I too would doubt lower resolution sensor than 45mp of Z7, Z7ii, and Z9. Only way I see a lower resolution sensor is if it brought definitively better low-light capability.
Then I would submit, Nikon shouldn't have put Z 200-600mm f/nothing lens on roadmap back in October 2019; without putting a big * by lens saying: Not happening till Z 400mm f/4.5 S and 800mm f/6.3 lens are on store shelves.
What I was thinking. It's not brain surgery, it's coding. With most of coding work already done via shutter sound demo.What is even more laughable is that it took them a year to get this out. Seriously? If they can't do this simple thing it's no wonder they can't actually get hardware out the door."The electronic custom shutter sound selection function, initially presented a year ago during the 2022 CP+ live-streaming event by Takekawa-san and Yokota-san, is finally coming to the Nikon Z9 camera. This function will be released soon according to the latest Nikon presentation at the 2023 CP+ show in Japan.""Quiet" was a nice bit of foreshadowing
https://nikonrumors.com/2023/02/25/...tion-function-is-coming-to-the-nikon-z9.aspx/
Should we be impressed by a yet to be released custom electronic shutter sound, shown a year ago? Simple firmware
I will be one delighted if this turns out to be correct.
I do also and the Z9 is the lowest res serious camera I own, leaving aside a D5 that I haven’t used since Apr 2022, but I am talking about the generic market trend.
Probably more like 37mp for Z bodies, since they all need to capture extra pixels to use when correcting for pincushion/barrel distortion. And a bit more probably if they are going to continue doing electronic image stabilization on video. But output would by 33.7 mp, yeah.
They do know, which is one of the reasons they are sceptical about demand. They know about demographics and focus groups. Also the sales of the D500 fell off a cliff, when the D850 was released. From that point on it outsold the best years of the D500 and D810 combined, despite costing more than either and when the rest of the market was shrinking.. Even if a photographer crops every shot, they still need to crop entirely within the DX area, every shot to gain nothing from FX.Approximately 7 years on, since the D500 launched in early 2016, it's still one of the top cameras for wildlife photography, and it's the most affordable considering the Autofocus and associated Pro level features.{Snip...}The great thing about discussions like this is that eventually we get an answer. Nikon either will or will not develop an professional APS-C Z body. Either way, we'll keep doing photography
The D500 is still a pretty good camera today. The main down side is that I can never mount my 800mm PF (or any Z lens) onto it.
Tellingly, this combination of cost effectiveness applies particularly with pairing a D500 with the 200-500 f5.6E or for more outlay a 500 PF, with a 70-300 or 70-200.
Nikon must know all this from its sales and marketing research.
Source? link to interview where Nikon stated this?They do know, which is one of the reasons they are sceptical about demand.Approximately 7 years on, since the D500 launched in early 2016, it's still one of the top cameras for wildlife photography, and it's the most affordable considering the Autofocus and associated Pro level features.{Snip...}The great thing about discussions like this is that eventually we get an answer. Nikon either will or will not develop an professional APS-C Z body. Either way, we'll keep doing photography
The D500 is still a pretty good camera today. The main down side is that I can never mount my 800mm PF (or any Z lens) onto it.
Tellingly, this combination of cost effectiveness applies particularly with pairing a D500 with the 200-500 f5.6E or for more outlay a 500 PF, with a 70-300 or 70-200.
Nikon must know all this from its sales and marketing research.
We know Nikon has sold close to 250 000 copies of the D500. No failure here, and sales persisted after the D850 launched....collectively covering the wildlife and sports markets + more.
Photosynthesis under represents actual sales radically considering none from southern Africa where the D500 is very popular. The total of 200 000+ of the D500 registered is likely closer to 1/4 million cameras sold, which would also apply to the 290 000+ copies of the D850. The higher number of D850's sold reflects how it is a distinctly different camera, and was eagerly adopted by many photographers for studio and advertising. This has been in addition to sports and wildlife.
Well, I know 2 of the largest retailers in S Africa continue to sell new D500's, and not lightly Used D850's. Consumer cost is one major factor for the excellent bang-for-the-buck.
Nikon has stated its aim to increase the ratio to 2 Z lenses/camera. Profit margin on DX MILCs is likely lower than the higher end FX bodies, particularly comparing Z30, Zfc to Z6 and Z7 series.They do know, which is one of the reasons they are sceptical about demand. They know about demographics and focus groups. Also the sales of the D500 fell off a cliff, when the D850 was released. From that point on it outsold the best years of the D500 and D810 combined, despite costing more than either and when the rest of the market was shrinking.. Even if a photographer crops every shot, they still need to crop entirely within the DX area, every shot to gain nothing from FX.Approximately 7 years on, since the D500 launched in early 2016, it's still one of the top cameras for wildlife photography, and it's the most affordable considering the Autofocus and associated Pro level features.{Snip...}The great thing about discussions like this is that eventually we get an answer. Nikon either will or will not develop an professional APS-C Z body. Either way, we'll keep doing photography
The D500 is still a pretty good camera today. The main down side is that I can never mount my 800mm PF (or any Z lens) onto it.
Tellingly, this combination of cost effectiveness applies particularly with pairing a D500 with the 200-500 f5.6E or for more outlay a 500 PF, with a 70-300 or 70-200.
Nikon must know all this from its sales and marketing research.
Those who would buy a high end DX and won't buy a Z9 or other FX camera, might not outweigh those who who would buy a high end DX INSTEAD of a Z9 or another FX, if one were available. Cost effectiveness, is a consumer goal and not really much of a consideration for a brand who has told shareholders it plans to sell fewer units for more money.
The 200-500 was released over a year before the D500 and it sold like hotcakes, it was possibly the dawn of unavailable, free stock, lenses.Nikon has stated its aim to increase the ratio to 2 Z lenses/camera. Profit margin on DX MILCs is likely lower than the higher end FX bodies, particularly comparing Z30, Zfc to Z6 and Z7 series.They do know, which is one of the reasons they are sceptical about demand. They know about demographics and focus groups. Also the sales of the D500 fell off a cliff, when the D850 was released. From that point on it outsold the best years of the D500 and D810 combined, despite costing more than either and when the rest of the market was shrinking.. Even if a photographer crops every shot, they still need to crop entirely within the DX area, every shot to gain nothing from FX.Approximately 7 years on, since the D500 launched in early 2016, it's still one of the top cameras for wildlife photography, and it's the most affordable considering the Autofocus and associated Pro level features.{Snip...}The great thing about discussions like this is that eventually we get an answer. Nikon either will or will not develop an professional APS-C Z body. Either way, we'll keep doing photography
The D500 is still a pretty good camera today. The main down side is that I can never mount my 800mm PF (or any Z lens) onto it.
Tellingly, this combination of cost effectiveness applies particularly with pairing a D500 with the 200-500 f5.6E or for more outlay a 500 PF, with a 70-300 or 70-200.
Nikon must know all this from its sales and marketing research.
Those who would buy a high end DX and won't buy a Z9 or other FX camera, might not outweigh those who who would buy a high end DX INSTEAD of a Z9 or another FX, if one were available. Cost effectiveness, is a consumer goal and not really much of a consideration for a brand who has told shareholders it plans to sell fewer units for more money.
However, this is where only Nikon knows how many new Z lenses DX owners purchase for their camera(s).
This relationship is important for the Prosumer DX sales. Again Nikon will know how many new copies of the 200-500 f5.6E were bought by D500 owners - of the 260 000 copies sold (likely close on 300 000).
In the case of the Z System, each DX Z90 will sell many copies of the 200-600 besides other Nikkors.
I hope I am not talking out of school, but as I said Nikon UK said this last week, (Apparently someone else from here was also on the call). It's what they have said pretty much every other time when asked about a Z D500 replacement. What is significant is the contrast to every other question about future products where they just refuse to comment at all.Source? link to interview where Nikon stated this?They do know, which is one of the reasons they are sceptical about demand.Approximately 7 years on, since the D500 launched in early 2016, it's still one of the top cameras for wildlife photography, and it's the most affordable considering the Autofocus and associated Pro level features.{Snip...}The great thing about discussions like this is that eventually we get an answer. Nikon either will or will not develop an professional APS-C Z body. Either way, we'll keep doing photography
The D500 is still a pretty good camera today. The main down side is that I can never mount my 800mm PF (or any Z lens) onto it.
Tellingly, this combination of cost effectiveness applies particularly with pairing a D500 with the 200-500 f5.6E or for more outlay a 500 PF, with a 70-300 or 70-200.
Nikon must know all this from its sales and marketing research.
I'd say the main downside to the D500 is the noisy shutter mechanism. There's no shortage of outstanding F-mount glass one could use with it. But there's almost bo getting around the noise that shutter mechanism makes. Animals hear it...and they're goneWay back in 2009, after Nikon made a slight upgrade to the D300 and introduced the D300S, rumors for an up-coming D400 was flying all over the place, but it gradually became clear to me that Nikon's goal was pushing people into FX, and DX was mostly for the consumer-grade (i.e. lower end) users. By 2013, Nikon referred to the D7100 as their "flag ship" DX body, and I was convinced that no D400 would be coming. By 2014, people had mostly given up on the D400 idea. However, out of the blue Nikon suddenly announced the D500, along with the D5, at the CES in early January 2016. The well known rumors site had zero prior info on the D500. I heard that even some inside Nikon had no idea. And suddenly some people on web forums picked on my "no D400" opinion (which was literally correct, but there was a successor to the D300/D300s that I didn't expect at all).The great thing about discussions like this is that eventually we get an answer. Nikon either will or will not develop an professional APS-C Z body. Either way, we'll keep doing photography
In other words, there were 8+ years between the D300 and D500, 6+ between the D300s and D500. Now that the D500 has been out for 7+ years, who is going to say whether there will be a successor, in the form of a DX Z body, to the D500 or not.
The D500 is still a pretty good camera today. The main down side is that I can never mount my 800mm PF (or any Z lens) onto it.
Who actually buys a DX lens for a highend DX camera such as the D500 (equally Z90) for wildlife, except an Ultrawide or perhaps a Fisheye?The 200-500 was released over a year before the D500 and it sold like hotcakes, it was possibly the dawn of unavailable, free stock, lenses.Nikon has stated its aim to increase the ratio to 2 Z lenses/camera. Profit margin on DX MILCs is likely lower than the higher end FX bodies, particularly comparing Z30, Zfc to Z6 and Z7 series.They do know, which is one of the reasons they are sceptical about demand. They know about demographics and focus groups. Also the sales of the D500 fell off a cliff, when the D850 was released. From that point on it outsold the best years of the D500 and D810 combined, despite costing more than either and when the rest of the market was shrinking.. Even if a photographer crops every shot, they still need to crop entirely within the DX area, every shot to gain nothing from FX.Approximately 7 years on, since the D500 launched in early 2016, it's still one of the top cameras for wildlife photography, and it's the most affordable considering the Autofocus and associated Pro level features.{Snip...}The great thing about discussions like this is that eventually we get an answer. Nikon either will or will not develop an professional APS-C Z body. Either way, we'll keep doing photography
The D500 is still a pretty good camera today. The main down side is that I can never mount my 800mm PF (or any Z lens) onto it.
Tellingly, this combination of cost effectiveness applies particularly with pairing a D500 with the 200-500 f5.6E or for more outlay a 500 PF, with a 70-300 or 70-200.
Nikon must know all this from its sales and marketing research.
Those who would buy a high end DX and won't buy a Z9 or other FX camera, might not outweigh those who who would buy a high end DX INSTEAD of a Z9 or another FX, if one were available. Cost effectiveness, is a consumer goal and not really much of a consideration for a brand who has told shareholders it plans to sell fewer units for more money.
However, this is where only Nikon knows how many new Z lenses DX owners purchase for their camera(s).
This relationship is important for the Prosumer DX sales. Again Nikon will know how many new copies of the 200-500 f5.6E were bought by D500 owners - of the 260 000 copies sold (likely close on 300 000).
In the case of the Z System, each DX Z90 will sell many copies of the 200-600 besides other Nikkors.
Is it feasible Nikon are going to struggle to sell as many 200-600s as they can make if it is, in any way competitive with or without a DX body to stick it on?
There are no S line DX lenses on the roadmap do you really think they will release a Pro DX body where the standard lens is a 16-50 3.5-6.3 collapsible pancake and the only promised wide angle has power zoom?
The 1% of use cases, where a DX could be better and it would lead to more sales, is not a reason to make one, especially if it takes resources and sales away from the rest of the line. That is different to say, it doesn't make sense for people to want one.
Then one wonders how they explain the sales of 200 000 D500's logged by Roland on his photosynthesis website?I hope I am not talking out of school, but as I said Nikon UK said this last week, (Apparently someone else from here was also on the call). It's what they have said pretty much every other time when asked about a Z D500 replacement. What is significant is the contrast to every other question about future products where they just refuse to comment at all.Source? link to interview where Nikon stated this?They do know, which is one of the reasons they are sceptical about demand.Approximately 7 years on, since the D500 launched in early 2016, it's still one of the top cameras for wildlife photography, and it's the most affordable considering the Autofocus and associated Pro level features.{Snip...}The great thing about discussions like this is that eventually we get an answer. Nikon either will or will not develop an professional APS-C Z body. Either way, we'll keep doing photography
The D500 is still a pretty good camera today. The main down side is that I can never mount my 800mm PF (or any Z lens) onto it.
Tellingly, this combination of cost effectiveness applies particularly with pairing a D500 with the 200-500 f5.6E or for more outlay a 500 PF, with a 70-300 or 70-200.
Nikon must know all this from its sales and marketing research.
The 200-500 was introduced in August 2015. The D500 was introduced 5-months later in January 2016.The 200-500 was released over a year before the D500 and it sold like hotcakes, it was possibly the dawn of unavailable, free stock, lenses.Nikon has stated its aim to increase the ratio to 2 Z lenses/camera. Profit margin on DX MILCs is likely lower than the higher end FX bodies, particularly comparing Z30, Zfc to Z6 and Z7 series.They do know, which is one of the reasons they are sceptical about demand. They know about demographics and focus groups. Also the sales of the D500 fell off a cliff, when the D850 was released. From that point on it outsold the best years of the D500 and D810 combined, despite costing more than either and when the rest of the market was shrinking.. Even if a photographer crops every shot, they still need to crop entirely within the DX area, every shot to gain nothing from FX.Approximately 7 years on, since the D500 launched in early 2016, it's still one of the top cameras for wildlife photography, and it's the most affordable considering the Autofocus and associated Pro level features.{Snip...}The great thing about discussions like this is that eventually we get an answer. Nikon either will or will not develop an professional APS-C Z body. Either way, we'll keep doing photography
The D500 is still a pretty good camera today. The main down side is that I can never mount my 800mm PF (or any Z lens) onto it.
Tellingly, this combination of cost effectiveness applies particularly with pairing a D500 with the 200-500 f5.6E or for more outlay a 500 PF, with a 70-300 or 70-200.
Nikon must know all this from its sales and marketing research.
Those who would buy a high end DX and won't buy a Z9 or other FX camera, might not outweigh those who who would buy a high end DX INSTEAD of a Z9 or another FX, if one were available. Cost effectiveness, is a consumer goal and not really much of a consideration for a brand who has told shareholders it plans to sell fewer units for more money.
However, this is where only Nikon knows how many new Z lenses DX owners purchase for their camera(s).
This relationship is important for the Prosumer DX sales. Again Nikon will know how many new copies of the 200-500 f5.6E were bought by D500 owners - of the 260 000 copies sold (likely close on 300 000).
In the case of the Z System, each DX Z90 will sell many copies of the 200-600 besides other Nikkors.
Yes. Potentially, 200,000+ sales will not be made if there isn't a professional APS-C Z- mount body to pair with the 200-600.
I've never used a DX lens on my D500 and almost certainly never will. The notion that a lineup of S-series DX lenses is needed to sell a professional APS-C body belies a fundamental misunderstanding of how such a camera would be used.
1%? While Nikon was selling more than 200,000 D500s, were they selling 20 million FX bodies? Nope. Not even close.
I own the Z50 and only 2 DX Z lenses; the two kits lenses (16-50 & 50-250), meaning that I have bought zero additional DX lenses.
And today a new firmware update for the Z9 comes out and they still can't deliver the custom shutter sound.
[/QUOTE]The 200-500 was introduced in August 2015. The D500 was introduced 5-months later in January 2016.The 200-500 was released over a year before the D500 and it sold like hotcakes, it was possibly the dawn of unavailable, free stock, lenses.Nikon has stated its aim to increase the ratio to 2 Z lenses/camera. Profit margin on DX MILCs is likely lower than the higher end FX bodies, particularly comparing Z30, Zfc to Z6 and Z7 series.They do know, which is one of the reasons they are sceptical about demand. They know about demographics and focus groups. Also the sales of the D500 fell off a cliff, when the D850 was released. From that point on it outsold the best years of the D500 and D810 combined, despite costing more than either and when the rest of the market was shrinking.. Even if a photographer crops every shot, they still need to crop entirely within the DX area, every shot to gain nothing from FX.Approximately 7 years on, since the D500 launched in early 2016, it's still one of the top cameras for wildlife photography, and it's the most affordable considering the Autofocus and associated Pro level features.{Snip...}The great thing about discussions like this is that eventually we get an answer. Nikon either will or will not develop an professional APS-C Z body. Either way, we'll keep doing photography
The D500 is still a pretty good camera today. The main down side is that I can never mount my 800mm PF (or any Z lens) onto it.
Tellingly, this combination of cost effectiveness applies particularly with pairing a D500 with the 200-500 f5.6E or for more outlay a 500 PF, with a 70-300 or 70-200.
Nikon must know all this from its sales and marketing research.
Those who would buy a high end DX and won't buy a Z9 or other FX camera, might not outweigh those who who would buy a high end DX INSTEAD of a Z9 or another FX, if one were available. Cost effectiveness, is a consumer goal and not really much of a consideration for a brand who has told shareholders it plans to sell fewer units for more money.
However, this is where only Nikon knows how many new Z lenses DX owners purchase for their camera(s).
This relationship is important for the Prosumer DX sales. Again Nikon will know how many new copies of the 200-500 f5.6E were bought by D500 owners - of the 260 000 copies sold (likely close on 300 000).
In the case of the Z System, each DX Z90 will sell many copies of the 200-600 besides other Nikkors.
1%? While Nikon was selling more than 200,000 D500s, were they selling 20 million FX bodies? Nope. Not even close.
It's a myth that downmarket products leech sales of other, more expensive, higher end products. People buy the products they want and walk past the products they don't want. The D500 didn't siphon sales of D5s or D850s because most customers who chose the D500 as their primary camera weren't in the market for those products. The D500 served its own 200,000-plus customer base; folks who wouldn't have purchased new D5s, new D850s, or new anything elses.
Most of us calling for a professional APS-C Z-body aren't potential new Z9 or new Z8 customers. But we'd gladly pay $2K to $2.5K for a professional APS-C body. A couple hundred thousand of us would, anyway.
What's Nikon's annual volume of digital ILC bodies...1 million units? If they sell 100,000 Z900s in the first year, that would represent 10% growth in sales volume and $200 to $250 milion in new revenue. Even 50K units would translate to 5% growth and $100 million in new revenue.
The real issue isn't potential market size or revenues. The real issue is, does Nikon have the capacity to meet the demand? Or will they introduce yet another product without first having secured the material & manufacturing capacity to meet need in a timely manner?
Well said. And there's nothing to add
There must be many of us, and, again, Nikon will know this from those who register their gear for warranty in addition to the sales data collated from their regional agencies.
There's evidence Nikon Marketing and/or their R&D employees also analyse metadata across published images. It's interesting to note what they knew about the 300 PF [interview with the engineers who designed the 800 PF]:
Q: According to Nikon's lens roadmap, Z-mount lightweight telephoto lenses include 400mm and 800mm F6.3 PF lenses, which are completely different from the 300mm and 500mm PF lenses in the SLR era. How did Nikon plan PF lenses, and why did they choose these two spec lenses?
A: About 3/4 of NIKKOR F-mount 300mm PF lens users will use with extenders, but demand has been declining since the 500mm PF lens was introduced. At the same time, user demand for telephoto lenses is increasing as performance such as camera sensor sensitivity (note: higher sensitivity) continues to evolve. Taking these factors into consideration, we are prioritizing the planning of a hand-held Z-mount super-telephoto lens. First, we have matched the 800mm lens with a PF lens, which is otherwise difficult to hold.
https://inf.news/en/photography/4d2484e428e46c4f75aa4c0c991ca6e2.html
That will be an add-on paid feature. ;-) It is like my wife paying $1 for a ring-tone for her iPhone, so that her ring stands out from others.
Concerning PF, we need to keep in mind that Nikon has a finite capacity to manufacture PF elements. I serious doubt that they could have introduced an 800 PF and then a 400 PF within a few months. Doing so would have made the current 800 PF shortage far worse, and few would be able to get a 400/4.5 PF at all.
