phinix wrote:
I’d love to see zf next to Big Mac from McDonalds, with fries etc
Not sure if McDs has followed Taco Bell's answer to the fast food minimum wage here in California but the Big Mac may not be usefully used in context anymore. I went to TB the other night and a regular crisp Taco was $3 and small. Would've fit perfect in the Burger King guy's tiny hands.
I bought a ZF very recently. The camera is a stunner. It's every bit as good looking as the pictures tell us. Moreover, the quality of materials and craftsmanship is there. They designed it from the heart.
The grip came with the camera (smallrig) but I prefer it without the grip. The grip takes away from the look. If I badly needed a grip, I would have waited for a6III. I see there are no L brackets (without grip) available, to my knowledge, that also allow vertical shooting.
I am shooting with CV 50/1.2 (Sony mount). The lens-camera combination looks gorgeous. The Megadap Pro adapter doesn't spoil the party in the looks department, rather adds to it. That silver ring on the mount adds a classic touch in otherwise black textured body.
Shutter sound, and the feel seems to have been tailored like a manual film camera. I put an old FM3a strap on it rather than the one that came with the box.
I shoot a D850 and the F mount lenses. I also have Sony lenses. This camera sort of completes the loop for me as it can take Sony as well as F mount lenses.
I didn't find the body too big or big. It is very dense and reassuringly heavy, as against light or hollow feel that we have seen in some retro cameras recently.
I bought the ZF primary to use manual focus lenses. I currently have a Voitlander 50:1.0 and a Nikkor 55:1.2 pre AI. I’m looking for one more manual lens for portraits in the 100 to 150mm range……… any recommendations from the gang for one of these lenses?
ndwgolf1 wrote:
Why's that mate.......I use auto ISO 100% of the time?
1st reason, I also often carry an analog rangefinder with me and use the meetering of my Zf or Zfc. ISO constantly changing would only confuse me.
2nd reason, exposure for me has allways been adjusting shutter and aperture to match film and lightning, thats how my brain works
Third and finaly, Im very impressed with high ISO handling of modern cameras, but I think at least to my eyes the photos loose more and more of their crispyness when the ISO goes up. I want to have the controll and make an acvtive decision when I think its worth it.
ndwgolf1 wrote:
Why's that mate.......I use auto ISO 100% of the time?
I also never use auto ISO. It's unnecessary if exposure is 2nd nature.
I set the ISO for the situation and (very easily) tweak it on the fly if necessary.
I want max dynamic range possible at all times.
Panorascal wrote:
I also never use auto ISO. It's unnecessary if exposure is 2nd nature.
I set the ISO for the situation and (very easily) tweak it on the fly if necessary.
I want max dynamic range possible at all times.
You will always have maximum dynamic range for the lighting situation if you expose properly. My view on ISO is as follows.
Aperture, Shutter Speed, and composition are the things that the photographer use to create the mood and style of the image. I prefer to handle these things fully manual through dials on the camera. ISO is used to micro adjust the exposure of the scene. It is not relevant to the art of the image. Since this value is usually calculated very well by the camera I rely on the camera to set the initial value for ISO by setting it to Auto ISO. Then I set the rear wheel/dial to Exposure Compensation. But since Aperture and Shutter Speed have been set by me on physical dials the only adjustment the camera can make is to change the ISO in response to the exposure compensation wheel setting. Exposure Compensation is therefore actually adjusting the iSO, but from a sensor calculated starting value. Exposure Compensation usually provides a 6 stop range in third stop increments, So, is very accurate and fine tunable.
So, yes it does make sense to set ISO to Auto, if you do so in a way the leaves you in instant complete control of it.
ndwgolf1 wrote:
Cant believe the new ZF doesnt come with a battery charger in the box........only a USBc charging cable.....crazy
It's likely because the EU wants to cut down on excessive charger waste, so manufacturers are expected to offer the product without charger (they can offer another package with a charger).
I for example have three copies of the Nikon charger for EN-EL15 series batteries (MH-25a) and while I personally think they're not excessive (one at home one at work and third is backup) I can see the need for this kind of regulation and certainly I don't need a fourth.
Panorascal wrote:
I also never use auto ISO. It's unnecessary if exposure is 2nd nature.
I set the ISO for the situation and (very easily) tweak it on the fly if necessary.
I want max dynamic range possible at all times.
I think most photographers want the highest quality for each shot they can get, and this means the lowest ISO that otherwise can give
adequate sharpness and depth of field. In tripod-based photography of static subjects or flash-based photography, low ISO (even base ISO) is typically used to ensure the best image quality, and for this, auto ISO doesn't really offer much over traditional manually set ISO.
However, when photographing moving subjects outside of studio environments, one typically needs to control the shutter speed (to obtain controlled amount of blur or minimize it) and when photographing action subjects with telephoto, usually the lens is set to maximum aperture or close to it. It's not desirable to let the aperture vary because of changes in lighting (usually one doesn't have enough light to stop down, and also in most cases one wants to blur the surroundings with the largest aperture available), so the ISO is usually the preferred variable that can make the exposure correct for the images in varying lighting conditions. I personally favour aperture priority for a lot of the time, and have my reasons for doing so, recently more and more I use manual exposure with auto ISO for subjects that can and are likely to move. This is especially the case for long focal length subjects because my long lens is not that fast (it's an f/4.5-5.6), and so I have fewer options in terms of aperture that yields fast enough shutter speeds and hence the exposure has to be accomodated by adjusting ISO all the time. When photographing people, I can use fast lenses and so there is some freedom in aperture choice and also shutter speed can vary and auto ISO is not as often needed as when photographing long focal length subjects such as wildlife. However, in practice auto ISO is usually ON in my cameras, and this includes the Zf. If I had a 400/2.8 I might not be as dependent on auto ISO as I am with my 100-400mm, but then photography would be more tedious in some ways (heavy lens).
Panorascal wrote:
I also never use auto ISO. It's unnecessary if exposure is 2nd nature.
I set the ISO for the situation and (very easily) tweak it on the fly if necessary.
I want max dynamic range possible at all times.
I shoot professionally and I always use auto ISO. I only sometimes switch to manual ISO when I use flash... that's only sometimes because my current camera is smart enough to know that I have the TTL flash on.
My partner never uses auto ISO. We shoot very differently (aperture priority vs full manual, EVF vs LCD, TTL vs manual flash, etc.) though I can't say we make vastly different photos. Whatever bits of benefits either way don't really show in the end products.
Usage will vary widely depending on your style of photography (tripod, night skies, action etc.) and what you are looking for. For example, for B&W high ISO might be more tolerable, and action obviously requires higher s/speeds.
But a few facts are important. Auto anything encourages users to rely on the setting chosen by the device, particularly in the heat of the moment for impromptu work.
Aperture shapes the image - wide open is very different to f16, we can agree. So it is what I call the 'sovereign control', the one that determines how the photo will look.
For many compositions shutter speed need only satisfy the minimum speed for the particular image, a personal choice of yours. This is a general statement.
ISO is very different. As the 'Image Quality Control' it needs close watching and again, you need a personal limit in mind - mine is ISO 6400 except in rare forced circumstances, but every image I take will be at the lowest ISO I can obtain within the envelope of the fixed aperture and the minimum s/speed.
Why this concern for ISO and not letting the camera decide? Because every stop higher in ISO costs you around a stop of dynamic range (DR)! ISO 6400 offers us around six full stops less DR than ISO 100. Now, noise is not the problem it once was, but few will not see the difference in images shot at 100 and 6400. Why?
Because lower DR compresses colour into a narrow range, and it does the same with tonal rendering. You lose nuance and life in your images commensurately. Colour deteriorates badly and becomes 'posterised' at high ISO. Sony (in particular) delivered us massive DR at low ISOs - 2.7 stops over Canon in 2013, or around 30% of the Canon DR.
DR is the quality that allows better (full frame) lenses to mimic medium format in tonal quality - colour and tone gradation give imaged subjects life and shape, be they human faces or landscape foliage. And these important qualities can't be recovered well in post, even using custom luminosity masks in PS. You don't often want to throw that away.
That is the argument against Auto ISO in a nutshell, for low light handholding and general use, where you want the best quality. Watch that ISO reading like a hawk, if image quality counts. Having set Aperture, let s/speed float down towards your minimum to preserve the best ISO for each circumstance.
philip_pj wrote:
Usage will vary widely depending on your style of photography (tripod, night skies, action etc.) and what you are looking for. For example, for B&W high ISO might be more tolerable, and action obviously requires higher s/speeds.
But a few facts are important. Auto anything encourages users to rely on the setting chosen by the device, particularly in the heat of the moment for impromptu work.
Aperture shapes the image - wide open is very different to f16, we can agree. So it is what I call the 'sovereign control', the one that determines how the photo will look.
For many compositions shutter speed need only satisfy the minimum speed for the particular image, a personal choice of yours. This is a general statement.
ISO is very different. As the 'Image Quality Control' it needs close watching and again, you need a personal limit in mind - mine is ISO 6400 except in rare forced circumstances, but every image I take will be at the lowest ISO I can obtain within the envelope of the fixed aperture and the minimum s/speed.
Why this concern for ISO and not letting the camera decide? Because every stop higher in ISO costs you around a stop of dynamic range (DR)! ISO 6400 offers us around six full stops less DR than ISO 100. Now, noise is not the problem it once was, but few will not see the difference in images shot at 100 and 6400. Why?
Because lower DR compresses colour into a narrow range, and it does the same with tonal rendering. You lose nuance and life in your images commensurately. Colour deteriorates badly and becomes 'posterised' at high ISO. Sony (in particular) delivered us massive DR at low ISOs - 2.7 stops over Canon in 2013, or around 30% of the Canon DR.
DR is the quality that allows better (full frame) lenses to mimic medium format in tonal quality - colour and tone gradation give imaged subjects life and shape, be they human faces or landscape foliage. And these important qualities can't be recovered well in post, even using custom luminosity masks in PS. You don't often want to throw that away.
That is the argument against Auto ISO in a nutshell, for low light handholding and general use, where you want the best quality. Watch that ISO reading like a hawk, if image quality counts. Having set Aperture, let s/speed float down towards your minimum to preserve the best ISO for each circumstance.
For bird photography I always use Auto ISO (max set to 6400). Camera in manual mode with maximum aperture set to 6.3 (wide open) shutter set to 1/3200
For portraiture I shoot in Aperture priority auto ISO (max 400). When shooting I’m constantly looking at the shutter speed. If it goes below 1/25 I’ll manually adjust the ISO wheel on the ZF to get the shutter speed up. I mainly shoot portraits wide open.
I'm new here. Hello and a few questions:
1. how do you "trap" focus? with the TTartisan m-z 6 bit + 35nokton vintage 1.5?
2. does the TTartisan m-z 6 bit have any problem with close vs infinity focus? what is the min focus distance when it's mounted?
Thank you
I bought Nikon's ZF GR1 grip after reading @Jman13 's blog. My ZF came with Smallrig grip as a freebie. I didn't like it.
I love Nikon's grip though. 2 things stand out:
It's custom made for ZF by Nikon, so the grip talks to the body in terms of design language. You would think there is no grip attached and it's all camera body. It's a true extension of ZF spirit in the way it has been made. The quality of materials, so perfectly matched to body, the subtlety.
Second, front side grip is not flushed with the body. That's a great thought as it makes you hold the camera more securely without making the ZF look like a Z6 series.
