Quick Z5IIC Thoughts

D7500, AF-S Nikkor 10-20mm VR G DX

 

In short, it's not really the light carry camera I wanted, but it's an OK effort. Users aren't going to be unhappy with it in reality aside from 1 item Nikon definitely got wrong.

The item is the LCD. It shares the 3" 1.04m dot unit that the Z DX bodies all have. This is adequate, but not really what you want on an EVF-less body that isn't at the bottom of the price range like the Z30 (which has the exact same LCD). Nikon should have priced it $50 higher and re-used the much better 2.1m dot unit from the Z5II. 

Otherwise the only real complaints are the name and the size, this is the Z3 in all but name, it is exactly to the Z5II as the Z30 is to the OG Z50. Same basic camera, no EVF (the Z30 had a couple other changes, but that's just because the Z50 had a couple bad decisions in terms of USB port and LCD articulation that were corrected on the Z30 and Zfc). Nikon unwisely chose to ape Sony's naming convention instead of sticking to their own and got designation salad as a result. 

In terms of size, while the smallest FX stills camera in the Z line, this is still a chonky boi at 600g, compare to its closest competitor, the Panasonic S9, and it's well over 100g heavier and notably larger (but with a MUCH better grip). You can actually get an S9+40/2 lens within 30g of the Z5IIC's bare weight. 

And yes, this is 100% a shovelware camera, it's a Z5II with the EVF chopped off, a cheaper LCD, one card slot and a lower spec shutter (1/4000 max). But the shovel contents are damned good aside from the bargain-bin LCD, so while entirely a low-effort release, it is actually a pretty excellent camera. Anyone who ends up with one won't be disappointed in anything except the high weight and size for its class and Nikon's poor and overly clustered selection of small 1st party lenses, but adding the Viltrox 14mm and 20mm at the wide end and the 7Artisans 75mm or Viltrox 85mm f2 EVO at the long end to the 26, 28 and 40 from Nikon will give a solid small prime selection for it. I'd skip the zooms, there are enough smallish zooms, but aside from the 24-50 (which I do not recommend, poor handling & reliability) nothing truly tiny to fit this body. 

I'd consider this if I was still willing to go in for small low-MP FX EDC options. As it is, I'd have preferred any refresh to the current Z DX line (Z30II or ZfcII) or either the rumoured Z70 or a Z5IIx shovelware camera (Z5II with Z7II sensor).

More Gear Musings

Zfc, AF-S Nikkor 85mm f1.8 G

Here's a few scattered thoughts on gear and my future plans.

First off, the D7500 is getting the most use, but it's definitely the only one of my 3 current bodies I'd consider parting with. That's because it's neither a viable EDC (Zfc is that, Z7 can sorta do it with the right lenses) nor does it have compatibility with most of my lenses (no metering with manual lenses, can't mount Z or adapt anything I own). It's just fun within its limits and while actually the slowest of my 3 bodies at 8fps max (the other two are capable of 9-11fps) it's the fastest no-limits bodies (8fps with no gotchas vs 5fps with no gotchas). If I had to pick just one body, the Z7 would win (most compromises, but also the most flexible), with the Zfc second. 

I do enjoy the D7500 and don't see parting with it anytime soon as it is fun to shoot with and I like the results. Like the Z7, it's also not really worth enough on a trade-in to bother parting with. 

What I'd like to see from Nikon is an indication that they are committed to support Z DX for the long term before I invest further in that direction. I'm not confident I'll see that from them though (and few are). Having more than 1 EXPEED7 body would go a long way here, as would a couple more lens releases that aren't consumer shovelware or a 'why would I pay that much for that little' lenses like the Z DX 35/1.7 MC (which is a very good macro/normal, but at the cost that I can buy a lot of 3rd party glass for the same cost). 

The reality is that I don't actually need more than is already available. My bodies mostly cover my needs and where I hit limits, they remain limits that a Z8 would solve. In terms of glass, as long as I'm willing to adapt (and I mostly am), I have what I need already or it is available. I simply don't want to invest in a dead-end system, even if it's one that actually does meet my needs. 

I did get out and do some city shooting with the Zfc over the weekend, both with the 7Artisans 35mm f1.4 II and the 85/1.8G, mostly bugging with the latter, we still have flowers and bees around. Had a fair bit of fun with it and I'm enjoying both lenses. Still need to get some time with the Z7, I've been ignoring it of late. 

Regarding future system options, I'm looking for two things really. A system with a future, I do not want to spend some years investing in a system just to have it killed off (as we've seen this year for Pentax DSLR's and effectively for Panasonic m43) and which delivers reasonably compact, reasonably priced and reasonably good IQ, plus the combo of a solid set of zooms for my hiking needs and some weird, interesting and cheap glass for playing around with. Fuji delivers all of that, Sony does technically, but I dislike their APS-C bodies, Nikon fails on system with a future for DX right now, while Canon fails the weird, interesting & cheap glass test and their APS-C is also on life support (although it is expected they will actually get 2-3 new APS-C bodies next year). OM System is also technically an option, but their stuff is hard to get these days and overly expensive, especially since used gear is hard to find now. A pity since the new Pen is finally a light carry option at a reasonable price for its spec (the OM-5's are way too expensive for what they deliver and the OM-3 suffers from barely adequate viewfinder in expensive body syndrome). OM System does have the nice computational features the others lack though, 

So the play now becomes stick with Nikon and hope they continue to support DX in an adequate manner, and consider switching to Fuji in 2027 if Nikon continues to ignore DX entirely. 

The reality is my current gear largely suffices for my needs, and I can address the real gaps mostly by buying glass and if I need to push the edges of capability, there's still the Z8. 

Fall Updates

D7500, 10-20VR

It's now Fall Colour season, and I'm pretty stuck indoors. This kinda sucks, although I did get a bit of a taste a couple weeks ago up in the Algonquin Highlands, where I got up around Haliburton with fall colour just starting to come in. 

Shooting has been slow, in part because I skipped the Canadian International Air Show on the Labour Day Weekend. I have gotten out a couple times with the D7500 though, and it's now approaching 1000 shots on the clock. 

I't's been interesting shooting a DSLR again. I do miss IBIS, USB-C charging and on occasion Live View composing, but the excellent ergonomics, more efficient control layout and great battery life have been nice to have. 

Need to get out with the Zfc some more, I did pick up the 7Artisans 35mm f1.4 II manual APS-C lens, which in silver is a nice match for my Silver Zfc, but I've barely used it. Got to take it for some lunchtime walks (which I need to do more of anyways). I've been so busy with work of late that my lunchtimes have been constrained. Same for the Z7, which hasn't been used in a while, but if I'm not going out, I'm not shooting which is the basic issue at hand. 

I've also been having yet another round of system existentialism. Fuji-focused again and largely because we're still not seeing any real commitment from Nikon on DX. A Z70 is rumoured with the sort of specs that put it in the X-H2 killer slot, but so far the sum total of Nikon camera announcements in the last year is the Z5IIC, which is little more than a Z5II with the EVF chopped off, single card slot and low-end screen. 

Now everyone else is slow on the releases, supply constraints are causing all sorts of issues, but those should not have affected lenses as well, and Nikon has done minimal there too. Not surprising that Nikon's financials are showing lots of red this year. 

I'm not asking for Nikon to go all-in on DX, just give me a half-decent body with IBIS and a decent UWA zoom. Otherwise at some point I am going to end up having to either buy a Z8 as a DX body or switch to Fuji as my primary system (I'll no doubt keep the Z7 for legacy glass). The issue with Z8 as DX remains no UWA zoom without adapting (the 12-28PZ is not wide enough and PowerZoom). 

Going to hold off for now, but if we don't see some movement from Nikon I'll need to make some hard decisions about whether or not Z makes sense for me long-term or if I need to make one last system jump. 

The DX Kit is Complete - For Now

 

Nikon D7500, Nikkor 24-85mm f3.5-4.5 VR G

I picked up a couple more F mount lenses on Friday, which leaves me with an essentially complete hiking kit for my D7500, and a mostly complete one for the Z7.

What were the lenses?

The 10-20mm f4-5.6 DX VR AF-P and the 80-400mm f4-5.6 VR G AF-S

That gives me a solid 3/4 lens kit for the D7500 covering 15-600mm effective, with the 24-85VR subbing for my Tamron 17-50 in this case as it fills the gap between the 10-20 and 80-400 better, and a 3/4 lens kit for the Z7 covering 21-400mm (the Zeiss 21, 24-85VR and 80-400). In both cases the fourth optional lens is the Tamron 90mm Macro, although for regular close focus work (flowers, some bugging) the 80-400 does just fine. 

The 10-20 is tiny, surprisingly good optically and has VR, making it a good alternative to my go-to lens for years in this space, the Sigma 10-20 f4-5.6 HSM, which I've owned multiple copies of over the years. The Nikkor is the better of the two optically, and noticeably so, which I'd hope for being a 10+ year newer design, plus significantly smaller and lighter, but less well built. I'm impressed so far, and it's small enough to handle well on the Zfc. 

The 80-400G is everything I'd hoped the Sigma 100-400 would be on my A7IV last year, but without the disappointment I got from the Sigma. Both are sharp lenses, but the Nikkor is sharper, handles better, has better AF and the stabilization works well (which the Sigma didn't).

Collectively I spend slightly less for both lenses than that Sigma cost me last year. Shooting modern DSLR glass has a clear value advantage these days, especially if you choose lenses which adapt easily to mirrorless as I am currently doing (AF-S and AF-P lenses for Nikon, AF-I Nikkors also adapt well but generally only includes lenses I don't have a huge need for, while AF Nikkors lose AF). 

I still need a decent UWA zoom for the Z7, but I'm leaning towards the 16-35VR here. It's decent but unexceptional optically, but handles well, has VR and sells for very reasonable pricing. 

I'm currently planning to continue to build up my modern F mount collection. Great class, great prices. Sure, Z glass is almost always better, but it's also usually far more expensive than it is better (the 50's excepted, Nikon didn't really design an exceptional 50mm offering between the 50/1.2 AI-S and the Z 50/1.8 S, I'll probably skip the Nikkor 50's and just get a 58G if I find one for the right price), plus I'm really enjoying shooting the D7500, so I may add some more late-model DSLR's to the kit if I continue to enjoy the D7500 long-term. Notably a D850 and maybe a D500, the latter I've long wanted because of my longstanding love for the D200 and D300.

Why Buy a DSLR in 2026?

D7500, AF-S Nikkor 85mm f1.8

Why would somebody buy a DSLR in 2026? Especially a new or nearly new one. My D7500 was technically used, but as recent production and less than 1000 shots on it, it was functionally new. 

There's pretty much 3 reasons why you'd do so.

1. The Optical Viewfinder. Some people simply prefer this experience to an EVF, and there are advantages in some conditions, especially very bright conditions. 

2. The 'DSLR Experience'. Mirror slap, OVF blackout, nice chonky grips and amazing battery life even with tiny batteries. Shooting a DSLR is not quite the same as mirrorless and some folks just like the DSLR experience better.

3. Value. Simply put there are very few cases today where you get more value for the dollars spent from mirrorless than from DSLR's, especially if you want more than 5-6fps or a high performance APS-C body from somebody other than Fuji. The real exception here is high-MP but low speed landscape cameras, there are some real steals on 40+MP low-speed bodies in the A7RII and OG Z7, which cost similar to a used D800 or D810, but deliver Z8/A1 level resolution and even more DR, at the cost of mediocre AF and low practical FPS (neither of which is really a landscape camera need). 

For me it was really #3 driving things, and mostly because I wanted a faster body (7-8fps minimum without compromises) with APS-C level pixel density and at a cost similar to or lower than my Z5ii's sale value. 

Note this brings up that SLR mount lenses are even more of a value than the bodies these days, since many of them are fully functional on mirrorless via adapter (and arguably more functional given you can get IBIS with lenses whose SLR mounts did not offer that feature). I'm still primarily using and buying SLR mount lenses (mostly F mount) because of this. Great glass, now cheap. Yeah, often the native mirrorless lens is better technically than the older SLR mount lens, but the price difference and performance are also often at odds with each other. 

For the value driven photographer, there's often real benefits to staying in the DSLR ecosystems rather than moving to the latest and greatest mirrorless system. 

 

First Outing with the D7500

Nikon D7500, Nikkor 85/1.8G

I took a short hike Sunday afternoon to clear my head after attending a Visitation for a friend's late wife. I don't deal well with events like that, so I needed some time in my own head. Hiked for 1km or so and shoot around 100 shots of woodlands and nature details. 

Overall shooting the D7500 was like a visit with an old friend, it just worked pretty much exactly as I remembered. I have a lot of experience with older Nikon DSLR's and it's not that different from my Z bodies either. 

One good thing is I finally solved my Bracketing Burst issue on the Nikons. Turns out that I'd forgotten about how Nikon bracketing interacts with drive mode and setting Continuous advance gets you Bracketing Burst. That means I can just put this on a user setting for the Z7 (which sets drive mode on a button), but for the Zfc (no user modes) and the D7500 (physical drive mode selector) I will need to remember this as it solves a major annoyance for me.

There's a couple things about the D7500 that remind me of some of what we've lost in going to the Z bodies. The BKT button and AF/MF switch/button on the left, the 2-button format shortcut and full ability to override crop modes (the D7500 actually has a 1.3x crop mode option to get down to an m43-esque crop level of about 2x from Full Frame, but unlike the D7100 and D7200, this does not also come with a speed bump, the D7500 is always an 8fps body). Sometimes I do feel like Nikon over-simplified some things in Z and I just cannot figure out why the 45MP bodies in particular lose 1.2x crop as an option as well as the ability to force non-DX crop with DX CPU lenses. 

I do miss IBIS though, even the shot above is just a touch soft due to lack of IBIS. I have adjusted my auto-ISO minimum shutter speed to bias a bit faster as a result. 

One thing this does make me think of is that maybe a D850 might make sense as an addition to the kit in the future. It would give me a fast, 45MP FX/19.5MP DX body in the best DSLR Nikon ever made, and new it costs between a Z5ii and a Zf right now (and that probably will continue to slowly drop until they finally disappear). There's a lot of great value available in DSLR's and DSLR lenses right now as people continue to sell them off to go mirrorless. Is mirrorless kit better? In most regards yes, but in a lot of cases right now the cost and benefit ratio is off when you can buy last-gen DSLR pro glass cheap (and it works on your mirrorless cameras too in most cases). 

 

Kit Priorities

Sony A7RIV, FE 28-60

With my bodies set for now, what does that mean for lenses?

Priorities are as follows:

1. Telezoom. Looking at a 80-400G as my primary option here. This will be for hiking, airshow/aviation and some wildlife stuff. This was already on the to-acquire list prior to the body changeup

2. 35/1.8DX. I have a DX DSLR again, this must be in my bag. It's my must-have lens for DX DSLR's. 

3. DX UWA zoom. Got to complete the base DX DSLR kit, and this time it probably won't be a Sigma 10-20mm f4-5.6. Not sure where I'll go on this, the Tamron 10-24 is a possibility, or maybe the Sigma 10-20mm f3.5. The Tamron is attractive for having VC and a focal length range that pairs well with a 24-xx FX zoom (like my 24-85VR) even on DX. That would give me a 3-lens stabilized kit with minimal overlap, or even a viable 2 zoom and a gap filling prime setup (with a 50-60mm prime) for hiking. 

In Z mount, I'll continue to build out my manual lens setup for the Zfc, I was also looking at adding a 3rd lens to my 28/40 pair for the Z7, but I think for now the 85/1.8G might suffice for that (albeit at a much larger size than say a TTArtisan 75/2). Further down adding some compact wide AF primes is on the list, notably the Viltrox 14/4 and the 9/2.8 and 15/1.7 APS-C wides for the Zfc, eventually I do see having a compact AF setup for the Zfc as well as a set of manual focus lenses.