ilkka_nissila

Frog pic from April. Z6 II, AF 200/4D Micro-Nikkor at f/8, 1/200s, ISO 1800. I was lying on a self-inflating mattress and trying to keep the camera steady. I used manual focus with focus peaking. I didn't even get one eye fully sharp, so f/11 would have been a better choice I guess.

Lens design involves compromises, and implementing in-lens VR probably would disrupt those bokeh balls. I am sure what improvements there are in the Zf in-camera VR mechanism will find themselves in future FX Z bodies, such as the Z9 II. At least some of Nikon's promotional videos of the 135mm were shot on a gimbal. In my opinion for telephoto video, a tripod is usually the best approach at least if the video is to be easy on the viewer's eyes.

Well, the previous 135mm from Nikon was released in early 1990s, if I recall correctly. The time period between releases of fast 105's was 23 years. These things don't get frequent updates (a little more frequent would be nice, but I don't know what is missing from the 135/1.8 to warrant a future update). There are lenses which do get frequent updates, in recent times it has been the long lenses. Nonetheless I still often use some of my 1990s era lenses.

Nikon being stuck with large quantities of lenses or cameras in a warehouse which no one will buy is also an error and could cost them more than a temporary slow delivery situation that typically lasts months for a lens that will probably be manufactured for 10 years or so. I think the temporary short supply situation and the online complaints following it is rather a case of customers feeling entitled and impatient without any meaningful reason to be in such a rush. I doubt very much that Nikon is worse off in a short supply situation, in fact it might make the products seem more desirable. People are in it for the rush and hype of having the hot new product. They're annoyed because they didn't get it as quickly as they wanted. If the product has a usable life of 30 years, one would think that people would not care if they have to wait a few months to get it.

I'm not sure what Nikon did that would qualify for "insanity"; from their perspective they are doing rational things, it's just that they don't always have the pulse of the customers, or the plethora of requests that they make are so diverse that it's impossible to make fully informed decisions and expect success every time.

It is kind of funny that Nikon would find itself in a situation where they shut down multiple factories due to reduced demand and then 1-2 years later they find themselves with "unexpected demand" for most new products. 🙂 Sometimes the problem is not with the competition from the smartphone but simply making the right product.

I guess what you can do is do some test shots to see if VR causes any problems in the conditions that you're shooting. I personally turn VR OFF when working with a tripod. With Z cameras, I do it from the i menu (if it is a Z mount lens), or from the lens if it's an F-mount lens.

Unfortunately once you get that one Z lens, you'll notice how much better it is and then you'll likely get a whole set.

I've used digital cameras since 2004, probably taken over 1 million frames with them and never got even a slightest mark on the back LCD screen. I think the screen is well protected as it is and probably the hinge of an articulating screen is a greater risk than the glass.

I suspect that a reverse engineered adapter would be a disaster in terms of compatibility and camera support... FTZ II is all black, I don't see why it would not fit with a black Zf body.

Well, there are many features over the history of Nikon cameras which showed up first on mid grade cameras and then the higher end. Do you want a list? 😉

But since there is likely an optical low-pass filter on the Zf, how would this work? It seems pixel shift can only recover the full RGB info per pixel cleanly if there is no OLPF. I have read the Z6 sensor has OLPF along only one direction and not the orthogonal one. So maybe this is how it would give some benefit, but still it is better suited for cameras without any OLPF.

Most likely they are testing it in the Zf and getting user feedback from it before putting it into other new models in the future. You know whenever you buy a new camera, after a short time there will be even newer models that have something you want. 😉 Think of cameras as a subscription service with regular (large) payments. Personally I consider the pixel shift feature of very limited use as even when photographing landscape, there is always some movement (due to wind, water flow etc., people or animals in the landscape) that ruins the integrity of the pixel shifted set. This means it had very narrow applications. Such as product shoots in a controlled environment etc. maybe. Yes, I know algorithms can fabricate some solution to the discrepancies but the resulting moment never existed in time. I think it's much better to see Nikon put out a 100 or 200 MP camera eventually and then we can hopefully be rid of this fumbling around with multiple images captured and merged into one.

Voigländer Z mount native lenses also come with aperture rings that are reported to function normally. I hope Nikon also considers making some Z lenses with aperture rings. I think those would sell in fairly decent numbers to Z f and Z fc users.

But why then does Viltrox sell lenses with physical aperture rings with Z mount? I am pretty sure these aperture rings do work (otherwise they would be left out) and there is no non-Z camera to which these lenses will fit (and focus at infinity).

Now I realize that e.g. Viltrox Z-mount lenses have aperture rings, so there must be a way of using them to control the aperture from the lens, otherwise making them would be pointless. So is it the case that native Z lenses can use aperture rings, but the aperture of adapted chipped lenses must be controlled from the camera body?

I think "need" is a strong word in this context, but since photography in its entirety is not necessary to sustain life (as a whole) and it is largely an activity that we do as part of enjoying life, one can then look at what kind of camera user interfaces would be enjoyable to use. The tactile sense is very important for humans and being able to adjust camera settings by feel (not even looking at the camera or turning the power on) is something I enjoy. I don't want to shoot film, however, at this point, as maintaining a film-based workflow would require more stuff and I try to avoid that. I know film enjoys a resurgence of interest, and I am glad to hear that there are people who shoot film cameras. But in my opinion the Zf isn't about film or making a camera that looks like a film camera, but it's more about a different user experience. Normally when using a modern camera, one has to turn it on, and then look at displays and apply settings. With a Df, even without turning it on, or raising the viewfinder to eye level, you can set aperture, shutter speed, ISO and exposure compensation. With a Zf the setting of the aperture may require turning it on if it doesn't allow the use of the lens aperture ring (powered off), and this does break this concept a bit, but if you do turn it on, you can set the aperture by looking at the small display on top of the camera, and the other settings are with clicking dials. I hope with the third-party lenses that have aperture rings, the camera would let the user set the aperture on the ring, but I'm not 100% sure (I don't own these.) I know that there have been some complaints about how the manual focus Nikkors work on the adapter. But these are things that Nikon can work on based on user input and improve. There is also a stylistic aspect, many people dress intentionally in a different way from others, and using a camera that looks a bit different can be a part of that. I think it can act as a conversation piece though regrettably cameras that look "retro" are quite common nowadays, so people might not notice it as anything unusual any more. I may get the Zf because sometimes I need to have a second camera with me and one that takes the same lenses as the camera I'm mostly shooting with. However, I may not need it to have all the capabilities of the primary camera, and it would be advantageous if it fits in a narrow compartment in my camera backpack so that carrying it doesn't increase the total weight or require a second bag. It would also be an advantage if it has a slightly different niche of excellence than my primary camera and in the Zf's case, it is the 24 MP sensor that (if it is similar to that in the Z6 II) will excel in high-ISO photography. Nikon has also developed the in-camera stabilization further and they also claim good low-light AF, which are two features that would perfectly fit my needs for a second camera. The drawbacks as far as I am concerned is that it doesn't appear to be able to be triggered by WR-R10 (as a remote camera) and it can't use it as a radio trigger for flash, so those are clear downsides. Finally it only partly uses the same memory cards that my other cameras use, and that's a bit of a nuisance as well. Unfortunately the WR-R10 incompatibility is something that I may not be able to get over as it would prohibit me from triggering the Zf as a remote camera from the primary camera using the equipment that I have; building another way of remote triggering might be possible but I don't think it is necessarily worth the effort. But I guess whenever Nikon makes a product, there are ups and downsides to it. 🙂 The vibes this camera is getting seem very positive on the gear forums in general. I just don't understand the lack of system-wide compatibility with accessories. Nikon could do it with the Z9 and Z8, why not here?

I may have sounded a bit harsh. Of course I know that cameras like the F3 were used with long lenses and motor drives at the time. Soon after the F3 era, the cameras' main grip started to get bigger, i.e. products such as the F-801 (N8008?) had more similar grips to today's cameras than those of manual focus film cameras. I was initially using the F3 HP with lenses such as 24/2.8, 35/2, 50/1.8 and 85/1.8. When I later got a 300/4 and 80-200/2.8, I quickly found that I didn't like manual focus for longer lenses (and handling was a bit awkward) and sold the camera. However, on many occasions since I've missed it and the experience of using it. In the manual focus era lenses tended to be a bit smaller than what many people used in the AF (D)SLR era. The cameras' design reflected that. I guess adding autofocus and moving towards fast zooms both increased the typical size of a lens. So the camera shape needed to be reconsidered with larger lenses in mind. However, I think there was a big push towards smaller kit in the 2010's and the Zf follows those trends. Nikon has 26/2.8, 28/2.8, 40/2, and 50/2.8 MC which are relatively small lenses. They also have a 24-50mm f/4-5.6 which is compact. True, several of these are with plastic mounts, but I'm unconvinced that it makes that much of a difference. The important thing is that temperature variations cause similar expansion to the different parts in the lens so that it doesn't break due to exposure to high or low temperatures. I hope that Nikon continues the compact lens lineup and introduces a few more. A smaller 85mm or 105mm would be great. Third parties also make compact prime lenses and many of those do follow the retro/vintage appearance. However, I am not convinced Nikon wants to make the Zf and let other manufacturers take the lens business.

That is true. I remember Shun showing me the new D100 and he said "Six megapixels is a lot." It must have been in January or February 2003. I was not terribly impressed by the early digital cameras and Shun said something along the lines of "just wait a little". He was right, digital did "get there" a few years later. I think I took my last film photos around 2009 or 2010. In fact I went to Yosemite on that same trip and I have been wanting to scan some of those images.

I did not find holding the F3HP uncomfortable neither did I feel that way about the Df. On the Z fc I felt some of the dials were really flimsy and it didn't seem to have the build quality I was expecting, but it's a relatively inexpensive camera so this may have been necessary to achieve its price. The Zf is supposed to have metal dials so I'm hoping it'll feel "right." However, I generally would use this type of cameras with prime lenses of moderate maximum apertures and not including long lenses. Things like 35/1.8 or 50/1.8, or the 40/2 should feel right at home with this camera without needing a grip extension. I think the assumption that these are intended to be used with long lenses is flawed and within their intended scope of use, the ergonomics are fine. The Z9 and Z8 are almost the same camera, one can easily substitute for the other for all but a few uses (and some of those differences are likely to be cancelled with future firmware updates to the Z8). The Zf is a camera for people who like the traditional looks and handling, whereas the Z6 series is sort of the system foundation camera, about as mainstream as a Z camera can get. I think Nikon could make a lot more money by offering an update to the Z6 II now rather than the Zf. However, I suspect the reason they are not doing that is that they're developing a new sensor for the Z6 III and it's not ready yet. The Zf, since it is going to sell with its good looks, doesn't necessarily need a stacked sensor or lag-free viewfinder to do OK in its market.

I think the 40/2 would do well as a "standard lens" for the Zf. It has a plastic mount but given that it's such a small and lightweight lens, I don't think it's likely to break very easily. I think a thin camera like the Zf would be a good ergonomic fit with the compact primes (28/2.8, 40/2, but also 50/2.8 MC and 26/2.8 pancake). The pancake and macro come with metal mounts, so there are options. I think the S-line f/1.8 primes are a bit on the long side but those are what I use and if I get a Zf those will be the lenses I'll put on it for the most part. I really enjoyed the F3 HP back in the day and it had a similar grip as the one in the Zf. I don't think this will be an issue for those using the camera with small lenses. However, for use with f/2.8 zooms or long glass, for sure the camera might feel awkward to hold. Nikon has a promotion offering a grip for the Zf (I assume it's the one made by Smallrig which is shown in some reviews and on nikonusa's site) and Nikon Store buyers can get it as a free item for a limited period at least in some countries. The grip extension might have Arca-Swiss style dovetail (?) and it extends the grip to one that is deeper and more substantial. Since I use the 24-70/2.8 a lot I am somewhat interested in this grip. I think the best way to deal with the Micro SD card is to just buy one and insert it into the camera once, and use it for in-camera backups without ever removing the card. If the backup is ever needed (I hope it won't be) then the data from the MicroSD card can be downloaded to computer via the USB cable without removing the card and risking misplacing it. Since the Zf has high-efficiency raw files and it's 24 MP so the files will probably be smaller than those of all but a few old DSLRs. I would assume that even the limitation to USB-I speeds in the second slot won't be a huge problem thanks to the efficient encoding. The other option is to use JPGs for backup and write those on the second card. It doesn't seem like the Zf has the terminal for MC-DC2 or 10-pin remotes. This means it also doesn't (apparently) support radio triggering of the SB-5000. I really don't like this omission. I think flash is an important part of photography lighting and making camera bodies incompatible with their own flash equipment is a drag. There is also no electrical remote control without resorting to the use of bluetooth (think: increased shutter delay and a lot of fun trying to pair the camera to the phone or bluetooth remote control handset).

I haven't posted in a while, as I have shot very little over this summer and my focus has been on work. I did take photos of some bands performing in Helsinki over the course of the summer and I'll post a few pics. These are with the Z8 and Z 70-200/2.8 S. First, a group called Naattiorkesteri performs children's music. They were very entertaining. Unfortunately I can't quite show what they're doing in still photos but perhaps you can get some idea from their gestures.

I believe both 28/2.8 and 40/2 compact primes are available as SE models to match the aesthetics, if desired. I am a bit disappointed Nikon hasn't put out the Z6 ii's replacement as I would like to have a 24 MP model for low-light situations and one which can accept a vertical grip and CFexpress/XQD cards. In the absence of the Z6 III I may get the Zf to use for those situations where I need to shoot in very low light and as a general backup Z camera. At least the Zf uses EN-EL15c. That's a big help. The Df and Zfc use other batteries which is a factor influencing me not to get those. A thin camera without grip should take less space in the bag when a lens is not mounted, so from that perspective it should be a good backup camera. I like clicking dials. I also like the aesthetics of the Zf. A Z6 III in the future would likely have advantages over the Zf: better handling with big teles, vertical grip option, CFExpress slot, more customizable buttons, etc. However, for whatever reason Nikon is delaying that camera over this one. I think it's a mistake as for a lot of people the Z8 is still too expensive and the Zf is a bit of a fashion item and not completely designed to be as efficient as a modern camera. I like it that they are making this camera but a Z6 III would probably do more for Nikon's market standing. Man, SD and microSD cards. This part is like eating tar for me.

Sorry, I'm not going to shake my camera on purpose. I think if the camera and IBIS function similarly between your Z9 and Z8 (in terms of sharpness, taking into account the heavier weight probably helps with stable hand-holding) you likely have nothing to worry about. The Z8 is very very quiet but it's not quite THAT silent as there are still moving parts. 🙂

I see, I usually don't try to move the camera on purpose but hold it steady. 😉 I haven't tried intentional movements while listening to the IBIS noise. The Z8 has different materials than the Z9 in the body, that can perhaps explain why it sounds different.