The Z8 is a tremendous camera and to me it comes doen to the question whether you really need 45+ MP.
If during your Z7 time you found it essential to your work to have this kind of resolution, then teh Z8 is the way to go.
If not, going the other way can be just as good and may be even better. Why ? Here are just a few that I have on the radar for me to decide whether or not to go back to 24+MP completely
- Being used to EVF for proably much loonger than me it may not make a big difference for you, but despite the possibilites you have with it for me the experience is not quite right coming from pro level AVFs liek D850 or even D4s. I am looking forward to getting my eye on the Z6 III viewfinder, because coming from pro level AVF like in the D850 or D4s I still have the feeling of looking at a computer game from th 90s.
- @Steve has published some interesting thoughts on motion blur and the impact of sensor resolution on it (sorry, cant recall the link straight away). And this is not just academic. My friend (retired pro and now full time nature & wildlife) demosntrated this to me years ago, before I even knew @Steve and this community.
- Pushing a 45MP+ to the limit in terms of IQ puts much higher demand on the lenses you use, compared to a good 24+ MP sensor, so basically the choice is bigger and the price level can be lower. That said, there are so many other factors having an impact on the final output, that most of us will have problems pushing todays sensors to their limit, being it 24 or 45 or whatever. 90% of the IQ still comes from what sits between our ears.
One thing in terms of lenses. Although I have lots of respect for people like Thom Hogan, they sometime miss out on switching position between people like him, basically living with a camera glued to his face and/or making a living of it and "the rest of the world".
@wotan1 is right in saying that you don't need a 14k+ lens to get outstanding quality. "Consistency" in moving to the Z world as a reason for concentrating on "Z-frienldy lenses" to me sounds a bit like marketing.
Of course it is nice to have lighter and smaller equipment, but especially im terms of super tele, considering the price difference of something between 9 to 10K $ I would certainly prefer to get e.g. a 500 f4 FL plus a FTZ and a TC, if I have the need for long fast glass with excellent IQ on a Z. The weight difference between the Z 400 2.8 TC and the 500 f4 FL is about 140g ! - well, depeindg on what you do plus a FTZ and a TC to be fair. Admittedly these top notch super primes are a dream, and who would say no if he/she could have one, but IMHO as long as you don't rely especially on the switchable TC or the additional control elements on the Z lens to me there no point in spending this amount of money unless you constantly fight in the Chammpions Ligue.
Just the two cents of a dinosaur ...
