D850 vs Z7

The mirrorless Z does not have such a compelling over riding advantage that I should get one.

As long as you continue to use DSLR lenses, the switch to mirrorless may be governed by different factors. Among them are precise manual focusing, calibration is not required for fast AF lenses, 100% live view in real time. quiet operation, including a silent electronic shutter option.

 

I understand the Z7 has excellent compatibility with AFS and E lenses. However once you see the results from a lens designed for the Z7, you will question the value of your legacy lenses.

Alas, this is true. The dedicated Z6/7 lenses are really good. Not all the legacy glass is going to hold up under hi res scrutiny. OTOH, when I use an f/1.2 I'm probably not looking for critical sharpness, but going for the limited DOF and some what ethereal quality of the lens. If I wanted a great 50 mm I'd just use the 24-70 I got with the camera. Still, IMHO, if you're committed to the older lenses, the D850 is the obvious choice, though I believe the Z mount is the future.

the D850 is the obvious choice, though I believe the Z mount is the future

 

..and there it is in a nutshell! ;)

Beware the conventional wisdoms of "every lens made before 2017 is utter useless crap, and you're a fool to even consider using such awful glass on a modern digital camera" and "abandon hope, all ye seeking to upgrade your previous camera, unless you're thrilled and able to drop thousands more on Grand Master Sony/Zeiss, top-line Z, or the stupid-fast new Canon RF lenses".

 

Things aren't that cut-and-dried for everyone: not all of us view our images on a 70" 8K OLED screen from a viewing distance measured in centimeters. Some of us actually can resist the siren call of over-the-top, overkill 46 MP (and heaven help us, 60MP next year) sensors. And some of us find the "dealbreaker flaws" in older lenses appealing. So a distinction needs clarifying from OPs launching this type of thread: in essence, how anal are you about perfection? Do you want flawless maximized optical performance from your new camera? Then expect to junk everything you now own, not just upgrade camera bodies. Otherwise, things get frustratingly murky.

 

A really extreme upgrade, such as this potential leap from 12MP D700 to 46MP D850/Z7 is going to be problematic even if you aren't a perfectionist. The unique D700 combination of "low resolution" FX sensor with heavy-duty AA filter makes it very friendly to lenses that would knock many photographers onto a fainting couch if they were to use them on the mild or no AA filtered Sony/Nikon 36-46MP bodies. That isn't to say you can't use older-spec lenses on the newest premium cameras: just be aware performance will be very subjective depending on each photographers use case (portraits may be great, landscapes for mural display may be very disappointing).

 

The D850 and Z7 are marvels, but their 46MP sensor is brutal on lenses. Heck, the previous 36MP D810 and Sony A7R were brutal. Depending on your personal standards, even 24MP is too demanding (our own Ed_Ingold would rather throw his Sony A7 kit in the river and take up charcoal sketching than use anything but the latest cutting-edge lenses, while I happily use everything from Coke bottles to Zeiss primes on mine). You can probably get away with the Nikkor AFS "Holy Trinity" 14-24, 24-70, 70-200 pro zooms on 46MP, but all bets are off with anything else. You might be satisfied, or very disappointed. Opting for a more midrange 24MP body like D750 or Z6 is the more practical, less glamorous approach if you have no near-term plans to upgrade your lenses.

 

In defense of old MF and earlier AF lenses, there is often nothing intrinsically wrong with them. I personally recoil every time I hear the vague slam "those lenses were designed for film (eeewwww), so they can't cut it on digital". While somewhat true, the claim is misleading: more accurately, its digital that can't cut it with older film-era lenses.The lenses are often perfectly fine, but digital sensor mfrs typically slap on a thick cover glass that interferes with lens performance just before it hits the sensor surface. Technology evolves, and many of the very expensive new lenses are indisputably better. But a big factor in them being "better" is their new optical designs taking into account the random piece of flat glass behind them at all times.

 

Sensor cover glass interference didn't exist when film-era lenses were produced, so its a little unfair for them to be summarily dismissed as terrible when it was digital itself that created the new problem. Otherwise there's no reason a 24MP sensor shouldn't be well within the performance curve of older designs. Rule of thumb, the shorter the focal length, and the higher the sensor resolution, the more of a problem the sensor glass will be for older lenses. The added flaws may or may not overcome your fondness for that existing lens for a particular purpose: there's a thriving subculture of people adapting all manner of "bad" lenses to mirrorless cameras.

I think Sigma saw the HiRes digital future far sooner and better than Nikon.

 

They produced superior primes with their ART series. Agreed there were AF issues, but that was/is an electronics flaw, not an optical one.

 

If you can pixel peep a shot at 200% and still think it's sharp, resolution isn't an issue for any reasonable future usage.

 

Resolution isn't everything of course, but it is a leveling metric, and some of Nikon's recent primes have been soft by comparison.. think the 35, 50, 85 and 105 AFS 1.4s.

 

No-one would have believed that anyone in their right mind would spend MORE on a similar spec lens from Sigma than one from Nikon. (some still won't believe on principle, but that's another story)

 

When i recently converted a D600 to full-spectrum by removing the filter stack, I noticed that it's physical thickness is now pretty slim compared to the D50/D90 I'd done a few years back.

 

If I shoot with essentially monochromatic light, esp in the IR, sharpness is very, very good with no filter-stack at-all using the Sigma 40mm 1.4 and LV focusing.

 

I've not met a Z6 IR conversion yet...:p

Is your's not the 2.8 HSM version?

It's the f/3.5 version: SIGMA AF 180mm f/3.5D APO EX HSM.

 

Now I really want to have a long macro lens (at least 150mm) that's compatible with the Z system with auto-focus. My long-loved 200mm does not do it. Any suggestion?

SIGMA AF 180mm f/3.5D APO EX HSM

Many of the older Sigma HSM lenses do not work even on Nikon DSLRs when in live view - in many cases, Sigma has a firmware update that corrects the issue. Requires a roundtrip to Sigma Services though. Might not hurt to give them a call and find out if a firmware update would get the lens to work on your Z6 as well.

"Sigma has a firmware update"

 

Some of mine like the 100-300mm f4 HM

 

Any suggestion?

AFAIK, the only 'modern' long macro is the Sigma 180mm 2.8 OS HSM Macro.

 

I've had some limited (!) success with a long extension tube (Kenko DG) on my 300mm 2.8 VRI, but it's an unwieldy beast, and I'm always afraid I'm going to pull the combo apart..... maybe I should build a single piece bracket?

Sigma has a firmware update that corrects the issue. Requires a roundtrip to Sigma Services though. Might not hurt to give them a call and find out if a firmware update would get the lens to work on your Z6 as well.

This is great news. I called Sigma and, sure enough, just like you said. I have packed up the lens to be shipped out before the post office closes.

 

Thank you so much! :)

AFAIK, the only 'modern' long macro is the Sigma 180mm 2.8 OS HSM Macro.

Does it auto-focus with the Z system or does it need a firmware upgrade as well?

the only 'modern' long macro is the Sigma 180mm 2.8 OS HSM Macro.

An unwieldy and expensive beast. I have the Sigma 150 OS version - even that one is quite large and heavy.

An unwieldy and expensive beast. I have the Sigma 150 OS version - even that one is quite large and heavy.

Just checked, the Sigma 180mm f/2.8 macro weighs a debilitating 3.62 lbs with a giant 86mm filter thread. Your 150mm at 2.6 lb (72mm) weighs about the same as the Nikon 200mm micro (62mm filter). My Sigma 180mm f/3.5 - the "lightest" of them all - weighs 2.1 lb (72mm) - and I already feel it may cause need for physical therapy. ;)

my trio of lens' are

AF-S NIKKOR 24-70mm f/2.8G ED,

AF-S NIKKOR 70-200mm f/2.8G ED VR II

AF-S NIKKOR 50mm f/1.4G

 

I went today and compared both camera bodies. I did not like the EVF on the Z7, nor the feel in my hands, the controls are different and the 850 is similar feel to my 700 and as most people mentioned would probably suit me better.

Edited November 9, 2019 by ShunCheung

my trio of lens' are

AF-S NIKKOR 24-70mm f/2.8G ED,

AF-S NIKKOR 70-200mm f/2.8G ED VR II

AF-S NIKKOR 50mm f/1.4G

I went today and compared both camera bodies. I did not like the EVF on the Z7, nor the feel in my hands, the controls are different and the 850 is similar feel to my 700 and as most people mentioned would probably suit me better.

The D850 is a great camera and the lenses you have are also some of Nikon's best. You will do well and we hope to see your creations sometime. Congrats!

bdmott,

Nice kit. Get the MB D18 grip with a EN-EL18 battery for the D850 and you will have a faster vertical gripped camera.

I love my D850 but it does not allow me to automatically stack and file macro images with my Nikon 200mm f4 macro screw drives lens. I can still stack but without the automation. I have been looking at the Sigma 150 and 180mm lenses as an alternative for years now. They are very good but truth is the Nikon 200mm macro is still amazing even today. Also consider a computer upgrade that includes a dedicated graphics processor with 4-6 G of RAM, 16 G or more DDR4, a late generation i7 or i9 processor and storage that uses NVMe M.2 form factor with PCie interface. You will need processing speed and fast storage for the files for either of these bodies. The files they produce are as large as the entire storage capacity of my first PC. You can find all of this in a lap top for under 2K.

I think that EVF is like broccoli or asparagus. Its an acquired taste. Like carrots it can also help you see in the dark.

Olympus has a thing called Pro Capture that is only achievable with a mirrorless camera and changes the way I think of high speed sport cameras. I hope Nikon gets on that wagon. My dream is that Nikon makes a large mirrorless camera that will sit well on a long lens and is packed with every conceivable feature other than a pop up flash.

Stay frosty.

Many thanks to all who replied to my post; especially to orsetto for his detailed thoughts on various combinations of optics and sensors.

 

I should like to add my observations as they apply to the use of various optics on modern sensors. I should preface this by stating that I am 88 years old and my eyes are not what they used to be in spite of very competent help from my ophthalmologist who evaluates my corrected vision as 20/20.

 

I resisted the conversion to digital as long as I could, but eventually purchased a D700 and subsequently a D800. Initially I used both with vintage Nikkor lenses. I then proceeded to do the following comparison: Using both cameras and a Nikkor 105mm/2.5 I photographed identical scenes (landscape & portrait). I employed some moderate post processing identically to duplicate images. I used Cosco to print 14 x 11 in. prints. Try as I could, I was not able to detect any significant difference when viewing the prints even with the aid of a small magnifying glass. I repeated the test replacing the lens with a Zeiss macro-planar ZF 100mm/2.0. Again I was not able to see a real difference.

 

One may reasonably attribute these results to my lack of visual acuity; and so be it. Since I do not display my photos for public viewing, I am the sole arbiter of their success (or lack thereof). At some time I shall surely try a Z6, just for the experience. The most attractive feature to me is the in camera stabilization; I'm too old to lug a tripod everywhere.

a little tongue in cheek but the Z7 felt like my kids Coolpix on steroids.

I just upgraded to a 2019 iMac with 72 GB ram, 8 core processor and high end graphics card and 1TB hard drive and 10TB external G drive.

I'm using Lightroom for first time and photoshop.

I just upgraded to a 2019 iMac with 72 GB ram, 8 core processor and high end graphics card and 1TB hard drive and 10TB external G drive.

I'm using Lightroom for first time and photoshop.

 

Nice, very nice.

2019 iMac with 72 GB ram

 

Unless computers are much cheaper where you are, you could have a D850 AND a Z7......;)

a little tongue in cheek but the Z7 felt like my kids Coolpix on steroids.

Both the Z6 and Z7 feel solid and sleek. I prefer them over my old D800 and my D500DX DSLRs. I wonder what Ansel Adams would say about your D850? :D

Edited November 9, 2019 by Mary Doo

Ansel Adams

Guess a lot has happened since 1984!

Unless computers are much cheaper where you are, you could have a D850 AND a Z7......;)

Pretty accurate

Unless computers are much cheaper where you are, you could have a D850 AND a Z7..

 

On the other hand Oakland will always be there for me.