I've been advised to look into the Z7 III as a travel camera since it's cheaper and lighter than the Z8.
If I go with a Nikon system, the two lenses that I want to use are the 14-30mm and the 28-400mm. This is a setup for travel and landscape photography.
With all the firmware upgrades since launch, how would you guys rate the Z7 II's AF when compared to the Z8? DPR's review states the following: "The tendency for Eye AF to slightly front-focus and the subject tracking's habit of focusing somewhere on the subject you selected, rather than tracking that precise point are the only real grumbles in terms of performance." Has this been addressed by Nikon over the years? DPR published its review back in May 2021. It's now August 2024. Is Eye AF reliable? Can I get accurate AF close to 100% of the time for slow or non-moving subjects?
I'm reading that RAW bit depth can drop down to 12-bit. What do I need to do to ensure that I always capture 14-bit RAW?
Can I shoot a seven-frame auto exposure bracket with a difference of 1 EV each? Will this always be in 14-bit RAW?
Is the Z7 II compatible with the Nikon ML-L7 Bluetooth Remote Control? Can I use the ML-L7 to wirelessly trigger the seven-frame auto exposure bracket?
Is ISO64 the sensor's native base ISO? Is this what will get me the best possible image quality and dynamic range for landscape photos?
What is the Z7 II's sensor read speed? How does it compare with the Z8?
What is the all-time lowest price you've seen at B&H? I'm currently seeing $2297.
The autofocus performance from the Z7II to Z8 is much improved because of the upgraded processor and faster readout from the sensor. Nikon took the software on the Z7/Z7II only so far.
Nothing is 100% except death, taxes, and u-tube whining.
While the 14-30 (which I have) and 28-400 (which I don't) are both well-regarded lenses for what they are (a relatively compact f4 wide angle zoom, and a relatively slow f4-f8 super, super zoom), neither are top tier glass. I mention this because you are talking about a high resolution sensor and maintaining bit depth and max DR. But it is the whole system that maximizes IQ. Why not look at the Z6III together with a couple of general purpose zooms and one or two primes to take advantage of the whole system?
glassartist wrote:
I''m sure others will chime in . . . but.
You mean 28-400. There is no 18-400.
The autofocus performance from the Z7II to Z8 is much improved because of the upgraded processor and faster readout from the sensor. Nikon took the software on the Z7/Z7II only so far.
Nothing is 100% except death, taxes, and u-tube whining.
While the 14-30 (which I have) and 28-400 (which I don't) are both well-regarded lenses for what they are (a relatively compact f4 wide angle zoom, and a relatively slow f4-f8 super, super zoom), neither are top tier glass. I mention this because you are talking about a high resolution sensor and maintaining bit depth and max DR. But it is the whole system that maximizes IQ. Why not look at the Z6III together with a couple of general purpose zooms and one or two primes to take advantage of the whole system?...Show more →
Sorry, it was a typo. I fixed the OP.
I want a higher-resolution sensor. Having said that, the Z6 III is definitely under consideration. I just got these questions to ask about the Z7 II. I want to understand this camera.
lsquare wrote:
I'm reading that RAW bit depth can drop down to 12-bit. What do I need to do to ensure that I always capture 14-bit RAW?
Shoot mechanical shutter, not electronic shutter.
lsquare wrote:
Can I shoot a seven-frame auto exposure bracket with a difference of 1 EV each? Will this always be in 14-bit RAW?
Yes but why would you? The Z7 has loads of DR at base ISO
lsquare wrote:
Is ISO64 the sensor's native base ISO? Is this what will get me the best possible image quality and dynamic range for landscape photos?
Yes. There is also a second gain step at ISO 400
lsquare wrote:
What is the Z7 II's sensor read speed? How does it compare with the Z8?
Let me google that for you... 1/16 for the Z7, 1/270 for the Z8
The comment that you want a higher-res camera than the Z6III is at odds with your choice of the 28-400mm lens. That lens is good for what it is, but it won't benefit a lot from the 45mp sensor over a 24mp one. For anything that's not landscape, the Z6III AF will be a big improvement over the Z7II.
fjablo wrote:
Shoot mechanical shutter, not electronic shutter.
Yes but why would you? The Z7 has loads of DR at base ISO
Yes. There is also a second gain step at ISO 400
Let me google that for you... 1/16 for the Z7, 1/270 for the Z8
The comment that you want a higher-res camera than the Z6III is at odds with your choice of the 28-400mm lens. That lens is good for what it is, but it won't benefit a lot from the 45mp sensor over a 24mp one. For anything that's not landscape, the Z6III AF will be a big improvement over the Z7II.
As far as I know, none of the Nikon mirrorless bodies drop to 12 bit mode in electronic shutter when shooting single shots. According to the Z7 II user manual, the camera will drop to 12-bit raw mode when shooting bursts faster than 5.5 fps (for both mechanical and electronic shutter), and at 4 fps or faster in electronic shutter mode (In continuous H). Interestingly H Extended it says it'll do 6.5fps in electronic shutter at 14-bit.
So shooting the Z7 II in silent shutter in single shot mode will still give you a 14 bit RAW file.
I don't believe it will automatically drop to 12 bit mode in burst rate either - those numbers are taken from the max burst rate settings, based on setting 12 bit or 14 bit mode in the RAW options - that is, you can get a faster burst rate if you CHOOSE to shoot in 12 bit RAW, but if you have RAW bit depth set to 14-bit, it will stay 14 bit no matter what shutter mode you are in.
thedruid wrote:
Yes one of the really frustrating things about the Z7 is the self timer issue, constant re-setting drove me nuts.
I don't have it anymore and someone can correct me here but I remember it resetting once the camera went into sleep mode, as well as shutting it off.
I've been told Fujifilm has fixed that problem, but the X-T2 has that problem. Disappointingly, Fujifilm never released a firmware update to fix it. It annoys the hell out of me, but I also got used to it.
Jman13 wrote:
As far as I know, none of the Nikon mirrorless bodies drop to 12 bit mode in electronic shutter when shooting single shots. According to the Z7 II user manual, the camera will drop to 12-bit raw mode when shooting bursts faster than 5.5 fps (for both mechanical and electronic shutter), and at 4 fps or faster in electronic shutter mode (In continuous H). Interestingly H Extended it says it'll do 6.5fps in electronic shutter at 14-bit.
So shooting the Z7 II in silent shutter in single shot mode will still give you a 14 bit RAW file.
If I shoot with the e-shutter, is the DR worse at ISO64 than shooting with EFCS?
My understanding is that using either the mechanical shutter or the EFCS at ISO64 will yield the same amount of DR. My intention is to use EFCS since I worry about potential shutter shock issues that have plagued m4/3 bodies, as that is where I have the most experience.
If I were to shoot a seven-frame auto exposure bracket, can I set the camera to continuous shooting and still get 14-bit RAWs, or I'll have to set it to a single shot?
I'm worried about the Eye AF issue as mentioned in DPR's review. I haven't seen anyone comment about it. Is it because Nikon never fully addressed it? Other than Eye AF, and I guess it mainly affects large apertures like f/1.4, and not f/11 or f/16, AF when shooting landscapes isn't an issue?
I guess the Nikon ML-L7 remote is fully compatible and can trigger a seven-frame auto exposure bracket wirelessly?
bcaslis wrote:
If you want a hi-res travel kit, I would use Z7 II, 14-30mm, and 24-120mm. This gets you the best IQ in this area unless you absolutely need 120-200.
I'm worried about the Eye AF issue as mentioned in DPR's review. I haven't seen anyone comment about it. Is it because Nikon never fully addressed it? Other than Eye AF, and I guess it mainly affects large apertures like f/1.4, and not f/11 or f/16, AF when shooting landscapes isn't an issue?
I don’t have the Z7ii any longer, I moved to the Z9 and didn’t look back. It’s an “issue” that has been overblown on forums, in particular by a certain member of FM, across multiple websites.
The Z7ii isn’t the camera to buy for great AF, though it IS serviceable. The Z8/Z9 will give you 90%+ keeper rate even with the “issue”. The lash thing is most visible in that 2.8-5.6 range where the DOF might not have the iris in focus if the lashes are. It’s a non issue by f8.
Again though, all of this is moot if we’re talking M or AF-S landscapes. The ZF is the camera you want for travel documentation from an AF perspective if the Z8 is too big to swallow. The Z8 and the Z9 are the no compromise solutions and the ZF is pretty close to them in regards to AF.
lsquare wrote:
Do you still have your Z7 II? It's pretty disappointing that Nikon never addressed this.
So basically Eye AF when shooting at f/8 or f/11 is unreliable?
Is there a difference between eye and face AF? If so, what is it?
If you are buying a travel camera, the Z7 II is great for the resolution and image quality. If you want the ultimate for Nikon in AF, Z8 or Z9. I have both Z7 II and Z8. I don't see all the concern here, put the Z7 II in single AF-S and you will get the shot every time. Especially if it is for landscape, the Z7 II would be my first choice among the Nikon cameras.
bcaslis wrote:
If you are buying a travel camera, the Z7 II is great for the resolution and image quality. If you want the ultimate for Nikon in AF, Z8 or Z9. I have both Z7 II and Z8. I don't see all the concern here, put the Z7 II in single AF-S and you will get the shot every time. Especially if it is for landscape, the Z7 II would be my first choice among the Nikon cameras.
lsquare wrote:
If I shoot with the e-shutter, is the DR worse at ISO64 than shooting with EFCS?
My understanding is that using either the mechanical shutter or the EFCS at ISO64 will yield the same amount of DR. My intention is to use EFCS since I worry about potential shutter shock issues that have plagued m4/3 bodies, as that is where I have the most experience.
If I were to shoot a seven-frame auto exposure bracket, can I set the camera to continuous shooting and still get 14-bit RAWs, or I'll have to set it to a single shot?
I'm worried about the Eye AF issue as mentioned in DPR's review. I haven't seen anyone comment about it. Is it because Nikon never fully addressed it? Other than Eye AF, and I guess it mainly affects large apertures like f/1.4, and not f/11 or f/16, AF when shooting landscapes isn't an issue?
I guess the Nikon ML-L7 remote is fully compatible and can trigger a seven-frame auto exposure bracket wirelessly?...Show more →
With the Z7 II, you don't need to worry about the shutter type with regards to dynamic range. That's what I'm saying...there is literally zero image quality penalty for using it on the Z7 II (or any Z camera to my knowledge). This can be an issue with Canon bodies and some Sony bodies too, but it isn't an issue with Nikon. Use full mechanical, use EFCS, use electronic...DR will be identical no matter what you choose. If you're worried about shutter shock, use silent mode. It will use the electronic shutter and you lose nothing and have no vibration issues.
Also, if using the mechanical shutter, just leave it set to Auto, which will use EFCS automatically when shooting at slower shutter speeds, and will switch to full mechanical when using fast shutter speeds, so you don't have funky cut-off bokeh with fast lenses.
The only reason to worry about using the mechanical shutter on the Z7 II is when shooting action, since the readout on the sensor is quite slow, so electronic shutter is not appropriate for shooting quickly moving subjects (high rolling shutter).
RoamingScott wrote:
I don’t have the Z7ii any longer, I moved to the Z9 and didn’t look back. It’s an “issue” that has been overblown on forums, in particular by a certain member of FM, across multiple websites.
The Z7ii isn’t the camera to buy for great AF, though it IS serviceable. The Z8/Z9 will give you 90%+ keeper rate even with the “issue”. The lash thing is most visible in that 2.8-5.6 range where the DOF might not have the iris in focus if the lashes are. It’s a non issue by f8.
Again though, all of this is moot if we’re talking M or AF-S landscapes. The ZF is the camera you want for travel documentation from an AF perspective if the Z8 is too big to swallow. The Z8 and the Z9 are the no compromise solutions and the ZF is pretty close to them in regards to AF.
I would like to move forward too, but the Z8 isn't quite perfect. If it was lighter and smaller, the decision would be easier. I also don't get why Nikon is still using the 10-pin connector and the ML-L7 isn't compatible with the Z8. Horrible decisions on Nikon's part.
For this setup's intended use, I don't necessarily need the Z8's AF. For portrait, casual group photos, and travel photos, the Z7 II's slower AF isn't an issue as long as it's accurate.
Given what you're saying, I guess I can be confident that for landscapes and cityscapes, AF won't be an issue, and I'll mostly be using a tripod in those situations.
For group photos, where I want as much to be in focus as possible, you're telling me eye/face AF isn't an issue for f/8 and f/11? Everything will be focused and sharp?
I'm not sure you know what you want. For travel or landscape get the Z7 II and be happy. It will be fine for group shots but honestly you can get those group shots without Eye AF. It seems you are really over thinking this.
It's not bleeding edge AF but unless you are a sport or wildlife photographer, it will be fine for 95% of any photos.
