>>4473052Fair point.
Really that’s keeping me away from Sony is the ergonomics/aesthetics of the zf body. I think it’s because I learned on my dad’s old film stuff from the ‘80s, but I just strongly prefer using the retro style bodies. Not a fan of the big molded-in grips and the Sony bodies just look like off to me. Saving 800 bucks in the body is definitely a consideration though, and I do like the corner EVF.
I’ve also heard really good things about the Nikon software and the integration with custom in-camera processing profiles.
In terms of long-term, being able to adapt vintage manual lenses very well on the zf is a selling point, but I’d rather not drop cash on that type of stuff rn.
Idk if the ZF actually has better colors for portraits and so on, or if there are just so many mediocre Sony shooters that it drowns out the skillful people.
Also fully agree that the d750 is a better buy in many ways, I just know that I’ll leave it home more frequently than I should. High quality video isn’t a top priority, but everyone is getting into it, so having that in the back pocket is nice.
MPB has a7c at $1100, but that’s still $500 off. I know at least one guy who uses mostly adapted Sony mount lenses on his zf, so the third party lens ecosystem is pretty comparable. That’s another point, maybe better to just get used zf, and skip all the Nikon lenses for third party only.
I like the “vintage rendering” that you get on the sample pics I’ve seen out of the 40, but there are probably cheap primes from china at a comparable level of compactness which also have “character”.
Not married to the 24-70 either, just nice to have some kind of basic standard zoom for hiking. Sigma/Tamron/etc is all the same, or better if the 3rd party stuff saves some grams.
I know they say the z zooms are optically amazing, but nobody is selling truly soft lenses at this point, let’s be real
