[stevebrot]

Interesting. The early posts I read suggested that the Nikon F-mount AF adapter for the Z-series uses a translucent mirror. If it doesn't, then it's more like Sony's LA-EA3 adapter, which is straight-through, but doesn't support screw-drive lenses (sounding more like the Nikon equivalent).

The Nikon Mount Adapter FTZ is a straight-through, nothing-but-air path from lens to sensor, CDAF PDAF only, no screw drive with no focus confirm for manual focus lenses. Thom Hogan's article is helpful...

Nikon F-Mount Adapter | Sans Mirror | Thom Hogan


Steve

---

Last edited by stevebrot; 09-01-2018 at 06:59 PM.

[Rondec]

I agree.

Sony's LA-EA4 adapter is, like the Nikon equivalent, a "semi-translucent mirror" arrangement with phase detect AF sensors built in. PDAF uses the adapter's sensors, not the camera's on-sensor PDAF points. Plus, for CDAF, there is some light loss due to the semi-translucent mirror. Because of this, video AF using the LA-EA4 and Sony A-mount lenses is not as snappy as using native E-mount glass that rely entirely on the camera's sensor.

I expect Nikon's AF arrangement and limitations are much the same...

As others have mentioned, this isn't an SLT adapter.

The problem is that this is being billed as perfect for F mount users at the same time as there are only minimal (very expensive) lenses available for the Z mount. If you plan to fill in with existing Nikon lenses you want a little better performance from them.

Things will get better as more lenses are released for this mount but that will take time. In the meantime, I would still probably prefer to shoot F mount lenses on an F mount camera, even if the size is a bit bigger.

[beholder3]

Unless, that is, you're an existing Nikon DSLR shooter. For folks who are already with Nikon and have some investment in quality F-mount glass, the Z6 and Z7 look like very decent mirrorless options. In fact, where re-use of modern Nikon glass is concerned, there's no better choice in mirrorless (same with the A7 / A9 series for previous Sony A-mount users).

Sadly it looks like the Z6/Z7 has no appeal to anyone else other than the remaining and shrinking Kino user base. Which in itself is already bad.
The K-1 performed much better in this regard in attracting users from other brands as well.

And the real fail for the topic of this thread is that even this reduced Nikon fanbase only gets K-7-like (how much do you pay for it today? $200?) liveview performance with a $3500 brandnew Nikon camera and $2000 lens.

Why would a intelligent person shell out an awful lot of money for a camera which doesnt even satisfy minimum requirements?

[BigMackCam]

Does the A7 mk II have PDAF sensors on the sensor? I though the reason for the translucent mirror was to introduce a way to add PDAF to the earlier sensor in the A7's. I'm no expert however.

The A7MkII does indeed have on-sensor PDAF sensors, but in the earlier versions of the firmware they were only utilised in a hybrid mode alongside CDAF. A couple of years ago, a firmware update was released enabling PDAF to be used independently. It works well in decent light and is certainly accurate when it achieves focus. But it doesn't compare to the SLT adapter's AF which basically replicates the A99's focusing system and functionality, and is both fast and accurate.

[stevebrot]

The A7MkII does indeed have on-sensor PDAF sensors, but in the earlier versions of the firmware they were only utilised in a hybrid mode alongside CDAF. A couple of years ago, a firmware update was released enabling PDAF to be used independently. It works well in decent light and is certainly accurate when it achieves focus. But it doesn't compare to the SLT adapter's AF which basically replicates the A99's focusing system and functionality, and is both fast and accurate.

Interesting...I have not been following the progress of on-sensor PDAF and have been of the understanding that the technology was fairly mature at this time. The poor performance shown in the video linked from the original post seems to indicate otherwise. One might caution, that the firmware was not the release version, but still.


Steve

[BigMackCam]

Interesting...I have not been following the progress of on-sensor PDAF and have been of the understanding that the technology was fairly mature at this time.

There's a useful Q&A here regarding on-sensor PDAF:

dslr - Why is on sensor PDAF drastically slower than traditional PDAF? - Photography Stack Exchange

It's an old thread - five years old, in fact - but the reasons mentioned for poor on-sensor PDAF performance sound plausible, and I wouldn't be surprised if some of them are still limiting factors several years on.

[surfar]

One might caution, that the firmware was not the release version, but still.

That may be the case but i'd guess its release grade,they should have lots(thousands) sitting in boxes ready to ship @ end of Sept.For Nikon to allow the testers around the world to insert their own cards and take the images away, they wouldnt do that i wouldnt think.

[BigMackCam]

That may be the case but i'd guess its release grade,they should have lots(thousands) sitting in boxes ready to ship @ end of Sept.For Nikon to allow the testers around the world to insert their own cards and take the images away, they wouldnt do that i wouldnt think.

Even so, if they work by the same principle as Sony, they'll get the cameras out there and offer fixes and improvements later via firmware updates. I imagine Nikon is already working on the first update as we speak...

[surfar]

I imagine Nikon is already working on the first update as we speak...

Absolutely!They should be but Nikon isnt renowned for updates via firmware.More renown for fixes via RE CALLS!

[stevebrot]

but i'd guess its release grade,

My French is not good enough to follow their conversation, so my guess would be that they were using a camera similar to that provided the major online reviewers. The reviews I have read to-date that included hands-on impressions caution that the firmware was beta at best. In other words, there is no way to know without having the camera in hand. Test users and even pre-release marketing events are typically provided with beta goods. Their findings are translated into tweaks that are tested by in-house QA and eventually for release. Release product is typically not put out into the wild until the actual release date or darn close.

BTW...from the YouTube caption text:

Please note that these were pre-release cameras, that might differ from the final products.

Steve

[surfar]

QuoteOriginally posted by surfar Quote
but i'd guess its release grade,
My French is not good enough to follow their conversation, so my guess would be that they were using a camera similar to that provided the major online reviewers. The reviews I have read to-date that included hands-on impressions caution that the firmware was beta at best. In other words, there is no way to know without having the camera in hand. Test users and even pre-release marketing events are typically provided with beta goods. Their findings are translated into tweaks that are tested by in-house QA and eventually for release. Release product is typically not put out into the wild until the actual release date or darn close.

BTW...from the YouTube caption text:
QuoteQuote:
Please note that these were pre-release cameras, that might differ from the final products.

Steve


Who knows for sure?

Normally the testers cant insert their own cards but Nikon have allowed this with the stipulation that anything used is labeled "pre release firmware"....but Why would they put on an event with anything less than firmware thats either final or close to it.

It just opens them up to criticsm which is allover the reviews and YT.

Anyway the real reviews wont be far away and we can then know for sure whether just the hardware falls short of $$$ony??

[mee]

QuoteOriginally posted by surfar Quote
but i'd guess its release grade,
My French is not good enough to follow their conversation, so my guess would be that they were using a camera similar to that provided the major online reviewers. The reviews I have read to-date that included hands-on impressions caution that the firmware was beta at best. In other words, there is no way to know without having the camera in hand. Test users and even pre-release marketing events are typically provided with beta goods. Their findings are translated into tweaks that are tested by in-house QA and eventually for release. Release product is typically not put out into the wild until the actual release date or darn close.

BTW...from the YouTube caption text:
QuoteQuote:
Please note that these were pre-release cameras, that might differ from the final products.

Steve


Who knows for sure?

Normally the testers cant insert their own cards but Nikon have allowed this with the stipulation that anything used is labeled "pre release firmware"....but Why would they put on an event with anything less than firmware thats either final or close to it.

It just opens them up to criticsm which is allover the reviews and YT.

Anyway the real reviews wont be far away and we can then know for sure whether just the hardware falls short of $$$ony??

I've seen shots of the back screen saying version 0.51 firmware on at least a couple of the Z7s on preview.

[surfar]

I've seen shots of the back screen saying version 0.51 firmware on at least a couple of the Z7s on preview.

Mee too!

But a number 051 and 1.00 may not be different or could be by quite a bit...as i said

Who knows for sure?

[Rondec]

There is always a feeling that pre-release firmware isn't final, which is true, but the reality is that once you get this close to release, there are few major tweaks that will be done.

[stevebrot]

But a number 051 and 1.00 may not be different or could be by quite a bit...as i said

Anything less than 1.0 is beta at best. It is not possible to know the sub-1.0 version numbering scheme; industry practice for software development is highly variable. That being said, the first fractional digit might be assumed to be a milestone release with those to the right of that being open ended (i.e. 0.5, 0.51, 0.52...0.535, 0.536) or any number of possible schemes. Once the release milestone is attained, the versioning rolls over to 1.0.

but the reality is that once you get this close to release, there are few major tweaks that will be done.

That is very true, though it says nothing about the stability of units available for pre-release marketing. I would expect that the firmware/hardware deemed "good enough and stable"* is what is shown and that nothing better will be revealed until the actual release. In other words, what is being shown is likely the state of development several weeks before the public unveiling, despite ongoing work to a release version. In all likelihood, the release firmware is probably already set and flashed onto the first wave of production waiting for shipment.


Steve

* Stable is the keyword here. Slow is better that fast with high potential for crash. Fast can come later.