Anyone gone from a D850 to Z7?

[Jacques]

I have be fortunate in that I have never experienced any car failures, staying loyal to Nikon I have mainly been using CF Cards in the D100, D200, D700, D800, D800e before changing to XQD in my current D850.
I can understand the concerns of photographers who are covering one off events weddings immediately come to mind when there is no second  chance should the photographer get back to his computer and find a card problem has resulted in corrupted image files.
I ceased wedding photography before quality digital cameras became available at an affordable price, there was similar concerns having exposed 6 rolls of 120 film, they were sent off to the lab and the wait to see if I had made a competent job a week later, now I am purely a leisure photographer, both card slots have a card installed but I would be annoyed if for whatever reason the image files were corrupt
It is unlikely I’ll part with my D850, I tried and struggled with the electronic viewfinder, that is probably a ‘ me ‘ issue rather than a camera issue, I would have given the Z system greater consideration had there been a reduction in the lens size, I am sure the new lens are optically better due to more recent designs etc but at a quick glance the lens look like there has been a spacer added at the rear of the lens,  resulting in a more compact body but out of proportion lens.

[Birna Rørslett]

A side remark: most of the new Z lenses  have glass all the way, down to the rear mount. Sometimes the rear element is almost flush to the bayonet. The Z bodies have moved the sensor planer to the front thus obtaining their very short register distance (16mm).

A physical long optical construction facilitates high quality with fewer elements and/or less refractive, ie. thinner and lighter, glass.

[Eddie Draaisma]

Comparing D850 with a 50/1.8AFS to a Z6/7 with the 50/1.8S it is instructive to observe the sensor plane  location marks (white circle with horizontal line through it).

https://j.mp/2Nb0RLE

It is clear that the distance from the marker to the front of the lens is actually shorter for the Z; but there is definitely more body space in the Z behind the marker (containing IBIS mechanism etc).

[Birna Rørslett]

Another way of putting this is saying the Z has the overhang of the finder to the rear and the DSLRs to the front.

The main comment on the lenses is that the Z designs does *not* add space to the rear of the lens.

[Mike G]

Another way of putting this is saying the Z has the overhang of the finder to the rear and the DSLRs to the front.

The main comment on the lenses is that the Z designs does *not* add space to the rear of the lens.

Birna, I’m really pleased with the Z6 EVF and really appreciate the rear overhang, I always had big problems with the D viewfinders which was one of the reasons I went over to Fujifilm. I used to think the Panasonic EVF was the bees knees but after seeing the Z EVF I was smitten. I’m still leaving nose prints on the rear screen. 
Perhaps though Nikon could come up with a system to omit all but the shooting info! Not sure if that is presently possible? Or maybe even customisable EVF + rear screen?

[Eddie Draaisma]

Another way of putting this is saying the Z has the overhang of the finder to the rear and the DSLRs to the front.

The main comment on the lenses is that the Z designs does *not* add space to the rear of the lens.

That lens comment is valid, no doubt about that.

The Z overhang at the backside however is not only finder, it is body also. Easy to see by making a picture of the linked site view, and vertically aligning the sensor plane markers by moving down the Z. (The site is copyrighted, otherwise I would link such a picture that I made for myself).

So with these lenses the Z effectively "feels" longer than the D850, and the increased length "seems" to be in the lens.

[Jacques]

I am aware that the whole of the lens barrel is optically necessary that is why I said at first glance ! Maybe I was wrong in anticipating that the new lens would be scaled down in proportion to the body ? I suppose my ideal scenario would be a Nikon version of a Leica M, a mirrorless DF ? I am old school and know I will be out of step with what most people want but I would prefer less tech, my photography enjoyment comes from using my knowledge and experience in decision making.

[Jack Dahlgren]

I am aware that the whole of the lens barrel is optically necessary that is why I said at first glance ! Maybe I was wrong in anticipating that the new lens would be scaled down in proportion to the body ? I suppose my ideal scenario would be a Nikon version of a Leica M, a mirrorless DF ? I am old school and know I will be out of step with what most people want but I would prefer less tech, my photography enjoyment comes from using my knowledge and experience in decision making.

The Z50 with the 16-50 zoom makes a pretty small package when lens is retracted. The roadmap for the other Z lenses shows 28mm and 40mm "compact prime" lenses to be announced, so I think Nikon will try to meet you somewhere in the middle. What they learned from the DF is that some people will pay for that sort of photography experience (I have one) but not very many people. I think that is why they are trying to make Z system with as few compromises to form factor as possible. They worked on making their best lenses ever instead of the smallest lenses. They worked on great video instead of a single purpose still camera. They want Z line to be a step forward instead of a set of compromises. Of course there are always compromises. Battery life is one.