photonc wrote:
1bwana1 wrote
Desmolicious wrote
photonc wrote
I transitioned from Leica to the nikon ZF and I am blown away how good M lenses perform on it. I see very little corner degradation... Interesting - is the sensor different, has different sensor cover thickness than other Nikon cameras? Because on my Z7 Leica lenses do not perform well, and I have not read them performing well on other Nikons. In my experience with the Zf which really only adds up to a couple of hours it is similar to my experience with my Sony bodies. Neither the Leica nor Voigtlander lenses perform at a level equal to how well they perform on my M bodies. Same whether we are talking about the M10-P or the M11. If one is not proficient with the range finder, zone focus, or other M camera techniques then I can see how the focus confirmation system in the Zf can make them feel like they are getting great performance adapting the lenses.
In the long run, I believe it will be generally recognized that the native Z mount versions of the Voigtlander lenses will perform much better than the adapted M versions of the same lens. I am sure the MF system of the Zf will find a strong following among those that prefer that focusing workflow. I have significant experience with rangefinder focusing. I would agree it can be very quick but as my eyesight gets worse with age the experience is less enjoyable. Zone focusing is great but not very functional indoors. With the green box focus confirmation it can be used indoors wide open without having to punch in.
The issue for me is that while the Zf can make focusing M lenses easier, it will always be easier in challenging circumstances to use native AF lenses if one wants narrow focus and esp. critical focus on an eye. Hence, unless I would have no choice, I would leave my MF kit on the shelf and use any good AF kit when critical focus and narrow depth of field are called for.