John Di Leo

I am still getting used to my z8. What I see a very much like, but I am having a couple of growing pains, I'm looking for advice from experienced hands. If you shoot spontaneous street photography, what is your method of doing so? To explain, do you leave the display on all the time? If I see a shot and the display has gone dark, by the time I have gotten the display to light up (either LCD or viewfinder), the shot can be lost. If I just point and shoot with a dark screen/vf, I fear I will either get nothing or get something out of focus. I am accustomed to using back button focusing, but does that hinder speed in capture for street in your practice? I like to hold the camera by my side, ready to lift and shoot in a second or so, but is as possible with a mirrorless as with a dslr?

That will be in the arsenal by Christmas! Ok, I shot the z8 lcd when focused, 35mm 1.8G, and then again on playback. I set up my d810 with the 55 micro to take pictures of the z8's LCD screen. Put them in lightroom and I do not see the difference I perceived on the LCD. I do not think this represents evidence of my insanity, there are far better pieces of evidence, so I am going to just watch it and see if the perception persists.

Yes, but considering the price of a new one, either the f4 or the 2.8, the 588 made (expensive) sense. To replace it would have been $1-2.5K, and I would not have gotten much, if anything for it. Now I should be able to get at least a few more years from it, I hope. Also, up until this time I always felt it was my favorite lens and it got a whole lot of use. I did not notice the sharpness thing until this shoot and that involved some very critical focusing on artwork where brush strokes mattered. So, although the repair was expensive, I could justify it. But, yes, OUCH

Some follow up 1) I started using the 55/3.5 and a 35/1.8 to good effect 2) I still notice, with both lenses above, using MF that the playback image is not as sharp as the focused image. Put another way, when I am focusing manually, I zoom in to the max using the + button on the camera body and pull focus. I move my hand, let the camera settle and I take the picture, sturdy tripod, no apparent vibration, timer, and when I review the image using the same degree of magnification there is a very slight difference in sharpness, less than there was with the 24-70, and VERY acceptable, but a difference. Is this just the nature of the beast, that a sensor when recording an image may not be as sharp as when focusing manually? It seems it should be the same. I notice this on both the d810 AND the z8 which I've finally been brave enough to take to a shoot. And TBC, this is max pixel peeping in camera and Topaz Sharpen AI makes short work to bring it even tackER sharp. It's a curiosity. It would not be noticeable if shooting portrait or street or general photos, but I am shooting paintings for an exhibit's catalog and the paintings have small geometric designs I will take test pictures of the lcd when focused and then on playback and post over the weekend. 3) As I posted on 7/14, on 7/12 the AF of my 24-70 started being reluctant to focus. Sent to Nikon and $588 later I have a new silent wave motor.

Thanks, I plan on keeping the 20, it is just too useful. Do you think keeping the 35 would be that useful if I have the 28? I have considered that. That's a personal opinion, but curious about your thoughts. The 35 I'd keep is a 1.8G which is a pretty good lens and served me well. Also, it could be that that 35 is sharper than the 28, and that would be a reason to keep it. I have a z8.

That is an excellent point, something I did not think of, and could be something very useful as long as I don't inadvertently step in a pothole. Yes, the d810 has a fixed screen. The 20z/1.8S is too big and too expensive. sage advice...dance with the one who brought you, make it work and be happy. Yes. Thanks again, to all for good observations and advice. John

Not really, but I have noticed it some. That said, the image I posted was in portrait, and the lines are pretty straight. When I first got the 20—decades ago— I did have issues with distortion, until I learned how to use the lens, being very mindful of horizontal and vertical axes...I watch the indicators in the viewfinder. I mostly shoot landscape aspect, though sometimes the frames are pretty off kilter, from shooting from the hip or quick grab and shoots— and I address in post. Yes, there is a contingent that uses an 85, but for up close the 85 becomes unusable, though it does have functionality at a bit of a distance. I am hoping to have the 105 by that time which would accomplish the same thing. exactly right and that is what I fear I would miss yes, exactly, though I am usually at f8 and zone focused It matters as a point of curiosity for the forum labeled "Street and Documentary," my emphasis on what I call Street, and not Documentary so much. I watch a lot of the Paulie B "Walkie Talkie" videos on youtube and nearly all of those guys are 1) shooting film 2) shooting Leica and 3) shooting with a 28. They are bringing the camera up to eye level for their shots. That's 4 major differences to the way I would sometimes use the lens. I know what I like about the 20, as mentioned above, and the question arises would a 28 address those concerns positively (enough) or not so positively. I have the 24-70 and the 16-35/4, so I am not foreign to 28mm, but at home, there is no real NYC world to really test it out as I would in NYC. Also, I am not using it as what I would call a "walk-around lens," and for just walking around, I would be happy with a 28 or 35, or my 24-70. I understand your valid points and appreciate the input.

I hope this is not like an oil or tire thread on motorcycle forums, and I DID search to see if I could find anything (couldn't), and I fully understand it has a very personal aspect to it, but... I get to Manhattan once a year for a meeting, and in the off times I love walking around shooting street day and night. I have been using my d810 with a nikkor 20/2.8 Ai (S I think). I like that lens because it is wide enough to shoot from the hip, literally. But, there's a new girl in town, a z8. I can use the 20 on the z8, but it sticks out pretty good with the FTZ2 adapter so I am considering an addition/replacement. It seems like a lot of street photogs shoot with a 28 and the 28/2.8z looks pretty attractive. I like it because it is light, small, has a reputation for good IQ, and not expensive. My concern is will it be wide enough. I believe the 20 covers ~90 degrees, while the 28 covers ~75 degrees. I won't know if I miss that 15 degrees until I try it, but I do know that I would not be happy with a 35mm, too narrow at ~63 degrees. I have 2 nikkor 35_s: the 35 AF-S 1.8 G and the 35 AF Nikkor f2 D; both of which become superfluous if I have the 28, so I would trade them, keeping the 20. Thoughts? If this isn't the right place to post, please direct me and TIA John

TBC I am not complaining, but there is only one RAW setting, as solely RAW, on both cameras under the Quality setting. However, on both there is another setting, called RAW recording, and I think there is where the difference resides. On my d810 I had the RAW recording setting at the highest level, 14-bit, while on the z8, although set to RAW, it was at High Efficiency* (star). That is probably the difference? It's hard to avoid the mindset of bigger being better, or at least noticeable. Thanks

EXCELLENT advice, ilkka! Thank you. That was maybe more helpful than any of the youtubes I've seen. The differences between the d810, that I am currently using, and the z8 are staggering, at least for me. Exactly, that is what I tried to do, but sending it away for 2 weeks didn't help that pursuit. I brought it to this event because these were subjects I could afford to miss, being just a fun shoot. Bringing it put into focus questions that would remain elusive until they smacked me in the face. To quote Mike Tyson: Everyone has a plan until they get punched in the mouth. I have not seen those two buttons you mention before...thanks. I knew about the settings, but coming from an optical VF, this is foreign. While shooting, I realized I wanted the z8 to behave like the d810...and that is NOT the animal it is, square peg, round hole and all that. And that was a source of confusion for me. I took that to mean the lower number in a range of shutter speeds, eg from 1/40 to 1/8000. It means the shortest shutter speed, now I know. I could go on with questions, but instead, I am going to print out your excellent response and go over them. One final question: I have the camera set to RAW (only), I am getting only NEFs. When I loaded them into the computer the file size from the z8 was about 35mb. On the d810, with far fewer megapixels, the file size was ~~45mb. I expected a file size significantly greater. How is that explained? Again, MANY thanks! John

Aside: Is there a good tutorial or source that explains ALL the thousands of settings for this beast? I took it out today for a fun shoot of the Running of the Bulls here. A bunch of roller skating girls wearing bull horns and somewhat skimpy outfits, but family friendly, chasing "runners"dressed as the runners do in Pamploma, and swatting them on the rear with plastic bats. It's a lot of fun, but a lot of quick action. I set up my B profile to be "action" based on Hudson Henry's recs on youtube. I must've set them wrong because I was shooting mostly at 1/40 sec, so I got a LOT of motion blur on many shots— that was NOT intended. And I was missing focus—don't have a lot of time to place it properly, but for "action" it would seem to need to rapidly acquire without fuss. Also, the LCD did not always display after a shot, though it sometimes did. I also did not like the VF and the LCD having to wake up. In short, I need to learn this camera better and get the settings right. Loving the colors though. A little sharpening in Topaz sharpen AI did the trick. I was using the 35/1.8 G.

Thanks. I have the 85 1.8 D. Is that the difference between the D and G lenses I will probably trade the 85 in. I don't trust myself to remember that 100% of the time.

Meaning, "Don't do that!" ?

That's what it would appear. I just attached a lens to the FTZ2. Attaching the FTZ2 to the body is smoother than attaching my 35mm/1.8 to the FTZ2. TBC both feel fine.

Got the z8 back a little while ago. The details of the invoice repair states under "Details" ITEM Material Description 0010 A Moderate Inspections & Cleaning Service Write Up Repair SC 201759 * RPL SCREW RPR BAYONET MOUNT I attached my FTZ2 mount and the catch that I noticed earlier is now gone. The adapter mounts more easily and more smoothly. I delivered it to UPS on 6/28 ( I think that's when, but it is listed in this thread) and it was returned to me on 7/14, so a little over two weeks, including the 7/4 holiday weekend.

Let me add a red herring to this discussion. 2 days ago the 24-70 became very reluctant to AF. I usually use back button focusing and pressing the AF-ON button >90% of the time now did nothing. Changing focusing modes and other parameters changed nothing, no AF. When it did focus on those rare button pushes, it snapped to focus, like something wasn't making contact. All settings are appropriate, ie on MA and AF, and the focusing indicators in the VF light up. Other lenses behave properly. I checked the contacts for spring...fine; I cleaned the contacts both on the lens and the camera...no joy. I can still manually focus the lens fine. So, it is on its way to Jericho NY for service...ugh. I do not think this has ANY bearing on the issue discussed here as I was using manual focus for the shooting. Question though: If the lens is set to MA or the body is set to AF, and fine tuning of focus is done using the focusing ring, does that have any adverse effect on the focusing mechanism? I notice that when the camera and lens is set to AF and MA and I turn the focus ring, it can be very stiff. When on M and M, the ring moves more smoothing and with little effort. So, is that a bad thing to do, stressing the internal focusing mechanisms of the lens?

now it is 7/14

Good news to report! I have a tracking number, meaning my camera is repaired and it is on the way! It is supposed to arrive by 7p on 7/13!

I am using manual focus, so that should not be an issue, right? Correct. The zoom did not move after focusing. I went back to see my details and it looks like most were shot between 32 and 60mm and at f8 I just tried that, maybe I did it wrong or not critically enough? I Live Viewed critical focus near the edge of a frame, shot the picture without recomposing and the center is sharper than the edge—where I focused. Sounds like the opposite of what you describe. Yes, on Shun's comment and I will use my 55/3.5 as much as possible from here. And regarding logistics, that is what we did as much as we could. Thnaks again

On the D810 using live view that should be a given - provided you don't press the DOF preview button as that will open the lens to full aperture. When in Live View, changing the aperture does not change the brightness of the image. I see a flicker when I change the f stop, but the image does not change brightness. Yes, the aperture changes, but the display stays the same, and double checking, yes, I am in manual mode yes, a 10 second delay. I did not have ECFS enabled...it is now. I was shooting mostly at 5.6 and 8 Yes, definitely overkill. Is 1600% the amount of mag seen on the LCD when completely zoomed in during Live View? We were way off the beaten path at a 200 year old plantation down a backroad. No traffic, no pumps or anything vibrating nearby. I could feel no vibration from my feet. We shot on a concrete floor as well as a VERY sturdy 2nd floor veranda. I do not think here were ambient vibrations and I was tuned to that. I think it's a function of the zoom lens because I was able to reproduce it at home, and correct it, 90-95%, when I changed to my 55 micro. But thanks for the interesting comments. Appreciated.

Right, and don't get me started on irregular fenestrated frames.

great comments...I'll answer later, but generally I am doing what is suggested...It's just the 24-70, I'm asking it to do something it is not designed for. As many have said I should use a prime and will in the future of this job. Also, I have the 55/3.5 and shoot manual anyway. Aside: There are three settings for manual focus vs AF on the lens/d810. There is the MA/M on the lens, there is the AF/M on the body, and there is the mode M. If one is shooting manual focus and exposure, do the settings on the lens and the body make a difference if the mode is set to M? I do not see any difference in outcome.

I reproduced the issue just now with the 24-70. Then I tried it with the 55 at f8 and 1/4 sec. It handles it significantly better. There is still a drop off in sharpness—very slight, but not nearly as much. So, I guess I will be sacrificing my knees for art. Thanks for the guidance. Much appreciated.

Hmm. When I focus I am focusing always in the center of the painting, and it shows tack sharp in the LCD. I do not recompose, but only trip the shutter, sometimes from Live View, sometimes to conserve battery, I turn live view off and shoot. When I check during playback I look again at the same spot on maximum zoomed in on the image, so it's not like I am focusing in the center then checking for focus at the periphery. Yes, on the 24-70, it a favorite. Thanks to all for the comments and suggestions. I am going to put the 55 micro on and see how that does.

Interesting comments all. Yes, all paintings and all flat; sometimes framed, sometimes just canvas. I got the lens new, probably around 2010, and I believe it is the first version. I see no Roman numeral II on it, and it is pre VR I shot it both from Live View and with the mirror down, same behavior. I am using a pretty heavy Bogen Tripod, without center extended. I shot 2 images with each shutter trip. When zoomed in in Lightroom I can sometimes see minimal variation in sharpness, but generally they look the same. As I said it requires pixel peeping to see, like going to 1600% in Lightroom. I can't capture the LCD image of the focus to compare. I only see what I am focusing as I do and then the playback...and a noticeable difference in there. I have been using 5.6, 8, and 11, usually f8 Actually, I have the 55/3.5. I don't have the 105 (yet. Christmas is not far away!) I will play with the 55 at home to see if that changes things. The problem with a prime, and it is a physics problem is how we are shooting the artwork because of the artwork involved. Sometimes, rarely, it is on a wall, ie too intricately mounted or too heavy to move. Most often though we are moving them to a nicely lit area, shooting a grey card, then shooting the work. They vary in size a good bit. Friday we were shooting in an old plantation house and the largest work was 90" x 40" and the smallest about 12"x16", so the zoom is helpful for composition and as a time factor, IOW I don't have to keeping moving the tripod forwards and backwards. My knees are screaming from what we did do. continued