D5, A9… or waiting for Z9 (sports photography)

Started 3 months ago | Discussions thread
T O Shooter Forum Pro • Posts: 11,707
Re: D5, A9… or waiting for Z9 (sports photography)

TOF guy wrote:

T O Shooter wrote:

They may drag themselves back into the game. But they'll never drag themselves to the top of the game. That's another ship that has sailed.

Based on? Is there some law of physics that says that Nikon cannot design AF as well as any of its competitors?

#1 - This cannot continue


Another big loss. $262 million.

#2 More a law of not paying attention to the competitors. Let's just say the Z9 is at or better than the D6 AF wise. Very well could be.

But most people don't buy a D6 (or a Z9, Alpha, etc) So now you have to wait for the Z9 tech to filter down to a lessor body. How far is that out - 1-2 years?? Sony and Canon will be that much further ahead again. I said from the beginning that the Zee AF was not there without ever touching one. I got shredded for that. But in Oct 2021 I am not alone in my opinion. I have been proven right. Even Lance is on board.

And you've got this that Primeshooter just posted. He's been nailing it on his posts lately. (Not that he wasn't before)

A recent comment from Ryan Cooper at f stoppers -

"I think, for me, as a Nikon shooter the biggest problem Nikon is facing is that it is a really tough sell getting me to jump into Nikon Z. (I am still on Nikon F).

Nikon Z seems like a perfectly good line but it doesn't appear to have anything whatsoever setting it apart to justify the downsides. They claim the larger lens mount design offers optical opportunities that their competitors lack but in reality that hasn't actually come to fruition in any meaningful way. (other than an absurdly expensive manual 50)

Add in the fact that Nikon, as a business, seems to be on awfully wobbly ground which makes me very apprehensive about investing in that platform. If/when I decide to go mirrorless, what does sticking to Nikon really benefit me over switching brands? I can just as easily adapt my existing glass to Sony as I can to Nikon Z. It isn't measurably better. I don't save money by sticking to Nikon. I don't have much brand loyalty.

I like Nikon. I think Nikon Z is a very solid system and can produce world-class images. I just can't justify investing in it. I'm not the only one."

Certainly not based on the significant improvements that Nikon has already made with the Z6Z7 series through firmware updates and the gen II bodies.

This reminds me the days of the 20D when some said that Nikon/Sony will never catch up with Canon. Or that group who claimed in the D3 days that Nikon will always be behind in resolution, and were so convinced of their predictions that they were in complete denial when Nikon Rumors leaked the D800 specs. Nikon has proven time again and again that it can catch up with and even exceed its competitors when it puts its mind to it. (snip)

And there's now an Alpha as well to compete with. And an Alpha II before they revise the Z9.

I suppose you mean an A1 II. Sure, Sony will know what the Z9 can do and do it one better. Then Nikon will do the same to Sony with the Z9 II. And so on, So?

When even Lance has conceded that the Z AF is not there, well that's a milestone and a good data point.

It's not there yet for AF-C. The progress already made is significant;

-- hide signature --

A Canon G5 and a bit of Nikon gear.

 T O Shooter's gear list:T O Shooter's gear list
Canon PowerShot G5 Nikon D4S Nikon D500 Nikon D850 +5 more
Post (hide subjects) Posted by
Keyboard shortcuts:
FForum PPrevious NNext WNext unread UUpvote SSubscribe RReply QQuote BBookmark MMy threads
Color scheme? Blue / Yellow