If starting now, which way?

[rhlpetrus]

I have been using Nikon APS-C dslrs since 2007. Before that, an AP slr and Leica M.

Finally, planning two moves into one: FF and ML. Not many lenses to keep, so no brand restrictions.

What would you consider as positives regarding staying with Nikon? Negatives? Forget for now the interest in particular bodies or lenses, just overall view of systems. The alternatives are Canon and Sony.

My photographic interests are mostly travel, including variety of living styles, people, family, but not any specialized shooting, like action, nature or landscapes. Mostly WA to portrait FLs.

If staying with Nikon, likely Zf or Z6, maybe Z7. Except for Zf, similar bodies from other makers.

Thanks.

 

[skyrunr]

Don't underestimate "family portraits." This often involves poor indoor lighting, challenging scenes, and moving subjects. You're going to want Expeed7 in Nikonland, or have a really good approach to lighting. It isn't that you can't get great photos with Expeed6, but your hit rate will be lower.

What you invest (increasing your skills or buying a more flexible camera.) will determine your outcome.

 

[jlafferty]

To over-generalize, back when Nikon had nothing good in digital that could keep up with Canon (D200 vs. 5D), we used to say “Canon makes great pictures, but Nikon makes great cameras.” The point is that Nikon’s approach to ergonomics and the vast support system they have for lenses and accessories were a major draw to the system. Those of us who started out around the D200 and have stuck it out to see Nikon catch up, then leapfrog the competition (D700, D800/810, Z8), it’s a fantastic system (though I’m not offended by the thought of shooting Canon, and debated jumping to the R5 until the Z8 existed). You can make great pictures with a raft of Nikon cameras, they’re not “just” great cameras now.

If I were jumping in today, it would be Zf plus the 24-120 f4 and the 40 f2 for me. I have that setup, but with the OG Z6, while I sit tight for a bit and see what’s emerging in the next year (strongly leaning to the Z8, but we’ll see…)

I have shot with the D810 for 99.99% of my shoots over the last 4 (6?) years, occasionally renting the D850 and now, Z9. But in the past 3 months I’ve been pushing myself to rely on the Z6 as my main camera and… it’s pretty damn good. Tethering speed with a good cable; sticky box AF; paired with native Z mount lenses; mechanical and silent shutter… I’m making consistently good work with it. Low light is pretty amazing.

--
http://jimlafferty.com
Evocative beats academic.

 

[Mr Baz Reviews]

Don't underestimate "family portraits." This often involves poor indoor lighting, challenging scenes, and moving subjects. You're going to want Expeed7 in Nikonland, or have a really good approach to lighting. It isn't that you can't get great photos with Expeed6, but your hit rate will be lower.

What you invest (increasing your skills or buying a more flexible camera.) will determine your outcome.

I don't know why people get fixated on a chip that has a name. Expeed is just a similar processor to other makers, and nobody can cross compare it's performance to other makers, they might even be the same chip, or similar with a sticker on it.

For example the Bionz X Sony used had multiple generations, yet wasn't significantly updated across many bodies.

Mix in co-processors and other chips, then it becomes even more tricky to work things out.

The other myth is the need for super fast sensor readout, hence the "you're not going to get Z8/9 AF performance as it's not a stacked sensor"

A7RV isn't either, nor the A7IV, or R6, R5 etc etc.

Nobody seems to know what that "second Expeed 6 chip" does in the Z6II or Z7II, it would seem not that much, or almost nothing as far as AF is concerned.

Canon's Digic X came out on 2020, nearly 4 years ago, even the old Digic 8 was fairly decent on the R and RP and got updates too.

The reason Nikon got a bad rap for AF is down to poor optimisation and it was just plain goofy at times (tendency to lock onto the background, hesitate or not refocus with subjects badly out of focus), largely down to Nikon's lack of skill.

Not too many complained about the A7III's AF and that was out before the first generation Z6/7 models. There is no reason to assume Sony's processor has better performance, every reason to think it's better optimised. The A7III AF isn't perfect, but not too many complained about it. Nikon could have matched it if they were on the ball.

 

[taildraggin]

I just went through this, myself. I have similar needs and narrowed it to the Canon R6II, which to me is "peak camera". It does everything well.

That said, I bought the Zf, 40mm, 24-120 last week and it's great. Why? Not the knobs or looks, but I'm hoping the AF is as good (close?) to the R6II. Good so far, but it takes time to figure this out. 2) Nikon color. I LOVE and have always loved the color and saturation I get out of Nikons with no work. 3) Lenses - there are a lot of great lenses out there, Nikon has a particularly nice set. 4), the looks of it do seem to help chill out folks your subjects/models. You trade "comfort" for "looks" with the Zf.

I recommend that you rent (lensrentals.com in US) to see what fits you. I rented an R8 w/24-105/4 and it was flawless, too. The R6II was even better and the joystick was important.

I still have a FE from high school bought new, so I do have soft spot for it. But, If this Zf (Nikon) so much as sneezes, I'm returning it and going for the R6II.

 

[skyrunr]

Hung up? It is a pretty big hang up. LOL It is the simplest way to mention which bodies to avoid in 2023. As I've mentioned, I've actually used them all. I owned the Z7II since it was released, and watched Nikon update the Z7 to near the Z7II's AF performance, while the Z7II got nothing from the Z9, and still hasn't!

The Expeed6 cameras and AF systems are good, but they aren't in sync with the hardware. There are many cases where a DSLR will outperform an Expeed6 ML camera with Expeed5 which is from 2017; due to the lack of cross-type sensors and overall count.

My 2019 A7C, while not perfect, outperforms any Expeed6 Nikon when it comes to focusing on family and friends indoors. The AF-C non-tracking works better farther away from the center than Nikon's as well. DSLR's didn't even go into the outer 1/3 of the AF area.

 

[Mr Baz Reviews]

Hung up? It is a pretty big hang up. LOL It is the simplest way to mention which bodies to avoid in 2023. As I've mentioned, I've actually used them all. I owned the Z7II since it was released, and watched Nikon update the Z7 to near the Z7II's AF performance, while the Z7II got nothing from the Z9, and still hasn't!

Who knows why that is, maybe Nikon are lazy or don't have time. The D780 didn't get updated (yet) for any serious FW update and it's more than capable of being updated to at least late Z6 era.

Nikon seem to have mostly given up on the Z6/7II as well, but more than happy to keep selling it to people, at a somewhat discounted rate.

The Expeed6 cameras and AF systems are good, but they aren't in sync with the hardware. There are many cases where a DSLR will outperform an Expeed6 ML camera with Expeed5 which is from 2017; due to the lack of cross-type sensors and overall count.

Unless someone "knows" the raw performance of the Expeed6 v Sony Bionz X (A7III era), we have no way of knowing what the problem is.

Yes I noticed even an old DSLR is often more responsive, the D780 is proof of that 80% of the time the live view AF is good, but it's not as fast, gets stumped at times and can lock onto background subjects, just like the Z6/7 models (and II ones as well), if you drop out of 780 live view into OVF mode it's faster, and usually just "nails it" for AF, hmmm way to go Nikon! No wait even my 2005 DSLR nails stuff the live view can fail at, shocking how did they let it get like that? :-x

A7III doesn't do this, or doesn't fall down nearly as much

My 2019 A7C, while not perfect, outperforms any Expeed6 Nikon when it comes to focusing on family and friends indoors. The AF-C non-tracking works better farther away from the center than Nikon's as well. DSLR's didn't even go into the outer 1/3 of the AF area.

D850 coverage is pretty good and wide, and old or not the 51 point AF isn't too bad for "normal" composition.

Either way I can't call Expeed 6 out as a "weak processor", it might just be the folks at Nikon labs being a bit off the pace.

The older Z's might pass for a used purchase, I'd skip them for new. And that leaves Nikon with their "3 old bodies" problem.

If you search for "Being a Nikon User in 2023 Is Horrible!" on the Tube you'll see someone have a big old rant about Nikon AF (the older bodies.)

IMO there was no obvious reason Nikon couldn't match the A7III at launch. Didn't someone go out for lunch and buy one to take back to Nikon HQ for a performance/tear down evaluation? If not they should have!

 

[AshleyMC]

What would you consider as positives regarding staying with Nikon? Negatives? Forget for now the interest in particular bodies or lenses, just overall view of systems. The alternatives are Canon and Sony.

My photographic interests are mostly travel, including variety of living styles, people, family, but not any specialized shooting, like action, nature or landscapes. Mostly WA to portrait FLs.

If staying with Nikon, likely Zf or Z6, maybe Z7. Except for Zf, similar bodies from other makers.

Overall, I suggest you consider full-frame sensors.

Beyond personal preferences, one should consider the performance realities that may make one’s photographic experience more joyful in different scenarios. To me, two key areas of performance are: AF (including dynamic “sticky” tracking, especially related to Human Eye) and IBIS.

Another aspect that may enhance enjoyment is size and weight.

From my practical experience, the Zf (implying directly Expeed 7) represents an “inflection point” in Nikon Z AF / AF-C / 3D Tracking / Eye / Subject Recognition performance. Zf IBIS is impressive, as well.

The Zf “form factor” may not suit everyone. I adore my Zf in many ways, but I use it as one of my cameras, for different tasks and occasions.

So, if you decide to stay with Nikon, I would recommend waiting a while for the Z6 III that would likely be at Zf performance level, plus some extra features. Sure, no one knows what Nikon will release in the next 6 ~ 8 months, but I sense Z6 III is a strong possibility.

I you wish to look at Sony, I would suggest a7 IV and a7C II. AF is superb, IBIS is OK.

On the Canon side, R6 II is excellent, or R8 if you want similar (near identical?) performance in a smaller and lighter body, without IBIS and with a small battery. One concern regarding Canon is the expensive native RF lenses and the lack of third-party lenses.

 

[JasonMulvern]

What would you consider as positives regarding staying with Nikon? Negatives? Forget for now the interest in particular bodies or lenses, just overall view of systems. The alternatives are Canon and Sony.

For me as a lowly Z50 shooter (having come over from Canon 350D, 500D and 550D), the main pro is the image quality, which I think is just lovely from Nikon's sensors. Especially at higher ISOs.

The second major pro is confidence that just about every Nikon Z lens is great quality, even the kit lenses. You look at other brands and see some issues with some of the cheaper offerings. You pay a lot for the better lenses (though you could argue Canon and Sony have equally eye-watering prices for the very top glass).

A possible con, depending on what you're after, the Z6ii/Z7ii is a little old in some eyes and needs a refresh. Also some exotic lens offerings are missing from Nikon's own native Z line (fisheye, very wide angle, maybe a wide astro lens would be nice). Nothing that can't be adapted from the F mount.

Minor niggle for me, this is subjective of course, the reverse direction lens mount does my head in every time I change my lens. Why oh why is it clockwise to undo? LOL.

Another annoyance is Nikon seems to have all but given up with the consumer (APSC) end of things. So much time and money pumped into the Z9, Z8, Zf and the fancy lenses.

It seems to me, if you have the money and want the best, the Z8/Z9 and Nikon glass would be a good investment. Those in the middle ground, the Z6ii still rocks though it needs a refresh so you'd need to be careful it meets your needs. The Zf has some nice technology if you like the retro form factor. For the budget end and beginners, the Z50/30/Zfc lag well behind the competition now and I think Canon, Sony or Fuji have better products.

 

[j_photo]

If I were choosing between brands, I would start by looking at whose got the lenses I would most like to shoot with.

As far as Nikon goes, the Zf seems like the body in the sweet spot right now. If I were starting out, I would be looking at that or maybe the Z8. I've been shooting with a Z7 and Z6II for a while now. I get great results and, for the things I shoot, there is really little lacking in these cameras for me. But these two bodies are getting long in the tooth and their is legitimate frustration among users with Nikon's slow development of their replacements. If I was shopping today for a Z6 / Z7 class Nikon, I would be looking in the used market, not new.

 

[sirhawkeye64]

I have been using Nikon APS-C dslrs since 2007. Before that, an AP slr and Leica M.

Finally, planning two moves into one: FF and ML. Not many lenses to keep, so no brand restrictions.

What would you consider as positives regarding staying with Nikon? Negatives? Forget for now the interest in particular bodies or lenses, just overall view of systems. The alternatives are Canon and Sony.
My photographic interests are mostly travel, including variety of living styles, people, family, but not any specialized shooting, like action, nature or landscapes. Mostly WA to portrait FLs.

If staying with Nikon, likely Zf or Z6, maybe Z7. Except for Zf, similar bodies from other makers.

Thanks.

I would say apsc if you are primarily doing travel (and possibly landscape, or just other non-portrait, non-sports, non-wildlife) stuff. Glass is cheaper (although there are fewer options, but you can use the FF lenses) and it's generally smaller, cheaper and lighter.

Otherwise the Z6 II on sale for $1700 is a good deal. The Z5 is also a good deal, but a little slower (but perhaps not in ways that would matter to you but it could save you $500 to put towards some lenses).

I would lean more towards APSC though for cost/size reasons if your primary objectives are casual portraits of family/friends, and travel and possibly some landscape. The APSC options from Canon, Sony or NIkon would work (Sony has the largest line of support for APSC lenses and probably native lenses in general when you factor in OEM and third party; Canon probably has the least, in terms of ML lenses).

Maybe look at getting the Z6 II with a 24-200 (or you could do a 24-120), a 50mm and maybe a 14-30 and that should cover you for pretty much everything you need.

--
NOTE: If I don't reply to a direct comment in the forums, it's likely I unsubscribed from the thread/article..

 

[dacrema]

I have been using Nikon APS-C dslrs since 2007. Before that, an AP slr and Leica M.

Finally, planning two moves into one: FF and ML. Not many lenses to keep, so no brand restrictions.

What would you consider as positives regarding staying with Nikon? Negatives? Forget for now the interest in particular bodies or lenses, just overall view of systems. The alternatives are Canon and Sony.
My photographic interests are mostly travel, including variety of living styles, people, family, but not any specialized shooting, like action, nature or landscapes. Mostly WA to portrait FLs.

If staying with Nikon, likely Zf or Z6, maybe Z7. Except for Zf, similar bodies from other makers.

Thanks.

I am a Nikon user dating from the mid1980s (FE2, 6006, D70, D70s, D300, D600, Z7 and Z9). I have used at time other people's Canon and Sony cameras. I had trouble using those cameras. That is my issue, the owners of those cameras got great pictures from them.

I like the idea mentioned earlier of renting the other camera brands. In my case I am just more comfortable using a system I know instead of learning new. But if you were to look at the differences between the D70 and Z9 my logic is a bit of a stretch. So much for the different brands.

I still use my Z7 and for some things prefer it to the Z9. Many of those preferences align with interests. But after having a Z9 I would suggest getting the Zf because of the new processor. It is just easier to use as a basic camera. There is a caveat with that though. It is a retro camera. It does not have many programable buttons and the camera's shape does not lend it self to using heavy glass unless you use it like you used the old film cameras with heavy glass.

I would actually be a good candidate for a Zf because I never use the "U" memory buttons on the Z7 and rarely use the Modes available in the Z9. I mostly shoot manual and set ISO, Shutter Speed and Aperture with each set of shots. But I like the fn buttons to do that. I also like using longer lenses (=heavy). So I am not getting a Zf.

Instead I happily use my five year old Z7 for family, friends, and some landscapes (it depends on which lens is on which camera for landscapes). The main disadvantage to the Z7 ii is the firmware will not really be developed further except to add lenses and minor fixes. The processor in that camera is seemingly very different than the new Expeed 8. I say this because of the lack of development over the last two years. So if you buy a Z6/7ii make sure you like how it performs. It should be a great camera for your stated goals. But do not expect a major firmware upgrade that will allow it to have less viewfinder lag or sticker AF on moving subjects.

 

[Leonard Shepherd]

Replying to the thread heading - I expect I would be moving beyond a smart phone.

Whether those doing this are able to distinguish the difference between 4:3, DX and 24x36 formats is a first challenge.

Whether they have the budget for an Expeed 7 Nikon body and several lenses is another important factor.

Beyond this if a newbie cannot take very good photos with any current equipment the equipment is unlikely to be the limiting issue.

 

[rhlpetrus]

I just went through this, myself. I have similar needs and narrowed it to the Canon R6II, which to me is "peak camera". It does everything well.

That said, I bought the Zf, 40mm, 24-120 last week and it's great. Why? Not the knobs or looks, but I'm hoping the AF is as good (close?) to the R6II. Good so far, but it takes time to figure this out. 2) Nikon color. I LOVE and have always loved the color and saturation I get out of Nikons with no work. 3) Lenses - there are a lot of great lenses out there, Nikon has a particularly nice set. 4), the looks of it do seem to help chill out folks your subjects/models. You trade "comfort" for "looks" with the Zf.

I recommend that you rent (lensrentals.com in US) to see what fits you. I rented an R8 w/24-105/4 and it was flawless, too. The R6II was even better and the joystick was important.

I still have a FE from high school bought new, so I do have soft spot for it. But, If this Zf (Nikon) so much as sneezes, I'm returning it and going for the R6II.

Indeed, R6II looks like a very good camera. Thanks for the feedback.

 

[Dennis]

What would you consider as positives regarding staying with Nikon?

Overall usability of the bodies and the quality/specifics of the lens lineup. Consistent quality throughout (differences between the entry level zooms and the S lenses, of course) and a lineup that works well for me. Less bleeding edge on the tech front (maybe when the Z9 came out, but that's way out of my league anyway). Less focus on video.

 

[rhlpetrus]

What would you consider as positives regarding staying with Nikon? Negatives? Forget for now the interest in particular bodies or lenses, just overall view of systems. The alternatives are Canon and Sony.

My photographic interests are mostly travel, including variety of living styles, people, family, but not any specialized shooting, like action, nature or landscapes. Mostly WA to portrait FLs.

If staying with Nikon, likely Zf or Z6, maybe Z7. Except for Zf, similar bodies from other makers.

Overall, I suggest you consider full-frame sensors.

Beyond personal preferences, one should consider the performance realities that may make one’s photographic experience more joyful in different scenarios. To me, two key areas of performance are: AF (including dynamic “sticky” tracking, especially related to Human Eye) and IBIS.

Another aspect that may enhance enjoyment is size and weight.

From my practical experience, the Zf (implying directly Expeed 7) represents an “inflection point” in Nikon Z AF / AF-C / 3D Tracking / Eye / Subject Recognition performance. Zf IBIS is impressive, as well.

The Zf “form factor” may not suit everyone. I adore my Zf in many ways, but I use it as one of my cameras, for different tasks and occasions.

So, if you decide to stay with Nikon, I would recommend waiting a while for the Z6 III that would likely be at Zf performance level, plus some extra features. Sure, no one knows what Nikon will release in the next 6 ~ 8 months, but I sense Z6 III is a strong possibility.

I you wish to look at Sony, I would suggest a7 IV and a7C II. AF is superb, IBIS is OK.

On the Canon side, R6 II is excellent, or R8 if you want similar (near identical?) performance in a smaller and lighter body, without IBIS and with a small battery. One concern regarding Canon is the expensive native RF lenses and the lack of third-party lenses.

The Zf seems like my first option now, waiting to see if any issues come up. R6ii by Canon, not so familiar about Sony’s offerings, naming very confusing to me. If Zf, 14-30, a few primes, one for portraits, that’d be it to start the system.

Thanks for feedback.

 

[rhlpetrus]

What would you consider as positives regarding staying with Nikon? Negatives? Forget for now the interest in particular bodies or lenses, just overall view of systems. The alternatives are Canon and Sony.

For me as a lowly Z50 shooter (having come over from Canon 350D, 500D and 550D), the main pro is the image quality, which I think is just lovely from Nikon's sensors. Especially at higher ISOs.

The second major pro is confidence that just about every Nikon Z lens is great quality, even the kit lenses. You look at other brands and see some issues with some of the cheaper offerings. You pay a lot for the better lenses (though you could argue Canon and Sony have equally eye-watering prices for the very top glass).

A possible con, depending on what you're after, the Z6ii/Z7ii is a little old in some eyes and needs a refresh. Also some exotic lens offerings are missing from Nikon's own native Z line (fisheye, very wide angle, maybe a wide astro lens would be nice). Nothing that can't be adapted from the F mount.

Minor niggle for me, this is subjective of course, the reverse direction lens mount does my head in every time I change my lens. Why oh why is it clockwise to undo? LOL.

Zeiss’ connection from the start by Nikon’s engineers determined that. Coming from Leica, I still try the wrong way at first!

Another annoyance is Nikon seems to have all but given up with the consumer (APSC) end of things. So much time and money pumped into the Z9, Z8, Zf and the fancy lenses.

My reason to move to FF, actually only Fuji, for obvious reasons, have great native aps-c lenses. Nikon is the worst offender there. I think they still feel embarrassed for having taken so long to embrace FF, back then.

It seems to me, if you have the money and want the best, the Z8/Z9 and Nikon glass would be a good investment. Those in the middle ground, the Z6ii still rocks though it needs a refresh so you'd need to be careful it meets your needs. The Zf has some nice technology if you like the retro form factor. For the budget end and beginners, the Z50/30/Zfc lag well behind the competition now and I think Canon, Sony or Fuji have better products.

No, Z8/9 beyond my needs and on the larger side of things IMO. Z6 or Z7 if updated, but Zf looks great for my shooting needs, and I like knobs, from film days.

Thanks for feedback.

 

[rhlpetrus]

I have been using Nikon APS-C dslrs since 2007. Before that, an AP slr and Leica M.

Finally, planning two moves into one: FF and ML. Not many lenses to keep, so no brand restrictions.

What would you consider as positives regarding staying with Nikon? Negatives? Forget for now the interest in particular bodies or lenses, just overall view of systems. The alternatives are Canon and Sony.
My photographic interests are mostly travel, including variety of living styles, people, family, but not any specialized shooting, like action, nature or landscapes. Mostly WA to portrait FLs.

If staying with Nikon, likely Zf or Z6, maybe Z7. Except for Zf, similar bodies from other makers.

Thanks.

I would say apsc if you are primarily doing travel (and possibly landscape, or just other non-portrait, non-sports, non-wildlife) stuff. Glass is cheaper (although there are fewer options, but you can use the FF lenses) and it's generally smaller, cheaper and lighter.

Otherwise the Z6 II on sale for $1700 is a good deal. The Z5 is also a good deal, but a little slower (but perhaps not in ways that would matter to you but it could save you $500 to put towards some lenses).

I would lean more towards APSC though for cost/size reasons if your primary objectives are casual portraits of family/friends, and travel and possibly some landscape. The APSC options from Canon, Sony or NIkon would work (Sony has the largest line of support for APSC lenses and probably native lenses in general when you factor in OEM and third party; Canon probably has the least, in terms of ML lenses).

I am actually very conscious about image quality, especially regarding portraiture and skin tones, so it’ll be FF. As I’m a “slow”, shooter, no need for the very best AF, speed, etc. Zf with a 14-30 and a couple of fast primes should do, my current option. But I’d like to try a Canon R6II.

Maybe look at getting the Z6 II with a 24-200 (or you could do a 24-120), a 50mm and maybe a 14-30 and that should cover you for pretty much everything you need.

No long range zooms for me.

Thanks for comments.

 

[LTheWafflePWN]

I have been using Nikon APS-C dslrs since 2007. Before that, an AP slr and Leica M.

Finally, planning two moves into one: FF and ML. Not many lenses to keep, so no brand restrictions.

What would you consider as positives regarding staying with Nikon? Negatives? Forget for now the interest in particular bodies or lenses, just overall view of systems. The alternatives are Canon and Sony.

Personally, I think Nikon has the best, most competent native 1st party lens lineup. Of course there are particular lenses I love, but the Z glass as a whole is superb. Sony has better 3rd party lens choices, and Canon has a couple interesting exotics. Based on the system of lenses, I would be between Sony and Nikon. Canon's stuff, while a couple things interest me like the 28-70 f/2.0 and the 24-105mm f/2.8, its all rather expensive...

For cameras, I think Canon has the largest range of choice, and a fairly competent feature set. Sony has god cameras, but I can't stand their ergonomics. Nikon seems to have the best fit for me personally, as I really enjoy the Z8. I have bigger hands though, and like the style of a pro body without the integrated grip, like a D850 or D500, etc. Your mileage may vary (ymmv). I do think without a Z6iii or a Z7iii, the subject detection and other mirrorless features are not quite up to the competition, which is unfortunate. At this point, I'd really just recommend getting a Z9/Z8 or Zf, or waiting for the eventual Z6iii/Z7iii/Z5ii with the better subject recognition, focus tracking, etc.

My photographic interests are mostly travel, including variety of living styles, people, family, but not any specialized shooting, like action, nature or landscapes. Mostly WA to portrait FLs.

I think for people, you'd really appreciate the subject recognition features that mirrorless cameras have. The first generation subject detection of the Z6/Z6ii/Z7/Z7ii isn't perhaps the best indication of what you can get today, because what is available in newer cameras works incredibly well.

If staying with Nikon, likely Zf or Z6, maybe Z7. Except for Zf, similar bodies from other makers.

I love the Z7/Z7ii sensor, but if you can deal with the Zf ergonomics, I think the feature-set of the Zf is better, in my opinion.

Thanks.

 

[NeedMorePractice]

I went with Nikon when I moved to mirrorless because I liked what I saw from their available Z lenses at the time and what I expected (hoped) that meant for its future. It was a gamble, but one that paid off for my needs and preferences. I knew the bodies from all manufacturers would continue to improve over the years, and those bodies would be a smaller portion of my investment in the system over time, while the lens purchases would be long term and very quickly overtake the cost of a couple good bodies.

As of late 2023, I am very happy with my decision, but I also expect I could have made any of the major systems work. The current Nikon lens lineup is pretty stellar, though, and it continues to get even better. Just waiting for a Z6iii announcement now so I can upgrade my first version Z6. At that point, I will be wanting for nothing (well, maybe still wanting more, but you know what I mean...).