Nikon Z* mirrorless

Stephen L said:
I can recommend you look at the Nonnikkor lenses from Artralab.
Really well built and optically surprisingly good.
Click to expand...
Thanks, I've had a look at the web site. Nice looking lenses but very little details.

Do they have electrical contacts? This was the big advantage of the CV lenses, as well as their optical performance.

I'll have look for some reviews and other pages.
 
myotis said:
Thanks, I've had a look at the web site. Nice looking lenses but very little details.

Do they have electrical contacts? This was the big advantage of the CV lenses, as well as their optical performance.

I'll have look for some reviews and other pages.
Click to expand...
Unfortunately they are dumb lenses, unlike some Laowa. I have the 35mm which is very good. J also have a 50mm f1.1 from Mr Ding (!) which ivnot really tried yet.
 
Stephen L said:
Unfortunately they are dumb lenses, unlike some Laowa. I have the 35mm which is very good. J also have a 50mm f1.1 from Mr Ding (!) which ivnot really tried yet.
Click to expand...
Thanks, as I understand it, the focus peaking still works with dumb lenses, but the focus spot turning green doesn't, which is what I prefer.

And of course you will need to manually tell the camera what the focal length is for IBIS, a bit of a pain when you switch lenses.

I’m currently using my Zeiss lenses (35 and 50) with the FTZ, which work fine but at 650g each (plus adaptor), and physically enormous, I'm really keen to replace them with something smaller/lighter for "walk around" photography.
 
myotis said:
Thanks, as I understand it, the focus peaking still works with dumb lenses, but the focus spot turning green doesn't, which is what I prefer.

And of course you will need to manually tell the camera what the focal length is for IBIS, a bit of a pain when you switch lenses.

I’m currently using my Zeiss lenses (35 and 50) with the FTZ, which work fine but at 650g each (plus adaptor), and physically enormous, I'm really keen to replace them with something smaller/lighter for "walk around" photography.
Click to expand...
Yes, I empathise with you on all counts! However, my eyes have decided that much of the time my interpretation of the “peaks” on focus peaking is slightly skewed, and that focussing without that assistance can be more accurate. But that’s just me.
At least with the Zf (probably most Z cameras) you can assign up to 7 (I think) lenses their own “slot” and if you put that function into your My Menu then it’s only a matter of seconds to activate. Not as ideal as having an electronic connection, granted.
Using the FTZ certainly adds bulk and weight - unwelcome as many manual lenses are built like brick outhouses to start with.
 
Stephen L said:
Yes, I empathise with you on all counts! However, my eyes have decided that much of the time my interpretation of the “peaks” on focus peaking is slightly skewed, and that focussing without that assistance can be more accurate. But that’s just me.
At least with the Zf (probably most Z cameras) you can assign up to 7 (I think) lenses their own “slot” and if you put that function into your My Menu then it’s only a matter of seconds to activate. Not as ideal as having an electronic connection, granted.
Using the FTZ certainly adds bulk and weight - unwelcome as many manual lenses are built like brick outhouses to start with.
Click to expand...
I'm not a fan of focus peaking, but if I'm trying to focus quickly I find the other focus indicators useful.

I would imagine all Nikons will have the facility to store preset lens details. It was on all of their DSLRs (at least all the ones I have owned) not for IBIS, but for manual focus Nikkor lenses that weren't chipped, but the camera still needed to know what the maximum aperture was. In the circumstances I wanted the Voigtlander's for, "I know" I will forget to change the settings.

The FTZ is an unwelcome complication, especially if you are switching with a mix of Z mount and F mount lenses (not that I have any z-mount lenses yet, but I have experience with other makes of switching between native and adapted lenses).

The discontinued lenses were in my long term plan, so maybe I will just have a rethink. In spite of my preference for manual focus lenses, there was also a slight nagging feeling that maybe they weren't the most logical of choices. Having said that, I nearly bought the 35mm last week, but chickened out at the last minute.
 
Apparently the Z6iii has the same manual focus eye AF as the Zf. Perhaps it’ll be available via firmware for others.
 
addicknchips said:
Will you be getting one, Trev?
Click to expand...
I’ve given it a lot of thought. My Zf is very capable. But sometimes I miss the U1-U3 on a SPAM dial. Particularly when on the dog walk. Switching from animal af for a portrait then wanting to get an action shot with different shutter speed with high frame advance. Should be just a click of the dial rather than a menu dive.
 
Does anyone use the Nikon Z 70-180 f2.8, especially on the Z8?

I’m currently loving the lightweight 400 f4.5 but want a slightly shorter focal length lens option to carry around too. It will be used for close up portraits of wildlife in wildlife centres and parks, or more environmental images of wildlife in the wild. In the past I’ve used a 70-200 lens for lots of wildlife like puffins, red squirrels and hedgehogs so its possibly a focal range I’d miss if limited to only the 400 f4.5.

I’d like a fast aperture lens as previously I used a 70-200 f2.8 when I had Nikon DSLRs. I ended up swapping it out for a 70-200 f4 for the lighter weight. This makes me think unless Nikon go the way of Sony or canon the current 70-200 f2.8 will be too large and heavy for me going on past experience.

This makes me think the 70-180 f2.8 would be nearly the ideal option for me.

70-180 f2.8 Compared to 70-200 f2.8:

Lightweight - 795g vs 1360mm

small - 151mm vs 220mm

Fast aperture - f2.8 vs f2.8

Lower cost - £1049 vs £1999

Looking at camera size.com the 70-180 looks to be a good size and would probably fit in my bag with the 400 f4.5 in there too.

IMG_1237.jpeg

I know there will be compromises with the 70-180 f2.8 namely in build quality, non S line, lower sharpness, external extending zoom and lack in lens VR, but generally for me I’m not too worried as heavy and large size have been the big issues for me in the past. If there was a Nikon 70-200 f4 Z lens I’d probably go for that.

I’ve been reading this review but it would be great to get anyone’s thoughts on the 70-180 f2.8 lens.

photographylife.com

Nikon Z 70-180mm f/2.8 Review

photographylife.com photographylife.com
 
Last edited:
rob-nikon said:
Does anyone use the Nikon Z 70-180 f2.8, especially on the Z8?

I’m currently loving the lightweight 400 f4.5 but want a slightly shorter focal length lens option to carry around too. It will be used for close up portraits of wildlife in wildlife centres and parks, or more environmental images of wildlife in the wild. In the past I’ve used a 70-200 lens for lots of wildlife like puffins, red squirrels and hedgehogs so its possibly a focal range I’d miss if limited to only the 400 f4.5.

I’d like a fast aperture lens as previously I used a 70-200 f2.8 when I had Nikon DSLRs. I ended up swapping it out for a 70-200 f4 for the lighter weight. This makes me think unless Nikon go the way of Sony or canon the current 70-200 f2.8 will be too large and heavy for me going on past experience.

This makes me think the 70-180 f2.8 would be nearly the ideal option for me.

70-180 f2.8 Compared to 70-200 f2.8:

Lightweight - 795g vs 1360mm

small - 151mm vs 220mm

Fast aperture - f2.8 vs f2.8

Lower cost - £1049 vs £1999

Looking at camera size.com the 70-180 looks to be a good size and would probably fit in my bag with the 400 f4.5 in there too.

View attachment 426836

I know there will be compromises with the 70-180 f2.8 namely in build quality, non S line, lower sharpness, external extending zoom and lack in lens VR, but generally for me I’m not too worried as heavy and large size have been the big issues for me in the past. If there was a Nikon 70-200 f4 Z lens I’d probably go for that.

I’ve been reading this review but it would be great to get anyone’s thoughts on the 70-180 f2.8 lens.

photographylife.com

Nikon Z 70-180mm f/2.8 Review

photographylife.com photographylife.com
Click to expand...
I can't help with a personal review, but I can add Thom Hogan's thoughts. (He hasn't published a complete review)

  • Nikon 70-180mm f/2.8 — An oft-overlooked lens, partly because it's based on a first generation Tamron optical design and the fact that it doesn't have VR. Both those supposed flaws are not worth worrying about. The Nikon sensor-VR does a fine enough job at 180mm, and this lens is perfectly good at 180mm f/2.8. The benefit of choosing this lens over the next one is simple: smaller and lighter, so easier to carry and pack. If all you're looking for is something good "around 200mm", this is probably your best choice.

Best Telephoto Options in the Z Mount | Thom Hogan

What's the best telephoto option for a Z camera at 200-800mm?
www.zsystemuser.com

That page is worth looking at, as he does a detailed comparison of all the Nikon tele options (Z and F+FTZ)
 
I’ve got one and used it for some events (military show and a jousting event).
I’ve not used it much this year but it’s good enough for me.
It also takes a Teleconverter.

www.talkphotography.co.uk

Jousting & Fighting

Joust 1 small by Peter Stephens, on Flickr Joust 2 small by Peter Stephens, on Flickr Cage fight small by Peter Stephens, on Flickr Bowman 2 small by Peter Stephens, on Flickr Fight 3 small by Peter Stephens, on Flickr Fight 1 small by Peter Stephens, on Flickr
www.talkphotography.co.uk www.talkphotography.co.uk
 
Last edited:
myotis said:
I can't help with a personal review, but I can add Thom Hogan's thoughts. (He hasn't published a complete review)

  • Nikon 70-180mm f/2.8 — An oft-overlooked lens, partly because it's based on a first generation Tamron optical design and the fact that it doesn't have VR. Both those supposed flaws are not worth worrying about. The Nikon sensor-VR does a fine enough job at 180mm, and this lens is perfectly good at 180mm f/2.8. The benefit of choosing this lens over the next one is simple: smaller and lighter, so easier to carry and pack. If all you're looking for is something good "around 200mm", this is probably your best choice.

Best Telephoto Options in the Z Mount | Thom Hogan

What's the best telephoto option for a Z camera at 200-800mm?
www.zsystemuser.com

That page is worth looking at, as he does a detailed comparison of all the Nikon tele options (Z and F+FTZ)
Click to expand...
@myotis Thanks for the links to the Thom pages.

After reading the telephoto stuff I drifted off to look at the Zf review by Thom.
This was very useful and explains the detail that had passed me by in use and skim reading the manual. I always criticised the choice of 26MP for the Zf as 33MP or better 45MP would produce a good camera for everything. However if you are serious in your landscapes you shoot on a tripod, so in this case why not shoot in multi-pixel mode and get a 96MP image! No need for a Zfx 45MP camera. This revelation puts my Z9 under threat as I could trade in my Z9 and get a second Zf with some Voigtlander lenses! However there are some very nice features on the Z9 that I use that ensures this is not going to happen.
 
jknights said:
@myotis Thanks for the links to the Thom pages.

After reading the telephoto stuff I drifted off to look at the Zf review by Thom.
This was very useful and explains the detail that had passed me by in use and skim reading the manual. I always criticised the choice of 26MP for the Zf as 33MP or better 45MP would produce a good camera for everything. However if you are serious in your landscapes you shoot on a tripod, so in this case why not shoot in multi-pixel mode and get a 96MP image! No need for a Zfx 45MP camera. This revelation puts my Z9 under threat as I could trade in my Z9 and get a second Zf with some Voigtlander lenses! However there are some very nice features on the Z9 that I use that ensures this is not going to happen.
Click to expand...
Thom Hogan, is always a good source of info, as I've mentioned before, his camera manuals are exceptionally useful sources of info.

My only concern about pixel shift is how subject movement might affect the final image. leaves/grasses blowing in the wind or moving water etc

I am sort of used to problems with subject movement from using 5x4 for landscape where long exposures were often inevitable, But the examples I've seen from pixel shift are sometimes just weird as the subject doesn't flow the way it would with a long exposure, but jumps around. I keep on meaning to give it a try (now that I have a Z8) and see if pixel shift + longish exposures replicates the movement seen with straight long exposures.

I never tried it when I had my Olympus kit, which had the big advantage of allowing hand held pixel shift..

I need to look into it properly, as even with the Z8, I miss the tonal/colour gradation of medium/large format and pixel shift seems to give a worthwhile improvement in these things.
 
rob-nikon said:
Does anyone use the Nikon Z 70-180 f2.8, especially on the Z8?

I’m currently loving the lightweight 400 f4.5 but want a slightly shorter focal length lens option to carry around too. It will be used for close up portraits of wildlife in wildlife centres and parks, or more environmental images of wildlife in the wild. In the past I’ve used a 70-200 lens for lots of wildlife like puffins, red squirrels and hedgehogs so its possibly a focal range I’d miss if limited to only the 400 f4.5.

I’d like a fast aperture lens as previously I used a 70-200 f2.8 when I had Nikon DSLRs. I ended up swapping it out for a 70-200 f4 for the lighter weight. This makes me think unless Nikon go the way of Sony or canon the current 70-200 f2.8 will be too large and heavy for me going on past experience.

This makes me think the 70-180 f2.8 would be nearly the ideal option for me.

70-180 f2.8 Compared to 70-200 f2.8:

Lightweight - 795g vs 1360mm

small - 151mm vs 220mm

Fast aperture - f2.8 vs f2.8

Lower cost - £1049 vs £1999

Looking at camera size.com the 70-180 looks to be a good size and would probably fit in my bag with the 400 f4.5 in there too.

View attachment 426836

I know there will be compromises with the 70-180 f2.8 namely in build quality, non S line, lower sharpness, external extending zoom and lack in lens VR, but generally for me I’m not too worried as heavy and large size have been the big issues for me in the past. If there was a Nikon 70-200 f4 Z lens I’d probably go for that.

I’ve been reading this review but it would be great to get anyone’s thoughts on the 70-180 f2.8 lens.

photographylife.com

Nikon Z 70-180mm f/2.8 Review

photographylife.com photographylife.com
Click to expand...
Hi Rob,

I had a 70-180mm lens but for my copy of the lens wasn't great between 70-105mm. I had to stop down to f4/f5.6 to get real sharp images. From 105 > 180mm it was tack sharp wide open. Also, in my experience it didn't like my 1.4 TC.

I then bought a Nikon AFS 70-200mm f4 and it was okay with the FTZ but the 70-180mm is a lot better lens. The copy I had, the VR or AFS noise was loud so I sent it back. I've had a few f4 lenses in the past on my DSLR's and I have found them excellent. It also confirmed I want a f2.8 lens now.

Just waiting for my credit to clear and I will be ordering the Z 70-200 f2.8 this week...From PL review the 200mm lens takes the TC better , which I want. For the weight difference I manage the 400mm f4.5 lens fine, so hopefully the 70-200mm lens will also be fine for my use. Some reports say the 70-200mm lens even takes a 2.0 TC okay.

In summary I would try the 70-180mm at your local shop or if you need to order online make sure the dealer has a good returns procedure. Just my IMO and from my experience, others will differ.
 
rob-nikon said:
Does anyone use the Nikon Z 70-180 f2.8, especially on the Z8?

I’m currently loving the lightweight 400 f4.5 but want a slightly shorter focal length lens option to carry around too. It will be used for close up portraits of wildlife in wildlife centres and parks, or more environmental images of wildlife in the wild. In the past I’ve used a 70-200 lens for lots of wildlife like puffins, red squirrels and hedgehogs so its possibly a focal range I’d miss if limited to only the 400 f4.5.

I’d like a fast aperture lens as previously I used a 70-200 f2.8 when I had Nikon DSLRs. I ended up swapping it out for a 70-200 f4 for the lighter weight. This makes me think unless Nikon go the way of Sony or canon the current 70-200 f2.8 will be too large and heavy for me going on past experience.

This makes me think the 70-180 f2.8 would be nearly the ideal option for me.

70-180 f2.8 Compared to 70-200 f2.8:

Lightweight - 795g vs 1360mm

small - 151mm vs 220mm

Fast aperture - f2.8 vs f2.8

Lower cost - £1049 vs £1999

Looking at camera size.com the 70-180 looks to be a good size and would probably fit in my bag with the 400 f4.5 in there too.

View attachment 426836

I know there will be compromises with the 70-180 f2.8 namely in build quality, non S line, lower sharpness, external extending zoom and lack in lens VR, but generally for me I’m not too worried as heavy and large size have been the big issues for me in the past. If there was a Nikon 70-200 f4 Z lens I’d probably go for that.

I’ve been reading this review but it would be great to get anyone’s thoughts on the 70-180 f2.8 lens.

photographylife.com

Nikon Z 70-180mm f/2.8 Review

photographylife.com photographylife.com
Click to expand...

I’ve got one that I use on my Z6, and I’m a big fan! Love the size compared to the bigger 70-200, and it’s plenty sharp enough for my needs. A couple from a trip to the British wildlife centre:

https://flic.kr/p/2pJ3A6A
View: https://flic.kr/p/2pJ3A6A


https://flic.kr/p/2pJ3A8K
View: https://flic.kr/p/2pJ3A8K
 
rob-nikon said:
Does anyone use the Nikon Z 70-180 f2.8, especially on the Z8?

I’m currently loving the lightweight 400 f4.5 but want a slightly shorter focal length lens option to carry around too. It will be used for close up portraits of wildlife in wildlife centres and parks, or more environmental images of wildlife in the wild. In the past I’ve used a 70-200 lens for lots of wildlife like puffins, red squirrels and hedgehogs so its possibly a focal range I’d miss if limited to only the 400 f4.5.

I’d like a fast aperture lens as previously I used a 70-200 f2.8 when I had Nikon DSLRs. I ended up swapping it out for a 70-200 f4 for the lighter weight. This makes me think unless Nikon go the way of Sony or canon the current 70-200 f2.8 will be too large and heavy for me going on past experience.

This makes me think the 70-180 f2.8 would be nearly the ideal option for me.

70-180 f2.8 Compared to 70-200 f2.8:

Lightweight - 795g vs 1360mm

small - 151mm vs 220mm

Fast aperture - f2.8 vs f2.8

Lower cost - £1049 vs £1999

Looking at camera size.com the 70-180 looks to be a good size and would probably fit in my bag with the 400 f4.5 in there too.
Click to expand...
I am using a 70-180 on a Z9 and am very happy with it. I have found it sharp, focus is quick and it is relatively small light and easy to carry. Previously I used a 70-200 vr1 on a D500 and D850, optically I think the 70-180 is shaper and has much less vignette, focus is maybe slightly slower, I can't do a direct comparison, but certainly fast enough not to be an issue. Overall I am really happy with this lens. I use it along side a 500pf and find carrying both very easy. Have not tried it with tc, as I don't have one.
 
inkiboo said:

NIKKOR Z 35mm f/1.4 Full-Frame Prime Lens | Nikon

Discover the NIKKOR Z 35mm f/1.4 full-frame prime lens: ideal for street photography and video, delivering sharp images with a classic perspective.
www.nikon.co.uk

Well that has come out of the blue.

Prices well too.
Click to expand...
A strange choice by Nikon. It's faster and cheaper but worse for image quality, according to the MTF chart. It's not an "S" lens.
It'll not get anyone with a f1.8 to buy it and anyone that was waiting on the Roadmapped f1.2 is also unlikely to pick it up.
2/3 of a stop isn't a huge benefit, when you're compromising image quaality but will probably produce more bokeh, whether that's pleasing bokeh will have to be seen.
 
wilt said:
A strange choice by Nikon. It's faster and cheaper but worse for image quality, according to the MTF chart. It's not an "S" lens.
It'll not get anyone with a f1.8 to buy it and anyone that was waiting on the Roadmapped f1.2 is also unlikely to pick it up.
2/3 of a stop isn't a huge benefit, when you're compromising image quaality but will probably produce more bokeh, whether that's pleasing bokeh will have to be seen.
Click to expand...
It does seem an odd choice, but Matt Irwins review suggests it still outperforms the f-mount equivalent, so this is still going to be a high quality lens, even if it isn't good enough to be an s-line lens.

It also has the programmable "aperture" ring which th 35mm f1.8 lacks. So, I'm guessing Nikon has a specific market in mind for what we might assume is a new 1.4 series. Videographers maybe, who want an f1.4 "effect" and less interested in absolute resolution/contrast etc. I suspect there is a "content creator" market who might want f1.4 "bokeh" but not that interested in absolute quality- but it’s a wild guess.

I suspect this lens will turn out to be "almost as good" as the 1.8S, at almost half the price and with an f1.4 aperture, which might have people flocking to buy it.: making Nikon a lot more money than an f1.2 lens and maybe people who wouldn't spend the money (£800 -£900) on the 35mm 1.8, as an occasional "street" wide angle will spend less money to get a 35mm f1.4.

Although, in the old days professionals tended to gravitate to 1.4 lenses for everyday use because film sensitivity was low, I'm not sure that is necessary any more, except for more specialist applications. I wouldn't think this lens rules out Nikon still giving us an f1.2.

25 ISO Kodachrome was our goto transparency film and negative films were normally in the range of 32 to 400 (occasionally higher) so you could be forced into using F1.4, but in my experience even with good 1.4 lenses quality wasn't all that great wide open and the shallow depth of field normally undesirable. The main reason we bought f1.4 lenses was that their quality stopped down was better than the equivalent f2/f1.8 lenses.

With digital, there is much more flexibility with ISO choice and the reviews suggest that the Nikon f1.8 lenses are perfectly useable wide open at f1.8, so no need to buy an f1.4 lens just to get decent performance once stopped down to f2.8/.4.

I still think it's an odd choice, for although, I don't think 1.4 lenses are as important as they once were, the "1.4 standard" for professional use seems to be still be ingrained amongst photographers, and it seems a strange marketing policy to not have have this as an S-lens. Even on the assumption that an f1.2 lens will follow, as the f1.2 lenses are physically pretty impracticable for everyday use. and very very expensive.

However, I think it's fair to assume that Nikon will have some sort of strategy, and that they know their market better than any of us do.
 
Apparently the f/1.2 s line version will still be coming, along with a 50mm f/1.4? ….

nikonrumors.com

The Nikkor Z 35mm f/1.2 S lens is still expected in the future, new Nikkor Z 50mm f/1.4 lens to be announced as well - Nikon Rumors

The just-announced Nikkor Z 35mm f/1.4 lens is not a replacement for the long-awaited Nikkor Z 35mm f/1.2 S-line lens from the latest roadmap, as initially reported. The Nikkor Z 35mm f/1.2 S-line lens is still rumored to be announced in the future (no specific date or timeframe for now). Nikon...
nikonrumors.com nikonrumors.com
 
myotis said:
It does seem an odd choice, but Matt Irwins review suggests it still outperforms the f-mount equivalent, so this is still going to be a high quality lens, even if it isn't good enough to be an s-line lens.

It also has the programmable "aperture" ring which th 35mm f1.8 lacks. So, I'm guessing Nikon has a specific market in mind for what we might assume is a new 1.4 series. Videographers maybe, who want an f1.4 "effect" and less interested in absolute resolution/contrast etc. I suspect there is a "content creator" market who might want f1.4 "bokeh" but not that interested in absolute quality- but it’s a wild guess.

I suspect this lens will turn out to be "almost as good" as the 1.8S, at almost half the price and with an f1.4 aperture, which might have people flocking to buy it.: making Nikon a lot more money than an f1.2 lens and maybe people who wouldn't spend the money (£800 -£900) on the 35mm 1.8, as an occasional "street" wide angle will spend less money to get a 35mm f1.4.

Although, in the old days professionals tended to gravitate to 1.4 lenses for everyday use because film sensitivity was low, I'm not sure that is necessary any more, except for more specialist applications. I wouldn't think this lens rules out Nikon still giving us an f1.2.

25 ISO Kodachrome was our goto transparency film and negative films were normally in the range of 32 to 400 (occasionally higher) so you could be forced into using F1.4, but in my experience even with good 1.4 lenses quality wasn't all that great wide open and the shallow depth of field normally undesirable. The main reason we bought f1.4 lenses was that their quality stopped down was better than the equivalent f2/f1.8 lenses.

With digital, there is much more flexibility with ISO choice and the reviews suggest that the Nikon f1.8 lenses are perfectly useable wide open at f1.8, so no need to buy an f1.4 lens just to get decent performance once stopped down to f2.8/.4.

I still think it's an odd choice, for although, I don't think 1.4 lenses are as important as they once were, the "1.4 standard" for professional use seems to be still be ingrained amongst photographers, and it seems a strange marketing policy to not have have this as an S-lens. Even on the assumption that an f1.2 lens will follow, as the f1.2 lenses are physically pretty impracticable for everyday use. and very very expensive.

However, I think it's fair to assume that Nikon will have some sort of strategy, and that they know their market better than any of us do.
Click to expand...
Where do you get half the price from ? the 35mm f1.8 is currently £679 at Cameraworld
 
imattersuk said:
Where do you get half the price from ? the 35mm f1.8 is currently £679 at Cameraworld
Click to expand...
I looked a couple of weeks ago and it was £839, but I see that Grays how have it (with the summer savings offer) at £699. Park Cameras have it at £849 and £749 with the summer savings.

The price for the 1.4 I saw mentioned somewhere was it would be around $400 so I reckoned a something between £400 and £500 in the UK, hence the "almost half price", when compared to the non-summer offer price of £839/849.
 
myotis said:
I looked a couple of weeks ago and it was £839, but I see that Grays how have it (with the summer savings offer) at £699. Park Cameras have it at £849 and £749 with the summer savings.

The price for the 1.4 I saw mentioned somewhere was it would be around $400 so I reckoned a something between £400 and £500 in the UK, hence the "almost half price", when compared to the non-summer offer price of £839/849.
Click to expand...
WEX are advertising the f1.4 for £649 preorder.
 
wilt said:
WEX are advertising the f1.4 for £649 preorder.
Click to expand...
!!!

Thanks, I suspect, that makes it a difficult decision unless you have a clearly defined need for F1.4 and/or the control ring on the lens. Or, or on pricing beyond the current offers, you really need to save £200.

In the case of the latter, for me, I would rather try and make some savings by going for a s/h F1.8.

Based on what I had picked up, I was thinking of it being more like £449 not £649, which together with the f1.4 and control ring, I could see as being a tempting buy for many..
 
Hi, had a bit of a mishap in my settings on the Z8, thought I had saved to an SD card but for some reason didn't so I have had to go through again and set up but for the life of me I cannot remember how to set my fn1 button to hold to reduce the number of FPS to 5, I use this when a bird lands and don't need 20FPS.
Russ.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top