shit i just listed my 16-50 and 50-250 z50 setup for $800 locally

think someone will buy it

>>4382371
>>4382369
>nophoto
Opinion discarded

>>4382372
ok but will someone buy it or not

i think i shouldve listed it for $700

>>4382369
So, an R50 clone that doesn't really do anything different, with worse autofocus?

>>4382374
I'll give you tree fiddy cash for it right now.

>>4382382
what the fuck else are you gonna pay me in other than cash

dumb nigga

>>4382369
On that product page Nikon keeps comparing it to cellphone camera quality lmao

>>4382369
What is the point of Nikon's and Canon's new APS-Cs? They have quite literally zero fucking glass for them

>>4382379
>doesn't really do anything different
Better video specs by a good distance, photo is buffered too
>worse autofocus
Lifted from the Z8 so no, it is superior

>>4382392
For newfags that will probably only ever buy a single body

>>4382392
>40 z mount lenses

>>4382394
Oh shit, they actuall fixed their AF issues? What will /p/ bitch about Nikon for now?
>>4382392
I buy fullsize RF glass since they usually have better controls and ergos. RF-S lenses are almost exclusively for cheap fags who don't mind every control has to be a menu item now. It's a shame though because if their 55-210mm or 18-150mm had IS and AF controls on the lens, I might have bought one.

>>4382406
>What will /p/ bitch about Nikon for now?
I can personally bitch about no IBIS, no pixel shift, no double grip compatibility and no focus stick, also no double card slot
But they added a mini flash and the actual Expeed 7 processor with all the AF performance of the Z8/Zf plus video with Log profiles, RED LUTs and the scopes. So they leaned more towards content creators than photographers, the flash i can understand because that's really what makes half the hipster faggot PnS aesthetic popular at the moment.

>>4382386
Cash money, bitchass. I can do silver coins if you like shiny rocks as well.

>>4382401
Are you brain damaged?

>>4382424
Are you?

>>4382425
>Mmmhhh sweaty just put a full frame Z lens on your APS-C that's totally the same as native glass without focal length and DoF equivalence fuckery

>>4382427
So you are

>>4382430
>Mmmmh sweaty do you want an 85mm FOV? well I'm sorry my epic full frame lineup has at best a 50mm 1.4 I hope you like your 75mm APS-C equivalent
>Mmmhhh sweaty you want a 16mm FOV? Then just buy a $2000 full frame 11mm lens to compensate the crop mkay???

>>4382432
By all means continue

>>4382433
By all means keep providing zero arguments ;)

>>4382432
oh no aps-c crop multiplier means
>cheap 50mm lenses now great as portrait lenses which are traditionally more expensive and heavier
>macro easier and more convenient to pull off
>birding now possible without a $10k lens
Crop is a cope, but there ya go fag

>>4382436
40>”literally 0”

Kinda saddened, wanted the possible P1100 to be announced instead

>>4382437
>Dude listen up: with a crop camera you can extend the reach of fool frame lenses!!! Hekkin awesomsauce!!!
Wow call me back when you have decent wide and ultra wide angle native glass without having to buy a fucking 24mm just to get 35mm equivalent framing.

You know, if your mount is worth anything it shouldn't be decent only for short telephoto onwards

File: saar3.jpg (1 KB, 84x40)

1 KB JPG

>>4382445
Not sure why ultra-wide is your go-to argument, when nobody on this board has the social skills or creative merit to get within 5 meters of their subject.
Please good sir, post one of your works of art that relies on an ultra-wide angle and couldn't fathomably be replicated by simply steping backwards and using a wide angle.
>shouldn't be decent only for short telephoto onwards
Literally the only thing it can't do with a kit lens is <24mm, and surprise fuckin surprise the RF 10-18mm is like $400. What are you, a poorfag?
Also, RF 24mm f/1.8 IS STM is optically as good and the same priceas the 35mm version, the 35mm is a stabilised 50mm equiv for only an extra $200, and the 50mm saves you like $400 over the RF 85mm IS f/2. If anything, everything kind of rounds itself out. All depends on **GASP** your use-case. How fuckin' dare people not exclusively be shooting ultra-wide amirite?

>>4382446
>This mount is sooooo cool it has 3 plastic kit zooms and everything else needs to be adapted from FF with meaningful results from 50mm onwards

>>4382459
>continues to refuse to provide any sort of argument beyond shit flinging, and moving goalposts
>how dare people use FF glass on a crop camera, that's not allowed!
>yes, the fact that your lens is plastic and my lens is plastic with a metal mount means my photo is better than your photo
Christ on a stick...

>>4382460
Assertion: crop Z mount is shit
Facts: native lenses are a few cheap zooms, everything else has to be adapted from FF
Argument: if you get crop you lose access to decent glass on the < 35mm range and you still have to carry FF-designed lenses to cover > 50mm
Conclusion 1: if you are a pro with FF glass who needs a second body for more reach, you are good.
Conclusion 2: If you are a literal retard who is happy with using only zooms, you are good.
Conclusion 3: if you want a complete APS-C ecosystem with good glass to do all of your photography, you're fucked.

It's all extremely simple, do you need it to be spelled out like this? Or do you prefer to say shit I never wrote?

>>4382462
One person talks about Z and the other about RF mount.

File: DSC_1045.jpg (38 KB, 640x427)

38 KB JPG

>>4382369

will it focus to dog or owner

dpreview z5 sample image

>>4382389
Because cellphonefags is their target audience.

>>4382437
>Crop is a cope
Crope sensor.

File: DSC_1085.jpg (1.39 MB, 3655x1827)

1.39 MB JPG

I literally went from a phone to my Z50 because my phone couldn't make these shots

[EXIF data available. Click here to show/hide.]

Camera-Specific Properties:
Equipment Make	NIKON CORPORATION
Camera Model	NIKON Z 50
Camera Software	Adobe Lightroom 9.5.0 (Android)
Sensing Method	One-Chip Color Area
Color Filter Array Pattern	818
Focal Length (35mm Equiv)	156 mm
Image-Specific Properties:
Horizontal Resolution	300 dpi
Vertical Resolution	300 dpi
Image Created	2024:09:24 12:01:24
Exposure Time	1/500 sec
F-Number	f/5.6
Exposure Program	Normal Program
ISO Speed Rating	100
Lens Aperture	f/5.6
Exposure Bias	0 EV
Metering Mode	Pattern
Light Source	Unknown
Flash	No Flash, Compulsory
Focal Length	104.00 mm
Color Space Information	sRGB
Rendering	Custom
Exposure Mode	Auto
White Balance	Auto
Scene Capture Type	Standard
Gain Control	None
Contrast	Normal
Saturation	Normal
Sharpness	Normal
Subject Distance Range	Unknown

>>4382432
Nikon fanboys are actually defending this.

As always, APS-C means fuji if you want ok apsc lenses and bad cameras and sony if you want mostly bad apsc lenses and one good camera (a6700)
>hey it sounds like apsc is dead
It is!

>>4382469
split the focus difference 50/50

NIKON
MOMENT

>>4382492
Sony has G series crop lenses that are ok, in a micro four thirdsy way. They’re basically micro four thirds.
>so many lens!
>only 4 with real weather sealing and modern quality
>all expensive zooms
Now they just need to bring back zeiss to sell overpriced mediocre glass and call an f1.4 on aps-c “noct”. Or is that what the GM branding does?

>>4382462
He argues with himself lol

File: A1000.png (325 KB, 700x581)

325 KB PNG

>>4382441
I want A1100

>>4382471
>>4382480
So it seems, so it seems

>>4382427
Birds, macro, etc.

Although, the z50 is pretty shit. I don't know why they haven't made a mirrorless d500 rebirth. Nikon needs to tell the poor fags to get fucked and just focus on good cameras. Make a crop censor z8 or some shit.

>>4382546
I kinda prefer brands to just focus on one format. I don't want to use FF glass on a crop body (too big and often in nonsensical FLs), and having to make a bunch of DX lenses defeats the point of it being a single brand. Even on F mount everyone was pairing a FF 200-500 with their D500s. I just don't believe any brand will bother with a pro-level APS-C. Would Fuji ever bother?

File: Screenshot_20241111-171324.png (191 KB, 1080x2400)

191 KB PNG

Just got stood up trying to sell my Z50 for $700 fuck this shit I'm gonna trade it in to Adorama for $590 and take the $100 hit before its worthless in a few months like a Canon M-Series

>>4382386
17 XL Bad Dragon toys.
4 unopened. 13 used.
Honestly my sex toys are worth more than your camera was new so I'm giving you a great offer.

>>4382546
Honestly what even is the Nikon Z50?
Sensor density seems in line with their bigger sensors, so what is it?
Defective Z7/8/9 sensors cut down to APS-C size?

In many cases the APS-C bodies actually have a higher pixel density than the full frame but Z50 is essentially just like Z7 in its DX crop mode. Seems to exist just to sell the rejects that didn't make it for fullframe.

>>4384231
Bigger pixels = better colors with extreme underexposure

File: Screenshot_20241113-235633.png (733 KB, 1080x1996)

733 KB PNG

>>4384182
Only thing that makes me sad is that my coworker who has a beat to shit D850 he EDCs said he would've bought it off me for $600, I would've gladly sold it to him for that amount. Otherwise fuck selling a used camera locally. It's often not even worth it. Too many idiots and lowballers. I was in and out in 10 mins.

I'm gonna shop for a A7C or A6700 next year after Snoy drops their A7V. Maybe a 5DIV or D750/850 if I can find a deal on one. I'm gonna keep a FF cam for photo-centric activities (airplanes, car show, etc) and my ZV1 as a EDC cam