Nikon Neglect? - Printable Version

+- Opticallimits (https://forum.opticallimits.com)
+-- Forum: Forums (https://forum.opticallimits.com/forumdisplay.php?fid=4)
+--- Forum: Nikon (https://forum.opticallimits.com/forumdisplay.php?fid=12)
+--- Thread: Nikon Neglect? (/showthread.php?tid=4569)

Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6

RE: Nikon Neglect? - Klaus - 11-15-2019

I slightly disagree with Markus regarding the costs. While Markus has to buy the cameras, he has access to all kinds of lenses. I have to either buy or rent most of them - resulting in base costs of about 10.000USD p.a. I won't pay this from my private money.

RE: Nikon Neglect? - mst - 11-15-2019

Sorry, that was a bit unfortunate phrasing from my side. I also have no intention to cover costs that won't lead to any return in the end.

RE: Nikon Neglect? - davidmanze - 11-16-2019

Well it's good to hear from Markus at least ....... Hi Markus !!

Those here haven't really been expecting many Nikon reviews ........

This new range of Z lenses!
Pretty much gone are the days of standard 24/35/50/85 AF-S F mount semi base models with their average wide open performance mediocre borders, soft corners, LOCAs and general fringing.
The Z range has pretty much done away with all that and are being compared with Otus range.
Lenstip have not yet tested the Z range and we're left with Ephotozines "fast food reviews" and the very overworked Gordon Laing's at Camaralabs who is doing sterling work. It probably heralds the future demise for the F mount ....... almost now.
So it's a pity Markus that you won't be documenting this transition .... as it's probably one the most interesting times in photography !

All the best !!

RE: Nikon Neglect? - JJ_SO - 11-16-2019

(11-15-2019, 05:50 PM)mst Wrote: Sebastian is the 3rd guy.

.... I was tempted to give you a sneek peak into some of the details, but thinking about it all day, let me please be very clear: this is none of your business (with 'you' in this context being the whole audience here and not a particular forum member). ...
Please accept that outside of this forum there are many other things that have a much higher priority for me and deserve my full attention, dedication and commitment more than lens reviews. Still, despite all the excuses I could come up with for the past, I feel guilty ...
... and sometimes things need to be updated in all reviews (the initial publication date can be found in all reviews for a while already, did anyone notice that? That was manual work).....

Most of the new ones are already around (still waiting for the X-T30 and the Z50 to be delivered),

No, unfortunately it's not that easy to find someone else to fill the gap temporarily. It would most of all require a lot of time to teach someone how to do it, including all the things that could go wrong and how to recognize and avoid them. If I had that time, I could just do the reviews myself instead.

Yes, some things need to change for OL to survive, most of all the rate we publish reviews at. But it is and always has been something we did in our spare time, and I personally don't want to change that.

I like to comment on this post, but first, I'm glad you didn't give in the temptation to publish details of your private life. Btw. I never asked for it. You're right, this is not our business. But the other side of that medal is that no one searching for reviews knows why there aren't any. "We're closed until..." at least tells a customer to come back another time. Customer? Well, OL offers a service and we people try to use it. I think that makes us customers, no? Some of us donate, others participate in discussions, others do both...

I don't think I ever read something from Sebastian.

Yes, outside the forum and outside Ol are many other things deserving attention, but I can't help but say: this is also true for Klaus and all of us. For you, it was apparently a bit more than the "normal dose" of other things.

Don't feel guilty - guilt doesn't write good reviews.

No, I didn't notice the addendum of initial publishing, you know, there are so many things outside this forum that I have to admit I don't keep a constant eye on old reviews if they loose or get new words.  Wink (these smileys all look pretty debile, sorry, hope you get the twinkling).

But this work "behind the scenes" and ordering one of the most insignificant camera bodies, a Z 50, already let me raise again two eyebrows, sorry to say that. Who on this wide world would buy an APS-C camera, for which there are just two lenses and otherwise only FF-lenses? What's the point in this "priority"? 19.5 MP of APS-C I can get out of a Z 7 - which you own and 21 MP don't make any difference in the result. But anyway, none of my business, I don't have to understand it.

That last bit about how time-consuming it is to teach someone I understand perfectly. But once that person is teached for the time equivalent of one or two reviews, she or he can support and deliver reviews. Believe me, I wrote down what I'm doing in my daily job and how because much of it are procedures I have to follow again when in half a year's time I have to do the same again and I don't want to re-invent it over and over. My colleague said, he never had such a "how-to guide" in any job before, neither did I - but this time investment  has already paid for itself. And I did it because I believe in company success and customer satisfaction. Suit yourself...

It all comes down to basic questions: 
  • With decreasing sales of bodies and lenses, with new products floating in on a daily basis, with lots of other information sources: Is there a place for a site collecting well made, comparable and methodical reviews of just one copy of a lens? 
  • Is this helping to find a decision, given the contemporary quality of lenses from a certain price point?
  • Is it possible to run this project free of costs for us benefiters? If not - how to generate income?
  • Is it possible to run this as a two-men show (sorry, Sebastian, for not counting you as author of reviews)?
More specifically:
  • Is this necessary for closed, proprietary systems (Nikon Z, Canon R) for which there are no significantly similar offerings of third parties? Meaning: If I like to buy a genuine mount 85 mm for my Zs, what choice I have? Exactly 1. All adapted lenses will perform exactly as they do on a native F-mount body.
  • Given the L-mount HAS alternative lenses and bodies, it also has a steep price tag and it's future is as doubtful as the Z-mount - Nikon already failed once with a mirrorless concept and some of it is in the Z system. In my opinion, L-mount deserves more attention than Z-mount.

RE: Nikon Neglect? - davidmanze - 11-17-2019

JoJu wrote:

"In my opinion, L-mount deserves more attention than Z-mount."

  If you are talking about a return on lens reviews? the L mount will not do it !
........ Leica lenses are rarely formally tested ...... Leica owners aren't interested in lens reviews ........ and Leica owners just want Leica lenses, compact and meticulously constructed in metal ..... 

If you are a Panasonic FF ML owner ......... you're a very rare bird indeed .... too rare to make any money out of !!



RE: Nikon Neglect? - Klaus - 11-17-2019

I think L mount is suffering from the fact that there's no camera with PD-AF - this has been criticized in pretty much all reviews.
You may forgive this in an MFT camera but in an S1R for that price point, it's a tough sell I reckon.

Curiously, even the Sigma FP doesn't feature PD-AF despite supposedly using a Sony sensor.

RE: Nikon Neglect? - JJ_SO - 11-17-2019

Dave, Sigma is also developing and manufacturing for L-mount. So there are 3 manufacturers offering lenses for the same mount, while Nikon remains exclusively. There are also 3 different camera manufacturers for the same mount. I agree, I don't think I will ever see a Sigma lens in front of a Leica SL or SL2 (in the wild) as these are very interesting for M-mount lenses as well. But regarding what happened to Nikon 1, to Samsung and to Pentax mirrorless systems, I see more potential in L- than in Z-mount. Especially since Nikon bragged about all the advantages of their bigger mount and so far we haven't seen the lenses following.

In my opinion L-mount has a broader base of manufacturers and users - and what better users a manufacturer can ask for than the ones than those willing to pay super-premium prices. Yes, some big pocket Nikonians will also buy the 58 mm Noct to put it in a glass shelf - but not enough to cover Nikon's financial loss. Occasionally I came to a different opinion about Z-mount and am far less positive about it's future than only one year ago. 

Sure, the grass is always greener in the other valley and before I choose a different systems I first try it out. Not far from where I live a dealer offers a CHF 100,-/48 hrs Leica rental, they also offer the Panasonics for rent. I like the handling of the Z 6 / 7 but I also see their downsides, there was only one major FW update, the pace on lenses remains slow, the f/1.8 are comparatively expensive (to what we were used), there's no professional body, the battery pack is a very bad joke and currently Sony offers better specs and lenses for each group of photogs.

At least I became confident the Z is a good camera to use it in the rain  Shy

[Image: 2019-10-19-_DSC0051-X2.jpg]

RE: Nikon Neglect? - Brightcolours - 11-17-2019

Many of the Canon RF lenses have bigger back elements than will fit in E or L mount. The Nikkor Z 58mm f0.95 S Noct also has back elements bigger than will fit in E of L mount. Perhaps that is true of the Nikkor Z 24-70mm f2.8 S too, have not tried to measure that from the lens construction diagram yet, nor from the 24mm one.
I bet other future lenses, like the 50mm f1.2, also will take advantage of the wide mount diameter.

Just because Nikon in its infinite wisdom has decided to first come with slower lenses, does not mean the wider mount does not have its merits?

RE: Nikon Neglect? - JJ_SO - 11-17-2019

I do not disagree the bigger diameter has it's merits. I just don't see the lenses benefitting from it for now and also in the near future. As biggest diameter (due to the contact ring) I measured 43 mm for the rear element. But apparently the 24 mm's rear element is recessed

Canon began with big lens designs on small bodies. Nikon's bodies were bigger and the lenses so far smaller (except the idiotic 58 mm), made in China (35, 85) or Thailand (24-70/4, 14-30/4) and the zooms are relying massively on software correction. I don't discuss this as good or bad anymore, but it's a way to keep the lens costs low (to produce) and high (to sell), otherwise the big rebates would have been pointless. Another manufacturer going constantly on big rebates is Fuji, but I do not know if it pays in higher turnaround.

RE: Nikon Neglect? - Brightcolours - 11-17-2019

And what is the biggest diameter that could fit in L and E-mount? Quite a bit smaller, it seems:

Only Sony takes a bit less room for its contacts row, but also has the smallest diameter.