If high ISO noise is a concern, the Z6 will beat the D500 handily. But if you're using the camera for sports shooting, the D500 (or a D850) have an advantage in their OVF and burst rate. While the Z6 can shoot sports (the AF is up to the task), my biggest grip with it is the EVF blackout, which can make following the action difficult if you're shooting a long sequence. The benefit of the D850 over the D500 is that you can take those 46MP images, and resize them upon export to give you a better noise pattern.Yep, it is purely a DR consideration, though I wouldn’t mind a second Nikon body. A D500 is also a consideration since I use the 200-500 in the field. I just shoot DX crop on Z7 now if I want that magnification in EVF, or crop in post.
Slightly more difference when comparing RAW images.
Sure there is. Is there enough of a difference to justify buying a new camera? Only the OP can answer that.Slightly more difference when comparing RAW images.
That's an interesting comparison which I hadn't seen. Bill Claff's data does show the Z6 to be about 1/2 stop better at iso 3200 as shown below, but I really didn't think that would be field relevant.Early this year, I decided to buy a Z6 and ended up buying both a used Z7 and a new Z6. After a couple months, I sold the Z7 for many reasons, but the short version is that the Z7 was simply more camera than I needed. In my limited comparison testing of high ISO performance between the Z6 and Z7, I did find the Z6 outperforms. Definitely not scientific enough to make a buy/no-buy decision, but take a look if you're interested:
Congrats Steven, keep us posted.As an update of sorts. A shiny new Z50 will be delivered today. A dedicated APS-C body. Nice to sling over a shoulder to make the 70-300P relevant in the field when my 200-500 is mounted to the Z7. I'll probably still just switch to DX mode, but we'll see...