I think in court they still use sketch artists, ;-)
-
Welcome to the new forums! Please read this first. For known issues we are working to resolve, click here.
The trend continues
- Thread starter Mister Anders0n
- Start date
Mister Anders0n
Active member
Well, the Canon is a hybrid camera, that shoots faster, has more focus points, and will do video a lot better, just to name a few things. I don't own any Canon gear, but from what I'm reading online, people are super impressed with the new 1DX and the specs for the EOS 5 seem pretty dang good. OTOH, no one seems impressed with the D6. I'm seeing lots of people already complaining that it's basically just a D5s.
I'm set for now, but if I have to sell off all my glass anyway if I decide to go ML someday, I might seriously look at Canon. It just seems like they are really upping their game lately.
DenWil
Veteran Member
I do not buy cameras to replace them. I buy them for what they are and what they do for me. I’ve used the same model of Pentax 67 for 20 years. Two bodies are still active while two have been retired and rebuilt into panorama cameras. I have never had a lens fail or be damaged.
I believe gear and light should be a constant and only content should be the variable. If you’re constantly breaking in new equipment that methodology is impossible.
After shooting with a Nikon D810 for four years I am confident that as long as I have the content and the light the camera will always perform exactly as I would have it .
I skipped the D850 but I will review the next iteration, say with 61 megapixels , and if it doesn’t pan out I’ll be Just fine. There will be options out there 5 to 10 years down the road -who’s to say what those options might be.
if Nikon cannot be competitive as a mass marketer then I have no doubt it could consolidate and work with the same numbers as Leica or Rolex.
I bet those "lots of people" aren't the ones actually buying.
The ones actually buying will buy the D6 because it has better AF than the Canon 1DXiii, just as they bought the D5 because it has better AF than the 1DXii.
The D6 is beyond the reach of the spec comparison hobbyists (I include myself here!) and thankfully Nikon can ignore the internet chatter and youtubers and "buzz" and worry about pleasing the only people who matter - the pros and enthusiast photographers who actually buy the Dx series.
All the internet buzz with the D5 was about low ISO DR when it launched. Utterly irrelevant in the long run and, it seems to me, the D5 has been the best camera in its class since. I think the D6 is likely to be another "Nikon 1, Internet 0" outcome.
I agree it's all about cost/benefit.
I'd guess the cost of developing and selling an AF-D FTZ adapter is not worth the benefit of pleasing the segment of users who prefer lens designs from the 90s and are not interested in the Z lens designs from the 20s.
Everyone is entitled to their own preferences, so when someone writes, as they did above: Number one, my AF-D primes are smaller and lighter than all of the Z primes. Number two, they are available in all focal lengths. Z won't get there until 2025. Number three, they are bought and paid for whereas Z lenses are priced well over their build quality and supposed image benefit.
I think, 'fair enough', but if I were Nikon, of all the competing priorities in a difficult market, making them happy would not be near the top of my list. I'd make more Z lenses for people who value their image benefits and think they are reasonably priced and might actually buy them.
I own 5 AF-D lenses, I kept them as a nice match for my Df. I have no interest in using them on a Z body - the FTZ is clunky enough, an AFD adapter with its own motor and AF module would be an awful contraption to mount on a light Z body and negate any size advantage inherent in the lenses.
Last edited:
Leonard Shepherd
Forum Pro
Even Nikon indirectly admit it is so, with several Nikon screwdriver AF lenses wide open. Nikon do not provide f8 performance detail but these older lenses generally have a lot of catching up to get near but not equal by f8, compared to a later AF-S lens and then again to an S lens.
https://imaging.nikon.com/lineup/lens/f-mount/singlefocal/normal/af_50mmf_14d/index.htm
I appreciate some prefer the "look" of some older lenses of not recording fine detail with reasonable contrast, or sometimes not resolving fine detail at all.
It depends where you set the line for a "big deal" - which is your choice.
Several of the older screwdriver lens were OK in the centre with film, and contribute to more image detail on recent high MP cameras, but still fall well short of AF-s or Z performance combined with a recent camera.
--
Leonard Shepherd
In lots of ways good photography is much more about how equipment is used rather than anything else.
Last edited:
All of these statements might be true but not necessarily meaningful unless one either crops a lot, prints very large, or has pixel peeping as a favorite pastime. What I find ironic is that I encountered more than once on this forum that some of the same folks who criticize older cameras and lenses are raving about new smartphones. Ironic because no smartphone I came across, including the latest iPhone 11, lets you pixel peep, once you zoom in far enough, it becomes pure mush.
The bottom line from my point of view is that one has the option of trading the old lens look for a new lens resolution. Is this a good bargain? — I don’t know, matter of personal preference, and probably warrants a case by case review even if one is willing to spend.
This is the problem.....specs, seems to be impressed.
Nope, my Z85 1.8S makes easily visible better pictures than my 85 1.8D in normal viewing on the normal screen I look at.
T O Shooter
Forum Pro
Instead of saying it, put up side by side images. Let us decide if the lenses make the image.
I'm of the belief it doesn't. But you have an opportunity here to change my mind.
Happy to leave your mind unchanged.
T O Shooter
Forum Pro
The reviewers and youtubers do so well with their gig that they had to ramp up for the D6 even though 99% of the people who would buy a D6 will never hear their message. Which is not a bad thing. But it does get the forum riled up so $$$ in their pockets.
A D6 might be something I'd interested in down the road on the used market, if I ever decide to update my D4s. But I wouldn't taint my decision listening to the shills, youtubers, and so called impartial "reviewers"
T O Shooter
Forum Pro
For very good reason, I suspect. Kind of a lame reply on your part.
NikonShoot3r
Veteran Member
Right on..still rocking my d750 and antiquated f mount glass, LOL
“Better” is always in the eye of the beholder, and reasonable people may have different opinions on this matter.
My guess is that, unless with the sole purpose to argue on this forum, one is not gonna purposefully do a side by side. So you end up comparing shots taken under different lighting conditions, with different subjects, at different apertures, etc. So your judgment ends up being based on comparing in aggregate, and you subjectively decide that you like one aggregate better than the other.
And even if you go through the effort of doing a side by side, the subject would likely be trivial and conditions limited. Even the same camera/body combination would yield markedly different results depending on the subject, settings, and shooting conditions. There is not much science to it beyond learning to use your gear in an optimal way, and choosing the right gear for the subject and the shooting conditions.
T O Shooter
Forum Pro
I'm a firm believer that the difference in an image is the fellow taking it, not the gear. But fellows with Zees seem to believe that there's a world of difference between something shot with a Zee lens than something shot with an f mount. My point has always been that I do not need to buy a Zee to get good images, images better than a D850 (as one body example)
If someone wants to run their sled alongside my 800cc 160+ hp sled, I have no problem doing it. It shows a comparison at that particular time on that particular day under those particular conditions. Nothing more.
VB said "my Z85 1.8S makes easily visible better pictures than my 85 1.8D in normal viewing on the normal screen I look at" which suggest he already did the comparison and has the images.
I said, and still say, show me. If it would make him feel better, put up the images, point out where he feels the differences are, and I'll look but won't comment.
If I wanted an 85 lens, I could buy a used 85 1.4G for the same price as a new Z85 1.8S in Toronto, I'd have 1.4, I wouldn't need to change systems. I doubt anyone could show me a difference between those two lenses that would affect final image. I can guarantee there'll be no difference at 1.4
Here's the thing... Nikon already has a reputation for needlessly angering their customers after numerous bone-headed product development choices in the last few years. They need to shake that perception if they want to survive. Offering a DTZ adapter isn't done for profit on the adapter itself, it's done keep the photographer within the Nikon ecosystem and secure greater profit from them over the long term.
This is what Thom Hogan wrote on the topic:
I mentioned legacy, and there’s another area where Nikon didn’t quite get it right: the FTZ Adapter. Why there aren’t more adapters—ala what Canon did—I don’t understand. I see three clear adapter options:
- G/E AF-S/AF-P lenses only. The simplest adapter for most current lens users. (Basically the current FTZ Adapter.)
- D and screwdriver lenses. More complex, more power hungry, but keeps older lenses relevant. (Sells modestly, but keeps the legacy Nikon user from being pis sed off by the abandonment of a class of lenses.)
- AI/AI-S lenses only. Yep, there’s room for this type of adapter, and it would be useful to some of the faithful; given how simple it would be, this is the one that you for sure put a drop-in filter option into. (Why? Full AI support enables the full PASM exposure options.)
http://www.sansmirror.com/newsviews/2020-mirrorless-camera/the-nikon-z-system-almost.html
Sony LA-EA4 A to E lens adapter with built in AF Motor (160g) - $298
Nikon FTZ adapter with no AF motor (133g) - $250
Adding 27 grams to get AF support for AF-D lenses would break a sweat on you, VBLondon? :-D
fPrime
--
Half of my heart is a shotgun wedding to a bride with a paper ring,
And half of my heart is the part of a man who's never truly loved anything.
Last edited:
I would be really nice to see some images. As a user of the 85 1.8D myself! But if not possible could you clarify what you mean by visibly better pictures? Are you talking about portraits? if so would be great to understand your point of view. Many thanks Toby
Similar threads
Keyboard shortcuts
- f
- Forum