Not the same features for a smaller price. Maybe it's equivalent to the Z5. I have the Z7 (latest firmware) and find no limitations to the way I use it especially for low light photography.

As time goes on, you will be.

No he won't

he wil !

You ?
Sony?
OMG !!!

i had the a7r3 and now own the z7. the z7 produce images much superior to the a7r3.

You too?
OMG, also Sony?
When will you finally get smarter?

You again?
Sony?
Deepest condolences.

The banding is only a feature which silent shutter above certain ISO, its in the manual. Switch it off, no banding.

@photoad
Banding does NOT disappear even when you switch to fully mechanical shutter.

I had it on previous cameras... never again, it's that simple.

Yes, you can always produce banding. Just expose higher and it has gone. You can only push process so far.

photoad
Well you said switching off silent shutter removes the banding.
Now you are admitting you are wrong?

Heh, this isn't right or wrong. This is a forum.
In the manual it clearly states the conditions that banding can be brought on by the use of silent shutter.
In any digital camera you can generate banding. Just use your professional skills to avoid it. It's the same for dust, every sensor has dust, jus don't photograph a white wall at f22 and all will be well

photoad

Yes you are wrong, period.

The banding that is being talked about here has nothing to do with the banding related to artificial lighting you are confusing it with.

This banding is resulting from the PDAF implementaion on the sensor. You cannot get rid of it, professional skills won't help either.

I hope this clears things up.

Banding?
You?
Put on your glasses.

Our annual awards are a selection of the cameras we thought were best in each category, based on our time reviewing then. They're essentially a summary of the year. I'm not sure why you're interpreting that as an attempt to sell something.

It is obvious for all informed that the SONY a7III should be the winner in this category, given it is such a better all round camera. Choosing the Z7 is not understandable, if you just consider its clumsy AF system, which in all reviews, including DPR, is shown to be below par!! then you wouldn't even put it as a good second,

The a7 III won its category and won the overall award, because it's a better all round camera.

@NordquistSONYTROLL:

No friends?
Bored?
Unhappy childhood?

so How can Nikon z get a higher score than eos r when the Nikon AF is questionable unreliable?

Sounds exactly like Sony crippling their high-end cameras with poor menus and no touch-screen while their low-end products enjoy both. Why innovate now when enough people will buy it as-is?

@worldaccordingtojim "At least now there is some competition to push Sony forward."

Haha, your name is very fitting for you. Sony, sir, is already FORWARD in the mirrorless market and the Z7 is no competition. The A7RIII is not only a better value but it offers far more feature set and it's a very well built camera. Sony has it's faults and they tend to cut corners every now and then, but they make the best FF mirrorless camera for professionals and prosumers and Nikon's Z7 is not the camera that will "push Sony forward". You've gotta be kidding. 😂

First, I sold all my Canon L glass and bodies to move to Sony. But Sony is still lacking in a few areas.

1. Their weather sealing is the worst on the market.
2. 8 bit video to external recorders, which I use an Atomos all the time.
3. There is still room for improvement on the grip
4. The hard plastic port covers are terrible
5. The Wifi app is far behind all the other brands

So in these examples, the Nikon does a better job. So I would hope Sony would use these as items to improve in the Mark4 series. Everyone wins with competition.

@worldaccordingtojim "Their weather sealing is the worst on the market."

And so you've actually tested the Sony A7RIII? And if so, by doing what? Dunking it in water, 6ft under? I mean, when you make such a bold statement I would love to know which model you tested and how you tested it.......or are you going by the usual Sony haters that say that? I have seen many YouTubers pour water on the Sony A6300 and it has had no issues with functionality. Honestly, the weather sealing should be a non-issue for most, unless you using it constantly in sand storms or the rain forest. I'm sure the A7RIII would handle either one anyway.

"The Wifi app is far behind all the other brands. So in these examples, the Nikon does a better job."

Haha, I wouldn't even have brought that up. Nikon's Snap bridge sucks!. Yeah, I have a Sony A6300 and the app could use some work, but it doesn't drop signal and it functions, but Nikon is known for the Snap Bridge being the worst in the industry.

https://www.imaging-resource.com/articles/2017-weather-testing-nikon-d850-vs-sony-a7riii-canon-5div-olympus-e-m1II

@worldaccordingtojim. Hey Good Job posting that.....uh....USELESS LINK. HAHA. Sorry but unless you're comparing the Z7 (WHICH ISN'T THERE) then don't post this nonsense. The Z7 is an overpriced camera pretending to be the D850 thanks to Nikon's lying marketing saying it's a mirrorless D850. More like a feature-less D850.
Still, most people are not shooting in constant wet situations and despite your witty response (or you thought it was) it doesn't change the fact that not all lenses are fully weather sealed, so it doesn't matter if Nikon is a little better than Sony in that respect. Do you shoot in the rain forest or constant sand storms? Even if some people do that, most people will not put their $3000 camera in that type of environment, regardless of the type of sealing it offers. Thanks for the laugh. 😂

Lot of hate going on for a shooter who sold all his Canons and L glass to shoot Sony-so you could say he's a fan-then dares to suggest some areas where Sony could improve.

How do you know he didn't have to replace a Sony body after it got set in the condensation ring from a cold drink on a hot day..? Their weather sealing has been called into question-even by fanboys-enough to suggest that there are shortcomings in that area on some Sony bodies.

I'm going to wait for a couple of firmware upgrades before trashing the Z series, as I think it's a great start.

I'm worldaccordingtojim. Sony has a lot to improve

You have to wonder if the A7R3 camera they tested with is also the same A7R3 that they did the tear down with. If so these results are completely invalid.

@HenryDJP... poor guy...

a youtuber french video to use a sony a7R3 to test it in wet conditions and at night (fine rain and sustained rain), after 45 minutes the case sony a7r3 is off and no longer wanted to run XD! sony, better sensors, better AF, ok but that's all ... professional? joke ... sony makes sensors, great AF technology, but no cameras ...
this video report was made in France XD !!!
and not in the tropical forest ...
and yes professionals want to be able to take photos under heavy rains ... but certainly not with a sony, a case nikon does it with his eyes closed.

"a case nikon does it with his eyes closed."

Yeah, Nikon's eyes were wide closed when they created the Z7 to compete with the A7R3.

This is a Z7 review but he shot with a Z6 camera. It looks interesting though. The Z6 could have a better AF performance but let's wait for the more in depth review of its sister model. Better AF performance is usually the trade off with higher resolution and the sensor size for mirrorless.

but best image quality on the market. have you seen jpgs from sony alpha camera. the worst of the worst

I don't know, I think I will stick with Nikon

https://www.dpreview.com/forums/post/61945374

The Nikon Z7 scored 89 and a Silver Award...The Canon R scored 79 and no Award.
Big difference

Not when Sony is 3-5 years ahead of any other manufacturer in sensor tech. Whoever has the best sensor wins.

You can have the best engine in a car, but if you don't have all the other components on point you won't be the best.

@DrEvil " Z7 is not perfect, but nothing is."

The Z7 had the potential to be as "perfect" as possible, especially since Sony's A7RIII had already been on the market. Nikon had all the cards in their hand to at least match the feature set and offer Nikon-exclusive features to bump off the A7RIII. Nikon's arrogance kept them from making the perfect camera. Heck, anybody would think they would make the "perfect camera" especially due to the forthcoming holiday shopping season.

"Sony has no idea how tough this market is."

Haha, are you for real? NIKON has no idea how tough the market is. Have you checked the prices? The Z7 is currently $3400. Sony's A7RIII is currently $2800. Please by all means show me where the Z7 is worth $600 more than the A7RIII? A company that knows the market wouldn't over-charge for their product when it's less than capable of the giant who's has far more experience in mirrorless.

Bear in mind there are multiple factors (investment in lenses, familiarity, pro-service membership) that contribute to inertia, preventing pros switching brands. Reviewers are trying to identify what's currently the strongest camera, which doesn't presuppose commitment to a system.

And thanks for reinforcing the fact that professional photographers pick the system that gives them the best results. Professional reviewers pick the best gadget. The technicalities important to professional reviewers are not the game changers that you so often make them sound to be.

@Noogy... no one really cares that you shoot Canon so no need to be so insecure.

I would say you came away with wrong conclusion as the Nikon Zs received a Silver and 89 vs. Canon that received no award and only 79.

The Nikon is a much more finished product, that has better build, better weather sealing , better ergonomics, better user interface and better video than any other full frame camera out there.

If you need the best continuous AF for sports, it is not the camera for you you.

@NexLupus @jkokich (re: sports shooting) and neither would the Sony A7 be the camera for you. You're looking at least at an investment in the A9 and at that price your dropping D5 and 1D money.

@NexLupus

As stated earlier by DPR, scoring is heavily based on IQ. So the fact that the Z 7 has almost the same sensor as the A7R III is what pushed it so far ahead. Not the camera's performance and build in general. The same can be said about the R falling so far behind, having to compete with the A7 III. DPR's scoring methods need to be revised.

@BluBomber
Yes, scoring is skewed towards image quality.
It is, however, completely disingenuous for you to say that that was the main reason for the score and the Silver award; especially when the opening statement in the review says that “The Nikon Z7 is the company’s most well rounded camera to date. “
That encompasses a lot more than just image quality!!!!

Unfortunately, the huge list of negatives, which encompasses nearly every major point of the camera, says otherwise. Adding usable video and usable LV AF definitely helped earn that "well rounded" statement, as Nikon was well behind the rest of the industry in both.

@Blue
Yet none of those negatives were enough to detract from the score of 89 or the Silver Award, or the opening statement.
You can try to detract, dissect, disinform all you want.
It does not change the fact that it is Nikon's most well rounded camera...this from a company that already has the best DSLR on the market in the D850.

@NexLupus

Correct. The Z 7 has IQ that's second only to the A7R III. And the score reflects that. DPR said as much after coming under massive fire for their scoring. No detracting, dissecting, or disinforming.

it's got the kung fu grip and you can take pix in a hurricane though

What major problem? That's the thing. The AF-C issue was amplified by fanboys that made the camera so bad but that is not the case. I see that you rode with them without even trying out the camera yet.

Just look at the links below what the pro's are saying and let me know more about that "major problem" is about. The camera is fine. It has quirks. Teh demand is high and caught Nikon by surprise despite the price.

Hear, Hear! Bingo!

I tried the camera and the AF is not on par with the D850 in any shape or form.
I haven't heard anybody contest that as yet!!
All people say is; they know it doesn't function as well as D850, but they still like it, which is personal choice that I respect, but doesn't make it as good a camera as the D850.

@Bob Jameson
Tony and Chelsea seem to me quite expert in using and testing new gear. I rarely seen them so not convinced with any new competitive cameras, always looking at pros and cons. Tony even has a comparison between the Eos R and the A7III stating 'not clear winner" definitely valuing some of the strengths of the Eos R even if on paper is trashed by the A7III. I was quite surprise to see them not to really on board with the performance of the new Z from Nikon. To me that is a pretty big flag.

the problem is the price

Ignore this,

Yes, exactly. The Fujifilm X-T3 received a Gold ranking and 88% where the Z7 received a Silver with 89%...What am I missing here?

What are you missing? Well, take a look at the full reviews. The "Gold" and "Silver" awards are akin to participation trophies. It is noteworthy when a camera does not receive one or the other (point and shoot excepted). Gold and Silver awards should be handed out at the end of the year in limited quantities and based on the totality of the year's reviews and not at the discretion of the reviewer. Make it meaningful. Make it hard.

Second, the scoring system does not generation enough variation. Most cameras reviewed fall into a narrow band--in the 80s. Some of this is simply due to the fact that the cameras reviewed on this site are generally very good cameras. DPReview needs to rethink this. There needs to be greater variation in the scores--88 or 89 are for all purposes the same--and greater range of scores. Toughen the testing and standards. I think I recall reading that they are working on this.

Years ago DPR used Recommended and Highly Recommended instead of Gold and silver. It was very rare for a camera to be rated not recommended. When asked why they said they only test cameras that deserve the Recommended or better ratings.

"When asked why they said they only test cameras that deserve the Recommended or better ratings."

How would they deserved this rating without testing the camera in advance?

You've got me. I asked the same question at the time. Maybe they started testing a camera and quickly realize it was a POS and not worth their time. :-)

Canon just reuses 5 year old sensors, that do not have the performance to keep up.

Z8 and z9 are coming. Those will fix the issues.

It's better than most people think. It's has several features better than the A7R III more than the A7R III has features better than the Z7. Real photographers say it is a very good camera even edging the best all around DSLR in D850 is most cases:

https://diglloyd.com/blog/2018/20181107_1145-ReaderComment-mirrorless-systems.html

http://blog.michaelclarkphoto.com/?p=7395

http://www.naturalart.ca/voice/blog.html

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sNAziALpnXc&t

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Xup0euGZS3Q&t

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DGdOIj71aXY

Only Sony fanboys will say this is a bad camera so that they can justify their purchase. I will say to Sony fanboys, buy another Sony A7 body while they are on sale. Get a second copy, enjoy it, and don't look back. Buy them ASAP because Sony just lost over 30% market share on full frame MILC. What a better way to help your company by buying a second body!

"even edging the best all around DSLR in D850 is most cases"

Debatable.

@Bob Jameson

"Only Sony fanboys will say this is a bad camera"
I feel this is the defensive interpretation of some supporters of the Z series. I do not think many actually are meaning that. Z6 and Z7 are really good cameras however they do not exist in a vacuum. It is hard to recommend them at their price point when you have cameras like D850, D750, A7RIII, A7II. They feel almost a generation behind in some core features, no bad for a first but facing a tough competition.

cause it's new and shiny

The best overall system where nikon launch with 3 lenses (24-70 stinks), rely on adapters (nothing wrong with it imo), don't have a proper battery grip, only a single card slot, auto focus issues, a lens road map without fast lenses (apart from one).....

Oh ya.... They are Reinventing the whole system alright.

Thematic you made yourself look like a troll.

You admit there is nothing wrong with adapters. Which means Nikon has over 90 lenses on day one.

And the Nikon adapter isn't like the Sony crap adapters that block light and massively restrict usuabliity (2.5 FPS, etc).

So one day one the Nikon Z cameras have lenses like the the 400/2,8 and the superb and compact 300/4 and many other lenses that other systems can only dream about.

@Oskar P
"Canon learned long ago. There is no need to have the latest most expensive technologies".
That is what Canon do with a massive market share and a mature system. That will not work as a strategy for someone that wants to succeed in competing with Canon at this time. Sony in my opinion is doing many things right, the main of them calling the opposite strategy that Canon offers drawing to them people unsatisfied with Canon marketing strategy, successfully. Canon will offer you a BMW will a Corolla engine? Sony offers you a Corolla with a BMW engine. Complementary works. It is also great that Sony can work quite well with Canon glass. That is also why I own both systems, yet for my own preference I shoot 99% Sony and 1% Canon, hanging there hoping that Canon will drop a decent engine in one of their future models. It has not happened in a while.

Sony is failing. They are down to 13% market share globally.
Canon APSC mirrorless (just a couple bodies) out sold Sony mirrorless, FF APSC, and SLTs combined in places like Japan...and not just for 1 year. For 3 years and each year increasing that dominance.

Now we see Sony has lost 33% market share in the past month alone. Ouch.

@Oskar P
"Now we see Sony has lost 33% market share in the past month alone. Ouch."
Going from 100% to 65% does not mean much at this time. It is really simplistic and naive making trends or drawing conclusions based on these numbers (i.e. are Sony Sales declining or MILC FF expanding? No new Sony model while Nikon Canon debut, etc).
Sony has had their A7SIII ready for debut for sometime, and they postponed the launch as they saw no real threat from current Canikon offerings :-) so clearly Sony has a different view from yours on the happening.
Let's pick up this conversation in a couple of years.

November/December is the most important time for sales volume during the year. This is when sales volume is at its greatest.

Sony had already fallen to 19% market share for mirrorless in Japan. Poor sales during the 4th quarter could mean dropping to well below that.

Meanwhile before releasing a FF mirrorless camera, Canon was inching towards 30% and is already the #1 mirrorless camera seller in Japan.

@Oskar P
again, let's pick it up in a couple of years :-)

SLT's set the ground work for everything great in mirrorless cameras. Once minolta was out of the market some needed to step in and innovate. Nikon and Canon cernity wasn't going to. If you love your full frame mirrorless camera (any brand) you need to thank Sony. It was their out of the box thinking that got us here.

SLTs had nothing to do with mirrorless. They were a massive failure.

Panasonic and Olympus pioneered mirrorless. They pioneered 5 axis IS, electric shutter, and more.
When Sony finally released a mirrorless camera, it lacked a VF, and IS. Later Sony got smart and started to copy Olympus, Panasonic and Aptina.

@Oskar P
If Sony did not work on FF mirrorless you can be sure that neither Canon or Nikon would be offering a FF mirrorless right now. That is pretty much a fact.
"SLTs had nothing to do with mirrorless. They were a massive failure."
SLTs are not a massive failure, Sony made the brave move to go all the way mirrorless sacrificing SLTs future, just like Nikon and Canon will follow suit with DSLRs. And again Sony is the overarching reason for which such process is happening much faster than Nikon and Canon would have liked to.
Panasonic and Olympus might have pioneered mirrorless, but Sony and just lately Fuji created the first truly competitive mirrorless to compete with DSLRs marking with this past year with the release of the A9, A7RIII, A7III, and XT3 the beginning of the end of DSLRs. Sure it is not because of the micro 4/3 systems.
But I doubt you get it Mr. Oskar who joined this forum 2 months ago and I know it all.

Sony developed it's on sensor focusing on SLT's. It developed its hi res EVF's for SLT's. Focus peeking DMF and facedetection / face registration all on SLT's. SLT's were the first SLR type camera with one button video. SLT's were only a failure to close minded people who thought all this features were just garbage that sony added, with no real value. Who cares that they lost a third of a stop. Sony over came that by removing the translucent mirror, and the sony A's were born with all the technology from the SLT's. Nikon and Canon along with their fan boys laughed and said these will never be a threat to our DSLR's.?..

Sony did NOT develop mirrorless AF on SLTs.
They had to buy that tech from Aptina.
SLTs only used mirror based PDAF until the A99ii.
And everything thing else you mentioned they copied.

SLTs were a huge failure.

And Sony's idea for mirrorless at first was a camera without a VF, without IS, and with terrible AF.

Minolta started IBS and sony bought it from them along with tha A mount. At least in dslr. I know minolta's IBS was part of the deal when Sony took over their mount.

Minolta used a very different kind of IBIS. It NEVER appeared in Sony mirrorless.
Also, Sony quit using that outdated IS with video in SLTs and opted for electronic stabilization because their OLD IS created too much heat.
Sony later copied Olympus 5 axis IBIS which is what they use in their mirrorless cameras.
It is not as good, but it is significantly better that the Minolta/SLT IS.

Like I said, Sony copied pretty much everything. All they did was apply it to a larger sensor.

The A99 was the first to use on sensor focus point. It has 102 points.https://www.dpreview.com/reviews/sony-alpha-slt-a99/11

The A99 uses the OSPAF tech Sony bought and copied from Aptina. It first appeared on the Nikon 1 cameras.

Sony's mirrorless AF was pretty bad, so they made a deal with Aptina.

And of course the A99 was a massive failure. No one talks about SLTs having a future.

As digital cameras became much more functional and affordable, photographers started transitioning to digital. Konica Minolta (which was later acquired by Sony) was the first to offer sensor stabilization in its Minolta DiMAGE A1 camera and it was a matter of time until other companies started adopting sensor-based image stabilization.

Minotla was first sony acquired they may bout something else I'm not going to research that. IBS started with Minolta and sony bought it soon after.

https://photographylife.com/lens-stabilization-vs-in-camera-stabilization

Again. NOT the IBIS in use today.
Olympus pioneered the 5 axis IBIS Sony later copied. It is completely different and far superior.
Sony still hasn't been able to come close to Olympus but their version is better than the inferior IBIS used in most SLTs (A99ii finally uses the superior IS).

This is about the fact that Sony use the SLT to develop its technology. They made have bought stuff along the way to improve it but this what built Sony cameras.Like Nikon never borrowed technology. they have never innovated anything important. Minolta innovated most of the stuff we use. I'm not bashing Nikon that was never the intent. I like Nikon products. I still have a lot of Nikon glass I may go back one day. I was really hoping for the z 7 to be a camera for me. I want a smaller package. The camera isn't the deciding factor great photos. I'm just saying the SLT's were important for Sony. If you have never actually you should. It all the things that people can't live without now, accept it had it five years ago.Yes it wasn't super refined yet but it worked well.Things it had that " real photographers" laughed at and said no real camera would have that. EVF, focus peeking, DMF, Focus zoom,face recognition, facial registration, on sensor focusing. and I'm sure there was more.

Again, Sony abandoned the IBIS tech from Minolta. It sucked. It wasn't near as good as ILIS and it caused massive overheating problems. Every SLT that used it for video shutdown in under 5 minutes if used on a sunny warm day. Sony was forced to abandon it for video and instead used terrible electronic IS on SLTs.
After giving up on that kind of IS Sony copied Olympus (but did a poor job).
The Olympus like 5 axis IS which is very different is found in the recent Sony cameras.
After buying Minolta, Sony abandoned their DSLR tech. They abandoned their IS tech. They abandoned most of the advanced A mount lenses. And soon they will abandon SLTs.
SLTs were a complete failure.

Last response. The SLT's had no over heating problems. Over heating did not come the small e mount bodies. You didn't answer my quest have you ever used one or is all your comments just hear-say.

LOL!!
SLTs had massive overheating problems.
That is why Sony abandoned the A55 body size. And in the A55 manual Sony had to a section explaining that the camera can overheating in as little as 5 minutes.
But it wasn't just the A55/A33 that over heated. The A77 was found to quickly overheat too. Sony's solution was to skip using IS during video and do it with software. But that didn't stop the problem.

With 1 point difference with the A7R III, it just goes to show how bad the Sony A7R III is. But Sony fanboys don't see it that way. They are like horse on blinders and just see it 1 way.

Here's a very nice camera and this does not have a serious issue:

https://www.lensrentals.com/blog/2017/10/about-getting-your-camera-wet-teardown-of-a-salty-sony-a7sii/

Hmm, did you learn vocabulary from a certain orange politician in the White House? Massive, shocking, serious. Good power words that often mean very little.

😂 Only if you're dumb enough to not translate them to whatever words might make sense in your own head, or to not Google them if they're beyond you.

@Bob Jameson

Someone's not paying attention. ;) DPR clearly stated the reason the score was so high was because of the camera's IQ, which is what the final score is heavily weighted on. The long list of failures in the Z 7 don't affect the score much, if at all, because of this. The Silver vs Gold rating is the more important thing to look at, with the Sony being Highly Recommended, and the Nikon just Recommended.

How's that soap box?

You lost? This website is called digital photography review.

What are you confused about?

Lol, Thematic. :D

Well, I get where both of you are coming from.

On the one hand, I'm SO there with Tommi. It's really obvious by DPR comments that many, a large majority actually, of people here are just fanboys and/or stat geeks that simply don't understand the way in which $3,000+ bodies are supposed to handle/deliver. They just wanna argue stats and fling endless insults. Very obvious they're not artists or pros, and obviously don't need $3,000+ bodies. What they really need is to read some Ansel Adams and basic photography books.

On the other hand there is the clear minority here that's been avidly/professionally shooting high/top-end gear for a long time and know what truly matters in a camera to deliver more/better images for their type of shooting, or all genres really. Such photographers have a very clear idea of what's out there and what's missing. Such photographers always yearn for that extra thing, that could actually make the difference in getting the "perfect" shot.

Thank you for a reasoned response and overview. Quite a contrast to most of the wackjob comments below.

@kodachromeguy???
I think most people below would agree with PPierre. Since its first unveiling the Z7 was considered by many an A7RII competitor more than the A7RIII which indeed makes it a great camera yet now not cutting edge and the A7RII was cheaper than the Z7 even at its first release. I think, included myself, many are annoyed by the biased overall score. I do not think anyone is questioning that Nikon did a great job for a first.

It's easy to generalize and claim the Z7 is an A7rII competitor because of some aspects of the Z7 AF system but when you consider things like the Z7 better battery life, better EVF, better rear LCD, top LCD, much better weather sealing, better grip, and overall better build quality you can see that it is a lot more than the A7rII especially if these are things that you consider to be important for your needs.

@Clayton1985
comparisons are often done at performance level. Considering that right now you get an A7RII for almost half the price of a Z7, well I do not know if the advantages you are talking about buy the difference. Note that the Z7 battery is rated only 10% better than the A7RII and the Sony still has eye AF which is a really good feature and Sony offers a REAL battery grip too. So when you look at value for the money I am not so sure which one is better.

The Z7 battery is significantly better in the real world vs the A7rII. It isn't really close in my experience. I agree about the value to performance, that really depends on your own needs. For me, the better EVF, better rear LCD, top LCD, better battery life, base ISO 64, built in intervalometer, better weather sealing and my expectations for the soon to be released 14-30 f4 lens were the primary reasons I decided to replace my A7rII with the Z7. It was a difficult decision and I could have easily gone with the A7rIII and been happy too. They are all really excellent cameras.

@Clayton1985
why the Z7 and not the D850? You do realize you are paying a premium for the Z7 I hope. What sort background do you have in photography gear? What have you owned so far? What is that you primarily shoot?

will they?
did you use the Z7?
Or is this just a theoretical exercise on your part?

Yes they will

I hefted the Z7 at Glazer's today. Well, 'hefted' isn't the right word since it felt nicely balanced and not too heavy. It also felt quick and responsive and the EVF was fantastic. I don't have any XQD cards or reader so sadly I couldn't bring the pics home for a pixel peep :-( but the camera playback looked great.

I've tried them both now, and I think I like the Nikon a little better than the Canon. Probably the control layout of the Nikon is a little closer to the Fuji and Olympus that I'm used to-the twin dial shutter speed and aperture control (versus on the lens aperture ring) felt very Olympus.

If I had the money I'd rent one to play with it in the real world.

@kreislauf
a camera at this price point cannot be a generation behind in terms of AF and FPS, nor a single card slot and a tease of a battery grip especially when the battery life is far from top performance. In order to achieve top rating should have something truly special to offset the shortcomings. I do not see anything truly special about this camera. Just a good camera and understandable that the shortcomings might be irrelevant to many yet a rating is based on its value compared to the competition.

@armandino
"In order to achieve top rating should have something truly special to offset the shortcomings"

yeah! like Image quality and ergonomics maybe?

"I do not see anything truly special about this camera"

that's because you are still focused only on the spec sheet instead of looking at the photos that come out of this camera nor did you use the Z7 in real live!!!

these reviews are for people who plan to buy the camera in question.
If the camera doesn't suit you, that's ok.
But WHY do you need to try to convince other people, that they shouldn't invest in that system?
Jealousy?
Or do you need to vent your post-purchase rationalization?

@kreislauf
"yeah! like Image quality and ergonomics maybe?"
Neither of the two are truly special, not enough to make up for the shortcoming at least. There are several cameras out there that match or surpass that, some of them are cheaper too.
Someone needs to be pretty blind or requiring very selective needs (i.e. compactness?) to take the Z7 over the D850. Considering that the D850 is cheaper AND one year older, I still think my argument is valid. None of the new Z lenses are a draw to the system (differently from the Eos R system). Again I am not questioning if the Z7 is a good camera but its value in the current market. The Z7 will not get even close to the success of the D850, yet same rating? I Believe there is lots of solid ground on my questioning, indeed I am not the only one here disagreeing with the overall rating.
I am not in the market for either the Z7 or the D850, so maybe I see things a bit more objectively here than people more invested in either or?

-Missing 3D tracking which was always advertised as Nikon's industry leading technology, only till Z7 came out !! Now they say, who said it makes a big difference. Actually you did, and for a very long time!!
-Shutter doesn't cover sensor when lens off, as in Canon-R when exposed
-No Eye-AF as in Sony a7x xxx
-Much smaller shooting buffer, especially in RAW-L 14-bit
-Continuous shooting falls below 5.5fps with no EVF blackout and C-AF (9fps with MDB-18 and EN-EL-18c combo)
-Only one XQD card slot (can still use my old SD-cards in D850 if stuck)
-Banding issue limiting the dynamic range use
-Only very few Z-mount lenses available even in intermediate term (5 year plan)
-Smaller but not that smaller, and lenses still large

All these problems or drawbacks are already in the review .. so people need to read the review and not rely on the score, which is shown to be very mathematically biased, invalid and showing external unreliability. It is not testing what it should test, and it is shown to be unreliable in comparing cameras. This is a matter for DPR to re-visit, and perhaps get a good statistician to advise. They are doing a good job testing, but using dubious measures and methods, which produce a completely invalid and un-reliable score. So, don't waste your time and get a good mathematician/statistician.

For potential buyers, go out to the shows and shops and try it out for yourself and make that decision out for yourselves .. yay or nay

And from DPR themselves

AF system hunts in low light, due to limited sensitivity
Face detect less reliable than competition
AF Tracking less reliable than competition
AF Tracking cumbersome to engage/disengage
Touchscreen cannot be used for touchpad AF when using the EVF
Limited AF button customization
Significant rolling shutter in full-frame 4K footage
No live feed at 9fps
Live feed at 5.5fps suffers from significant drop in EVF refresh rate
Very limited buffer
Inconsistent metering, heavily weighted to AF point
On-sensor AF causes banding, slightly limiting usable dynamic range
Aggressive noise reduction at high ISO
Electronic first curtain shutter (EFCS) needed to avoid potential shutter shock (yet is off by default)
EFCS limits shutter speed to 1/2000
Two-Button-Reset and Quick Format actions missing
No linear response option for video shooters wishing to manual focus
Battery life on the short side
Single card slot
No flip-around screen for vlogging

It is unfortunate that the Z7 is so expensive, if it was considerably cheaper I think people would look at the comparison between the D85 and the Z7 differently. I do not shoot Nikon, but if I did I would currently stick with the D850 and wait for at least one iteration, unless you are a hybrid photographer really needing the Z7 AF and possibly the 10 bit files.

Should be for the price. That's the key factor you're missing and so is DPR - for the price and how does it stands vs the D850 & A7R3. Not so good in my humble opinion...

It is indeed a great camera, but at this price point, why people would prefer it over the D850? Unless portability is critical I really do not see any valid reason to get the first iteration Z7. Things would be different if it was considerably cheaper.

Yes, same score as the D850. Why only a Silver??? Or, better yet, how come a silver with all those CONS???

I think that question has been asked and answered too many times. There is no correlation between the score and award. They indicate two different things.

Readhttps://www.dpreview.com/articles/4416254604/camera-scores-ratings-explained

@Mared and @Satyaa, remove your blinders and look at what the Z7 has over AR7 III and D850 and you will understand. You focused too much on the negatives that you entirely missed the big picture and that is Z7's advantages over other cameras.

DPreview got it right. In fact, the score could have been higher if not for the auto area AF. Don't worry that Sony lost 30% market share on MILC full frame the last 2 months. Good for you, they are on sale now. You can get your 2nd body cheap. Deal with it. Sleep well at night knowing your Sony can still make great pictures tomorrow.

I am not sure how/why you interpreted my message but I wasn't talking about Z7 or A7 cameras at all. You don't have to feel the need to defend any camera from me. I'm neither buying a Z7 or A7.

My response was only to the questions about why a score of 89 does not result in a Gold award. I was pointing out that the score and award are not directly related.

Go back and look at my comments on the Z forum. I agreed with DPR's conclusions.

@Mared
They gave it that score because they felt it obviously deserved it.
Again the Sony May focus faster in CF but the Z7 has...
Much better build
Much better weather sealing
Better viewfinder
Better touchscreen implementation
More megapixels
Better user interface (I know subjective, but they DPR prefers it).
Better ergonomics
Capable of 10bit 4.2.2 video
Better native implementation of adaptor with existing lenses.

Bob Jameson - You're full of cr*p. First - Sony hasn't lost 30% market share. That was for for one store sales in Japan only - nothing like conflation and lying. Also - if you looked at that data, Z7 sales were miniscule - all of the dent in Sonys dominance was a temporary spike in EOS R sales. Z7 sales were flat-lined/dead :).

As for DPRs PROS/CONS if you look at DPRs positives, the Z7s are a joke in a large part. Examples: - "No need to micro-adjust lenses" No Kidding, it's Mirrorless!!!! and "Headphone and microphone socket" You think!?!? for a $3,400.00 camera!!! "Menus familiar to Nikon DSLR users" Well that's nice for Canon, Fuji, Sony, etc Users!!! "First full-frame Nikon with a usable silent shutter mode" Who cares, everyone else (Sony, Fuji & Canon) has had this forever!!!!

What a silly list of positives - DPR staff was really reaching

@Satyaa, my bad. I just realized I included your name. Not my intention. Sorry.

@Mared, DPReview is saying the A7R III is that bad that's why there is only 1 point difference with the Z... but you will not accept this. You knew that one small firmware fix by Nikon will overtake your beloved A7R III. That hurts really bad if it happen.

XQD is supposed to be faster and/or more reliable than SD. That's my understanding anyway.. SD is just about maxed out in speed capability, but XQD has a lot of headroom left for expansion. Meaning the Nikon might get faster at high FPS as its memory cards get faster.

Yeah. Nice.you can set an AF mode it just does not make any difference. It ain't AFing.

This is what I'm reading between and not so much between the lines in every, single, ef-ing review.

As a stupid Nihon follower I have about any camera they have ever made, but usually they got better. This whole AF mess on the z series I don't understand since all 1 series where better.

But of course ymmv, my personal opinion, whatever just get it right.

It is great to see actual results where the AF is so much better than initial quick reviews.

The rest of the camera is mostly superior to the current FF mirrorless cameras (that have poor ergonomics and no weather resistance and lack lenses). 90 Nikon lenses function superbly...and there are more from several 3rd parties. And no 2.5 FPS restrictions!!

@Oskar P
The a9 has no 2.5 FPS restrictions, and has in my opinion superior ergonomics. As a fact the A9 is generally under valued and under understood by the majority. In simple words the Z7 looks like a petty attempts to mirrorless when you compare it to the shear performance of and A9. I am pretty sure the A9 AF and FPS will simply kill the Z6 or the Z7 with Canon glass ( not problem tracking at 10FPS), never mind with native glass, in which case the A9 lives on an entirely different planet altogether.
I find it funny how you keep on clinging on the poor Sony environmental sealing, clearly it is the only thing you can hang on. Petty you.

But trolls keep say it can't do that! Shouldn't we believe those haters who never touched the camera?

The camera looks to be very capable. And unlike another mirrorless brand can shoot faster than 2.5 FPS with lenses like the 400mm 2.8, or a 200-500mm zoom.
This camera has a much wider choice of lenses.

https://www.dpreview.com/forums/post/61903133

If you look at the short comings of the Sony, you can say the same thing. In fact, other than AF, the Sony has more short comings than the Nikon. Please look at it both ways and not open your eyes only to the system you already have.