So now that the Z 7 scores an 89, will that change your mind?

MinAZ

Veteran Member
Messages
5,715
Solutions
5
Reaction score
2,212
Location
Los Angeles, CA, US
Looks like the Z 7 scored an unprecedented 89 for a Nikon mirrorless camera. I am sure this is much higher than many expected, so will that now drive you (/them) to buy this camera?

Also, how does one get 89 and not gold? (confused)
 
On one hand, I wanted the score lower to prompt Nikon to fix the AF. On the other hand, the score of 89 is just about right with AF that is not competitive enough. Assuming Nikon comes out with a fix, the score will be 93 or 94 easy. But...

... the question really is, will Nikon come up with a firmware fix? Because if they do, they will not want few sports shooters sporting a D5 who don't care about single card slot to start migrating to Z7. That will result in less profit margin and it will obliterate the pro segment that is their bread and butter.

Big dillema for Nikon.

I say fix the AF and announce development of a pro MILC at the same time.
 
Looks like the Z 7 scored an unprecedented 89 for a Nikon mirrorless camera. I am sure this is much higher than many expected, so will that now drive you (/them) to buy this camera?

Also, how does one get 89 and not gold? (confused)
It's all so subjective, and to some extent arbitrary, but here's my take: The 89% score reflects the fact that this is a very fine camera with much to commend it. The silver award means that although DPR recommends the camera, given the shortcomings identified in the review, they cannot highly recommend it.

Or something like that.
 
Looks like the Z 7 scored an unprecedented 89 for a Nikon mirrorless camera.
I'm not sure I understand. Is that sarcasm or are you serious? Has there been another Nikon ML camera? Oh, you mean the N1??
I am sure this is much higher than many expected,
No, I expected 90 +/- 2. So, it's in that range
so will that now drive you (/them) to buy this camera?
No, I'm waiting for Z6
Also, how does one get 89 and not gold? (confused)
You seem to you have missed an important link on the review page. The criteria for score and award are different. There is no correlation. Here... https://www.dpreview.com/articles/4416254604/camera-scores-ratings-explained
 
Looks like the Z 7 scored an unprecedented 89 for a Nikon mirrorless camera.
What a strange criterion.
I am sure this is much higher than many expected,
Some people thought it would be filled with Gen 1 product flaws. Other people shouted that it would CRUSH SONY IMMEDIATELY. The middle group probably hoped it would be a typical Nikon product: essentially conservative, with good engineering and performance. That middle group were on the money, IMHO.
so will that now drive you (/them) to buy this camera?
It's a very, very nice camera. It should be a big success.
Also, how does one get 89 and not gold? (confused)
Not class leading.

P.S. for those who need to be told: my title is ironic
 
Last edited:
Looks like the Z 7 scored an unprecedented 89 for a Nikon mirrorless camera.
I'm not sure I understand. Is that sarcasm or are you serious? Has there been another Nikon ML camera? Oh, you mean the N1??
I am sure this is much higher than many expected,
No, I expected 90 +/- 2. So, it's in that range
so will that now drive you (/them) to buy this camera?
No, I'm waiting for Z6
Also, how does one get 89 and not gold? (confused)
You seem to you have missed an important link on the review page. The criteria for score and award are different. There is no correlation. Here... https://www.dpreview.com/articles/4416254604/camera-scores-ratings-explained
Thanks for the link but it still doesn't make sense. Shouldn't the two be linked? What is the point of the score if a lower scoring camera is more highly recommended than a highly scoring one?
 
I waiting for nikon to fix af and have more fps with live view. it will take a few generations.
 
Looks like the Z 7 scored an unprecedented 89 for a Nikon mirrorless camera.
I'm not sure I understand. Is that sarcasm or are you serious? Has there been another Nikon ML camera? Oh, you mean the N1??
I am sure this is much higher than many expected,
No, I expected 90 +/- 2. So, it's in that range
so will that now drive you (/them) to buy this camera?
No, I'm waiting for Z6
Also, how does one get 89 and not gold? (confused)
You seem to you have missed an important link on the review page. The criteria for score and award are different. There is no correlation. Here... https://www.dpreview.com/articles/4416254604/camera-scores-ratings-explained
Thanks for the link but it still doesn't make sense. Shouldn't the two be linked? What is the point of the score if a lower scoring camera is more highly recommended than a highly scoring one?
From the same link, "If a new model raises the expected performance level for a class of camera, then that's the one you need to match to get a Gold. In other words, simply doing as well as a camera that got a Gold in the past may not be sufficient."

The Z7 doesn't quite match the A7R III or the D850, both of which raised the performance level for the class of camera. So it cannot get a gold.
 
I've learnt a long time ago to pay attention only to the features and functions that are important to me in a car, camera, or any other item of interest to me. How somebody else rate a product might be quite different (and usually is) from my own rating.

For many Nikon shooters the Z cameras will work well regardless of the score.
 
You seem to you have missed an important link on the review page. The criteria for score and award are different. There is no correlation. Here... https://www.dpreview.com/articles/4416254604/camera-scores-ratings-explained
Thanks for the link but it still doesn't make sense. Shouldn't the two be linked? What is the point of the score if a lower scoring camera is more highly recommended than a highly scoring one?
The score is to cater to those who over-rationalize everything, and the award is to account for gut feeling. :)
 
Last edited:
Looks like the Z 7 scored an unprecedented 89 for a Nikon mirrorless camera. I am sure this is much higher than many expected, so will that now drive you (/them) to buy this camera?

Also, how does one get 89 and not gold? (confused)
Anybody deciding to spend money on a camera based on a score like that, has different issues... I dont care how the Z7 scores, I care about how goodit feels in my hands...
 
The award is an opinion of the writers and editors, The score is the score, numerically graded and compiled, I believe. Awards are subjective. With a score of 89, the Z is (clearly) capable of Gold award shooting, but enough of the staff felt some of the features did not justify gold. It's hard to fault that many users express the same thoughts in the Z forum.

Anyway, the Awards are opinion, although experienced opinion. Many other will be different, or the same. A score of 89 is pretty elite. And a Silver ain't half bad for the first FF milc camera.
 
Last edited:
I been watching the Z7 with interest but it's ridiculously overpriced in the UK so that's a no from me.
 
I'm retired, 3400 is a lot of money. Plus i have a 750, that is my favorite camera ever.

But when its time to retire it, I think the Z6 will be next. The $1400 savings will buy a two lens kit with adapter.
 
I always buy the gear that I think will work for me, and if not, I sell it.
 
It got a silver rating, and as the review confirms is less camera than the A7RIII which is already one year old. To put it bluntly (and I am a new entrant into FF), I just put in my order for the A7R III. The EOS R (as the review noted) was the worst of the lot.
 
It got a silver rating, and as the review confirms is less camera than the A7RIII which is already one year old. To put it bluntly (and I am a new entrant into FF), I just put in my order for the A7R III. The EOS R (as the review noted) was the worst of the lot.
'less camera', LOL

Actually it is MORE camera but has a worse continuous AF.

You should put things right here...
 
It got a silver rating, and as the review confirms is less camera than the A7RIII which is already one year old. To put it bluntly (and I am a new entrant into FF), I just put in my order for the A7R III. The EOS R (as the review noted) was the worst of the lot.
'less camera', LOL

Actually it is MORE camera but has a worse continuous AF.

You should put things right here...
DPReview clearly disagrees with you. Go look at the ratings of the individual components. The Z7 definitely leads on build and ergonomics. Nothing else.

HTH
 
It got a silver rating, and as the review confirms is less camera than the A7RIII which is already one year old. To put it bluntly (and I am a new entrant into FF), I just put in my order for the A7R III. The EOS R (as the review noted) was the worst of the lot.
The A7R III is a great camera (I owned one) and will give yield high-quality output. And there’s nothing like Sony’s Eye-AF. I loved that on mine. Enjoy it in good health!

I hope, however, that your decision to get the A7R III was not because of a subjective 1% difference in the official review.
 
Last edited:
It got a silver rating, and as the review confirms is less camera than the A7RIII which is already one year old. To put it bluntly (and I am a new entrant into FF), I just put in my order for the A7R III. The EOS R (as the review noted) was the worst of the lot.
The A7R III is a great camera (I owned one) and will give yield high-quality output. And there’s nothing like Sony’s Eye-AF. I loved that on mine. Enjoy it in good health!

I hope, however, that your decision to get the A7R III was not because of a subjective 1% difference in the official review.
It had nothing to do with 1% and everything to do with the individual components (there is a lot of yellow in the side-by-side). This really is just in line with everything else I have seen from most reviewers. I also got the A7RIII (new) for $1K less than the Z7 is offering for.
 

Keyboard shortcuts

Back
Top