I love my Z50 and have gotten some amazing work from it but I can't help feeling Nikon's abandoned it. I'd considered buying a Z6 back when I picked up the Z50 but the Z50 was such a huge upgrade over my old D200 I didn't feel the need. Now, I just feel as though I bet on the wrong horse.

The Zfc gets a lot of accolades for it's retro design and it does pack on some improvements over the Z50. Maybe some of that tech will roll into a future "Z50ii" (the main thing I miss is in-body stabilization) but I'm not holding my breath. Nikon can only release so much but it's hard not to feel as though its heart isn't in APS-C.

With a nice tax refund on the horizon, last night I ponied up and ordered a Z7ii (with the 24-200mm kit lens) from B&H. Forget about the Z9; I just don't need that much camera. The Z7ii will up my game and the 24-200 will easily cover my current needs. The Z50's not going anywhere and it gives me sufficient breathing room to allow me to gradually add full-frame lenses as needed.

First, agree, agree, agree.

Second, Like others, I am never going to shoot masterpieces, unless maybe astro or special stuff. But I take photos on trips and hate carrying lots of stuff. For most of my life, I rarely carried anything except for special events like shooting cave formations in low light using film. So carrying two cameras and lens got old real fast on plant tours, we climb up hill sides, etc. to often find the plants. So I got the Canon SX cameras for wide range, based on watching and talking with fellow travels. So for me, while masterpiecing would be nice, versalitity is tops.

Third, I think a lot of good photographers really know way more about cameras than I will ever know, so statements like you can do all that with manual settings, assuming you have the dexitery, knowledge, etc., on a 15 yr old camera while informative and interesting are not as important as how much of that can be done simplier on a new model, of course with $$$$$. For example, the latest review of tracking functiins on a Z9 were of real interest to me.

My point, some of us want/need to fill a need, which others can do already after years of experience, but we want it the easy way. That's my right, just it is anyone else's to try to find that exact wording needed in a small print, virtually unidexed manual, if there is one you don't have to print out first. I really enjoy all the info, but demeaning someone is just a trip by a fragile ego.

PREACH! I’ve never understood the “What is your current camera not doing, blah-blah” response.

I think maybe several are retired and on fixed incomes, so they prioritize $$ differently. Maybe it’s because there are several engineers who analyze everything to death and are natural problem solvers, even when there isn’t one. Then you have the deadliest of members, the dreaded retired military engineer. Hoh-boy!

So listen up, photography is supposed to be FUN! It’s a HOBBY for Christ sakes! Can we please go back to Nikon vs Canon arguments while Pentax people quietly grin?

Listen Up- there is NO Shame in upgrading your camera equipment even if only for GAS! If you want it and you can afford it then go for it. You don't need anyone's permission here to do that. You don't need anyone here setting limits on what you buy or how often you buy or if you should buy. If you have a closet full of unused equipment that is your business.

Will it make you a better photographer? Maybe or maybe not. But it will be fun to find out. New equipment will often push you forward to becoming better by the technical advances. It may help you see improvement which may be the catalyst for more improvement.

Why is it there is honor in using outdated equipment? It is often said here that my (really old) equipment works just fine. Well that's fine for you but don't use it as a measure of why someone else should not buy new.

It use to be fun here seeing members say "The Brown Truck is coming and then it fell out of favor followed by other members denigrating the purchase of new equipment. (yes- I have been on this forum for a long time) Why- why taint new equipment purchase with underlying negative judgement? There are real advances in new cameras now that can achieve results that older cameras can't- ISO improvement, focus, reduced size and weight, focus stacking, interval and video results and many other advances.

So let's not treat our members as children but as thinking adults. We should be responding to the implied question of what did you gain by updating not should I update. And GAS is ok.

There was a recent post that garnered a number of responses. The post was in regard to posting critical comments in the Photo Gallery section of this site. You can find that article here: https://www.uglyhedgehog.com/t-726989-1.html

First off, there is an art to offering critiques. One can simply do a website search for ' how to critique art '. There are many articles explaining this skill. I'm reminded of a story a friend of mine told me regarding critiques. It's a great lesson.

A friend of mine's father worked for Ansel Adams. As such, both my friend and his father attended a number of Ansel Adams receptions. On one such occasion, my friend was there and accompanied Ansel Adams as he walked down the hallway to the reception room. He was, of course, in a group of people who worked for the museum and were in charge of organizing the exhibit and reception.

As they walked down the hallway, this gentleman, carrying a portfolio, approached AA and, after greeting him, asked him if he'd mind looking at some photographs. Ansel stopped, looked around, and saw an empty bench nearby. He took the portfolio from the gentleman and indicated that they should sit on that bench together. Of course, this was to the dismay of the accompanying group. They both walked to the bench and sat down.

At this point, AA opened the portfolio and looked at each of the photographs in a rather studious manner. He then asked the gentleman if he just wanted him to appreciate them or critique them. The gentleman indicated that he's like him to tell him what was wrong with them. AA looked at the gentleman and stated, "Why don't we see what's right with them and where they could be improved."

While the assembled museum personnel kept tapping their watches indicating they needed to hurry, AA took time discussing the merits of each photograph and then where minor things could be done to improve each of them. He also included why each of those minor things would improve the photograph.

That's the kind of critique that gives one incentive to improve. It's a far better approach than expressing something along the lines of 'you wasted good photons and materials to produce that?' or 'I would have done it this way or that way.'

Anyway, it was quite interesting to see how an artist of some stature provided a critique.
--Bob