Nikon Z. Objectives achieved?

Probably, from Nikon's perspective, the objective was to provide Nikon users looking enviously at Sony some viable alternatives and good compatibility with Nikon lenses.

Mission accomplished, probably. Familiar controls, nice EVF (for the OVF die-hards) and very good build quality. Also, a lens mount optimised for FF, unlike Sony.

Nikon forum seems a little downbeat though. A single card slot and poor battery life are not what they had hoped for, no eye AF and OK but not exceptional video. Two QXD card slots would be a stretch and I guess SD is a little slow for buffer clearing with such large files, but battery life will be disappointing for some.

If anything, this makes Nikon's future APSC strategy more uncertain. Is it possible they just decided to ship slower versions of the same lenses to reduce size and weight rather than bother with APSC at all? I can't see the lens mount working well with a smaller body, but I may be wrong.

So where do all the APSC Nikon users go next? Upgrade to FF (at a considerable cost) or switch to Fuji/Sony? For many people, $2000 for a camera body is way out of their league.

Canon are already established in the APSC market, although they do not seem to regard it as a serious enthusiast or professional option. I doubt very much they will use their APSC mount on their FF cameras.

I have no skin in the game. I am happy with my Xpro2 and XE2 and have no plans to change until they wear out. But I am puzzled about the future strategies of the big three with regards to the rest of the market, which they seem to be ignoring.

The alternative to a phone camera does not have to be a $2000 FF camera. Moreover, the low end Fujis, Canon APSC mirrorless and MFT are all doing well in emerging markets.

Where is Nikon's solution to that, and what will it be?

Perhaps Fuji will pick up some new customers from this. I doubt they will lose many.