Taperwing wrote:
Curiouis, the Z7II at $1440 is $360 LESS expensive than the Z7I at $1800. Both are listed as refurbs, or am I missing something?
Probably has to do with inventory. They probably have a lot of Z7ii bodies in stock that they need to move, even if they aren't technically "refurbished" this gives them an avenue to reduce inventory at a price that's still profitable without eroding their dealers' pricing for new models.
I am on the fence to buy a Z5II but I see most online images taken by Z5II seem flat and low on contrast. The images produced by ZF seems to have higher contrast and better colors SOOC.
Just best to read through the list if you are looking for something. A couple years ago I bought a D780 with 24-120 for $1500. At the same time they were offering the D780, body only, for $1600.
raeyanraju wrote:
I am on the fence to buy a Z5II but I see most online images taken by Z5II seem flat and low on contrast. The images produced by ZF seems to have higher contrast and better colors SOOC.
Can anyone share their experience?
I've owned the zf on a few different occasion and now the z5ii and can't say I see a difference.
raeyanraju wrote:
I am on the fence to buy a Z5II but I see most online images taken by Z5II seem flat and low on contrast. The images produced by ZF seems to have higher contrast and better colors SOOC.
Can anyone share their experience?
I don't have either, but both cameras can use Nikons Picture Control recipes that can be downloaded into the camera to achieve the SOOC look that you want. You can use Nikon Imaging Cloud to view their curated Cloud Picture Controls and download them onto your camera. You can also create your own from scratch if you want. The Z5ii has a dedicated Picture Control button to switch between the various recipes on your camera.
raeyanraju wrote:
I am on the fence to buy a Z5II but I see most online images taken by Z5II seem flat and low on contrast. The images produced by ZF seems to have higher contrast and better colors SOOC.
Can anyone share their experience?
There's zero difference between the internals of the two.
My anecdotal guess is the difference of the cameras in regards to how they are marketed. The Z5ii is sort of "baby's first full frame" and an "entry" level camera, while many Zf shooters I know use it as a second body to their more capable, larger Z cameras and they are simply more experienced photographers in general.
You're likely just seeing more amateur shots from the camera that is more marketed towards amateurs.
The pricing does baffle me sometimes. They are just completely unanchored to the market for some of the items. No one is gonna buy a $1700 Z7. Some of those old F mount lens prices are close to retail from a long time ago. The last few sales have been pretty Meh and the deals that were available before seem fewer and farther between.
RoamingScott wrote:
There's zero difference between the internals of the two.
My anecdotal guess is the difference of the cameras in regards to how they are marketed. The Z5ii is sort of "baby's first full frame" and an "entry" level camera, while many Zf shooters I know use it as a second body to their more capable, larger Z cameras and they are simply more experienced photographers in general.
You're likely just seeing more amateur shots from the camera that is more marketed towards amateurs.
I am currently shooting with the Z5 II and I owned the Zf for over a year. Image quality is identical.
I also think 'baby's first full frame' is massively condescending for both the camera and the users of it. While it is Nikon's 'entry' point in the full frame market at this point, it is so capable that calling it an entry level camera belies its capabilities. It replaced my Z6 III (which in turn replaced my Z8).
Jman13 wrote:
I am currently shooting with the Z5 II and I owned the Zf for over a year. Image quality is identical.
I also think 'baby's first full frame' is massively condescending for both the camera and the users of it. While it is Nikon's 'entry' point in the full frame market at this point, it is so capable that calling it an entry level camera belies its capabilities. It replaced my Z6 III (which in turn replaced my Z8).
I said in terms of marketing. I pay very close attention to what Nikon posts and how they market their products.
Nikon completely undersells the Z5ii which I have always found strange. I am personally well aware of what it is and what it can do and have posted to that end many many times here and otherwise.
jiannazzone wrote:
Thinking about a Z50 or Z50II kit for travel. The Z50 kit is less than the body alone.
Get the X50ii - I had a Z50 for a couple of years and enjoyed it but the superior AF of the ii is a revelation. It feels like a completely different camera. I was disappointed when the 50ii was announced and didn’t have IBIS and then I read Thom Hogan’s review and realized thet the AF improvement was much more significant. I can use my Z7 when I need IBIS or 47mp but the rest of the time I gravitate to my Z 50ii.
Jman13 wrote:
I am currently shooting with the Z5 II and I owned the Zf for over a year. Image quality is identical.
I also think 'baby's first full frame' is massively condescending for both the camera and the users of it. While it is Nikon's 'entry' point in the full frame market at this point, it is so capable that calling it an entry level camera belies its capabilities. It replaced my Z6 III (which in turn replaced my Z8).
I'm ok with Scott calling me baby, but he needs to at least pay for dinner...
I also agree on how the Z5II is marketed- look at any of their material, they do NOT push it as a serious and capable camera. All the selling points are basically stepping up from a crop camera, or your first serious camera.
We all know it's one of the best cameras in the segment, if not the best. An incredible value. Nikon doesn't want people buying it instead of a Z6III or Z8.
