Great job with the video. Those shots are nice. I got the G9 ii a few weeks ago, it's everything I wanted for a G9 upgrade and more! Love the 120 fps 4k 10 bit video, it's been a game changer for me.
Way ahead of every Fuji. Way ahead of old Nikons. Feels about the same as the r5. Probably a bit behind faster systems like the r6ii. It’s definitely very good!
I love your channel, and hope you will publish more frequent videos. Your photography journey is very interesting and informative. Thanks.♡ Liked and subscribed
Glad you like it! Been busy and hadn’t had much inspiration to film, but I’m back at it now. Out in the field working on a video on the Lumix 200 2.8 right now!
I think it will in time! Still fairly new and a lot of people aren’t aware that Lumix has modernized their AF systems. Hopefully I can help to do a small part to spread the word in the wildlife community. I’ve shot everything from an xt3/xh2s to a z9/r5 and I’m comfortable listing this as my favourite kit for sure
Its true I bailed when you jumped from Fuji - you were doing a great job helping me learn about the XH2S and 150-600mm. But congrats on the new kid! You have an awesome setup with deep buffers etc. that you are willing to carry around - that is what counts. Getting to use Olympus or Panasonic / Leica lenses is also a real treat. I'll look forward to your reports on life with the Panasonic - file editing, autofocus, lens likes/dislikes and so on. I eventually picked up a used XF 150-600mm that I now stuff into a backlight 18L backpack. It isn't quick-draw convenient, but it enables me to take the lens more places and keep my hands free. It is a challenge to shoot with 900+ mm equivalent, but the lens is fun to shoot with and phenomenally good when it hits. But it does get me noticed in populated areas and it is rather large. I frankly don't care at this point, the pictures I can get of not only wildlife but friends and family (when the animals aren't around), have been worth it. You have a heck of a portrait lens in your hands - don't forget to point it at your kids too! Modern cameras have gotten real good - but for now I still think APS-C is my sweet spot.
Yea for sure, I’ll always have a gear itch and I’m glad I tried everything under the sun, but I got really bored of canon and Nikon very quickly. Honestly I really dislike the Fuji a lot. When I was deciding what to get this time around, I absolutely considered going back to it. My only gripes with Fuji were the video autofocus for animals being spotty, and the lack of lens support. While I did really love the 150-600, I still don’t see Fuji doing much to support wildlife shooters. If they came out with something like a 400 f4 at a reasonable price and weight, that would be super awesome. The g9ii feels a lot like the xh2s to me in terms of fun factor, and cool video specs. The xh2s felt faster in terms of operation. The g9ii takes a bit longer to boot up etc. but yea after shooting big full frames and primes, I am definitely back on the crop/m43 team!
@@heymikeriley I get it - I'm not sure I'd enjoy rival brands quite as much either, not to mention the size, weight, cost factors. I'm dismissing your "lack of lens support" comment however, because you gave up on telephoto primes for very good reasons - and because I couldn't care less if they made a 600 f/4 or not - I'll never afford it or want to use it anyway. All the pros I know use zooms for everything, because versatility usually trumps maximum image quality. Punching in and out quickly is essential when I'm chasing small birds, insects, or my toddler. I still shoot on the lowly XT3, and it is pretty clear to me at this point that as Fuji updates the lens lineups, image quality and AF hit rates are going up. To me it is clear that the lenses have been the bottleneck in AF performance, to some extent. The Red Badge lineup is pretty consistently excellent, but an updated 100-400 would be hard for me to resist since it would likely spank Nikon's 180-600 or Sony's 200-600 for wildlife/sports etc. I'm no fanboy, however, I have a lot of gripes with Fuji. One is that they blew it with the XT5 - rolling shutter is worse, the buffer is worse, build quality went down, and no battery grip for those of us "photography-first" people that actually use Fuji's best and most versatile lenses (which are also the biggest, typically). I like the XH2/2S hardware in theory, but they turned the cameras into Nikon/Sony/Canon boringness. Nikon's ZF is a better approach - they included a PASM dial below the ISO dial. It doesn't fix the ergonomics of the body , but it grants the camera both "retro" and "modern" shooting approaches which is genius. Fuji should copy that for a future XT / XH body. Keep the soul of the cameras but let people shoot the "modern" way when its time for maximum speed or just preferable. Fuji also should lean into their JPEG processing even more - I want to straighten files in camera, I want better cropping/compression options, and I want to focus or HDR stack IN-CAMERA, for example. If the camera lets me setup the shot, it should be able to process it, basically. I don't want to have to get a PhD in Photoshop to do things like that. As a busy parent myself, I really, really appreciate just ripping the shot of the day in-camera, sometimes, sending it to my phone, then my mother-in-law, and saving the RAW file for the future when I can re-process it more thoroughly. That said, the film sims really are so good I'm not sure I need to bother with a re-edit half the time. The interface is a bit clunky however, and if the camera can do "exposure preview" whilst shooting, I don't know why you can't do it whilst editing in-camera. I have to keep hitting "Q" to check the change, and then "back" to tweak or move to the next adjustment. Clunky. And it eats battery. No, I don't setup JPEG film recipes and shoot away - anyone that shoots 100s of shots a day knows that the exposure/shadow/color/white balance etc. are moving targets so the recipe works for one shot and might fail the next 50. I hate that.
@@matt88169 I hear ya, but while I’m loving the 100-400 on the Olympus, I just bought the 200 2.8 and it’s become my fav lens pretty easily. I use the zoom for video, but if I know I’m focused on stills and can get closer, I’m taking it every time. Fuji send me their 200 2.8. It’s almost triple the price what I paid for the Lumix (albeit, on sale) and easily double the weight and more than double the size. The Lumix is sharper too. But even going farther, things like the Olympus 150-400 are an option. In a world where Nikon makes the 400 4.5 and Sigma now makes the 500 5.6 both for about 4k Canadian, those are light, sharp, portable options I really value. If Fuji made a 400 f4 that weighed under 3 pounds and cost the same 4000 Canadian, I bet it would be a very popular and useful lens.
@@heymikeriley What Olympus 200 f/2.8 are you talking about? The 50-200? The Fuji 200 f/2 is a freak lens in the lineup, way out of lines with what I'd be willing to pay for any lens, period. There are always more/better/sharper things coming out. Wildlife primes are too niche for me personally (and 99.90% of the rest of the world), the price/performance ratio is usually flipped in the wrong directions.
Man, I can relate. The whole reason I got into photography is because it’s more accessible with young kids than cranking up guitars and amps or trying to gig. I just picked one up G9 II for bird detection coming from an em1.3 and I’m debating ditching the Olympus 100-400 for the PL 100-400 II. Any experience with that lens when you shot em1x?
I didn’t ever shoot the OLY 100-400 so can’t weigh in there. I know the PL in smaller and lighter which was a big draw. I will say, I just bought the 200 2.8 PL and it’s noticeably way, way sharper than the zoom, even with the tc. I’ve been using the zoom more for video when I need reach and can’t crop in, and then the prime more for stills. I do prefer the zoom if I’m out for a walk with the kids though. If I’m shooting alone and can spend the time to be quiet and get closer then the prime is definitely better. If I need quick reach, the zoom definitely has good image quality and it’s lighter etc. they’re both great options and the prime is being sold cheaper by a lot of places now. I just bought a new copy that was 35% off.
The 200mm f2.8 with the TC can consistently be had for less than the PL100-400 and it is noticeably sharper and faster than either of the 100-400's. I found the 200mm f2.8 for a truly ridiculous price so I bought it even though I thought it would be too short for me, and I just love it. Beware scummy ebay sellers that try to sell it without the TC. The TC is part of the lens. If money was no option I'd also be looking at Nikon with the new 500mm prime in a comparable set, or the Sigma 500 5.6... or even Canon with the RF600/RF800. But with exception of Canon (stupid mount) those are many times the price for similar purpose setups.
@@IsawUupThere that’s definitely a crazy deal. I got the 200 2.8 brand new for 3000 Canadian though, regularly 4000. I paid 2300 for the zoom, also new. I like both lenses a lot for sure!
Rofl.....I loved your wildlife Fuji videos sorry about the Z9. I Recently sold my XH2 for Z8. I also wanted better lens selection like f2.8 like the Tamron lens offering. I'm using the Z8 with the 70-200mm F2.8 Nikon lens on sale at B&H for 2295.00, which was 300.00 more than the Tamron 35-150 f2-2.8. My next lens is going to be the Nikon 180 600, and the Tamron 28-75 F2.8 G2. I have always used my Cotton Carrier CCS G3 since Fuji. The Cotton Carrier makes carrying my XH2 and now Z8 with the Nikkor 70-200mm F2.8 seamless.
@heymikeriley I am glad that you are back in the wildlife game and was sad to hear about your Z9. I have until the end of the month to get insurance for drops and spills from B&H, so I think in retrospect to your mishap that I need to get this for peace of mind. I'll stay tuned for more because it's not just about the camera it's about the content.
Appreciate the support! I don’t know a ton about older models, but I’m really liking what I’m seeing from Lumix as a manufacturer compared to other brands. The support, firmware and flexibility is really appealing!
I used to have an E-M1 mk2 and I loved it, but when I sold my Canon gear(R5, R6, several lenses) I bought a used G9 and Pana/Leica 100-400 lens for a LOT less than I sold the old kit for. I want to like OM System, but I agree that the 150-400 is moot because most of the cars I've owned cost less, and the 150-600(and their 100-400, for that matter) are larger and heavier than they need to be for the system. Even if I won the lottery or got a big raise at work, I still wouldn't change systems. I'd get a G9mk2 and pick up the 50-200/2.8-4, but that's about it.
Yea totally. My r5 was a great camera but it just never felt right to me. I only bought the 200 2.8 because ingot such a great deal but the 100-400 mkii is my daily lens for sure
@@heymikeriley I had the R6 first, and I honestly think I was happier with just that. It sounds crazy, but moving to the R5 felt like a let down, I guess. I expected the extra megapixels to blow me away, and they just didn't. Had I spent that money on more lenses, I might have stuck it out with the system, but instead I just came back to smaller sensors and a smaller kit.
Totally in sync with what you say about shooting FF vs M43. I don't want FF because of bulkiness, I want my shooting experience to be fun and also they are way too expensive for a hobby. Also I have the OM1 and the G9. My next camera will be the G9-2 without a doubt. This is because the G9 is so friendly to use compared to the over complicated OM1. Lumix cameras in general have good color profiles, good colors, and are easy to operate.
That’s interesting to hear! I didn’t really do much comparing on the om1 or mkii vs the g9ii this time around. I did consider a used om1 to save money, I knew a mkii was too much and overpriced. A g9ii new was such a good deal and has some crazy video features so it was easy to go that way for me.
@@heymikeriley To be fair with the OM-1: - I use it as my travel camera because it is significantly smaller than the G9 - The super control panel on Olympus cameras is better than the Lumix Quick menu - The OM-1 is better in low light (but there I expect the G9-2 to be as good). What I don't like is that: - for the default values and menu settings it is a nightmare compared to Lumix systems. - I have more controls and easier to fetch on the G9 Now that I have configured my OM-1 I dont dive into the menus anymore and I do appreciate using it. Just not as much as my Lumix cameras. Personnal preferences of course.
@@laurentyarp514 yea they’re both definitely very competent cameras. The price difference is a big one in my book though. And the Lumix is a way better video camera. Lots of Olympus stills features im envious of though. Can’t say I’ll never add one to the kit!
Really looking forward to comparing the PL 200 2.8 to the OLY 300 f4. I’ve got a a buddy who has the 300 and we’ll do it when we can! I had the 300 a few years ago but would like to test them back to back. They’re both such great lenses that really embody the magic of the m43 system.
I’m only going to get this working better, but yes initial impressions are great! Internet problems today so I only uploaded this at 1080, but generally I’m finding the autofocus reliable, stability good and crisp, sharp details
triple the price and heavier. I’m not a fan of the 600 6.3 at all personally. I did love my z9 and I’m sure the z8 is awesome. Would never spend 6500 on a 6.3 600 personally though
Great job with the video. Those shots are nice. I got the G9 ii a few weeks ago, it's everything I wanted for a G9 upgrade and more! Love the 120 fps 4k 10 bit video, it's been a game changer for me.
I couldn’t own a camera without 4k120 these days. It’s a must have for me!
I switched from a Sony a7rIV camera and the 200-600mm to an Om-1 and the 300mm f4 pro lens about a year ago and I am so happy I did.
Yea that’s a really nice move. Sony has some crazy gear but all of their really good stuff is so so expensive.
Great honest and to the point video , subscribed today , cheers . 👍👍👍👍👍
Glad you liked it! Working on lots more Lumix content!
How would you rank the AF and tracking of the G9ii in comparison to Canon, Nikon and Fuji?
Way ahead of every Fuji. Way ahead of old Nikons.
Feels about the same as the r5. Probably a bit behind faster systems like the r6ii. It’s definitely very good!
I love your channel, and hope you will publish more frequent videos. Your photography journey is very interesting and informative. Thanks.♡
Liked and subscribed
Glad you like it! Been busy and hadn’t had much inspiration to film, but I’m back at it now. Out in the field working on a video on the Lumix 200 2.8 right now!
Nice! Got one myself. Wish the camera got more love.
I think it will in time! Still fairly new and a lot of people aren’t aware that Lumix has modernized their AF systems. Hopefully I can help to do a small part to spread the word in the wildlife community. I’ve shot everything from an xt3/xh2s to a z9/r5 and I’m comfortable listing this as my favourite kit for sure
It is a really cool camera... i do not own one. But i always hear good things about it! Glad you enjoy your new kit.
I’m loving it!!
Its true I bailed when you jumped from Fuji - you were doing a great job helping me learn about the XH2S and 150-600mm. But congrats on the new kid! You have an awesome setup with deep buffers etc. that you are willing to carry around - that is what counts. Getting to use Olympus or Panasonic / Leica lenses is also a real treat. I'll look forward to your reports on life with the Panasonic - file editing, autofocus, lens likes/dislikes and so on.
I eventually picked up a used XF 150-600mm that I now stuff into a backlight 18L backpack. It isn't quick-draw convenient, but it enables me to take the lens more places and keep my hands free. It is a challenge to shoot with 900+ mm equivalent, but the lens is fun to shoot with and phenomenally good when it hits. But it does get me noticed in populated areas and it is rather large. I frankly don't care at this point, the pictures I can get of not only wildlife but friends and family (when the animals aren't around), have been worth it. You have a heck of a portrait lens in your hands - don't forget to point it at your kids too! Modern cameras have gotten real good - but for now I still think APS-C is my sweet spot.
Yea for sure, I’ll always have a gear itch and I’m glad I tried everything under the sun, but I got really bored of canon and Nikon very quickly.
Honestly I really dislike the Fuji a lot. When I was deciding what to get this time around, I absolutely considered going back to it. My only gripes with Fuji were the video autofocus for animals being spotty, and the lack of lens support. While I did really love the 150-600, I still don’t see Fuji doing much to support wildlife shooters. If they came out with something like a 400 f4 at a reasonable price and weight, that would be super awesome.
The g9ii feels a lot like the xh2s to me in terms of fun factor, and cool video specs. The xh2s felt faster in terms of operation. The g9ii takes a bit longer to boot up etc. but yea after shooting big full frames and primes, I am definitely back on the crop/m43 team!
@@heymikeriley I get it - I'm not sure I'd enjoy rival brands quite as much either, not to mention the size, weight, cost factors.
I'm dismissing your "lack of lens support" comment however, because you gave up on telephoto primes for very good reasons - and because I couldn't care less if they made a 600 f/4 or not - I'll never afford it or want to use it anyway. All the pros I know use zooms for everything, because versatility usually trumps maximum image quality. Punching in and out quickly is essential when I'm chasing small birds, insects, or my toddler. I still shoot on the lowly XT3, and it is pretty clear to me at this point that as Fuji updates the lens lineups, image quality and AF hit rates are going up. To me it is clear that the lenses have been the bottleneck in AF performance, to some extent. The Red Badge lineup is pretty consistently excellent, but an updated 100-400 would be hard for me to resist since it would likely spank Nikon's 180-600 or Sony's 200-600 for wildlife/sports etc.
I'm no fanboy, however, I have a lot of gripes with Fuji. One is that they blew it with the XT5 - rolling shutter is worse, the buffer is worse, build quality went down, and no battery grip for those of us "photography-first" people that actually use Fuji's best and most versatile lenses (which are also the biggest, typically). I like the XH2/2S hardware in theory, but they turned the cameras into Nikon/Sony/Canon boringness. Nikon's ZF is a better approach - they included a PASM dial below the ISO dial. It doesn't fix the ergonomics of the body , but it grants the camera both "retro" and "modern" shooting approaches which is genius. Fuji should copy that for a future XT / XH body. Keep the soul of the cameras but let people shoot the "modern" way when its time for maximum speed or just preferable.
Fuji also should lean into their JPEG processing even more - I want to straighten files in camera, I want better cropping/compression options, and I want to focus or HDR stack IN-CAMERA, for example. If the camera lets me setup the shot, it should be able to process it, basically. I don't want to have to get a PhD in Photoshop to do things like that. As a busy parent myself, I really, really appreciate just ripping the shot of the day in-camera, sometimes, sending it to my phone, then my mother-in-law, and saving the RAW file for the future when I can re-process it more thoroughly. That said, the film sims really are so good I'm not sure I need to bother with a re-edit half the time. The interface is a bit clunky however, and if the camera can do "exposure preview" whilst shooting, I don't know why you can't do it whilst editing in-camera. I have to keep hitting "Q" to check the change, and then "back" to tweak or move to the next adjustment. Clunky. And it eats battery. No, I don't setup JPEG film recipes and shoot away - anyone that shoots 100s of shots a day knows that the exposure/shadow/color/white balance etc. are moving targets so the recipe works for one shot and might fail the next 50. I hate that.
@@matt88169 I hear ya, but while I’m loving the 100-400 on the Olympus, I just bought the 200 2.8 and it’s become my fav lens pretty easily. I use the zoom for video, but if I know I’m focused on stills and can get closer, I’m taking it every time. Fuji send me their 200 2.8. It’s almost triple the price what I paid for the Lumix (albeit, on sale) and easily double the weight and more than double the size. The Lumix is sharper too. But even going farther, things like the Olympus 150-400 are an option.
In a world where Nikon makes the 400 4.5 and Sigma now makes the 500 5.6 both for about 4k Canadian, those are light, sharp, portable options I really value. If Fuji made a 400 f4 that weighed under 3 pounds and cost the same 4000 Canadian, I bet it would be a very popular and useful lens.
@@heymikeriley What Olympus 200 f/2.8 are you talking about? The 50-200? The Fuji 200 f/2 is a freak lens in the lineup, way out of lines with what I'd be willing to pay for any lens, period. There are always more/better/sharper things coming out. Wildlife primes are too niche for me personally (and 99.90% of the rest of the world), the price/performance ratio is usually flipped in the wrong directions.
@@matt88169 slip of the tongue, meant the Panasonic Leica 200 2.8
Man, I can relate. The whole reason I got into photography is because it’s more accessible with young kids than cranking up guitars and amps or trying to gig.
I just picked one up G9 II for bird detection coming from an em1.3 and I’m debating ditching the Olympus 100-400 for the PL 100-400 II. Any experience with that lens when you shot em1x?
I didn’t ever shoot the OLY 100-400 so can’t weigh in there. I know the PL in smaller and lighter which was a big draw.
I will say, I just bought the 200 2.8 PL and it’s noticeably way, way sharper than the zoom, even with the tc. I’ve been using the zoom more for video when I need reach and can’t crop in, and then the prime more for stills. I do prefer the zoom if I’m out for a walk with the kids though. If I’m shooting alone and can spend the time to be quiet and get closer then the prime is definitely better. If I need quick reach, the zoom definitely has good image quality and it’s lighter etc. they’re both great options and the prime is being sold cheaper by a lot of places now. I just bought a new copy that was 35% off.
The 200mm f2.8 with the TC can consistently be had for less than the PL100-400 and it is noticeably sharper and faster than either of the 100-400's. I found the 200mm f2.8 for a truly ridiculous price so I bought it even though I thought it would be too short for me, and I just love it.
Beware scummy ebay sellers that try to sell it without the TC. The TC is part of the lens.
If money was no option I'd also be looking at Nikon with the new 500mm prime in a comparable set, or the Sigma 500 5.6... or even Canon with the RF600/RF800. But with exception of Canon (stupid mount) those are many times the price for similar purpose setups.
@@IsawUupThere that’s definitely a crazy deal. I got the 200 2.8 brand new for 3000 Canadian though, regularly 4000. I paid 2300 for the zoom, also new. I like both lenses a lot for sure!
Rofl.....I loved your wildlife Fuji videos sorry about the Z9. I Recently sold my XH2 for Z8. I also wanted better lens selection like f2.8 like the Tamron lens offering.
I'm using the Z8 with the 70-200mm F2.8 Nikon lens on sale at B&H for 2295.00, which was 300.00 more than the Tamron 35-150 f2-2.8.
My next lens is going to be the Nikon 180 600, and the Tamron 28-75 F2.8 G2.
I have always used my Cotton Carrier CCS G3 since Fuji. The Cotton Carrier makes carrying my XH2 and now Z8 with the Nikkor 70-200mm F2.8 seamless.
Definitely a great kit, glad you’re loving the z8!
@heymikeriley I am glad that you are back in the wildlife game and was sad to hear about your Z9. I have until the end of the month to get insurance for drops and spills from B&H, so I think in retrospect to your mishap that I need to get this for peace of mind. I'll stay tuned for more because it's not just about the camera it's about the content.
I still use the Lumix GH3.New subscriber
Appreciate the support! I don’t know a ton about older models, but I’m really liking what I’m seeing from Lumix as a manufacturer compared to other brands. The support, firmware and flexibility is really appealing!
I used to have an E-M1 mk2 and I loved it, but when I sold my Canon gear(R5, R6, several lenses) I bought a used G9 and Pana/Leica 100-400 lens for a LOT less than I sold the old kit for. I want to like OM System, but I agree that the 150-400 is moot because most of the cars I've owned cost less, and the 150-600(and their 100-400, for that matter) are larger and heavier than they need to be for the system. Even if I won the lottery or got a big raise at work, I still wouldn't change systems. I'd get a G9mk2 and pick up the 50-200/2.8-4, but that's about it.
Yea totally. My r5 was a great camera but it just never felt right to me. I only bought the 200 2.8 because ingot such a great deal but the 100-400 mkii is my daily lens for sure
@@heymikeriley I had the R6 first, and I honestly think I was happier with just that. It sounds crazy, but moving to the R5 felt like a let down, I guess. I expected the extra megapixels to blow me away, and they just didn't. Had I spent that money on more lenses, I might have stuck it out with the system, but instead I just came back to smaller sensors and a smaller kit.
Totally in sync with what you say about shooting FF vs M43.
I don't want FF because of bulkiness, I want my shooting experience to be fun and also they are way too expensive for a hobby.
Also I have the OM1 and the G9. My next camera will be the G9-2 without a doubt. This is because the G9 is so friendly to use compared to the over complicated OM1.
Lumix cameras in general have good color profiles, good colors, and are easy to operate.
That’s interesting to hear! I didn’t really do much comparing on the om1 or mkii vs the g9ii this time around. I did consider a used om1 to save money, I knew a mkii was too much and overpriced. A g9ii new was such a good deal and has some crazy video features so it was easy to go that way for me.
@@heymikeriley To be fair with the OM-1:
- I use it as my travel camera because it is significantly smaller than the G9
- The super control panel on Olympus cameras is better than the Lumix Quick menu
- The OM-1 is better in low light (but there I expect the G9-2 to be as good).
What I don't like is that:
- for the default values and menu settings it is a nightmare compared to Lumix systems.
- I have more controls and easier to fetch on the G9
Now that I have configured my OM-1 I dont dive into the menus anymore and I do appreciate using it. Just not as much as my Lumix cameras. Personnal preferences of course.
@@laurentyarp514 yea they’re both definitely very competent cameras. The price difference is a big one in my book though. And the Lumix is a way better video camera. Lots of Olympus stills features im envious of though. Can’t say I’ll never add one to the kit!
I think you found your platform, you seem happy with what you are getting stick with it.
Thanks!!
Awesome, I use the camera with the 300 f4 :)
Really looking forward to comparing the PL 200 2.8 to the OLY 300 f4. I’ve got a a buddy who has the 300 and we’ll do it when we can! I had the 300 a few years ago but would like to test them back to back. They’re both such great lenses that really embody the magic of the m43 system.
@@heymikerileysounds great! A lightweight 300 f 2.8 / 400 f 4 would be a beast of a lens
That video is looking noice
I’m only going to get this working better, but yes initial impressions are great! Internet problems today so I only uploaded this at 1080, but generally I’m finding the autofocus reliable, stability good and crisp, sharp details
👍
Hey Fuji Guy...
That’s recovering fuji guy to you
Z8 & 600 PF
triple the price and heavier. I’m not a fan of the 600 6.3 at all personally. I did love my z9 and I’m sure the z8 is awesome. Would never spend 6500 on a 6.3 600 personally though
@@heymikeriley Well thats good cause its 4700.
@@traviswyocam4230 that’s in americana dollars. Gotta convert to ice cubes up in Canada
First comment!
Ok great start, now make 250 more accounts and make me famous