(Refurb) Nikon Camera's & Lenses: Z6 Body $1099. Z50 +16-50mm Lens $899, Z7 Body $2299, 16-80mm f/2.8-4E $699, 35mm f/1.8 S + free s/h at Adorama

Try this: https://www.amazon.com/Type-C-Ada...091315ML2/ [amazon.com]

Okay, I don't understand why you are going out of your way to help me... while appreciated, I think you missed many of my posts.

I'm well aware of battery adapters.

My D750 is basically dead. I have to get a new camera. That said, If I got a Z6, I would have to spend $30 more for this and carry it in addition to my power bank. I think we can both agree just plugging one cable from a power bank to the camera for free is a far better solution.

What poor reviews? The Fringer EOS-NZ adapter has either good or excellent reviews. I certainly did not see a single 'poor' review. Perhaps you could show them to me?

Here is what I found:

Amazon - 4.7 out of 5

https://www.amazon.com/Fringer-Ad...08336WB3X/

User in DPReview - https://www.dpreview.com/forums/thread/4456943

"it is clear that aperture control works, IS implementation works, as you can see in the video. And AF focuses very accurately, as you can see"

Steve Huffington Post - https://www.stevehuffphoto.com/20...a-shapiro/

"the AF worked really well"

Shrug.

How are refurbs from Adorama? I just got the z50 2lk new for about $150 more (it was $200 more but had some discounts applied to drop it another $50). Not sure if saving $150 for a refurb package is worth it.

Trying not to get buyers remorse... I originally thought the Z6 I just bought would replace my D750, but I've been stumbling across more small time blogs and reviews that say the Z5 is actually a replacement for the D750. Most importantly they say because of the banding issues with the BSI sensor in the Z6/Z7/II that the Z5 is actually better for landscapes. Do you find this to be an accurate statement?

Note: I bought both the Z5 and the Z6, I just don't want to be caught with a Z5 if it can't do a few things better than the Z6 and vice-versa.

Thanks for any insight.

EDIT: Also, just a note that my D750 is dying and needs replacing. I was on the fence about replacing my cropped D5300 so buying the Z5 and Z6 seemed like a worthy jump to take as both combined were the price of the Z6 II with FTZ right now...and I got an FTZ with the Z5

Fix the D750 as it's still a excellent camera. Precision Camera in Sacramento will repair for very reasonable cost. Note you are giving up 2fps with the Z5 if that matters to you (sports, wildlife, action).

$300 + $45 Diagnostic fee
That's a tough call for a camera whose shutter crossed the 300k barrier two months ago.

I'm not a spray and pray kinda shooter so 4.5fps is perfectly fine.

The mirrorless to mirrorless ones that you mentioned... Z mount to E mount, etc. They work terribly.

I stated that if you had a collection of legacy DSLR glass Canon and Nikon mirrorless make more sense. But if you want mirrorless glass, they essentially only have first party lenses.

The D750 is still widely used as I always see them at sporting events, wildlife shooters, etc. The $300. cost of a new shutter is reasonable. What type of photography are you doing? I handled the Z50 at our local Mike's Camera store and it's really nice, but when or if I make the move, the Z6 is calling me.

8 Minute long exposures are a huge part of my shooting [imgur.com]. 4.5fps is fine for me. I value dynamic range at minimum ISOs more than auto-focus, continuous shoots or high ISO artifacts. I saw videos showing the Z6 (all BSI sensor cameras) have less dynamic range when bumping up ISO and they even lead to banding in the dark areas. Z6 in particular had color noise in dark areas...yeesh.

Don't get me wrong... for the most part they all take great photos, but there lies the issue. Why pay more for features I don't need right now? I do eventually need a faster camera for events and such, but I can wait until the II series is on sale.

What I don't need is to fix a camera with 300k shutter clicks failing me while on vacation because of sunk cost fallacies.

Cool photo! Stacking? That would look great on a large 16x20 or so print on Kodak Endura paper that has a metallic look. It's hard to find in individual vs sheet. My printer won't take sheet so I have a source that will cut to size, ship to me. I use a Canon Prograf Pro 1000 and get excellent results. ALways fun to see what prints out vs viewing on a monitor.

This is pretty funny because there is plenty of third party glass for folks like me who like to experiment with new lenses, such as: https://www.venuslens.net/product...5-6-ff-rl/

That's manual focus... Did you even read my original reply.

Given that both have native adapters, why would you get a Nikon to shoot canon glass, aside from manual or exotic glass. Both have general parity in terms of DSLR glass.

Third party adapters for AF mirrorless lenses work terribly as well, so that's not a draw either.

I'm not disparaging Nikon, I just would rather not pretend that the things you've listed are realistic "benefits".

You'd get Nikon if you have Nikon DSLR glass you want to continue using. That or you're willing to sell your current lens collection to move over to Nikon mirrorless glass. Or if you don't have an extensive collection or any, and are willing to move to the Nikon platform. Same applies for any other camera body/brand.

No, or else I would have A) read that or B) quoted it.

There are 3 pages of you being deliberately obtuse. Either reply to what people are taking the time to discuss with you or concede your point or accept that you have an inflexible viewpoint.

Manual focus mirrorless lenses are adaptable to the Z mount or come in a Z mount variant, but that isn't the draw you've originally stated. And I've stated that manual focus generally isn't an issue to adapt or have "native" mounts for. Generally speaking, the main issue is of lens formulas not being adapted to thicker sensor stacks, ex: rangefinder lenses on Sony.

If you wanted to shoot manual focus only, that's a draw for mirrorless in general as they can all adapt for the flange distance. There's no differention for Nikon vs its peers for that. And as I've argued, there's no benefit or reason to buy this to shoot canon DSLR glass, as Nikon has its own DSLR glass and native adapter, and Sony has the metabones and sigma mc-11 adapter for that as well, and the L mount has the sigma mc-16. So that leaves out one kind of adapter that no one else has, due to the Z mount being the shallowest of the mirrorless mounts, which is mirrorless to mirrorless mount adapters and those are semi useless, due to the issues I originally mentioned, which are what give those adapters such poor ratings.

Mirrorless in general can adapt DSLR lenses and manual lenses just fine. The issue right now is that canon and Nikon generally only have first party native mirrorless lenses. If you're willing to pay those prices, then there's no real issue. But Canon and Nikon both are unlikely to open up their lens mount to third party lens manufacturers. So if you want sigma, Tamron, etc AF lenses, you'd be best off going to Sony or Panasonic.

I am highlighting the pros and cons of going Nikon.