[obican]

Oh and about Phase One...

 

Not many people know these:

 

-Phase One dropped the support for film backs on their newest bodies.

-Phase One mount is the Mamiya 645 mount from decades ago but they can't even operate the aperture on older lenses (Same goes for Mamiya AF cameras, can't operate with their MF lenses unless stopped down)

-You want to use their latest IQ3 backs on older bodies? Better find a compatibility chart because you'll need one.

-You have a Phase One back for Hasselblad H body? You want to use that on the newest H6? Not going to happen (Thanks to Hasselblad)

-You want to use the newest Phase One AF lenses on older bodies? Are you sure that's going to work?

 

With Hasselblad it can even be worse. They have the HxD versions which work with their digital backs. They also have a HxX series (Like H4X and H5X) that work with film backs and third party backs. So you bought a H6D and want to shoot film or your old Phase One back? Nope. You need a H6X for that. Which does not exist. Or if you have an H5X and want the most recent 100MP back from H6D? Nope, Hasselblad doesn't sell the back on its own.

 

Update: Seems like they just released the H6X.

[JJ_SO]

With some of your points I can agree, with others strictly not  thanks for the time to go more deeply into this matter.

 

I did not mean the lack of/existence of firmware updates and continious support by that. 

 

Most (if pretty much not all) of the native mirrorless lenses depend entirely on electronics to work. If you don't connect them, they can't even focus. You can't change the aperture, you can't even open the aperture wide open. So all these lenses will eventually break down and they'll have to be thrown away as parts won't be available and repairs won't be feasible. A serious lot of them don't even have optical adjustments inside.

What would you like to do with an unpowered lens without a camera? I agree on the stupid fashion to jam some glass together and the optical flaws "can be corrected by software" - that's clearly not what I like to pay for the price of, say, a Fuji 16-55/2.8. But for the rest of it? All these tiny motors and actuators suck the battery empty, true, but this is not the major reason of poor "shots per charge"-numbers. Put yourself in the chair of a designer - if you know, marketing department will go for a new model in less than five years, why take the effort and design it to last 50? And just look at us: When there's a new lens on the horizon, the buzz goes on here. Manufacturers need the buzz. Tokina for instance is nearly off the radar, nothing interesting coming from there.

 

What is more, most of those lenses are also either planned poorly or planned too well so that the company can/will release a new version in a few years to make the old one obselete and mostly worthless. Fuji's 35/1.4 is an example of that. It is optically alright (although not perfect) but the focusing is so slow, pretty much everyone who loves that lens will jump on the new one if it comes out. I get the fact that technology advances in time but come on, that focusing performance was poor even when the lens came out.

I'm not sure, but I think it was one of the first X-lenses, so they were experimenting. And as you said yourself you could live with slow AF but not with unreliable.  I skipped that one and went for 23 and 56 instead. Not superfast, but alright.

 

Newest Nikon lenses don't even work on their bodies from a couple of years ago. Actually the whole F Mount is hilarously and horribly non-compatible within itself so that's nothing new but come on, there are people still using D90s which don't work with the newest lenses anymore. It actually didn't even work with older lenses, when I think about it. Couldn't even meter the light with AI-S lenses.

With Nikon, I only have 6 years experience and never a lens which was not working like expected, I think, it were about 20, genuine Nikkors and Sigmas. But I never tried to attach some "oldie but goldie"-samples from the time I was young. I started with G lenses and now we have at Nikon as well some E versions which come with electrically operated apertures - no more levers. I can't say I miss it.

 

Sigma designed their first generation ART lenses so poorly that no matter what you do, you don't get consistent AF with their 50mm and 35mm lenses. Reported a thousand times by various people and won't be fixed unless they release a new version and sell you that. Who will buy the old one that can't even focus properly? I'm fine with getting an older version for cheap if it's not as sharp or maybe focuses slightly slower but can't focus reliably? Naah, I'll pass.

 

I think you never ran focus reliability tests? You can do so by using FoCal Pro. You must remain very strong now: I have no single lens, be it Nikon or Sigma, which passed the test with flying colors. ALL of them have one or two shots amongst 10 which make a big jump in the graph. So, you can blame Sigma for unreliability. I blame the AF system itself for systematic weaknesses. Sometimes the compromise between speed and accuracy works, sometimes it fails gloriously. AF-reliabilty on DSLRs? I call it a dream. And still better than my manual attempts! Like to see some graphs? I do it anyway 

 

 Nikon 300/4

 

Sigma 35/1.4

 

Nikon 85/1.4 G


So, what now about consistency? 

 

I can repeat the test and the next ten shots with the same lens/body combination will show a different graph. And that was in ideal conditions. Enough light, tripod, static target - who needs AF at such a moment? The real game of mastership is AF-C but this is hard to reproduce. And here I don't see less keepers from Sigma (exception the 20/1.4) than from Nikon.

[obican]

 

 

What would you like to do with an unpowered lens without a camera?

 

Adapt them to a different camera

 

 

 

All these tiny motors and actuators suck the battery empty, true, but this is not the major reason of poor "shots per charge"-numbers.

 

Actually when I had the very first Nex 5, it would return me about 300-400 shots per charge when the camera was completely stock (which means it was tyring to AF all the time, even when the shutter was not pressed). Using old Canon FD lenses I was able to shoot 2000 photos during a concert, on a single battery. So actually those actutators end up draining a lot of battery because of the way camera behaves.

 

 

 

I'm not sure, but I think it was one of the first X-lenses, so they were experimenting. And as you said yourself you could live with slow AF but not with unreliable.

 

It was in the first set of 3 lenses released, yes. Still, it was a very poor attempt at experimenting . And what does that tell you about the upcoming GFX system? Can we trust that one to be good out of the box or are we going to end up throwing away the first generation? The answer is: Neither of us will be buying one in the first place, right?  

 

35/1.4 is still one of my favorite lenses, especially at that price (Can buy one used for less than 200€ here). I'll happily pay double and buy the Sony 55/1.8 instead though (Which I have).

 

 

 

With Nikon, I only have 6 years experience and never a lens which was not working like expected,

 

Clearly you never put AI-S lens on a D90 (their enthusiast model) or a budget 50/1.8D on a D40 (their budget model) or the new E series on something older than 6-7 years (Does not work). 

 

 

 

I started with G lenses and now we have at Nikon as well some E versions which come with electrically operated apertures - no more levers. I can't say I miss it.

 

Yeah, good riddance. They should have done it way back in the day and at once like Canon.

 

 

 

I think you never ran focus reliability tests?

 

Was not needed. My friend had the 50/1.4 ART and it was clear as day even on the rear LCD that the camera would front focus twice and back focus the next shot on a still target in good light. No need to even remove the SD card from the camera, it was useless.

[davidmanze]

I did not mean the lack of/existence of firmware updates and continious support by that. 

 

Most (if pretty much not all) of the native mirrorless lenses depend entirely on electronics to work. If you don't connect them, they can't even focus. You can't change the aperture, you can't even open the aperture wide open. So all these lenses will eventually break down and they'll have to be thrown away as parts won't be available and repairs won't be feasible. A serious lot of them don't even have optical adjustments inside.

 

What is more, most of those lenses are also either planned poorly or planned too well so that the company can/will release a new version in a few years to make the old one obselete and mostly worthless. Fuji's 35/1.4 is an example of that. It is optically alright (although not perfect) but the focusing is so slow, pretty much everyone who loves that lens will jump on the new one if it comes out. I get the fact that technology advances in time but come on, that focusing performance was poor even when the lens came out.

 

Same goes for pretty much every lens Sony made in the past years. If you release a 24/1.8 for APS-C which is mediocre for its price range and a 35/2.8 for FF just a few years later which is smaller, focuses faster, sharper, AND cheaper; nobody will want the 24/1.8 and the one you have will not be worth much anymore. Especially since you can't even get lenses designed for that system as the APS-C mirrorless is not Sony's focus anymore. 

 

They also add a lot of "why didn't you implement this on the previous version" features like a sudden IBIS, focus hold buttons, aperture dials etc. If you like those features on the new lenses, why would you buy an older design of them which doesn't have the feature? Why doesn't the 55/1.8 have an aperture ring and a focus hold button? Design-wise, it's already obsolote in their ecosystem even though it's one of the best lenses at that focal length made by anyone. And there is no true replacement for that lens either. 

 

Newest Nikon lenses don't even work on their bodies from a couple of years ago. Actually the whole F Mount is hilarously and horribly non-compatible within itself so that's nothing new but come on, there are people still using D90s which don't work with the newest lenses anymore. It actually didn't even work with older lenses, when I think about it. Couldn't even meter the light with AI-S lenses.

 

Sigma designed their first generation ART lenses so poorly that no matter what you do, you don't get consistent AF with their 50mm and 35mm lenses. Reported a thousand times by various people and won't be fixed unless they release a new version and sell you that. Who will buy the old one that can't even focus properly? I'm fine with getting an older version for cheap if it's not as sharp or maybe focuses slightly slower but can't focus reliably? Naah, I'll pass.

 

A lot of people said many times, you invest in lenses. Is that really the case anymore? How many of the lenses we have will be in working condition in 10 years? I'm not keeping my hopes high for my mirrorless gear. Even if they end up surviving, nobody will want to buy them.

 

If you want to compare this to traditional AF lenses, I have quite a few 80's Minolta AF lenses that I use on a weekly basis. Same goes for most of the Canon lenses released in the 90's. I'm not even mentioning the all-manual mechanical gear that I have.

  I thought Nikon's compatibility covered most of their lenses dating right back, even my mod on the 55mm F1.2 (Ai)  produces a lens that communicates with the body leaving only MF as it's shortfall, not bad for a lens that was released in 1977, as it happens Nikon even produced an aperture ring and would mod the lens to Ai for a moderate fee.

 

   Pentax also has amazing compatibility dating back to the ark, including a sweet little adapter to M42.

 

 Canon changed mounts fairly early (shrewed move).

 

But your right Obican, optimism and seeing the bright side of life is rubbish and totally overrated........

 

     ...... pessimists on the other hand know that nothing goes right in life and thus are rarely disappointed, even with lens mount changes!  B)

[obican]

Nikon is absolutely horrible. Screw driven lenses can't have AF on lower end bodies, most AI lenses won't meter properly on even some higher models like D90, E series lenses won't work on anything older than 2007 etc. Yes everything fits physically but you can get a cheap adapter and then all of them fit on a Canon too

 

http://www.kenrockwell.com/nikon/compatibility-lens.htm

 

The best part is the AF-P lenses, which don't work on something as recent as D4, D800, D7200 and D610. Apparently those are too old. Yes the only AF-P lens is a 18-55 right now but they will probably release more of them in near future. Also, a lot of Nikon DX cameras also go into the list of the things that won't work with those lenses. Basically anything but a D3300, D5, D500 and D810.

[JJ_SO]

Clearly you never put AI-S lens on a D90 (their enthusiast model) or a budget 50/1.8D on a D40 (their budget model) or the new E series on something older than 6-7 years (Does not work).

True. Didn't want to waste money on old garbage. :lol: When I stumbled into Nikon grounds, their enthusiast model started with D7000 which was a big step forward from Pentax K-m/x/r or whatever.

 

Was not needed. My friend had the 50/1.4 ART and it was clear as day even on the rear LCD that the camera would front focus twice and back focus the next shot on a still target in good light. No need to even remove the SD card from the camera, it was useless.

 

Meaning it front focused in LiveView?  :blink: At first: One friend, one lens? You dare to conclude from the behaviour of this and another 35 mm to a whole brand? Courageous. And of course, the lens had the current firmware 1.03 (35 mm, the 50 still is at 1.00*).

 

"the internet is full of stories about...", yes it is, but how many of them are real lens failures and how many are just "some dude found the video record button and got himself a YouTube account"? 10 lenses of each brand, 100 shots per lens, then we're talking again.

 

I just put mine in front of the D810. With the 35 mm, no problem at all. With the 50 mm and AF-S: 2 front focus shots out of 9. With AF-C, nine shots perfectly focused. Sometimes it's the lack of photographers technique, not the lens' technique  And before you start counting how many gazillion shots both of you already took and all always in focus and only the Sigma.... please spare us the time. I know professional photographers being scared of using AF-C, scared of any ISO beyond 800. Professionals are sometimes really great to stick to misconceptions - and I understand that. If I once would find out which AF technique is 100% foolproof, I also would stick to it, but I'm still trying and erroring...

 

Sigma is no holy manufacturer in possession of a single truth, they have their error quote like Nikon or Canon. I just wanted to point out, that in terms of AF accuracy and especially reliability, the whole system is not only the lens.

 

*) most Sigma lenses for Nikon stick at 1.00 (20, 24, 50, 24-105). How boring  <_< no action on firmware front.

[JJ_SO]

Nikon is absolutely horrible. Screw driven lenses can't have AF on lower end bodies, most AI lenses won't meter properly on even some higher models like D90, E series lenses won't work on anything older than 2007 etc. Yes everything fits physically but you can get a cheap adapter and then all of them fit on a Canon too

 

http://www.kenrockwell.com/nikon/compatibility-lens.htm

 

The best part is the AF-P lenses, which don't work on something as recent as D4, D800, D7200 and D610. Apparently those are too old. Yes the only AF-P lens is a 18-55 right now but they will probably release more of them in near future. Also, a lot of Nikon DX cameras also go into the list of the things that won't work with those lenses. Basically anything but a D3300, D5, D500 and D810.

 

The AF-P lenses which is exactly one model, being a super rare 18-55 kitshit, oh yes, all the owners of the non-fitting cameras will weep themselves into sleep each night. If they ever realize how unfair Nikon treats them with AF-P lenses, that is.

 

And screw driven lenses on low end bodies? Why? Why on earth should they take care for bodies which hardly anytime see something else in their mount than the kit lense they were assembled with? Some decisions might be strange but this one I can understand.

[obican]

Most people buy the cheapest prime they can buy and put it on their low-end bodies to get some artsy feeling shallow DOF much bokeh portraits and in Nikonverse, that lens is the 50/1.8D . Or you pay double and get 50/1.8G to have AF .

[davidmanze]

Nikon is absolutely horrible. Screw driven lenses can't have AF on lower end bodies, most AI lenses won't meter properly on even some higher models like D90, E series lenses won't work on anything older than 2007 etc. Yes everything fits physically but you can get a cheap adapter and then all of them fit on a Canon too

 

http://www.kenrockwell.com/nikon/compatibility-lens.htm

 

The best part is the AF-P lenses, which don't work on something as recent as D4, D800, D7200 and D610. Apparently those are too old. Yes the only AF-P lens is a 18-55 right now but they will probably release more of them in near future. Also, a lot of Nikon DX cameras also go into the list of the things that won't work with those lenses. Basically anything but a D3300, D5, D500 and D810.

 

 

    I spoke to one pessimist who criticized Nikon's lens compatibility, I tried to console him saying,

 

    "Never mind the world is going to end!"

 

    He replied;

 

    "Yeah I know, but how long do we have to wait already?"  :blink:

[obican]

    I spoke to one pessimist who criticized Nikon's lens compatibility, I tried to console him saying,

 

    "Never mind the world is going to end!"

 

    He replied;

 

    "Yeah I know, but how long do we have to wait already?"  :blink:

 

I told one pessimist about that Nikon AF-P lens, he said:

 

"Yeah, I knew I had made a good choice switching to Fuji!"