Desmolicious wrote:
I would prefer the heavier metal mount. It doesn't have anything to do with lightness. It's about making it as cheap as possible which is why the other Z lenses use metal mounts. it just goes against the whole ZF metal camera ethos. Here is your metal camera with knobs of brass. And here is the matching plastic lens that came out of a box of Crackerjacks.
I thought you were all about putting cheap lenses on expensive cameras
I had 2 of the Zf on order from Nikon (Burgundy and Brown). Was *super* excited to jump ship from Sony (A73) as a full time wedding shooter until I noticed:
~ heavier, thinner, and bigger (would have to add SmallRig grip to make easier to hold, increasing weight)
~ as has been noted, slap a boring looking lens on it and retro design diminished greatly
~ pretty much half the battery life as compared to current setup
~ microSD card. Not a deal breaker, but a bummer nonetheless
If they release a retro lens lineup, I will certainly reconsider. Reminds me of the FM I shot back in the 80s
Seems the reported release dates are varied through the month by country still. I'm leaving for a 2 week trip to Italy the 14th so by my bets I think it will ship out on the 16th
If they release a retro lens lineup, I will certainly reconsider. Reminds me of the FM I shot back in the 80s
If Voigtlander can make 8 different versions of a single lens, why can't Nikon make two of theirs? Adding a silver plastic ring and calling it SE does not count. I think a lot of non ZF users would be interested in it too.
Desmolicious wrote:
If Voigtlander can make 8 different versions of a single lens, why can't Nikon make two of theirs? Adding a silver plastic ring and calling it SE does not count. I think a lot of non ZF users would be interested in it too.
In my opinion, there are 2 major things a "retro" lens absolutely has to have...classic focus throw (not by wire) and aperture ring. If they did that and kept the mount plastic, we could still have a decent discussion about the merits of such a lens.
You cannot develop trusty muscle memory with a by-wire focus throw.
I was hoping that Nikon was going to have priority delivery for NPS on these, but looks like that's a no-go. They did for the z30, but it's not available for the ZF.
RoamingScott wrote:
In my opinion, there are 2 major things a "retro" lens absolutely has to have...classic focus throw (not by wire) and aperture ring. If they did that and kept the mount plastic, we could still have a decent discussion about the merits of such a lens.
You cannot develop trusty muscle memory with a by-wire focus throw.
I think if someone is waiting on Nikon to make Z-mount Voigtlander-style manual focus lenses, good luck. Even waiting for Voigtlander to expand their Z line will be a long wait. I’m thinking the Zf will be more for me to adapt M lenses and drop in a few CV Z lenses were possible. For now, the Zf is as close to an M with a built-in EVF as I can get without moving to a smaller format.
I was genuinely waiting to buy this Zf, and the day has finally come.
I selected the Zf + 40 f/2 kit and added it to my Amazon cart, a price tag of a little under $2500 with tax. I stared at it for a good 5 minutes. As my cursor hovered over 'place order', I stopped and asked myself: What am I trying to achieve here? I've done this perhaps for the 30th time but I've never once asked myself what my end goal was. Am I just bored and want a new toy? Hell I can't even remember the last photo I posted at FM. Do I just want to feel the dopamine rush of playing with a new camera? What is it that my Fuji XPro3 with REAL retro lenses don't provide? I don't even want this black Zf - I wanted a silver one.
With that in mind, I hit delete and closed the browser. I think I'm gonna sit this one out.
I know it's fun to play with new gear, but I had to identify my "enough", or I'll be cursed to want more everytime a new gear comes out. I think Fuji is "enough" at this point. It has everything I wanted in a retro camera. At this point, what does Zf even provide? Just full frame sensor? I've shot lots of crappy photos with FF sensor too, so it's not the sensor.
I think I'll spend the $2500 on a single malt Scotch instead, maybe a trip to Islay
highdesertmesa wrote:
I think if someone is waiting on Nikon to make Z-mount Voigtlander-style manual focus lenses, good luck. Even waiting for Voigtlander to expand their Z line will be a long wait. I’m thinking the Zf will be more for me to adapt M lenses and drop in a few CV Z lenses were possible. For now, the Zf is as close to an M with a built-in EVF as I can get without moving to a smaller format.
I think it is more of a case of Nikon making Z mount lenses in the style that Fuji does. Still has AF, but a really nice metal build with really nice aperture rings. And of course manual focus option.
If Fuji does it, why can't Nikon?
Desmolicious wrote:
I think it is more of a case of Nikon making Z mount lenses in the style that Fuji does. Still has AF, but a really nice metal build with really nice aperture rings. And of course manual focus option.
If Fuji does it, why can't Nikon?
Certainly they can, but they won't. They were criticized for years for dropping the aperture rings from their F-mount AF lenses – even Ken Rockwell relentlessly shamed Nikon calling them castrated lenses ("gelded").
highdesertmesa wrote:
Certainly they can, but they won't. They were criticized for years for dropping the aperture rings from their F-mount AF lenses – even Ken Rockwell relentlessly shamed Nikon calling them castrated lenses ("gelded").
I actually have no issues w G lenses on body appropriate cameras. Even film cameras such as the F6, F80 etc. Because the body design that Nikon had moved to paired up well w Gs. When I take my F80 or F6 out, people think it is a digital camera because they look like DSLRs.
But the ZF has the chunky knobs. It looks and kinda/sorta handles like a film camera. So Nikon should make AF lenses to match, the way Fuji does for their film-like cameras.
Joseph. wrote:
I was genuinely waiting to buy this Zf, and the day has finally come.
I selected the Zf + 40 f/2 kit and added it to my Amazon cart, a price tag of a little under $2500 with tax. I stared at it for a good 5 minutes. As my cursor hovered over 'place order', I stopped and asked myself: What am I trying to achieve here? I've done this perhaps for the 30th time but I've never once asked myself what my end goal was. Am I just bored and want a new toy? Hell I can't even remember the last photo I posted at FM. Do I just want to feel the dopamine rush of playing with a new camera? What is it that my Fuji XPro3 with REAL retro lenses don't provide? I don't even want this black Zf - I wanted a silver one.
With that in mind, I hit delete and closed the browser. I think I'm gonna sit this one out.
I know it's fun to play with new gear, but I had to identify my "enough", or I'll be cursed to want more everytime a new gear comes out. I think Fuji is "enough" at this point. It has everything I wanted in a retro camera. At this point, what does Zf even provide? Just full frame sensor? I've shot lots of crappy photos with FF sensor too, so it's not the sensor.
I think I'll spend the $2500 on a single malt Scotch instead, maybe a trip to Islay ...Show more →
You asked a tough question that everyone is well served to ask of themselves. The answer will vary, but upon close inspection of where this camera slots into the greater Z ecosystem, the answer is not entirely clear.
I got to handle the new Zf today - it looks so cool! Having said that, even the Nikon rep had a Smallrig grip installed and I wouldn't carry it without it for any length of time.
1bwana1 wrote:
I think it is part of a strategy called monetizing the user base. Not unique to Nikon by the way.
I don't mind being monetized as long as I feel I am getting something in return.
How much more could a metal mount cost? If TTA has it on their $69 50mm f2 Z? And Nikon has it on their 50 1.8G?
$5? $10? I'd be happy to pay that 'extra'.
The lens is already made in Thailand. This lens really screams 'we could not make it any cheaper'. it's one thing when you disguise that, it's another when you don't even try.
Desmolicious wrote:
I don't mind being monetized as long as I feel I am getting something in return.
How much more could a metal mount cost? If TTA has it on their $69 50mm f2 Z? And Nikon has it on their 50 1.8G?
$5? $10? I'd be happy to pay that 'extra'.
The lens is already made in Thailand. This lens really screams 'we could not make it any cheaper'. it's one thing when you disguise that, it's another when you don't even try.
I'm not suggesting or condoning this, but...if you can find a broken FTZ, you can swap its metal mount to the 40/2 with ease. I've seen several reports of this, if the 40/2 is a lens you're interested in long term.
RoamingScott wrote:
I'm not suggesting or condoning this, but...if you can find a broken FTZ, you can swap its metal mount to the 40/2 with ease. I've seen several reports of this, if the 40/2 is a lens you're interested in long term.
If anyone here buys an FTZ and 40, swaps the mounts, returns the FTZ - you Sir, are despicable.
