What's going on with Nikon?

To address just your last point, and speaking from the user point of view rather than the point of view of the business, the reason I haven’t bought a Z9 is not that it’s too expensive, it’s that it is too big and heavy. Isn’t there room for a Z6/7 size body with some of the Z9’s AF capability?

And isn't making money what they are in business for?

So what? That is a temporary situation. Technology companies are always playing catch up to compete for sales. That dynamic isn't going anywhere.

No, I wouldn't, because I don't obsess over which gear has better technical specs. I embrace whatever tool(s) I've chosen and concentrate on my photography skills and vision to make the best of it. A skilled photographer with a vintage camera that has no autofocus can produce an image that is aesthetically equal, or superior, to an image captured by an R5 or a Z9 or an a7 IV.

As much as Nikon may have wanted us to think the Z7 was the ML equivalent of the D850, it has never been accepted as that by the most of the Nikon faithful as far as I can see. The Z7/Z7II just didn't have the tracking ability nor responsiveness of the D850 and there is a disconnect there that Nikon needs to address, IMO. Whether Nikon intended for the D850 to seen as a "baby" D5 is irrelevent as it was seen that way by the Nikon users and was a success simply because it was basically a "baby" Z9. This intention or unintenbtion was a success and thus needs to be repeated in the ML world, IMO. So, with all that aside it leaves us with, where does the Z7III, or is it a Z8, or is there both, now fit? Whatever we say will be conjecture, but I think Nikon does have to introduce a gripless Z9 in the form of a Z7II or Z8 (pick your name to fit with the Nikon heirarchy).

A Baby Z9 was brought up by the OP and not a term that I wanted to go with but did use it in my response to him as that was where he was at, although the term is not without merit but is open to conjecture as to what he actually means as far as a Nikon camera smaller than the Z9.

The spiel that a marketing department gives to separate people from their money and reality are not the same thing.

If anything is very clear, it's that the Z7 isn't a mirrorless D850.

I was hoping for a constructive thread. When will DP Revived catch up to Backcountry which has banned stupid brand bashing threads?

Interesting in that I have no "colleagues" per se and have never wanted or owned a full-frame digital camera.

Bob,

I think you're missing the point here with all this nomenclature talk. I realize most people are caught up on this nomenclature, BS, but many of us don't give a rat's a$$ about what it's called.

As I've said before, many of us want as much of the Z9 goodness as current technology allows to be squeezed into a D850/D500 sized body. I have a Z9 and I'd like to have a second body, sans grip (grip optional) that I can have with me as I usually did with my D850/D500 combo. We'd like the same ergo's and control/button layout as the Z9 so one can move easily between the two bodies, just as with the previous pair. That is never going to happen with the smaller Z6/7 bodies, there is not enough space to do that. A larger body and creative design might allow space for a new battery that is more powerful than the EN-EL15 series, too...something smaller than the EL18 series.
If push comes to shove, I'll end up buying another Z9 before buying a Z6/Z7 sized FX body...and spending an extra $2K isn't going to change my standard of living in any meaningful over the balance of my life, is it. Well, it might make me stronger by carrying that extra weight around. :)

Also, with regards to a second body being DX, as the D500 was...the only reason I chose the D500 over the D850 as the second body was for the higher frame rate, greater AF coverage and, to a lesser extent, the lower price. At this point, I have zero interest in a DX body as a second body...rather have two FX bodies, I can make either one of them DX at the touch of a button, and the frame rate/AF coverage advantages no longer apply.

In my case, is there a place for a smaller form factor body...sure, as a standalone, two lens, DX travel kit. I almost pulled the trigger on a Z50 during the recent sale, but I'm holding out for a new model with improved processor...hopefully they'll move the Expeed 7 through the full lineup over the next year. I still have a D3200, 12-24 and 18-300 kit that suits me just fine for a minimal travel kit. Still have a few F primes if need be, too.

Cheers!

This isn't subjective. The Z7 didn't hit the mark. It is not a successor or even an equivalent in terms of performance. You allude to this in your following statement.

LOL!! You think?

Bob, you'll clearly admit that the Z7/Z7ii wasn't an equivalent to the D850 because it simply couldn't match it's performance, then in the same argument, say that it is the D850 equivalent because Nikon had "hoped" that it would be. Are you not able to see the fallacy in that?

I think he is explaining Nikon's marketing, not real world performance. This seems very important to you.