Nikon Z* mirrorless

After some advice. I’ve been looking at rationalising my cameras, D850, D810 and D500. currently the D810 backs up the D850 use and the D850 with grip and big battery backs up the D500 for wildlife/ sport use

Was thinking about losing the D810 and D500 and getting a second D850 but recently photographing diving osprey i tried the D850 and grip and the buffering is a bit of an issue so will probably hang onto the D500 and the D850 with grip can back it up if the d500 fails.

was still planning on a 2nd D850 to replace the D810(flippy screen, same cards, same button layout) but have started wondering if perhaps a z7 with ftz might be ok. I think flippy screen, common xqd cards and not having to mfaf adjust each lens would be worthwhile. It might also be start of a move to mirrorless as the future of the dslr with Nikon seems clear. I have a selection of nikon and other f glass so a move into non Nikon mirrorless is a dauntingly expensive thought.

i probably will stick at z7 for mp rather than look at z6.

there are some good grey costs around on the z7 against the z7ii. As a dipping toe in nikon mirrorless water would there be many advantages to a z7ii rather than a z7. not overly fussed about the second card. Would appreciate thoughts from those who changed from z7 to z7ii and those who went from d850 to z7 on what they think.
 
Personally if wildlife is what you shoot, I'd stick with the D850 and D500 combo.
I've had both of them and they're simply the best for wildlife/sports. I sold my D500 as I felt the D850 with grip practically had a D500 inside it. It then became too much weight to carry around and purchased a D500 again. I then sold both due to arthritis and moved to the Z6, which was just okay but seriously lacking compared to the D500 and D850. I then moved to the Z7II and whilst it's still not a D850 replacement, it suits my needs pretty close.
I missed the high megapixels and cropping power of the D850, that's why I got the Z7II.
There's currently no Nikon mirrorless camera that's as capable for wildlife as the D500 and D850.
 
wilt said:
Personally if wildlife is what you shoot, I'd stick with the D850 and D500 combo.
I've had both of them and they're simply the best for wildlife/sports. I sold my D500 as I felt the D850 with grip practically had a D500 inside it. It then became too much weight to carry around and purchased a D500 again. I then sold both due to arthritis and moved to the Z6, which was just okay but seriously lacking compared to the D500 and D850. I then moved to the Z7II and whilst it's still not a D850 replacement, it suits my needs pretty close.
I missed the high megapixels and cropping power of the D850, that's why I got the Z7II.
There's currently no Nikon mirrorless camera that's as capable for wildlife as the D500 and D850.
Click to expand...
I see the mirrorless as more for my landscape side of things- i’d have D500 with gripped D850 as wildlife/ sport main/ backup and the D850/ z7 on landscape, still life, macro, etc

A bit of me says keep the 810 but the flippy screen when low on a tripod or in the water just puts me off using it and i’m getting older so lying in the damp is less appealing ( dont know what age has to do with that but there appears a direct correlation).
 
Jim_Tod said:
I see the mirrorless as more for my landscape side of things- i’d have D500 with gripped D850 as wildlife/ sport main/ backup and the D850/ z7 on landscape, still life, macro, etc

A bit of me says keep the 810 but the flippy screen when low on a tripod or in the water just puts me off using it and i’m getting older so lying in the damp is less appealing ( dont know what age has to do with that but there appears a direct correlation).
Click to expand...
The Z7II wouldn't really have much benefit over the Z7 for landscapes as both would have exactly the same image quality and the benefits of dual processors are really on the AF side of things. The Z7 produces images just as good in quality as the D850. So for a smaller body that produces D850 quality images for landscape, I'd go with the Z7 over the Z7II. Just remember that the Z7 looks to be abandoned firmware wise, and only second generations look to be getting firmware updates.
 
Jim_Tod said:
After some advice. I’ve been looking at rationalising my cameras, D850, D810 and D500. currently the D810 backs up the D850 use and the D850 with grip and big battery backs up the D500 for wildlife/ sport use

Was thinking about losing the D810 and D500 and getting a second D850 but recently photographing diving osprey i tried the D850 and grip and the buffering is a bit of an issue so will probably hang onto the D500 and the D850 with grip can back it up if the d500 fails.

was still planning on a 2nd D850 to replace the D810(flippy screen, same cards, same button layout) but have started wondering if perhaps a z7 with ftz might be ok. I think flippy screen, common xqd cards and not having to mfaf adjust each lens would be worthwhile. It might also be start of a move to mirrorless as the future of the dslr with Nikon seems clear. I have a selection of nikon and other f glass so a move into non Nikon mirrorless is a dauntingly expensive thought.

i probably will stick at z7 for mp rather than look at z6.

there are some good grey costs around on the z7 against the z7ii. As a dipping toe in nikon mirrorless water would there be many advantages to a z7ii rather than a z7. not overly fussed about the second card. Would appreciate thoughts from those who changed from z7 to z7ii and those who went from d850 to z7 on what they think.
Click to expand...

I been a Nikon shooter for years and for wildlife and birds in particular I have used the latest DSLR's - e.g., the D750/D810 - with Nikon 300mm f2.8VR, 300mm PF and 600mm f4 lens - I have just bought a D850 and it is quite an impressive camera.

for me shooting birds can be very time consuming at best and my number of "keepers" has always been a lot lower than with other subjects - it's very easy to miss shots

I have spent some time on the internet comparing the Nikon Z's with the Canon R5 and R6 - the Canon cameras seem to be well ahead for bird photography and moving subjects.

I think that I am going to make the switch to a Canon with say their 100 -500mm lens, really just for birds/wildlife - I'll wait a bit and see what the next generation Nikon Z is like as the next time I plan shooting birds etc., will be early next year.

Will Nikon produce a Z camera with image tracking as good as the Canon R5/R6 - you would have thought so - but will they?
 
Last edited:
Speakers Corner today... Nikon Z6 + Nikon Z 50mm F1.8


RSTabRf.jpg
 
BillN_33 said:
I been a Nikon shooter for years and for wildlife and birds in particular I have used the latest DSLR's - e.g., the D750/D810 - with Nikon 300mm f2.8VR, 300mm PF and 600mm f4 lens - I have just bought a D850 and it is quite an impressive camera.

for me shooting birds can be very time consuming at best and my number of "keepers" has always been a lot lower than with other subjects - it's very easy to miss shots

I have spent some time on the internet comparing the Nikon Z's with the Canon R5 and R6 - the Canon cameras seem to be well ahead for bird photography and moving subjects.

I think that I am going to make the switch to a Canon with say their 100 -500mm lens, really just for birds/wildlife - I'll wait a bit and see what the next generation Nikon Z is like as the next time I plan shooting birds etc., will be early next year.

Will Nikon produce a Z camera with image tracking as good as the Canon R5/R6 - you would have thought so - but will they?
Click to expand...
The D850 is simply the best all round DSLR ever made.
As for Nikon matching the tracking of the R5/R6, they'll certainly match it and surpass it.
I suspect the Z9 will match it, hopefully surpass it. Time will tell.
The Z9 advancements will have a knock on impact on future Z series cameras.
 
I need a bigger lens. I sold my D3300 and all my lenses to buy a z5. No adapter, as I wanted to go all in with mirrorless. I sold the kit lens and bought a 24-70 f4 so I'm reluctant to trade that again for the 24-200 as I really like it. Bigger lenses are still a big gap in the roadmap. There is the 70-200 f2.8, but the cost is eye-watering. I'd like to see a 100-400 or so.

Here's what brought this on. Walking at the mouth of the river Almond today, 4 heron on the ground and another up a tree. There's also a deer sticking its head out under the trees. I was across the river, but afraid to move too much in case I frightened them.

Cramond heron 4005 by James West, on Flickr
 
One of the biggest attractions to me of mirrorless was high end kit in a small(er) package.

I love my 24-200, and am excited about the tiny 40mm f/2. But a long lens is going to be massive whatever the mount, so have the sigma 150-600 C and an FTZ. I’m sure the z mount 200-600 will be great, but it’s not going to be radically smaller.
 
Nebulous said:
I need a bigger lens. I sold my D3300 and all my lenses to buy a z5. No adapter, as I wanted to go all in with mirrorless. I sold the kit lens and bought a 24-70 f4 so I'm reluctant to trade that again for the 24-200 as I really like it. Bigger lenses are still a big gap in the roadmap. There is the 70-200 f2.8, but the cost is eye-watering. I'd like to see a 100-400 or so.
Click to expand...

I had my doubts when I changed my 24-70 for the 24-200. The 24-70 is a cracking lens. I did toy with keeping both but sold the 24-70 the day after I got my 24-200. I'm really pleased, and surprised, with just how good the 24-200 is. I keep thinking to myself how great it is that I can wander the hills and mountains and cover 24-200mm with one lens and body that weighs next to nothing compared to what I used to lug about.
 
todders said:
Speakers Corner today... Nikon Z6 + Nikon Z 50mm F1.8


RSTabRf.jpg
Click to expand...


Very nice candid street style shot Adrian, with a really good mono presentation.
 
chris321 said:
One of the biggest attractions to me of mirrorless was high end kit in a small(er) package.
Click to expand...

this is what’s holding me back from selling my m43 gear and d600 and buying a z6ii - as I use my m43 gear for travel, I’d love Nikon to have a pancake lens.

Is there one or in the pipeline ?
 
Just some morning musings.......

I'm a fickle person, easily swayed by new shiny things. As you may see from my signature, I now own a fair collection of Nikon Z products (Z6 II, Z7 II, 24-40 F4, 24-200, 14-30 F4, & 35, 50 & 85mm F1.8 primes, along with 5 other F mount lenses for use with the FTZ adapter). Looking at that I should be very happy yes, as it's a killer setup for a great deal of what I like to shoot. However, I've never been 100% happy only having the 300mm F4 PF VR (& TC14E III converter), to net me "only" 420mm F5.6 in FF reach for my wildlife and birding, and I do find compared to my previous D500 the the AF speed takes a bit of a beating when adapted to the Z's using the FTZ adapter. I had the 200-500 VR some years ago and TBH, was never totally convinced, and always wondered about the 500 F5.6 PF, but at over £3k it's a lot of money for a single lens, and I still have doubts over it being a prime (i.e. not having the versatility of a zoom), and that the speed via the FTZ might also take a hit seeing how the 300mm F4 PF is affected ?

I know Nikon is supposedly coming out with a 100-400 S lens and a non S 200-600 (which is exactly what I need) in the native Z mount, but who knows when. They aren't announced yet so 2022, 2023...who knows...... That got me the other day most unexpectedly looking at Sony cameras (something I said I would never do). I have to admit for action or wildlife photography, the A9 II, A7R IV or the flagship A1 are killer wildlife bodies with the last two in particular having both the pixel count, buffer, FPS and amazing AF to handle even the fastest moving bird. Couple that with the bargain Sony 200-600 (which by all accounts is a cracking lens), and potentially if I swapped systems I would have my dream wildlife setup available NOW. I already run a dual system (Nikon Z and Olympus M4/3), and have been thinking of chopping in all my M4/3 gear (bodies and lenses) for the Sony stuff. I would loose a shed load of cash doing this but then that's the case I guess with all photographic equipment i.e. they tend to depreciate like a brick.

Are the Sony's perfect, no of course, but by all accounts the Sony A1 is much nearer to that the most, and is genuinely a master of all trades. However (and it's a big however), I've used Nikon now for over 40 years, and it's just in my DNA, and I just can't conceive never owning them. The Z's are great cameras in their own rights like I said for everything other than fast moving action and wildlife (due to both current native lens availability and general AF-C and tracking performance - which whilst OK, isn't anywhere near Sony or Canon's). I know what will happen though, I'll make the switch and that day Nikon will announce the Z 200-600, deliver the Z9 which all the review sites will hail as the next Messiah and announce the Z8 (a D850 mirrorless body or basically a cut down Z9 for the masses), or a major firmware release for current bodies which takes the AF to a whole new dimension (wishful thinking I guess) - it always happens to me.

So no, I won't be changing just yet, but I can't help it, the green eyed monster keeps looking over at Sony and wondering if only....

Also, I remember reading a report on DP Review about 6 or 7 years ago that said in 5 years, Sony wanted to be number 2 in the photographic world and overtake Nikon, and eventually rule the world by overtaking Canon. I laughed at the time thinking no way will that ever happen...how wrong was I ? Whilst they might not have supplanted Canon yet, they left Nikon for dust ?

Like I say, I'm a fickle sort of guy :)
 
Last edited:
I think everyone questions "Is the grass greener somewhere else?" Even Sony and Canon shooters. Whilst the numbers switching to Nikon might be low, there is people doing so from other manufacturers. I had the opportunity to completely change systems when moving from DSLR'S to mirrorless, but stayed with Nikon. I firmly believe that Nikon will resolve the issues surrounding the focusing, either through firmware or in the next bodies. I've nearly all the Z glass I need except that 200-600mm and will continue to use my 300mm pf + 1.4TCMkIII in the meantime. With the release of megadap E-mount to Z-mount adapter, maybe you can pick up that Sony 200-600mm now and wait for the Z-mount native to arrive.
 
lunar22 said:
In my 18 years living in Edinburgh in the digital era (now in Germany), I took quite a few of Cramond Island but few could match this one!
Click to expand...

Thank you!

We are 150 miles further North, but use the caravan sight at Silver Knowes. It's a great base for exploring Edinburgh with access to cycle routes. We really like Cramond and Cramond Island, especially when the sun shines.
 
There's a current discussion about this over on DPR in the Nikon Mirrorless thread. I not sure if I'm allowed to post a link to another forum but I'm sure you can soon find it.
Might help you decide.
 
wilt said:
I think everyone questions "Is the grass greener somewhere else?" Even Sony and Canon shooters. Whilst the numbers switching to Nikon might be low, there is people doing so from other manufacturers. I had the opportunity to completely change systems when moving from DSLR'S to mirrorless, but stayed with Nikon. I firmly believe that Nikon will resolve the issues surrounding the focusing, either through firmware or in the next bodies. I've nearly all the Z glass I need except that 200-600mm and will continue to use my 300mm pf + 1.4TCMkIII in the meantime. With the release of megadap E-mount to Z-mount adapter, maybe you can pick up that Sony 200-600mm now and wait for the Z-mount native to arrive.
Click to expand...
I'm one of those people who moved somewhat to Canon recently although I still have my Z6. I just couldn't get on with Eye AF which was one of the reasons for moving from the D750. It was a feature on the Z6 which wasn't helping me in Wedding situations. It doesn't work more than it does, far to unreliable even on portraiture - so much so I always use single point AF. Using the Canon R6 is night and day in that respect. I have to say the Z6 and 50mm f/1,8 combo is super sharp - and I still use that combo for the family portraits part of the Wedding,
and the 20mm f/1.8 is fantastic for non-flash photography indoors - I believe there's no equivalent that's that fast and wide on the canon line up (correct me if I'm wrong).

I do miss a wildlife lens currently on the Canon setup, and may invest in a Canon 100-400mm or a Canon 100-500mm if funds allow. I would prefer the subject isolation on a 300mm f/4, but the f4 on the Canon range isn't that sharp, imo the 300mm f/4 IF ED trumps it with image quality, however the AF motor is pretty poor on that lens which is where the Canon equivalent wins. The Canon 85mm f/1.2 II also trumps the Nikon 85mm f/1.8s in terms of AF performance both with and without Eye AF - again in Weddings I've found that subject AF acquisition is more important for my candid approach. I do hope Nikon improve in the AF side of things in future models
 
Last edited:
gilbouk said:
I'm one of those people who moved somewhat to Canon recently although I still have my Z6. I just couldn't get on with Eye AF which was one of the reasons for moving from the D750. It was a feature on the Z6 which wasn't helping me in Wedding situations. It doesn't work more than it does, far to unreliable even on portraiture - so much so I always use single point AF. Using the Canon R6 is night and day in that respect. I have to say the Z6 and 50mm f/1,8 combo is super sharp - and I still use that combo for the family portraits part of the Wedding,
and the 20mm f/1.8 is fantastic for non-flash photography indoors - I believe there's no equivalent that's that fast and wide on the canon line up (correct me if I'm wrong).

I do miss a wildlife lens currently on the Canon setup, and may invest in a Canon 100-400mm or a Canon 100-500mm if funds allow. I would prefer the subject isolation on a 300mm f/4, but the f4 on the Canon range isn't that sharp, imo the 300mm f/4 IF ED trumps it with image quality, however the AF motor is pretty poor on that lens which is where the Canon equivalent wins. The Canon 85mm f/1.2 II also trumps the Nikon 85mm f/1.8s in terms of AF performance both with and without Eye AF - again in Weddings I've found that subject AF acquisition is more important for my candid approach. I do hope Nikon improve in the AF side of things in future models
Click to expand...
I do believe that they will be competitive in the eye-af and even af, in the not too distant future.
I'm willing to stick with Nikon, as everything else is just better IMO and I've practically all the lenses I now need.
 
Was messing around with the Z7II today in the sunshine. Camera was fitted with the Nikon Z 24-200, which isn’t the fastest lens in the world. I had the Z7 II already set up to test BIF (so continuous AF-C , large group, fast shutter speed etc, continuous H),and TBH wasn’t expecting much (especially with an F6.3 lens). suddenly a pigeon near me took to flight and I just swung round and hit the shutter. Out of 7 images taken, 6 were tack sharp. Thought this thing couldn’t do BIF :D

Nothing award winning of course, just tests, but I was pretty impressed.





 
Always pays to shop around. Had two separate quotes for one of my Z5s which is now surplus to requirements. One company offered me £560, another £785!
 
killy said:
Lets hope its not just a rumour!!!
Click to expand...
Let’s hope so although I’m really happy with my Z7 II yes I really want the autofocus to get closer to my D500 but generally its such a good camera especially when paired with the 500PF for easy carrying
 
Thinking of buying the Nikon Z 70-200 F2.8 S and matched 1.4x teleconverter for my Z6 II and Z7 II. Does anyone have these and can comment if (as I’ve read), AF-C performance is quite a bit better then using a similar F mount lens adapted via the FTZ ?
 
Sootchucker said:
Thinking of buying the Nikon Z 70-200 F2.8 S and matched 1.4x teleconverter for my Z6 II and Z7 II. Does anyone have these an. d can comment if (as I’ve read), AF-C performance is quite a bit better then using a similar F mount lens adapted via the FTZ ?
Click to expand...
I've both and prefer to use the 300mm f4 PF instead of the 200mm and 1.4tc. The 70-200mm is stellar and the 1.4tc is very good but because I have the 300mm f4 PF, it's lighter and shaper from my testing than the 70-200mm and 1.4tc, but not as versatile.
 
Thanks Wilt, that’s useful info. I’m trying to get photos of my dogs (who are both jet black), running at full pelt, and so far with my adapted 70-300 VR the keeper rate is quite low, but when I switched to the 24-200, even though technically it’s a slower lens, I had better results, which is why I thought stepping up to the S line 70-200might give another useful speed increase in AF-C ?
 
Sootchucker said:
Thanks Wilt, that’s useful info. I’m trying to get photos of my dogs (who are both jet black), running at full pelt, and so far with my adapted 70-300 VR the keeper rate is quite low, but when I switched to the 24-200, even though technically it’s a slower lens, I had better results, which is why I thought stepping up to the S line 70-200might give another useful speed increase in AF-C ?
Click to expand...
Try changing to 12bit. I recently done this for Motocross and I immediately seen a speed increase in focus performance.
 
a basic question from me - are the sensors used in the Nikon Z cameras the same as those used in the D850 and other Nikon DSLR's?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top