[mee]

^ Quick question. Do you struggle with AF when shooting in low light? It's the one issue that I keep reading about for this camera.

I can't and won't try to answer for Lee, but I will say I tested my trusty D750 and my Z5 back to back in the same dim environment with the same lens (45mm f/1.8) and aperture. And both locked on the same way at the same (perceptible) speed. They both locked on kind of slowly, a little hunting but if I wasn't having an issue with the D750 I sure am not going to complain about it on the Z5.

And the setting was a very dim room at night with no direct lighting, just reflection of a light from another room.


Z5 has latest firmware and the Low light AF mode enabled. Instead of the normal near-insta lock it took about 2 seconds to figure it out.

Z6 II has better ability to lock at extreme dimness supposedly, but I don't have one to test. It's at least rated a couple EV better which should be an obvious improvement imo.

I should also point out the viewfinder gets a lot of color noise introduced as it amplifies the gain to keep the image bright enough through the VF too. Just a difference with the EVF over the OVF in general which just gives you more than pitch darkness real world view. Not a minus (because its better to see your subject), but something to be prepared for.

Are you still on the fence on new camera?

[LeeRunge]

I suspect the tech will trickle down to the next gen revisions in a couple of years from the Z9.


I'd stick with a DSLR and a well tuned telephoto too if I did heavy sports or action work. Only because it would be a lot cheaper to go that route than pick up a Z9 (once they are released).

The A7 IV is coming with a 33MP sensor -- I wonder if that will be available for Nikon Z in a couple of years too? I'd like that.

I agree it’ll eventually catch up as trickle down happens from the current flagships.

A7IV looks pretty disappointing IMO. 6FPS RAW unless you go lossy raw for 10 FPS, same back LCD as the Z5, same resolution EVF as the Z5. Z5 shoots 4.5 Raw vs 6 on the A74 unless you go lossy. Thats kind of bad imo for a camera that’s basically double the price for stills anyway. Sony is a beast for video, and maybe that’s what they’re trying to dominate.

33mp vs 24mp isn’t much of a sell for me either.

And the Z5 is proper weather sealed and all my Z lenses which I love. Soaked em already and it’s like a Pentax with DA* in rain. No worries. I would not be that confident with a Sony given past weather sealing with them and lack of it in many lenses.

Nikon Z is the most weather sealed system out there right now, more so than Pentax and Olympus. At least in full frame. 24-200 is I think the only one of it’s kind with top level weather sealing.

Z6ii seems to be a much better performer to me than the A74 that just came out. 33MP isn’t going to make up for the slow FPS and low res back screen. Z6ii rear screen is double the resolution.

Canon and Nikon I think will start to pull away from Sony as they’re firing on all cylinders for the most part now that they woke up and are full speed ahead on mirrorless.

---------- Post added 10-21-2021 at 08:37 PM ----------

^ Quick question. Do you struggle with AF when shooting in low light? It's the one issue that I keep reading about for this camera.

Nope, they released an update that killed that. It was only an issue on slow lenses at F4 and above. Like the kit lens that everyone reviewed. Back to back with my D750 before the update, the Z5 with a slow lens like the 24-200 would focus pretty slow in really dark conditions, but faster than the D750 with a F1.8.

After the update it’s faster all around than the D750. AF takes some getting adjusted to though as it worked a bit different, but it’s fast.

The EVF on the Z5 is a slideshow at full FPS for wildlife and much worse than and OVF so don’t buy it for that. Wait for the trickle down from the new flagships that don’t have any blackout. I think the D500/K3iii with a fast lens is the way to go for that, for now.

Overall the Z5 is a killer camera for it’s price and it has excellent weather sealing as well as almost all the Z lenses. Pretty good for a $1200 dollar camera. Sensor is excellent as well, but it’s a slow frame rate camera.

All the reviews are old that talk about low light being slow. Nikon addressed that with the last firmware update.

[The Squirrel Mafia]

I can't and won't try to answer for Lee, but I will say I tested my trusty D750 and my Z5 back to back in the same dim environment with the same lens (45mm f/1.8) and aperture. And both locked on the same way at the same (perceptible) speed. They both locked on kind of slowly, a little hunting but if I wasn't having an issue with the D750 I sure am not going to complain about it on the Z5.

And the setting was a very dim room at night with no direct lighting, just reflection of a light from another room.


Z5 has latest firmware and the Low light AF mode enabled. Instead of the normal near-insta lock it took about 2 seconds to figure it out.

Z6 II has better ability to lock at extreme dimness supposedly, but I don't have one to test. It's at least rated a couple EV better which should be an obvious improvement imo.

I should also point out the viewfinder gets a lot of color noise introduced as it amplifies the gain to keep the image bright enough through the VF too. Just a difference with the EVF over the OVF in general which just gives you more than pitch darkness real world view. Not a minus (because its better to see your subject), but something to be prepared for.

Are you still on the fence on new camera?

Interesting observations. I've been going back & forth with the K-3III, Nikon Z6II, & Sony a7IV. The Z5 has been another possibility. Getting it & getting nice S lenses & eventually getting the Z6III.

Nope, they released an update that killed that. It was only an issue on slow lenses at F4 and above. Like the kit lens that everyone reviewed. Back to back with my D750 before the update, the Z5 with a slow lens like the 24-200 would focus pretty slow in really dark conditions, but faster than the D750 with a F1.8.


After the update it’s faster all around than the D750. AF takes some getting adjusted to though as it worked a bit different, but it’s fast.

The EVF on the Z5 is a slideshow at full FPS for wildlife and much worse than and OVF so don’t buy it for that. Wait for the trickle down from the new flagships that don’t have any blackout. I think the D500/K3iii with a fast lens is the way to go for that, for now.

Overall the Z5 is a killer camera for it’s price and it has excellent weather sealing as well as almost all the Z lenses. Pretty good for a $1200 dollar camera. Sensor is excellent as well, but it’s a slow frame rate camera.

All the reviews are old that talk about low light being slow. Nikon addressed that with the last firmware update.

Good to know. The Z6II does a slide show after 5.5FPS, so I take it that the Z5 is even worse with the slide show already happening at 5.5?

I almost bought one when it was selling for $1,000, but all the reports of slow AF in low light kind of turned me off. Thanks for the response.

[Serkevan]

A7IV looks pretty disappointing IMO. 6FPS RAW unless you go lossy raw for 10 FPS, same back LCD as the Z5, same resolution EVF as the Z5. Z5 shoots 4.5 Raw vs 6 on the A74 unless you go lossy. Thats kind of bad imo for a camera that’s basically double the price for stills anyway. Sony is a beast for video, and maybe that’s what they’re trying to dominate.

Wait, the 10 fps are only on 12-bit raw? Huh. I also saw the camera as... middling, considering it's a whopping 2500. It's not really better than the A7iii IMHO... except for video. The LCD going from tilt to swivel-out is a big hint that they are making a cheaper A7S camera more than anything else.

[repaap]

Wait, the 10 fps are only on 12-bit raw? Huh. I also saw the camera as... middling, considering it's a whopping 2500. It's not really better than the A7iii IMHO... except for video. The LCD going from tilt to swivel-out is a big hint that they are making a cheaper A7S camera more than anything else.

I was just looking at this yesterday. Where Sony and Canon pull ahead Nikon is AF, especially continious eye AF. Now Sony seems to have best AF in it's league, althou Jello and low FPS is a let down. But, it will use that 10(jpg/lossy raw) very well. as well as that 6 fps, where Nikon might be okay, it is not winnig prices with AF, especially for video. These cameras seem to be more and more about 'hybrid' shooting, so this is why video is important part, not just a feature.

I have panasonic S5 now for my Video and I do use K-3III occasionally too but mostly it is for photos. I did consider Nikon Z6II also, but Panasonic does have very nice v-log and internal 10-bit video no lineskipping. K-3III blows Panasonic it out of water with photos, AF and with superb nice OVF. Should panasonic have to have much more than 24 MP to make much difference to K-3III 26 MP, even if it is aps-c. I'v thrown DNG and RW2 and while difference is there, it is not big. So in that way 33 MP would be improvement if agreeable not that big deal. If I'd just like sony colours...and EVF...and incamera corrected lenses, it would be nice.

To be honest, Z5 is for sure nice bargain for 'FF milc' but compared to many cameras, it needs to be too. Let us see wht that Z9 is going to be. How I see it, Canon and Sony has that king of MILC flag in their posession right now, in terms of many things. Not that it really matters that much either, but it is what it is.

[LeeRunge]

I was just looking at this yesterday. Where Sony and Canon pull ahead Nikon is AF, especially continious eye AF. Now Sony seems to have best AF in it's league, althou Jello and low FPS is a let down. But, it will use that 10(jpg/lossy raw) very well. as well as that 6 fps, where Nikon might be okay, it is not winnig prices with AF, especially for video. These cameras seem to be more and more about 'hybrid' shooting, so this is why video is important part, not just a feature.

I have panasonic S5 now for my Video and I do use K-3III occasionally too but mostly it is for photos. I did consider Nikon Z6II also, but Panasonic does have very nice v-log and internal 10-bit video no lineskipping. K-3III blows Panasonic it out of water with photos, AF and with superb nice OVF. Should panasonic have to have much more than 24 MP to make much difference to K-3III 26 MP, even if it is aps-c. I'v thrown DNG and RW2 and while difference is there, it is not big. So in that way 33 MP would be improvement if agreeable not that big deal. If I'd just like sony colours...and EVF...and incamera corrected lenses, it would be nice.

To be honest, Z5 is for sure nice bargain for 'FF milc' but compared to many cameras, it needs to be too. Let us see wht that Z9 is going to be. How I see it, Canon and Sony has that king of MILC flag in their posession right now, in terms of many things. Not that it really matters that much either, but it is what it is.

For what it’s worth I find the AF on the Z5 about the same as the D750. It’s not something I find inhibits any scenario or misses shots at all. It’s a mess on reviews because they’ve updated firmware so many times to improve it being they were behind from the start. But they seem to be solid in AF now. I really have no complaints in that respect. It’s nowhere near what the gap between something like my K-3 and D-750 was in AF-C for example.

For video Panasonic and Sony is the way to go, or Canon. And I think the K-3iii is a super choice for stills. That’s the next acquisition for me is replacing my K-3 with the mark 3. I still really love Pentax control/ergo’s for still shooting. And EVF’s are amazing BUT not for wildlife unless you have an expensive high end one because of the slideshow effect panning, it’s really difficult to track wildlife depending on the settings due to screen lag. So that will take some trickle down from the flagships. I do find EVF superior for normal shooting though, you just get everything right on the first try and chimping is a thing of the past. Post processing is greatly reduced or eliminated as well, because you can get it just right on the EVF first. Rear screens can do that but it’s awkward holding the camera out and extremely hard to see in direct sun with glare so not realistic to see the detail you need to nail the shots. With OVF you just can’t get those tiny fine tune adjustments like you can with EVF, the stuff you normally tweak in post for highlights and shadows, you just do that up front. It’s a time saver.

It’ll be interesting to see how the Z9 pans out if it somehow jumps ahead for AF. I wouldn’t be surprised as Nikon has a pretty solid history of having really good AF. But in the long run Video is probably more important than stills in these cameras and Canon/Sony/Panasonic offer more in that respect. The Z line is the best Nikon has ever offered for video, but the other company’s have way more experience offering dedicated video equipment since forever.

The Z5 is for sure a bargain for stills shooting if wildlife isn’t in the mix. Image quality is excellent, EVF is the same as the 2k plus cameras. Fully weather sealed. But I don’t think I’ll update it until the EVF’s are 100% stutter free and have trickled down into the sub 2k price range a few revisions from now.

[mee]

Wait, the 10 fps are only on 12-bit raw? Huh. I also saw the camera as... middling, considering it's a whopping 2500. It's not really better than the A7iii IMHO... except for video. The LCD going from tilt to swivel-out is a big hint that they are making a cheaper A7S camera more than anything else.

I suspect this is pandemic pricing and the affects of a shrunken camera market as a whole. Otherwise It would have been closer to 2k imo.

It does make the A7 III look nice at 1800 USD though. If you don't mind Sony.


The body and general ergonomics of the Sony mirrorless look to be a bit less refined than the Nikons though. OTOH the one thing I'm heavily missing on the Z front is access to quality 3rd party optics. That's something that imo gives Sony a lot of value.


For instance, instead of spending 2300 USD for an OEM 24-70mm f/2.8 lens, one has access to 800-1000 USD Tamron and Sigma models. If that was your goal, it might still be cheaper to buy an A7 IV + the lens over a Z6II and OEM lens. There are still situations where it makes financial sense, if finance is a high goal.

[repaap]

For what it’s worth I find the AF on the Z5 about the same as the D750. It’s not something I find inhibits any scenario or misses shots at all. It’s a mess on reviews because they’ve updated firmware so many times to improve it being they were behind from the start. But they seem to be solid in AF now. I really have no complaints in that respect. It’s nowhere near what the gap between something like my K-3 and D-750 was in AF-C for example.

For video Panasonic and Sony is the way to go, or Canon. And I think the K-3iii is a super choice for stills. That’s the next acquisition for me is replacing my K-3 with the mark 3. I still really love Pentax control/ergo’s for still shooting. And EVF’s are amazing BUT not for wildlife unless you have an expensive high end one because of the slideshow effect panning, it’s really difficult to track wildlife depending on the settings due to screen lag. So that will take some trickle down from the flagships. I do find EVF superior for normal shooting though, you just get everything right on the first try and chimping is a thing of the past. Post processing is greatly reduced or eliminated as well, because you can get it just right on the EVF first. Rear screens can do that but it’s awkward holding the camera out and extremely hard to see in direct sun with glare so not realistic to see the detail you need to nail the shots. With OVF you just can’t get those tiny fine tune adjustments like you can with EVF, the stuff you normally tweak in post for highlights and shadows, you just do that up front. It’s a time saver.

It’ll be interesting to see how the Z9 pans out if it somehow jumps ahead for AF. I wouldn’t be surprised as Nikon has a pretty solid history of having really good AF. But in the long run Video is probably more important than stills in these cameras and Canon/Sony/Panasonic offer more in that respect. The Z line is the best Nikon has ever offered for video, but the other company’s have way more experience offering dedicated video equipment since forever.

The Z5 is for sure a bargain for stills shooting if wildlife isn’t in the mix. Image quality is excellent, EVF is the same as the 2k plus cameras. Fully weather sealed. But I don’t think I’ll update it until the EVF’s are 100% stutter free and have trickled down into the sub 2k price range a few revisions from now.

I do agree. Nikon has very good history with AF. nd these new models are geting better. There is a gap thou.. K-3III is worthy upgrade but only if you want OVF and Pentax. EVF from Pana S5 is so bad(yes, slideshow) and it does hurt my eyes, so I can't use it as much as I'd like to, even if it is handy. I can use it I just want to avoid it. AF from K-3III is very nice as well as performance all in all especially compared to K-3 original. My old lenses do work so much better now.


I'm quite open minded with cameras, and I have no problem using and even buying cameras needed for work, for example if I need high end video(actually budget is the limit ofcourse at there too). I suppose that many are doing the same. I suppose that I'll have a look at Sony since it's s-cinetone is actually not that bad and AF for video is amazing as well as ISO. but I'll keep my eyes open. The thing is that if one can sit down and wait, good things can happen.

[LeeRunge]

Interesting observations. I've been going back & forth with the K-3III, Nikon Z6II, & Sony a7IV. The Z5 has been another possibility. Getting it & getting nice S lenses & eventually getting the Z6III.


Good to know. The Z6II does a slide show after 5.5FPS, so I take it that the Z5 is even worse with the slide show already happening at 5.5?

I almost bought one when it was selling for $1,000, but all the reports of slow AF in low light kind of turned me off. Thanks for the response.

With the Z9 right up at the top now with AF you may want to wait for a Z6iii or go the mee and I would and get a Z5 and build up Z glass with the savings. We’re for sure going to get some really good updates from that Z9 tech in a few years. No concerns now whatsoever that Nikon will have AF up with the best.


BUT the Z lenses are probably the nicest lineup of any manufacturer right now, that’s why I would go Nikon. My 24-200 zoom is weather sealed and it’s very sharp for that range. Actually I don’t think theres a single Pentax lens as sharp as that zoom, never mind the primes like my 85 1.8. The Z lenses are very very good. And all but 3 (2 DX and the retro prime) are comprehensively weather sealed. So you get sealed primes with them as well. Not the case with Sony or Canon. They want you to pony up L glass or G prime money.

The Z5 is just rough with action at lower shutter speeds because of the blackout on the viewfinder. Oddly it doesn’t do this at all at 30fps in movie mode when you use 30fps at 8 mp. Probably just something to do with writing to the card and it can’t feed the viewfinder and card at the same time. It’s not made for action though so I can’t beat it up too much. The Z9 uses a dual stream so it’s no factor on that camera and I suspect that’s what we’ll see from now on out in the others as well.

Don’t get me wrong, the Z5 is a lot of camera for the money, I’m really happy with it. It’s not crippled in any way other than having 4.5 fps full size stills and the viewfinder blackout, but I think that’s an issue with all the lower end mirrorless cameras. For the money it’s well worth it. The sensor is excellent and paired with a 24-200 it’s a killer combo for travel. The weather sealing works really well too. The sensor is one of the highest dynamic range sensors available. It’s actually better than the 6 line at low ISO, where those are better at very high ISO. But I rarely use ISO above 12800 so I’d rather have the Z5 sensor.

With a little patience I think the Nikon Z will be the top system in a few years once the expeed 7 board gets into lower priced cameras. And I think you can go forth with full confidence knowing that and build Z glass up for now.

I would not be concerned for low light with the Z5 after it’s last firmware. It’s not a problem. Initially it was slower with F4 and above glass. Which happens to be what all the reviewers used with the 24-50 and 24-200, even worse at F6.3 at the telephoto ends. So it got beat up for that. It actually was fine with a F1.8 imo. But it’s much better after the update and not a factor.

As mee said be ready to see some noise and color in very dark conditions in the viewfinder and some lower frame rates if it kicks into low light mode (it’s basically taking a long exposure to “see”). Keep in mind in these conditions you can’t even see anything in the D750 viewfinder, so it’s better overall. OVF’s are a pain in the dark.

I find the EVF a huge advantage for getting your shots right the first time, rather than in post production later, it’s a massive time saver. All those little shadow and highlight adjustments are becoming a thing of the past, you just get it right the first time. No chimping, no post needed. I have the front MF ring set to EV compensation now for that purpose, and another tied to D-Lighting (it’s like highlight and shadow auto adjust), with those two on tap you get perfect exposures consistantly and no need for lightroom.

---------- Post added 10-30-2021 at 07:14 AM ----------

Here’s some travel photo’s from a few weekends back. This is the Z5 and 24-200. Most of these are SOC with some I used “magic wand” on apples photo album, very streamlined way to take photo’s. You just get the look set up front in the EVF and go have fun.

These are taken middle of the day under blinding full sun, so terrible lighting conditions with a circular polarizer. This is Okeefanokee swamp in southern Georgia.

[cxdoo]

My 24-200 zoom is weather sealed and it’s very sharp for that range. Actually I don’t think theres a single Pentax lens as sharp as that zoom, never mind the primes like my 85 1.8.

I find this really hard to believe. Are you sure you didn't mean 'single Pentax lens in comparable class'?

[LeeRunge]

I find this really hard to believe. Are you sure you didn't mean 'single Pentax lens in comparable class'?

.

I know it’s hard to believe, I looked at MTF charts for a bunch of Pentax lenses and I have not seen one that outperforms it in sharpness. I’m not saying they don’t render nice images, but for absolute sharpness yes. If you see one I’m glad to change my mind.

I’m tracking the sharpest lens for Pentax is actually a Sigma 35mm 1.4 ART lens. And the 24-200 is sharper than that. And it’s sharper than the recent 28-105.

What’s the sharpest Pentax lens out there? I’m happy to admit being wrong, I just have not seem an MTF that shows a sharper lens. The Z primes are some of the sharpest lenses period so no surprise there, but the 24-200 is a super zoom.



35 1.4 mtf

[luftfluss]

.

I know it’s hard to believe, I looked at MTF charts for a bunch of Pentax lenses and I have not seen one that outperforms it in sharpness. I’m not saying they don’t render nice images, but for absolute sharpness yes. If you see one I’m glad to change my mind.

I’m tracking the sharpest lens for Pentax is actually a Sigma 35mm 1.4 ART lens. And the 24-200 is sharper than that. And it’s sharper than the recent 28-105.

What’s the sharpest Pentax lens out there? I’m happy to admit being wrong, I just have not seem an MTF that shows a sharper lens. The Z primes are some of the sharpest lenses period so no surprise there, but the 24-200 is a super zoom.

An article that addresses, in part, the exceptional sharpness from the Z: The Nikon Z7’s Insane Sharpness | Strolls with my Dog

[LeeRunge]

An article that addresses, in part, the exceptional sharpness from the Z: The Nikon Z7’s Insane Sharpness | Strolls with my Dog

That was a pretty interesting article!

I should say absolute sharpness isn’t everything in a lens at all. A lot of my favorite shots are from the 16-50 2.8 (before SDM died) and it’s a pretty poor performer for lens sharpness.

I should take some shots with my K3 and Sigma 18-250 and the Z5 24-200 side by side some time. I used the K3 combo (and the Sigma 8-16) for travel for a number of years. The Z5 24-200 is like a sharper version of that with weather sealing. It’s too bad there isn’t a super zoom that’s weather sealed for Pentax.

I actually bring both with me on my motorcycle, the Z5 with 24-200 and the K-3 with the 8/16. I’ll probably eventually get the 14-30 F4 but the Sigma 8-16 and K-3 works fine. AF isn’t much of a factor on a super wide angle lens.

USB-C charging is a really nice thing on travel as well, one less thing to carry with you and you can charge the camera from a battery pack like everything else so only one battery is needed.

[Rondec]

.

I know it’s hard to believe, I looked at MTF charts for a bunch of Pentax lenses and I have not seen one that outperforms it in sharpness. I’m not saying they don’t render nice images, but for absolute sharpness yes. If you see one I’m glad to change my mind.

I’m tracking the sharpest lens for Pentax is actually a Sigma 35mm 1.4 ART lens. And the 24-200 is sharper than that. And it’s sharper than the recent 28-105.

What’s the sharpest Pentax lens out there? I’m happy to admit being wrong, I just have not seem an MTF that shows a sharper lens. The Z primes are some of the sharpest lenses period so no surprise there, but the 24-200 is a super zoom.



35 1.4 mtf

I think the sharpest Pentax lens is the DFA *50.

[cxdoo]

.

I know it’s hard to believe, I looked at MTF charts for a bunch of Pentax lenses and I have not seen one that outperforms it in sharpness. I’m not saying they don’t render nice images, but for absolute sharpness yes. If you see one I’m glad to change my mind.

I don't really have a strong opinion or knowledge so I don't have much to offer except being surprised. My naive take is - why would anyone in their right mind invest in a system where no lens (including 2k+ * DFAs) comes even close to a sub-1k consumer superzoom?

Couple things i noticed browsing those lens comparison sites - warning about not comparing results from different systems and the fact last results from Pentax are 10 year old lenses on a K3. Also, that zoom was tested on Z7II. Again in my naive understanding, a significant part of that gap might be due to difference in sensor generation/size and in-camera processing.

Anyway, thanks for sharing your experience. I've seen Z5 and Z6 in shops here and wasn't particularly charmed by the looks but I don't doubt they are very competent cameras. I was thinking of getting a FF MILC early this year but since getting K3III I can't really convince myself to do so.

Kind of tangential but still relevant, the biggest expense I had when moving from K5II to K3III wasn't the camera or the lenses, it was the computer capable of running photo editing software fast enough. 4000 euros later, I'm not willing to move above 26mp in whatever format in next 5 years.