We recorded the event and are sorting out the best way to publish it. We plan to do more live events in the future, but want to make sure people who can't attend live are able to listen as well.

MILC man - Viewfinder refresh isn't a spec most brands give in their spec sheets. If they've delivered an impressive-sounding number they'll sometimes put it in the 'features' section of their marketing website, but it's not consistently given by most brands.

In this instance we've quoted the number stated by a Senior Technical Engineering Liaison from Nikon (ie: the person tasked with making sure Nikon USA has the correct details), which is about as 'official' as I'd expect to see.

This is another reason why the Z9 is likely the best camera today.

This site did an excellent job explaining why why even though a few 'specs' may not appear impressive, those specs don't tell the whole story. For example, the Z9 has the best EVF experience today (as well as other features).
It is not a good idea to get hung up on 'specs' . The actual use and experience are vastly more important.

For anyone who missed it.
https://www.dpreview.com/articles/4210565040/shooting-experience-the-nikon-z9-is-the-most-dslr-like-mirrorless-we-ve-ever-seen

dpr opened the door for this specs conversation in the first place, with an article about a "dslr experience" with a milc evf... it's helpful that we got an unofficial refresh rate from a nikon employee, given that nikon won't do it officially.

"World's first 240 fps refresh rate, 9.44M1 dot 0.64” QXGA OLED EVF" https://electronics.sony.com/imaging/interchangeable-lens-cameras/all-interchangeable-lens-cameras/p/ilce1-b

"The EOS R3's blackout free EVF when in electronic shutter mode supports a 120 fps refresh rate" https://www.usa.canon.com/internet/portal/us/home/products/details/cameras/eos-dslr-and-mirrorless-cameras/mirrorless/eos-r3/

nikon by comparison doesn't list any z9 evf refresh rate anywhere that i can find, for instance: https://www.nikon-asia.com/tmp/Asia/2419865273/3760176746/2586568015/286546384/152549275/92909824/3726938141/3948025830.pdf

i personally would be fine with the low-rez z9 evf, it's the af that really matters.

'Unofficial refresh rate from a Nikon employee'? Really? It's literally from an employee whose job is to communicate the technical detail from the engineering department to the outside world. It takes some work to classify that as 'unofficial.'

But thanks for illustrating my point that it sometimes turns up in the 'features' section of the marketing website, if it sounds impressive enough. Whereas, based on having shot with all three of those cameras, I would say it's a misleading data point: it sounds like it should tell you something useful but doesn't.

the fact that dpr has access to manufacturer staff like that is a big reason why i like reading dpr, and i really appreciate that you guys go to great lengths to get facts that most other sites can't get... it's a big part of what sets dpr apart from the rest.

but i don't see how the official sony/canon a1/r3 websites are somehow unofficial compared to what nikon does? it's not complete specs, but at least they list partial evf refresh rates, direct from the manufacturer... nikon apparently never does that, in fact they define the z-mount evf as the same for all cameras: https://www.nikonusa.com/en/learn-and-explore/a/products-and-innovation/nikon-z-system-electronic-viewfinder-evf.html

we know that's not true, stacked vs. unstacked sensors has a radical effect on the actual evf shooting experience; it's frame duplication vs. no frame duplication, a lower-rez evf by comparison isn't a deal killer, but it's not good to hide specs when the competition doesn't do that.

I'm not saying Sony and Canon's statements are less official, but that doesn't mean it's 'unofficial' if it's communicated to the media, rather than included as a marketing bullet point.

My point is that it's not a widely-quoted spec. Brands may choose to trumpet it when they think it sounds good but if you want to find numbers for other models in the lineup, you'll have to dig (if it's communicated at all). My point being that prominently quoting the number is the outlier, not the other way 'round. And, as I say, it actually ends up being a rather misleading spec detail.

And to be fair, neither Canon nor Sony maintain those high spec refresh rates in lower light and during AF. I've read here that the Sony outputs to that 9m dot EVF at half that res during shooting-even less when AF is in play.

The selling point of the Nikon is that the EVF refresh rate, whatever that may be, stays the same-and the resolution always stays the same-under all conditions.

That's a lot cooler than having a spec sheet shiny 9m dot EVF that shoots at 4.

Yes, the point is that with the EVF, Nikon has prioritized consistency, clarity and brightness, and shown that their choice of what is important is a better one than Sony's.

With the Sony A1, it's still an impressive EVF, but it doesn't achieve that resolution when it's being used for its main purpose, which is high speed shooting with AF.

To me it's almost misleading to advertise the EVF in the way that Sony has. When people hear that the EVF has over 9 million dots of resolution, then it's reasonable to assume that one enjoys that when actually taking the photos, using that high speed AF that it's known for.

Thom Hogan phrased it best: "Sony is the crowned king of footnotes to specs that dilute their impact."

"Thoughts": Mr. Hogan is actually a big fan of the Sony A1 and the A7R IV. Here are his words on the subject:

Up front in the bag is a Sony A1. This 50mp master of all trades is Sony's best foray into mirrorless so far, and by a wide margin. At the back of that bag is the Sony A7R Mark IV. This 61mp full frame camera is a near master of most everything. It works into low light far better than the m4/3 cameras, but it also is a pretty much state-of-the-art low ISO camera, too. Things I’d start to worry about with m4/3 (deep shadow detail or high ISO capability) I generally don’t worry about at all with the Sony.
Link: https://www.sansmirror.com/articles/thoms-sony-efe-bag.html

How embarrassing for you: In your endless war against Sony, you end-up accidentally quoting a guy who likes Sony cameras!

@Eddie Bk said "the Z9 has the best EVF experience today"

People did rave about the R3's EVF and eye control, and wen on about how they had problems going back to other cameras. I'd wait until there are more side by side comparisons with the A1, R3 and Z9 before you go crowning the "best" of anything.

Yveske - Smaller pixels inherently have more noise per pixel (absent a spectacular advance in quantum efficiency), because a major source of noise is the randomness of light, and the less light you capture, the more noisy that pixel will appear.

However, if you combine the pixels down to the same resolution as the D5/D6, you'll be comparing the same amount of captured light, and the only differences will then stem from differences in electronic (read) noise. These tend to be incredibly minor.

Which means you get greater resolution at low ISOs and comparable noise (with potential detail improvements) at all but the very highest ISO settings. I'm not sure how that's a step backwards.

Obviously we'll see how the high ISO files look in out studio scene as soon as production spec cameras become available.

The camera already has a number of competitive advantages. The price is the icing on the cake we all can appreciate.

Well, for a lot of people the price is actually what determines if they end up buying the camera or not. So, not just icing on the cake.

It has a simulated shutter sound: I believe you can even adjust the volume, there may be a few choices.

Does it sound like the real thing. We will see. It seemed to sound the like the real thing in the teaser ad.

It sounds nothing like a real shutter though, which is how I interpreted his question. I guess that is somewhat subjective but it sounds nothing like the shutter on the D6 or D850.

Some cameras brands real shutter doesn't sound like an real shutter.

I expect electric cars will soon have speakers to make it sound like a gas powered engine. ;-)

Actually, Tesla allows owners of at least some of its models to download all sorts of simulated sounds to play out. I believe they call this feature Boombox.

It is considered both a fun feature but also a safety feature as well. Pedestrians often rely on hearing the sound of a car as an alert the one is nearby. I believe Tesla calls this part of their Pedestrian Warning System.

But Tesla does allow all sorts of fun customizations to the sound.

How about a library of shutter sounds from all varieties of cameras vintage and otherwise that you could download to the camera....I can see this coming!! :)...or better yet, sounds from actual cameras owned by famous photographers of the past and present!!.....sounds funny, but could see it happening!

OK... you guys won me over. I'd want my shutter to sound like chirping birds. ;-)

Oh god - shutter sound tuning. What next?

A camera is a camera and not a motor bike.

It seems like the next logical step.. you can already get bling shutter buttons and wood grips, etc.

I would like to be able to upload a D3 shutter sound to the Z9, for that authentic, scare the .... out of any wildlife, machine gun effect (but first I would like a Z9 ;) )

@Barleyman.
They already do. BY LAW!
After hitting blind people that rely on the noise the engine makes to avoid them it is now mandatory that every electric car engine run with the noise on, no quiet mode anymore.
Furthermore, manufacturers of high end models have installed speakers that play that base vroom vroom sound on acceleration to accentuate/simulate the effect from revving up of a powerful engine, since modern engines and sound isolation systems have reduced it and changed it too much.
So there you go, lol, we've been well into the world of 'simulated experience' for years, before cameras started fooling us that we are taking a picture.

In single shot, Sony does a brute force CDAF check at the end of the PDAF cycle.

In continuous AF, Sony abandons the CDAF and is PDAF only, sacrificing some accuracy for all out speed.

I am just curious what Nikon's approach is. Looking at the Z6/7 doesn't tell us much because the Z9 AF is a complete overhaul.

single shot sony is af-s, and very few people use af-s with sony, because sony af-c is incredibly accurate, with no cdaf hunting... about the only time you might want af-s is in a studio setting with flash, where in some situations it'll focus wide open with a stopped-down lens, like a dslr does.

i think that the z9 is using cdaf with their "starlight mode", it might even be cdaf-only, we'll have to see what the reviews say.

the big problem with nikon milc is that they never had af with subject selection that's comparable to how sony real-time tracking does subject selection.

that might have finally changed with the new af system in the z9.

"the big problem with nikon milc is that they never had af with subject selection that's comparable to how sony real-time tracking does subject selection.

that might have finally changed with the new af system in the z9."

I would say that definitely has changed going by early reports by users of the Z9.

Also, one advantage for the Z9 is that it will automatically switch between the types of subject recognition...for instance, people, animals, birds, autos, etc. You can tell it to prioritize one or the other, but it will auto switch.

Sony does not yet have this capacity. So for instance, in the A1, if you are photographing animals (other than birds), you set it to animals. But then if you switch to photographing birds, you need to change the AF setting to bird eye AF.

So it appears that Nikon has leapfrogged Sony in this regard. Not only does its AF recognize more types of subjects/objects, but it will automatically switch between them according to its AI algorithms.

Sony still has not implemented animal/bird eye AF in video in the A1, even though they have it in the far less expensive A7 IV. It would seem they might release a software update for the A1 and A7S III, since they use the same processor. But they seem to be taking their time doing so. It's rather odd; they have the resources and the work is done.

But why didn't they put this in the A1 in the first place? Or the A7S III? The A7 IV shows it can be done by Sony. Is there some catch to it?

Surely Sony won't exclude it from the A1 and A7SIII to try to get users to also buy an A7 IV? That would be the ultimate cripple hammer.

I am sure they are working on FW to try to catch up to Nikon and Canon.
But it could be like the A9 and A9ii where Sony added a fix for artificial lighting but didn't put the fix in the A9 firmware. So maybe there is an A1 mark II coming with an improved body (vs. the basic one on the A7iv and A7Siii) and these FW updates to catch up to the A7iv. Either way, Sony will fix it in the current A1 or future A1.

@Thoughts R Us

> So it appears that Nikon has leapfrogged Sony in this regard.

Yep. And it's a good thing. We all should want manufacturers to constantly leapfrog each other.

AND acknowledge it when it does happen. Blind defense of a brand by a user is... well, it's manufacturers' dream, but it's a disservice to photographic community as a whole.

> That would be the ultimate cripple hammer.

More Sony bashing from our professional Sony hater. I would say the prize for crippling stuff has to go to Canon - as you well know they disabled eye-control focus for video in the $6,000 R3 and stuck a ludicrous toy micro HDMI connector on that giant body to protect their Cinema Series line. Kudos to Nikon and Sony for using full size professional connectors.

mikegt: well, we know that Sony can do animal/bird eye AF in video because they did it with the A7 IV. Why didn’t they put that into their flagship camera, the A1? Or their main video hybrid camera, The A7S IIII.

It’s like they take those customers for granted. Sony obviously had the tech developed earlier for their A7 IV and could have already put out a software update for these two premier models. Why haven’t they?

Do they really expect to force A1 and A7 S III owners into buying the A7 IV as another camera?

YouTubers need to start asking Sony for this software update.

Kudos to Nikon and Canon for giving this feature to their customers.

Maybe they couldn't do it because of the increased CPU load from all that stacked sensor resolution and data? Maybe when they tried, it slowed down the AF on the A1-and if there's one thing Sony doesn't want to do, it's slow down their autofocus.

The first question is an interesting one from an academic perspective, and I don't think you will get an answer from the panelists in this forum, unless they've taken apart a Z9 and looked at the markings on the image sensor :)

However, here is a link to a video from a Nikon Z9 event at Bedfords Camera, and the Nikon rep has an interesting answer to this very question (I've linked to the actual moment):

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-L6bhKOigE0&t=2535s

He doesn't give the answer but he does give an interesting perspective. Nikon designed the sensor, it was manufactured by someone else, but using Nikon machines!

There's some other interesting stuff, like the fact that it takes almost 12 months to make the image sensor.

Does anyone care Apple doesn't make the CPU in their new computers?
If you do care, then TSMC makes them. Just like they make a lot of Sony's sensors sold under the Sony name.
As of 2021, only three firms are able to manufacture the most advanced semiconductors: TSMC of Taiwan, Samsung of South Korea, and Intel of the United States. They are also the 3 largest.
Most electronics have parts made by at least one of those 3.

Here is a list of the top 10 chip makers if you really care.
https://www.zippia.com/advice/largest-semiconductor-companies-world/

@Eddie Bk @Thoughts R Us

Why I care -- I think a key to survival in a future full frame mirorless wars will be independence in the sensor technology.

So Canon is for sure independent. If Nikon also now -- that makes them much more sustainable.

Fuji, both for X and GFX cameras is not. Fuji can be in trouble, like Olympus, which in some moment stuck with same 20 Mp sensor for 7 years.

About sensor manufacturer list -- even if you not own you fabric, but you design and prototype itself inhouse, than you are a manufacturer, like Apple is.

Lol, Apple uses Sony sensors (although TSMC makes some of them), but could switch to Samsung or TSMC at the drop of a hat. They sure are not worried, but Sony sure is. (and rumors are TSMC is building a huge plant next to Apple in California so they can replace Sony chips in iPhones)
If Olympus or anyone wanted the most advanced sensors, they too could go to Samsung or TSMC at any time. Samsung's NX1 sensor was more advanced than any Sony sensor when it came out, and Sony relies on TSMC to make some of their sensors.

You are saying olympus has been stuck with 20mpx sensors for 7 years... but that is kind of the sweet spot for M43 sensors... Panasonic also has been using 20mpx sensors for years and nothing ever higher than that for their cameras....

Duncan, and don't forget Sony has yet to use a sensor as good as the Samsung APSC sensor from 7 years ago in their APSC cameras. No BSI, etc. I am sure if they wanted a better sensor Samsung or TSMC would sell them some. heck, Sony could even put their name on the sensors like they do with other TSMC made sensors.

The only thing we know for sure is it's not the D850 or Z7II sensor and that it's a Nikon design and we know either Sony or Tower fabricated it.

We also know Nikon isn't going to put a worse sensor in their flagship, so I personally couldn't care less who makes it. Every single hands on reviewer so far has said it's at least as good.

@Eddie Bk - "Lol, Apple uses Sony sensors (although TSMC makes some of them), but could switch to Samsung or TSMC at the drop of a hat"

no, they can't, because tsmc is a fab house, they do not design sensors, and tsmc can't contract with other companies to manufacture sensor technology and designs that don't belong to apple, that would be illegal.

apple has to buy cutting-edge sensors from outside companies because they don't have the capability to design it in-house.

@Eddie Bk

"If Olympus or anyone wanted the most advanced sensors, they too could go to Samsung or TSMC at any time."

Well how certain are you that they(Samsung or TSMC) could build an FF an or APS-C stacked image sensor, so easily?

There seems to be some confusion regarding Apple. TSMC manufactures the CPUs for Apple devices. Sony manufactures the image sensors for Apple‘s iPhones and iPads.

With Samsung and TSMC's more advanced chip factories and technology, they likely could make better stacked sensors. There maybe some IP they need to use, but that would not be an issue. Remember Samsung made a BSI APSC sensor before Sony made either an ASPC or FF BSI sensor. Sony has still yet to create and equal APSC sensor.

It seems one of the core technologies of a stacked sensor is the bonding technology used to bond the layers together and enable them to make an electrically sound connection.

That tech is licensed from a company called Xperi. And Nikon, Sony and Canon all have active licenses to use this tech. So it's not like only Sony has this technology, or even owns all of the technology associated with stacked sensors, as we clearly see with Canon making their own image sensors.

I do agree wit h@nameless0ne: it's better for the industry if there is more than one player making image sensors. Sony Semi does a fabulous job with image sensors, but there needs to be some competition and diversification.

TRU,
TSMC makes Apple's CPUs, and they make some of the Sony branded sensors.
http://image-sensors-world.blogspot.com/2020/07/tsmc-builds-dedicated-28nm-fab-for-sony.html

TSMC created a subsidiary in Japan to manufacture sensors. Sony will be a minority share holder. They are going to build a plant in Japan (easier with Sony as a minority partner).
http://image-sensors-world.blogspot.com/2021/11/its-official-now-tsmc-sony-fab-in-japan.html

TSMC is also building a new factory in California near Apple's HQ.

Rumor goes the sensor is designed, patented and licensed to Nikon by Sony

An there are Rumors that the sensor is designed, patented by Nikon an made by tower semiconductor.

I don't believe you'll ever get a complete answer on this. We might find out who fabs the sensor if Tech Insights or someone like that does a teardown, but that still doesn't necessarily give a clear picture of who was responsible for what parts of the design process.

There's been speculation around Tower for years (primarily based on them saying that one of their customers was a DSLR maker), but I've never seen anything more concrete than that.

Personally, I'm much more interested in seeing how it performs (and what impact the Raw compression does or doesn't make). Who designed or manufactures the sensor is next to meaningless.

Nikon very likely designed the sensor with Sony's help and licensed IP from Sony and others. As TRU mentioned part of the stacked sensor design is patented and licensed by Xperi.
So if you wanted to get technical you could say all stacked sensors including Sony's were (in part) designed, patented and licensed by Xperi.
Its all silly though. The sensor would not be made if Nikon didn't tell someone to make it for them. And who knows, maybe TSMC makes them like they do other Sony sensors.

I don't think Nikon needed any help in designing this sensor, they just needed somebody to build it.

BackToNature1

So what you are saying is why buy AMD CPUs or Apple computers when someone else actually makes them and has a 'lock' on manufacturing CPUs?

And btw , Sony and Nikon are closer to each other in camera sales than they are to Canon. Canon sells more cameras than Nikon and Sony combined. So if you think Nikon is far behind then so is Sony and everyone else.

And two final questions for you to ponder. Why does Sony use Samsung sensors in some of their latest phones? And why did Sony announce TSMC will be the OEM of even more of their sensors?

Next we need to argue about who makes Kirkland paper towels and peanut butter. Both are great, and no normal person cares where they are made.
:)

So called Normal people usually don't understand why they should care about certain things. :)

...like who makes Kirkland paper towels, Apple CPUs, and many of Sony's sensors.
TSMC is the answer for 2 out 3.

"I think a key to survival in a future full frame mirorless wars will be independence in the sensor technology."

Disagree. This is just a theory made by insecure Sony bois.

Nikon has always been a precisions and optical company first, everything else second. Even if nikon stops making cameras they'll survive anyway. Just like olympus they sell lots of medical equipment like microscopes. In fact it is their precisions department that make more revenue and money.

Even among smartphones, putting aside iphone, every Chinese brand used parts from Samsung, Sony and the others. You think they won't survive because they rely on others? Lol

You're not wrong but a huge bulk of Nikon's business is in its imaging products.

> As of 2021, only three firms are able to manufacture the most advanced semiconductors: TSMC of Taiwan, Samsung of South Korea, and Intel of the United States.

And all three are based on the advanced EUV machines from Dutch ASML. Which in turn largely depend on a crazingly sophisticated optics from ZEISS, which was 30 years in the making. Which is kind of relevant in a camera forum ;)

But the Z9 sensor doesn't require EUV lithography and may have been made using Nikon machines indeed.

@TrUs, thanks, I liked his comment: "our design, our machines, their labor", where machines mean semiconductor making machines, steppers, etc.

Some interesting stuff.
Xperi owns the patent to ZiBond® and DBI® 3D semiconductor interconnect technologies. Everyone has to license the tech from them.
And none could make the sensors without EUV machines from Dutch ASML.
And those machines depend on optics from Carl Zeiss.

One can see why the idea of 'who makes' a sensor is so silly. There are several fabs when they can be made, but they could not be made today without ASML, Xperi, or Zeiss.

I think what we are seeing is everyone recognizing the Z9 is the best camera out there today. And some want to be a part of it, even though "who makes the sensor" is as Richard said, "next to meaningless".

Actually TSMC only started making Sony CMOS sensors in 2019, so up to then Sony fab its own. Problem isn't if Sony makes sensors for Nikon per se, that's only an issue with the fans, there is no such thing as loyalty in the business side of things, subcontracting is common, not just with cmos sensors and will occur more as the need to supply the world's demands increase.

@onlyfreeman typically the PDAF pixels are used for image making. Usually the unused pixels are at the very edge of the sensor and are masked off and used for noise reduction calculation. The thing with Z9 is there are far more unused pixels than normal- probably 3x.

@ photography-lover - Matt Granger just released a youtube video scrutinizing the RAW modes at 100% in photoshop. Long story short, literally zero difference between lossless compressed and high efficiency star, tiny difference with high efficiency (no star). No noticeable difference between the 3 in a print (he himself guessed wrong). ~50-80MB lossless compressed, ~30MB HE Star, ~20MB HE. Not a perfect test but it likely reflects what most people will experience.

To be clear: this is a Q&A with the editors who've used the camera, not with Nikon. We don't know anything about production.

Their spec sheet says:

"X=1/200 sec. to 1/250 sec.; synchronizes with shutter at 1/200 sec. or slower; Auto FP High-Speed sync supported"

We're trying to get some clarity around why the X speed is given as a range but then syncing is only listed as 1/200th.

Generally in the past the x-sync speed with nikon flash is 1/250 and 1/200/ on third part flashes.

With the current generation of mirrorless cameras, it really is. The few more FPS or the few more MP or bit depth don't really change much at all. It's really just a spec sheet difference.

Either Canon, Sony, Nikon, you can't really go wrong. (it was like that in the past before even though the differences were greater but let's be clear, neither DR, nor MP nor FPS really mattered for 99% of the photographers).

@jazja

I would love to see it all done on an Tripod an NONE this handheld stuff we see so often. That's when I believe the differences tend to show up between each photography handheld techniques.

What do I think would happen in this comparison, folks would see that MP, A1 or Z9, aren't nearly what they are cooked up to be as the best selling point of some given camera. That there indeed an difference in low light ability between the cameras, aka MP low or high.

Ergonomics are very important an vastly underrated. Hopefully soon we shall see. I think the R3 can more than hold it's own, in spite of far less MP an no 8K.

@Kerensky97
It seems simple to me.
Indeed, the human eye is incapable (for the most part) of being bothered by refreshing times from 60 fps.
In addition, devices that display faster refreshing times (and/or higher resolutions) no longer keep them when high bursts (or video) are used ...
It would therefore be counterproductive to argue about this characteristic because in practice and at this level (60Hz) it is not penalizing, and this would be retained as a weakness of the "list of characteristics" when it is it is a simple rational choice vs perceived technical reality and pragmatic compromise vs other much more critical and efficient characteristics of the Z9

The key is how the EVF looks in usage. Micheal Hall gets to the heart of it.

Why worry about specs when you can look at it and see for yourself.

Now obviously most of us haven't been able to try one yet, but the clear consensus among those who have is that they really like what they are seeing in the EVF. If someone tells me they used the EVF and liked what they saw, that matters to me more.

There are more important specs than just resolution and refresh rate. Nikon has optimized for features like clarity, brightness, etc.

Bigger numbers is not always better. We've been trained too much to try to take the easy way out and just judge by certain specs. But the reality is more complex.

I'm not arguing for or against the 60fps refresh rate, that's not my point. I just think think it's absurd that Nikon isn't willing to publicly say themselves. Instead of having to rely on "So and so told me" it should just be in the spec sheet. Let's put it to bed and move on instead of being so secretive.
We're not in "Teaser/Promo" phase of the release anymore. The Z9 has been officially announced, put it out there for the world already.

'farm' views? I'm not even sure I know what that means.

I think the plan is to record it, but this is only our second attempt at a Twitter Space, so we're still trying to work out how to make the best use of the result.

Geesh. Such cynicism by Dual System Guy.

If they did a YT video of the session, I would welcome that. YT is the go to place for videos, by far. Like it or not, that's the way it is. Almost all businesses place their videos on YT. Even a large company like Apple does that, because they know YT is the place that most people go to look for video content.

Also, what's wrong with trying to make a profit? I'm a big believer in the market based capitalist system. That's what makes these goodies like these great cameras and lenses possible.

So if they did place the video on YT to "farm views" and maximize profits, I say more power to them. I want this site to continue. They do not charge a subscription fee. So the money has to come from somewhere. There's no such thing as a free lunch.

To me profits is not a dirty word. How many reading this site are willing to work for free?

What! Z (space) 9 looks weird anyway, even if that is meant to be the way no one really cares right? I call my D850 an '850', because it's clear what I mean.

Wait are you talking about the Nikon Z9?

@Photo_AK going to have to pull you up here. You called me "primes shooter". You used a space when infact there is none. Also I am "prime" shooter - Primeshooter.

prime shooter - EXACTLY! That's intentional, so, I'll just add this:

What! primeshooter looks weird anyway, even if that is meant to be the way no one really cares right? I'll just call you 'shooter', because it's clear who I mean.

Negative. Using "shooter" could refer to myself, users like "T O Shooter" amongst others, infact it could easily be confused. It is clear that you have problems with comprehension.

Photo_AK - Wouldn't it be nice if you praised DPR for something, rather than criticise for what is an irrelevant point. Pick your battles

They improved the name, adding a space there is inefficient and wastes server resources.

I'm appreciative of OP -- I hadn't noticed that. Precision is, generally, good. Especially in technical publications. (It's also a kind of respect.)

@Just Another Tog:
For crying out loud ... hypocrisy, really? I made a mistake, a typo - I typed Z7 II instead of Z 7II, a mistake I surely made more than once in the recent years, I corrected that, and now I'm a hypocrat? You sure are an unpleasant person to communicate with.

I'd never even post a comment, if what DPR had done was a typo, rather a systematic use of incorrect info through months and years.

"If what I wrote above and dealing with me is seriously all you have to worry about in life, I pity you, your life must devoid of any worth."

Says the poster that just wrote how awful it was that there wasn't a space between "Z" and "9".

Nikon's decision caused quite a lot of extra work -- search engines and shops had to be 'told' to recognize Z 6 as the same as Z6 (and not 'Z' and '6' ), for example

I don't get that you are getting all bent out of shape over a space in a camera name, yeah. You are right. I dont get it.

Nykon or Nikon?

I thought Zed's dead.

@Restio: in the US both of your spellings result in the same pronunciation: Ny’kon. I think you are looking for “Nik’kon” as the short “I” pronunciation.

About as pointless as that other poster’s insistence on a space between the Z and number, but … there you are.

Likely this won't be public info for some time, like where Nikon sourced its Z9 sensor. Probably for the best marketing wise anyway, the camera is the sum of its parts and not just orbiting around one.

Thom Hogan claims it is in fact a Socionext with plenty of advancements compared to Expeed 6. He guesses at least 4 cores.

Silly…

If expeed 7 doesn’t become faster Nikon processor guys will be fired.