Buying advice Moving to FF

[Morexp57]

Hello photographer friends,
For a few weeks now, I've been wanting to change my equipment and move to a hybrid and FF camera. I am a happy owner of a Nikon D7500 since 2017.
But I hesitate on which camera to choose. I've had Nikon equipment for years and I don't want to change brand. So I'm hesitating between the Z6 II and the Z7 II. There is a price difference, of course. The Z6 II is almost 1000 francs (about £800) cheaper than the Z7 II. But I can afford the difference (after all, we only live once...).
As for lenses, I'm thinking of the Nikkor Z 14-30mm f/4 S and the Nikkor Z 24-200mm f/4-6.3 VR.

What makes me hesitate are some differences in the specifications of the cameras such as:

Sensor pixel count:
Z6 II 24.5M versus 45.7M for the Z7 II.
As I like to have the possibility to crop my pictures, having more pixels is more comfortable. However, as I will probably never print in very large format, 24.5 M pixels are enough.
Also, I've heard that it's harder to master 45 million pixels than 24 million (higher risk of blurring). You also have to think that the files from a 45 Mpixel sensor are bigger, of course. So I would have to allow for storage space as well. And will my computer be able to handle files of this size easily during editing?

The sensitivity range:
ISO 100 to 51200 for the Z6 II and ISO 64 to 25600 for the Z7 II.
I don't need to go very high in sensitivity so I prefer the possibility to shoot at ISO 64 of the Z7 II.

The Z6II is better for videos, but as I don't do videos I don't care.
The Z6 II is faster in frame rate (up to 14/s for the Z6 II vs. 10/s for the Z7 II), but I rarely use this feature so I don't care either.

So, in theory, the Z6 II would be more suitable for me (and cheaper) but I'm afraid I'll miss the cropping possibilities and ISO 64 shots of the Z7 II...

So what do I choose between equipment that is sufficiently high end for my current needs and to please myself and not regret it later...

Do you have anything to say about this? Any personal experiences on this kind of choice?

 

[Jack]

Hello Morexp57 , I'm not a Nikon user, however I believe this applies to all brands.

Are you considering brand new ff camera or second hand? Also what lenses do you own at the moment? Would they will work with a ff camera or no, or you will need an adapter?

What's your expectation with a full frame?

I'm thinking about full frame too, but I believe lenses are more important than the camera body.

 

[Andy Smith]

I recently opted for the Canon R5, but was thinking of hanging on for the R3 instead.
The reason I chose the R5 was for the higher pixel count and I am so glad I made the choice to move to the larger size. It has been incredible for me to notice the improved detail in my images especially close up work, or when cropped. I would go for the Z7 II for this reason, although it has slowed down my post processing due to file size. Especially when stacking a hundred macro images. I have never had any challenges with blurring or mastering a higher pixel count.
The ability to shoot at 64 ISO over 100 ISO does not make much difference, I like the option of a lower ISO, but I don't think I have ever gone above 25,000 especially with the new camera as they are extremely good and very sensitive to light anyway. I shot for years with ISO 100 as my lowest option and never had any problems, it still is my base setting for most of my images.
Video is not something I do either so not really a factor for the camera I would choose.
A faster frame rate is something I like though, as shooting fast bursts has been a revelation to me, but to be honest I wouldn't see a vast difference between 10fps and 14fps so even on that one between the cameras.
I believe the Z7 has more autofocus points, (Z6 has 273 v Z7 at 493) and from my experience the more the better, which would make me lean towards the Z7 slightly.

To be honest though Morexp57, apart from the resolution I don't see much difference in the cameras except the Z6 is slightly faster and the Z7 has more focus points.
So your choice really boils down to just pixel count. I would opt for the Z7 for this reason alone personally but the cost saving of 1000 Francs would go well towards the new lenses you want.
Tough choice for you I am sure and I am not sure I have helped here at all.

 

[Morexp57]

Are you considering brand new ff camera or second hand?

A brand new, I am a bit wary of second hand.

Also what lenses do you own at the moment? Would they will work with a ff camera or no, or you will need an adapter?

I have 3 lenses at the moment. An 18 mm - 300 mm, a 10 mm - 20 mm and a 35 mm. They can be used on a full frame camera with an adapter, but they are DX lenses, which means that the camera automatically switches to DX mode and is no longer FF. As they are not high quality lenses, I will not keep them.

What's your expectation with a full frame?

A better quality of my images, more details.

I'm thinking about full frame too, but I believe lenses are more important than the camera body.

Yes, you are probably right. From what I've read, the lenses I'm going to buy, even if they're not the highest quality possible (now that's getting really expensive...) are excellent with the Z6 II or Z7 II.

 

[Morexp57]

I am so glad I made the choice to move to the larger size. It has been incredible for me to notice the improved detail in my images especially close up work, or when cropped.

Yes, I have the same feeling about the resolution. I like having the ability to crop my images because I often see a detail in the image that I didn't necessarily see when I shot it and is worth an image on its own. Being able to do this without losing quality is very nice.

I have never had any challenges with blurring or mastering a higher pixel count.

Good to know!

I believe the Z7 has more autofocus points, (Z6 has 273 v Z7 at 493) and from my experience the more the better, which would make me lean towards the Z7 slightly.

Yes, this is correct.

To be honest though Morexp57, apart from the resolution I don't see much difference in the cameras except the Z6 is slightly faster and the Z7 has more focus points.

Indeed, this is the only big difference between the two.

So your choice really boils down to just pixel count. I would opt for the Z7 for this reason alone personally but the cost saving of 1000 Francs would go well towards the new lenses you want.

This is true. Besides, this 1000 francs is not even the price difference between a 14 mm - 24 mm f/2.8 (2799 francs!) and a 14 mm - 30 mm f/4 (1399 francs).
These prices are insane!

Tough choice for you I am sure and I am not sure I have helped here at all.

Yes, your answers have helped me, and like you, I am slightly in favour of the Z7 II. Thanks!
I'll mull over my choices for a few more days and then we'll see!

 

[Jack]

A brand new, I am a bit wary of second hand.

Same here, I never go for second hand, you never know the reason behind the sale.

I have 3 lenses at the moment. An 18 mm - 300 mm, a 10 mm - 20 mm and a 35 mm. They can be used on a full frame camera with an adapter, but they are DX lenses, which means that the camera automatically switches to DX mode and is no longer FF. As they are not high quality lenses, I will not keep them.

Are the lenses FF ? If no, then probably I would focus getting Ff lenses before you getting Ff camera.

A better quality of my images, more details.

My personal opinion is that you get better image quality from the lens rather than camera body.

Yes, you are probably right. From what I've read, the lenses I'm going to buy, even if they're not the highest quality possible (now that's getting really expensive...) are excellent with the Z6 II or Z7 II

Have you consider selling your lenses and getting a high end lens and Ff camera body ?

 

[GeoffM Photography]

Hello photographer friends,
For a few weeks now, I've been wanting to change my equipment and move to a hybrid and FF camera. I am a happy owner of a Nikon D7500 since 2017.
But I hesitate on which camera to choose. I've had Nikon equipment for years and I don't want to change brand. So I'm hesitating between the Z6 II and the Z7 II. There is a price difference, of course. The Z6 II is almost 1000 francs (about £800) cheaper than the Z7 II. But I can afford the difference (after all, we only live once...).
As for lenses, I'm thinking of the Nikkor Z 14-30mm f/4 S and the Nikkor Z 24-200mm f/4-6.3 VR.

What makes me hesitate are some differences in the specifications of the cameras such as:

Sensor pixel count:
Z6 II 24.5M versus 45.7M for the Z7 II.
As I like to have the possibility to crop my pictures, having more pixels is more comfortable. However, as I will probably never print in very large format, 24.5 M pixels are enough.
Also, I've heard that it's harder to master 45 million pixels than 24 million (higher risk of blurring). You also have to think that the files from a 45 Mpixel sensor are bigger, of course. So I would have to allow for storage space as well. And will my computer be able to handle files of this size easily during editing?

The sensitivity range:
ISO 100 to 51200 for the Z6 II and ISO 64 to 25600 for the Z7 II.
I don't need to go very high in sensitivity so I prefer the possibility to shoot at ISO 64 of the Z7 II.

The Z6II is better for videos, but as I don't do videos I don't care.
The Z6 II is faster in frame rate (up to 14/s for the Z6 II vs. 10/s for the Z7 II), but I rarely use this feature so I don't care either.

So, in theory, the Z6 II would be more suitable for me (and cheaper) but I'm afraid I'll miss the cropping possibilities and ISO 64 shots of the Z7 II...

So what do I choose between equipment that is sufficiently high end for my current needs and to please myself and not regret it later...

Do you have anything to say about this? Any personal experiences on this kind of choice?

The question of pixels is an issue. To my mind, 24.5 is plenty unless you are printing huge prints over say A3+. Yes, the detail in 40+ pixels is amazing but when we view a wall-mounted print, say, we stand back, we don't pixel peep. How important ultimately, in art photography especially, is tiny detail? Also, from guidance I have seen elsewhere, high pixel count doesn't work as well in low light. I agree that sometimes we feel the need to crop but as long as we try to get our shot right in camera, how much of an issue is it really? I would save money for glass and get the Z6.

 

[Hal M]

I shot Nikon for 40 years and really wanted to stay with Nikon, but after doing all the research, I went with the Canon R5, like Andy. I mainly shoot wildlife and with the combination of sensor size and the superb eye tracking it was the best choice for me. That being said, it really depends on what you mainly shoot. With the large sensor and the ability to crop, I get many more keepers than I ever got with Nikon.

 

[Morexp57]

The question of pixels is an issue. To my mind, 24.5 is plenty unless you are printing huge prints over say A3+. Yes, the detail in 40+ pixels is amazing but when we view a wall-mounted print, say, we stand back, we don't pixel peep. How important ultimately, in art photography especially, is tiny detail? Also, from guidance I have seen elsewhere, high pixel count doesn't work as well in low light. I agree that sometimes we feel the need to crop but as long as we try to get our shot right in camera, how much of an issue is it really? I would save money for glass and get the Z6.

Yes, I understand that with 25M pixels, the resolution on a print up to A3 and even larger is more than enough. But the possibility of crop was still important to me. Anyway it's too late as I bought the Z7 II last Friday...

And I am very happy, even if I still have to tame the beast.