NIKON...MIRROR LESS NOW WITH FIRMWARE UPDATE

mhedges

Well of course you won’t see a difference but you won’t have the same FOV.

spraynpray

mhedges said:

DenverShooter said:

I ran this and didn't see any difference.

http://www.dofmaster.com/dofjs.html

Denver Shooter

spraynpray said:

Noooooo! One of us is wrong here...

I ran it and saw the difference.

DX body (I think I picked D5000) 300mm f/8 50 feet to subject 2.66 ft DOF
FX body (D800) 450mm (for same field of view) f/8 50 feet to subject 1.75 ft DOF

Now of course if you shoot the FX body at 300 mm and crop down to DX size you get the same 2.66 ft DX DOF. that’s what @donaldejose was saying, I think.

That's what I was saying. Don was saying the DoF advantage exists.

Searcy

I here by declare the new Nikon Z6 and Z7 a success.

As I have said before, I had already decided that my next camera would be a Sony A7iii because of its video capability, its EVF and the super fast EyeAF. I have never worried about if the new Z6 and Z7 are a mirrorless d750 or d850 or d5. I have never given much thought to selling all my dslr gear and going full Sony. I'm not sure why anyone would.

My question has always been "Will the Nikon mirrorless be as good as the Sony Mirrorless?"


But Nikon has succeeded in making me pause and think a little longer before I place that order. Now I want to see the final version of the Z6 and see it in the hands of shooters. I want to see how well it works with the F mount adapter. I want to see how fast its video focus works and how well it can track a subject.

I'm not sold, yet, but Nikon has made me want to see more before I buy.

Show me more.

mhedges

spraynpray said:

mhedges said:

DenverShooter said:

I ran this and didn't see any difference.

http://www.dofmaster.com/dofjs.html

Denver Shooter

spraynpray said:

Noooooo! One of us is wrong here...

I ran it and saw the difference.

DX body (I think I picked D5000) 300mm f/8 50 feet to subject 2.66 ft DOF
FX body (D800) 450mm (for same field of view) f/8 50 feet to subject 1.75 ft DOF

Now of course if you shoot the FX body at 300 mm and crop down to DX size you get the same 2.66 ft DX DOF. that’s what @donaldejose was saying, I think.

That's what I was saying. Don was saying the DoF advantage exists.

But it does exist, right? Now I’m confused.

snakebunk

I think the greatest thing about Z6 and Z7 is the new mount. I find it very interesting that it is supposedly easier to build sharp lenses with the larger opening. This will give Nikon an advantage against Sigma and others since Nikon only have to care about the Z mount. (and I think Sigma will be happy once they don't have to care about the F mount)

About DOF I think that it is only dependent on the aperture and the distance. The focal length only affects the magnification but doesn't change the image, and the sensor size is only a matter of how large of an image you can fit on it, it has nothing to do with the image itself. You can of course say that with a large sensor you can walk closer and therefore get a shallower DOF (and make similar statements about focal length), but it is still the distance that makes the difference.

donaldejose

mhedges: Yes that is what I am saying. You cannot use the same focal length lenses when you make this comparison because the whole point is to take advantage of the higher megapixel sensor by using a lower mm lens and cropping to get the same image as you would with a higher mm lens and no crop. If you go back and look at my post I compared an 800 mm lens with no crop in FX size and a 500 mm lens with enough mp on the sensor to crop down to what an 800 mm lens would show. For example, a 16 mp D4 sensor and a 45 mp Z7 sensor cropped down to about 16 mp image. I think when you use the comparisons I was talking about you do get more Depth of Field. Am I wrong? Of course, the same focal length lens will get the same Depth of Field full frame or cropped down. After all, it is the same image shot with the same mm at the same distance. Now if you fill the frame in FX and also fill the frame in DX with the same mm lens you would have to shoot from two different sensor to subject distances and that would affect the Depth of Field. I am speculating that a small and lighter rig which can produce the same image quality (in megapixels) may be one of the advantages offered by Zseries bodies used with PF lenses. We may hear wildlife shooters notice this advantage and mention it in some reviews once the gear is out and tested.

donaldejose

Heie is a seldom discussed potential advantage of shooting with a mirrorless body: less eye time looking away from the subject. Most of us cannot resist looking at the LCD on the back of the camera ever so often to check exposure. With WYSIWYG in the EVF there should be little need to move the camera away from the eye to see the back LCD monitor. Additionally, if we do want to review an image we should be able to do that in the EVF without taking the camera away from our eye. More eyetime in the viewfinder should result in a greater chance of capturing fleeting events. This may be an advantage for wildlife and wedding photographers and of no advantage to product or still life photographers. I plan to turn off automatic LCD review after each image and rely upon WYSIWYG for exposure. There shouldn't be a need for automatic review of each image in the EVF either. WYSIWYG should be sufficient to confirm exposure before I press the shutter. As to review to confirm focus accuracy with a magnified image and subject position (such as eyes not blinking) I will try to see if I can develop muscle memory pressing the right buttons by feel alone so I can accomplish these tasks quickly in the EVF without taking my eye off the EVF. There may be some practical aspects of the Z bodies that we don't yet fully realize.

manhattanboy

@donaldejose there is an adjustment period where you are used to looking through the DSLR and you know what you see is not the exposure you get. With mirrorless you sometimes forget that that's not the case. I've shot a series on mirrorless where my brain thought exposure would turn out fine despite what I was seeing.

All I'm saying is that humans, at least fallible ones like myself, may have trouble rapidly switching back and forth. It's far easier if you only shoot with one type of camera given that there are significant differences.

@Searcy I would have to agree with you that Z7 is a success. There is no way that the Z7 has $1,400 more value than the Z6, so the fact that Nikon convinced so many people to buy the Z7 has to be considered a huge success for them. I guess despite what everyone says about Nikon having terrible marketing (like Thom Hogan's), their marketing apparently knows how to make money off fat margin cameras for their shareholders.

mhedges

I think it's more of a case that there was tremendous demand for these cameras and they basically sell themselves, at least to a certain group of Nikon fans and/or early adopters. They are doing well in spite of Nikon's marketing, not because of it.

donaldejose

Also, the Z7 is selling well partially because the Z6 is not going to be available until two or three months after the Z7 hits the store shelves so if you want a Nikon mirrorless as soon as possible you have no choice but the get the Z7. If both had the same availability date I suspect more people would select the Z6 rather than the Z7.

HankB

donaldejose said:

Also, the Z7 is selling well partially because the Z6 is not going to be available until two or three months after the Z7 hits the store shelves so if you want a Nikon mirrorless as soon as possible you have no choice but the get the Z7. If both had the same availability date I suspect more people would select the Z6 rather than the Z7.

And that is exactly why Nikon scheduled production giving the higher profit camera, the Z7, priority.

tc88

Nikon has been practicing lean manufacturing since D850, which BTW is the right thing to do. So no matter how small the demand, it will always be out of stock. I have a feeling that this generation of Z cameras, especially Z7, will just end up like DF, barely contribute anything meaningful to the revenue and market share. Now I think about it, even the marketing bear a lot of semblance, with those useless teasers.

Now you don't need to believe me. You can call your local camera store and find out how many pre-order Z7 they have, and how many pre-order D850 they had last year.

tc88

.

NSXTypeR

I don't think anyone is trying to prove that the new Z6 or Z7 is better than sliced bread or worth the investment in new projected lenses. In fact, a lot of us Nikon users are likely sticking onto old hardware, myself included, whether it be DX, FX, or the 2-3 CX users out there that still exist.

There's no reason to try and for yourself to find reasons to justify a Z mount camera/lens purchase or on the contrary to stay with the FX mount. You use what you enjoy or heaven forbid, what you already own.

Chances are, Nikon right now makes products that would satisfy 99% of what anyone needs out of a camera, whether it be at the pro level or at the beginner level. Even for that last 1%, I'm sure you'd still be able to find what you need in the Nikon used camera department... for you CX users who haven't bought a CX 70-300 VR.

It's been a while since I've seen a thread with such heated arguments. A lot of people have issues with change, but for the time being, Nikon doesn't seem to be slowing down with FX lenses. In fact, they owe us a fair amount of DX lenses to make for us DX shooters (wide primes).

And if you absolutely had to use a Z mount camera with your old FX/DX gear, it absolutely seems to be a viable option if you're using lenses from the last 20 years or so.

So relax, and just take photos. You can argue till you're blue in the face... or enjoy taking photos. Your choice.

Pistnbroke

Messing about with tethering etc at a moving event like a wedding is just stupidity.KISS
If you have two cards you use back up not overflow.
You don't need large cards if you use large basic JPEG.
The perceived concept of more depth of field on DX is only because you must stand further away to get the same shot on DX. A lens is a lens and a sensor a sensor DOF does not change when you change body

HankB

Pistnbroke said:

The perceived concept of more depth of field on DX is only because you must stand further away to get the same shot on DX. A lens is a lens and a sensor a sensor DOF does not change when you change body

I wouldn’t use the term “perceived concept” because one can just as legitimately be conceiving of swapping with a shorter lens instead of moving back. In that conception, DX does have greater DoF.

DenverShooter

Pistnbroke said:

Messing about with tethering etc at a moving event like a wedding is just stupidity.KISS
If you have two cards you use back up not overflow.
You don't need large cards if you use large basic JPEG.
The perceived concept of more depth of field on DX is only because you must stand further away to get the same shot on DX. A lens is a lens and a sensor a sensor DOF does not change when you change body

I run RAW without a backup (overflow into second slot). I don't want the artifacts of transcoding JPEG files to edit them and then compressing back to JPEG for web distribution. I export to 16 bit TIFF for print publication.

And large capacity cards are cheap, as are hard disks. B&H has SanDisk 128GB Extreme PRO UHS-II SDXC Memory Card for under $250 and Sony 128GB XQD G Series Memory Card is less than $230. Thats right the XQD card is cheaper than the SD..

I have never had a problem with lost or corrupt images on either the D4 or D800E. But I don't use cheap memory cards and I format them in the cameras after I off load the images into the computer. YMMV.

Denver Shooter

donaldejose

Remember when I talked about increased DOF as a side benefit I was talking about mating the Z bodies with PF telephoto lenses to get a lighter rig which yields a photo that can be cropped to 16 or 20 mp. The point is to get the same image size with less weight and much less cost. Increased DOF was just a side benefit of the idea. Another possibility, which we now don't know if Nikon has implemented, is that an EVF could crop to DX by enlarging the image in the viewfinder rather than by darkening the sides like a OVF does. I was not talking about wedding photography. The new 500 mm f5.6 PF lens on a Z7 when shot in DX mode would give you a 750 mm lens at a savings of almost $13,000.00 compared to an 800 mm f5.6 shot full frame and you still have about a 20 mp in that DX image.

mhedges

Pistnbroke said:

The perceived concept of more depth of field on DX is only because you must stand further away to get the same shot on DX. A lens is a lens and a sensor a sensor DOF does not change when you change body

I don't get your reasoning here. With the same distance to subject and same field of view DX will have about 1 stop more DOF because you use a shorter lens to get the same result. It's not the same shot if you step back to get it.

HankB said:

Pistnbroke said:

The perceived concept of more depth of field on DX is only because you must stand further away to get the same shot on DX. A lens is a lens and a sensor a sensor DOF does not change when you change body

I wouldn’t use the term “perceived concept” because one can just as legitimately be conceiving of swapping with a shorter lens instead of moving back. In that conception, DX does have greater DoF.

Exactly. Swapping with a shorter lens is the only way to really get the same shot between DX and FX. If you move back then it is no longer the same shot because the perspective will be different.

Hiker

WestEndFoto said:

Hiker said:

/blockquote>

You seem to be missing my point. But that's not really surprising now is it?! Nikon rushed these cameras out. That's my opinion and the opinion of many others, including die hard Nikon users. Maybe, just maybe the new Nikons will be great. But with this big to do with a release, they should have had a camera in the hands of people that was going to be released to the masses. NOT preproduction. Nikons marketing is horrible. All they had to do was make enough cameras for the reveal that would show what this is capable of. Thinks might have been different in peoples responses. And again, after years of bashing mirrorless, the Nikon folk (yup, there it is again) have blinders on all of a sudden.

Yes, I am missing your point, because the point seems to be an agenda that you have not stated. You are coming across as someone with an axe to grind. Now maybe there is some sensible logic in your thinking and you have "hit" on some truths, but I have not been able to discern it and I have tried. Perhaps state your agenda and we will go from there.

I'll say it again..I wish Nikon well. I hope they fix the issues and come out with a decent camera. And yes, you are missing my point since you are a Nikon Fan Boy. And go through life with blinders on. So far everyone that has said positive things about the new Nikons is either an Ambassador for Nikon or get Ad money from camera manufacturers. Nikon screwed up the release. Pre Production model? And the excuses keep coming. What was Nikon thinking? Oh, yeah, lets rush out a pre production model with flaws.

HankB

Let’s hope Nikon actually did rush out the pre-production units and that the upcoming production units equipped with newer firmware perform BETTER than their Sony competition; and perform as well as Nikon DSLRs. So far, the reviews on the pre-prod Zs range from “a generation behind Sony” to maybe just as good.

Nikon NEEDS to hit it out of the park, and to do so they have the advantage of examining and reverse engineering the competition that is already out there.

If Canon does a better job than Nikon in this first round, that wouldn’t bode well for Nikon. And Canon already has the advantage of cheaper, simpler, lighter, less obtrusive, easier to design adapters for their existing lens stock (no screw drive AF or mechanical stop down).

WestEndFoto

The FTZ adapter does not incorporate a screwdrive so there is no handicap there.

WestEndFoto

On the topic of Nikon fanboys, one should be mindful that there are also Nikon hate-boys. I think that people on this forum don’t fall into either of those narrow minded categories however. This is a pretty civil forum in that regard.

mhedges

I think he's saying they don't need to worry about incorporating a screw drive or not - the adapter will likely give full AF etc. with all EOS lenses.

manhattanboy

@mhedges can you tell me about the adapter that allows "EOS" lenses on the Z. That sounds amazing.

On a side note I bought a lens from someone selling all their Sony stuff to buy the Z. Nikon's Z roadmap is neglecting telephoto lenses, and certain Sony lenses are much smaller than the Nikon FX version with an adapter. I pray eventually Nikon will care about telephoto shooters, but the recent Nikon interview from Imaging Resource basically stated that tele shooters shouldn't use the Z system.