For those saying Z6II is better in low light, shoot medium on the Z7II and there you go the difference is barely noticeable by you and only the software you editing with will pick up the differnece. Both systems are excellent and almost identical - you get the z6ii to save money and get a great camera and maybe a lens or you get the Z7II to crop and get a great camera. I am wedding photographer and I shoot with both. Z7II is superior, all the details, ring shots, bridal groom portraits, group shots, elopement and stylized shoots. Both can do it pretty well but Z7ii does it better due the fact that is so darn sharp and if you are a pixel peeper its so pleasing. Usually on a wedding day its 60% Z6ii (not so important shots) and 40% Z7II but the Z7II gives you the option to shoot mRAW at almost 30mpx which is great its like 2 cameras in one, you actually may not even need the Z6II. And if you do commercial work aswell or maybe product or landscapes you can actually do that too, this system simply doesnt limit you! Theres your extra 1000 bucks, creativity and imagination and this is my 0.02
I have the Z7 and absolutely love it, so I was hoping for a different conclusion 🤓. It is definitely not a low light beast, but with ample light it is phenomenal!
Yes so was I, they are both amazing cameras, though the Z6 is better is a few different ways. For me the Z7 doesn't justify the price, if they were a similar price it would make sense to me.
When I was looking to upgrade my camera from a D5600 I chose the Z7 over the Z6 because of the mp count so that I could keep using the cropped lenses. On a Z7 this is 45.7 / 1.5^2 = 20.31mp, which is still a decent mp count. On a Z6, however, this would have been 24.5 / 1.5^2 = 10.89mp, which is quite a big difference. Looking at the Z6ii vs Z7ii I couldn't come to a clear conclusion on picking one over the other, much like the video portrays - they both have their pros and cons. I'm hoping in the next year or so they have the rumoured Z8 as the Z9 is too bulky in comparison in my opinion.
In most situations the Z6/Z6II is the better choice. It is simply one of the best cameras for available light! If you need a Z7 because you have to crop all the time there is something wrong with your skills in photography! I can see only two ecological niches for the Z7II: Product- resp. still life photography, and wall-huge images of landscapes destinated for hallways, where people come close and want to see every detail in full sharpness, as on a painting of Peter Bruegel the Elder.
Both cameras are good. A good photographer would produce excellent images with both. The main use cases as you said might be hyper detailed landscape and giant enlargements or more realistically cropping in. Very large images are viewed at a distance and the advantages of more pixels are still slightly less obvious at long viewing distances. A really thoughtful review!
I pretty much agree with your conclusions. Since I mostly shoot landscape however, it's really no contest - 45MP at ISO 64 is the holy grail. That's quite annoying, coz I can see the Z6 is better at very low light and at video. I want one of each at the same price. (BTW you forgot to mention that the Z6II has a faster frame rate - just to add insult to the higher price of the Z7II)
That's a nice illustrative comparison you made. I subscribe to your general conclusions but still would buy the Z 7ii if I had a greenfield decision tomorrow. The question you neither ask and nor answer, and that I elaborated on below, is to what extent are we looking at Lightroom's raw processing when we compare cameras in Lr? I have no straightforward answer. And, if you choose D850 or Z 7(ii) resolution, then there are consequential costs that I mention. As we shoot raw, we have to be aware that, what we see in Lightroom, is the result of Lr's raw processing. The raw file has no RGB pixels but monochrome photosite data (this is where the 14 bits (***) gradation resolution are). When we look at DxO Mark's data for the Z Series i, then we see: [quote DxO Mark with comment on difference] Z 6 Z 7 (DxO Mark) 95 99 - difference ? Colour depth (bits) 25.3 26.3 - factor 2 and note that JPEG has 3*8=24 bits Dynamic Range (EV) 14.3 14.6 - less than 0.5 f-stop Low light (i.e. high ISO) 3,299 2,668 - less than 0.5 f-stop [end quote] Between the cameras we see a 'linear' resolution (diagonal (**) photosites) difference: 7,287 9,958 - 36.7% increase. Linear resolution predicts the quality difference (detail resolution) humans will perceive (ceteris paribus and assuming lenses that can reveal the best of both). Megapixels (MP) are an area number and exaggerate - fool our expectations. MP however do predict file size and processing power differences that are involved between the two. MP (#) are an engineer's way to tell you how smart they have been and a marketer's best friend to give you an illusion. As to low light, if we take the difference in DR into account then the 7 compares with the 6, actually. Detail resolution in photosites (a sensor has no pixels) aside, the absence of the "fuzzy filter" (*) in the 7 explains the improved contour sharpness. However, the absence of that fuzzy filter impacts raw processing and if Lr (you) do not apply a raw processing profile specifically for the no-fuzzy-filter 7 camera, then you loose some of the potential. I noticed with the 7 that Lr gave me "colour noise" that magically disappeared in Nikon's free raw processing app (now Nikon NX Studio), and it also disappeared in C1 (that had no specific profile yet) and it disappeared in Lr from shots with the 7, taken with older F mount lenses. The moral of the story is that, in LR we may look more at Lr than at the Nikon Z camera. As soon as we move to a camera without the fuzzy filter, we need to worry about Lr's detail sliders and its ability to handle the deBayerization (colour guessing) properly in absence of said filter. As deBayerization is combined with demosaicking, and some understanding of what is in the image helps to make decisions about what is artefact and what is not, how much colour noise we end up with depends on the AI in these algorithms. As to AF, there is a tiny Depth of Field (DoF) aspect between the 6 and 7 in that the 7 has more resolution and no fuzzy filter. This makes the Circle of Confusion smaller and this means you have less DoF at the same aperture. Also note that the square in the viewfinder indicating an AF focus lock is just the visual representation of underlying software. Influencers thought that a Nikon detected people slower than another brand but they just applied DoF wisdom and farther away locked on a person when closer by the software locked on an eye. In both cases, the person had been recognised and the eye was clear in that. With a recent firmware update, Nikon adapted this "informing you what it sees", not the underlying AF. I shoot the Z 7ii now since early last October, after over a year with the Z 7 and 45 years of single digit Nikon F and D cameras. I felt we do not need more than 24MP in the past but the Z/S glass is so good that the differences really show at large format or an excellent 4K display like an Eizo that has great contour sharpness. A Z 7 seriously competes with medium format (I also shot film MF and LF 8" x 10" in the past). The Z 7(ii) resolution (or D850) comes at a price. After my workstation broke down in the Z 7 (i) era, I bought a 2K notebook with 9th gen Intel i7, 16GB RAM and a discrete GPU with 4GB video RAM. The notebook has a 4K display and can drive 2 of these. Well, LR simply cannot run stable on that (****). I built a new workstation with 10th gen i7 and 64GB RAM, and a GPU with 11GB video RAM. Open a browser and a couple web pages, Outlook, Lr with one 45.7MP shot and Ps with no image and already over 32GB RAM and more than 6 GB video RAM are in use. In my configuration, the sky is the limit, you could say, but it has a price - if only the kWh it turns into heat every month (even with a Titanium efficiency power supply unit). The notebook now got degraded to tethering station in the studio, only allowed to run only Lr after a cold reboot in tether mode. Note that all this raw processing (or colour guessing) happens in camera when you shoot JPEG or MPEG and likely happens to generate the Live View in the eVF or the display. And it also happens in your smartphone's camera system. (*) Fuzzy filter - generally called either anti aliasing (AA) filter or low-pass filter. These filters disperse light travelling to one photosite in the sensor a bit to the surrounding photosites. Thus light travelling to photosite [x,y] arrives a bit in all the neighbours. [x,y] may have a green filter, so its neighbours have red or blue, or also green filters and the idea is that this dispersion helps raw processing. Basically it makes the mathematically precise and repeatable wild-assed guessing for missing colours easier. This "let's help image processing software in hardware" approach already got applied in the software with scanning tunnelling electron microscopes in the 1970s. (**) when frame aspect ratios are the same, you can take one side, but when you compare different aspect ratios the diagonal is more fair. (***) Raw processing turns 14 bits monochrome data and guesses the missing two colours. In the process we loose about 5 or 6 of the 14 bits and get 16 to 18 in return from the guessing - basically, though all three colours in RGB are guessed now. Raw processing can cause clearly visible artefacts that we call Moiré when we recognize it. But these artefacts can happen at pixel level and then we call them colour noise, assuming they come from the "sensor". Note that "sensor testing" is baloney and the sensor is colour-blind and analogue. We get 14 bits from an Analogue-to-Digital conversion based on camera manufacturer algorithm and monochrome RGGB-patterned raw data from camera manufacturer specified R, G and B filters (specified for wavelength and filter decay slope) and between all that and the raw file, the camera's firmware may change bits here and there, even. (****) Lr generates previews based on the horizontal display resolution and in the case of 2x 4K, that is 7,680 - it needs a lot of both RAM and video RAM for that. Or if you upgrade your GPU, you might be better off with an older GTX 1080ti than with a brand new RTX 3060. The RTX supports "ray tracing" - hence the RT in RTX - that is used to calculate patina in virtual worlds between light sources and viewpoints. Here my assumption is, that the Mudbricks have not yet found ways to use ray tracing instructions to speed up stills photography processing. (#) No members of parliament implied here. Engineers are just too smart for them.
@@alfredconqueror4422 - definitely. In some cases, you may want to reduce sharpness in post for obvious reasons. If you can afford the 7(ii) then just do it, when the extra money holds you back from buying "glass" I would opt for the glass. There are use cases when you may want the additional sharpness of the 7(ii) - say when you frequently shoot larger groups. People will zoom in on those to look at their own faces, or an attractive other person, whatever. In general, use cases where you need to nail it in one shot. In landscapes, you can shoot a panorama and stitch the individual shots into a big one and that is very easy. How you perceive the difference in sharpness between the 6(ii) and 7(ii) will depend on your raw processing software, though. Note that the 7 adds only about 40% resolution (linear) to the 6 and that the absence of the fuzzy filter may turn that into, say, 80% but the added contour sharpness only becomes visible with the best raw processing.
Really, the well equipped photographer might have one of each: the Z6 for low light, events or video; and the Z7 for landscape, products, or enlargement/ cropping.
@@russandloz The higher price for a higher resolution sensor and more focusing points, essentially, but you can get a Z7 body today for around 2300 USD.
Hi guys I just subbed. Firstly what a good well thought out comparison video. I'm a pro photographer who's recently getting back into the swing of things after a 17year gap. (I got burnt out and looking after my poorly wife). The last camera I bought from Nikon was a D3 and still use it now, so watching this upload I found interesting. In the late 80s and 90s I was fortunate to be able to gain the sponsorship of Nikon and obtained the F100 and F5 which served me well. Sadly after a long trip photographing wildlife or sporting events you had to wait to see the brilliant or total crap images that I took out of a 36 exposure film. When the D2h came out I thought it was heaven sent. Even at 4.1 mp I was still able to make money selling to magazines and papers and was even able to blow up useable images at A3. I absolutely love my D3 but keep being tempted to get mirrorless Z6II or Z7II. Very tough choice. probably the Z6II has the edge due to low light and faster frame rate. Or should I splash out and get the Z9? I never thought I would have so much difficulty in choosing. I agree with your price conclusion by the way as it makes total sense. The Z7II should have been no more than £200 to £500 more if solely based on mp. Keep up the good work guys. Maybe you could swing by and look at my little channel. I have found making videos takes away the necessary concentration, for me at least, when getting that shot. I do however have a tonne of vids that need to be edited and put up.
Thanks John, we are hoping the mark 2's get a firmware update so the autofocusing issues are resolved but we'll wait and see for that. Not to say they are usable now, its just annoying sometimes when it doesn't work especially in low light. Unless you need the extra crop, the z6ii is great camera you won't be disappointed in.
Hi there! Nice review. The thing is that you can print the same "big" size printings with the Z6. The 45 Megapixels will not help you seeing more details with a common size printing you do for the walls of your house. I am talking about 200cm x 150cm size printings here! It is huge! 200cm x 150cm is a massive picture in my wall here. And I took it with my D500 which has a 20MP sensor. The details are amazing! I will repeat: The details are amazing with just 20MP! You can see every little, micro thing in the picture. The 45MP thing is just for professionals who need to print real large scale photos. By large scale I mean the size of a street outdoor. I mean huge stuff! Nobody needs this kind of thing at home. Never. I mean NEVER! So, don't buy the Z7, unless you are a professional who really needs to print 15, 20 meters size pictures to be hung outside of a building in Manhattan! The other case scenario is: pixel peeping photographers who like to check their pictures in a computer monitor at 200% magnification. Yes, the 45MP will deliver more detail in this case, but who on earth will appreciate any picture this way? Nobody! What we love to look at is the overall composition, the lights around, the way the photographer saw and framed the picture. Nobody needs 200% magnification to check if a finger nail is in absolute focus. So, 24MP within the Z6 is much more, much more than enough for anything! What we definitely need to increase is the quality of the lenses we use. Spend your money on better lenses. Don't spend money on more megapixels that nobody needs!
I have a z6 and z7ii, use depends on what your shooting. Landscape such as Yosemite the 7 without a doubt is the tool. The color rendering is outstanding with outstanding detail. Not to mention the dynamic range. Use for wildlife is far better for the same reasons. The version 2 is much better overall. Low light the 6 is the tool, with that said do you really shoot at 51,000, no. The use of a tripod and lower shutter speed renders best results. Often comparisons are at extremes that most would not use nor care about. Portrait with an 85mm 1.8 I like the 6 with less detail, especially shooting in B&W. The 7 captures everything, the ultra sharp z lens picks up amazing detail that can be too much. Lens quality on both is key with native lens far better, just need a 100-400mm S.
Hum! I am considering trading in my D850 for either the Z6ii or Z7ii. After watching this video I think I will choose the Z6ii. Maybe my eyes are bad but it appeared to me the images and video from the Z6ii were sharper with less noise.
@@russandloz compared them in LR also when converted to Jpegs.. have 2-Z6's, 1-Z6ii and a Z7ii..all of my Z6 generations was perfect until i got the Z7ii..and i seldom crop the Z7ii image to get the full potential of the image quality it produces, I frame my shots properly ,if i can get out of cropping ill take the extra time to compose..i was hesitant before, but when bought my first Z7ii,i was impressed, selling my 2-Z6's soon and getting another Z7ii..
@@camilo8cheryl in another comment you Said you sell your 50mm 1.8 to get a z6ii. here you said you would like to get another z7ii.... How did you decide?
@@papisjungle3716 sold my 2-z6's and 50 1.8, did not went to getting another Z7ii, and just taking time off and saving some more for a Z9 body.. hope i can get it by spring.. its just huge like getting back on my D700 with battery grip days..my local hobby RC club wanted to get my services for their 2022 race outdoor season and the Z9 will likely can deliver focusing speed accuracy on those tiny but fast 1/8th scale RC buggies..
Many thanks for making a very valuable video I have been longing for a z7 since I got my Z6 I assume your conclusions would remain for the mk1 versions of these cameras as well
I also stay with my Z6 Version 1 - the difference in performance of the second version does not justify the price difference. Image quality is the same. Nor do I need the resolution of the Z7/Z7II in most cases. Maybe the situation will change with the appearance of a third generation, which perhapts will combine resolution and high ISO- capability in a better way.
I got the Z6 mark I which I chose over the Z7, I weighed it because I do a lot of night photography and figured it would be better. And yes price. Would like to have a Z7III in the future for daytime use. I do find it annoying though that the shutter speed only goes to 30s on mark one and 15min shutter speed on markII. Do a software upgrade for that one common!
Well - the advantages of the Z7 II are very obvious when zooming in - of course, no doubt ! And there is one thing you did not mention at all ! When you sample the 47mp down to the same 24 mp of the Z6II the noise should be on the same level between the 2 cameras - so with a little extra afford one can even level both cameras for low light results !
Great video guys. I probably watch this every couple weeks to remind myself I don’t need a Z7ii with my Z6ii. Your video saves me $3k at least once a month lol. Seriously great video. Are either of you going to get the Z9?
Thanks Alan, we like to think we offer an alternative buying guide to help people get the best gear for their user case. We also have a video on our thoughts about the Z9 coming out soon!
Great video and it answered the exact questions that I have been asking as I am trying to decide between the two cameras. My point of reference would be the D500 as yours is the D850. Does the Z7ii have better low light performance than the D850?
D850 is a legendary camera but can't compete with the new technology including the ISO performance which is much better. The Z lenses are also much better wide open to help that. The only drawback is the the snappier DSLR focussing isn't quite there yet on these Z bodies.
I have the z7 and I love it and especially in landscape photography. I also like to have a very good low light performance and a good dynamic range. When I start to edit the pictures that I took in iso 3200 or 2000 of the z7 I see a lot of noise when I bump up the shadows. I have downloaded some high iso files of the nikon z6 II and for me they look a lot cleaner. Iam considering to swap my z7 for a z6ii mainly for the low light performance but also for the better auto focus.
I would say the z7 is the same in low light up to a certain point if you have it on 14 bit full raw files, though the autofocus is the same in my experience. But yes the z6 is better in really low light.
One could say just get a longer lens which can be a cost issue but with the Z7 I think by setting the camera to DX crop in place of that telephoto is a good option.
I’d like the z6/7 mk 3 to have the processor in the z8/9, so it can autofocus like those cameras, and also the sensor protector for when changing lenses. Could just have the shutter close when camera off. Maybe z6-3 could have around 30mega pixels. (Z5 @ 26mp, z6 @ 30ish mp, and z7 @ 45mp)
@@russandloz Indeed. And you examined two issues that can make a big difference in photography. It makes sense to not over value a big pixel count. Yes, with good light, you will get more detail and bigger blow ups for posters, or bill boards. The Z6II appears to have more capabilities, and better design, for video. Both cameras have excellent features. One other field the Z7II might also shine is in technical photography. Lighting conditions are often easier to control and even finer detail could be achieved. It is a trade off. The Z9, wonder how that will compare. It may have the best of both worlds, but expensive.
Using the right lens is sometimes cost or time prohibitive. The extra mp gives you more options, especially with primes. When shooting for prints you are often cropping for ratio. or is every shot a 4x6?
I usually edit with the 10x8 ratio as this is better for printing options too. We have an updated video we just made with the z6 Vs z7 worth watching. 😊
@@russandloz8x10doesnt matter .I find a difference at 16x20,but useable, 24x30 I much prefer the high mp. The larger you print the more obvious the differences 16 vs 30mp.
@@russandloz so do I. I think the z7 might out perform the z6 at 24mp in low light at the same iso setting. Please let me know how you get on if you decide to do a test
Nice review, but now I’m confused. This is because I do both landscape and astro - I need both megapixels for the landscapes (which I had in spades when I had a D800), and good low-light performance for nightscapes (which I get brilliantly with my current D750). On the D750 I miss not being able to crop in so much. Hmmm - it’s a difficult choice as I can’t afford to do both.
@@russandloz Thanks for the suggestion, but I believe it still has the higher MP count (same sensor as the D850 I think), which means smaller pixels with the associated effect on low-light performance.
thx for this usefull test, seen more than one test and you nail it. and you get the camera's where there weekest point is. high iso and focus then. Off course the camera's are good, but how good!! and yes the price difference is rediculus... why.... and the 6 is still not cheap!
Thanks for this video. I have a question as a portrait photographer I shoot a lot of people in suits and I am finding with the Z62 I am getting more Moire patterns than with my D850 or D4. I understand the Z62 does not have the AA filter and the Z72 does have the AA filter? Is that correct? Does that mean I will get more problems with Moire on suit fabric with the z7ii than with the Z62? This causes a lot of extra work for me and post processing (sometimes making it unusable) I’m wondering if you can test that to compare it. I’m sure a lot of portrait photographers would be interested in the results. It happens a lot with sweaters and tightly woven fabric.
Why would the image appear closer on the Z7 II versus the Z6 II? The number of megapixels should have no affect on the perceived focal length. That’s very strange.
@@russandloz In your video, I thought you were saying at full size (not cropped) the Z7 II image appeared closer than the image from the Z6 II. This makes no sense to me. They’re having a Nikon Event at my local camera shop this weekend. I own the Z7 and a Z7 II. I have to go in and compare the Z7 II to the Z6 II with the same lens to check this for myself.
I thought that was weird as well when the 100% crop in LR brings the image closer on the Z7. I googled it and apparently 100% crop means one image pixel equals one hardware screen pixel. So I think that somehow that explains it !
Well in that case nikon d750 or d780 should be same price as d810 and d850... If u cant value details n ISO 64 raw dynamic range then high megapixel cameras not for you
RIDICULOUS COMPARISON, BECAUSE THEY ARE DIFFERENT MEGAPIXELS YOU WILL ALWAYS GET A BETTER IMAGE IN THE ONE WITH MORE MPX BY ZOOMING IN, IT IS OBVIOUS... IT WOULD BE BETTER IF YOU CLOSER THE SUBJECT TO THE EQUIVALENT DISTANCE, THERE YOU WOULD GET YOUR FINAL ANSWER
Our videos shows how good the z6 is cropping in too. But people would be interested to see the a actual difference so they can make a decision. We welcome constructive criticism but I think your caps lock is broken too.
@@russandloz involuntary capital letters by the translator copy and paste... but I emphasize that the comparison was poorly made, you must equate the distances to obtain the object of the same size and zoom, so you get the real result, because it makes no sense to zoom in two objects that appear at different distances, the closer one will always be better.
@@cristianfuentes69 Our first sharpness tests start from exactly the same position but again we wanted to show what the z7 extra crop can do in comparison.
![TEEDEE TADA - DIAMOND NARAKORN X LEGO LYKN [Special Dance Performance]](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/QgtZedFeumA/mqdefault.jpg)
For those saying Z6II is better in low light, shoot medium on the Z7II and there you go the difference is barely noticeable by you and only the software you editing with will pick up the differnece. Both systems are excellent and almost identical - you get the z6ii to save money and get a great camera and maybe a lens or you get the Z7II to crop and get a great camera. I am wedding photographer and I shoot with both. Z7II is superior, all the details, ring shots, bridal groom portraits, group shots, elopement and stylized shoots. Both can do it pretty well but Z7ii does it better due the fact that is so darn sharp and if you are a pixel peeper its so pleasing. Usually on a wedding day its 60% Z6ii (not so important shots) and 40% Z7II but the Z7II gives you the option to shoot mRAW at almost 30mpx which is great its like 2 cameras in one, you actually may not even need the Z6II. And if you do commercial work aswell or maybe product or landscapes you can actually do that too, this system simply doesnt limit you! Theres your extra 1000 bucks, creativity and imagination and this is my 0.02
I have the Z7 and absolutely love it, so I was hoping for a different conclusion 🤓. It is definitely not a low light beast, but with ample light it is phenomenal!
Yes so was I, they are both amazing cameras, though the Z6 is better is a few different ways. For me the Z7 doesn't justify the price, if they were a similar price it would make sense to me.
@@russandloz I think the sensor in the Z7 is very expensive.
@@NVIK5 It must be, though if you need better low light the Z6 is more valuable?
When I was looking to upgrade my camera from a D5600 I chose the Z7 over the Z6 because of the mp count so that I could keep using the cropped lenses. On a Z7 this is 45.7 / 1.5^2 = 20.31mp, which is still a decent mp count. On a Z6, however, this would have been 24.5 / 1.5^2 = 10.89mp, which is quite a big difference.
Looking at the Z6ii vs Z7ii I couldn't come to a clear conclusion on picking one over the other, much like the video portrays - they both have their pros and cons. I'm hoping in the next year or so they have the rumoured Z8 as the Z9 is too bulky in comparison in my opinion.
Yes, we don't want to go back to bulky heavy bodies.
In most situations the Z6/Z6II is the better choice. It is simply one of the best cameras for available light! If you need a Z7 because you have to crop all the time there is something wrong with your skills in photography! I can see only two ecological niches for the Z7II: Product- resp. still life photography, and wall-huge images of landscapes destinated for hallways, where people come close and want to see every detail in full sharpness, as on a painting of Peter Bruegel the Elder.
Both cameras are good. A good photographer would produce excellent images with both. The main use cases as you said might be hyper detailed landscape and giant enlargements or more realistically cropping in. Very large images are viewed at a distance and the advantages of more pixels are still slightly less obvious at long viewing distances. A really thoughtful review!
I pretty much agree with your conclusions. Since I mostly shoot landscape however, it's really no contest - 45MP at ISO 64 is the holy grail. That's quite annoying, coz I can see the Z6 is better at very low light and at video. I want one of each at the same price. (BTW you forgot to mention that the Z6II has a faster frame rate - just to add insult to the higher price of the Z7II)
Yes I can see for landscape it is a better choice and we agree it should be the same lower price.
But is the image quality on the z7 better then z6 at 45mp? Also z7 is better at dynamic range
That's a nice illustrative comparison you made. I subscribe to your general conclusions but still would buy the Z 7ii if I had a greenfield decision tomorrow. The question you neither ask and nor answer, and that I elaborated on below, is to what extent are we looking at Lightroom's raw processing when we compare cameras in Lr? I have no straightforward answer. And, if you choose D850 or Z 7(ii) resolution, then there are consequential costs that I mention.
As we shoot raw, we have to be aware that, what we see in Lightroom, is the result of Lr's raw processing. The raw file has no RGB pixels but monochrome photosite data (this is where the 14 bits (***) gradation resolution are). When we look at DxO Mark's data for the Z Series i, then we see:
[quote DxO Mark with comment on difference]
Z 6 Z 7 (DxO Mark) 95 99 - difference ?
Colour depth (bits) 25.3 26.3 - factor 2 and note that JPEG has 3*8=24 bits
Dynamic Range (EV) 14.3 14.6 - less than 0.5 f-stop
Low light (i.e. high ISO) 3,299 2,668 - less than 0.5 f-stop
[end quote]
Between the cameras we see a 'linear' resolution (diagonal (**) photosites) difference: 7,287 9,958 - 36.7% increase. Linear resolution predicts the quality difference (detail resolution) humans will perceive (ceteris paribus and assuming lenses that can reveal the best of both). Megapixels (MP) are an area number and exaggerate - fool our expectations. MP however do predict file size and processing power differences that are involved between the two. MP (#) are an engineer's way to tell you how smart they have been and a marketer's best friend to give you an illusion.
As to low light, if we take the difference in DR into account then the 7 compares with the 6, actually.
Detail resolution in photosites (a sensor has no pixels) aside, the absence of the "fuzzy filter" (*) in the 7 explains the improved contour sharpness. However, the absence of that fuzzy filter impacts raw processing and if Lr (you) do not apply a raw processing profile specifically for the no-fuzzy-filter 7 camera, then you loose some of the potential.
I noticed with the 7 that Lr gave me "colour noise" that magically disappeared in Nikon's free raw processing app (now Nikon NX Studio), and it also disappeared in C1 (that had no specific profile yet) and it disappeared in Lr from shots with the 7, taken with older F mount lenses.
The moral of the story is that, in LR we may look more at Lr than at the Nikon Z camera.
As soon as we move to a camera without the fuzzy filter, we need to worry about Lr's detail sliders and its ability to handle the deBayerization (colour guessing) properly in absence of said filter. As deBayerization is combined with demosaicking, and some understanding of what is in the image helps to make decisions about what is artefact and what is not, how much colour noise we end up with depends on the AI in these algorithms.
As to AF, there is a tiny Depth of Field (DoF) aspect between the 6 and 7 in that the 7 has more resolution and no fuzzy filter. This makes the Circle of Confusion smaller and this means you have less DoF at the same aperture. Also note that the square in the viewfinder indicating an AF focus lock is just the visual representation of underlying software. Influencers thought that a Nikon detected people slower than another brand but they just applied DoF wisdom and farther away locked on a person when closer by the software locked on an eye. In both cases, the person had been recognised and the eye was clear in that. With a recent firmware update, Nikon adapted this "informing you what it sees", not the underlying AF.
I shoot the Z 7ii now since early last October, after over a year with the Z 7 and 45 years of single digit Nikon F and D cameras. I felt we do not need more than 24MP in the past but the Z/S glass is so good that the differences really show at large format or an excellent 4K display like an Eizo that has great contour sharpness. A Z 7 seriously competes with medium format (I also shot film MF and LF 8" x 10" in the past).
The Z 7(ii) resolution (or D850) comes at a price. After my workstation broke down in the Z 7 (i) era, I bought a 2K notebook with 9th gen Intel i7, 16GB RAM and a discrete GPU with 4GB video RAM. The notebook has a 4K display and can drive 2 of these. Well, LR simply cannot run stable on that (****). I built a new workstation with 10th gen i7 and 64GB RAM, and a GPU with 11GB video RAM. Open a browser and a couple web pages, Outlook, Lr with one 45.7MP shot and Ps with no image and already over 32GB RAM and more than 6 GB video RAM are in use. In my configuration, the sky is the limit, you could say, but it has a price - if only the kWh it turns into heat every month (even with a Titanium efficiency power supply unit). The notebook now got degraded to tethering station in the studio, only allowed to run only Lr after a cold reboot in tether mode.
Note that all this raw processing (or colour guessing) happens in camera when you shoot JPEG or MPEG and likely happens to generate the Live View in the eVF or the display. And it also happens in your smartphone's camera system.
(*) Fuzzy filter - generally called either anti aliasing (AA) filter or low-pass filter. These filters disperse light travelling to one photosite in the sensor a bit to the surrounding photosites. Thus light travelling to photosite [x,y] arrives a bit in all the neighbours. [x,y] may have a green filter, so its neighbours have red or blue, or also green filters and the idea is that this dispersion helps raw processing. Basically it makes the mathematically precise and repeatable wild-assed guessing for missing colours easier. This "let's help image processing software in hardware" approach already got applied in the software with scanning tunnelling electron microscopes in the 1970s.
(**) when frame aspect ratios are the same, you can take one side, but when you compare different aspect ratios the diagonal is more fair.
(***) Raw processing turns 14 bits monochrome data and guesses the missing two colours. In the process we loose about 5 or 6 of the 14 bits and get 16 to 18 in return from the guessing - basically, though all three colours in RGB are guessed now. Raw processing can cause clearly visible artefacts that we call Moiré when we recognize it. But these artefacts can happen at pixel level and then we call them colour noise, assuming they come from the "sensor". Note that "sensor testing" is baloney and the sensor is colour-blind and analogue. We get 14 bits from an Analogue-to-Digital conversion based on camera manufacturer algorithm and monochrome RGGB-patterned raw data from camera manufacturer specified R, G and B filters (specified for wavelength and filter decay slope) and between all that and the raw file, the camera's firmware may change bits here and there, even.
(****) Lr generates previews based on the horizontal display resolution and in the case of 2x 4K, that is 7,680 - it needs a lot of both RAM and video RAM for that. Or if you upgrade your GPU, you might be better off with an older GTX 1080ti than with a brand new RTX 3060. The RTX supports "ray tracing" - hence the RT in RTX - that is used to calculate patina in virtual worlds between light sources and viewpoints. Here my assumption is, that the Mudbricks have not yet found ways to use ray tracing instructions to speed up stills photography processing.
(#) No members of parliament implied here. Engineers are just too smart for them.
So If I want to shoot models and portraits the Z6II is enough?
@@alfredconqueror4422 - definitely. In some cases, you may want to reduce sharpness in post for obvious reasons. If you can afford the 7(ii) then just do it, when the extra money holds you back from buying "glass" I would opt for the glass.
There are use cases when you may want the additional sharpness of the 7(ii) - say when you frequently shoot larger groups. People will zoom in on those to look at their own faces, or an attractive other person, whatever. In general, use cases where you need to nail it in one shot. In landscapes, you can shoot a panorama and stitch the individual shots into a big one and that is very easy. How you perceive the difference in sharpness between the 6(ii) and 7(ii) will depend on your raw processing software, though. Note that the 7 adds only about 40% resolution (linear) to the 6 and that the absence of the fuzzy filter may turn that into, say, 80% but the added contour sharpness only becomes visible with the best raw processing.
Really, the well equipped photographer might have one of each: the Z6 for low light, events or video; and the Z7 for landscape, products, or enlargement/ cropping.
That's what I have! Although I don't think the 50% increase in price is justified?
@@russandloz The higher price for a higher resolution sensor and more focusing points, essentially, but you can get a Z7 body today for around 2300 USD.
Hi guys I just subbed. Firstly what a good well thought out comparison video.
I'm a pro photographer who's recently getting back into the swing of things after a 17year gap. (I got burnt out and looking after my poorly wife).
The last camera I bought from Nikon was a D3 and still use it now, so watching this upload I found interesting. In the late 80s and 90s I was fortunate to be able to gain the sponsorship of Nikon and obtained the F100 and F5 which served me well. Sadly after a long trip photographing wildlife or sporting events you had to wait to see the brilliant or total crap images that I took out of a 36 exposure film. When the D2h came out I thought it was heaven sent. Even at 4.1 mp I was still able to make money selling to magazines and papers and was even able to blow up useable images at A3.
I absolutely love my D3 but keep being tempted to get mirrorless Z6II or Z7II. Very tough choice. probably the Z6II has the edge due to low light and faster frame rate. Or should I splash out and get the Z9? I never thought I would have so much difficulty in choosing.
I agree with your price conclusion by the way as it makes total sense. The Z7II should have been no more than £200 to £500 more if solely based on mp.
Keep up the good work guys. Maybe you could swing by and look at my little channel.
I have found making videos takes away the necessary concentration, for me at least, when getting that shot. I do however have a tonne of vids that need to be edited and put up.
Thanks John, we are hoping the mark 2's get a firmware update so the autofocusing issues are resolved but we'll wait and see for that. Not to say they are usable now, its just annoying sometimes when it doesn't work especially in low light.
Unless you need the extra crop, the z6ii is great camera you won't be disappointed in.
Hi there! Nice review. The thing is that you can print the same "big" size printings with the Z6. The 45 Megapixels will not help you seeing more details with a common size printing you do for the walls of your house. I am talking about 200cm x 150cm size printings here! It is huge! 200cm x 150cm is a massive picture in my wall here. And I took it with my D500 which has a 20MP sensor. The details are amazing! I will repeat: The details are amazing with just 20MP! You can see every little, micro thing in the picture. The 45MP thing is just for professionals who need to print real large scale photos. By large scale I mean the size of a street outdoor. I mean huge stuff! Nobody needs this kind of thing at home. Never. I mean NEVER! So, don't buy the Z7, unless you are a professional who really needs to print 15, 20 meters size pictures to be hung outside of a building in Manhattan! The other case scenario is: pixel peeping photographers who like to check their pictures in a computer monitor at 200% magnification. Yes, the 45MP will deliver more detail in this case, but who on earth will appreciate any picture this way? Nobody! What we love to look at is the overall composition, the lights around, the way the photographer saw and framed the picture. Nobody needs 200% magnification to check if a finger nail is in absolute focus. So, 24MP within the Z6 is much more, much more than enough for anything! What we definitely need to increase is the quality of the lenses we use. Spend your money on better lenses. Don't spend money on more megapixels that nobody needs!
Your info just isnt true. Sure you can print big with a z6, but it wont stand out like a z7 print. You can see the difference in a 16x20.
I have a z6 and z7ii, use depends on what your shooting. Landscape such as Yosemite the 7 without a doubt is the tool. The color rendering is outstanding with outstanding detail. Not to mention the dynamic range. Use for wildlife is far better for the same reasons. The version 2 is much better overall.
Low light the 6 is the tool, with that said do you really shoot at 51,000, no. The use of a tripod and lower shutter speed renders best results. Often comparisons are at extremes that most would not use nor care about.
Portrait with an 85mm 1.8 I like the 6 with less detail, especially shooting in B&W. The 7 captures everything, the ultra sharp z lens picks up amazing detail that can be too much.
Lens quality on both is key with native lens far better, just need a 100-400mm S.
Hum! I am considering trading in my D850 for either the Z6ii or Z7ii. After watching this video I think I will choose the Z6ii. Maybe my eyes are bad but it appeared to me the images and video from the Z6ii were sharper with less noise.
THe z6ii will be better for low light and lower noise unless you need the higher megapixels. Will also save you money.
Agree. I love my Z6ii. Just like picked up Z MC 105mm 2.8 and it’s amazing.
Z7ii is still has superior image quality vs the Z6ii when i compare my photos..i always pair my Z7ii and 50 1.2S and its a killer combo!
Interesting, how is it better apart from the extra crop ability?
@@russandloz compared them in LR also when converted to Jpegs.. have 2-Z6's, 1-Z6ii and a Z7ii..all of my Z6 generations was perfect until i got the Z7ii..and i seldom crop the Z7ii image to get the full potential of the image quality it produces, I frame my shots properly ,if i can get out of cropping ill take the extra time to compose..i was hesitant before, but when bought my first Z7ii,i was impressed, selling my 2-Z6's soon and getting another Z7ii..
@@camilo8cheryl in another comment you Said you sell your 50mm 1.8 to get a z6ii. here you said you would like to get another z7ii.... How did you decide?
@@papisjungle3716 sold my 2-z6's and 50 1.8, did not went to getting another Z7ii, and just taking time off and saving some more for a Z9 body.. hope i can get it by spring.. its just huge like getting back on my D700 with battery grip days..my local hobby RC club wanted to get my services for their 2022 race outdoor season and the Z9 will likely can deliver focusing speed accuracy on those tiny but fast 1/8th scale RC buggies..
Many thanks for making a very valuable video I have been longing for a z7 since I got my Z6 I assume your conclusions would remain for the mk1 versions of these cameras as well
We think they would to be honest
Thanks, yeah really the MKii's are functional additions more than image quality improvements.
I also stay with my Z6 Version 1 - the difference in performance of the second version does not justify the price difference. Image quality is the same. Nor do I need the resolution of the Z7/Z7II in most cases. Maybe the situation will change with the appearance of a third generation, which perhapts will combine resolution and high ISO- capability in a better way.
@@markusbolliger1527 Many thanks for replying I think I will stay with my Z6 and ignore my GAS many thanks
I got the Z6 mark I which I chose over the Z7, I weighed it because I do a lot of night photography and figured it would be better. And yes price. Would like to have a Z7III in the future for daytime use. I do find it annoying though that the shutter speed only goes to 30s on mark one and 15min shutter speed on markII. Do a software upgrade for that one common!
Yeah I feel they could improve things based on the z9 improvements
Well - the advantages of the Z7 II are very obvious when zooming in - of course, no doubt !
And there is one thing you did not mention at all !
When you sample the 47mp down to the same 24 mp of the Z6II the noise should be on the same level between the 2 cameras -
so with a little extra afford one can even level both cameras for low light results !
We’ve got an updated comparison where we have done just that. 😊
This was a really helpful comparison, thanks 👍 :)
Great video guys. I probably watch this every couple weeks to remind myself I don’t need a Z7ii with my Z6ii. Your video saves me $3k at least once a month lol. Seriously great video. Are either of you going to get the Z9?
Thanks Alan, we like to think we offer an alternative buying guide to help people get the best gear for their user case. We also have a video on our thoughts about the Z9 coming out soon!
I still have a bunch of apsc lenses, so using them on z6 is too little mega pixel for them. Z7 is for me
I would like to see how the z7ii does when using iso 6400 as this is the iso I shoot indoor sports with the D850.
The jpgs are disappointing but NEFs processed in ACR are very good, no reason to avoid ISO 6400.
Great video and it answered the exact questions that I have been asking as I am trying to decide between the two cameras. My point of reference would be the D500 as yours is the D850. Does the Z7ii have better low light performance than the D850?
D850 is a legendary camera but can't compete with the new technology including the ISO performance which is much better. The Z lenses are also much better wide open to help that. The only drawback is the the snappier DSLR focussing isn't quite there yet on these Z bodies.
z7ii or z6ii. which of the two cameras has better ibis?
Both the same as far as I’m aware?
Can not see any difference on my net all the pictures are less sharp, but if I had to choose I would go for the Z6 II (on internett).
I have the z7 and I love it and especially in landscape photography. I also like to have a very good low light performance and a good dynamic range. When I start to edit the pictures that I took in iso 3200 or 2000 of the z7 I see a lot of noise when I bump up the shadows. I have downloaded some high iso files of the nikon z6 II and for me they look a lot cleaner. Iam considering to swap my z7 for a z6ii mainly for the low light performance but also for the better auto focus.
I would say the z7 is the same in low light up to a certain point if you have it on 14 bit full raw files, though the autofocus is the same in my experience. But yes the z6 is better in really low light.
One could say just get a longer lens which can be a cost issue but with the Z7 I think by setting the camera to DX crop in place of that telephoto is a good option.
The Z7 crop power is nice, though I'm sure its the same cropping in from a full res photo and using dx mode?
I’d like the z6/7 mk 3 to have the processor in the z8/9, so it can autofocus like those cameras, and also the sensor protector for when changing lenses. Could just have the shutter close when camera off. Maybe z6-3 could have around 30mega pixels. (Z5 @ 26mp, z6 @ 30ish mp, and z7 @ 45mp)
Yeah it would be nice. But then it’s very close to being a z8. What wouldn’t it have to make it cheaper?
Very honest evaluation. Thanks.
Thank you, we do try
@@russandloz Indeed. And you examined two issues that can make a big difference in photography. It makes sense to not over value a big pixel count. Yes, with good light, you will get more detail and bigger blow ups for posters, or bill boards. The Z6II appears to have more capabilities, and better design, for video. Both cameras have excellent features. One other field the Z7II might also shine is in technical photography. Lighting conditions are often easier to control and even finer detail could be achieved. It is a trade off. The Z9, wonder how that will compare. It may have the best of both worlds, but expensive.
Using the right lens is sometimes cost or time prohibitive. The extra mp gives you more options, especially with primes. When shooting for prints you are often cropping for ratio. or is every shot a 4x6?
I usually edit with the 10x8 ratio as this is better for printing options too. We have an updated video we just made with the z6 Vs z7 worth watching. 😊
@@russandlozSeen it, Love you guys. My point was the 24mp z6 is now 16 mp simply by cropping to 8x10. Z7 is 30mp 8x10. I prefer the flexibility of 30.
@@johncooper9746 I see what you mean. Does this make much difference with printing then?
@@russandloz8x10doesnt matter .I find a difference at 16x20,but useable, 24x30 I much prefer the high mp. The larger you print the more obvious the differences 16 vs 30mp.
I am a concert photographer so the z6Ii would appear to be my logical upgrade then……I am still on the fence
Would the original Z6 work for you?
@@russandloz ooh haven’t event thought about the og z6! Time to do some homework on that!
@@mattlocks We have a video comparing those too!
Have you tried changing the z7ii to 24megapixels raw to compare in low light?
That might be worth comparing as I do shoot 24 MP with my z7 for weddings.
@@russandloz so do I. I think the z7 might out perform the z6 at 24mp in low light at the same iso setting. Please let me know how you get on if you decide to do a test
Nice review, but now I’m confused. This is because I do both landscape and astro - I need both megapixels for the landscapes (which I had in spades when I had a D800), and good low-light performance for nightscapes (which I get brilliantly with my current D750). On the D750 I miss not being able to crop in so much. Hmmm - it’s a difficult choice as I can’t afford to do both.
How about a z7i if you find a quality used price?
@@russandloz Thanks for the suggestion, but I believe it still has the higher MP count (same sensor as the D850 I think), which means smaller pixels with the associated effect on low-light performance.
@@NigelBaileyPhotography I would say the z7 is really good in low light so the benefits out way the possible issues.
thx for this usefull test, seen more than one test and you nail it.
and you get the camera's where there weekest point is. high iso and focus then.
Off course the camera's are good, but how good!!
and yes the price difference is rediculus... why.... and the 6 is still not cheap!
Thanks, they are both good in low light, though the Z6 is much better in that case.
The comparison/evaluation about iso 64 is not fair as the real value for that low iso is all about landscape photography and dynamic range.
Which Has More True Color?
Love the channel, best on the net right now
Thanks Rob! We enjoy what we do even if not everyone else does !
Thanks for this video. I have a question as a portrait photographer I shoot a lot of people in suits and I am finding with the Z62 I am getting more Moire patterns than with my D850 or D4. I understand the Z62 does not have the AA filter and the Z72 does have the AA filter? Is that correct? Does that mean I will get more problems with Moire on suit fabric with the z7ii than with the Z62? This causes a lot of extra work for me and post processing (sometimes making it unusable) I’m wondering if you can test that to compare it. I’m sure a lot of portrait photographers would be interested in the results. It happens a lot with sweaters and tightly woven fabric.
Hi Karen, the Z6 versions have the AA filter, the Z7 versions don't. I've never noticed in my shoots so far but yes it might be worth a video.
Why would the image appear closer on the Z7 II versus the Z6 II? The number of megapixels should have no affect on the perceived focal length. That’s very strange.
I'm not sure how Lightroom computes but I guess 100% crop on a bigger file is able to be closer based on photo quality not focal length.
@@russandloz In your video, I thought you were saying at full size (not cropped) the Z7 II image appeared closer than the image from the Z6 II. This makes no sense to me. They’re having a Nikon Event at my local camera shop this weekend. I own the Z7 and a Z7 II. I have to go in and compare the Z7 II to the Z6 II with the same lens to check this for myself.
@@guyyowell8547 Without cropping they are the same, when using 100% crop the bigger files are closer.
I thought that was weird as well when the 100% crop in LR brings the image closer on the Z7. I googled it and apparently 100% crop means one image pixel equals one hardware screen pixel. So I think that somehow that explains it !
Have you noticed the z6ii getting purple as you pull up deep shadows.
Yes. Unfortunately the z7 and z6 have a different colour tone. Quite annoying.
@@russandloz So for low light, maybe 10000 iso, where you had to pull out the shadows and do some minor cropping, which camera would you choose.
@@tc6912 The Z6 then if you don't need the crop. It has a higher iso and cheaper!
So what i am hearing is that the Z7 Ii should be roughly the same price as the Z6 II.
Yes, both have different capabilities, depend what you value more in a camera?
Another educational video
z7ii or z6ii for portraits?
Z6ii is plenty for portraits
Seems like the Nikon Z6II has superior color and functionality over the Z7II.
I would say the colour is the same, though yes it has a better low light function.
Or both... As said, different use cases 🤔
Yes, I have both which is a great combo.
Well in that case nikon d750 or d780 should be same price as d810 and d850... If u cant value details n ISO 64 raw dynamic range then high megapixel cameras not for you
Z7II is line skipping in 4k, but it has 4k 60p full frame.
And how many native lenses ? :)
Little diff on Sony a73 vs a7R3
At low light i sleep -_-'
In terms of colors Canon 5D mark 1 can't be beat.
Interesting as most people say Nikon has the nicer colour rendition. Guess it’s subjective.
If you zoom in and you see a difference, then there is a difference.
You can crop in quite far with both and further with the z7, but how much does the average photographer need?
Nikon z6ii weeding Photoshop best ya Nikon z6ii price comparison ...and. Online photography best z6ii ya z7ii
Z62 in wedding photography and videography best choice...afcos
RIDICULOUS COMPARISON, BECAUSE THEY ARE DIFFERENT MEGAPIXELS YOU WILL ALWAYS GET A BETTER IMAGE IN THE ONE WITH MORE MPX BY ZOOMING IN, IT IS OBVIOUS... IT WOULD BE BETTER IF YOU CLOSER THE SUBJECT TO THE EQUIVALENT DISTANCE, THERE YOU WOULD GET YOUR FINAL ANSWER
Our videos shows how good the z6 is cropping in too. But people would be interested to see the a actual difference so they can make a decision. We welcome constructive criticism but I think your caps lock is broken too.
@@russandloz involuntary capital letters by the translator copy and paste... but I emphasize that the comparison was poorly made, you must equate the distances to obtain the object of the same size and zoom, so you get the real result, because it makes no sense to zoom in two objects that appear at different distances, the closer one will always be better.
@@cristianfuentes69 Our first sharpness tests start from exactly the same position but again we wanted to show what the z7 extra crop can do in comparison.
Hey Guys, random question. Is there anyway you can do a review on the F mount Tamron 70-200 G2 vs Z mount 70-200 S on the Z6, Z7 or Mark IIs.
Sorry Max, we don't have any non Z lenses anymore as we've found they are always better.
Love Loz. Is Loz single?
Much better z7 ii
Ok, why do you think so? I’d be interested to know. 😊