Sample gallery from my Z24-70 F/4 S, my new favorite walk around lens!

Started 3 months ago | Discussions thread
OP MustAg Forum Member • Posts: 51
Re: Not really...

rbmphoto wrote:

The 24-70 is not overkill, it is more limited on the z50 than the 16-80. On the Z7, the 24-70 let’s one use the full benefit of the larger sensor, albeit with limited range. However, having used it extensively on the Z7, I would always prefer the 2.8s version, or a prime - the kit lens is a great kit lens, but at the end of the day, it still is a kit lens. But as the op showed - you can get very good pics using it with proper technique with still subjects.

If af performance is important to you, let me suggest a Z6/Z7, or the ii versions of each, with your 300mm lens. Useful as the z50 may be, it is not in the same AF class, by far, as its semipro ff z big brothers. Something Clint E .said about knowing one’s limits...

In summary, I’m not sure what you would gain by spending money on a 24-70 4.0 s for your z50. I also believe that you would get greater satisfaction with your beloved 300mm lens on a larger z body with better af, and ibis for that matter. Your d7100 is probably more responsive, but less accurate, than the z50 with the 300mm. For af response, it is tough to beat the dslr’s compared to mirrorless, however you take a large step up in mirrorless response by going to the single digit z’s.

again, good luck!

Thank you for the nice words!

A few things I beg to differ on:

- Having rented the Z 28-70mm F/2.8 for a test, I had a very hard time telling the difference between that one and my 24-70 F/4 at the same aperture. Most reviewers seem to agree on that too. About the only significant difference was distortion and vignetting at wider apertures but that wasn't at the level where it's something that's hard to fix in post. Given the huge price gap, and since I have other primes that open wider than F/4 so the wider aperture isnt an absolute must for me, I decided to keep my F/4 version.

- I have owned a D7200 then D7500 and the Z50 focuses better in live view, much better too, than even 7500. It also has a better high ISO performance. Dunno how that particular lens would compare between 7100 and Z50, but I'm gonna give it to Z50 if I had to guess.

- totally agree that those who can afford the jump should move on to Z6 II/7 II after a while with the Z50. Tho AF on the latter has become way better than first firmware. I am able to get tack sharp shots with animal eye tracking in low light. That said, if af is a big concern, I would skip the first Z6 Z7 iterations for mk 2.

Post (hide subjects) Posted by
Keyboard shortcuts:
FForum PPrevious NNext WNext unread UUpvote SSubscribe RReply QQuote BBookmark MMy threads
Color scheme? Blue / Yellow