Exactly. We are a world where the main differentiator is user experience.

Tech specs bore and turn off most people. You will never have a strong market if you just sell specs.

In fact one factor hastening the decline of the camera market has been an overemphasis on specs. Look at the world of HiFi to see what happens when there is too much obsession on specs.

Regarding Hi-Fi, yes most people don't give a rip about being able to 'listen to the blackness' especially when that can cost as much as the mortgage on their house. They just want it to work and have good bass and imaging.

What happens when people don’t pay attention to hi-fi specs is that a band comes to me with a recording they made of their last concert on MP3 at a bit rate of 64bps by mistake and get upset when I tell them I can’t turn that into a 24bit 96kHz uncompressed lossless recording for premium price downloads. . .

Mr Bolton, you have it exactly correct. WRT cameras, most people don't care about an extra 1/3 stop of dynamic range or a burst rate that is 40 fps and not 30 fps, they just want nice looking photos and a device that's fairly easy to operate.

Photo-opinion: what you are talking about is not the consumer but professionals producing a product, more akin to a Hollywood film producer. Even then some of the biggest artists have produced best selling work on less than ideal equipment, to say the least. But regardless, no one is saying that technical excellence in gear doesn't matter, only that it it needs to be taken in proper perspective.

All camera gear these days is excellent, and most of the major technical problems have been solved. Thus to focus on specs is to turn most consumers off and ignore what really appeals to them, which is a better experience.

When I read the reviews of Panasonic cameras, it seems all about the myriad video codecs and specs and waveforms and vectors and zebras oh look, more bitrates and audio modes.. I'm sure this is germaine to the video producers of the world, but I personally can't imagine needing all that. With Sony it's all burst rates and fast autofocus.. maybe that's in part why I've stuck with Fuji for so long now. The user experience of shooting it is outstanding. OK, outstanding 'til you miss focus like three times on a stupid easy shot that a Maxxum 7000 could nail :-D I think it's important to have a sense of humor about your gear tho.. but anyway.. maybe Nikon grabbed a clue and made this Zf to cater to a different UI seeking crowd than their PASM cameras which have to compete directly with the above mentioned tech specs-centric brands.

Simplicity? The instruction manual is more than 800 pages. . .

Well. There was the Pentax ZX-5 (Or MZ-5 up here in Canada.) that came out in 1996. This was followed by the Pentax ZX-M in 1997.

So "retro" or at least "manual" cameras were a thing back in the late 90's.

I had a Pentax ME Super back then.

Then I used my sister's Pentax K1000 and really had fun with the engaging feel of the dials.

It got me thinking about picking up a Pentax ZX-5 back then.

I ended up picking up a Vivitar XV-2. (A manual control K-mount camera.)

Shortly after that I ended up with a Pentax K100d.

But I still remember the fun I had the last time I used a manual film camera.

That's what keeps me looking at great camera models like this.

It is a great option for those that want to approach photography with a different tool! :)

Humans both look forward and progress but also celebrate highlights from the past. Since when has it been any different? Ever been to a classic car show?

How about celebrating any traditions of the past, including holidays? How about visiting museums with classic works of art? How about admiring classic works of architecture?

Geesh. It seems the OP's problems is not with this camera but with human nature.

@Thoughts - If we had a choice you'd have a point.

@nextSibling: I honestly don't understand your point. I would say that we do have great choice in the camera market and also among Nikon cameras. Not every camera is a retro design; in fact retro design cameras are a small fraction of the available camera bodies on the market. If you don't want a retro design camera you have plenty of options.

As a retro limited edition, it would be great, but as a mainstream model, not so much.

Haptics are instinctive, and that´s the best cue to a good design.

They mostly disappeared in favor of push buttons because of the price to reliably manufacture at scale—more to do with higher company margins than better functional design.

Who is required to use this camera? Some like the design, others not. 99% of photos nowadays are taken with mobile phone haptics.

4Photos has it right. No one is required to use this or any other retro camera. You have most of the available camera models from which to choose.

It's good the market gives us choice. And again, the number of retro models is a small percentage of the market. Why worry about a few retro models when every other model is a more modern design? And why not let those who like retro models have something to enjoy?

No one should complain about the presence of a few retro models on the market.

I don't understand specifically what about this design hinders in any way compared to modern camera design.

I welcome the options like this.

I look at manual cameras like this as similar to manual transmission on cars.

For those of us that have driven a manual transmission (and liked it), it is unfortunate that there are less manual transmissions available now-a-days, and the manual transmission cars are now actually the more expensive models. :(

I found driving manual very fun and engaging. It was a cheap thrill. LOL. It was fun driving hard into a curving on-ramp, pressing the clutch, braking to negotiate the turn, and then picking the right gear to accelerate out of the curve to launch onto the highway.

I was in control of what the engine and transmission were doing. I was engaged.

Yes. You can have gear control on the steering wheel. And I know that that is how race cars are now. But . . . there is something so engaging with the four(or five)-on-the-floor.

I still remember the last time I used a Pentax K1000 film camera with its engaging dials. It was just so fun! :)

TacticDesigns - Stick-shift motorcars are still the favourite in Europe. 80% manual in Europe, 1% in the US.

@ Karl Huber

I totally envy the European market then. LOL.

Right now, our 2nd car is automatic transmission because our daughter uses it.

I'm hoping down the road, when I'm the only one using the 2nd car I can still find a cheap, little manual transmission car to tool about in. LOL. :)

For lenses with aperture rings there's the classically-styled Shoten adapter:

https://nikonrumors.com/2022/07/22/new-shoten-fz1-lens-adapter-designed-for-using-old-ai-s-nikkor-f-mount-lenses-on-nikon-z-mount-cameras.aspx/

It's explicitly styled to resemble a model from 1982, I stand by the adjective 'retro.'

@20thCentury
I agree with Roland. Nikon did use dials with A-position in the 80s, and Nikon could have used the F3 A-position on dials rather than the FA PASM dial.

Having PASM together with numbered dials is confusing because to know what is going on, the photographer should look at PASM + numbered dials + think about which is overriding which (and the override may be different for speed/aperture/ISO) — whereas with an A-position the settings that are automated are obvious in a blink.

And of course, with an A-position the photographer can easily, directly, and at will, choose to automate any one or any two or the three settings out of the speed/aperture/ISO settings without additional menu or button.

Agreed, and the EM10, EM10 II, and PEN-F are the best looking digital cameras ever made.

@M Lenson, I would say that Fuji is a much better choice if you want this styling. Then you will get the original settings with an A setting for aperture and shutter speed, and maybe also ISO. The right way of doing it.

@Kahran @NowHearThis
Olympus is retro in camera look only, which is cute... and not much more than that.

Nikon and Fuji are retro in use, and the ergonomics of then were excellent and more intuitive than today´s (although more expensive to manufacture with high reliability, which is why they mostly disappeared with the advent of programmable electronics).

Erm, no? You still need to use other, "modern" interfaces and menus to do anything but the most basic photography on either Fujifilm or Nikon retro designs. They're also not "more intuitive", unless you somehow are arguing that most pros are dumb because they prefer programmable dials and buttons, which is THE style of operation that you find on pretty every single pro-oriented body.

Including, unsurprisingly, Fujifilm's top offerings.

@Kharan. I have no idea what you are talking about. The fact is that if you set the exposure speed dial on the Fuji to 1/100 then you get 1/100. On Nikon Zf you might get whatever. Regarding Olympus, do they even have speed dials?

The Fuji XH1 took weeks to learn, not a camera I could just pick up and shoot. Frustrating experience. So just because a camera has dials doesn't mean anything.

Seems about Nikkormat size!
With a noticeably larger body that the likes of the FM2, it will be interesting to see how it goes in the Japanese home market, where "small is cute".

The FM2 is small compared to the F3. And by the way, accessory handgrips were a thing back then.

It's big as a mirrorless camera. To me, a reference to a 40 year old film camera is completely irrelevant.

Not supprise at all that ZF with great IBIS, video and big EVF is a bit bigger size compared to FM2 without them. So fully acceptable and actually it's not big at all compared to F3 and up.

Adding an MD-4 to my F3HP effectively doubled its size and weight. Its size (and the 1/80 top flash sync speed) compelled me to rely on the FM2 (its initial 1/200 sync was a Very Big Deal back then) and similar size Nikons. All my work was on location and I usually managed the camera/lights myself, so size really mattered to me. Also cost, since I had to have multiple cameras on-hand.

In my case the reference to a 40 year old camera is relevant because I've always wanted a modern Nikkormat FT2 replacement. . . The FT2 was the second Nikon I ever used (on loan by my best friend), the first I purchased and my favorite body. I still have one that I found at a garage sale 20 years ago and in mint condition, having spent its life in a collector's safe.

It has to accommodate the Z mount ... maybe partly the reason it is a little larger than old film bodies ??

Looking at the size and weight of other well corrected f/1.2 lenses and how large Sigma 35 f/1.2 is, it's likely that Nikon 35 f/1.2 will be of comparable bulk and weight. Something that is ok on a body with a vertical grip, but too large for casual use on a smaller body.

Oh, it'll do very well indeed, Scrooge, and will indicate just how many people prioritise form over function, and retro looks.

Subdials and menus are form over function. They add layers of actions to a control that should be direct and instantaneous and intuitive. Direct access dials are pure function. You have it round the wrong way.

TN Args: your complaint seems to be more about the human species than about this particular camera. Sorry other people don't think or behave like you. :)

But as gavinlg mentions, there actually is a high degree of functionality to direct access dials.

Fuji tried something like that with the X Pro 4 and got destroyed for it by the reviewers. I always thought it was a nice touch but Fuji paid a price.

Some people have no sense of humor. . . ;)

I guess the rub is being able to use automatic/semi-automatic modes with the AF(-D) and AI(-S) lenses, right? When shooting fully manual or in aperture priority mode, as I would do a lot of with a camera like this, short of not having EXIF data accurately reported, I don't see the problem. I've shot fully manual with a couple of manual AI lenses on my Z6 in M and A modes and it worked like a charm.

You know a camera is done right, when people with no interest in that brand and with no interest in ever buying it, still need to tell the world how dreadful it is.

The funny thing about @elkarrde rent, is that he owns a lot of lenses, but only one with an aperture ring. Clearly that is a top priority for him, that Nikon should have that.

Naah, no hate at all, just disappointment.
It's just a massively missed opportunity for making a truly great camera, because of Nikon's management ego and self-importance. Zf is among the best-looking modern mirrorless cameras, no dilemmas there, and it is the first Z-mount camera I'm interested in - but it's because of its looks, not brains.
But it could have been so much better if only Nikon management decided not to blindly copy FA dials in the name of some faked, inconsistently applied nostalgia - nobody cares about the FA anyway. If they put A positions on both dials, dropped the PASM switch and added a range of SE-styled and a bit slower but smaller lenses with aperture rings with A position, that would be a camera to look up to. I don't doubt this existing Zf will be a good seller, but it'll be permanently used in some of the automatic modes, nobody will use dials after the first few days, and that's a shame.

Actually, I have fond memories of my Nikon FA. . .

It was the first camera with the Multi-Segment Metering System (which I never used because I preferred center-weighted and manual mode). But at the time the FA was the only Nikon other than the F3/MD-4 combo that could be powered by the MD-15 motor drive.

The mirror-slap/shutter sound was relatively quiet. It was a nicely compact and lighter alternative to the F3, with or without a motor drive. I wound up regretting selling my FA.

I love the throwback; not a gimmick. I'd been using the cheapest Nikon DSLRs for a while, but really missed the manual dials with settings clearly marked.

It's really nice to be able to take a quick look at the top of your camera and know exactly what the settings are -- and to be able to change them with those specialized/dedicated controls. Don't have to have the power on, no fumbling with buttons and thumb dials to get to what you want -- it's very simple, very straightforward to control.

Nostalgia or not, "analog" settings are a huge practical bonus.

And no real shortcuts with the sensor. My zfc is a really enjoyable, no compromise camera body. (Okay okay, the dx frame is a serious compromise. That's about my only regret, though not an $800 regret... yet.)

@McPicture For the throwback I just use the real deal - the FE. At least black & white film is still available, it's relatively cheap, and it's very easy to process.

But also, I agree with the practicality of real dials, just not if they're openly lying.
For example - what happens when Zf(c) is on, let's say, P mode, and both dials are set to a value, what takes precedence, dials or program mode? If it's not the dials, then dials are lying, and that's a bad user experience in my book.

Fuji is doing dials the right way on many of the cameras, they're never lying, so if Fuji engineers can do it, I'm fairly certain Nikon can do it too. Both Zf and Zfc are really good-looking, but flawed cameras, with just a few important details missing.

For me, those details are so disappointing, and repeating the same issues from the Zfc on the Zf tells me Nikon doesn't really care about the usability of those two cameras, it's all about grabbing the headlines and trying to counter Fuji's success.

Uhh? Only 5 lenses?

Anything up to the 70-180mm 2.8 is perfectly fine. The entire 1.8 S line is.
The 24-70 S, and the Ais 28-85mm? 510g, 90mm long, almost exactly the same. 100-300 zoom wasn't a big deal either. All of those were go-to lenses for FA, FE2, etc.

@elkarrde You and I appear to be birds of a feather. I have never been a fan of AF but seeing as how I was a busy editorial/PJ shooter, I finally did the deed and added two N90s (x) to my kit. Big mistake. . . Both cameras would scratch the film, probably due to the miserable automatic film loading mechanism, which I did not need in the first place.

Nikon gutted both cameras under warranty but it did not solve the issue. Since I could not sell them with such a defect I stuck them away in a dark corner of my office. A few years ago I came across them (in really good condition 'cuz hardly used LOL) and tossed them into the trash. That was around $2000 down the drain. So it goes. . . I never bonded with them anyway; too much plastic.

Some years back I retired early for health reasons (MUCH better these days). So what Nikons did I keep? A Nikkormat FT2, FM2, D700 and a D200. Just the ones I love using and in the best shape. . . These days 12mp is plenty for my needs. ;)

@Leo_Yai I'm definitely pickier than you regarding the size and weight of the lenses! :D
If I'm lugging a lens as big as 24-70/4 S-line, I might just as well go full house then, to Fuji GFX. :D

Of all the Nikkor Z lenses, I'd consider 24-50mm, 26mm, 28mm, 40mm and 50mm macro as appropriately sized, at least for me. TTArtisan 32mm and Yongnuo 35mm are both also acceptable, all those lenses are under 300 g. Meanwhile, all Nikkor F1.8 S primes are closer to half a kilo than to 400 g, and they're pretty big. I know, they're good, but personally, I'd rather sacrifice 2-3 stops of light for a small, light lens.

When I'm not hiking or cycling; when I have my car at my disposal, I don't care about weight and size, but if I'm not hiking or cycling I don't care that much about photography, either.

I used FMs, FEs, F3s for years and have no interest in regressing to their user interface

@nextSibling That's funny because I set-up my digital cameras to operate as closely as possible to my manual-focus FM2, F3, FA, FT2, etc. Nikons.

I don't need all of the functions, buttons, dials, etc. Manual exposure, center-weighted/spot metering, aperture/shutter settings and I'm good. I do appreciate the rear LCD (sure beats using Polaroids) but IMO chimping is the bane of early 21st century photographers.

I can't say whether the Zf will finally meet my needs or not until I know more about it and handle the camera myself. If it is more accommodating of my desire for operational simplicity in a reasonably-sized package, then I'm all for it.

@anwiko How many of those M-mount lenses are Nikon lenses?
There are native Z-mount Cosina Voigtländers that are reasonably sized and look gorgeous, as well, but that's *exactly* my point - Nikon's attempt is shallow. Half-arsed, if you prefer honest words. ;)

Basically, what Nikon did with the Zf (and Zfc) is no better than what Pentax did with colourful DSLRs, back in the day. Pentax targeted the entry-level market with cheap models and didn't go beyond pretty (and bold) colours, while Nikon targeted a bit higher and went for nostalgia and a slightly different colour palette.

This thing is designed to be used with vintage lenses. Just look at it. I've been using older manual lenses on my Sonys since I bought the Nex 5n, and not having proper reporting of the aperture, and lens type remains a PITA.

Eric Hensel I’m using the techart adapter. Doesn’t tell you the aperture but will tell you the focal distance.

Pantunes...4 years later I'd just love to know which lens it was, without faffing around with the EXIF...first-world problems :)

or hope Sigma will bring its FF f2 primes with apertures in Z mount - like it did with APS-C primes.

Nikon seems to have a hatred agains aperture rings since, I think, the F80.

Not really eating into Fujifilms offerings. Why? Fuji does have ~54 Lenses APS-C Line-up, the biggest, best APS-C into the business, because they have only APS-C and MF, not "FF" gear. And many of the XF lenses do feature aperture rings, something, Nikon doesn't have into Z-mount, yet.

I said it once & before, Nikon should've had released at least 5 prime lenses, say from 20 to 85 or 135mm, into classic style, with AF, and aperture rings. It would sell like hot cakes - matching the Zf body language...the 40/2 is ok, but missing the aperture ring, and not the best optically...albeit fine for the asking price.

Fujifilm does have a complete APS-C system, Nikon now the DX(APS-C) Zfc and FF Zf bodies, but still...no matching lenses with aperture rings & design...

Good light.

There's two things about the Nikon lens ecosystem:

First, Nikon's lenses are some of the best out there. The S-line all seem pretty fantastic. Not the smallest or cheapest, but stellar lenses. If a lens is in that S-line, it's going to be as good as any any equivalent on other systems for pure optics.

Second, there aren't many choices outside the S-line. Not too many budget options, next to zero offerings for 3rd party primes. The Nikon glass is excellent, but there are few alternatives.

Get Voigtlander glass.

I get the appeal of an aperture ring...but geesh...it's not the be all to end all. Talk about nitpicking.

For most people this camera and any Z lens will make a great kit.

Sparse? Are you referring to Fuji X or Nikon Z? (I'm guessing the latter.) I'd argue that neither one of them are particularly sparse anymore. As a Z6 owner, I don't feel like I'm lacking for choice anymore like I did when I first got into the system in 2019.

Well, ask SONY... A7c R with 61 MP ... smaller than this 24MP from NIKON..

or PANASONIC (have you seen a GM5 in real?... so tiny..)

N.B: I am a Canon FF user still in dSLR + Panasonic for M4/3

I partly agree that the Zf feels slightly too bulky, but actually the size/weight difference to the FA/FM/FE is not that large: The Zf is about 1 cm taller (reg. height) than these cameras and roughly 100 g heavier. Otherwise, it is pretty similar.

I just hope you're not thinking that more megapixels means a larger body.

Yes...it seems odd to mention the MP count as somehow impacting camera size.

The Sony A7cR is definitely an alternative...but it's not that much smaller...but it's $1000 more...and it has some compromises too, like a far lesser EVF, a lesser LCD screen, one card slot, not as nice of a build quality, some overheating if you do video and push it...

Just for the EVF alone I would get the Zf over the Sony.

And the Panasonic GM5 is smaller but it is also using the smaller micro 4/3 sensor, and so there's that.

and how would the camera exhaust the heat?