I understand that the Z5 II works exactly like the Zf with MF lenses (e.g., Voigtlanders, pre-AI, AI, etc.; BTW, I have no problem using my Apo-Lanthars with my old Z6).
IBIS too is very similar (7.5 vs 8 stops ... I'd say "identical" performance). Brighter VF and better ergonomics (in my opinion); two full-size UHS-II SD card slots
So it's time to replace your Zf with a Z5 II
Haha…well, it’s not really about what works or functionality, which are so close. It’s emotional, harking back to my 50 year old FE which I still have. The Zf form gels with the MF lenses…for sure it’s staying. The Z5ii similarly gels with Z lenses bigger than the 24-70 f4. I’ll be waiting until end of year discounts when I predict I’ll capitulate.
RoamingScott wrote:
If anyone is seriously considering an overpriced Fuji over a Z5ii this year, they are a silly goose. The value prop on the Nikon is tremendous.
I just got mine last week with Nikon 24 months financing. And before price goes up. I'll still keep my ZF and Z6iii. all great cameras. I know it's overkill. But so what...
mascejos wrote:
I just got mine last week with Nikon 24 months financing. And before price goes up. I'll still keep my ZF and Z6iii. all great cameras. I know it's overkill. But so what...
Well, for beginners, the ergonomics obviously. Still testing. Size wise, it's a little smaller than Z6iii. Feels lighter than ZF, I guess because of ergos grip. And I have the MB-N14 battery grip already from the Z6iii that also works on the Z5ii.
mascejos wrote:
Well, for beginners, the ergonomics obviously. Still testing. Size wise, it's a little smaller than Z6iii. Feels lighter than ZF, I guess because of ergos grip.
Why "for beginners"? It's the same ergonomics implemented in "all" Nikon pro bodies since decades. And in fact Z5 II "feels lighter".
Only nostalgic Nikon fanboys prefer the retro look of Df and Zf (where f stands for Frankenstein ). In any case, I am a democrat and I appreciate that Nikon takes these minorities into account by producing these bodies for them.
For those partial to Voigts and other manual focus lenses, the Zf is certainly a "image" maker in more ways than one. But I switched to the Z5II and have no regrets. The deep grip on this camera (more than what the Z7II offered) is perfect to handle a lens like the 50 1.2, a lens that I would not dare use on a Zf due to its weight. My fingers do not dig in to the cover on the body like they did on the Z7II, its very comfy. But the Z5II has just what I need in functionality and ergonomics. Its a "dense" camera in that nothing is wasted here....dials that I don't use, or speed that I did not need, or video etc. It is a bit lighter and smaller which allows me to use a bigger lens in a smaller sling bag.
But I suppose having both cameras is a possibility for those inclined to do so. The Zf is the coolest digital camera I have ever handled though. But I love the functionality of the Z5II and I can be sure I will be able to do more with this camera than the Zf when it comes to "getting the shot." I am having a grand time setting up the customization of this camera. Will be wearing this like an old shoe soon.....
If you study Nikon's marketing strategy, this camera could be considered a "market maker" as it easily is the "best buy" in the stable. Nikon is absolutely killing it these days.
aerospace99 wrote:
For those partial to Voigts and other manual focus lenses, the Zf is certainly a "image" maker in more ways than one.
I will never understand these statements invented by Nikon's marketing guys to stir up desires in nostalgic Nikon users.
I (currently) own two Apo-Lanthars that I use with no problem, no issue, with the only Z body I own at present, the Z6. Isn't the Z6 a "image maker" in exactly the same way as Zf? No. It's even better (with MF lenses) thanks to its better ergonomics. And not all MF lenses are lightweight. Try my Zeiss ZF.2 135/2 Apo Sonnar w/FTZ ...
And in fact: aerospace99 wrote:
But I switched to the Z5II and have no regrets.
Ripolini wrote:
I will never understand these statements invented by Nikon's marketing guys to stir up desires in nostalgic Nikon users.
I (currently) own two Apo-Lanthars that I use with no problem, no issue, with the only Z body I own at present, the Z6. Isn't the Z6 a "image maker" in exactly the same way as Zf? No. It's even better (with MF lenses) thanks to its better ergonomics. And not all MF lenses are lightweight. Try my Zeiss ZF.2 135/2 Apo Sonnar w/FTZ ...
And in fact:
My reference is double entendre, in that the retro designs create an image of ones equipment. All cameras make images, but I liked the "cool" factor of the Zf. This camera with a Voigtlander on it looks stunning. The Z5II looks like what it is, a mass produced camera. It lacks some of the subtle elegance of the Z6 and Z7's cameras I have owned. It is somewhat "pedestrian" in it's build quality, but it is very functional. If I had unlimited resources, I would still own a Zf and a Voigtlander 50 APO or a 40 1.2. My decision to switch to the very large 50 1.2 was part of the decision tree here. YMMV
Ripolini wrote:
Why "for beginners"? It's the same ergonomics implemented in "all" Nikon pro bodies since decades. And in fact Z5 II "feels lighter".
Only nostalgic Nikon fanboys prefer the retro look of Df and Zf (where f stands for Frankenstein ). In any case, I am a democrat and I appreciate that Nikon takes these minorities into account by producing these bodies for them.
I should have said as a beginning statement. Not meaning for beginners. sorry
SiMuMe wrote:
Now that's a F for Frankenstein. That lens belongs in a Df or (your)D780, not in an FT-Z (worst, Mk1). <- Revenge for calling Df owners Nikon fanboys.
Ripolini wrote:
I will never understand these statements invented by Nikon's marketing guys to stir up desires in nostalgic Nikon users.
I (currently) own two Apo-Lanthars that I use with no problem, no issue, with the only Z body I own at present, the Z6. Isn't the Z6 a "image maker" in exactly the same way as Zf? No. It's even better (with MF lenses) thanks to its better ergonomics. And not all MF lenses are lightweight. Try my Zeiss ZF.2 135/2 Apo Sonnar w/FTZ ...
And in fact:
That is not correct, the huge advantage of the Zf (and other recent Z bodies) over the Z6 with MF lenses is the ability to use eye detect and to zoom to 100% to the eyes. Game changer if you shoot people with MF lenses.
From a different point of view, the controls of the Zf encourage a slower approach to photography that can help some users think more about the photographs they are creating. I know it is possible to work slow with any camera.
Finally, I am a firm believer about the impact of camera look on relationship with subject (humans at least) and the Zf does trigger something that is not happening with most modern looking cameras. It is subtle but real.
bernardl wrote:
That is not correct, the huge advantage of the Zf (and other recent Z bodies) over the Z6 with MF lenses is the ability to use eye detect and to zoom to 100% to the eyes. Game changer if you shoot people with MF lenses.
From a different point of view, the controls of the Zf encourage a slower approach to photography that can help some users think more about the photographs they are creating. I know it is possible to work slow with any camera.
Finally, I am a firm believer about the impact of camera look on relationship with subject (humans at least) and the Zf does trigger something that is not happening with most modern looking cameras. It is subtle but real.
It's an interesting comment. Back in the day I was taught that the 85 was the perfect portrait lens not only because the slight compression (compared to a 50 or even more a 35) kept facial features in balance, but also because it provided the perfect working distance to interact with the subject. Anything wider and the subject felt like there was a camera in their face and anything longer and you'd lose personal contact with them. The concept was that a portrait was the result of the interaction between the photographer and the subject, not the camera and the subject.
A retro looking camera, with its 'quaint' vibe, certainly dovetails into that thinking. It certainly suggests a more deliberate approach.
bernardl wrote:
That is not correct, the huge advantage of the Zf (and other recent Z bodies) over the Z6 with MF lenses is the ability to use eye detect and to zoom to 100% to the eyes. Game changer if you shoot people with MF lenses.
bernardl wrote:
From a different point of view, the controls of the Zf encourage a slower approach to photography that can help some users think more about the photographs they are creating. I know it is possible to work slow with any camera.
This is psychology, not photography. And the best tool for a slower approach to photography is well known since the film era: It's the TRIPOD.
bernardl wrote:
Finally, I am a firm believer about the impact of camera look on relationship with subject (humans at least) and the Zf does trigger something that is not happening with most modern looking cameras. It is subtle but real.
This assumption can't be demonstrated, unless you can give reference to papers published in Psychology journals that substantiate your feeling.
But do you really think that Canon and Sony users have not the same "trigger" because they don't have retro design cameras?? Really??
OMG, this is turning into a religious forum.
This is psychology, not photography. And the best tool for a slower approach to photography is well known since the film era: It's the TRIPOD.
This assumption can't be demonstrated, unless you can give reference to papers published in Psychology journals that substantiate your feeling.
But do you really think that Canon and Sony users have not the same "trigger" because they don't have retro design cameras?? Really??
OMG, this is turning into a religious forum.
Ahh. You want charts and graphs, double blind studies, and P-values < 0 0.05 over multiple independent studies . . .
Of course psychology bears on this. Portraiture is about human interaction otherwise anyone with a camera is an Arbus or Leibovitz or Avedon. Read about the famous portrait of Steve Jobs (the one he picked for his posthumous autobiography) if you want some insight into how important interactions are between photographer/subject.
For me, it's enough to look at @GiovanniAprea 's portraits, in this forum. I don't think he needs to use a retro-style camera to connect with his subjects. Actually, he uses Z6 II and Z8, with 50/1.8 S and 58/1.4G.
RoamingScott wrote:
Any Z that has subject detection + focus confirmation in MF is objectively better than the Z6 in this regard.
That doesn't preclude a skilled, experienced shooter from getting great MF shots on the Z6.
Yes, and in fact we are speaking about Z5 II, a camera that can take same pictures as Zf, also with subject detection + focus confirmation in MF, a feature that can make life easier for photographers, but without which you can still take photos.
