Nikon Z users, what are you rocking?

as a long time Nikon user, I’d argue its more about body/lens balance than just weight alone.

My Z7ii body is pretty light and compact (I think) for a full frame camera. Some of my primes, like the 50mm f1.8 S and the 24mm f1.8 feel very front heavy to me when I try to hand hold, that is, the body is too light for the glass.

I had some larger F mount lenses when I had the D850, and though the D850 was way heavier than the Z7ii, it always felt good because the lens never really made the D850 body feel out of balance.

I think the body should mostly be heavier than the glass (sans long or extremely huge lenses) if you want to hand hold, and that makes more of a difference to me (up to a certain point, certainly, the GFX is just heavy af all around) rather than weight alone.

Of course most of that is moot for me because I love my tripod. Upgrading for an aluminum tripod to a carbon fiber one has been a most excellent weight reduction.

1 Like

I have a Z6III and the Z 24-120 f4 - the same as you. If you are looking for a (roughly) 15mm lens for that camera you may want to look at the Viltrox 14mm f4 full frame prime. I picked one up about a month ago when they were on sale for a ridiculously low price ($230 CAD). They are back to regular price now ($280 CAD) but still an amazing bargain and probably about the same price you would have to pay to pick up a used D5300. The lens has been getting very good reviews and I have certainly been more than happy with mine.

1 Like

I have the DX counterpart to that one, the 9mm f/2.8, and I like it even more than I thought I would.

1 Like

I like my Voigtlander 15mm, but it is certainly a difficult lens to shoot. Its so wide.

1 Like

This is the camera I would consider, or the mark III if it comes out. The original Z7 was 675g, and the mark II is 705g, which is a little above average for mid-range full frame cameras (680g).
Good point about the lenses. I’ve noticed it’s a common complaint with the Sony A7CR that it feels very unbalanced with longer lenses.

One of my vague plans is to get one of these higher MP bodies (min 45MP) and then use APS-C lenses for telephoto work. That should help with the balance. One of my gripes with the X-T5 is the grip. It’s just not good enough for heavier lenses. Once I add the L bracket/grip, it’s as big and heavy as a full-frame camera.

For me, lenses that are way larger change the way I hold the camera. The Nikon 100-400mm is the largest lens I have, and when I hold that, it tends to be with one hand on the lens foot and the other hand on the camera grip, so it doesn’t feel unbalanced in that regard.

When I hold the 100mm macro, it feels way too heavy.

I’m probably the last person who should be commenting on this, since I almost exclusively use a tripod (except with the Ricoh GR IV) and I tend to have the shakes, which makes hand holding even harder.

For a while I was handing holding the Z7ii and the 50mm f1.8 and like half my photos were unsharp. That’s when I learned about the balance thing, since I spent some time with the camera in my hand just holding it. Now I just don’t hand hold it anymore. But I stand by my judgement that the 50mm f1.7 S is really really amazing. I think maybe it is in the same class as the Fuji GF 55mm f1.7, which is 5x the cost :stuck_out_tongue: I need to shoot the gf lense more though.

1 Like

Yeah, at wider focal lengths it makes wonders - for the last shoot of Christmas light decorations in the city I didn’t even need to bring the tripod. I could comfortably handhold everything.

That was a hot candidate for me until I learned how much the lens suffers from flaring, so a no-go for me. I’d rather the Tamron Z 70-300mm.

Yeah, the full-frame sensor in amazing.

I agree, compared to my D3500 it’s quite heavy.

Yeah, the D3500 being so light, anything non-kit made it front heavy and it was a bit annoying.

3 Likes

Weight matters more than balance for me. I’m generally herding children and carrying a backpack with supplies for them and then have a camera and a couple of lenses around my neck. Unfortunately I’m a mug and insisted on full frame.

1 Like

That’s when you get two bodies: one for travel and hiking; and one for tripod or “this shot will make me famous, I just know it” moments :smiley:

I love my OM-5 and tiny zoom, and it’s a near perfect size for a general walkabout and travel kit. But there’s a limit to the size of lens you can put on it. Hence the ongoing search for another body. I’m considering all options, including the OM-1, flagship APS-C and trying full frame again. But I don’t think I can realistically afford medium format…

1 Like

I hold larger lenses on tiny micro 4/3 bodies just fine. Use your other hand to support the lens. That’s the way photographers have always done it, the idea that you can single-handedly shoot with a larger lens is a novelty.

I think that on full frame, the Z6 ii/iii + 24–120mm f/4 is ideal for a generic travel kit, there isn’t much you can throw at it that it would not handle.

Yeah, the 24-120mm is a great lens for single lens users/occasions. The 24-200mm already has too many drawbacks

What kind of drawbacks?

Wait, I was thinking different superzoom, oops :sweat_smile:

But anyways, the aperture progression superzooms in never really great

1 Like

Superzooms are really not an optical stack that resolves well. In my digital history, I’ve owned two Nikkor DX (18-200 and 18-140) and two FX (24-70/f4 and 24-200), and they’re all just not as sharp as primes at the same focal lengths. I found the 6MP D50 with the 18-200 was a good pairing, but that lens on the 16MP D7000 showed its ass, why I got the 18-140. When I moved to the Z mount, the 24MP Z 6 and the 24-70/f4 were a pairing made in heaven, but reach was deficient and that eventually let to my procurement of the 24-200. That put me back in DX-land…

I don’t have any specific focal length/MTF analysis or other any such quantitative assessment, just how my web-sized renditions have worked out.

If I did that, it would look like I specialized in ICM.

I do use my other hand to support the lens. Do any serious photographers not do this? I can’t imagine just holding the body with both hands.

For me, it’s mainly the smaller grip on the OM-5 that makes it less than ideal for longer lenses. Yes, it can still be done, but the ergonomics takes a hit, and I find it less comfortable. And the whole idea about balance is that weight is more evenly distributed over both hands/arms, rather than more being on one side (even if total weight is lighter). That’s an important consideration for me with a neck injury I have.

I can add a grip, but then we’re into larger kit territory, and it detracts from the appeal of the OM-5, which is all about being compact. So I’d rather have two kits than try and make my small body do everything.

2 Likes

With modern IBIS, you can just use one hand for wider lenses. Yes, I know, not a good habit. But convenience builds bad habits :wink:

In fact, with 5-axis IBIS, you don’t even have to stop and pause to take a shot, it can compensate for a lot of camera motion.

2 Likes

One handed shooting leaves the other free to hold a softbox. A style of shooting that I need to try some day.

1 Like