Z6 ii and Z7 ii

Pistnbroke

At last Z cameras with dual slots and vertical grip capacity by the end of the year . All we need now is improved AF and I might even buy one . Why they have kept the same sensor rather than go to 60 MP to differentiate it from the D850 I dont know but its all rumour.
PS no I won't buy one it will be $3000 just go buy another D850

photobunny

The Z6s looks like everything I want addressed in the Z6 is getting addressed. A proper vertical grip and more processing power for AF. Hopefully even pushing the FPS a little bit more again with that second processor.

As long as the CF Express is still there on one slot or both then it'll be golden. Preferably if the second slot is SD I would prefer they launch that along side a single CF Express slot version, I am going into mirrorless for todays tech and not for an obsolete and slow format.

Pistnbroke

I missed the second processor for the AF so that looks hopeful.

photobunny

@Pistnbroke the second processor is the bit that attracts me. The Z6s will make a great primary body with the 100-400S coming out. I'll just walk about with the 70-200 on my Z6 and 100-400 on the Z6s unless it get something cool like a 500 or 600 prime.

WestEndFoto

photobunny said:

@Pistnbroke the second processor is the bit that attracts me. The Z6s will make a great primary body with the 100-400S coming out. I'll just walk about with the 70-200 on my Z6 and 100-400 on the Z6s unless it get something cool like a 500 or 600 prime.

Seems an odd focal range to walk around with. Both cameras at the same time?

mhedges

Yep they look very interesting. I hope they do not do mixed-type card slots. Dual CFe (retaining XQD compatibility) is the way to go IMO.

WestEndFoto

I had three main complaints about the Z7. For background, the only way my D850 with GST, grip and the D5 battery could be improved would be to integrate all - think a D6 with 46 mp. In fact, if Nikon came out with a D6x with 46+ mp, I would buy it. I will probably wait until the D880 comes out to fill out f-mount, which I plan on using until 2030.

1.
No grip - 80% solved if it doesn't take the D6 battery. 90% solved if it does. The only way to get to 100% is to build the grip into the camera.
2.
Dual card slots. The main reason is that I shoot 128 gb cards then remove them. I have 8 sets and used 6 on a 25 day Europe trip. They both go to different places so if luggage or something is lost...….. Another backup strategy could involve a laptop and external hard drive, but that is a pain in the ass.

The XQD/CFExpress is far superior in every way (speed and durability) and anything less does not belong on a D780/Z6 or better.

Please Nikon, make BOTH slots CFExpress. Don't make us deal with two sets of card OR choose between speed and backup.
3.
Cheese. Comparing the Z7 to my D850, the Z7 is missing a button or two. Hopefully, they fix that with the Z7s. I always want more buttons and that is a major reason to upgrade.

I will wait until the Z8 and Z9 come out before making a buying decision on the Z7s, but the Z7s is now worth consideration for more than a walk around camera.

tc88

My guess, CFE + SD, or dual SD. We will see.

mhedges

WestEndFoto said:

The XQD/CFExpress is far superior in every way (speed and durability) and anything less does not belong on a D780/Z6 or better.

Please Nikon, make BOTH slots CFExpress. Don't make us deal with two sets of card OR choose between speed and backup.

Yep this exactly.

photobunny

WestEndFoto said:

photobunny said:

@Pistnbroke the second processor is the bit that attracts me. The Z6s will make a great primary body with the 100-400S coming out. I'll just walk about with the 70-200 on my Z6 and 100-400 on the Z6s unless it get something cool like a 500 or 600 prime.

Seems an odd focal range to walk around with. Both cameras at the same time?

Yup. Ideally I would like a 70-200 + 500. But the 100-400 would do until we get a native Z 500.

WestEndFoto

photobunny said:

WestEndFoto said:

photobunny said:

@Pistnbroke the second processor is the bit that attracts me. The Z6s will make a great primary body with the 100-400S coming out. I'll just walk about with the 70-200 on my Z6 and 100-400 on the Z6s unless it get something cool like a 500 or 600 prime.

Seems an odd focal range to walk around with. Both cameras at the same time?

Yup. Ideally I would like a 70-200 + 500. But the 100-400 would do until we get a native Z 500.

Ah, makes sense.

photobunny

@WestEndFoto also on my daily walk(which is currently my only outlet until I can travel again). I spend a good 40 minutes inside a dark wooded area where I need f/2.8 to get the shutter speeds for the woodland critters. I also only use the 70-200 lenses at 200 and would be even happier with a 180 or 200mm macro as that would work from spiders and frogs to little birds glaring at me from the branch of a tree.

photobunny

If it has a proper battery grip, maybe we can expect a FtZ adaptor that doesn't have a wart.

Pistnbroke

If it takes an EN EL18 battery I will be very pleased as I can supply grip/battery and charger as a kit at a profit making price like I do for the D850

mhedges

photobunny said:

If it has a proper battery grip, maybe we can expect a FtZ adaptor that doesn't have a wart.

Wart meaning the hump on the bottom? I think that's unavoidable because of the need for the mechanical aperture actuator. Without it you would only have aperture control on the "E" lenses, and there aren't very many of those.

Honestly I'd be pretty surprised to see any new adaptors from Nikon now. You bring a adapters to market when you first put the system out and you don't have many native lenses. Not when you are somewhat close to having a fairly complete lineup, which they should have (except for telephoto) by the end of the year if they can get the other 2.8 zooms and 50 1.2 out.

photobunny

@mhedges aye I thought it was just to provide am extra tripod mount, but if it is to fight some legacy stuff then it makes sense. Just each of the Canon EF to RF adaptors look a bit smarter and all but one add something to the old lenses. I know to most the looks are a bit irrelevant, but to me I quite like things to look like they are all correct and proper.

And while the trinity will be out and some of the 1.2's... there are the whole host of tilt shifts and the like to get update.

mhedges

photobunny said:

@mhedges aye I thought it was just to provide am extra tripod mount, but if it is to fight some legacy stuff then it makes sense. Just each of the Canon EF to RF adaptors look a bit smarter and all but one add something to the old lenses. I know to most the looks are a bit irrelevant, but to me I quite like things to look like they are all correct and proper.

And while the trinity will be out and some of the 1.2's... there are the whole host of tilt shifts and the like to get update.

Yes Canon is in a much better position adapter wise because all of their AF lenses had integrated motors and electronic aperture activation so their adapters can basically just be an extension tube. Nikon isn't so lucky due to all the different tech they have used in their AF lenses.

Oh sure there are still lots of lenses needed to fill out the system but in terms of the most common ones they are getting close (again except for telephoto).

I will add a Macro lens to the 2.8 zooms and 50 1.2. They need to get one of those out too.

photobunny

mhedges said:

photobunny said:

@mhedges aye I thought it was just to provide am extra tripod mount, but if it is to fight some legacy stuff then it makes sense. Just each of the Canon EF to RF adaptors look a bit smarter and all but one add something to the old lenses. I know to most the looks are a bit irrelevant, but to me I quite like things to look like they are all correct and proper.

And while the trinity will be out and some of the 1.2's... there are the whole host of tilt shifts and the like to get update.

Yes Canon is in a much better position adapter wise because all of their AF lenses had integrated motors and electronic aperture activation so their adapters can basically just be an extension tube. Nikon isn't so lucky due to all the different tech they have used in their AF lenses.

Oh sure there are still lots of lenses needed to fill out the system but in terms of the most common ones they are getting close (again except for telephoto).

I will add a Macro lens to the 2.8 zooms and 50 1.2. They need to get one of those out too.

Surely they can bring out a 'lighter' adaptor for the latest lenses like the 500mm PF(Or release a Z version of that lens, it would have been a great opener to the Z system).

Frankly I only want for that one lens, and even then it is a bit of a fuss justifying buying a lens on a legacy mount at that cost. The 500mm war for my wallet is going to be a hard fight between the Canon RF100-500 and the Nikon 500mm PF. And one of them I know I'll be able to put on a new camera without adaptor in 20 years.

mhedges

photobunny said:

Surely they can bring out a 'lighter' adaptor for the latest lenses like the 500mm PF(Or release a Z version of that lens, it would have been a great opener to the Z system).

Frankly I only want for that one lens, and even then it is a bit of a fuss justifying buying a lens on a legacy mount at that cost. The 500mm war for my wallet is going to be a hard fight between the Canon RF100-500 and the Nikon 500mm PF. And one of them I know I'll be able to put on a new camera without adaptor in 20 years.

They certainly could but I don't think they should. It would lose too much functionality for what is really a pretty minor gain. And their would undoubtedly be so many complaints from folks who bought one and then found out their lens doesn't work on it. It would be like the "no AF on AF-D lenses w/ FTZ" complaints (which the Nikon Z facebook page was absolutely inundated with) but way worse.

Have you considered waiting for the Z 200-600? Or 100-400 if that's long enough?

tc88

I agree. I don't think Nikon has the resource or motivation to make another converter in the short term.

Regarding the Z tele though, get ready to pay 30% or maybe even 50% premium over the F mount counterpart. Actually every camera maker does that these days. An iteration is another excuse to raise the sticker price.

Pistnbroke

The wart on the FTZ would make for an interesting shaped grip..I think they will just ignore the FTZ and it will be Z lenses only with the grip

photobunny

mhedges said:

Have you considered waiting for the Z 200-600? Or 100-400 if that's long enough?

The 200-600 is not going to be an S lens so I would be a bit worried taking it out to the middle of the highlands. And the Nikon 100-400s is a consideration but both of these need to come out so I can see how they compare to the alternatives. My Z6 isn't going anywhere, even if I get a R5 and 100-500, I am still going to use the Z6 and all the lovely little primes that are on that system that I can shove in my bag.

Pistnbroke

Lets hope they get the Z7s right ..The canon R5 overheats after 20 min of video ..its in the instruction book ! WE are familiar with the 29m59sec recording limit but at least you can start another file staight away.

photobunny

Pistnbroke said:

Lets hope they get the Z7s right ..The canon R5 overheats after 20 min of video ..its in the instruction book ! WE are familiar with the 29m59sec recording limit but at least you can start another file staight away.

Something had to give to make it 8k without a cooling fan. Though like with every camera I have ever used, I'll record ten minutes of my snake doing snake things about the garden then promptly return to stills. The Z6s and Z7s just have to up their AF for me, I already love the sensor on the Z6 and don't particularly want to chance a major change to it.

photobunny

I wonder if the Z7s will have a good frame rate. I chose the Z6 for its low light ISO performance and FPS. But a Z7s might be more interesting to me if it can now match the current Z6 in burst.

rmp

Can the z6s and Z7s get the D6 focus system? Do you think they will get the D6 focus system?