From my friend Ray:
I have the Z6-2 which is a later model. It is great for stills, astro and for everything stationary which is what I use it for. The problem is that it does not handle motion well. The viewfinder blacks out between images that makes birds in flight more difficult to follow. From what I have read it is a hardware issue that firmware cannot solve. If you are interested in one for bif you will not be happy with it. There is rumor of a new model coming out.
Well, YOU might not appreciate a camera like Z8 at first sight but maybe at the second. I have a photo friend I know fairly well that really takes a lot of bird images that have gone the whole circle around from Canon via Nikon and even Sony for a while (A7rIV with 60 MP) and he is back now and very pleased with his Z8. He is oven 80 but still very open to new tech and changes brands and cameras like others changes their shirts.
I think you will feel an instant difference compared to you DSLR-cameras when it comes to bird photo. Hybrid-type autofocus with 493 AF points that covers up to 90% of the sensor area is far better that you have now (down to -6.5 EV at f/1.2) and will definitely make your life easier as a bird photographer. Even the AF will be far better without any back- or front focus like you always risk with the DSLR-construction.
Super fast electronic shutter (only) that is largely free of focus breathing
Sensor-based image stabilization up to 6 stops (with VR-Z lens) - which helps better than the what you have now.
OLED viewfinder with 3.69 MP and a handy format and acceptable weight
I think the specs looks fine.
45.7MP stacked CMOS sensor
Film up to 8K / 60p & 4K / 120p
Hybrid-type autofocus with 493 AF points (down to -6.5 EV at f/1.2)
Super fast electronic shutter (only) that is largely free of focus breathing
Sensor-based image stabilization up to 6 stops (with VR-Z lens)
OLED viewfinder with 3.69 MP
Tiltable 4-axis screen
Burst shooting up to 20 frames per second (45MP/RAW)
Burst shooting up to 120 frames per second (11MP/JPEG)
ProRes 4:2:2 / 10 bit
ProRes RAW & N-RAW
48kHz / 24-bit audio recording
Weighs only 820 grams
Still, it is not a cheap camera but who said photography gear should be cheap??
Come on Mike.You need to take a deep breath and come back into the real world.
A 64GB memory card can only hold 800 24Mpx uncompressed RAW images. The D780 can only take a maximum of 64 shots of 14-bit RAW before the buffer is full and it stops shooting or, at least, slows down. And, as @mwsilvers says, the time that sifting through thousands of images takes means you are likely to spend more time in front of the screen than you would going out and photographing.
Just one word - luck. Shear dumb luck. How do you think Helen got the perfect shot of moonrise over TrĂŠduder? No? She went into the garden one day, saw how things were developing, rushed back into the house for the camera, went back out and shot it. What was key was that she had set the camera ready so that she could easily adjust it grab any shot. She knew that she would want the smoothest possible tonal graduations, so she use 64 ISO. She knew what exposure to use by setting the aperture to f/10 to minimise diffraction and measuring for the shutter speed from the brightest cloud plus 2EV. Then she mounted a red filter on the lens and increased the exposure by 3 stops to get the best sky contrast. All this within 2-3 minutes before the clouds cast shadows over the village and/or the moon disappeared.
But, the most important thing was being there at the right time. Being prepared and using her camera without any fancy auto-anything. Had she used auto-focus, where would she have focused on? Had the used auto-exposure, how could she have guaranteed the correct shutter speed and aperture - all of which had to be carefully selected?
You keep on saying that it is the photographer that makes the shot and yet you seem to continually look to let the camera take control with things like machine gunning, where you have to hope that, after all those shots, you might, possibly, find one that is good enough to keep.
As I have previously said, auto-focusing can take longer than the interval between burst mode shots and, with a DSLR, the camera canât re-focus between shots because the mirror is in the way.
The best images are not taken by machine gunning
Even with real machineguns itâs best to single shot or take short burst at the time and re-aim for the next oneâŚ
Whenever Iâm looking at reviews of anything I donât base my opinions on any single person. I read a variety of reviews and look for a consensus of experiences. I have also read Ken Rockwell, as many people here have as well, which is why we know as much about him as we do. He is simply one additional source of information which is sometimes useful, but much of what he writes should be taken with a grain of salt.
As you know he only shoots JPEG, not raw. I purchased the Nikon Z50 mirrorless camera for my wife a while back. There we:re a large number of reviews of this body and Rockwellâs was one of them. He also provided what he believed was the optimum jpeg image setup for this body. That included shooting in vivid mode with maximized sharpness set as the ânormalâ setting for that body. Yeah, right! 
As I said, much of his advice needs to be taken with a grain of salt. You seem to have been bamboozled by him into believing heâs an expert in all things photographic. He isnât. As I said, he is nothing more than an additional source of information.
Mark
I need to re-write that:
âWhat is more important is that you TRY TO focus on the eye or, at least, the head.â
These were hand-held, no tripod, no monopod, and this is one more reason for (as you called it) âspray and prayâ.
Possibly the second time I go to Wakodahatchee Wetlands, I will improve. Perhaps after several more, photographing active birds may eventually be as easy as photographing a sitting duck. Quack. 
âŚand you were correct, I set the camera to a single point for focus, and tried to keep it on what I considered the proper part of Mr. or Mrs. Bird. Ainât nuthinâ easy, and lots and lots of practice is good, following the best advice I can. If I can teach the camera Iâm using to follow the birdâs eye, that will eventually be good. Right now, I have enough trouble just following a flying bird, let alone concentrate on the eye. This got better the longer I worked at it.
Yeah, I can spend the multiple thousands of $$$, and just buy a fancier Nikon ML camera that I can simply select âfocus on eyeâ and be done with it. âŚbut photographers have been capturing beautiful photos of birds decades ago. I think itâs silly to spend $$$$ on a new camera, and then $$$$$ more for all new lenses. If I had to spend money on a camera, Iâd likely be buying a used D850, than a Z-whatever. (Iâm not sorry I bought the D780, but for a mere $1600 I could have this in two days!
D850
Why? Itâs not the kit that makes a good photo, itâs the photographer.
I agree completely. All this stuff is dazzling, and itâs fun to read about, but Iâm not about to go about doing it. Your suggestions are ârealâ. So are Steveâs suggestions, but not for me. Did you watch his actual video by the way? I havenât actually bought anything yet, not even a longer lens.
@Stenis, again, if I was to buy another camera this week, it would be a D850. Yeah, I appreciate the Z8, and I appreciate the Z9 a lot more, but I ought to consider how serious I intend to get about photographing birds, and act accordingly. This is a hobby for me, and itâs supposed to be enjoyable, and Iâ'm already doing so, on my terms.
Other than emptying out my bank account, I doubt I will enjoy a Z8 any more than I enjoy my current cameras - and if I was actually about to buy a Z8, I would instead by the Z9, which is more like my D-series cameras, with built-in grip. The only Z camera I felt interested in was the Zf but I no longer even want that.
Again, watch Steveâs video.
Once again, watch Steveâs video.
Steve and others, make their own luck.
Ha! I agree. But when I covered car racing, I made sure to take LOTS of photos of the car(s) that I thought might win, so after the race I would have a suitable image to send off to my magazine. I certainly agree with what you wrote about Helen, and would do the same. But Helen had the skill to go along with the luck, and was able to take advantage of it quickly. Iâm certainly not going to argue with you about any of this.
Years ago, I went for the D750 as the best camera for me. When I had the opportunity, I moved upwards for the D780. The only camera Iâm aware of in 2024 that I know I would like to have, is the D850, and the price gets more and more affordable every year. I would be going birding with my D850 if I had it now, not my D780. But I still havenât learned as much as I want to understand about the D780 using the ML focusing tools. I know what you say about them, but I need to find someone who can really explain them to me.
For BIF, I disagree. Consider all the possible wing positions you have to choose from, shooting as Steve suggests. :-)))
Yep, I agree, and I do read lots of opinions, when available. I have lots of salt, if needed, and his settings are what works for him, not me. I never have used his settings. One of the best things about Ken, is he writes what is both good and bad with a camera or lens. It seems like everyone else finds ways to cover up what they did not like. They find interesting ways to do so. Ken comes right out and says it. I never wrote or said or implied he is an âexpertâ. I know they are all opinions. But for Ken, I likely would have already bought a Zf. He killed that by telling me both what was good AND what was bad about the Zf. Read the review if you have time. Everyone else was competing for who could say the best things about the Zf. Or, perhaps, itâs simply that I know how to âreadâ his articles by nowâŚ
There is no camera that is perfect for everyone. The Zf is tailored to a very specific audience. I currently shoot with the Nikon Z fc, a crop sensor body which in most respects is almost identical in looks, control layout and general operation to the Zf. I mostly use my fast Voigtlander manual focus prime lenses with it. They are designed specifically for the Nikon Z mount with electronic contacts,
I hope to acquire the ZF soon. For my requirements and type of shooting it will likely be the perfect body for me. I will primarily be using it with my Voigtlander 40mm f/1.2 Nokton manual focus full frame lens which is far superior to the all plastic Nikkor Z 40mm f/2 which is the kit lens for that body.
While the combination of that body and lens may be perfect for my requirements, it would not be the right choice for most people, any more than the Leica Q3 with its 28mm f/1.7 prime lens. I would not specifically need to read Ken Rockwell to know that. Most reviews of the Zf touch on the audience this camera is intended for.
Mark
Mark, after reading the article (I think you should too), the Zf was designed to look good, not for ease of use. Maybe thatâs why I enjoy reading Kenâs articles, as he finds the things I would be annoyed by.
Yes, I also bought an âfâ camera, the Df. Sort of quirky, but I brought it with me last time on my trip to India. Never again. My D750, now D780, âfitsâ into my hands and shooting style much better than the Df. I made the Df do what I wanted anyway, and images came out well, but Joanna already asked a year ago why I would take my 16 megapixel camera rather than my 24. To me, it is VERY important that all the controls are accessible and easy to use. My D750 was perfect. But for the weight, the D850 would have been even better for me.
Anyway, while I agree with what you wrote, after slowly reading Kenâs review, I had the feeling that the Zf (for me) would be a disaster. Youâre not me, and so many people seem to like the camera, maybe itâs good enough. Maybe Ken got a bad copy of the Zf. I have no idea. Both the D750 and D780 fit me perfectly, with the D780 having added some nice improvements.
I smile when I read what you wrote âThe Zf is tailored to a very specific audience.â. To me, that means those who buy a camera for looks, not for function. Maybe thatâs part of why I bought my Df, with all the manual controls. My D750 was a much better choice for me in so many ways.
âŚor, perhaps, the Zf is fine, itâs me (and Ken) who are weird, and complain about things that others donât much care about? About your Z fc, I tried it twice at camera shops in Miami and Denver. I felt âsea-sickâ trying to shoot with it. The view was rocking back and forth like a boat in waves. Not for me. Beautiful, though, and compact!!!
I know exactly what it is designed for and how it works. As I indicated my Z fc is almost identical. As far as ease of use is concerned it depended on your shooting style, what you shoot and how you expect to use it. I find the Z fc, and the Zf when I tried it, very easy to shoot and it meets and exceeds all of my requirements. As I said it is not a camera for everyone, but to suggest it is designed for looks and not for function is a ridiculous assumption on your part especially since you havenât tried it.
The main purpose of camera like this one and the other retro style cameras like those from Fuji are to allow the photographer to slow down, and focus on each shot much as we were forced to do in the days of film. The manual controls definitely slow you down and force you the think more about each shot. This is especially true when used with manual focus lenses. It adds to the creative process. which is more about what is going on in your head than the effort it takes using your camera. There is certainly no run and gun with the ZF using the manual controls although you can set it up and use like any other camera and completely bypass the manual controls. It is generally not the best camera for sports and wildlife but am I not interested in that anyway.
I have been using the Z fc for over two years and have enjoyed using it far more than any other camera I have ever owned which is why I am getting a Zf . But it is not an experience for everybody, I am surprised by your attitude though since you are a Leica shooter and your experience with your Leica is probably much more similar to the ZF than to your D780.
Keep reading Ken Rockwell since you enjoy him so much.
Mark
Ken is one of many people on my âenjoy reading listâ.
@Joanna is at the top of my other, much more serious reading list, which now includes Steve Perry. Actually, Joanna is in a list all by herself, as 99.9% of the time I end up agreeing with her once I understand things better.
As to why I feel as I do about the Zf, skim through the introduction:
https://www.kenrockwell.com/nikon/z/zf.htm
Then screw in a standard cable release, which apparently doesnât function.
Hope you enjoy it - itâs beautiful!!! Great style!
Itâs the only ML camera I came this close to ordering.
Added later - I accept that while the Zf might be the worst camera for me, it might be the perfect camera for you. Different strokes for different folks.
I hope you enjoy it as much as you expect to.!!
Out of the blue, this video started to play as I was watching YouTube videos before going to sleep. Maybe youâll find it useful:
Mike,
Thanks for finding that gem and bringing it to my attention. It is a perfect example of why you need to take everything Ken Rockwell says with a grain of salt.
He makes three egregious and incorrect statements about the shutter button âcable releaseâ threaded socket feature that only confirms what I have been saying about him . He states in his review:
" No more wired remote connector; has what looks like a [standard threaded cable release] socket like real camera â but doesnât work!"
" Has what looks like a [standard threaded cable release] socket â but it doesnât work!!! While you can screw-in a cable release, it wonât fire the camera. Itâs only for show. Boo!"
" What looks like a [standard threaded cable release] socket is a fake ."
He is incorrectly suggesting that the screw in shutter button socket is a fake, is present just for show, and effectively serves no function. Perhaps he should have spent a bit more time researching it before printing incorrect information on his site. Unfortunately, some of his followers too often donât question what he prints, and assume his reviews are accurate.
The fact is that threaded socket in the shutter button is not, and never was, intended for a standard cable release. That was an poor assumption on his part. Its purpose is for attaching an optional soft release shutter button which many owners have done.
Here is an example of one type of soft release button:
I havenât bothered to read his whole review, but since his comments about the shutter button threaded socket are so wrong, it makes me wonder what other mistakes and bad assumptions he made about this camera body in his review.
How did I know what this socket is for? Thatâs easy, after reading his comments I actually took the time and researched it myself. It took me two or three minutes, not exactly a huge effort. That is something you could have and should have done yourself before parroting his error as fact here. I did warn you about putting too much faith in his reviews and this is just one example of why. Please stop wasting our time and yours with the error laden meanderings of Ken Rockwell.
Mark
Hmm, thatâs actually not the best example of Ren Kockwellâs countless mistakes, but raises some questions.
Nikon, why didnât you make the release in a way that makes a soft release button not needed? Like the stupid thumbs rest on some Fujis and Leicas, imitating a film transport lever.
Ren Kockwell, whatâs the advantage of a âstandard threaded cable releaseâ? To release a camera which doesnât do anything without its battery and gets additional mechanical vibration from an always too short/stiff/flimsy and outdated âgrandfatherâs cable releaseâ.
I guess this dumb fool also tries to start his car with a mechanical crank, no?
And I support the urgent demand: âMike, donât waste our time with your crappy Kockwell links and try to find a suitable forum for your Non-DxO-related-postings. Else it could be that I try to find out whatâs happening when reporting your endless and countless posts!â Once you asked yourself if youâre posting too much and wanted to improve â the emptiness of that promise was already obvious after you hit the reply button.
@mwsilvers
My problems with Rockwell are two. I have hard to understand serious photographers saying they donât use RAW or don 't postprocess their images.
The second peculiarity is all these âtestsâ he has been doing of different cameras ISO performance using very well lit up motifs. Absolutely useless with âtestsâ like that when he misses the very central issue which ought to have been to really challenge the performance limitations there is in every sensor in low light. Absolutely useless.
Still he is in many respects not worse than a lot of others. He has been around a long time now and he has been very productive so no wonder we bump into him now and then just because of that reason. I have to give him that at least and he do have developed a lot of experience after all these years, so in many respects he knows what he is talking about even if his perspective sometimes gets a little narrowed because of the reasons I wrote above.
There was an interesting thread in the Leica forum about âsoft release shutter buttonsâ, and a suggested test people can try.
They suggested that photographers rest their fingers on the âringâ around the shutter release button, and instead of pushing down on that button, they simply increase the pressure on the button until the camera fires. Movement âpushesâ the camera down. The pressure way does not. This concept works just as well on my Nikon as my Leica. âŚand I got rid of the buttons.
(Easy to test, start by pushing down on the button, and watching for movement in the camera/lens. Then try resting your finger over the shutter release, and gradually increase only the pressure, without âpushingâ, the goal of course being to fire the shutter without moving the camera.)
Back to the Zf shutter release for a secondâŚ
The cable release socket on my Nikon Df works just as it is supposed to, and is threaded for a standard cable release. I too would have expected the Zf to work the same way.
Oh I agree to a large extent on what you write here about Helen´s moment and here skills. Photography is a lot about pure luck when the moment just is there but can as well be a lot about skills too. BUT, it is rare when that happens that we have minutes to set the timing. So, in Helenâs case that was a necessary prerequisite. In other cases that time is just not available and I can recall quite a few cases where I have lost the moment because I haven´t been prepared. It is to meet those requirements that I always have my camera prepared with Auto ISO Minimum Shutter Speed âStandardâ and my AF set in AF-C (continuous tracking) Eye/Face priority if it is humans I will take pictures of - for example at street photo occasions.
BUT even a notoriously into the spine analog poisoned single shot guy like me understands that sometimes the only thing that will work is spraying at full speed with Auto ISO Min Shutter Speed set to 1/2000 and AF Focus Area to Flexible Spot Tracking. My stand is that we have to be prepared for everything and I´m open to use whatever tools available and means necessary to take those pictures. That also means that I am happy over every single new feature in the cameras that increase my possibility to improve my timing, focusing and exposure. That goes even for all the features that helps us handle even the cases when we not succeed fully out and have to rely on software and postprocessing to various extent.
In the past, with my racing photos, I never thought of this as âsprayingâ. To me it was âhigh speed burst modeâ, allowing me to select the perfect frame later.
This was one of the benefits of shooting with my D3, which made this easy. None of my other cameras could keep up. Itâs what Steve Perry recommends for how to capture âthe perfect momentâ. I like it for birding, for the same reason Steve recommends it. The above photo confirms this.
Spraying can be: taking a huge number of continuous photos, hoping something worksâŚ
orâŚ
Taking a high speed burst of something to capture the highlight of what is being photographed.
My other thought was "if there is any doubt, SHOOT. I can always delete later.
About the above photo - nice timing, nice composition, and everything is sharp! I would like it even more, cropped tighter:
I agree with you . I donât donât think he is a useless resource, but because of many errors in fact and odd opinions no one should use him as a main or only resource. I often read his reviews but only use them alongside the reviews of many others to develop a consensus. about a product. As I have stated many times before, one must take much of what he writes with a large grain of salt. When he posts negatives I have learned from long experience with his opinions, biases, and many errors to get confirmation elsewhere as I did in this situation.
He is not any worse than many other reviewers which is why I read a number of different reviews in order to get a more objective opinion. The real issue is that many of his fans seem to completely overlook his many flaws and take everything he writes as immutable fact.
Mark
