bilzmale
Hall of Famer
- Location
- Perth, Western Australia
- Name
- Bill Shinnick
Probably a typo thing. Since the article compares the Sony A body.fuji a
click bait title
When I went from my 17-55 DX to 24-70 FX I noticed I was changing lenses less often on the dance floor. But yes it's already to big IMHO.I'm cool with 28-70.....just think how much bigger it would be if it were 24-70.
fuji a
click bait title
The mirrorless 50mm 1.2 is bigger/heavier than the DSLR 50 1.2.Still weighty, add those lenses and really dont get one/any if you have crappy wrists.
Thank you for the write up Matt. I have a Z6 with FTZ + 24-70 on preorder now. I keep thinking that the sensible thing to do is to get a refurb D750 for $1200 or so instead. For now, I am sticking with th Z6 plan. It looks like it will be a very high quality and easy to use light weight camera for travel and walk around use. The D4 gets heavier and heavier as time goes byI went hands-on today with the Z7 - and all I can say is that whatever teething troubles may still be around, I didn't notice any; the camera felt very well thought out and was responsive, accurate and fundamentally functional. I'm after the Z6 myself, but handling is very important for me - and the biggest differentiator from Sony, so it's a good thing that the Z6 is basically identical to the Z7 in this regard (minus a couple of specifics like more AF points and higher resolution, of course). In short, the Z7 felt like a real camera, a slightly smaller Nikon FF DSLR (or a sligthly bigger APS-C DSLR - think D7500, with a more comfortable grip), but with a fantastic EVF, easily the best I've ever tried, but I haven't sampled them all - for comparison's sake, let's say it's about on par with the Leica Q's. The Sony A7 II's somewhat toyish ergos that sometimes do put me off a bit simply can't compete, nor can the EVF in the A7 III (the Z6's EVF is the same as the Z7's!). Nikon managed to make things just a little bigger and beefier without blowing them up unduely. The 24-70mm f/4 S is quite an intriguing lens, too - it's remarkably small, balances very well, and sharpness on the Z7's 45MP sensor is strong even on the edge of the frame (I had no way of checking the corners).
And now the decisive thing for me: The FTZ adapter worked flawlessly - even with Sigma's Art lenses that can be more than a bit capricious on the D750! The 35mm f/1.4 Art is one of the lenses that feels like a racehorse on the D750 - sometimes, it's adorable, verging on divine, sometimes, it's a moody beast with downright mediocre performance; the reason's usually the somewhat spotty AF accuracy for which the lens and the D750 both are responsible, I guess. I do use AF Fine Tune, but it's a pain, Nikon's as well as Sigma's much more sophisticated one. The Z7 handled this lens very satisfyingly wide open, no troubles, no misses - but please note that this was only in my kind of test, i.e. S-AF, single point, aim, frame, shoot (with and without moving the AF point); I shot just like I would on the D750 to compare performance. The other Sigma lens I tried was the 24-105mm f/4 Art - a lens that works beautifully on the D750, but not at all on my secret AF sharpness champion, the Sony A7 II with Commlite Pro adapter. If the Sony/Commlite combo finds focus, it's incredibly accurate (e.g. with the Sigma 35mm Art ...), in a way the D750 only matches in LV, but that mode is basically unusable for my personal needs because it's much too slow. However, the "if" in the former sentence is quite a big "if" - the Sigma 24-105mm doesn't work at all on the Sony/Commlite combo, the Nikon 70-200mm f/4 only does so in very good light. On the Nikon Z7 with FTZ adapter, the Sigma 24-105mm displayed snappy AF just like a native lens (no noticeable difference to the D750's usual performance - if anything, the point-to-point performance on the Z7/FTZ was faster!), and it produced tack sharp images to an extend I haven't seen before (its corners are not quite up to what the primes can do, at least stopped down).
To sum up, at least for me, the Z line really appears to work. Still, I'm in no hurry to jump on the Z6 - I have plenty of nice gear to use. But if real world tests with production cameras should turn out equally solid as most initial impressions suggest, the Z6 will be my next Nikon body, and - just like the D750 when it arrived - make shooting my much-loved Nikon lenses a lot more satisfying. I actually feel the Z6 could be all I need from a Nikon FF camera for quite some time, maybe even replace the D750 altogether. We'll see how things turn out - I'm not preordering. But I came really close to doing so simply because I couldn't find a single major issue as far as my personal needs and wishes were concerned - and that was with a preproduction camera in less than ideal testing conditions. I'm quite impressed.
M.
I own and frankly love the D750 for what it is - but it's not a small camera, and it can be frustrating at times due to AF issues. If it works, it works beautifully, though. I want the Z6 for all things Nikon and will probably keep the D750 as a time-tested backup body. But with the Z6, I also get a travel-ready, well sealed camera that's decently compact to carry around. I'm biding my time because I want more insight in the final product before buying, but as far as decisions go, I know exactly what I want - the combo you choseThank you for the write up Matt. I have a Z6 with FTZ + 24-70 on preorder now. I keep thinking that the sensible thing to do is to get a refurb D750 for $1200 or so instead. For now, I am sticking with th Z6 plan. It looks like it will be a very high quality and easy to use light weight camera for travel and walk around use. The D4 gets heavier and heavier as time goes by
I went hands-on today with the Z7 - and all I can say is that whatever teething troubles may still be around, I didn't notice any; the camera felt very well thought out and was responsive, accurate and fundamentally functional. I'm after the Z6 myself, but handling is very important for me - and the biggest differentiator from Sony, so it's a good thing that the Z6 is basically identical to the Z7 in this regard (minus a couple of specifics like more AF points and higher resolution, of course). In short, the Z7 felt like a real camera, a slightly smaller Nikon FF DSLR (or a sligthly bigger APS-C DSLR - think D7500, with a more comfortable grip), but with a fantastic EVF, easily the best I've ever tried, but I haven't sampled them all - for comparison's sake, let's say it's about on par with the Leica Q's. The Sony A7 II's somewhat toyish ergos that sometimes do put me off a bit simply can't compete, nor can the EVF in the A7 III (the Z6's EVF is the same as the Z7's!). Nikon managed to make things just a little bigger and beefier without blowing them up unduely. The 24-70mm f/4 S is quite an intriguing lens, too - it's remarkably small, balances very well, and sharpness on the Z7's 45MP sensor is strong even on the edge of the frame (I had no way of checking the corners).
And now the decisive thing for me: The FTZ adapter worked flawlessly - even with Sigma's Art lenses that can be more than a bit capricious on the D750! The 35mm f/1.4 Art is one of the lenses that feels like a racehorse on the D750 - sometimes, it's adorable, verging on divine, sometimes, it's a moody beast with downright mediocre performance; the reason's usually the somewhat spotty AF accuracy for which the lens and the D750 both are responsible, I guess. I do use AF Fine Tune, but it's a pain, Nikon's as well as Sigma's much more sophisticated one. The Z7 handled this lens very satisfyingly wide open, no troubles, no misses - but please note that this was only in my kind of test, i.e. S-AF, single point, aim, frame, shoot (with and without moving the AF point); I shot just like I would on the D750 to compare performance. The other Sigma lens I tried was the 24-105mm f/4 Art - a lens that works beautifully on the D750, but not at all on my secret AF sharpness champion, the Sony A7 II with Commlite Pro adapter. If the Sony/Commlite combo finds focus, it's incredibly accurate (e.g. with the Sigma 35mm Art ...), in a way the D750 only matches in LV, but that mode is basically unusable for my personal needs because it's much too slow. However, the "if" in the former sentence is quite a big "if" - the Sigma 24-105mm doesn't work at all on the Sony/Commlite combo, the Nikon 70-200mm f/4 only does so in very good light. On the Nikon Z7 with FTZ adapter, the Sigma 24-105mm displayed snappy AF just like a native lens (no noticeable difference to the D750's usual performance - if anything, the point-to-point performance on the Z7/FTZ was faster!), and it produced tack sharp images to an extend I haven't seen before (its corners are not quite up to what the primes can do, at least stopped down).
To sum up, at least for me, the Z line really appears to work. Still, I'm in no hurry to jump on the Z6 - I have plenty of nice gear to use. But if real world tests with production cameras should turn out equally solid as most initial impressions suggest, the Z6 will be my next Nikon body, and - just like the D750 when it arrived - make shooting my much-loved Nikon lenses a lot more satisfying. I actually feel the Z6 could be all I need from a Nikon FF camera for quite some time, maybe even replace the D750 altogether. We'll see how things turn out - I'm not preordering. But I came really close to doing so simply because I couldn't find a single major issue as far as my personal needs and wishes were concerned - and that was with a preproduction camera in less than ideal testing conditions. I'm quite impressed.
M.
I agree with the clickbait designation. The images in the article are all from the Camerasize.com website. Anybody can visit that site to compare camera and lens sizes.