michaelgunne
Offline
•
Upload & Sell: Off
|
 p.1 #9 · Why would you choose Nikon over the other brands? | |
Vento wrote:
It's hard to say, because—at least for me—investing in the Z system was a gradual process that spanned several years.
So it was never a case of, “Here’s 10 or even 20k—let’s go on a big shopping spree.”
It started with a Nikon Z6 Gen 1 and a Z 24-70/4 S kit zoom; the alternative at the time was the Sony A7III.
My main goal wasn’t even so much to build up an extensive collection of Z lenses, but rather to adapt my existing vintage Canon FD lenses—gems like the FD 85/1.2 L, FD 20-35/3.5 L, Mamiya 645 Sekor lenses, and various heirlooms in the M42 mount.
Since autofocus was a secondary consideration for me at the time—a better EVF and LCD were my main priorities for adapting my existing dozen or so manual-focus lenses—I ended up choosing a Nikon Z6 over the Sony A7III.
Back then, the Z6 was the right choice for me, and a lot more has built on that since.
Little by little, I added a Z 14-30/4 S, a Z 50/1.8 S, a Z MC 105/2.8 VR S, a Z 400/4.5 VR S, and a Z TC-1.4x.
I got rid of the Z 24-70/4 S kit zoom and replaced it with the Z 24-120/4 S.
Later on, I wanted better autofocus for action/wildlife/sports, so I got a Z8.
A Z 135/1.8 S Plena, and a few manual-focus lenses, such as the 35/2 Apo Lanthar Z and the Thypoch Simera 28/1.4 Z.
If I were to do it over today, I’d definitely invest a little less.
Sometimes less is more, and I can barely keep up with the sheer number of lenses I have—especially since I still love and use some of my vintage lenses.
For one thing, I’m with Nikon primarily because of the lenses—lenses like the Z 24-120/4 S, the Z 135/1.8 S Plena, and the Z 400/4.5 VR S.
For another, the Z8 was unbeatably affordable for its performance class.
I paid €3,400 just under two years ago; that price already includes the mandatory 20% VAT here.
For that price, all I could get from Sony right now is a Sony A7V—an A1 costs still €2,000 more, and an A1II costs more than €4,000 more—so there’s no comparison.
After enjoying the benefits of a fully stacked sensor with an extremely fast readout for two years with the Z8, there's no turning back for me now.
So Sony is out of the running—3/4 of the 10k budget would go just for the fully stacked body, so it's not an option.
Neither is the A1; it's still way too expensive, with no real added value compared to a Z8.
The price of the Z8 hasn't dropped here in two years, so it would still cost around €3,500 today—but that would be only 35% of the 10k budget, not 75% like with a Sony A1II.
Since I still frequently and happily use classic, high-quality manual-focus lenses, Nikon is also exemplary when it comes to manual-focus assists (manual-focus subject detection/face and eye detection).
So not much would change.
I’d end up with a Z8 again today, but I’d buy one or two fewer lenses—the Z 14-30/4 S and the Z MC 105/2.8 VR S are gathering dust on my shelf, or rather, they’ve been replaced by the Plena and the Apo Lanthar, including a multi-row nodal adapter, which allows me to achieve any desired field of view at Voigtländer Apo Lanthar quality in panoramic photography.
Canon would be an option today with the R5II, but I don’t have the lenses I’d find with Nikon or Sony.
Apart from that, Canon burned a bridge with me after switching from the FD mount to the EF mount.
Sure, from Canon’s perspective, it was the right move, but from the perspective of a photographer who’d invested many thousands of hard-earned dollars in the FD system, it wasn’t so funny.
It wasn’t until MILC came along that my old FD lenses were brought back to life, because before that, they could only be used without loss of quality in the FD mount.
...Show more →
Yeah, that makes a lot of sense. I actually like that your Z journey started more because of the vintage glass than because you were trying to build a huge Nikon lens collection.
And the Z8 argument is pretty hard to ignore. Once you get used to a stacked sensor and that fast readout, I can see why going back to a slower sensor would feel like a downgrade. And getting that kind of performance without spending A1/A1 II money is a pretty big deal.
The manual-focus stuff is interesting too. I hadn’t really thought about Nikon’s MF assists being a reason to stay in the system, but if you’re regularly using FD/M42/Voigtländer glass, that suddenly matters a lot.
Also, I’m laughing at the “I’d buy fewer lenses” part. 😂 Probably the most realistic answer to the $10k scenario. The 24-120, Plena and 400/4.5 already cover a ridiculous amount of ground.
|
