I was referring to the OP.

If the camera is poo, then do it in a full review using data, critical thinking and let the chips fall where they will. Do not put headlines after headlines of sensational crap. If Nikon Z7 sucks, then write it down in a review. Have the guts to say it and back it up.

They have [more or less and in a way that upsets as few snowflakes as possible] said it in that summary. You don't like it. That's tough.
No doubt a full and comprehensive review putting the meat on these shocking bones will follow at some point, just as such reviews will be forthcoming for the rash of other new cameras just launched and about to be launched.

This isn't a 'first impression'. This is a summary of what they have found so far after considerable use in as many circumstances as practical. Everyone, and certainly the press should be allowed to express their honest critical opinion and while some would consider it brave of people like the Northrups and DPReview to be honest and tell it as they see it in an unbiassed way, I would that it is their absolute duty to be honest, unbiassed and as a consequence, sometimes controversial. Their long term reputation and integrity depends on it to rational intelligent people who want to know it all. Warts and all, while being politic!

Unfortunately, "click baiting, multi-slide clicking" is a reflection of what ultimately justifies ad funded web sites, where they are measured by metrics among which include page visits, session length, unique visitors and yes, click throughs. That is the model of how sites like DPReview and others like it are able to exist, by how much and how long people like you and I visit their sites, linger and occasionally click on a ad.

Advertisers like Nikon, Sony, etc. make decisions on whether to advertise on a site like DPReview on the basis of their "stickiness" and the audience they attract. So if headlines are more sensationalist than they were a couple of years back, they are a reflection of how the underlying objectives of sites like DPReview have been defined more explicitly by their upper management to drive more traffic, advertising and transactional revenue. Outside of ignoring these articles, we'll just have to accept that this is just the nature of the Internet today.

If you can't remember, you need to expand your 'brain buffer'. Maybe the 2.0 version of yourself will have that expanded buffer capability and then you'll be able to see your argument does not stand.
A series of articles always happens for every major camera release and rightfully so. Such post are always accompanied by trolls like yours claiming that this is bad/annoying, whether the articles are positive and overpraising the camera or overcritical of it.

My "brain buffer" needs help. So please educate me. Give me specific examples where there have been 3 consecutive, click baiting, sensationalized articles which were pushed out for a camera, which has yet to be fully reviewed. Please list them in order.

"Outside of ignoring these articles, we'll just have to accept that this is just the nature of the Internet today."

Of course. It is the easy, cheap way of running a web business. Poor misguided editorial oversight. Create controversy with opposing bait clicking views to drive up web clicks. PetaPixel, here we come.

Your comment that I need a "brain buffer" may be true. Also your comment that I'm "lazy" may be accurate.

But your comment that you have neither the time nor the inclination to prove me wrong does not stand. If I'm wrong, prove me wrong, and I will retract what I said. The onus is on you.

When you say 'singled-out' you are implying that what DP review is doing is biased against Nikon. Remember that they also said that the Nikon AF performance in DSLR is the benchmark. What I have seen on their testing methodology is that they are very consistent on how and what they test. The Z DOES have a problem. Looking at it objectively, I would say that DPReview 'pointed out" the obvious flaws.

I am not defending the camera or Nikon. The point is not that this camera has issues, but the senseless click baiting that is going on.

Yes, they use consistent methodology, but in the context of a comprehensive review--not a gotcha article.
This is a very good website, or perhaps used to be. Stop the BS sensational tabloid headline articles and do the good work this site used be known for.

Ahead of our review, we're trying to get out information relevant to our audience, and potential buyers, as fast as possible.

This is a problem how?

What Rishi said is ultimately a benefit to.us and retailers. Full reviews take a lot of effort and time. Intermediate releases of articles that tell us about what they are finding is particularly beneficial to those who are currently considering a Z7. No one enjoys buying a camera only to find that it's not for them and it's past the return window.

Likewise, camera stores and yes, Amazon, take a hit on every product return within the return window. So I don't see anything wrong with what DPReview is doing with these articles and similar articles in the past on other cameras.

@JoeGuide
I pointed at two examples (D850 & A7III) for which many segments like these were dedicated. You can look those up. Beyond that, you are on your own. I am not gonna start proving to you that the earth is not flat if you claim it is.
Also, there is absolutely nothing wrong with your so-called 'gotcha' articles and in this case it's totally justified. If there were not differences in the way cameras performed and it was all about personal preference everybody could just pick what they liked and call it the day. Unfortunately, or fortunately, it isn't so.

JoeGuide, you call that 'sensational tabloid headline'? What kind of tabloids do you read, the polite ones? A sensationalist headline would read like "New Nikon Z7 no match for older Sony A7rIIi Hint: It really sucks in AF". AT least, they made a suggestion on how to improve it. Now, I understand some people don't like to be told what to do or what is wrong, in this case Nikon fanboys who wet dream about the Z7 do not want to be told the camera sucks. DP review did not make any unsubstantiated claims, they made the recommendations based on their findings.

Rishi,
The three headline articles that I posted is the best this website has to offer? Really? How about starting with a comprehensive review after a careful and deliberate analysis? How about presenting products in a rational scientific way? Having a bicyclist weaving back and forth under noncontrolled light as a way to assess AF? Come on. You can do better than this.

And this has nothing to do with Nikon or Sony. It has to do with doing a good job.

RandyPD,
How do you write an article called "Five ways the Nikon Z7 could be improved (hint: four of them involve AF)," when you haven't released the Z7 review. What journalism class teaches that? What scientific journal writes out the criticism and rebuttal without releasing the actual study?

Joe, the fact is the Z7 performed poorly under that test and under a variety of other scenarios. And DPReview is not the only place reporting AF-C not being comparable to existing Nikon DSLRs and the A7Riii.. Do you dispute that? If DPReview were an outlier in what it sees about focusing then your point about testing is valid.

I do not own a Z7 but I do not dispute that AF is not comparable to DSLR. What I am saying is that the level of article being produced at this site is no better than the second rate photo blog sites. I am calling out the writers on this web site to do a better job. Write a review that is comprehensive and detailed. Until then, to be an objective writer, one must not pre-judge a product until it has been thorough tested. Thoroughly tested.

And if the product sucks, so be it.

Joe, I don't think there's anything wrong with presenting findings along the way towards a full review if they're not going to change between now and then.

I would rather get these updates along the way rather than wait weeks, months for the final review.

Guys, be careful what you say. Apparently they have very thin skin, because they sent me a "Notice of Warning". Somewhere (I don't know where) it said that I insulted a "dpr admin.", and now I think I might have to go to an online hearing.
If you don't hear from me, I may be in the pokey (only online of course!) ...Joe

Joe, thanks for the warning. My comments were not meant to be personal. I have no animosity for the staff on dpreview. I suspect they have an incredibly difficult job balancing the demands of the manufacturer, editors, and readers. I also suspect they may be chronically understaffed. I can imagine it's very hard, what they do. Especially having to put up with a bunch of Joe's.

Hi Joe, I thought that most of these comments made quite a bit of sense (they are opinions from very experienced Photographers, and your comments always hit the nail on the head! (I really like the one that starts with "If the camera is poo .....") it sums up quite a bit, in only a few sentences. I thought they'd have a Z7 copy long in advance, and do a comprehensive review, but I don't know enough to comment on that.

I agree about the Sensational Headlines, that lead to very mediocre reviews, or stories, (or whatever they call them). But, as someone pointed out, it seems that is the way the internet is these days (TV News does this a lot).
Nikon should've sent out Beta copies, because anything this new will have many bugs to work out. Maybe the race was with Canon, for the holiday season. (Theirs doesn't even have IBIS).
I thought I should warn the other commenters. It's no biggie for me, but many of you have spent quite a bit of time contributing.
Best Regards JoeGuide,
... Joe

1 QXD is better than 2 SD slots.

@io_bg

So the other brands are ALL stupid, right?

After seeing an awful lot of bashing in several internet forums, not just DPR, from people who have never shot with the Z7, I am not sure how you can say with any degree of authority "... that the comments you find objectionable, come without any subsidy from Sony, Fuji, or Canon." How on earth would you know even which comments I am referring to, no less know who they are coming from and what their motivation is? Actually, I am starting to also see a lot of comments from people who HAVE shot with the camera saying the same kind of thing that I am saying, that those who actually have shot with it, think it's a pretty good camera and that the criticisms of it are blown way out of proportion. I STILL can't get over calling a camera an "epic fail" because it has only one card slot. Or because it is not as good as the D850 in low light shooting. You know what? It does video far better than the D850. Does that make the D850 an epic fail?

Oh and btw, having owned the A7Rii, I can honestly say that the Z7 IBIS is FAR superior to the IBIS in that Sony. As a matter of fact I used to keep the IBIS off when using the Sony because it was so unreliable. I guess that makes the Sony A7Rii an epic fail doesn't it!
And then there was Sony flash, still in use with the A7Riii. Completely amateurish system using the worst flash shoe in the industry. I suppose the A7Riii must be considered an epic fail as well.
And one more thing. I never said Sony, Canon or Fuji were subsidizing anyone or anything.

Sorry Joe, but do you have weeks experience using the Z7 ? I doubt it...

I’ve done 3 jobs with it since and got better results that I would have with the D850 in terms of autofocus. How ? More points across the frame. Better face tracking for candid portraits. The D850 hunts a bit less in low light and tracks fast moving subjects better, but for MOST of my situations the Z7 performs better than the D850 in terms of AF.

I never drove a Pinto for weeks either but if I was buying a car back in the 70s-80s I would probably avoid it based on certain widespread reported issues. The common retort from camp Nikon z7 is that unless you have used z7 for weeks or months or years you can only blame yourself.

I have tested the z7 on several occasions and was not impressed at the results of tracking focus when we examined the images on a 27" monitor. I admit i have not used it for weeks, months or even years.

Perhaps I was holding it the wrong way like my old iphone 4.

You state: "Can it track sports as well as the D850 ? Certainly not."

You say you "got better results that I would have with the D850 in terms of autofocus."

Taking a portrait with a subject that is not moving around erratically is hardly a taxing test of an af system.
I have taken many candid portraits and not had an issue with D850 or D5 af.

And for a couple of hundred dollars less, my d850 can shoot in low light and perform in way more situations. D850 is THE BEST BANG FOR THE BUCK. This is the one camera that I will miss in the Nikon lineup.

Whatever Joe - I’m just trying to have a constructive conversation here about my real experience and people like you are a big problem with DP Review forums these days lowering the bar with your sassy attitude (ex Ford Pinto).
All I know for sure is I’m getting better shots with my Z7 than my D850 in most situations. And there are more widespread reports confirming this experience from very reputable photographers - not just gear reviewers who should be heard but don’t tell the whole story.
Are there AF areas where it can still improve ? Yes. But there are many areas where it has advantages over the D850 (and even other mirror less).

You still don't get it Joe...

There are occasions when the D850 is faster and more accurate, and others when the Z7 is faster and more accurate.

Asking $3396 for a camera that has inferior af (including face
And eye tracking) to a competing body that is
$400 less is quite “sassy”.

“ But when it comes to continuous autofocus performance and usability, it's simply not nearly as capable as its nearest mirrorless peer the Sony a7R III, nor (in some respects) as good as Nikon's own mid-range and high-end DSLRs, including the similarly capable and priced D850”

I want Nikon to succeed in the mirrorless world especially since
Competition could bring down Sony prices

6. Solicit input from real photographers, not comedians and techno-dweebs who live in a camera fantasy land.

The Z7 problem becomes twice as serious for every 100 dollars more in price from the A7III.

For many including myself, we don't have the luxury of purchasing and having multiple bodies to apply to a particular situation. It's also an additional inconvenience if we want to travel light. I have to place my bets on one primary FF body that will do the job.

If anything, the DPReview approach of looking at cameras standalone is far more useful, either for people like me who rely on one primary body or those who use cameras from different manufacturers.

Since when did "good enough" or "more than good enough" become the goal? The Fuji XT2 or Sony A7rII AF systems are also "more than good enough" using this logic... should we criticize anyone that talks about the better AF of the XT3 or A7rIII since we already had cameras "more than good enough"? Hopefully anyone spending $3400 on a camera is bright enough to decide whether the AF is good enough for them.... what they need is good information to make that initial assessment instead of fanboys and Nikon ambassadors and supporters telling them how it's good enough for them. And while the Z7 AF is just fine for me, calling it impressively good is really a stretch.

@zakk9 - "Weaknesses in one part of the system are compensated for in other parts of the system."

how does weak z7 af get "compensated for by other parts of the system"? lol

Clayton,
the A7RII is $1799 at Best Buy, wink wink...LOL I was just there for something else.
BTW the EOS R is already on display while the Nikon Z7 is nowhere to be found. Speaks volumes about Nikon crappy marketing and release strategy. I think the entire Nikon marketing dept. should be fired. After trying the joy of the EOS-R 3fps in AF-C I would let the engineering dept. at Canon go as well.

@MILC man - You use your D500. ;)

The problem with all these dpr articles about the "weaknesses" of the Z7 is that most user reviews reveal them as BS. Users seem to be extremely happy, also those who rely on AF for wildlife and other moving subjects.

So you're saying the solution to the Z7's autofocus weakness is to pick up a D8xx, D7xx or D500.

Put down whatever you're smoking.

Plus the D600 has Nikon's exclusive sensor oiling system if I RECALL correctly. :)

A soul?
Insert "can't tell if serious" Futurama meme

I'd love to actually see hard numbers as to how many people would switch from Sony to the Z7.

Sonys...
Worst weather resistance
Overheating
Terrible affordable lens selection (i.e. zero 70-200/2.8 for under $2200)
Star eater problem
Poor controls
Worse EVF
No top plate LCD
And so on

Nikon has over 350 near fully compatible lenses.
It has more accessories and far better support system worldwide.

No wonder why Nikon sells 2x more ILCs than Sony.

Oskar,
what a troll!
Nikon sold soo many more 'ILCZ' than Sony that they had to go and start competing with them. LOL
In reality Sony has outsold Canon and Nikon FF cameras for the past couple of years. Shhh, don't tell anybody, OK?

Oskar P's comment was not Trolling.

@Wye Photography... Oskar P's comment was the textbook definition of trolling.

@Clayton, if any was offended or provoked by Oskar’s opinion then they are the textbook definition of a snowflake.

Offended? Nah. Simply calling out moronic trolls. It's fun.

@ Wye Photography... and I like lemonade... what does your comment or mine have to do with someone trolling?

LOL, now we see the real Troll...
Who lies and says Sony with their 13% global market share out sold Canon who has a 49% market share.

So here is the truth. In Japan the last 3 years, Canon's 2 or 3 EOS-M models out sold ALL Sony ILC cameras. Canon mirrorless out sold Sony APSC mirrorless, Sony FF mirrorless, Sony APSC SLT, and Sony FF SLT combined!

Sadly, Sony is in trouble. The only segment where they are going OK, now has 3 new major competitors. Their market share will probably sink from 13% globally down to 9% or less.

Get a Z6 and you won't have to adapt Canon lenses like Sony users do. The Nikon has 350 compatible lenses on day one. Try to find a good Sony 70-200/2.8 for under $1800, LOL!!!

There is a limit to how much AF can be improved on a DSLR with a dedicated physical focus system but mirrorless cameras are limited by the processor and software. Nikon Z system has the speed it seems so there is room to fix the focus accuracy with firmware and being the first Nikon mirrorless I am sure they will want to take care of this issue.

Historically Nikon has provided firmware fixes for AF issues - for instance there was one on the D800 which was corrected in firmware, and one on the D850, and as the mirrorless rely more on firmware for the autofocus system than the DSLR, to me it seems more likely than less.

I have to laugh at people thinking this can't be improved, or fixed entirely, in firmware.

...but the GX85 AFs well, too. Do you really use CAF in ordinary shooting? Just pick the appropriate mode for the appropriate camera. S-AF focuses in a tenth of a second...

GX85 owner here. IBIS and lightning fast AF. He must not know how to set his camera up...

@Androole

"...but the GX85 AFs well, too."

Not as well as an OSPDAF camera.

"Do you really use CAF in ordinary shooting?"

Yes, 95% of the time, unless it's macro (MF or Sony DMF w/ peaking), on a tripod, or a MF lens. Things move, I move. Especially when you're closer to a subject, even your own movements can throw them a bit out of focus if you're only using Single AF.

"Just pick the appropriate mode for the appropriate camera. S-AF focuses in a tenth of a second..."

That's the point. The GX85's AF performance is limiting me. Therefore, I choose the A6300 when I need to get the job done right the first (and sometimes only) time. Its AF never lets me down, and is the biggest reason I switched from DSLRs.

And don't get me started on adapted lenses. The Sony is perfect for professional use with adapted lenses. The Panasonic gives false positives in just casual shooting with static subjects, and has a very restricted limit for low light shooting.

@camerosity

"He must not know how to set his camera up..."

That's the usual excuse of someone who hasn't used something better. Just like the Canonites' "just expose properly and you don't need DR!" I've yet to find a sub-$1K camera that can AF as well (speed AND accuracy) as the A6300, let alone the A6000 (minus adapted).

@Tommi K1

"instead they go to use wrong C-AF mode when S-AF is the proper one"

Guess that means Sony's invented the first all-purpose AF-C? There are no drawbacks to using it, and with BBF, you don't have to worry about moving the AF point off the target and losing focus.

@Androole

I mostly use AF-C for moving things. Of course, on m4/3, it's very annoying for non-moving things, so then I'll have to switch to AF-S to keep the view from bobbing all over. And in low light, the camera will force AF-S. On OSPDAF cameras, though, that's a thing of the past. Once AF-C locks, it locks, and doesn't need to keep pulsing to monitor focus, and there's no limit to where and when you can use it.

And adapted, C-AF is useless, as it bobs around slowly. use AF-F, where it starts out as AF-S, then detects if I move focus, and then refocuses with AF-S. Though it's only around a 66% hit rate in AF-F or AF-S, as the camera seems to get confused with highlights/bokeh. OSPDAF is on top again.

I also dislike this new policy of DPR when they present each page of a review as a standalone post. This looks and feels lame, guys, really.

If Ming Thein wants to resort to name-calling, that's his prerogative, but I've lost much of the respect I once had for the man. I can't stand his "reviews" anymore, precisely because of that holier-than-thou attitude (and the fact that he works mostly with still subjects and does no video, which leads to him having very lopsided views on some topics).

I've never understood why people treat Ming Thein as some kind of prophet for photography? Can someone explain what his credentials are and why is he so revered?

ming is right about about dpr allowing itself to be overrun with fake troll accounts.

but him trolling dpr doesn't improve his lack of credibility... he's always been a Nikon fanboy.

For a fellow who uses Canon, Panasonic, Leica, Olympus, Ricoh, Nikon, Hasselblad and other cameras, and has for years, calling him a Nikon fanboy is strange.

As to his credentials, anyone can look him up, and see why he deserves respect.

@Grapejam. He does not shoot only static subjects. The point here is that the AF is actually better than most cameras of only 5-7 years ago. But now people are complaining. The AF is very good. Ming's opinion carries weight. Yours does not.

Rob: Your opinion on Ming Thein carries no weight either, then >_<

I agree with Janist74. I use my MILC mainly with legacy MF lenses. My button and Fn menu setup is aimed at that and is different from how I would set it up for use with native AF lenses. All I need is assigned to buttons or the Fn menu. I only dive into the "inborn" menues for functions I deliberately want to keep less readily accessible, for example card formatting. So I value the customization features highly.

Paul, Nikon put a dedicated video-record button on the top plate. Don't you think that someone who doesn't shoot video would like to customize it to another feature? The best part about Nikon allowing their buttons to be customizable is that if you are happy with Nikon's design decisions, you don't need to change them.

Actually, I do NOT shoot videos so this is my case exactly. So well, yes, I partially agree. It's just when I've switched from SONY A7-2, that has LOTS of customization and is a disaster to use anyway to Nikon, who has very little customization compared to SONY, I felt that finally I have a well thought out camera in my hands, not a damn constructor from SONY with random buttons in random places. So this was rather emotional post. But yes, I'd like to customize record button...

Disliking Sony's body design and their button locations is different from wanting the Z7's buttons to be more customizable.

It is funny to think of using a second camera as a backup when the first one fail on memory card.

Well specs on sheet is more important then real life use herr.

jherry? is that you?

"Any pro worth his weight carries a second body to insure against failure"

It must get really tiring taking the same photo with both cameras simultaneously.. Have you experienced any ergonomic issues shooting that second camera with your left hand? Are you able to see both viewfinders with the same eye?

Before digital, when we shot with something called film, which could also fail either in processing or otherwise, what did we do then? We as professionals carried a second and sometimes a third camera to insure that we were covered. I am not suggesting duplicating everything we shoot with a second camera, I am only suggesting using a second camera to cover what needs to be covered on an assignment. That way if a card does fail, we can still deliver to our client. BTW, the camera itself can fail too, not just the card. Why is this such a laughable suggestion? Frankly I doubt the seriousness of any so called pro who does not equip himself with a backup camera while on a job.
Btw, up until just a few years ago, no camera had a second card slot. What did you guys do then? Just accept the fact that you lost some images at times?

That IS funny actually. I absolutely despise AF. The only reason I use it is because the manufacturers are producing absolutely horrendous focusing screens in cameras that make it sooo difficult to shoot manually. As far as dual slots go, again keep in mind that I am not suggesting using a second camera to duplicate what the main camera has shot. I am only suggesting a second camera to insure that the job is covered...that everything needed to be shot is shot and accounted for. I have seen so called pros shooting events with one camera and then complaining when something failed and after not being able to finish the job, they blame the camera manufacturer. Sorry but if you're a pro, you blame yourself. On the other hand I myself HAVE had some equipment failures on jobs but I never once failed to produce what I needed in order to satisfy the client. Of COURSE 2 slots are better than one but to some, the Z7 is a failure because it doesn't have that...come on!

The Z7 isn't a failure because of one slot but it is a valid criticism for a high end camera especially for those that need 2 slots.

I don't disagree. But I have seen comments in various forums with phrases such as "epic fail" because of the single card slot. Same for the low light focusing. It would be nice if the Z7 had D500 focusing but it doesn't but it's a first generation camera. To call it an "epic fail" because of these things is pure trolling.
BTW, I am not so sure that the Z7 is such a high end camera that many are assuming. Most of its controls are more D750-like than D850i-like such as 1/200 flash sync, no flash outlet, square rather than round eyepiece, MC-DC2 release cable, etc. I predict a higher end camera will come within a year or 2.

I am not quite sure based on my own experience that I would want to design a camera using Sony as a template. I owned 2 A7Rii bodies and several lenses for about a year and a half and felt that it was an ok camera with some major faults. Quality control among lenses was pretty bad, its flash system amateurish, and its image quality while decent, was wanting. To me, a first generation camera with only one card slot and slow low light AF as its only major faults is not an epic fail regardless of whether or not that only means "I don't like it." If you're gonna fall for the marketing "reinvent mirrorless" BS, I am sorry. That said, in my opinion, it's not at all a half baked camera but rather one that probably produces the best images I have ever seen a digital camera produce.

"Template", meaning what Sony has stumbled upon on it's on it's way to developing FF cameras, Nikon shouldn't have made any mistakes. Nobody should believe the hype, especially not me, but people do. I wouldn't call Nikon a good template, and on what I have seen, the Z7 didn't produce the best images on a digital camera either. You plunked down money for a flawed camera, you should be able to ignore its shortcomings. But for a first generation Nikon FF camera, with all the promises it claims, but with all the cons, it IS an epic fail. With the pricing, there is zero value proposition. People invested in Nikon should stick with the D810 for top IQ and wait for the 2nd or even 3rd update to the Z series. I know I am.

Well I must disagree. My wife owns a D850. I own the Z7. Not only is image quality at least equal, but when using the Z 24-70, it's better than the D850 with the 24-70 2.8. Whatsmore the Z7 does much better video.
Ya know, Otus lenses are way overpriced, and only MF which in 2018 is not state of the art. I guess they should be considered epic failures as well.
Have you ever actually shot with this camera that you are so quick to trash, or are you just trusting a bunch of bloggers to tell you what to think about it? Seems to me that most of us who have used the camera don't experience the problems most of these bloggers talk about.

There is a Sony Zeiss 24-70 F4, which is about $100 LESS than the Nikon 24-70 f4. The Sony A7rIII is $1000 LESS than the Z7, body only. These are Amazon prices. With the Nikon z7/24-70 bundle, some sites have it for $4000. But the Sony + 24-70 zeiss is still less. So I don't know where you get your prices but you are way off. But even, say, that the Sony bundle is $150 more, I would rather go with the Sony. You can adapt basically anything to E-mount because it is an open system.

I'm happy to get my prices from Amazon or B&H or Adorama but the price of the A7rIII is pretty well known .... The A7rIII is $2998 on Amazon US right now and you need at least the Sony 24-105 to have similar IQ... the Sony 24-70 f4 is not comparable to the Nikon 24-70 f4. So, you're at $4296 vs $4146 for the NIkon bundle with the adapter. If you prefer the Sony setup then good for you but that has nothing to do with my point.

So do you have comparison shots between the two 24-70 lenses to conclude that they are not similar IQ-wise? But say, if you have to swing that way, the Nikon is not comparable to the Sony setup, 24-70 vs. 24-105. Basically, I'm paying $150 for a more expensive lens. It becomes an even more no-brainer for me to go Sony.

What point? You just made an apples to oranges comparison between two lenses. Now, if you started your initial statement with "For current Nikon users.." or " for users who prefer the Nikon system", then it would be a lot clearer. People who are set on having the Nikon Z mirrorless system regardless of the cons, the cost will not be a factor. They may not pay a premium cost-wise building the system, but they are getting an underperforming camera body. That is not a good value.

This way the battery lasts longer (!!!).

With its terrible CIPA ratings I don’t think there’s extra battery to spare.

The backlit buttons are a real plus on the D850 and are, of course, switchable on and off. As much as I am peeved by the Zed 7's shortcomings (including said lack of backlit buttons) I am at least encouraged that despite the poor CIPA rating of the battery, in real life shooting it's not nearly so bad.

However, the high price of what is in essence a simpler camera to produce is a right cheek. My wallet will remain padlocked.