The GetDPI Photography Forum

Great to see you here. Join our insightful photographic forum today and start tapping into a huge wealth of photographic knowledge. Completing our simple registration process will allow you to gain access to exclusive content, add your own topics and posts, share your work and connect with other members through your own private inbox! And don’t forget to say hi!

Nikon Z7 with FTZ compared to D850 AF

JPL

Member
for me that is just comparing apples to oranges.... there are things a DSLR might be better at, others the Mirrorless...
The D850 is not stabilized - the Z7 is....
The D850 has a nice finder... but the Z7 is wysiwyg...
The on sensor AF might be more precise than that of the D850, think about lenses like the 58 1.4...

JP
 

docmoore

Subscriber and Workshop Member
Looked at the Moose Peterson site.

He still is using the D5 and D850 for action but the Z 7 for landscapes.

Horses for courses ...

But I do think that the AF may be much better that the YouTubers imagine ... just need
to know what settings are best and the most of them have not spent enough time
with the camera to have a clue.

Just sayin ....
 

iiiNelson

Well-known member
So first tests are out and it seems not completely true what Nikon claims - that AF on the Z7 with FTZ adapter performs as well as original Nikon DSLR with F mount lenses ....

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XMIAV-exl_o

Interesting to see if this will improve with firmware updates.
It probably needs to be said that adapters MAY be fast enough for most photography even if not faster than the D850. Then there’s the reality that native lenses are almost always gonna be faster than adapted lenses. So the end result is that people should go native once the lens lineup grows and pricing allowsnif they plan on the Z becoming their primary system.
 

Photon42

Well-known member
For what it's worth, I have not seen any difference in performance between my 2nd Hand d810 and the new Z7 with AF-S lenses. I guess the d810 has to go at some point.

AI lenses without chip are less convenient to use as on the 810. There is no feeler for the aperture and for some strange reason, in exposure M mode, the exposure meter does not show up. That is, no indication of over or underexpose. Histogram is shown, however. Maybe a firmware issue, as I think there is actually no reason for it. Interestingly, the A mode just functions fine and shows the measured shutter speed.
 

Jorgen Udvang

Subscriber Member
Some more food for thought - Mark Smith made a little test for stills as well as video and he is actually amazed by the AF capabilities with FTZ adapted Nikkor lenses - enjoy

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DQFPjvIBQfE
In many ways this guy crushes most of the arguments about Nikon being behind when it comes to more or less anything. It apparently works so well with legacy lenses that even those without any Nikon gear to get started, can buy a body with the 24-70, the adapter, and a few second hand primes to get a competent setup that will work for more or less anything. It's smaller than an X-H1, and the Z6 will be around the same price level as that camera, but it's full frame with a giant lens mount.

What Nikon really sucks at is marketing, and Fuji sails rings around them there, but when the Z6 arrives, it will probably be a very, very popular camera, with the advantage over the competition (except Canon) that AF-S F-mount lenses can be used seamlessly between Z-bodies, D-bodies and F-bodies. Nobody else offers this kind of compatibility except Sony, but as opposed to F-mount, which is very much alive, the A-mount seems to go from a small user base to a reletively certain death. My guess is that they are mostly selling from stock now, not producing any new A-mount lenses.

This gives Nikon users the advantage of choosing between state-of-the-art DSLR bodies and state-of-the-art mirrorless bodies. The F6 has no competition anyway. I see Fuji and Nikon fighting for second spot behind Canon the next 5 years.
 

PeterA

Well-known member
In many ways this guy crushes most of the arguments about Nikon being behind when it comes to more or less anything. It apparently works so well with legacy lenses that even those without any Nikon gear to get started, can buy a body with the 24-70, the adapter, and a few second hand primes to get a competent setup that will work for more or less anything. It's smaller than an X-H1, and the Z6 will be around the same price level as that camera, but it's full frame with a giant lens mount.

What Nikon really sucks at is marketing, and Fuji sails rings around them there, but when the Z6 arrives, it will probably be a very, very popular camera, with the advantage over the competition (except Canon) that AF-S F-mount lenses can be used seamlessly between Z-bodies, D-bodies and F-bodies. Nobody else offers this kind of compatibility except Sony, but as opposed to F-mount, which is very much alive, the A-mount seems to go from a small user base to a reletively certain death. My guess is that they are mostly selling from stock now, not producing any new A-mount lenses.

This gives Nikon users the advantage of choosing between state-of-the-art DSLR bodies and state-of-the-art mirrorless bodies. The F6 has no competition anyway. I see Fuji and Nikon fighting for second spot behind Canon the next 5 years.
I hope both Nikon and Canon manage to stay relevant because consumers benefit from more choice however 35mm sensor size so called 'full frame' ( which is a marketing nonsense) it is a very crowded competitive landscape getting more crowded by the day.

I think Fuji will own the > 35mm sensor market within 2-5 years - with people who need the utility of seperate backs to use on technical cameras and old mirror box clunkers being the holdouts - in <35mm sized sensors I think Fuji has become very strong offering the opposite to Leica- high quality high performance low cost - everyone else is in the middle ground of 35mm or aaspiring to be in 35mm - the killing field as far as competition goes.
 

Jorgen Udvang

Subscriber Member
I hope both Nikon and Canon manage to stay relevant because consumers benefit from more choice however 35mm sensor size so called 'full frame' ( which is a marketing nonsense) it is a very crowded competitive landscape getting more crowded by the day.

I think Fuji will own the > 35mm sensor market within 2-5 years - with people who need the utility of seperate backs to use on technical cameras and old mirror box clunkers being the holdouts - in <35mm sized sensors I think Fuji has become very strong offering the opposite to Leica- high quality high performance low cost - everyone else is in the middle ground of 35mm or aaspiring to be in 35mm - the killing field as far as competition goes.
I wouldn't worry about Canon. As per second quarter this year, they still dominated the ILC market with a worldwide market share of over 49%. Their little EOS M system also sells very well, and I believe it's still the most sold mirrorless system in Japan. They also have very deep pockets and full control over their value chain.

Nikon is in a much trickier situation, but I believe they have hit spot on with their new bodies. The Z6 is an advanced camera at exactly the right price point, and will be the perfect supplement to or replacement for the D750, which is still very popular.

Most people don't care about tiny differences in AF performance. People care about brand names and in protecting their investments. It's a Nikon and my old lenses will fit. Game over.

The only company that seems to be able to get around this is Fuji. Not that they didn't have a strong brand name, but Kodak had that too. However, with excellent cameras and lenses and even better marketing, they have made great inroads, particularly here in Asia. Notice that every time there's a new Fuji model, it's actually new, and it has significant new features. This as opposed to Sony, where most new releases seem to be focused on what was lacking on last year's model, the exception being the A9.

I think Fuji will sell more mirrorless bodies than Nikon, but I also think that DSLR cameras are here to stay, not until mirrorless cameras are better, but as long as cameras are sold as separate boxes that don't also include a communication device and a computer. Some people simply prefer an optical viewfinder. That gives Nikon (and Canon) and advantage.
 

ptomsu

Workshop Member
I hope both Nikon and Canon manage to stay relevant because consumers benefit from more choice however 35mm sensor size so called 'full frame' ( which is a marketing nonsense) it is a very crowded competitive landscape getting more crowded by the day.

I think Fuji will own the > 35mm sensor market within 2-5 years - with people who need the utility of seperate backs to use on technical cameras and old mirror box clunkers being the holdouts - in <35mm sized sensors I think Fuji has become very strong offering the opposite to Leica- high quality high performance low cost - everyone else is in the middle ground of 35mm or aaspiring to be in 35mm - the killing field as far as competition goes.
I am pretty confident that Canon AND Nikon will stay relevant in the FF market and widen their offerings in the mirrorless area. While their current and also first mirrorless FF offerings are maybe a bit weak and they both could have done better, I am pretty confident that their second and third iterations will rock and offer all the features desired by today. Having said that I am also sure that FF is the sweet spot for the future - both for stills and video with APSC and m43 playing niche roles.

I myself am a big Fuji fan and have shot long time with the X system but while this system is great it still has many limitations - not wanting to count them all. m43 is a different story and will also remain relevant for people who seek small as possible. MFD will always offer better IQ and Fuji kind of leads the revolution in that area but will always be much bigger and offer less functions than e.g. FF. I for myself abandoned MFD already 6 years ago when I sold all my Hasselblad H-gear and I was never intrigued by going back into any medium format system again. IMHI it will stay a nich system for those who need highest IQ and resolution but hey, I guess I am also more than happy and satisfied with FF 45-like MP.
 

PeterA

Well-known member
I wouldn't worry about Canon. As per second quarter this year, they still dominated the ILC market with a worldwide market share of over 49%. Their little EOS M system also sells very well, and I believe it's still the most sold mirrorless system in Japan. They also have very deep pockets and full control over their value chain.

Nikon is in a much trickier situation, but I believe they have hit spot on with their new bodies. The Z6 is an advanced camera at exactly the right price point, and will be the perfect supplement to or replacement for the D750, which is still very popular.

Most people don't care about tiny differences in AF performance. People care about brand names and in protecting their investments. It's a Nikon and my old lenses will fit. Game over.

The only company that seems to be able to get around this is Fuji. Not that they didn't have a strong brand name, but Kodak had that too. However, with excellent cameras and lenses and even better marketing, they have made great inroads, particularly here in Asia. Notice that every time there's a new Fuji model, it's actually new, and it has significant new features. This as opposed to Sony, where most new releases seem to be focused on what was lacking on last year's model, the exception being the A9.

I think Fuji will sell more mirrorless bodies than Nikon, but I also think that DSLR cameras are here to stay, not until mirrorless cameras are better, but as long as cameras are sold as separate boxes that don't also include a communication device and a computer. Some people simply prefer an optical viewfinder. That gives Nikon (and Canon) and advantage.
Indeed the biggest barrier to new competition is the barrier to exit that is built over time as people add to their lens collections in one brand it is no small matter to walk away from 4-6 lenses or more for most people - and explains the brand loyalty factor - I am feeling this myself with Leica M and SL lenses. To put things in perspective my Noctilux in Leica M could have paid for my GFXS and a couple of lenses on its own.

Perhaps Fuji understand this and explains why they are offering their excellent lenses at such low prices ?

Re Sony I see them as the leaders in photographic technology supplying pretty much every maker with digital chips-they have become the Intel of the photographic world and their camera line up is now backed by an increasing number of excellent lenses - certainly serious competition for traditional Canon and Nikon in 35mm so called 'full frame' cameras and in apc. the Sony 400/2.8 is a serious statement of intent by Sony aimed at the high end sports and wildlife segments.

As for mirrorless being better than traditional - opinions differ based on people's requirements - I've changed my mind totally since the Leica SL and its EVF came out -and have resisted the Leica CL because I dont think its viewfinder is anywhere near acceptable levels of performance - even compared to the little XT-3 camera I shove in my bag now and take everywhere. that said Leica have been very clever with their L mount strategy across both 35mm and apc offerings-with lens interchangeability and now the announcement of opening its L mount technology to both Sigma and Panasonic - I am tempted to buy a CL so I can use my 90-280 on the apc sensor -extending its reach considerably.

We are all fortunate to have so many choices at ever more affordable price points.

Cheers
Pete
 

PeterA

Well-known member
I am pretty confident that Canon AND Nikon will stay relevant in the FF market and widen their offerings in the mirrorless area. While their current and also first mirrorless FF offerings are maybe a bit weak and they both could have done better, I am pretty confident that their second and third iterations will rock and offer all the features desired by today. Having said that I am also sure that FF is the sweet spot for the future - both for stills and video with APSC and m43 playing niche roles.

I myself am a big Fuji fan and have shot long time with the X system but while this system is great it still has many limitations - not wanting to count them all. m43 is a different story and will also remain relevant for people who seek small as possible. MFD will always offer better IQ and Fuji kind of leads the revolution in that area but will always be much bigger and offer less functions than e.g. FF. I for myself abandoned MFD already 6 years ago when I sold all my Hasselblad H-gear and I was never intrigued by going back into any medium format system again. IMHI it will stay a nich system for those who need highest IQ and resolution but hey, I guess I am also more than happy and satisfied with FF 45-like MP.
Hi Peter - I've long ago given up on the notion of one system for all needs. I am back into >35mm chip sized cameras via Fuji because I like to shoot in a 3:1 aspect ratio or XPan mode and still have at least 25 megapixels to print with but that is my idiosyncratic requirement for a certain look at a certain file size- and Fuji with 50mp and next year with 100 and IBIS perfectly satisfies this requirement at a price point far easier on my bank account. I am not interested at all in traditional separate backs glued on to old fashioned camera designs using optical viewfinders - and my exit from XID was purely based on price and know future offerings declared by Fuji.

LOL if I am coming across like Fuji fan-boy, apologies if this is the case it is not my intention.

Pete
 

ptomsu

Workshop Member
Hi Peter - I've long ago given up on the notion of one system for all needs. I am back into >35mm chip sized cameras via Fuji because I like to shoot in a 3:1 aspect ratio or XPan mode and still have at least 25 megapixels to print with but that is my idiosyncratic requirement for a certain look at a certain file size- and Fuji with 50mp and next year with 100 and IBIS perfectly satisfies this requirement at a price point far easier on my bank account. I am not interested at all in traditional separate backs glued on to old fashioned camera designs using optical viewfinders - and my exit from XID was purely based on price and know future offerings declared by Fuji.

LOL if I am coming across like Fuji fan-boy, apologies if this is the case it is not my intention.

Pete
Hi Pete,

can fully understand your motivations and for these requirements I would also work with Fuji GFX system. I abandoned MFD as I said several years ago and was sometime back pretty hard pressed not to buy into Leica S which I thankfully for my bank account managed to do. I also was never impressed by the X1D and actually the only MFD system I would enter today would be Fuji.

I am sure you will more than enjoy Fuji as their lenses are stellar and their color science is superior. Have fun!

Peter
 
Top