Ilkka Nissila

In Arri's case they offer (1) Alexa 35 with all features included in the purchase price, (2) Alexa 35 base model with the most commonly used features enabled, and (2a) subscription to optional features that you may need for a specific project, (2b) permanent licensing of those features that you want to keep, so the subscription is just one option and permanent licenses to those features are available if you want them. 
 
I don't understand what the issue is. Having more options in how the payment is made is good and means more people/companies will be able to afford the stuff. No one is complaining that leasing or renting cars (or getting a taxi ride) are available in addition to the option of purchasing and owning a car. Public transport tickets are available on a single trip, load value, or pay for use for a period of time basis. Again no one is complaining about the existence of these options. Why then is subscription software or firmware as an option a problem?
 
I think people are complaing about these things because they don't understand that software development costs money and if you want to continue developing a particular piece software in the future you probably need to keep those same people who developed it continuously employed so that you can do it efficiently in the future. If you have to let the people who developed something go, to add features, the cost is multiplied because no one new initially understands the existing code. The subscription model works best for software because it enables continued employment so the knowledge of how the software works internally is not lost.
 
Today since operating systems are continuously changed, the applications software also needs frequent maintenance. So for Adobe the subscription model works best. They are able to maintain broad hardware support and have a huge library of cameras and lenses that are supported in terms of raw processing and lens corrections. The subscription cost is really low for the (still) photography software kit (LR + PS) and while the other stuff is kind of expensive, it was always expensive even in the then-thought-permanent license era. And as there are free or inexpensive options available for the tasks which Adobe prices expensively (Davinci Resolve instead of Premiere Pro), there is something for everyone available in the market. 
 
What would be much worse is that people rely on a particular product and have a lot of material made with it and suddenly those files could not be opened or edited as a result of the company making the software ending their operations or support of the product.

In Arri's case they offer (1) Alexa 35 with all features included in the purchase price, (2) Alexa 35 base model with the most commonly used features enabled, and (2a) subscription to optional features that you may need for a specific project, (2b) permanent licensing of those features that you want to keep, so the subscription is just one option and permanent licenses to those features are available if you want them. 
 
I don't understand what the issue is. Having more options in how the payment is made is good and means more people/companies will be able to afford the stuff. No one is complaining that leasing or renting cars (or getting a taxi ride) are available in addition to the option of purchasing and owning a car. Public transport tickets are available on a single trip, load value, or pay for use for a period of time basis. Again no one is complaining about the existence of these options. Why then is subscription software or firmware as an option a problem?
 
I think people are complaing about these things because they don't understand that software development costs money and if you want to continue developing a particular piece software in the future you probably need to keep those same people who developed it continuously employed so that you can do it efficiently in the future. If you have to let the people who developed something go, to add features, the cost is multiplied because no one new initially understands the existing code. The subscription model works best for software because it enables continued employment so the knowledge of how the software works internally is not lost.
 
Today since operating systems are continuously changed, the applications software also needs frequent maintenance. So for Adobe the subscription model works best. They are able to maintain broad hardware support and have a huge library of cameras and lenses that are supported in terms of raw processing and lens corrections. The subscription cost is really low for the (still) photography software kit (LR + PS) and while the other stuff is kind of expensive, it was always expensive even in the then-thought-permanent license era. And as there are free or inexpensive options available for the tasks which Adobe prices expensively (Davinci Resolve instead of Premiere Pro), there is something for everyone available in the market. 
 
What would be much worse is that people rely on a particular product and have a lot of material made with it and suddenly those files could not be opened or edited as a result of the company making the software ending their operations or support of the product.

A 200-800 may be appropriate for wildlife documentary but adding TCs to an f/9 long lens to increase the size of long-distance subjects in the image is unlikely to be very useful. The aperture with a 2X will be f/18 and usually one starts to see significant blurring due to diffraction at f/13 and smaller. The best use of TCs is generally for increasing the magnification at close to intermediate distances where the image quality degradation is not significantly present. At long distances, especially when photographing over water, the temperature variations across layers of air, and humidity in the air, distorts and blurs the image and the longer your focal length, the more obvious it becomes. It's almost always better to be in a location which allows the wildlife to get closer and then shoot without a TC. I'm saying "almost" because there are situations where the light is good only when photographing subjects at longer distances and at closer distances the light is blocked by trees, hills etc. so in that case the longer focal length is needed to get the good light (but atmospherics still apply).
 
In a video, the small aperture may not be a critical issue as the shutter speed is typically lower than in stills (e.g., 1/50s to 1/100 s when at 25 or 50 fps), bright sunlight giving f/16 1/100 s at ISO 100, for example. However, bright sunlight can lead to harsh shadows and in order it to look good, it should come at the right angle (which is usually low above the horizon). At low angles the sunlight is attenuated more by the longer distance of travel in the atmosphere. This generally improves the quality of light on the subject but the quantity is reduced. For stills, usually people want high sharpness in the details of the animal which can dictate a faster shutter speed such as 1/400 s or even 1/3200 s for birds-in-flight. A lot of the time there are clouds and in many cases the most atmospheric and beautiful light is before and after sunrise and sunset, and in those conditions you might be at ISO 25600 even with a f/5.6 lens. A lot of wildlife are the most active in these time windows. So the best times-of-day for photography might not be possible with an f/9 lens let alone f/18. Having the skills to pan effectively make it possible to do some shots successfully in lower light by allowing the subject to have controlled movement blur (sharp head, blurry wings, landscape blurred into trails) but this requires great skills.
 
Even though some softness can be corrected with sharpening and noise-reduction algorithms, garbage-in-garbage-out still applies. A lens with a really small aperture means usually elevated ISO and increased noise. A 200-800+2X will have significantly reduced contrast over a native 1200 mm lens, for example, and if the noise is increased by the need to use fast shutter speeds and higher ISO, then the deciding parameter (contrast divided by noise) in terms of the clarity of subject details will be reduced from multiple factors: atmospherics, low-light-noise, reduced contrast due to use of imperfect optical system (with TC), all working to make it harder to get high-quality images.
 
I'm not saying it's not a good idea to use a lens like the 200-800 for the stated purpose; especially for video with the camera+lens on a tripod and fluid head, it may be a very practical compromise for travel-based wildlife photography, but one should have realistic expectations and when people talk about 2X use to magnify long-distance subjects with a small-aperture lens, then I can't really but feel that the OP hasn't thought it out through and might not have a lot of experience with very long lenses. I think a lens like the 100-500 is much more travel-friendly and might give a greater pleasure of the experience but it also requires you to be closer to the wildlife or select subjects that work with that range. It might be a good idea to take both the 100-500 and 200-800 and use the 200-800 when you feel up to it (traveling can be exhausting) and when photographing subjects which require the reach while the 100-500 can be carried along more casually and with other lenses. For video I think fluid head and tripod give the best results when it comes to these focal lengths, but a fluid head won't easily adopt to regular photography with shorter focal lengths such as landscape in low light. A 1600 mm lens is going to be tough to keep steady no matter what gear is used.

I think the solution is to have distribution channels independent of the USA. Create your own streaming platforms for content made regionally and also internationally (among movie-producing countries that don't go into trade wars with each other). This way the market becomes much more healthy and less dominated by a small number of current players that are very large. Of course I understand that funding can be an issue, but such platforms could gather public financing (either via subscriptions that are a bit larger than the big platforms' fees initially, or via government or intergovernmental support from tax money). The streaming costs that a platform incurs are dependent on the quantity of content  and if the focus is on quality, this shouldn't be a huge issue.
 

I think personally that while I can make the 24-70 & 70-200 combination to work for me, a lot of the time something in-between would be useful, as I mentioned before, in portraiture. In the 1980s and 1990s, there were still a lot of lenses with intermediate ranges such as 50-135/3.5, 75-150/3.5, 35-135/3.5-4.5, 35-105/2.8 etc. but somehow these disappeared and standard zooms started at 24 mm and telezooms at 70 mm, 80 mm, or 100 mm. In portraiture a range that is between the two (24-70 and 70-200) would be ideal. I think the reason why 24-70 became the standard "pro" zoom is that when the first digital SLRs came with 1.3x, 1.5x, and 1.6x sensors they needed the standard zoom to have shorter focal lengths, so instead of a 28-105 or 28-80 they would make a 24-70 and 24-105. Of course, then came lenses like the 17-55/2.8 specifically for 1.5x / 1.6x sensors. But anyway the 24-70 range stuck and now some photographers would consider a zoom that starts at 28 mm too limiting even "useless". This I don't agree with, and I'd be happy to have an in-between range zoom such as 50-150 or similar. To me this sounds a very practical lens and not at all weird. However, the f/2.0 maximum aperture does make it a bit big and heavy and I can see the objective is to replace primes for some users. If it becomes popular, perhaps they can make an f/2.8 zoom with a similar range.
 
The f/2.0 makes the lens expensive as well. I notice a 4600 EUR initial price in Finland (incl. 25.5% VAT) vs. $3900 (not including VAT) at B&H. This seems absurd considering the tariff situation, it's like they slapped on the price increase from the tariffs on both regions instead of just where it is actually applied. I think it's completely unrealistic to expect most European customers to even consider this lens at a 4600 EUR price point. I would expect the price to fall rather quickly if Sony wants to sell these lenses.

I think it's not clear whether the MAGA politicians are rational or not. Clearly, many of them know little about the government of states, which explains why there is so much fumbling about and obvious mistakes and unintended consequences. However, it's clear that Trump is a con artist. He is using the power of the presidency for personal gain. Just now there are videos showing how Trump is bragging about how he and his friends made a lot of money by taking advantage of the stock market fluctuations caused by Trump's tariffs (being turned on and off).  This is entirely rational behavior from a con artist and a narcissist. He's got the all-clear from the Supreme Court that he can't be held responsible for his official actions as president in court. Congress could still hold him responsible (impeachment), and the people maybe can (if there are free elections in the future) but it could very well happen that he gets away with it, and he's old enough that even if he does go into prison, he wouldn't be there for a long time.
 
Tariff wars tend to be followed by actual wars where people die. That's why the EU was founded, by removing tariffs between European states, it was thought that wars between the states can be avoided, which has been the case so far. However, for Trump, the tariffs are just a means towards personal enrichment (and his friends' enrichment), plus getting a lot of personal attention in the media that he craves.

What happens next is limitless exploitation of the planet's resources for the personal gain of the dictators of the various regimes. War and selfish overuse of resources are clearly not good for the planet. The people in charge couldn't care less about the world or its environment. Some European leaders have tried to show a different path but now are told to arm with 5% of their GDP (which is IMO ridiculous and can only lead to further harm). With current technology, a set of dictatorial powers fighting it out for resources will lead to damage on a previously unseen level.
 

What happens next is limitless exploitation of the planet's resources for the personal gain of the dictators of the various regimes. War and selfish overuse of resources are clearly not good for the planet. The people in charge couldn't care less about the world or its environment. Some European leaders have tried to show a different path but now are told to arm with 5% of their GDP (which is IMO ridiculous and can only lead to further harm). With current technology, a set of dictatorial powers fighting it out for resources will lead to damage on a previously unseen level.
 

What happens next is limitless exploitation of the planet's resources for the personal gain of the dictators of the various regimes. War and selfish overuse of resources are clearly not good for the planet. The people in charge couldn't care less about the world or its environment. Some European leaders have tried to show a different path but now are told to arm with 5% of their GDP (which is IMO ridiculous and can only lead to further harm). With current technology, a set of dictatorial powers fighting it out for resources will lead to damage on a previously unseen level.
 

I think it's not clear whether the MAGA politicians are rational or not. Clearly, many of them know little about the government of states, which explains why there is so much fumbling about and obvious mistakes and unintended consequences. However, it's clear that Trump is a con artist. He is using the power of the presidency for personal gain. Just now there are videos showing how Trump is bragging about how he and his friends made a lot of money by taking advantage of the stock market fluctuations caused by Trump's tariffs (being turned on and off).  This is entirely rational behavior from a con artist and a narcissist. He's got the all-clear from the Supreme Court that he can't be held responsible for his official actions as president in court. Congress could still hold him responsible (impeachment), and the people maybe can (if there are free elections in the future) but it could very well happen that he gets away with it, and he's old enough that even if he does go into prison, he wouldn't be there for a long time.
 
Tariff wars tend to be followed by actual wars where people die. That's why the EU was founded, by removing tariffs between European states, it was thought that wars between the states can be avoided, which has been the case so far. However, for Trump, the tariffs are just a means towards personal enrichment (and his friends' enrichment), plus getting a lot of personal attention in the media that he craves.

I think it's not clear whether the MAGA politicians are rational or not. Clearly, many of them know little about the government of states, which explains why there is so much fumbling about and obvious mistakes and unintended consequences. However, it's clear that Trump is a con artist. He is using the power of the presidency for personal gain. Just now there are videos showing how Trump is bragging about how he and his friends made a lot of money by taking advantage of the stock market fluctuations caused by Trump's tariffs (being turned on and off).  This is entirely rational behavior from a con artist and a narcissist. He's got the all-clear from the Supreme Court that he can't be held responsible for his official actions as president in court. Congress could still hold him responsible (impeachment), and the people maybe can (if there are free elections in the future) but it could very well happen that he gets away with it, and he's old enough that even if he does go into prison, he wouldn't be there for a long time.
 
Tariff wars tend to be followed by actual wars where people die. That's why the EU was founded, by removing tariffs between European states, it was thought that wars between the states can be avoided, which has been the case so far. However, for Trump, the tariffs are just a means towards personal enrichment (and his friends' enrichment), plus getting a lot of personal attention in the media that he craves.

I think it's not clear whether the MAGA politicians are rational or not. Clearly, many of them know little about the government of states, which explains why there is so much fumbling about and obvious mistakes and unintended consequences. However, it's clear that Trump is a con artist. He is using the power of the presidency for personal gain. Just now there are videos showing how Trump is bragging about how he and his friends made a lot of money by taking advantage of the stock market fluctuations caused by Trump's tariffs (being turned on and off).  This is entirely rational behavior from a con artist and a narcissist. He's got the all-clear from the Supreme Court that he can't be held responsible for his official actions as president in court. Congress could still hold him responsible (impeachment), and the people maybe can (if there are free elections in the future) but it could very well happen that he gets away with it, and he's old enough that even if he does go into prison, he wouldn't be there for a long time.
 
Tariff wars tend to be followed by actual wars where people die. That's why the EU was founded, by removing tariffs between European states, it was thought that wars between the states can be avoided, which has been the case so far. However, for Trump, the tariffs are just a means towards personal enrichment (and his friends' enrichment), plus getting a lot of personal attention in the media that he craves.

I think it's not clear whether the MAGA politicians are rational or not. Clearly, many of them know little about the government of states, which explains why there is so much fumbling about and obvious mistakes and unintended consequences. However, it's clear that Trump is a con artist. He is using the power of the presidency for personal gain. Just now there are videos showing how Trump is bragging about how he and his friends made a lot of money by taking advantage of the stock market fluctuations caused by Trump's tariffs (being turned on and off).  This is entirely rational behavior from a con artist and a narcissist. He's got the all-clear from the Supreme Court that he can't be held responsible for his official actions as president in court. Congress could still hold him responsible (impeachment), and the people maybe can (if there are free elections in the future) but it could very well happen that he gets away with it, and he's old enough that even if he does go into prison, he wouldn't be there for a long time.
 
Tariff wars tend to be followed by actual wars where people die. That's why the EU was founded, by removing tariffs between European states, it was thought that wars between the states can be avoided, which has been the case so far. However, for Trump, the tariffs are just a means towards personal enrichment (and his friends' enrichment), plus getting a lot of personal attention in the media that he craves.

It's like the polar opposite of how people view things in my country. If someone is rich, in my country, many people will invariably feel that that person didn't get rich via honest work but instead probably did something either unlawful (stole something, didn't pay taxes, smuggled something etc.) or at least morally questionable (oppressed workers for personal gain). And so it's something to be ashamed of rather than proud.
 

Can you explain? As a European I am completely lacking understanding of how American voters make decisions. I did live in the US for two years, but things weren't then how they are now. And it was in Massachusetts, so that may not count.
 
I would think that those who are poor and lower middle class would not want to be swindled and wealth transferred to the ultra-rich, nor can I see any benefit in voting in favor of policies of the current US government (including stock manipulation but also in general, high tariffs).

While I agree that buying fewer things that you don't really need (only may want) is good for the environment, it's not the main result that will come out of this if the trade wars and tariffs continue.
 
The main effect is that people who have low incomes will not be able to afford what they need to continue living, and the rich are comparately less affected (which is why a government led by billionaires is doing it). It's a move from progressive income taxes to a flat tax that mainly affects the poor and middle class. The billionaires know when to buy and when to sell because they have inside information of Trump's moves. So the billionaires sold stock before the tariffs came into effect and the common people sell in panic after the tariffs have crashed the stock market. After the crash the billionaires on the inside buy stock on the cheap after which the tariffs will be cancelled and the rich will have made a lot of money and the common people have lost their retirement savings. That's what this is all about. The richest people can never have enough.
 
Industry will never return to the US because the American people are not willing to do that kind of work for as little money as the people who live in the 3rd world are willing to do it for. Not even close. Tariffs would need to be something 500-1000% for the manufacturing to actually return to the US. And that would make a lot of the American people poor in terms of what purchasing power they have.
 
Instead, US sells services such as software and financial services to other regions, balancing the trade. This is of course not going to help them fight a world war because for that they would indeed need a manufacturing industry, which led to this dilemma.

They practiced each episode for two weeks and then filmed it twice a day for one week, so 10+ takes for each episode. They then selected the best version of each episode.

It believe it's the nominal price the factory sells the product for. Typically the retail price is 2-3x that. So why does the price at retail differ so much? This is because the importer typically does marketing, answers questions from customers, pays for the existence of the repair facilities (and typically covers the cost of warranty repair) etc. Then obviously there are shipping costs and retailer markup. These are not included in the CIPA numbers but they are included in the retail price.

They practiced each episode for two weeks and then filmed it twice a day for one week, so 10+ takes for each episode. They then selected the best version of each episode.

They practiced each episode for two weeks and then filmed it twice a day for one week, so 10+ takes for each episode. They then selected the best version of each episode.

This is an important point, and has been widely discussed in other forums. The Z8 works well in terms of temperature management as long as you choose one of the coolest running CFexpress cards. Card temperatures have been tested a few years ago in https://www.thessdreview.com/our-reviews/cfexpress/delkin-black-cf-express-type-b-512gb-memory-card-review/4/ though not specifically in this camera.
I have the 325 GB Prograde Digital Cobalt card and it's excellent (it was originally preferred by Nikon when the Z9 came out, as their developers found it to perform the best in the Z9), but Delkin Blacks (which are a newer card series) are very popular among the intense-shooting crowd and can be cheaper than the Prograde Digital Cobalt. If you need larger capacity than is available in Delkin Black, then Delkin Power can be considered. Note that the series have been updated by Delkin and the newest cards may be different, but I haven't heard anything negative about the new series.
The Z9 has a larger body and better temperature management than the Z8 but the Z8 also does fine as long as one chooses the right CFexpress card for the extended video recording.

This is an important point, and has been widely discussed in other forums. The Z8 works well in terms of temperature management as long as you choose one of the coolest running CFexpress cards. Card temperatures have been tested a few years ago in https://www.thessdreview.com/our-reviews/cfexpress/delkin-black-cf-express-type-b-512gb-memory-card-review/4/ though not specifically in this camera.
I have the 325 GB Prograde Digital Cobalt card and it's excellent (it was originally preferred by Nikon when the Z9 came out, as their developers found it to perform the best in the Z9), but Delkin Blacks (which are a newer card series) are very popular among the intense-shooting crowd and can be cheaper than the Prograde Digital Cobalt. If you need larger capacity than is available in Delkin Black, then Delkin Power can be considered. Note that the series have been updated by Delkin and the newest cards may be different, but I haven't heard anything negative about the new series.
The Z9 has a larger body and better temperature management than the Z8 but the Z8 also does fine as long as one chooses the right CFexpress card for the extended video recording.

Currently the camera market is stable and overall slowly growing. The amateur/enthusiast/professional market has been stable in size over a long time. What happened is regular consumers (to whom photography is not their spiritual or financial lifeline) stopped buying decated cameras. This caused some trouble to the traditional camera makers but they weathered this disruption.
 
Nikon and Canon haven't stopped making DSLRs and they will produce what the people buy. I happen to prefer the optical viewfinder but because of the need to be able to photograph silently in some situations, I also needed a mirrorless camera system. But I have great regret about the absence of the OVF which I prefer when timing shots one by one (which for me results in superior keeper rate over what I can get with high frame rate continuous and much less time spent on editing). However, for shorter focal length wide-aperture lenses, mirorrless produces usually better in-focus rates so the overall result is that I am divided. 
For the manufacturers selling entirely new lens lineups must be profitable. For the Earth's environment, it may be a disaster.

I hadn't even noticed that there is a sticker, after using the camera for over a year. 😉 
Having the battery door also access the cards means there has to be only one hatch instead of two. In a small camera, this makes some sense. Having more hatches splits the camera's surface and in this case it would probably affect how nice it is to hold with the right hand. The MicroSD card is a bit annoying; I would have preferred dual SD or SD/CFexpress type B but I solve the problem by simply having a 1 TB MicroSD card in the second slot permanently and never taking it out. I normally insert/remove the SD card and use a card reader with it, or stick it to the computer's internal SD card reader. The MicroSD card is the in-camera backup slot (for stills) and if I ever need to access those files on it, I do have a card reader for that as well, but I might use the USB-C cable to transfer those files as I don't want to handle the super-tiny MicroSD cards any more than necessary.
The battery door seems similar to other Nikons with the EN-EL15c battery. I have never run into problems with it. In the Smallrig grip that came with the camera in my country (and  also the Nikon GR-1 grip that is available in Japan) there is a gap in the base plate of the grip that allows batteries and cards to be accessed.
The i button is an integral part of the menu system of the camera and allows accessing some important settings. I don't think Nikon should remove it from the camera as that would mean menu dives would have to be done for even some of the most common settings (since there are fewer physical controls belonging to the "modern" interface, to make space for the "traditional" dials). Another custom menu that is available is My Menu and that's a list of user-selectable menu items that is collected in a list that the user can order and access from a function button. I set the front Fn button to access My Menu. These menus are similar across Nikons of the past ten years or so, and leaving out the option to access one of them would be problematic and make camera operation slow.
I don't need the joystick and the multi-controller works fine for my purposes. I use it in preference to the joystick even on cameras that have both because only the multi-controller is available on all Nikons and the joystick center button press can easily accidentally lead to slipping the jostick to the side. It's much easier to access the center button on the multi-controller reliably. I haven't noticed any quality of materials issue with the controls.
I don't know what a PU grip is. There are multiple add-on grips and "skins" available for the Zf. I use the Smallrig grip when I need to use the Zf with a bit larger lens so it's a bit more comfortable to handle with a lens like 135/1.8. I don't think the camera is a good fit for really large lenses though, as it is too small and doesn't support an optional vertical grip.  But in a pinch it can be used also with large lenses, just not ergonomically ideal but does the job as a backup camera.
Auto ISO basically works the same as it does on all Nikon cameras that support Auto ISO. You specify the ISO you want to use and the camera overrides it when it has to do so to achieve the metered (+- EC) exposure. Since I have the front Fn button open My Menu and the Auto ISO setting is on the top of that list, I can toggle Auto ISO by pressing Fn + OK. It's no more difficult than pressing and holding ISO on other cameras and turning the sub-command dial to turn Auto ISO ON/OFF. I would argue that Fn + OK is even easier as it doesn't require any finger acrobatics.
 
For video use, set the shutter speed dial to 1/3 STEP and use the main command dial to select shutter speed in 1/3 stop increments. Adding 1/50 and 1/120 on the shutter dial would throw off the classical settings and the idea that you can count stops by counting the clicks easily. They could of course shift the values by 1/3 stop - I believe this was available on the Df but not on the Zf or Zfc. But 1/125 s isn't 1/120 s, so specific video shutter speeds probably would make sense to offer for the main command dial when in video mode. Rumor is that Nikon will be adding shutter angle as option on the Z9 in a firmware update.
 
I prefer the Z8's two-axis tilting screen over the one in the Zf which flips out. I find the flipping-out screen quite a nuisance as the camera strap can easily get entangled with it when opening it to the side. Another issue is that the flipped-out screen is (way) off axis whereas the two-axis tilting screen is close to being on the optical axis even when tilted. However, I think the two-axis screen would make the camera thicker and more expensive, and selfie shooters wouldn't be happy.
 
Aperture rings are available on third-party lenses such as Viltrox, Voigtländer etc.
 
Z6III has a faster sensor read time but more read noise than the Zf. There is in my opinion space for the higher quality Zf sensor for those who don't need the faster sensor read time and prefer the higher quality image.
 
DISP is a different function from what is on the multi-controller up/down. DISP goes through different shooting information configurations (that one can configure if one wants to change them) during viewfinder or live view use while shooting, whereas up/down on the multi-controller moves the focus point when shooting and it shifts between different playback data displays in playback mode. Both need their own controls to scroll through. As for +/- zooming, it's been the same since at least 12 years on Nikons and I don't think they're changing it. 😉 It used to be that zooming in/out was a press-and-hold a button + turn main command dial, but I suspect most people find the separate +/- buttons easier on the fingers. What I don't like is that Nikon keeps shifting the buttons around from model to model, making it harder to instinctively use the camera without looking when using different models over time or even on the same day. I swapped the DISP and playback buttons in custom settings so that the playback button is closer to where it is on the Z8 (it's still not the same button but one above it). I don't normally press DISP all that often so it can be in more difficult-to-access location.
 
Anyway my main complaints about the Zf (which I love to use) are that it doesn't have either of the standard Nikon connectors for firing radio flash (SB-5000) remotely and the same connectors also work for cable release which is also not available. Only via bluetooth can be the camera remote triggered and there is a slight delay associated with that, which is annoying. However, I bought the camera anyway for the reasons that (1) I love the dials-based interface and "feel", (2) it has a better high ISO image quality than the Z8 and so it's a good complement to the Z8 for low-light shooting; the mechanical shutter of the Zf also saved the day two weeks ago when I got banding on the electronic shutter of the Z8 in theatrical lights, (3) it has a slim profile so it takes very little space in the bag when I need it as a backup camera. If I changed something it would be adding a 10-pin connector so it would work with the same accessories and remote flash control as the Z8 and other recent Nikon cameras. But we have always something missing from the Nikon "fusion" models, and the Zf is the best of the line yet (Df/Zfc/Zf). Not having access to SB-5000 as radio remote is a significant problem for me as it means if I use the Zf as backup on a portrait shoot then I wouldn't be able to use those remotes if the main camera fails. So in the end I will need a third Z camera just for that purpose. It's sometimes hard to understand why Nikon takes away features that are useful. Perhaps they think SB-5000 radio remote control hasn't been that popular instead people choose cheaper options which sometimes work. The SB-5000 + WR-R10 has been very reliable for me, the best in that respect of any radio controlled flash. It just always works, and is less unwieldy on camera than Profoto.
 
The Leica SL/SL2 are not similar cameras as they don't have mechanical dials with marked settings that one can use even with the camera off. Also the Leicas don't take Z lenses so for a Nikon lens user it's a no-go.  As for the modern lenses, for me what is important is that the lineup produces a consistent look across focal lengths and the Z mount S-line does that for me. Yes, it's very modern and contrasty and that takes some getting used to be as long as there are no surprises I can work with it.

All the video recording modes on the Z50II are 4:2:0.