# Upgrade path to full frame - DSLR vs. mirrorless



## adamhiram (Aug 28, 2020)

I’ve been contemplating moving to full frame for a while now for various reasons - shallower depth of field for the same effective focal length / field of view, better working distances for the same lenses, etc.  My issue is that Nikon and everyone else threw a wrench in the works with mirrorless.  Whereas my upgrade path seemed pretty straightforward before, now there are more options, and none of them are ideal right now.

My original plan was to pickup something used, such as a D750.  However, there are a number of reasons I held off.

Coming from a D500, anything under $1k is going to be a step down, at least in terms of autofocus, which is something I probably prioritize more than any other feature
I’m not sure now is the best time to start investing in higher end F-mount glass when Nikon is focused on mirrorless and Z-mount
It is also worth mentioning that these days, finding reasonably priced good condition used stock is getting pretty difficult
I also considered a D780 or D850, but then I’m looking at a much higher price point and the same concerns with new lenses potentially not holding their value in the future.

Of course the other option is to look at mirrorless, which would likely mean a Z6 or the new Z5.  However I’m not completely sold on these yet either.  I’ve heard mostly good things about the Z6, but that’s been out nearly 2 years, and there isn’t much of a used market for them.  The Z5 hits a nice price point, but it kind of sounds like a watered down Z6 with almost every feature being worse than what I have now, other than a full frame sensor.

But the bigger issue is still lenses.

These all cost more than their F-mount equivalents.  A 50mm f/1.8 is $600 instead of $200. An 85mm f/1.8 is $800 instead of $400.
There are significant gaps in the lens lineup, with common zoom ranges and primes not yet released, and currently available primes limited to f/1.8 right now
With everything being brand new or available at a future date, there is obviously no used market for these.
So that’s been my dilemma for the past year, and not much has changed.  Right now, I’m leaning towards picking up a Z6, and hoping there will be some decent Black Friday sales.  Since I already have a handful of f/1.8 F-mount primes, it makes sense to use them adapted until some of the new wider aperture Z-mount primes are announced.  At that point, I can either invest in the higher end primes, or pickup used Z-mount f/1.8 lenses when everyone starts trading them in for the wider aperture ones.

I would love to hear others’ thoughts on this dilemma.  With DSLRs possibly on their way out and mirrorless not quite ready for primetime, what’s a good upgrade path today?


----------



## JBPhotog (Aug 29, 2020)

Look for a used D810 to tide you over, prices are quite favourable for a decent body.

DSLR’s will be around for a while buy I would agree, mirrorless is the direction Nikon is spending R&D funds on. For a variety of reasons, the Z lenses can produce sharper results and fewer anomalies than F mount lenses and that is saying a lot considering there are some amazing F mount lenses.


----------



## smoke665 (Aug 29, 2020)

I have a lot of years with SLR format, and at this point have no desire to move to mirroless. Pentax glass isn't cheap, especially that for full frame. The new FA 85mm f/1.4 will cost you $2k with tax, same with the FA 70-200mm f/2.8. The only way someone like myself could consider such an investment is the interchangeability between my APS-C K3II and the full frame K1MII. Not only that but based on past history I feel pretty sure that any new model Pentax that comes out will continue to follow the backward compatibility model, that allows me to use legacy glass all the way back to 1975. 

Frankly I haven't seen any feature, on any mirroless that would entice me to dump years of accumulation and experience with what I have.


----------



## Strodav (Aug 29, 2020)

I am heavily invested in Nikon using a D500 for wildlife / birding and a D850 for everything else with a lot of AF-S glass.  I like your thinking about a D750, which is a workhouse for professional event photographers, but suggest a D810 if you can swing it.  The best place I have found to buy used gear is KEH.com.  I really like their rating system and they have a no questions asked 14 day return policy.  If you eventually buy a Nikon Z mount camera, you can use your newer Nikon FX glass with an adapter and eventually start buying Z mount glass.  If you decide to go mirrorless right now, I like your thinking with the Z6, but be careful.  I am not sure Nikon is going to make it.  They are behind Sony and Canon in mirrorless technology (especially in AF) and their photography division is hemorrhaging money.  I am waiting until I see Nikon release a camera that is clearly better than the D850 / D500 combination and competitive with Sony and Canon before I go Nikon mirrorless.  I'm going to give it until next spring.  If Nikon doesn't deliver by then, I'll probably pick up a Canon R5 and start selling my Nikon gear to KEH and start buying Canon glass.


----------



## Quassaw (Aug 29, 2020)

What do you intend to do with your new camera?  For birding it's had to beat the D500, as you know, but the Z6  isn't bad.  For sports it's very good once you've read the manual a dozen times and adjusted to the differences of the focusing system to the D500 etc.  For studio/portrait work, which I use mine for, it's great!  With the FTZ you can mount all (well, probably all!) your old Nikkors, but check first if you've got Tamron or Sigma lenses that you intend to use.  I don't agree that they are behind Sony and Canon, but that's an argument I'm not going to get into - all modern cameras are much better than I'll ever be.


----------



## mjcmt (Aug 29, 2020)

I did the same mental gymnastics and just purchased a Nikon refurbished D750 from B&H. Nothing comes close to the price...nothing. I can use all my old MF Nikkor lenses and there is so much AF glass new and used that it was a not brainer. No need to use the Z adaptor and loose the AF capability. Its small for a FF almost Z6 size and even smaller w/o the adaptor. Lastly Z lenses are expensive and large...go figure. DSLRs will be here for the near future.


----------



## ac12 (Aug 29, 2020)

I agree, WHAT is the use that you will put the FX camera to?
The D500 is pretty darn good, and really isn't a general purpose camera like the D7200.
Personally from a D7200 (24MP), I would go with a D750 (24MP) or D810 (36MP)
My issue with the D850 (45MP) is the significant weight increase.

The F mount dSLRs and lenses are not going away soon.
And with people going to the Z cameras, you should find better deals on used F mount gear.  And if you get it for cheap, then you don't lose as much on the resale.  Personally, I don't really intend to resell, so I don't worry about the F lens losing value vs. a Z lens.  
If I were a pro, and I could get a good 5+ years use out of the gear, it would have paid for itself.


----------



## Derrel (Aug 29, 2020)

D800 or D810 would be my suggestion. These two cameras are available for a relatively good price on the used market. you really do not need too many lenses.

A 24 to 70 mm zoom, a 70-200, and maybe an 85 mm prime  and a 50 mm prime and an extension tube set and you have 90% of your lens kit already. You might wish to have a wide-angle or a macro lens, or some other specialty lens.

I think the best way to purchase lenses is on the used market, and there are lots of good AF lenses on the market right now. If Nikon goes to the Z mount
 market in a big way I would expect that the prices for used F-mount lenses would drop somewhat, and you could purchase whatever you wanted at a good price.

I would not worry too much about your investment. I have found that high quality Nikon lenses are good for at least 10 years . The b85 mm a f s g
Is an incredibly sharp lens -perhaps the sharpest lens under $3,000. The 70 to 200 mm models are quite good.

 the 300mm F4 AFS is quite good. The 180mm afd f 2.8 is quite good and is available for around $300 used. I do not think the Z mount lens lineup is complete enough unless you are happy with just three or four lenses.

In the past few years Nikon has upgraded their 80- 400 to a pretty good AFS model, and they have also introduced the 200 - 500 for a fairly affordable price oh, and they also have quite a few other outstanding lenses such as the new G series wide-angles and the 60 and 105 mm macro models. The F-mount AF lenses are in their full maturity, whereas the z series lenses are in their infancy. I myself would be happier with a good set of fully mature lenses than I would be with four or even five brand new lenses that represent the emergence of a new mount.


----------



## Destin (Aug 30, 2020)

Strodav said:


> I am heavily invested in Nikon using a D500 for wildlife / birding and a D850 for everything else with a lot of AF-S glass.  I like your thinking about a D750, which is a workhouse for professional event photographers, but suggest a D810 if you can swing it.  The best place I have found to buy used gear is KEH.com.  I really like their rating system and they have a no questions asked 14 day return policy.  If you eventually buy a Nikon Z mount camera, you can use your newer Nikon FX glass with an adapter and eventually start buying Z mount glass.  If you decide to go mirrorless right now, I like your thinking with the Z6, but be careful.  I am not sure Nikon is going to make it.  They are behind Sony and Canon in mirrorless technology (especially in AF) and their photography division is hemorrhaging money.  I am waiting until I see Nikon release a camera that is clearly better than the D850 / D500 combination and competitive with Sony and Canon before I go Nikon mirrorless.  I'm going to give it until next spring.  If Nikon doesn't deliver by then, I'll probably pick up a Canon R5 and start selling my Nikon gear to KEH and start buying Canon glass.



This is exactly the path I’d be looking at were I still shooting Nikon and making the switch now. I think it just makes the most sense if you want to stick to full frame. Alas, I made the jump from this same kit (D850/D500) to a single Fuji x-t3 a while back, and I love it for what I shoot these days. Lighter, more user friendly, more compact.. and the lenses are super high quality at a reasonable price. Certainly not for everyone, just my experience. If you need/want full frame mirrorless I think canon is the best option right now. 

FWIW: I chased full frame for a lot of years and spent tons of money upgrading my kit to it because I thought it was what I needed. Once I got there I certainly enjoyed it, but it really didn’t impress me as much as I had expected. Full frame is great, but totally unnecessary for 99% of people. I was told this dozens of times before upgrading to it but still felt like I just had to do it.. but I’ve been there and back, and I don’t miss it.


----------



## Derrel (Aug 30, 2020)

Fuji APS-C benefits highly from a full line of lenses optimized for crop frame  use.Nikon and Canon have many glaring gaps when it comes to lenses that work well on crop frame bodies.

I really do not think there is a Fuji aps-c camera that can match the Nikon d850 when it comes to high resolution.

the d850 also has an amazing capability that many people are unaware of which is medium raw and small raw in an implementation that is vastly superior to the one used in the d810. The d850 uses a sensor that is not made by Sony.

I am much less familiar with the sensors used in Nikon's new z series mirrorless cameras.


----------



## Derrel (Aug 31, 2020)

In the world in which I live there is almost never an ideal circumstance, and I would encourage you to look at your current situation as one in which there is no ideal course of action.

There are almost always trade-offs and compromises to be made.


----------



## Quassaw (Aug 31, 2020)

"Upgrade" is an interesting word.  At the time I upgraded to FF my partner upgraded to a m4/3.  We are both happy with our choices, as our requirements are different.  Figure out what's wrong with your current kit (if anything!), then address that. A new D850 will cost something like £2,500 - that will buy you a lot of other things that may (or may not) improve your enjoyment of photography - 25 hours with a top model, a calendar full of studio time,  a trip to North Korea to shoot soviet-era 'planes, workshops with a great landscape photographer.  You could splash out on an Alpa 10d or the down-payment on an Ilford Witness if you really do want a new camera.

In short, if Full-Frame is the answer, make sure you know what the question is.

(PS: The D750 is a great camera!)


----------



## adamhiram (Aug 31, 2020)

Thank you for the great feedback and discussion, it is definitely some good food for thought.  I am in no rush to switch, but have been considering available options for a long time and have commented on countless threads where others have had these same questions.  I thought this thread would be a good opportunity to dive deeper.  Please pardon the long post!

These are my main reasons for switching to full frame.  I did not want to sideline the main discussion on the merits of this rationale, but figured it would help with the conversation.

*Shallower depth of field*: This would be immensely beneficial for cluttered indoor spaces where I want to hide the background, as well as location shoots where I may not be able to find a clean background.  This is just not possible on DX.  For example, to get the same field of view and depth of field of an 85mm f/1.8 lens on a full frame body, I’d need a 50mm f/.95, which doesn’t exist.
*Better working distances*: I like to shoot headshots with an 85mm, full body shots at 50mm, and smaller group shots as wide as 35mm.  At home I have about 24’ of space to work with, but as soon as I go on location, I rarely have this much room.  That means I am now taking headshots at 50mm, full body shots end up being 35mm or wider.  Any group shots are often at the wider end of my 17-55, and often require some lens corrections in post.
*Better lens options*: Nikon never fully built out their DX lens range as much as I would have liked.  I love my 17-55, but it’s not nearly as sharp as a 24-70, especially in the long end.  I have a Tokina 11-16, but it’s not even in the same ballpark as a Nikon 14-24.  And I have almost purchased a 70-200 several times, but 70mm is just too long to be practical for things like indoor sports.
*The big catch for me is autofocus performance*.  I am currently using a D500, and it really doesn't get better than that for autofocus.  It's the same AF system in the D5 and D850.  It's better than the D780 without switching to live view.  And it is better than any of the used offerings worth considering.  Almost anything else non-mirrorless would be a downgrade in AF performance, and I know this going in.  What I really want doesn't exist; a full frame D500, without the higher resolution of the D850.

Some additional comments:

@JBPhotog: I agree for the most part, but would want to consider a longer-term strategy as well, not just something to tide me over.  I question whether it makes more sense to buy a used F-mount 24-70, or spend twice as much on a new Z-mount version, which ironically is almost the same size and weight (why are we moving to mirrorless again?) 
@smoke665: I definitely agreed with the cost of full frame or Z-mount lenses.  At least with Nikon's F-mount, there’s a great used market if I don’t need the latest versions.  Z-mount will inevitably be more expensive than new F-mount, and with no used market for a long time.
@Strodav: I have considered this as well - Nikon isn't doing so well financially, and they are trailing other manufacturers in mirrorless performance.  Other brands certainly look appealing, but Canon and Sony have much steeper price tags to get into their mirrorless systems.
@Quassaw: Thank you, this is exactly the information I was looking for.  Unless I want to pickup a D850, mirrorless seems to be the best option without sacrificing AF capabilities, and you nailed the 2 use cases I would be looking at.  I’m still not sold on mirrorless, but am pretty intrigued by EyeAF and better 3D tracking.
@mjcmt: Thanks!  For the price (at least a few months ago) it almost seemed like a no-brainer, but I was hesitant to give up my D500 for an older body with lesser AF capabilities.  I agree about lens size - I never really understood the point of a smaller body with the same large glass, and mirrorless lenses seem to be getting bigger, not smaller (look at some of Sigma’s recent offerings).
@ac12: Excellent points about there being a growing second hand market for F-mount lenses.  Of course this means treating lens purchases as a sunk cost with no real expectation for decent resale value.
@Derrel: While the lenses might have longevity, I'll probably want a new body in less than 10 years, and by then I'll need to either re-buy Z-mount versions or use them adapted.  It’s really hard to tell if mirrorless is really the future, or if it’s mostly marketing hype, amplified by review sites and youtube personalities.  It definitely seems like F-mount development has slowed though.  For example, I have my doubts whether Nikon will ever update their 50mm f/1.4 for F-mount when they have yet to come out with one for Z-mount.  It really feels like we’re in a 3-5 year purgatory for camera technology.
@Destin: I'm glad you chimed in, as I remember you being a D500 user for a while.  I think we shoot pretty different things, so size and weight aren’t my main concerns.  Of course I question how much utility I’ll get for these cases I mentioned above, and whether it’s really worth the cost and effort.


----------



## mjcmt (Aug 31, 2020)

Looks like Sony full frame is calling you if AF is key.


----------



## mjcmt (Aug 31, 2020)

adamhiram said:


> @mjcmt: Thanks!  For the price (at least a few months ago) it almost seemed like a no-brainer, but I was hesitant to give up my D500 for an older body with lesser AF capabilities.  I agree about lens size - I never really understood the point of a smaller body with the same large glass, and mirrorless lenses seem to be getting bigger, not smaller (look at some of Sigma’s recent offerings).




Looks like Sony full frame is calling you if AF is key.


----------



## adamhiram (Aug 31, 2020)

mjcmt said:


> Looks like Sony full frame is calling you if AF is key.


LOL, how quickly that went from an $800 used body with a $900 used 24-70, to a $3500 body with $5k+ in new lenses!


----------



## malling (Aug 31, 2020)

adamhiram said:


> mjcmt said:
> 
> 
> > Looks like Sony full frame is calling you if AF is key.
> ...



Older Sony bodies are available either new or used so spending that much might not be necessary. All of my GM and G lenses are actually bought used, so you don’t need to spend $5k+ on lenses either.

That said changing system to Sony from
Either Canon or Nikon doesn’t really make much sense today.


----------



## mjcmt (Aug 31, 2020)

adamhiram said:


> mjcmt said:
> 
> 
> > Looks like Sony full frame is calling you if AF is key.
> ...


I guess you'll have to keep what you have and not upgrade if you want everything the D500 has, but in FF for $800.


----------



## Destin (Aug 31, 2020)

“What I really want doesn't exist; a full frame D500, without the higher resolution of the D850.”

This absolutely exists. It’s the D5.. just ignore the price tag lol


----------



## weepete (Aug 31, 2020)

I can't really add to the brand information but I switched to full frame last year and I'm really glad I did. The better quality glass really shines and makes traditional focal lengths really useful.

I think if your primary interest is portraiture or landscapes then the switch is well worth it, but do it bearing in mind that the cost of good quality lenses is significant. If you are more field based (like I am) I'd go DSLR, but if you are more studio based then mirrorless is probably the way to go just because of battery life.

I really don't like EVFs, to me they put me out of the scene too much but many people don't mind them.

If you really need the AF perfomace then mirrorless is probably better, for me I could live without the extra fps, but that's me and down to what my primary focus is (landscapes)


----------



## adamhiram (Aug 31, 2020)

Destin said:


> This absolutely exists. It’s the D5.. just ignore the price tag lol


Isn't that the truth!  I had high hopes when they announced the D780, but it turned out to just be a D750 with an updated processor, and some mirrorless functionality if you use live view.


----------



## adamhiram (Aug 31, 2020)

weepete said:


> I think if your primary interest is portraiture or landscapes then the switch is well worth it, but do it bearing in mind that the cost of good quality lenses is significant. If you are more field based (like I am) I'd go DSLR, but if you are more studio based then mirrorless is probably the way to go just because of battery life.


Thank you, this is very helpful.  Battery life was another big concern I had - the Z6/Z7 are rated for something like 300 shots per charge, which might not be enough o make it through a full shoot in some cases.  I've heard in practice it is much better, but I'm used to around 1000 shots before my battery runs out as long as I don't chimp too much.  What has your experience been like?


----------



## Destin (Aug 31, 2020)

adamhiram said:


> weepete said:
> 
> 
> > I think if your primary interest is portraiture or landscapes then the switch is well worth it, but do it bearing in mind that the cost of good quality lenses is significant. If you are more field based (like I am) I'd go DSLR, but if you are more studio based then mirrorless is probably the way to go just because of battery life.
> ...



I’ll chip in here, though I don’t have experience with z series. 

When I went mirrorless with Fuji, everyone told me the battery life was terrible. As a result I bought 4 extra batteries and carried them with me on every shoot. I too was used to 1000+ shots with my DSLRs. 

I adapted quickly and it’s been no big deal. 300-500 shots with minimal chimping is easy. Even shooting landscapes in live view the battery lasts an hour or so. 

I’ve only changed batteries mid shoot a few times, and it’s usually easy to plan a convenient time to do so. I guess the battery life may be an issue if you’re a professional wedding or sports shooter, but otherwise I’ve come to see it as a non-issue. 

Even when I got 1000+ shots on my DSLR I’d swap to a fresh battery before it got low on critical shoots, and I’d always recharge after a shoot even if it was close to full.. so my workflow hasn’t changed much.


----------



## ac12 (Aug 31, 2020)

adamhiram said:


> weepete said:
> 
> 
> > I think if your primary interest is portraiture or landscapes then the switch is well worth it, but do it bearing in mind that the cost of good quality lenses is significant. If you are more field based (like I am) I'd go DSLR, but if you are more studio based then mirrorless is probably the way to go just because of battery life.
> ...



Battery life on a mirrorless is VERY different than a dSLR, and much shorter.

You need to change how you think and plan for battery life.
With a dSLR, it is not draining much power until you press the shutter.
With a mirrorless, while the camera is on, the EVF is sucking power, and the processor is running the video to the EVF.

With my D7200, I can shoot all weekend and Monday and still have battery power left.
With my Olympus EM1, I will drain the battery to empty in 4 hours (continuous ON), 2-1/2 if I use a power sucking lens.
Where I did not carry a spare battery with the D7200, I carry FOUR spares with the EM1, to get me through a FULL day of shooting.  And that is only ONE day, the next day of the weekend would need another four or five, for a total of NINE or TEN batteries. So I have to charge every night, using at least two chargers, and charging in two shifts, to start the day with all batteries fully charged.  Definitely a logistical issue.

Based on my experience, mirrorless battery life is not based on number of shots, but on POWER ON TIME.
Example1, I shot about 2,000 shots at a tennis meet, but in less than 2 hours.  And I still had battery life left.
But, at a basketball game, I shot less than 800 shots in 3-1/2 hours, and the battery went empty.​Example2, On vacation, I could reliably predict when I would need to change batteries in my EM1, at 11am and 4pm +/-.  About 4 hours of continuous use.  It did not matter how much or little I shot.

I don't know what the battery life of the Z6/7 are like, but you get the idea.


----------



## Pixeldawg1 (Aug 31, 2020)

Rather than tell you what camera to get, I am going to tell you my experience with the Mirrorless Z7, which IS full frame and a really fantastic camera. In fact, I compare it to the "F" camera (F, F2, F3...). It is just THAT good. I love the quality and at 48MP, it enough image to do whatever you'd like. I use all of my "old" Nikon glass (a 50mm F1.4 from the F, an ancient 105mm Micro (I purchased new when I was 16. Now 55 years old...) a 70-200 F2.8 and a brand-spanking new 200-500 F5.6. All of them are tack sharp and work really well. I have purchased a Z mount for each of these, so that I can change out lenses as I always have. A bit of cash to do this, but it is worth it for my habits and work flow. I also have the 14-28 and 24-70 Z series lenses, which are magnificent. I am astounded by the sharpness each and every time I use them. 

There are a few things you have to get used to with the mirrorless. First, the flash only fires on "single shot" mode. Nikon, about two years ago, asked me to test drive the Z7 and I noted this when using the camera for the week and asked their staff here in Shanghai why this was and they explained that it was to avoid sensor damage. The flash, if fired rapidly, will literally cause the sensor to burn up. The next thing is the "silent mode". I never use it as I have found it to be intrusive in other camera functions, like shooting in very high ISO in very low light. I discovered, much to Nikon's chagrin, that the "silent mode" caused a significant amount of noise when using "silent mode" in concert with these settings (24,00 ISO and exposures of 1/200th of a sec at F4, if I recall correctly). It otherwise is fine if the silent mode is turned off, so I don't use it. Not really needed anyway without the mirror slap. It is a very quiet camera, and there are other issues with it as well, so keep it off. The video is wonderful. We have an instructor for Cinematography here that I work with (He did work with Michael Jackson and many other noteables) and he was just blown away by the video quality. It is magnificent. He went out and purchased a Z7 for his personal work when I showed this to him. To me, significantly better than the Sony.

Anyway, this is my take on this. Hope it helps you make a decision about mirrorless. Personally, I can't see what all of the fuss with mirrorless is about. It works very, very well and the image quality is nothing short of fantastic. Jump in, the water is warm!


----------



## malling (Sep 1, 2020)

Regarding battery time I don’t see it as much of a problem in portrait nor landscape photography, as it’s relatively easy to plan an on/off cycle and changing battery, you can also let the camera turn off the EVF when your not looking into it. This alongside photographing my hobby is my main field and I have never had an issues.   

But it’s advisable to have a portable charger for  the longer hikes. I would be carrying around with one either way. 

The biggest problem with the shorter battery time is actually not with those type of photography, but rather the type where you have to catch the moment like wedding, sports, wildlife, time-lapse this is where you really can run into problems with the shorter battery time and where a battery-grip or a portable battery that is hooked up with the camera is essential to make the system work as you do not really want to turn of the camera.


----------



## petrochemist (Sep 1, 2020)

smoke665 said:


> I have a lot of years with SLR format, and at this point have no desire to move to mirrorless. Pentax glass isn't cheap, especially that for full frame. The new FA 85mm f/1.4 will cost you $2k with tax, same with the FA 70-200mm f/2.8. The only way someone like myself could consider such an investment is the interchangeability between my APS-C K3II and the full frame K1MII. Not only that but based on past history I feel pretty sure that any new model Pentax that comes out will continue to follow the backward compatibility model, that allows me to use legacy glass all the way back to 1975.
> 
> Frankly I haven't seen any feature, on any mirrorless that would entice me to dump years of accumulation and experience with what I have.



My experience with mirrorless hasn't caused me to dump any of the experience with PK mount gear. All 4 of the mirrorless bodies I use -that's e-mount in FF & APSC, and 2 MFT bodies (normal & IR) work well with all my legacy lenses without any problems. Indeed with magnify & focus peaking available in the viewfinder the newer models work considerably better than my Pentax DSLRs with manual focus lenses irrespective of mount PK/M42/OM/LTM...

Pentax's backwards compatibility is significantly better than Nikon's let alone Canon's, but it's not a patch on mirrorless when it comes to manual focus lenses. There's even a third party adapter that allows limited AF with these old lenses (in a similar way to Pentax's 1.7x AF TC).


----------



## smoke665 (Sep 1, 2020)

petrochemist said:


> Indeed with magnify & focus peaking available in the viewfinder the newer models work considerably better t



I have that now in both the K3II and K1MII in live view, with magnification it goes to 16x. Provided I have the time to do so it works well. However when I don't the view finder is still the best option for me especially in low light. The viewfinder uses phase detect while live view uses contrast. Granted some mirrorless incorporate phase detect but there are limitation. A good read on the subject Why Mirrorless Autofocus Means Trade-Offs. 

The other thing is how I shoot, with both eyes open, it's easier for me to acquire and focus using the viewfinder. I lose that ability with a screen.


----------



## petrochemist (Sep 1, 2020)

smoke665 said:


> petrochemist said:
> 
> 
> > Indeed with magnify & focus peaking available in the viewfinder the newer models work considerably better t
> ...


Low light is another place where an EVF can beat an OVF, doing macro at 5x magnification I can't see a thing through my DSLRs viewfinder, not an issue on the mirrorless.

Shooting without a viewfinder is indeed a poor choice, My first IR converted camera came without a viewfinder & I soon decided the optional one was worth the extra.

Now I'd better go & read your link 

Didn't take long to spot his trade offs are inaccurate.
 DSLRs phase detect sensors are also under an IR block filter (or they'd focus in the wrong place!) as a regular IR shooter I'm well aware of how this can differ.
Not only that but 100% of the light goes to the sensor rather than a portion to the viewfinder & the remainder to AF & exposure sensors.

On sensor phase detect (& EVF) uses the all the wavelengths the sensor can see to focus with. When using an Full spectrum converted model this makes a huge difference - I might used a 890nm+ filter on one shot & 450nm & less on the next.


----------



## smoke665 (Sep 1, 2020)

petrochemist said:


> DSLRs phase detect sensors are also under an IR block filter



I don't shoot IR, but I'm not sure I agree with this, as the viewfinder uses an AF IR assist light in low light. Having an IR filter on the focus sensor would negate it's use, would it not?


----------



## petrochemist (Sep 1, 2020)

smoke665 said:


> petrochemist said:
> 
> 
> > DSLRs phase detect sensors are also under an IR block filter
> ...


Most lenses focus IR in a significantly different place I can't see how IR focus assist can be reliable. Their focus assist may be barely in the IR, but with many lenses the difference at 700nm is already significant. IMO focusing at the wrong wavelength defeats the purpose of AF!


----------



## adamhiram (Sep 1, 2020)

HowdyMark said:


> There are a few things you have to get used to with the mirrorless. First, the flash only fires on "single shot" mode. Nikon, about two years ago, asked me to test drive the Z7 and I noted this when using the camera for the week and asked their staff here in Shanghai why this was and they explained that it was to avoid sensor damage. The flash, if fired rapidly, will literally cause the sensor to burn up.


Can you elaborate on this a bit more?  Last year, I updated my studio strobes to 400W/s units to get better recycle times, and sometimes use continuous shooting.  At 1/8 power I can shoot reliably at 4fps, and at 1/32 power I can shoot as high as 10fps (which I have never used, but it works!).  Are you saying that in continuous shooting, a Z6/Z7 will only fire the flash on the first shot?


----------



## Pixeldawg1 (Sep 1, 2020)

adamhiram said:


> HowdyMark said:
> 
> 
> > There are a few things you have to get used to with the mirrorless. First, the flash only fires on "single shot" mode. Nikon, about two years ago, asked me to test drive the Z7 and I noted this when using the camera for the week and asked their staff here in Shanghai why this was and they explained that it was to avoid sensor damage. The flash, if fired rapidly, will literally cause the sensor to burn up.
> ...



No, I am saying what I said above, you can not fire continuously with a strobe. The camera won't allow it because if you do, it burns the sensor up. So, you would not be able to do as you have described here. 

Cordially,

Mark


----------



## Pixeldawg1 (Sep 1, 2020)

adamhiram said:


> HowdyMark said:
> 
> 
> > There are a few things you have to get used to with the mirrorless. First, the flash only fires on "single shot" mode. Nikon, about two years ago, asked me to test drive the Z7 and I noted this when using the camera for the week and asked their staff here in Shanghai why this was and they explained that it was to avoid sensor damage. The flash, if fired rapidly, will literally cause the sensor to burn up.
> ...



No, I am saying what I said above, you can not fire continuously with a strobe. The camera won't allow it because if you do, it burns the sensor up. So, you would not be able to do as you have described here. 

Cordially,

Mark


----------



## Quassaw (Sep 1, 2020)

HowdyMark said:


> adamhiram said:
> 
> 
> > HowdyMark said:
> ...


Now I'm confused.  My Z6 seems to be able to shoot as quickly as my flash and studio strobes will recycle, and I believe the HSS works too.  Why would the sensor burn?  If I'm shooting a model in the studio with flash then she's reflecting no more light on to the sensor than if I shoot her outside in the sun.  What exactly can't I do with flash and the Z6?


----------



## adamhiram (Sep 1, 2020)

HowdyMark said:


> you can not fire continuously with a strobe. The camera won't allow it


That's a very interesting limitation, so one shutter press per flash.  It sounds like it will still trigger the flash as fast as I can press the shutter button, but if I hold it down for continuous shooting it will only trigger the flash once?  For reference, I'm using Godox monolights with an XPro trigger.


----------



## Derrel (Sep 1, 2020)

Mark, you mean the in-camera flash can not fire repeatedly without damaging the sensor, correct?


----------



## adamhiram (Sep 1, 2020)

Derrel said:


> you mean the in-camera flash can not fire repeatedly without damaging the sensor, correct?


I don't think the Z6 and Z7 have a built-in pop-up flash.  That seems like an odd limitation to trigger a remote flash.


----------



## weepete (Sep 1, 2020)

adamhiram said:


> Thank you, this is very helpful.  Battery life was another big concern I had - the Z6/Z7 are rated for something like 300 shots per charge, which might not be enough o make it through a full shoot in some cases.  I've heard in practice it is much better, but I'm used to around 1000 shots before my battery runs out as long as I don't chimp too much.  What has your experience been like?



Full frame has been great, I'm loving the format. I frequently shoot in challenging lighting conditions and the larger sensor just gives that little more leeway. Putting some quality glass on has helped but even background tranitions are smoother and less granular. I'm definately getting better quality raw files so I'm happy. Though I wouldn't rule out confirmation bias in my conclusion


----------



## ac12 (Sep 1, 2020)

Maybe what Mark means is the processing to get the image off the sensor into the memory.
Although I don't know how that differs from the EVF being on, unless there is less sensor data going to the EVF so there isn't as much data to process and shove through the pipe.


----------



## Pixeldawg1 (Sep 1, 2020)

My understanding from Nikon is ANY strobe. I will double-check this though. I don't do much studio work and in my regular work, I generally use fill-flash and use a Nikon SB-5000 strobe, which is quite nice and does an excellent job, but will only shoot 1 frame at a time. Nikon has designed it this way because once again, multi-burst flash firing burns the sensor up.


----------



## Pixeldawg1 (Sep 1, 2020)

OK... in doing a check of my z7, if I tab to the "Information" ("i") setting on the back of the camera, and go to "Release Mode", on "Continuious High" (Extended) the flash "ready" button shuts off and it will not fire the strobe, but the camera still works. However, if you go to normal "High" and "Low" the "Ready" light on the flash lights again. In single, no problem. In High, it is missing frames while the flash is set to 1/64th power. This may be a change that was made with firmwear releases (which I have kept current). In the model I used, which was a beta version of the first version of the Z7 firmwear, they did not allow the flash to be fired on anything but "single", and it still seems sketchy to me on "high" mode. I have sent a WeChat to my buddy at Nikon asking for their response to this and have not heard back, but when I do, I will post their response here.


----------



## Pixeldawg1 (Sep 1, 2020)

adamhiram said:


> Derrel said:
> 
> 
> > you mean the in-camera flash can not fire repeatedly without damaging the sensor, correct?
> ...



Correct, they do not. Just a hot-shoe for an on-camera flash. I use an SB-5000 on mine.


----------



## adamhiram (Sep 1, 2020)

HowdyMark said:


> I have sent a WeChat to my buddy at Nikon asking for their response to this and have not heard back, but when I do, I will post their response here.


Thanks for the follow-up, definitely appreciate it!  It certainly doesn't sound like a dealbreaker either way, I don't think I've ever actually done a studio shoot with continuous shooting.  It just seems like an odd limitation.  In your example, it sounds more like the on-camera speed light just can't cycle that fast.


----------



## Pixeldawg1 (Sep 2, 2020)

OK... Nikon responded and the exact quote is "It is the same for in-studio strobes as it's the default settings". And again, he reiterated that Nikon does NOT recommend quick, multiple bursts as it effects the sensor life significantly. Does not mean it can't be done, I suppose. As for me, I (mostly) use the SB-5000, so will continue to shoot single frame. As far as the strobe not being able to keep up, Fresh batteries and on 1/64th power, so I think it is more the camera as opposed to the flash. Your mileage may vary though. All that being said, the camera is magnificent if you can work around the few little quirks. Any more questions about this, hollar'.


----------



## adamhiram (Sep 2, 2020)

A potential dealbreaker I just came upon with the Z6 is the diopter adjustment.  I strongly dislike wearing glasses when I shoot, so I typically use a corrective eyepiece to get to around -5.  With my D500, I have it set to -2 internally with a -3 corrective eyepiece.  Before that I had a D5100 set to around -1 with a -4 corrective eyepiece.  The problem with the Z6 (and Z7) is that it goes to -4 internally, but there do not appear to be any corrective eyepiece accessories available.  @HowdyMark (or anyone else), any additional information on this?


----------



## ac12 (Sep 2, 2020)

adamhiram said:


> A potential dealbreaker I just came upon with the Z6 is the diopter adjustment.  I strongly dislike wearing glasses when I shoot, so I typically use a corrective eyepiece to get to around -5.  With my D500, I have it set to -2 internally with a -3 corrective eyepiece.  Before that I had a D5100 set to around -1 with a -4 corrective eyepiece.  The problem with the Z6 (and Z7) is that it goes to -4 internally, but there do not appear to be any corrective eyepiece accessories available.  @HowdyMark (or anyone else), any additional information on this?



I did that ONCE, back in my film days.
The problem was, as soon as I lowered the camera, I could barely see anything.
So for ME, a corrective eyepiece while it seemed like a good idea, was not practical in actual use.

What would work is contacts.
Then I can see when I lower the camera.
But doc said they don't make contacts that will correct my vision problems.


----------



## adamhiram (Sep 2, 2020)

ac12 said:


> So for ME, a corrective eyepiece while it seemed like a good idea, was not practical in actual use.


It's definitely not the right solution for everyone, but for me it works well.  I haven't been able to wear contacts for a long time, and I can't stand the dirty smears on my glasses from pressing them against my face when I look through the viewfinder.  For the last 10 years or so, a corrective eyepiece has been a great solution, but unfortunately it appears to have been overlooked on the Z series.


----------



## JBPhotog (Sep 2, 2020)

HowdyMark said:


> OK... Nikon responded and the exact quote is "It is the same for in-studio strobes as it's the default settings". And again, he reiterated that Nikon does NOT recommend quick, multiple bursts as it effects the sensor life significantly. Does not mean it can't be done, I suppose. As for me, I (mostly) use the SB-5000, so will continue to shoot single frame. As far as the strobe not being able to keep up, Fresh batteries and on 1/64th power, so I think it is more the camera as opposed to the flash. Your mileage may vary though. All that being said, the camera is magnificent if you can work around the few little quirks. Any more questions about this, hollar'.



I am wondering if there was a language barrier when the person reported that continuous firing with flash would damage the sensor? I can't understand the technical reason why exposing a subject with flash/strobe is any different than exposing it with continuous light if both are captured with a reasonable exposure, the camera sensor can't discern which light source is used to expose the photocells.

One issue that is plaguing the new Canon R5 is sensor heat when shooting video, in other words high frame capture rates. I wonder if this was the nexus of the comment with the Z6 & Z7?


----------



## Pixeldawg1 (Sep 2, 2020)

adamhiram said:


> A potential dealbreaker I just came upon with the Z6 is the diopter adjustment.  I strongly dislike wearing glasses when I shoot, so I typically use a corrective eyepiece to get to around -5.  With my D500, I have it set to -2 internally with a -3 corrective eyepiece.  Before that I had a D5100 set to around -1 with a -4 corrective eyepiece.  The problem with the Z6 (and Z7) is that it goes to -4 internally, but there do not appear to be any corrective eyepiece accessories available.  @HowdyMark (or anyone else), any additional information on this?



On my Z7, there is a rubber cover for the eyepiece, it can be removed (Mine is quite tight though) and a normal diopter correction piece can be put in as usual. Not sure about the Z6, but it seems that it should be the same. If you like, I can ask Nikon about this as well. Let me know.


----------



## Pixeldawg1 (Sep 2, 2020)

JBPhotog said:


> HowdyMark said:
> 
> 
> > OK... Nikon responded and the exact quote is "It is the same for in-studio strobes as it's the default settings". And again, he reiterated that Nikon does NOT recommend quick, multiple bursts as it effects the sensor life significantly. Does not mean it can't be done, I suppose. As for me, I (mostly) use the SB-5000, so will continue to shoot single frame. As far as the strobe not being able to keep up, Fresh batteries and on 1/64th power, so I think it is more the camera as opposed to the flash. Your mileage may vary though. All that being said, the camera is magnificent if you can work around the few little quirks. Any more questions about this, hollar'.
> ...



Nope... he speaks perfect English and I speak enough Chinese where there is never a comm issue. I am sure that the high frame count plays into this. To me anyway, it seems like common sense that it would. The strobe also has processing that it goes through, along with the lens and of course the sensor. So, adding the strobe, which "talks" to the lens and sensor during TTL exposure may just tax the system enough to cause issues. I don't know, but my best (uneducated) guess.


----------



## adamhiram (Sep 2, 2020)

HowdyMark said:


> On my Z7, there is a rubber cover for the eyepiece, it can be removed (Mine is quite tight though) and a normal diopter correction piece can be put in as usual. Not sure about the Z6, but it seems that it should be the same. If you like, I can ask Nikon about this as well. Let me know.


That would be great if you could ask - I may end up just calling Nikon customer support directly if I can find a few minutes during the day.  I currently have a rectangular DK-20C correction eyepiece, which sounds like the closest match, as well as a DK-17C round correction eyepiece that I currently use.  I wasn't able to find much useful information, but if the rectangular one fits, that would be awesome.


----------



## Pixeldawg1 (Sep 2, 2020)

adamhiram said:


> HowdyMark said:
> 
> 
> > On my Z7, there is a rubber cover for the eyepiece, it can be removed (Mine is quite tight though) and a normal diopter correction piece can be put in as usual. Not sure about the Z6, but it seems that it should be the same. If you like, I can ask Nikon about this as well. Let me know.
> ...



It should. To me, it appears to be a standard Nikon eyepiece. I will ask though. Is still early here in China (I get to work at 6:30... yeah, I am one of THOSE people... hahaha!) so give it a few hours and I will get back to you as soon as I can. I have meetings most of the day today though, so may be slow-going, but will try to get back to you ASAP. Be well, Adam.


----------



## adamhiram (Sep 4, 2020)

Pixeldawg1 said:


> It should. To me, it appears to be a standard Nikon eyepiece. I will ask though.


Very interesting - I made some inquiries and got some conflicting answers.  I called Nikon and they seemed to not know and submitted a ticket for someone to get back to me.  My local camera shop is pretty sure the rectangular correction eyepiece will not fit, as the Z6/Z7 have their own new shape eyepiece.  However various forums showed people complaining about the rubber eyecup that came with it and swapping it out for another one designed to fit that rectangular mount with no issues.  So the jury is still out on this one...

I think my next step will be try to get to my local camera shop to see if the internal diopter adjustment is enough.  Who would have thought that would be the determining factor between mirrorless and DSLR.


----------



## Dave Maciak (Sep 5, 2020)

Derrel said:


> D800 or D810 would be my suggestion. These two cameras are available for a relatively good price on the used market. you really do not need too many lenses.
> 
> A 24 to 70 mm zoom, a 70-200, and maybe an 85 mm prime  and a 50 mm prime and an extension tube set and you have 90% of your lens kit already. You might wish to have a wide-angle or a macro lens, or some other specialty lens.
> 
> ...


----------



## adamhiram (Sep 5, 2020)

adamhiram said:


> I called Nikon and they seemed to not know and submitted a ticket for someone to get back to me.


I got a. Response from Nikon and they confirmed that the is no correction eyepiece available for Z6/Z7.  However it sounded like they were just quoting product documentation, and I am not fully convinced this is the case.  At this point I’ve managed to convince myself that a Z6 with FTZ adapter is my best path forward, so I think my next sTsp is to try one and see if the built in diaper adjustment is sufficient.  If not, look like I’m back to looking at used DSLRs.


----------



## Solarflare (Sep 9, 2020)

Hu ?

If a Nikon F lens that was carefully handled would only last 10 years I would consider it a scandal.

Now Nikon Z, thats a different issue. Nikon seems to have recently "learned" that people no longer care for good build quality.


----------



## Pixeldawg1 (Sep 9, 2020)

Solarflare said:


> Hu ?
> 
> If a Nikon F lens that was carefully handled would only last 10 years I would consider it a scandal.
> 
> Now Nikon Z, thats a different issue. Nikon seems to have recently "learned" that people no longer care for good build quality.



Huh??? Do you own a Z? I have the Z7 and the build quality is very good, as is with the Z lenses. The sharpness of the lenses is magnificent as well. Not sure where you have your information from, but as a current user, seems quite inaccurate.


----------



## Solarflare (Sep 9, 2020)

Hu ? I did not claim that Z cameras have bad build quality ?

And I'm no expert on that, not by a long shot, but people who are experts say that Z lenses have the build quality of Samyang lenses now. Thus I wouldnt be surprised if the average time a well treated Z lens can be used would indeed be merely a decade now.


----------



## Pixeldawg1 (Sep 9, 2020)

Solarflare said:


> Hu ? I did not claim that Z cameras have bad build quality ?
> 
> And I'm no expert on that, not by a long shot, but people who are experts say that Z lenses have the build quality of Samyang lenses now. Thus I wouldnt be surprised if the average time a well treated Z lens can be used would indeed be merely a decade now.



I used to write and test equipment for Popular Photography & Imaging, the Adorama Learning Center and Nikon has regularly asked me to run their gear through the paces as well, so I feel as qualified as anyone. In your response you wrote:

"Now Nikon Z, thats a different issue. Nikon seems to have recently "learned" that people no longer care for good build quality."

Your reference is generic and you did not specify what "Nikon Z" you meant. You also plainly state that they "no longer care about build quality". So, you did in fact claim this, which you stated in your last response that you did not. Please re-read your original comment.  I have told others that the "Z" is a deceptive camera and lens combination and that the image quality is magnificent and so is the camera and lenses. Bar none, the sharpest lenses I have are the two Z lenses that I own. The camera is rugged and stands up to moisture and difficult conditions without any issues. Had mine for over a year and in heavy daily use, not a single issue.


----------



## Derrel (Sep 9, 2020)

Build quality is often a synonym for made of metal. Many modern lenses use industrial plastics even for things like barrels. I have a Tamron 90 mm that is probably 30 years old and the barrel is made of industrial plastic which is in most cases more shock resistant and dent proof than metal.

And I have read numerous articles where people be moan the quote build quality of a lens or of a camera when what they really mean is that the maker has used PVC or some type of other modern industrial plastic instead of the traditional metal or metal alloys of yesteryear.

So when someone says Nikon Z lenses have the build quality of Samyang,I really don't take that type of comment seriously.


----------



## Pixeldawg1 (Sep 10, 2020)

Derrel said:


> Build quality is often a synonym for made of metal. Many modern lenses use industrial plastics even for things like barrels. I have a Tamron 90 mm that is probably 30 years old and the barrel is made of industrial plastic which is in most cases more shock resistant and dent proof than metal.
> 
> And I have read numerous articles where people be moan the quote build quality of a lens or of a camera when what they really mean is that the maker has used PVC or some type of other modern industrial plastic instead of the traditional metal or metal alloys of yesteryear.
> 
> So when someone says Nikon Z lenses have the build quality of Samyang,I really don't take that type of comment seriously.



Right. You and I understand this because we are ancient and remember Nikon F's.  But, to the beginner, "build quality" can mean something quite different, and can (in my universe anyway) translate to a cheaper quality in an overall sense, which isn't true. And while I don't take it seriously either, as an educator, I also understand how this translates to someone with less experience and (again as an educator) I fully understand that I don't know everything, so am always on the lookout for new information that is relevant to these kinds of situations. So, I prefer to hear the reasoning and then make a more informed decision regarding the validity of the information/opinion. All of that being said... ultimately, you are right in that much of it can't be taken seriously.

Cordially,

Mark


----------



## photoflyer (Sep 10, 2020)

I feel for the engineers.  If they make it durable (high quality) it is often heavy...and people complain...then they make it from exotic materials and it is super expensive....and people complain.


----------



## Derrel (Sep 10, 2020)

I have perhaps the worst build quality Nikkor lens that I have ever seen... The 1990s made 28 to 80 mm afd. This zoom hasahas plastic lens mount and a wobbly front barrel, and yet it is surprisingly sharp for a zoom lens.

It is a little shy of 30 years old, and yet it is still making good pictures. I last used it extensively in 2017 with the D800,and even though it is a low dollar lens it made surprisingly sharp images on the D800.


----------



## ac12 (Sep 10, 2020)

Derrel said:


> Build quality is often a synonym for made of metal. Many modern lenses use industrial plastics even for things like barrels. I have a Tamron 90 mm that is probably 30 years old and the barrel is made of industrial plastic which is in most cases more shock resistant and dent proof than metal.
> 
> And I have read numerous articles where people be moan the quote build quality of a lens or of a camera when what they really mean is that the maker has used PVC or some type of other modern industrial plastic instead of the traditional metal or metal alloys of yesteryear.
> 
> So when someone says Nikon Z lenses have the build quality of Samyang,I really don't take that type of comment seriously.



And modern plastics/composites are LIGHTER than metal.

Olympus made the barrels of their pro lenses of metal, and I personally do not like the weight penalty of that decision.  
Even the grip is metal.  And what happens when your hand get sweaty, well it slips on that metal grip.  I am constantly wiping my hand on my pants, to dry it off, so it won't slip


----------



## adamhiram (Sep 12, 2020)

I decided to pull the trigger and pickup a Z6 with an FTZ adapter.  I spoke with a number of working professionals who switched to a Z6/Z7 and echoed the same positive sentiments as those on this thread.  If I decide to keep it, I have a number of acceptable offers lined up for my current gear, and figure I can use my existing lenses adapted for a while. My hope is that some of the Z mount lenses will be discounted around Black Friday, and when some of the faster lenses are released, hopefully people start selling off their f/1.8 Z mount primes.

Order Z6 from someplace with a good return policy, see if the built-in diopter adjustment is sufficient
If not, try to Frankenstein together a DK-20C correction eyepiece into a DK-29 rubber eyecup.  I give it a 50/50 chance it’ll work, but it’s only $20 worth of parts, so why not give it a shot
Either keep the Z6 or look into DSLR options
Z6 bodies are currently on backorder everywhere, so it may be a few weeks before I know for certain.  Thanks for the input, and wish me luck!


----------



## Pixeldawg1 (Sep 13, 2020)

adamhiram said:


> I decided to pull the trigger and pickup a Z6 with an FTZ adapter.  I spoke with a number of working professionals who switched to a Z6/Z7 and echoed the same positive sentiments as those on this thread.  If I decide to keep it, I have a number of acceptable offers lined up for my current gear, and figure I can use my existing lenses adapted for a while. My hope is that some of the Z mount lenses will be discounted around Black Friday, and when some of the faster lenses are released, hopefully people start selling off their f/1.8 Z mount primes.
> 
> Order Z6 from someplace with a good return policy, see if the built-in diopter adjustment is sufficient
> If not, try to Frankenstein together a DK-20C correction eyepiece into a DK-29 rubber eyecup.  I give it a 50/50 chance it’ll work, but it’s only $20 worth of parts, so why not give it a shot
> ...



I think you'll be pretty pleased with the Z6. Make sure you shoot RAW to get the most out of it. The 6 is actually a better choice if you're going to shoot video and with about $1,000 you can upgrade it to a 10bit video camera (The next model capable of doing this is about $90k, so considering that, the Z6 is a bargain!). If you have any questions and I can help you, please hollar'. Happy shooting!


----------



## SquarePeg (Sep 14, 2020)

adamhiram said:


> I decided to pull the trigger and pickup a Z6 with an FTZ adapter.  I spoke with a number of working professionals who switched to a Z6/Z7 and echoed the same positive sentiments as those on this thread.  If I decide to keep it, I have a number of acceptable offers lined up for my current gear, and figure I can use my existing lenses adapted for a while. My hope is that some of the Z mount lenses will be discounted around Black Friday, and when some of the faster lenses are released, hopefully people start selling off their f/1.8 Z mount primes.
> 
> Order Z6 from someplace with a good return policy, see if the built-in diopter adjustment is sufficient
> If not, try to Frankenstein together a DK-20C correction eyepiece into a DK-29 rubber eyecup.  I give it a 50/50 chance it’ll work, but it’s only $20 worth of parts, so why not give it a shot
> ...



Congrats!  If you are in the US (which I think you are?) check out the Nikon USA Buy/Swap/Sell group on Facebook.  I had no trouble selling most of my Nikon gear there when I switched to Fuji - and for much more than was offered by the online reseller sites.


----------



## adamhiram (Sep 14, 2020)

SquarePeg said:


> Congrats! If you are in the US (which I think you are?) check out the Nikon USA Buy/Swap/Sell group on Facebook. I had no trouble selling most of my Nikon gear there when I switched to Fuji - and for much more than was offered by the online reseller sites.


Thanks!  Do you recall the name of the FB group?  I see one called "Nikon Equipment Sales or Trade" with 14k users, not sure if that's the same one.  Were you comfortable selling through that group with low risk of fraud?  As it stands, I can unload my current DX gear for about $1500 pretty much anywhere with zero effort, but I also noticed it sells used for about $1k more than that in comparable condition.  I was debating paying for a FredMiranda buy/sell membership to try to sell there before just shipping it off, but to be honest I just didn't want the hassle.

Edit: It may also be worth noting that I have not had any luck selling used gear on here, and eBay has produced about the same selling price as selling back to the usual places, with additional overhead costs and effort.  While it pains me to leave so much value on the table for a middleman, it's also a lot of effort to piece out, especially during a pandemic when I don't want to be in a post office a half dozen times.


----------



## SquarePeg (Sep 14, 2020)

adamhiram said:


> SquarePeg said:
> 
> 
> > Congrats! If you are in the US (which I think you are?) check out the Nikon USA Buy/Swap/Sell group on Facebook. I had no trouble selling most of my Nikon gear there when I switched to Fuji - and for much more than was offered by the online reseller sites.
> ...



I thought it was Nikon USA...  but I think I confused it with the Fuji USA Buy/Swap/Sell group.  Haven't had Nikon in a while.  I am currently still a member of *NCDG - Nikon Buy & Sell Group* which says it is USA based so that must be it.  There was a "Feedback" post that you could search someone's name to see if they had positive reviews for previous transactions.  When buying or selling I will stalk the person on FB and the web a bit to make sure they are a legitimate photographer/hobbyist and not someone scamming.  I used PayPal for my transactions and never had an issue.  I believe @JonA_CT  used the group to sell off some Nikon gear during his fling with Fuji.  I also sold a few items locally on Facebook Marketplace and via Craigslist - cash in person only.  Our local PD has a spot in their lobby where people can meet for a safe transaction - probably not a great option during the pandemic it's likely closed...


----------



## adamhiram (Sep 14, 2020)

@SquarePeg thanks for the follow-up!  It was easy enough to separate the purchase of new gear from selling my current gear, so at least there's no rush.  The new body is on back-order anyway, so it may be a while before I can even evaluate if it's the right option for me.  At least the order has been placed and I have some decent options when selling.


----------



## adamhiram (Sep 15, 2020)

Pixeldawg1 said:


> I think you'll be pretty pleased with the Z6. Make sure you shoot RAW to get the most out of it. The 6 is actually a better choice if you're going to shoot video and with about $1,000 you can upgrade it to a 10bit video camera (The next model capable of doing this is about $90k, so considering that, the Z6 is a bargain!). If you have any questions and I can help you, please hollar'. Happy shooting!


Out of curiosity, have you noticed any loss of sharpness from the OLPF/AA filter?  I was searching for information on quirks with this body and what has been improved with software updates, and a recurring theme seems to be alarmism over the inclusion of an AA filter.  In my experience, it really doesn't make that big of a difference; I certainly didn't notice any major increase in sharpness when I got my D500, other than a better hit rate due to better continuous AF.

Incidentally, it looks like it is only about $200 USD to upgrade a Z6/Z7 to 12-bit ProRes RAW.  Probably not something I would bother with, but not terribly expensive either.


----------



## Pixeldawg1 (Sep 15, 2020)

adamhiram said:


> Pixeldawg1 said:
> 
> 
> > I think you'll be pretty pleased with the Z6. Make sure you shoot RAW to get the most out of it. The 6 is actually a better choice if you're going to shoot video and with about $1,000 you can upgrade it to a 10bit video camera (The next model capable of doing this is about $90k, so considering that, the Z6 is a bargain!). If you have any questions and I can help you, please hollar'. Happy shooting!
> ...



 My understanding of these filters is that they give a slight blur to the image prior to capture by the sensor to reduce the Aliasing. I am placing an image here from my Z7 that I shot a couple of months ago and can tell you this image is typical of what I get with my Z7. And unless you are specifically set up in a lab that can measure these kinds of issues, I typically consider this "user error". So, in my humble opinion, I consider this a non-issue. Not familiar with the 12 bit raw thingy, but would be interested in looking at it. If I remember correctly (and I could be wrong here... so take this with a lump of salt...) the Z7 can shoot 16 bit RAW, so shooting 12 bit would seem a step backwards. Someone correct me if I am wrong, please.

Here's what I shot... You are welcome to download and give it a closer look if you like. No editing or other reproduction though. 






Cordially,

Mark


----------



## adamhiram (Sep 15, 2020)

Pixeldawg1 said:


> I am placing an image here from my Z7 that I shot a couple of months ago and can tell you this image is typical of what I get with my Z7


That's right, you said you shoot a Z7, which doesn't have the AA filter.  I don't think it's a dealbreaker, but of course I plan to take some comparison shots once it ships.  Beautiful photo!



Pixeldawg1 said:


> If I remember correctly (and I could be wrong here... so take this with a lump of salt...) the Z7 can shoot 16 bit RAW, so shooting 12 bit would seem a step backwards


Yup, the Z6 shoots in 14-bit Raw as well.  What I was referring to was the firmware upgrade you mentioned to upgrade the video capabilities, which I don't have much use for.

Thanks again for all your help!


----------



## photoflyer (Sep 15, 2020)

I know this is a Nikon thread but the AA filter topic is timely for me.  The Canon R is 30.3 megapixels and the R6 is 20.1.  The later does not have the AA filter.  Recently someone online did a sharpness comparison between the two and the R6 is easily equal to and certainly better at high ISO relative to its higher mpix cousin.  I just got the R6 and this explains why I am amazed at how much I can crop an image and still get good sharpness -- of course none of this matters without good glass.

There are certainly design considerations when determining whether to include one or not.  I would like to know those details.


----------



## Pixeldawg1 (Sep 15, 2020)

adamhiram said:


> Pixeldawg1 said:
> 
> 
> > I am placing an image here from my Z7 that I shot a couple of months ago and can tell you this image is typical of what I get with my Z7
> ...



Adam, do you know, is there a reason why the 6 has this and not the 7? The 7 has twice the megapixels (48) as the 6 does, so in my little universe, it seems as if it would be reversed. Curious. And the video upgrade is actually a hardware upgrade by a third party source. Does not involve the firmware within the camera.

Mark


----------



## adamhiram (Sep 15, 2020)

Pixeldawg1 said:


> Adam, do you know, is there a reason why the 6 has this and not the 7? The 7 has twice the megapixels (48) as the 6 does, so in my little universe, it seems as if it would be reversed.


My initial thought is that with the lower resolution, the likelihood of moire from repetitive textures is more likely, but I never had that issue with my D500 with no AA filter and that's only 20MP.  Your guess is as good as mine.  I'm hoping 24MP with AA filter is at least as sharp as 20MP with no filter; I guess we'll see when it arrives.


----------



## Pixeldawg1 (Sep 16, 2020)

adamhiram said:


> Pixeldawg1 said:
> 
> 
> > Adam, do you know, is there a reason why the 6 has this and not the 7? The 7 has twice the megapixels (48) as the 6 does, so in my little universe, it seems as if it would be reversed.
> ...



I know back in my pressman days while in college, we had some occasional issues with Morie patterns, but mostly caused by two screens of the same pattern and resolution. In color printing (lithography) there are distinct screens used for 4-color printing that do not do this in relation to the 3 other screens. I will do more research regarding this and see if my buddies at Nikon have any information regarding this that they can add to the conversation.

Be well and thanks for the response.

Mark


----------



## Peeb (Sep 16, 2020)

I’ve had my Z6 for over a year and I love it. Switched from a D600 and the low light image quality is shockingly better on the Z. Focus peaking with manual focus lenses is fantastic. It’s fantastic across the board really. Keep the D500 for sports/wildlife if you can, but the little Zed camera is a marvel.


----------



## adamhiram (Sep 16, 2020)

Peeb said:


> I’ve had my Z6 for over a year and I love it. Switched from a D600 and the low light image quality is shockingly better on the Z. Focus peaking with manual focus lenses is fantastic. It’s fantastic across the board really. Keep the D500 for sports/wildlife if you can, but the little Zed camera is a marvel.


Glad to hear it, I may want to pick your brain in the next few weeks as I start to rethink my lens lineup.  With the Z-mount, the days of $200-400 fast primes and sub-$1k used f/2.8 zooms are pretty much gone, so I need to put more thought into what I really need.  Adapted F-mount is always an option, primes are great for studio work, but any travel photography begs for a more versatile normal zoom.

I'd love to hold onto my D500 and collection of lenses, but those are what will fund any new purchases (50mm f/1.2 perhaps?)


----------



## Pixeldawg1 (Sep 16, 2020)

Pixeldawg1 said:


> adamhiram said:
> 
> 
> > Pixeldawg1 said:
> ...



Wow... I get to quote myself, the ultimate dream of an academic researcher.  . I contacted Nikon here and they had no answers, and so kicked the questions up to Nikon Tokyo, so we shall see how they respond. When I find out or get any kind of response, I will post it to this thread.

Hope all of you are well.

Mark


----------



## Kiron Kid (Sep 30, 2020)

After 45 years of shooting exclusively with Nikon film cameras, I very recently picked up a D99 and a D750.  I see no reason to “upgrade” from the D750. And after handling the mirrorless rigs, I have no desire to get one. The Nikon film and DSLR’s feel perfect in my hands


----------



## greybeard (Oct 5, 2020)

I have a D750 and a D850.  I use the D750 most of the time and do my macro stuff with the D850.  But, for the kind of stuff you like to shoot, I think you have the best camera for that in the D500.  I sometimes shoot the D850 in crop mode (roughly 19mp) because of the added reach with my tele's.


----------



## photoflyer (Oct 5, 2020)

Good point.  I think the term "upgrade to full frame" is  a misnomer.   While my full frames are my best bodies I will always have a crop sensor for situations where it is the best tool.





greybeard said:


> I have a D750 and a D850.  I use the D750 most of the time and do my macro stuff with the D850.  But, for the kind of stuff you like to shoot, I think you have the best camera for that in the D500.  I sometimes shoot the D850 in crop mode (roughly 19mp) because of the added reach with my tele's.



Sent from my motorola one action using ThePhotoForum.com mobile app


----------

