Nikon Mirrorless (Page 2): If you like Nikon, I'd recommend sticking with Nikon - but not because of the lenses. Nikon doesn't have many Z lenses now, but they will be adding more. You...

jerryc41 Loc: Catskill Mts of NY

If you like Nikon, I'd recommend sticking with Nikon - but not because of the lenses. Nikon doesn't have many Z lenses now, but they will be adding more. You can buy the adapter and use the lenses that you have. As Z lenses become available, sell your current lenses and buy new ones.

I've been using Nikon SLRs since the 1970s, and I have no plans to switch brands or types. Maybe when I see reports of vast improvement in Nikon mirrorless, I'll buy one, depending on the price. What I have now works for me.

https://www.kenrockwell.com/tech/comparisons/nikon-vs-canon-vs-sony-full-frame.htm
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bWhF7bLRxXg
https://www.kenrockwell.com/tech/comparisons/nikon-vs-canon-vs-sony-full-frame.htm
https://www.techradar.com/news/mirrorless-vs-dslr-cameras
https://www.digitalcameraworld.com/features/dslr-vs-mirrorless-cameras-how-do-they-compare
https://www.adorama.com/alc/mirrorless-cameras-vs-dslr/
https://www.bhphotovideo.com/explora/photography/buying-guide/dslr-vs-mirrorless-which-is-best-for-you

yssirk123 Loc: New Jersey

After years of using a Nikon D3S and D800E, I dipped my toes in the mirrorless waters with an (relatively) inexpensive Z50 and was impressed with it's performance. The FTZ adapter works fine with compatible lens, and the Z 24-200 lens is an amazingly sharp zoom lens.

I've had no issues with autofocus, and will likely be purchasing a Nikon full frame Z camera at some point later this year.

billnikon Loc: Pennsylvania/Ohio/Florida/Maui/Oregon/Vermont

jerryc41 wrote:

If you like Nikon, I'd recommend sticking with Nik... (show quote)

You wrote," Nikon doesn't have many Z lenses now"
I currently count 18 Nikon mirrorless lenses. I believe Nikon has more dedicated Mirrorless lenses than Canon currently has. Is this not correct? Am I missing something? Which would not be unusual.

jerryc41 Loc: Catskill Mts of NY

billnikon wrote:

You wrote," Nikon doesn't have many Z lenses now"
I currently count 18 Nikon mirrorless lenses. I believe Nikon has more dedicated Mirrorless lenses than Canon currently has. Is this not correct? Am I missing something? Which would not be unusual.

You're right, and I'm wrong.

Nikon list 18 Z lenses, and that's more than most people need. When I've read articles about Nikon mirrorless, the universal comment is the lack of lenses. That comment no longer applies.

https://www.nikonusa.com/en/nikon-products/camera-lenses/mirrorless-lenses/index.page

Festus Loc: North Dakota

CHG_CANON wrote:

Either you ride with the brand until the equipment has no tangible economic value, or you accept your loss and ride with the winners. There's a glut of used camera equipment as it is, so a 'loss' is coming no matter what you do. Smart money avoids ever buying new camera equipment except for the newest must haves.

Just like the city he lives in, "WINDY"!

jbk224 Loc: Long Island, NY

CHG_CANON wrote:

Either you ride with the brand until the equipment has no tangible economic value, or you accept your loss and ride with the winners. There's a glut of used camera equipment as it is, so a 'loss' is coming no matter what you do. Smart money avoids ever buying new camera equipment except for the newest must haves.

You are one of the more prolific and knowledgable members here.
Your comment implies that whatever equipment one owns is not good enough (no tangible economic value) or you 'ride with the winners'. The fact is that there is always something newer and 'better'. Clearly most of us own equipment that we can never master in the same manner as the top professional photographers. That being said, professional photographers have found economic value in the equipment that they currently use-- that may not be the newest or the 'winners'. Yet they are perfectly satisfied with their business.
I find it annoying in other websites when comments are made as though everyone must aspire to professional grades only. Most of us enjoy this hobby. Yes, not profession. And we have been more than satisfied with what we 'produce' and look to get better. Smart Money plays no role here. And you don't have to be smart to be realistic and satisfied.
Why is it that 'we' are marginalized if we choose to ride with a brand that works--for the overwhelming majority; or are not as smart as some who think you must always buy the newest?

repleo Loc: Boston

RahulKhosla wrote:

Is it likely that Nikon mirrorless cameras will catch up with the capabilities and quality of top end Sony mirrorless cameras? As someone with a bunch of Nikon lenses - it’s daunting and expensive to consider a shift to Sony. I shoot mostly wildlife and birds in flight so high FPS and good performance tracking capabilities are important.

Nikon will catch up to the current Sony’s - eventually! By then, Sony will be even better and you will be in the same dilemma.

imagemeister Loc: mid east Florida

RahulKhosla wrote:

Is it likely that Nikon mirrorless cameras will catch up with the capabilities and quality of top end Sony mirrorless cameras? As someone with a bunch of Nikon lenses - it’s daunting and expensive to consider a shift to Sony. I shoot mostly wildlife and birds in flight so high FPS and good performance tracking capabilities are important.

EVF tracking for BIF remains a serious concern for me across ALL makers ......proceed with caution and look at many objective reviews !
Meanwhile, IMO, it would be very hard to move away from the excellent Nikon 300 and 500 PF lenses ! !
.

mymike Loc: Tucson, AZ

Earlier this year I bought a used D500 and a 300 mm PF and 500 mm PF lens. I have the Z6 and a D750. Each has its own uses. I find that I have not mastered either of the 3 cameras. I always like to look at what's coming out in the future, but at this stage in life, I will spend in learning how to use what I own. There will always be a newer greater (in the minds of the manufacturer's marketing teams) camera/system. That is what sustains the camera industry. I have bought into that concept, but now reality sets in and I am set.

User ID

Mac wrote:

The people with Sonys will tell you to get Sony.
The people with Canons will tell you to get Canon.
The people with Nikon Z cameras will tell you that the only way you can get good pictures is with a Z mount lens.
I bought a Z5 and use my F mount lenses with the FTZ adapter and I have no complaints.

Not always. I recently bought a Z for my Nikkors. It was an unfortunate brain fart. My Nikkors work well enough on my Sony and the Sony is a better camera.

I’m sure it’s easy enough to like a Z if you’re moving away from a D850 or 750. But it’s not so easy when you’re already spoiled by Sony.

photoman43

RahulKhosla wrote:

Is it likely that Nikon mirrorless cameras will catch up with the capabilities and quality of top end Sony mirrorless cameras? As someone with a bunch of Nikon lenses - it’s daunting and expensive to consider a shift to Sony. I shoot mostly wildlife and birds in flight so high FPS and good performance tracking capabilities are important.

Only time will tell us if Nikon's Z bodies will match the competition's. My needs are satisfied by what I have now and use. Would I like faster fps (more than 10 fps) and eye tracking? Yes. But is it worth $6500-$20,000 and more? For me, NO and NO and NO.

zug55 Loc: Naivasha, Kenya, and Austin, Texas

Architect1776 wrote:

There is a lot of superficial hype about Sony but when you dig down it has huge weaknesses compared to other makes including Nikon.

Such baseless blanket statements are not helpful, aside from the fact that they are not true. I have been shooting with a Sony A7 III and A7R III for over three years, and i have not seen those "weaknesses" yet.

As a Sony shooter, I am happy to see that Canon is catching up. Having more than one strong, competitive mirrorless system is good for all of us.

The question is whether Nikon will catch up. Nikon has lost market share, and their pockets are not as deep as those of Sony or Canon. If OP is happy with their current setup, they can afford to wait to see what Nikon comes up with next.

Here is another thought. Using Nikon DSLR glass on any mirrorless camera will require an adapter. I would want to research how well these adapters work for Nikon, Canon, or Sony mirrorless bodies.

MDI Mainer

repleo wrote:

Nikon will catch up to the current Sony’s - eventually! By then, Sony will be even better and you will be in the same dilemma.

DavidPine Loc: Fredericksburg, TX

RahulKhosla wrote:

Is it likely that Nikon mirrorless cameras will catch up with the capabilities and quality of top end Sony mirrorless cameras? As someone with a bunch of Nikon lenses - it’s daunting and expensive to consider a shift to Sony. I shoot mostly wildlife and birds in flight so high FPS and good performance tracking capabilities are important.

Yes.

User ID

imagemeister wrote:

EVF tracking for BIF remains a serious concern for me across ALL makers ......proceed with caution and look at many objective reviews !
Meanwhile, IMO, it would be very hard to move away from the excellent Nikon 300 and 500 PF lenses ! !
.

You worry so much ! I don’t mean you’re concerns have no basis. I just mean that you seem to fret *overly* much about the little things.

Most every picture taking device on the market works great. Yes, some greater than others, but they are all truly great. Don’t worry - be happy.