Are Nikon Z Lenses Too Clinical & Sharp?
Вставка
- Опубліковано 25 вер 2024
- Nikon has the same problem as Canon. Their new Z lenses are actually a bit clinical and overly sharp compared to their wonderful F mount G glass. But does it really matter? The lack of character made up for by better autofocus and sharpness? Which is better? Comparing a bunch of Nikkor Z lenses today, the 17-28mm f2.8 vs the 28mm f2.8 SE, 40mm f2 and 85mm f1.2 S lens.
Subscribe to Edvard for creative and mean camera reviews :) / @edvard2942
Thank you Steinbeck for the very generous gift! Let's all subscribe to / @carlsteinbeck@uc1iqs2...
If you buy today's gear through my affiliate links, you can film yourself 300 feet from the camera in the ghetto. Should make for a good chase scene in your movie, assuming the thief films it properly.
Nikon ZF amzn.to/44J0wsj
Nikkor Z 17-28mm f2.8 amzn.to/4bIrp1C
Nikkor Z 28mm f2.8 amzn.to/44O3b3P
Nikkor Z 40mm f2 amzn.to/4dH1wkF
Nikkor Z 85mm f1.2 S amzn.to/3Ra0FiO
LAV MIC WIND MUFFS amzn.to/4bIEsR0
All my gear and recommended products can be found in my affiliate shop, thanks for shopping around! www.amazon.com...
Instagram / vegetablepolice
Topaz Video AI for enhancing and slowing down footage! www.topazlabs....
Remove Mucoid Plaque in 1 DAY to improve digestion! zencleanz.com/...
My Monkey Strength ebook payhip.com/b/VyEG
My Music from videos! Entire Discography 15% off vegetablepolic...
Patreon for Monthly Q&A Videos / vegetablepolice
T-shirts and merch! vegetablepolic...
Random ass donations to paypal.me/vegetablepolice Thank you!
Q-Link Products changed my life! share.shopqlin...
My Health Channel Vegetable Police / @vegetablepolice
My MMA channel UFC Conspiracies / @ufcconspiracies
Subscribe to Edvard for creative and mean camera reviews :) www.youtube.com/@edvard2942
Thank you Steinbeck for the very generous gift! Let's all subscribe to www.youtube.com/@carlsteinbeck
If you buy today's gear through my affiliate links, you can film yourself 300 feet from the camera in the ghetto. Should make for a good chase scene in your movie, assuming the thief films it properly.
Nikon ZF amzn.to/44J0wsj
Nikkor Z 17-28mm f2.8 amzn.to/4bIrp1C
Nikkor Z 28mm f2.8 amzn.to/44O3b3P
Nikkor Z 40mm f2 amzn.to/4dH1wkF
Nikkor Z 85mm f1.2 S amzn.to/3Ra0FiO
LAV MIC WIND MUFFS amzn.to/4bIEsR0
All my gear and recommended products can be found in my affiliate shop, thanks for shopping around! www.amazon.com/shop/vegetablepolice
One of the best things I like about Edvard is how he seems to set "certain forum moderators and fan boy's" hair on fire without even talking to them directly! Truly entertaining. 🤣🤣🤣
Thanks for the shoutout Kasey , haha! I've been watching you since 2018 xt3 times, Sometimes I go to sleep playing one of your videos haha and you kinda inspired me to make videos about cameras. I have only one word for you : TONEH
@@edvard2942 My pleasure dude, keep on making videos! They're good :)
@cameraconspiracies channel recommendations are always GOLD! Thank you for promoting quality content, Sir.
🎉
Looked great to me. Didnt see any hunting.
How the budget these days? Have your kids choosen their gender yet? Bro You’re a legend
😅😂🤣 "have your kids chosen their gender yet?"
😂😂😂😂
though not so hot on geography in Canada. thought that was an American thing eh.
@@harryflashman4542 isn’t Canada and ‘merica the same, buddy?
@@elpoutre2522 you're thinking of Mexico. They're still trying to keep Canadians out and rightly so. Pitiable people but you just have to look at them and you know that maybe the Phrenologists were onto something.
@@harryflashman4542 i have absolutely no idea what you are talking about friend.
I’m gonna rewatch Southpatk S15e3 again as it suit my views very well buddy.
On this shoot the 85mm looks great and you really look separate from the background and it's got that 3D look to me. You have depth in front of the backround to me.
That`s no 3d pop.
3d pop is almost holographic even if your dof is very deep.
My Nikkor Z 135 Plena is simply amazing (as is all my other Z glass), it enables me to turn the ordinary into something extraordinary
Bingo, plus it just won a few awards, just as the Nikkor 85 1.2
Your Nikon footage always looks best. I don’t understand your criticisms of it looking too clinical or sometimes not having “3d pop “. It’s by far the best-looking footage!
Just hating just to hate Nikon like most of these UA-camrs, plus he doesn't know what is talking about, most 85s are slow, smh, but this one def. ain't slow, smh
He is a weird contrarian who thinks having shit opinions or demanding broad accommodations for niche things is a comedy routine. Watch for the entertainment, don't watch for actual hardware advice.
You're subscribed to a satirical anti-fanboyism channel and you don't even know it.
He is a comedian and that's why i watch him lol
@@f.iph7291 I know it is comedy but at the same time it is misleading, the AF problems is a thing if the past when it comes to Nikon and videos like this make people believe that Nikon's AF is still bad, smh
The AF is really good, actually. I would say better than my Z6 II. And the footage from 40/2 looks really good. Especially considering how small and cheap this lens is.
This was fun, thanks! Regarding "3D pop": this impression results at 70% from how the scene is lit and what colours are in the frame (clothing, sky, surroundings), 20% about background separation (aperture vs focal length vs distance to subject) and 10% or less about optical design. You did not do yourself (or us) any favours by doing this exercise on a windy semi-cloudy day, with constant changes from sun to shade. I have yet to meet a lens that consistently brings me "3D pop" independently from the light, colours and aperture. For the rest, thanks for the show, it was informative and entertaining. :)
It is incredibly difficult to do a fair test between lenses, especially because aperture is the "wrong number". The real number is "Transmission" used by cinema lenses, because it accounts for light lost through the optical path. Even so, any test between two lenses should be done at the same aperture (which will only be approximate), ISO and shutter speed. Otherwise, the footage will be wildly different and we are comparing apples to oranges. IMO-YMMV. But this is not an equipment review channel in the same lines as Christopher Frost or Gerald Undone. It's a guy having fun with his camera gear and with us.
Maybe you should try a Batis 25mm f2.0 it has holographic 3dpop. You`ll notice instantly, if you don`t you will never see it because some people just don`t have the eyes.
Besides, you got your percentages completely wrong, 3d pop is 95% lens, it`s there or it`s not.
The 40 Tony 2 looks glorious
Definitely the best lens for the money they have.
I have the Nikkor 50mm f1.2 and it is by far my favourite lens. The character it has and how it renders the out of focus area and light are just beautiful.
40 2.0 looks really nice. I should use it more. And as far as the special look of the Canon 85...yes it was special with horrid magenta tones and aberrations.
The 50mm f1.8 has a ton of character - swirly bokeh, a ton of pop, same with 40mm F2.
The pro glass is clinical, because it's primary purpose is different.
Not the 105 Dc
I know you aren’t talking about the Z 50 1.8
@@livejames9374 yes I am, I've been using it for a long time with my Z9, and it's got plenty of character
@@bartromanowski1262 I disagree, but it’s all subjective
@@giannagiavelli5098 I like the 135 DC even better. Not sure what the negative (F) setting is for. It looks terrible when you turn it that way. But crank it to the R and you are in dreamland.
Good call on the Edvard channel. Awesome of you to help a newb. His stuff is pretty awesome
Imagine what first UA-cam videos were from Markus Pix!
@@Fessoid I mean he's been in the game forever. He made a legit Hollywood movie while I was eating lunch at school
NEVER used a shirt to clean a lens. I scratched my most expensive lens like that, lesson learned!
A microfiber cloth that has never been used or washed works, but use the bulb to blow gunk off first. A tiny bit of distilled water (keep it in a washed eye-drops bottle) can help if something is stuck on the lens. At home, q-tips and distilled water is better yet. Only dampen the q-tip, never wet. The coatings on lenses can be damaged by a metal or hard plastic button, by saliva, and any of a number of other things. It there is sand on the lens, rubbing it with anything is like using sandpaper on it. The angry photographer has a nice lens cleaning video. You have to be careful about lens cleaning videos because half of them are loaded with terrible advice that will damage your lens.
The 105mm f/2.8 Macro Z lens is one of the best macro lenses ever made 😊 it's so dang good. It's pretty swell for portraits too.
There are professional photographers who prefer macro lenses for portraits of beautiful women because they are sharper than other lenses. Nikon has a record of great macro lenses. A very early one so sharp you could shave with it was the 55mm AIS. Along the same lines, the 60mm Micro was a ludicrous bargain and a great general purpose lens. And the 200mm f4 Micro is absolutely legendary.
I love the 40f2. Such an amazing lens! So cheap but punch a ton! I love the 24-70f4 too for the compactness and sharpness at all focals. The 50 1.8 or 85 1.8 will be next!
Whehey! Thanks for the interesting reply to my query. I think we're all moving the goalposts constantly but it's also good to stop sometimes and take stock of how far we've come.
I love clinical and sharp look of Z glass and top Nikon mirrorless cams. If you want blurry mush there are hundreds of thousands of moldy $40 lenses on eBay to stuff all the blurry, inaccurate mush into your eyeballs you could ever want. Also: it's easy to soften a clinical image all you like but impossible to get a back to a clinical image when you shot using a blurry garbage lens.
Theres a difference between objectively bad mushy lenses, and lenses that are sharp centrally but then have falloff towards the corner with excellent contrast(see basically any zeiss lens). Modern lenses tend to be sharp across the entire frame from wide open which prevents that pleasing falloff and the extra elements used tend to reduce contrast. Theres times and places for both types of lenses.
It’s not to do with sharpness. It’s a clinical look where bokeh falloff is ruined due to multiple aspherical elements and in z lenses those elements are not hand polished properly (to save production cost) so they have micro grooves unlike Leica glass. Even $400 Leica 70s glass is sharper than Nikon z glass. The problem is also the optical formula I.e. too complicated.
@@18yearsoldnot 100%, the 85mm here in particular made kasey look like he was on a green screen, no depth to the bokeh. And just to be clear, lenses can have aspherical elements that still look good, I think in this case there's just way too many elements in general (15 apparently). Like the 40mm looked good, it has 2 aspherical elements but only 6 total and was far more pleasing
@@CianMcsweeneyfair point. Also it doesn’t get more mushy than at f1.2 😂. I guess it’s to hide all that busy bokeh from the complicated design. What’s the point in a sharp lens when you’re going to shoot that wide open…. All that extra weight for what… That’s why I got a sigma fp with a 90mm Leica tele elmarit for much less money and half the size and weight as well
@@18yearsoldnot yeah I love my voigtlander 90mm f2.8 m-mount lens, very pleasing
When you first don't succeed, try try again! Looked so much better this time! I did not see any hunting! Fantastic advise! Always entertaining and "Grounded" in reality! Thanks Kasey for sharing your vast array of knowledge and expertise!
I just bought the 85mm based partly on your footage
Love these real-world lens comparisons. Keep up the good work :)
Greetings from Argentina!
Yes, your camera will be stolen.
No, you don't need to cross an ocean to get here, Casey. Just follow the Pan-American highway all the way down south.
Lmao. He won't make it an hour into Mexico without being robbed if he's filming. I'd hide the camera all of the time until you know nobody can see you filming.
You still have to take a ferry from Panama to Columbia like for instance the Colon Cartagena ferry. So you do have to cross an ocean because there are no roads over the Darien Gap. Cycling the world is not uncommon. I'm not sure what draws people to this sort of thing but it's a sort of upgrade of boredom and horror that's more fulfilling than cycling across america which anyone can do. I have followed Karl Bushby off and on and while he didn't try to bicycle across the world he has tried to walk around the entire world including walking across the frozen bering straight. The actual walking for Bushby hasn't been the biggest problem, it's been visa issues especially in Russia, then later visa issues in Iran.
Anytime I go to the gym and think it's torture to get that last set in I try to remember as least I'm not trying to bicycle around the world.
Not sure I'd want to cycle the Darién gap...
@@samhodgkinson8901 lol
Let's all pray for the poor guy.
if the Z lenses are too clinical, why not get the FTZ adapter and use the F mount G glass?
Because all g glasses s*** you need to use af-d or AIS
That’s right. I think we’re heading towards the original vintage noct lenses which cinematographers still use
Better still , adapt canon ef lenses to z mount using 3rd party autofocus adapters
@@18yearsoldnot how smooth would the AF be for video if you do that?
G glass is awesome, AF motors may not be as refined for video.
I have the Z 28/2.8 and compared it to my F-Mount 28/1.8G and... the Z has less CA but they look really similar. Love my Z70-200/2.8 though that thing is amazing, I have the 1.4x and 2.0x TCs for it too.
Why are you stopping a 1.2 down to 4 or 6.3 🤣. Open that thing up
The 50 1.8z is regarded as the best lens overall in their lineup without costing 1000s of dollars. Curious if you like the look of that one.
That NikkiBoi 85mm is magic!
We are talking about fidelity (3D Pop) vs. bokeh. Lens character truly makes a difference. We know Zeiss and Leica produce it but also my Voigtlanders 40mm|2 and 58mm|1.4 these lenses are manual focus, but the images they produce for portraiture is unmatched My sigma Art 35mm|1.4 on my D3 was unmatched when it came to image sharpness and good bokeh. But once i converted to black +white the image fell flat on its face. I would have to apply heavy contrast and clarity to get the image to look better. The B/W from the Voits were simply unmatched. The tonality from white to black was very apparent. The imaGe fidelity is true to form. What can be seen on a 4K monitor is mind-blowing in print.
rofl 17:04 killed me pure gold, top notch editing skills, should start a masterclass; and 18:55 hahah why no shoes ?!!?
The Canon 85mm f/1.2 is notorious for slow focusing, especially wide open. Knowing this, I would probably only use manual focus for video.
I don't know how you can stand there without shoes... insane.
Dynamic steady shot on Sony ZVE1 has a lot of jitters at 24 fps. I realized you have to raise the shutter speed to get rid of the extra blur. I want A7s3.
When you have a perfect exposure, you can do what you want with it in post processing.
Thank you for the genuinely entertaining content. I just ordered my first camera. I got an r6mii with the 24-105mm 2.8. Is this overkill for my first setup and does it make me a spoiled little biotch? Did I mess up? I need answers, please! The biophotons have abandoned me
Well, you can always make a clinical image artistic, but you can't make an artistic image clinical. The 85f1.8 S is wonderful, and reasonable for what it is. All Z lenses should have had VR just because the 16-50DXVR does.
Good point. Sort of like recording audio clean and neutral, then coloring it later. If you color it on the recording, then you’re stuck with it for better or worse
I'm sorry but clinical is the trend for all brands... Fuji included with 33mm or 18mm
I don't think it's a bad thing since for all brands you can adapt old lenses...
What about people doing landscape or astrophotography ? They must be plenty happy with theses lenses 😉
THIS.
Clinically sharp lenses may not be ideal for portraits but they are excellent for landscapes, nightscapes and macro.
G master is not clinical, anyway at least very little.
@@brugj03 which gm lens are you referring to? gm 85 is from 2016 and "only" 1.4. new sony lenses are also clinically sharp like the 50 gm 1.2! when saying a lens has caracter, it means flaws like CA. the only flaws sony lenses have is focus breathing and distortion that is corrected in body the keep them small.
@@josejuncal9342 The 1.2 is as flat as a pancake.The 1.4s are really nice and have some 3dpop. I`d say the character of 1.4 gmasters is that they are near perfect without being clinical and boring.
Sony has breathing compensation on the newer bodies.
I love that passers by will wonder wtf your're up to standing in a field gesticulating wildly 🤣
This is one of my favourite videos. Loved it.
Even though you were recording on a tripod the video looked solidly stable considering all the wind that was hitting the camera. Did you have something blocking the wind or was it just the camera stabilization correcting it? Or did you have a lot to correct in post?
I didn't do anything special.
Random: Why aren’t you wearing shoes? Just wondering.
my favorite look was the 28mm prime. and the 85mm when it was wide open (you looked like an hologram).
but it is hard to compare as there was no sun with the 85mm so the image was very flat. also I think you generally overexpose your footage a bit, and that is part of the reason the 28mm prime footage looked more intresting. it was less overexposed.
you wanna try let the shadows wrap around your face or your silhouette in the shot, to the point where it falls off into black. that is how you look more 3d. if you overexpose (or do not slightly under-expose in some instances) you mitigate this effect and the image looks more flat (although the istogram probably looks better, but f@#k the istogram).
Can you review Sony Xperia 1 VI, is it good enough to use as everyday always with you waterproof camera to shoot close stuffs and 2X macro and just get Nikon Zf with 28-400mm f4-8 for everything else?
Yeah, that 40mm was nice. If I was going Nikon for photographic prints of still lifes and English landscapes for large 16 x 20 prints to sell in my gallery, I'd go with a set of those f1.8 primes. And I'd use an old Z7 because it has so many megapixels and screw features of newer Nikons. That 85mm f1.2 looks like one of those wedding photographer lenses. Here's the happy couple kissing and everything else in the universe is out of focus. Isn't that unique?
@-Tex.t_camera_conspiracies That's a very old technique. Nobody tries that anymore.
I now have a collection of Pro Mist filters to fit my Nikon Z-mount lenses. There are definitely times when too sharp isn’t the most pleasing result.
Top sound in harsh conditions.
I have no camera I have no money still I watch 😂. And in my opinion this video was better than every Sony you've posted lol😂
Which len for fuj x system has objectively the most 3D Pop?
Angry Photographer's list www.flickr.com/photos/134746128@N05/27344353199/in/photostream/
@@cameraconspiracies the cinema shall finally be mine, thanks!
@@randomframe3436 not sure there's any way to objectively measure 3D Pop. After hearing about it on this channel, I went down the rabbit hole for a bit and it mostly seems to come down to individual taste/perception. Google "Lens Feature Search: Number of elements" and see dprevew forum disccussion on the element count question, for one example.
Fuji GFX. Medium format. When?
I have my zfc at +5 focus speed. Its really accurate. Walking towards or away from the camera and it almost never hunts. And if you go out of the frame and come in again it catches my eye instantly. Ive been doing videos with it for my channel for two years and never have i ever been out of focus
That’s why I bought Sirui sniper f1.2 it reduces the sharpness at wide open.😂
What ? You don't like the Nikon 85 1.2 ? I love that lens. The 1.2 is so beautiful. Why did you not like the 85. Still watching your video perhaps you will say.
This is what consumers wanted. Some photographers especially the new ones focus on lens sharpness and bokeh. Older lenses may have been less sharp but had more character. With all the glass and coating to remove. Unwanted CaR. And flare, ghosting etc. Now you have flat and sharp images.
There is 'Toneh' and then, there is BigFoot Blur....the 85 1.2S is definitely looks like it will capture Bigfoot. 100%.
I think the primes all looked good in the Nikon. It almost $3000 for the 85 mm? I don’t care what it looks like that’s too expensive.
What ocean do you cross to get to Argentina from Vancouver?
The Indian Ocean.
It depends on your route. If you go via Antarctica, you cross the arctic ocean and the Bering sea (or maybe Chukchi). I imagine if you picked carefully you could cross them all.
AF-S NIKKOR 105mm f/1.4E ED with F to Z adapter is the best looking medium tele
Angry Photographer hates that lens, so I hate it.
I don't see the point in replicating the same "uncorrected" lenses of old, which are already mostly available.
And for what it's worth, clinically sharp lenses are excellent for landscapes, nightscapes and macro.
To not need an adapter, improve autofocus etc. I can't even stop my 85mm f1.2 down due to the stupid 7 Artisans adapter lol.
Hi, after you get your F to Z adapter, you may want to sell the 85Z and buy some Nikon G primes instead. 24/1.4,, 35/1.4 and 85/1.4 have that pop you are after. You can probably buy all three used for the same price.
I think it's got some pop.
On the Caseys flat earth there is an ocean between North and South America! 🤣 Is he trolling? Probably!
I wondered that too haha. The cyclist will def have to get on a boat to cross the Darian gap, but that still doesn't qualify as an ocean crossing 👀
Amazing to have 5 options under the same brand
Notifications going nuts for the new Sigma 28-45mm f1.8 reviews dropping while I’m watching this. I hope Gerald Undone got a guernsey for that one otherwise it’s gonna be ugly.
What's a Gernsey?
@@luisneumannp2748It's like a Guernsey.
@@KingfisherSeven I think it might be an expression I'm not familiar with. According to Google Guernsey is either a type of cow or an island?
@@luisneumannp2748 damn autocorrect fixed it
@@luisneumannp2748 the top shirt footballers wear... Australian slang for "was invited to play" or "part of the team" 😂
i want a nikon z6n with red color science!
honestly with the 85 the compression gets weird at full body. Never occurred to me for stills, but for video it seems to bother me. 28 or 40 was the sweet spot
If you haven't checked it out yet, the Yongnuo 85mm f1.8 is surprisingly good (to me) at $369 greenbacks. I don't understand assessing 3D pop, although I do kind of think I saw some in the 28mm in this video, and maybe the 40. The 85 looks good to me, but not 3 grand worth of good. I don't think it's better than the Yongnuo really.
But Casey, potatos are round so how would the lens look flat 🤔
With his sense of humour (yes I am Canadian, it underlined humour for spelling) but with his sense of humour -- it did it again sheesh - but as I was saying, with him being so funny (ah finally it did not underline it) I thought he was being funny when he used the phrase "blown away" on such a windy day.. but he was not... he was actually seriously blown away by something figuratively .. not literally.. you keep me on my toes Mister! See 3:12 to be blown away as well
All mirrorless lenses meticulously design their optical architecture to accommodate the higher megapixel count in new camera bodies, resulting in exceptionally sharp and precise photos. The increasing demand for video has greatly influenced lens design, leading to significantly faster focusing speeds. The narrative effectively highlights the key differences between film-based optics and modern optical systems while maintaining a neutral stance on their superiority. Autistic parallels are more fitting than technical ones, as mirrorless lenses and film optics have distinct purposes. It's important to mention that a mirrorless lens is not optically inherently better than film optics, as they each have their own distinct creative and artistic uses.
EXACTLY TODAY I decided to sell my 35 1.8, 50 1.8 and 85 1.8 because I just don't use them anymore but rather some 7artisans/TTartisans faster glass that I just adore. The only thing I'd miss is the VR and weight, maybe 😄
Think carefully before doing that: those three f/1.8 lenses are stunningly good! It is always possible to get great lenses to look artsy or funky (with diffusion filters while shooting or by fiddling in post), it is impossible to get funky lenses to look great. You'll soon realise that the ultra fast cheapies are one trick poneys. After a couple of months you'll get bored with the swirls and bubbles and glows and fringing. You'll regret throwing out the great ones. Just add an Helios or similar to your current set for the occasional fun.😊
@@brusselssprout1 I know what you mean but I'm already thinking for that for 2 years and I always go out with the manual ones and love them way mlre. They are cheap but not crappy-cheap. 7artisans 50mm 1.05 is proven already one of the best for its price. Also TTartisan 90mm 1.25. The Z glass is amazing, no doubt about it but I always lean to one of those. And I need money which is the main reason, haha. I become birder anyway so that's why I don't use the wider lenses much. Left the city, I don't like people much anymore so no chances to become portrait photographer anymore while my whole house needs reinovation and stuff. 😁
All I want to know; is what tripod setup you were using on such a windy day? Dam, that was a stable shot. Not a hint of tripod movement.
Return the f/1.2 (build for artwork and highend portraiture) and get the f1.8 instead. Will be much better for the kind of videos you do.
For the money you save, get yourself, or your girlfriend, something nice.
The Argentinian Ocean. 😃
One of the seat of adapters does auto focus on manual focus lenses you should look for that one I forget which one it is
Techart
Z mount cameras accept all the lenses I own from multiple other mount systems. Z mount glass OTOH adapts to no other camera mount. Zero chance I’m blowing good money on Z mount lenses that are still facing the realistic possibility of being orphaned.
I highly doubt Nikon will ditch z mount for at least a couple of decades lol. It's not Canon m mount. They put a lot into the design of the mount for that exact reason of being able to adapt anything to Nikon. They are just getting started with the z mount...
Not af-d
Z-mount is not being replaced any time soon 😂
Do you understand why Z-mount is designed like it is and not the others?
Z mount isn't going anywhere for very long time, they thought hard about this one. It's awesome.
That 40/2 is something special. The 85/1.2 has no character whatsoever, definitely worse than RF equivalent imo.
Just watch Julia trotti's video on the Nikon Z 85 1.2, then get back to me. That lens is insanely good.
I'm honestly thinking about turning off lens corrections lol
"..your special ed kids are going to throw up all over it..." Jeez.... Ha! You have to cross an ocean...... Actually, the Pan American highway can be traveled all the way south. Not easy though...not for me. Don't know if it was the better exposure or not, but that 40mm T2 really looked better than the 28 to me. That phone spinning through the air was fabulous. The 85mm focal length gives that beautiful portrait result. The XF56 T1.2 does that too. I have the old version and it's sweet. Have a beautiful day!!
I know your grounding, but be-careful about glass and nails on the floor hiding in the grass, tetnus and all that.
In that area of Toronto he needs to worry about syringes 😂
Dunno the proper terminology but does the Nikon footage tend toward green? The Canon footage was very brown IMO, so the two side by side to my eye both looked very wrong. That said the 40mm T2 was best to my failing untrained eyes.
It was Autumn...
@@cameraconspiracies understood, and I tried to account for brown leaves and green grass, but I see those color shifts in gray too, and on different monitors. Perhaps it's just me.
@@ak4good Greys will shift as there will be green or brown light being thrown around.
@@MTBD80 but isn't that something we should aim to correct to arrive at a neutral/natural look?
@@ak4good Depends on look you are going for but yeah. I was just in the woods on a hike, sooo much green light being thrown around. Makes full foliage summer least fav time for photography and video.
Markuspix will gladly recommend you some camcorder format cameras as I'm sure you know. @ 12:35
One could argue that his little Sony (I think maybe it's a HDR-AS15, but I don't remember. I have one of those and it looks like his) is a camcorder format machine. But Marcus would greatly prefer the CX-405, and his videos about that camcorder are compelling. But even more so, Marcus would suggest the RX-100 series, which are his true loves. And not camcorder shaped at all.
"Clinical" really just means accurate. Put something beautiful in front of a "Clinical" lens, and guess what, it's beautiful! Sharp is a precondition for "3-D pop" which is another name for micro-contrast. Not sharp? Micro contrast cannot possibly be good. Also, I have never seen a camera lens that had good contrast but not good micro-contrast. Doesn't mean they don't exist, but I am not too sure what could cause that. Mist filters reduce sharpness. This is a good thing for older women who would prefer not to have every wrinkle look like it was ironed in with a can of Niagara spray starch, or men in general (we're hideous, I need mist filters stacked for my portrait). Quite frankly, I don't care what lens you are using. But you should keep churning over it, because it's one of the things that makes this channel funny. BTW, "The Angry Photographer" LOVES Tamron SP primes. Don't believe me? Look at his reviews. I like them too.
Example: "Angry Photographer: Close-Up look at Awesome! TAMRON 45mm f/1.8 VC USD"
I was at the Nikon stand at the Photography Show chatting to a couple of the reps where they had the "pro" lenses. I asked: “Is it just me, or is the 85/1.2 a bit disappointing?”
The reps were aghast: “ l think it’s you - I've never met anyone who wasn’t blown away by it”
“Well I only tried it for 10-15 minutes at a Nikon roadshow, but I found the focussing a bit slow, and very hit and miss. When it did manage to focus, image quality is good but not spectacular, so I bought the Plena.”
“If you're comparing it to the Plena then of course it’s not as good. Not even close."
I'm sure there are many people who are very pleased with their 85/1.2 and for them it is worth every penny, but for me, I think the main problem with it is that the 85/1.8 is sooooooo good for sooooooo much less. In fact the Z 85/1.8 is faster in practice than the F- mount 85/1.4 G I had previously since the Z lens is acceptably sharp at f/1.8, whereas the G lens needed stopping down to at least f/2 and ideally more.
Yeah they wouldn’t understand. They’re fanatics and marketers. Same reason why Justin bieber is more successful than Mozart. Photographers need to be more educated
Nikons 85 1.2 is the best portrait lens I’ve ever used. Including the Plena (too limited of focal length), all the legendary EF and F mount lenses, voightlander (my second favs) and Uber expensive Leica lenses. It’s really quick to focus. Not sure what you experienced but it has no problem keeping up with dogs running at full speed.
I'm really sorry, but videographers who think that the lens determines the look, they just probably don't understand that much, it's best to have a lens that collects all the data in an optimal way and determine the look using lighting art and color correction..
nice af, but that's a crappy 28
No 3D Pop??? You have to be crazy, lol... The hate for anything Nikon is real lol... these UA-camrs really hate Nikon for no reason, smh
I'm just saying, $3000 lens is a bit clinical. I get better results on older vintage glass.
@@cameraconspiracies I mean, it is crazy how much youtubers and photographers nit pick and complain about everything, now we are going to complain about not having "3D Pop" and lenses being "too Clinically" sharp? Like wouldn't most people want nice and sharp images with correct colors? If you want lenses with character buy old ones or third party ones :) anyway, I'm happy with everything Nikon has been putting out, and they can call me "fanboy" all they want, when something is great, why wouldn't you be a fan of it lol, SMH
@@felm.974 I do buy old lenses, I wanted to see what one of the better modern Nikon lenses looked like. It was pretty glorious, but not for me.
@@felm.974 It has no 3dpop so it is just as good as any boring modern prime, some people just want a more artistic lens.
@@brugj03 Treu... And that's what he should say and not make it sound like the lens and camera sucks lol
gh7 is coming, 🐎
Wide angle looks so weird when the camera is not at a certain angle and height lol
Wow, man you really surpassed yourself big time.
Really high class humour and cristal clear explaining combined. 3d POP is real. And the nikon is as flat as a pancake.
And yes edvard is really good and hè`s just getting started, subt him right away.
85 1.2 was 3D pop amazing 😊
You can use an app on your phone to make sure you're in the shot. ;)
This guy got it ALL WRONG, learn to use the camera man, I have never had these AF focus problems you are showing here, pure BS, smh
The AF was perfect the whole video. Took me a few to find the right settings, relax.
@@cameraconspiracies lol, no problem man, my issue is that videos like this will make people believe that Nikon is still doing horrible in the AF dept.... also, the 85 1.2, Plena and many more have won awards for a reason, they are stellar lenses... I watch for the entertainment which is appreciated but many of these companies are struggling, and if they are doing a great job, they should be applauded :) anyway.. it is what it is lol
@@felm.974 No idea what you're even talking about. I showed the Nikon AF working fantastically the whole video. But in order for it not to hunt you have to set the responsiveness down a bit. And that has it's own issues with no recognizing subjects right away. I'm here to discover the truth, not fanboy over brands.
@@cameraconspiracies Can you believe a guy like that, he rather hears lies and marketing bullshit than the truth and some humour. Also he thinks that you are there only to entertain him...........man.
I shoot Viltrox and Sigma Art glass on my Nikon Z
You’re just now finding out that Nikon has shitty autofocus?
Are you using a monitor? Because if not you have some eagle-eye fucking vision to see the camera’s screen in that bright ass sunlight lol. I can’t see shit when it’s bright like that, was thinking an external monitor might help
If you use the green bar and soft 2x1in cotton wheel, you should make 10,000 grit polish. The glass hardness is easily a 4 compare to a casio 0.8. You just push the green line back and forth for half an hour. It really on cuts the handicapped zone, then your at 0.00001 hardness vs a 4 hardness, but 3d pop means afaik 2D. The astro glide does nothing at all. it's vasoline, thats how you put lamile door ramp moon base door stop, only need to modulate the shipping containers in star trek with hf to vhf as superconductor, get in my buggy, of course your jesting.
Have your kids “choosen” their gender yet?😂
The Nikkor S-lenses for the Z-mount are - with a wide margin - the best lenses I have ever used - and I used a lot of lenses from different companies!!
If you don't mind a flat rendering, sure. They are sharp and have that modern look.
Deciding between a Fuji and a Canon just shows the person has no values, like how do you even consider a Canon body as someone interested in Fuuj, one looks like a toy, the other is the definition of sacrificing function for pure aesthetics and emotion. And don't even get me started on the slow mo, Canon R8 stops at 180fps, embarrassing, get that X-S20 with 240fps
3D pop is hugely overrated. Casey geography inserted an ocean between north and south America 😂 DJI Action 1 was a pretty decent action cam. Footage was decent quality.
Did you really just pretend the zve1 was better than the a7iv for video? Give me a break
It's not even close.
@@cameraconspiracies yeah just like the Nikon D3500 is.
Nikon Z stuff is really sharp... so are the RF Canon stuff... even the 3rd party stuff... like Viltrox, sharp as a tack, great for Astro