I would definitely keep the 50 especially if you have the 2 kit lenses…quite excellent output at very light weight for ultra commando fits in a waist pack kit. While the 7II is less good in low light than the 6II because of pixel size…it’s still better than most DSLRs IMO. I wouldn’t count on a Z8 or Z7IIi or whatever they call it until it’s here. The extra MP in the 7II make it better than the 6II in my view and it’s good for just about everything including BIF although it does struggle a bit with that and my 500PF…haven’t tried it with my Z 100-400.

If we see a more 9 like but no grip body…it’s seriously on my I would likely upgrade the 7II list.

The II is the way to go. The Z6 II and Z7 II are quite a bit better than the originals - according to reviewers. As for the Z8, from what I hear, that probably won't be coming around any time soon.

Considering the choices in your title, I would go (I did go) with the Z6 (II). The difference between the Z6 II and Z7 II is mainly MP. Are you willing to pay $1,000 for 21 MP?

Z6 II vs Z7 II - https://www.google.com/search?q=z6+ii+vs+z7+ii&oq=z6+ii+vs+z7+ii&aqs=edge..69i57j0i22i30l3j0i390l2j69i64.5379j0j4&sourceid=chrome&ie=UTF-8

Don't forget about refurbished and used - KEH and MPB.

IMHO, your last stated option is your best bet. Trade in the Z6 for a Z7II.

I have, or had, all of the items you mention. The Z50 has a niche place in my inventory as a travel, social event camera, and only used for wildlife when the bigger bodies are not available. The Z7II, with the dual processors and higher MP, should be able to give you a more satisfactory wildlife experience than either the Z50 or the Z6, as well as producing wonderful landscape images.

The Z8 is a remote dream to which we can attach our hopes and wishes, but I would not base important decisions on my wishes for the future.

When I say "more satisfactory" wildlife shooting, please understand that I don't regard any of the Z bodies, except the Z9, as superior to the D500 for birding (my wildlife focus). But at least you would be able to use DX mode on the Z7II and still get reasonable results.

Why don't you rent or borrow a Z7II and give it a whirl?

Good luck!

I checked the embedded EXIF data two different ways and this was definitely shot at 1/200. That's why the bull and rider are blurred.

1/2000 is nearly impossible to shoot at night, under the lights, as this appears to have been done.

Below was shot in daylight, which made it possible to use a reasonably fast shutter speed of 1/800. Subject size, speed and lens focal length are all similar to your image. 2/3 stop larger f/5.6 was more than adequate depth of field, even though my subjects were much closer where DoF will naturally be shallower at any given aperture.

https://live.staticflickr.com/8323/8105759597_bfb718074b_o.jpg

Also notice that I oriented the camera vertically. Probably half my shots are vertical, half horizontal. Don't be afraid to rotate the camera, then use your zoom to better "fill the viewfinder" with your subject. (I don't fill the viewfinder too tight, so I can crop to standard sizes like 5:4 to make 8x10 prints, if needed.)

Your image was shot at 1/200.... not 1/2000.

When I first looked at it I thought the camera had focused behind the bull and rider. However, it is subject movement blur making them unsharp... not missed focus. There should have been plenty of depth of field at f/7.1.

You need a faster shutter speed. I don't know why you stopped down to f/7.1. You were at around 115mm with your zoom, so probably could have used f/5.6 (it's variable max aperture is f/4.5 at 50mm and f/6.3 at 250mm). That's 2/3 stop more light, which would have allowed around 1/320 shutter speed.

That's better, but still not fast enough. You should have used an even higher ISO. 1/12800 would have been another 2/3 stop increase, allowing shutter speed of at least 1/500.

Even better, but faster would be better. I might increase ISO another 1/3 stop to allow 1/620. However your image is 1/3 to 2/3 stop over-exposed, so probably could have been shot at 1/720 or even 1/800 with ISO 16000.

You will see digital "noise" with such high iSOs... but better that than blurred subjects!

Another challenge at events like this is separating the subject from the background. For this particular shot, right out of the chute the scene composition is nice and there's some appeal to having all the people in the background too. But if you study a lot of sports shots, it's more common to try to blur down the background. Iif you follow the action away further into the arena you may be able to get some background blur... though it will be limited with a zoom that maxes out around f/5.6. A longer focal length with f/4 or even f/2.8 would give better separation too. (I might have used my 135mm f/2 or 85mm f/1.8 lens!)

Or try shooting from a different angle where the background is less busy.

But mix it up... Some shots like yours, with a lot of background detail, can be nice too.

Picture too light now to look good. If you lightened the original then it should be easy to Start Over and bring it up carefully observing when your main subject looks best. However I usually stop when most of the image looks OK, duplicate to a new layer, modify until the rest is properly exposed, then erase back to the first layer to combine effects before flattening the image. Once I have the overall exposure looking good, I draw in edges to "sharpen" key elements needing improvement.
This ignores two things that may be important to you: I never care about all the background faces being clear, and I value the overall impression of the picture over noise degradation.
Boris