Nikon Z6, Z7 and Leica SL ..... (merged)

[mmradman]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

In my case, the ability to control focus is key. That means that Leica's offer of dozens of outstanding manual focus R and M lenses beats Nikon's multitude of AF lenses (which are very hard to focus manually).

Sure, there are many Nikon AI and AI-s lenses around, but they were designed 30+ years ago, and they weren't all world-beaters.

Did you ever used any Nikon equipment?

[Advertisement]

The Leica Q3 is available for pre-order at B&H Photo Video and Adorama

[LD_50]

Nothing strange about the question. Everyone knows the Nikon lens line up and that Z6 and Z7 are both capable of using old Nikon lenses as well with a $100 adapter. Leica SL on the contrary has very few lenses unless until you buy a $400 adapter for M lenses. I assumed this much would be common knowledge. I can also say confidently that Nikon lenses are no slouch either. I also know for sure that Nikon will be quick in lunching native lenses for mirror less.

 

I thought logic would have prevailed and one would like to comment on owning a 5 year old technology vs latest technology. If lenses play a 70% part in digital photography, 30% is still played by body. Both Z6 and SL are 24 MP bodies but technology differs.

What I find strange about the question is the need to crowd source what you need in a camera system.

 

If you bought the SL at launch, it will perform better in most regards today than it did then. Being 5 years old doesn’t change the quality of the camera or lenses.

 

If you’re constantly wanting to be on the leading edge of technology or specs per $, Sony is the best bet. Nikon is predictable and slower than Sony with their releases and Leica is much slower still.

 

No one here will have tried the Z7 or Z6 yet and I’ve seen only anecdotal reports on the native lenses. I have a lot of experience with Nikon cameras and lenses and the zoom trio for the SL bests the Nikon “holy trinity” easily for me. The 14-24, 24-70, and 70-200 will likely be better than the announced Z lenses, judging by marketing and price point.

 

Nikon does also have some great ones (200 f/2, 58 f/1.4, 105 f/1.4, etc) that would require adaptation. I don’t enjoy having to use an adapter so I would want a majority of native Z lenses if I were going to that system.

[mmradman]

My A7R2 has been sent to Sony no less than five times to fix the IBIS.

 

Sony and service in the same sentence is a stretch.

[mmradman]

What I find strange about the question is the need to crowd source what you need in a camera system.

If you bought the SL at launch, it will perform better in most regards today than it did then. Being 5 years old doesn’t change the quality of the camera or lenses.

If you’re constantly wanting to be on the leading edge of technology or specs per $, Sony is the best bet. Nikon is predictable and slower than Sony with their releases and Leica is much slower still.

No one here will have tried the Z7 or Z6 yet and I’ve seen only anecdotal reports on the native lenses. I have a lot of experience with Nikon cameras and lenses and the zoom trio for the SL bests the Nikon “holy trinity” easily for me. The 14-24, 24-70, and 70-200 will likely be better than the announced Z lenses, judging by marketing and price point.

Nikon does also have some great ones (200 f/2, 58 f/1.4, 105 f/1.4, etc) that would require adaptation. I don’t enjoy having to use an adapter so I would want a majority of native Z lenses if I were going to that system.

Nikon adapter is non issue, three lenses you mentioned, 200/2, 58/1.4 & 105/1.4, all superb, are AFS and G type, AF and AE fully supported.

[LD_50]

Adapter use is not a non issue to me. It’s cumbersome, adds more stress to the mount, and increases the likelihood of alignment issues.

 

Also, those lenses are designed for PDAF, not CDAF. It’s yet to be seen if they perform as well adapted to the Z.

[BernardC]

Did you ever used any Nikon equipment?

Of course I have. I speak from experience with their lenses. Almost all AF lenses are difficult to focus manually with great precision, so that comment is not aimed at Nikon specifically (although Nikon lenses focus the opposite way from all others, which adds a level of difficulty). Their manual lenses were good, and solidly built, but they rarely reached the consistent excellence of Zeiss and Leica.

 

Isn't that why most of us are here?

[bags27]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

Adapter use is not a non issue to me. It’s cumbersome, adds more stress to the mount, and increases the likelihood of alignment issues.

 

Also, those lenses are designed for PDAF, not CDAF. It’s yet to be seen if they perform as well adapted to the Z.

actually, early users are praising the adapter, which contains a tripod mount. Turns out that mount is a perfect resting place for your supportive hand. folks are going wild about the ergomatics of the camera.

[mmradman]

Of course I have. I speak from experience with their lenses. Almost all AF lenses are difficult to focus manually with great precision, so that comment is not aimed at Nikon specifically (although Nikon lenses focus the opposite way from all others, which adds a level of difficulty). Their manual lenses were good, and solidly built, but they rarely reached the consistent excellence of Zeiss and Leica.

 

Isn't that why most of us are here?

Spot on.

 

Myself included, once I fitted first leitaxed R lens to D700 I was hooked.

Introduction of Mirrorless full frame Nikon creates new dimension in the choice of cameras.

 

By the way I was never keen on Sony as I had awful service experience with Sony laptop so decided to give “groundbreaking alpha” wide berth, “inferior” Leica Cameras served me well over the last six years, however emergence of relatively affordable and versatile Z7 camera from a pedigree brand is intriguing.

[LD_50]

actually, early users are praising the adapter, which contains a tripod mount. Turns out that mount is a perfect resting place for your supportive hand. folks are going wild about the ergomatics of the camera.

Yes it contains a tripod mount. Useful with a tripod but not otherwise.

 

I don’t want an extra inch of metal added for a hand rest. The lenses I shot regularly with Nikon were all fairly large (14-24, 24-70, 70-200, 105 macro) did not need any additional room for my hand. That a large adapter would be needed for already large DSLR lenses to allow for handholding ergonomics is preposterous.

[bags27]

Yes it contains a tripod mount. Useful with a tripod but not otherwise.

 

I don’t want an extra inch of metal added for a hand rest. The lenses I shot regularly with Nikon were all fairly large (14-24, 24-70, 70-200, 105 macro) did not need any additional room for my hand. That a large adapter would be needed for already large DSLR lenses to allow for handholding ergonomics is preposterous.

Some folks, as I said, are raving about that very thing. different strokes.... 

 

Hugh Brownstone is certainly underwhelmed with what Nikon's produced. 

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RQY-yN05-SY

[Csacwp]

How will the Z7 work with M lenses once an adapter hits the market? Does the sensor have a thick cover glass?

[sdw]

It'll probably be on par with the A7 series, which is to say, wonderfully. They're great lenses. Perhaps some smear on the wider end of the spectrum. No need for Nikon's blessing, either — they just need to copy the flange design and machine an M mount on the other side and it's done. Probably one of the first adapters we'll see hitting the market. 

[frame-it]

F1.8 is "medium speed" ?

 

 

The native lens line is limited for now (one kit zoom, two medium-speed primes).

[Mr.Q]

If a Leica SL owner were to switch to the new Nikon's based on the recent announcement (of 2 cameras and 3 lenses), they would have already switched to the A7III or A7RIII a few months ago.

 

Only existing Nikon shooters are excited with this (non-)news.

[bags27]

If a Leica SL owner were to switch to the new Nikon's based on the recent announcement (of 2 cameras and 3 lenses), they would have already switched to the A7III or A7RIII a few months ago.

 

Only existing Nikon shooters are excited with this (non-)news.

This is Nikon's first, rush-to-market, attempt at a competitive mirrorless (not counting the now-discontinued 1). Currently it might not be more or even as attractive as Sony. But the competition, esp. when Canon comes in, will be fantastic, as Sony, Nikon, and Canon all have deep pockets and access to top technology. Of particular interest to Leica owners, of those three, Nikon will eventually produce the best in form and simplest in interface. Not to mention all that legacy glass, especially at the extremes of telescopic and fisheye, where Nikon has always excelled. For those who don't already own it, that legacy glass is available at discount.

 

This former "Nikon shooter" was tempted by Sony, but the delta in form and unnecessary complexity between Sony and Leica is absurdly great. I figured there'd be a much smaller delta between Leica and Nikon, so I held off, hoping for either a decent Nikon (jury is still out) or a smaller form SL2.

[Mr.Q]

This is Nikon's first, rush-to-market, attempt at a competitive mirrorless (not counting the now-discontinued 1). Currently it might not be more or even as attractive as Sony. But the competition, esp. when Canon comes in, will be fantastic, as Sony, Nikon, and Canon all have deep pockets and access to top technology. Of particular interest to Leica owners, of those three, Nikon will eventually produce the best in form and simplest in interface. Not to mention all that legacy glass, especially at the extremes of telescopic and fisheye, where Nikon has always excelled. For those who don't already own it, that legacy glass is available at discount.

 

This former "Nikon shooter" was tempted by Sony, but the delta in form and unnecessary complexity between Sony and Leica is absurdly great. I figured there'd be a much smaller delta between Leica and Nikon, so I held off, hoping for either a decent Nikon (jury is still out) or a smaller form SL2.

I can agree with that as both the SL and Z7/Z6 have similar strengths over the Sony --- better ergonomics/grip, better build, better weather-sealing, top LCD, and superior EVF.

To be honest though, I'm envious of how much smaller the 35/1.8 and 55/1.8 primes are over the upcoming SL F2 equivalents.

 

I've voiced my disappointed in the past, but a 35/2 and 50/2 should not be as long as a 90/2. It's undeniable that Leica is re-using the barrel for cost-cutting measures.

[Chaemono]

The 35 Summicron-SL is tiny. I don’t know about the 50. I find the 75 an 90 small and compact enough with IQ that rivals that of the 50 Summilux-SL. But what a great move but Nikon. No need for Nikon users to switch to Sony now. I wonder how good the native lenses are. But Nikon stays realistic. Their standard Z 24-70 zoom is f/4. They claim on their website “NIKKOR Z 24-70mm f/4 S delivers uncanny sharpness, vibrance and even lighting across the entire frame.” I tend to believe them. None of this G-master BS.

 

Love it. Love it because it will force Leica to improve on the SL to stay in the game. Hopefully, we’ll know in a few weeks if the S008 has IBIS. My guess is it does. SL2 scheduled for May (I assumed May 2019 but others pointed out with Leica it could mean May in any future year) will likely also have it. Faster AF with the SL2 can be assumed. When the SL2 comes out I’m tempted to compare lens quality of these NIKKOR Zs. See if they are as good as the SL lenses.

Edited August 25, 2018 by Chaemono

[jaapv]

I can agree with that as both the SL and Z7/Z6 have similar strengths over the Sony --- better ergonomics/grip, better build, better weather-sealing, top LCD, and superior EVF.

To be honest though, I'm envious of how much smaller the 35/1.8 and 55/1.8 primes are over the upcoming SL F2 equivalents.

 

I've voiced my disappointed in the past, but a 35/2 and 50/2 should not be as long as a 90/2. It's undeniable that Leica is re-using the barrel for cost-cutting measures.

Are you a lens designer?

[Advertisement]

Hallo,

Look here: Leica L-Mount

[helged]

The 35 Summicron-SL is tiny. I don’t know about the 50. I find the 75 an 90 small and compact enough with IQ that rivals that of the 50 Summilux-SL. But what a great move but Nikon. No need for Nikon users to switch to Sony now. I wonder how good the native lenses are. But Nikon stays realistic. Their standard Z 24-70 zoom is f/4. They claim on their website “NIKKOR Z 24-70mm f/4 S delivers uncanny sharpness, vibrance and even lighting across the entire frame.” I tend to believe them. None of this G-master BS.

 

Love it. Love it because it will force Leica to improve on the SL to stay in the game. Hopefully, we’ll know in a few weeks if the S008 has IBIS. My guess is it does. SL2 scheduled for May (I assumed May 2019 but others pointed out with Leica it could mean May in any future year) will likely also have it. Faster AF with the SL2 can be assumed. When the SL2 comes out I’m tempted to compare lens quality of these NIKKOR Zs. See if they are as good as the SL lenses.

Yes, the S008/S3 and SL2 will be critical upgrades for Leica. Leica M has its territory - whereas S and SL have multiple, comparable systems to compete against.

 

S008/S3 with IBIS would be something...

[marknorton]

It’s interesting to see people here dismiss the Nikon Z before it’s hardly announced and staunchly support their choice of the SL. Human nature, I suppose, but Nikon offers in the Z6 similar resolution for half the price with a huge array of legacy lenses supported via a single adapter. The SL does too of course but with markedly inferior usability. No autofocus and stopped down metering and focussing.

 

Most recent F lenses do not have an aperture ring so the aperture is set from the camera, and so it will be in the Z. I expect the tripod lump contains an actuator for the lens coupling prong. What’s not clear is whether Nikon has made this fast enough for the lens to stop down when a shot is taken or whether it is used just to preset the aperture.

 

It’s an interesting introduction and the lens/adapter bundle pricing is attractive. I’ve ordered one to complement my D5 and D850 which as a pair are a bit like having a Z6 and Z7 pair. I agree the single card slot is a mistake but I am happy with the use of XQD.

 

I wonder what will now happen to F development. Will the Z be able to extend downwards to entry DSLR country? Difficult to see any more DSLR bodies and D5/D850 sales are bound to suffer because Z6/7 buyers might well have otherwise chosen one of those.

 

It’s early days and of course the native lens range is poor - just as it was - is? - with the SL. How long was it between the first lens and the next one? Leica need to crack on...

 

Makes me also wonder whether there is any new development in plan for the S and the M.

Edited August 25, 2018 by marknorton