Here's my take: I don't think Nikon ever advertised or even hinted that the Z6/7 cameras were suitable replacements for the D500 or D850. I've said this before - I believe the Z6 is more of a replacement for the D750, and the Z7 is similar, but with a higher megapixel sensor. So to say the Z7 is no good for action is the same as saying the D750 is no good for action photography. Not too many folks that I know of try to use a D750 for serious wildlife action work, the same as how I could not successfully and consistently use the D7000 series (D7000, D7100, D7500) for years for action wildlife work. I got some amazing images, and I also lost some where the camera's autofocus system could not keep up in some conditions. One learns to live with the limitations of a specific camera, and if it's too frustrating, one replaces the camera with a more capable one (usually at significantly increased cost).I don't want to get into arguments on the issue.How ever splitting hairs can never hide the fact that Z 7 ii did not have a good AF compared to even it's predecessors like D 500 / 850 & that's the point I was trying to make . The proof of that is in this forum itself where there are threads where Z 7 ii owners have been repeatedly asking for FW updates to improve is AF
As for firmware updates, yes, I'm also waiting for such an update for my Z6II. Again, Nikon did not promise to improve the firmware in such a way as to make the camera more capable for action work. It is something we're all wishing for. In a couple of years I'll probably replace my Z6II with whatever more capable Nikon is available at the time because I have become more interested in wildlife action photography lately. Now if Nikon can narrow the gap and make the Z6II more capable through firmware I'll probably be happy enough to use it for longer.
Last edited: