Molldan
New member
Right now I have a D500 and a 200-500mm to go with it. I have a chance to get a used Z6 at a good price and I was wondering should I not get that and save up for the newer Z7ii or save up for the D850?
Z6 or save for Z7ii or D850
- Thread starter Molldan
- Start date
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).
IainD
Well-known member
If your D500 is working well, I am not completely sure the Z6 will bring much more to the table. Iy you are shooting wildlife, the D500 may be better because of shutter blackout. The D500 gives you more pixels on the subject, and the weight saving of the Z camera may not be very much.
I am sticking with my D500. I am sure others will have other ideas!
Iain
I am sticking with my D500. I am sure others will have other ideas!
Iain
Honestly, I've been debating the "new camera" thing since mirrorless cameras started becoming more of a viable option for wildlife and nature photographers. I have the same D500 / 200-500 kit (along with a host of Nikon and 3rd Party F Mount) lenses.
Other than simple "I want one" I keep asking myself "Jeff, exactly what do you think the new camera will do for you that your current equipment cannot do?" When I'm being completely honest with myself, the answer is "not a lot." Sure "what you see is what you get" in the viewfinder and having the histogram visible in the viewfinder would be great and would help with some tricky exposures but honestly, very few of my images are lost due to exposure problems.
Other than simple "I want one" I keep asking myself "Jeff, exactly what do you think the new camera will do for you that your current equipment cannot do?" When I'm being completely honest with myself, the answer is "not a lot." Sure "what you see is what you get" in the viewfinder and having the histogram visible in the viewfinder would be great and would help with some tricky exposures but honestly, very few of my images are lost due to exposure problems.
I switched to Nikon from Olympus about a year ago. I started with a d850 and a d500. In the spring I added a z6 and the 14-30 and 24-70 f4. The z took nice pics and was light but using the ftz for F mount lenses bugged me. Enough so that I ended up selling the Z kit and buying a second d500. I am very happy with the D series bodies and lenses that I own and plan to keep that format indefinitely. Like was said. For wildlife , the d500 gives more pixel density and gives the crop factor magnification that is useful for wildlife. I use my D500 bodies much more than the D850. The couple of DX lenses that I have 16-80 f4 and Tokina 11-20, make the DX bodies as versatile as my F lenses with the D850 in my opinion. Bottom line, my dance with the z cameras was more of a want for the new shiny thing than a practical improvement over what I already owned.
Last edited:
After picking up the Z6, I sold my D500 and just kept a D850. But it's a matter of the rest of your kit, what you photograph, and how the photos are used. If you can get a used Z6 around $900-1000, it's worth going that direction. Be sure you get the FTZ adapter - it most likely sold to the Z6 owner for $49.
The Z6II or D850 / D850 successor are certainly options. The Z6II gives you improvements to AF speed and AF Area options, a second card slot, etc. But the Z6 as an entry point for the Z system is still a good choice at half the price. It will let you evaluate the system and potential long term direction.
The D850 is about the same pixel density as the D500, but it also offers the depth of field benefits of full frame, high resolution if you are not cropping, and a very good camera overall.
The Z cameras almost eliminate chimping. You can see what you are going to get before pressing the shutter.
You can zoom through the EVF. I use the Fn1 button programmed to zoom. I can check focus, watch for precise position, fine tune focus manually, etc. with a 50%, 100% or 200% zoom.
Menus and controls are largely managed through the EVF. I have immediate access to almost everything I need with the EVF and Fn buttons or the iMenu. My eye never leaves the viewfinder.
Exposures are more accurate because you see the photo about to be made.
AF is more accurate with a Z camera - AF is with a hybrid phase detect / contrast detect so you rarely need fine tuning
AF coverage across the frame is the same
The newer cameras have additional AF Area options
AF is possible at combinations that are f/9 or f/11 wide open - something not possible on a DSLR.
The FTZ lets F-mount lenses perform as they would on a DSLR. AF speed is subject to the individual lens.
Z lenses are sharper in almost every case than their F-mount alternatives - sometimes much sharper. This is especially true toward the corners of the frame.
Stabilization is in the camera and improved. This let's non-VR lenses be stabilized.
The disadvantages:
The Z cameras are a little more likely to give up rather than hunt when AF is badly unfocused; this means you are more likely to need to pre-focus on the correct distance, and manually override focus when it gives up.
For fast erratic subjects - sparrows - the EVF has a 15-20 millisecond lag at the fastest frame rate, but that is eliminated with a slower mechanical frame rate. The shutter is also slightly slower. You can track predictable subjects just fine - but erratic subjects are harder.
Battery life is reduced with a Z camera, but it's rarely an issue in practice. I've only gone to a second battery a couple of times in over two years.
Z cameras don't work with some older lenses that lack focus motors, and some third party lenses that don't have firmware updates. These issues are lens specific - most lenses work fine.
There is a learning curve for the Z cameras. You need to embrace learning to use it to get the shot rather than comparing it to your current camera and questioning why they are not the same. The shots I don't get are shots that with my DSLR have a success rate of 20% or lower - often much lower. If I am shooting a subject like sparrows in flight with my DSLR, my hit rate may be 2-3%. It's about the same with my Z6. But I can choose a different lens, modify technique, and both cameras do much better.
I'd get the Z6 and FTZ in a second if it's a good price.
The Z6II or D850 / D850 successor are certainly options. The Z6II gives you improvements to AF speed and AF Area options, a second card slot, etc. But the Z6 as an entry point for the Z system is still a good choice at half the price. It will let you evaluate the system and potential long term direction.
The D850 is about the same pixel density as the D500, but it also offers the depth of field benefits of full frame, high resolution if you are not cropping, and a very good camera overall.
The Z cameras almost eliminate chimping. You can see what you are going to get before pressing the shutter.
You can zoom through the EVF. I use the Fn1 button programmed to zoom. I can check focus, watch for precise position, fine tune focus manually, etc. with a 50%, 100% or 200% zoom.
Menus and controls are largely managed through the EVF. I have immediate access to almost everything I need with the EVF and Fn buttons or the iMenu. My eye never leaves the viewfinder.
Exposures are more accurate because you see the photo about to be made.
AF is more accurate with a Z camera - AF is with a hybrid phase detect / contrast detect so you rarely need fine tuning
AF coverage across the frame is the same
The newer cameras have additional AF Area options
AF is possible at combinations that are f/9 or f/11 wide open - something not possible on a DSLR.
The FTZ lets F-mount lenses perform as they would on a DSLR. AF speed is subject to the individual lens.
Z lenses are sharper in almost every case than their F-mount alternatives - sometimes much sharper. This is especially true toward the corners of the frame.
Stabilization is in the camera and improved. This let's non-VR lenses be stabilized.
The disadvantages:
The Z cameras are a little more likely to give up rather than hunt when AF is badly unfocused; this means you are more likely to need to pre-focus on the correct distance, and manually override focus when it gives up.
For fast erratic subjects - sparrows - the EVF has a 15-20 millisecond lag at the fastest frame rate, but that is eliminated with a slower mechanical frame rate. The shutter is also slightly slower. You can track predictable subjects just fine - but erratic subjects are harder.
Battery life is reduced with a Z camera, but it's rarely an issue in practice. I've only gone to a second battery a couple of times in over two years.
Z cameras don't work with some older lenses that lack focus motors, and some third party lenses that don't have firmware updates. These issues are lens specific - most lenses work fine.
There is a learning curve for the Z cameras. You need to embrace learning to use it to get the shot rather than comparing it to your current camera and questioning why they are not the same. The shots I don't get are shots that with my DSLR have a success rate of 20% or lower - often much lower. If I am shooting a subject like sparrows in flight with my DSLR, my hit rate may be 2-3%. It's about the same with my Z6. But I can choose a different lens, modify technique, and both cameras do much better.
I'd get the Z6 and FTZ in a second if it's a good price.
FB101
Well-known member
I went through the same debate and in the end decided to add a D850 to my stable as an upgrade to my D750. Now I have D500 and D850 with similar controls (the D750 uses the non pro Nikon control layout), and I get to keep building my collection of F lenses much more cheaply (rebates but especially used gear popping up). All that knowing that the first generation Zs aren’t stellar for wildlife and second gen although better aren’t quite on D500/850 level. Live histogram would be nice, reduced weight would be nice but it’s irrelevant if the AF lets you down. I don’t get to shoot every day or even every week, so when I can, I need to make it count - and for now that means D series, not Z.
I agree with Eric's comments and summary. I have been using a Z7 for the last 2 years and a Z6 for over a year. Like them a lot. I kept my D500 and D850 to use for birds in flight and wildlife. Nice to have one of those two (or a D4/5/6) for action along with a Z body if you can.
I originally got a Z7 in December 2018 because I wanted a better and lighter mid-range zoom for hiking and travel. The 24-70 f4 Z mount lens was attractive and better than my 24-120 in F mount. I didn't want something as heavy as the 24-70 f2.8 VR in F mount. The Z mount lenses I have tried have all been quite good to exceptionally good.
At this point, I think the thing I like best about having a Z body (beyond access to Z mount lenses) is the accuracy of focus, at least on stationary and slowly moving subjects, and the fact that autofocus points cover the entire frame. You might want to see Steve's thread on top ten reasons to use mirrorless cameras for additional thoughts.
I used the Z7 and Z6 for wildlife photography all summer on a lake in northern Minnesota near the Boundary Waters. They are very good wildlife cameras in most settings and even decent for BIF. Eric is right that there is a learning curve. My results with Z bodies got better as I used them more. I now reach for a Z body before my DSLRs, in most cases.
I recommend Steve's book on Nikon mirrorless autofocus (just updated for the new ZII models) and Thom Hogan's book on the Z7 & Z6 (he will have a new book for the Z7II and Z6II, which is not out yet). Very helpful on the learning curve.
I just got a Z6II from my wife for Christmas. Still setting it up and trying it out. It's pretty cold here in Minnesota. But I have already had fun using it to photograph our 4 1/2 month old puppy. The animal eye detect in Wide Area Large seems to work quite well, even in fairly low light.
I originally got a Z7 in December 2018 because I wanted a better and lighter mid-range zoom for hiking and travel. The 24-70 f4 Z mount lens was attractive and better than my 24-120 in F mount. I didn't want something as heavy as the 24-70 f2.8 VR in F mount. The Z mount lenses I have tried have all been quite good to exceptionally good.
At this point, I think the thing I like best about having a Z body (beyond access to Z mount lenses) is the accuracy of focus, at least on stationary and slowly moving subjects, and the fact that autofocus points cover the entire frame. You might want to see Steve's thread on top ten reasons to use mirrorless cameras for additional thoughts.
I used the Z7 and Z6 for wildlife photography all summer on a lake in northern Minnesota near the Boundary Waters. They are very good wildlife cameras in most settings and even decent for BIF. Eric is right that there is a learning curve. My results with Z bodies got better as I used them more. I now reach for a Z body before my DSLRs, in most cases.
I recommend Steve's book on Nikon mirrorless autofocus (just updated for the new ZII models) and Thom Hogan's book on the Z7 & Z6 (he will have a new book for the Z7II and Z6II, which is not out yet). Very helpful on the learning curve.
I just got a Z6II from my wife for Christmas. Still setting it up and trying it out. It's pretty cold here in Minnesota. But I have already had fun using it to photograph our 4 1/2 month old puppy. The animal eye detect in Wide Area Large seems to work quite well, even in fairly low light.
For me, the mirrorless bodies are so much more pleasurable to use than the DSLR bodies. I’m sure many will disagree but I just like so much more the entire user experience of the Z bodies. The sacrifice I had to make switching from DX format D7500 to full frame Z6ii is the loss of reach for bird photography using my Nikkor 200-500mm lens. That loss is real so for sure my small bird photography suffers.
My dilemma now is: Do I get a teleconverter for my 200-500mm lens or do I wait and get the new Nikkor Z 200-600mm when that arrives, and then get a converter for that lens too? Using the F-mount with a converter is less than ideal and comes with its own problems.
No matter which way you look at it, switching from DX to full frame is expensive if you do small bird photography. It’s easier to get away with if your wildlife is closer and larger. Currently there is not a mirrorless Nikon that can realistically replace the D500. When such a camera arrives it will make the switch to mirrorless that much easier.
I reckon if you use all the capabilities of the D500 now for wildlife action, stay with that for now until a better mirrorless replacement comes along.
My dilemma now is: Do I get a teleconverter for my 200-500mm lens or do I wait and get the new Nikkor Z 200-600mm when that arrives, and then get a converter for that lens too? Using the F-mount with a converter is less than ideal and comes with its own problems.
No matter which way you look at it, switching from DX to full frame is expensive if you do small bird photography. It’s easier to get away with if your wildlife is closer and larger. Currently there is not a mirrorless Nikon that can realistically replace the D500. When such a camera arrives it will make the switch to mirrorless that much easier.
I reckon if you use all the capabilities of the D500 now for wildlife action, stay with that for now until a better mirrorless replacement comes along.
As to a Z6 or Z7II or D850 -- all are good choices. If you are going to keep the D500, I'd probably lean more to adding the Z6 or Z7II.
I am expecting better autofocus results on the ZII models, although I can't say I have used my new Z6II enough to tell for sure. Comments from Steve and others on this forum lead me to hope that it will be true. But this would matter most for action and maybe the new Wide Area eye detect, which seems useful in some cases.
I find that for wildlife, I prefer the D850 and Z7 -- nice to have full frame if you can get close, but I also like the ability to crop with a fair number of pixels still on the duck (to paraphrase Steve). I have a Z7II on order, but it seems like they are in short supply at the moment if you are not NPS.
I like the Z6/Z6II for more general work, where I do not need the higher resolution and file size. It's also good in low light. I think the image quality for the Z7II and Z6II will be generally the same as the image quality of the Z7 and Z6, respectively.
Another advantage of the Z6 here might be if it left funds to try a Z mount lens. Agree you will want an FTZ.
Good luck with your choice.
I am expecting better autofocus results on the ZII models, although I can't say I have used my new Z6II enough to tell for sure. Comments from Steve and others on this forum lead me to hope that it will be true. But this would matter most for action and maybe the new Wide Area eye detect, which seems useful in some cases.
I find that for wildlife, I prefer the D850 and Z7 -- nice to have full frame if you can get close, but I also like the ability to crop with a fair number of pixels still on the duck (to paraphrase Steve). I have a Z7II on order, but it seems like they are in short supply at the moment if you are not NPS.
I like the Z6/Z6II for more general work, where I do not need the higher resolution and file size. It's also good in low light. I think the image quality for the Z7II and Z6II will be generally the same as the image quality of the Z7 and Z6, respectively.
Another advantage of the Z6 here might be if it left funds to try a Z mount lens. Agree you will want an FTZ.
Good luck with your choice.
Another possibility is to use a Z7II (or Z7). The DX crop, in post or in camera, is very similar to the image from a D500 or D7500. That said, D500 will still excel at BIF and other fast action.
True, but I have the Z6ii now and I’m not going to spring that plus another Ca$1000 for the Z7ii so I have to make what I have now work for me.
I was thinking the same thing…although originally I was aiming at the Z7II to replace my D7500 and not lose the reach that the DX body gives me with long lenses and am planning a 500PF as well. However…based on some discussions I've been having with Hudson Henry out in Portland I'm rethinking the 7II and might get the 6II instead. A little faster frame rate and much better High ISO performance with the larger sensor pixels on the 6II. His suggestion was to not worry about losing the reach but just to use the D7500 and long lens when the extra reach is needed in order to keep the other advantages the 6II has over the 7II. Still thinking on it at this point though.
Hudson also is a firm believer in the Auto area AF mode for low to medium action wildlife and slower BIF with subject tracking turned on if necessary. I'm going to experiment a bit with Connie's new Z50 and see how this works…my initial (4 frames of a great blue heron as it took off) had tack sharp focus on the head as it launched sort of toward and crossing in front of where I was…and will do the same with the 6II or 7II to see what works the best. His overall evaluation of the 6II is that for almost all wildlife action the auto area AF is sufficient to do the job…but since beauty is in the eye of the beholder I'll have to see how it works for my shots.
Rassie…kind of off the original subject but wondering about yours of the 24-70 as a walking around lens. With only going up to 70…assuming you take that one for walking around…have you noticed many lost shots due to insufficient reach or does your walking around kit include the 70-200? I've been thinking on what to get for my walking around/travel lens for either the 6II or 7II that I end up with…and it seems like the 24-200 might be a better idea there. It's almost as good as the 24-70 at the shorter focal lengths…essentially no noticeable difference unless you do some pixel peeping based on several comparison reviews. It's almost the same weight as the 24-70 and while not as fast as the 70-200 it's a lot cheaper and lighter and more of a travel lens than the 70-200.
Just wondering what your thoughts were…not meaning to hijack the thread but I saw your kit in your sig line.
Just wondering what your thoughts were…not meaning to hijack the thread but I saw your kit in your sig line.
I reckon it's gonna depend on the price of that 200-600 Z mount…and whether it's enough 'better' than the TC on your 200-500 to make the expense worthwhile. I'm leaning toward the 500PF as it is hand holdable and while we don't have any real info on the 200-600…neither the 200-500 or my Tamron G2 150-600 really are hand holdable for very long. Especially at the long end…keeping the subject in the viewfinder without either having it on my monopod or leaned on my wife's shoulder for quick shots is pretty hard. Hopefully the 500PF will help with this…although it might very well be worth my renting one for a week before spending the $4100 or so for it and the 1.4TC to go along with it.
Of course…upgrading to anything that requires new glass to get optimum performance ain't gonna be cheap…it all comes down to how much dough one has and whether the bang for the buck is there. At my age…and from your profile pic with the graying hair likely yours too…less weight is a prime consideration and if the 200-600 is light enough and cheap enough it might make a better choice overall.
Exactly what I’m hoping for. If it works well one can then also pair it with a Z TC.
Since I already have the Nikkor 70-200mm F/4 lens I carry that together with my 24-70mm Z lens on walk-about. If I didn’t already have the 70-200mm I would absolutely go for the Z 24-200mm as a general all-purpose lens. That 70-200mm F4 is such a stellar lens that I don’t want to replace it with the 24-200mm. Same with the Z 24-70mm lens. Both of them are a bit better than the Z 24-200 so to replace my two lenses with the one 24-200 feels like a step backward regarding IQ. If I was starting out with no lenses and a Z body I would definitely go for the Z 24-200mm. It just makes sense.
Thanks…pretty much what I thought since you already had the lens.
ccirelli
Well-known member
Since you have the 200-500, I'd honestly just hang on to the D500 for a while. That's an awesome wildlife setup (I'm assuming wildlife is important to you, since you're here 
).
If you want to experiment / dip your toes in the mirrorless water - pick up a Z5 or Z6, used or even new. Or wait a little longer. The Z6 is an amazing camera - but it's not matching up to a D500 for wildlife purposes (crop factor "reach" and AF performance mainly).
IF you're planning on ditching the D500... and moving to mirrorless altogether... I'd strongly suggest no less than a Z6ii or Z7ii (my Z6 will be replaced with a Z6ii as soon as I can get one on sale in 2021).
Also keep in mind, the Z6ii will be a little less noisy than the Z7ii in lower light... but if you're cropping to DX format (in or out of camera - same thing), you'll be working with about 10mp. The Z7ii gives you back about the same number of pixels in DX mode as the D500 does with it's crop factor.
).If you want to experiment / dip your toes in the mirrorless water - pick up a Z5 or Z6, used or even new. Or wait a little longer. The Z6 is an amazing camera - but it's not matching up to a D500 for wildlife purposes (crop factor "reach" and AF performance mainly).
IF you're planning on ditching the D500... and moving to mirrorless altogether... I'd strongly suggest no less than a Z6ii or Z7ii (my Z6 will be replaced with a Z6ii as soon as I can get one on sale in 2021).
Also keep in mind, the Z6ii will be a little less noisy than the Z7ii in lower light... but if you're cropping to DX format (in or out of camera - same thing), you'll be working with about 10mp. The Z7ii gives you back about the same number of pixels in DX mode as the D500 does with it's crop factor.
I'm using a lot of different combinations for walking around - depending on where I am walking. I'm mainly walking in small area parks for birds, other wildlife, macro, or landscapes. The parks in my area are wooded - often with thick brush - and that's very different from parks in some other areas.
My Bird Walk kit is the Z6 or Z7II with a teleconverter and the old 300 f/4 AFS. I've historically been using the TC14E II teleconverter but recently have been testing the TC17E II. The 1.7 teleconverter picks up a half stop, and is very good on the Z7II to a crop of 75%. Deeper cropping or viewing shows the softness of the TC on the high res body. This kit is geared to small songbirds and lots of mobility. Few of the photos that result are expected to have any real value - mainly just examples for classes or for sharing.
I almost always carry a wide lens when I'm out, and it's usually either the 14-30 f/4 or 24-70 f/4. These are "just in case" lenses that work well if needed. I might take an F-mount kit instead, and that could be a Sigma 35mm f/4 and Nikon 105 f/2.8 macro. I tend to not use lenses like the 24-200 because I'd rather carry 1-2 higher quality lenses. That's probably overkill because the 24-200 is pretty good - I'd just rather carry two lenses.
I’d hold fire because if the rumours coming through are true Nikon are said to be bringing out an update to both the D500 & D850 in 2021.
Ado Wolf
Well-known member
I've been rocking that boat for a while.. and I came to realise there is no perfect solution..
with the Z50 I maintain the DX factor, but lose on AF speed, lack of IBIS and poor Kit lens performance (mainly due to F6.3 limitation)
with the Z6ii I gain fast frames per second, AF speed, IBIS, good 24-70 kit lens, but lose on DX (quite important fo me).
with the Z7ii I gain AF speed, IBIS, good kit lens and DX crop (same density) but lose the money i was saving for the 500 PF.
no matter how I spin it, I have to make a compromise, which I don't have if I stick with my D7500 and buy the 500 PF.
the main reason swinging me to Mirrorless is the silent shooting (awesome for wildlife).
If rumors are true.. there won't be an improved DX Z lens for a while.. (Z3 will be a step down for me)..
so I have to wait in either way.. either for eventually an improved Z50 or a discounted Z7ii..
with the Z50 I maintain the DX factor, but lose on AF speed, lack of IBIS and poor Kit lens performance (mainly due to F6.3 limitation)
with the Z6ii I gain fast frames per second, AF speed, IBIS, good 24-70 kit lens, but lose on DX (quite important fo me).
with the Z7ii I gain AF speed, IBIS, good kit lens and DX crop (same density) but lose the money i was saving for the 500 PF.
no matter how I spin it, I have to make a compromise, which I don't have if I stick with my D7500 and buy the 500 PF.
the main reason swinging me to Mirrorless is the silent shooting (awesome for wildlife).
If rumors are true.. there won't be an improved DX Z lens for a while.. (Z3 will be a step down for me)..
so I have to wait in either way.. either for eventually an improved Z50 or a discounted Z7ii..
Yeah…there's two kinds of walking around. For travel stuff I usually like to have an all in one zoom with 35mm equivalent of 28 or so up to at least 200…typically an 18-300 on my D7500…and then in my bag I have a wider lens and a fast lens. Walking around in the woods looking for wildlife…I have the Tamron G2 on the body a lot and the other lens in pockets so that I can easily shift to the 18-300 or the wide angle if needed.
For traveling…I tend to like to have a lighter load and generally don't take the G2 along…but once I end up getting the 6II or 7II I might just carry 2 bodies on travel…as long as one is in the backpack it's not as much of a weight issue. OTOH…my wife's new Z50 is pretty nifty and might end up being the second body (if there is one) for travel.
I tend to stay away from songbirds and look for waders and birds of prey. Neither my wife or I have much look finding the little guys in the trees…we have a generic term for them 'taunty birds' since they just call and taunt you since they know you can't find them anyway. Besides…a songbird out at more than 40 or 50 feet starts to get pretty small in the viewfinder.