Hacker News Reader

Comment by cultofmetatron | Hacker News Reader

in my opinion, the Zmount is a worthy successor. They fixed all the flaws of the f-mount and really thought about how it would be used over the next 100 years. its bigger so you don't need as much optics for low fstop lenses, it uses 4 armatures for added stability and they added an additional control wire for faster autofocus. Plus it feels justs as solid when connecting your lens

View on HN

I'm a firm believer that the transition to mirrorless needs a new mount. I get that pros want to re-use old lenses, but lenses can be sold.

Sold to me. I have an F, an F2, and a D850, and most f mount lenses will work on all of them.

> I'm a firm believer that the transition to mirrorless needs a new mount

So the new Nikon Z-series mirrorless cameras have a 'Z' mount and the FTZ mount adaptor lets you use F-mount lenses on a Z-mount camera.

> I get that pros want to re-use old lenses

I haven't yet had to buy a new lens to use my Z-series mirrorless, and probably wont while I'm still using it in conjunction with my F-mount D850

Yes, exactly this too. The shorter flange distance of mirrorless makes adapters pretty trivial. All the more reason to use a new mount.

New lenses don’t have the same build as old ones.

And you can almost always adapt a mirrorless mount into an SLR mount.

In the old days prior to live-view, some even added the mirror back!

https://www.l-camera-forum.com/leica-wiki.en/index.php/Visof...

It really is incredible, the short flange distance rivals APS-C lens mounts, while the throat and inner diameter is by far the largest of the current mirrorless mounts. In practice, lenses are extremely well-balanced relative to the body, even the zooms like the new 24-120.

The Z mount is what made my switch from Canon DSLR to Nikon Mirrorless. Yes, Nikon's current AF implementation is no match to Canon's but the technical specifications and the resulting possibilities of the Z-mount are just something I couldn't ignore.

Would you know where I could read up on the armatures and the mechanics of the mount?

I'm curious how they spec out / tolerance and achieve things like angularity (sag) and position (centeredness).

this site has a TON of information on lenses and cameras. If you cant get answers here, i'd bet there's links to where you can find them. He probably would reply to a request for more info...

https://www.kenrockwell.com/nikon/fe2.htm

I hardly comment on any Hackernews post, but I had to come here to say if you have any respect for photography and optics in general, you will stay away from that man’s site and remove the link. It’s a joke for a site and well-known as a poor-content, money-grabbing venue in the photographic community.

> money-grabbing venue

What do you mean? The site is free to browse and what little ads there are, are unobtrusive.

Content-wise, I personally find his take of not spending time pixel-peeping refreshing, but to each their own, I guess.

As a professional photographer who has been linked to Ken many times over the years, I would have to agree with the sentiment that you should STAY FAR AWAY from his blog.

Ken passed his technical prime and photographic abilities many years ago. That website is mostly bad information and should be wiped from the internet archive.

Which sites would you recommend instead?

Thom Hogan: https://bythom.com

Thom Hogan is by far the best. The only photogear site I frequent. Highly recommended.

Ken is very controversial in the photographing community. He has the audacity to shoot JPEG only (which is a sacrilege for all the RAW shooters). And his writing style is very ... well ... over the top.

I think his site is a great resource if you want to look up older Nikon glass. About the new stuff (mirrorless, etc) ... I don't know ... take it with a grain of salt.

With reviewers, I now first look at the style of shots they take. For example, with Jared Polin, I trust his opinion on sports / action photography, but not landscape, street, or architectural photography. Or for portraits, my go-to is Pye Jirsa.

About Ken Rockwell, I've heard him described as a "black and white photographer shooting in color" - he likes contrast & texture, and generally shoots stuff that would look better in b&w.

Interesting. It seems Ken is sold on just getting the latest iPhone Pro for photos and videos these days. Convenient, but was hoping there’d be merit in going down the rabbit hole of old fixed lense film photography…

Do you have a link to a post where Ken elaborates on this opinion? Thanks

https://www.kenrockwell.com/apple/iphone-12-pro-max.htm

Reply on news.ycombinator.com