Does anybody own both or have switched from Sony A7riii to Z7? If so, how is the experience especially in terms of AF?
From what I have gathered so far is that Z7 is definitely better in terms of ergonomics, but weather sealing and maybe in jpegs as well but AF is not in the same league as Sony especially C-AF. Is that really the case?
I have both Z7 and A7r iii. I use both along side D850.
For my own use, A7r iii got very very little use since Z7 arrived.
In general, I almost always prefer Nikon colour over Sony but I hardly ever used jpg except to send small jpg file to my phone to send to some friends quickly. JPG file probably depends mostly on personal preference.
I find AF-S to be very similar. AF-C, especially tracking is definitely not as good as A7r iii but it is not horrible by any mean. I was able to get bird in flight shot with Z7 and 500/5.6PF but keeper rate is definitely not as good as D850.
When I first got Z7, I compared Z7 with FTZ adapter to Sigma Art 50/1.4 vs A7r iii with Sony Zeiss 50/1.4 and I find low light AF (AF-S mode) to be very similar, if anything, I give an edge to Z7/Sigma combination as they hunted a bit less but most people reported better low light AF with Sony. Not sure why that should be the case.
D850 is definitely better in AF area in general except that Z7 can AF with 500/5.6PF + TC20e iii but D850 cannot.
Weather seal and ergonomic, big + for Z7. EVF specification is about the same for both but I have
strong preference for Z7.
Z7 seems to play better with more M mount lenses than A7r iii also.
PS since I have D850, action and wild life is mostly done with D850 so AF-C with tracking is not my big criteria for Z7.
I used to use A7r i/ii/iii a lot with manual focus lenses along side D850/D810. Z7 serve the same purpose very well while being
a better back up camera for D850 (A7r iii with Commlite adapter is no match for Z7 but if you like eye focus, it works well with many Nikon lenses). So for my personal use, Z7makes more sense although I would be perfectly happy with A7r iii as well.
@Suteetat,
Thank you for the detailed reply. I currently have a Sony A7riii kit and I never considered Z7 as I didn't think that it offered anything that A7rIII doesn't. In fact the lack of eye-AF in Z7 is a big drawback.
For someone who already have D850 + Nikon lenses then Z7 is an easy choice but if someone looking to make a move from another mirrorless FF, it might be a struggle. The reason why I started thinking about Z7 was because of better jpegs (yes I shoot jpegs for regular everyday pictures) and the ability to use more telephoto lenses but from the reviews I'm seeing online it does not look like Z7's C-AF or buffer is good enough for fast moving action.
Also, how do the back LCD and EVF compare between the two? There have been few reports about lag in EVF and weird exposure in LCD, where it does not correctly reflects what the output is.
If you have no F-mount glass, then I honestly don't think it makes sense to switch systems unless you're really convinced the Z6/Z7 offers you something that your A7R3 doesn't.
Both are great cameras (currently have the Z7 and D850 and sold my A7R3s a couple months ago), and there are many threads here on FM and on other forums going over this topic in detail, so I doubt you'll find something new here that will push you over the edge either way. AF-C between the two cameras isn't far off in my experience - hyperbolic comments of "in a different league" or "X camera annihilates camera Y" is great for youtube review clicks, but in the real world neither is going to be a camera I'd reach for fast action (that is generally when I grab my D850 as it's better than either camera in that regard).
As for the EVF thing - it's a bug that shows up in a very specific situation with strobes, and is fixed by turning D8 "live view preview effect" off. Sony EVF's have their own issues when using strobes - in my experience it's a mirrorless thing as I've seen similar wonkiness on Fujis too. If it's any comfort, I am a full time photographer that primarily shoots with strobes and I haven't been able to replicate the issue. Have been shooting the Z7 pretty regularly since it came out in October, and had the A7R3 for about the same length of time (and shot the A7R2, A72, A7, A6500, etc for several years before that).
What do you find lacking with the A7R3 that you hope the Z7 would solve? Or being honest with yourself, are you just suffering from a bout of G.A.S.? Nothing wrong with either - we all like our gear on this forum
G.A.S is definitely a big factor but I was just thinking if Z7 will give me similar IQ as A7rIII but better jpegs, better ergonomics and ability to adopt cheaper telephoto zooms with decent AF.
sungphoto wrote:
What do you find lacking with the A7R3 that you hope the Z7 would solve? Or being honest with yourself, are you just suffering from a bout of G.A.S.? Nothing wrong with either - we all like our gear on this forum
ajamils wrote:
G.A.S is definitely a big factor but I was just thinking if Z7 will give me similar IQ as A7rIII but better jpegs, better ergonomics and ability to adopt cheaper telephoto zooms with decent AF.
Thanks for clarifying, that's helpful.
I personally find the ergonomics to be a lot better, and the camera just wears better after a few months - it'd drive me nuts when the sharp edges of my sony cameras would start brassing after only a month or two.
SOOC jpegs are a matter of taste, but after playing around with the picture profiles a bit on the Z7, I really like some of the modes, especially the black and white ones. And I prefer the EVF on the Z7.
Overall image quality in RAW on both is a bit of a wash. They both produce excellent files - I prefer the skintones on the Z7 much more though, but that's a subjective difference.
In terms of adapted lenses, the FTZ works close to native with some of the latest Nikon F-mount lenses, but keep in mind that generally the older the lens design, the less performance you'll be able to squeeze out of the lens adapted. You won't save much money going with the Nikon 70-200 f2.8E (but you will have a tele that is better in pretty much every way vs the GM 70-200). The reasonably priced Tamron G2 70-200 f2.8 performs pretty well on the Z7 (I have the Tamron G2 24-70 f2.8 and 17-35 f2.8-4 and they both work great on the Z7). I've been pleasantly surprised by how good the FTZ adapter is after having disappointing experiences with all of the Sony adapters (metabones, sigma mc-11, fotodiox, vello, LA-EA4, LA-EA3), as the FE>EF adapters were pretty buggy and not something I'd want to use on a paid shoot for fear of camera lockups.
I have both right now and I'm testing both out. I just like the feel of the Nikon better. I'm not concerned about single card. I find out of camera colors better with Nikon. I am not great at colors, so take that with a grain of salt. Focusing is a little slower, but with upcoming firmware I expect improvement. Nikon is clearly better put together IMHO.
ajamils wrote:
@Suteetat@,
Thank you for the detailed reply. I currently have a Sony A7riii kit and I never considered Z7 as I didn't think that it offered anything that A7rIII doesn't. In fact the lack of eye-AF in Z7 is a big drawback.
For someone who already have D850 + Nikon lenses then Z7 is an easy choice but if someone looking to make a move from another mirrorless FF, it might be a struggle. The reason why I started thinking about Z7 was because of better jpegs (yes I shoot jpegs for regular everyday pictures) and the ability to use more telephoto lenses but from the reviews I'm seeing online it does not look like Z7's C-AF or buffer is good enough for fast moving action.
Also, how do the back LCD and EVF compare between the two? There have been few reports about lag in EVF and weird exposure in LCD, where it does not correctly reflects what the output is. ...Show more →
In your case, at the very least, I would sit tight and wait until Nikon release its new fw that will add eye AF and see if there is any significant improvement in AF-C or not.
Generally, at the moment, I cannot really recommend Z7 to anybody who is starting from scratch over A7r iii (over here, A7r iii can cost a bit less than Z6 depending on special promotions regularly) and it does not really make sense for anyone to move from A7r iii to Z7 without significant amount of F mount lenses already. May be when Z mount lens line up is more extensive, it would be more competitive in this regard.
To me, it does not make a lot of senses to buy Z7 and buy a lot of F mount lenses to use, knowning that sooner or later,
Nikon most likely will produce all the lenses that you want in Z mount as well.
Better jpg might be the only reason for you to migrate to Z7 but I think only you can tell that whether you like it better than Sony enough for all the expenses. Which tele zoon are you thinking of? Sony 100-400 is fantastic and better than Nikon 80-400 in my opinion. No idea about 70-300 but Nikon definitely has the advantage with 300/4PF and 500/5.6PF.
200-500 is nice but I think Sony also has something similar in its upcoming new lenses according to some rumour source.
As typing, I have both A7r iii and Z7 next to my computer. LCD screen is very similar, may be a slight edge for Nikon but
not really significant, I think. However, the different in EVF is more noticeable. In fact, Z7, A7r iii and Fuji GFX 50s have some pretty much the same resolution in its EVF but GFX 50s is the worse by far, especially when you use focus magnifier.
Z7 is very very close to Leica SL which in my experience has the best looking EVF (never saw the new Pana though). A7r iii is slightly behind. However, in AF-S mode, A7r iii has almost no EVF black out where as Z7 will have more pronounced black out period before you can shoot the next shot.
PS opps, I just checked local website, looks like Nikon finally reduced price of Z6 down closer to A7 iii and now it is cheaper than A7r iii usually but no change in price of Z7 though, still 20-30% more expensive than A7r iii generally).
ajamils wrote:
Does anybody own both or have switched from Sony A7riii to Z7? If so, how is the experience especially in terms of AF?
From what I have gathered so far is that Z7 is definitely better in terms of ergonomics, but weather sealing and maybe in jpegs as well but AF is not in the same league as Sony especially C-AF. Is that really the case?
If ergonomics is the issue, get the Meike hand grip extension or the Sony first party one. It makes a huge difference to the A7R III ergonomics. I tried a Nikon Z7 at Best Buy and it does feel better in the hand by a noticeable amount vs. a Sony A7R III but the Meike grip closes that gap pretty much. It makes the larger lenses much more comfortable to use and I keep it on for primes as well. I only take it off to change batteries or if I need my A7R III to be the smallest size it can be, which is rare for me.
ajamils wrote:
G.A.S is definitely a big factor but I was just thinking if Z7 will give me similar IQ as A7rIII but better jpegs, better ergonomics and ability to adopt cheaper telephoto zooms with decent AF.
You have come to the correct conclusion.
I went from a D850 to a GFX-50s, back to the D850, to the A7RIII, and now Z7. suteetat has done a fantastic job describing the real world differences that reviews often seem to neglect and echo his comments.
I will add that I thought (and hesitated swapping for a while) the Z system not having Eye-Af would make me really miss the Sony; however, again in real-life use, the current-state technology gap really isn't that far off and Nikon has announced they'll be mitigating that gap around the corner. The Z system AF is quite accurate and also faster than I imagined even with the FTZ adapter. One such example is I've found that the AF speed with the 105E mounted on my Z7 is practically the same as the D850 in the scenarios I've used it in so far.
The Z7 addressed all the minor quirks I had with the A7RIII that drove me nuts and unequivocally have no regrets. Yes, the AF-C could be better and I'm certain it will be with future firmware updates but it's really nothing to be concerned about unless your main usage is sports/action.... in that field you shouldn't look at Nikon mirrorless anyway.
Nahhhh. Get the Sony A7r3 as it is head and shoulders better than the Nikon Z.
After all you will be daft not to trust the Pontificates lining up behind Sony such as the Northrumps - Lanier - Perry - the elephant guy....etc and all other "pay as you talk" lunch bunch.
I mean, who cares if the Nikon Z:
- Records video 4-2-2 10 bits Full Frame?
- Higher read/write speed with the XQD v SD UHCII which means faster buffer clearing for both video and stills.
- Better ergonomics
- Higher IQ
- Better weather sealing
- Better EVF
- getting rather tedious going through the all the "highers" and "betters" but then again, I have no Youtube video channel to push or paid workshops and do not make my money from click and bait.
Ohhh. the Nikon Z does not have Kelvin thingy. Told ya, get Sony.
I am kind of in the same boat. Just sold my A7R2, and have no native mount lenses on either mount. And since Novaflex now makes a CY>Z mount adapter, I am tempted by the Nikon. Native ISO 50, familiarity with Nikon and the faster card option and I am not worried about a single card.
I kept the Sony A7Rii for a few months and always felt that something wasn’t right, whether it be the ergonomics or the colors, the camera just wasn’t fun to use.
I bought the z7 and have been quite content with it. As others have said, the AF is good enough and the colors going from Sony mk ii are much better (mk iii to z7 may be less of a difference).
Just a thought: throw away any brand loyalty to Sony (i.e. don’t think about the innovations and strides they made jumping into Mirrorless tech) and decide if Nikon or Canon or even Fuji deserve your money.
omairster wrote:
I kept the Sony A7Rii for a few months and always felt that something wasn’t right, whether it be the ergonomics or the colors, the camera just wasn’t fun to use.
I bought the z7 and have been quite content with it. As others have said, the AF is good enough and the colors going from Sony mk ii are much better (mk iii to z7 may be less of a difference).
Just a thought: throw away any brand loyalty to Sony (i.e. don’t think about the innovations and strides they made jumping into Mirrorless tech) and decide if Nikon or Canon or even Fuji deserve your money. ...Show more →
I'm a big fan of what Fuji is doing, especially lately with the announcement of their 100mp MF sensor. Speaking as someone that loves my Nikon cams (and am very happy with my Z7) and glass, I'm excited by what Fuji is doing more as they're focused more on the experience of shooting, rather than making essentially glorified and very expensive point and shoots that automate everything to the nth degree. The real competition for me when I decided to go for the Z7 was my Fuji system (in particular because the XT3 and XH1 are so good and the glass is superb)
sungphoto wrote:
I'm a big fan of what Fuji is doing, especially lately with the announcement of their 100mp MF sensor. Speaking as someone that loves my Nikon cams (and am very happy with my Z7) and glass, I'm excited by what Fuji is doing more as they're focused more on the experience of shooting, rather than making essentially glorified and very expensive point and shoots that automate everything to the nth degree. The real competition for me when I decided to go for the Z7 was my Fuji system (in particular because the XT3 and XH1 are so good and the glass is superb)...Show more →
Sony and Fuji have been making a lot of good decisions in the last few years putting tremendous pressure on Nikon and Canon. In the end it's good for us regardless of which one we choose to buy.
RobCD wrote:
Sony and Fuji have been making a lot of good decisions in the last few years putting tremendous pressure on Nikon and Canon. In the end it's good for us regardless of which one we choose to buy.
Totally agree. I have to say though that after shooting with the 200-500 f5.6 a couple days in the "snowpocalypse" that's hit the pacific NW, I have newfound respect for the D850 from a ruggedness and weatherproofing standpoint (there was literally a small pool of water in my camera bag from accumulated moisture on the camera and lens once I got back home!), as well as how well the 3d tracking works with wildlife. I'm definitely a bit more careful with my mirrorless cams when it comes to adverse weather.
sungphoto wrote:
Totally agree. I have to say though that after shooting with the 200-500 f5.6 a couple days in the "snowpocalypse" that's hit the pacific NW, I have newfound respect for the D850 from a ruggedness and weatherproofing standpoint (there was literally a small pool of water in my camera bag from accumulated moisture on the camera and lens once I got back home!), as well as how well the 3d tracking works with wildlife. I'm definitely a bit more careful with my mirrorless cams when it comes to adverse weather.
Even if you don't want the D850 because of size or video or some other reason I think most people know that it's one of the best all around cameras ever made. If we didn't have mirrorless full frame cameras I would own the D850 for sure.
sungphoto wrote:
Totally agree. I have to say though that after shooting with the 200-500 f5.6 a couple days in the "snowpocalypse" that's hit the pacific NW, I have newfound respect for the D850 from a ruggedness and weatherproofing standpoint (there was literally a small pool of water in my camera bag from accumulated moisture on the camera and lens once I got back home!), as well as how well the 3d tracking works with wildlife. I'm definitely a bit more careful with my mirrorless cams when it comes to adverse weather.
Agreed! Every time I spend an afternoon at the beach, particularly with wind, sand and salt spray, I love having my D850 and longer lenses there. There will be a place for bullet proof DSLR's for quite some time when you need them
