This channel is dedicated to creating images and words through photography and writing. I'll show you how I edit my images in Photoshop and Lightroom as well as an occasional video on creative writing and motivation.
This is supposed to be a photography channel, right? You're white, you're wearing all white and there's mostly white clouds in the background. What's wrong with you and why should anyone listen to anything you say about photography?
Maybe the dislikes were directed at Voigtlander for discontinuing the two APO-Lanthar Nikon Z lenses. Your video was excellent and informative. Perhaps they disliked the news you accurately conveyed 🤷♂️
voigtlander frequently discontinues its lenses: adds new ones, changes it optical formulas: has single and multi-coated variants. I like to buy m mounts, just because they have been a standard forever. Plus they are adaptable to every other brand
Super cool prints. I’d better apply, but I have to remember which questions to answer. I don’t have a Voitlander, but this video made me interested in them. Those b&w shots are Lieca-like on a Nikon, and a 50mm prime is my favorite. That’s why I have the Nikon 50mm 1.8 S.
HA. I think you've already qualified, Marcus! I like the Voigtlander a bit more than the Nikon, but it's a close call. Unless you use 50mm a lot then I'd stick with the Nikon. If you want that tad extra pop (separation between the subject and background) that you get with the Voigtlander, then try to find one before they are gone.
@@MichaelCantwell Thanks! Great advice. Becuase I've really just moved to mirrorless with the Z8 in December, I'm gonna keep shooting with what I have, which is the Nikon 50mm 1.8. I did look around for a used Voigtlander 50mm, but didn't see much in my local area.
@@marcusgrandon3640 I haven't sold my Nikon version. That should tell you something. Besides, I use the Nikon to film my videos like this one where I'm sitting indoors and not in my dark office.
I love the Voigtlander Z mount APO lenses. I feel very lucky to have all three. That 50mm just performs outstandingly well (from a technical perspective) while still having a beautiful character. And the 35mm is almost always in my bag when I travel. It’s not as razor sharp wide open as the 50mm (only slightly less so), but it has such a beautiful rendering that it just doesn’t matter. In fact, I struggled to wrap my head around the 35mm focal length for the longest time and with the Voigtlander APO everything just clicked; I suddenly “got it.” Anyway, I hope, as you suggest, this just means there are updated versions on the horizon. Beautiful prints, by the way! Cheers!
Thanks for watching and commenting. I once owned the 58mm and the 40mm for the F mount. I sold them when I migrated to the mirrorless system and jumped all over the 50mm F2 as soon as it was made available. I never bought the 35 because I have always tended to shoot far more at 50mm then 35. I have the Nikon version of the 35mm, but I might sell it off and pick up a copy of the Voigtlander 15mm. I realize plenty of people know about the value of the Voigtlander lenses, however I still think they are one of the best kept secrets when it comes to excellent lenses. Thanks again.
If you listen closer, I think you will find that this is more of a first impressions video than a review. I later do a review of the Z8 after using it for several months. You will see that I do use it in the video. Thanks for watching and commenting.
Thank you so much for this informative video. I started following you recently as I researched the ZF, and now I’ll start planning our trip to Iceland. I appreciate your presentations and your down to earth demeanor. Thanks, Gary
Thanks for watching and now being a loyal subscriber and watcher. All I can say about Iceland is... GO... GO and GO.. it was the most spectacular place I've ever been as far as how many different types of landscapes you will see. I wish I could've spent more time in that beautiful country. If I can help more or you have any specific questions, shoot me an email and I'll do my best to answer. Thanks again.
One of the really good mistake I made is to take 24 120 as my kit lens now it's very hard to find another lens to add to the kit which matches the quality. I say this as a mistake because it's so good I don't know what to buy next.
There are only two lenses I take traveling, the 24-120 f4 and the 14-30 f4. Both of these lenses are fantastic, lightweight and the image quality is outstanding. If I bring a 3rd it’s the 85 f1.8 like you mentioned. My working lenses are the 24-70 f2.8 and 70-200 f2.8 with a Z9, but that is so heavy and bulky I hate carrying them around all day. I now have my Z6III (replacing my Z6) as my fun travel camera and they all fit in my smaller backpack so I’m good for the day. And to be honest, when anyone looks at the pics most couldn’t tell if they are from the Z9 with the pro lenses or my Z6’s with the travel lenses. So you’re right, it’s not the best for anything specific but it’s the best for everything. Great video!
Thanks for watching and adding your thoughts, Patrick. I'd be interested in knowing how you end up liking the Z6III in the future. I agree it's really hard to tell the difference between most of the Z lenses these days. They are that good. I don't understand the people who knock the 85 F1.8 lens. Maybe they should look how it compares to some older lenses, including Nikons. I had the older F mount 85mm lens and yes it was a very good lens for it's day but this latest version to me seems to be the best of the bunch.
What do you think about the Z6III so far? I'm contemplating making it my main camera and using the Z9 for special use or difficult shooting situations. IMO, the Z6III continious AF isn't quite as quick/accurate- especially in low light.
@@uhoh7541 To be honest, I've yet to pay it much attention. I have a Z7II and a Z8. I'm afraid if I looked at too closely, it might encourage me to sell off the Z7II to get the Z6III and there really wouldn't be an advantage for me to do it. I'm assuming that the Z8 will do anything a Z6III will and more. I'm focused on studying lenses right now to come up with exactly the ones I will need and or use. I've seen a few videos about the Z6III, but I don't trust opinions from people who are really only reading the specs and offering an opinion and that's what I would be doing here. Therefore, I won't do it. IMHO, it's hard to judge a camera body until you've used it for several months. Good luck with your decision if you've yet to buy one.
Just a comment on the your choice of favorites; I think your favorite is mine as well. I own six Nikon Z lenses and I think they are all very good to excellent, but we agree on #1.
Thanks for watching and commenting, John. I still say the lens choices are very personal, but the 24-120 is for sure a good choice for many using the Nikon mirrorless system.
Best overall Z lens is highly dependent on how you judge this. Judging by "if you could only have one lens" presumably for the rest of your life is not the same thing as saying its the best overall lens. Those are two different topics. I would argue in the "you can only have one lens" discussion that the 24-200 is the clear winner. If I could have two lenses, its the 24-120 and 100-400. If I could have three lenses, its the 14-30, 24-120 and 100-400. If you could only own three lenses for the rest of your life, its pretty hard to go with any prime lenses. But if this is more like you can only own three lenses at any given time, that's different. If we are talking what is the best Z lens released so far, my vote is for the 800 PF.
Thanks for watching and commenting. Lenses are such a personal choice, it's one reason why I stated in the video that I don't like making these types of videos but unfortunately, I have to so I can get more watch hours and pick up some subscribers. It's at time a necessary evil and then I can go back to making other types of videos. I also did it so that the people who wanted their images to be seen had some extra views this month. I fully admit it. I will however take issue with you about one thing and again it's clearly my opinion. I did own the 24-200 and used it often before changing over to the 24-120. For me, let me say it again, for me, the constant F4 when needed and the faster focus speeds of the 24-120 were more important to me than the extra focal length. It's why for me, I would still pick the 24-120 over the 24-200. I can understand your reasoning behind the no prime set up and essentially using the trinity of lenses. I would also agree with you that there is a difference between the "if you could have one lens" vs "your best lens". The 24-120 in my opinion is my most used and useful lens and not my "best" lens. I think that would be the Voigtlander 50mm F2 APO. Thanks for the healthy discussion and I hope to have more in the future with you.
Thanks for watching and commenting. I owned the 24-200 right after it came to market. I don't regret owning that lens, however once I purchased the 24-120, it became my lens of choice over the 24-200 despite the loss of focal length. The 24-120 is faster to focus, is a constant F4 and yes is a bit sharper :)
Yes, it's an amazing bit of design. I shot a wedding with it on my Z6 recently and it did a very good job, despite some crappy light. Nobody even notices noise (apart from photographers), so I don't care about bumping up the ISO a bit. Since then I got a used Viltrox 85mm f/1.8 really cheap and it's a big surprise to someone who has mainly only used Nikkors before - the IQ and feel of it seems just as good or better than most Nikkors! (recent ones, not the AI/AIS era) I am thinking about getting the Viltrox 35mm next, and maybe their 20mm too, that would make a nice set of 3 primes.
Thanks for watching and commenting. I do enjoy hearing about other lenses and what people photograph with the lenses they own. I'm happy to hear the 24-120 was used for weddings.
I think the great thing about Nikon is that they have always been open to third party glass, so it’s possible to have some great Nikkors but also say, Kipon or Viltrox (which I don’t have: Viltrox AF 16mm F1.8 cf Ken Rockwell, a Canon man who just discovered third party). I still love my Zeiss Milvus / Otus range which cuts out the need to do panoramas and despite being DX will, without doubt, deliver that famous micro contrast to any future ~60 Mp sensor. So congratulations regarding Voightländer, it’s the start of the rabbit hole.
Thanks for watching and commenting. I've used 3rd party lenses like Voigtlander and Tamron for years. It's important to find the proper lens for your style and budget. I'm considering doing another video on the Voigtlander 50mm F2 APO because it was just discontinued.
@@MichaelCantwell haha, that’s a great idea regarding the Voigtländer! I know a collector who’s also in the trade (UK), so I’m sure he’ll sell you anything discontinued but I’m sticking with Zeiss for landscape and environmental portraiture. Please do not feel that you need to reply to this comment.
@@Stephen_Baker I'm keeping my Voigtlander and might pick up the 15mm in case they discontinue that one as well. I've owned Zeiss in the past as well. It's hard to dispute that you shouldn't be using Zeiss lenses. They are excellent.
I bought my 24-120mm Z lens as an afterthought thinking that I'd not use it much. How wrong I was. This lens is super sharp. Probably the sharpest mid-zoom I've ever used. It looks like a prime. It produces the most amazing results.
Despite being a cheapo lens, my 28mm f2.8 sure does get a lot of time mounted on the camera. 24-120 is a great lens as well, but if I'm going to be covering a lot of ground I like something smaller.
Thanks for watching again and commenting. About the only time I shoot video is for my own videos, so sometimes I forget to mention video. Thanks for reminding me.
You can get a Z7II for $1,999 (body only). The Z8 is $1,500 more. That's not a small difference. I would only switch if you really need the speed the Z8 provides.
Thanks for watching and commenting. It really depends on what you photograph as to which body to use. I've said many times that if I was only shooting landscapes, I'd stay with the Z7II. However, since I shoot sports and wildlife, the Z8 was worth the upgrade for me. Thanks again for watching.
Not a good test as you seem to be getting confused between depth of field, focus point and exposure. To compare sharpness the focus on both lenses should be on exactly the same point and the exposure should match as well. A classic is on the blue and white sign where the Nikon shows superior sharpness but yet again you have underexposed the Nikon image. And then you say that the voigtlander is focussed on the top of the sign so it is better but of course the Nikon is focussed on the bottom of the screen so it’s better than the voigtlander there. Sorry but there are too many discrepancies in the testing you done to draw any conclusions.
Thanks for watching and commenting. I would agree with some of your comments. I have considered to take this video down. I made another video later on doing a better comparison. I was rushing and could have done a better job.
Of course not. First of all, "professional" just means you're a "hired gun" that supplies specific photos for clients (a.k.a. "commercial" photography) and relatively few of them routinely create truly "great" images from an artistic standpoint, which is fine, as they're merely trying to meet the client's expectations to get paid, not create portfolio pieces. Although there were times when Ansel did commercial work to pay the bills, he considered himself to be an amateur, which simply means he shot what he wanted to shoot. I wouldn't have it any other way! Re composition, it's good to know the "rules" just so you can ignore them! Wasting time thinking about "how" to get the shot often results in a lesser result than relying on experienced-based instinct (and knowing whatever gear you have well enough to operate it by feel). I agree with your approach of avoiding the "obvious" perspective, as that's a great way to simply replicate what others have done (boor-ing!). I disagree that an easily-identifiable subject is necessary to produce a compelling image. Much of my favorite abstract work (mine and other's) not only lacks a clear subject, but it's not necessarily obvious what the "subject matter" is! Emotional/thought-provoking impact is in the eye/mind of the beholder and I'm often "moved" simply by an interesting texture or the way certain visual elements interact. To quote Ansel (of course), "There are always two people in every picture: the photographer and the viewer," and if something appeals to you, chances are it will appeal to others. Nice work from Iceland, BtW. What an interesting and amazing place. I subscribed a while back and it's nice to have your voice out there. I'm much more drawn to the philosophical aspects of artmaking than the technical ones.
Thanks again for watching and commenting. Yes, I'm aware that you're a loyal watcher and commenter. I'm old and feeble at times, but I do remember when people are kind enough to watch more than one video and comment on a regular basis. I do have a few like yourself. I guess we could debate what "professional" really means, though I'm not sure it's that important. There are plenty of landscape photographers who would consider themselves to be a professional and aren't specifically a "hired gun". As far an obvious subject, I would agree with you to some extent. However, maybe an abstract is in itself the subject. Who knows. Again, another debate that we can all have. I still believe we can all have our opinions as to what is a good image or not. There is a very good photographer here on RU-vid is makes unique images that suits his style, yet I'm not a particular fan of that style. Does that make it a bad image, for sure not. On it's face he makes wonderful images, but not something I would want on my wall. Anyway, I do enjoy our chats and let's keep em going. Thanks again.
Very nice shots (and sound track), including the homages to Ansel and the Wratten 29. I hope to get back to Iceland soon. I was there in 1976 (at 17) with a Pentax Spotmatic F, but it was only a fuel stop turned maintenance issue overnighter, so it was basically spent going from Keflavik airport to a hotel in Reykjavik and back. Nothing like the amazing terrain you encountered. I don't suppose you'd want to share your itinerary... ;)
Thanks for you're continued support and kind words. I don't mind sharing. I did a video before this one about the trip and I think my itinerary. In short it was changed because of mechanical issues with the plane. We went directly from Keklavik to the Snefelness Peninsula for 2 days. We then went and stayed in Vik down south for 2 days then moved farther east for a night and then back to Vik. We ended in Reykavik for an afternoon and then to the airport the following morning. Because we missed a day and the weather went sour the last day ro two, we missed out on the Thingold National Park are but I was pleased with what we could see and the areas. I would stay in the south and east more if I did return. Thanks again.
@@MichaelCantwell Ha! What is it with Iceland and aircraft issues? We blew an auxiliary hydraulic pump and had to have one flown in from the US--in retrospect, it's too bad it didn't take longer! Thanks for sharing--I'll have to check out that other video.
This video is way more useful and enjoyable than the more “technical” reviews which often don’t cover the real-world usage details that end up actually mattering more. Thanks!
Mike, you had three letters for Iceland, and as Marcus said, there are three letters to describe your photography - - - W O W! And others watching, after you see the focus of each shot, look up for another breathtaking view of the clouds. Mike has a way with clouds! Awesome.
Thank you for this video< I have been considering purchasing a Z7 or a Z8 for some time and this has been a great help to hear the thoughts of someone of (I think) of a similar standard as myself it has made my decision easier about what to buy.
I have the Nikon Z 50mm f1.8S on my Nikon Z7. I've been interested in the Voigtlander 50mm f2 APO, but there are differing sharpness charts online in regard to the Nikon Z 50mm f1.8S. One chart I saw had the Nikon Z just about neck and neck with the Voigtlander. But, yet another chart showed it obviously losing to the 50mm f2 APO. I don't want to duplicate focal lengths, but would do so if the rendering and character were significantly different on the Voigtlander than the Nikon Z 50mm f1.8S. What's your take on this?
That is hard to answer because what I might like is different from you. The rendering is a bit different yes. Enough to have 2 copies of a 50mm lens, honestly, I'm not good at spending other people's money. The Voigtlanders are more known to resemble a Leica rendering, while this particular Nikon 50mm is more of a clinical look. Again, that's strictly my opinion and if I could only have one lens it would be the Voigtlander. However, I'm keeping the Nikon because I use it to film some of my videos and I use it in spots like I just took it to Iceland because the weather sealing is better with the Nikon. So, for me, I have a place for both lenses. All I can say is that I do prefer the rendering on the Voigtlander but I wouldn't argue with others who prefer the look of the Nikon. Both are excellent lenses and the overall differences are minor. It really does come down to manual focus vs AF. weather sealing, and the slightly difference in rendering. Whatever takes preference for you will be your choice. I do see a ever so slight difference in sharpness, but it's hard to see if not pixel peeping. Also, the Nikon is F1.8 vs F2 if that makes difference at all to you. I doubt it would. You really can't lose either way and if you're happy and own the Nikon, try to borrow or rent a Voigtlander. Like I said, I use both for different reasons. If I was on a strict budget and already owned the Nikon, Id 'be happy.
@@MichaelCantwell Thank you for your reply. Ya, I'm after that 3-D pop. Sometimes I see this with my Nikon Z 50mm F1.8s, but reading and watching reviews like crazy to find out if any of the Voigtlanders have even more of this character.
@@sierragold I do prefer the Voigtlander look but it is minimal. Again, I don't like spending other people's cash, but I have had 3 Voigts now and loved them all. I almost pulled the trigger on the 50mm F1 a few months back but decided that I didn't like spending my cash that much either :) thanks again for watching and commenting.
Excellent initial analysis of Iceland, Mike. I'm glad to hear that things went mostly well over there. I got quite a few chuckles while watching, and quite a bit of what you said echoes my experience in New Zealand. Looking forward to seeing more images and hearing more stories!
Thanks, Marcus, always good to hear from you. Next week's video will have about 40-45 images. I think it's coming out pretty well. Then I'll maybe do another with more stories. Shrugs. Talk soon my friend.
I often play camera videos in the background while working just to hear what different people have to say about things. As you say, everyone has different use parameters so most comments by most people are too personal to be of general interest. You and I have far different use parameters but I was impressed by two things: (1) the Z system cries out for a zoom in the 24-120 / 24-200 range and the 24-120 is the FAR superior lens. Is the 24-200 "ok?" I guess it depends upon the Z you own. If you are shooting with the Z7ii, Z8 or Z9, the 24-200 will render those cameras impotent. The 24-120 with a constant f4 is an affirmatively good lens. (2) the Voightlander is designed to render images in a German, Leica-esk way. I was once a Leica shooter. I can look through 1000 photographs in my own "catalogue" and find the photos taken with Leica glass. I love that look. I remember each of the 7 spectacular lenses I sold when I left Leica with great sorrow. I cannot live without one lens that can give me that look and the Voightlanders do. (So do Zeiss Otus lenses.) But I don't think "pixel-peeking" is what sets Leica glass apart. They are not "as sharp" as some modern lenses. They "render" beautifully. I see no reason to pay Leica $ to put Leica glass on a Nikon. (By the way, the Nikkor Planar lens renders like German glass.)
Thanks for watching and your thoughts, Stephen. I agree about the Voigtlander lenses. I had them with my DLSR cameras and use the 50mm F2 with the Z7II and Z8. And yes, no doubt everyone has their own use case for lenses, and their ideas on what makes up a good lens. Nothing wrong with experimenting until you get the look you desire. I tempted myself and looked at the Q2 or M10 but I photograph too many different genres for those cameras. They have their place in the world, no doubt and after I win the lottery, my first trip will be to the Leica store. I'd still keep my Z8 though, it for sure has it's place in my photographic world too.
Good to see you address some concerns from the first video. This is a useful comparison and there is definitely a difference in OoF rendering. Sharpness falloff is clearly much more rapid with the Nikon. But, I'm guessing we're seeing here either the cooler color balance of the Voigtlander giving higher apparent contrast, or maybe a higher contrast at the nyquist limit of the sensor than we are seeing differences in "sharpness". I say this because you report differences at f5.6. However, both lenses are diffraction limited at f5.6 in the center (quantitative testing I've seen, e.g. photography life, report that f4 is superior in performance to 5.6 for central sharpness). The Voigtlander should be more even across the field and be better corrected for coma, loca, etc., the Nikon is half the price, autofocuses and is weather sealed. Nice that we have both options available to us. As a bit of hopefully not too unwanted feedback, when I personally compare lenses I try to match color temp and brightness. Ofc this can be hard given how ludicrous the vignetting on the Voigtlander is (which doesn't ruin images but it's just a lot).
Thanks for watching and commenting. I appreciate you offering your views on it. I'm more of a see what I see guy as opposed to being technical and I know it. It's why I appreciate others like you who dig deeper into the technical aspects of a lens. Sorry for the late response, I've been in Iceland. Chime in anytime you like and thanks for being in the audience.
Hello, my friend. I do hope that I haven't taken my best yet. I do think that some of my current favorites though eventually will end up as being some of my best. I'm not sure that I will ver have one, single 'best'. Rather it will be a group of images. The thing is that time will tell because if what one has done already stands the test of time, say over 5-7 years, then those images will find their way to remain on my personal pantheon. As for being friends, one thing we can say for sure is that we are online friends. And I feel that way not only about you but also about the others who consistently post on this channel and who send in photos of the month regularly. While I really like participating in the photo of the month videos on this channel, I like even more that I get to see the work from the others who participate as the community developing here at your channel grows. I get inspiration from all of these images. I hope Iceland goes well for you! Looking forward to seeing what happened over there!
Hey ya, Marcus. I hope all is well with you. Iceland was well, hopefully I'll be able to do it a tiny bit of justice with my future videos and photos. It's a stunning country. Yes, it has it's drawbacks when visiting that I'll discuss in the upcoming video, but overall it's well worth a visit. The views are top notch at every turn. Take care my friend.
The main thing travel represents for me is opportunities to see (and photograph) things I wouldn't normally see. My "obsession" (as my wife would call it) can interfere with just enjoying the experience. There's certainly something to be said for that. I enjoyed the recent eclipse more when I realized that millions were taking essentially the same images I was, so why bother (the ones with no sun in frame were more interesting anyway). Just sit back and enjoy the show! The thing is, the "pain" of missing potentially great shots just won't go away! The curse of the artist. You have to keep reminding yourself that you're continuously missing infinite shots, and that's just life. That said, yeah--total moron "photographer"/driver you had there--when you see the shot, get the @#$%&* shot! It's so often now or never (although just as often, the perfect light will hit when you're not in a position to take advantage). As you well know, so much of photography is just fortunate timing, and that can rarely be planned. Again, just life.
Thanks for your continued support and comments. Sorry for the delay in responding but as you know I was out of the country. Thankfully my wife rarely complained as I took time to wander around looking for compositions. She even carried my tripod a couple of times for a few minutes as the pack did get a bit heavy by days end. It was an amazing trip and I'll discuss it in future videos. Thanks again. Be well.
