Moving from D850 to Z7ii for wildlife

If you would like to post, you'll need to register. Note that if you have a BCG store account, you'll need a new, separate account here (we keep the two sites separate for security purposes).

Hi there,

I'm a bit confused lately everyone moving from DSLR to Mirrorless systems. I'm a long time Nikon shooter and about some time ago entered the wildlife photography with the 200-500 f5.6E lens. I own D850 which was amazing for landscape, it's alos great for wildlife, but in wildlife I found it with the 200-500 to be a bit hard to get snappier, focus on the subject as well as hard to get sharper image, where I've seen the Z7ii being much faster, focus points from edge to edge, focus tracking, etc.. and there is no need for any AF fine tuning as well. I know as well that of course better glass like 500 f4 would get me sharper pictures, but can not afford that unfortunately. Maybe I'm mistaken and being blinded by the mirrorless systems thinking they provide far sharper and on spot results, so I started thinking of selling D850 but it's such an amazing DSLR in my opinion.

I would be really greatfull if somone can let me know if it's really worth switching from D850 to Z7ii or Z6ii using my current F-mount glass from Nikon (not planning to buy Z glass anytime soon) or is still better to wait and consider on something like Z9 or potentially Z7iii if it comes to that? I'm confused 🙄. Thank you in advance.

b.r. Alex
 
I would be really greatfull if somone can let me know if it's really worth switching from D850 to Z7ii or Z6ii using my current F-mount glass from Nikon (not planning to buy Z glass anytime soon) or is still better to wait and consider on something like Z9 or potentially Z7iii if it comes to that?
The Z7 II is a great camera and of course it has the same resolution as the D850 so it carries some of the D850's advantages like the ability to crop more deeply into your photos when necessary compared to lower resolution cameras. But the Z7 II's AF system is NOT faster or snappier or better for action shooting than the D850. The current Z II cameras aren't terrible and I use my Z6 II for wildlife including fast moving wildlife all the time but for action shooting Nikon's top DSLRs including the D850 still have a bit of an edge in AF performance.

Lot's of great things about MILCs including WYSIWYG exposure through the viewfinder that lets you see exposure problems and dial in any necessary exposure comp before you release the shutter and capture the image. That alone is super helpful but currently the AF performance of Nikon's Z cameras (even the II models) lags a bit behind Nikon's top DSLRs so don't make the jump hoping for better AF in action situations. That could change over time and hopefully will change big time with the upcoming Z9 release (at a much higher price point) and a lot of us are still hoping for a v2.0 firmware release for the Z6 II and Z7 II that will bump up their AF performance but right now you have a very good camera from an AF standpoint. If you want other MILC features then the Z7 II is a great choice but don't expect better AF performance in action situations.
 
I completely agree with DRwyomings response. I have both the D850 and the Z7II and I find the D850 my choice for BIF situations. The Z 7II lacks in focus Speed and focus Tracking in comparison. The Z is a fun camera to use and with good Glass like the 500PF and the 70-700 2.8 E FL image quality equals the D850. Just the shortfall in Focus parameters is where I find the D850 better for some BIF situations.
 
I completely agree with the previous two responses. I will add though that the Z7ii is better at focusing the 200-500 or the 500pf when mounted with the 1.4x TCiii - the f:8 aperture is too narrow for the D850 to give its best.
And with static subjects, you will often get more accurate focus with the Z7ii but if you chase little birds that stay on a branch for a few seconds, then stick with the D850, or if you shoot with busy backgrounds, then the d850 is consistently better.
 
I shoot with a Z7ii and Z7 and agree with the others. I use the Z7ii for wildlife and it works well, but the D850 is going to be better in fast action. If you shoot slower or stationary wildlife like I tend to do, you might like the Z7ii a little better. For landscape, I’d take the Z7ii over the D850 without question, but for wildlife there are some limitations that are deal breakers for some users. At this point, in your situation, I’d recommend waiting a while. The Z9 will show what Nikon is capable of, we might see a firmware update for Zii cameras, and if they stay with a two year refresh cycle, we might see a Z7iii late next year.
 
Hi there,

I'm a bit confused lately everyone moving from DSLR to Mirrorless systems. I'm a long time Nikon shooter and about some time ago entered the wildlife photography with the 200-500 f5.6E lens. I own D850 which was amazing for landscape, it's alos great for wildlife, but in wildlife I found it with the 200-500 to be a bit hard to get snappier, focus on the subject as well as hard to get sharper image, where I've seen the Z7ii being much faster, focus points from edge to edge, focus tracking, etc.. and there is no need for any AF fine tuning as well. I know as well that of course better glass like 500 f4 would get me sharper pictures, but can not afford that unfortunately. Maybe I'm mistaken and being blinded by the mirrorless systems thinking they provide far sharper and on spot results, so I started thinking of selling D850 but it's such an amazing DSLR in my opinion.

I would be really greatfull if somone can let me know if it's really worth switching from D850 to Z7ii or Z6ii using my current F-mount glass from Nikon (not planning to buy Z glass anytime soon) or is still better to wait and consider on something like Z9 or potentially Z7iii if it comes to that? I'm confused 🙄. Thank you in advance.

b.r. Alex

Have you considered buying the Nikon 500PF? A great lens and very lightweight. Since I got it my Nikon 200-500 has been on the shelf. I don't use the tripod anymore either for wildlife, everything is shot hand-held. Just a thought.
 
Have you considered buying the Nikon 500PF? A great lens and very lightweight. Since I got it my Nikon 200-500 has been on the shelf. I don't use the tripod anymore either for wildlife, everything is shot hand-held. Just a thought.
yes I was considering the 500 PF lens as well as it's sort of my goal when upgrading lens first. A friend of mine also bought AF-S NIKKOR 180-400mm f/4E TC1.4 FL ED VR and that is just another level. I could have spoiled my eyes a bit beacuse of testing that lens 😂 but for me as harvesting for wildlife experience still, 200-500 will have to do it at the moment. It's not a bad lens but just not on level of 500 PF lens of course.
 
but for me as harvesting for wildlife experience still, 200-500 will have to do it at the moment. It's not a bad lens but just not on level of 500 PF lens of course.
I've owned both and they're actually incredibly close from an image quality standpoint. The 500 PF is of course much lighter and smaller and mine focuses a bit faster than my 200-500mm(that I eventually sold) but the resulting images at 500mm were very good from both lenses. And of course the 200-500mm zooms to cover a wide focal length range which can be handy. Don't worry about the optical quality of the 200-500mm unless you have a bad copy (and unfortunately there are some bad copies out there) the lens is very good and delivers great images.
 
Thank you to all of you guys for all the honest replies on this and I completely agree with you all, it's worth the wait for the Z9 and what follows after in case of updates for Z6ii and Z7ii. Of course, the Z9 will be flagship and pack great technology in it (I already reserved the spot to test it out localy), but yeah, I will stick for now with D850 as I'm shooting birds in flight (eagles, herons, cranes, woodpeckers,..), not so many stationary animals - some (deer, bears, fox, squirrels,..). Still imporving the techniques and skills in this and I love this type of photography over the landscape or any other, even if it's a hard one to master, but its fun.

Only onw question left - if you use the F lens on the Z body, do you loose quality or you actually gain better results of the lens since the senzor has edge to edge cover or is it only the Z lenses that actually take the cake here? Thanks.
 
I've owned both and they're actually incredibly close from an image quality standpoint. The 500 PF is of course much lighter and smaller and mine focuses a bit faster than my 200-500mm(that I eventually sold) but the resulting images at 500mm were very good from both lenses. And of course the 200-500mm zooms to cover a wide focal length range which can be handy. Don't worry about the optical quality of the 200-500mm unless you have a bad copy (and unfortunately there are some bad copies out there) the lens is very good and delivers great images.
I'm not sure if I have a bad copy of the lens. I never AF tuned it, but what would be best option to check if I maybe have bad copy? So far the lens focuses fast enough and the subject looks in focus, only noise is a bit boggling my head and that is probably the technique thing. I found one thread here on the forum of testing the front or back focusing of lens with the focus peak but I'm not sure if that would be necessary 🤔. Is there any fast method for checking this out rather then doing that dot method thing?
 
...Only onw question left - if you use the F lens on the Z body, do you loose quality or you actually gain better results of the lens since the senzor has edge to edge cover or is it only the Z lenses that actually take the cake here? Thanks.
There's no loss in optical quality when you put an F mount lens on a Z camera via the FTZ adapter. There's no glass or any other optical surfaces in the FTZ adapter, it's simply an extension tube to make up the distance from the missing mirror box assembly that a DSLR has but a MILC does not. Yes, there's some electronics for communication between the camera and lens but optically it's nothing but a spacer which is quite different than things like teleconverters that have lens elements in them.

As you imply F mount lenses can actually perform a bit better on MILCs as the Z cameras use the actual image sensor for focus sensing vs a separate focus sensor in DSLRs. That means the optical path is identical between focusing action and actually capturing the image on the Z cameras which can result in more precise auto focus and generally no need for focus fine tuning. Focus is often not quite as fast as on a good DSLR but when a Z camera does lock focus it tends to be very accurate which is a plus just not enough to offset the somewhat slower focus response compared to a high end DSLR at least for higher speed action work.

The ability to place the focus point almost anywhere in the MILC frame is definitely and advantage for certain creative compositions, especially if you can get close to your subjects and fill the frame. But that doesn't generally speaking make the focus sharper at the edges or anything it just lets you place your subjects further from frame center and still place an AF point right over the subject's eye which is nice creatively.
 
I'm not sure if I have a bad copy of the lens. I never AF tuned it, but what would be best option to check if I maybe have bad copy? So far the lens focuses fast enough and the subject looks in focus, only noise is a bit boggling my head and that is probably the technique thing. I found one thread here on the forum of testing the front or back focusing of lens with the focus peak but I'm not sure if that would be necessary 🤔. Is there any fast method for checking this out rather then doing that dot method thing?
If you can reliably capture images sharp enough for your tastes then the lens is likely good. Bad lenses show themselves when you can't really get a sharp photo even for static subjects and just about everything seems too soft.

Focus fine tuning really just helps with DSLRs that tend to repeatedly focus in front of where you placed a single AF point or tends to repeatedly focus behind the point where you are placing your focus point. This can show up with things like perched birds where you're certain you used a Single AF point and you're certain you placed that AF point right on the bird's eye but maybe a twig behind the bird's head is sharp when the eye is not (back focus) or maybe a leaf or twig that's closer to the camera is in sharp focus when the eye is not (front focus). If that happens in a lot of your photos even when you're certain you got the focus point right where you wanted it then yeah, checking for front or back focus with some testing and then correcting it with AF Fine Tuning ONLY if you actually see a repeatable front or back focus issue.
 
If you can reliably capture images sharp enough for your tastes then the lens is likely good. Bad lenses show themselves when you can't really get a sharp photo even for static subjects and just about everything seems too soft.

Focus fine tuning really just helps with DSLRs that tend to repeatedly focus in front of where you placed a single AF point or tends to repeatedly focus behind the point where you are placing your focus point. This can show up with things like perched birds where you're certain you used a Single AF point and you're certain you placed that AF point right on the bird's eye but maybe a twig behind the bird's head is sharp when the eye is not (back focus) or maybe a leaf or twig that's closer to the camera is in sharp focus when the eye is not (front focus). If that happens in a lot of your photos even when you're certain you got the focus point right where you wanted it then yeah, checking for front or back focus with some testing and then correcting it with AF Fine Tuning ONLY if you actually see a repeatable front or back focus issue.
I guess I should check this AF tune as well. In most cases I got the subject in focus, somw are a bit blurry but that was by mistake of too slow shutter for the focal length (my bad actually), but when mounted on tripod it was ok, but what is considered tech sharp for this 200-500 lens paired with D850 actually? I've checked the web and there is so many different results 🙄 on the sharpness of it. Hmm..
 
I guess I should check this AF tune as well. In most cases I got the subject in focus, somw are a bit blurry but that was by mistake of too slow shutter for the focal length (my bad actually), but when mounted on tripod it was ok, but what is considered tech sharp for this 200-500 lens paired with D850 actually? I've checked the web and there is so many different results 🙄 on the sharpness of it. Hmm..
Honestly I'd say that if you are happy with the sharpness then I wouldn't worry about it. There are tools and methods for accurately measuring lens sharpness but doing that well, especially if you don't have a history in lens testing and very careful test setups really isn't worth the trouble. It takes good test targets, good lighting, working from a solid tripod or other support and being very careful with the procedure so that everything is repeatable. And in the end if you're happy with the sharpness of your images, especially the eyes in wildlife photos, then that's all that matters, not the number of line pairs per mm that the lens can resolve in a test environment. Pretty much any modern lens is more than sharp enough and if it has a big problem it's usually very obvious as none of your shots come out sharp even when working from a tripod with very static subjects.

Similar thing with lens fine tuning. Review your images looking for obvious and repeating front or back focus issues. If some are right on the eyes, others are front focused a bit and others are back focused a bit then that's an indication of field technique issues including things like choice of focus area mode and how far you are from your subjects. Only consider AF Fine Tuning if you regularly and repeatedly see focus errors in one direction (front or back) and you know you were using Single Point AF and had that point right on the subject's eye or wherever you wanted the focus to be.

In photos where you used one of the: Group, Dynamic Area or Auto AF Area modes then all bets are off as you don't really know where the camera decided to focus so it's hard to know if there's actually an error or the camera just grabbed focus in a different place than you would have. Those wider and more automated AF Area modes are great for action situations where things move so fast it's hard if not impossible to keep a Single AF Point right where you want it. But for static subjects where you can place a Single AF Point right on the eye that's the way to go and those are the kind of photos that you can review to see if there's a consistent front focus or consistent back focus issue in a high percentage to all of your static images. If not, don't do an AF Fine Tune as it can just create problems where there aren't any.
 
I guess I should check this AF tune as well. In most cases I got the subject in focus, somw are a bit blurry but that was by mistake of too slow shutter for the focal length (my bad actually), but when mounted on tripod it was ok, but what is considered tech sharp for this 200-500 lens paired with D850 actually? I've checked the web and there is so many different results 🙄 on the sharpness of it. Hmm..
I meant to say, how can I be sure my lens is tech sh
Honestly I'd say that if you are happy with the sharpness then I wouldn't worry about it. There are tools and methods for accurately measuring lens sharpness but doing that well, especially if you don't have a history in lens testing and very careful test setups really isn't worth the trouble. It takes good test targets, good lighting, working from a solid tripod or other support and being very careful with the procedure so that everything is repeatable. And in the end if you're happy with the sharpness of your images, especially the eyes in wildlife photos, then that's all that matters, not the number of line pairs per mm that the lens can resolve in a test environment. Pretty much any modern lens is more than sharp enough and if it has a big problem it's usually very obvious as none of your shots come out sharp even when working from a tripod with very static subjects.

Similar thing with lens fine tuning. Review your images looking for obvious and repeating front or back focus issues. If some are right on the eyes, others are front focused a bit and others are back focused a bit then that's an indication of field technique issues including things like choice of focus area mode and how far you are from your subjects. Only consider AF Fine Tuning if you regularly and repeatedly see focus errors in one direction (front or back) and you know you were using Single Point AF and had that point right on the subject's eye or wherever you wanted the focus to be.

In photos where you used one of the: Group, Dynamic Area or Auto AF Area modes then all bets are off as you don't really know where the camera decided to focus so it's hard to know if there's actually an error or the camera just grabbed focus in a different place than you would have. Those wider and more automated AF Area modes are great for action situations where things move so fast it's hard if not impossible to keep a Single AF Point right where you want it. But for static subjects where you can place a Single AF Point right on the eye that's the way to go and those are the kind of photos that you can review to see if there's a consistent front focus or consistent back focus issue in a high percentage to all of your static images. If not, don't do an AF Fine Tune as it can just create problems where there aren't any.
thank you for this detailed explanation. You have a spot on point there. I really don't have experience in this lens testing and in reall scenarios, its hard to nailed everything perfectly due to things changing very fast. I guess I will just keep shooting outside in good conditions and try to nail the best settings for animals. Mostly, some of us are too much vorried of having all tech sharp all the time 😂. At least I'm sort of that way. Thank you again for honest reply.
 
Back
Top