P: Lens support Nikkor 16mm f2.8D with Nikon Z5 and FTZ

[FeedbackCommunityMember]

Following on from our twitter conversation yesterday, regarding LR v9.4 support for Z5 with FTZ and the Nikkor 16mm f2.8 lens.

Please see the video for the issue.

Regards

Mark

ps I say in the video Z7, which is wrong it's the Z5

[oasisfan33]

great news! thanks for sharing....i hope to check as soon as i get the update...

[pgoswami125]

The update is not yet live for my desktop app yet (should be soon I am guessing). However, based on my iPad results, I am very happy :). Finally can get my photos edited!

[dgrainger]

Sure hope this fix will quiet the hoard of kvetchers!

[pgoswami125]

Not sure why you have to be so mean about it @DGrainger ? It's not like people were not legitimately put in a difficult position because of the issue. I am sure people should be able to voice their concerns. 

[dgrainger]

@Pratik_goswami_cac4t5o5qk4gx

My frustration is that instead of either posting a question or posting a suggestion, so many people just express anger and non-specific slams at the company. None of that has any impact on how quickly the issues get resolved, but all of that serves to create a very unpleasant adversarial atmosphere. I think that you would agree!

Adobe does not delay nor withhold fixes for malicious reasons; it would be foolish to do so from a customer relations standpoint. Sometimes issues are very difficult to resolve as software is often such a huge complex of interconnected and near infinite variables. Screeching from the sidelines does not improve the ability for correction of difficult problems.

All I want is a bit more civility 'mongst the crowd!
 

[FeedbackCommunityMember]

@DGrainger

Can you imagine paying a photographer over $2k for a premium senior session and then they tell you they are unable to edit photos because there has to be an update to the software they use to edit.  You mention the name  Adobe which everyone has heard of and it is very hard to believe that this issue has been brought to this massive company's attention for 2 months with no resolution.  It would be very hard to understand this when you have paid this premium price for a session.  This is the type of issue I am dealing with.  The company I have built since I was 15 years old is now looking bad because of something I can do nothing about.  My company is based around an amazing experience and superior communication to my clients but I simply can't do that when not even a slight answer has been given to me.  I would expect more than a generic answer from a company this massive in size.

So, when MY COMPANY'S REPUTATION is on the line, you better believe I will express the frustration I have since I cannot get an answer to give MY CLIENTS.  

[mrfearless47]

And it didn’t ever occur to you to test the software before you used it for a $2k job.

[allynea9103298]

@marc_feldesman_wb8cbl66q52v 

@DGrainger

Actually I was going to comment that this crowd has been awesome and very civil! Well, until someone had to step in and suggest people shouldn't be commenting or frustrated. 😞

Sure, testing should have been done. But really it also should have worked. The Z5 was announced as compatible with LR's latest update. The FTZ has been out for as long as the other z cameras.Â

Maybe testing was done with a Nikon lens and all was good and without thinking another thought ( cause why the heck would changing a lens matter) changed lenses during the shoot.

Easy to have happen.

And sure, converting to TIFF is an option. But there are issues with workflow, files are large, etc... again can be done but it shouldn't have to be done.

After seeing the way people comment in other areas online, I found this forum to be quite calm and patient.

Indeed programming is a beast and no laughing matter. And Adobe is a large company with a lot of resources...and I think they can handle a complaint. 

[FeedbackCommunityMember]

THIS WAS JUST CONFIRMED THROUGH ADOBE CHAT SUPPORT!!!

"Hi Trent. Thank you for staying connected. As checked that you need to know if LR 10.0 will support Nikon Z5 and sigma lenses with the FTZ adapter. I just checked with the senior team and yes, LR 10.0 will support Nikon Z5 and sigma lenses with the FTZ adapter. I request you to wait for the update, it will be released tomorrow."

Update is being released TOMORROW!!!  YAAAAYYYYYY!!!!!

[allynea9103298]

Awesome sauce! And looks like they made zooming in and out better. Thank goodness haha

[ernst]

That's very specific. Fingers crossed that it will fix everyone else's problem!

[sousvide23]

Yeah. This forum has definietly been helpful. I'm an am. photog. My day job is working in (SAAS) software with a large engineering and customer care team and yes - engineering is difficult as is realeasing fixes/patches as fast as customers want it. So I have empahty.

But 100% this does not get fixed unless customers raise their concerns.

Every company goes through triage of issues and if it's a minor reported issue, it will not get addressed. The last thing you want to do is stay quiet as a customer. Keep things civil but raise your concerns and frustrations.

[allynea9103298]

Agreed. I have no beef with the minions crunching the code

[sousvide23]

Thank you for that! I don't need to keep checking for the update today then 🙂 

[Christian Michael Brandt]

*tbroglinphoto Thanks! I wonder why @Rikk wouldn’t just tell us that? Oh right... “Adobe doesn’t release timelines blah blah blah”

Looks like that support technician just broke your rules Rikk. Maybe you should penalize him.

[allynea9103298]

Well to be fair the tecnician probably only said because Adobe already announced thw update today..

[FeedbackCommunityMember]

*marc_feldesman_9snxu9yq5decq 

I’m glad you have the time to make bratty comments. I’ll go back to booking 2k sessions while you troll some more...  

[FeedbackCommunityMember]

It was actually DP review that announced it.  I couldn’t find it anywhere on Adobe’s stuff until I chatted with support for half an hour 🤦🏼‍:male_sign:

[mrfearless47]

You seriously expect someone to be concerned about your issue when you didn’t have the common sense to test the lens, adapter, body combination before doing a paid job.  Get real.  I wouldn’t go out photographing for pay until I was 100% certain that my new camera body and adapter and lens all worked with the software I was planning to use to ingest and edit the images.  Treat this as a learning experience.  My wife and I took an expensive workshop and Lightroom did not yet support her new camera (not Nikon).  She missed out on all the extremely valuable post-processing tips that occurred in the evenings after taking wildlife photos all day.  I’m not being a jerk here.  I know from personal experience now that you use a new camera at your own peril if you don’t make certain that everything works with everything, including software, before you set foot out of your house.

[FeedbackCommunityMember]

Marc, if I run a photo business that regularly books sessions for $2k, you should know I am not a moron... so please don't speak to me in that way.  I have been in business for over 15 years and nothing of this sort has ever come up and I upgrade equipment every 2 years.  Of course I tested the camera with the adapter and an F mount lens (which happened to be nikon brand) as soon as I got it and before I used it on a shoot.  Little did I know I needed to test ALL of my lenses to make sure the files created by them would all read in Lightroom and Photoshop.  This is not a common problem with software so why would I ever think I needed to do this. 

If you read my very first post in the forum, you would have read that I had an adobe tech logged into my computer for FIVE HOURS trying to fix the problem and eventually saying my files were corrupt. Luckily, 

I use Photo Mechanic software for culling and that program read every file correctly so I knew that was false.  Adobe was not even making techs aware of this issue and wasted so much time of their consumers.

I honestly can't believe I wasted my time explaining this to you, but I guess I felt I should pass on some knowledge to someone who likes to troll forums and make comments that are not helpful to a solution.  Hope you learned another valuable lesson today.  Take care.

[mrfearless47]

I’ve been involved with photography for more than 40 years, and with digital photography for the past 18 years.  I also have written computer software for almost 56 years, starting with FORTRAN II on a GE 225 as a UCLA undergrad. If there is anything that experience has taught me is to never make assumptions, or generalize from one case to all.  There have long been incompatibilities between 3rd party lenses and camera bodies, particularly when the body manufacturers don’t share communication information with the 3rd party lens manufacturers.  Similarly, the body companies are not always forthcoming in their communication protocols, or with the way they write their data to physical media such as cards.  Bugs are remarkably easy to introduce, and devilish to find.  Put the right hardware together with the right software and the bugs just jump out.  I beta test software for photography companies, as well as statistical software and operating systems.  My test philosophy is always to look for boundary conditions that will stress the software.  With photo software, I test ALL lens,body,adapter combinations I have in my collection, and have found some interesting combinations of body, lens, adapters don’t work (either mechanically in some instances, or in software in other instances).  While I bring these immediately to developers’ attention, some bugs take a while to get fixed.  You’d be surprised at some of the software that still doesn’t work with certain pieces of hardware. I’d share this, but that would be against NDA to do so.  I will say that in our house we have multiple Nikon FX, DX, and Z bodies, as well as Fuji XF bodies.  Incompatibilities between software and hardware is still fairly prevalent, especially with Z bodies with or without the FTZ adapter, and with Nikon FX and S lenses, as well as third party lenses.  The Fujis are less problematic, but that is largely because there are few 3rd party lenses available.  The Zeiss Touit line still doesn’t read properly in a number of pieces of software.

So, while I don’t doubt your success as a photographer, I think your approach to validating lens, adapter, body combinations is both naive or shortsighted.  Assume nothing.  Trust, but verify.

[Rikk Flohr: Photography]

Greetings,

Updates for the Adobe Photography Products were officially released on 10.20.2020 that include fixes for this issue. Please install the most recent update and confirm that your issue is now fixed. Please let us know if you encounter any issues.

Thank you for your patience.

[pgoswami125]

Awesome! Thanks. 

[allynea9103298]

@marc_feldesman_wb8cbl66q52v 
You bring up some good points I’d like to address. I can tell you make an effort to be efficient in your life and I appreciate that. But you may be applying it here incorrectly. I agree with verifying and testing!

Please hear this out. 

Common sense is only common sense if it is generally common knowledge or can be extrapolated from common knowledge. 

This issue certainly is not common knowledge and I bet even if one made conscientious effort to educate themselves on how their devices function they still wouldn’t learn that. 

Perhaps Adobe or Nikon or both have responsibility of educating people if users are going to be punished or criticized for not having this knowledge.

But how did this happen to you two if it’s such common sense? Well in any case perhaps you or at least your wife learned from that experience and then had it scarred into your memory and knew that that could be an issue in the future. This just happened to all of us...where we just learned for the first time that this could be an issue. We will now forever remember this experience and be able to say we have this experience...surely we will share it with others who may suffer the same fate. 

The same way it isn’t common sense, it also isn’t a true assumption in the sense you mean. Just as it is not an incorrect assumption on anyone’s part to put a different brand of AAA battery into their remote control and expect the remote to work. Having not been told otherwise be able to go home from work and still access work email. Nor for me to lose the eyecup on my camera and the camera will still have autofocus. 

If there is no warning, precedent, nor obvious functional connection...someone who is not an expert on how a thing is built and how the software operates (nor should they be) is not making an assumption to think the thing will function as intended. Those who built it are responsible to educate end user.

The IT Dept (no it didn’t happen to me but I work in IT) is likely the one responsible to warn the user when issuing their laptop and account that work email is housed locally and they need to connect to a VPN first. Not scorn the dumb user for thinking they could access email at home. They failed to let the user know.

So now we’re back to testing our cameras. 

If seemingly unrelated things that there are no precedents or warnings for can cause a file to not open...well that means there is an infinite number of things that need to be tested in every combination. 

It turns into anything can cause anything. And it certainly isn’t logical to test say every aperture stop, plus every camera battery, plus AF switch on or off, plus the list goes on... in every combination.

No, I don’t think it would be a silly assumption on the user’s part to think they didn’t have to test all those things.

Yet none of this changes this simple fact, that it was a mistake, a bug, an error in Adobe’s release. Not a user error.

[mrfearless47]

• Yes, it was a bug on Adobe’s end.  But the OP was using a newly released camera for a paying job, and a (then) newly released piece of software that supposedly supported said newly released camera.  While he may have tested the hardware and the software, it has long been known that 3rd party lenses don’t always work perfectly with some camera bodies.  Again, if your livelihood depends on everything working together, wouldn’t you think that doing minimal testing just makes sense (common or not).  I’ll bet cards were formatted, batteries charged, bodies and lenses correctly put into bags, spare cards, extra batteries, light sources all put in.
• My whole point is that bugs happen all the time - I’ve found and reported thousands of them.  Therefore, if you are using some combination of gear that you have not tested yourself with the software (s) you intend to use, you can never be certain it will work properly in the field or at home in the studio, unless you check it first.
• We made the same mistake that the poster made.  The images were ingested into Photo Mechanic; we assumed LR supported the newly released camera body, but we didn’t test that assumption first.