Convince me not to, that I have it figured out correctly.
All my lenses are MF, F-mount, and I can legally post here every picture I take. It's been fun and educational and I've made some new e-friends.
Lately I've been reading about how good the auto-focus is on the Z5ii, fast, accurate, good at tracking a designated target, especially compared to the Z5. It tempts me for what I'm missing, to taste the forbidden fruit. One such temptation is the Z-mount 24-200mm f/4-6.3 VR, not terribly expensive, with decent reviews.
I'm certain I miss pics while focusing or changing aperture for focus' sake before resetting it for DOF or other reasons. AF would let me get some of those. A Z-mount lens would let me use shutter-priority and full-aperture focusing. And it might as well be a zoom, since that would be more versatile than a prime.
But rational thought keeps stopping me. The Z5ii has made me lazy about considering exposure and AF would make me lazy about everything! Plus there are decision I can't make. Focal length, for example. I already have primes 28 to 300mm. Something longer would seem a logical next purchase (not that really need 400+ at all) but unless it's a zoom over the range I have now it wouldn't solve the lost pics now. With an AF zoom I might never use the current primes at all. Then there's the cost. Oh yeah, there is that (though that 24-200 isn't too bad).
So it's a temptation that I can't justify. Does all that make sense?
Cheers!