Ugly Hedgehog - Photography Forum
Home Active Topics Newest Pictures Search Login Register
Main Photography Discussion
OK, another mirrorless and full frame question
Page 1 of 10 next> last>>
Jan 1, 2019 12:16:06   #
jaycoffman Loc: San Diego
 
It may just be a GAS attack but I am considering changing from my Nikon d7100 to a mirrorless in the near future. My two main reasons are that I hope to lighten and shrink my equipment even a small amount as it's getting harder to lug my d7100 and Tamron 18-400 lens around. I realize there will be some change in how I view my photography with a mirrorless and also that some lenses will be as big as what I have but between lugging the gear in the tank bag of my bike and jumping in and out of safari vehicles and walking through the brush I'm ready for a little relief. Second, I also find myself pushing the ISO in the d7100 for a lot of shots in very low light conditions and a lot of my pictures are very difficult to bring back from the snow factor when using high ISOs even with subscription Lightroom/Photoshop. My 50mm makes pushing possible but not enough for acceptable pictures.

Right now many reviewers are saying that the mirrorless Nikon Z6 is the best buy now but there are as many still sticking the the Sony a7III (both are at about the same price point). The Nikon attracts me because I'm used to Nikons. If I get the Z6 I'll also get the 24-70mm f4 lens for my general lens.

First Question: My two main lenses on my d7100 are the Tamron 18-400 and a Nikon 50mm 1.4 lens. Both are, I believe, for the crop sensor. So if I get the adapter for the Z6 will these work for me on the full frame Z6? I know they will increase the bulk when I need to use them but I will no longer need to use the 18-400 as a walk-around lens.

Second Question: Will I see low light improvement in the quality of my pictures with a mirrorless? (I understand that I am responsible for the content and getting the exposure factors right and I will always be working on that.) Low light performance is one of the things advertised about these full frame mirrorless cameras.

Last Question: Nikon vs. Sony--Will I have to do anything special with the FTZ cards, are they expensive and does anyone have experience with them?

If anyone has any other cameras in this range I'm open to suggestions. I'm not a pro and won't be but I do like trying to get good images that I can use in picture stories and other things but probably no huge prints.

Thanks for any thoughts. I will go to the local camera store tomorrow to see how each of these cameras feels to me and see what they say about my issues but I've been somewhat disappointed in their advice in the past which is why I'm posing this question.

Reply
Jan 1, 2019 12:34:03   #
imagemeister Loc: mid east Florida
 
jaycoffman wrote:
It may just be a GAS attack but I am considering changing from my Nikon d7100 to a mirrorless in the near future. My two main reasons are that I hope to lighten and shrink my equipment even a small amount as it's getting harder to lug my d7100 and Tamron 18-400 lens around. I realize there will be some change in how I view my photography with a mirrorless and also that some lenses will be as big as what I have but between lugging the gear in the tank bag of my bike and jumping in and out of safari vehicles and walking through the brush I'm ready for a little relief. Second, I also find myself pushing the ISO in the d7100 for a lot of shots in very low light conditions and a lot of my pictures are very difficult to bring back from the snow factor when using high ISOs even with subscription Lightroom/Photoshop. My 50mm makes pushing possible but not enough for acceptable pictures.

Right now many reviewers are saying that the mirrorless Nikon Z6 is the best buy now but there are as many still sticking the the Sony a7III (both are at about the same price point). The Nikon attracts me because I'm used to Nikons. If I get the Z6 I'll also get the 24-70mm f4 lens for my general lens.

First Question: My two main lenses on my d7100 are the Tamron 18-400 and a Nikon 50mm 1.4 lens. Both are, I believe, for the crop sensor. So if I get the adapter for the Z6 will these work for me on the full frame Z6? I know they will increase the bulk when I need to use them but I will no longer need to use the 18-400 as a walk-around lens.

Second Question: Will I see low light improvement in the quality of my pictures with a mirrorless? (I understand that I am responsible for the content and getting the exposure factors right and I will always be working on that.) Low light performance is one of the things advertised about these full frame mirrorless cameras.

Last Question: Nikon vs. Sony--Will I have to do anything special with the FTZ cards, are they expensive and does anyone have experience with them?

If anyone has any other cameras in this range I'm open to suggestions. I'm not a pro and won't be but I do like trying to get good images that I can use in picture stories and other things but probably no huge prints.

Thanks for any thoughts. I will go to the local camera store tomorrow to see how each of these cameras feels to me and see what they say about my issues but I've been somewhat disappointed in their advice in the past which is why I'm posing this question.
It may just be a GAS attack but I am considering c... (show quote)


#1. Lenses will work - but with the 18-400 I believe the camera will auto-crop so you will loose pixel capacity. The 50 is full frame.
#2. Mostly generally, YES - low light performance will be best ( of the current models) with a 24MP FF sensor.
Lastly,. no experience there.

I will also tell you that Nikon's new mirrorless mount will bring a vast improvement in the optical performance of the lenses designed for it - like the 24-70 f4 - you will be amazed !

..

Reply
Jan 1, 2019 12:40:42   #
jaycoffman Loc: San Diego
 
imagemeister wrote:
#1. Lenses will work - but with the 18-400 I believe the camera will auto-crop so you will loose pixel capacity. The 50 is full frame.
#2. Mostly generally, YES - low light performance will be best ( of the current models) with a 24MP FF sensor.
Lastly,. no experience there.

I will also tell you that Nikon's new mirrorless mount will bring a vast improvement in the optical performance of the lenses designed for it - like the 24-70 f4 - you will be amazed !

..


Thanks.

Reply
 
 
Jan 1, 2019 12:43:08   #
Ched49 Loc: Pittsburgh, Pa.
 
Your photo's wont automatically improve by using mirrorless, if your changing because of the weight and size factor...that's one thing but photo's from a DSLR or mirrorless camera aren't any different. I don't know anything about FTZ cards or how expensive they are. Good luck.

Reply
Jan 1, 2019 12:48:56   #
jaycoffman Loc: San Diego
 
Ched49 wrote:
Your photo's wont automatically improve by using mirrorless, if your changing because of the weight and size factor...that's one thing but photo's from a DSLR or mirrorless camera aren't any different. I don't know anything about FTZ cards or how expensive they are. Good luck.


Thanks and I realize that the actual photos are a product of composition and proper settings of the camera (both up to the photographer) but I'm hoping for better low light performance along with the less weight.

Reply
Jan 1, 2019 15:08:50   #
rgrenaderphoto Loc: Hollywood, CA
 
jaycoffman wrote:
It may just be a GAS attack but I am considering changing from my Nikon d7100 to a mirrorless in the near future. My two main reasons are that I hope to lighten and shrink my equipment even a small amount as it's getting harder to lug my d7100 and Tamron 18-400 lens around. I realize there will be some change in how I view my photography with a mirrorless and also that some lenses will be as big as what I have but between lugging the gear in the tank bag of my bike and jumping in and out of safari vehicles and walking through the brush I'm ready for a little relief. Second, I also find myself pushing the ISO in the d7100 for a lot of shots in very low light conditions and a lot of my pictures are very difficult to bring back from the snow factor when using high ISOs even with subscription Lightroom/Photoshop. My 50mm makes pushing possible but not enough for acceptable pictures.

Right now many reviewers are saying that the mirrorless Nikon Z6 is the best buy now but there are as many still sticking the the Sony a7III (both are at about the same price point). The Nikon attracts me because I'm used to Nikons. If I get the Z6 I'll also get the 24-70mm f4 lens for my general lens.

First Question: My two main lenses on my d7100 are the Tamron 18-400 and a Nikon 50mm 1.4 lens. Both are, I believe, for the crop sensor. So if I get the adapter for the Z6 will these work for me on the full frame Z6? I know they will increase the bulk when I need to use them but I will no longer need to use the 18-400 as a walk-around lens.

Second Question: Will I see low light improvement in the quality of my pictures with a mirrorless? (I understand that I am responsible for the content and getting the exposure factors right and I will always be working on that.) Low light performance is one of the things advertised about these full frame mirrorless cameras.

Last Question: Nikon vs. Sony--Will I have to do anything special with the FTZ cards, are they expensive and does anyone have experience with them?

If anyone has any other cameras in this range I'm open to suggestions. I'm not a pro and won't be but I do like trying to get good images that I can use in picture stories and other things but probably no huge prints.

Thanks for any thoughts. I will go to the local camera store tomorrow to see how each of these cameras feels to me and see what they say about my issues but I've been somewhat disappointed in their advice in the past which is why I'm posing this question.
It may just be a GAS attack but I am considering c... (show quote)


Multiple reviewers report autofocus issues with 3rd party lenses and the new Z's with the Z to F adapter. Matt Granger did a pretty extensive test:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XMIAV-exl_o&t=21s

I am thinking if I ever went to the Zs, I would have to replace my Tamron 24-70 and 70-200 with Nikkors.

Reply
Jan 1, 2019 17:32:43   #
imagemeister Loc: mid east Florida
 
rgrenaderphoto wrote:
Multiple reviewers report autofocus issues with 3rd party lenses and the new Z's with the Z to F adapter. Matt Granger did a pretty extensive test:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XMIAV-exl_o&t=21s

I am thinking if I ever went to the Zs, I would have to replace my Tamron 24-70 and 70-200 with Nikkors.


Yes, that is the biggest reason I see for the switch to the Nikon mirrorless - is the increased lens performance from the dedicated lenses !

..

Reply
 
 
Jan 1, 2019 17:46:46   #
BebuLamar
 
I must warn you first that going mirrorless isn't going to save you any significant bulk and weight unless you go for M43.
Here are the answer for all your questions.
1. Your lenses are DX and although they would work on the Z6 (with the FTZ) just like an FX DSLR (i.e. D750) but give you the save FOV as the D7100 and with fewer pixels. You actually lose quality by going full frame this way.
2. There is certainly low light performance improvements because of the larger sensor (not because of whether it's mirrorless or DSLR).
3. With the FTZ all AF-S and AF-P lenses will work just about as good as they are on a DSLR. AF-D or AF without built in motor won't AF. You can use manual focus lenses too and the Z6 does meter with these lenses. The FTZ isn't expensive when you buy with the Z6 body I think the cost is only about $100. Just checked with B&H the price is now $250. Nikon drops the discount when buying with the body.

Reply
Jan 1, 2019 18:13:27   #
jaycoffman Loc: San Diego
 
BebuLamar wrote:
I must warn you first that going mirrorless isn't going to save you any significant bulk and weight unless you go for M43.
Here are the answer for all your questions.
1. Your lenses are DX and although they would work on the Z6 (with the FTZ) just like an FX DSLR (i.e. D750) but give you the save FOV as the D7100 and with fewer pixels. You actually lose quality by going full frame this way.
2. There is certainly low light performance improvements because of the larger sensor (not because of whether it's mirrorless or DSLR).
3. With the FTZ all AF-S and AF-P lenses will work just about as good as they are on a DSLR. AF-D or AF without built in motor won't AF. You can use manual focus lenses too and the Z6 does meter with these lenses. The FTZ isn't expensive when you buy with the Z6 body I think the cost is only about $100. Just checked with B&H the price is now $250. Nikon drops the discount when buying with the body.
I must warn you first that going mirrorless isn't ... (show quote)


Thanks I appreciate the time you took to explain this. Yes, I'm not sure about the weight and size issue that's why I'm going to the photo store tomorrow. The other answers are helpful. I didn't think it was the mirrorless feature that would help with the low light pictures I just wanted to confirm that the bigger sensor would indeed help with that. I had a feeling but wasn't sure about the lenses so if I go mirrorless I can also look at the Sony as I'll probably benefit from dedicated lenses.

Reply
Jan 1, 2019 18:16:55   #
jaycoffman Loc: San Diego
 
rgrenaderphoto wrote:
Multiple reviewers report autofocus issues with 3rd party lenses and the new Z's with the Z to F adapter. Matt Granger did a pretty extensive test:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XMIAV-exl_o&t=21s

I am thinking if I ever went to the Zs, I would have to replace my Tamron 24-70 and 70-200 with Nikkors.


Thanks. I think the answers I've gotten today let me look at the Sony as well as I don't think I'll be happy with the performance of the Tamron 18-400. I'll just have to spring for a longer lens if I want to go on safari again.

Reply
Jan 1, 2019 18:27:58   #
Bipod
 
jaycoffman wrote:
It may just be a GAS attack but I am considering changing from my Nikon d7100 to a mirrorless in the near future. My two main reasons are that I hope to lighten and shrink my equipment even a small amount as it's getting harder to lug my d7100 and Tamron 18-400 lens around. I realize there will be some change in how I view my photography with a mirrorless and also that some lenses will be as big as what I have but between lugging the gear in the tank bag of my bike and jumping in and out of safari vehicles and walking through the brush I'm ready for a little relief. Second, I also find myself pushing the ISO in the d7100 for a lot of shots in very low light conditions and a lot of my pictures are very difficult to bring back from the snow factor when using high ISOs even with subscription Lightroom/Photoshop. My 50mm makes pushing possible but not enough for acceptable pictures.

Right now many reviewers are saying that the mirrorless Nikon Z6 is the best buy now but there are as many still sticking the the Sony a7III (both are at about the same price point). The Nikon attracts me because I'm used to Nikons. If I get the Z6 I'll also get the 24-70mm f4 lens for my general lens.

First Question: My two main lenses on my d7100 are the Tamron 18-400 and a Nikon 50mm 1.4 lens. Both are, I believe, for the crop sensor. So if I get the adapter for the Z6 will these work for me on the full frame Z6? I know they will increase the bulk when I need to use them but I will no longer need to use the 18-400 as a walk-around lens.

Second Question: Will I see low light improvement in the quality of my pictures with a mirrorless? (I understand that I am responsible for the content and getting the exposure factors right and I will always be working on that.) Low light performance is one of the things advertised about these full frame mirrorless cameras.

Last Question: Nikon vs. Sony--Will I have to do anything special with the FTZ cards, are they expensive and does anyone have experience with them?

If anyone has any other cameras in this range I'm open to suggestions. I'm not a pro and won't be but I do like trying to get good images that I can use in picture stories and other things but probably no huge prints.

Thanks for any thoughts. I will go to the local camera store tomorrow to see how each of these cameras feels to me and see what they say about my issues but I've been somewhat disappointed in their advice in the past which is why I'm posing this question.
It may just be a GAS attack but I am considering c... (show quote)

This sounds like a smoke screen. Either this person is totally deluded by
marketing, or he is marketing. Assuming the former:

Try a smart phone: smaller and lighter (since that's what you care about).
Also faster and cheaper! And you can make phone calls with it.

Funny how painters don't mind carrying around easels and paintboxes,
but amateur photoraphers now complain about the weight of their (mostly
plastic) cameras. Try a Nikon F2! Or a Sinar!

There is nothing new about mirrorless or tiny formats. Minox was both.
It's just that people used to care about image quality, and they were willing
to work to get good photographs. Times have changed.

Electronic viewfinders are new. They do the job of an optical viewfinder,
but with lower resolution and lower contrast. However, an EVF can do three
things an OVF can't do: mess up the color, introduce a time lag and create
a big battery drain. We all love dead batteries!

Optical viewfinders draw 0 mA. And you are seeing the actual light from
the subject. EVF displays can't even match the sensor's contrast or
resolution.

Eventually, EVFs may be excellent. And global shutters (or even a separate
solid-state optical shutter) may be able to replace the mechanical shutter
in high-end cameras. But not today. Today mirrorless is a step backwards.
Before 1861, all cameras were mirrorless.

The reason EVIL/MILC cameras are being heavily promoted is that they are
cheaper to manufactuer: less labor to assemble. That's good for the
manufactuer, but not good for you unlessthey pass along the savings---
which they are not doing. A Nikon Z7 costs $1000 more than a D-850
(both 45 megapixels). A Nikon Z6 costs about the same as the D800 did
(both about 24 megapixels).

You are paying more for less. You are a good consumer---the Nippon
Manufacturer's Association loves you.

You might be surprised by Henri Cartier-Bresson's "walk-around lens".
Or that of Annie Liebovitz, Bill Cunningham, Terry Richardson, Don McCullin
or Bruce Barnbaum. (Of course, one shouldn't listen to famous photographers,
only to advertising.)

Did you know you can now get a computerized minature bicycle? And
Tonka makes very small, compact trucks.

Or you could take up knitting instead of fauxtography (or marketing?).

Reply
 
 
Jan 1, 2019 18:41:30   #
imagemeister Loc: mid east Florida
 
Bipod wrote:
This sounds like a smoke screen. Either this person is totally deluded by
marketing, or he is marketing. Assuming the former:

Try a smart phone: smaller and lighter (since that's what you care about).
Also faster and cheaper! And you can make phone calls with it.

Funny how painters don't mind carrying around easels and paintboxes,
but amateur photoraphers now complain about the weight of their (mostly
plastic) cameras. Try a Nikon F2! Or a Sinar!

There is nothing new about mirrorless or tiny formats. Minox was both.
It's just that people used to care about image quality, and they were willing
to work to get good photographs. Times have changed.

Electronic viewfinders are new. They do the job of an optical viewfinder,
but with lower resolution and lower contrast. However, an EVF can do three
things an OVF can't do: mess up the color, introduce a time lag and create
a big battery drain. We all love dead batteries!

Optical viewfinders draw 0 mA. And you are seeing the actual light from
the subject. EVF displays can't even match the sensor's contrast or
resolution.

You might be surprised by Henri Cartier-Bresson's "walk-around lens".
Or that of Annie Liebovitz, Bill Cunningham, Terry Richardson, Don McCullin
or Bruce Barnbaum. (Of course, one shouldn't listen to famous photographers,
only to advertising.)

Did you know you can now get a computerized minature bicycle? And
Tonka makes very small, compact trucks.

Or you could take up knitting instead of fauxtography (or marketing?).
This sounds like a smoke screen. Either this pers... (show quote)


Wow, that's quite an attitude/rant you have there !.....

..

Reply
Jan 1, 2019 19:18:02   #
jaycoffman Loc: San Diego
 
Bipod wrote:
This sounds like a smoke screen. Either this person is totally deluded by
marketing, or he is marketing. Assuming the former:

Try a smart phone: smaller and lighter (since that's what you care about).
Also faster and cheaper! And you can make phone calls with it.

Funny how painters don't mind carrying around easels and paintboxes,
but amateur photoraphers now complain about the weight of their (mostly
plastic) cameras. Try a Nikon F2! Or a Sinar!

There is nothing new about mirrorless or tiny formats. Minox was both.
It's just that people used to care about image quality, and they were willing
to work to get good photographs. Times have changed.

Electronic viewfinders are new. They do the job of an optical viewfinder,
but with lower resolution and lower contrast. However, an EVF can do three
things an OVF can't do: mess up the color, introduce a time lag and create
a big battery drain. We all love dead batteries!

Optical viewfinders draw 0 mA. And you are seeing the actual light from
the subject. EVF displays can't even match the sensor's contrast or
resolution.

Eventually, EVFs may be excellent. And global shutters (or even a separate
solid-state optical shutter) may be able to replace the mechanical shutter
in high-end cameras. But not today. Today mirrorless is a step backwards.
Before 1861, all cameras were mirrorless.

The reason EVIL/MILC cameras are being heavily promoted is that they are
cheaper to manufactuer: less labor to assemble. That's good for the
manufactuer, but not good for you unlessthey pass along the savings---
which they are not doing. A Nikon Z7 costs $1000 more than a D-850
(both 45 megapixels). A Nikon Z6 costs about the same as the D800 did
(both about 24 megapixels).

You are paying more for less. You are a good consumer---the Nippon
Manufacturer's Association loves you.

You might be surprised by Henri Cartier-Bresson's "walk-around lens".
Or that of Annie Liebovitz, Bill Cunningham, Terry Richardson, Don McCullin
or Bruce Barnbaum. (Of course, one shouldn't listen to famous photographers,
only to advertising.)

Did you know you can now get a computerized minature bicycle? And
Tonka makes very small, compact trucks.

Or you could take up knitting instead of fauxtography (or marketing?).
This sounds like a smoke screen. Either this pers... (show quote)


My my, that was quite a rant--maybe you were bitten by a mirrorless camera when you were young? Anyway, your response was pretty much non-responsive to my questions. I do get it that you don't think switching to mirrorless is a good move at this point in time and I also get it that you didn't pay any attention when I indicated that I am and will remain an amateur and that I shoot for a type of travel photography to insert pictures into my stories of my trips and that because of how I often travel space and weight are at a premium.

Let's see, I do not care how good the modern iPhones are--I have one but cannot take good pictures on it and have no desire to. I actually like being able to play around with shutter speed, f-stops and ISO as well as different focus points etc. To me (and many of my readers) my photography has evolved significantly since I started doing these trip stories and as I have modified and improved the equipment I use--that makes me happy--I don't care about rewards or becoming famous--it's not going to happen. I don't care what famous photographers used as walk-around lenses--I am not them although I very much appreciate a lot of their work.

And for the record I've been following the debate about mirrorless cameras and Nikon vs. Cannon vs. all the other brands on UHH and other sources for some time. I presented this post not because I didn't check out past discussions but because I am presently considering changing format for what I consider valid reasons (I didn't really ask you) and I have a few questions that I was hoping to get the most current thinking on. So far I've had a really good response and I appreciate the other hoggers who took the time to help clarify my questions. They have helped me open my mind to a few new possibilities and to the strengths and weakness of what I'm contemplating and that's what I think this forum is for.

So, thanks for you answer I do always enjoy good rants--I've been know to do a few myself--but unfortunately I must reject yours because it is irrelevant to my questions.

Reply
Jan 1, 2019 19:50:05   #
Bill_de Loc: US
 
I have the Z6 with the 24-70 and the FTZ. As mentioned above the $100 discount on the FTZ with a body is gone. This had been the plan from day 1, no surprise.

The Z6 with the 24-70 F/4.0 is a nice package. As reported by many reviewers the AF misses in certain situations more than the D500 or D850. It is not as bad a some made it seem. Mostly rants from people vying for attention. We're used to that at UHH.


I read recently that the Z (or S) 24-70 F/2.8 expected next year will be close to the size and weight of the current F mount. While I love fast lenses I'll stick with the F/4.0 for this body.

I did use the FTZ with a couple of Nikkor lenses and one Sigma with no issues.

A couple of shots with the 24-70

--





Z6 w/FTZ and 400mm F/2.8
Z6 w/FTZ and 400mm F/2.8...

Reply
Jan 2, 2019 00:08:50   #
jaycoffman Loc: San Diego
 
Bill_de wrote:
I have the Z6 with the 24-70 and the FTZ. As mentioned above the $100 discount on the FTZ with a body is gone. This had been the plan from day 1, no surprise.

The Z6 with the 24-70 F/4.0 is a nice package. As reported by many reviewers the AF misses in certain situations more than the D500 or D850. It is not as bad a some made it seem. Mostly rants from people vying for attention. We're used to that at UHH.


I read recently that the Z (or S) 24-70 F/2.8 expected next year will be close to the size and weight of the current F mount. While I love fast lenses I'll stick with the F/4.0 for this body.

I did use the FTZ with a couple of Nikkor lenses and one Sigma with no issues.

A couple of shots with the 24-70

Thanks Bill - if I can get pictures as clear as these I will have improved on what I've been doing on my d7100.


--
I have the Z6 with the 24-70 and the FTZ. As menti... (show quote)

Reply
Page 1 of 10 next> last>>
If you want to reply, then register here. Registration is free and your account is created instantly, so you can post right away.
Main Photography Discussion
UglyHedgehog.com - Forum
Copyright 2011-2024 Ugly Hedgehog, Inc.