I love reading the comments - all of them. Very entertaining and sometimes informative. :-) …. My cut on this camera is quite a bit different. I'm not disappointed by what some see as shot comings. I don't know if the camera has reached new highs in performance or not. But honestly, I don't think this version of the camera has to do that. This version is not about new highs. It's about transition. Transition to the modern age of technology. Gone is the OVF, the mirror. Are we seeing the end of the mechanical shutter? This camera is more about changing the way a camera functions as when sensors replaced film. This is another incremental step in the way a camera works. Another step away from mechanical to electrical operation and a greater shift to software. The fact that it performs as well as the previous generation is indeed an accomplishment in itself. And anything that exceeds the performance of the previous generation is a plus!

;-)

Heavy duty Nikon user here (Two D5's one D850 and a crap load of native Nikon lenses + Sigma 35mm Art). I'm still waiting for the impressive performance of the new Z mount lenses. We heard 'medium format like', 3d pop, micro contrast, etc. I think Nikon made a fatal mistake by not targeting professionals with the new Z mount (lenses and cameras). Whilst Canon has been exactly on top of industry innovations in the past decade, they at least offered two out four lenses with their new mount that are incredible (I'm waiting for the 'expensive and heavy' comments now). The new 50mm 1.2R is up there with the Otus in terms of sharpness. Unfortunately nothing I've seen so far can convince me that they are not 'undercooked' cameras (severely lacking in focus) released before maturity with lenses that are...well, boring (1.8 and F4 lenses). That doesn't exactly scream pro. So... lets recap. Crappy focus, crappy lenses. It looks like will not pursue Nikon for mirrorless.

Good photos. Overall, they look like photos produced by any Nikon FF camera. That's a good thing! :-)

The noticeable difference for me is that shots around ISO 10,000 or above are clean.

These images look very impressive, especially those with metal reflections.

Glad some RAW conversions were included as I thought the OOC jpegs looked a bit heavy on the low end. Nice images and color. To be expected from a modern FF camera.

this is perfect for me!

I'm a Canon shooter. I think these shots look completely fine. Nothing at all wrong with them.

Any current FF camera will do fine up to about ISO1600 and from there, there's slight variations as to what works best.

It's silly, or just plan dumb, to say anything looks much better or worse. Well, Sony does often have weird colors. But besides that, most bodies do a pretty good job.

Nice colors out of the camera, pushes a little bit and everything looks completely off.

Looks pretty good to me.

insanely sharp

Not even close to the D750 IQ, sad.

I think the images look good, but I've got to question the accuracy of some of the EXIF (one example, the couple shot through an entryway). I see relatively low light shots at a low ISO and decent shutter speed that don't seem to correspond to the images.

Look very nice to me and a good mix of subjects. The quality of the jpegs is good enough to warrant buying one on its own.

DPReview comments bar now almost completely reserved for morons looking to bash other “rival” camera brand users for their own self gratification.

Not impressed with the cold and insipid OOC colors!
Go back to the drawing board and work on your color science, Nikon!

Not impressed at all . Seems as if they had to edit the shots to fix the metering down fall . My old Olympus E-1 yields a better dynamic response .

Colors look much nicer and natural then X-T3.

The P-51 Mustang is superb...is it the RR Merlin engined variant, or are all surviving Mustang Merlin powered😊😊

What a great camera.Will stop a lot of people from downsizing their gear.

Nothing out of the ordinary.

But the most pressing question for all of us. Why is the singer holding a very small melon or pumpkin in her hand?

Thanks for sharing this puppy progress report/Z6 gallery. I want to meet the puppy!

This gallery shows that the hustle about banding and DR isn‘t as dramatic as discussed.
Only thing for me (as a D750 user): The Z6 is 500 € to expensive for what its capable of.
Sony just set the bar incredibly high with its A7 III

Holy cow! The output is incredible.

Impressed. Real life photos say so much more than test charts. Have Z6 on preorder. As much as I liked my X-T2 we struggled in low light. Z6 will be my MILC low light camera and IBIS will also help.

Once again the noise reduction utterly ruins skin.

Turning it off only helps slightly also.

Not sure what is wrong with Nikon for creating such plastic, make-up caked on looking skin in the last many years of cameras.

Is the p-51 "pilot" supposed to look like he has a heavy foundation which is also melting like plastic?

Canon 50D much, much better if you are taking JPG portraits outdoors. 230$ for a AA condition used.

X
Z6 are better than Z7.

"we joined Nikon in Orlando, Florida."

Well good for you 'joining' Nikon. These pics, along with any photos in the dpr 'sample galleries' could have been made with any modern camera.

Am I the only person here that would benefit from a review of A2 (A3+ maybe) printers, or film scanners, or pro labs?

The 'sample gallery' is a copout. Review stuff please.

Great photos. But we would expect no less from the editor who shot these.
Now, suggestion: Photography is the art of sculpting light and Nikon can turn any schlub with a camera into a Lord of the Photons. I would argue that no brand gives photographers more control than Nikon’s speedlight system.
And with few differences between cameras nowadays, the most valid reason to pick Nikon is the tight integration between cameras and speedlights.
So could whoever is reviewing the camera please grab a couple of compatible speedlights and test whether or not the Z cameras are capable of the same strobe magic as their DSLR brethren.

The images are ok. But that P-51 is gorgeous.

They look great and the skin tones look to be very good just what I would expect. Will have mine soon.

I like these...a lot.

Too clinical. Too artificial. Too plasticky.
Like I'm watching miniature sets full of people with plastic surgery done, fake plastic palms, plastic food, plastic cars, toy airplanes ...
X-T3, same tendency, but worse: noon colour is virtually twilight there.
Z7, glorified clinical with colour gone.
K-1, again, same, on the cool side. Leica M10, on the verge of same disaster with some digital Kodachrome fakery.

What is going on?
Part of the problem is in bloody new lenses, which are like porcupines: too sharp but have zero character as a good pet. Or, they are never happy sharp-tongued shrews and wenches.

The second issue is in low-noise, hi-megapixel sensor tech, which eliminates lots of useful light and chokes the colour to death. Photodiodes are virtually constipated from fear that some "noise" may "blow out". It's like, "Hush, send them monochrome, they won't notice".

The trend is horrible: visually artificial, uninspiring, and as clinical as the microscopy.

The sample look pretty unremarkable to me.

All-in-all, I'd say the samples meet expectations. I'm looking forward to the review.

Just in Nikon Black is Black. Exccelent.

These galleries can be useful to see what a camera can do.

But what I find jarring is what a difference it makes when a corporate-sponsored photo shoot is organized in combination with DPR staff heavily motivated vs. random gear relegated to the intern for some quick shots of Seattle.

I've downloaded Capture NX-D, and while it opens Z7 files, it won't open these. Should I be able to open them (NX-D v1.5.0, Windows 10), or does Nikon need to issue an update? Thanks.