Nikon Z6 Body - Refurbished by Nikon $1199

The z6 body only price matches the Nikon refurb pricing around Easter.
It looks like the z6 kit is $150 more than the previous "sale" from Nikon which was $1500.

The Adorama link says it's refurbed by Nikon (for what it's worth) and I believe shipping is free at adorama. It was around $30 if you bought from Nikon refurb website.

Now if only they bring back the refurb lenses like that s lens 24-70 2.8 deal at $1656. That was something!

When will the z6ii have refurbished models

BH have the same thing, fun fact, searching z6 alone won't give result, need to add 'refurb'

Is this camera better than modern cell phone cameras? Don't know anything about cameras

Quote from Slayer85 : Is this camera better than modern cell phone cameras? Don't know anything about cameras

No it isn't. You can't make a phone call on a z6. Stick to your modern cell phone.

Quote from Slayer85 : Is this camera better than modern cell phone cameras? Don't know anything about cameras

Lol yes but seriously take a moment to think if you really need a camera before you buy one. It's a big investment.

Quote from Slayer85 : Is this camera better than modern cell phone cameras? Don't know anything about cameras

(I don't care your camera nerds thumb downs. I have z6ii , 14-24-70-200 2.8 zooms and many f/1.4 lenses. after seeing photos on S21 Ultra, it's pretty good, easily beat old APSC Sony 18-55 kit lens on 18mm, not up there vs ff f/4s

The current (Android) flagship 108mp really is close in terms of 26mm still photos vs kit lens (1 stop difference, iPhone 12 prob about 2 steps, even worse for iPhones before 11)
Remember this is only for regular wide camera of the phone vs kit lens. Tele cameras of the phone drastically worse vs this kit lens.

For casual videos recent phone is no brainer.

Quote from motaku96 : Lol yes but seriously take a moment to think if you really need a camera before you buy one. It's a big investment.

Compared to anything else I'd agree, but compared to a modern cell phone it is not actually that big an investment. Not if you look at the top tier phones in any case. Add to that how often people seem to update them, the cost to maintain a sizable data plan, and it is really not clear.

I own a Nikon D750, a near legend at this stage in terms of the do-it-all, has-it-all, which I bought in late 2014 and to this day its sensor and image quality can compete very well with other cameras of its demographics. There are thing I like about the Z6, but overall I see no really good reason to switch. I own three major lenses, a lovely 35 f/1.8 by Tamron (my hands-down favorite lens), the 85 f/1.8 and Nikon's 70-200 f/2.8, and while not cheap per se, they deliver years and years later with no possible reason to seek the newest and 'best'.

My point? There is indeed an investment, but if you are not plagued by GAS (Gear Acquisition Syndrome), you will get immense value over time from it. Provided you invest time to enjoy the hobby.

As to the OP's question: it is not even close. There are shots where both can seem very similar, so be careful how and in what conditions you compare. Well lit subjects in the day for example will be very close. However, wide dynamic range such as sunsets, sunrises, images with bright and dark subjects at the same time, low-light, and more. Cell phones are still a million miles away. And yes, I have a good one and do take pics all the time with it. The real question is: how much do you enjoy or wish to enjoy photography? Will you spend time learning about it to make your images shine?

Here are some of mine on Flickr [flickr.com].

Quote from kushi100 : When will the z6ii have refurbished models

First we have to see the new z6ii models in stock. I think they are finally starting to come around to being in stock.

Quote from AmericanCarioca : Compared to anything else I'd agree, but compared to a modern cell phone it is not actually that big an investment. Not if you look at the top tier phones in any case. Add to that how often people seem to update them, the cost to maintain a sizable data plan, and it is really not clear. I own a Nikon D750, a near legend at this stage in terms of the do-it-all, has-it-all, which I bought in late 2014 and to this day its sensor and image quality can compete very well with other cameras of its demographics. There are thing I like about the Z6, but overall I see no really good reason to switch. I own three major lenses, a lovely 35 f/1.8 by Tamron (my hands-down favorite lens), the 85 f/1.8 and Nikon's 70-200 f/2.8, and while not cheap per se, they deliver years and years later with no possible reason to seek the newest and 'best'. My point? There is indeed an investment, but if you are not plagued by GAS (Gear Acquisition Syndrome), you will get immense value over time from it. Provided you invest time to enjoy the hobby. As to the OP's question: it is not even close. There are shots where both can seem very similar, so be careful how and in what conditions you compare. Well lit subjects in the day for example will be very close. However, wide dynamic range such as sunsets, sunrises, images with bright and dark subjects at the same time, low-light, and more. Cell phones are still a million miles away. And yes, I have a good one and do take pics all the time with it. The real question is: how much do you enjoy or wish to enjoy photography? Will you spend time learning about it to make your images shine? Here are some of mine on Flickr [flickr.com].

Good write-up. I have a D750 and X100F and a bunch of Nikon lenses from the film days. I'm tempted to get this deal

Quote from AmericanCarioca : Compared to anything else I'd agree, but compared to a modern cell phone it is not actually that big an investment. Not if you look at the top tier phones in any case. Add to that how often people seem to update them, the cost to maintain a sizable data plan, and it is really not clear. I own a Nikon D750, a near legend at this stage in terms of the do-it-all, has-it-all, which I bought in late 2014 and to this day its sensor and image quality can compete very well with other cameras of its demographics. There are thing I like about the Z6, but overall I see no really good reason to switch. I own three major lenses, a lovely 35 f/1.8 by Tamron (my hands-down favorite lens), the 85 f/1.8 and Nikon's 70-200 f/2.8, and while not cheap per se, they deliver years and years later with no possible reason to seek the newest and 'best'. My point? There is indeed an investment, but if you are not plagued by GAS (Gear Acquisition Syndrome), you will get immense value over time from it. Provided you invest time to enjoy the hobby. As to the OP's question: it is not even close. There are shots where both can seem very similar, so be careful how and in what conditions you compare. Well lit subjects in the day for example will be very close. However, wide dynamic range such as sunsets, sunrises, images with bright and dark subjects at the same time, low-light, and more. Cell phones are still a million miles away. And yes, I have a good one and do take pics all the time with it. The real question is: how much do you enjoy or wish to enjoy photography? Will you spend time learning about it to make your images shine? Here are some of mine on Flickr [flickr.com].

Good photos, but frankly allof them could have taken with a decent cell phone camera

Quote from penniewise : Good photos, but frankly allof them could have taken with a decent cell phone camera

Even with algorithmic computations for shallow depth of field, a "decent" phone will still yield errors, unlike a large sensor camera. Not to even mention lens options or RAW.

Quote from DavidP6348 : Even with algorithmic computations for shallow depth of field, a "decent" phone will still yield errors, unlike a large sensor camera. Not to even mention lens options or RAW.

Good points but irrelevant to what I said

Quote from penniewise : Quote from DavidP6348 : Quote from penniewise : Quote from AmericanCarioca : Here are some of mine on Flickr [flickr.com]. Good photos, but frankly allof them could have taken with a decent cell phone camera Even with algorithmic computations for shallow depth of field, a "decent" phone will still yield errors, unlike a large sensor camera. Not to even mention lens options or RAW. Good points but irrelevant to what I said

Perhaps you meant to say that the photographer is more important than the camera, that a good photographer could take good photos using an inferior camera?