Hi all!
Has anyone compared the autofocus speed of the z9 and Zf? Can it be used as a backup camera for children's hockey? It's clear that the z8 is better, but it's much more expensive for a backup camera.
To my sense, Zf is enough when it comes to AF (but I may be biased as I think an old 7D will work too ;) )...
What can be more of a concern to me is the handling, so maybe you should try and hold the camera with your own lenses because even with the grip, it can feel weird in hands with some -even not so- big ones. The problem can be also with buttons configuration and access when you need more strength and "agility" to hold your combo (something that is never a problem with Z9, of course).
For instance, with the grip, I think Zf coupled well with the Z 70-180, which can be an excellent lens for that kind of casual action shots. Though, I bet I'd feel already more unconfortable with the heavier Z 70-200.
So, it's probably something you should more care about than the AF, which is fine, to my sense.
Anyway, I think you should perhaps wait for Z6III, it may be a best bet for your purpose.
Though, of course, with Zf, if ever you miss shots, you will miss them with style :D ...
The Nikon Z9 has faster and more reliable autofocus than the Zf, especially for fast-moving subjects like children's hockey. The Z9's stacked sensor and advanced AF system are built for high-speed tracking, making it the superior choice for action. The Zf performs well in general use, but its autofocus may lag in fast-paced sports, even with the Z 100-400mm lens. If you're on a tighter budget, the Zf can work as a backup, but expect occasional missed shots in fast sequences. For consistent sports performance, the Z9 remains the more dependable option.