did I make a mistake by investing in nikon's mirrorless ecosystem
>>4380787What camera/lens(es)? What are you shooting?I’m planning on sticking with f-mount for the foreseeable future due to price/performance
>>4380788Z5 w/ the 40mm, 85mm 1.8, and 24-120. IQ is great but kinda chaps my ass how unreliable the AF is on anything that's not stationary
>>4380789Yeah Nikon seems behind on AF compared to Canon/Sony, especially on the older z mount cameras. Not to gearfag but maybe consider upgrading camera?
>>4380794that would mean going to a Z8 which is $3900 when it's not on sale. I could get into an R6 mk2 w/ the 24-105 f4 for about the same price, albeit with less resolution.
>>4380787depends on why you think it might have been a mistake.
>>4380799Z6iii/Zf have much improved af and would be around the price of an r6mk2 while being able to keep your lenses. Still wouldn't match the r6mkii af though. R6mkii applies denoise to RAW files if that matters to you.
>>4380789Learn to focus then, single-point AF for startersBoomers can, why can't you? is the machine better than you?>I could get into an R6 mk2 w/ the 24-105 f4 Nevermind you are a gearfaggot, not a real photog looking to improve himself first.
>>4380812I do use single point most of the time but even with back button focusing it's not reliable on anything that's moving[EXIF data available. Click here to show/hide.]Camera-Specific Properties:Camera SoftwareAndroid UP1A.231005.007.S918USQS3CXD7Image-Specific Properties:Image Width1440Image Height3088Unique Image ID82cb8dab-372f-47ed-8fa2-e38f5da502f5
>>4380787If you wanted to "invest", yes, because nikon's vision for Z mount is video-centric and all of their bodies after the ZF are projected to be low DR, high speed sports video cameras. This trend has been confirmed by the Z8, Z9, and Z6III.Capitalism is based on extracting money from idiots so I predict that before 2034, the entire mirrorless market will cripple full frame cameras dynamic range to increase readout speed, stop production of crop sensors, and make the next step up from 'FF with APS-C DR' a $10,000 crop medium format.What you have to choose from now is most likely as good as it'll get for a very long time. Do not "invest" in anything, for your own sake, or spend $2k on a prosumer camcorder just to get usable autofocus.>>4380812Nigger, shut the fuck up. You are not epic and enlightened for pretending there is no such thing as a bad camera, only a bad photographer. Nikon's autofocus is geniuinely bad. Single point AF on nikon Z doesn't even work as well as single point AF on a nikon D750. They lost all their market share to fucking sony, and that's saying a lot. People sacrificed weather sealing and the ability to update firmware without waiting and researching to get autofocus that worked as well as a DSLR back and there's still a huge contingent of professionals still using D750s and D850s. One of my wedding photographer friends recently sold his new z6ii and Z lenses for a second D850 and a Lumix GH6 based video rig. It's that bad.>>4381042In real life, a D750 with a 24-120 f4 VR will take sharper photos than your Z5, and actually have better stabilization than the wiggly sensor because IBIS becomes exponentially less useful as focal length increases but VR provides the same 3 stops across the zoom range. If you desire mirrorless for portability or wundertech, the sony a6700 (dr>res and features) and canon r7 (res and features>dr) are the best cameras for your budget.
>>4381060>not shooting manual onlySKILL ISSUEt. failed hobbyist who only takes photos of building corners, rocks, leaves, and his girlfriends dog
>>4381090Looks like the a7c’s color science>>4381092Thats why you sold yours for gambling money and went to a broken z6 huh
>>4381098>Ken Rockwell is my idolI hold him in high esteem as well.He once complimented my photography and I was very pleased with myself.
>>4380787yes
>>4381060I really just want great AF that I don't have to fight with to get good results. obviously switching brands is a pain in the dick once you have a body and some lenses, but if I sold all my shit I'd at least be able to afford an R6 mk2
>>4383083>Comes to the most sensible solution on his ownHaters will call it a blob, or a "proffeshinal" camera, but you know deep down for peak performance with nothing but yourself holding you back, it's a Canon.
>>4383086this is an ad
>>4383086the way I see it is I either upgrade to a Z8 and get better AF and more resolution, and deeper into the nikon ecosystem, or I take the hit and sell my stuff to get an R6 mk2 but not have much left over for acquiring lenses, which are definitely pricier on the canon side.
>>4383102The honest non-ad answer is you're better off staying in your nikon ecosystem is just getting the better body. If money was no object, go Canon, but it is, so you shouldn't at this point.
>>4380787Can't you use Sony lenses on Nikon mount?
>>4380787As much as it sounds dumb, I use Sony for mirrorless due to the AF and lens selection, while still keeping all my Nikon DSLR gear still (they're still great performers). So I have two systems. I have thought of selling my Sony gear to stay on 1 platform, but I don't see any reason to. I just don't buy anymore Nikon stuff.
>>4383105The adapter is buggy and some people have had it melt. Nikon F lenses on sony mirrorless work a lot better b
>>4380787You did a mistake by starting photography in the first place.We are all doomed.
>>4380787It's only a mistake if you don't take photos.
>>4380787no>>4383210but thisIt's a good system to be in. Stop second guessing yourself. If it's getting too expensive just adapt F or EF glass. Or sony FE for that regard.
>>4380787The question is, will I make a mistake if I buy a Nikon ZF?
>>4384005Imagine the resale value if you end up not liking itDoesn't seem like a mistake to me
>>4384015Everything points to my liking it. The thing is, it seems weird that Nikon suddenly released a good camera.
>>4384005It’s a rattly and cheap feeling camera. It feels like an old HP laptop that promised to use some metal but still made huge parts out of easily scuffed plastic. A sony a7iv feels like an IBM thinkpad and the real world durability holds up (turn off the sensor dust cover tho, it breaks shutters). Nikon’s lenses are all uninspiring and clinical now, and very few of them balance on the zf except for a couple of plastic mount cheapos that don’t do the weather sealing justice.
>>4384146I've worked with the A7IV. What I found surprising is how uninspiring the pictures turned out both colour and quality-wise. The AF is wonderful, though; it's simply impossible to deny its the camera's main strength.
>>4384147>>4384146>everyone arbitrarily calls yourbrand uninspiring and mybrand stunning
>>4383103money is an object because I don't get paid to do this, but I'm definitely pondering what I could get into for the cost of a Z8 body which is the only upgrade that would make sense if I stay with nikon. was at a tee ball game with my 24-120 and I couldn't get eye tracking to activate once on a batter from like 20 feet away
>>4384232This is exactly why I'm selling my Z50 for a Snoy A7C (probably around Q1 '25 when the A7V drops) but my situation is worse cause DX lenses are compatible with maybe like 3 other bodies 2 of which have as bad AF (ZFc Z30 Z50 II)I hate telling the Snoy schizo he's right, the AF on these cameras is really good for landscapes and cat photos and even then it'll occasionally miss focus. It's literally as good as my ZV1 with a 1in sensor. It's gimped even vs the older D-Series DSLRs. I wish I just got a Canon R10 Refurb or paid a little more for a A6400.
>>4384258Sony and canon have 90% market share combined, and that last 10% is entirely reliant on sony for sensors. Other companies literally cant compete.
>>4384258How much did you buy the z50 for?A6400`s are dirt cheap but imo they're not worth it, they feel too plastic and the low light is noisy shit unless you pay for expensive lenses.The A7C instead feels more like an actual camera.
>>4384272$500 3 months ago with 16-50 DX Kit Lens and a 400 shutter countIt's at 1700 atm, I paid $300 for the 50-250 Z DX lens on top. Trying to sell it all for $700. A6400s in my area go for $600-700 with the 16-50 lens and $7-900 with the 18-135 or 28-70 lens.I chose it over the R10/R50 because of the weathersealing and over the Sony because cheaper + better ergos (fixable with a grip anyways).Low light on this camera isn't that good either. IMO the performance is closer to a A6000/6100 all around. But you can get a A6000 for close to $3-400 nowadays...I agree with the other posters about Sony color science being fixed after the A7C/A6400/A6700/ZV1 (so basically after 2019). No green tint with SOOC JPEGs
>>4384278It's worth considering tamron lenses for the A7C, they're affordable and have weather sealing unlike their sigma counterparts. Canon is good too... but expensive and no third party lenses. And yes that kit lens on the a6400 is a pile of shit, go full frame with Sony/canon . Don't fall for the crop meme. >Green tintIt's one schitzo who spams the same meme
>>4380787WHY THE FUCK IS IT SO DIFFICULT FOR NIKON TO MAKE A DECENT CAMERA REEEE
>>4380787if you put the money in glass, noif you went all on the body, yes
>>4381078>t. failed hobbyist who only takes photos of building corners, rocks, leaves, and his girlfriends dogkek
>>4384278>3 months ago with 16-50 DX Kit Lens and a 400 shutter count... It's at 1700Why do you take so few pictures?
>>4384278Green tint isn't real on sony, but it's a very real issue in pentax and olympus raws. I always have to fix the em5ii's files if I shoot outside.>SOOC jpegsLol no one has good SOOC jpegs, even fuji's are so blurry they're basically phone photos. Jpeg functionality is an afterthought.
>>4384419>Green tint isn't real on sonyOne quick google search says otherwise
>>4384232just get a used 1dx mkII holy shit, falling for what is still early adopter mirrorless retardation with 5lbs. lenses and no battery life and overheating bodies god damn
>>4384433I don't want a DSLR
>>4384427Anyone who actually uses one knows its a lie. I’ve only ever used decent lenses on sony and they run neutral to warm with brown shadows when flaring. Maybe it’s on low end, scheiss and scamron lenses only? Green tints are associated with low end optics. But then if you use one, you must be lying. The shill calls you a shill first thing as his primary defense mechanism.Or basic logic, sony wouldn’t be closing the market share gap with canon despite lacking a good walmart camera if their stuff was bad. They wouldn’t have the #1 photojournalism agency picking them over canon either. Sony is actually very good, and canon is doing desperate shit like handing free cameras out at the olympics to try and stay above a brand that didnt even need a strong walmart/best buy camera to gobble up the market.
>>4384712Clearly you have never vlogged by aliexpress desk lamp light using an a7iii with everything set to auto
>>4384355Why are you still pretending Z7, Z8 and Z9 don't exist?Yeah, the Z50 and early versions of Z6 had shit AF. That's in the past.
>>4384997Every nikon but the zf, z6iii, z8, and z9 has shit autofocus
>>4384997I'd consider the Z8 if I had the confidence that a 4 year old canon wouldn't have significantly better AF[EXIF data available. Click here to show/hide.]Camera-Specific Properties:Camera SoftwareAndroid UP1A.231005.007.S918USQS5CXI8Image-Specific Properties:Image Width1440Image Height3088Unique Image IDb8b597e4-ad5b-4c62-8172-47b3a29e3e33
>>4385024Sounds more like a skill issue from your part than the camera's
>>4385025not an argument. people were saying the same shit with expeed 6 bodies
>>4385025>just accept your $1699-4000 products underperforming, sissy. real men punch in and correct focus manually. Ok, but those of us who had sex in highschool arent this desperate for a sense of accomplishment and competence. We just don’t pay thousands for broken shit. Do you call a7iii shutters crapping out a skill issue too?
>>4385035>>4385038There's photography for pros doing real work and photography for artists, if you are bitching about AF systems you are neither, you don't know how to focus even with 3D tracking and much less with a manual lens using punching zoom ins.You are failure and can't even grab a subject with a Z6 I, you are focusing with the shutter button, you are the black kid who puts ketchup in his pizza, you are a simply not made for this hobby.
>>4385048>broken autofocus is fine, you arent a real….Dont you have a broken mercedes to fix, I mean, a mercedes that needs early routine maintenance
>>4385048>software defocuses your photo at random>WELL, JUST DONT PRESS THE SHUTTER WHEN IT DOES THAT>price: $4000 (body only)>$1000 used sony or canon do not have this problem>jared polin looked the world in the eye and said “the r8 has better autofocus then the z8”
>>4385048>muh back button autofocus!lmfao
>>4385048>photography for artistsyeah, it's called film and I already have a manual film body for that. I'm $3000 into the nikon ecosystem and even single point AF isn't reliable.
>>4385056what the heck, it's so much better, you've never tried it?
>>4385050>>4385051>>4385056>>4385063Learn to focus first and then come back, you couldn't even pinpoint with a D5
>>4385205You couldn't even pinpoint Deeznuts
>>4385205>Learn to focus firstPlease detail your procedure for circumventing the autofocus function on the Z8s tedency to defocus the lens while actively tracking the subject.Do you double check AF-S with the focus magnifier? Lmao.I have used a D750, a ZF, a Z8, and a Z6II and the D750 and the ZF were the only ones with consistently good autofocus
>>4385212>Please detail your procedure for circumventing the autofocus function on the Z8s tedency to defocus the lensSure:Back button focus, single point in the middle, stick button to activate 3D tracking, menu option to not refocus if subject gets out of focusing plane/frame, laugh at nophotos, call you a nigger.>a Z8, and a Z6II and the D750 and the ZFLearn to write first and then learn the AF module, chimp
>>4385229>be me>half press shutter to focus on thing I want in focus>maybe recompose if needed (usually don't)>full press shutterwow so hard haha
>>4385229>just dont use half the functions bro. single point tracking only. >$4000 camera>AND AND AND AND AND>lern too rightLol. The funny part is this is how I coped on the z8 and z6ii because otherwise eye detect was random object detect. It still constantly missed focus. Nikon really deserves to lose their entire market share to fuji. I don’t care if Z mount reduces vignetting a quarter stop. The AF on your $4000 camera is worse than a $400 DSLR.
>>4385229>posts no photos
>>4380787Nah, their lenses are the bitches tits. Bodies are good to great, depending on how much you pay the piper. But prepare thine anus bc every few hundred bucks more gets you a notable performance boost in different ways. So you think you're being reasonable by buying a low-cost used Z6, and you're like hory fuk this is nice, but look at those big Z7 images, I could sell my 6 and buy a 7, so you do but then you try a ZF and you're like ohhh fuck my face it's so fast and solid it's like a spaceship, then you're into a used ZF, and then you're like ayyywaaait for just another couple-few hundred I can get a... and every time you do it, you lose 20% of the total value on sellers fees. So you still end up with a fucking used Z8 but you've paid new Z9 prices to get it. What a bunch of cunts, this world.
>>4385231>plz halp I can't AF an AF cameraPerhaps, have you considered, that maybe, just maybe, it is you that sucks the proverbial ass?
>>4385526Autofocus. If it doesn’t automatically focus even in single point tracking, it’s pointless. >but it does sometimes!Not consistently enough to be worth $4k. >PAYING MORE FOR WORSE TOOLS IS BASED AND MAKES ME MORE SKILLED THAN YOUNo, it makes you dumb. I rec having sex to fill the void in your soul left by your virginity.
>>4385526>your $3800 plus tax cameras autofocus only works semi consistently in the least automatic mode>you defend thisif nikon had a penis how fast would your asshole be on it?
mirrorless cameras are black rectangles with spec sheets designed to make you FOMO back and forth for shit that can be added in firmware updates. forget user experience, forget aesthetic design, forget build quality. it's all about hollywood standard video codecs that three people will ever need to use.
>>4380787Depends. Is it your first camera ever?
>>4385537I have an old minolta and dicked around with a d3400 before going to nikon mirrorless
>>4385539In that case I guess it depends how much you read about the market and possibilities nowadays. You definitely, by now, notice a difference between your D3400 and your new mirrorless camera. You're definitely happy with what you've bought. However, if you were to compare what, say, Snoy has in the store, you'd be right to second-guess yourself.
>>4385541the IQ is great and it obviously mogs a d3400 but I definitely feel retarded for believing all the online cope about how the expeed 6 bodies aren't that bad compared to the competition. going to a Z8 sounds great for my wallet but I'd fucking neck myself if I copped one and eye AF stops working when they're in profile
>>4385542Nikon doesn't have a good affordable Full Frame at the moment. That's their biggest problem.
>>4385543yeah I would jump on something like a Z5ii but they went with a meme z50ii instead, so I'm stuck with the possibility of dropping almost 4k on a new body and hoping I don't feel disappointed or just taking the hit and moving to an r6ii and knowing it'll just werk
>>4385544What about Snoy? I know A7iii is a little bit old, and there's something wrong with the shutter, but other models seem to hold up.
>>4385545I've thought about an a7iv because of the 30mp and competent AF, but I also just don't like the idea of shooting snoy. I don't really give a shit about 3rd party lenses, and /p/ always kvetches about the terrible colors or how sterile the files are. the r6ii just seems to be the best camera in that price range, and the canon color/character dickriding is making me wonder if the grass is actually greener over there.
>>4385545The a7iii is on a global do not buy list. Any other sony is fine. >>4385550The colors/sterility is shill FUD. Sony colors are great. Its just that pixel peeping gearfags cant tolerate jpegs on any brand.
>>4385550Does /p/ look like successful, knowledgeable photographers to you? Or do they come off more as salty brand fanboys and paid shills from eastern europe and south asia?
>>4385550You are a faggot GAS-ridden mouthbreather, shoot some fucking photos and then decide if you really need more, learn to use your fucking machine first.
>>4385630yeah, I need more
>>4385550I'm in a similar situation. What I'll do is wait for A7V to debut (allegedly Q1 2025) and wait for a price drop for A7IV
