The link (to purchase) this review mentions all the Zs up to, not not including, Z8. So you re using it successfully on your Z8?

Thank you to all of you who have contributed opinions on this. I decided to rent a Z8 with the heavier 70-200 2.8 lens and see what what I think. I am certainly aware that in general wildlife photography, a 200 is not enough reach. But for the specific work I want to do, 200 is more than adequate as long as it works well in low light.

Right but full frame or not is not my concern. I have been shooting w the smaller format and you are right, it is adequate. Looking for a step up in quality. Had heard the Z8 w an S lends might be the ticket but not going to lug around 6 pounds. I am a small woman.....

Excellent idea. Given that, I seriously doubt I'd be happy with that weight! Back to the drawing board.....

I have been wanting to move to mirrorless. I need to be able to photograph animals in low light, so also considering getting Nikkor 70-200 2.8. I have been using Canon 7D Mark II for years, with L lenses, and to me, it has been OK but not great. But I have zero experience with Nikon of any sort. A bit concerned about weight, too, as that lens weighs quite a bit.

Any thoughts would be appreciated! Especially those of you that actually own a Nikon Z8....

Appears to be back!!

Tried that too - did not work. Thanks, though!

Anyone else experiencing this???

You bring up a great point! Photography services can yield sales as well. I edit others photos and get them prepared for gifts the customer wants to give, etc. Printing others work is a great photography service. My printer goes to 17x22 and that has been enough for the types of things my own customers want. And of course, if it is your cup o' tea, teaching what you know. I have made more money from teaching one-on-one than sales of my work (although it is close!).

I could not agree more! I have done the tent-on-street shows, been in galleries, held open studios, and hung art for sale in coffee shops. And the #1 thing I have learned is that people like to have a connection with the image and often get that through connection with the artist telling the story of the image. In other words, the images do not sell themselves no matter how good you think they are. But I have had considerable success when I engage with the viewer. Nothing better than at the end of the story, they say "I'll take it!" But you also have to be able to smartly promote your work and ALWAYS think of how you promote from their perspective, not yours.

Lastly, I agree that a watercolor (painted) vs what looks like a watercolor (digital) should indeed be far more expensive for all the reasons given by others. I have tried the former (failed) and now successfully sell the latter and have no issue whatsoever with the watercolor original selling for far more money. But both are art IMHO.

LOL I bought the first gen of this thing and love it still!

Oh - one more thing. If you join a forum that is made explicitly for CC (constructive criticism), you will get a lot farther than "nice shot". I photograph wild horses and joined an Equine Photographer forum whose whole purpose is to give CC by your peers. I have learned a TON from them! I have also learned how my work is perceived when someone looks at it for the first time. That has helped my "editing eye" greatly.

Welcome! For me, having a website has been helpful in the sense that I use it for further information for the folks that like my work in an artists' coop. Someone in this list said "exposure" and I could not agree more. But targeted exposure is even better. And that does not happen overnight. For years I have kept track of who has bought my work in the gallery and in my shows. I invite them to my shows and I can tell by my Square receipts that many are repeat customers. My advice: give it time, take the shots that please you, and enjoy the unpredictable ride. You will be amazed at the people you meet and the (good) situations and commissions that come your way! I have also picked up students along the way and the helps, too.

I use the 7D MII to photograph wild horses and have been very happy with it. When they are in motion, it focuses quite quickly while I shoot in fast continuous mode.

I have all three....Photomatix Pro, full Topaz, and NIK. The only one of these three whose reason for existence is HDR is Photomatix. Hands down Photomatix is my go to program and I do a fair amount of HDR (also tried Aurora but maybe I am just too used to Photomatix). You can get, in my opinion, some excellent realistic results with Photomatix. I do understand the argument about people ditching HDR. But done right, it is spectacular. Trey Ratcliff has made an excellent living doing just that. Back to Photomatix. Like many said here, it is intuitive. It is a lot of fun. Try it and form your own opinion. Enjoy!