Lets talk numbers.

I've said the same thing on every recent "Z500" thread, I think the Z50ii will be technically superior to, or at least as good as the D500 in every way.

I owned a D500 and I have a Z50ii on order and, as an engineer, I'll be quite happy to admit my opinion was wrong if that proves to be the case in use - that's the nature of the scientific method.

The things that the Z50ii is regularly criticised for, lack of IBIS and 20MP sensor, apply equally to the D500.

I suspect the thing that's lacking from the Z50ii to allow D500 enthusiasts to embrace it, is its lowly position in the line-up and the corresponding loss of cache.
Owning a camera doesn't always translate to knowing the camera, its strengths and weaknesses.

I shot birds, wildlife, sports, portraiture, and landscapes with a D500 for 6 years before upgrading in May to a Z9. Here's a bullet-point summary of why it's just silly to consider a Z50II a mirrorless D500:
  • No battery grip: The #1 reason I upgraded to a Z9 instead of a Z8 is that a Nikon battery grip has been affixed to my D500 from day 1. The grip and second battery extend the amount of time a photographer is able to shoot without changing batteries. It also balances the weight of the long lens that's attached. The absence of a battery grip with controls is an instant disqualifier.
No battery grip is an irritating annoyance certainly but it is not a showstopper. More seriously the Z50 II doesn't use CFExpress B cards, and the ENEL15c battery would have been a better choice too.
  • Consumer user interface: The Z9 felt comfortable in my hands, right away. It felt familiar because, like the D600, it has a dedicated AF-ON button, thumbstick, and left top panel mode turret. These are essential control surfaces for a D500 shooter. All Nikon professional bodies have them. The Z50II has none of them. It has a dedicated exposure mode dial, which is just a huge waste of real estate. Again, these missing controls are instant disqualifies.
Customization of the back buttons, camera rear panel right allows BBAF with the Z50 II. Plus it's simple to use powerful AF Overrides and AF HandOff, on Fn buttons, which are standard techniques to optimize AF performance on birds and other challenging subjects.
  • User Settings vs Banks: All Nikon's professional cameras incorporate the banks custom configuration system. Other cameras in their lineup feature user settings. Banks are not more customizable and powerful tools. Any camera without banks isn't a suitable D500 alternative.
Correct and unfortunate. However the Z50 II has a wider range of customization options on more controls, and it's possible to customize these to more control buttons.
  • The Z50 isn't an upgrade: At best, the Z50II matches the autofocus capability, burst rate, and buffer of the D500.
The buffer is 200 images, apparently, which will not be restrictive in almost every situation. The Z50 II Autofocus is going to outperform DSLRs in almost every aspect, with the partial exception of stickiness thanks to the DSLR cross-type AF sensors.

Mechanical frame rate is 1 frame faster than the D500, and significantly faster - 25 fps - using the electronic shutter. Burst rates are far ahead of anything possible in a DSLR.
  • I've been shooting with a D500 since 2018.
Excellent camera and it still is excellent, and I enjoyed mine 2016-2018, but a D850 and D5 replaced it for important reasons, 'croppability' and ISO performance respectively. Latterly the D6 and Z9 are my workhorses.
  • Some have been with that system from the beginning. Anybody migrating from a D500 isn't interested in making some lateral move that costs a lot of money but doesn't deliver improved performance.
<$1000 for a Z50 II is a remarkable bargain of a deal.
  • The Z50II with its 11 fps mechanical shutter is a discount D500, at best. Those who leave the D500 for the Zcosystem want 20 fps in raw, minimal rolling shutter, a zero blackout EVF, silent shooting, more pixels. They want an actual upgrade.
The Z50II isn't a D500 replacement and it most certainly isn't an upgrade.
Nevertheless, photographers will vote with their wallets.

This camera outperforms the D500 in Autofocus and faster fps notwithstanding its different haptics and ergonomics. It's impossible to deny it's a compact light powerhouse for wildlife and similar genres, which will outperform the D500 where it matters and the Subject Recognition with eye detection plus high fps will even outperform the D6. Silent shutter is an added bonus.

The Z50 II should sell very well, and it will work surprisingly well as a light weight camera for photographing wildlife, aircraft, sports etc. It will be straightforward to carry spare batteries with a portable compact power pack for PD charging on a USB C cable.
 
Last edited:
The buffer is 200 images, apparently, which will not be restrictive in almost every situation. The Z50 II Autofocus is going to outperform DSLRs in almost every aspect, with the partial exception of stickiness thanks to the DSLR cross-type AF sensors.

Mechanical frame rate is 1 frame faster than the D500, and significantly faster - 25 fps - using the electronic shutter. Burst rates are far ahead of anything possible in a DSLR.
This camera outperforms the D500 in Autofocus and faster fps notwithstanding its different haptics and ergonomics. It's impossible to deny it's a compact light powerhouse for wildlife and similar genres, which will outperform the D500 where it matters and the Subject Recognition with eye detection plus high fps will even outperform the D6. Silent shutter is an added bonus.
People keep saying the Z50ii has a faster frame rate than the D500. This is only true in the Continuous H+ mode, which IMO is a trick mode. The lagged slideshow you get in Continuous H+ is not equivalent to 10 FPS on a DSLR.

The equivalent mode is Continuous H, which is only 5.4 FPS with mechanical shutter. That's a lot slower than the D500.

And my experience with the DX Z bodies is that, for whatever reason, their shutters wind slower than the FX bodies, so you get more blackout.
 
Owning a camera doesn't always translate to knowing the camera, its strengths and weaknesses.
I don't know about that, I got a feel for the D200/D300/D500 when you use them side-by-side with a Dxxx. The D500's OVF was a whole difference experience too.
I shot birds, wildlife, sports, portraiture, and landscapes with a D500 for 6 years before upgrading in May to a Z9. Here's a bullet-point summary of why it's just silly to consider a Z50II a mirrorless D500:
  • No battery grip: The #1 reason I upgraded to a Z9 instead of a Z8 The absence of a battery grip with controls is an instant disqualifier.
I plan on setting up a dummy battery with a PD charger and use it for video too.
  • Consumer user interface: The Z9 felt comfortable in my hands, right away. It felt familiar because, like the D600, it has a dedicated AF-ON button, thumbstick, and left top panel mode turret. These are essential control surfaces for a D500 shooter. All Nikon professional bodies have them. The Z50II has none of them. It has a dedicated exposure mode dial, which is just a huge waste of real estate. Again, these missing controls are instant disqualifies.
I THOUGHT I missed the clover on the top left, until I tried the Z8, and reaching over is awful. I don't use the top LCD on the Z6III either, and I DO NOT like the mode dial on the left at all! Rarely used buttons like bracketing, flash compensation, and a few others for my needs would be okay on the top left. Everyone's use is different, so 3-4 FN buttons would be the way to go. NOTE: The D780 has an awful, cheap plastic, thin clover.

The magic of the Z50 was that everything was on the right. Probably awful for lefties, but they could make a left-hand version given the numbers in the OP's post. The soft buttons were awful, but if they were customizable (maybe for playback/review) might have served a much better purpose.
  • User Settings vs Banks: All Nikon's professional cameras incorporate the banks custom configuration system. Other cameras in their lineup feature user settings. Banks are not more customizable and powerful tools. Any camera without banks isn't a suitable D500 alternative.
IF banks could be combined into one set, MAYBE, but NO. I never used banks with my D500 for the 5+ years I owned it. A mode button with unlimited and hide/limit feature, and custom labels (icons or text) would be ideal.
  • Those who leave the D500 for the Zcosystem want 20 fps in raw, minimal rolling shutter, a zero blackout EVF, silent shooting, more pixels. They want an actual upgrade.
The Z50II isn't a D500 replacement and it most certainly isn't an upgrade.
I have to strongly disagree. The Z50 85% of the time outshot my D500/D7100/D750 with better metering, WB, and glass. I even went back to the D500/D750 as I wasn't that happy with mirrorless in 2020. (Mostly missed the D500's overall responsiveness and years of muscle memory.) Not to mention updated JPG rendering, I shoot JPG half the time, but have to shoot RAW with ML due to my "only" 24mp Z6III. It was a minor but visible difference. I don't buy this pro and non-pro camera mentality. You can take professional photos with any camera or smartphone these days.

YOU ARE RIGHT. A 26-33mp partially stacked sensor DX body would have been an industry leader. It could have replaced my Z6III, and then I'd pick up two, or pair it with a used Z7II for landscapes when the Z7III drops. So would a full-frame rangefinder with a 22f2 lens and "fully featured" 1080p video.

Can't wait to try out my Sigma 56f1.4 on the Z50II, hopefully this afternoon!
 
Meanwhile, one can still buy a new D500 today, almost 9 years since the January 2016 announcement. In other words, how long a particular model stays on the market also skews the number of cameras sold.
You can get a new D500 today? With a valid warranty from Nikon? Where? I couldn’t get a new D500 when I was looking for one three years ago. I settled on buying a used D500 in good condition with 30000 clicks. Even used copies were tough to find at that time. Where did these new D500 bodies magically appear from?
I had checked before I posted. B&H currently sells new D500, but they are gray market: https://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/1214161-GREY/nikon_1559_d500_dslr_camera_body.html

The problem is that B&H wants $1600 for a new D500, while used D500 are like half that price. I would imagine that very few people will pay for new, gray market.
Currently with a Z8 selling @ $3500 (and more like $3000 in certain markets and below $3000 for used and refurb), there is not much room for a D500-type DX Z body, or Nikon would have introduced that ahead of the Z50ii.
Used Z8s? Those are as rare in my area as new D500s were three years ago.
Used Z8 are not rare at all in the US. Sounds like the problem is your area.
 
Used Z8s? Those are as rare in my area as new D500s were three years ago.
Used Z8 are not rare at all in the US. Sounds like the problem is your area.
Another way to look at it is that Z8 owners in my area are happy with their cameras and have no desire to get rid of them. That’s not a problem.
 
We know a few benchmarks on sales performance from interviews with Nikon executives.

The D850 was a big seller;

The Df, Zfc, Zf have all been popular in Japan and other Asian countries.

The Z9 was Nikon's highest selling flagship camera in 15 years - presumably since the extremely successful D3

The ratio of D500 to D850 numbers is revealing. It kicks into touch the fairy tales that the D500 was a market failure, poor seller etc etc

https://petapixel.com/2024/09/05/ni...irst-year-than-any-flagship-in-past-15-years/
Nikon reps said the D500 was very strong until the D850 finally became widely available, then it fell off a cliff and used D500s flooded the market.
 
Last edited:
I've said the same thing on every recent "Z500" thread, I think the Z50ii will be technically superior to, or at least as good as the D500 in every way.

I owned a D500 and I have a Z50ii on order and, as an engineer, I'll be quite happy to admit my opinion was wrong if that proves to be the case in use - that's the nature of the scientific method.

The things that the Z50ii is regularly criticised for, lack of IBIS and 20MP sensor, apply equally to the D500.

I suspect the thing that's lacking from the Z50ii to allow D500 enthusiasts to embrace it, is its lowly position in the line-up and the corresponding loss of cache.
Z50II is clearly not superior to D500 in every way, as it lacks quite a lot (the list is not exhaustive):
  • The screen has lower resolution and is fully articulated instead of tilting, which is important for some people
  • The shutter speed is only 1/4000 instead of 1/8000, so in bright light with fast lenses you will need to use an ND filter to avoid blowing out the highlights
  • If you have any screw-drive lenses, they will not autofocus
  • Battery life is significantly worse, you need at least two batteries for an active day's shooting
  • Grip size is smaller, which can be less comfortable
  • No shoulder display
  • No second card slot
  • No joystick
  • No add-on grip
  • No flash sync port
  • No illuminated buttons
 
Last edited:
We know a few benchmarks on sales performance from interviews with Nikon executives.

The D850 was a big seller;

The Df, Zfc, Zf have all been popular in Japan and other Asian countries.

The Z9 was Nikon's highest selling flagship camera in 15 years - presumably since the extremely successful D3

The ratio of D500 to D850 numbers is revealing. It kicks into touch the fairy tales that the D500 was a market failure, poor seller etc etc

https://petapixel.com/2024/09/05/ni...irst-year-than-any-flagship-in-past-15-years/
Nikon reps said the D500 was very strong until the D850 finally became widely available, then it fell off a cliff and used D500s flooded the market.
That is consistent with my understanding. As I mentioned earlier, I have a bunch of friends who ditched their D500 in favor of the D850 when the latter became available in the latter part of 2017. For something like birds in flight, it is often difficult to keep the subject in the center of the frame so that I am better off using a larger sensor area and then crop in post processing.

With two 45MP Z8 and Z9 around, a mid-to-high-end DX Z body along the line of D500 doesn't seem to make sense any more. If Nikon needs to develop a DX stacked sensor for such a camera, it will be difficult to make a profit and there is essentially no way to reuse such sensor on another lower-end DX Z model.
 
Z50II is clearly not superior to D500 in every way, as it lacks quite a lot:
The D500 was $2000 back in 2016, while the Z50ii is $907 in 2024, less than half. It should surprise no one that the Z50ii is a lower-level camera.
  • The screen has lower resolution and is fully articulated instead of tilting, which is important for some people
  • The shutter speed is only 1/4000 instead of 1/8000, so in bright light with fast lenses you will need to use an ND filter to avoid blowing out the highlights
  • If you have any screw-drive lenses, they will not autofocus
  • Battery life is significantly worse, you need at least two batteries for an active day's shooting
  • Grip size is smaller, which can be less comfortable
  • No shoulder display
  • No second card slot
  • No joystick
  • No add-on grip
  • No flash sync port
However, the Z50ii has two huge advantages over the D500: (1) you can mount the many great Z-mount lenses on the Z50ii, especially the excellent telephoto lenses such as the 400mm/f4.5 S, 600mm/f6.3 PF, 800mm/f6.3 PF .... (2) the video specs are far superior.

To me, the Z50ii is an excellent deal, but a lot of its features need to be tested outside of Nikon.
 
Z50II is clearly not superior to D500 in every way, as it lacks quite a lot:
  • The screen has lower resolution and is fully articulated instead of tilting, which is important for some people
Most would prefer the flippy, and for me mostly flipping it over! LOL
  • Grip size is smaller, which can be less comfortable
Solved with a custom L-bracket or cage. The D500 was getting bulky for parties, street, and small events. I'm wondering if we'll see a third party grip though.
  • No shoulder display
Never use it on ML, as everything is in the EVF, and I love toggling the EVF to clear view too. The FULL AREA AF coverage is worth it.
  • No second card slot
Snapbridge/transfer for local backup and delivery, but I'd be open to dual micro-SD-II slots for sure. I'd have been fine with a CFE-B card too. It is too bad CFE-A didn't get enough traction to be affordable or a better option for smaller cameras.

Because of the mixed card layouts, I never used an SDHC to backup my CFE's for performance reasons. Copying in camera would run the battery down more too.
  • No joystick
Redundant with the dial-pad anyway, 3D replaces having to move the AF around more than 75% of the time, and I'm an old school small AF area shooter. Especially for handheld macro work. Not to mention Wide-L being resizable.
  • No flash sync port
$40 Radio triggers, I've been waiting until black Friday to upgrade my GODOX to the new smaller one's. LOL

--
SkyRunR
=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=
Moderation is a fatal thing. Nothing succeeds like excess. Oscar Wilde
 
Last edited:
We know a few benchmarks on sales performance from interviews with Nikon executives.

The D850 was a big seller;

The Df, Zfc, Zf have all been popular in Japan and other Asian countries.

The Z9 was Nikon's highest selling flagship camera in 15 years - presumably since the extremely successful D3

The ratio of D500 to D850 numbers is revealing. It kicks into touch the fairy tales that the D500 was a market failure, poor seller etc etc

https://petapixel.com/2024/09/05/ni...irst-year-than-any-flagship-in-past-15-years/
Nikon reps said the D500 was very strong until the D850 finally became widely available, then it fell off a cliff and used D500s flooded the market.
That is consistent with my understanding. As I mentioned earlier, I have a bunch of friends who ditched their D500 in favor of the D850 when the latter became available in the latter part of 2017. For something like birds in flight, it is often difficult to keep the subject in the center of the frame so that I am better off using a larger sensor area and then crop in post processing.

With two 45MP Z8 and Z9 around, a mid-to-high-end DX Z body along the line of D500 doesn't seem to make sense any more. If Nikon needs to develop a DX stacked sensor for such a camera, it will be difficult to make a profit and there is essentially no way to reuse such sensor on another lower-end DX Z model.
The demand for the D850 was probably higher. Nikon has said it's been one of their best selling high end cameras.

Nonetheless, the D500 was a success: Well over 200 000 Units sold

A significant percentage of D500 owners will also have sold a significant number of lenses, FX as well as DX and Telephotos in particular.

Retailers in S Africa and UK have complained Nikon discontinued the D500 too soon, as there is continuing requests from customers. Perhaps the Z50 II will meet the needs of some of these Nikonians. However, I agree with others in this, and recent threads that there's a big empty gap between the Z6 III and Z50 II.

This niche can be filled with a high performance DX Z90 with Z8 style design and controls;

Partially-Stacked 24mp DX Sensor with 6K RAW video;

ENEL15c battery;

top end RAW performance including PreCapture and AutoCapture;

dual CFExpress B cards;

Detachable Grip for ENEL18d

Nikon can feed the Z90 sensor downwards over the next decade into its DX upgrades
 
Vince P wrote:
Nikon reps said the D500 was very strong until the D850 finally became widely available, then it fell off a cliff and used D500s flooded the market.
Assuming the reps comment is accurate, this strongly indicates that many more serious photographers will only buy a DX body if it provides more MP than a cropped full frame body.
 
Nikon reps said the D500 was very strong until the D850 finally became widely available, then it fell off a cliff and used D500s flooded the market.
Assuming the reps comment is accurate, this strongly indicates that many more serious photographers will only buy a DX body if it provides more MP than a cropped full frame body.
Or rather, once you have an FX body with enough pixels so that a DX crop from that FX body can yield around 20MP, and that FX body is not outrageously expensive, the market for any high-end DX body will drop drastically.

For example, the 36MP D800 and D810 have a 16MP DX crop. Apparently that is not quite sufficient, but the 45MP D850 provides a ~20MP DX crop that seems to be very acceptable.
 
Nikon reps said the D500 was very strong until the D850 finally became widely available, then it fell off a cliff and used D500s flooded the market.
Assuming the reps comment is accurate, this strongly indicates that many more serious photographers will only buy a DX body if it provides more MP than a cropped full frame body.
Or rather, once you have an FX body with enough pixels so that a DX crop from that FX body can yield around 20MP, and that FX body is not outrageously expensive, the market for any high-end DX body will drop drastically.

For example, the 36MP D800 and D810 have a 16MP DX crop. Apparently that is not quite sufficient, but the 45MP D850 provides a ~20MP DX crop that seems to be very acceptable.
The Z9’s cropped image size along with a lower than expected price were factors in my purchase. It was like having two cameras in one.
 
I've said the same thing on every recent "Z500" thread, I think the Z50ii will be technically superior to, or at least as good as the D500 in every way.

I owned a D500 and I have a Z50ii on order and, as an engineer, I'll be quite happy to admit my opinion was wrong if that proves to be the case in use - that's the nature of the scientific method.

The things that the Z50ii is regularly criticised for, lack of IBIS and 20MP sensor, apply equally to the D500.

I suspect the thing that's lacking from the Z50ii to allow D500 enthusiasts to embrace it, is its lowly position in the line-up and the corresponding loss of cache.
Owning a camera doesn't always translate to knowing the camera, its strengths and weaknesses.

I shot birds, wildlife, sports, portraiture, and landscapes with a D500 for 6 years before upgrading in May to a Z9. Here's a bullet-point summary of why it's just silly to consider a Z50II a mirrorless D500:
  • No battery grip: The #1 reason I upgraded to a Z9 instead of a Z8 is that a Nikon battery grip has been affixed to my D500 from day 1. The grip and second battery extend the amount of time a photographer is able to shoot without changing batteries. It also balances the weight of the long lens that's attached. The absence of a battery grip with controls is an instant disqualifier.
No battery grip is an irritating annoyance certainly but it is not a showstopper. More seriously the Z50 II doesn't use CFExpress B cards, and the ENEL15c battery would have been a better choice too.
The fully functional battery grip was/is an important accessory for many D500 shooters. The weight of the camera with the grip balancing that of a long prime or zoom was/is also important to many D500 shooters.

The Z50II offers neither and that is a showstopper for many.
  • Consumer user interface: The Z9 felt comfortable in my hands, right away. It felt familiar because, like the D600, it has a dedicated AF-ON button, thumbstick, and left top panel mode turret. These are essential control surfaces for a D500 shooter. All Nikon professional bodies have them. The Z50II has none of them. It has a dedicated exposure mode dial, which is just a huge waste of real estate. Again, these missing controls are instant disqualifies.
Customization of the back buttons, camera rear panel right allows BBAF with the Z50 II. Plus it's simple to use powerful AF Overrides and AF HandOff, on Fn buttons, which are standard techniques to optimize AF performance on birds and other challenging subjects.
That's a discount sports & fast action body. It's good enough for some but to most folks who've shot with a professional body, it's a poor substitute.
  • User Settings vs Banks: All Nikon's professional cameras incorporate the banks custom configuration system. Other cameras in their lineup feature user settings. Banks are not more customizable and powerful tools. Any camera without banks isn't a suitable D500 alternative.
Correct and unfortunate. However the Z50 II has a wider range of customization options on more controls, and it's possible to customize these to more control buttons.
Couldn't disagree more. I've used both extensively and banks are more customizable and flexible than the user settings interface. You couldn't pay me enough to go back to relying on the UX of a Nikon enthusiast system as my primary kit.
  • The Z50 isn't an upgrade: At best, the Z50II matches the autofocus capability, burst rate, and buffer of the D500.
The buffer is 200 images, apparently, which will not be restrictive in almost every situation. The Z50 II Autofocus is going to outperform DSLRs in almost every aspect, with the partial exception of stickiness thanks to the DSLR cross-type AF sensors.
Those who bought the D500, did so because it had a similar AF system to the flagship body of the time. That's the standard. Today, Nikon's superior AF performerance is available in a Z8 and Z9. Nobody seriously talks about the Z50II having performerance comparable to those systems. That would be the conversation about a Z900.
Mechanical frame rate is 1 frame faster than the D500, and significantly faster - 25 fps - using the electronic shutter. Burst rates are far ahead of anything possible in a DSLR.
Nobody who's serious about action photography is using the Z50II in electronic shutter mode to make images suffering noticeable rolling shutter. In mechanical shutter mode, the camera is a lateral move, at best, from an 8-year-old DSLR.
  • I've been shooting with a D500 since 2018.
Excellent camera and it still is excellent, and I enjoyed mine 2016-2018, but a D850 and D5 replaced it for important reasons, 'croppability' and ISO performance respectively. Latterly the D6 and Z9 are my workhorses.
Are you replacing those with a Z50II?
  • Some have been with that system from the beginning. Anybody migrating from a D500 isn't interested in making some lateral move that costs a lot of money but doesn't deliver improved performance.
<$1000 for a Z50 II is a remarkable bargain of a deal.
I don't dispute the value of the Z50II. I simply point out the many ways in which it's not a D500 substitute. It's not a professional body offering performerance comparable to that offered by the flagship of the time but in an APS-C body.

That's what a Z900 would need to be to be a true D500 replacement.
  • The Z50II with its 11 fps mechanical shutter is a discount D500, at best. Those who leave the D500 for the Zcosystem want 20 fps in raw, minimal rolling shutter, a zero blackout EVF, silent shooting, more pixels. They want an actual upgrade.
The Z50II isn't a D500 replacement and it most certainly isn't an upgrade.
Nevertheless, photographers will vote with their wallets.
Let them do so.
This camera outperforms the D500 in Autofocus and faster fps notwithstanding its different haptics and ergonomics. It's impossible to deny it's a compact light powerhouse for wildlife and similar genres, which will outperform the D500 where it matters and the Subject Recognition with eye detection plus high fps will even outperform the D6. Silent shutter is an added bonus.
It's a discount Z900. It's the D7500 of the Zcosystem...affordable, capable, a great option for first-time buyers but not nearly the equal of the professional bodies available in the lineup.
The Z50 II should sell very well, and it will work surprisingly well as a light weight camera for photographing wildlife, aircraft, sports etc. It will be straightforward to carry spare batteries with a portable compact power pack for PD charging on a USB C cable.
It's a solid, compact, lightweight option. Photographers who shoot with a Z8 or Z9 may add one to their kit for those situations when going small and portable is a priority. They won't use a Z50 as a backup body to their primary kit. Just as a D500 could fill that role in the era of the D5, a true Z900 could full that role, today.
 
The D500 wasn't a good fit for how you like to shoot and interface with a camera. The Z50II is probably a better fit precisely because it isn't a D500 replacement. I hope the UX and performance are what you expect.
 
I've said the same thing on every recent "Z500" thread, I think the Z50ii will be technically superior to, or at least as good as the D500 in every way.

I owned a D500 and I have a Z50ii on order and, as an engineer, I'll be quite happy to admit my opinion was wrong if that proves to be the case in use - that's the nature of the scientific method.

The things that the Z50ii is regularly criticised for, lack of IBIS and 20MP sensor, apply equally to the D500.

I suspect the thing that's lacking from the Z50ii to allow D500 enthusiasts to embrace it, is its lowly position in the line-up and the corresponding loss of cache.
Z50II is clearly not superior to D500 in every way, as it lacks quite a lot (the list is not exhaustive):
  • The screen has lower resolution and is fully articulated instead of tilting, which is important for some people
  • The shutter speed is only 1/4000 instead of 1/8000, so in bright light with fast lenses you will need to use an ND filter to avoid blowing out the highlights
  • If you have any screw-drive lenses, they will not autofocus
  • Battery life is significantly worse, you need at least two batteries for an active day's shooting
  • Grip size is smaller, which can be less comfortable
  • No shoulder display
  • No second card slot
  • No joystick
  • No add-on grip
  • No flash sync port
  • No illuminated buttons
Thank you for detailing a more expensive list.
 
The D500 wasn't a good fit for how you like to shoot and interface with a camera. The Z50II is probably a better fit precisely because it isn't a D500 replacement. I hope the UX and performance are what you expect.
That is the rub, for everything other than the bulk and banks, the D500 fits how I shoot better than any ML body. All those little switches and outer dials were so intuitive I rarely needed banks. I'll just add again that the esoteric feel of the pro bodies inspires confidence when you're shooting. It always feels ready to take another photo. ML shutters/mirrorless feels squishy or doesn't offer enough feedback. (The Z50II doesn't have the shutter sound types like the Z6III does.)

If Nikon had crammed a D500 into a D7xxx (or D5xxx) body, added a joystick, expanded the AF area a bit, and offered an articulating screen, I could still have made that work for a few more years, and I was happy enough with f-mount AF-P glass. You'd have a hard time selling/telling me that 5-6 years of advancement couldn't accomplish this.

Now that I have the Z50II in hand, I'm pretty sure it is a close enough "mini Z6III." You are also right, that it can't quite replace a D500 due to battery life and NLS with infrared flash photography. I'm going to have fun finding out what it can or can't do.
 
Where does the Z7 fit in all this. I've been saying for some time that Nikon's best move with a Z7III would be to redefine that line as their top model serving content creators. It could be priced in that $3,500 to $4K range without competing with the Z8 or Z9. It wouldn't need a 60MP+ sensor. It would need beaucoup videography capability and a line of cinema lenses to pair with it.

[. . . . . . . ] The Z7 line is their best opening to develop a high end product within the Zcosystem for that market.
I disagree with these visions for a Z7 line future and fervently hope nobody's listening across the Pacific. That camera with its lighter weight and smaller dimensions should remain the stills/landscape centric alternative to the bulk and weight of Z8/Z9. Nikon has and can introduce all kinds of other models to pander--oops, cater---to so-called "content creators." FHS, there are enough menu items being whipped up for the wildlife/fast-action shooters and the video crowd. Let the stills folks have one premium camera niche.
 
Hi, interesting numbers and if somewhat close to actual sales at least in comparison between different models there’s on thing that stands out to me.

Nikon has sold a lot more D500 than Z50, maybe the double amount. Against this background it seems almost stupid if Nikon is not going to meet this market demand with a more advanced DX body than the Z50ll. Maybe not a complete baby Z8 but something with more prosumer features (IBIS, larger battery, joystick, higher frame rates etc) than the Z50ll and of course a higher mpx count. A camera in its own niche.
 

Keyboard shortcuts

Back
Top