Reading mode: Light Dark

Would the Z6ii have improved these shots?

Go to last post
NoosaPete

NoosaPete

Leading Member
Messages
546
Reaction score
330
Location
Noosa, AU
I've had the Z5 form just over a tear now and have been very happy with the results.

However, I'm wondering if I'd now do better with the Z6ii.

Here are a few of my shots just picked at random. Using the same lens with the same settings do you think that the extra expense of the Z6ii would be justified?



aa6542a239334f849409ba46cb73458e.jpg



2d8ecf5b956548a9b1c6060b6d4a8804.jpg



ddf594d330bb49358571d41499ebd99e.jpg



beb5dea08bf840b9a3cafb89091d9daa.jpg



b2fe066bf25041f4bf3249e9df465d05.jpg



3d4b62773d9b4610980f7aed80124427.jpg





39ca3f9d25844e3697ede58ba8b4f565.jpg



f722660462e5416c8a7f6f027117f773.jpg










I don't use video, continuous focus nor multiple shots.

Thanks.
 
With those scenes, the Z6ii probably won’t be any different, perhaps except for the last one. For indoors/night low light situations, the Z6/Z6ii may give you better high-ISO results. However, if you shoot from a tripod still with low ISO and a long shutter speed, there may still be little difference.
 
No, I don't think so, and they are great shots. Kudo's.

For me too, it is first the mind, then the quality of the lenses and then the body. I think the Nikon bodies have great colours.

regards Boudewijn
 
Last edited:
I know I am swimming against the stream here, which is not unusual for me... :-) ...but you seem to use pretty high ISO for no apparent reason, and assuming that's because of the selected shutter speed (????) the Z6 would allow you the use of IBIS and lower the shutter speed and the ISO.

The last image is pretty noisy for my taste, assuming it is only ISO3200, but that can be caused by your processing also.

The first image is quite a bit overexposed and there is also a strange bluish halo in the image to the right, which might have been caused by a cheapo UV filter (there is really no reason to use any UV filter) or the severe processing you applied.

Generally, in my opinion these images are not representative because they are all taken in very strong light, where you should have used ISO 100. The only exception is really the last image, where the IBIS might have helped. Anyway, to be honest, I think all the problems in these images are caused by you, not the camera, I think that since the Z5 and the Z6 share the same sensor that even the last image could have been produced with less noise. Are you using ADL at a very high setting perhaps?

The pictures seems to have been taken with random settings, I don't know why. There is plenty of light, so there is no reason for anything other than ISO100. Take that ISO800 image for example, I don't what is the reason there. But also the fifth image, it seems like it is overprocessed by the camera through ADL, or by you during PP. Which mode you have used?

--
https://www.youtube.com/playlist?list=PLo219FKz6e4qho70cbk5bm9yBZPTI6aLx
https://adapting-camera.blogspot.com/2021/01/latest-update-regarding-external-auto.html
 
Last edited:
olyflyer said:
I know I am swimming against the stream here, which is not unusual for me... :-) ...but you seem to use pretty high ISO for no apparent reason, and assuming that's because of the selected shutter speed (????) the Z6 would allow you the use of IBIS and lower the shutter speed and the ISO.

The last image is pretty noisy for my taste, assuming it is only ISO3200, but that can be caused by your processing also.

The first image is quite a bit overexposed and there is also a strange bluish halo in the image to the right, which might have been caused by a cheapo UV filter (there is really no reason to use any UV filter) or the severe processing you applied.

Generally, in my opinion these images are not representative because they are all taken in very strong light, where you should have used ISO 100. The only exception is really the last image, where the IBIS might have helped. Anyway, to be honest, I think all the problems in these images are caused by you, not the camera, I think that since the Z5 and the Z6 share the same sensor that even the last image could have been produced with less noise. Are you using ADL at a very high setting perhaps?

The pictures seems to have been taken with random settings, I don't know why. There is plenty of light, so there is no reason for anything other than ISO100. Take that ISO800 image for example, I don't what is the reason there. But also the fifth image, it seems like it is overprocessed by the camera through ADL, or by you during PP. Which mode you have used?
Click to expand...
Only the last two images were shot with ISO above 125.
 
I don't think the additional expense of a Z6ii would bring you much, given your use case. These are great. If you have some money burning a hole in your pocket, I would spend it on lenses and wait for the successor to the Z6ii, whenever that will occur. If photos like these are your thing, you are doing great with what you have...

The other option is a Z7ii, which many prefer for landscape work, for obvious reasons. It may bring something to the table for you if you print large or need the cropping. But overall I would say you are getting great results.
 
NoosaPete said:
I've had the Z5 form just over a tear now and have been very happy with the results.

However, I'm wondering if I'd now do better with the Z6ii.

Here are a few of my shots just picked at random. Using the same lens with the same settings do you think that the extra expense of the Z6ii would be justified?

aa6542a239334f849409ba46cb73458e.jpg

2d8ecf5b956548a9b1c6060b6d4a8804.jpg

ddf594d330bb49358571d41499ebd99e.jpg

beb5dea08bf840b9a3cafb89091d9daa.jpg

b2fe066bf25041f4bf3249e9df465d05.jpg

3d4b62773d9b4610980f7aed80124427.jpg

39ca3f9d25844e3697ede58ba8b4f565.jpg

f722660462e5416c8a7f6f027117f773.jpg

I don't use video, continuous focus nor multiple shots.

Thanks.
Click to expand...
Not for those shots, no. The main difference between cameras/sensors in terms of image quality is noise and dynamic range and the Z6II is probably slightly better in those areas. Aside from those things however the lens is more important for image quality than the camera/sensor. So if you want better image quality it's mainly lenses you should be looking at. Although the Nikon Z 24-70/4 has very nice image quality indeed.

--
https://www.instagram.com/brixphoto/
 
Last edited:
I think the body is serving you well, and the money would be better allocated to any holes you might have in your lens line up. As stated by others, the Z6ii offers some low light performance advantages and has features like a top LCD as an example, but if you don't need/want those things, you're good.
 
olyflyer said:
I know I am swimming against the stream here, which is not unusual for me... :-) ...but you seem to use pretty high ISO for no apparent reason, and assuming that's because of the selected shutter speed (????) the Z6 would allow you the use of IBIS and lower the shutter speed and the ISO.
Click to expand...
Among the OP's images, only the last two were at mid/high ISO, 800 and 3200 respectively. IMO the OP used ISO 800 for the 7th image (next to the last) with the lighthouse with no particular reason. There is plenty of light and nothing is moving, but it is 1/1250 sec, f8 and ISO 800. It could have easily been ISO 100, 1/60 sec or so.

The OP is coming from a Z5. Both the Z5 and Z6 have IBIS, which shouldn't be a factor in this discussion.
olyflyer said:
The last image is pretty noisy for my taste, assuming it is only ISO3200, but that can be caused by your processing also.

I think that since the Z5 and the Z6 share the same sensor that even the last image could have been produced with less noise. Are you using ADL at a very high setting perhaps?
Click to expand...
Both the Z5 and Z6 have 24MP sensors, but they are not the same. The Z6/Z6ii use a backside-illuminated sensor and it has better high ISO capability. On the other hand, the Z5 uses a 24MP sensor that is more in line with the one on the D750, while the subsequent D780 uses a sensor similar to the one on the Z6, although they are all 24MP.

Prior to the Z6, I used a D750 for about 4 years. After getting the Z6 in 2018, it was very apparent that the Z6 has even better high-ISO capabilities, mostly due to the newer sensor at the time. (The EVF also helps composition under low-light situations, but that also applies to the OP's Z5.)

IMO one factor that can dramatically improve the OP's outdoor images is better lighting. When the sun is at a lower angle, e.g. 7, 8am and 4, 5, 6pm (it is seasonal and also location dependent, of course), you tend to get better results. It looks like those image samples were mostly captured closer to the few hours on either side of noon or when it is overcast.
 
With shots like these you aren't going to get visibly better captures with a Z6.

If I may offer my opinion... There are some very nice shots here. The area for improvement I see is in post processing. However you processed these you ended up losing contrast and washing them out a bit. In my opinion. I would say the exposure could be toned down a bit in post. Or shadows or highlights.

So improvements in post processing, yes. Switching to a Z6, no.
 
Mackiesback said:
olyflyer said:
I know I am swimming against the stream here, which is not unusual for me... :-) ...but you seem to use pretty high ISO for no apparent reason, and assuming that's because of the selected shutter speed (????) the Z6 would allow you the use of IBIS and lower the shutter speed and the ISO.

The last image is pretty noisy for my taste, assuming it is only ISO3200, but that can be caused by your processing also.

The first image is quite a bit overexposed and there is also a strange bluish halo in the image to the right, which might have been caused by a cheapo UV filter (there is really no reason to use any UV filter) or the severe processing you applied.

Generally, in my opinion these images are not representative because they are all taken in very strong light, where you should have used ISO 100. The only exception is really the last image, where the IBIS might have helped. Anyway, to be honest, I think all the problems in these images are caused by you, not the camera, I think that since the Z5 and the Z6 share the same sensor that even the last image could have been produced with less noise. Are you using ADL at a very high setting perhaps?

The pictures seems to have been taken with random settings, I don't know why. There is plenty of light, so there is no reason for anything other than ISO100. Take that ISO800 image for example, I don't what is the reason there. But also the fifth image, it seems like it is overprocessed by the camera through ADL, or by you during PP. Which mode you have used?
Click to expand...
Only the last two images were shot with ISO above 125.
Click to expand...
Yes, I know that. But that doesn't mean there is nothing wrong with some of the others. Nevertheless it is probably a user error.
 
NoosaPete said:
I've had the Z5 form just over a tear now and have been very happy with the results.

However, I'm wondering if I'd now do better with the Z6ii.

Here are a few of my shots just picked at random. Using the same lens with the same settings do you think that the extra expense of the Z6ii would improve the shots
Click to expand...
No not materially.
The sensor's resolution is effectively the same in both cameras (sure the Z6 sensor has better low light performance ).
Moving to a Z7 would provide higher resolution and improved dynamic range when at low ISO.
Improving the quality of your lenses might help more.

--
areallygrumpyoldsod
 
Last edited:
With a more expensive Z6 II, you would theoretically have less funds to to go to those trips and your photos would instead consist of dogs and cats. Photos of dogs and cats are in general better imo.
 
olyflyer said:
I know I am swimming against the stream here, which is not unusual for me... :-) ...but you seem to use pretty high ISO for no apparent reason, and assuming that's because of the selected shutter speed (????) the Z6 would allow you the use of IBIS and lower the shutter speed and the ISO.

The last image is pretty noisy for my taste, assuming it is only ISO3200, but that can be caused by your processing also.

The first image is quite a bit overexposed and there is also a strange bluish halo in the image to the right, which might have been caused by a cheapo UV filter (there is really no reason to use any UV filter) or the severe processing you applied.

Generally, in my opinion these images are not representative because they are all taken in very strong light, where you should have used ISO 100. The only exception is really the last image, where the IBIS might have helped. Anyway, to be honest, I think all the problems in these images are caused by you, not the camera, I think that since the Z5 and the Z6 share the same sensor that even the last image could have been produced with less noise. Are you using ADL at a very high setting perhaps?

The pictures seems to have been taken with random settings, I don't know why. There is plenty of light, so there is no reason for anything other than ISO100. Take that ISO800 image for example, I don't what is the reason there. But also the fifth image, it seems like it is overprocessed by the camera through ADL, or by you during PP. Which mode you have used?
Click to expand...
 
Marlin Roberts said:
I don't think the additional expense of a Z6ii would bring you much, given your use case. These are great. If you have some money burning a hole in your pocket, I would spend it on lenses and wait for the successor to the Z6ii, whenever that will occur. If photos like these are your thing, you are doing great with what you have...

The other option is a Z7ii, which many prefer for landscape work, for obvious reasons. It may bring something to the table for you if you print large or need the cropping. But overall I would say you are getting great results.
Click to expand...
Even the Z7. For this work the dual processors won't help, although you lose the dual cards from the Z5
 
JayPhizzt said:
Although the Nikon Z 24-70/4 has very nice image quality indeed.
Click to expand...
OP,

I also have a Z5 and often shoot with this lens. I find that the sweet spot with this lens is 1-2 steps down from wide open, (maybe around F5.6 - 6). Even with this there is plenty of DOF if you focus 1/3 into the frame. Try taking photos with better light.

I often wonder whether an Z6 or 7 would help me take better photos, but according to my wife the answer is a definitive "NO" ;-)
 
NoosaPete said:
I've had the Z5 form just over a tear now and have been very happy with the results.

However, I'm wondering if I'd now do better with the Z6ii.

Here are a few of my shots just picked at random. Using the same lens with the same settings do you think that the extra expense of the Z6ii would be justified?

I don't use video, continuous focus nor multiple shots.

Thanks.
Click to expand...
There's absolutely nothing wrong with any of those shots. Technically, they are excellent.

Would a Z6ii make a difference to those or similar shots? I don't think so.
 
Wrong light, sometimes lack of subject story or theme. Composition / Edit doesnt tell me what you want to say nor where to look. No, cameras do not improve the pictures. They might improve some aspects of over all image quality but sometimes it would be best to go and buy a cheap dslr or something on ebay and learn to shoot with that before spending a fortune on this stuff. Upgrading the camera is never the answer in these circumstances.

You need to work on your shot discipline. You are not alone in this. Many here do. It is a lost art. Don't use anything but base iso unless you have to. You will gain; the best DR, richest colour, best tones, best detail. Best IQ.
 
Thank you to all who have replied. The general consensus is that little or no gain ( in my situation) would be achieved with the Z6ll. With the way the economy is shaping up perhaps that is just as well!

Although I did not seek opinion on the quality of my photos, it seems that I have had some. If I'd known, perhaps I would have been more selective in my choice of inclusion. Any way I will take on board the suggestions given especially that to keep the iso at 100 for most shots. I have been a little lazy in that respect by using auto iso set at max of 800.

Regards to all and thanks again.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Keyboard shortcuts

f
Forum
m
My threads
Mobile site
About
Editorial content
Cameras & Lenses
Community
All content, design, and layout are Copyright © 1998–2025 Digital Photography Review All Rights Reserved.
Reproduction in whole or part in any form or medium without specific written permission is prohibited.
When you use DPReview links to buy products, the site may earn a commission.
©GPS Media - Guides, Products, Services.
Back
Top