I'm gonna get a Z6...

[pdk42]

Hi everyone. I've decided that I'll get a Z6 to run alongside my m43 system. I want to dip my toe in the water but OTOH I want to have enough FOV coverage to make it meaningful. My two most lenses in m43 are the 8-18 and 12-100. So, 16-200 That's a huge range I realise and I obviously don't expect to cover that in an initial Z6 kit.

So, I'll definitely pick up the "starter kit" - Z6 + 24-70 + FTZ. However, 24mm really isn't wide enough for me so I'll need something wider - ideally an UWA zoom. The 14-30 S looks really nice and if I decide to go further I'll definitely pick one up (assuming it performs which I'm pretty sure it will). In the interim though, I guess it makes sense to get an F-mount stop-gap. So, the question is, which? I don't want to pay a fortune and a decent prime in the 16mm range would do if I can't get an zoom. I don't mind a third-party option.

I know very little about Nikon so could do with some help. So, any Ideas?

Thanks!

 

[Palouse]

This may interest you: This is the new Nikon Z offer: trade-in any working digital interchangeable-lens camera and get up to $400 in addition to your trade-in value - Nikon Rumors

 

[73Z1]

I rented a Z6 + FTZ for 9 days last month and while I didn't shoot it with any UWA lenses, I shot using super telephotos, my 24-70 G, and with a MF 50 f/1.2 AiS. Except for some minor hunting issues with the 800mm, the FTZ and any F-mount lens should work just fine. Note that the IBIS in the Z6 worked quite well with my 24-70 f/2.8 G (non-VR) and 50mm AiS, allowing really long shutter speeds handheld. However, the Z6/Z7 + FTZ does not display the aperture or record EXIF data for un-chipped MF lenses correctly. It shoots and meters just fine though. Since you are looking at getting the 14-30 S in the future, You might consider picking up the 16-35 f/4 VR. It is a pretty sharp WA zoom lens that can be picked up used at a very reasonable price. Given that the 16-35 has VR, it should be easy to resell. Alternatively, consider a 14mm f/2.8 AF-S prime until the 14-30S is released. Sorry my error, as Jonathan F/2 points out in his response, the current 14mm AF lens is a D lens which will not AF with the FTZ adapter.

 

[pdk42]

Would this work? - Tokina AT-X PRO 17mm f/3.5 Aspherical Super Wide Angle Lens AF MF for Nikon FX:

Tokina AT-X PRO 17mm f/3.5 Aspherical Super Wide Angle Lens AF MF for Nikon FX | eBay

 

[pdk42]

Or this? - Nikon 14mm F/2.8 D AF NIKKOR ED FX:

Nikon 14mm F/2.8 D AF NIKKOR ED FX Wide Angle Prime Lens 182080192506 | eBay

I quite like the look of this

 

[Jonathan F/2]

Would this work? - Tokina AT-X PRO 17mm f/3.5 Aspherical Super Wide Angle Lens AF MF for Nikon FX:

Tokina AT-X PRO 17mm f/3.5 Aspherical Super Wide Angle Lens AF MF for Nikon FX | eBay

Or this? - Nikon 14mm F/2.8 D AF NIKKOR ED FX:

Nikon 14mm F/2.8 D AF NIKKOR ED FX Wide Angle Prime Lens 182080192506 | eBay

I quite like the look of this

None of those lenses will AF since they are screw-drive driven only. If you want something that will AF on an FT-Z adapter you have several options such as:

- Nikon 18-35mm f3.5-4.5 ED G
- Nikon 20mm f1.8 G
- Nikon 16-35mm f4 VR
- Tamron 17-35 2.8-4 OSD

I'm partial to the Nikon 20mm 1.8 G. It's been around for awhile, so you might be able to find a used copy. It's tack sharp, fast and it will give you something different from the 14-30mm f/4 S when it comes out. If you don't mind MF, the ones you mentioned will be okay, but don't expect amazing corner-to-corner sharpness.

The 20mm works great when stopped down, but also has that 1.8 aperture for low light photography. I know some people like it for astro photography as well. I use it mainly for events and interior shots.

Here's a quick sample with the D750+20mm 1.8G on a tripod:

Subscribe to see EXIF info for this image (if available)

Real Estate Photo Shoot.Date: December 11, 2018 by Jonathan Friolo, on Flickr

 

[acnomad]

Not exactly a “stop gap” but the AF-S 14-24 can be obtained for around US$1000. And it might very well prove to be just as sharp as the 14-30, with the bonus of an extra stop of light gathering ability.

 

[ahinesdesign]

The Nikon 18-35mm G is a sleeper - very good performance, light weight, relatively compact, but not too pricey. Reviews of the Tamron 17-35 OSD are largely positive, but I have not used that lens myself. All of the other F-mount ultrawide primes/zooms that will AF on the FTZ adapter are large and heavy, not to mention costly.

If you are comfortable with manual focus, there's the Samyang/Rokinon 14mm (probably the cheapest option) and Irix 11mm & 15mm.

 

[Cslucas34]

Subscribe to see EXIF info for this image (if available)

The Sigma 14-24mm f/2.8 Art lens works amazingly well with the Z series and the adapter. Very high quality lens with surprisingly minimal barrel distortion at 14mm and very good sharpness. Here’s an image I took with this lens on the z7.

 

[pdk42]

Well, I've decided in the end not to cross the Rubicon and to stick with my m43 stuff. I spent an hour with both the Z6 and the A7iii yesterday and took a shed load of images alongside my EM1.2 that I then pored over later. My main conclusions are this:

- There are things that my EM1.2 does that neither the Z6 nor the A7iii do that are important to me. I'm talking about things like Livetime, Livecomp, over/under indicators on live view, handholdability of several seconds when using sync IS on some lenses, and 60 fps electronic shutter with frame count limiter (for HDR or other image stacking reasons).

- Lenses - to get even near a lens range that matches my m43 setup I'd be into building a kit of comparatively large, heavy and expensive lenses. On the Z that would mean a number of adapted F-mount lenses (which wouldn't be small) and on the A7iii it would be worse - stuck either with mediocre, cheaper lenses or crazy big and expensive G Master versions.

- Image quality on m43 is obviously inferior, but at low ISO and with using a few stacking tricks when need be, I can get it very, very close. I seldom print bigger than A3+ at which the output is stunning from m43. Even when I have printed larger I've still been very happy with the results if I carefully prepare the file. For on-line posting to Flickr etc, even m43 is overkill.

So, that's my decision. It's been an interesting exercise to look at the Z6 and FF mirrorless world again and I really thought that I'd jump. Maybe I'll re-evaluate again in a year or so.

Of course I'm mainly a landscape guy. It might be a different conclusion if I were into portraiture, sports or such. It might even be different if I were starting from scratch, but right now m43 is capable of meeting my needs/wants.

I may pickup an RX1rii at some point as a low light compact camera, but I'm going to avoid running two system cameras because of the dithering it might cause me whenever I need to pick a camera up to go out shooting!

 

[acnomad]

So, that's my decision. It's been an interesting exercise to look at the Z6 and FF mirrorless world again and I really thought that I'd jump. Maybe I'll re-evaluate again in a year or so.

Paul,

I know from reading your posts on mu-43, and lately, here on the cafe how thoughtful and analytical you are. As I consider the call of the Z6, your conclusion and the well-articulated details that back it are very valuable to me.

 

[ijm5012]

Paul,

There are certainly features that the Olympus has that the Nikon doesnt. LiveComp/Time/Bulb, ProCapture, 60fps, etc. If those features are ones that are regularly used, then yes you would miss them with the Nikon. Personally, the two features I miss most are LiveTime and Live View blinkies. The live view blinkies aren't a huge deal, because the live view histogram on the Z6 works very well and the sensor definitely has better dynamic range, so the files are more malleable in post. However, a LiveTime equivalent simply doesn't exist.

At the same time, there are things I like more in the Z6. Far better video performance, usable video AF, the wonderful EVF and Rear LCD, better DoF control and dynamic range.

There's always a bit of give & take when comparing one system to another. Being that I was already using the large PRO glass on m43, the size difference was pretty negligible. Overall, I was gaining more than I was losing by moving form Olympus to Nikon. However, that's not the case for everyone, and for some it may make sense to stay with their current system.

 

[pdk42]

Paul,

There are certainly features that the Olympus has that the Nikon doesnt. LiveComp/Time/Bulb, ProCapture, 60fps, etc. If those features are ones that are regularly used, then yes you would miss them with the Nikon. Personally, the two features I miss most are LiveTime and Live View blinkies. The live view blinkies aren't a huge deal, because the live view histogram on the Z6 works very well and the sensor definitely has better dynamic range, so the files are more malleable in post. However, a LiveTime equivalent simply doesn't exist.

At the same time, there are things I like more in the Z6. Far better video performance, usable video AF, the wonderful EVF and Rear LCD, better DoF control and dynamic range.

There's always a bit of give & take when comparing one system to another. Being that I was already using the large PRO glass on m43, the size difference was pretty negligible. Overall, I was gaining more than I was losing by moving form Olympus to Nikon. However, that's not the case for everyone, and for some it may make sense to stay with their current system.

Thanks Ian. I guess cameras are ultimately a personal decision. There's no perfect camera system that will suit everyone. We all need to make our own choices. I know you do a lot of motorsport and I can see how the D500 is a much superior tool for that job. I can also see how running two systems is a PITA so can understand why you went for the Z6 to consolidate into one. The Z6 is a fantastic camera. Handling one again yesterday confirmed what I thought the first time I did in New York.

BTW - good to see you continuing to post over on mu43!