Z7-Z6 Lenses

1131416181930

Comments

  • Ton14Ton14 Posts: 645Member
    @mhedges I just read that there are two AF motors in the 85 mm / 1.8 S for precision AF.
    User Ton changed to Ton14, Google sign in did not work anymore
  • SymphoticSymphotic Posts: 704Member
    rmp said:

    The z7/24-70f4 is a terrific camera/lens. I can shoot a closeup (1 ft.) then do a little cropping (47mp) and it is almost as good as a macro setup. It is a good portrait setup at 70 mm. At 24 mm it is a good landscape setup. The image stabilization really helps with handholding. The autofocus is better that what I can do (without my glasses.) Complainers must be talking about a different device.

    So true. I invested in both the 24-70/2.8 and the 14-30/4, but on my gig next week I will take only the 24-70/4.

    I'll be documenting a training program with both stills and video, and this will be more than enough. It comes down to ease of use and getting the most information content in each photo or video clip we publish.

    I am happy I won't be chasing my subjects around the South Carolina coast in 100 degree F weather with a D850 and a 24-70 G and 105 macro. The ability to stand back and shoot using single hand-held body and lens is a money maker.
    Jack Roberts
    "Discovery consists in seeing what everyone else has seen and thinking what nobody else has thought"--Albert Szent-Gyorgy
  • PeterTPeterT Posts: 5Member
    BVS said:

    Personally, I don't understand why some people are still critical of the Zs, particularly post 2.00. They're awesome cameras that solve nearly all the things that were annoying about DSLRs (e.g. AF fine tune, video AF, AF point coverage, face/eye detect, IBIS, etc.). Nikon just needs to make a Z8/9 pair with dual slots, grip, and a few more buttons, keep working on the AF system, viewfinder refresh, and connectivity, and release a flash with green AF assist beam, and it'll be a near perfect camera.

    I mostly agree, especially the need for a higher end Z body with more battery juice and vertical grip. One thing though that does not make me totally happy is the eye-AF. When I shoot in studio with modeling light turned on the AF misses quite a few shots. Also the cameara needs some time to acquire focus again after turning it away from the model (e.g. for correcting a pose). It is better with native S lenses but far from reliable. I hope that they address this feature with FW and not only with the next generation of bodies.

  • donaldejosedonaldejose Posts: 3,415Member
    We all hope Nikon continues with the trend of improving features and adding new features with free software updates. So far, so good on that for the Z bodies.
  • PeterTPeterT Posts: 5Member
    Hi,

    at first I was a bit disappointed by the quality of the bokeh the new S 1.8/50mm produces. I was clear that I have to do further shooting to find out if it was the scene or the lens that caused that harsh bokeh in my last shoot with a model in the woods. So I grabbed my 4 of my 6 around 50mm lenses and tried to determine if it really is the lens. Here are the results of my next "test":

    S 1.8/50mm
    [url=https://www.nf-bildhosting.de/image/P0Gsl][img]https://www.nf-bildhosting.de/images/2019/08/12/Z60_1840_web.th.jpg[/img][/url]

    AF 1.8/50mm
    [url=https://www.nf-bildhosting.de/image/P0Io8][img]https://www.nf-bildhosting.de/images/2019/08/12/Z60_1842_web.th.jpg[/img][/url]

    AF-S 1.4/50mm @ f1.8
    [url=https://www.nf-bildhosting.de/image/P0M0I][img]https://www.nf-bildhosting.de/images/2019/08/12/Z60_1844_web.th.jpg[/img][/url]

    AF-S 1.4/58mm @ f1.8
    Z60_1846_web.jpg">Z60_1846_web.jpg

    More than the differences in bokeh quality I was surprised by the differences in transmission with the AF-S 1.4/50mm beeing the brightest.

    I forgot to include the 1.2/50mm and the 3.5/55mm Micro. As soon as I wanted to add them to the bunch, the light changed :(

    Best
    Peter

  • manhattanboymanhattanboy Posts: 1,003Member
    Shot last week with the Z7 and the tech art adapter for FE glass. Used a Rokinon 35 2.8 near-pancake on the Z7. Images were beautiful and the af was decent in Nikon auto mode with face detect enabled. As an example, AF with that FE combo was as fast if not faster than the Z7 paired to the F mount 300pf4 on nikon’s FTZ adapter.

    I think going forward this (Z7 with the 35 2.8) will be my preferred travel combo as it is the only way to get a near-pancake onto the Z7 while also allowing for 35 and 52mm cropped shooting flexibility.
  • PeterTPeterT Posts: 5Member
    edited August 2019
    Just a quick bokeh comparison between different 50mm/58mm lenses that I wanted to share here (all @f1.8):

    Z 1.8/50mm
    Z60_1840_web.jpg

    AF 1.8/50mm
    Z60_1842_web.jpg

    AF-S 1.4/50mm
    Z60_1844_web.jpg

    AF-S 1.4/58mm
    Z60_1846_web.jpg
    Post edited by PeterT on
  • manhattanboymanhattanboy Posts: 1,003Member
    @PeterT not really surprising, but the 58 1.4 has the nicest look. Thanks for the pics
  • PB_PMPB_PM Posts: 4,493Member
    If the pictures didn't have the lens title with them, I'd never have known the difference. Sorry.
    If I take a good photo it's not my camera's fault.
  • WestEndFotoWestEndFoto Posts: 3,675Member
    I think it is subtle, but obvious once you know what to look for. Look at the two lights to the right of the dark spot. Just to the left of the chin.
  • PeterTPeterT Posts: 5Member
    edited August 2019
    Yes it is very subtle and only one example/scenario. It is obvious that the Z-lens is noticeably sharper than the others (you can see it in the full resolution shots) but regarding bokeh it is hard to tell if you have to spend the money on a 1.4/58mm if you are not using it wide open at f1.4.

    With other distances and backgrouds that may look better or worse. I will try to provide more examples when I find the time to do so.

    BTW: the transmission of the AF-S lenses is higher than that of the Z and the older AF lens. Light didn´t change and I shot manual mode at the same settings.
    Post edited by PeterT on
  • mhedgesmhedges Posts: 2,645Member
    PeterT said:


    BTW: the transmission of the AF-S lenses is higher than that of the Z and the older AF lens. Light didn´t change and I shot manual mode at the same settings.

    That could also be due to changes in the actual ISO of the sensors. It's very hard to tell.
  • PB_PMPB_PM Posts: 4,493Member
    Unless you are working with controlled lighting it’s hard to say if light transmission was the reason for the different brightness levels. One thing that is true is that more glass, equals less light transmission.

    Part of the reason I mentioned there is little difference is that a background and lighting situation like the one photographed does not highlight the differences in the apertures very well. Bright highlights in the background, such as street lights, sunlight breaking through trees would emphasize it more. As would being closer to the background.
    If I take a good photo it's not my camera's fault.
  • KnockKnockKnockKnock Posts: 398Member
    Interesting. I know the 1.8 is a popular bargain but it's the last one I'd want for portraits.
    D7100, D60, 35mm f/1.8 DX, 50mm f/1.4, 18-105mm DX, 18-55mm VR II, Sony RX-100 ii
  • WestEndFotoWestEndFoto Posts: 3,675Member
    Made my first ever visit to B&H yesterday. That was an experience.

    Out of interest, I handled the following 24-70 zooms. They were the 2.8G, 2.8E and 2.8S.

    The G felt quite light, while the E, which I own, was significantly heavier. The main difference I think is the VR. Then the S felt like the G, maybe slightly lighter.

    So I am wondering how much of the weight difference is the optics and how much is VR?
  • mhedgesmhedges Posts: 2,645Member
    There's also the construction of the lens body itself (plastic vs metal, how thick, etc). That can account for some of the difference.
  • SymphoticSymphotic Posts: 704Member

    Made my first ever visit to B&H yesterday. That was an experience.

    Out of interest, I handled the following 24-70 zooms. They were the 2.8G, 2.8E and 2.8S.

    The G felt quite light, while the E, which I own, was significantly heavier. The main difference I think is the VR. Then the S felt like the G, maybe slightly lighter.

    So I am wondering how much of the weight difference is the optics and how much is VR?

    Since the VR of the S is in the camera, it is going to be lighter for that reason, but the optics are much different, aren't they? the E has 20 elements, where the S has 17 elements. These optics add weight and length. The S is more sophisticated in its use of aspherical elements.
    Maybe the use of two focus motors in the S adds back the weight of the VR system in the the E, though.
    Jack Roberts
    "Discovery consists in seeing what everyone else has seen and thinking what nobody else has thought"--Albert Szent-Gyorgy
  • WestEndFotoWestEndFoto Posts: 3,675Member
    Yeah, between the G and the S I had to move the lenses back and forth between my hands to perceive a weight difference.
  • SymphoticSymphotic Posts: 704Member
    But when mounted on the camera, the S makes for a much lighter and shorter system that the G on a D850 or a Z with the adaptor. I must say, however, some of my best photos were taken with the 24-70/2.8 G wide open indoors with existing light. It's hard to quantify how pleasing the images can look, even with a lens that doesn't compare strongly on paper specs. Because I got such pleasing images with the G I never seriously considered the E. I wouldn't have gone with the /2.8S because I like the /4S so much, but sometimes you have to buy yourself a present.
    Jack Roberts
    "Discovery consists in seeing what everyone else has seen and thinking what nobody else has thought"--Albert Szent-Gyorgy
  • rmprmp Posts: 585Member
    When will the 70-200 f 2.8 get here?
    Robert M. Poston: D4, D810, V3, 14-24 F2.8, 24-70 f2.8, 70-200 f2.8, 80-400, 105 macro.
  • mhedgesmhedges Posts: 2,645Member
    Rumors are it's delayed till next year
  • BVSBVS Posts: 440Member
    mhedges said:

    Rumors are it's delayed till next year

    "could be delayed (maybe in Q1 of 2020)"
    D7100, 85 1.8G, 50 1.8G, 35 1.8G DX, Tokina 12-28 F4, 18-140, 55-200 VR DX
  • SymphoticSymphotic Posts: 704Member
    I'm heading to Greece next week for work. This time it's sonar imaging, not photographic, so I'm not too bothered that I won't have my 85 mm by then. But it would have been nice. I will take the 14-30 and the 24-70 2.8 for sightseeing after hours.
    I am really curious to see how the 85 and the coming 70-200 work out.
    Jack Roberts
    "Discovery consists in seeing what everyone else has seen and thinking what nobody else has thought"--Albert Szent-Gyorgy
  • donaldejosedonaldejose Posts: 3,415Member
    Looking good folks. Mine is on preorder. Hopefully, soon Nikon will have a two CFexpress card slot Z body out with either built in or add on vertical grip. Also, hopefully, Nikon will continue to improve Z body performance with free software updates. I should add, if the 85mm S 1.8 is this good when Nikon produces an 85mm S 1.4 it will be spectacular!
  • BVSBVS Posts: 440Member

    Looking good folks...

    Awesome! Thanks for sharing.

    D7100, 85 1.8G, 50 1.8G, 35 1.8G DX, Tokina 12-28 F4, 18-140, 55-200 VR DX
Sign In or Register to comment.