Nikon Z* mirrorless

twist said:
Gosh, Nikon are playing Sony games, remember the RRP of the 16-50 and 28-70, hilarious, it basically forces most to consider the kit price because it appears to be a'bargain'.
Click to expand...
No such thing as a bargain in the photography game. :rolleyes:
 
twist said:
Gosh, Nikon are playing Sony games, remember the RRP of the 16-50 and 28-70, hilarious, it basically forces most to consider the kit price because it appears to be a'bargain'.
Click to expand...

I will never understand the logic, sure, some will say it's perfect because size ... not a chance in my book, this lens is a fail and the pricing is a complete joke. These companies seem to think budget = any old cack will do for those with less money. Budget photographers are often just as experienced as the next they just don't have the funds to compete, doesn't mean they should settle for crap. I don't see why they can't introduce a budget friendly prime for these kits, a plastic, non WR, basic as you like 50mm 1.8 or even F2. I know what I'd do if I was buying this Z5 - get the old reliable 50 1.8 and adapt it until i could get something native mount.
 
Last edited:
Cagey75 said:
I will never understand the logic, syre, some will say it's perfect because size ... not a chance in my book, this lens is a fail and the pricing is a complete joke. These companies seem to think budget = any old cack will do for those with less money. Budget photographers are often just as experienced as the next they just don't have the funds to compete, doesn't mean they should settle for crap. I don't see why they can't introduce a budget friendly prime for these kits, a plastic, non WR, basic as you like 50mm 1.8 or even F2. I know what I'd do if I was buying this Z5 - get the old reliable 50 1.8 and adapt it until i could get something native mount.
Click to expand...

Theyre basically trying to catch dummies.
 
The RRP for kit lenses has always been ridiculous, a good example is the 24-120 f/4 that has an RRP of somewhere in the region of £1k yet everyone is buying white box ones split from kits for around £400. In time it'll be the same for the 16-50 and 25-50.
 
Last edited:
So the Z5 is mostly inferior to the Z6 on paper, except for the dual slot thing (and that's SD), slower, no top display, downgraded rear LCD, not a back-illuminated sensor, and the launch price is more than the street price of the higher spec camera. Or you can buy it for over £1700 with the slowest standard kit zoom ever made. Is there some sort of clever financial justification for making a camera that nobody will buy, like the show that was intended to fail in The Producers? They need to knock £££ off it pretty quickly or it's DOA.
 
Retune said:
So the Z5 is mostly inferior to the Z6 on paper, except for the dual slot thing (and that's SD), slower, no top display, downgraded rear LCD, not a back-illuminated sensor, and the launch price is more than the street price of the higher spec camera. Or you can buy it for over £1700 with the slowest standard kit zoom ever made. Is there some sort of clever financial justification for making a camera that nobody will buy, like the show that was intended to fail in The Producers? They need to knock £££ off it pretty quickly or it's DOA.
Click to expand...


Madness innit? It needs to be more like £1200 with the adapter for actual budget photographers [who it's apparently aimed at] to be really interested, and they will wait it out ... a case of having to for many. Those with bigger pockets already have the better gear, so this is a bit of a pointless excercise by Nikon IMHO. While catching the odd few 'must have it all' spenders, they lose yet more ground where they could be luring more beginners and budget consious photographers in. It's certainly not going to impress anyone into vlogging, can't see many pros taking to it either when they can have the Z6 used as a back up if needed. Reckon many who might have been interested here will just finally say F it, and buy an A7R2 with a couple half decent used primes. That's what I might do if I'd been waiting and then they come with this BS. 1200 with the adapter and I'd seriously consider it and I think it would make the competition have a bit of a think and maybe do the right thing also.

I know many are anti-gray, but nobody cares about that, right now I could get a brand new Z6 with the adapter for €1499 gray [about £1350] the only thing that would stop me if choosing between these is the single slot for those over priced cards
 
As someone said, It`s about time for a Title change, How about "Nikon Z Cameras"
 
The Z5 looks relatively competitive in the US at $1399, but am I right in thinking there is actually no 'body only' option in the UK? The cheapest price I can see is £1719, which makes no sense when compared to the Z6.
 
It’s never a productive exercise comparing the launch price of a new camera to the settled market price of an existing camera, the same could be said of the recent Nikon D780 and the D850.

Prices will eventually find equilibrium in the market although I expect the price of the Z6/7 to drop like a stone when the updated twin card slot models hit so the disparity in this particular price comparison may continue for some while.
 
I was quite excited about the coming release of the the new TC-1.4X and TC-2.0X Teleconverters.
But at approx £550 to £600 each - wow :(
Are they reasonable prices? Seem a bit high to me.
Depends how they perform really I suppose.
I used to have a 1.4 which was pretty good, but got rid of a 2.0 that I wasn't impressed with at all.
 
Last edited:
Skypilot said:
I was quite excited about the coming release of the the new TC-1.4X and TC-2.0X Teleconverters.
But at approx £550 to £600 each - wow :(
Are they reasonable prices? Seem a bit high to me.
Click to expand...

canon and sony equivalents are about that. so seems competitive with other brands.
 
Skypilot said:
I was quite excited about the coming release of the the new TC-1.4X and TC-2.0X Teleconverters.
But at approx £550 to £600 each - wow :(
Are they reasonable prices? Seem a bit high to me.
Depends how they perform really I suppose.
I used to have a 1.4 which was pretty good, but got rid of a 2.0 that I wasn't impressed with at all.
Click to expand...
What lens were you going to use them on? ;)
 
Skypilot said:
I was quite excited about the coming release of the the new TC-1.4X and TC-2.0X Teleconverters.
But at approx £550 to £600 each - wow :(
Are they reasonable prices? Seem a bit high to me.
Depends how they perform really I suppose.
I used to have a 1.4 which was pretty good, but got rid of a 2.0 that I wasn't impressed with at all.
Click to expand...

These prices are par for the course. A new 1.4 iii SLR tc is listed at £469 om camerapricebuster.
 
How do I get images linked to Flickr to display larger on here?
 
Peter123 said:
How do I get images linked to Flickr to display larger on here?
Click to expand...
I think it depends what size you select within the Flickr “share” section. I use the BBcode Large 1024, if I remember correctly.
 
Stephen L said:
Wonder why the Z6S will be heavier?
Click to expand...
Looks like I may need to modify my original response to you on this, even though I'm technically still correct.

Nikon had said it was impossible to fit two XQD cards or an XQD card an SD card into the Z6/Z7, hence my assumption that the Z6s/Z7s would be bigger and heavier.

However, the Z5 is "already" bigger and heavier than the Z6/Z7 (2mm deeper and 5g heavier) so maybe, if they have designed things around using the same body shell for the Z6s/Z7s, this may well be all the increase in size and weight we get Which seems negligible to me.

The review I had seen, had the Z5 and Z6 side by side, and said the weight and size of the Z5 was identical to the Z6, which it now seems it isn't.
 
Last edited:
Having looked more deeply at the Z5, I have to say that, if I didn’t already have the Z6, I would buy the Z5 as it has everything I need. Although I may have expected a greater price difference twixt the two.
 
Stephen L said:
Having looked more deeply at the Z5, I have to say that, if I didn’t already have the Z6, I would buy the Z5 as it has everything I need. Although I may have expected a greater price difference twixt the two.
Click to expand...
I'm the same. I think I'd have wanted a lower price for the Z5 though. I'm happy with what I paid for the Z6 mind. But I'm unlikely to use the full 4k video capability. Or the 12fups. And a lot of other stuff too, tbh.
 
Peter123 said:
Z5 prices will likely drop in a few months.
Click to expand...
Undoubtedly. The Z6 was something like forty three thousand pounds when first launched ( I seem to remember summat like £2899 with the 24-70 and FTZ, am I wrong?). The full kit is now £2199 at places like Wex, obvs cheaper grey, but that's co of the Z5 release and will probs drop again in time. The cheapest I've seen that kit was about £1949 or so I think, from 'proper' UK retailers. So I reckon the Z5 kit could drop to praps £1300 or maybe even lower. B/O to £1100. And the Z50 dropping down below £800 would generate a lot of sales for Xmas/Jan. I could well be wrong though.
 
Another from testing the 24-200. This time hand-held, 200mm at 1/20th.

Water by Stephen Lee, on Flickr
 
Skypilot said:
I was quite excited about the coming release of the the new TC-1.4X and TC-2.0X Teleconverters.
But at approx £550 to £600 each - wow :(
Are they reasonable prices? Seem a bit high to me.
Depends how they perform really I suppose.
I used to have a 1.4 which was pretty good, but got rid of a 2.0 that I wasn't impressed with at all.
Click to expand...
TC’s are hideously expensive these days, Sony e-mount 1.4x is £479, 2x is £499
 
twist said:
Yeah, wth happened and they only work on like 2 lenses these days, definitely a downside to milc.
Click to expand...
Yeah, why is that?
 
Peter123 said:
Here's the original, no cropping, shot at 135mm with the Z7 and 24-200. Handheld. Standard lightroom processing. The first image in the post above was Camera standard, the second Camera vivid.
this one is vivid.

Holyhock 2 original (1 of 1) by Peter Stephens, on Flickr
Click to expand...
Nice results!! I've yet to try the alternative in camera profiles (I'm guessing that what Camera Standard and Camera Vivid are?).
 
gilbouk said:
Nice results!! I've yet to try the alternative in camera profiles (I'm guessing that what Camera Standard and Camera Vivid are?).
Click to expand...
I find the Adobe profiles to provide a good starting point.
 
LR defaults to Adobe colour. I like this for most reds.
Camera standard gives things a bit of a boost. Vivid even more so and is useful for specific images.
All IMO of course.
 
Peter123 said:
LR defaults to Adobe colour. I like this for most reds.
Camera standard gives things a bit of a boost. Vivid even more so and is useful for specific images.
All IMO of course.
Click to expand...

You can now set LR to default to specific cameras and their settings. You have the ability to chose which camera you want to default to.
 
I almost always work in Camera Standard in LR, with the very odd photo I start with Camera Neutral if I want to choose where to place the contrast.

Where is everyone getting their 24-200s from? Doesn't seem to be a lot of stock about.
 
Stu Meech said:
I almost always work in Camera Standard in LR, with the very odd photo I start with Camera Neutral if I want to choose where to place the contrast.

Where is everyone getting their 24-200s from? Doesn't seem to be a lot of stock about.
Click to expand...
Got mine direct from the UK Nikon store. I’d tried everywhere else (with some frankly rude comments from some dealers) with no luck, then found Nikon had one in stock. It was despatched from the Netherlands and I got it two days later.
 
What TC would I be best considering for a Z6 that I’m mounting a Tamron 70-200 with an FTZ on? Slightly confused!
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top