Reading mode: Light Dark

There is something about the Z6 images compared to my d500

Go to last post
A

Ad12

Veteran Member
Messages
1,760
Reaction score
879
I got a Z6 with an adapted 100-400C and 150-600C. I loved it, but the AF for small birds and BiF was annoying me. I grabbed a d500, and it was night and day as far as focusing. I recall trying to shoot small dogs running head on towards me. The Z6 couldn't cope. The d500 had a 95% plus hit rate, really amazing. Since then, i've used the Z6 for travel, landscapes, night, and the D500 for all things wildlife.

Today I booked my first ever hide. Aside from my feelings of unease with the concepts of paid for hides that have food placed (I won't do one again despite the incredible images....), when I review the images, the Z6 photos are insanely wonderful, they pop so so well.

I had the D500 with 100-400, and the Z6 with the 150-600C. Same FOV, different bodies and capabilities.

WYSIWUG - I adore this for mirrorless, I just used the back screen. As you'd expect, the subject separation with the Z6 was so beautiful, much more so than the still wonderful D500 images. Also, when I raised shutter speed for movement, the Z6 as you'd expect, handles higher ISO's with ease, it doesn't even notice ISO 8000.

Perhaps it's the import settings in LR (Z6 imports with settings itself, D500 doesn't so I have to set presets myself), though I feel it's something else. The images from the Z6 are just popping. They are also sharper consistently, which makes me wonder if whilst the D500 images are sharp for sure, perhaps the focus adjustment stuff is not 100% nailed down. The D500 though is not out of focus - it's in focus, just less crisp to my eye.

I tell you one thing - If I could have a Z6 with the D500 focus snap and responsiveness, I would be a very very happy man, with or without the AI stuff. Sadly, I cannot afford a £4000 body.

Could the different be sensor or colour depth or something or dynamic range? I definitely notice that the highlights in the sun are better managed on the Z6 images, retaining more colour details - where as the D500 has more trouble, with more contrast. I wonder if this also contributes.
 
Last edited:
Ad12 said:
I recall trying to shoot small dogs running head on towards me. The Z6 couldn't cope.
Click to expand...
For this scenario try setting Custom Setting #a1 to 1 instead of the default of 3 if you haven't. Made a big difference with my Z5 and my small Coton de Taleur. This mostly white blur (low contrast except for eyes, nose, and a tongue if it is hanging out) of a creature is difficult to focus on when he is running.

I don't think it will equal a D500 (I don't have one to compare with), but you may see improvement in number of in focus shots.
 
SoCalAngler said:
Ad12 said:
I recall trying to shoot small dogs running head on towards me. The Z6 couldn't cope.
Click to expand...
For this scenario try setting Custom Setting #a1 to 1 instead of the default of 3 if you haven't. Made a big difference with my Z5 and my small Coton de Taleur. This mostly white blur (low contrast except for eyes, nose, and a tongue if it is hanging out) of a creature is difficult to focus on when he is running.

I don't think it will equal a D500 (I don't have one to compare with), but you may see improvement in number of in focus shots.
Click to expand...
Thanks i will try that.
 
I don't know what if anything will make the af and response characteristics of mirrorless compare on even keel with dslr's. There is a complete different situation going on in that comparison. But the image quality difference which seems like should not really be there, I have a personal crazy notion not accepted by most, that there is some AI involved in the processing of the images in the latest and greatest mirrorless that was not available in dslr's. It's almost like the mfg's are taking lessons from the cell phone mfg's. In my experience thus far with Nikon mirrorless, the image quality is just entirely too good and consistent across the entire range of lenses to be unassisted in some manner. But the response and quick handling of my dslr's still wins in many instances for me personally and in those situations my camera choice is always a dslr.
 
Ad12 said:
SoCalAngler said:
Ad12 said:
I recall trying to shoot small dogs running head on towards me. The Z6 couldn't cope.
Click to expand...
For this scenario try setting Custom Setting #a1 to 1 instead of the default of 3 if you haven't. Made a big difference with my Z5 and my small Coton de Taleur. This mostly white blur (low contrast except for eyes, nose, and a tongue if it is hanging out) of a creature is difficult to focus on when he is running.

I don't think it will equal a D500 (I don't have one to compare with), but you may see improvement in number of in focus shots.
Click to expand...
Thanks i will try that.
Click to expand...
I meant #a3 (Focus Tracking with Lock On) not #a1 but I'm sure you have figured out what I meant.

My back yard has about 80 feet of running space, which means I have roughly 50 feet to work with (When he first moves towards me I get the first shot off at 10-15 feet and once he gets within 20 feet he is too close). With the Z5 I can usually get off 4 shots in that 50 foot zone. Since I made that shift I get about a 50% hit rate (2 out of 4). The misses are mostly because I don't keep the center of the focus area on the head of the bounding dog.

My Z50 shoots up to 11 frames per second but it does't have this setting and my hit rate for this head on situation is much less.

Some examples (these look better when viewed 100% on my iMac than through the browser).

64d16125f806437da463b3dbac0feaea.jpg

1de230026b3045f4a6c0d4e516d38451.jpg
 
Last edited:
Ad12 said:
I got a Z6 with an adapted 100-400C and 150-600C. ...

Today I booked my first ever hide. ... when I review the images, the Z6 photos are insanely wonderful, they pop so so well.

I had the D500 with 100-400, and the Z6 with the 150-600C. Same FOV, different bodies and capabilities.
Click to expand...
Different lens sharpnesses too.
Ad12 said:
WYSIWUG - I adore this for mirrorless, I just used the back screen. As you'd expect, the subject separation with the Z6 was so beautiful, much more so than the still wonderful D500 images. Also, when I raised shutter speed for movement, the Z6 as you'd expect, handles higher ISO's with ease, it doesn't even notice ISO 8000.

Perhaps it's the import settings in LR (Z6 imports with settings itself, D500 doesn't so I have to set presets myself), though I feel it's something else.
Click to expand...
It is something else. It is primarily the larger size of the Z6's sensor, although the higher pixel count contributes a tiny bit too.

Let assume you use the same lens on both cameras. That lens will project an analog image onto the sensor. That analog image will have an attained resolution measured in line pairs per mm. It will be the same on both cameras. But the Z6's sensor is 50% taller than the D500's sensor. So if the lens is producing an analog image with 50 line pairs per mm, then it is producing an analog image with 50 lp/mm * 24mm picture height = 1,200 line pairs per picture height on the Z6 but only 50 lp/mm * 16mm picture height = 800 line pairs per picture height on the D500. That a 50% sharper analog image on the larger sensor.

Then you digitize the image using pixels. You are using sharper digitization on the Z6 due to the higher pixel count of the Z6. So now you have a greater than 505 advantage.

Now, in practice, the difference won't be quite this much as the average sharpness of a given lens over an APS-C sensor will be a bit higher, since the lowest lens resolution is found farthest from the centre of the image -in the part captured on the FF sensor but not on the APS-C sensor. But the drop-off in edge sharpness is usually not nearly as much as 50% , so the net result is the FF image will be sharper.
Ad12 said:
The images from the Z6 are just popping. They are also sharper consistently, which makes me wonder if whilst the D500 images are sharp for sure, perhaps the focus adjustment stuff is not 100% nailed down.
Click to expand...
No, it's just simple physics. The larger senor results in a sharper image.
Ad12 said:
...

Could the different be sensor or colour depth or something or dynamic range? I definitely notice that the highlights in the sun are better managed on the Z6 images, retaining more colour details - where as the D500 has more trouble, with more contrast. I wonder if this also contributes.
Click to expand...
These may be minor contributory factors but the prime difference is the difference made by the larger sensor on the attained resolution of the captured, digitized image.
 
Until i got my d500 I used the z6 only. I got the d500 as the AF was crap for action. Ive uses the d500 only for wildlife for a year. Until this recent shoot i forgot how good the z6 images are. The smooth background and crisp clean images are beautiful…..

it made me want to sell my d500. But then, something flew and I misses focus… and then the battery died… now i recall why the d500 has a place.



i do really miss the great aspect of being able to shoot with full capability on the lcd. I can shoot from super low down towards my subject. The d500 lcd live view is useless.



has the d850 got a better live view? I fogure the d850 could be a good middle ground possibly? But man….. id love a z8. Its like my z6 and d500 merged in to one camera! Perfect!
 
Kind of like my D750. It loved light, too.

I think that those Sony 24 mp sensors were kind of the sweet spot.
 
This is the first thread I've noticed that talks about the (to me) very significant change in the basic Nikon "look" in the Z system. Mostly for the better.

Partly I think some of it are the lenses and maybe specifically the coatings ... but also I think there is just generally more contrast built into the default settings ... the color handling in post is "easier". The look is more "color slide film-ish" with of course way more dynamic range.
 
Last edited:
Sandy,

I've got my 750 still and a Z6ii (and z50) and 7 z lenses now. Since I shoot so much real estate I have a pretty good idea of the delta between these 24 mpx sensors.

The color differentiation is hands down better in the z6 files. It's easier to deal with color in Z6 files, one of the real difficulties of shooting properties. The stock z pic styles have more contrast across the board - some of that I think is due to the lens coatings, but also the inbuilt contrast of the styles - the lenses themselves are rungs up the ladder from f mount just generally. This is not to say the 750 files are not excellent, but the z files are a step up for me in post.

Unfortunately, I'd still rather shoot an event with my 750. I'm pi$$ed that I have to contemplate moving up to a Z8 to get focus reliability on par with my 750. Not features, just basic "is it in focus". You know, basic single point AF-S, press back button, green means it's in focus, get the file into post - it's not. That happens 3-4 times every shoot out of 50-70 shots (deliver 25-35 usually).

F
 
Fred Mueller said:
Sandy,

I've got my 750 still and a Z6ii (and z50) and 7 z lenses now. Since I shoot so much real estate I have a pretty good idea of the delta between these 24 mpx sensors.

The color differentiation is hands down better in the z6 files. It's easier to deal with color in Z6 files, one of the real difficulties of shooting properties. The stock z pic styles have more contrast across the board - some of that I think is due to the lens coatings, but also the inbuilt contrast of the styles - the lenses themselves are rungs up the ladder from f mount just generally. This is not to say the 750 files are not excellent, but the z files are a step up for me in post.

Unfortunately, I'd still rather shoot an event with my 750. I'm pi$$ed that I have to contemplate moving up to a Z8 to get focus reliability on par with my 750. Not features, just basic "is it in focus". You know, basic single point AF-S, press back button, green means it's in focus, get the file into post - it's not. That happens 3-4 times every shoot out of 50-70 shots (deliver 25-35 usually).

F
Click to expand...
Agreed im annoyed I need to pay £4k for decent focusing to be able to sell my d500.
 
In lmy case it is not the lenses as I am most always using the same exact AF-S lenses on my dslr's and Z body. That is why I notice the difference. A huge majority of my photos are taken at my home of basically the same scenes and from the same locations, with just the critters involved being different. All lenses are universally shared between Z and F bodies with the exception of 2 z lenses. And I don't notice anything super special about the z lenses in comparison to the AF-S lenses, but do notice the consistently better images from the Z body. There are times when you can't tell the difference between Z and F bodies, but overall the Z body wins in super sharp images. But the DSLR's win easily in quick response of af.
 
I have noticed that with my first FX camera which is Z5 after many years of using ASP-C cameras such as Z50, D7500, D3500 and Fujifilm's X-T30.

Compared with the other images I took with my previous cameras, there is nothing quite like the images coming out of Z5, which I presume that has more to do with it being a full frame. Not even the Z50.
 
In my case, the image difference can't have anything to do with FF sensor vs DX sensor, as all cameras I have compared are DX sensors. So the image difference I am seeing is all coming from DX sensors. 20.9mp from the Zfc or D500 or D7500 or 24mp from the D5500, or D3300.
 
Ad12 said:
Until i got my d500 I used the z6 only. I got the d500 as the AF was crap for action. Ive uses the d500 only for wildlife for a year. Until this recent shoot i forgot how good the z6 images are. The smooth background and crisp clean images are beautiful…..

it made me want to sell my d500. But then, something flew and I misses focus… and then the battery died… now i recall why the d500 has a place.

i do really miss the great aspect of being able to shoot with full capability on the lcd. I can shoot from super low down towards my subject. The d500 lcd live view is useless.

has the d850 got a better live view? I fogure the d850 could be a good middle ground possibly? But man….. id love a z8. Its like my z6 and d500 merged in to one camera! Perfect!
Click to expand...
I don't know about your AF-C but I find that using Single or Dynamic AF point worked very well for me on my Nikon Z5, especially on the kids running about or riding their bikes around. Also I also found Small/Large Wide AF worked great too.

Just forget about Auto Area AF which has eye/face detection, it's like giving away more AF control to the camera.
 
A little addition - I noted when I just had a Z6 the crops of the images even with my sigma lens were really great on the Z6. I seem to be able to crop forever and retain details, though cropping on the D500 is not as forgiving. I appreciate the d500 has the crop factor already to compensate, but I look at it more like this; the Z6 I think can crop to the same FOV of my d500 with the same lens and still look awesome.

I think tomorrow i'll do some tests. D500 at 600mm and Z6 at 600mm, and crop to equivalent FOV and see how things look. I am really curious if my above instincts ring true back to back.

Example:

Note this first ones cropped to 4505x2997.

0344e62fe22c4ed9be834b2596310320.jpg

This one is 2049 x 1363.

0f7644373a2844af9119c688dd6c7efb.jpg
 
Last edited:
FingerPainter said:
No, it's just simple physics. The larger senor results in a sharper image.
Click to expand...
No, sharpness is an almost entirely lens sided characteristic and has very little to do with the sensor. Basically the only thing that affects sharpness on a sensor is whether it has an AA filter or not. The D500 sensor doesn't have an AA filter while the Z6 does, so if anything you should be able to get slightly sharper photos with the D500. If one gets less sharp photos with it it's either because a less sharp lens has been used or perhaps focus is a bit off. It could also be that the Z6 has IBIS and he's getting some motion blur in his D500 images.
 
Last edited:
Ad12 said:
I got a Z6 with an adapted 100-400C and 150-600C. I loved it, but the AF for small birds and BiF was annoying me. I grabbed a d500, and it was night and day as far as focusing. I recall trying to shoot small dogs running head on towards me. The Z6 couldn't cope. The d500 had a 95% plus hit rate, really amazing. Since then, i've used the Z6 for travel, landscapes, night, and the D500 for all things wildlife.

Today I booked my first ever hide. Aside from my feelings of unease with the concepts of paid for hides that have food placed (I won't do one again despite the incredible images....), when I review the images, the Z6 photos are insanely wonderful, they pop so so well.

I had the D500 with 100-400, and the Z6 with the 150-600C. Same FOV, different bodies and capabilities.

WYSIWUG - I adore this for mirrorless, I just used the back screen. As you'd expect, the subject separation with the Z6 was so beautiful, much more so than the still wonderful D500 images. Also, when I raised shutter speed for movement, the Z6 as you'd expect, handles higher ISO's with ease, it doesn't even notice ISO 8000.

Perhaps it's the import settings in LR (Z6 imports with settings itself, D500 doesn't so I have to set presets myself), though I feel it's something else. The images from the Z6 are just popping. They are also sharper consistently, which makes me wonder if whilst the D500 images are sharp for sure, perhaps the focus adjustment stuff is not 100% nailed down. The D500 though is not out of focus - it's in focus, just less crisp to my eye.

I tell you one thing - If I could have a Z6 with the D500 focus snap and responsiveness, I would be a very very happy man, with or without the AI stuff. Sadly, I cannot afford a £4000 body.

Could the different be sensor or colour depth or something or dynamic range? I definitely notice that the highlights in the sun are better managed on the Z6 images, retaining more colour details - where as the D500 has more trouble, with more contrast. I wonder if this also contributes.
Click to expand...
The Z6 is a full frame camera while the D500 is an APS-C camera and a larger sensor generally gives you less noise at high ISO and more dynamic range.

The difference you claim to experience in sharpness could be either that you're using different lenses or focus could be a bit off in your D500 images. It could also be that the Z6 has IBIS whereas the D500 doesn't so you might be getting some motion blur. Or are you perhaps shooting JPG? If so it could simply be because of different rendering and/or settings.
 
Last edited:
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