A $2 difference

 Well the kit is fully formed now. 

And it only took $2 to do it!

OK an additional $2, to be precise.

A well-worn but functional F-mount Tamron 100-400 vc usd lens will arrive next week. It was listed too low to meter so I claim that i was forced to bid! I chose a reasonable bid above the opening value, then added $2 above that nice round number. And the nice round number was the winning amount!

Anonymous
switches!

The lens has lost nearly all of its letters and numbers, especially around the focus and stabilizer switches. Given the (barely) winning bid, this is a truly not-big deal. And with the choice of a small dx zoom or the Sigma 70-300 fx (or my primes) for the long end, the bulk of this lens won't be something I take on every outing!

And so the kit, once all shipments reach their destinations, look like this:

• AF Primes (Z): viltrox 20, Nikkor 40
• MF Primes (pK): 28, 50, 70, 85, 135
• MF Primes (T/F): 300, 400, 500
• AF Zooms (F): 24-85vr, 70-300apo, 100-400vc
• MF Zooms: 70-150, 80-200

And that covers plenty of range for me. After all: the μ43 kit has 600mm/e if i really need it!

If I can afford to swap in more Z native lenses at some point, they would likely be the 24-70/4 and ..? A yet unannounced telephoto zoom that's compact and slower than f/4.5 .. something like a 50-200 f/4-5.6?

But only if it isn't something silly-slow like f/5-8! 

The reviews I've seen of the Nikk-Z 24-50 have not reassured me of first-party lenses that will tempt me. Perhaps smaller Asian sources will help out with FX lenses more suitable to the S9/BF/α7c body size?

Such lenses would be just my type!

 

call me Wimpy

 - but not for the hamburgers!

I've just resigned my campaign for slower DX/36x24 lenses, and ordered a Nikkor 55-200 VR². Yes, it will shoot at 10½ Mpixels on the Z6, which sucks. It will be an 80-300 mm/effective focal length.. which is what I'd like to find in a compact FX lens. If only I could shoot this at 1:1 or 5:4 with the entire sensor height.. but apparently Nikon frowns on such creativity. 

What counters the suck?

• it has VR². VR just showed me its value on the 24-85G lens with the Z6. And this VR is one better :)
• it cost $75. Not $250 (50-250 Z version), nor $475 (Tam rxd 70-300), nor >$700.
• it weighs 425 grams - with the FTZ adapter! Less than every mid-long telephoto I've looked into, even the bargain Sigma 70-300apo (630g) that I've been trying this week.

At some point one must choose our compromise. Here's mine. The Z50-250 has points in its favor, but neither are weather sealed. The dx 70-300vr would be ~550g and provide even more effective telephoto range - for a price.

Price is big because I'm not sold on 10Mpx± .. but we'll find out soon how much it hurts to shoot with that resolution. 

	Nikon Z6
	Viltrox 20
	Nikkor-z 40
	dx 55-200mm vr²
	Vivitar 70-150
	nikkor VR 24-85
	Qray 300
	Sig apo 70-300

24-85G Nikkor contest!

"Would that it 'twere so simple" - from Hail, Caesar! 

Well, this test was an easy one. Bummer that my preferred answer did not pan out.

I put the two 24-85 Nikkors G (VR and previous) in a dimly-lit room and shot it out. ISO 500, f/5.6 and an instruction manual about six feet away. Shutter was 1/2.5 seconds for easy VR evaluation. Elbows on knees but little other support; with ftz the lenses are just over 500g.

First up was the VR lens, fully engaged. Wow: an excellent result with lens and sensor VR in effect. No surprise? Well, 85mm and 1/4 second is 8+ stops - so an image this sharp was a surprise.

Turning off VR is simple, as the lens switch disables both internal and lens VR. It took me three tries and much more rigorous technique to achieve a nearly not-blurry shot. The other two were awful. 

Lens #2 with in-body VR was better than no VR.. but not by much. The internal VR definitely couldn't handle the shutter speed used in this scenario. Coming from Pentax and Lumix S5, it was disappointing. However: internal VR improves to a 5-axis system with Z-native lenses; bonus points for the marketing team for that 🫤 but my wallet is displeased. 

So about five minutes of testing convinced me that the slightly heavier VR lens is a keeper, and a 72mm cpl filter is in my future. I had hoped to run with just 52+67mm filters; oh well. At least I already have a 72mm split ND! 

Wow! on several levels

 After a sleepless night I did some browsing yesterday. I had a z6 in hand and lenses on the way, but the path they were taking was slow and tortuous - or maybe I was just impatient?

In any case, I encountered a 'used well' copy of the 24-85G that I had bought but just leaving New Jersey. This copy was a pinch less expensive and sitting in Adorama (New York) seeking adoption. I bought it and upgraded to fast shipping for under $10.

It arrived in 24 hours to our home in SW Washington! And we do not live in Portland or Vancouver, we're an hour away in a semi-rural Longview 'suburb'.  Wow.

When I opened it up, I noticed it had a 72mm lens cap. That's odd, the copy I sought and the online image all said 67mm. Oh, look at that - this was the 24-85G VR lens. Wow!!

I hadn't sought VR since the z6 body has its own within, but it can make use of the lens' internals to improve slow-expo images even more - so absolutely no complaints here. Well, maybe one: I suppose now I need few new filters.

Thanks Adorama!

And of course let's not forget: the non-VR lens is coming soon (it's probably past Philadelphia by now). 

While the front glass on the VR is larger and overall weight is up a few grams, most reviews I've seen rate the image qualities as essentially identical. The non-VR copy takes 67mm filters (also on their way as I write), so I suppose a showdown is coming. 

Inevitably.