Nikon Z AF

yep, the best Z camera by far ……
[/quote]

.. and one of the two or three best cameras you can buy, period. You conveniently omitted this part. Steve Perry compares Sony A1 and Nikon Z9 and concludes it is a wash.

He does that a lot with things he can't argue against, or finds inconvenient to his world view.

My closest photographer buddy fits this demographic exactly. And I clown on him for it almost daily. Have a sense of humor.

Such as? Folks on this thread broadly fall into two camps:

1. Those that show interest in and debate the approach of various brands to specific problems raised and their solutions.
   and
2. Those that have a meltdown at the merest hint that Nikon might not be smartest at everything and start insulting folk who disagree with their world view, as a defensive mechanism. Regardless of the facts.

You clearly fall into camp 2. Which is sad and what turns threads vitriolic. I've said many times I'm a Nikon fan. I've also pointed out where other brands have a suitable approach to solving certain issues pointed out on this thread.........

No brand is perfect at everything, not one of them. I have more respect for folk who have tried various brands for their needs and have come to a balanced conclusion.

As each person has different needs their conclusion will vary. Unless of course they are a hardcore brand fanatic. In which case, all sensible analysis goes out of the window.

I have been in favor of no or less moderation, but I see now why someone like mako2011 would benefit this forum.

You want me to comment in this incredibly toxic thread?? LOL.
The studio environment, assuming one is using decent strobes with a short flash duration, allows a few things. Obviously, one can control the light, and optimize the light to make the subject of the photo look really good. Secondly, as you've alluded to, the short flash duration takes care of a lot of ills if the ambient light isn't so high to start interfering with things (which kind of goes back to the issues I have of having to turn up the modelling lights full blast to help the Z7 get somewhat more consistent AF and yet it still struggles). If we're talking about "image quality" from the lenses performance envelope, sure, by F/9 on a D850/Z7 we're going to start walking slightly into the land of diffraction, but I always go by what the DOF needs are first. But that's the wrong way to look at it. There's a huge difference in terms of how much of a lenses maximum potential performance envelope we can achieve in a handheld shot in ambient light (only) versus a handheld shot in low ambient light but powerful (and short flash duration) strobes, as obviously both photographer and subject motion blur are greatly reduced. That means the mid and higher MTF structures increase, often greatly. Obviously a tripod and a perfectly still subject is even better, but then one might not get the expression of a person right. I move around in the studio, constantly looking, constantly adjusting and I shoot fast to capture fleeting things. So F/9 gives me the DOF, at that aperture I'm still getting very good mid/high structure MTF resolution, which means the resulting image will look "sharper" (god I hate that word without additional description) than a handheld shot in ambient light (no strobe) only. Remember the Otto Schade, he of MTF, said that image quality of a system is related to the square of the area under an MTF trace when frequency is plotted against contrast, and that means the "more" area you have (meaning, motion blur, imprecise focus, etc aren't robbing the higher frequencies from your image), the better the image quality. At least from a technical view. I'm always about best capture - but like Burnimages comments, I don't sacrifice getting the shot/expression by being overzealous on making sure I don't shoot at highly diffraction-impacted apertures or other technical aspects - but I am certainly aware of those aspects as they matter for what I do as well. It's a balancing act.

Not sure that was a great job at explaining that, and this thread is a freaking disaster with some truly arrogant, insulting participants, so I'm not really going to delve into it much further here.

.. and one of the two or three best cameras you can buy, period. You conveniently omitted this part. Steve Perry compares Sony A1 and Nikon Z9 and concludes it is a wash.
[/quote]

I've never been a fan of taking review advice from fellows with a "click where I buy" button. One has no idea how much these reviews depend on that to put food on the table. Why chose one over the other when if you keep the review close, you can potentially sell to both? Might even be done subconsciously,

I will very occasionally watch or read a review. I very much preferred to get opinions from members on DPReview who owned the gear, but that changed with the arrival of the Zees, and there were just too many owners giving bad information. So I read and read, PM'ed and emailed with fellows on DPReview, and eventually we came up with a body of information that slowly came out from owners. Enough to know that for my use, I made a very good choice not to buy a Z6 or Z7, and likely to not buy a Z9.

This was not a defensive post in any way and I am serious. I think once the thought of another brand enters the head, moving on is often the best medicine as there is always be that nagging doubt in the back of your head that you should have done it. Look at what either Sony or Canon has to offer in cameras, and most importantly look at their lenses and if it all adds up for you, then maybe that is the best way to go. I chose to stick it out with Nikon as it made sense to transition using the F mount lenses but they have come up with the goods as far as I am concerned and I am happy, but that may not be for you.

I never found the AF of the Z7/Z7II a concern as I was able to get the images I wanted, other than bird AF tracking, it just never was an issue for me. If I really needed the AF tracking I always had the D850 if required, but I just found I never needed it enough to warrent using it much, very little in fact. Once the Z9 was announced I sold almost all of my F mount lenses and have never been happier. I am not saying this is for you, but it worked perfectly well for me.

I will say that it is probably worth waiting to see what the Z8 has to offer once it has had it's showing on Wednesday as I think there will be more than just the camera, probably a new lens or so and more firmware updates for the Z9 as well. If after that what Nikon has to offer still doesn't meet your requirements, I think that you still may need to look elsewhere. It is simple really and no need to be emotional about it, they are just tools for the job at the end of the day.

Sorry, but I don't believe you. The comments "maybe better if you bought Sony", "maybe better if you bought Canon", "if you're not happy here", "you'll always have doubts" and the rest of the bs that gets spewed by fellows who are somehow slighted because you looked at another brand, is just so, so immature.

Absolutely nothing wrong with someone liking and owning Nikon, but checking out other options.

Maybe FM is a better place for you. Which I'm not suggesting, just pointing the foolishness of such comments.

I see you just can't move on from your disgraceful days at DPR and the same old attacks at anything you don't agree with especially from me. It seems as though the legacy of DPR days are not left behind and have simply migrated to DR Revived. I really couldn't give a flying fornication if you do not believe me but my comments were said with complete honesty. The fact is, anyone considering a new camera system like ML should be looking at all brands if they are thinking of going that route and thus anything I said above is fair and just. If they are requiring their camera to do what their D850 could do as far as AF tracking and general overall responsiveness, then all ML cameras and systems should be considered and this is what anyone would do when looking fo a camera system. I'm somehow "who are somehow slighted because you looked at another brand"? what an absurd conclusion to make. The fact that I said it is just your animosity coming out once again and showing your true colours. The only foolishness being displayed is your desire to take control of all things that are said in any forum, just like the DPR DSLR days.

TO, I really do think you are the main culprit and conspiracy theorist here. In this thread you have commented several times about the unjust bias and ulterior motivations of DPReview on how easy it was to have posts removed, censored and threads shut down and even get oneself banned. Positioning yourself here as the unfairly treated victim. Fact is that DPReview had codes of conduct that they required forum participants to abide by and one found out rather abruptly if one had crossed the line. I had several posts deleted during a period of time and interestingly those posts were mainly responses to you during the old DSLR vs Z wars where you were a prominent champion of the anti-z movement. These posts of mine had nothing to do with criticizing Z cameras, but criticizing “something” else. Was it unfair of Thierry to single me out those times? Did I go away, sulk and concoct conspiracy theories to justify the righteousness of my own actions. No, I totally got it and accepted it and moved on. Treat like with like fair and square, that’s all.

True, but at-least they were trying and I found a way to respect it and stay out of trouble eventually. Boiled down to common sense really. Something that some have more trouble with than others I suppose…

I'm not your buddy, you are on a public forum, and I neither know you or share your sense of humour.

You clearly are just making this up to fit your narrative of 'move on'. Do you really think I haven't looked at the competition when im telling you in this thread about Canon and my experience with their R5 ? The R5 or sony would not work for my shooting. Rf mount as i have already said is too closed, offers no 3rd party lenses and still what 5 years on missing vital lenses I need. It's non starter for these reasons and others. Canon's sensor tech is a decade behind; they have no clean iso 64 and pushing files as I do they fall apart much quicker. But let us give canon credit. Amazing af performance. That body can track a moving face and eyes at 1.2 moving towards camera at speed with stunning precision. Your z7ii is a slug in that regard and still is with firmware updates, just the facts of the matter. All sony bodies produce bad concentric rings when stacking hours of deep sky photos and they produce green stars / delete stars. It's a no go...all their bodies have this defect. I have previously specified reasons why I wouldnt (currently anyway) move from nikon, so please stop suggesting what I should do...

Ps obviously I am waiting to see the Z8. If you actually read the OP i mention I am looking toward the Z8 Af ability...It is clear I'll have to test it myself as if you buy it I'll just get the rose tinted version of events if I listen to what you say about it. Your feedback about any camera you have ever bought seems to come down to 'it works for me'. Considering I talk about the Z8 in here and mentioned to you im trying to gage how good the z8 af will be by using the z9 as an example of nikons new af tech. Again in your last paragraph; you can stop telling me to look elsewhere I already have...the other manufacturers' don't align with my shooting needs so for now I stay and watch if nikon finally sort their AF problems out. You just hate hearing the truth about nikons first two bodies it seems...

common sense is unfortunately not very common

There are things you know that you know. There are things that you know you don't know. But there are also things you don't know that you don't know. You're spending too much time in the latter and not enough time in the former.

But know this. You can try to distract a thread, and on DPReview you could get it shut down. That's not going to work here.