I've searched the forum and don't see much on the Z50II. I've been ignoring the camera since I really wanted IBIS like the full frame bodies.
About a week ago, I noticed the new DX lenses (16-50 f2.8 and MC 35mm f1.7). I went to a local dealer and checked out the camera and lenses and did some more research. I bought the camera and 16-50mm yesterday and it really seems like a mini Z8 after I set it the same as my Z8. It seems like with the new lens you really can make a small carry around kit with it now that virtually performs like a Z8 (other than resolution). One day of photos around the house and tracking Christmas ornaments I'm really impressed!
Anyone else have experiences with the Z50II? It seems like anything except the beginner camera it is billed as once you set it up.
I had 2 of them, and its a very nice well rounded camera. With the new Expeed7 in it, its much snappier with far better AF vs Z50. And to top it off, the 10-bit video is a nice touch. The lack of IBIS is the one drawback. These new lenses are absolutely stellar and the camera is small and very capable.
I’m planning to upgrade from a Z50 and it seems very impressive. I only use it for travel when not driving and it’s been great to have good IQ and leave the larger full frame kit at home. I bought the Viltrox 25mm 1.7 to add as a 35-40ish walk around. Good IQ and dirt cheap.
Spectro wrote:
I’m planning to upgrade from a Z50 and it seems very impressive. I only use it for travel when not driving and it’s been great to have good IQ and leave the larger full frame kit at home. I bought the Viltrox 25mm 1.7 to add as a 35-40ish walk around. Good IQ and dirt cheap.
Oh yeah, and I forgot that there are some 3rd party lenses for them as well.
I had it briefly and the AF is a standout feature in it. People say its not a replacement for D500 and it probably is not but hot damn that's a fantastic camera. If I hadn't gotten the Z5 II (for its IBIS) the 50 II would have stayed. I have m43 gear too and that coupled with a full frame made more sense to me. If I ever feel like replacing my m43 with another crop sensor system, I would get the Z50 II without a second thought.
bcaslis wrote:
I've searched the forum and don't see much on the Z50II. I've been ignoring the camera since I really wanted IBIS like the full frame bodies.
About a week ago, I noticed the new DX lenses (16-50 f2.8 and MC 35mm f1.7). I went to a local dealer and checked out the camera and lenses and did some more research. I bought the camera and 16-50mm yesterday and it really seems like a mini Z8 after I set it the same as my Z8. It seems like with the new lens you really can make a small carry around kit with it now that virtually performs like a Z8 (other than resolution). One day of photos around the house and tracking Christmas ornaments I'm really impressed!
Anyone else have experiences with the Z50II? It seems like anything except the beginner camera it is billed as once you set it up. ...Show more →
I have been considering adding a Z50II to my line up as a compact always in my bag camera with nice AF.
I have used if off and on and I share the sentiment expressed so far. I also think that the AF is a tad better then Z6III though that may be situation dependent.
However lack of ibis, but more importantly joystick, prevents me from keeping the camera long term.
I photograph events, portraits and several century bike rides a year. I went to Nikon mirrorless in 2020 for events and upgraded to Z5 II but kept D500, 24-120 f4 VR, 70-200 f4 VR for several years for bike rides. The first gen mirrorless bodies were not good enough on AF for bike riders but the Z50 was nice for travel.
When Z50 II came out I sold the Z50, added the DX 18-140 and 24-200 from my mirrorless kit and sold the DSLR kit. The Z50 II is as good or better to acquire AF and maintain tracking and is certainly appreciated at the day's end. I also added a Nikon Z7 II, DX 12-28, Sigma 30mm f1/4 and 56mm f/1.4 to add stabilization and occasional low light and wide angle needs. The new Nikon 16-50 f/2.8 DX is tempting but I will wait a while.
After a couple of days of playing, I'm really struck by how good the Z50 II and the new DX lenses are for casual snaps around the house for the holidays. The 16-50mm f2.8 and 35mm f1.7 paired with the small body and built-in flash just makes this the most fun camera I've ever used for casual snaps. Anyone for some ornament fun?
I keep thinking about getting a DX Z camera, but the lack of IBIS bugs me. I like to shoot primes and most that aren't telephotos lack VR/OIS, which would make it a sub-par experience compared to all the full frame Z bodies.
ISO1600 wrote:
I keep thinking about getting a DX Z camera, but the lack of IBIS bugs me. I like to shoot primes and most that aren't telephotos lack VR/OIS, which would make it a sub-par experience compared to all the full frame Z bodies.
People shot with no ibis for 100 years and somehow made great images.
ISO1600 wrote:
I keep thinking about getting a DX Z camera, but the lack of IBIS bugs me. I like to shoot primes and most that aren't telephotos lack VR/OIS, which would make it a sub-par experience compared to all the full frame Z bodies.
In a market that has Canon's R7, it surprised me that Z50II was released without IBIS. Nikon works in mysterious ways, sometimes.
If resolution matters, and you don't mind Expeed 6, a (used) Z7/Z7II could be a good do everything DX/FX substitute. I occasionally deploy a Z5 instead of a Z50 for DX duties when I think IBIS could be beneficial. For every other prime use case, I see all pluses with a Z50II.
I currently have a ZF, and really enjoy it. A used ZFc is a logical choice, but a Z30 is a cheap opportunity to get a second body, and something my son would probably enjoy using as well.
Z5 are dirt cheap for what they bring to the table.
There's a lot of good options in the Z family.
I came over from a R7, and it's frustrating how economically the R7 and RF zooms covered travel and nature so well... Compared to Nikon. I really enjoy the Nikon system, but most of the lenses are far more expensive and/or larger than the Canon equivalents.
SiMuMe wrote:
In a market that has Canon's R7, it surprised me that Z50II was released without IBIS. Nikon works in mysterious ways, sometimes.
If resolution matters, and you don't mind Expeed 6, a (used) Z7/Z7II could be a good do everything DX/FX substitute. I occasionally deploy a Z5 instead of a Z50 for DX duties when I think IBIS could be beneficial. For every other prime use case, I see all pluses with a Z50II.
I currently have a Z50II, a Z8 and a Z7II converted to full spectrum IR.
It would be nice if the Z50II had:
- IBIS
- built in GPS
- a MC-DC2 port
My longish DX zooms have VR, so the first of the above is not a huge problem. With a fast prime or short zoom plus Auto ISO, lack of IBIS is not an issue for me.
Why Nikon can't put GPS is all camera bodies is a mystery to me. Every smartphone has it. Yes, I know you can use Snapbridge, but I find it is not very accurate and requires a cellular connection. Plus it drains your camera and phone battery quicker.
The MC-DC3 port is pretty useless, except for the lone Nikon corded remote. An MC-DC2 port opens up a nice variety of accessories, including cordless remotes, remote flashing control and external GPS.
They also need a better selection of AF DX lenses. Nikon isn't doing it, Viltrox is pretty good but only primes and nothing very long, and it would be nice if Sigma were allowed to make Z versions of its mirrorless lenses (although the Megadap ETZ adapter is a good option).
All that said, if I had to get rid of all but one camera and lenses, I would keep the Z50II. The image quality is excellent, the feature set is good and the size and weight are the best for travel.
ISO1600 wrote:
I keep thinking about getting a DX Z camera, but the lack of IBIS bugs me. I like to shoot primes and most that aren't telephotos lack VR/OIS, which would make it a sub-par experience compared to all the full frame Z bodies.
The DX zooms have VR, including the new 16-50mm f2.8. This lens is really great, it moved me from not considering the Z50 II to buying it.
ISO1600 wrote:
Well yeah, but I have IBIS now and I don't want a camera without it lol
How often do you actually use it though? I've been shooting professionally for more than 15 years and IBIS has never been a decision factor for me. For critical sharpness, I'm always 2x my focal length so camera shake is a non-issue. Stopping motion requires more shutter speed. Anything less has intentional camera movement, or a tripod.
I utilize IBIS only for personal travel during twilight and even then, I made due without it for 12 years and still came home with keepers worthy of commercial sales and large printing.
Talking about IBIS in an entry-level camera is silly, especially when Nikon left it out to cost of entry down. The Z50ii offers so much bang for your buck. I just wish Nikon would release a D500 replacement that is larger and can use a vertical grip.
StanOPhoto wrote:
How often do you actually use it though? I've been shooting professionally for more than 15 years and IBIS has never been a decision factor for me. For critical sharpness, I'm always 2x my focal length so camera shake is a non-issue. Stopping motion requires more shutter speed. Anything less has intentional camera movement, or a tripod.
I utilize IBIS only for personal travel during twilight and even then, I made due without it for 12 years and still came home with keepers worthy of commercial sales and large printing.
With this kind of reasoning, VR is useless too...
I shot for decades with Velvia 50 and Provia 100 without IBIS or VR, bringing home shots that I sold anyway. So I shouldn't use more than ISO 100.
And there are photographers who didn't even have AF in the past... yet they took excellent photos. So what?
You say you're a professional photographer and that a tripod is better for certain photos. Sure. For serious macro and landscape work, I always use a tripod. But then you say that IBIS isn't really necessary in an entry-level camera? So you're saying that anyone who buys an entry-level camera should always travel with a tripod instead of using IBIS? Not all amateurs want to carry a tripod with them; and if you're a professional photographer, you know that there are situations where you can't use a tripod unless you have specific permission.
StanOPhoto wrote:
Talking about IBIS in an entry-level camera is silly, especially when Nikon left it out to cost of entry down. The Z50ii offers so much bang for your buck. I just wish Nikon would release a D500 replacement that is larger and can use a vertical grip.
Z50II is NOT the cheapest DX MILC. It's the most expensive one, actually (more expensive than Z30, Z50 and Zfc). And IBIS doesn't cost so much.
