We're seeing the same output we've seen from previous generation sony bodies.
So either Nikon is developing the sensor and selling the development to sony before they use it, or they're using sony development with small adjustments.
-
Welcome to the new forums! Please read this first. For known issues we are working to resolve, click here.
- Status
So either Nikon is developing the sensor and selling the development to sony before they use it, or they're using sony development with small adjustments.
RaindropDroptop
Forum Enthusiast
- Messages
- 253
- Reaction score
- 356
Don’t trust any “expert” that thinks the RP or R outperforms the Z6/Z7. I was able to shoot a RP + 70-200 RF over the weekend, the lens was great (though oddly feels very cheap) but the body was yeeesh.
briantilley
Veteran Member
There's a bit more to it than that. You might check out this recent thread - especially the posts by Bobn2.
This seems like an odd premise to me. When we discuss systems we're always talking about native lenses. If we count F mount lenses, we could also count adapted lenses, and the waters get muddied. The better argument seems that the Z system has a limited amount of lenses that are all phenomenal. The f1.8 lenses are excellent optically and reasonable in cost. There's consistency in the look of the images across the platform. As a non Z shooter, the one thing I notice most is the DR and detail in the images that come from native glass (even the "kit" lens). Prices seem right in the Z system, too.
Last edited:
OK, I read the following article yesterday and can't stop posting something on here. I like his AD-free website and I have learned a lot from him. So I avoided mentioning his name or citing exactly what he wrote to hide the source of the information...
Usually, I wouldn't be bothered by what others think. But I always try to learn from the experts as I know there are lots of things I don't know. I don't think I am the "old people" he mentioned, so I started to ask myself the question: shall I follow his suggestion?
Loading…
kenrockwell.com
"This is called FUD, or a "placeholder." Nikon floats this fluff to try to keep old people (people like me who've been shooting Nikon since back when Nikon was a leader) from upgrading to Canon, as I did back in 2013.
Sure, maybe it will be awesome, or maybe not, and no one has any idea when or how much it will cost.
The only thing we do know is that today is that the Z9 is completely worthless to photographers because we can't shoot with it. Dreamers can dream, but some of us have to produce something for a living. Nikon announced the name of this unicorn — but absolutely nothing else about it — before we can buy it to try to slow the hordes of people leaving Nikon for better systems.
It's not 1984 anymore. Nikon hasn't been the leader in pro cameras since the 1990s, and I honestly doubt, with Nikon's reduced development budgets, that anyone ought to be investing further into Nikon. All because people like me have been shooting with and building our Nikon systems since the 1980s doesn't mean it makes any sense today to buy into it — much less wait around for a camera we can't buy. The FTZ adapter is awful because a large proportion of my classic lenses won't autofocus or couple data to the Z system with it. The longer you've been shooting Nikon, the less valuable it is to get a Z camera because less of our collection works well with it!
The Canon R5 is in stock and can be at your house tomorrow with free delivery, and just as important, Canon makes a slew of innovative lenses that Sony and Nikon don't. No, I doubt Nikon will ever catch up; they no longer have the development budgets."
I don't know which favourite for you you are talking about but in general......Internet armchair experts......apparently they know everything.......they know more about the companies they comment on than the people who work in them.......mmmmmmm. The internet comes with a note of caution I think.
Sorry to say, there is a lot of stupidity behind a lot of those comments and reviews you came across. People tend to conflate a lot of different things into one, because complexity is tough--and because simple & controversial content is easier to monetize.
Let's start with this: What happens if 80-90% of a company's sales are in the lower-end gear that is irrelevant to a majority of serious enthusiasts? And further, what happens when reductions (sales, manufacturing, development) primarily effect only those lower-end items?
In other words, what if Nikon offered only 2 cameras: D3500 and Z7; and 90% of resources (inc. sales, manufacturing, R&D, support, etc.) went toward the D3500; with only 10% going to the Z7? And then what if 100% of those D3500's go away? Then Nikon has reduced by 90%...and the Z7 is unaffected. The crazy part of it all is that the DPReview people & Youtubers are purportedly only interested in the Z7--yet they are using the 90% data from the D3500 to make their judgements, ignoring the relevant data.
It's also off to consider the EOS R & RP as being better than the Z6 & Z7--perhaps in the limited and controlled scope that whoever you were watching manipulated; but that's the game. Literally the opposite of the above: now, instead of applying too broad of a scope, it is applying to narrow of a scope. But most serious photographers would not consider the R & RP to be better than the Z6 or Z7 (and eventual Z5). Canon didn't either--those were their R prototypes to test the waters and to bring something out fast to compete and hold it down until they could get serious (just like the R3 will be). They superseded those cameras with the R5 & R6; and I doubt you'll see mark ii versions of the R or RP. They don't even follow any of Canon's naming conventions.
My advice is: stop paying attention to people who are too simple minded to understand these basic concepts of scope & relevance. Don't be one of those people who needs to take in what others have digested and given you--don't be the tail end of the human centipede.
S
Shadowsurfer
Guest
What is the problem. The Z9 or whatever it will be called is overkill for most of us.
Quite wisely Nikon made the Z5,6,7 and 50 first. Those are cameras aimed and best suited to us mere mortals who will not be going to Tokyo to record the Olympic games.
The ones they made first are starting to sell well it has been said.
Will our cat photo's be any better shot on the Z9?
Why do people get so wound up about the lack of a top tier "pro" body, when most of us cannot even use the Z5 to its full capacity.
I think Mr Rockwell might have spent too much time out in the Californian sun of late. Or he might have written the piece just as a "wind up", to get some internet traffic, thanks to links like the one the OP posted.
Quite wisely Nikon made the Z5,6,7 and 50 first. Those are cameras aimed and best suited to us mere mortals who will not be going to Tokyo to record the Olympic games.
The ones they made first are starting to sell well it has been said.
Will our cat photo's be any better shot on the Z9?
Why do people get so wound up about the lack of a top tier "pro" body, when most of us cannot even use the Z5 to its full capacity.
I think Mr Rockwell might have spent too much time out in the Californian sun of late. Or he might have written the piece just as a "wind up", to get some internet traffic, thanks to links like the one the OP posted.
briantilley
Veteran Member
From what you had already said about the opinions of your "expert", I suspected it was Mr Rockwell.
Personally, I would not class him as an expert in anything except attracting clicks to his website. The passage that you've now quoted does nothing to change my view - and I suggest you'd do better to ignore it and find a more reliable source.
Last edited:
Sony and Nikon make innovative lenses that Canon don't. All 3 make innovative lenses . Ken is a Canon shooter and look only where is Canon better.
And have Nikon no longer development budgets? If I look at the last info over R&D in the IR section I see this:
Loading…
www.nikon.com
That is a other story than Ken tell you. In 2 weeks we will see the financial info over Q4 and entire financial year. Yesterday we see the Revision of the Consolidated Financial Forecast. And that exceeding the previous forecast from feb 2021. That is the reason the stock price go up.
The Z9 won't compete with the R5. It'll compete with the R3. Neither the Z9 or R3 have seen the light of day in the real world. Yep both companies have lifted the lid on them to keep interest going in the market. Nothing wrong with that.
What Ken doesn't know is whether Nikon's R&D budget is big enough to support mirrorless development. It almost certainly is, because Nikon has slimmed down and is being very choosy about where it's resources go. Which is a good thing. In Nikon's case it's going into mirrorless.
The problem facing Nikon, and other companies, is not budgets; it's the squeeze on manufacturing resources. But the plan is there and the budgets are there.
What Ken doesn't know is whether Nikon's R&D budget is big enough to support mirrorless development. It almost certainly is, because Nikon has slimmed down and is being very choosy about where it's resources go. Which is a good thing. In Nikon's case it's going into mirrorless.
The problem facing Nikon, and other companies, is not budgets; it's the squeeze on manufacturing resources. But the plan is there and the budgets are there.
The market in film and early digital days was even smaller, and that didn't stop the main players to invest in R&D. Nikon's market share in mirrorless isn't big but it's more than enough to support the cost. What we probably won't see are resources allocated to lower end products, at least for now.
What matters is if you are happy with the camera and the system, because lenses are probably more important than the camera. Canon has a range of RF L lenses, several zooms and the 50 and 85 1.2 primes. Nikon also has the S 50 1.2 and the S 85 1.2 shouldn't be long, the f2.8 trinity is complete and it's at least as good if not better than the Canon L and Sony GM equivalents. The S 100-400 and the 200-600 are on the way, the 400 f2.8 and the 600 f4 are on the roadmap as well. What Nikon has is a set of S f1.8 primes (especially the 20, 50 and 85) that are compact and relatively affordable for the excellent quality they deliver. It seems the R&D budget was enough to produce excellent lenses for the Z system.
The Z6/Z7 were the first step in the mirrorless full frame, and they are excellent cameras, better than the competition in many aspects but trailing behind in AF tracking of fast and erratic subjects. If today you want mirrorless to photograph sports maybe your best bet is to get a 400 2.8 and a R5 or a a9 or a1, but if you are doing other types of photography and have a different budget, the Z system offers a good bang for the buck, although S lenses may seem expensive at first.
I don't care about the a1, the Z9 or the R3. I will care one day when the technology is passed down to more affordable models, meanwhile I'm building the system with the excellent Z S lenses and the few F glass that I kept, those lenses will probably see 2-3 cameras in their lifetime. As the mirrorless technology matures improvements become smaller and all companies get to the same place, Sony has the advantage of having started earlier, Canon is closing the gap fast and Nikon is getting there.
What Ken writes is partially true, the R5 is in stock now, the Z9 will take a while and will be more expensive. Canon has some innovative lenses like the 600 and 800 f11 and they are interesting if you have enough light, the 70-200 f2.8 collapses to a relatively small size but many people prefer internal zooms for that category of lenses, the 28-70 is f2 but some people want 24 in the wide end... I would take things with a pinch of salt, he tends to write different things each time, "The Nikon D3 is taking the sports world away from Canon by storm [...] Canon makes no full-frame pro sports camera." in 2007, "The D4s belts out the shots like nothing else if you're a pro" in 2014, doesn't really match "Nikon hasn't been the leader in pro cameras since the 1990s", not even alluding to the fact that the relatively recent D850 is considered by many people the best DSLR of all time.
But the Z9 and the R5 don't matter much if you don't want to spend that kind of money in the camera, and in the glass to make the camera shine.
Don Simpson
Well-known member
Be a bit wary of Ken's site and advice. He has a lot of useful information, but I find his declarative opinions a bit much sometimes. For instance, he often declares you do not need to shoot RAW (NEF) images. JPEG is all you need.
Now years ago I followed his advice with a D90 + 18-300mm DX in an after hours take all the pictures you want visit to the Sistine Chapel. I dearly wish I had NEFs of that visit now.
In any event, good advice from others.
Now years ago I followed his advice with a D90 + 18-300mm DX in an after hours take all the pictures you want visit to the Sistine Chapel. I dearly wish I had NEFs of that visit now.
In any event, good advice from others.
Hi,
Thanks for bringing this under our attention !
Very interesting and promising indeed !
There are certainly excellent engineers at work in the nikon company.
photography-lover
Leading Member
- Messages
- 598
- Reaction score
- 840
Nikon is developing sensors and sensor technologies. They have recently done a tech announcement about a 1000 fps 1 inch sensor with exceptional DR in case you missed that.
I don’t agree on the 50mm f1.2 S. This is exactly the kind of lenses Nikon needs to continue to deliver. They have the most talented lens developers, they need to keep using them. Having by far the best f1.8 primes line up and the best f2.8 pro zooms isn’t enough. They also need flagship lenses.
photography-lover
Leading Member
- Messages
- 598
- Reaction score
- 840
We should obviously count adapted lenses.
The fact that all the Sony FE mount lenses can be adapted on the Z bodies is an essential core strength of the Z mount that Canon and Sony will never be able to replicate.
photography-lover
Leading Member
- Messages
- 598
- Reaction score
- 840
The thing being that the Z7II is very close to the R5 for stills. Better in some ways a bit behind in others.
With firmware 1.20 the only way to describe the AF of the Z7II is overall excellent, in particular when shooting people with eye AF. Tracking is probably a bit behind on small objects such a distant birds, but is overall totally usable for a variety of subjects and better than what most DSLRs were able to achieve, including a Canon 5DmkIV for example. The only DSLRs better AFwise than a Z6II/Z7II are the D850 and pro sports body.
The R5 is a very nice camera, no doubt. But a lot of the excitement results from how low Canon had set the bar both with their DSLRs and early R bodies. Nikon on the other hand has managed to deliver much better average value to their customers by consistently delivering bodies close to the best.
Last edited:
photography-lover
Leading Member
- Messages
- 598
- Reaction score
- 840
More likely is the Z9 will compete with the R1 that Canon is obviously not even close from being ready to produce.
There is a high probability that they intended to deliver the R3 as an R1 then heard about how good the Z9 will be and renamed the R1 into an R3 ar the last minute to convey the message that they are behind by design…
Disagree. If I buy into a mount I'm doing so to use native glass, and ultimately most people will fall into this category even if they try out older glass in early days. Adapted glass is often not ergonomic and generally using adapters isn't fun compared to native glass that functions perfectly.
- Status
Keyboard shortcuts
- f
- Forum