How do you ISO?

How often do you use Auto ISO?

  • All Auto, all the time

    Votes: 2 3.4%
  • Mostly Auto

    Votes: 20 34.5%
  • 50/50 Auto/Manual

    Votes: 5 8.6%
  • Mostly Manual

    Votes: 12 20.7%
  • Only Manual

    Votes: 19 32.8%

  • Total voters
    58

Apple fanboy

macrumors Nehalem
Feb 21, 2012
32,384
22,445
0
Behind the Lens, UK
I didn't opt to get the Z6 solely for the weight savings. I knew with F mount lenses that would be negligible. I will say that the camera with the kit 24-70 f/4 lens *is* much smaller and easier to carry for the day. So from that perspective, as a versatile day trip kit it does fit the bill.

I like the larger focal point coverage (nearly 90% of the frame). I like the joystick for moving the focal points (I missed that from my Canon days) although I think that's in newer Nikon dSLR bodies than I own. I like the in body stabilization (I can handhold to 1/30). The battery life so far isn't a problem for me.

I am struggling with figuring out backlit studio images, but this is not something I shoot often. And I'm only working on it because I read it is a limitation specifically to EVF. It's not something I really worry about though as I don't often shoot directly into a flash.

I still don't need auto ISO though. :)
I wonder if the 24-70mm 2.8 weighs that much different than the f-mount though. How do you find focus peaking for macro work? I could see that being useful.
 

mollyc

macrumors 68020
Aug 18, 2016
2,026
9,428
0
I wonder if the 24-70mm 2.8 weighs that much different than the f-mount though. How do you find focus peaking for macro work? I could see that being useful.
There is a sizeable difference between my Nikon 24-70 2.8 F mount and the 24-70 f/4 Z mount. And because the body is stabilized I can shoot as low as 1/30 which makes up for the slower lens. I haven't seen the 2.8 Z mount though, but all the Z lenses are supposed to be markedly lighter than the F counterparts....... Well, B&H says my older version of the 24-70 2.8 weighs 2 pounds. The newer, VR version weighs 2.4 pounds. The Z mount 2.8 equivalent weighs 1.75 pounds. My f/4 Z mount weighs just over 1 pound. So that can be a lot of weight savings, depending on which lens you are replacing.

I haven't gotten the hang of focus peaking yet. I tried a bit yesterday to figure it out but didn't get far. Since I shoot the majority of my macros handheld, I'm not sure focus peaking will benefit me much but I think right now it's more user error. I can't seem to get to the same screens I see in tutorials, so there's something big I'm missing.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Scepticalscribe

Apple fanboy

macrumors Nehalem
Feb 21, 2012
32,384
22,445
0
Behind the Lens, UK
There is a sizeable difference between my Nikon 24-70 2.8 F mount and the 24-70 f/4 Z mount. And because the body is stabilized I can shoot as low as 1/30 which makes up for the slower lens. I haven't seen the 2.8 Z mount though, but all the Z lenses are supposed to be markedly lighter than the F counterparts....... Well, B&H says my older version of the 24-70 2.8 weighs 2 pounds. The newer, VR version weighs 2.4 pounds. The Z mount 2.8 equivalent weighs 1.75 pounds. My f/4 Z mount weighs just over 1 pound. So that can be a lot of weight savings, depending on which lens you are replacing.

I haven't gotten the hang of focus peaking yet. I tried a bit yesterday to figure it out but didn't get far. Since I shoot the majority of my macros handheld, I'm not sure focus peaking will benefit me much but I think right now it's more user error. I can't seem to get to the same screens I see in tutorials, so there's something big I'm missing.
Hang in there. You’ll get there.
 
  • Like
Reactions: mollyc