Anyone with experience of Nikon Z 6 II?
Discussion
I'm far from a professional photographer, but I do take a lot of photographs for my work as a building surveyor.
In particular, I do survey work overnight inside London Underground tunnels, and can average 800-1000 photos per survey. Most of the photos are taken in low light conditions, and I currently use a Nikon D7500, with the SB-700 external flash.
I'm generally happy with the results from this setup, but the camera now has over a 150,000 shutter count, and I'm half expecting the need to replace the camera in the not too distant future, if I keep using the camera at the current rate.
I like to look of the mirrorless Nikon Z 6 II but it is twice the price over what a replacement D7500 would cost.
My question therefore is; would I see any noticeable upgrade in quality / performance in low light conditions with the Z6 over the D7500?
I know about the differences between FX & DX formats, and that the Z6 uses different lenses, etc, but it's real world experience with the Z6 that I have no idea about.
In particular, I do survey work overnight inside London Underground tunnels, and can average 800-1000 photos per survey. Most of the photos are taken in low light conditions, and I currently use a Nikon D7500, with the SB-700 external flash.
I'm generally happy with the results from this setup, but the camera now has over a 150,000 shutter count, and I'm half expecting the need to replace the camera in the not too distant future, if I keep using the camera at the current rate.
I like to look of the mirrorless Nikon Z 6 II but it is twice the price over what a replacement D7500 would cost.
My question therefore is; would I see any noticeable upgrade in quality / performance in low light conditions with the Z6 over the D7500?
I know about the differences between FX & DX formats, and that the Z6 uses different lenses, etc, but it's real world experience with the Z6 that I have no idea about.
Mandat said:
I'm far from a professional photographer, but I do take a lot of photographs for my work as a building surveyor.
In particular, I do survey work overnight inside London Underground tunnels, and can average 800-1000 photos per survey. Most of the photos are taken in low light conditions, and I currently use a Nikon D7500, with the SB-700 external flash.
I'm generally happy with the results from this setup, but the camera now has over a 150,000 shutter count, and I'm half expecting the need to replace the camera in the not too distant future, if I keep using the camera at the current rate.
I like to look of the mirrorless Nikon Z 6 II but it is twice the price over what a replacement D7500 would cost.
My question therefore is; would I see any noticeable upgrade in quality / performance in low light conditions with the Z6 over the D7500?
I know about the differences between FX & DX formats, and that the Z6 uses different lenses, etc, but it's real world experience with the Z6 that I have no idea about.
I have some general experience of NIkon kit, though not either of the two camera you mention. (I have a D750, D500, Z6 and have previously used a D700 and a D7000).In particular, I do survey work overnight inside London Underground tunnels, and can average 800-1000 photos per survey. Most of the photos are taken in low light conditions, and I currently use a Nikon D7500, with the SB-700 external flash.
I'm generally happy with the results from this setup, but the camera now has over a 150,000 shutter count, and I'm half expecting the need to replace the camera in the not too distant future, if I keep using the camera at the current rate.
I like to look of the mirrorless Nikon Z 6 II but it is twice the price over what a replacement D7500 would cost.
My question therefore is; would I see any noticeable upgrade in quality / performance in low light conditions with the Z6 over the D7500?
I know about the differences between FX & DX formats, and that the Z6 uses different lenses, etc, but it's real world experience with the Z6 that I have no idea about.
The fact that you are using a flash surprises me. Unless this is for fairly close up work I would imagine that the light from it falls off dramatically in a tunnel. So if you're taking big shots of tunnels I can't see how a flash helps, and if you're taking closer shots lit by flash I can't see why low light performance is an issue.
If you fancy a Z6 II, which is an awesome camera I am sure, then just buy one. As the resolution is *only* around 25 MP you could expect excellent low light performance, but the viewfinder and rear screen use a lot more power than a DSLR will. Battery life might be a big deal for you.
Also, with no mirror if you change lenses in a dirty tunnel you might get that sensor grubby very quickly. Another thing I would say is that if you have no interest in shooting video then I'm not sure I would go mirrorless. The only reason I have a Z6 is for video focus performance.
I assume you have DX lenses, but if you're looking at a Z6 then you have clearly decided to upgrade your lenses. You could go for F mount with the adapter, but I think buying a Z6 II and not buying Z mount lenses would be a bit silly.
With the possible exception of the D500 the D7500 is the flagship crop sensor body, and in real world use I doubt you will see any genuine difference between low light performance between D7500 and Z6, maybe one stop.
You could just wait until the shutter fails, it could easily last to 250,000 actuations. However, if you want something new I would give serious consideration to a D750 at not much money or a D780 at a similar price to a Z6 II.
So no "I've used both, here's what I think" comparison I'm afraid, but perhaps a little bit there for further thought.
How about the Z5? Are there any features you feel the Z6II will give you over the Z5? The Z6II is pretty much double the price. I have a Z5, D750 and a D7500, all great cameras. The Z5 is essentially a mirrorless D750, which is still an awesome camera to this day.
But to answer your question, depending on how much you push ISO, yes you are likely to see a difference compared to the D7500, not a huge one though if you're mainly using flash anyway.
Considering how affordable the Z5 is they took very little out compared to the significantly more expensive siblings. You won't have shutter life to worry about either if you're getting through that many shots. Depending on which lenses you have the FTZ adaptor (often bundled with the camera) will more than likely accept them on the Z5.
But to answer your question, depending on how much you push ISO, yes you are likely to see a difference compared to the D7500, not a huge one though if you're mainly using flash anyway.
Considering how affordable the Z5 is they took very little out compared to the significantly more expensive siblings. You won't have shutter life to worry about either if you're getting through that many shots. Depending on which lenses you have the FTZ adaptor (often bundled with the camera) will more than likely accept them on the Z5.
Thank you both for taking the time to respond in detail.
The main reason for looking at the new Z6 as a replacement, is that I am a sucker for new tech, and looked at mirrorless as an upgrade to the traditional dSLR option.
I've also been reading various reviews, and it seems that I won't see a huge difference in the quality of photos, particularly as the main use will be for work, inside tunnels, etc.
I'm also surprised at that rated battery life, with only approx. 400 shots on a single charge. My D7500 uses the same battery as the Z6 (albeit an older version) and on my last survey I managed over 1,500 shots with the battery still showing 50% charge.
The suggestion for going for the older Z5 is a good one, on the basis of costs, but as mentioned earlier, I am a sucker for new tech, and generally prefer the newer models / variants over the older tech.
I'll probably end up keeping an eye on price of the Z models, and I'll keep using the D7500 until it breaks, which will then force me into making a decision.
Thanks again.
The main reason for looking at the new Z6 as a replacement, is that I am a sucker for new tech, and looked at mirrorless as an upgrade to the traditional dSLR option.
I've also been reading various reviews, and it seems that I won't see a huge difference in the quality of photos, particularly as the main use will be for work, inside tunnels, etc.
I'm also surprised at that rated battery life, with only approx. 400 shots on a single charge. My D7500 uses the same battery as the Z6 (albeit an older version) and on my last survey I managed over 1,500 shots with the battery still showing 50% charge.
The suggestion for going for the older Z5 is a good one, on the basis of costs, but as mentioned earlier, I am a sucker for new tech, and generally prefer the newer models / variants over the older tech.
I'll probably end up keeping an eye on price of the Z models, and I'll keep using the D7500 until it breaks, which will then force me into making a decision.
Thanks again.
We have a Z5, Z6 II and Z7 here, so I've got experience of all of them if you have any specific questions.
The only DX camera I'm now keeping is a D500, so I can compare it against that.
Low light performance is a big selling point of the Z range and if you can stretch to the expensive faster Z lenses then you'll have an even bigger advantage if you want to get away without using flash.
The only DX camera I'm now keeping is a D500, so I can compare it against that.
Low light performance is a big selling point of the Z range and if you can stretch to the expensive faster Z lenses then you'll have an even bigger advantage if you want to get away without using flash.
Edited by FurtiveFreddy on Monday 22 March 16:05
One reason that DSLRs do so much better on battery life is that they don't have to power a screen all of the time.
It's clear you want a Z camera of some description, and good on you. You'll love whichever one you buy. I'm not a fan of mirrorless personally, I see no advantage over a conventional DSLR other than size (doesn't bother me) an AF for video (which is important and why I have a Z6).
I much prefer an optical viewfinder too.
It's clear you want a Z camera of some description, and good on you. You'll love whichever one you buy. I'm not a fan of mirrorless personally, I see no advantage over a conventional DSLR other than size (doesn't bother me) an AF for video (which is important and why I have a Z6).
I much prefer an optical viewfinder too.
Mandat said:
The suggestion for going for the older Z5 is a good one, on the basis of costs, but as mentioned earlier, I am a sucker for new tech, and generally prefer the newer models / variants over the older tech.
The Z5 is about is about 8 weeks older than the Z6II 
The main difference between the two is video, the Z5 is essentially a stills camera, the Z6 II is a hybrid and much better for 4K video, that's where much of the £1000 difference is going. Personally I'd put that extra grand towards better glass, a stop faster lens and you've essentially more than removed the small stills difference between them.
In terms of battery I wouldn't worry to much, the CIPA standard punishes mirrorless quite badly. Doubling the quoted life (especially if shooting a lot during one night) wouldn't be out of the question, I regularly get closer to 3x times the quoted life.
Edited by ch37 on Monday 22 March 22:48
ch37 said:
The Z5 is about is about 8 weeks older than the Z6II
The main difference between the two is video, the Z5 is essentially a stills camera, the Z6 II is a hybrid and much better for 4K video, that's where much of the £1000 difference is going. Personally I'd put that extra grand towards better glass, a stop faster lens and you've essentially more than removed the small stills difference between them.
In terms of battery I wouldn't worry to much, the CIPA standard punishes mirrorless quite badly. Doubling the quoted life (especially if shooting a lot during one night) wouldn't be out of the question, I regularly get closer to 3x times the quoted life.
That's very interesting, particularly on the battery lift. .The main difference between the two is video, the Z5 is essentially a stills camera, the Z6 II is a hybrid and much better for 4K video, that's where much of the £1000 difference is going. Personally I'd put that extra grand towards better glass, a stop faster lens and you've essentially more than removed the small stills difference between them.
In terms of battery I wouldn't worry to much, the CIPA standard punishes mirrorless quite badly. Doubling the quoted life (especially if shooting a lot during one night) wouldn't be out of the question, I regularly get closer to 3x times the quoted life.
On the basis that I don't need video capability the Z5 might actually fit the bill.
Gassing Station | Photography & Video | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff