After shooting extensively with the Nikon Z 7, I had a pretty clear idea how the Z 6 would perform and I’m happy to say, it has lived up to my high expectations.
Having a lower pixel count on the same size sensor gives the Z6 a few advantages over the Z7. The larger pixels are able to gather more light which means that noise levels are lower – not that the Z7 struggles in that area! Also, as the sensor is used for autofocusing, the AF system is more sensitive. And the smaller file sizes of the Z6 means it has a faster maximum continuous shooting rate (12fps) and deeper burst depth. For example, you can shoot 44 large fine Jpegs in one burst with the Z6 and 25 with the Z7.
When I was photographing football with the Z7 I had to be mindful of the burst depth with the Z7. When I was shooting with the Z6, however, I didn’t find the burst depth restricting.
Read more about how the Nikon Z6 and Z7 compare
Autofocusing
Nikon pitches the Z 6 as an all-rounder, which means it needs an autofocus system that can cope with a wide range of subjects and conditions. After shooting with the Z 7, I was already reasonably confident about the Z 6’s autofocus (AF) system. And now I’ve been able to photograph a football match with the Z 6, I’m even more impressed.
The conditions at the match were perfect, low sun giving a nice warm glow and good contrast. And the Z 6 responded well, getting everything I pointed it at sharp. It also proved extremely good at keeping the subject under the active AF area sharp.
As the match progressed and the sun began to set, the light became more challenging yet the Z 6 kept up well. This is especially impressive as I was shooting with the AF-S Nikkor 80-400mm f/4.5-5.6G ED mounted via an FTZ adaptor. The majority of images were shot at the 400mm end where the maximum aperture is f/5.6.
As I also had the Nikon Z 7 with me, I was able to compare its performance in the same conditions. Its AF system good but the Z 6’s is just a bit snappier. Also had the Sony A7 III with me, although this benefited from an f/2.8 lens, and the Z 6 compared very well indeed.
Further good news is the Z6’s AF system copes a bit better with low-light than the Z7.
Image Quality
The 24.5Mp Z6 produces images with 6048×4024 pixels. That means they measure 51.2x34cm or 20.2×13.4inches at 300dpi. That’s more than enough for most photographers. And while it can’t capture the same level of detail as the Z7, there’s plenty of detail on show.
Noise is also controlled extremely well. At ISO 3200, for instance, there’s only the merest hint of noise visible in images at 100% on-screen. However, I’d be inclined to keep the sensitivity setting below the ISO 51,200 native maximum if possible. At this value, some out of focus low contrast areas lack detail. The cracks between distant paving slabs become lost, for example. However, if the background has a bit more contrast, the detail looks pretty good, so it’s something the keep in mind rather than make a hard rule. Nevertheless, I’m happier keeping the ISO to 25,600 or lower.
Exposure
I customised the manual focus ring on the Z lenses I was sent to adjust exposure compensation. I find this a really intuitive way to work. This means that when I’m shooting in aperture or shutter priority, I can tweak the exposure as I’m looking in the viewfinder. It’s a tad easier than reaching for a button and rolling a dial.
With this set-up, I had no reason to switch away Z6’s matrix metering system. In many situations, it delivered an accurate exposure by itself, but there were a few occasions when I reduced the exposure just a little.
Dynamic range
I found that the Z7 has an impressive dynamic range, so I had high expectations for the Z6. And indeed it is capable of capturing a wide range of tones in a single image. This means that it doesn’t burn out the highlights quickly and the shadows don’t turn inky-black at the slightest underexposure. It also handles tonal gradations well so there are nice, smooth transitions.
These points are especially useful to landscape photographers. It means that clouds aren’t an amorphous mass of white and there are details the shadows. It also means that they can manipulate the exposure to get the perfect result. In tricky conditions, for example, they can underexpose to ensure all the highlights are retained and then brighten the image to bring out some texture in the shadows.
I deliberately underexposed a few raw files and then experimented with their processing. This reveals that heavily underexposed images can withstand significant brightening, up to 5EV in some cases.
You can then bring down the brightness of the lighter areas to produce a more balanced exposure. In some instances, you can produce an HDR-style (high dynamic range) image from just one shot. But with a subtler hand, you can also produce more natural looking images.
As you’d expect, high ISO images can withstand less brightening. They lack detail and look mushy if you push them too hard.
Dynamic Range Example Images
The shot on the far left below was taken at ISO 400. It’s an extreme scene with the sun in the shot and I underexposed it dramatically to get lots of colour. Of course, this is at the expense of the tree in the foreground, but as you can see from the brightened version in the middle, the detail is still there.
Zooming in to 100% reveals a hint of chromatic noise. But when a more realistic degree of brightening is applied, it’s far less visible.
The image on the far left below was shot at ISO 100 and deliberately underexposed to make it almost black. Increasing the exposure of the raw file when processing it in Adobe Camera Raw makes it a little too bright (middle below), but it demonstrates what’s possible. Again, there’s a little noise visible in the darkest parts of the trees if you look for it at 100% on screen, but it’s not problematic. The last version (far right) was only brightened by 4.2EV to create a more pleasing result. It keeps the noise nicely concealed.
Follow the link to browse and download full-resolution versions of these images.
SnapBridge
SnapBridge is Nikon’s combined Bluetooth and WiFi system that simplifies connecting your camera and phone to transfer images or control the camera remotely. Well that’s the theory. It’s had a chequered past. I first used it with the Nikon D500 and it performed very well, only occasionally requiring the app to be restarted to trigger the automatic image transfer.
Subsequently, I’ve tried to use it with other cameras and it’s been less helpful. In fact, in some instances, it’s been downright frustrating, especially when trying to control the camera with a phone.
Nikon has been working on the system for a while trying to improve it. I found the Z6’s SnapBridge works well. It connected easily enough to my iPhone and most images transferred across automatically.
However, if the camera and phone were out of range at any point, I usually had to restart the app or toggle between its Camera and Phone icons to remind it to work. The Remote photography option, which allows you to control the camera with a phone also worked well. There’s a short delay between tapping Remote photography on the app and the connection to the cameras being made, but the connection seems pretty stable.
The camera also responds quickly to a tap on the phone’s screen to set the AF point or fire the shutter.
Nikon Z6 Battery Life
As I mentioned earlier, the Z6 uses a new EN-EL15b battery. Under CIPA testing conditions this has a life rating of 310 images, which doesn’t sound a lot. However, in real-world shooting situations, I find I can get many more images than that from a single charge.
For example, I shot 1090 images during the 90 minutes of the football match. As I was shooting raw and Jpeg files simultaneously, I actually recorded a total of 2180 files. These images were shot is short bursts but I was shooting for much of the game.
At the end of the game, the battery was very low but I still had enough power to shoot another 39 images of the sunset. Even then, the battery wasn’t completely depleted.