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.
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.
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.
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 actually cost a bit less than Z6) 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.
Feb 07, 2019 at 06:20 PM
Previous versions of suteetat's message #14749678 « Sony A7riii (A7r3) vs Z7 »
