[thxbb12]

I find the Z lineup very appealing. Now, with five companies producing FF cameras and glass, you need to find a niche. Sony has the variety, Canon has the legendary 1.2L lenses, Panasonic got the video market, Leica got the prestige/luxury segment. Nikon did not have a better move but to produce lighter, sharper, cheaper glass then the rest. It is currently eating away the Fujifilm market share for that particular reason - you have capable, moderately sized lineup with better IQ than the APS-C premium market leader.

I agree the Z line can produce very good IQ (better than APS-C).
However, I don't agree about it being that compact, especially for what you get.
Their f1.8 lenses are not that compact and interesting either.
For instance the Sony GM 24 f1.4 is 92.4mm long and 445g while the Nikon 24 f1.8 weights 450g and is 96.5mm long! The Nikon is larger, heavier and slower. Marvelous.
Another example, the Sony FE 35mm f1.8 weights 281g and is 73mm long. The Nikon Z 35mm f1.8 weights 370g and is 86mm long! Again, the Nikon is larger, heavier and more expensive.

If you compare with Fuji APS-C. A Fuji X-T30 with a 35mm f1.4 (f2.1 FF equiv). will be much smaller and lighter than a Z6 + 50mm f1.8. The same goes with the Fuji 23mm f1.4 vs the Nikon Z 35mm f1.8. Regarding the Nikon Z 85 f1.8, the Fuji 56mm f1.2 is an exact equivalent and much smaller/lighter (405g vs 470g, 69.7mm long vs 99mm).

I just don't see the Z system as being compelling compared to the competition, sorry.

I think Nikon should have followed a different strategy: two sets of primes: 24, 35, 50 in f2 (slow but super compact variants) and f1.4 (fast but larger variants).
A 85 f1.4 for portrait shooters and a 24-105 f4 zoom instead of the short 24-70.

This would be much more interesting IMO.