This is the time of year when my regular rental house, LensesForHire, likes to get their stock out by offering 12 days for the price of 3. So, this year, I thought I'd sample the Nikon Z mirrorless system by renting the Z6 and 24-70mm f/2.8S lens. For me, especially with my experience of the GX9, mirrorless cameras with interchangeable lenses are the future, and I wanted a chance to see how Nikon's system stands up.

The Z6 is the less expensive of the two current Z cameras, and as it does most of the things that I care about the same as the Z7, for a short rental this was a simple choice. The lens choice immediately came down to the 24-70mm f/2.8S lens: this has been reviewed as one of the best 24-70's ever made, and given the paucity of light at this time of the year it was a no brainer over its f/4 cousin. The camera also came with the FTZ adaptor so I can use it with my F-mount lenses too.

The camera I was supplied had firmware version 2.0, which implemented a number of improvements, including eye-AF. Version 2.2 is the current release, so some of my comments may not apply to that. My view of the Z6 is also tempered by the other experiences I have had with it in the week or so I've had with it.

A couple of days before Christmas, the weather was sunny and not too cold, so I decided to take the Z6 for a day's pottering in London, together with the 24-70, and my 70-200, plus 2xTC. I wanted to try out as many of my usual things with it as possible, from a bit of aviation photography to some street and tourist photography, as well as seeing how it did in typical UK late afternoon darkness. I started at London City Airport: this was one of two specific subjects I had in mind for the day. A wind from just South of West meant that Runway 27 was in use. Standing on the Steve Redgrave Bridge, arrivals came in overhead from the East, crabbing because of the off-axis wind. Departures gave the impression of straining to clear Canary Wharf.

I used my usual AF-C with back button focusing, and Dynamic Area AF. This worked very well, and gave me multiple series of sharp shots, even when trying close-ups of the undersides as landing aircraft came right overhead just a couple of hundred feet up.

It would have been very helpful to have got tracking AF to work. On, say, my D500, 3D tracking is one of the immediately available modes. But enabling tracking on the Z6 involves a series of button presses that I had forgotten on the day, so as useful as it would have been - especially for tracking departures against the Canary Wharf skyscrapers - I didn't use it. Enabling tracking AF on the Z6 is something of an ergonomic disaster as far as I am concerned.

The other subject I had planned was the view down to Tate Modern from St Paul's, over the Millenium Bridge. I've often wondered about using a long telephoto to compress the view. So, after lunch, I took the DLR and underground over to St Paul's and tried it. It worked just fine - just like it would with my other cameras.

After that, I swapped on the 24-70, and mostly played tourist, drifting from St Paul's over the Millenium Bridge and on to the Tate. Sometimes, it is just a pleasure to play tourist in your own city, and the moderate weight and small size of the Z6 were great for that.

One further feature I wanted to try was multiple exposures. I stood at the South end of the Millenium Bridge and did hand-held multiple exposures combining 4 or 5 shots, at slow shutter speeds (0.5 sec) to show the movement of people. Worked a treat, and the combined body IS and lens VR was a real advantage over my DSLRs.

I ended up - after a very slow drift, and a break for a cup of tea - on the viewing platform at the top of the Tate Modern extension. The sun had just set, and the lights over the City were starting to stand out in the blue hour.

This is where a mirrorless camera comes into its own. The ability to see a picture of a darkening scene before even taking it, with the potential to dial in exposure compensation as needed, is an immense help with a mirrorless camera. Sure, I could have done this with my D810, but the focussing in live view is rubbish by comparison to any fully mirrorless camera. A definite win for the Z6.

To finish the day, I pottered back up to St Paul’s, and took some hand-held pictures of the Christmas tree in front of the Cathedral, using the steps in front of it as leading lines. I played safe with the exposure - 1/60 at f/3.2 - but this meant the ISO went up to 9000! Pretty clean - better even than my D810. Again, this is where seeing the exposure in advance is so helpful, so all told, a definite win for the Z6.

So, where does the Z6 sit for me, as someone used mirrorless m43, and full-frame DSLRs? Well, for the most part, I could definitely live with a Z6 (or Z7). it is very comfortable to use, and feels much less fiddly than the GX9.

By and large, the ergonomics and haptics are fine. But the focussing system needs sorting out. Subject tracking was just too fiddly to bother with. Why? For Heaven's sake, just implement the same interface as that on the D500. Parenthetically, as I didn't mention it here, the eye-AF is also only barely adequate with the firmware version I've been using: I'll probably have more to say about that another time.

Focussing the 70-200 with the TC2 works quickly, and certainly accurately enough with Dynamic Area AF on flying aircraft, although the whole business of having the use the FTZ adaptor makes things more complicated than I'd like.

It is not as small as the GX9, but with the 24-70/2.8 makes a surprisingly pleasant package to walk around with all day. Compared to my D810 with the 24-120mm f/4, the difference is actually very marked: as I have mentioned elsewhere, I have no desire to go for a day walking in a big city with that combination. On the other hand, the Z6/24-70 is substantially bigger and heavier than the GX9, and has the noticeable hump on top where the viewfinder sits: this marks it out as a serious camera, something which, for street shooting, I prefer to avoid. Of the D810, GX9, and Z6, the Z6 looks to have the best high ISO performance: I was amazed at the quality of an ISO9000 picture.

Were there any pictures I got with the Z6 I could not have got with either my D810 or D500? No. Some were easier, but realistically, had I taken my D810 instead of the Z6, I'd have got very much the same results.

To cut a long story short, at this point, I can't really see a reason to trade in any of my current gear for either a Z6 or Z7. The Z6 is very good, and has some real advantages. But for the price of a Z7 (which is probably the one I'd go for) and the 24-70/2.8S, not only would I have to trade in the D810 and a couple of lenses (or more), but the price difference on top of that would represent a really nice trip away with my existing gear. Both the Z6 and Z7 represent version 1 of the mirrorless system. These days, I generally do not buy anything until version 3, so depending on what Nikon comes out with - and how the focussing ends up - it is at least another year before I’d even think of buying a “Zv3”. In the meantime, I may well try renting the Sony A7RIV some time: I feel the need to check out the competition, especially now that the Sony focusing seems so good.