Olympus user running a Z6/Z7?

Dinobe

Mu-43 Veteran
Joined
Nov 23, 2017
Messages
266
Location
Lochristi, Belgium
- Is there a highlight warning (overexposure blinkies) feature? If so, how does it compare with the Oly version?
Not that I know if in real time, must look at them in playback...although you do have the ability to put the histogram in the EVF. It is a JPG representation, but I find it sufficient.
Really?? That's one serious ommision. The biggest advantage of an EVF/mirrorless is that you can see the photo before you take it (exposure, B&W, etc etc) and no longer need to chimp.

Showing a histogram in playback is something my 15 year old 300D could do....
 

ijm5012

Mu-43 Legend
Joined
Oct 2, 2013
Messages
7,963
Location
Pittsburgh, PA
Real Name
Ian
Really?? That's one serious ommision. The biggest advantage of an EVF/mirrorless is that you can see the photo before you take it (exposure, B&W, etc etc) and no longer need to chimp.

Showing a histogram in playback is something my 15 year old 300D could do....
The histogram is visible in the EVF during Live View.

Is that something your 15 year old 300D could do?
 

Dinobe

Mu-43 Veteran
Joined
Nov 23, 2017
Messages
266
Location
Lochristi, Belgium
The histogram is visible in the EVF during Live View.

Is that something your 15 year old 300D could do?
Ok, I clearly misunderstood this. I read it could only show a histogram on playback (reviewing your images) Nevertheless, it's shame it doesn't show over and under exposed areas in the EVF. I find this a very useful feature on my EM5. You can even set at what level the under/over exposed warnings need to show, so you can build in a little buffer.
 

ijm5012

Mu-43 Legend
Joined
Oct 2, 2013
Messages
7,963
Location
Pittsburgh, PA
Real Name
Ian
It's a one brand, two mounts system. To use the d500 lenses on Z6 you still need an adapter. Do they share flash, menu system, controls?
Yes, flash, menu system, controls are all the same between Nikon DSLRs and Nikon Z mirrorless cameras.

It was far cheaper for me to buy a Z6, FTZ adapter, the kit 24-70, and use adapted F-mount glass from my D500 than it was for me to have an E-M1 II and 7 m43 lenses in addition to my D500 and F-mount glass (because that stuff wasn't getting sold). I ended up netting right around $3k by consolidating down to only Nikon equipment.

Ok, I clearly misunderstood this. I read it could only show a histogram on playback (reviewing your images) Nevertheless, it's shame it doesn't show over and under exposed areas in the EVF. I find this a very useful feature on my EM5. You can even set at what level the under/over exposed warnings need to show, so you can build in a little buffer.
Do I wish the Nikon was set up the same way? Sure I do, but only because I was used to shooting that way. The sensor has enough latitude in post processing that it's not that big of a big deal though. I'll set the exposure so that the blinkies show the highlights just starting to clip. The highlights in the RAW file can still be recovered, because the histogram is only for the JPEG (just like every other mirrorless camera).

Once you shoot with it you get used to it, it's really not that big of a deal. If highlight control is really critical, I just use highlight weighted metering, which exposes for the highlights to ensure they're not blown out (this is something that Olympus lacks in terms of metering).

As was stated earlier, there's always some give and take when it comes to evaluating a camera for your needs. There is no perfect camera...
 

Dinobe

Mu-43 Veteran
Joined
Nov 23, 2017
Messages
266
Location
Lochristi, Belgium
Do I wish the Nikon was set up the same way? Sure I do, but only because I was used to shooting that way.
Not necessarily, but one of the main advantages of going mirrorless are the possibilities this provides such as over/under exposure warnings, live histogram, focus peaking, live time, live composite, etc etc...
You remove the mirror because it's in the way to do fancy stuff, Nikon has now done this, but what does this bring apart from a smaller body?
 

ijm5012

Mu-43 Legend
Joined
Oct 2, 2013
Messages
7,963
Location
Pittsburgh, PA
Real Name
Ian
Not necessarily, but one of the main advantages of going mirrorless are the possibilities this provides such as over/under exposure warnings, live histogram, focus peaking, live time, live composite, etc etc...
You remove the mirror because it's in the way to do fancy stuff, Nikon has now done this, but what does this bring apart from a smaller body?
Usable Live View AF, Focus Peaking, Live View Histogram, Fully Silent Shutter, Excellent Video AF, Eye AF (coming via FW update). Would you like me to continue?

And technically, you don't need to be mirrorless to do LiveTime/Bulb/Comp. Pentax does it with their DSLRs. It's simply software (just like Live View blinkies).

We get it though, you're not interested in the Z6/7 cameras, and that's perfectly fine. Everybody has their own criteria that they use when deciding on which camera is right for them.
 

ouldsmobile

Mu-43 Regular
Joined
Mar 23, 2016
Messages
130
Location
Toronto, Ontario
Real Name
Kevin
Oh man. Now y'all got me thinking about the Z6. I was all set to upgrade my EM1 to a MkII when I find a good 2nd hand deal. But after reading this thread and watching a few YouTube reviews I am considering the Z6 too.

Have you guys that own the Z6 tried it out with Wildlife or Sports yet(using F-mount glass)? How about macro? I know the D500 seems to be king in this area but I want to stick with mirrorless. I currently have the 12-40, 40-140 and 300 Pro's, plus the 60mm Macro.
 

Xx123456xX

Mu-43 Regular
Joined
Nov 11, 2017
Messages
154
Location
Houston, TX, USA
Real Name
Jake
Since I’m interested in the Z6, too, I’ll use this thread to ask my questions.

The first question I have:
With the exception of AF-P, are all F mount lenses, regardless of brand, mechanical focus?
 

Turbofrog

Mu-43 Legend
Joined
Mar 21, 2014
Messages
5,362
In other news, while Nikon has struggled to show the value of its new short flange, wide mouth mount with its product plans, it looks like 3rd parties will be broadcasting those advantages loud and clear soon:

Nikon Z6 goes Sony E mount with new razor thin lens adapter, supporting electronics and full AF! - EOSHD

Subscribe to see EXIF info for this image (if available)


Now there's no need to fuss about choosing between the much wider variety of Sony E-mount lenses and the superior ergonomics, build, and F-mount backwards compatibility of the Nikon Z cameras...
 

ijm5012

Mu-43 Legend
Joined
Oct 2, 2013
Messages
7,963
Location
Pittsburgh, PA
Real Name
Ian
In other news, while Nikon has struggled to show the value of its new short flange, wide mouth mount with its product plans

LMAO, I always love when people say stuff like this with no knowledge of how the Z mount design has affected the design of the current Nikon Z lenses. It’s amazing how many people on the internet know about optical lens design!

Personally, I don’t want huge, heavy f/1.4 primes and f/2.8 zooms. The ergonomics are terrible with heavy lenses hanging off the front of mirrorless cameras because the grips are too short compared to the more ergonomic DSLRs.

Sony’s 85 1.4 weighs 820g, whereas their 85 1.8, which is optically very good, weighs only 370g and costs $600 vs $1800. And because it’s on a FF sensor, you still get excellent DoF control. Sony’s 24-70 2.8 costs $2200 and weighs 890g, whereas my Nikon 24-70 costs $1000 ($600 in kit form), and weighs 500g. Canon’s new 50 1.2 costs $2300 and weighs 950g, whereas Nikon’s 50 1.8 S costs $600 and weighs 415g.

Given the excellent sensors in modern FF cameras, I prefer the smaller size, lower weight, and cheaper cost of f/4 zooms and f/1.8 primes. You get excellent image quality (Nikon’s S series of lenses have been getting great reviews), less weight, but still have good DoF control.
 
Last edited:
D

Deleted member 20897

Guest
Since I’m interested in the Z6, too, I’ll use this thread to ask my questions.

The first question I have:
With the exception of AF-P, are all F mount lenses, regardless of brand, mechanical focus?
AF-S and AF-P lenses are both in lens motor versions. Both are 100% functional on the Z cameras with the FTZ adapter.

Other f-mount lenses like D types will fully meter, but are manual focus.

I've tracked dogs at this point work some success, but have not had a chance to use it with my sports of choice yet.

From some preliminary testing, I feel I can make it performs at or near a D7500/D750 level AF using the correct mode.

I base this on some events I shot recently where the Z6 and adapted f-mount lenses performed just as well the DSLR.
 

ooheadsoo

Mu-43 Top Veteran
Joined
Jan 13, 2018
Messages
597
It's somewhat important to note that the AF-D lenses were designed with the screw drive AF motor in mind and have short throws and relatively undampened motion to their focus rings.
 

masayoshi

Mu-43 Top Veteran
Joined
Dec 5, 2016
Messages
929
Location
Salt Lake City
Real Name
Masaaki
Oh man. Now y'all got me thinking about the Z6. I was all set to upgrade my EM1 to a MkII when I find a good 2nd hand deal. But after reading this thread and watching a few YouTube reviews I am considering the Z6 too.

Have you guys that own the Z6 tried it out with Wildlife or Sports yet(using F-mount glass)? How about macro? I know the D500 seems to be king in this area but I want to stick with mirrorless. I currently have the 12-40, 40-140 and 300 Pro's, plus the 60mm Macro.
Mark smith tested Z6 for wildlife.
 

Linh

Mu-43 All-Pro
Joined
Apr 14, 2009
Messages
1,695
Location
Maryland, US
Personally, I don’t want huge, heavy f/1.4 primes and f/2.8 zooms ... I prefer the smaller size, lower weight, and cheaper cost of f/4 zooms and f/1.8 primes.
On a FF, I'm in this camp. I actually would like to see some good, compact f/2 primes (though.. not so good as to compromise size). I'm not going to switch to FF to get a bunch of f/1.4 glass (ok, maybe one because I can). I'm in no rush as I just picked up a used PEN-F for some reason. And it doesn't seem like anyone has this in the pipeline.... but I'm game if it happens.
 

Turbofrog

Mu-43 Legend
Joined
Mar 21, 2014
Messages
5,362
LMAO, I always love when people say stuff like this with no knowledge of how the Z mount design has affected the design of the current Nikon Z lenses. It’s amazing how many people on the internet know about optical lens design!

Personally, I don’t want huge, heavy f/1.4 primes and f/2.8 zooms. The ergonomics are terrible with heavy lenses hanging off the front of mirrorless cameras because the grips are too short compared to the more ergonomic DSLRs.

Sony’s 85 1.4 weighs 820g, whereas their 85 1.8, which is optically very good, weighs only 370g and costs $600 vs $1800. And because it’s on a FF sensor, you still get excellent DoF control. Sony’s 24-70 2.8 costs $2200 and weighs 890g, whereas my Nikon 24-70 costs $1000 ($600 in kit form), and weighs 500g. Canon’s new 50 1.2 costs $2300 and weighs 950g, whereas Nikon’s 50 1.8 S costs $600 and weighs 415g.

Given the excellent sensors in modern FF cameras, I prefer the smaller size, lower weight, and cheaper cost of f/4 zooms and f/1.8 primes. You get excellent image quality (Nikon’s S series of lenses have been getting great reviews), less weight, but still have good DoF control.
I'm not saying there's no advantage to the mount, I'm saying that Nikon has struggled to show it. Because all they've been doing is bragging about how they could allow lenses even faster than f0.95. OOooh! As if anyone has asked for that. And in the mean time, they show off a $6000, >1 kg, manual focus only, 58mm/f0.95 that is so massive it comes with its own tripod collar.

Before you jump to snap conclusion, I think the lenses they've released so far are perfectly fine. In fact, I think their 24-70/f4 and 14-30/f4 look like very nice lenses, possibly the best of their kind. The 35/1.8 and 50/1.8 are a bit on the large and pricey side, but appear to be very good optically to justify it. But it seems exceedingly unlikely that anything about them is novel to the mount, given their specification - Sony and Canon have similarly excellent lenses that make slightly different choices, and they both have very 'pedestrian' mount designs, compared to the Z-mount.
 

ijm5012

Mu-43 Legend
Joined
Oct 2, 2013
Messages
7,963
Location
Pittsburgh, PA
Real Name
Ian
I'm not saying there's no advantage to the mount, I'm saying that Nikon has struggled to show it.
All I'll say is that it's better to have it and not need it, than need it and not have it.

Nikon learned their lesson with the F-mount, which was too small in diameter to allow any autofocus lens faster than f/1.4. They weren't going to make that same mistake again when designing their next camera mount to carry them in to the future.
 

dlentini

Mu-43 Regular
Joined
Jul 26, 2015
Messages
154
@ijm5012 Hi!

If I remember correctly, you added the D500 for Motorsport, mostly for the panning slow shutter shots?

Have you have time to test the Z for fast action and slow panning?

How does it perform compared to D500 and Em-1.2 fw 2?
 
D

Deleted member 20897

Guest
All I'll say is that it's better to have it and not need it, than need it and not have it.

Nikon learned their lesson with the F-mount, which was too small in diameter to allow any autofocus lens faster than f/1.4. They weren't going to make that same mistake again when designing their next camera mount to carry them in to the future.
Plus the communications channel has been increased over f-mount as well. That is why Nikon had stated that they are confident that the z-mount will provide them with another 100 years of use.
 
Links on this page may be to our affiliates. Sales through affiliate links may benefit this site.
Mu-43 is a fan site and not associated with Olympus, Panasonic, or other manufacturers mentioned on this site.
Forum post reactions by Twemoji: https://github.com/twitter/twemoji
Copyright © 2009-2019 Amin Forums, LLC
Top Bottom