Should I hope for a Z body "D500" replacement?

arniebook said:

Full Frame lenses on DX Cameras perform exactly as they do on full frame cameras ... great! ... even better ... they potentially resolve more detail on a 21MP DX sensor, which is more dense than any full frame Nikon sensor to date ... period ... and that includes Z7, Z8, & Z9. (monte ... you have the necessary gear to prove that, right or wrong ... using one full frame lens, fill the frame with a subject, using your Z50, and Z7 ... then heavy check the corners).

Click to expand...

I think this statement needs qualifying ..... in the Nikkor world that depends on the age of the lenses and "potentially resolve" means just that ... or could do!

.... taking by example the AF-S 500mm F4D .... produces sharp images on the D750 ... on the D500 with a higher density sensor it struggles .... less sharp and with more aberrations .... the D500 puts the lens under the microscope where it shows it was designed for 12 Mp FF sensors ....

so not so great and not the same ....

The D500's sensor needs sharp FF lenses for good results ... at least over the APSc area!

.... the AF-S 600mm F4E FL VR however has no such issues on APSc.

So far, so good.

Have had the Z6III less than a day.

Time to sell the D500. I am grateful for all the good service it gave me.

smallegret said:

.... these arguments are based on the fact that the Z8 is the equal to the D500 on pixel density .... therefore we don't need a Z500

... but what D500 users have really been asking for is a higher density (30Mp) sensor ....

Click to expand...

Precisely what we have been saying the last four or five years. We wanted upgrades, not just the "Z" stamped on a D500. The Z8 easily satisfies all of those needs, with the exception of pixel density.

smallegret said:

....... no current Nikon camera can equal that density .... for that you would need a 60 Mp + sensor ..... then you run into rolling shutter/ buffer depth/price and all the other limitations associated with high speed data streams that the APSc sensor is better suited for ...

Click to expand...

I still use the same glass (500mm f5.6 PF) on my Z8, as I did on the D500. I am working as much as possible on my "Fieldcraft" (wonderful word, quoted from Bill Ferris) in an effort to fill the Z8 frame. If I am shooting across a body of water, as I often do, there is nothing "Fieldcraft-wise" I can do. File sizes are smaller when I have to crop, and results using the 1.4TCIII, to make up "most" of difference in reach, are good, but not "as good" as the bare lens, and possibly not as good as a cropped equivalent (need more shooting comparisons). Handholding the Z8, with a true 700mm Focal length, for some strange reason, seems more difficult than the bare 500PF on the D500, which is a 750mm field of view equivalent ... of course there are two devices between the Z8 and the lens.

I'm not yet willing to "shock" the Boss with another big "Holiday Hobby spending spree" (Z8, FTZII, Z 24-120 ... + Tax = North of 5K) for an 800mm f6.3 ... so, better "Fieldcraft" is currently my only avenue to maintain good "pixels on subject" results.

smallegret said:

Canon has shown the market is certainly there .... and when Nikon has fulfilled it's goals in the FF MLC, the hole in the APSc market (2 years or so) will still remain .......

I don't see Nikon leaving the door open to Canon in the significant birding world ....

Click to expand...

I'll be an interested Bystander (hopefully). ... Arnie

--
What we spend on this stuff is equal to the depth of our pockets squared ($²) times what we (j)ustify in our minds as to what we expect to do with our pictures plus (+) the (e)njoyment we experience from using our stuff and sharing the result ... $xxxx=$²(j+e )

AWG_Pics said:

So far, so good.

Have had the Z6III less than a day.

Time to sell the D500. I am grateful for all the good service it gave me.

Click to expand...

Wonderful! Outstanding detail.

Arnie

--
What we spend on this stuff is equal to the depth of our pockets squared ($²) times what we (j)ustify in our minds as to what we expect to do with our pictures plus (+) the (e)njoyment we experience from using our stuff and sharing the result ... $xxxx=$²(j+e )

Bill Ferris said:

chambeshi said:

Even with the $900 Z50 II, the neglect of DX by Nikon is embarrassing compared against how far Canon is ahead in the affordable high performance Mirrorless camera market - namely its RF System R7. Equally Fujifilm has its stacked sensor APC XH2

Where is Nikon's answer to the $1500 APC M7 and the pending M7 II ?

Click to expand...

The Z50II, Z6III, and Z8 are entry level, enthusiast, and professional options available to the birds & wildlife photographer. A camera costing $1,500 won't be anything more than a discount mirrorless D500.

Click to expand...

$1,500 would actually be a nice — and necessary — price point between the $1,000 Z50II and the $2,500 Z6III. This would even apply if we included the $1800 Z5II in the mix. Someone who bought a $1k camera yesterday probably couldn't easily upgrade to a $2.5k camera tomorrow, let alone add a couple of full-frame lenses to that. In many countries, even $1k for a camera is a lot of money.

Take the Canon lineup as an example of a much better priced lineup (current rounded EU prices with VAT for simplicity):

• R100 – €500
• R50: €660
• R50V: €740
• R10: €850
• R7: €1,400.

With these models, you can start with a lower-level model and upgrade to a higher-level model at your own pace, without having to change your lens collection. If you then decide to switch to a full-frame model, you can start from the same price point (or even lower, considering the discontinued RP model, which is still available new for €700).

• R8: €1,400
• R6 II: €2,100
• R5: €3,200
• R5 II: €4,500
• ...

Having started out years ago as a penniless student with a humble Nikon D40 before slowly making my way up, I can certainly appreciate the path that Canon lays out for its customers. It's no wonder they have the largest market share.

I do not even know what to think about Nikon. There is no proper upgrade path after the Z50II. The Z5II and Z6III are both very nice cameras, of course, but how is Nikon going to nurture the users who will upgrade to them (and lenses)? Or do they hope that people will just jump into expensive full-frame photography without any prior experience? Do they only want to cater to existing (and inevitably declining) Nikon users?

It isn't a complete system. It's just a pretty good, albeit expensive, full-frame system. Perhaps Nikon should stop messing around and drop their frustrating APS-C line altogether?

Bill Ferris said:

Besides, it's the lens that forms the image recorded by the camera. Nikon sports, bird, and wildlife lenses are better than the competition's.

Click to expand...

Even if that were true, why did you choose only sports, birds and wildlife? Are there no other equally important genres? I, for one, do not do much of action photography, but I would gladly buy a Z500 camera just for its other features.

Bill Ferris said:

Bill Ferris said:

At the price for a top performance 45mp FX camera, the Z8 is indeed excellent value with its Z9 stacked sensor and Professional design. IF you have the $3500, that is.

But why pay the $3500 price for a "D500 Replacement" against the $1500 Canon M7, or the $2500 Fuji XH2? With IBIS, high frame rate etc, RAW PreCapture both these APC cameras are distinctly superior for wildlife and sports photography. They leave the new Z50 II in the dust.

Click to expand...

If a person wants to invest in those systems, they should. The X-H2 and H2S are solid systems and Fujifilm is deeply committed to the APS-C format. Nikon isn't as committed to APS-C and that's OK.

Click to expand...

If Nikon wants to continue to exist as a mass-market camera manufacturer, that is categorically not OK. They must either provide a viable line-up of cheaper cameras with a clear path forward to more expensive models, or become a boutique manufacturer like Leica or Pentax.

Bill Ferris said:

In the late 20-teens, Nikon was on the brink of financial ruin because they tried to serve the needs of every photographer by offering a bloated product line with too many products that didn't sell.

Click to expand...

Are you sure that was the reason? And not the Key Mission fiasco or Nikon 1 mismanagement?

Bill Ferris said:

Nikon has embraced a more targeted focus on a specific desirable customer. That focus had led them back from the brink. Nikon is much better positioned for longterm success in 2025 than they were in 2015.

Click to expand...

I do not see any clear indication of long-term success. Their last financial report wasn't exactly rosy or promising. The Z8/9 pair was certainly very, very successfull, but how many expensive full-frame cameras can you sell once the market is saturated? The Z6III had to be heavily discounted to be moved from the shelves. The Z7II is lingering, missing a successor.

And the chaos with tarifs in the USA isn't exactly helping.

Bill Ferris said:

Bill Ferris said:

Fujifilm and Canon must be attracting hobbyists and DSLR owners seeking high performance DX by paying $2000-2500 for a stacked-sensor XH2 or $1500 for a M7 Mk I - BUT the R7 Mk II is pending

https://www.canonrumors.com/canon-eos-r7-mark-ii-to-drop-the-mechanical-shutter/

https://fstoppers.com/gear/canon-planning-big-camera-release-later-year-702050

Nikon has nothing vaguely close to an answer in the DX flagship category, as the Z50II is in the sub $1000 DX category- no IBIS, so no Synchro VR, Rolling shutter effects with electronic shutter etc

Click to expand...

Nikon's focus is on cameras costing $2K and higher. That's a price range many enthusiasts and most professionals are willing to pay to get the performance they desire.

Click to expand...

In what way is Nikon going to nurture those enthusiasts? Not many people in the world can routinely afford a $2k first camera. And even if they can, they might as well just get a Leica instead!

Bill Ferris said:

Bill Ferris said:

There's fertile ground here for a Flagship Nikon Z DX camera to outperform both Canon and Fuji options, especially with the unmatched options in Nikon telephotos.

https://www.dpreview.com/reviews/canon-eos-r7-review#HC

https://www.sansmirror.com/cameras/...rf-camera-reviews/canon-r7-camera-review.html

https://www.dpreview.com/reviews/fujifilm-x-h2-in-depth-review#HC

https://www.sansmirror.com/cameras/...mera-reviews/fujifilm-x-h2s-camera-revie.html

Click to expand...

As a wildlife and bird photographer who shot with a 500 for six years, I'm happy that APS-C enthusiasts have options, including cameras capable of performing well in that verve genre. Nikon doesn't have a professional APS-C fast action body. That's unfortunate but also in sync with the business model; a model with which they've found success.

Click to expand...

A temporary success, I might add.

wjan said:

Bill Ferris said:

chambeshi said:

Even with the $900 Z50 II, the neglect of DX by Nikon is embarrassing compared against how far Canon is ahead in the affordable high performance Mirrorless camera market - namely its RF System R7. Equally Fujifilm has its stacked sensor APC XH2

Where is Nikon's answer to the $1500 APC M7 and the pending M7 II ?

Click to expand...

The Z50II, Z6III, and Z8 are entry level, enthusiast, and professional options available to the birds & wildlife photographer. A camera costing $1,500 won't be anything more than a discount mirrorless D500.

Click to expand...

$1,500 would actually be a nice — and necessary — price point between the $1,000 Z50II and the $2,500 Z6III. This would even apply if we included the $1800 Z5II in the mix. Someone who bought a $1k camera yesterday probably couldn't easily upgrade to a $2.5k camera tomorrow, let alone add a couple of full-frame lenses to that. In many countries, even $1k for a camera is a lot of money.

Click to expand...

Your price points are not accurate:

• The Z50ii is a $910 camera, and so far has not been discounted in the US.
• The Z5ii was introduced @ $1700 and so far has not been discounted in the US.
• The Z6iii was introduced @ $2500, but it has been discounted to $2100 and with the new tariffs, it is $2200.
• The is also the Z5, which was introduced @ $1400 back in 2020 and has been discounted to $999, just below $1000 many times and is now @ $1100 with the new tariffs.

IMO it is unlikely that Nikon will introduce a DX body that is more expensive than the cheapest FX body, namely the Z5 at this point. A $1500 DX body will also be way too close to the price point for the Z5ii, which will eventually be discounted. Nikon's objective in the last decade or so is to push people into FX.

wjan said:

Bill Ferris said:

chambeshi said:

Even with the $900 Z50 II, the neglect of DX by Nikon is embarrassing compared against how far Canon is ahead in the affordable high performance Mirrorless camera market - namely its RF System R7. Equally Fujifilm has its stacked sensor APC XH2

Where is Nikon's answer to the $1500 APC M7 and the pending M7 II ?

Click to expand...

The Z50II, Z6III, and Z8 are entry level, enthusiast, and professional options available to the birds & wildlife photographer. A camera costing $1,500 won't be anything more than a discount mirrorless D500.

Click to expand...

$1,500 would actually be a nice — and necessary — price point between the $1,000 Z50II and the $2,500 Z6III. This would even apply if we included the $1800 Z5II in the mix. Someone who bought a $1k camera yesterday probably couldn't easily upgrade to a $2.5k camera tomorrow, let alone add a couple of full-frame lenses to that. In many countries, even $1k for a camera is a lot of money.

Click to expand...

At the risk of redundancy … The D500 release price was $2000.

There is absolutely no possibility of a Nikon Mirrorless D500 replacement coming in at less than that. In fact. my expectation would have been more like a $2500 release price for a Nikon Pro Bodied Z-APS-C Camera matching the best specifications from the Fuji XH2S AND the Canon R7 … i.e. Compare those two cameras, pick the best spec ... spec for spec ... Stamp Nikon Zwhatever on it, and sell a ton of them for $2500, over the last 5 years.

It’s a pointless argument, now, however, because the market is no longer there. The D500 Collective, to a large degree, has since moved on to other Z Cameras, or have left the Nikon System for a Fuji, Canon, or Sony.

wjan said:

Take the Canon lineup as an example of a much better priced lineup (current rounded EU prices with VAT for simplicity):

• R100 – €500
• R50: €660
• R50V: €740
• R10: €850
• R7: €1,400.

With these models, you can start with a lower-level model and upgrade to a higher-level model at your own pace, without having to change your lens collection. If you then decide to switch to a full-frame model, you can start from the same price point (or even lower, considering the discontinued RP model, which is still available new for €700).

• R8: €1,400
• R6 II: €2,100
• R5: €3,200
• R5 II: €4,500
• ...

Having started out years ago as a penniless student with a humble Nikon D40 before slowly making my way up, I can certainly appreciate the path that Canon lays out for its customers. It's no wonder they have the largest market share.

I do not even know what to think about Nikon. There is no proper upgrade path after the Z50II. The Z5II and Z6III are both very nice cameras, of course, but how is Nikon going to nurture the users who will upgrade to them (and lenses)? Or do they hope that people will just jump into expensive full-frame photography without any prior experience? Do they only want to cater to existing (and inevitably declining) Nikon users?

It isn't a complete system. It's just a pretty good, albeit expensive, full-frame system. Perhaps Nikon should stop messing around and drop their frustrating APS-C line altogether?

wjan said:

Besides, it's the lens that forms the image recorded by the camera. Nikon sports, bird, and wildlife lenses are better than the competition's.

Click to expand...

Even if that were true, why did you choose only sports, birds and wildlife? Are there no other equally important genres? I, for one, do not do much of action photography, but I would gladly buy a Z500 camera just for its other features.

wjan said:

wjan said:

At the price for a top performance 45mp FX camera, the Z8 is indeed excellent value with its Z9 stacked sensor and Professional design. IF you have the $3500, that is.

But why pay the $3500 price for a "D500 Replacement" against the $1500 Canon M7, or the $2500 Fuji XH2? With IBIS, high frame rate etc, RAW PreCapture both these APC cameras are distinctly superior for wildlife and sports photography. They leave the new Z50 II in the dust.

Click to expand...

If a person wants to invest in those systems, they should. The X-H2 and H2S are solid systems and Fujifilm is deeply committed to the APS-C format. Nikon isn't as committed to APS-C and that's OK.

Click to expand...

If Nikon wants to continue to exist as a mass-market camera manufacturer, that is categorically not OK. They must either provide a viable line-up of cheaper cameras with a clear path forward to more expensive models, or become a boutique manufacturer like Leica or Pentax.

wjan said:

In the late 20-teens, Nikon was on the brink of financial ruin because they tried to serve the needs of every photographer by offering a bloated product line with too many products that didn't sell.

Click to expand...

Are you sure that was the reason? And not the Key Mission fiasco or Nikon 1 mismanagement?

wjan said:

Nikon has embraced a more targeted focus on a specific desirable customer. That focus had led them back from the brink. Nikon is much better positioned for longterm success in 2025 than they were in 2015.

Click to expand...

I do not see any clear indication of long-term success. Their last financial report wasn't exactly rosy or promising. The Z8/9 pair was certainly very, very successfull, but how many expensive full-frame cameras can you sell once the market is saturated? The Z6III had to be heavily discounted to be moved from the shelves. The Z7II is lingering, missing a successor.

And the chaos with tarifs in the USA isn't exactly helping.

wjan said:

wjan said:

Fujifilm and Canon must be attracting hobbyists and DSLR owners seeking high performance DX by paying $2000-2500 for a stacked-sensor XH2 or $1500 for a M7 Mk I - BUT the R7 Mk II is pending

https://www.canonrumors.com/canon-eos-r7-mark-ii-to-drop-the-mechanical-shutter/

https://fstoppers.com/gear/canon-planning-big-camera-release-later-year-702050

Nikon has nothing vaguely close to an answer in the DX flagship category, as the Z50II is in the sub $1000 DX category- no IBIS, so no Synchro VR, Rolling shutter effects with electronic shutter etc

Click to expand...

Nikon's focus is on cameras costing $2K and higher. That's a price range many enthusiasts and most professionals are willing to pay to get the performance they desire.

Click to expand...

In what way is Nikon going to nurture those enthusiasts? Not many people in the world can routinely afford a $2k first camera. And even if they can, they might as well just get a Leica instead!

wjan said:

wjan said:

There's fertile ground here for a Flagship Nikon Z DX camera to outperform both Canon and Fuji options, especially with the unmatched options in Nikon telephotos.

https://www.dpreview.com/reviews/canon-eos-r7-review#HC

https://www.sansmirror.com/cameras/...rf-camera-reviews/canon-r7-camera-review.html

https://www.dpreview.com/reviews/fujifilm-x-h2-in-depth-review#HC

https://www.sansmirror.com/cameras/...mera-reviews/fujifilm-x-h2s-camera-revie.html

Click to expand...

As a wildlife and bird photographer who shot with a 500 for six years, I'm happy that APS-C enthusiasts have options, including cameras capable of performing well in that verve genre. Nikon doesn't have a professional APS-C fast action body. That's unfortunate but also in sync with the business model; a model with which they've found success.

Click to expand...

A temporary success, I might add.

Click to expand...

arniebook said:

wjan said:

Bill Ferris said:

chambeshi said:

Even with the $900 Z50 II, the neglect of DX by Nikon is embarrassing compared against how far Canon is ahead in the affordable high performance Mirrorless camera market - namely its RF System R7. Equally Fujifilm has its stacked sensor APC XH2

Where is Nikon's answer to the $1500 APC M7 and the pending M7 II ?

Click to expand...

The Z50II, Z6III, and Z8 are entry level, enthusiast, and professional options available to the birds & wildlife photographer. A camera costing $1,500 won't be anything more than a discount mirrorless D500.

Click to expand...

$1,500 would actually be a nice — and necessary — price point between the $1,000 Z50II and the $2,500 Z6III. This would even apply if we included the $1800 Z5II in the mix. Someone who bought a $1k camera yesterday probably couldn't easily upgrade to a $2.5k camera tomorrow, let alone add a couple of full-frame lenses to that. In many countries, even $1k for a camera is a lot of money.

Click to expand...

At the risk of redundancy … The D500 release price was $2000.

There is absolutely no possibility of a Nikon Mirrorless D500 replacement coming in at less than that. In fact. my expectation would have been more like a $2500 release price for a Nikon Pro Bodied Z-APS-C Camera matching the best specifications from the Fuji XH2S AND the Canon R7 … i.e. Compare those two cameras, pick the best spec ... spec for spec ... Stamp Nikon Zwhatever on it, and sell a ton of them for $2500, over the last 5 years.

It’s a pointless argument, now, however, because the market is no longer there. The D500 Collective, to a large degree, has since moved on to other Z Cameras, or have left the Nikon System for a Fuji, Canon, or Sony.

Click to expand...

Agreed.

arniebook said:

At the risk of redundancy … The D500 release price was $2000.

There is absolutely no possibility of a Nikon Mirrorless D500 replacement coming in at less than that. In fact. my expectation would have been more like a $2500 release price for a Nikon Pro Bodied Z-APS-C Camera matching the best specifications from the Fuji XH2S AND the Canon R7 … i.e. Compare those two cameras, pick the best spec ... spec for spec ... Stamp Nikon Zwhatever on it, and sell a ton of them for $2500, over the last 5 years.

It’s a pointless argument, now, however, because the market is no longer there. The D500 Collective, to a large degree, has since moved on to other Z Cameras, or have left the Nikon System for a Fuji, Canon, or Sony.

Click to expand...

yes i think that the days of professional level APS-C cameras are over (with the exemption of Fuji). Even the Canon R7 isn't really a true replacement of the 7D DSLR series and more of a 90D level camera.

Nikon doesn't necessarily need a D500 replacement but more of a D7000 level camera that could complete with the Canon R7 around the $1200-$1500 USD range.

shuncheung said:

wjan said:

Bill Ferris said:

chambeshi said:

Even with the $900 Z50 II, the neglect of DX by Nikon is embarrassing compared against how far Canon is ahead in the affordable high performance Mirrorless camera market - namely its RF System R7. Equally Fujifilm has its stacked sensor APC XH2

Where is Nikon's answer to the $1500 APC M7 and the pending M7 II ?

Click to expand...

The Z50II, Z6III, and Z8 are entry level, enthusiast, and professional options available to the birds & wildlife photographer. A camera costing $1,500 won't be anything more than a discount mirrorless D500.

Click to expand...

$1,500 would actually be a nice — and necessary — price point between the $1,000 Z50II and the $2,500 Z6III. This would even apply if we included the $1800 Z5II in the mix. Someone who bought a $1k camera yesterday probably couldn't easily upgrade to a $2.5k camera tomorrow, let alone add a couple of full-frame lenses to that. In many countries, even $1k for a camera is a lot of money.

Click to expand...

Your price points are not accurate:

• The Z50ii is a $910 camera, and so far has not been discounted in the US.
• The Z5ii was introduced @ $1700 and so far has not been discounted in the US.
• The Z6iii was introduced @ $2500, but it has been discounted to $2100 and with the new tariffs, it is $2200.
• The is also the Z5, which was introduced @ $1400 back in 2020 and has been discounted to $999, just below $1000 many times and is now @ $1100 with the new tariffs.

Click to expand...

I'm not sure that we can use US prices as a reference point at this stage. The US tariffs are causing turmoil. This is why I used EU prices, which more or less reflect global price trends and correlate with prices in Japan.

The prices of all three cameras — the Z50II (€1000 -> €850), the Z5II (€1900 -> €1550) and the Z6III (€3000 -> €2200) — have dropped in the EU. The last two dropped in price within the first few months even, which is a reliable indicator of lower-than-expected sales.

I haven't included the Z5 in my price review at all as it is an older, discontinued model whose price has already increased from €850 to €950, indicating sell-out. The situation is pretty similar to that of the sell-out of the discontinued Canon RP, except the RP is even cheaper at €700. But sure, you can consider it too if you will.

shuncheung said:

IMO it is unlikely that Nikon will introduce a DX body that is more expensive than the cheapest FX body, namely the Z5 at this point. A $1500 DX body will also be way too close to the price point for the Z5ii, which will eventually be discounted. Nikon's objective in the last decade or so is to push people into FX.

Click to expand...

Nikon has actually done just that with the Z50II DX body, which costs €1000 at launch in the EU and was more expensive than the cheapest FX body at the time, the Z5, which was €850. You have to look beyond the US price bubble. Visit the price aggregator www.geizhals.eu to check historical prices (with graphs) for all cameras and lenses sold in the EU for better understanding.

Furthermore, Canon also has price intersections between the RP, R8, R10 and R7 models. The same applies to Sony, with the a7III selling at the same price as the APS-C a6700. You have to ask yourself: as long as customers buy your cameras, why should it matter whether they are full-frame or APS-C?

If Nikon wants to really push people to FX, then perhaps it should simply discontinue its defective DX line altogether and stop confusing customers. I am certainly confused, or rather, angry about their APS-C product planning and vague communication. It is impossible to know if they are commited to something or not. I have burned myself once with their Nikon 1 system. Z DX looks quite similar at current stage.

wjan said:

shuncheung said:

wjan said:

Bill Ferris said:

chambeshi said:

Even with the $900 Z50 II, the neglect of DX by Nikon is embarrassing compared against how far Canon is ahead in the affordable high performance Mirrorless camera market - namely its RF System R7. Equally Fujifilm has its stacked sensor APC XH2

Where is Nikon's answer to the $1500 APC M7 and the pending M7 II ?

Click to expand...

The Z50II, Z6III, and Z8 are entry level, enthusiast, and professional options available to the birds & wildlife photographer. A camera costing $1,500 won't be anything more than a discount mirrorless D500.

Click to expand...

$1,500 would actually be a nice — and necessary — price point between the $1,000 Z50II and the $2,500 Z6III. This would even apply if we included the $1800 Z5II in the mix. Someone who bought a $1k camera yesterday probably couldn't easily upgrade to a $2.5k camera tomorrow, let alone add a couple of full-frame lenses to that. In many countries, even $1k for a camera is a lot of money.

Click to expand...

Your price points are not accurate:

• The Z50ii is a $910 camera, and so far has not been discounted in the US.
• The Z5ii was introduced @ $1700 and so far has not been discounted in the US.
• The Z6iii was introduced @ $2500, but it has been discounted to $2100 and with the new tariffs, it is $2200.
• The is also the Z5, which was introduced @ $1400 back in 2020 and has been discounted to $999, just below $1000 many times and is now @ $1100 with the new tariffs.

Click to expand...

I'm not sure that we can use US prices as a reference point at this stage. The US tariffs are causing turmoil. This is why I used EU prices, which more or less reflect global price trends and correlate with prices in Japan.

Click to expand...

So far, US tariffs have not affected Nikon camera body prices much. Nikon USA has not increased MSRP for camera body at all; so far only lens prices have increased. But some camera discounts have gone down, e.g. the Z6iii has gone from $2500 to $2100 and now to $2200.

wjan said:

The prices of all three cameras — the Z50II (€1000 -> €850), the Z5II (€1900 -> €1550) and the Z6III (€3000 -> €2200) — have dropped in the EU. The last two dropped in price within the first few months even, which is a reliable indicator of lower-than-expected sales.

Click to expand...

It looks like introduction prices for those bodies were very high in the EU and hence they have come down pretty quickly. E.g. the Z6iii was launched @ $2500 in the US but €3000?? No wonder those prices were reduced quickly.

wjan said:

If Nikon wants to really push people to FX, then perhaps it should simply discontinue its defective DX line altogether and stop confusing customers. I am certainly confused, or rather, angry about their APS-C product planning and vague communication. It is impossible to know if they are commited to something or not. I have burned myself once with their Nikon 1 system. Z DX looks quite similar at current stage.

Click to expand...

Nikon's objective is to push most people into FX. That has been their stated goal for over a decade, but they still need a few DX bodies for those whose budget is below Euro/$1000.

I was skeptical about Nikon 1 when it was introduced back in 2011. Nikon USA sent me a J1 to review. The images it created were fine, but I never liked those tiny bodies with insufficient dedicated control buttons. I also tested the Nikon 1 AW (all weather) and under water, it leaked into the rear LCD area. Glad I never bought into any Nikon 1 product at all. I did, and still own, some Nikon DX DSLRs, but currently I own no DX Nikon Z product.

shuncheung said:

It looks like introduction prices for those bodies were very high in the EU and hence they have come down pretty quickly. E.g. the Z6iii was launched @ $2500 in the US but €3000?? No wonder those prices were reduced quickly.

Click to expand...

As has been said numerous times on this site, the EU prices include tax, whereas the US prices do not. You always need to account for that. Therefore, your $2,500 MSRP plus sales tax could amount to around $2,700 at the checkout.

But yes, €3,000 at start was outrageosly high, considering the launch price of €2,150 for its predecessor.

wjan said:

The prices of all three cameras — the Z50II (€1000 -> €850), the Z5II (€1900 -> €1550) and the Z6III (€3000 -> €2200) — have dropped in the EU. The last two dropped in price within the first few months even, which is a reliable indicator of lower-than-expected sales.

Click to expand...

Where? Wish this was true. Here in NL the lowest price for the Z6III is €2349 from a 'less reliable' source or €2499 from Amazon (next best). Based on the tweakers.net pricewatch, which is probably the best reliable source to date for NL

wjan said:

shuncheung said:

wjan said:

Bill Ferris said:

chambeshi said:

Even with the $900 Z50 II, the neglect of DX by Nikon is embarrassing compared against how far Canon is ahead in the affordable high performance Mirrorless camera market - namely its RF System R7. Equally Fujifilm has its stacked sensor APC XH2

Where is Nikon's answer to the $1500 APC M7 and the pending M7 II ?

Click to expand...

The Z50II, Z6III, and Z8 are entry level, enthusiast, and professional options available to the birds & wildlife photographer. A camera costing $1,500 won't be anything more than a discount mirrorless D500.

Click to expand...

$1,500 would actually be a nice — and necessary — price point between the $1,000 Z50II and the $2,500 Z6III. This would even apply if we included the $1800 Z5II in the mix. Someone who bought a $1k camera yesterday probably couldn't easily upgrade to a $2.5k camera tomorrow, let alone add a couple of full-frame lenses to that. In many countries, even $1k for a camera is a lot of money.

Click to expand...

Your price points are not accurate:

• The Z50ii is a $910 camera, and so far has not been discounted in the US.
• The Z5ii was introduced @ $1700 and so far has not been discounted in the US.
• The Z6iii was introduced @ $2500, but it has been discounted to $2100 and with the new tariffs, it is $2200.
• The is also the Z5, which was introduced @ $1400 back in 2020 and has been discounted to $999, just below $1000 many times and is now @ $1100 with the new tariffs.

Click to expand...

I'm not sure that we can use US prices as a reference point at this stage. The US tariffs are causing turmoil. This is why I used EU prices, which more or less reflect global price trends and correlate with prices in Japan.

The prices of all three cameras — the Z50II (€1000 -> €850), the Z5II (€1900 -> €1550) and the Z6III (€3000 -> €2200) — have dropped in the EU. The last two dropped in price within the first few months even, which is a reliable indicator of lower-than-expected sales.

I haven't included the Z5 in my price review at all as it is an older, discontinued model whose price has already increased from €850 to €950, indicating sell-out. The situation is pretty similar to that of the sell-out of the discontinued Canon RP, except the RP is even cheaper at €700. But sure, you can consider it too if you will.

wjan said:

IMO it is unlikely that Nikon will introduce a DX body that is more expensive than the cheapest FX body, namely the Z5 at this point. A $1500 DX body will also be way too close to the price point for the Z5ii, which will eventually be discounted. Nikon's objective in the last decade or so is to push people into FX.

Click to expand...

Nikon has actually done just that with the Z50II DX body, which costs €1000 at launch in the EU and was more expensive than the cheapest FX body at the time, the Z5, which was €850. You have to look beyond the US price bubble. Visit the price aggregator www.geizhals.eu to check historical prices (with graphs) for all cameras and lenses sold in the EU for better understanding.

Furthermore, Canon also has price intersections between the RP, R8, R10 and R7 models. The same applies to Sony, with the a7III selling at the same price as the APS-C a6700. You have to ask yourself: as long as customers buy your cameras, why should it matter whether they are full-frame or APS-C?

If Nikon wants to really push people to FX, then perhaps it should simply discontinue its defective DX line altogether and stop confusing customers. I am certainly confused, or rather, angry about their APS-C product planning and vague communication. It is impossible to know if they are commited to something or not. I have burned myself once with their Nikon 1 system. Z DX looks quite similar at current stage.

Click to expand...

I don't believe the Z dx line will be discontinued like nikon did with the Nikon 1 system. But the chances for Z D500 successor are not big IMO.

I accept the dx line for what it is, a camera system that is small and lightweight with a small number of good dx lenses. The Z50(II) with the 16-50 dx lens is an ideal companion for situations a ff camera and lenses are not wanted.

Current DX Nikkors | Thom Hogan

It has the possibility to use some cheaper small nikon ff prime lenses to keep it a lightweight system and as Thom Hogan indicates the Z ff 24-200 VR zoom lens combined with the Z dx 12-28 lens is also an interesting combination. See The Rational Z DX Lens Kits | Thom Hogan

I don't intend to use the dx system as a ff system , so i don't need a complete lens line up like eg Fuji has for its aspc system.

mrbr said:

I don't believe the Z dx line will be discontinued like nikon did with the Nikon 1 system. But the chances for Z D500 successor are not big IMO.

I accept the dx line for what it is, a camera system that is small and lightweight with a small number of good dx lenses. The Z50(II) with the 16-50 dx lens is an ideal companion for situations a ff camera and lenses are not wanted.

Current DX Nikkors | Thom Hogan

It has the possibility to use some cheaper small nikon ff prime lenses to keep it a lightweight system and as Thom Hogan indicates the Z ff 24-200 VR zoom lens combined with the Z dx 12-28 lens is also an interesting combination. See The Rational Z DX Lens Kits | Thom Hogan

I don't intend to use the dx system as a ff system , so i don't need a complete lens line up like eg Fuji has for its aspc system.

Click to expand...

So I guess you don't think the Nikon DX line is "defective" ... I'm still wondering why this guy (the one you replied to, I mean) is continuously bashing Nikon. Looks like an obsession.

wjan said:

Nikon has actually done just that with the Z50II DX body, which costs €1000 at launch in the EU and was more expensive than the cheapest FX body at the time, the Z5, which was €850. You have to look beyond the US price bubble. Visit the price aggregator www.geizhals.eu to check historical prices (with graphs) for all cameras and lenses sold in the EU for better understanding.

Furthermore, Canon also has price intersections between the RP, R8, R10 and R7 models. The same applies to Sony, with the a7III selling at the same price as the APS-C a6700. You have to ask yourself: as long as customers buy your cameras, why should it matter whether they are full-frame or APS-C?

If Nikon wants to really push people to FX, then perhaps it should simply discontinue its defective DX line altogether and stop confusing customers. I am certainly confused, or rather, angry about their APS-C product planning and vague communication. It is impossible to know if they are commited to something or not. I have burned myself once with their Nikon 1 system. Z DX looks quite similar at current stage.

Click to expand...

They can't just kill DX without introducing the next entry level full frame at the prices of that DX can command, i.e. the Z30's $710 and the Z50ii's $910 launch MSRP, then DX has it's role to play in the Z mount system. They need something to release at those price points. That is DX's role today. Size and price. That's it. DX doesn't need to be a "full" system. It just needs to exist.

And as much as we like to look at things as seasoned photographers, there is a market of folks people who wants to play with a camera but are not comfortable with getting anything more sophisticated than say a Z30 or R50 kind of camera. Even a Z50ii can be daunting for them.

If you're worried about confusion, I think the messaging from the camera companies are quite clear. They know where DX's role is today. Their camera and lens releases say as much. DX isn't going to be a "full system" and it's perfectly fine just like that.

Pierre Lagarde said:

mrbr said:

I don't believe the Z dx line will be discontinued like nikon did with the Nikon 1 system. But the chances for Z D500 successor are not big IMO.

I accept the dx line for what it is, a camera system that is small and lightweight with a small number of good dx lenses. The Z50(II) with the 16-50 dx lens is an ideal companion for situations a ff camera and lenses are not wanted.

Current DX Nikkors | Thom Hogan

It has the possibility to use some cheaper small nikon ff prime lenses to keep it a lightweight system and as Thom Hogan indicates the Z ff 24-200 VR zoom lens combined with the Z dx 12-28 lens is also an interesting combination. See The Rational Z DX Lens Kits | Thom Hogan

I don't intend to use the dx system as a ff system , so i don't need a complete lens line up like eg Fuji has for its aspc system.

Click to expand...

So I guess you don't think the Nikon DX line is "defective" ... I'm still wondering why this guy (the one you replied to, I mean) is continuously bashing Nikon. Looks like an obsession.

Click to expand...

I was wondering that too.

wjan said:

shuncheung said:

It looks like introduction prices for those bodies were very high in the EU and hence they have come down pretty quickly. E.g. the Z6iii was launched @ $2500 in the US but €3000?? No wonder those prices were reduced quickly.

Click to expand...

As has been said numerous times on this site, the EU prices include tax, whereas the US prices do not. You always need to account for that. Therefore, your $2,500 MSRP plus sales tax could amount to around $2,700 at the checkout.

But yes, €3,000 at start was outrageosly high, considering the launch price of €2,150 for its predecessor.

Click to expand...

Careful. There is no sales tax in some states. I live in Oregon, which has no sales tax. Three days ago I paid $2,700 for the Z6iii with the 24-70 F4 S lens as a kit. That is not a bad deal. Shuncheung is right. I have several DSLR DX bodies, including the D500, from Nikon and now 3 Nikon FX Z-mount bodies. I don't miss the DX cameras.

MyRTSIII said:

Any rumor about having a D500 replacement?

I'm still waiting for it especially with IBIS. The Z50II does not get me excited...

Click to expand...

Whilst I agree that the Z50 II doesn't excite me, as far as I can see it out features and out performs the D500. The only thing it lacks against the D500 is an optional grip.

If you want to play the specification game, a stacked sensor, no mechanical shutter and IBIS are absent but this is an entry level camera (based on price) yet it is being talked about in company with the, former, top of the range DX body.

I think te idea that a specific Z body is the "replacement" for a given DSLR is misplaced. The Z5 II and Z6III have features that were only on the flagship DSLRs. Without going into the manuals I can't say whether they are customisable in the same way but they are very well specified. The Z8 and Z9 are far in advance of the D850 and D5/6 that they supplanted in the Nikon range. They are, all four, replacements only in terms of price and position in the range.

As far as the DX range is concerned the Z50 II does everything the entire cast of DSLRs did in a single body. None of them, D3XXX, D5XXX or D7XXX offers anything that is missing from the Z50 II. Only the D500 and D7XXX series offered a grip option and I can't see why Nikon has chosen not to do so in the Z range.

I can see that some D500 users would like a higher resolution sensor in a Z50 size body but that would mean developing a new sensor. If Nikon doesn't see sufficient sales to justify the expense it won't happen.

Looking through the lens range I can see only three, fast F mount DX lenses, the 17-55 f/2.8 the 10.5 f/2.8 fisheye and the 35 f/1.8. all the other DX lenses are variable aperture zooms or slower primes. One might almost think Nikon wasn't interested in pro-spec DX lenses once the D3 arrived. The weight benefits for the DX user never really materialised. I await the comments saying I missed someone's favourite lens.

To answer the original question, you can hope but I think you should accept that any Z mount body offers you more than the D500, unless you want a grip.

Hayden N said:

Nikon doesn't necessarily need a D500 replacement but more of a D7000 level camera that could complete with the Canon R7 around the $1200-$1500 USD range.

Click to expand...

What about the Z50 II? Other than lacking dual card slots that existed up to the D7500, it seems like an adequate replacement that even competes with the D500.