Nikkor z 50/1.8 or Sony Zeiss 55/1.8?

Where is side-by-side comarison if any?

They seem to run close.

I want mirrorless FF 1 camera - 1 lens approach and the lens matters here.

Are you looking to by a Nikon Z or Sony A7? That decision should be based on more than a single lens (and the Nikon lens won't fit a Sony). Using a native lens will always give the best compatibility. There is more to a lens than its resolution (which appears to be comparable), including CA and distortion. Build quality and handling are harder to define, but are things you will have to live with.

 

Most important is the "system" you are buying into, which gives you the flexibility to grow with your needs and expectations. Nikon has many more "legacy" lenses which can be used with varying degrees of success, but only 4 "native" lenses at present, with a promise of more to come. Sony has nearly 70 lenses from several manufacturers designed specifically for that platform, and can adapt to any DSLR lens from Nikon or Canon. Four years ago, Sony was at the place Nikon is now. Especially with competition, things will change quickly, and for the better.

I too wouldn't decide on a system based on just one lens. Nikon is going to have three 50-58mm lenses for the Z system pretty quickly. Of course few would buy the 58mm Noct, which is expected to be super expensive, but additional 50mm lens will be available within 2, 3 years. For example, I would imagine the links of Sigma and Tamron will have their 50mm lenses in the Nikon Z mount in the coming years.

 

I would suggest playing with both cameras at a store to see which design you prefer. The Nikon Z system is still missing a lot of lenses, but Nikon has a huge number of F-mount lenses that can be easily adapted to the Z bodies. Some people loved adapters and put various lenses on mirrorless bodies, but I happen to not like adapters much.

I would suggest playing with both cameras at a store

 

For sure, but many of us who used to be blessed with a brick-and-mortar camera store, no longer have that luxury.

 

It is possible to rent the cameras/lenses from an outfit like LensRentals.com. This is highly to be recommended for items that are both expensive and which will commit you to some particular course of action far into the future.

There's something to be said for avoiding decision paralysis. Speaking as someone who went through a system change in the distant past (from Canon), you take a financial hit (especially if you bought new) and it takes a while to adjust to different philosophies, but a box for recording light is a box for recording light. I guess it may be more of a concern for people now because the Z mount is making a lot of people think of a "system change", but the worst you're going to end up with is a very good camera which is a slightly less perfect fit for your needs than the alternative - unless you decide to invest in an overpriced vanity project (Y35). If you can't tell them apart, pick one, otherwise you'll just be missing the chance to take images.

 

I obsess as much as the next when it comes to deciding between features and reading manuals before buying. But at some point, changing your mind in the future is an inconvenience rather than a catastrophe (albeit one that may involve a lot of saving up), and any option is better than not having a camera at all. If you're not sure what you're going to get from the new system, maybe it's better sticking to an old one - which is what I'm doing in the current generation. Also Nikon already has all of my money. :-)

 

There's a tradition that we're locked into a system by our historical purchases, and that "lenses are for life". Well, you can adapt your lenses, especially if you're going to mirrorless at some point, and Sigma (at least) will re-mount your lenses for you. Lenses were a lot more "for life" in the age of film, where there was less of a "sensor upgrade" concept (new films were rare), and a good lens was likely to stay a good lens. In a digital world, I've upgraded a lot of glass, despite trying to spend money on it and researching "good" options: I'm on my third 70/80-200 f/2.8, my fourth (Nikon mount) 50mm prime, my third 85mm prime (fourth if you count the 90mm Tamron), my second -500mm zoom, etc. Not to mention a few tripod upgrades. Even bodies aren't that consistent: my switch to a D850 involved new memory cards, a new reader, a new grip (and in my case batteries and charger), and a set of wireless flash triggers to do what my D810 could do with CLS and integrated flash. Even staying in a system can be expensive as technology moves on. Despite Nikon's efforts (notably not publicising their mount protocols), staying in a system at any point isn't a no-brainer. I timed my switch from Canon to the point when I was considering going full-frame and getting better lenses, so I knew that I had expenses coming even to stay Eos.

 

None of which means we shouldn't nitpick on technical differences between products - that's no small chunk of what this forum is for. But I thought I should start the year with a bit of perspective.

I am in the Silicon Valley area, and our largest local camera store went out of business in 2016, but fortunately there are still two smaller ones with those bodies in stock. In the US, not sure a local Best Buy is an option or not; sometimes their stock is not too bad.

 

Unfortunately renting two bodies and lenses can be pretty expensive. If you have a local camera club, maybe you can find some members with those bodies so that you can take a look.

Stores are great, especially large stores. We had Helix Camera* (and Calumet) once upon a time. Now we have LensRentals (for one) and B&H (by internet), which have many cameras and lenses in stock, available on a week's notice (if you're lucky). I suggest that route before laying down serious coin. Renting is more expensive than a look-see-touch, but you can drive it hard for a week and see how it works for you. If you go that route, read up and make your best guess for the first, possibly only) trial. It's hard enough to learn one camera in a week.

 

* Never rented from Helix. They wanted my first born as a deposit, and he wasn't having it ;)

Edited January 11, 2019 by Ed_Ingold

I saw this review by some-one whose reviews I respect. Jim Kasson.

 

Nikon 50/1.8 S, Otus 55 on Z7; Zony 55 on a7RIII

It would be better to blow up a 700 pixel sample from the raw BEFORE converting it to JPEG. What are we seeing, artifacts of JPEG or of the lens(es)?

That decision should be based on more than a single lens (and the Nikon lens won't fit a Sony). Using a native lens will always give the best compatibility. There is more to a lens than its resolution (which appears to be comparable), including CA and distortion. Build quality and handling are harder to define, but are things you will have to live with.

 

Most important is the "system" you are buying into, which gives you the flexibility to grow with your needs and expectations. Nikon has many more "legacy" lenses which can be used with varying degrees of success, but only 4 "native" lenses at present, with a promise of more to come.

Nikon will catch up.

I do not need a complete system, being a minimalist, I will have 1 or 2 lenses. I agree to wait.

Nikon seems to have a thicker grip and upper display.

Sigma will produce all their range for Nikon too.

But Nikon doesn't have in-camera stabilizer, does it? z 50/1.8 s has it.

Personally I have never liked how Nikon (lower tier models like D7000 render blonde human's skin) I guess Z series will be better.

Now it is time for bigger and sharper lenses than we used to use.

Mirrorless open the time for newer, another, sharper and cleaner (sterile) class of optics... 50/1.8 is using nano-cryslal coating.

Nikon will probably make their superb 50/1.2 I see to compete with Canon.

Edited January 12, 2019 by ruslan

The revolution is underway.

Nikon will catch up.

I do not need a complete system, being a minimalist, I will have 1 or 2 lenses. I agree to wait.

Nikon seems to have a thicker grip and upper display.

Sigma will produce all their range for Nikon too.

But Nikon doesn't have in-camera stabilizer, does it? z 50/1.8 s has it.

Personally I have never liked how Nikon (lower tier models like D7000 render blonde human's skin) I guess Z series will be better.

Now it is time for bigger and sharper lenses than we used to use.

 

both z7 and z6 has IBIS but the 50/1,8 has no VR

both z7 and z6 has IBIS but the 50/1,8 has no VR

THANKS! I did not know! Good news.

I have seen their roadmap. Looks promising! Esp. new Noct. :rolleyes:

Unfortunately renting two bodies and lenses can be pretty expensive.

 

That's true, but still a lot chaaper than making a mistake in equipment that is even more expensive.

 

Truthfully, I think most of us will admit that buying almost any of the modern, still-in-production cameras will work out just fine.

 

I was well-imprinted on pre-AI Nikon (twist, twist), but had very little trouble adjusting to my first Canon EOS cameras.

Do you have a digital camera that works and a decent set of lenses? If you, relax, sit back, let others rush in pay full price, and debug the new cameras and lenses (there are always bugs). Unless, your name is Adams, Weston, Avedon, Lange, etc. the limiting factor for your images is you, not your equipment. In a year or so, prices will have diminished (somewhat) and there will be more equipment, especially lenses, to choose among. And there will be much more information published (some of it may even be valid <grin>)..

Yes I do.

maybe you're right.

I saw this review by some-one whose reviews I respect. Jim Kasson.

 

Nikon 50/1.8 S, Otus 55 on Z7; Zony 55 on a7RIII

 

Interesting, as is the comparison in the same sequence with an adapted 50mm Art (more relevant to me, since I own one); thank you. While I'm sure DxO will be cleaning up the edges of the 50mm Art a bit, and it's got more light to work with because of the reduced fall-off compared with the Nikkor, that's still impressive corner performance from the 50mm f/1.8 S. Nice to see Nikon produce a 50mm that I don't think sucks. :-)