Nikon Z* mirrorless

Nice to see Nikon is looking to keep its flagship camera ahead of the pack, but just a bit of a disappointment that the current mid-level cameras (Z6 II and Z7 II) have received no love at all for a good time now. It looks like Nikon is only concentrating on halo products like the Z9 and its super telephoto lenses, which are largely out of reach of most people. Either that, or the MK II cameras are already at the max limit as to what can be achieved from their dual processors ?

It's a real shame for me, as I'm sort of at a crossroads with Nikon at the moment. I was hoping for some AF-C improvements to the aforementioned mentioned cameras that enables them to be used and perform much better for moving objects (not just BIF but also things like my dogs). Let's be honest I'm not expecting Z9 performance, just a bit quicker and more reliable AF-C tracking performance. Whilst I love many things about my Z6 II and Z7 II, (ergonomics, image quality, high ISO capability, form factor etc), I've been truly spoilt by my OM-1 which runs rings around the lower tier Z's (albeit taking a slight hit in image quality and high ISO performance). At present (for my use case at least), the Z6 II and Z7 II are just "meh" for tracking capabilities, and whilst I can get some good images, it takes a lot of work with a very low success rate (at least compared to the OM-1), and realistically they are 5.5 fps cameras as anything above that, is the very annoying slide show effect. As still life, portrait, landscape cameras etc. they are superb, but wildlife and pets also form a good part of what I shoot, and in my humble opinion, compared to its peers at similar price points, for this task, they are just not up to it.

I know some people will site websites like Mirrorless comparisons etc. where they say the AF_C hit rate is actually quite high and near to that of it's direct peers, but my real-life use with my 300 & 500PF lenses tells another story. Maybe I'm just a crap wildlife photographer, If that's the case then so be it, but as stated my OM-1 will allow me to get very high and reproducible success rates.

So the question is, do I hold on to see if Nikon announces a Z8 (or whatever it will be called) i.e. a mini Z9 (sort of like the D3 / D700 combo was), get a used Z9 (lots of money), wait to see if a MK III version of the Z6/Z7 has adequate wildlife capabilities /frame rates etc, or for the first time in my adult life, completely ditch the brand I grew up with and either go all in with Olympus (OM Systems), or dare I say change systems to Sony / Canon / Fuji which might suit my needs better.

Whilst I'm pleased for the Z9 users that Nikon is forging a path for them, the vast majority of their mirrorless user base must be the lower-level cameras, and it seems aside from minor updates to the original Z6 and Z7, the MK II users and even the Z5 users are left out in the cold and forgotten. Not sure I'd really be buying in to a MK III version of the cameras after being let down by the MK1 and MK II iterations, Decisions, decisions.
 
Last edited:
The Z6/7ii cameras were dead in the water on launch, they were an intermediate fix for low performance but dual processors was always going to be a problem as it meant a different code structure to every other Z camera. Now there is Expeed 7 I doubt the Z6/7ii will get much more love as far as improvements. The Z6/7 are already just as good as the ii bodies on AF due to the improvements made, but those improvements will be time consuming to put in the ii bodies I suspect which is why we haven't seen much for them.

I don't think we will see a mini Z9 ( like the D3/D700 ) to be honest but I live in hope. I also don't think we will see the Z6 & 7 lines continue if a Z8 is going to be a higher MP body because there's then too much overlap in the range. But I was told by someone from Nikon that the Rumours on NR are funny as they are not even close, which I found interesting so who knows what's going to happen.

Nikon have painted themselves into a corner at the moment though. The legal wrangling with RED probably means they are having to delay newer cameras, assuming they have some ready to go, just in case they lose. Also the AF performance of the Z9, while far far better than the other Z cameras, is still lagging the competition when it comes to subject detection and tracking. I have a Fuji X-H2s sat here next to my Z9 and if I want to photograph a bird in flight, one that isn't very large in the frame, or one that is going to be moving at all, I don't pick up the Z9. I'm interested to see if there is much improvement in V3.0 but right now I'm seriously thinking of moving over to Fuji it's that good. The only thing stopping me is the Z9 being full frame can produce a better IQ if the moons align, or you go back to dynamic AF, but when you have subject tracking that works, it makes things so much less stressful to get the results in camera for anything that happens quickly. So the issue is, if Nikon are behind with the flagship, if they release a mid range price point body, it's already behind the cameras at the same price point as it, which means it gets hammered on the net in reviews. Difficult times still for Nikon it feels.
 
PeteStewardson said:
The Z6/7ii cameras were dead in the water on launch, they were an intermediate fix for low performance but dual processors was always going to be a problem as it meant a different code structure to every other Z camera. Now there is Expeed 7 I doubt the Z6/7ii will get much more love as far as improvements. The Z6/7 are already just as good as the ii bodies on AF due to the improvements made, but those improvements will be time consuming to put in the ii bodies I suspect which is why we haven't seen much for them.

I don't think we will see a mini Z9 ( like the D3/D700 ) to be honest but I live in hope. I also don't think we will see the Z6 & 7 lines continue if a Z8 is going to be a higher MP body because there's then too much overlap in the range. But I was told by someone from Nikon that the Rumours on NR are funny as they are not even close, which I found interesting so who knows what's going to happen.

Nikon have painted themselves into a corner at the moment though. The legal wrangling with RED probably means they are having to delay newer cameras, assuming they have some ready to go, just in case they lose. Also the AF performance of the Z9, while far far better than the other Z cameras, is still lagging the competition when it comes to subject detection and tracking. I have a Fuji X-H2s sat here next to my Z9 and if I want to photograph a bird in flight, one that isn't very large in the frame, or one that is going to be moving at all, I don't pick up the Z9. I'm interested to see if there is much improvement in V3.0 but right now I'm seriously thinking of moving over to Fuji it's that good. The only thing stopping me is the Z9 being full frame can produce a better IQ if the moons align, or you go back to dynamic AF, but when you have subject tracking that works, it makes things so much less stressful to get the results in camera for anything that happens quickly. So the issue is, if Nikon are behind with the flagship, if they release a mid range price point body, it's already behind the cameras at the same price point as it, which means it gets hammered on the net in reviews. Difficult times still for Nikon it feels.
Click to expand...
I am looking forward to seeing your thoughts on the new firmware as some ready 3d is better along with animal detect but I’d rather hear real world from yourself than some that might be biased early on, I’ll try mine this weekend / next week while on holiday in wales and red kites will the a real test for me too
 
I've just updated mine. Will hopefully get to try it out against the fuji again tomorrow afternoon and Sunday with any luck. I've done my back in again so carrying both systems is going to be a pain but the fuji goes back on Monday ( well other than the X-H2s I've bought but not got any of my own lenses for.
 
Last edited:
I need to pick the collective hive mind....

After getting back from Africa I am completely revitalised for wildlife photography. I would like to change my Tamron 150-600G2 for a Nikon prime. Therein lies my dilemma.

I wish Nikon made a 300 or 400 2.8 (that I doesn't cost the same as a car!) for the Z system. But they do not, so I see two viable options.

1) F mount 300 2.8 VRII for circa £2.5k. used I can add a 1.4 TC to get 420mm at f4 (so that's better, on paper than option 2), 1.7TC to get 510mm at f4.5, or a 2TC to get 600mm at f5.6 (better than the f6.3 at 600 on my Tamron).

2) New Nikon 400 4.5 for circle £3.2k. I could then add a 1.4TC to get 560mm at f6.3 or 2TC to get 800mm at f9

I'm favouring option 1, primarily because I really enjoy portrait type shots. Looking at my favourite shots from Africa they are all at f2.8 with great subject isolation. So the flexibility to be able to do that with the 300 I think would appeal to me.

So I guess my question is, will I find a marked improvement in IQ by going for the new Nikon 400 4.5? Say, versus the 300 2.8 with a 1.4TC? Also, does anyone have experience of the AF and general performance of the 300 2.8, with a TC, and an FTZ adaptor?
 
Last edited:
Doug said:
I wish Nikon made a 300 or 400 2.8 (that I doesn't cost the same as a car!) for the Z system.
Click to expand...
They do... and it includes a built in 1.4x TC (better than an add on TC).

You are making a common mistake... a 300/2.8 has more DOF and includes more BG at smaller size (busier) than a 400/4.5 does at any given subject distance (without cropping). But if you crop for equal FOV/composition then the 300/2.8 will have less DOF.

The difference between 5.6 and 6.3 is 1/3 stop, pretty much negligible in every sense.

There is the significant consideration of 5 axis VR, programmable function buttons, control ring, and full compatibility with the 400/4.5; these are things you will not get with the 300/2.8 VRII. But I probably would not use the 2x with this lens... cropping will tend to be just as effective; actually, using DX mode is likely to be more effective (it also improves autofocus).

FWIW, I continue to use my 400/2.8 VRII + TC's and my Sigma 60-600/4.5-6.3. The only Z lens I am planning on buying is the proposed 200-600/6.3. But if I didn't have the 400/2.8 I would probably opt for the 400/4.5Z
 
Last edited:
Doug said:
I need to pick the collective hive mind....

After getting back from Africa I am completely revitalised for wildlife photography. I would like to change my Tamron 150-600G2 for a Nikon prime. Therein lies my dilemma.

I wish Nikon made a 300 or 400 2.8 (that I doesn't cost the same as a car!) for the Z system. But they do not, so I see two viable options.

1) F mount 300 2.8 VRII for circa £2.5k. used I can add a 1.4 TC to get 420mm at f4 (so that's better, on paper than option 2), 1.7TC to get 510mm at f4.5, or a 2TC to get 600mm at f5.6 (better than the f6.3 at 600 on my Tamron).

2) New Nikon 400 4.5 for circle £3.2k. I could then add a 1.4TC to get 560mm at f6.3 or 2TC to get 800mm at f9

I'm favouring option 1, primarily because I really enjoy portrait type shots. Looking at my favourite shots from Africa they are all at f2.8 with great subject isolation. So the flexibility to be able to do that with the 300 I think would appeal to me.

So I guess my question is, will I find a marked improvement in IQ by going for the new Nikon 400 4.5? Say, versus the 300 2.8 with a 1.4TC? Also, does anyone have experience of the AF and general performance of the 300 2.8, with a TC, and an FTZ adaptor?
Click to expand...
Doug, I have been shooting with the 300/2.8 + 1.4 & 1.7 for the last few years. I love this combo and the flexibility it gives me. I recently also acquired the Z 400/4.5 to try. In terms of sharpness, there's not much in it, but the 300mm will deal with low-light situations better due to its faster aperture. The downside is that it is substantially heavier and bulkier than the 400/4.5. I'm still waiting for Nikon UK to send me the Z 1.4 & 2.0 to try with this lens. If you're not bothered about the size and weight, the 300mm combo works very well.
 
I had a quick play with v3 in front room tonight, not great light and 400 4.5 with 2x TC, 3d definitely seemed to lock quicker but not a very extensive test ! Wales tomorrow night for a week so that will be a good test
 
Sootchucker said:
So the question is, do I hold on to see if Nikon announces a Z8 (or whatever it will be called) i.e. a mini Z9 (sort of like the D3 / D700 combo was), get a used Z9 (lots of money), wait to see if a MK III version of the Z6/Z7 has adequate wildlife capabilities /frame rates etc, or for the first time in my adult life, completely ditch the brand I grew up with and either go all in with Olympus (OM Systems), or dare I say change systems to Sony / Canon / Fuji which might suit my needs better.

Whilst I'm pleased for the Z9 users that Nikon is forging a path for them, the vast majority of their mirrorless user base must be the lower-level cameras, and it seems aside from minor updates to the original Z6 and Z7, the MK II users and even the Z5 users are left out in the cold and forgotten. Not sure I'd really be buying in to a MK III version of the cameras after being let down by the MK1 and MK II iterations, Decisions, decisions.
Click to expand...
Get Z9 today or wait and stick with D8*0. Z6/7 II are badly out of date (basically 2018 models), very small, and far inferior to later dslrs
 
AdamSi said:
I am looking forward to seeing your thoughts on the new firmware as some ready 3d is better along with animal detect but I’d rather hear real world from yourself than some that might be biased early on, I’ll try mine this weekend / next week while on holiday in wales and red kites will the a real test for me too
Click to expand...
So I've been out testing for a couple of hours, and.... Well I'm not sure the buzz I've seen online is warranted. I din't try 3D tracking but it's mode no impact on subject detection outside 3D tracking I can attest to that. The Z9 subject detection and tracking is so frustrating at times. It will fail to see a duck right in front of you, or a bird against a blue sky, and yet it will then happily lock onto a tiny dragonfly, tiny in the frame with a confusing background and not lose lock. Like this...

DSC_2164.jpg

And a 100% crop
DSC_2164_100crop.jpg
 
todders said:
Hi Trevor still have the Gfx fancied using something a bit lighter with 24-200 today and Z6. Iam on the fence with keeping it though as i might go for the XH2 or maybe XT5. It never ends really :)
Click to expand...
You’re right. It doesn’t. I am lucky enough to have X-H2. Still have the GFX. I used to have a Z6. Sometimes miss it.
 
trevorbray said:
You’re right. It doesn’t. I am lucky enough to have X-H2. Still have the GFX. I used to have a Z6. Sometimes miss it.
Click to expand...

I have has the Z6 for quite a while now but it feels like a toy compared to the gfx. My back however thanks me though and that is becoming a consideration these days the older i get :)
 
Just had an hour photographing red kites at Grigin and without doubt my highest ever keep rate, prior to this was my D500 but this locked so quick and stayed throughout, this was AF Wide and animal detect, trouble is silent shutter and 20FPS means I have a lot it pics to download and process / cull DOH!
 
wibbly said:
Spent the day in the Peak District on a woodland photography course with Demi Ray Oral & Marc Robbins on Saturday. A very wet but enjoyable day wandering the Peak District around Padley Gorge and other close by areas. Nikon Z7ii & 24-70 f4s

Z72_0951 by Dave Young, on Flickr
Click to expand...

I really like that. Quite a contrast between the dark and the light.
 
As I’ve been running two parallel systems (Fuji X and Nikon FX) for too long, I’m now going to start to consolidate and move to just one system. I’ve been using Fuji’s for a good few years as a smaller lighter alternative to hauling a full frame Nikon around, and while I do like them, I’ve always preferred the handling and menu’s of Nikon, so I’m going to sell off the Fuji X-T2 and lenses first. I’m leaning towards a Z6ii, is this well regarded by those who have used it? If I get on with it, I will probably replace my D810/D4 with a Z7ii or whatever replaces that down the line for when I want more resolution.
 
viewfromthenorth said:
As I’ve been running two parallel systems (Fuji X and Nikon FX) for too long, I’m now going to start to consolidate and move to just one system. I’ve been using Fuji’s for a good few years as a smaller lighter alternative to hauling a full frame Nikon around, and while I do like them, I’ve always preferred the handling and menu’s of Nikon, so I’m going to sell off the Fuji X-T2 and lenses first. I’m leaning towards a Z6ii, is this well regarded by those who have used it? If I get on with it, I will probably replace my D810/D4 with a Z7ii or whatever replaces that down the line for when I want more resolution.
Click to expand...
I went from a D810 to a Z6 and then added a Z6ii. Very pleased with them.
 
gremlin16 said:
I went from a D810 to a Z6 and then added a Z6ii. Very pleased with them.
Click to expand...
How does the autofocus compare? I don’t mean in terms of tracking and things like that (I rarely take pictures of moving stuff), more in terms of speed of response and in low light etc. And general speed of operation? I always found my X-T2 a little bit slower from turning on to being able to take a picture, the D810 was pretty much instant, but that could be a function of camera and lens.
 
viewfromthenorth said:
How does the autofocus compare? I don’t mean in terms of tracking and things like that (I rarely take pictures of moving stuff), more in terms of speed of response and in low light etc. And general speed of operation? I always found my X-T2 a little bit slower from turning on to being able to take a picture, the D810 was pretty much instant, but that could be a function of camera and lens.
Click to expand...
I think the best way to describe it is ‘different.’ It’s a different style of using a camera. You soon get used to it, but it’s different.
 
Thanks! Sounds interesting, I’m used to using mirrorless and DSLR’s so I’m used to the difference in user experiences, but it sounds like the Z6 could be different again. I do like the instant response of DSLR’s though, although the X-T2 is quicker than previous Fuji’s I’ve had.
 
Nothing too exciting today, but as it had been ages since I'd used my Z6 II, I had a quick outing at lunchtime with it and my 500mm PF.



 
If you have a spare £15.5k laying around you can get your preorder in for the 600 with built in TC , these prices are eye watering but I guess the waiting list will be big again.

Homepage

Nikon
www.nikon.co.uk
 
AdamSi said:
If you have a spare £15.5k laying around you can get your preorder in for the 600 with built in TC , these prices are eye watering but I guess the waiting list will be big again.

Homepage

Nikon
www.nikon.co.uk
Click to expand...
This is the problem, no matter what brands charge, folk will always pay. Ruins prices for everyone else and the brands just end up fleecing everyone.
 
I really don’t understand anyone complaining about the price of these super teles. They’ve always been expensive, prices of everything are going up, and again Nikon have gone for giving you two lenses in one.

This time a 600mm f4 and then an 800 ( actually 840mm ) f5.6.

For those that need these long lenses, these are not expensive.
 
PeteStewardson said:
I really don’t understand anyone complaining about the price of these super teles. They’ve always been expensive, prices of everything are going up, and again Nikon have gone for giving you two lenses in one.

This time a 600mm f4 and then an 800 ( actually 840mm ) f5.6.

For those that need these long lenses, these are not expensive.
Click to expand...
They fooled you, clearly!
 
TGphoto said:
They fooled you, clearly!
Click to expand...
There's no fooling going on.

It's about £2k more than the 'equivalent' Canon which in reality is just the old EF lens with the convertor built in. And it's not equivalent because it has no built in TC. Where as Nikon have designed a new lens which likely has the same overall optical qualities all the other Z lenses have, and it has the TC inbuilt which is a big plus. Having the ability to instantly switch that in and out is huge for many photographers. I was talking to someone the other day that bought the 400/2.8 and would have paid more as he does expeditions to places like rainforests, the fact that he only needs one camera with essentially a 400/2.8 and a 600/4 on is absolutely huge to him. He couldn't change lenses in the conditions he works in, and already carries 3 bodies with 3 lenses on, so not having a 4th not only saves him about £20k but also a huge amount of weight.

For the people this is marketed for, these are tools that pay for themselves, to many of those 2 lenses in one is a huge saving.

Anyone complaining it's too expensive wasn't the intended market anyway. Just like I'm not. I'd love that 400/2.8s, but I can't afford it. Had it been about £2k less I still wouldn't be able to afford it, it's simply not a lens for me. So I'm not going to complain it's too expensive, as for those it's marketed for, it's not...
 
PeteStewardson said:
There's no fooling going on.
Click to expand...
The previous 800/5.6 FL was $18k when released 10yrs ago; it's a little cheaper now, but still more than the 600/4 TC. And the 600/4 FL is a bit over $12k. The built in TC's are grreat... generally much better than an add on TC.

Edit: But if I were spending that kind of money I would get the 400/2.8 TC + a secondary 1.4x... it's just so much more versatile, it weighs less, and it costs a fair bit less as well.
 
Last edited:
PeteStewardson said:
he does expeditions to places like rainforests, the fact that he only needs one camera with essentially a 400/2.8 and a 600/4 on is absolutely huge to him. He couldn't change lenses in the conditions he works in, and already carries 3 bodies with 3 lenses on, so not having a 4th not only saves him about £20k but also a huge amount of weight.
Click to expand...
Agree with you about the prices, they are not out of whack. With regards to your friend working in the rainforests, I distinctively remember a while back I had a guest that was struggling with his bag to which I offered to help. I was shocked at how heavy it was and when questioned, he told me that he had 4 bodies with different lenses attached because he was worried about changing lenses. Unless your friend is staying for over a month at a time, it really isn't an issue. And if he is, then he should find access to a dehumidifying, dry-box for his equipment. Just having a lens attached to a body will not prevent fungal growth. But most trips are only for a couple of weeks and in this case, it should not be a problem.
 
Sootchucker said:
Nothing too exciting today, but as it had been ages since I'd used my Z6 II, I had a quick outing at lunchtime with it and my 500mm PF.



Click to expand...

Two very nice wildlife style captures Andrew.
 
dragonfly said:
Agree with you about the prices, they are not out of whack. With regards to your friend working in the rainforests, I distinctively remember a while back I had a guest that was struggling with his bag to which I offered to help. I was shocked at how heavy it was and when questioned, he told me that he had 4 bodies with different lenses attached because he was worried about changing lenses. Unless your friend is staying for over a month at a time, it really isn't an issue. And if he is, then he should find access to a dehumidifying, dry-box for his equipment. Just having a lens attached to a body will not prevent fungal growth. But most trips are only for a couple of weeks and in this case, it should not be a problem.
Click to expand...

It wasn't fungal growth it was the internals fogging up when you change lenses.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top