ktmrider
Well-known
I purchased one on Saturday and by the time I got it home and charged the battery, I discovered it would not take a SD card. Stewarts Camera in Anchorage was already closed and I had a flight to CONUS that evening. I left the camera at the condo with a frantic call to my partner who was traveling to Baja but would be back in Anchorage on 9 May while I probably won't be back in Alaska till 1 July.
I wanted to take it to Scotland for a 95 mile hike in a few weeks but that is not to be. I will be taking my Leica MP, a bunch of Ektar 100 and my GR3. Stewarts told me to have my partner bring them the camera when she gets back to Anchorage and they will make it right. I do not do enough with digital to know if the camera or SD card was the cause and I did not want to force anything. The Nikon Zf will be traveling with me as I ride a motorcycle to the lower 48 and then around the world this fall.
In a way, it has saved me lots of bucks since I will not be purchasing a Leica Q3.
I wanted to take it to Scotland for a 95 mile hike in a few weeks but that is not to be. I will be taking my Leica MP, a bunch of Ektar 100 and my GR3. Stewarts told me to have my partner bring them the camera when she gets back to Anchorage and they will make it right. I do not do enough with digital to know if the camera or SD card was the cause and I did not want to force anything. The Nikon Zf will be traveling with me as I ride a motorcycle to the lower 48 and then around the world this fall.
In a way, it has saved me lots of bucks since I will not be purchasing a Leica Q3.
leitztozeiss
Newbie
Doesn't hunt anymore than I do in manual focus
With this 50/1, in my experience, eye focus locks in quite well. But, I also don't try to shoot in the dimmest possible conditions - works fine in low-lit restaurants, which is where I often shoot when out with the wife. Generally, Nikon eye focus for manual focus lenses both with the Techart or a dumb passive adapter is, at the moment, better than the rest. I'm basing this opinion on adapting SL2s, Z9, Z8, A7RV (haven't shot Canon mirrorless recently, so can't speak for current state of their MF eye-focus aid, if any).
Sold all my SL gear and am strictly now M11 and ZF! Best move! The focus assist on the ZF is on a different level. Its a game changer with manual focus glass. So in love with that camera that I eve setup nikon-zf.com
JohnGellings
Well-known
I'll be using mine with AF when I buy it. However, some of the CV lenses look great on it. Can you tell me how it is a game changer?
tcmx3
Member
it detects subjects. you can map a button to instantly zoom to 100 or 200 percent and it goes straight to the subject.
this works with people and goes straight to their eyes. it's pretty magic tbh.
JohnGellings
Well-known
Thank you for the info. So basically, like we have already had in AF, but the first to do it with manual focus lenses?
tcmx3
Member
More or less.
It does a pretty good job.
That said, I dont really like adapting lenses with the Zf. Results are good but it's awkward unless by CV you mean M mount. I recommend if you want to go with CV manual focus lenses, you go for the native Z ones if possible, or the M if you dont care that much about how it looks. Allegedly the filter stack is much thinner than Sony, that's cool at least.
JohnGellings
Well-known
I'll be using Z Mount AF lenses generally, but CV makes some nice Z mount MF lenses... like the Voigtlander MACRO APO-LANTHAR 65mm f/2.
Did you ever figure out how to install the SD card?
The Zf should take an SD card and also take a Micro-SD card, two cards used for in-camera backup. My Z5 takes two SD cards, never a problem.
tcmx3
Member
My opinion has shifted slightly as I use the Zf more. Specifically, using some Leica lenses on the Nikon, I'm now a bit on the fence because more than ever I just feel like the Zf deserves its own lenses. The little 28/2.8 and 40 are great for the price but I don't want "for the price". I enjoy some of the other glass but it's too big (or flawed, in the case of the 26 and 50 macro).
The 28 cron is like a 20 year old design at this point. And yet, on the Zf it just makes me wish for better than the 28 Z lens. I don't want to deal with an adapter, non-internal focusing on the Zf, etc.
That and the auto-ISO setup are the only drawbacks of the camera but theyre big ones IMO.
The 28 cron is like a 20 year old design at this point. And yet, on the Zf it just makes me wish for better than the 28 Z lens. I don't want to deal with an adapter, non-internal focusing on the Zf, etc.
That and the auto-ISO setup are the only drawbacks of the camera but theyre big ones IMO.
Out to Lunch
Menteur
This is what I find puzzling about the Zf's apparent popularity. Sure, it's a pretty retro camera but apart from the SE 28 and 40, you'll have to make do with bulky and heavy native Z lenses. Cheers, OtL
tcmx3
Member
The camera itself is amazing. The sensor is very good, it's crammed into a tiny package with amazing IBIS, the EVF is more than adequate, the AF is a huge step up for Nikon outside of the 8/9 cameras, the dynamic range and high iso performance are absolutely crazy...
Maybe 28mm and 40mm are enough. I mean Fuji and Ricoh are sold out all the time with their fixed lens cameras and the 28/2.8 on the Zf is still going to beat the Ricoh. Or maybe people buy Zfs and put zooms on them? No idea tbh.
I don't mind the size of some lenses because using them is an inherent compromise. A 100mm macro, a 70-200, sure fine.
I'm definitely happy to travel with the Zf and 28 + 40 (well, usually I keep the 50/1.8 in my bag instead but ok) but it just feels like if Nikon doesn't offer some options they're going to lose that moment to strike and take advantage of the popularity. Nikon's going to have to charge some money I'm sure, but there's no way their engineers can't figure something out. The Zf is a two grand camera, 1k for a 28/2.0 that really delivers would be an easy buy for a lot of owners I bet. Me included.
kbb
Newbie
The whole world is waiting for a good native 28mm Z lens. The focal length is conspicuously absent from the Z lineup. I suspect Nikon will make the Z 28mm one of their suoer-duper "special" lenses, which (to them) means optically excellent but physically bloated beyond reason. Myabe Mr. Kobayashi will help. While I would welcome his potential contribution of a nice Voigtlander Z 28mm, it certainly won't be auto focus.
My experience with the the Z 28mm "Plastique" is that technically, it easily competes with the best of the old Nikon manual focus 28mms. Personally, I find the tiny front element with the aperture right behind upsetting and a touch creepy. It just doesn't look right.
Benjamin Marks
Mentor
When you compare the lengths of, say, the Z 50/1.8 with that of a Nikon 50 AiS lens + adapter, you are kind of in the same place. I think Nikon wanted performance out of its lenses where the cost-is-no-object performance of Zeiss lenses has placed the market. This is why, IMHO, many of the Nikon Z lenses (like that 50 and the 35/1.8) are so large -- very modern design w/lots of elements. The 26, 28, 40 are something else -- optimized for portability rather than lens speed. But (as I think you imply) the Zf is a modestly sized body compared to the Z8/Z9 and those big honkers look a bit out of place on it.
FWIW with today's sensors, I wonder whether what we want is a wide with little to no light fall-off as opposed to a fast prime per se. I can't think of a picture I could take with my 28/2 AiS lens that I couldn't also make with its little Z28 (and slower f:28) cousin. Based on light levels at least.
DownUnder
Nikon Nomad
I like the look of this! You have a future here, with zillions of Nikon aficionados at ready call.
When you've finished with this one for your Zf, how about one like it for the D800?
Last edited:
tcmx3
Member
The 28/2.8SE does fine against the 28mm f2.8 AIS. But that lens is 40 years old now isnt it?
I know the 28 cron costs 5 grand but it is 20 years old (mine is v2 so maybe half that but still, it is fundamentally the same design). Maybe it's a house style thing but working with Zf files shot with the 28 cron, vs the 28 Z, well there's just more there. More separation of colors and tones and you can push harder. Which for me matters as I like to push my raw files pretty hard. Sharpness... uh yeah the Cron is also definitely that but I care less about that.
I think Nikon is capable of making small lenses that are good. The question is are they willing to charge 1000, 1500, 2000 for a lens all the reviewers on youtube will not understand? All youtubers want is sharpness and shallow DoF. They even say "I dont see the different in these two" between the 105 that's swirling like an old Russian lens and the 70-200 for the same shot (this comment inspired by an actual youtube video I saw with many many thousands of views). Thanks, you sold me on the 105 but you didnt even notice they were obviously different renderings lol.
The size thing is why I gave up adapting SLR lenses. Why would I bother, when the 50/1.8S is as good as it is? It renders amazing as well, though the contrast is a bit much.
BUT, you can throw a 50 Lux on the front, and it's a lot smaller. Yes the 1.8S is sharper. In fact it is one of the sharpest lenses money can buy for peak resolution in the center 2/3rds of the frame. It renders really beautifully too. It autofocuses. But the size is huge. What I'd like is for Nikon to make an F2.0 that performs more like the Lux; it can have some field curvature and vignetting and weaker corners if it's small.
Instead the offering is a 6/4 40mm. Which is... ok. I guess. It's not weather sealed though and that's one of the big selling points of the whole system. Like, middle ground! That's what I want lol. Middle ground.
Also no, I think we want vignetting and distortion if it can get us a faster aperture without the aberrations that are hard to suppress in software. Nikon already is allowing for both, and size, not just for sharpness but for a lot of these lenses to not have focus breathing for them to be video appropriate. Given the Zf is a stills first camera, and it focuses with the lens closed down, I'd be absolutely fine with some focus shift, breathing, etc. to cut down on size. Same with distortion and vignetting.
I don't need a 2.0 that's true. What I do need is a better lens than the 28mm. JMO. I'm willing to pay huge money. Frankly, I have, because I'm going to also be shooting digital Leica going forward because I think Leica balances size and performance better. If Nikon can start offering something a bit more reasonably sized I will be SOOOOO happy I genuinely think the Zf is just an amazing camera and I can hand it to a friend and be in focus in a picture. Trust me I have never been in focus in a photograph in my life that was taken by a friend or family member lol.
Last edited:
tcmx3
Member
BTW I want to be clear Im saying this because I think Nikon is so very close to offering the generational camera here.
I like Nikon's current lenses a ton, more than Canon and Sony and Fuji (non-MF) for sure. But there's a focal range here that I think isn't being served well for a lot of real world photographers (Im projecting here, that many people want to just walk around town and take pictures of their kids and pets) who want a slightly different size/performance tradeoff that takes advantage of Nikon's modern manufacturing, economy of scale, etc. 24, 28, 35 and 50 all need a moderate size S tier option IMO. Crank these out and I will buy all of them.
I like Nikon's current lenses a ton, more than Canon and Sony and Fuji (non-MF) for sure. But there's a focal range here that I think isn't being served well for a lot of real world photographers (Im projecting here, that many people want to just walk around town and take pictures of their kids and pets) who want a slightly different size/performance tradeoff that takes advantage of Nikon's modern manufacturing, economy of scale, etc. 24, 28, 35 and 50 all need a moderate size S tier option IMO. Crank these out and I will buy all of them.
Benjamin Marks
Mentor
Gotcha. I don't disagree with any of that. FWIW, I bought my Leica lenses at a different point in my life, where my earnings were greater in proportion to my photographic spending. I don't think I could afford to replace any of my relatively modern Leica lenses if they were broken/lost/stolen etc. today. That said, my Z8 experience is that wide angle SLR lens design is a better fit for the sensor than the rangefinder lenses. Some RF are particularly bad, like a Contax G-Biogon in 28mm that I had adapted to M mount. Just can't salvage the corners on that one. Others, like the 28 Summicron aren't bad at all -- in fact it might be better than the Nikkor Z offering in that focal length . I ran some quick test shots of a 1960's 28/3.5 M42 lens against a just-arrived-yesterday C/V 28/2.8 and the 60 year old Pentax did better than I was expecting. Granted, it wasn't a flare/coma torture test.
Last edited:
jaredangle
Photojournalist
For anyone who has tried the ZF or Z5, which do you think is better for RF glass? I'll be using some Nikon F manual focus lenses but am primarily interested in the Z system for my Contax G 45mm and some of the faster Voigtlander M lenses (21mm 1.4, 40mm 1.4, and some of the fast 50mm Voigtlanders). An M11 would be ideal but that's not in the cards right now.