AcquiredTaste
Veteran Member
I chuckled out loud at that one. Were you being serious?
I didn't even want 8k now.
One wishes.
-
Welcome to the new forums! Please read this first. For known issues we are working to resolve, click here.
New Pro Body
- Thread starter Ramon767
- Start date
I think both are related to wanting to be competitive or in this case class leading in video. The moment they decided 8K 60 FPS raw was not only doable but important to do the stills resolution and frame rate came along for the ride.
If you compare that to the new Canon R5C that can't even autofocus or control the aperture in 60FPS Nikon has done something that stands out .
AcquiredTaste
Veteran Member
I agree with that as well.
The D3s had nothing to do with the D3x in the form of a successor as was already mentioned. Just like the D2h wasn't in the same vein as the D1X. Just like the D2hs wasn't a scaled down D2x. They were separate lines of cameras with their own distinctive strengths.
The Z9 offers flagship quality to its actual buying demographic and is what many professional photographers have long been asking for. Unfortunately it took Nikon 100 years to bring forth a strong competing high resolution solution in pro trim.
Unlike the D3x, the Z9 has a much better cost/performance ratio. Whereas that of the D3x was seen as dismal to many would-be buyers of that camera.
Goldaccess is correct - the market is very thin. What you see is probably what you're going to be seeing for some years to come. A refined Z9 as an "s" designation? Perhaps, but you'd still have the same animal - just refined (e.g. D2h vs D2hs style)
BGD300V1
Senior Member
WHAT????
for many of the last 100 years, Nikon was the camera that others wanted to emulate.
AcquiredTaste
Veteran Member
I'm both of those things, and I disagree.
I will get back to you about 1 year later after I received the Z9,
Correct. Not worth discussing on a practical level.
Those saying "all we need are 12mp" were those who should've spoke only for themselves. It's painful obvious to many photographers pro and amateur alike, that 12mp can be a glaring detriment to your end result depending on what it is you're trying to achieve and how you're going about doing it.
Correct again - we no longer consider a 24mp file as "huge" in today's contexts
Correct.
Manufacturers, marketing, conditioning, and people saying ridiculous things have caused to many people to think that 30-50mp is huge. It's not huge, it's about the same image quality that your granny got from her El'Cheapo medium format camera bought at the corner store. We're just now getting to where that quality is the norm again.
We use to see crowds of people in national parks using 5x4 and 8x10 cameras; it was the norm. But today, people consider a 150mp Phaseone digital back to offer some superlative image quality above no other.... when actually we're just now getting somewhat firmly into 8x10 territory with 150mp. We've lost the ability to put things into perspective when it comes to 'megapixels'.
The Z9 as it is now, leaves little to want for and is an excellent entry. Global shutter would be a game changer to the market as a whole, and would draw many currently shooting older medium format (MF) systems / lenses with leaf shutters, over to the Z9 if global shutter was on the table.
Z9 is the best I've seen from Nikon in many years - a second iteration with menu refinement, new processors, tweaked AF... all those little things that make an already compelling camera even better. More pixels on the horizon for a 2nd iteration of the Z9 or a whole new model is a given.
Likewise. Which is my point.
EricK214
Senior Member
Yes, low light night and concert type photography yes, lower MP is better for high ISO noise. I agree there but i was speaking for wildlife/bif shooters
I was being facetious - I didn't mean 100 years in the literal sense.
Companies want to emulate different facets of both Canon and Nikon (just to name several companies) as both companies made inroads into making photography better for the user in different ways.
However, I haven't forgotten how, with frustration I'll add, many Nikon photographers waited for VR to come to the super telephoto lenses, others waited for tilt-shift options, others for built-in teleconverter (e.g. 200-400 f/4) and others wondered when Nikon would bring forth a high resolution pro body, let's not forget the rather loooooong wait for Nikon to field 35mm/"full frame" options as well.
Canon, Pentax, etc., of course aren't perfect either, and have also left a sour taste in photographer's mouth over their respective issues.
If I didn't appreciate Nikon, I wouldn't use it. At the same time I'm being truthful. The Z9 is one of those precious moments (like the D800) when Nikon has a moment of clarity and I'm eager to hear more reports of how the Z9 is working in the hands of users putting it through its paces in the field.
AcquiredTaste
Veteran Member
If that helps your point, you didn't make your point very well at all.
AcquiredTaste
Veteran Member
Unless those field reports disagree with you, perhaps?
I'll simplify it.
1. "Many" professional photographers is fraction of a whole Nikon buying demographic.
2. You say you're both, meaning a pro + buyer of Nikon.
3. "Likewise" means that I too shoot-to-eat and am a buyer of Nikon (pro cameras, etc.) but disagree with you - - - which was my point. The point was clear, and simple.
Many professional photographers (not all obviously) have been asking for a Z9-like, high res, pro body for years. You disagree with my assertion, wile other pro photographers who shoot at base iso - 12500.. don't find "high iso" performance today a thing to quibble over as it's not the glaring issue that it once was for their professional photography.
FingerPainter
Forum Pro
- Messages
- 12,593
- Solutions
- 37
- Reaction score
- 13,643
Hope springs eternal.
Do you have a theory about why Nikon's first flagship MILC has so many pixels? ("Because they're idiots!" and "Because they hate me!" don't count.)
Most people seem to agree that the D6's high ISO performance is not quite as good as the D5. Do you have a theory about why Nikon went ahead with the D6 despite that?
Why do you think the R3 is called the R3 and not the R1? How many MP do yo think the actual R1 will have?
What do all these points tell you about whether the Z9II will have 20-30MP?
FingerPainter
Forum Pro
- Messages
- 12,593
- Solutions
- 37
- Reaction score
- 13,643
In Auto-ISO, the ability to specify a minimum ISO other than the camera's base ISO.
Faster X-Sync
Longer-lasting battery
More independent port covers
Avoid LED flicker banding
Faster X-Sync
Longer-lasting battery
More independent port covers
Avoid LED flicker banding
goldaccess
Forum Enthusiast
Thanks for bringing this thread more on topic again!
AcquiredTaste
Veteran Member
Absolutely! It's an arms race. More HP sells cars, more MP sells bodies. The professional market (where flagship bodies were originally aimed) is very small, but the enthusiast with cash to burn market is relatively large. I think that's why Nikon also priced a $6500 camera at $5500, to entice the latter crowd. That crowd is heavily swayed by MP and wouldn't have been nearly as likely to jump ship if the Z9 was 'only' 24MP.
No, in that case, I actually don't.
Too many.
It won't. I'm not sure why you thought I said it would?
The question in the OP was: "what is everyone hoping for in the Z9ii?"
My answer was 20-30MP. That is what I hope for. I'm still confused as to why anyone had a problem with that so intense as to derail a thread talking about it. My hopes, apparently, are very important to people! ;-)
AcquiredTaste
Veteran Member
Awww, dangit. Usually it's me telling people that they need to read more carefully, but this time I'm clearly at fault. My apologies. When I read your initial response, I missed the 'many' entirely. I thought you said "The Z9 offers flagship quality to its actual buying demographic and is what professional photographers have long been asking for." I thought you were attempting to speak for the entire professional market rather than a subset.
You are clearly correct, the z9 is what many professional photographers have been asking for. No arguments, and my sincere apologies.
Keyboard shortcuts
- f
- Forum