Indeed there are some nice pictures in this thread. Thank you for providing the link.
The framing, action, and pizzazz are all there.
However,
when scrutinizing the feather detail, as a connoisseur, I don't think it's actually there. (And I know what truly great feather detail actually looks like.)
It could be the the fault of the 500 PF, I am not sure. However, when scrutinizing the detail,
even the images taken with the 400/2.8 were pretty much "meh" to me.
Having not seen the original files, it's hard to know
where the mediocrity is coming from. (Looking at the background processing,, etc., I think
it may well be the author's sub- optimal post-processing skills are the cause of the "meh" in the overall presentation. (There is noise, even in simple backgrounds.)
That said, my concern remains
the constant comparisons of the Z9 to "the Z7 II" in image quality.
As a connoisseur, I'm pretty particular about my "feather detail," I know what "great feather detail" actually looks like. I'm just not seeing it in any of these images. (I've not seen it in my own Z7 or Z7 II images, either — processed in the same way that brings me
incredible micro-detail using the Z6 @ higher ISOs.)
In closing, I think it's great that Nikon has put out the Z9, it excels in any number of important ways. But until I see evidence that its high-ISO performance can
at least compare to the Z6, let alone the D5, I myself am happy with what I have already ... and will remain hopeful for a
Z9s ... which retains all of the great features of the new Z9, but with an emphasis on high-ISO performance.
