Why I changed my mind about keeping the D810

[billtils]

When I weighed up the pros and cons of trading my D810 for a mirrorless the only entry in the "Do it" column was saving weight, and I wasn't sure if that out-weighed (ouch) the entries in the "Don't Do It" one. However it made me look again. The old hands are getting a bit rheumaticky and I got offered an excellent deal on a trade for a new Z6ii.

It certainly delivered on the weight front and from these shots from its first outing I don't think I'll regret it.


1: John. This is a grab shot of my brother-in-law 2 days after he got home after 6 weeks in hospital. Hand held, natural light from the window, Nikon Z 40-70mm S fully extended, f/4, 1/80s





2: Cara (my nephew's Black Lab). Taken on the same day and well before I was up to speed with the electronics... F series 70-200 mm at 120mm, f/4, ISO 10,000, 1/8000s. I now know how to set it up correctly but that's pretty good IQ for ISO 10,000 with no post noise reduction.

[DanK]

Thanks for posting. Weight is the issue for me too, although I'd love the better AF for candids of kids. I'm still dithering about this. The relevant age-related issues for me are primarily back and shoulder damage. I'm scheduled for shoulder surgery in mid-September and will probably put off any decision about this until I see how the recovery from that goes.

If I don't want to buy a new system, the only real choice for me is the Canon R7. By the time my shoulder has healed, many of the questions about that should be answered. I'm still fascinated by the new OM Systems OM-1, but age notwithstanding, I'm not sure I can accept going all the way to MFT.

[billtils]

Dan, very best wishes for successful surgery.

Turning to relatively minor matters, staying with Nikon markedly reduced the change-over cost as I could use all my favourite lenses. I do have a friend of a simliar vintage to us who dumped his 5D3 and Canon glass for an OM and assures me he would have been delighted with the change even if there had not been any weight pressures.

[Manfred M]

I had a good look at both the Z6 and Z7 when they first came out and my impression at the time was that both cameras were good, but had some "first generation" issues. So far as I can tell, most of those were ironed out along the way, either through firmware updates or in the partial minor redesign of the ii series update.

My D810 is likely to remain my mainstay until both the Z6ii and Z7ii are updated. I need to keep the D810 for use with the D series lenses I use occasionally and cannot justify replacing as they require the internal focus motor of the higher end D cameras. At that point I will have to make the call on whether I stay with Nikon, due to my heavy investment in Nikon gear or go to the medium format Fujifilm cameras. Economics suggest I will be staying with Nikon...

It will likely not be the Z9, just because it is not aimed at the type of photography I tend to do.

[DanK]

Bill,

Many thanks. The surgery is quite routine, but the recovery is long: 5 weeks in a sling and then about 6-7 months longer to a full recovery. It's that half year that has me thinking most seriously about weight.

I've read an inordinate number of reviews of the OM-1, and it's clear to me that it's a superb camera and for many people a very good choice. I'm just not sure I'm among them. Here's one issue, dynamic range:



The OM-1 does remarkably well for such a small sensor, virtually identical to the new Canon APS-C R7 down to the OM-1's base ISO of 200, and only about a stop less than my FF 5D Mark IV. However, the R7 at its base ISO of 100 is about a stop better than the OM-1 at its base ISO of 200. Not a huge difference, and probably small enough that I could overlook it.

A second issue is MPX. The OM-1 is 20, the R7 34. The fact is that I was able to get good 17 x 22 prints from my old 5D Mark III, which was 22 MPX, but 20 doesn't leave much room for cropping if you are going to print large. The OM-1 has a high-res mode (50 MPX hand-held, 80 MPX on a tripod), but that only works if the subject is still. E.g., no leaves blowing in the wind.

The last is low-light performance. The OM-1 is clearly a step down in that regard from the 5D IV, but it may not be much different from the R7, which also has a very small photosite size. This comparison will have to wait for more tests and reviews.

The final consideration is Bill's point about keeping lenses and peripherals. I would have to replace everything if I were to go with an OM-1, at a steep loss given that most of my equipment is in mint condition. If I were to go with an R7, I would sell my walk-around zoom and perhaps one other lens, but I would keep everything else, all of which works flawlessly on R bodies with the Canon adapter. And the R7 itself is quite a bit cheaper than the OM-1.

So, I'll wait for more information about the R7 and to see whether the rumored high-quality RF-S standard zoom actually appears--and if so, how much it weighs and how good it is. I'm hoping that all of this is resolvedin the 2 months before I go under the knife.

[billtils]

On the evidence so far the R7 is the way to go (unless I can persuade you to move to the dark side and buy Nikon ).

[DanK]

On the evidence so far the R7 is the way to go (unless I can persuade you to move to the dark side and buy Nikon ).

That would be a step too far. Then again, people do all sorts of stuff before they clear the anesthetic from their bodies.

[Stagecoach]

When I weighed up the pros and cons of trading my D810 for a mirrorless the only entry in the "Do it" column was saving weight, and I wasn't sure if that out-weighed (ouch) the entries in the "Don't Do It" one. However it made me look again. The old hands are getting a bit rheumaticky and I got offered an excellent deal on a trade for a new Z6ii.

It certainly delivered on the weight front and from these shots from its first outing I don't think I'll regret it.

You certainly won't regret it and that 24-70 f/4 lens is superb. One thing I learnt about it the other day is that in very low light when using the AF assist light on the camera remove the lens hood. The hood interferes slightly with the light beam and with it off, AF is more responsive and accurate.

[billtils]

Thanks Grahame - low light advice noted.

Bill