My Z6 takes awesome photos; landscape, starscape, even wildlife. The user interactions and menus are fantastic and easy to navigate. My old Nikon lenses, my Rokinon, and Tokina perform properly. It smokes my old D7200. I understand with the ii series, focus tracking functions properly.

I've been taking bird and wildlife photos with my Nikon 300mm F4 for a few years now and it's doing a great job. I also use a teleconverter that brings me up to 420mm at 5.6. But, alas, I want more reach. Right now my top two contenders are the Nikon 200-500 or the Tamron 150-600 g2. I love my Nikon glass, but I know I will want more, so I tilt towards the Tamron.

Also, I do like my prime and I get great results with it. I noticed Nikon has a 500mm f5.6 prime out there, but it costs over twice as much as the 2-500. Sigma also has a few long lenses not outrageously over priced, but just quite expensive, like a 300-800mm 5.6, a 500mm 5.6, and an 80mm 5.6.

I was wondering if anyone has experience with any of these lenses, I'd love to get your thoughts.

Oh yea, I upgraded from my D7200 to a Z-6 ~ it's awesome.

You can get beautiful sunset photographs from Larrabee State Park, it's right on the water and there is a rocky shoreline. If you like urban photography, downtown Bellingham has many beautiful turn of the century buildings, and it's a great place to visit.

The iconic photos of Seattle, the Puget Sound, and Mt. Rainier are taken from Kerry Park.

http://www.seattle.gov/parks/find/parks/kerry-park

Thanks for posting those links, I have both of them saved on my favorites list.

I've been trying my hand at starscape photography for over a year and your magazines will be a great resource.

I've been very happy with my Z6. It performs far better than my old D7200, and surpassed every expectation I had. I have a sneaky feeling, if you are comfy with the larger RAW files, you would prefer the Z7. My understanding is the Z6 is slightly better in low light, and because I enjoy starscape photography I opted for that camera. I have amazingly little noise in my photos even t high ISOs.

I upgraded from my Nikon D7200 to a full frame Z6. I mostly shoot landscape, starscape, and travel photography but occasionally I put on my Nikkor 300mm f4 and shoot birds and wildlife. I figured I would hang onto the D7200 for wildlife and birds, but when I tried the 300mm on the Z6, it focussed better and faster, and tracked better, than it ever did on the D7200 and even with the crop factor, the Z6 took much better photos than the D7200. The 300mm does not have VR, but with the IBIS (in body image stabilization) in the Z6 I get stabilization even though it is not native to the lens.

After a month of use, the Z6 is performing far better than I ever dreamed it would!

And it shoots fantastic starscapes as well.

I need a larger memory card in my camera.

Well, it seems Luminar does not (yet) support the NEF files from my Nikon Z6. So I have to convert them to either DNG or TIF. Any ideas as to which is best? Thanks.

I'm shopping the same two cameras right now. If it were just a matter of features, I would choose the Z6 in a heartbeat. What makes the choice difficult is the Z6 kit I want is twice the price if the D750.

$1400 vs $2800+

I have a Tokina 12-28 I use with my D7200, it has provided me with some great photos. I highly recommend it for the price.

I held back on buying a D750 a few months ago wondering what Nikon may replace it with, but is the Z6 worth the extra money?

I do outdoor photography, wildlife, landscapes, and starscapes. Both cameras will do very well what I want in a new camera, and I am attracted to the features of the Z6. But ... Is the Z6 worth the extra money?

I can get a D750, with a battery grip and a few other niceties for $1400.

The new Z6 body only & adapter: $2150. Through in the f4 24-70 and the price is $2750 ($600), wait to buy the lens later and it is $1000. Oh, and like another $75 for the memory card with either kit.

As much as I want to go mirrorless, I'm not sure the extra $750 - $1350 gets me that much more.

Current lenses: Nikon 50mm prime, 24-85, 70-300, 300mm f4 with 1.4 teleconverter, Tokina f4 12-28, and a Rokinon f2.8 14mm for starscapes.

Another option is to bite the bullet and get BOTH! Luminar has many features, such as their presets, that I enjoy. It also does very well with layers and white balance. When I do starscape photography, the sky needs different white balance than the foreground, so I do this with layers and the brush tool. When this is complete, I use Luminar's "open in" feature and it exports the image directly to Elements. I do this because Elements has a much better "healing brush" tool than Luminar.

Each software has its uses, but if I had to pick only one, I would opt for Luminar.

Green Valley is not that far from the Buenos Aires National Wildlife Refuge. It's worth a stop by.

https://www.fws.gov/refuge/buenos_aires/

Astrophotography: When you choose your lens, go wide and go fast. It takes a LOT of experimenting, but you need to kick your ISO up a bit, well over 1200. Also, get yourself two apps, one is a dark sky finder, the other is a moon phase app. You need to do starscapes with a new moon. Also, choose a nice foreground, light it up with a flashlight on a stand, high as you can get it, somewhere off to the side for side lighting. Did I mention you need a tripod and your exposures need to be 15-30 seconds? Like I said, you need to experiment to get good exposures, and you probably wont do your best first time out. But keep at it.