frank bruce wrote:
Does anyone have an opinion on the Nikon Z7?
Yes. I have several thoughts on the Nikon Z7. I have less to say about the Z7 II, because I have not looked at it to the same depth that I have looked at the original Z7. You should know that I currently shoot a D850 (2.5 years), D810 (3.5 years), and D500 (x2, for 2+ years) after using a D200 (which I still have and use) for 14 years and a D300. After looking intently at a Z7, I chose not to buy one, although I believe that they are fine cameras. But even though they are the last purchased, the D500s are my most used cameras right now.
You have received several replies which show very serious confusion between the Z7 and Z7 II. These are very different cameras with very different internal architectures. They probably should be considered different models instead of a single model with an upgrade. I'm going to reply separately to Ron's posted comparison, which as written contains several significant errors. So be sure which model you are looking at and read carefully about whichever one you are choosing.
While a number of folks have replied with the implication that the Z7 is the "perfect" camera, it hasn't been that long since the same people were calling the D850 the perfect camera, and before that, the D500. So I'm sure that in a couple of years, neither the Z7 not the Z7 II will be the perfect camera either.
OK...here are a couple of specifics to which I can speak definitively. First...I still do not like electronic viewfinders. Clearly, that it is a minority opinion, but you have asked for opinions here. I find it very fatiguing to use an EVF for any prolonged period of time. I also do a lot of night sky photography and would never use the Z7 for that, because the EVF is too costly to night vision. While it can be convenient, the cost of requiring as much as 30 minutes for my right eye to recover full sensitivity is simply not worth it. I can use Live View to accomplish the same benefits (usually around focusing) with little or no loss of night vision sensitivity.
If you are really looking at a Z7 instead of a Z7 II, be aware that there is no battery grip available and no connector interface to add one even if one becomes available from a third party. This is kind of a big deal (at least to me) when using a camera for which battery life is one of the big negatives compared to other available models.
There is nothing about the Z7 that is likely to "fix" anything about your photography. Some claim that the WYSIWYG capability of the EVF will solve a lot of problems. I guess it might be a help, but keep in mind that the EVF is in no way in the same league as a calibrated monitor, and the image is not large enough to support making really informed critical decisions. I find (and still believe) that the claims made for the EVF, while not totally without merit, are seriously exaggerated. There are other ways to improve your exposure performance without spending $3,000. As far as image stabilization goes, there is also likely some merit to the claims as well, although the claim of 5 stops of stability doesn't wash with me in any real life scenario.
In the end, it doesn't matter to me what camera you buy and shoot, as long as you are happy with it. Hey...I shot a D200 for 11 years...even after a number of newer and "better" choices became available. I still like its CCD sensor when I am in an intense color situation, like a Dale Chihuly glass exhibit. It's just not very good when the light starts to fade.
It's not clear from your question whether you are considering a purchase or just thinking about the camera. Either way...have fun.