Adapted Nikon Lenses on X-H2/X-T5 and X-H2S

Morris0 wrote:

a_c_skinner wrote:

Of course, my point was that a user with Nikon lenses and Nikon bodies needs a really good reason to contemplate a Fuji body and an adaptor. I can think of reasons, but none that persuasive.

Have a conversation with the recent migrants from Nikon that photograph wildlife. They are dealing with the cost of the Z9 and the fact that all there old lenses need to be adapted to use on the Z9. Yes the native Z lenses are sweet yet so are the Native Fuji lenses.

Morris

I think it depends on what lenses you like. If you're shooting the new 1.4 primes and zooms like the 16-55, Nikon Z will be comparable size and the primes are actually cheaper.

My problem with Nikon Z is I can't go really small if I want to. They have the 28 and 40 compact lenses but that's about it. Now they're adding a pancake 26 when I'd like a 20 f2.8 or something. I also like the simplicity of the 18-300 for hiking and photographing bigger animals like big horn sheep. There are also random holes in the lens lineup like 70-300--the new Tamron isn't stabilized and has a terrible magnification ratio.

I'm going to Costa Rica soon and I think I'm going with quite the odd couple--Z9 with the 400 f4.5 (with 1.4x and 2x TC) and the XH2S and 70-300. I have an easier time getting focus on the Z9 with the multiple AF-On buttons than the Fuji, and I can be versatile with the TCs based on available light. The Fuji will be for random monkeys walking right up to me and 4k 120p video of hummingbirds.

The best native Z solution is probably the 100-400 which is heavy and a Z6 that doesn't do 4k 120p.

Nikon also uses different batteries for the Z9, Z6/7, and Z50 so I'd need a second charger even if I stayed full Nikon.