Nikon Z AF

Can we be candid now and discuss this without the bias and protectionism I and many others seen on dpreview of the Z cameras? Are there any folks here that have shot canon and sony that have tried the Z9 and have direct experience? My personal experience is such that the R5, beats the Z6/7 I and II variants so much so that it isn't even funny, the R5 wins hands down in every situation and is simpler to be in the correct AF mode, etc etc. It is very clear that dpreview moderation attempted to hide any complaints of the AF system in the bodies I mention. The R5 AF system is so far in advance of those nikon bodies.

Now what about the Z9 (as I am thinking about the potential in the Z8 AF system). There seem to be mixed reports that even with the Z9 it isn't there yet, not R8/R3 levels. Is there anyone out there has honestly used both systems extensively can comment? What is the real story...in terms of AF reliability vs Canon / Sony and tracking performance.

Yes -- who the heck cares. Normally it is just trolls who should all ........... and are only looking for hits/views

As shooters one's system choices are driven by the glass we own. AND then it is a host of other things - not least the video and stills performance.
I happen to primarily shoot wildlife and primarily big cats in Africa and birds AND I have no issues whatsoever with either or my Z9 and their AF.
The latest Nikkor glass is SPECTACULAR and far far far far better than anything from any other brand -- YES I mean the Z400/2.8TC; the Z600/4.0TC, the 800/6.3PF and the 400/4.5PF -- as well as the rest of the lineup.
I have used other systems and these are also fine -- BUT my fingers and muscle memory is right for a Z9 - not a tiny A1/A7Riv/v or a Canon - low res R3 or other body.

I also own a Z7 and a Z6ii both are fine for what I use them for -- which is NOT shooting wildlife action. That is what my pair of Z9 are for.

I suggest YOU stop trying to cause havoc. I had hoped that this forum would not be home for trolls.

Look at Steve Perry's video comparing Sony A1 and Nikon Z9. In his opinion it's a wash.

Trolling? So causing havoc is asking a simple question and making a post on a forum? "YOU" seriously need to calm down. PS I did not ask about the glass, I asked about AF. Also it sounds like you have not tried the other brands like I wondered. The only true way of knowing how systems compare.

I will have a look, thank you.

Hi, I think this is a legitimate question. Not having the Canon R5, I cannot compare however. I think it would be helpful if you are able to do some controlled tests and report results here.

p.s. I think the problem with your post was not the question but the claim of R5 being much better without showing evidence.

Seems like the only difference from DPReview is that you won't get banned for questioning it.

Nothing like shill like comments such as "The latest Nikkor glass is SPECTACULAR and far far far far better than anything from any other brand -- YES I mean the Z400/2.8TC; the Z600/4.0TC, the 800/6.3PF and the 400/4.5PF"

You expect someone to believe that Sony or Canon shooters, or Nikon DSLR shooters are coming up with far, far, far inferior images. DPReview has lightened up enough, and there's such an abundance of unbiased info there now, that you can now get a good handle on what the Zees are and what they are not. Even "everything is Golden" boy is now giving some less flattering opinions of the Zee system and how far behind Canon and Sony it is.

I saw a post over there from Craig from Phoenix where he spent $32000 to go from like kind Nikon DSLR to like kind Nikon ML, and I'm betting what he got in any difference in image quality or AF wasn't work $3200, certainly not $32000. And he went from a D850, so not a full on pro DSLR body, to a Z9 which is designated as a full on Nikon ML pro body.

I don't currently have both. There is no smoke without fire. Too many people's experience is the same as mine - the R5 wipes the floor with the Z6/7 series, both variants. Come on let's not kid ourselves here, let's not be disingenuous and pretend a Z7 can compete in the same league AF wise as an R5!

I have noticed this sudden shift at dpreview. Plenty of folk have taken off the rose tinted glasses and the real story as I always knew it is coming out. Just like the D800 days when myself and others called out the left AF / inconsistent AF problem and it was denied over and over.

I do not know what the differences are never having used Canon R5.
But I don't believe people who make claims without showing evidence.

You want "evidence" but I am here to tell you that folk that try both just end up ditching the body they deem scores them significantly less in focus shots - true of the Z7 compared to several competitors bodies (e.g. if they were a sports shooter - not that most seasoned sports shooters would even consider a Z7 I or II in the first place which says a lot about it's AF system). That would be the end of it. It's just the reality of the situation. I've tried both, and not just for an hour or two. The R5 is much advanced compared to the Z7. Show me a thread where someone with credibility is showing that they prefer a Z7 for fast action over a R5 from canon? I think crickets are the sound you will hear if you ask that question. I've been a nikon shooter for a very long time but I am not so blinkered to realise when a competitor is clearing out in front with some part of their camera

Well it looks like Woodward and Bernstein finally got to the root of it. Maybe you two can just vent in this thread that won't be pulled and finally be done with it? Because you can ask about the Z9 AF (even though it has been covered a lot of places) without dragging the conspiracy theory and Z6/Z7 garbage with it. God you guys are a broken record.

Since then Nikon has released firmware version 3.10 bringing about some modest AF improvement.

And you no longer have the ability to walk into a thread and bob and weave until you get a thread shut down. So you, the Tilleys, the Lances of the world can no longer control the dialogue. Looks good on you all.

DPReview constructed their own image of the Z6 and Z7 in particular, maybe for sales, who knows? But there were dozens, likely hundred of posts pulled, posts modified to their liking, temporary bans, permanent bans. When a product needs to be protected like that, me thinks the product may not be all that good.

Great seeing you over here. Hoping BS won't work here for you though,

First time I've seen one of the fanboys calling the Z6/Z7 garbage.

Just trying to discover the truth before I buy a z8 etc. You'll need to forgive me because it is hard to discover truth when you've had to listen to the nonsense that posters' at dpreview told about the nikon af system in the z7i and ii. It is all coming out now. I know several prolific posters from dpreivew who communicate with me tell me the z7 is next to trash under studio lights. Could any of them write this at dpreview. No...because the thread would be deleted and locked as 'flame baiting' or some other BS to hide the facts. It was quite disgusting.

Absolutely true. This is what was happening at dpreview regarding those cameras and the II variants. It is even coming out at dpreview right now as you mentioned.

So you still offer no evidence of your own. You are repeating what folks say. R5 being more advanced says nothing about AF.

Did you actually test the two side by side, or are you relying on what folks say? Seems latter to me.

Btw Z9 is obviously more advanced that R5, but that doesn't say anything about whether its AF is better than R5.

I said my experience...I also declared not just for a few hours (paraphrasing). You didn't read that part clearly.