-
Welcome to the new forums! Please read this first. For known issues we are working to resolve, click here.
VR Lenses for a Zfc
- Thread starter RJake1
- Start date
jaymc
Senior Member
DVF Photography
Forum Enthusiast
The good news is that, except for the Nikkor Z DX 24mm f/1.7, all Nikkor Z DX lenses have VR.
The bad news is, you're talking about just four:
- the Nikkor Z DX 16-50mm f/3.5-6.3 VR,
- the Nikkor Z DX 50-250mm f/4.5-6.3 VR,
- the Nikkor Z DX 12-28mm f/3.5-5.6 PZ VR, and
- the Nikkor Z DX 18-140mm f/3.5-6.3 VR.
As you can see, Nikon's DX line isn't exactly extensive. There are 3rd party manufacturers that produce quality APS-C lenses for the Z-mount, like Viltrox, Meike, Yongnuo, TTArtisan, 7artisans and Sirui, but as far as I know none of those have VR, all of those are prime lenses, and some of those are manual focus only.
If you're hell-bent on VR, my suggestion would be either the Nikkor Z DX 16-50mm and 50-250mm combo (new around $690 for the pair, and cheaper when bought as a kit with the ZFc), or the Z DX 18-140mm (new around $650, not sold as a kit). The 16-50mm/50-250mm combo is also available in a silvery finish, fitting well aesthetically with ZFc's retro looks.
Otherwise I can highly recommend the Viltrox threesome of 23mm f/1.7, 35mm f/1.7 and 56mm f/1.7. Sirui has a similar threesome set (the Sirui Sniper set, which is on par quality-wise) but the Viltrox set will be somewhat cheaper.
--
Tempestas Furit Cum Omni Vi
Tempestas In Capite Meo
Last edited:
Not having ibis is not a big deal. All of Nikon's DX Z mount lenses have VR in the lens. And we have survived for years and years without ibis in cameras. This is only a new bells and whistles that has been added in recent mirrorless cameras. I much prefer my sensor to be solidly mounted and not flopping around when I am taking photos, but that is a personal thing of mine and I do not expect others to feel the same. If ibis works as touted, it kinda blows any thoughts I ever had about how precisely the sensor needed to be aligned with the lens and optical path. That and now that the sensor is used to establish focus, it seems like it should be tough trying to establish pin point focus using something that is moving around all the time. :-D But nevertheless, it seems to work, as folks seem to get in focus photos while using it.
Agreed, but knowing what the OP is shooting and their experience would help a bit more. You can't go wrong with the two kit lenses, and for under $200ea used (form the usual trusted keh/mbp/etc.) they are a bargain.
The next level up would be ANY of the "Tamrikon" f2.8 zooms, and they work just fine with out IBIS and VR. Half the time I disable IBIS/VR to get better results. It is mostly critical if you shoot below 1/30th, or have poor shutter technique, as I often do when I'm in a rush.
@OP Why not consider a used A7C or A7CII? I shot with them for a year, after owning the Z7II, Z50, and Z30. Many more lenses to select from, and compact (and third party) primes with aperture rings. Full-frame and much better (than Expeed6) AF. I'm a fan of DX bodies, and own the Z50II, but more because I also own a Z6III.
--
SkyRunR
=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=
“The quickest way to make money at photography is to sell your camera.” – Anonymous
Last edited:
VR and IBIS are overrated. IBIS makes most sense for selfie videos; VR for very long tele lenses. They are less important for other uses.
My main combo used to be Nikon D500 and Sigma 18-35/1.8 + Sigma 50-100/1.8 without VR or IBIS. As soon as your subjects move, you need a higher shutter speed anyhow. I consider a large aperture more important -- f/1.8 letting in 4 to 8 times more light than e.g. f/4 to f/5.6 of.a typical Nikon zoom lens with VR, like 16-50/3.5-6.3 or 12-28/3.5-5.6. This allows you to use 4 to 8 times higher shutter speeds for the same exposure. It also.allows you to employ depth of field to better emphasise your subject.
Nikon makes a 24mm f/1.7 prime lens. I recently purchased the Yongnuo 35mm f/1.8 for bit more than 100€ and am quite impressed by it -- featuring metal mount, weather sealing and function buttons.
Some people are raving about the Viltrox f/1.7 Air lenses (35mm and 25mm) or f/1.2 Pro lenses (27mm and 75mm). Be aware though that the Chinese lenses don't support in camera distortion correction to my knowledge.
Last edited:
plantarum
Active member
Only the three zooms have VR. Yhe 24mm prime does not.
RBFresno
Forum Pro
Hi!
You've already gotten some good advice regarding image stabilization.
I went to your gallery images to get an idea of what you tend to shoot and how important image stabilization might or might not be and saw your pics from the 7/19/2016 Paul McCartney concert in Pennsylvania taken with a Sony Cyber Shot RX 100 II
Really nice shots from that concert!
I've been to a few McCartney concerts and some of the more difficult factors to getting good images are being in a good position with whatever camera one can get into the concert.
You did well!
I was never able to get images as good as yours. but here's one from about 50 rows back (D3 and Zeiss 100/2) in San Francisco
On topic, I find VR very useful for super tele's , especially when the light is low.
Other times, including concerts, I often could get by without image stabilization or even AF (D3 and Zeiss 100/2)
Keith Urban:
Best Regards,
RB
--
NikonImages
Discover the artistry of Nikon photography. Join a community of passionate photographers sharing breathtaking images, tips, and insights using Nikon cameras and lenses.
JasonMulvern
Leading Member
- Messages
- 576
- Reaction score
- 577
Don't be concerned - I was worried too before I bought a Z50 but four years later and no-one has died. I use the kit lenses with VR. The Nikon kit lenses are superb. You've got 12mm to 250mm via three lenses (two with a gap).
But I would urge you to look at the Z50ii which is way ahead of the three older Nikon DX cameras (Z50, Z30, Zfc) in terms of focus particularly.
SecondTimeAround
Senior Member
Like DVF Photography already said, there are currently four DX zooms with VR.
I agree, the Z50II is a much more impressive camera and value, and only a few hundred (the cost of a lens) more. I'd rather have the Z50II any DX lens (or even a prime) than a Zfc with both kit lenses, all day long.
--
SkyRunR
=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=
“The quickest way to make money at photography is to sell your camera.” – Anonymous
Last edited:
Lack of IBIS is overrated. The 16-50 is a great lens to have in addition to any other lenses. I also have an old Sigma 17-50/2.8 EX which works great on it, but really I just keep putting the 16-50 back on it. Too small and fun (and very good optically). The old Sigma 10-20 EX is great too. Both require FTZ adapter.
Last edited:
SoCalAngler
Senior Member
I have the Viltrox f/1.7 25, 35, and 56mm lenses and use them with my Z50. Distortion is minimal and often not even noticeable in many shots. The small amount of barrel or pincushion distortion is easily correctable in post if deemed necessary. I don't recall even bothering to do so yet in any of my images, but I can see where I might if shooting architecture or brick walls.
I'm not an Adobe user, but there may already be profiles available for some of these lenses for Lightroom.
Good to hear. I can confirm the same for the Yongnuo 35mm f/1.8: distortion is hardly noticeable. This might also explain why the Viltrox 25mm f/1.7 is larger than the Nikon 24mm f/1.7 (length of 64mm vs 40mm). They correct more optically.
I had forgotten about the Viltrox 56mm f/1.7. These three Air lenses might be what the OP is looking for; replacing VR with large aperture for light gathering and more artistic freedom. Certainly not breaking the bank.
Last edited:
RJake1
Forum Enthusiast
- Messages
- 494
- Reaction score
- 176
I love your concert shots. They look so much clearer and sharper than mine. I only take fixed lens cameras into shows because many venues outlaw the IC cameras. Mine could've used a faster SS but when I'm at the show, viewing my shots on the small LCD screen, they all looked fantastic!! LOL!! Not as perfect when viewing them on a larger screen. But thanks for your compliment and advice. Much appreciated.Hi!
You've already gotten some good advice regarding image stabilization.
I went to your gallery images to get an idea of what you tend to shoot and how important image stabilization might or might not be and saw your pics from the 7/19/2016 Paul McCartney concert in Pennsylvania taken with a Sony Cyber Shot RX 100 II
Really nice shots from that concert!
I've been to a few McCartney concerts and some of the more difficult factors to getting good images are being in a good position with whatever camera one can get into the concert.
You did well!
I was never able to get images as good as yours. but here's one from about 50 rows back (D3 and Zeiss 100/2) in San Francisco
On topic, I find VR very useful for super tele's , especially when the light is low.
Other times, including concerts, I often could get by without image stabilization or even AF (D3 and Zeiss 100/2)
Keith Urban:
Best Regards,
RB
RJake1
Forum Enthusiast
- Messages
- 494
- Reaction score
- 176
I'm considering a used A7C but was attracted to the Zfc due to its retro styling. I think the 'fun factor' might be higher with the Zfc. I currently have an A6500 but am ready for something different.Agreed, but knowing what the OP is shooting and their experience would help a bit more. You can't go wrong with the two kit lenses, and for under $200ea used (form the usual trusted keh/mbp/etc.) they are a bargain.
The next level up would be ANY of the "Tamrikon" f2.8 zooms, and they work just fine with out IBIS and VR. Half the time I disable IBIS/VR to get better results. It is mostly critical if you shoot below 1/30th, or have poor shutter technique, as I often do when I'm in a rush.
@OP Why not consider a used A7C or A7CII? I shot with them for a year, after owning the Z7II, Z50, and Z30. Many more lenses to select from, and compact (and third party) primes with aperture rings. Full-frame and much better (than Expeed6) AF. I'm a fan of DX bodies, and own the Z50II, but more because I also own a Z6III.
DVF Photography
Forum Enthusiast
Different? Yes. But not really an improvement.
Although I'm a Nikoneer by heart (I've been shooting Nikon for more than 20 years, my current beiong Z6III and Z50), I'd think it would be a bit silly to go from an a6500 to a ZFc. As you've already established, you'd lose the IBIS - but you'd also lose the flash, the weather sealing and half of the focus points. The only real gain would be the retro looks, fully articulating screen instead of a flippy screen (if that's important to you), and animal eye AF (again, if that's important to you). The ZFc might be 5 years newer than the a6500, but its sensor is the same as from the D500/D7500 DSLRs.
Another consideration is lens environment, which is much more exntensive with Sony. Yes, a lot of (mostly Chinese) 3rd parties make nice primes for the DX Z mount, but they don't include the Sigma and Tamron zoom lenses, which are available for the E mount.
So if you're hell-bent on the retro looks, by all means go for it. But tech wise you might be better off with that A7C.
--
Tempestas Furit Cum Omni Vi
Tempestas In Capite Meo
Last edited:
Here’s an off the wall alternative I’ve just adopted myself. I’ve just replaced my Z50 II with a first gen Z7 (around the same price).
Paired with DX glass it gives 19.5MP vs 20.9 so it loses 1.4MP but the advantages are twofold. Firstly, it has IBIS (which I agree isn’t mission critical but better to have than not) so third party non VR lenses are stabilised. Secondly, add an FX lens and you have access to 25.6 (medium) or 45.4 (large) MP.
Probably not right for most, but the weight penalty over the Z50ii is only 125g, and I’m quite pleased with the additional versatility.
Paired with DX glass it gives 19.5MP vs 20.9 so it loses 1.4MP but the advantages are twofold. Firstly, it has IBIS (which I agree isn’t mission critical but better to have than not) so third party non VR lenses are stabilised. Secondly, add an FX lens and you have access to 25.6 (medium) or 45.4 (large) MP.
Probably not right for most, but the weight penalty over the Z50ii is only 125g, and I’m quite pleased with the additional versatility.
JasonMulvern
Leading Member
- Messages
- 576
- Reaction score
- 577
Yes, the retro aspect of the Zfc attracts many people who want a "simpler" or more organic and old school feel. But it comes with compromises in terms of features compared to your A6500 and more so compared to an A7C.
But whatever floats your boat, some go for the "feel" and if that motivates you to get out and shoot, that's the answer. Others look at the technical side, you need to drill down into what you're giving up. Custom buttons, user settings, remote release port, etc. None of which may be things you need.
The "HERALBONY" versions of the Zfc are completely and utterly gorgeous. I get GAS just looking at them. Completely the wrong camera for me, but...
I find the Zfc to be a simple but quite good camera to use, I actually enjoy using it. Yes it lacks in build quality and weather sealing, that's my main gripe despite it being Expeed 6. The sensor is also old but also very good.
My context is having a Z6 I, D80, D200, D300s, and D7100 and using all of them regularly. I'm also waiting to pick up a Z6 III or Z8...but primarily for the faster sensors that enable better 4k60 and 4k120.
IF you want all the good stuff then simply go with the Zf otherwise the Zfc is a great little camera when you aren't staring at spec sheets and actually using it.
Last edited:
Similar threads
Keyboard shortcuts
- f
- Forum