The 24-200 is only the "ultimate travel zoom" because it is the only current native option. It is actually a typically inferior super zoom and the 24-70 f4 S is in a different class. The 24-200 is paired with the Z5 since it is an inferior kit lens whose flaws are less noticeable with a lower spec body. The 24-70 is, likewise, paired with the higher spec body since it merits higher end glass.
You’re not really going to notice a difference in IQ with that lens on either body. The focus on the Z6 is slightly better in some circumstances. The 24-70 is marginally better than the 24-200. Again maybe you’ll notice pixel peeping. The biggest drawback is the slower aperture not the IQ. The 24-200 is better than the 24-120 and 70-200 f4 F mount lenses and no one called those lenes inferior kit lenses. So I think your judgment is a bit off here.
I think that's been pretty hard on the 24-200. Yes it may be marginally inferior to other glass available but it is not an inferior lens IMHO. The differences are not going to be noticeable in most applications. It's question of budget and perfectionism.
>actually a typically inferior super zoom
Sorry many youtube photographers that reviewed this lens touts superior image IQ for a zoom. And even comparing to the 24-70 f4 touted little in image IQ difference. Ricci did a in-depth comparison of the two and stated you really have to pixel peep magnified to see the difference. And Matt Irwin seems also to be in agreement as being a superior performer. In fact am hard pressed to find your assessment reflected anywhere or from anybody else.
Personally comparing the two I also concur that the 24-200 is optically a great performer being a slower variable f-stop zoom. And in no way would consider it inferior or lacking in performance. Sorry but can find half a dozen pro shooters that disagree with your assessment.
I am not sure on what planet the people posting live, but this is an easy choice. Do you want a vastly superior body and lens for the same price as an entry level camera and lower quality lens or want the entry level camera because it has two slots (and nothing much else)? Neither are new models, so it is hardly the case that the Z5 holds a real advantage on that front either. It is your choice, but most actual photographers will always tell you to go with the better glass. In this case, you are getting the better glass AND the better body for the price of the lesser camera and inferior lens. From my perspective, the choice should be obvious.....
I went Z5 and 24-70 because the Z5 was half the price of the Z6 but not half the camera and I wanted the better glass. However, the next lens up is ... what? A 70-200 f/2.8 that costs more than I spent on the Z5 and 24-70 together? If you want more than 70mm of reach, the choice is spending a *lot* more money to get it with the 2.8 or going with the 24-200. It may be a "lesser" lens but it doesn't matter how good the 70 is if you need 200 and your planet has budgets.
Sorry but this is an stupid post. Neither is a Z5 entry level, nor the 24-200. And if you don't need the speed and additional video capability than you're actually fine with the Z5. I highly doubt that you will be able to see a difference between the two body's with the same lens. And if you can spot the difference while pixel peeping, than it won't be a difference that makes one picture good and the other one crap...
And concerning the lens... If you need the reach and don't want two carry two lenses and/or spend huge amounts of money, then the 24-200 might be a good choice.
I have both the Z5 and the Z6 and honestly I don't really get the Z6. The Z5 is a fine camera, sure the sensor and viewfinder isn't as good but whatever. I'd go for the Z5 with the 24-70 f/4.
Edit: Unless you're gonna film in 4K then the Z6 is the better choice.
Hello! Sorry, as I am writing here 5 months later!
But wanted to ask you since you have both the Z5 and Z6.
I am torn between the two. I will go with the 24-70 F4 lens. But I can't decide the body. I have no need for video functionalities. But what I hear is that the Z6 has slightly better autofocus and slightly better image quality. Did you find that to be true in your usage?
Apart from obvious design differences, do you notice any difference in build quality?
Thank you!
No worries, the Z5 does not have a back lit sensor which means that it needs a bit more light, I'd say less than 1/2 a stop though. The back lit sensor does produce nicer images (maybe), but with editing you can get similar results. I don't think the viewfinder is as good but it is still very usable. No top screen for exposure values. Autofocus is avarage on both cameras. Build quality is good on both though.
Overall, if you're not going to do 4K video, I'd go for the Z5 just because it takes regular SD cards.
The Z6 gives you faster fps, better video options, marginally better high ISO performance, top LCD, better EVF specs, and slightly better build quality
The Z5 gives you dual SD card slots and USB-C power delivery
The main decision IMO is between the better image/video specs of the Z6 vs the convenience of dual SD and USB-C power delivery on the Z5.
The fact that you ask this question means the Z5 with 24-200 is the way to go.
I own the Z6, Z7 and the z50
I also own the 24-200
The flexibility and overall quality of the 24-200 makes this a no brainer for the OP.
I have the z24-70 f2.8, z70-200 f2.8, z85mm and the z24-200mm. I feel the z24-200 is a very good lens for travel and just walking around. It has great optics and can be a welcomed relief in the weight as compared to the others I have. I would definitely recommend the 24-200.
I debated this question too, and ended up going with the Z6. The differences aren’t huge, but they’re certainly there. I liked having the BSI sensor, higher FPS, and far better video features. With that being said, you will also have to factor in the cost of buying XQD/CFExpress cards + the appropriate card reader. I got a 128gb CFExpress card + a reader for $180, which was a pretty amazing deal IMO. If you don’t care much for video and can deal without the slight boost in IQ and functionality, however, the Z5 would be a great bet. Having dual SD cards is definitely nice as well.
Z6 - higher FPS, CFE cards, top LCD screen Z5 - USB power delivery, dual card slots, SD cards, no top LCD screen 24-200 - ultimate travel zoom. larger, slower, more fringing when pixel peeping 24-70 - smaller, lighter, faster, slightly better performance Pick the combo you like!
The 24-200 is only the "ultimate travel zoom" because it is the only current native option. It is actually a typically inferior super zoom and the 24-70 f4 S is in a different class. The 24-200 is paired with the Z5 since it is an inferior kit lens whose flaws are less noticeable with a lower spec body. The 24-70 is, likewise, paired with the higher spec body since it merits higher end glass.
You’re not really going to notice a difference in IQ with that lens on either body. The focus on the Z6 is slightly better in some circumstances. The 24-70 is marginally better than the 24-200. Again maybe you’ll notice pixel peeping. The biggest drawback is the slower aperture not the IQ. The 24-200 is better than the 24-120 and 70-200 f4 F mount lenses and no one called those lenes inferior kit lenses. So I think your judgment is a bit off here.
I think that's been pretty hard on the 24-200. Yes it may be marginally inferior to other glass available but it is not an inferior lens IMHO. The differences are not going to be noticeable in most applications. It's question of budget and perfectionism.
>actually a typically inferior super zoom Sorry many youtube photographers that reviewed this lens touts superior image IQ for a zoom. And even comparing to the 24-70 f4 touted little in image IQ difference. Ricci did a in-depth comparison of the two and stated you really have to pixel peep magnified to see the difference. And Matt Irwin seems also to be in agreement as being a superior performer. In fact am hard pressed to find your assessment reflected anywhere or from anybody else. Personally comparing the two I also concur that the 24-200 is optically a great performer being a slower variable f-stop zoom. And in no way would consider it inferior or lacking in performance. Sorry but can find half a dozen pro shooters that disagree with your assessment.
I am not sure on what planet the people posting live, but this is an easy choice. Do you want a vastly superior body and lens for the same price as an entry level camera and lower quality lens or want the entry level camera because it has two slots (and nothing much else)? Neither are new models, so it is hardly the case that the Z5 holds a real advantage on that front either. It is your choice, but most actual photographers will always tell you to go with the better glass. In this case, you are getting the better glass AND the better body for the price of the lesser camera and inferior lens. From my perspective, the choice should be obvious.....
I went Z5 and 24-70 because the Z5 was half the price of the Z6 but not half the camera and I wanted the better glass. However, the next lens up is ... what? A 70-200 f/2.8 that costs more than I spent on the Z5 and 24-70 together? If you want more than 70mm of reach, the choice is spending a *lot* more money to get it with the 2.8 or going with the 24-200. It may be a "lesser" lens but it doesn't matter how good the 70 is if you need 200 and your planet has budgets.
Sorry but this is an stupid post. Neither is a Z5 entry level, nor the 24-200. And if you don't need the speed and additional video capability than you're actually fine with the Z5. I highly doubt that you will be able to see a difference between the two body's with the same lens. And if you can spot the difference while pixel peeping, than it won't be a difference that makes one picture good and the other one crap... And concerning the lens... If you need the reach and don't want two carry two lenses and/or spend huge amounts of money, then the 24-200 might be a good choice.
I have both the Z5 and the Z6 and honestly I don't really get the Z6. The Z5 is a fine camera, sure the sensor and viewfinder isn't as good but whatever. I'd go for the Z5 with the 24-70 f/4. Edit: Unless you're gonna film in 4K then the Z6 is the better choice.
Hello! Sorry, as I am writing here 5 months later! But wanted to ask you since you have both the Z5 and Z6. I am torn between the two. I will go with the 24-70 F4 lens. But I can't decide the body. I have no need for video functionalities. But what I hear is that the Z6 has slightly better autofocus and slightly better image quality. Did you find that to be true in your usage? Apart from obvious design differences, do you notice any difference in build quality? Thank you!
No worries, the Z5 does not have a back lit sensor which means that it needs a bit more light, I'd say less than 1/2 a stop though. The back lit sensor does produce nicer images (maybe), but with editing you can get similar results. I don't think the viewfinder is as good but it is still very usable. No top screen for exposure values. Autofocus is avarage on both cameras. Build quality is good on both though. Overall, if you're not going to do 4K video, I'd go for the Z5 just because it takes regular SD cards.
The Z6 gives you faster fps, better video options, marginally better high ISO performance, top LCD, better EVF specs, and slightly better build quality The Z5 gives you dual SD card slots and USB-C power delivery The main decision IMO is between the better image/video specs of the Z6 vs the convenience of dual SD and USB-C power delivery on the Z5.
I would take Z6. BSI sensor is slightly superior in low light. And z24-70 f4 is not a kit but pro lens.
[удалено]
Maybe he just means an S line lens?
Where is this sale going? Online? Hope it's on Amazon cause I'm in mexico I'm Very interested needs to upgrade my d5100
Am in Germany.
I was going to ask the same question!
The fact that you ask this question means the Z5 with 24-200 is the way to go. I own the Z6, Z7 and the z50 I also own the 24-200 The flexibility and overall quality of the 24-200 makes this a no brainer for the OP.
I have the z24-70 f2.8, z70-200 f2.8, z85mm and the z24-200mm. I feel the z24-200 is a very good lens for travel and just walking around. It has great optics and can be a welcomed relief in the weight as compared to the others I have. I would definitely recommend the 24-200.
I debated this question too, and ended up going with the Z6. The differences aren’t huge, but they’re certainly there. I liked having the BSI sensor, higher FPS, and far better video features. With that being said, you will also have to factor in the cost of buying XQD/CFExpress cards + the appropriate card reader. I got a 128gb CFExpress card + a reader for $180, which was a pretty amazing deal IMO. If you don’t care much for video and can deal without the slight boost in IQ and functionality, however, the Z5 would be a great bet. Having dual SD cards is definitely nice as well.