Then again, Cosina noticed us buying Sony and understand we must be loaded buying that expensive brand. Sp they set a price accordingly.
OTOH someof us don't have a lot of money now that we bought the camera(s).
Really?
Unfortunately, the Nikon Zf doesn't have 5-axis stabilization with the Voigtländer lenses and a 9.44 million pixel EVF like my fine Sony A7RV, and not to mention the first-class 61 MP sensor.
blnmen57 wrote:
Really?
Unfortunately, the Nikon Zf doesn't have 5-axis stabilization with the Voigtländer lenses and a 9.44 million pixel EVF like my fine Sony A7RV, and not to mention the first-class 61 MP sensor.
3 vs 5 axis stabilization means very little in the real world.
I'm getting very lovely output from the ZF and with modern upscaling am printing 50" wide from its supposedly inferior sensor
Who needs 9mil EVF when we have excellent MF focus aids on the Nikon? I'm never punching in or relying on the screen resolution to confirm focus with CV lenses.
Nifty Fifty wrote:
Does anyone have an explanation for why the 40mm Nokton with Z Mount is significantly cheaper than the other versions?
The Z version isn't cheaper in the US, at least not right now. CameraQuest has it for $850, B&H has it listed for $899 but backordered. The M version is $699 with both places, and the FE version is $899 at CQ and $799 at BH.
blnmen57 wrote:
In Europe, the Nikon Z version currently costs €769.
And the Sony E-mount version costs €1,099.
Interesting. I wonder if it's as simple as materials? I have the M and Z versions, and they feel like totally different lenses. The M version is dense and feels like it's mostly brass. The Z version feels a lot more like aluminum.
RoamingScott wrote:
3 vs 5 axis stabilization means very little in the real world.
I'm getting very lovely output from the ZF and with modern upscaling am printing 50" wide from its supposedly inferior sensor
Who needs 9mil EVF when we have excellent MF focus aids on the Nikon? I'm never punching in or relying on the screen resolution to confirm focus with CV lenses.
Why do you keep posting this in the Sony forum?
We all know you are a huge Nikon fan, that is completely fine, but please just post that in the Nikon forum.
There are good reasons for various brands.
But, please, do not go after people that post in the Sony forum that they are very happy with the A7RV and A1 viewfinders and that they prefer Sony camaras for specific reasons. It is their right to reflect their preferences over other brands in a Sony forum. I use Sony, but I do not roam the Nikon forum seeking possibilities to point out Sony advantages to Nikon fans. What is the point of your statements here?
You have gone after me, when I stated something similar in this forum and now you go after the next person.
Why do you post in the Sony forum at all?
Knut. wrote:
Why do you keep posting this in the Sony forum?
We all know you are a huge Nikon fan, that is completely fine, but please just post that in the Nikon forum.
There are good reasons for various brands.
But, please, do not go after people that post in the Sony forum that they are very happy with the A7RV and A1 viewfinders and that they prefer Sony camaras for specific reasons. It is their right to reflect their preferences over other brands in a Sony forum. I use Sony, but I do not roam the Nikon forum seeking possibilities to point out Sony advantages to Nikon fans. What is the point of your statements here?
You have gone after me, when I stated something similar in this forum and now you go after the next person.
Why do you post in the Sony forum at all?...Show more →
This is a thread about this lens that people of all brands post in, Sony, Leica, and yes, Nikon. That's how all of the Voigtlander lens image threads work. Why they are posted in Sony, who knows, ask Fred.
Stop trying to gatekeep. I'm glad Sony shooters are happy! That's the whole point. I'm not the one that brought up the of-very-little-real-world-relevance 3v5 axis talking point.
Finally, a fan boy I am not. I've shot every brand (save the stupid luxury brands) over the last 15 years. I like things about each of them, I hate things about each of them. Nothing's perfect.
RoamingScott wrote:
This is a thread about this lens that people of all brands post in, Sony, Leica, and yes, Nikon. That's how all of the Voigtlander lens image threads work. Why they are posted in Sony, who knows, ask Fred.
Who really knows if Voigtländer lenses on Nikon perform in the same way as Voigtländer on Sony lenses? Voigtländer lenses on Leica often perform quite differently (but this might be due to sensor stack thickness and microlenses).
Nevertheless it is possibly well worth exploring the specific performance of Voigtländer lenses on Nikon bodies. Who knows in which way Voigtländer has adapted their lenses to Nikon? I absolutely do not believe that it is a given, that CV/Nikon will yield same results as CV/Sony (CV/Sony is what Fred originally tested here besides CV/Leica).
But my point was a different one, please do not be dismissive of Sony posters in the Sony forum, especially when they are rather new to this forum.
And, do your own research: the closer an object gets, the greater the advantage of 5 axis IBIS versus 3 axis IBIS. Olympus has pioneered this and helpful insights into the differences between 3/5 axis IBIS can often be found in micro 4/3 forums.
To some extend it boils down to which distances a photographer typically shoots. A landscape photographer might profit less than a fan of flower close-ups or even macro photography.
Concerning Sony the article is slightly outdated. Between A1 and A7RV (latter not yet released/tested at the time of the article) there has been a very clear jump in IBIS performance.
Knut. wrote:
And, do your own research: the closer an object gets, the greater the advantage of 5 axis IBIS versus 3 axis IBIS. Olympus has pioneered this and helpful insights into the differences between 3/5 axis IBIS can often be found in micro 4/3 forums.
To some extend it boils down to which distances a photographer typically shoots. A landscape photographer might profit less than a fan of flower close-ups or even macro photography.
Not all of us are shooting our cat's buttholes at MFD where this is a pressing concern
Regardless, been here a while, no need to lecture me on how to act.
The E and Z versions of the venerable 40/1.2 are absolutely identical, apart from:
. angle of view
. firmware
. minimum focus
. max repro ratio
. diameter
. length
. weight
. focusing support functions 1-2-3
. haptics
. appearance
. very different focus aids
. marketing and pricing
. dates of release
. camera-based color, sensors, sensor design etc.
I'd vote to keep them separate, therefore, unless a Sony version is used on an adapter. Cosina sees them as very different lenses excluding the internal design. There are other forums to use without usurping this one.
But it won't happen so it's best to just know who is who and what they use so you can disregard, or head off to join the other mount forums yourself. They serve very different people, as a casual read will confirm. I read a Nikon forum guy the other day who hated the Sony base.
I mean, really, he wrote that. A real charmer, warmed the cockles of my heart to come across that. Many of the rest just think that, I am guessing, since no one had a shot at him.
RoamingScott wrote:
Not all of us are shooting our cat's buttholes at MFD where this is a pressing concern
….
Well, not all close ups are about buttholes. I feel that there are use cases where 5 axis IBIS is clearly of an advantage and blnmen57 pointed out that 5 axis IBIS is possible with VC lenses on Sony bodies. This is relevant, especially considering that Voigtländer not only produces the 40, but also the 65 and 110mm macros.
I agree that the effect of 5 axis IBIS over 3 axis IBIS is neglible on Voigtländer‘s 10, 12, 15 and most likely 21mm lenses.
