p.1 #1 · I need feedback from Nikon Z8 portrait/ sport shooters with adapted lenses please
Hi.
I shot Sony for many years before moving to Canon after the amazing R5, R6 and R6 ii dropped giving me the accurate eye af I wanted.
The fact that adapted ef lenses work like native was a great feature.
Unfortunately Canon not allowing Sigma lenses is gotten under my skin.
I started looking at options like Panasonic s1 ii or another Sony but they all seem to have issues I dont like.
I never shot Nikon aside from super zoom cameras but I started learning about how good Sony lenses adapt and that got me intrigued.
Plus some of its own lenses like the 200mm f2 vr and 50mm 1.2 got me interested as well.
I mean in reality I could just grab a canon ef 200mm f2 and move on but seeing options like the sigma 135mm 1.4, 200mm f2 etc, while we at canon dont get that option, is annoying.
How accurate is eye af with z8 vs sony and canon? Sony used to give me a lot of eyelashes in focus issues.
How are Nikon skin colors for portrait work?
I like the fast readout speeds for sure.
So basically I am looking at these options
Keep my canon and grab a 200mm f2 or f1.8 and be done
Grab the z8 and grab a 200mm vr or new sigma lens adapted
Try a Panasonic s1 ii with a laowa 200mm f2 or sigma but this 3rd option seeks like possibly the worse.
Thanks
p.1 #2 · I need feedback from Nikon Z8 portrait/ sport shooters with adapted lenses please
General consensus is that the AF modes across flagships from various manufacturers are within a small percentage of each other.
You will find that Nikon requires some more initial investment in getting up to speed and customization whereas Sony is a bit more hands off out of the box.
Z8/Z6III I am a staunch believer/fan/evangelizer of reducing available AF modes to just two, with a possible third outlier (this is for shooting people in a studio setting, or location/street portraiture):
Wide Area C1 set to a box about 1/3rd the size of the frame, with Subject Detect active
3D Tracking with Subject Detect disabled
Possible outlier: Auto Area AF with Subject Detect for edge case randomness and surprises as a "'Hail Mary" mode. I've been told this is good by a handful of reputable people - I have it active but haven't had a need of it yet, so YMMV.
Skin tones are great but then I color correct every camera in a similar fashion and find they all perform well. My tip: add a pinch of Cyan to the mids, drop saturation a little, warm up the WB.
I honestly can't tell you what you should do otherwise - cameras are an immensely personal choice, from aesthetics to handling, etc. I'd suggest renting and putting each through their paces and see what you find.
I've been predominantly with Nikon for ~17 years and it has been a wild ride at times, but I absolutely love their handling, and a few choice lenses. For the Z series, so far I'm all about the 24-124 f/4 and the 40 f/2.
p.1 #3 · I need feedback from Nikon Z8 portrait/ sport shooters with adapted lenses please
Hey Gabriel, good to see you again around these parts!
My 2 cents is that if Canon is working for you color and AF wise, I can't see the value in dumping it over Sigma glass that you'd have to adapt to Z anyways.
I am also in the camp that if you are shooting SO shallow that lashes could be in focus but the iris isn't, you're shooting too shallow regardless, but others are free to dissent on that
Overall, I'd say my Nikon bodies have been the most egregious about lash-focusing in my stress tests compared to everything else I've shot, and that is with native glass.
I find Nikon's skin tones to be MUCH better and more pleasing than Canon and Sony straight out of the box. The really fun part about the Z8 sensor is you can shoot f/1.2 outside, in the middle of the day, with zero impact on IQ.
p.1 #4 · I need feedback from Nikon Z8 portrait/ sport shooters with adapted lenses please
I do find that Sony is better than Nikon at eyelash focusing. Not to say that it's bad, but if a crisp eyelash is absolutely necessary, the Sony's do seem to be more consistent.
Nikon eye AF works, and usually the picture comes out great. Only in very rare cases do I think that Nikon was off focus, like focused an inch forward or behind the eyelash, and Sony would have nailed it. It does come up once in awhile though.
I'm not sure why you'd want to adapt Sigma glass to Nikon, unless there's some amazing lens out there that I'm not aware of.
Nikon has so many options for sports/telephoto now, including many reasonably priced options (Hello 180-600) that you're really spoiled.
Not F8 and be there, Z8 and be there.
Well ok: Z8 and 180-600 and be there.
And you don't have to bankrupt yourself to be there either.
