First Z6II Impressions - AF Speed Test - A Update 11-29-2020

[Rassie]

Thanks for sharing your thoughts and experience. I have a D500 I use when needed but prefer shooting with the Zs. I’d like the AF to be a little better so hoping the II will be enough to let me leave the D500 home most of the time. I don’t really shoot small birds either, but do once in a while. A lot of birds in florida.

Adding to Bruce's post, I'd agree with what he says regarding Z6ii versus Z6. I find the autofocus on the Z6ii to be more reliable overall, but it's hard to quantify. Here's what I'm hoping for now: Steve seems to think that the autofocus shortcomings should be fixable through firmware going forward. In my own view, the fact that the Z6ii now has two processors it should have enough power to be able to do what's needed should the firmware fixes be implemented. At this time, though, it's up to Nikon to step up with the firmware. If they don't then I would not consider the Z6ii a serious wildlife action camera, specifically if one wants to use it for fast action with birds or any action where one needs a lens to lock up focus fast.

So if you want to use the Z camera for a lot of fast wildlife work, then no, the Z6ii is not the way to go. It's great for everything else. That may change with future firmware upgrades, but I would wait to see what Nikon releases in the near future.

I will say this: Shooting my Z6ii with the Nikkor 200-500mm lens the combo is now capable of equaling the performance of my previous D7500 with the same lens. I did not feel that the Z6 with that lens was equivalent to the D7500. I did two wildlife safaris in South Africa, one in 2016 and then again in 2019. On the first safari I took a D7000 and D7100 with me. On the second safari I used a D7500 and D7100. In both cases my Nikkor 200-500mm was my go-to long lens, and I got great images of all manner of wildlife with all three those cameras. This means I would not hesitate to go on such a safari with the Z6ii with that lens. I did not once have a situation where I needed the fast A/F performance of a D500/D5/D850 with a faster-focusing lens. It might have been different if I had to shoot a leopard/cheetah/lion chase, but actually being in the right place at the right time for such opportunities are rare indeed.

Bottom line: Right now the Nikon Z cameras are not of equivalent performance compared to D500/D5/D850 and I don't realistically expect the current Z bodies to ever get there. Perhaps the rumored Z9 would be able to compete.

 

[Steve]

Interesting that Bruce and Brian both mention not being small bird photographers in thinking about the Z6II. I like to photograph warblers In their spring migration and their summer residence in northern Minnesota. After experimenting with various combinations, my preferred kit for warblers has become the Z7 + 500 mm PF + 1.4x TCIII. Given the small size of the warblers, I need all the focal length I can get. And in many cases I still crop. Once I use the TC, I find autofocus on the Z7 works better for me than the autofocus on the D500/D850. Most of the shots involve perched birds, although they move around quickly.

I have decided to upgrade my Z7 and Z6 to the new II models. From what Bruce and Steve say, I expect better autofocus in the field. I don’t that often have to go from minimum focus to infinity (although if I do, the 500 mm PF seems to be not a bad choice). Of course, I could occasionally be photographing a butterfly at close distances and then see something farther off. I have liked the Z7 and Z6 a lot, although I have kept and plan to keep my D500 and D850. The new II versions sound like an improvement in autofocus that could be material for me. I also shoot water birds and other larger birds, mammals, insects, flowers and other parts of nature. I also like landscape photography, where the new Z mount S lenses are quite nice.

Steve, do you have a 70-200 f2.8 E FL that you could shoot on a D850 and compare in the close focus to infinity test against a 70-200 f2.8 S on the Z6II? Or a 24-70 f2.8 VR on a D850 to compare to a 24-70 2.8 S on the Z6II? I know you are busy, but might be interesting.

For warblers and small birds, I think the larger AF area of the Z6ii might make it tricker to get precisely where you want - the Z7ii will have a smaller AF point (like the current one). This is especially true if the bird is smaller in the frame than you'd like.

I don't have the F version of the 24-70 anymore and only have the F version of 70-200. However, before I sold the 24-70E, I did the test you wanted

The day I tested it, the 24-70s on the Z6 was 0.53 seconds vs 0.26 seconds for the F mount on the D850. So, the F-mount was faster no matter how you cut it - but - I also doubt Nikon was overly concerned about AF speed on the 24-70S lens. The 70-200 would be more interesting to test.

(As a side note, I know my stats from the latest test were 0.7 seconds for the Z mount 24-70, but that was rounded up from 0.66. Still just over a tenth of a second discrepancy, but I had to use a different infinity target for that one than the first test. That's why when I list any results, I always re-test things I have already tested since it's a different day, different conditions, different targets, etc - and that can all make a difference.)

 

[Steve]

Adding to Bruce's post, I'd agree with what he says regarding Z6ii versus Z6. I find the autofocus on the Z6ii to be more reliable overall, but it's hard to quantify. Here's what I'm hoping for now: Steve seems to think that the autofocus shortcomings should be fixable through firmware going forward. In my own view, the fact that the Z6ii now has two processors it should have enough power to be able to do what's needed should the firmware fixes be implemented. At this time, though, it's up to Nikon to step up with the firmware. If they don't then I would not consider the Z6ii a serious wildlife action camera, specifically if one wants to use it for fast action with birds or any action where one needs a lens to lock up focus fast.

So if you want to use the Z camera for a lot of fast wildlife work, then no, the Z6ii is not the way to go. It's great for everything else. That may change with future firmware upgrades, but I would wait to see what Nikon releases in the near future.

I will say this: Shooting my Z6ii with the Nikkor 200-500mm lens the combo is now capable of equaling the performance of my previous D7500 with the same lens. I did not feel that the Z6 with that lens was equivalent to the D7500. I did two wildlife safaris in South Africa, one in 2016 and then again in 2019. On the first safari I took a D7000 and D7100 with me. On the second safari I used a D7500 and D7100. In both cases my Nikkor 200-500mm was my go-to long lens, and I got great images of all manner of wildlife with all three those cameras. This means I would not hesitate to go on such a safari with the Z6ii with that lens. I did not once have a situation where I needed the fast A/F performance of a D500/D5/D850 with a faster-focusing lens. It might have been different if I had to shoot a leopard/cheetah/lion chase, but actually being in the right place at the right time for such opportunities are rare indeed.

Bottom line: Right now the Nikon Z cameras are not of equivalent performance compared to D500/D5/D850 and I don't realistically expect the current Z bodies to ever get there. Perhaps the rumored Z9 would be able to compete.

Good points. I think what's happening is that many people (myself included), tend to compare the "best" cameras from manufacturer to manufacturer. That pit the Z6/7ii against the a9ii and R5. The problem is, the Z7/6 are more like a mirrorless D750 / 780 - and should be thought of as that level of camera. Capable for the vast majority of subjects, but not the higher-performance action / wildlife work many of us on this forum do. I think we'll all be much happier when the Z8/9 materialize

 

[cohenfive]

Bring on the D850 successor! Disappointing result but what I was expecting. Nikon will need more than dual processors in the same body/sensor to compete with sony and canon. What is really disappointing is the slow af performance using f mount lenses. I don't use my z6 for wildlife so the only f mount I use with it is the 70-200 f4...and mostly for video or stills where I don't care about af speed. For most of my shooting my d850 and d500 will soldier on. Maybe we get lucky and nikon announces a d850 successor this coming month when the z7ii ships.

Last question, for canon r5/6 users...How is the af performance of the ef mount lenses on the new bodies compared with rf glass? I'm thinking of getting an r5 and maybe something like the 100-400ii which isn't too costly even with the adapter (if you can find one)...

 

[abc123brian]

Adding to Bruce's post, I'd agree with what he says regarding Z6ii versus Z6. I find the autofocus on the Z6ii to be more reliable overall, but it's hard to quantify. Here's what I'm hoping for now: Steve seems to think that the autofocus shortcomings should be fixable through firmware going forward. In my own view, the fact that the Z6ii now has two processors it should have enough power to be able to do what's needed should the firmware fixes be implemented. At this time, though, it's up to Nikon to step up with the firmware. If they don't then I would not consider the Z6ii a serious wildlife action camera, specifically if one wants to use it for fast action with birds or any action where one needs a lens to lock up focus fast.

So if you want to use the Z camera for a lot of fast wildlife work, then no, the Z6ii is not the way to go. It's great for everything else. That may change with future firmware upgrades, but I would wait to see what Nikon releases in the near future.

I will say this: Shooting my Z6ii with the Nikkor 200-500mm lens the combo is now capable of equaling the performance of my previous D7500 with the same lens. I did not feel that the Z6 with that lens was equivalent to the D7500. I did two wildlife safaris in South Africa, one in 2016 and then again in 2019. On the first safari I took a D7000 and D7100 with me. On the second safari I used a D7500 and D7100. In both cases my Nikkor 200-500mm was my go-to long lens, and I got great images of all manner of wildlife with all three those cameras. This means I would not hesitate to go on such a safari with the Z6ii with that lens. I did not once have a situation where I needed the fast A/F performance of a D500/D5/D850 with a faster-focusing lens. It might have been different if I had to shoot a leopard/cheetah/lion chase, but actually being in the right place at the right time for such opportunities are rare indeed.

Bottom line: Right now the Nikon Z cameras are not of equivalent performance compared to D500/D5/D850 and I don't realistically expect the current Z bodies to ever get there. Perhaps the rumored Z9 would be able to compete.

This is helpful as well. I think my expectations align with what you’re describing as the capabilities of the ii versions. I guess I need to decide whether to keep my Z7ii preorder or to cancel it and get the Z6ii. I have the D500 for when needed and would like a combination of one Z6ii and one Z7ii camera for primary use. The problem is I have the first generation of each and don’t want to upgrade both. I know.. problems

Good points. I think what's happening is that many people (myself included), tend to compare the "best" cameras from manufacturer to manufacturer. That pit the Z6/7ii against the a9ii and R5. The problem is, the Z7/6 are more like a mirrorless D750 / 780 - and should be thought of as that level of camera. Capable for the vast majority of subjects, but not the higher-performance action / wildlife work many of us on this forum do. I think we'll all be much happier when the Z8/9 materialize

I think this is exactly what most people are doing. I don’t expect the current Z cameras to complete with the A9ii or R5 but would really like to see the tracking modes improved. Given the price of the A7RIV and R6, I’d like to see how it compares against them. I am very curious regarding the Z8/Z9 cameras. I don’t need a D6 level camera but a mirrorless D850 would be nice, something like an R5 equivalent would be ideal for me.

 

[Steve]

Bring on the D850 successor! Disappointing result but what I was expecting. Nikon will need more than dual processors in the same body/sensor to compete with sony and canon. What is really disappointing is the slow af performance using f mount lenses. I don't use my z6 for wildlife so the only f mount I use with it is the 70-200 f4...and mostly for video or stills where I don't care about af speed. For most of my shooting my d850 and d500 will soldier on. Maybe we get lucky and nikon announces a d850 successor this coming month when the z7ii ships.

Last question, for canon r5/6 users...How is the af performance of the ef mount lenses on the new bodies compared with rf glass? I'm thinking of getting an r5 and maybe something like the 100-400ii which isn't too costly even with the adapter (if you can find one)...

Can't comment on Canon, but I do have a thought on the adapted F mount lenses.

I wasn't aware of it, but there's a chip in the FTZ adapter (I figured sine it required a firmware update for the Z6ii, it must have one). This makes me think that the delay is not the camera but the translation of signals via the FTZ. So, I'm optimistic about the native telephoto lenses.

 

[cohenfive]

Thanks Steve. But nikon should be able to do better with an adapter than evidently they have so far. I haven't heard canon users complaining.

 

[Steve]

I think this is exactly what most people are doing. I don’t expect the current Z cameras to complete with the A9ii or R5 but would really like to see the tracking modes improved. Given the price of the A7RIV and R6, I’d like to see how it compares against them. I am very curious regarding the Z8/Z9 cameras. I don’t need a D6 level camera but a mirrorless D850 would be nice, something like an R5 equivalent would be ideal for me.

Agreed. Nikon's tracking mode (the actual mode, not it's ability to track in general) is sorely lacking compared to the competition. However, I'm very happy with using the normal AF modes (especially Wide Small) for BIF work. It's not D6 level or even D850 level, but it does get the job done.

 

[Steve]

Thanks Steve. But nikon should be able to do better with an adapter than evidently they have so far. I haven't heard canon users complaining.

Oh, I agree - I was just speculating about the reasons. I too think that at the end of the day when people are picking a system or camera, they don't care why something isn't as good, just that it isn't. Part of me wonders if it's deliberate to sort of force Z mount sales. I would hope not, that would seem foolish if that was the plan.

 

[tomfranic]

I received my Z6ii today and took it out for a spin at a local beach area. These are just some VERY preliminary thoughts. I normally wouldn't share this stuff, but we're all friends here

Sadly, all I could find were seagulls (and they would't let me approach as close as I'd like), but I did have a chance to pop off some flight shots. Nothing artistic and I can't post them yet anyway (Lightroom doesn't support the Z6ii yet and I'd sooner chew off my own arm than use Capture NX-D).

Anyway, in reviewing the images on the back LCD panel, I have to say, it's looking pretty good. Most of the shots where sharp (really sharp) and the camera seemed to lock on well and wasn't apt to drop the target - although, it was an easy target! The bad thing was the birds were more at a distance for DX shooting, there was a lot of DoF to cover up errors, even at F/4 with my 600mm. Still, I think from strictly an AF standpoint, it's looking good. It's no D6 or D850, but it can get the job done. I may revise this when I can finally load the images into Lightroom

A few other notes...

CH Extended is still a rather useless side show and not good for tracking birds from side to side.

There does seem to be less blackout and lag seems better too - although it's hard to tell this early in the game.

Start up time is WAY better - like a split second! I lost more than a few quick moments when my Z6/7 went into standby mode, I don't think that's a problem anymore.

The new buffer is really good - I never touched it once this evening. I haven't put it through it's paces yet, so I can't give any specifics.

The FTZ adapter did need a firmware update. I thought it was simply an extension cord, but there must be a chip in it. So, that may explain why F mount lenses are slower on the Z cameras - the signals must need translated through the adapter. I haven't tested the AF speed yet with the adapter, but it seems about the same as on the MK I cameras. I could be wrong though, I'll have to test.

Also, I was able to leave Apply Settings To Live View turned on and performance was great. I always shut it off with the first Z6, but never felt the need to tonight.

Obviously, I'm just getting started with it, but so far, so good

Update 11-10-2020

I was out again this morning with the Z6ii, this time after bucks in a local park. A couple quick notes.

I was using the same battery as before and ended up shooting a lot more than I wanted (I'll explain why in a moment). However, I did want to mention battery life because I know there was some concern. I charged the battery when I received it ands do far have shot 1800+ images with the camera. My charge shows exactly 50%. This is just normal shooting, not too much chimping but some menu diving (I'm kind of setting it up as I go because, well, I'm lazy).

I'm pretty happy with the battery life and I think part of it is because the shorter startup time allows for a shorter standby timer. With the first versions of the cameras, I would set a 5 minute timer because it took so long to wake back up when it went into standby. That way, if I was waiting for something to happen I was always ready. Now, I have standby set to just 1 minute - if it goes into standby mode, it's on in less than a second, no big deal and it less battery usage

By the way, and this applies to all the Zs, I found another use for the CH Extended feature this morning. I was photographing a buck who was striking some nice poses, but he was also vigorously chewing his cud at the same time. I used the 10FPS (shooting 14 bit RAW, so I can't hit 14) frame rate to knock out longer series of shots as he chewed so I can capture a few with his mouth closed and not in some weird chewing position. Since he was just looking at the camera, the slide show wasn't a problem and in fact worked to my advantage since I could spot when I got the shot (about 1 in 5 it seemed). Oh, and so far, I've not hit the buffer with my XQD card in there - even for longer sequences at the higher frame rate. (I did a quick test, looks like just over 130 shots on an XQD card shooting in 14 bit RAW - for the little mini review video I'm planning, I'll get you some more thorough numbers).

Update 11-29-2020

OK, I did an AF speed test with the Z6, Z6ii and the D850. I used my 600 F/4, 200-500, 500PF, and the 24-70 S series lens.

You're not gonna like this if you're a Z fan...

There's no significant improvement in AF speed with adapted lenses that I can detect with my tests. The tests were from minimum focus distance to infinity. Here are the results:

600mm

Z6ii = 1.5 seconds
Z6 = 1.4 seconds
D850 = 0.5 seconds

I honestly have no idea why the Z cameras were so slow with that lens. I ran the test multiple times and the results were the same each time.

200-500mm

Z6ii = 0.9 seconds
Z6 = 1 second
D850 = 0.8 seconds

In this case, I think the cameras can all drive the lens pretty much as fast as it can go.

500PF

Z6ii = 0.7 seconds
Z6 = 1 second
D850 = 0.4 seconds

Here, we see the Z6ii does hold a slight advantage, but no where near as fast as the D850.

24-70 Z

Z6 = 0.7 seconds
Z6ii = 0.7 seconds

So, neck and neck there.

Overall, AF speed is roughly the same, at least from minimum focus distance to infinity between the Z6 and Z6ii. The D850 is still faster in every test.

However, I have noticed in the field that the closer the system is to proper focus, the faster it'll drive the AF ring. So, if you start at minimum focus, it's not so great. However, if your subject is at 50 feet and you start at 30 feet, it latches on at speeds that seem comparable to DSLRs. The Z6ii also feels more confident with AF and is not subject to as much hunting and seems more accurate than the first model.

In short, while these results are a little disappointing (at least to me), keep in mind that most of the time we aren't racking the focus back and forth from minimum distance to infinity - and that sort of hunting happens far less with the Z6ii than it did with the Z6. Overall, I still like the AF much better in the new camera.

And What You expect with the new Z line lenses ? Bether then F mount lens or? AF

 

[Steve]

And What You expect with the new Z line lenses ? Bether then F mount lens or? AF

My experience with Z mount lenses has been 100% positive. The 24-70 2.8 is the best lens of that type I have ever used. The 14-30 is easily on par with my old 14-24. One of the things I like about the Z system are the new lenses. I'm fairly confident that they will continue to surpass the F-mount in sharpness and I have feeling the lenses targeted more for action will offer the same AF speeds. Really looking forward to the Z mount 100-400, 200-600, and the 600 F/4.

 

[cohenfive]

I think nikon would be making a big mistake if they didn't release a 500pf or better yet a 600pf for z mount. They have been losing market share to sony and now canon. The one thing that will keep people in the nikon family or even increase it will be unique lenses. Clearly they will be playing catchup with z bodies for the foreseeable future. Right now the 300pf and 500pf do not have competition and they are just superb at what they do. Sure the 600mm f/4 is great for people like Steve who are pros and who can buy whatever they need for their business...as can a few amateurs. But if nikon wants to increase market share, imo they should focus on products that are unique in the market that can drive people to the z system...even if the af isn't quite ready for prime time yet. Nikon could sell 10x as many z mount 600pf lenses as they could the 600mm f/4..maybe more than that. Imo of course.

 

[BillW]

Agreed. Nikon's tracking mode (the actual mode, not it's ability to track in general) is sorely lacking compared to the competition. However, I'm very happy with using the normal AF modes (especially Wide Small) for BIF work. It's not D6 level or even D850 level, but it does get the job done.

Thanks Steve. That’s good to hear. I like the Z7 and Z6 for many of the reasons you cite in the Top Ten Reasons to Go Mirrorless thread. It sounds like the Z6II autofocus has improved and so presumably will the Z7II‘s autofocus, so I expect I will like them even better. Glad if they can “get the job done” on BIF. But also glad to still have my D500 and D850 for now.

 

[abc123brian]

My experience with Z mount lenses has been 100% positive. The 24-70 2.8 is the best lens of that type I have ever used. The 14-30 is easily on par with my old 14-24. One of the things I like about the Z system are the new lenses. I'm fairly confident that they will continue to surpass the F-mount in sharpness and I have feeling the lenses targeted more for action will offer the same AF speeds. Really looking forward to the Z mount 100-400, 200-600, and the 600 F/4.

That 100-400mm silhouette on the roadmap looked like a really nice size and I think the 200-600mm will be a great replacement for the 200-500mm F mount. I’m sure the 600mm F/4 will be fantastic for those who want/need it.

 

[ruley74]

Last question, for canon r5/6 users...How is the af performance of the ef mount lenses on the new bodies compared with rf glass? I'm thinking of getting an r5 and maybe something like the 100-400ii which isn't too costly even with the adapter (if you can find one)...

I can't talk for the R5/6 but i did have the EOS R with the 100-400ii

The AF speed was stellar, i actually tested (not timed) in store the AF of the D500/200-500, A9/200-600 and my then EOS R/100-400 and the Canon combo was the fastest of the lot. The biggest thing i miss about Canon is that lens, it's awesome!

 

[wild-pics]

Agreed. Nikon's tracking mode (the actual mode, not it's ability to track in general) is sorely lacking compared to the competition. However, I'm very happy with using the normal AF modes (especially Wide Small) for BIF work. It's not D6 level or even D850 level, but it does get the job done.

Steve, Thank you for all the testing on the Z6ii. It confirms based on all the promotional videos by Nikon that this is aimed at the "Urban Photographers", not sports/wildlife. That said it will be interesting to see which DSLR's Nikon releases next year. I'am hoping that one would be the D500 upgraded with a 24 Mp sensor and D6 AF engine.

 

[Steve]

Steve, Thank you for all the testing on the Z6ii. It confirms based on all the promotional videos by Nikon that this is aimed at the "Urban Photographers", not sports/wildlife. That said it will be interesting to see which DSLR's Nikon releases next year. I'am hoping that one would be the D500 upgraded with a 24 Mp sensor and D6 AF engine.

Agree - I think it's an excellent general purpose camera. I think it can do wildlife as well, but if that was all someone was doing, I think there are other options to look at. Still, it's serviceable and can certainly snag some nice wildlife keepers.

 

[Ado Wolf]

I think we'll all be much happier when the Z8/9 materialize

I think Nikon achieved a lot in a very short time, but it is starting to feel like they are only "trying to catch up" to Sony and Canon. I do hope I am wrong though..
It does make you wonder for example:
- why not create a new more powerful processor, rather than adding an older one (dual solution)?
- why not make AF simply faster and better, rather than offering an alternative solution with EAF in Wide-Area AF mode

it feels to me like Nikon is trying to cut corners with these "half" solutions.. don't you agree?

Having said that, I remain a dedicated Nikon shooter, simply because I am too invested in it and love the quality of photos, colors and handling.

 

[Tom-Neth]

Hi Steve, do you have an overview of the settings you use on the Z6 II ? Probably will learn a lot from it. Thanks !

 

[Steve]

I think Nikon achieved a lot in a very short time, but it is starting to feel like they are only "trying to catch up" to Sony and Canon. I do hope I am wrong though..
It does make you wonder for example:
- why not create a new more powerful processor, rather than adding an older one (dual solution)?
- why not make AF simply faster and better, rather than offering an alternative solution with EAF in Wide-Area AF mode

it feels to me like Nikon is trying to cut corners with these "half" solutions.. don't you agree?

Having said that, I remain a dedicated Nikon shooter, simply because I am too invested in it and love the quality of photos, colors and handling.

No real clue on the processor - if I had to guess it's probably done to split up multiple tasks as once - maybe more efficient (or maybe less reprogramming).

To the second point, AF really is decent now. When the Z6/7 first came out, I really didn't like using them - I found the AF incredibly frustrating in the field. The z6ii AF system however is a non-issue for the vast majority of wildlife shots. It's not up to D6 (or D850) performance, but it does get the job done. Honestly, the 3D tracking in the D6 isn't any better than the Tracking mode in the Z6ii (the actual tracking mode, not tracking with one of the other AF areas like Wide L /S, dynamic, etc). It's just that Sony (and it sounds like Canon) do it so much better. I've tracked birds with my a9ii that flew out of the frame - when I quickly got back on them (with AF engaged), it picked them back up! With the Z6ii in tracking mode it was dropping seagulls against a blue sky...

As of the AF speed, I think some - or most - of the loss is because of the adapter. I'm anxious to see how the native lenses work.

I think my biggest complaint right now is the frame rate - I'd like a live feed at something faster than 5.5 FPS.

Sadly, I do agree that Nikon does seem to be doing just the minimum tp stay relevant compared to Sony and Canon. However, I also remember that Nikon wasn't doing to hot at the beginning of the DSLR era either - then they launched the D3

So, fingers crossed.

 

[Steve]

Hi Steve, do you have an overview of the settings you use on the Z6 II ? Probably will learn a lot from it. Thanks !

I'm planning on a setup video after I get my mirrorless AF book updated for the z6/7ii

 

[Arci]

I'm planning on a setup video after I get my mirrorless AF book updated for the z6/7ii

Two great news.
I have tested the Z6II just few hours with seagulls and I agree with Steve's first impressions, the Auto tracking is not good at all for BIF, but tracking with old school methods the AF is very accurate. Comparing with my D500 experience let me say that when the Z6II has nailed the bird the shoots are very sharp, the D500 is faster as per first focus acquisition and FPS but does not have the same accuracy.
High ISO of Z6 II are pretty good.

You can only see EXIF info for this image if you are logged in.

You can only see EXIF info for this image if you are logged in.

You can only see EXIF info for this image if you are logged in.

 

[Terlap]

I received my Z6ii today and took it out for a spin at a local beach area. These are just some VERY preliminary thoughts. I normally wouldn't share this stuff, but we're all friends here

Sadly, all I could find were seagulls (and they would't let me approach as close as I'd like), but I did have a chance to pop off some flight shots. Nothing artistic and I can't post them yet anyway (Lightroom doesn't support the Z6ii yet and I'd sooner chew off my own arm than use Capture NX-D).

Anyway, in reviewing the images on the back LCD panel, I have to say, it's looking pretty good. Most of the shots where sharp (really sharp) and the camera seemed to lock on well and wasn't apt to drop the target - although, it was an easy target! The bad thing was the birds were more at a distance for DX shooting, there was a lot of DoF to cover up errors, even at F/4 with my 600mm. Still, I think from strictly an AF standpoint, it's looking good. It's no D6 or D850, but it can get the job done. I may revise this when I can finally load the images into Lightroom

A few other notes...

CH Extended is still a rather useless side show and not good for tracking birds from side to side.

There does seem to be less blackout and lag seems better too - although it's hard to tell this early in the game.

Start up time is WAY better - like a split second! I lost more than a few quick moments when my Z6/7 went into standby mode, I don't think that's a problem anymore.

The new buffer is really good - I never touched it once this evening. I haven't put it through it's paces yet, so I can't give any specifics.

The FTZ adapter did need a firmware update. I thought it was simply an extension cord, but there must be a chip in it. So, that may explain why F mount lenses are slower on the Z cameras - the signals must need translated through the adapter. I haven't tested the AF speed yet with the adapter, but it seems about the same as on the MK I cameras. I could be wrong though, I'll have to test.

Also, I was able to leave Apply Settings To Live View turned on and performance was great. I always shut it off with the first Z6, but never felt the need to tonight.

Obviously, I'm just getting started with it, but so far, so good

Update 11-10-2020

I was out again this morning with the Z6ii, this time after bucks in a local park. A couple quick notes.

I was using the same battery as before and ended up shooting a lot more than I wanted (I'll explain why in a moment). However, I did want to mention battery life because I know there was some concern. I charged the battery when I received it ands do far have shot 1800+ images with the camera. My charge shows exactly 50%. This is just normal shooting, not too much chimping but some menu diving (I'm kind of setting it up as I go because, well, I'm lazy).

I'm pretty happy with the battery life and I think part of it is because the shorter startup time allows for a shorter standby timer. With the first versions of the cameras, I would set a 5 minute timer because it took so long to wake back up when it went into standby. That way, if I was waiting for something to happen I was always ready. Now, I have standby set to just 1 minute - if it goes into standby mode, it's on in less than a second, no big deal and it less battery usage

By the way, and this applies to all the Zs, I found another use for the CH Extended feature this morning. I was photographing a buck who was striking some nice poses, but he was also vigorously chewing his cud at the same time. I used the 10FPS (shooting 14 bit RAW, so I can't hit 14) frame rate to knock out longer series of shots as he chewed so I can capture a few with his mouth closed and not in some weird chewing position. Since he was just looking at the camera, the slide show wasn't a problem and in fact worked to my advantage since I could spot when I got the shot (about 1 in 5 it seemed). Oh, and so far, I've not hit the buffer with my XQD card in there - even for longer sequences at the higher frame rate. (I did a quick test, looks like just over 130 shots on an XQD card shooting in 14 bit RAW - for the little mini review video I'm planning, I'll get you some more thorough numbers).

Update 11-29-2020

OK, I did an AF speed test with the Z6, Z6ii and the D850. I used my 600 F/4, 200-500, 500PF, and the 24-70 S series lens.

You're not gonna like this if you're a Z fan...

There's no significant improvement in AF speed with adapted lenses that I can detect with my tests. The tests were from minimum focus distance to infinity. Here are the results:

600mm

Z6ii = 1.5 seconds
Z6 = 1.4 seconds
D850 = 0.5 seconds

I honestly have no idea why the Z cameras were so slow with that lens. I ran the test multiple times and the results were the same each time.

200-500mm

Z6ii = 0.9 seconds
Z6 = 1 second
D850 = 0.8 seconds

In this case, I think the cameras can all drive the lens pretty much as fast as it can go.

500PF

Z6ii = 0.7 seconds
Z6 = 1 second
D850 = 0.4 seconds

Here, we see the Z6ii does hold a slight advantage, but no where near as fast as the D850.

24-70 Z

Z6 = 0.7 seconds
Z6ii = 0.7 seconds

So, neck and neck there.

Overall, AF speed is roughly the same, at least from minimum focus distance to infinity between the Z6 and Z6ii. The D850 is still faster in every test.

However, I have noticed in the field that the closer the system is to proper focus, the faster it'll drive the AF ring. So, if you start at minimum focus, it's not so great. However, if your subject is at 50 feet and you start at 30 feet, it latches on at speeds that seem comparable to DSLRs. The Z6ii also feels more confident with AF and is not subject to as much hunting and seems more accurate than the first model.

In short, while these results are a little disappointing (at least to me), keep in mind that most of the time we aren't racking the focus back and forth from minimum distance to infinity - and that sort of hunting happens far less with the Z6ii than it did with the Z6. Overall, I still like the AF much better in the new camera.

 

[Terlap]

Steve, you said the FTZ adapter needs an update. Is that just for the 6ii or for both the cameras? I’m wondering if the update is okay for both versions of the camera. I plan to keep my Z7 but get the 6ii so can I use the FTZ adapter on both with the update? Also can you point to where I can find out how to update the adapter? Thanks.

 

[jaco67]

Steve, you said the FTZ adapter needs an update. Is that just for the 6ii or for both the cameras? I’m wondering if the update is okay for both versions of the camera. I plan to keep my Z7 but get the 6ii so can I use the FTZ adapter on both with the update? Also can you point to where I can find out how to update the adapter? Thanks.

Hi, You can use your updated FTZ with any Z bodies, Mk1 or Mk2. But if you do not update the firmware, it won't work with Mk2.