fredmiranda.com

Moderated by: Fred Miranda

New fredmiranda.com Mobile Site

New Feature: SMS Notification alert

New Feature: Buy & Sell Watchlist

FM Forums | Nikon Forum | Join Upload & Sell

2 3 end

Archive 2020 · Z7 24-70 for landscape vs Sony?

billsnature
Offline
• • • •
Upload & Sell: On

p.1 #1 · Z7 24-70 for landscape vs Sony?

I currently have a Sony landscape set up and I don't see getting rid of all of it, but do wonder if anyone has made the jump from A7R III or A7R IV to the Z7 and either the f4 or f2.8 versions of the 24-70.

I read some stuff that says the Nikon 24-70 f4 is better than Sony/Zeiss 24-70 and the 24-70 f2.8 is best in class, but I am not seeing a whole lost to support that in DXO or other sights. And no comparisons to Sony 24-105mm.

Anyone seriously compared the Z7 and 24-70 (either one) to the Sony 24-105 and was it better enough to justify a partial switch? I would keep A7R IV and 16-35 GM.

Thanks
Bill

Apr 27, 2020 at 04:11 PM

jrscls
Online
• • • •
Upload & Sell: Off

p.1 #2 · Z7 24-70 for landscape vs Sony?

The 24-70 f/4 S compared to S primes-

Apr 27, 2020 at 06:22 PM

1bwana1
Offline
• • • • • •
Upload & Sell: On

p.1 #3 · Z7 24-70 for landscape vs Sony?

I see no strong advantage to either system for landscape work. Both are excellent, and are capable of superb landscape images.

Apr 27, 2020 at 06:27 PM

Tartine
Offline
• •
Upload & Sell: Off

p.1 #4 · Z7 24-70 for landscape vs Sony?

billsnature wrote:
I currently have a Sony landscape set up and I don't see getting rid of all of it, but do wonder if anyone has made the jump from A7R III or A7R IV to the Z7 and either the f4 or f2.8 versions of the 24-70.

I read some stuff that says the Nikon 24-70 f4 is better than Sony/Zeiss 24-70 and the 24-70 f2.8 is best in class, but I am not seeing a whole lost to support that in DXO or other sights. And no comparisons to Sony 24-105mm.

Anyone seriously compared the Z7 and 24-70 (either one) to the...Show more →

Shooting Sony myself, and I have been pondering my general range zoom options, and have been eyeing the Nikon 24-70 f2.8 Z for the same reasons. I have had occasional issues with autofocus with my FE 24-105 f4 on my A7III, and find it just adequate in terms of sharpness. I had the tamron 28-75 f2.8 before, but wanted the wider and longer ends.

I need to borrow my studio mate's Z7 for a week or so once things calm down a bit. He loves his 24-70 f2.8 and he doesn't geek out on gear very often.

Apr 27, 2020 at 06:39 PM

tzhang4284
Offline
• • •
Upload & Sell: On

p.1 #5 · Z7 24-70 for landscape vs Sony?

billsnature wrote:
I currently have a Sony landscape set up and I don't see getting rid of all of it, but do wonder if anyone has made the jump from A7R III or A7R IV to the Z7 and either the f4 or f2.8 versions of the 24-70.

I read some stuff that says the Nikon 24-70 f4 is better than Sony/Zeiss 24-70 and the 24-70 f2.8 is best in class, but I am not seeing a whole lost to support that in DXO or other sights. And no comparisons to Sony 24-105mm.

Anyone seriously compared the Z7 and 24-70 (either one) to the...Show more →

I don't have any plans for leaving the Sony system but this site has comparisons for all the lenses you're looking at: https://www.the-digital-picture.com/Reviews/ISO-12233-Sample-Crops.aspx

The Nikon 24-70mm f2.8 seems slightly better than the Sony GM across all apertures but that's not necessarily true for Nikon Z primes vs. their FE mount equivalents.

Seems like the right answer for a Sony user is to give the new Sigma zooms a try first unless you really want to stick to first party brands.

Apr 27, 2020 at 06:56 PM

OwlsEyes
Offline
• • • • •
Upload & Sell: On

p.1 #6 · Z7 24-70 for landscape vs Sony?

All of these lenses are so good that I can't imagine why someone would switch systems to shoot one 24-70mm lens over another.
It might make sense to make a shift if one company had multiple unique (and needed) lenses not available in the other, or if the camera's ergonomics/sensor/AF etc... didn't meet one's needs. However, to switch because one 24-70 f2.8 is marginally better than another just does not make sense to me.

I doubt that anyone could tell the difference between two 30" prints of the same subject shot at the same time with the Z7 and 24-70 f/2.8S vs a Sony A7RIII and 24-70 f2.8GM... hey, but maybe I'm wrong...

Apr 27, 2020 at 08:50 PM

AcuteShadows
Offline
• • • •
Upload & Sell: Off

p.1 #7 · Z7 24-70 for landscape vs Sony?

OwlsEyes wrote:
All of these lenses are so good that I can't imagine why someone would switch systems to shoot one 24-70mm lens over another.
It might make sense to make a shift if one company had multiple unique (and needed) lenses not available in the other, or if the camera's ergonomics/sensor/AF etc... didn't meet one's needs. However, to switch because one 24-70 f2.8 is marginally better than another just does not make sense to me.

I doubt that anyone could tell the difference between two 30" prints of the same subject shot at the same time with the Z7 and 24-70 f/2.8S vs...Show more →

At least I would do a thorough examination of color, including adjustability of color, flare resistance, coma etc., and then look at whether there are significant differences with regard to the use cases that are most relevant to you. I doubt any review would give you all the necessary information at that level, so you would need to compare for yourself.

Also, can you add a prime that mainly stays in your bag, except for the occasional situation where your zoom has an identified weakness. That would depend on the overall use situation. Adding a prime lens is cheaper than changing a whole system. For my medium-size kit, I have Nikon S primes, but as a single lens (or centrepiece of a set), I think the 24-70mm f/2.8 is the best choice.

Apr 27, 2020 at 09:53 PM

billsnature
Offline
• • • •
Upload & Sell: On

p.1 #8 · Z7 24-70 for landscape vs Sony?

OwlsEyes wrote:
All of these lenses are so good that I can't imagine why someone would switch systems to shoot one 24-70mm lens over another.
It might make sense to make a shift if one company had multiple unique (and needed) lenses not available in the other, or if the camera's ergonomics/sensor/AF etc... didn't meet one's needs. However, to switch because one 24-70 f2.8 is marginally better than another just does not make sense to me.

I doubt that anyone could tell the difference between two 30" prints of the same subject shot at the same time with the Z7 and 24-70 f/2.8S vs...Show more →

I largely agree with the statement you have made here, but not sure I would hold up the 24-70 GM as a benchmark.

I recently bought a D500 and a 500mm PF because there is no Sony equivalent to the 500mm PF. It even outclasses the Sony 200-600 as a unique and valuable tool. It is the potential value of adding a full frame Nikon to go with the 500mm PF that sparked my interest in the Z7.

That leads to the question of does Nikon have a better landscape tool? The Sony 24-70 GM did not impress me. The Sony 24-105 is better than the Nikon 24-120VR or the Canon 24-105 or 24-70 f4, and in my mind the 24-70 GM. Leaves me wondering if the hype around Nikon Z lenses is real or not. If real, a system that had Sony for 12mm to 35mm and Nikon for 24-70 + 85mm would work as I normally carry two bodies anyway (A7R III and A7R IV).

The question remains... Real or hype? Clearly the best Nikon has ever offered, but is it better than Sony zooms?

This site gives it glowing review and compares it to Tokina and other Nikon lenses but not the Sony's

https://photographylife.com/reviews/nikon-z-24-70mm-f2-8-s

Apr 27, 2020 at 09:56 PM

AcuteShadows
Offline
• • • •
Upload & Sell: Off

p.1 #9 · Z7 24-70 for landscape vs Sony?

Apr 27, 2020 at 11:51 PM

OwlsEyes
Offline
• • • • •
Upload & Sell: On

p.1 #10 · Z7 24-70 for landscape vs Sony?

billsnature wrote:
I largely agree with the statement you have made here, but not sure I would hold up the 24-70 GM as a benchmark.

I recently bought a D500 and a 500mm PF because there is no Sony equivalent to the 500mm PF. It even outclasses the Sony 200-600 as a unique and valuable tool. It is the potential value of adding a full frame Nikon to go with the 500mm PF that sparked my interest in the Z7.

That leads to the question of does Nikon have a better landscape tool? The Sony 24-70 GM did not impress me. The Sony...Show more →

Hello Bill,
Your original question makes perfect sense in the context that you decided to buy a 500PF + D500. This supports my point... that is, a system switch makes sense to someone who is seeking a piece of kit that is unique to only one manufacturer. Here, Nikon has two things that neither Canon nor Sony produce... a "pro-spec" DX camera and the 500PF.
I know a number of people who went the other way for similar reasons... the Sony A9I or A9II are the most affordable pro-spec full frame bodies with best in mirrorless class (and possibly best in class) AF. Combined with the 200-600 zoom w/ complete weather sealing and internal zooming design, this a piece of kit unique to one manufacturer and might prompt a system change.

Now back to your point... My wife and I shoot Nikons w/ a mix of DSLRs and Mirrorless. I own the 500PF among other pro lenses. Should you be interested in moving to Nikon for their mirrorless landscape capabilities, I'll offer you the following rationale.
1. The Z7/Z6 is a pleasure to use with a logical lay out and menu system that matches other Nikon cameras.
2. The bodies are weather sealed
3. The AF is as good as any other system (save the A9-series), and is accurate.
4. Both 24-70mm lenses are crazy share w/ the 24-70 f/2.8 being exceptional.
5. The 70-200 f/2.8S is even sharper than the 70-200 f2.8E and the F-mount E-lens was considered best in class.
6. The 14-30 is compact, sharp stopped down, and takes an 82mm thread... thus no need for a large & bulky filter kit.

I like the Z-bodies so much that I am contemplating the purchase of another Z-body to replace one of our three D500's.

Apr 28, 2020 at 05:53 AM

billsnature
Offline
• • • •
Upload & Sell: On

p.1 #11 · Z7 24-70 for landscape vs Sony?

Apr 28, 2020 at 06:00 PM

OwlsEyes
Offline
• • • • •
Upload & Sell: On

p.1 #12 · Z7 24-70 for landscape vs Sony?

Apr 28, 2020 at 06:39 PM

AcuteShadows
Offline
• • • •
Upload & Sell: Off

p.1 #13 · Z7 24-70 for landscape vs Sony?

Apr 28, 2020 at 06:52 PM

Lance B
Offline
• • • • •
Upload & Sell: On

p.1 #14 · Z7 24-70 for landscape vs Sony?

OwlsEyes wrote:
Hello Bill,
Your original question makes perfect sense in the context that you decided to buy a 500PF + D500. This supports my point... that is, a system switch makes sense to someone who is seeking a piece of kit that is unique to only one manufacturer. Here, Nikon has two things that neither Canon nor Sony produce... a "pro-spec" DX camera and the 500PF.
I know a number of people who went the other way for similar reasons... the Sony A9I or A9II are the most affordable pro-spec full frame bodies with best in mirrorless class (and possibly best in...Show more →

I own the Z7 and all of the Z primes and all of the Z zooms except the 70-200 f2.8S (not yet!) and the 20 f1.8S. Of the points above:
1) completely agree. I just love using my Z7
2) thats true
3) I cannot confirm how the Z7 stacks up to other systems other than being able to compare it to my Nikon DSLR's. The Z7 for all AF duties is almost on par with my D850 except for AF tracking, but then there are few cameras that can keep up with the D850. The Z7 is very accurate for AF due to no AF fine tune requirements. Also, I get a few % more crisper shots from my Z7 probably due to a few things like no AF fine tune requirements, IBIS, no DSLR mirror slap and EFCS. I only use my D850 for tracking birds now, my Z7 handles all other duties with aplomb. I have sold all my F mounts under 70mm as I have them in Z mounts for use on my Z7. However, I still use longer lenses on my Z7 only going to my D850 for tracking birds with long lenses.
4) I have the 24-70 f2.8S and as Bruce (Owleyes) states, the 24-70 is crazy sharp and it is crazy sharp wide open, sharp across the frame, superb overall IQ and excellent bokeh for a zoom and little CA. It is a bag of primes in a lens. I only use the primes when I need wider then f2.8.
5) Agreed. According to the consensus so far as there are no real reviews yet. However there have been comparison shots next to the stunning 70-200 f2.8E FL VR and the 70-200 f2.8S is sharper which is amazing as the f2.8E FL VR is also like a bag full of primes.
6) Agreed. Love it. The 14-30 f4S is an amazing lens considering it's very diminutive size and zoom range.

As for whether the Z mount is hype. When taken in context as a comparison to the F mount, it's hard to argue that it is hype when all the Z mounts measure up and are all quite a bit better than their F mount counterparts, IMO. I have owned the Nikon 24 f1.4G, 35 f1.4G and 85 f1.4G and the Z mounts are sharper, sharper wide open and sharper across the frame, arguably mostly better bokeh and all with negligible CA and better coma. Yes, you could probably get lens results from F mount as good, but they would be much larger, heavier and more costly due to the probable use of more exotic glass to control CA etc.

Is all this worth switching to Nikon? Only you can ascertain that as it depends on what you value and how much money you are willing to throw at the change over. For me, I bailed out of F mount lenses where there is a Z mount equivalent and will continue to do so where they show better performance than their F mount counterparts which they all have so far and I am sure they will do so in the future. There is no such thing as a hard and fast rule as to "is it worth it" as that varies from person to person, circumstance to circumstance. For me it is worth it.

Edited on Apr 29, 2020 at 01:59 AM · View previous versions

Apr 29, 2020 at 01:28 AM

Lance B
Offline
• • • • •
Upload & Sell: On

p.1 #15 · Z7 24-70 for landscape vs Sony?

billsnature wrote:
A question about the Z7 vs the D500 when using the 500mm PF and a 1.4X TC.

Does the Z7 still focus with the 1.4X and how well? Can you move AF point outside of the very center of the frame? Or are you restricted to an area right around the center point like you are in the D500/D850? It would be great if you can go wider with the Z7 at f8.

I have used the Z7 + 500 pf + 1.4x TCIII, only in decent light, but then I would only ever use it on the D850 in decent light also. I never have taken photos with the D850 + 500 + 1.4x TC due to AF limitations of the DSLR AF but have played around with it experimentally. In reasonably decent light, the Z7 + 500 + 1.4x TC focuses basically as fast as the D850 as the D850 is limited to f8 for AF anyway, whereas the Z7 AF is not really limited to f8. You can use all the AF points across the frame. My only hesitation in using it is similar to Bruce's (Owleyes) in that f5.6 is my preferred maximum aperture as anything slower is a real compromise in ISO and shutter speed requirements for long lenses. I have no issues using TC's on f2.8 lenses like my 400 f2.8E FL VR, but slower max aperture lenses generally don't play as well with TC's due to AF considerations and sharpness. I just find that you can get good results, but the results are generally more hit and miss compared to the f2.8 or faster glass. The 500 pf is an outstanding lens, but I would hesitate using it with the 1.4x TC in all but good conditions and top notch long lens technique.

Here is a sample shot of the Z7 + 500 pf + 1.4x TCIII. I used a *very* low shutter speed of 1/200sec to obtain the lowest ISO I could in order to actually gain some sort of an advantage of using the TC rather than the lens bare and cropping more. This is the sort of thing we all have to balance when using such long lenses. The result is quite good but may have been better with a slightly higher shutter speed. I purposely went almost a stop more than wide open as I know the TC would take the edge of sharpness. However, I have not really experimented with this combo other than a few shots as I know I won't really ever use it for the reasons Bruce and I have pointed out above.

Z7 + 500 pf + 1.4x TCIII, 1/200s f/10.0 at 700.0mm iso125. Handheld.

100% crop of above

As for the Z7 + 500 combo bare, I have hundreds of (what I think) are stunning bird photos with that combo. The Z7 is not really a limiting factor in the chain except if I am tacking fast birds in flight. The Z7 will track slower larger birds quite easily, just not the fast small flitty birds that the D850 is better at.

Apr 29, 2020 at 01:54 AM

DapperedGator
Offline
• •
Upload & Sell: Off

p.1 #16 · Z7 24-70 for landscape vs Sony?

Lance - Australia is blessed with some amazing birds and wildlife; we are blessed to have you share your always-incredible images of them with us! I miss my time in Australia every day, and can't wait to get back down there when it's safe to travel again.

OP - I switched to the Z system from Sony. Although I'm not as critical of a reviewer as many (I just don't know enough), I can tell you that I never looked back. I've owned both the Sony 24-70 f/2.8 GM and the Z-mount equivalent, and in my opinion there is no comparison. Given how outstanding the Z-mount equivalent is, that lens is my go-to choice for just about everything (even international travel), as I know I am getting prime quality images with virtually no compromises in optical quality. I am chomping at the bit for the rest of the Trinity, and given Nikon's excellent track record with recent optical releases (even in F-mount), I have every bit of faith that the 14-24 will be as good as my 24-70 has been, and the 70-200 appears to be from Stany's photos over on DPReview.

I wouldn't hesitate for a second to jump in!

Edit: Link to Stany's post on DPR. Skim through--there are several shots throughout. Incredible. https://www.dpreview.com/forums/thread/4474505

Apr 29, 2020 at 05:55 PM

Lance B
Offline
• • • • •
Upload & Sell: On

p.1 #17 · Z7 24-70 for landscape vs Sony?

DapperedGator wrote:
Lance - Australia is blessed with some amazing birds and wildlife; we are blessed to have you share your always-incredible images of them with us! I miss my time in Australia every day, and can't wait to get back down there when it's safe to travel again.

Thank you very much for your kind comments, DapperedGator. Much appreciated.

Apr 30, 2020 at 01:54 AM

Steve Spencer
Offline
• • • • • • •
Upload & Sell: On

p.1 #18 · Z7 24-70 for landscape vs Sony?

I have the Nikon Z7 and the Sony A9 and A7r II. I also have the Sony 24-105 f/4 G. The Sony system is very capable for landscape. Good sensors and a lot of good lenses. If you like zooms for landscapes you can go with the 12-24 f/4 G, the 24-105 f/4 G, and the 100-400 f/4.5-5.6 G and have an excellent set up for almost all your landscape needs (filters on the 12-24 would be a pain, however). You can have a great system with Sony.

You can have a great system with Nikon as well, however. I don't have either of the 24-70 S lenses, but both look great in a way that the Sony/Zeiss 24-70 f/4 does not--the 24-70 f/2.8 GM, looks at least fairly good, however.

I do have a 50 f/1.8S and 85 f/1.8S and these are wonderful primes. The 50 f/1.8S is, IMO, quite a bit better than the Sony/Zeiss 55 f/1.8. The Nikon lens has a lot less CA, better bokeh, and is just a tiny bit sharper. It is larger, however. The 85 f/1.8S is a wonderful lens. Low CA, lovely bokeh, and very nice sharpness. Really a great offering from Nikon. I would put it just a notch above the Sony 85 f/1.8, which is also a very nice lens but it does not match the Nikon for bokeh, IMO.

Like you the reason that I have the Nikon system is for the PF lenses, which just don't have a counterpart for Sony and I don't think they will have a counterpart. I want my long lenses to be reasonably small and Nikon is the only one that has done that.

Personally, I am building my Nikon kit and my Sony kit separately but also trying to not create overlap where it isn't needed. I have found this isn't as hard as I might have expected. For example, for fast primes two of Nikon's best are the 28 f/1.4E and the 105 f/1.4E and Sony doesn't really have similar lenses (you can get Sigma versions but they are much bigger and not much better). On Sony the nicest fast primes, IMO, are the 24 f/1.4GM, the Sigma 35 f/1.2, the 85 f/1.4 GM, and 135 f/1.8GM. So you can build each kit as makes sense without too much overlap.

When you start comparing lenses which has better lenses almost certainly goes back and forth. Like I said above, in my experience the Nikon 50 f/1.8S is clearly and noticeably better than the Sony/Zeiss 55 f/1.8, but it sure looks like the new Sony 20 f/1.8G is smaller, sharper, with less CA, and cheaper than the Nikon 20 f/1.8S (the Nikon does look pretty good, however, although CA control and corner sharpness could be better). Likewise it sure looks like the Nikon 24-70 f/4S is better than the Sony/Zeiss 24-70, I am sure there will be other places as the lens lines fill out where the Sony will have the better lens, and of course all that can change as each company makes second versions of any lens. Basically, I don't think either system as a whole can be described as better than the other system.

Each individual, however, may find that one system or the other works better for their preferences and how and what they shoot. If you decided to use Nikon for landscapes I don't think you would be lacking anything, but I'm not sure overall it would be much if any of an upgrade over Sony either.

Apr 30, 2020 at 09:24 AM

ChrisMak
Offline
• • •
Upload & Sell: Off

p.1 #19 · Z7 24-70 for landscape vs Sony?

Steve, really interesting that you have experience with both the Sony A7rII and the Nikon Z7, because that is exactly where I am now, after getting into the Nikon system with the 500PF and D500.
The thing for me is: I really prefer to have a single system, so I have ordered the dumb converter to put my Loxia 25, 35 and 50mm lenses on the Z7 although it will take some time to arrive out of China. I can live without the exif.
What is your experience with this? Are the Loxias as good on the Z7 as they are on the A7rII (or even better?). If so, I will sell my A7rII because I have no other Sony gear.
Another thought is to keep the Loxia 25mm (because I cannot imagine a better 25mm lens) but sell the Loxia 35mm and 50mm and add the Nikon Z35mm f1.8S that I can shoot in DX mode for a +/-50mm lens. The Nikon Z35mm looks a bit "austere" in color rendering compared to the Zeiss Loxias, but that is only from what I have seen on the web.

Steve Spencer wrote:
I have the Nikon Z7 and the Sony A9 and A7r II. I also have the Sony 24-105 f/4 G. The Sony system is very capable for landscape. Good sensors and a lot of good lenses. If you like zooms for landscapes you can go with the 12-24 f/4 G, the 24-105 f/4 G, and the 100-400 f/4.5-5.6 G and have an excellent set up for almost all your landscape needs (filters on the 12-24 would be a pain, however). You can have a great system with Sony.

You can have a great system with Nikon as well, however. I don't have either of the 24-70 S lenses, but both look great in a way that the Sony/Zeiss 24-70 f/4 does not--the 24-70 f/2.8 GM, looks at least fairly good, however.

I do have a 50 f/1.8S and 85 f/1.8S and these are wonderful primes. The 50 f/1.8S is, IMO, quite a bit better than the Sony/Zeiss 55 f/1.8. The Nikon lens has a lot less CA, better bokeh, and is just a tiny bit sharper. It is larger, however. The 85 f/1.8S is a wonderful lens. Low CA, lovely bokeh, and very nice sharpness. Really a great offering from Nikon. I would put it just a notch above the Sony 85 f/1.8, which is also a very nice lens but it does not match the Nikon for bokeh, IMO.

Like you the reason that I have the Nikon system is for the PF lenses, which just don't have a counterpart for Sony and I don't think they will have a counterpart. I want my long lenses to be reasonably small and Nikon is the only one that has done that.

Personally, I am building my Nikon kit and my Sony kit separately but also trying to not create overlap where it isn't needed. I have found this isn't as hard as I might have expected. For example, for fast primes two of Nikon's best are the 28 f/1.4E and the 105 f/1.4E and Sony doesn't really have similar lenses (you can get Sigma versions but they are much bigger and not much better). On Sony the nicest fast primes, IMO, are the 24 f/1.4GM, the Sigma 35 f/1.2, the 85 f/1.4 GM, and 135 f/1.8GM. So you can build each kit as makes sense without too much overlap.

When you start comparing lenses which has better lenses almost certainly goes back and forth. Like I said above, in my experience the Nikon 50 f/1.8S is clearly and noticeably better than the Sony/Zeiss 55 f/1.8, but it sure looks like the new Sony 20 f/1.8G is smaller, sharper, with less CA, and cheaper than the Nikon 20 f/1.8S (the Nikon does look pretty good, however, although CA control and corner sharpness could be better). Likewise it sure looks like the Nikon 24-70 f/4S is better than the Sony/Zeiss 24-70, I am sure there will be other places as the lens lines fill out where the Sony will have the better lens, and of course all that can change as each company makes second versions of any lens. Basically, I don't think either system as a whole can be described as better than the other system.

Each individual, however, may find that one system or the other works better for their preferences and how and what they shoot. If you decided to use Nikon for landscapes I don't think you would be lacking anything, but I'm not sure overall it would be much if any of an upgrade over Sony either....Show more →

Apr 30, 2020 at 10:09 AM

Steve Spencer
Offline
• • • • • • •
Upload & Sell: On

p.1 #20 · Z7 24-70 for landscape vs Sony?

ChrisMak wrote:
Steve, really interesting that you have experience with both the Sony A7rII and the Nikon Z7, because that is exactly where I am now, after getting into the Nikon system with the 500PF and D500.
The thing for me is: I really prefer to have a single system, so I have ordered the dumb converter to put my Loxia 25, 35 and 50mm lenses on the Z7 although it will take some time to arrive out of China. I can live without the exif.
What is your experience with this? Are the Loxias as good on the Z7 as they are on...Show more →

My experience is, yes, the Loxia lenses (I have the 21, 25, & 85, and I had the 50) are every bit as good on the Z7 as they were on the A7r II, and I like using them on the Z7 more with the better viewfinder. These manual focus lenses really work well on both systems.

Apr 30, 2020 at 10:19 AM

1 2 3 end
FM Forums \| Nikon Forum \| Join Upload & Sell 1 2 3 end