What is it, like the 25th time you have said that? You do realize that works both ways right? I can call you out on BS without repercussions unlike the dozen times I did it over there.
So, 75 posts for you so far, probably 50 of them in threads like these in the Z forum, from a guy who arguably will never own one, over a 5 year old cameras AF system. I think most rational people can see this for what it is. I saw the opening paragraph of this thread and muttered "here comes the gong show". So perhaps there is a truth not being addressed here. Your problems in DPR were suppressed posts, in the Z forum, where you have no intention owning the gear, while criticizing the gear without trying it, and seriously think your posts were being suppressed for lets face it, a rounding error in sales. It's difficult to understand if that could be categorized as narcissism, victim-hood, a combination of both, delusions, who knows what? Perhaps, and I know this is really out there, the mods were slapping your posts because they didn't want to deal with the drama you seem to create everywhere you go. I know right? Really out there stuff.
Fred Miranda saw what it was and handled it in minutes. That forum is a better place for it.
So yes Dorothy, we are not in Kansas anymore. Deal with it.
Burn you have nothing to apologize for. You tried the Z gear, liked it, but your needs changed, and thus your gear requirements as well. You found a solution in a different brand, and shared it here, which is very helpful. You posted this use case scenario with real world experience of both systems, which really should be a requirement here, in other words ideal content addressing the initial question from the OP. And you are taking heat for it (well, from one person so we can see what that is) and you shouldn't be. What you posted was the exact type of content forum administrators should welcome.
I am more than fine turning on the bright lights and letting it play out on its own. That would have been pulled over there, it isn't here, and I won't feel the need to say it twice. I'm done with it. Thanks Bob.
Thank you, that means a lot. I have tried to contribute with real world experience of two systems (both of which I like and have previously or now own) with answers to specific questions about how different brands provide different solutions for specific needs.
Being honest, I'm a bit frustrated with myself for getting wound up by certain attackers and being blunt with my replies.
I'll endeavour to keep contributing where I think I have something meaningful to add to the debate. But I'll endeavour to rise above hitting back and defending myself when attacked.
There's still a post or two earlier in the thread that are factually incorrect by quite some margin. I'm still pondering replying to those....
I would have bought a Z6 as a Nikon ML Df, except 1. couldn't AF worth a crap and 2. couldn't AF non AF-S lenses and 3. Didn't index with AI/AI-S lenses. And you bring up the Z6/Z7 AF system, but the same AF system is still current in the Z6ii and Z7ii. And reading some threads, some fellows actually consider it worse, as the non II ones got updates that the Z6ii and Z7ii did not.
Maybe you're on the irrational side. From where I'm sitting that sounds about right
So did I. And it wasn't long showing up.
Let's go with delusions on this one and see how that works.
Drama had nothing to do with it. The mods did the same to dozens of others. In the Nikon forums, in the Canon forums. Power tripping individuals. Think that's been established in what is now the "arguments" threads. You, Lance and several others like to divert from the topic / discussion / whatever to take the attention from that and put it on the bs you dream up. It worked on DPReview due to the moderation situation.
I was there quite awhile. Never did like it there, would never go back. One day I had enough and made a comment that I figured would get me banned. Easy way to delete my posts there without having to go through the hassle of asking. Just not a nice place, but I can easily get another user name and come visit.
I dealt with it very well on DPReview. I had a good relationship with the mods. I had a lot of posts pulled, many as collateral damage, when mine had to go as part of someone else's conversation that got pulled, but as I would say to them "it was up long enough that (for example) Mackiesback read it and got my message" So dealt with 😀
Might be an idea to go here scroll down until you find the threads where is the Z6ii updates?, where is the Z7ii updates ? and make them aware of it. Be aware, sometimes they'll shoot the messenger.
Obviously your reputation precedes you, with your track record of tens of thousands of posts on other fora demonstrating your incisive ability to discuss the pros and cons of various brands objectively.
With that in mind I'm sure you'd be mortified if you accidentally and unintentionally posted incorrect information, which is what has happened here.
For the benefit of the community I'll correct the bits you got wrong (no need to thank me or apologise, we all get it wrong sometimes):
The problem here Leonard is that the Z system didn't exist in 2017. So nobody was wrong back then. There was nothing from Nikon in ML terms to compare it with.
The A9 was so ground breaking at the time that it changed the industry. DPReview had to pick the dSLR Nikon D5 to compare it to, as there was nothing else close at the time, and zero competition in ML terms.
The A9 fell a bit short initially compared to the D5, but that was at firmware 1.0:
Of course, Sony relentlessly improved the product.... let's talk firmware:
Sony continued to hone the A9, with the big breakthrough coming in 2019 with FW 5.0. Yes 5.0
That's when real time tracking came to the A9 and changed the industry forever.
We can thank Sony for this as it eventually forced an answer from Canon with the R5/R6. Nikon didn't join this party until the Z9.
Back to firmware. Sony A9 ended up on FW 6.0 by 2019. Yep, 5 major firmware updates after launch. Then the A9II was launched. FW 1.0 on the A9II was essentially FW 6.0 from the A9. But did they stop there? Nope! The A9II was further developed up to FW 3.2.
In comparison, Nikon launched the Z6/7II variants with the dual Expeed 6 processors and never even got to a FW2.0 update. Those bodies are still on FW 1.5. In fact, what they did was left the Mark II bodies virtually unimproved but bought their predecessors closer to the II variants with FW 3.5. Go figure?
Sony clearly and unarguably have the leading track record on the FW front compared to Nikon Z.
Every Z line lens is great. No argument there. But they are not all superior to Sony. Sometimes Sony wins too.
Prime examples would be the classic 24-70mm and 70-200mm 2.8 workhorses for jobbing photographers. In Sony land the new GMII versions are best in class at a significantly lighter weight than the Nikon Z variants:
In real world terms these lenses are optically equal. The Sony's are much lighter though, whilst featuring lightning fast quad linear focus motors and other goodies that are practical. For example, flaps in the lens hoods so you can adjust your c-pl or variable ND and other well thought out touches like that.
But it's a balance. Sony has no answer for the latest long exotics from Nikon or lenses like the 14-24mm 2.8S.
Equally, Nikon has no answer to some astonishing 1.4 primes in Sony land. And so on......
Finally, the Z6 and Z7 series do not and never have played in this league.......
Seriously, I can see why some people are getting exasperated by this. There maybe a lot of truth in what you're saying, but it's not something that many people already invested in the Nikon Z system particularly want to hear. If what they have works fine for them, in which case, why are they bothered? If it doesn't they've presumably already investigated the alternatives and might have made a decision.
In either case, I'd suggest it's time to take a break. Everyone has said their bit, and a bit. No point going round it for the third or fourth time.
I like factually correct information, but there comes a point where re-iterating a correction ceases to be very useful. Maybe if that's the point, then the way forward is to settle on a very terse correction and exclude rhetoric.
Well I only corrected this information one time, I never commented on it before. But I'm open to guidance. Incorrect information can be ignored or commented on. Your site, your rules. :)
Its kinda been 4 years of this in Z dedicated forums. I completely expect it in the DSLR forums, where I also go as a DSLR user, but yeah, its gotten to the point where it is just stirring the pot over and over again. Ive said my piece and will not reply to the inaccurate response to it. Done and dusted as they say.
I'm simply replying to a post on this thread from a couple of days ago that was factually incorrect. I cannot see anywhere where I've been disrespectful to Nikon or anyone personally with my counter balanced post. My reply only came about in response to a factually incorrect post.
I actually don't know what the answer is here. Do folk want factually incorrect posts to go unchallenged? Or would they like them to be responded to?
