Nikon Z or DSLR? Which is the better choice for plenty of AI-s and AFD lenses?

[Anon Ymous]

DUST

Is it that much different compared to DSLRs?

 

[Mal Paso]

DUST

Just pay the $5,500 for the Z9 Body, it has a sensor cover. Best tip is turn the lesser cameras off for lens changes. Oh, what we do in the name of technology! LOL

 

[Moose22]

Is it that much different compared to DSLRs?

Yes.

Dust is worse on my Z7 than on my previous couple of cameras. I do a lot of cleaning when I've been using it in anger. It's almost always an issue after I might have switched a lens, used a zoom... it's weather sealed but you can get stuff in through the battery compartment, too. Eventually something gets in there.

Since the sensor isn't covered and it doesn't have a mirror for incidental coverage, it does seem to attract those dust bunnies more often.

No digital is dust free, but the Z6 and Z7 do need more cleaning in my experience.

 

[xkaes]

Is it that much different compared to DSLRs?

Depends on the DSLR, I suppose. Mine have a mirror, of course, but also have a metal, electronic shutter that keep dust OFF of the sensor because it's closed 99.9999% of the time.

 

[Sirius Glass]

I am a fan of SLRs. Mirrorless is the future.

I do not see it in my future. I am happy with what I have,

 

[jtk]

Dust has almost never been a problem with any Pentax DSLR (they shake it off).

I think the Z is way too early in it's design-life. Give its successor a couple of years before betting on it.

Meanwhile, Z has all sorts of bells/whistles if that's someone's goal.

 

[mshchem]

Digital cameras are computers. 10 years max and they are done.

 

[Anon Ymous]

Digital cameras are computers. 10 years max and they are done.

My 10 year old Canon 6D is a perfectly fine camera. Actually, my 14 year old 450D is also perfectly usable and I'll pick it if I want something light, combined with a stabilised kit lens. None of them is "done".

 

[mshchem]

My 10 year old Canon 6D is a perfectly fine camera. Actually, my 14 year old 450D is also perfectly usable and I'll pick it if I want something light, combined with a stabilised kit lens. None of them is "done".

I have a 23 year old Nikon Coolpix 990. Still works, it takes AA batteries. The 995 used a Nikon rechargeable battery pack, these are toast.

 

[benveniste]

I have a 23 year old Nikon Coolpix 990. Still works, it takes AA batteries. The 995 used a Nikon rechargeable battery pack, these are toast.

There are still batteries (and chargers) available for the Coolpix 995. Mine still works. Not that it's germane to the original question.

At this time, my preference for AI-s lenses would be a Z camera. Focus peaking is a better solution for manually focus than either Live View or the "Green dot."

For "screwdriver" AF lenses, it's a much closer decision. The full-frame Z cameras give you IBIS, but you have to focus manually, and I can't say much positive about the focus feel of any of my "D" or pre-D AF lenses. So for those lenses, I'd stick with a dSLR.

 

[RalphLambrecht]

You doubt that mirrorless is the future?

I do. The acceptance has been slow;even though, T think Nikon's adapter solution is brilliant.

 

[Ariston]

DSLRs are so noisy. That's my biggest issue. No one needs flash or bright lights at press events today, mirrorless excel in everything, and they are silent.

I wouldn't say they excel at everything (battery life? cost?). I can't stand looking at another screen. I'm surprised so many people are ok with it; but then again, people love looking at screens these days. I understand the advantage of seeing instant feedback on the exposure, etc. But to me, the price you pay of having to look at yet another screen is not worth it.

Maybe because I have to look at screens all day for work. I'm over it. I don't want to be detached further from reality on yet another activity. This same "progress" has ruined much of modern music in my opinion, which is now programmed instead of composed and performed.

 

[jtk]

I wouldn't say they excel at everything (battery life? cost?). I can't stand looking at another screen. I'm surprised so many people are ok with it; but then again, people love looking at screens these days. I understand the advantage of seeing instant feedback on the exposure, etc. But to me, the price you pay of having to look at yet another screen is not worth it.

Maybe because I have to look at screens all day for work. I'm over it. I don't want to be detached further from reality on yet another activity. This same "progress" has ruined much of modern music in my opinion, which is now programmed instead of composed and performed.

I've loved jazz ever since I heard Miles et al. I love black music (jazz), and that constitutes the best of "modern music IMO.

It's important to listen to what you love, or what you are tempted to learn about.

I doubt many people "love looking at screens".

I don't think exploration of ideas is a wonderful online resource. For example, I've been reading some online thinking about Mark Twain and info about Ukraine history. Some folks don't like ideas, but that's OK with me. .

One alternative to Ariston's sad attitude about computers is to use them intelligently. For example, one can learn a lot about photography by exploration of Photrio.

Personally, I have no interest in photo-chemistry but a lot of interesting folks share a lot of photo chemistry experience on Photrio.

 

[tanager4]

The recent posts seem to have gone off topic

@alentine could you post which AI-s and AF-D lenses you have specifically? Why do you want to hang on to them instead of replacing them with more modern lenses?

 

[jtk]

I've loved jazz ever since I heard Miles et al. I love black music (jazz), and that constitutes the best of "modern music IMO.

It's important to listen to what you love, or what you are tempted to learn about.

I doubt many people "love looking at screens".

I don't think exploration of ideas is a wonderful online resource. For example, I've been reading some online thinking about Mark Twain and info about Ukraine history. Some folks don't like ideas, but that's OK with me. .

One alternative to Ariston's sad attitude about computers is to use them intelligently. For example, one can learn a lot about photography by exploration of Photrio.

Personally, I have no interest in photo-chemistry but a lot of interesting folks share a lot of photo chemistry experience on Photrio.

OOPS, typo. For me, computers ARE wonderful idea-exploration resources.
I don't think exploration of ideas is a wonderful online resource. For example, I've been reading some online thinking about Mark Twain and info about Ukraine history. Some folks don't like ideas, but that's OK with me. .

Also...without computers we might be stuck with very little optical glass.

 

[benveniste]

Nikon Z or DSLR? Which is the better choice for plenty of AI-s and AFD lenses?

Hello everyone,
Really could not decide which camera that can serve better?
Nikon mirrorless like Z7ii, with FTZ adapter of course?
Or,
Nikon DSLR like D850?
and why that choice?
Have several lenses of AI-s & AFD Nikon lenses.

Happy to know your thoughts.
Regards.

For "screwdriver" AF-D lenses, the D850 allows autofocus operation. None of the F-to-Z adapters include an AF motor, so your AF-D lenses become manual focus lenses typically with inferior focus feel.

For manual focus lenses, it's a much more subjective call, but my current plan is to shift from my D800 to a mirrorless body in 2023 or 2024. For my most commonly used lenses (24-120mm, 70-200mm, 105mm macro), I'll buy "native" lenses and use an FTZ adapter for the more specialized "stuff."

 

[BradS]

If a manual focus AI lens is mounted on the FTZ adapter, does the FTZ adapter auto stop down the aperture?

 

[bdial]

If a manual focus AI lens is mounted on the FTZ adapter, does the FTZ adapter auto stop down the aperture?

No, the lens operates as if it's a manual aperture, so it is "stopped down" all the time. There is a tab in the adaptor that engages the stop-down lever on the lens.
You can set the camera to show you the stopped down view, that is, the metered result for the amount of light it sees, or have it show a bright image all the time.

Lenses that have an electromagnetic aperture will stop down for the exposure, then open back up as normal.

 

[BradS]

No, the lens operates as if it's a manual aperture, so it is "stopped down" all the time. There is a tab in the adaptor that engages the stop-down lever on the lens.
You can set the camera to show you the stopped down view, that is, the metered result for the amount of light it sees, or have it show a bright image all the time.

Lenses that have an electromagnetic aperture will stop down for the exposure, then open back up as normal.

Thanks.

It seems that mirrorless with adapted manual focus lenses would be quite cumbersome in actual use then; if one must manually open the aperture to focus then manually stop down to expose.

 

[bdial]

Thanks.

It seems that mirrorless with adapted manual focus lenses would be quite cumbersome in actual use then; if one must manually open the aperture to focus then manually stop down to expose.

Not really, most of the time you just set the lens to whatever aperture you want and leave it.
I just did an experiment with my 180/2.8, at 7 feet, it was difficult to nail the focus at f/32, but at f/8, it was no problem.
I usually have the camera set to show the bright image, so, the view is always bright even with the lens at F/32, it’s very similar to working with a rangefinder camera.

My Z is a Z6, overall I like it quite a lot, though there are things to get used to,. For example, the camera has to be turned on to see anything in the viewfinder. Not something you expect with an SLR.

If you want to experiment with lenses, it’s a very good choice, the Z’s have a relatively short flange distance, so you can use just about any lens, and there are a zillion adapters available.

 

[MattKing]

Thanks.

It seems that mirrorless with adapted manual focus lenses would be quite cumbersome in actual use then; if one must manually open the aperture to focus then manually stop down to expose.

Don't forget that, unlike film cameras, when you view and focus with an EVF equipped camera at the shooting aperture, the viewfinder image is always at its brightest.

 

[BradS]

Not really, most of the time you just set the lens to whatever aperture you want and leave it.
I just did an experiment with my 180/2.8, at 7 feet, it was difficult to nail the focus at f/32, but at f/8, it was no problem.
...

Don't forget that, unlike film cameras, when you view and focus with an EVF equipped camera at the shooting aperture, the viewfinder image is always at its brightest.

I appreciate your patience with me. I'm trying to learn how this all works. It seems too good to be true to me. So, thanks again for bearing with me.

Wouldn't focusing with the aperture at f/8, for example, introduce significant uncertainty? Isn't the increased depth of field an issue? The computer would say "all of this stuff is in focus" but one wouldn't know where the plane of focus actually is.
It seems like it would be like focusing with the depth of field preview button pressed but brighter. I understand that lack of brightness may not be an issue but how is sloppy focus not an issue? or does the computer some how know and show where the plane of focus really is?

 

[MattKing]

I appreciate your patience with me. I'm trying to learn how this all works. It seems too good to be true to me. So, thanks again for bearing with me.

Wouldn't focusing with the aperture at f/8, for example, introduce significant uncertainty? Isn't the increased depth of field an issue? The computer would say "all of this stuff is in focus" but one wouldn't know where the plane of focus actually is.
It seems like it would be like focusing with the depth of field preview button pressed but brighter. I understand that lack of brightness may not be an issue but how is sloppy focus not an issue? or does the computer some how know and show where the plane of focus really is?

It is only an issue if you are concerned about the planes where the subject is not in focus - e.g. if you want to be sure that it is the area behind your main subject that is unsharp, rather than the area in front.
In either case - focusing at f/2 or f/8 - the focusing system will maximize the sharpness of the part of the subject that the focus selection spot is centred on.
And if the focusing system is your Mark 11 eyeball (manual focus), you get to evaluate the depth of field at the same time you focus.

 

[BradS]

It is only an issue if you are concerned about the planes where the subject is not in focus - e.g. if you want to be sure that it is the area behind your main subject that is unsharp, rather than the area in front.
In either case - focusing at f/2 or f/8 - the focusing system will maximize the sharpness of the part of the subject that the focus selection spot is centred on.
And if the focusing system is your Mark 11 eyeball (manual focus), you get to evaluate the depth of field at the same time you focus.

Hmmm ... I guess will have to experiment with this some more.
Thanks.

 

[jp498]

I don't mind being a few years behind. I'm not a pro. A D810 or D7500 still does an amazing job. Technology changes enough that being >10 years behind is a disservice to the digital photographer, but a small number of years behind isn't a big deal for a non-pro. I'll continue to enjoy the above for a couple more years. My style is not apt to change.

The Z mirrorless cameras would do an easier job with video, but I don't do enough of that to be motivated to change.