Bohemien wrote:
Could someone pls measure the depth of the Z6 (or Z7) body's underside (in cm/mm, if possible)?
I.e. the maximal length of an Arca-Swiss plate that will fit under the body without obstructing the FTZ adapter or sticking out in the back of the camera.
Thanks!
Markus
~42-44mm. but the center of the mount thread is only ~15mm from the edge of protruding FTZ.
I have the Z6 on pre-order, when it arrives I might order this one for testing. However, on your photo it looks like the "flat" part of the bottom is only 2.5-3cm, that's really short... so even that 40mm plate would reach over the edges, I guess? (and interfere with the display when tilting?)
I have the Z6 on pre-order, when it arrives I might order this one for testing. However, on your photo it looks like the "flat" part of the bottom is only 2.5-3cm, that's really short... so even that 40mm plate would reach over the edges, I guess? (and interfere with the display when tilting?)
Good point. There's a couple mm space between front of the camera and the FTZ - but to avoid screen flip issues you'd have to stick to 35mm max.
I'm trying to wrap my head around these User Settings Modes. This is the first body I've had that offers that sort of thing.
Initially I thought it would be a good way to get around not having a hardware Release Mode control. But, nope…release mode is persistent across camera modes. Then I found the Release Mode button, so I guess that's not so bad.
Then I thought, maybe I can at least use them for Focus Modes. That seems to be working. U1 can be single point/AF-S, U2 can be auto area/AF-C, U3 dynamic/AF-C. Those cover my main focus setups. That's handy.
But then I realized that, apparently, the ISO gets baked into the User Mode settings when you first set them up, so every time I switch between modes, I'm back at ISO 100. That's…crazy?
Maybe I'm not really getting what these modes are intended for, but the settings they do and don't control don't match my expectations, so I'm not quite sure what to do with them. How do other folks have them set up?
tek9 wrote:
Good point. There's a couple mm space between front of the camera and the FTZ - but to avoid screen flip issues you'd have to stick to 35mm max.
Thanks again! I guess I'll have to look around once I get the camera. I'm not really keen on getting one of these large, heavy and expensive L-brackets... But I guess once the Zs are in the market for a while, manufacturers will come up with usable solutions if you just want a mounting plate.
Bohemien wrote:
Thanks again! I guess I'll have to look around once I get the camera. I'm not really keen on getting one of these large, heavy and expensive L-brackets... But I guess once the Zs are in the market for a while, manufacturers will come up with usable solutions if you just want a mounting plate.
Please do mention if you find some viable solution - so far RRS has FTZ compatible l-bracket in the works (but it's 135 USD). Kirk is not compatible (and offers a separate l-bracket for just the ftz). Smallrig looks cheaper but... big.
farski wrote:
I'm trying to wrap my head around these User Settings Modes. This is the first body I've had that offers that sort of thing.
Initially I thought it would be a good way to get around not having a hardware Release Mode control. But, nope…release mode is persistent across camera modes. Then I found the Release Mode button, so I guess that's not so bad.
Then I thought, maybe I can at least use them for Focus Modes. That seems to be working. U1 can be single point/AF-S, U2 can be auto area/AF-C, U3 dynamic/AF-C. Those cover my main focus setups. That's handy.
But then I realized that, apparently, the ISO gets baked into the User Mode settings when you first set them up, so every time I switch between modes, I'm back at ISO 100. That's…crazy?
Maybe I'm not really getting what these modes are intended for, but the settings they do and don't control don't match my expectations, so I'm not quite sure what to do with them. How do other folks have them set up?...Show more →
If you’re using them for only changing one setting you’re probably better of using a custom button for that. For me the user settings is about a specific type of shooting so on my Z7 I have one for landscape, one for handheld manual focus (third one is not in use yet) and the normal A, M etc is for handheld with AF lenses.
Laslo Varadi wrote:
So what is the best setup on the Z6/Z7 to capture action photos? I use BB and AF-C. How about the rest of the setup? Example photos with your setup would be nice to see. The basketball photos in this thread were fantastic by the way.
I'm the person who posted the basketball stuff. I use dynamic AF in continuous focus for action. Its the one most similar to my d5's dynamic AF 9.
sungphoto wrote:
From what I what I understand it's because mirrorless vs DSLR lenses need to be optimized for the respective AF systems, requiring different lens designs and AF motors. Mirrorless AF systems require an AF motor that can make extremely fine adjustments quickly - which is part of the reason why most lenses optimized for mirrorless systems use drive by wire (ie not turning the focus ring via the AF motor but instead directly driving the focusing lens elements). That adds complexity and cost, in addition to of course R&D costs of an entirely new mount and lenses. Lastly, the additional elements to correct a lens for flare, sharpness, CA, etc.
This is why lens adapters like the FTZ will be ultimately limited by the design of the F-mount lens in front of it, and why more modern lenses like the E lenses (28 f1.4E, 105 f1.4E, 70-200 f2.8 ED FL) appear to perform a bit better than prior generation lenses. This is also reflected in the relatively poorer performance of newer FE-mount Sigma Art lenses on Sony bodies compared to lenses initially designed for FE, as even though those new Sigma Arts don't require an adapter, they are optimized for DSLR af systems.
To be clear, this is not to say that one AF system is necessarily better than the other. The phase detect cross-type AF points on the D850 are extremely accurate and fast - particularly considering the small size of the dual cross type AF points. A small mirrorless AF square on Nikon, Sony, Fuji, etc is noticeably less accurate and/or quick to autofocus compared to a DSLR dual cross-type AF point of a similar size. One need only look at comparisons of the D5 and D850 AF hit rate compared to the latest gen mirrorless cameras to see that they are as good if not superior for more challenging situations like subjects moving quickly towards/away from the camera.
Also if you look at a cheapo Sony option like the FE 50 f1.8 that uses an old school DC motor - you'll see what the major tradeoffs are in terms of price vs performance. That lens is a stinker in terms of both optical performance as well as AF accuracy and speed due to the lens design and old school DC AF motor (sounds like an RC car when it autofocuses).
To be clear not intending to make this about brands - as the AF system differences between mirrorless and DSLRs are irrespective of brand....Show more →
Thank you sung, that makes more sense to me now understanding the complexity of building a good mirrorless lens. That being said, I do hope the 50mm 1.8S is more then just that, would be great if the rendering of this lens was very unique with outstanding IQ as compared to the F series offerings. I'd happily go with f/1.8 if the "look" was better than the others, most likely the same reason you and others opted for the 58mm even though it was a lot more expensive than the 50mm - sometimes we pay for that "look". I am currently testing out the 105mm f/1.4 and it definitely has that "wow" factor...
tek9 wrote:
Please do mention if you find some viable solution - so far RRS has FTZ compatible l-bracket in the works (but it's 135 USD). Kirk is not compatible (and offers a separate l-bracket for just the ftz). Smallrig looks cheaper but... big.
I know one of the benefits of the ML body is that it is small and lightweight, but if Nikon keeps the MB-N10 battery grip as low profile as possible I might prefer this setup over just the Z7/Z6 alone, I am assuming the grip will alleviate the issue with bottom plates interfering with the FTZ, but then again Nikon has not announced a release date for the grip, makes me wonder if a third party might have a grip offering before Nikon does, I would even consider that if they made it even slimmer than the two EN-EL15b grip Nikon has in the works, be very cool if they could make a slim grip that only held AA batteries and was fully compatible with NiMH, in fact, I'd actually prefer that setup.
turbodude wrote:
I'm the person who posted the basketball stuff. I use dynamic AF in continuous focus for action. Its the one most similar to my d5's dynamic AF 9.
So far, I'm not finding a lot of love here. With Dynamic AF, I'm finding that one of the helper points will be in more focus than the main point. So I've gone back to Single Point AF-C.
I guess I did have some false expectations because I'm not finding the Z6 and 24-70/4 S to be very snappy or responsive "as I'd like". I wasn't expecting D5 and E lens (24-70, 70-200, 400) performance, but that's what I'm used to. I know I'm on the extreme of this and that's not fair to the Z6 or most bodies out there. I'm also not a casual photographer so my usage so far has been way outside of my box. However, I'm having some hesitations and now I'm seeing some stuff in what people have posted that I'm having difficulty with.
I do love the high ISO performance. I cooked this in NX-D which I'm not really comfortable with, but for ISO 25,600, this is cool.
la puffin wrote:
So far, I'm not finding a lot of love here. With Dynamic AF, I'm finding that one of the helper points will be in more focus than the main point. So I've gone back to Single Point AF-C.
I guess I did have some false expectations because I'm not finding the Z6 and 24-70/4 S to be very snappy or responsive "as I'd like". I wasn't expecting D5 and E lens (24-70, 70-200, 400) performance, but that's what I'm used to. I know I'm on the extreme of this and that's not fair to the Z6 or most bodies out there. I'm also not a casual photographer so my usage so far has been way outside of my box. However, I'm having some hesitations and now I'm seeing some stuff in what people have posted that I'm having difficulty with.
I do love the high ISO performance. I cooked this in NX-D which I'm not really comfortable with, but for ISO 25,600, this is cool....Show more →
My experience was similar to yours. From what I am seeing from other posters you need to figure out ways to shoot around some of the Z Cameras capabilities in this area. It can be done by treating it more like a DSLR and choosing your focus points. However one of the reasons for switching to mirrorless are are some of the advanced focusing capabilities available when focusing directly off of the sensor. The Z cameras seem to be somewhere in between the mirrorless and DSLR focusing paradigm. Photographers will each have to decide if those are compromises that they are willing to make.
ISO 25K. Can you believe we are now getting usable results in such low light? Amazing.
la puffin wrote:
So far, I'm not finding a lot of love here. With Dynamic AF, I'm finding that one of the helper points will be in more focus than the main point. So I've gone back to Single Point AF-C.
I guess I did have some false expectations because I'm not finding the Z6 and 24-70/4 S to be very snappy or responsive "as I'd like". I wasn't expecting D5 and E lens (24-70, 70-200, 400) performance, but that's what I'm used to. I know I'm on the extreme of this and that's not fair to the Z6 or most bodies out there. I'm also not a casual photographer so my usage so far has been way outside of my box. However, I'm having some hesitations and now I'm seeing some stuff in what people have posted that I'm having difficulty with.
I do love the high ISO performance. I cooked this in NX-D which I'm not really comfortable with, but for ISO 25,600, this is cool....Show more →
I’m with you on this one. Tried one shot with 25,600 and result was amazing, kicked my D610/D810 in this department
As far as I can see, Nikon decided to copy Auto-area AF in AF-C mode from video function.
What I mean is, you need to initiate tracking by pressing OK button, which will bring white square on, with ability to move it around.
Once you decide what to track in the frame, you need to press either OK again, or AF-ON/Shutter button half way (square becomes yellow).
To cancel tracking, you need to press OK again (square goes white again), then you can choose another spot/object, and to tack all over again.
If you want to cancel white square and let camera to choose focus, you need to press zoom out button (white square disappears).
The tracking itself looks like 3D tracking to me, and start/stop may be appropriate for video, but it's completely stupid for stills.
IMO, Nikon must changed this in some of the FW releases, to make it as simple as it should be, so
the white square is always there, you point it to the spot/object you want to track, then you push AF-On/Shutter button half way, to get tracking started.
You release buttons, so tracking stops, and white square goes back to center.
Have I missed something in this system, or I understood it wrong?
Was this so hard to program in, I'm not sure, but it sounds logical.
la puffin wrote:
So far, I'm not finding a lot of love here. With Dynamic AF, I'm finding that one of the helper points will be in more focus than the main point. So I've gone back to Single Point AF-C.
I guess I did have some false expectations because I'm not finding the Z6 and 24-70/4 S to be very snappy or responsive "as I'd like". I wasn't expecting D5 and E lens (24-70, 70-200, 400) performance, but that's what I'm used to. I know I'm on the extreme of this and that's not fair to the Z6 or most bodies out there. I'm also not a casual photographer so my usage so far has been way outside of my box. However, I'm having some hesitations and now I'm seeing some stuff in what people have posted that I'm having difficulty with.
I do love the high ISO performance. I cooked this in NX-D which I'm not really comfortable with, but for ISO 25,600, this is cool....Show more →
what are you seeing that you dont like? tracking accuracy? ability to lock? initial acquisition? comparing it to a d5, is prob not the best bet, you have to remember you can buy 3 z6's with the cost of a d5. i have yet to any issues when trying to focus. and i only use continuous focus. i was shooting a friendsgiving earlier this week, and it locked focus every time, and i was using Auto AF - and locking targets and using the cursor to change detected faces. All these were with the 35 1.8S
I hate to say this, not wanting to point to another brand, or criticize someone's images. But it is relevant to the discussion at hand. These are very nice pictures, and faces look to be basically in focus. However, the eyes are not the focus point in these images. It is somewhere else on the face. One of the things about mirrorless technology is the ability of the focus system to do that easily. If that is not something you care about in your images, that is valid. But technology is changing, and expectations along with it. I am expecting that these assisted features will make it into future Z cameras.
Currently, the Z cameras can do it too. It just means that you have to manually do much of this work yourself.
Please, please take this in the manner it was meant, and not as brand or personal flame.
1bwana1 wrote:
I hate to say this, not wanting to point to another brand, or criticize someone's images. But it is relevant to the discussion at hand. These are very nice pictures, and faces look to be basically in focus. However, the eyes are not the focus point in these images. It is somewhere else on the face. One of the things about mirrorless technology is the ability of the focus system to do that easily. If that is not something you care about in your images, that is valid. But technology is changing, and expectations along with it. I am expecting that these assisted features will make it into future Z cameras.
Currently, the Z cameras can do it too. It just means that you have to manually do much of this work yourself.
Please, please take this in the manner it was meant, and not as brand or personal flame....Show more →
Eye focus is the thing I wish the Z have or will have with future firmware. I feel like these feature missing have to have something to do with patent. I was very close to switch to Sony and I decided to go with the Z6 due to my current Nikon gear. I never tried a Sony system with speedlite (I use those all the time) so I can't compare the performance and I found this Z6 sync perfectly with my Nikon CLS, even my Flashpoint gear. If I have zero Nikon gear in my hand, I'll go with Sony as the system is pretty mature, but again, in my opinion these Z are for us Nikonians
nhat179 wrote:
Eye focus is the thing I wish the Z have or will have with future firmware. I feel like these feature missing have to have something to do with patent. I was very close to switch to Sony and I decided to go with the Z6 due to my current Nikon gear. I never tried a Sony system with speedlite (I use those all the time) so I can't compare the performance and I found this Z6 sync perfectly with my Nikon CLS, even my Flashpoint gear. If I have zero Nikon gear in my hand, I'll go with Sony as the system is pretty mature, but again, in my opinion these Z are for us Nikonians ...Show more →
If it's about patent, wouldn't that be Fuji's problem too?
