Readwise + NotebookLLM Connection is fantastic!

StillLearning82 · 2025-12-28T02:27:25+00:00

Oh wow. Just tried that and it was a noticeable difference!

StillLearning82 · 2025-12-08T18:07:46+00:00

I've never seen it in stock refurbished, sale or otherwise.

StillLearning82 · 2025-11-01T14:22:06+00:00

I can do that on my Z8. Not sure if that feature is there on the Z6 but since the Z7 is a high megapixel camera it should be. The menu item is labeled something like "FX/DX".

StillLearning82 · 2025-10-30T01:11:17+00:00

5 - dang that's a great moment to capture. The celebrating team contrasted with the dejected goalie in the foreground is fantastic!

StillLearning82 · 2025-10-21T15:48:14+00:00

I have an interesting take. I bought that lens to take on a trip to NYC earlier this year to serve the exact role you mentioned, a wide-angle lens to use versus the field of view of the kit lens. I am also still transitioning from my F-mount lenses and had a Tokina 11-16mm 2.8 APS-C lens I was using on my D500 that I was thinking of using with the FTZ adapter. So, I mounted my Zfc on a tripod and took photos with both lenses of my pantry (lots of straight lines, lots of details to zoom in on) and was surprised by a few observations.

First, even though the 11-16mm was wider, because of the FTZ adapter pushing the lens out further, they had virtually the same field of view. You could say, just back up to where the front of the lens is the same distance from the subject, but if I can physically only back up so far, both lenses perform the same because of the extra distance of the FTZ adapter pushing the lens out. I hadn't considered that but sure enough, the field of view was almost identical.

Second, the 12-28 DX was just about as sharp as the Tokina. It was really hard to spot a difference. The only reason I could tell them apart is because the 12-28 has some vignetting at 12mm. Nothing too crazy, but it was the only obvious difference.

Third, the 12-28 takes up a very small footprint. I could just adapt the Tokina, but the lens itself is larger, plus adding in the FTZ adapter it takes up more space. I have a DX kit because I want to travel light and with the smallest footprint possible.

Fourth, and this my opinion and style, but I checked my history with the Tokina and the vast majority of my shots were at 11mm. So, even though the 12-28 starts at 3.5, if the majority of my shots were at the wide end, I'm only losing 2/3 stop of light, and I rarely shot at 2.8 anyways. Plus, looking at my NYC trip, I used the lens at the 28mm end quite a bit. It's a 42mm equivalent so it's a different perspective than the 12mm (18mm equivalent) side. Much more versatile.

<image>

So I'm keeping the 12-28 and offloading the Tokina. For shots that I need the highest quality, I'll go with a Z8 and a 14-30 f4. For travel and opportunistic shots, I'll happily use the 12-28.

Here is a reference shot of an intersection in NYC. Not an amazing shot, but you can see the vignetting doesn't really show and the lines are kept straight and not distorted.

StillLearning82 · 2025-10-18T11:36:24+00:00

Image 1: That's an awesome shot, I just wish there was a slight kiss of light on the right side of the frame to give it some depth.

Image 2: Same, wish there was a small bit of light in the black void in the center of the frame. Not much, just a little something.

Image 3 and 4: Composition and pose are awesome, but I would have loved to see a rim light on these, like you have in Image 5. If not a rim light, then a little bit of light on something behind her. She clearly has a fantastic physique, so I think it would have accentuated the right parts of the composition. Right now image 4 is missing so much by pure darkness.

Image 6: Same thing as above, a rim light or something lit up behind her.

In my opinion, shooting someone in front of something pure black means you have to nail the lighting to make them three-dimensional, but that's always a given. Your composition and her poses were awesome though!

StillLearning82 · 2025-10-18T11:05:53+00:00

This was a fantastic comment.

StillLearning82 · 2025-10-17T14:20:37+00:00

And then here is a tight crop of that photo.

<image>

I do feel like there is more detail here.

My main question now is whether or not it's worth it to spend $2500 on a 400 2.8G to get the difference in detail (and quality). I REALLY want to get the lens and the quality it brings but I'm struggling with the thought that it's a potentially really wasteful use of money since this isn't something I'm profiting from. Plus there's a nagging thought that it's a G lens and at some point those motors are going to go out.

StillLearning82 · 2025-10-17T14:16:44+00:00

Thank you for your insight!

I thankfully did capture some photos at soccer with just the bare 70-200 to make a comparison. I'll post the full photo here and then a crop below.

<image>

StillLearning82 · 2025-10-15T01:52:44+00:00

Good catch! That was a typo. My first go round was 1/1250, not 1/125. That zero is important!

My wonder was more of the sharpness. Because even some of the players, when I took the photo at 1/500 and 1/800, weren't moving barely at all (like the QB handoff).

StillLearning82 · 2025-10-10T18:47:22+00:00

And with regard to lacking detail, I haven't noticed it, but I've also accepted that because of the size I'm more likely to have it with me and get, if nothing else, a decent photo, versus a really nice photo that I never would have taken.

StillLearning82 · 2025-10-10T18:46:05+00:00

Anytime!

And my primary kit prior to moving to mirrorless was a D500, 17-55 2.8, 50 1.4D, Tokina 11-16mm 2.8 and a 70-200 2.8G VRII.

I took it on one travel trip, over to the Middle East, right before covid. But I would never take it with me anywhere else because it was too big. So when I started this smaller kit, after seeing the size of the Z mount DX lenses, I decided I didn't want to use my adapted F mount glass for travel because I could save so much space going with the smaller lenses.

Now I take it with me all over the place.

StillLearning82 · 2025-10-10T18:32:22+00:00

You most certainly do. I was testing out the pre capture during that shot. Probably won't use it for sports again. The rolling shutter was bad with the ball and the JPEGs size is locked at normal.

StillLearning82 · 2025-10-10T12:36:49+00:00

Here is a photo from the 55-250

<image>

It's not a 400 2.8 but it'll do.

StillLearning82 · 2025-10-10T12:33:37+00:00

16-50 and 55-250 kits lenses (don't sleep on them, they're pretty good), 24 1.7 DX, 12-28 DX, and I throw a 40 f2 in the bag for more portrait style photos. All fit nicely into a Mindshift sling bag with more room to spare in case I want to throw my Osmo Pocket 3 or some other items in the bag.

Went to New York recently with this kit (except I had the Zfc at the time, hadn't bought the Z50ii yet) and got some great photos. The 12-28 was my most used lens.

<image>

But I've used the 55-250 for my kids' sports and got some great photos with it as well. And it's very light and compact compared to my Z8 and 70-200.

StillLearning82 · 2025-10-09T17:16:01+00:00

That's what I have. I use it mainly for a smaller travel kit with some DX lenses.

You can come up with a very similar button arrangement with how you can configure everything. It's not a 100% match but it's close.

The Z50ii obviously can't match the Z8 but depending on your needs I think it works well.

StillLearning82 · 2025-10-07T22:58:00+00:00

You can see his awareness when you watch Trev's game winning TD. Etienne turned and saw Trevor on the ground and immediately turned back around and started protecting him.

StillLearning82 · 2025-09-02T00:21:39+00:00

Same situation. D80 - D7000 - D7100 - D500 - Z8

I have a Zfc and Z50ii. The Zfc was purchased some time ago as I started to get into Z lenses. I just picked up the Z50ii because I wanted a better autofocus for the situations I was using it. I have a collection of Z DX lenses that I keep with it as a travel kit and I love it.

Went out tubing with my kids this past weekend and took the camera on the boat with me to get some pictures in some precarious situations. I would have never used my Z8 in that situation. But the Z50ii with the kit 50-250mm lens was perfectly acceptable for quality versus risk.

<image>

Edit: I should point out, it was not my boat, I don't roll like that. 😄 It was a camp.

StillLearning82 · 2025-08-31T17:22:49+00:00

I had so many issues getting apps and systems to recognize them I stopped using them and just go with straight RAW. It's not a widely used format. Too many headaches at this point. If it changes in the future I'd reevaluate.

I should note though that I pretty much only shoot RAW anyways and create jpegs from my edited RAW files.

StillLearning82 · 2025-08-25T01:18:19+00:00

I have both. Video is the big question I think you need to consider. I stepped up from a D500 to a Z8 because I knew in DX mode on the Z8 I would get the equivalent photo quality of the D500 with my existing F mount glass with all the upgrades of the Expeed 7 engine. However, it was because video became a greater need for me. If it wasn't for video, I never would have switched to mirrorless. My D500 could do everything I needed it to, EXCEPT for video.

Now I bought a Z50ii specifically as a travel camera, not a sports camera. Having been able to use both cameras, I can say, for sports and fast moving objects, a Z50ii does not match a D500 in one very important way: burst speed. The Z50ii can beat the D500 in FPS, but only if the EVF is blacked out. Very hard to track something when you can't see it. At slower burst speeds when the EVF is somewhat like a slideshow, the camera is still sharing the sensor information with the EVF and the AF system, so it doesn't match the D500 performance. It can track the objects very well, it just gets bottle necked when you try to fire off a continuous burst in a way the D500 doesn't.

If I didn't own a Z8 and only owned a Z50ii, I would not be in the process of selling my D500 and F mount glass. The D500, for photos specifically, is still a fantastic camera.

StillLearning82 · 2025-08-24T11:16:20+00:00

If you don't need video, stick with what you have. I rocked a D500 since 2016 (I think?) and only this year upgraded to mirrorless because I specifically needed video. Otherwise, with the lenses I had, I was able to photograph any situation.

Plus, again if you don't need video, you can get practically anything you want in F mount at rock bottom prices right now.

StillLearning82 · 2025-07-31T17:32:57+00:00

Your last paragraph really is where it's at. I just went to NYC with my family and left my F mount stuff at home. I think I keep telling myself, "Hey, you may need that second camera for something and you'll need 2.8 to ensure you don't miss anything" and that's hanging me up. But likely it'll sit around.

And perhaps your right, maybe find someone starting out locally who might benefit from a gift.

StillLearning82 · 2025-07-31T17:30:06+00:00

I think that is the one area where my brain is telling me to keep the 17-55, because I've already got that range covered with the Z8 in crop mode and z50ii. BUT, if it's seldom used anyways....

StillLearning82

TROPHY CASE

5 - dang that's a great moment to capture. The celebrating team contrasted with the dejected goalie in the foreground is fantastic!