Nikon d750 to z7ii viable upgrade

Nikon f1.8

Nikon f1.8

Suspended / Banned
Messages
1,724
Name
Paul
Edit My Images
Yes
I have been offered a good deal for my d750 against a z7ii from LCE. Since the 750 is pretty old now and the tech has improved a lot would the z7 be a big step up from what I have.
Mainly shoot at the wetlands trust and a bit of family stuff with the grandson and dog.
Don’t have any z glass only sigma art and contemporary so would assume that they will be ok with adapter.

Thoughts from z7 owners out there.
 
Hi Paul, it's quite a quandary, isn't it? When I was looking to upgrade from my D750 I had four bodies shortlisted - D500, D780, Z6ii & Z7ii. I was able to borrow a D500 from a buddy for a weekend so had a good idea of how that would fit into my photography which is mostly birds, motorsport and cycle races. Having assessed (and discounted) the D500 I hired both the Z bodies and the D780 for a week each.

I'm not a fan of the EVF but I think I gave both Z's a good testing. To my mind the focussing of the Z7ii falls short of what I was expecting and I got a high percentage of missed focus shots of both stationary and flying birds. The 45.7Mp of the Z7ii was also a problem for me as I know from my D800 days that I struggle to hand hold the camera well enough to get clear, unblurred images on a consistent basis. The camera struggled to follow birds whether they were perched or flying and even longish bursts of 10 images couldn't be guaranteed to got me 2 good images. Overall the Z7ii experience for me was not good but having said that the images that were good were very good.

The Z6ii was a different but similar proposition. I struggled with the EVF on this camera too but in my view the focussing was more reliable - I had far fewer OOF shots - and its lower pixel count meant less blurred images too. As with the Z7ii, the camera struggled to follow birds whether they were perched or flying but a burst of 6 or 7 shots would get me at least two in focus and sharp. Again, those images that were good were very good, maybe even exceptional, and I really liked the way the sensor rendered colours.

I tried my Nikon 28-300 AF-S and Sigma 150-600C lenses on both Z bodies with an FTZii adaptor and was pleasantly pleased at how well they both worked.

The final body I tested was the D780 and from the moment I took the camera out of the box it felt comfortable in my hand, a bit like an old friend. The D780 uses the same 24Mp BSI sensor as the Z6ii and Nikon have designed the camera to be a bit of a hybrid - it works as a DSLR when using the OVF but becomes a Z6ii when using liveview. Although different to the D750 it is close enough to very quickly become second nature when using it ... and all your F-mount lenses will work on it too. If you are anything like me you will spend long periods of time shooting at high ISO and the way the D780 (and Z6ii) handles image noise is very impressive. I used to think the D750 was good in this area but the D780/Z6ii are seriously better. Indeed, if you compare Nikon cameras on photonstophotos.net you will see they are the best of all.

Wow! If you've managed to read this far well done so I'll cut the crap and get to the result :eek: In the end I bought the D780 and absolutely love it :D but if I was going mirrorless it would be with the Z6ii not the Z7ii. Just my impressions, of course (y)
 
Thanks for the in depth summary of your experience. I am in two minds to actually "upgrade" it is mainly for the better focusing and faster shooting speed and after reading your experience, especially as you have the same sigma, I wonder if I could hire one for a few days, just to try out.

Off to YouTube to find some real word wildlife shooting with the ZII
 
I don't shoot wildlife but have recently upgraded to a z6ii and it is a big difference from using my D750.

I was hoping for better lowlight performance but it is either the same or very similar to the D750, I do like the live view of the Z6ii.

I only recently got the Z6ii so have not have a proper use of it but am happy with the change.
 
juggler said:
The key question for me.. is whether Z7+F mount lenses + adapter gives _worse_ performance than D750 with the same lenses. I'm not ready to replace all lenses with expensive Z mount stuff.
Click to expand...
I could not see any different when using the 24-70 f2.8 on the z6ii.
 
juggler said:
The key question for me.. is whether Z7+F mount lenses + adapter gives _worse_ performance than D750 with the same lenses. I'm not ready to replace all lenses with expensive Z mount stuff.
Click to expand...

Optically, they are of course the same. I've used all sorts of adapted F-mount lenses on my Z6. I moved from a D600, which has essentially the same sensor as both the D750 and the Z6, just an older version. I haven't noticed any significant differences in IQ between the two cameras at lower ISO settings; it's only when you push things above ISO6400 that the IQ on the Z6 is noticeably better. I cannot speak for the D750 v Z7ii in that regard, although the lower resolution sensor in theD750 may offer better low light performance at the extremes, as each photosite thingy is larger and therefore gathers more light etc.

Where the Z cameras will excel, is with the 'native' new Z-mount lenses. The larger lens mount diameter, coupled with the shorter 'flange' distance, enables superior optical designs to work. For eg; my Z-mount 50 f1.8 lens far surpasses any F-mount 50mm lens in terms of optical quality; sharpness, colour, 'rendition' etc. Just noticeably better and in some cases significant (vs the 50mmf1.4G for eg). I have the 14-30mm too, and that is surprisingly very good indeed, even at the edges. I've never seen an F-mount UWA lens perform that well. Of course, the more 'exotic' lenses, such as the f1.2 primes, and the big teles, 'pro' zooms etc, will offer even better performance. It's a paradigm shift, quite frankly. Although I will continue to use my older F-mount lenses with the adapter, I doubt I'll ever buy a new F-mount lens again. I'll be selling off some of my F-mount lenses to help fund purchases of Z-mount versions. So you might not shift to Z-mount yet, but in time, you will.

As for the viewfinder; I fnd it much better than the optical versions in DSLRs, for one significant reason; low light shooting. I do a lot of photos of gigs, events etc, often with terrible lighting, and the EVF allows me to 'see' in darkness my eyes cannot. The AF of the Z6 is significantly better than the D600 in such low light. Manual focussing with focus peaking is far easier too.
 
Abdichoudxyz said:
Optically, they are of course the same. I've used all sorts of adapted F-mount lenses on my Z6. I moved from a D600, which has essentially the same sensor as both the D750 and the Z6, just an older version. I haven't noticed any significant differences in IQ between the two cameras at lower ISO settings; it's only when you push things above ISO6400 that the IQ on the Z6 is noticeably better. I cannot speak for the D750 v Z7ii in that regard, although the lower resolution sensor in theD750 may offer better low light performance at the extremes, as each photosite thingy is larger and therefore gathers more light etc.
Click to expand...
In image quality terms I'd expect the Z7ii to be superior, even with F mount lenses. But what about focus performance?
 
Nikon f1.8 said:
Thanks for the in depth summary of your experience. I am in two minds to actually "upgrade" it is mainly for the better focusing and faster shooting speed and after reading your experience, especially as you have the same sigma, I wonder if I could hire one for a few days, just to try out.

Off to YouTube to find some real word wildlife shooting with the ZII
Click to expand...
Take a look at Steve Perry's Back Country Gallery channel. He gives very honest appraisals of cameras that he invariably purchases himself and tests over several months. I know he has a couple of videos on the Z7ii (and cameras from other manufacturers too.
 
juggler said:
In image quality terms I'd expect the Z7ii to be superior, even with F mount lenses. But what about focus performance?
Click to expand...
That’s what I’m worried about if it is not as good for bif,s then I might as well get the 780 as it’s the same price more or less. Couldn’t care about the video aspect.
 
Nikon f1.8 said:
That’s what I’m worried about if it is not as good for bif,s then I might as well get the 780 as it’s the same price more or less. Couldn’t care about the video aspect.
Click to expand...
I believe the D750 and D780 share the same Multicam 3500 II AF module, but with the 780 having 'an improved algorithm', so the AF performance may not be a huge leap. The D780 is great in live view, especially if you have older AF-D lenses.
 
sep9001 said:
I don't shoot wildlife but have recently upgraded to a z6ii and it is a big difference from using my D750.

I was hoping for better lowlight performance but it is either the same or very similar to the D750, I do like the live view of the Z6ii.

I only recently got the Z6ii so have not have a proper use of it but am happy with the change.
Click to expand...
Take a look at the charts on photonstophotos.net and you will see that the Z6ii (and D780) have the best high ISO performance of ANY Nikon camera. I shoot my D7880 (same sensor as the Z6ii) without any care for what ISO it is and below 10,000 I rarely have to use noise reduction apps like Topaz or the new LRC denoise function.
 
Abdichoudxyz said:
Optically, they are of course the same. I've used all sorts of adapted F-mount lenses on my Z6. I moved from a D600, which has essentially the same sensor as both the D750 and the Z6, just an older version.
Click to expand...
Aside from having the same nominal pixel count, the sensors in the D600 & D750 are a world away from the one in the Z6ii and D780 - completely different design philosophies and manufacturing processes. BSI sensors are a whole new ball-game compared to plain vanilla FSI CMOS :)
 
Abdichoudxyz said:
As for the viewfinder; I fnd it much better than the optical versions in DSLRs, for one significant reason; low light shooting. I do a lot of photos of gigs, events etc, often with terrible lighting, and the EVF allows me to 'see' in darkness my eyes cannot. The AF of the Z6 is significantly better than the D600 in such low light. Manual focussing with focus peaking is far easier too.
Click to expand...
It's odd, people appear to either love or loathe EVFs. Personally, loathing would be a bit strong but I really don't like them ... but I'm not sure why :oops: :$ Maybe I'm just an old fuddy-duddy :D

I certainly can't argue with your experience at gigs and the like and if that was genre then I could probably be persuaded (y)
 
Well the plot now thickens after doing a bit of research.
A D850 is only 1790 from panamoz and I have just watched a comparison between the Z7ii and D850 from Tony & Chelsea Northrup.
For stills and sports/birds they found the 850 to be the better camera because of the autofocus.

Could get the 850 sell me 750 and would not have to buy the adapter to use my current lenses, saving even more money, so if I can get 600 for my 750 the 850 works out at under 1200, this Z7ii seems like a bad buy in those circumstances.
 
Nikon f1.8 said:
Well the plot now thickens after doing a bit of research.
A D850 is only 1790 from panamoz and I have just watched a comparison between the Z7ii and D850 from Tony & Chelsea Northrup.
For stills and sports/birds they found the 850 to be the better camera because of the autofocus.

Could get the 850 sell me 750 and would not have to buy the adapter to use my current lenses, saving even more money, so if I can get 600 for my 750 the 850 works out at under 1200, this Z7ii seems like a bad buy in those circumstances.
Click to expand...
The D850 was a noticeable upgrade over the D750 for me, better IQ and I preferred the colours. I also found AF better, and the frame rate (with grip) was a welcome improvement. One thing to consider with the mirrorless is eye AF, for me it really is a game changer as you can concentrate on composition rather than frantically trying to move the AF point around. The other advantage is the edge to edge AF leading to less restriction of composition.
 
Bristolian said:
Aside from having the same nominal pixel count, the sensors in the D600 & D750 are a world away from the one in the Z6ii and D780 - completely different design philosophies and manufacturing processes. BSI sensors are a whole new ball-game compared to plain vanilla FSI CMOS :)
Click to expand...
Yes, it's disingenuous for me to say they're 'the same'; more of an evolution, like a 2012 Golf GTi vs a 2018 model. But in real world use, I found the D600 to be every bit as good as the Z6 at lower ISO settings. Those 24Mp sensors were fantastic all-rounders, and had great dynamic range.

Bristolian said:
It's odd, people appear to either love or loathe EVFs. Personally, loathing would be a bit strong but I really don't like them ... but I'm not sure why :oops: :$ Maybe I'm just an old fuddy-duddy :D

I certainly can't argue with your experience at gigs and the like and if that was genre then I could probably be persuaded (y)
Click to expand...
I wasn't at all sold on the new Z system when it was announced; I bought a Z6 as a replacement for a D3300 I'd been using as a 'travel' camera, because it was smaller and lighter than the D600. With the 24-70 kit lens, it made a great little package for travelling and that. But it very quickly grew on me, and I found the viewfinder to be far better than I'd expected or experienced previously. I started using it at gigs, and it quickly took over as my 'main' camera. The D600 is better ergonomically, but the low light performance of the Z6 beats it hands down, and the D600 is already a great low light performer. The silent shutter is also a major boon at times when I need to be quiet. I was covering one event where another photographer was ordered to stop shooting by organisers, because of the 'machine gun noise' his EOS 5D was making (a speaking event which was being recorded). I was able to continue taking pictures, because of the silent shutter mode. Such things, you don't know are useful until they are useful. And when you find out, you are really grateful you've got them.

snerkler said:
One thing to consider with the mirrorless is eye AF, for me it really is a game changer as you can concentrate on composition rather than frantically trying to move the AF point around. The other advantage is the edge to edge AF leading to less restriction of composition.
Click to expand...
This. It really is a game changer. I'd always coped fine with single point AF and recomposing, but Eye AF just makes things that much easier. So I think for those 3 things, I'd choose mirrorless over DSLRs any day, now. I was a sceptic, now I'm a convert.
 
Last edited:
toohuge said:
I agree with the other posters re. eye af as a game changer. The D850 / D5(6) are the top of their game re. AF, but the eye af of the mirrorless cameras is much, much more useful imo
Click to expand...
but is it any good for birds ???
 
Last edited:
Abdichoudxyz said:
Yes, it's disingenuous for me to say they're 'the same'; more of an evolution, like a 2012 Golf GTi vs a 2018 model. But in real world use, I found the D600 to be every bit as good as the Z6 at lower ISO settings. Those 24Mp sensors were fantastic all-rounders, and had great dynamic range.


I wasn't at all sold on the new Z system when it was announced; I bought a Z6 as a replacement for a D3300 I'd been using as a 'travel' camera, because it was smaller and lighter than the D600. With the 24-70 kit lens, it made a great little package for travelling and that. But it very quickly grew on me, and I found the viewfinder to be far better than I'd expected or experienced previously. I started using it at gigs, and it quickly took over as my 'main' camera. The D600 is better ergonomically, but the low light performance of the Z6 beats it hands down, and the D600 is already a great low light performer. The silent shutter is also a major boon at times when I need to be quiet. I was covering one event where another photographer was ordered to stop shooting by organisers, because of the 'machine gun noise' his EOS 5D was making (a speaking event which was being recorded). I was able to continue taking pictures, because of the silent shutter mode. Such things, you don't know are useful until they are useful. And when you find out, you are really grateful you've got them.


This. It really is a game changer. I'd always coped fine with single point AF and recomposing, but Eye AF just makes things that much easier. So I think for those 3 things, I'd choose mirrorless over DSLRs any day, now. I was a sceptic, now I'm a convert.
Click to expand...
Two of the "hybrid" features that the D780 inherited from the Z6ii is silent shooting and eye AF when in liveview. Unfortunately, the eye AF only works on humans not animals so its use is limited for me but I find the ability to shoot completely silently quite handy when getting close to wildlife.

If we all had the same requirements or opinions then camera manufacturers would have a much simpler life :)
 
snerkler said:
There are plenty of mirrorless cameras out there that simply excel in AF (including BIF) and outperform the best DSLRs but sadly the Nikons don’t look great here at 8:17 for BIF.
View: https://youtu.be/YqKaUjjaA70

An example of what mirrorless is capable of, see 0:13 for BIF.
View: https://youtu.be/kwzVy75W1-0
Click to expand...
I have seen that video from Steve, I'm actually subscribed to his channel as he shoots Nikon and has gave me some good advice on setting up the auto focus and so on.

Going to LCE tomorrow to have a look at the Z7 and have a feel for it, might not even to be my liking as I have always been a DSLR person.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top