Nikon Z* mirrorless

Swanseajack said:
Thanks for the reply. I may revisit the 24-120mm f4.

Thanks for the reply. I have decided to buy the 14-24mm first and see how I get on.

There's an updated Tamron 16-30mm f2.8 due to be released at the end of this month as I believe Tamron make the Nikon 17-28mm lens.
Click to expand...
The Z 14-24 is a cracking lens. It's just the filter size requirements that are a PITA

I replaced an F-mount Tamron 17-28 OSD with the 14-24 as I wanted something a little wider
 
inkiboo said:
Have NX Studio, the camera doesn’t stay connected long enough for NX to read it.

Tried the same cable with an iPad connected to the PC and that works fine.

Very odd. Think I will try and find a card reader somewhere!
Click to expand...
I've just tried it myself with a Z8 and a USB-C to USB-C cable connected to a Windows 11 PC and it works fine, that message appears on the rear of the camera and stays there while Windows shows an MTP Z8 device. It does sound like a cable or port issue even though the cable is working fine with the ipad but I don't think there's anything you're doing wrong.
 
Just checking I have my head screwed on properly! The Viltrox 20mm f2.8. On my Z7 it'll be a 20mm prime and on my ZfC, it'll be a 35mm prime?

The lens can be used on both Fx and Dx bodies?

Thanks.

Also, to update my Z7 issue on the previous page of this thread. I shot an image of the landing in my house with no adjustments and it was dull and under exposed. No bright areas to fool the cameras metering. I then used the fine tune optimal exposure in the settings, dialled in a full stop and reshot it, and it looked much better. I'll put them in Lr tomorrow and check the raw files, as well as shoot some real life landscape images to further test.
 
Putting a FF lens on a Nikon DX camera increases the perceived focal length by 50%. So 30mm.
All Nikon Z FF lenses can be used on Z DX bodies as the lens mounts (Z mount) are the same.
 
Last edited:
Well it’s a problem with my laptop as it works fine on another Surface.

Which is annoying!
 
I use the Z14-30 as its more than good enough and the difference between f2.8 & f4 is minimal, especially as few use a super-wide angle lens wide open anyway, its also the same filter size as my 24-70 f2.8 which I use mostly at f2.8 or f11, the rest of the apertures are pointless :D
 
Dave Goodier said:
I use the Z14-30 as its more than good enough and the difference between f2.8 & f4 is minimal, especially as few use a super-wide angle lens wide open anyway, its also the same filter size as my 24-70 f2.8 which I use mostly at f2.8 or f11, the rest of the apertures are pointless :D
Click to expand...
Agree 100%with this.
I have the 14-30 f4 Z series and the 14-24 f2.8 F series and see little difference. I tend to use these wide lenses at f5.6-8.
 
Adamcski said:
Ta da

Click to expand...

FWIW the data throughput of raw video being the most demanding for sustained write speeds, it's generally accepted that Delkin Black, followed by Angelbird are the best CFE cards. Angelbird being close in performance but notably cheaper. However... just as good, but significantly cheaper is the option of a CFE adapter, within which you house an NVMe 2230 SSD, these are mini SSDs that would typically go inside a gaming console and the like. Only two models qualify as meeting the appropriate sustained write speeds: Sabrent Rocket 4, and Corsair MP600s. Zitay manufactures the adapter. I have two Zitay adapters and two 1TB Sabrent Rockets, and these were each about 1/2-1/3rd the price of their CFE card equivalents from Angelbird.
 
myotis said:
According to Nikon, there is a small loss in quality between normal Raw and High Efficiency Raw, when measured in the lab, but is unnoticeable in day to day use. But with HE*, although files are smaller again, you may notice a small quality difference.

I have only used HE once, by accident, as this is the Nikon default, and I had reset my camera back to camera defaults. First problem was it had defaulted to JPEG only (and I never shoot Jpeg) and the second problem was that having fixed the JPeg problem, I discovered choosing RAW defaulted to HE Raw, This gave me my third problem that not all my programs could read the Nikon HE format ! Capture One was fine, but other programs that I use (e.g Fast Raw Viewer) couldn't.

This may well have fixed this now, as I haven't used HE since. My philosophy is that after spending the money on a Z8, I want to get the best quality I can, and therefore I am going to use normal raw. File storage is an inevitable cost of digital photography, and my Mac doesn't have any issue with this file size even though it trebles (and more)once they are in Photoshop.
Click to expand...

Check out this video:
View: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RLLn3nG6uM8


It looks like there's no discernible, and even no significant provable differences.
 
jlafferty said:
Check out this video:
View: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RLLn3nG6uM8


It looks like there's no discernible, and even no significant provable differences.
Click to expand...
Interesting, but I wouldn't call this a "laboratory" quality comparison, even though it's a useful personal set of tests to help an individual make their own decision.

Nikon's guidance still seems valid enough to me.
 
Son_of_Thor said:
The Z 14-24 is a cracking lens. It's just the filter size requirements that are a PITA

I replaced an F-mount Tamron 17-28 OSD with the 14-24 as I wanted something a little wider
Click to expand...
Have you tried using the lens hood which takes 112mm filters or do use holder systems.?
 
Swanseajack said:
Have you tried using the lens hood which takes 112mm filters or do use holder systems.?
Click to expand...
Yes, I use it all the time. I went with the Kase magnetic filters - v. expensive even in the sale, but great quality and couldn't be easier to use. The only issue with the 112mm ones vs the smaller ones is that they're a little cumbersome handling-wise when it comes to getting them in and out of the pouch
 
myotis said:
Interesting, but I wouldn't call this a "laboratory" quality comparison, even though it's a useful personal set of tests to help an individual make their own decision.

Nikon's guidance still seems valid enough to me.
Click to expand...

What to your mind is missing from the analysis?

FWIW I circulate among a lot of geekier, tech driven photo industry people, and the Nikon shooters among them universally praise HE and HE*. I haven't seen an example yet where image degradation has been a problem among them. If I were looking to shoot into a sunset, or needed the absolute best image possible when shooting with a very fine gradient, I might switch out of HE*, but I look forward to testing even these situations. If/when I do I'll report back.
 
jlafferty said:
What to your mind is missing from the analysis?

FWIW I circulate among a lot of geekier, tech driven photo industry people, and the Nikon shooters among them universally praise HE and HE*. I haven't seen an example yet where image degradation has been a problem among them. If I were looking to shoot into a sunset, or needed the absolute best image possible when shooting with a very fine gradient, I might switch out of HE*, but I look forward to testing even these situations. If/when I do I'll report back.
Click to expand...
If you go back to what I said in my post:

"According to Nikon, there is a small loss in quality between normal Raw and High Efficiency Raw, when measured in the lab, but is unnoticeable in day to day use. But with HE*, although files are smaller again, you may notice a small quality difference."

This suggests to me that "I" am unlikely to notice any difference between Raw and High Efficiency. And, if I notice a difference between HE* and normal Raw, it's going to be difficult (outside a lab) to pin this down as resulting from using HE*, or being from some other reason.

So, for someone to find the differences that Nikon refers to, in my mind, would need a perfect experimental technique, and knowing where these differences that Nikon refers to, are likely to occur.

Now I don't know what that technique should be, but I don't see it including converting Raws to DNGs, admitting that the lighting might have varied between test shots, and using PNGs for a comparison.

It's the sort of thing I might do as a rough-and-ready comparison to see if, for my photography, I am likely to see any meaningful difference, but I am happy to go along with what Nikon has said. Especialy, as I'm not concerned about file size, so it isn't an issue for me.

If I felt the need for smaller file sizes, e.g wildlife where I may use high fps, or if I were an event photographer, I would probably do a simple comparison to confirm that in my circumstances I could just accept Nikon's assessment.

However, I couldn't be bothered with the effort required to do a statistically sound comparison (I taught statistics and experimental design at University), and to be frank, I don't have the expertise to design, or carry out, or analyse or interpret an experiment that could disagree or confirm in any meaningful way, what Nikon are saying.
 
Evening all after a little help if I may.

Shooting portraits on the Z8. I've dialed in the settings to generate a black image. No issues there. But how do I then get the LCD screen and evf to just show me the live view, excluding the camera settings? So I can actually see where the model is as you see it in the room.

At the moment, I have it set up for taking the image but the LCD and evf remain pitch black. So I can't see or set up the composition.

Any ideas?
 
Press menu, go to the "custom settings menu", then scroll down to "d Shooting/display" the d9 setting is where you have the options.
Its called view mode(photo Lv) and when you go into it there's the option of "Show effects of settings" and "adjust for ease of viewing" it this second option that allows you to see without the settings effecting the EVF or back LCD screen.
I have it set in my quick "i menu" for the ability to quickly change it.
 
Last edited:
Peter123 said:
Adam, a question for you. I have no knowledge or experience of shooting portraits. Why do you do this?
Click to expand...
It's not specifically for portraits...anything where "Flash" features.
wilt said:
Press menu, go to the "custom settings menu", then scroll down to "d Shooting/display" the d9 setting is where you have the options.
Its called view mode(photo Lv) and when you go into it there's the option of "Show effects of settings" and "adjust for ease of viewing" it this second option that allows you to see without the settings affecting the EVF or back LCD screen.
I have it set in my quick "i menu" for ability to quickly change it.
Click to expand...
I think they've changed the terminology a bit from DSLR days...confused me a bit!
 
wilt said:
So there is no ambient light effecting the shot, only flash will be recorded.
Click to expand...
That's the answer :)

As I'm new to the Z8 I couldn't figure out how to go about changing the screen. So I shot a few yesterday framing my dog (see dog appreciation thread for images) with a virtually black LCD and EVF lol. Still got some really nice images but it helps if you can actually see the subject lol
 
Last edited:
Adamcski said:
That's the answer :)

As I'm new to the Z8 I couldn't figure out how to go about changing the screen. So I shot a few yesterday framing my dog (see dog appreciation thread for images) with a virtually black LCD and EVF lol. Still got some really nice images but it helps if you can actually see the subject lol
Click to expand...
I had something similar a few weeks ago when shooting a friend's birthday. Luckily I was teething so they could see the images.

When I got home I looked up the d9 settings and have booked marked it on my phone, so hopefully when I have the same next time I am prepared.

I am using a z6ii, so not sure if the setup is different between the z6ii and z8.
 
Today I purchased the Nikon 24mm f2.8 D AF Lens, I attached it to the FTZ mkii adapter then to the ZF.

So the question is why do I need to lock the lens out at f22? I don’t appear to have the BB focusing working either, I also cannot use the other f stops due to locking it out? Am I doing something wrong? This is the first time I am using an older f mount lens.
 
You need a Nikon AF-S lens if you require AF with Nikon Z cameras. D lenses are only usable in manual mode when used with the FTZ adapter. Unlock the aperture lock and it will work.
 
Gandalf said:
Today I purchased the Nikon 24mm f2.8 D AF Lens, I attached it to the FTZ mkii adapter then to the ZF.

So the question is why do I need to lock the lens out at f22? I don’t appear to have the BB focusing working either, I also cannot use the other f stops due to locking it out? Am I doing something wrong? This is the first time I am using an older f mount lens.
Click to expand...
You lock the aperture at f22 and use the command dial to change the value, you won't get any kind of focusing, as AF-D lenses require a screw drive, which the FT-Z doesn't have, so it will be manual focus only
 
New version of the 24-70 f/2.8 coming apparently. Not too sure what they’ll improve as I thought the original was meant to be pretty knockout?

I don’t suppose ‘making it half the price’ is on the list of requirements from Nikon design HQ!

nikonrumors.com

Expect the Nikkor Z 24-70mm f/2.8 S Mark II lens announcement this week (August 19 ±1 day) - Nikon Rumors

Expect the Nikkor Z 24-70mm f/2.8 S Mark II lens announcement this week – my guess is on Tuesday or Wednesday (August 19 ±1 day). Stay tuned for potential leaks and detailed coverage of the announcement. Breaking news: Nikon is rumored to announce a new Nikkor Z 24-70mm f/2.8 S II lens (Mark II)...
nikonrumors.com nikonrumors.com
 
chris321 said:
New version of the 24-70 f/2.8 coming apparently. Not too sure what they’ll improve as I thought the original was meant to be pretty knockout?

I don’t suppose ‘making it half the price’ is on the list of requirements from Nikon design HQ!

nikonrumors.com

Expect the Nikkor Z 24-70mm f/2.8 S Mark II lens announcement this week (August 19 ±1 day) - Nikon Rumors

Expect the Nikkor Z 24-70mm f/2.8 S Mark II lens announcement this week – my guess is on Tuesday or Wednesday (August 19 ±1 day). Stay tuned for potential leaks and detailed coverage of the announcement. Breaking news: Nikon is rumored to announce a new Nikkor Z 24-70mm f/2.8 S II lens (Mark II)...
nikonrumors.com nikonrumors.com
Click to expand...
I saw that and thought the same. They also hint that there may be Mk 2 versions of the 14-24 and 70-200 coming too. I doubt lower cost will be on the agenda as the lower price point is covered by the Tamron-based f2.8 zooms
 
Last edited:
chris321 said:
New version of the 24-70 f/2.8 coming apparently. Not too sure what they’ll improve as I thought the original was meant to be pretty knockout?

I don’t suppose ‘making it half the price’ is on the list of requirements from Nikon design HQ!

nikonrumors.com

Expect the Nikkor Z 24-70mm f/2.8 S Mark II lens announcement this week (August 19 ±1 day) - Nikon Rumors

Expect the Nikkor Z 24-70mm f/2.8 S Mark II lens announcement this week – my guess is on Tuesday or Wednesday (August 19 ±1 day). Stay tuned for potential leaks and detailed coverage of the announcement. Breaking news: Nikon is rumored to announce a new Nikkor Z 24-70mm f/2.8 S II lens (Mark II)...
nikonrumors.com nikonrumors.com
Click to expand...
I have the F mount AFS version, I see no reason to change to Z mount. Hence my order for the MonsterAdapter LA-FZ1.
 
Last edited:
wilt said:
What do you think a 300mm f/2.8 Z mount would cost? More,less or around the same as Sony's?
Click to expand...
Yes I would imagine so, the original was a classic, the new Z mount at ultra lightweight would be a killer, maybe even a 120-300 version like the last F mount release was?
 
AdamSi said:
Yes I would imagine so, the original was a classic, the new Z mount at ultra lightweight would be a killer, maybe even a 120-300 version like the last F mount release was?
Click to expand...

I’d love an 120-300 f/2.8, was a big fan of the sigma one back in the day!

And with an RRP of £100 ideally instead of the £10k+ for the F-mount version would be nice.
 
chris321 said:
I’d love an 120-300 f/2.8, was a big fan of the sigma one back in the day!

And with an RRP of £100 ideally instead of the £10k+ for the F-mount version would be nice.
Click to expand...
Yes I loved the 300 2.8G VRII and also had a sigma 120-300 Sport OS which was also great too, if they did a Z mount and halfed the weight, it would be a winner ! Oh and not mortgage pricing
 
A very quick review of the 180-600 vs the 100-400

Both brilliant. For the more, the 600 is a bargain.

400 is sharper and has much better bokeh.

Can’t decide which to keep.

Apologies for a review that achieves little.
 
inkiboo said:
A very quick review of the 180-600 vs the 100-400

Both brilliant. For the more, the 600 is a bargain.

400 is sharper and has much better bokeh.

Can’t decide which to keep.

Apologies for a review that achieves little.
Click to expand...
I've the 180-600mm.
I've had 2 180-600mm lenses now and I wouldn't say I'm pleased with either of them.
Maybe it's me and I can't hold that weight steady any longer but even with very fast shutter speeds in good light, I'm not happy with the sharpness.
I've got the 100-400mm and love it.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top