To Z7, or not to Z7, or Sony?

Who knows what the following weeks or months will bring? But chances are that camera prices now are probably at their most competitive for some time. Seems like a buyer's market to me, and with my D800 falling apart on me, I'm seriously considering a new full-frame body. And preferably a mirrorless one.

 

My experience with Nikon over the last few years has been increasingly negative, which makes me reluctant to choose a Z7. OTOH, the Z-mount adapter is attractive, since I won't have to replace or cripple my F-mount lens collection. That, as I see it, is the only positive, and if glassware and money was no object, the Z7 wouldn't get a millisecond of thought.

 

The price and specification of a Sony a7Riii is looking very attractive right now.

 

So. Does Nikon or Sony get my money? Thoughts please.

I've mostly heard horror stories about the Sony user interface - slightly less bad with each generation. On the other hand, I believe they like to be a bit more configurable than Nikon, which is one of my complaints. I got on okay with my RX100 (other than I believe it's current reluctance to charge). I'd suggest going to a shop and trying it, but perhaps under the circumstances downloading the manuals would be wiser? I always do that before a big purchase anyway. Some of it's subjective. One reason for my switch to Nikon was that the "index finger on the shutter, middle finger on the dial" approach made more sense to me (when Nikon don't mess it up with top-plate buttons) than Canon's version, but it's only a preference.

 

The A7Riv allegedly has slightly better autofocus and some other tweaks compared with the A7Riii, but you pay for it. I'd just be repeating some online articles when it came to the absolute image quality. I want to say that ISO64 is a Nikon thing, but I could be wrong. Sony do well in high ISO tests, but there are reports that this might be party raw cooking, so check with a more authoritative source than me.

 

Nikon were very proud of their viewfinder, so I assume it might be an improvement over Sony's? They're also still iterating the firmware, and I'm not sure how much Sony are. Sony have the 135 f/1.8; Nikon have their new 70-200 (eventually) and fast 50mm; Canon have their 85mm - take your choice with the proprietary exotics. I'd kind of expect the third parties to target everything - Sony has a big installed base, and if you can support that, you can support the other two.

 

I'm still happy with my D850 (give or take the big improvement request list and a bit of envy over eye focus). If I were after mirrorless at this point, I'm not 100% sure that Nikon would keep me as a customer - a fair bit of my lens collection is third-party anyway. There are a few exotics that I'd still lust after if I eventually pay off credit cards and get a big corporate bonus (500mm PF, 19mm TS, one/some of the bit superteles), but they're not tied to the Z. If I wanted to switch, I'm not sure my Nikkor 14-24, 70-200 or 200-500 are respectively much better (and may be worse) than the Sigma equivalents. Not that I really have any reason to complain about any of them.

 

Is it worth throwing the GFX100 into the mix? In the other direction, were I starting from scratch, I might wonder whether full frame is still needed - especially in mirrorless where speed boosters are viable. Fuji built quite an extensive range while the others were worrying about full frame.

I have a Sony A7Riii as my go-to camera. I moved up from the A7Rii mostly for the larger battery. My second is a Sony A9, which is better in low light and much quicker for action. Most recently I added an A7iii to my collection, which I use strictly for video. While I have the usual set of zooms - 16-35/4, 24-70/2.8 and 70-200/4, I increasingly use prime lenses for landscapes and general photography. I retired my Nikon D3 in 2014, and decided to take a new direction.

 

Your existing lenses will work just as well on the Sony as on the Z7. There are many adapters, some of which will give you dial control over the aperture and auto-focus with AFS lenses. Sony has a much wider choice of native lenses than Nikon, in part because they teamed up with Zeiss early in the game. Eventually you will find that native lenses perform better than legacy lenses in every respect. The fact that you can use legacy lenses means you don't have to jump in the deep end. You have time to sort things out.

 

Sony and Nikon have sets of features which may meet some of your needs better than others. Only you can make that decision. The Nikon is cleaner, somewhat more rugged and has very nice ergonomics. The feature I like least on the Sony is the ease at which the exposure compensation dial can be changed accidentally. Other than that, it feels as solid as the Leica M2 I used for 40 years, and nearly the same size and weight. The viewfinders are the same, 3.7 MP, almost window clarity. Nikon has the edge in video, with 10-bit files v 8-bit for the Sony. That said, I use it alongside a Sony FS5 cinematic camera (12 bit), and the results are nearly indistinguishable.

If your Nikkor glass collection is mostly common AiS lenses like mine, say 20-200 mm, you'll find they don't buy you anything much compared to the S-series zoom. Sure, they're faster, but high ISO performance is so good these days I don't think it matters for most situations. If you have lenses with the electronic interface or expensive long lenses, they'll be more useful. OTOH, they'll work with the Sony too. I'm thrilled with my Z6 as the Z7 file sizes are overkill for anything I ever do. The video quality is superb. That said, I have one major complaint. The XQD card slot on my Z6 is finicky and the cards tend to jam a bit on removal. I actually sent the thing back for the problem, hoping they'd change out the board and connector, but I'm not sure they did anything at all. It's a major tear-down to do that. I haven't had a chance to try more cards, but I'm pretty sure it's the connector that's at fault. IMO, you need to try both cameras because it's a hard decision. I'd also consider where you think both companies might be a couple years from now. Any high end camera like these eventually becomes a doorstop if factory support is unavailable.

I have used top end Nikon cameras for fifty years, not that I am a top photographer. I still have a fine collection of Nikon primes and use them on my D4. I bought in to the Z system with the intention of using my f mount lenses with an adaptor. Then I succumbed to an attractive offer on the new 50 1.8. Oh boy! A 14-30 f4 followed and now I never use my adapted lenses. On my very limited experience I believe that Z lenses are at another level. Having owned a Sony A7 I would say that the Z lenses show the advantage of youth, (the honest stupid truth is that I didn't like Sony stuff much, Nikon gear feels right)). I never thought I would write something like this but I am blown away by the quality. That said I am taking my D4 to my Viking funeral pyre.

 

So. Does Nikon or Sony get my money? Thoughts please.

 

Hmm... I'm not digitally

inclined. All my money

is spent on bananas...

http://bayouline.com/o2.gif

My experience with Nikon over the last few years has been increasingly negative, which makes me reluctant to choose a Z7.

Since 2016, I have bought four different Nikon bodies: D5, D500, Z6, and D850. Each one of them has been working perfectly so far. One thing in common among those bodies is the XQD card, which I am extremely happy with, but I am aware that not everybody shares my preference for XQD cards.

 

Obviously I have a Z6 instead of Z7, but so far after a year and half, I am very happy with it. Personally I think the Z6 is too small, as I prefer a larger body. And having only one memory card slot is a bit of negative, but so far I have never had any XQD card failure yet. If it weren't COVID-19, I would say wait a few months until Nikon introduces a new generation of Z6 and Z7 bodies. However, given the current situation and an obvious deep recession world wide, I wonder Nikon's release plan will be pushed back. Life is short. Sometimes it is not worthwhile to wait for the next great product.

 

Sony has a longer history of mirrorless cameras, at least for FX. Hence they have more lenses and third-party lenses available. I don't have much experience with them, but Sony cameras tend to be even smaller. Moreover, Sony's FE mount was originally designed for APS-C bodies. While they manage to squeeze FX lenses into it, I think the Nikon Z mount designed from the ground up for DX is a better design.

No technical/scientific analysis from me as both cameras are good, along with inevitable pros and cons that are mostly trivial stuff in the big picture. But with your deep Nikon experience, I'd stick with Nikon.

Rodeo_Joe, if you put a good selection of photographs on your gallery page it might help influence people's responses and opinions. If I were spending your money, I'd wait until the A7 Mark II goes back on sale (under 1K with a zoom) and see how you like the shape, feel and menus.

Buy the Sony because don't let the lenses hold you back. Personally I don't like the Sony.

Buy the Sony ... Personally I don't like the Sony.

o_O

o_O

Joe said the Sony is better but he considered the Z7 only because he can use his Nikon F lenses. For that I say go for the Sony. Otherwise I don't like the Sony.

I’d take a Z over a Sony in a heartbeat. The user interface is just much more relatable for somebody with Nikon experience, and the FTZ adapter beats any Nikon to Sony adapter situation. I have an A7 and I hate it. Hate isn’t strong enough. I loathe it. The menus are impenetrable. It seems like it should be great for old lenses on adapters, but the zoom to focus takes too many button presses and the thick sensor glass makes many lenses crap.

But with your deep Nikon experience, I'd stick with Nikon.

Unfortunately, my deep Nikon experience includes a D800 that had to be immediately returned with way-off autofocus, and a D7200 that needed a new shutter within 3 months, and also had a terrible autofocus error that couldn't be 'fine' tuned out over the zoom range of its kit lens. My D800 developed a floppy 'joystick' switch a couple of years ago, and recently dislodged its 10 pin socket with only a slight push. Its autofocus accuracy also varies from lens to lens and is generally unreliable unless I use LiveView. So much for Nikon's reputation for high build quality! It's not as if my cameras get heavy professional use these days either.

 

The need to use LiveView for accurate focus leads me to think that a MILC is definitely the way forward. I could care less about EVF resolution, as long as it shows me what the composition is going to look like, and it doesn't look as if the subject is made out of Lego bricks. I hardly ever shoot video either and I'd rather not be reliant on XQD cards that (for my use) just don't warrant their cost.

 

The Sony UI isn't entirely unfamiliar to me - I have an a6000 and a NEX 6. I like the a6000 despite its heavy menu reliance, and some features are actually easier to access than on a Nikon DSLR.

 

The mount size is a non issue IMO, since Sony/Zeiss seem to be turning out astoundingly good (but expensive) lenses, and at a higher rate than Nikon's snail pace. The throat diameter really doesn't have much of a bearing, since neither Sony nor Nikon appear to have any tilt-shift lenses in the pipeline.

 

I guess I've now listed for myself all of my reasons not to buy Nikon. And hearing that Nikon AF-s lenses can be used on a Sony a7riii with a 3rd party adapter leans me further in Sony's direction.

 

I'll download the Z7 and a7riii manuals.

 

Now, do I have the spare time to read them? Mmmm, my social calendar appears to be a bit empty at the moment.... for some reason.

Rodeo, you seem to have a disproportionate share of bad luck with Nikon. You do what suits you. Get the Sony, try it out, and you can always swap back in the future if you want to.

 

I have been co-using Olympus E-M1 followed by EM-1 II with their pro lenses for a few years. Not bad, not much complaint except for the menu and silly Auto-ISO limit of 6400 but, for some reason, I have been reaching out for Nikon Z now when I want to shoot something. There's something charming about it.

Edited April 20, 2020 by Mary Doo

The D800 was launched eight years ago and was one of the cameras launched in the aftermath of the 2011 earthquake, tsunami and flooding - I wasn't sure Nikon would be able to produce anything at all in 2012, let alone something that worked. So its autofocus issues came to no surprise to me. The 2014 D810 was much, much better, and I could quickly forgive Nikon for a problem that likely resulted from the chaos of much of their infrastructure being destroyed 2011. I think you could easily get a lightly used D810 on the cheap and might find yourself quite happy with it. The D850 is of course excellent but might not be easy to find cheaply. And the D810 has a pleasing sound, wheras the D850 is designed for higher speed and makes a louder sound.

 

If you want a mirrorless camera then you have to make a choice of which brand to go with, as you note. I like the Z6 and Z7 from what little experience I have with them (very pleasing ergonomics and for an EVF, a good viewfinder) but I don't want to use an adapter and the Z lens lineup isn't broad enough for me to get into. I use short and medium telephoto lenses a lot and there are currently no native lenses available longer than the 85mm. I find the Z7/Z6 sound very pleasing and since I miss the soft sound of the D810, I am attracted by these cameras for situations where quietness is important.

 

I don't like the Sony cameras in terms of their shape or handling (they are all too small for my hands and I find the gap between grip and lens to be too narrow), or their viewfinders. I also have bad experiences with their attitude to service and owning up to obvious problems. But this could be a regional issue, or an isolated bad experience. If I were to switch away from Nikon, I would consider Hasselblad, Canon and Fuji, but not so much Sony. I know a lot of people love Sony's technology, but to me ergonomics and the viewfinder experience are more important. I think Nikon will catch up with the technology side over a few years of time, and most of the lenses that most people need will probably be launched within a few years. However, I am likely to stay with Nikon DSLRs. I like the lenses I have and the FX DSLR viewfinder. Which incidentally has improved a lot in clarity and evenness of illumination from the D800. The D850 has a magnificient viewfinder.

Back in 2012, I had a D800 on loan from Nikon USA for several months, and I ended up getting a D800E myself. Neither camera had any issues. In 2014 I bought a D750, and that body had a defective GPS connection, which Nikon USA fixed under warranty. Later on a D810 test sample developed electronic issues after 3, 4 days. Nikon sent me a replacement that was perfect. I also had D7100's and a D7200 without any issue. I have dealt with a lot of Nikon bodies in the last 15 years or so, and I wouldn't say their quality has dropped at all.

 

If you go the Sony route, I would avoid the first two generations of their A7 FX bodies. They are now on fire sale for a reason. Sony finally started getting things right in their third generation.

Maybe I have had some 'bad luck' with Nikon, but Nikon UK's attitude just stinks. It seems that they just don't take complaints seriously, and will sit on a returned item until the customer decides to put up with a minor issue, rather than be without the lens or camera for weeks on end while being 'examined' and finally declared 'within spec.'. I have never had a swift turnaround from Nikon UK, not since I first started using Nikon gear in 1975 or thereabouts. But it does seem to have got a lot worse in the last 20 years. Then again, I rarely had cause to complain about Nikon gear until I bought a D700 shortly after it was introduced. The metering on that camera was less consistent than any TTL metered camera I'd previously owned. So bad it got me into the bad habit of 'chimping' nearly every shot.

 

Again it was only a legacy of glassware and accessories that kept me coming back to Nikon with the D800. Now I'm just getting sick of putting up with inferior AF, stupid design or manufacturing faults that just get corporately denied, or only slowly addressed and my (apparently) unique run of 'bad luck'.

I wouldn't have thought location mattered, but it seems to be a major consideration. My experience with Nikon repair was very good. Everything was tracked and updated and service was reasonably fast. Not true now, of course, since service is shut down completely.

I wouldn't have thought location mattered, but it seems to be a major consideration. My experience with Nikon repair was very good. Everything was tracked and updated and service was reasonably fast. Not true now, of course, since service is shut down completely.

America seems to have a very service-centred and 'the customer is king' attitude. The UK, OTOH, has at best half-arsed customer service from large corporations, and, at worst, a 'screw you' attitude.

 

There are exceptions of course, but they're mainly small businesses that can't afford to lose customers.

B&H just put all their Sonys on sale.

A few years ago, Roger Cicala of Lensrentals posted that Sony USA was charging $135 just to evaluate equipment sent for repair whether they did a repair or not. The true cost of ownership of any equipment be it photographic equipment, automobiles, boats, etc. must include the costs of maintenance. You might wish to check what Sony UK charges to avoid any nasty surprises.

B&H just put all their Sonys on sale.

 

With this lockdown, unemployment, and travel restrictions, I suspect we will see many sales this year. There is no rush.

Nikon was on the verge of closing all of their independent repair shops before the world stopped turning. It sounds like they have customer service in mind ;)

 

Sony has an exchange service if you qualify and are willing to pay for it. For me, having a functional backup for everything is SOP, even if it's not necessarily the same model.

I used to build Sony components into computers ... and never had a successful outcome dealing with warranty support. My business partner banned me from even considering a Sony for a camera even though the small size and features were attractive.

 

When a tried a Nikon Z7 in the store, it fit my hand and muscle memory on where controls were placed. The menus were familiar. I chose the Z6 to have the bucks for the 14-30. I'm very happy with the kit. Oh, the only problem I had was with my first XQD card that eventually would not read on the USB card reader - guess which brand.