Thread Rating:
  • 0 Vote(s) - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
Z50 in the lab soon
#1
The Z50 will probably arrive on the weekend (actually together with the X-T30), completing the refresh/replacement of the test cameras here Smile

Side note: you can buy the Z50, body only or as a kit with one or both new DX Z lenses. However, you can not buy an additional battery yet (scheduled for mid december), and you can also not buy the hoods for the two new lenses (which, as most cheap Nikkor kit lenses, come without a hood). The hoods are currently expected to be available in 3 months...
Editor
opticallimits.com

#2
What kind of use has a hood on a 50-250 or 16-50? Big Grin 

Except of a bit of rain protection or plastic bumper against wild animals (elk comes in mind...). The 14-30 also comes with a hood and the hood stays at home usually.

Side note: If I ever read a sentence like "The build quality of the lens is very good. The lens is based on a metal mount, both tubes are made of high quality plastics, the nicely rubberized zoom ring in addition features metal elements." which you wrote for the 1 Nikkor VR 30-110mm f/3.8-5.6 I'll have to make some fun out of it.

Yesterday I disassembled one to see if there was the slightest chance to get rid of some dust particles behind the front element. (No, that elements are glued or melted in their plastic cage) The "metal mount" is just screwed with 3 8 mm long screw into an all plastic design. The lens I got 2nd hand. Wobbling, scratching when zooming and occasionally the camera reacts funny (loose contacts?) when this lens is attached to it.

It's a throw away lens, not meant to be repaired - and the two DX Z lenses will be the same, in regards of their price. I don't know if that's part of Nikon's survival strategy?

There's so much more heritage of the 1 series in the new Z line that I start wondering if the 1 series was just a kind of pilot project, never meant to succeed economically. Trying out new ways to assemble lenses and bodies and make the as cheap as possible - but for the people and testers, who judge build quality by the look at the outside, gives it a nice finish and a bit of metal at the rear end, that will do  Tongue
#3
(12-05-2019, 07:19 AM)JJ_SO Wrote: What kind of use has a hood on a 50-250 or 16-50? Big Grin 

To each his own, I made it a habit to use them as flare protection... and occasionally physical protector, which they manage to be much better than a front filter Wink

Still: it would be nice to leave the decision if a hood is a useful or useless piece of plastic to all buyers and just include it for free, like with most other lenses. Instead, they expect those who want to use one to pay another 50 EUR for two peaces of cheap plastic.

Regarding the mount construction: you maybe haven't opened many current lenses, did you? Wink Screws going into plastic constructions is the rule, not the exception. Nikon does that on many lenses (including many of the modern AF-S primes and zooms, also most of the Z lenses), same with Canon (including L zooms and primes) and Sony. You will rarely find all metal constructions inside, occasionally though metal thread inserts in the plastic frames, that don't wear out too easily. However, wear is something that depends on what kind of plastic material is used... and those screws are not meant to be removed and reattached hundreds of times anyway.
A heavily used or even mistreated lens will show signs of wear over time, that's true for cheap kit zooms as it is for Canon L zooms. Scratching when zooming is usually a sure sign that the lens was used in an environment it wasn't intended or designed to be used in... on a beach, in a dusty place (like right next to a rallye track or a teardown site), things like that. I still find the construction of the 10-30 VR solid... mine is still working like new, at least Smile

In any case: why even bother about dust in there? It won't show up in any image...
Editor
opticallimits.com

#4
That is not entirely true, you can get the dust to show up in "bokeh balls". But that is easier with tele(zoom) lenses.
#5
... and the 30-110 is a telezoom lens Wink

Usually I don't mind a bit of dust, but here were fibers involved of which I have no idea how they made it to the inside - I mean, I could not open the front group.

In terms of lenshood I agree, it is a good bump protector and much better than filters.

I got a second 1 V2 with three lenses. Before I got the 1 V2 with 10-100 (that one has a metal barrel as Zoom ring) and the 70-300 (again, metal barrel). The kit lenses are a different league (not surprisingly). And I don't see metal as superior in each case, I even admire the design work involved in the housing and functions - but the tolerances are huge because else it would not work.

On second thought, the smaller the sensor, the shorter the FL and the sooner dust particles of a certain size (and close to the sensor) can appear, when aperture is stopped down. Anyway, the 10-100 (the non-PD version) appears to be better made, so I would not use the plasticky 30-110 anyway. And I was curious about it's inner structure.

And of course, Marcus, I opened up every lens in my posession to check wether it's plastic or not Wink. As you apparently also did because you know things like "Screws going into plastic constructions is the rule..." Big Grin

On a more serious base: Could you explain why so many Z-glass (14-30, 24-70) needs to be extended first before you can use it? Can't imagine this to be cheaper or more reliable than a body in the "extended" size already would be. More compact? Yes, but regarding the 14-30 I usuallly turn it in the wrong direction to make it transport ready.
#6
Sorry, I did not read your first post carefully enough, I thought we're talking about the 10-30 VR.

Fibres are a reason to maybe explore how to get rid of them, I agree. And yes, I do that regularly with lenses here Wink And I also agree that it makes you wonder how these things got in there.

Regarding Nikon's passion to build retractable lenses: I honestly don't see any other advantage than to have a smaller lens size for transport and storage. Personally, I did not like it on the Nikon 1 lenses, on the DX kit zooms for their DSLRs and I am quite surprised to see it as a "feature" on Z lenses now.
Editor
opticallimits.com

#7
(12-05-2019, 10:37 AM)mst Wrote: ...
Regarding Nikon's passion to build retractable lenses: I honestly don't see any other advantage than to have a smaller lens size for transport and storage. Personally, I did not like it on the Nikon 1 lenses, on the DX kit zooms for their DSLRs and I am quite surprised to see it as a "feature" on Z lenses now.

The whole design becomes more complex. If collapsed, the lenses are better protected. But if one of these falls to the (hard) floor when extended, I'm not sure if I could just blow the dust off and keep on using it? And it's not a pro feature, as the 24-70/2.8 doesn's collapse.
#8
(12-05-2019, 08:41 AM)mst Wrote: Regarding the mount construction: you maybe haven't opened many current lenses, "have" you? Wink

  As a matter of interest ...... What lenses will you be testing on the Z50 apart from the two standard kits lenses? ........ 

 ..... it just seems a little limited in it's testing capacity.
Dave's clichés
  


Forum Jump:


Users browsing this thread:
1 Guest(s)