Reading mode: Light Dark

Z7 II vs Z5 II

Go to last post
vwsjr

vwsjr

Leading Member
Messages
631
Solutions
1
Reaction score
550
Location
Bloomington, US
Problem I'm trying to solve: I have a Z8 and use it primarily for wildlife photography. Best camera ever an it has spoiled me for everything else. Unfortunately I have been taking fewer landscape photographs because I hate to switch lenses so often in the field.

I am almost always focused on birds and without a doubt, when I switch lenses I miss an opportunity, plus there's always the risk of dust in the camera. For context I spend a lot of time photographing from a kayak, and am often out in the wind or rain. I find the downside of switching lenses reducing the number of non-wildlife photos I take, and I don't like that.

I'm looking for a second Nikon body that I use almost exclusively for landscapes. I'm split between the Z7 II and the Z5 II, eaching having different benefits and drawbacks. Currently the Z7 is $100 more, but the discount on the Z7 likely goes away today!

Why I'm considering the Z7 II

- high MP count, detail, resolution, things I love about my Z8 and D850. To me this is the only win for the Z7 II. I don't print large and I'm not likely to crop landscape photos, so this probably is not as big a factor as I'm making it.

Z5 II pluses.

- improved AF and low-light capability.

- better IBIS. this is important to me if it really is significantly better than the Z7 II. I rarely use a tripod and shooting from a kayak I need all the stabilization I can get. Also, the vast majority of lenses I'd use on this camera do not have VR.

- vari-angle LCD

- newer, more likely to get continued improvements via firmware

- in some ways smaller files are a plus but I have mild concerns about going backwards in pixel count for landscapes

I could go on forever about pluses/minuses of each, and in reality either would improve my current situation a lot, but what it comes down to for me is whether I'm ok with giving up the resolution for the newer features of the Z5. I feel like the Z5 II is the win, because if I really need more reolution, I'd shoot with the Z8. But given my reluctance to switch lenses frequently, I know if I go this route, 90% of my landscapes are going to be with the Z5 II.

One other factor to consider, my budget would keep me in the f/4 class of landscape lenses, not the f/2.8 class. I might eventually get a very fast prime or two, but I'm most likely to be shooting with the 14-30 f/4 and the 24-70 f/4, which means I'm not getting the absolute most out of the higher resolution sensor.

Curious what others think, and especially if you've been in a similar situation, what route you've gone. I've got so many older DSLR bodies, but I'm really done with F-mount lenses and older DSLR bodies. I'm one of the converts that after a few years of using mirrorless, completely lost interest in using my older equipment.
 
Last edited:
You could consider the Z7, in stead of the Z7II.

That saves you good money and still gives the high MP and all the other advantages.

The extra card slot on the II is just that: extra.

I've choosen it next to my Z6III. And very much enjoy it for landscapes and such.
 
Given that you’d use it for birds as a second camera, you should go for the Z5ii.
 
Nikonparrothead said:
Given that you’d use it for birds as a second camera, you should go for the Z5ii.
Click to expand...
Or better yet, get the Z6iii that can work quite well for birds. Can always use the Z8 for landscape. The Z6iii has exactly the same memory card arrangement as the Z8.
 
I recently bought the Nikon z 5 ii camera. My reasons were better auto focus, good for wildlife and stabilization. One other reason was the great low light capabilities. I read awhile back where others say get the Z7 ii. For me 24 np is enough. What ever you choose you will be getting a good camera.
 
Last year I sold my Z7ii in favor of the Z6iii to pair with my Z8. The combination of two high performance cameras and similarity of controls has worked very well. I have clear preferences for one or the other as a primary camera depending on what I am photographing.

I have not second guessed the decision to sell the Z7ii and get the Z6iii. It's worked out very well for all types of work.
 
I think it really comes down to the question: are you really willing to use the second camera just for landscapes? If you are, the Z7 (not even the Z7II) should do the job. But, if you have any inclinations of using the second camera also for fast wildlife and action, then the Z5II and even the Z6III are contenders.

If you really want the second camera just for landscape, why not use the D850 that you already have? (assuming you still have it) Maybe use that for landscapes for a spell and see how well you might like that combination? You can probably find some good used F2.8 lens within your budget, and I always think that lens matter a lot more than camera body (when AF isn't a limiting factor). I guess I just don't see much of an advantage of mirrorless over DSLR for landscapes.

If you find that you really hate the D850 for landscape, then you can always get a second mirrorless camera. But I would say it's rarely wrong to use what you have today and wait a bit longer, even with the tariff situation.

Finally, there is a bit of misconception that higher MP sensors have worse IQ for low light. They aren't for IQ, (AF can be different) given the same lens and same conditions, because the total light from the scene is the same. If you down-sample the higher MP image into lower MP, you basically get the same noise performance of the lower MP sensor.
 
maverick256 said:
I think it really comes down to the question: are you really willing to use the second camera just for landscapes? If you are, the Z7 (not even the Z7II) should do the job. But, if you have any inclinations of using the second camera also for fast wildlife and action, then the Z5II and even the Z6III are contenders.

If you really want the second camera just for landscape, why not use the D850 that you already have? (assuming you still have it)
Click to expand...
The OP has some Z lenses such as the 14-30/4, etc. Those lenses are useless on the D850. The OP should get a second Z body.

Mirrorless is definitely the way to go for landscape photography because of the superior mirrorless lenses.
 
Last edited:
vwsjr said:
Why I'm considering the Z7 II

- high MP count, detail, resolution, things I love about my Z8 and D850. To me this is the only win for the Z7 II. I don't print large and I'm not likely to crop landscape photos, so this probably is not as big a factor as I'm making it.
Click to expand...
We have ALL been oversold on the "advantages" of higher resolution. Fact is the highest resolution for Display is the good old Print and Human Eyesight has a distinctly limited ability to resolve fine detail. Pixel Peepers will disagree but I just don't consider Pixel Peeping as Photography. The ONLY advantage the Z7 II provides is more crop space.
vwsjr said:
Z5 II pluses.

- improved AF and low-light capability.

- better IBIS. this is important to me if it really is significantly better than the Z7 II. I rarely use a tripod and shooting from a kayak I need all the stabilization I can get. Also, the vast majority of lenses I'd use on this camera do not have VR.
Click to expand...
I have the Zf and in terms of functions and image quality it's a twin of the Z5II. Yeah the older and prettier twin but still just a twin and the Z5II does offer more programmability. Pluses for the Z5II is wonderful image rendering, a nice wide Dynamic range, and excellent high ISO low light performance. Yeah you do get noise, but it's a noise that cleans up quite well.
vwsjr said:
- vari-angle LCD

- newer, more likely to get continued improvements via firmware

- in some ways smaller files are a plus but I have mild concerns about going backwards in pixel count for landscapes
Click to expand...
I spent at least 6 years shooting with the 12mp D300 and had a couple of images printed at 24 x 36 inches that still look great. With the AI tools we have today all we need to produce a wonderful 36 x 54 inch print is in the range of 16-20mp.

Suggested Lenses.

1) The 14-30mm f4 S. It's 1/2 the cost of the 12-24 f2.8 and if you are using it for landscap images you will likely be shooting at f5.6 to f11. So why spend all that money for 1 stop of light you won't be using. Another plus it's much lighter.

2) The 24-120mm f4 S. Another great lens that you will be shooting at f5.6 to f11. In addition this is the Perfect range of focal lengths for Landscapes and you'll use it for 95% of your images.

Finally I will also point out that the Z50II with it's 2 lens kit is both light and very useful. If I were Kayaking my first choice for Landscapes would be the Z50II with just the 16-50mm Kit Zoom. BTW, these Kit lenses aren't your typical Kit lenses in terms of Image Quality, the 16-50 is excellent and the 50-250 is stunning. I will grant that it's not weather sealed to the level of the Full frame cameras but there are workarounds that can allow you to keep it relatively dry.

PS; yes I do have the Z7 II and it is a great camera. However experience gained with Mirrorless has taught me that a wiser choice would have been to pay a bit more and get the Z6 III.
 
It really comes down to what you personally want. I bought a z7ii a week ago using my ZF and a 40 f2 lens in Nikon's trade-in program. With the $500 rebate (expiring today I think) it cost me around $500 total. The z5ii was going to be around $400.

I already owned a Z7, and kept it. For what I do, the AF system has been more than adequate, so I knew what I was getting into. The Z5ii is a strong temptation, and I may eventually pick one up from the refurb or used market, but I finally decided on getting two (almost) identical bodies, which I've been missing for a while. I always have two bodies with me, and I've really missed having the similar bodies along.

I'm a hobby shooter now, I just can't justify z8/z9 prices for what I do, but I really want that mp count for crop-ability. I also like the fact that I can shoot 45/24/20 mp with the same camera.

The downsides to the z7ii and the z7
  • the expeed7 processor is definitely a step up from the 6 (but for me and what I do, it is fine. I'm still close to 100 pct in focus).
  • you're not getting all the various focus modes like bird's eye animal eye etc. I've only used those out of curiosity on the ZF, wasn't impressed, so not a drawback for me.
  • maybe the biggest drawback is that the z7 is 7 years old, the z7ii 5. Nikon definitely doesn't keep repair parts around forever. I've got a 28-70 2.8 AFS lens holding down papers for the last 10 years that will attest to that.
 
Thanks for all the comments on my dilemma. I decided to go with the Z7 II, which was not where I was leaning initially.

I went through a lot of my landscape photos and I have a lot of stuff I like going all the way back to my Nikon D80, but I'm most impressed with photos from my D850 and Z8, with the 45MP sensors. I don't disagree that composition, lighting, and so many other factors are more important, but I love the last few generations of 45MP sensors.

My second body will only be used for landscapes. Given the choice, I'd never use anything but my Z8 for wildlife or action, and the second body will always have a wide or ultra-side lens on it. Worst case, if my Z8 had to go in for service, I'd probably rely on my D850 more than the Z7 II for wildlife. For landscape use only, I didn't feel like the Z7 II had any compromises. I would have had to of bought used for a Z7, and even for landscapes I felt the improvement in AF in the Z7 II was worthwhile. The Z5 II certainly would have worked fine, and is probably a better all around camera, but the Z7 II seemed to fit my more limited use case better.

As part of this, I finally sold off all my APS-C equipment...Nikon D7200, Nikon D500, Sigma 8-16 lens, and Sigma 18-35 lens. That actually covered a big chunk of this upgrade. I'm getting closer to 100% mirrorless and Z lenses, but I'm still holding onto my D850 and some of my F-mount lenses. My 500mm PF is still my most used lens, since I do more bird photography than anything, and I haven't been able to justify the 600mm or 800mm Z lenses yet.
 
Enjoy!
 
I don’t have either of these cameras, so I can’t speak from first hand experience. However, I recently went back to a 2008 photo I took with my then 12mp D300 in Italy, and I was shocked by the IQ it delivered for a large print. If you’re not printing large or cropping, the Z5ll should easily meet your needs. However, if you were shooting to produce large fine art landscape prints, then you’d be better served by the Z7 or Z7ll.
 
vwsjr said:
Problem I'm trying to solve: I have a Z8 and use it primarily for wildlife photography. Best camera ever an it has spoiled me for everything else. Unfortunately I have been taking fewer landscape photographs because I hate to switch lenses so often in the field.

I am almost always focused on birds and without a doubt, when I switch lenses I miss an opportunity, plus there's always the risk of dust in the camera. For context I spend a lot of time photographing from a kayak, and am often out in the wind or rain. I find the downside of switching lenses reducing the number of non-wildlife photos I take, and I don't like that.

I'm looking for a second Nikon body that I use almost exclusively for landscapes. I'm split between the Z7 II and the Z5 II, eaching having different benefits and drawbacks. Currently the Z7 is $100 more, but the discount on the Z7 likely goes away today!

Why I'm considering the Z7 II

- high MP count, detail, resolution, things I love about my Z8 and D850. To me this is the only win for the Z7 II. I don't print large and I'm not likely to crop landscape photos, so this probably is not as big a factor as I'm making it.

Z5 II pluses.

- improved AF and low-light capability.

- better IBIS. this is important to me if it really is significantly better than the Z7 II. I rarely use a tripod and shooting from a kayak I need all the stabilization I can get. Also, the vast majority of lenses I'd use on this camera do not have VR.

- vari-angle LCD

- newer, more likely to get continued improvements via firmware

- in some ways smaller files are a plus but I have mild concerns about going backwards in pixel count for landscapes

I could go on forever about pluses/minuses of each, and in reality either would improve my current situation a lot, but what it comes down to for me is whether I'm ok with giving up the resolution for the newer features of the Z5. I feel like the Z5 II is the win, because if I really need more reolution, I'd shoot with the Z8. But given my reluctance to switch lenses frequently, I know if I go this route, 90% of my landscapes are going to be with the Z5 II.

One other factor to consider, my budget would keep me in the f/4 class of landscape lenses, not the f/2.8 class. I might eventually get a very fast prime or two, but I'm most likely to be shooting with the 14-30 f/4 and the 24-70 f/4, which means I'm not getting the absolute most out of the higher resolution sensor.

Curious what others think, and especially if you've been in a similar situation, what route you've gone. I've got so many older DSLR bodies, but I'm really done with F-mount lenses and older DSLR bodies. I'm one of the converts that after a few years of using mirrorless, completely lost interest in using my older equipment.
Click to expand...
Do you really need 45MP? You said you don't print "large" so I'm thinking that maybe it doesn't make a lot of sense honestly. Although I don't know what your definition of "large" is, but the 24MP images can handle a 13x19 print without cropping at 300 dpi for example. I'd say the only reason to get the Z7 II now is if you crop a lot or print large, beyond that it doesn't make much sense IMO.

The IBIS I think in the Z5 II is also a bit better, rated at 6.5 or 7 stops, versus 5 stops on the Z7 II. And keep in mind, that's a paper spec. In my experience, a good number to go by is about 2-stops less, so in practice, you might only get about 5 stops on the Z5 II, and 3 stops on the Z7 II depending on the lens used, but also the Z5 II supports the new "link VR to focus point" option which helps optimize stabilization (this is something that is not found in the Z7 II I don't think but might be useful with some lenses).

Anyway, if it was me I'd get the Z5 II. It's what I'd almost call worlds better than the Z7 II in all other respects (other than MP). Plus it doesn't require the CFE cards which is also a bonus and it's got more power in case you might encounter things along your journies, like some wildlife.

if you really want MP, then I would suggest the Z8 but it's larger, and more expensive, but a heck of a camera. But based on your comments above, I don't think that you necessarily need 45MP. I have both the Zf (same as the Z5 Ii basically) and Z8 and frankly, the Zf gets a lot more use, as I don't need 45MP most of the time. So my vote would be for the Z5 II. Plus it has a longer shelf life and Nikon will probably continue to improve it with firmware, plus you have pixel-shift shooting if you do find you want high-res images (although it's use is somewhat limited in nature/landscape or anything that can move within the scene, but it is a feature that you can use). Frankly, with my Zf if I need a larger file, I just use Gigapixel to upscale anyway and the results aren't too bad as long as you stay away from their AI models....

--
* PLEASE NOTE: I generally unsubscribe from forums/comments after a period of time has passed, so if I do not respond, that is likely the reason. *
 
Last edited:
maverick256 said:
I think it really comes down to the question: are you really willing to use the second camera just for landscapes? If you are, the Z7 (not even the Z7II) should do the job. But, if you have any inclinations of using the second camera also for fast wildlife and action, then the Z5II and even the Z6III are contenders.

If you really want the second camera just for landscape, why not use the D850 that you already have? (assuming you still have it) Maybe use that for landscapes for a spell and see how well you might like that combination? You can probably find some good used F2.8 lens within your budget, and I always think that lens matter a lot more than camera body (when AF isn't a limiting factor). I guess I just don't see much of an advantage of mirrorless over DSLR for landscapes.

If you find that you really hate the D850 for landscape, then you can always get a second mirrorless camera. But I would say it's rarely wrong to use what you have today and wait a bit longer, even with the tariff situation.

Finally, there is a bit of misconception that higher MP sensors have worse IQ for low light. They aren't for IQ, (AF can be different) given the same lens and same conditions, because the total light from the scene is the same. If you down-sample the higher MP image into lower MP, you basically get the same noise performance of the lower MP sensor.
Click to expand...
 
Thomerik said:
Various tests has shown that the Z6 has better noise performance than the Z7 with night photography when downsampling the Z7 to match resolution. It's probably only noticeable in extreme scenarios like some types of night images, but it seems like there is a difference regardless.
Click to expand...
Ah yeah I wouldn't expect exact equivalents, since there are probably some differences in the sensors themselves. The downsampling algorithm itself is also working with imperfect data. But from the physics of it, I would only expect minor differences, unless the readout noise is just so much worse on the higher MP sensor.
 
maverick256 said:
Thomerik said:
Various tests has shown that the Z6 has better noise performance than the Z7 with night photography when downsampling the Z7 to match resolution. It's probably only noticeable in extreme scenarios like some types of night images, but it seems like there is a difference regardless.
Click to expand...
Ah yeah I wouldn't expect exact equivalents, since there are probably some differences in the sensors themselves. The downsampling algorithm itself is also working with imperfect data. But from the physics of it, I would only expect minor differences, unless the readout noise is just so much worse on the higher MP sensor.
Click to expand...
As for the differences, here are the tests:

Night test, fast forward a bit for the test at same resolution.

Astro test with comparison at same resolution.

ISO comparison in a studio setting, so not in very low light. Same resolution.
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

Paddler213
Used Z7 vs Z7II vs Z5??
Replies
14
Views
4K
sirhawkeye64
S
Rene Gr
Questions regrading Z5 II
2
Replies
26
Views
11K
Thom Hogan
Thom Hogan
D
  • User review User review
While waiting for the Z7 III . . .
Replies
9
Views
8K
maestro55
M
nameless0ne
Issue of missing Z7III... real pain
3 4 5
Replies
96
Views
19K
sirhawkeye64
S
T
Nikon Z7 II or...?
Replies
16
Views
3K
NikonMike
N

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