two of stabilization on the table. Now they only have to make it available in Z mount with a decent focus.

armand

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 4861
    • Photos
Re: Z mount native lenses
« Reply #408 on: November 14, 2020, 12:59:14 pm »

Testing the 85mm 1.8 Z. On a Z7.


F 1.8


















F 2








F 5.6





F 8

BernardLanguillier

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 13725
    • http://www.flickr.com/photos/bernardlanguillier/sets/
Re: Z mount native lenses
« Reply #409 on: November 15, 2020, 04:47:12 am »

Very nice!

I am just in love with the rendering of this lens and you are putting it to very good use.

Cheers,
Bernard

John Camp

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 2021
Re: Z mount native lenses
« Reply #410 on: December 01, 2020, 03:50:14 pm »

I've been working with the AF-P 70-300 f4.5-5.6E with the FTZ and find it to be quite good and manageable. I have an F-mount 70-200 f2.8, and the 70-300 is a hair shorter even with the FTZ, and far lighter. (The f2.8 with an FTZ is a bazooka.) What I really want, I guess, is an f4 70-200 in an S lens, but it doesn't look like Nikon is going that way, which is a shame. In any case, paired with the f4 24-70, the two lenses and a Z6 make a reasonably compact travel package. Thom Hogan reviews this latest 70-300 and finds it to be a good lens and a bargain at its price. Although an F-mount, it is fully compatible with the Z cameras with an FTZ.   
Logged

BernardLanguillier

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 13725
    • http://www.flickr.com/photos/bernardlanguillier/sets/
Re: Z mount native lenses
« Reply #411 on: December 02, 2020, 06:43:08 pm »

I've been working with the AF-P 70-300 f4.5-5.6E with the FTZ and find it to be quite good and manageable. I have an F-mount 70-200 f2.8, and the 70-300 is a hair shorter even with the FTZ, and far lighter. (The f2.8 with an FTZ is a bazooka.) What I really want, I guess, is an f4 70-200 in an S lens, but it doesn't look like Nikon is going that way, which is a shame. In any case, paired with the f4 24-70, the two lenses and a Z6 make a reasonably compact travel package. Thom Hogan reviews this latest 70-300 and finds it to be a good lens and a bargain at its price. Although an F-mount, it is fully compatible with the Z cameras with an FTZ.   

Totally agree! I don't understand why Nikon hasn't included a collapsible 70-200mm f4 in their roadmap. That's really the only obvious shortcoming.

I use the 70-300mm also and share your views.

Cheers,
Bernard
Pages: 1 ... 19 20 [21]   Go Up