Who's jumping first to the Z9II?

IGNORE PLEASE - duplicate post - due to a server problem at my end saying earlier post timed out and not sent.

flyingpointroad said:

After six years with Sony (A1 & A9iii), I moved back to Nikon (Z9 and Z8) due to durability/repair expenses.

Click to expand...

Hands on system comparison is always useful.

flyingpointroad said:

There's very little I miss about the Sonys, but -- as a sports shooter -- focus is one of them. The Sony bodies just lock on faster and more dependably, especially in field sports.

Click to expand...

Steve Perry recently posted a similar comment for birds in flight in Africa, though he noted the Sony system had distinct difficulty auto focusing on elephants.

flyingpointroad said:

But a better, more "competitive" focusing system feels a bit like table stakes.

Click to expand...

The Z9 and later Z8 are probably moderately constrained by the seven year old age (at launch) of Expeed 7 and the decision to go with a relatively small number of F points when the Z system was launched in 2018.

At one stage, especially in the early stages of subject detection, Nikon was ahead for overall AF ability.

It is probable in the update leapfrog game that with an Expeed 8 and more AF points handled quicker that Nikon will for a while will move ahead of Sony for AF capability.

--
Leonard Shepherd
In lots of ways good photography is similar to learning to play a piano - it takes practice to develop skill in either activity.

Droster said:

I think that's actually a sound business move. You want people to move on from the 4 year old product. Us existing Z9 users may not necessarily have to buy the immediate successor, but Nikon also needs to give people who don't already have the Z9 a good reason to buy the new product over the old one.

Remember, we are not owed any updates outside of bugfixes which they are obliged to fix. You paid for the product at the point of purchase. Any updates that we get is a gesture of goodwill. When we keep going "I want more gestures of goodwill, I deserve and demand it", the companies will be like "this is not worth the backlash, I'll just do the bare minimum".

Click to expand...

I don't agree with your point of view and logic when applied to just the Z9.

The Z9 was the first nikon mirrorless flagship and they were late to the party compared to Sony etc.

Hardware wise a great product but the initial Firmware did not take advantage or could not drive the HW to its full potential. They had togo with the ship early (HW ready / FW not fully ready) and ship often (lots of FW iterative updates) to get a product into flagship owners hands or risk defections.

Thats the reason the Z9 was given so many updates to get the FW upto the point it can fully drive the HW.

Holding back the latest FW features added to the Z8/Z6III is a mistake and gets flagship owners wondering what happened to the flagship getting new features first and then a trickle down to the other cameras in nikons range.

lightaffaire said:

Droster said:

I think that's actually a sound business move. You want people to move on from the 4 year old product. Us existing Z9 users may not necessarily have to buy the immediate successor, but Nikon also needs to give people who don't already have the Z9 a good reason to buy the new product over the old one.

Remember, we are not owed any updates outside of bugfixes which they are obliged to fix. You paid for the product at the point of purchase. Any updates that we get is a gesture of goodwill. When we keep going "I want more gestures of goodwill, I deserve and demand it", the companies will be like "this is not worth the backlash, I'll just do the bare minimum".

Click to expand...

I don't agree with your point of view and logic when applied to just the Z9.

The Z9 was the first nikon mirrorless flagship and they were late to the party compared to Sony etc.

Hardware wise a great product but the initial Firmware did not take advantage or could not drive the HW to its full potential. They had togo with the ship early (HW ready / FW not fully ready) and ship often (lots of FW iterative updates) to get a product into flagship owners hands or risk defections.

Thats the reason the Z9 was given so many updates to get the FW upto the point it can fully drive the HW.

Holding back the latest FW features added to the Z8/Z6III is a mistake and gets flagship owners wondering what happened to the flagship getting new features first and then a trickle down to the other cameras in nikons range.

Click to expand...

Most recently, Nikon executives have confirmed some of the features added in firmware updates were responses to customer feedback and specific requests.

Nikon's Firmware Strategy is integral to its marketing and client relations.

Nikon prioritized its Firmware Strategy with the Z System well before the Z9. "....We want to do regular scheduled firmware updates to keep the products up to date for a long time... "

chambeshi said:

lightaffaire said:

Droster said:

I think that's actually a sound business move. You want people to move on from the 4 year old product. Us existing Z9 users may not necessarily have to buy the immediate successor, but Nikon also needs to give people who don't already have the Z9 a good reason to buy the new product over the old one.

Remember, we are not owed any updates outside of bugfixes which they are obliged to fix. You paid for the product at the point of purchase. Any updates that we get is a gesture of goodwill. When we keep going "I want more gestures of goodwill, I deserve and demand it", the companies will be like "this is not worth the backlash, I'll just do the bare minimum".

Click to expand...

I don't agree with your point of view and logic when applied to just the Z9.

The Z9 was the first nikon mirrorless flagship and they were late to the party compared to Sony etc.

Hardware wise a great product but the initial Firmware did not take advantage or could not drive the HW to its full potential. They had togo with the ship early (HW ready / FW not fully ready) and ship often (lots of FW iterative updates) to get a product into flagship owners hands or risk defections.

Thats the reason the Z9 was given so many updates to get the FW upto the point it can fully drive the HW.

Holding back the latest FW features added to the Z8/Z6III is a mistake and gets flagship owners wondering what happened to the flagship getting new features first and then a trickle down to the other cameras in nikons range.

Click to expand...

Most recently, Nikon executives have confirmed some of the features added in firmware updates were responses to customer feedback and specific requests.

Nikon's Firmware Strategy is integral to its marketing and client relations.

Nikon prioritized its Firmware Strategy with the Z System well before the Z9. "....We want to do regular scheduled firmware updates to keep the products up to date for a long time... "

https://www.dpreview.com/interviews...nterview-nikon-we-are-at-a-transitional-stage

Click to expand...

It is a delicate balance, since Nikon (for the most part) does not charge for new firmware upgrades, they cannot keep on releasing new firmware without making money, directly or indirectly. In the first 2, 3 years of a new camera's product cycle, perhaps additional features will attract more customers to buy those cameras, new from Nikon, but after a while, there are too many used one already on the market. Releasing free firmware upgrades will mainly benefit existing customers, and a lot of people will buy used ones instead of new cameras from Nikon. After perhaps 4, 5 years, Nikon will need to introduce new, more powerful hardware anyway, and they will make money from selling new cameras.

Take the Z6ii and Z7ii as examples. When Nikon introduced them in 2020, they emphasized about having dual EXPEED 6 processors, but those generation 2 bodies never got much better than their original generation 1 ones. Perhaps some (a lot?) people thought Nikon would introduce new firmware to make those gen 2 far better, but those people were disappointed. It took Nikon another 4 years to introduce the Z6iii with a new sensor and the Z9's EXPEED 7 to produce a superior camera in the Z6 family.

Leonard Shepherd said:

flyingpointroad said:

After six years with Sony (A1 & A9iii), I moved back to Nikon (Z9 and Z8) due to durability/repair expenses.

Click to expand...

Hands on system comparison is always useful.

Leonard Shepherd said:

There's very little I miss about the Sonys, but -- as a sports shooter -- focus is one of them. The Sony bodies just lock on faster and more dependably, especially in field sports.

Click to expand...

Steve Perry has recently posted a similar conclusion for BIF - though he noted Sony interestingly had a lot of trouble with elephants.

Leonard Shepherd said:

(snipped)

But a better, more "competitive" focusing system feels a bit like table stakes.

Click to expand...

The Nikon Z8/9/6 III are probably hampered to a modest extent by 7 year old (from launch) Expeed 7 capability and the decision to go with less than 300 AF points at the Z system launch.

Click to expand...

Xpeed 7 debuted in 2021, so it's only four years old. However, still valid point that four years old is growing long in the tooth for camera CPUs.

Leonard Shepherd said:

The Z9 and later Z8 were at one stage AF front runners, particularly with earlier versions of subject detection.

Click to expand...

I felt like my Zf autofocus actually slowed down with the V2 firmware. Not a lot, but it just seems not quite as sticky as it used to be. I have no proof for this assertion, however. Maybe they made it a little less sensitive so it would stay locked on better? More likely is that user settings changed and I don't know how to optimize them for the new and improved algorithms.

Leonard Shepherd said:

It is probable in the leap-frog game with an Expeed 8 able to handle many more AF points quicker Nikon will soon move ahead of Sony for AF ability.

Click to expand...

Always something new on the horizon. Barring some quantum leap in AF tech from Nikon-difficult to imagine, as good as things already are-I'm only one year into my five year camera body upgrade cycle and I'm happy where I am, so far.

Mr Bolton said:

Leonard Shepherd said:

The Nikon Z8/9/6 III are probably hampered to a modest extent by 7 year old (from launch) Expeed 7 capability and the decision to go with less than 300 AF points at the Z system launch.

Click to expand...

Xpeed 7 debuted in 2021, so it's only four years old. However, still valid point that four years old is growing long in the tooth for camera CPUs.

Click to expand...

The first version of EXPEED was introduced with the D3 and D300 on 23 August 2007. Roughly speaking, there were six newer generations of EXPEED when Nikon introduced the Z9 with EXPEED 7 on 28 October 2021. I.e. 6 new versions were introduced in the 170 months in between so that on the average, it is about 28.3 months for each new generation. Now, the EXPEED 7 maybe a pretty big leap forward, but one way or another, a 48-month old CPU chip is a fairly old design. I said roughly speaking between there were certain "half generation" EXPEED improvements so that some may consider that it is not exactly 6 generations.

Besides full CFexpress 4.0 compatibility, modern cameras will have a lot of AI-related calculations and features that will demand more processing power, and those features will be refined and improved future firmware upgrades throughout the lifecycle of the new CPU.

shuncheung said:

Mr Bolton said:

Leonard Shepherd said:

The Nikon Z8/9/6 III are probably hampered to a modest extent by 7 year old (from launch) Expeed 7 capability and the decision to go with less than 300 AF points at the Z system launch.

Click to expand...

Xpeed 7 debuted in 2021, so it's only four years old. However, still valid point that four years old is growing long in the tooth for camera CPUs.

Click to expand...

The first version of EXPEED was introduced with the D3 and D300 on 23 August 2007. Roughly speaking, there were six newer generations of EXPEED when Nikon introduced the Z9 with EXPEED 7 on 28 October 2021. I.e. 6 new versions were introduced in the 170 months in between so that on the average, it is about 28.3 months for each new generation. Now, the EXPEED 7 maybe a pretty big leap forward, but one way or another, a 48-month old CPU chip is a fairly old design. I said roughly speaking between there were certain "half generation" EXPEED improvements so that some may consider that it is not exactly 6 generations.

Besides full CFexpress 4.0 compatibility, modern cameras will have a lot of AI-related calculations and features that will demand more processing power, and those features will be refined and improved future firmware upgrades throughout the lifecycle of the new CPU.

Click to expand...

EXPEED8 is probably being finalized for release in its first high performance camera. It will be very interesting to see how much improved.

Nikon will probably continue to sell as many EXPEED7 processors as possible, considering the high cost of these chips.


"....We're due for another EXPEED generation of cameras (some say overdue, but unlike with Apple and their M chips, constantly iterating small incremental power/performance changes is out of the question for the low-volume camera companies; I'd bet that Nikon has to generate at least 5m units, and probably more, of an EXPEED generation to just pay back R&D and refabbing costs, and at 800K+ a year, that's five years)...."

shuncheung said:

Now, the EXPEED 7 maybe a pretty big leap forward, but one way or another, a 48-month old CPU chip is a fairly old design. I said roughly speaking between there were certain "half generation" EXPEED improvements so that some may consider that it is not exactly 6 generations.

Click to expand...

The issue here is that this is really a Socionext chip. While Nikon has a close relationship with them, Socionext has been a bit slow to get to really small process size. Many of the improvements that people are asking for require more CPU/GPU improvements, and most of those will derive from smaller process size.

Thus, the critical element for Nikon is how fast Socionext is moving. The good news is that they now seem to be moving faster and getting down to the process sizes that will make a difference Nikon can take advantage of.

This has been an issue for all the camera makers. They all use different base platforms, but those haven't moved into the absurdly small process sizes as fast as Apple, Qualcomm, and Samsung are moving. That all really gets back to quantity. When you're only producing 800k units a year, it's insanely costly to move as fast as Apqualung. Instead, the camera companies are trying to get cost per chip down by using them for years, and then making a big jump when they eventually make one.

Thom Hogan said:

shuncheung said:

Now, the EXPEED 7 maybe a pretty big leap forward, but one way or another, a 48-month old CPU chip is a fairly old design. I said roughly speaking between there were certain "half generation" EXPEED improvements so that some may consider that it is not exactly 6 generations.

Click to expand...

The issue here is that this is really a Socionext chip. While Nikon has a close relationship with them, Socionext has been a bit slow to get to really small process size. Many of the improvements that people are asking for require more CPU/GPU improvements, and most of those will derive from smaller process size.

Thus, the critical element for Nikon is how fast Socionext is moving. The good news is that they now seem to be moving faster and getting down to the process sizes that will make a difference Nikon can take advantage of.

This has been an issue for all the camera makers. They all use different base platforms, but those haven't moved into the absurdly small process sizes as fast as Apple, Qualcomm, and Samsung are moving. That all really gets back to quantity. When you're only producing 800k units a year, it's insanely costly to move as fast as Apqualung. Instead, the camera companies are trying to get cost per chip down by using them for years, and then making a big jump when they eventually make one.

Click to expand...

From the EXPEED 5: D5/D500 in January 2016 to EXPEED 6: Z6/Z7 in August 2018, there was 31 months, fairly close to the 28.3 month EXPEED upgrade average. Now some 7 years since the introduction of the EXPEED 6, Nikon is still selling a bunch of EXPEED 6-based cameras: Z7ii, Z30, Zfc and even the D780 is still supposed to be "current," but I assume Nikon is now selling next to no new DSLRs. In fact, even the EXPEED 5-based D850 is still available new.

Nikon could do a minor Z9 upgrade similar to Sony's A1 to A1ii, but in such case while Nikon can retail the EXPEED 7, they wouldn't be able to sell a whole lot of Z9ii that is only slightly improved from the Z9. An EXPEED 8 is a must if Nikon is preparing some Z9ii hardware that can last another 3 to 5 years into the future with more new features arriving via new firmware in the next few years. Moreover, those AI features and video capabilities will be power hungry. Not only CPU processing power is an issue, Nikon may need yet another new battery (new version of the EN-EL18??) to power that chip and the camera.

As far as how to produce such EXPEED processor in a timely and cost-effective manner, that is something Nikon will have to figure out, in order to stay competitive. Hopefully the cooperation with RED will generate more synergy. Those RED cine cams are low-volume but expensive products.

shuncheung said:

An EXPEED 8 is a must if Nikon is preparing some Z9ii hardware that can last another 3 to 5 years into the future with more new features arriving via new firmware in the next few years.

Click to expand...

But that's part of my point: at this point, Nikon needs a process size decrease, and badly. That's determined mostly be Socionext, so Nikon would be on their schedule.

You can continue to add additional IP (algorithms in hardware) to a chip, but unless there's corresponding increases in processing (CPU/GPU/NPU, memory speed, etc.), you won't get the performance increases that you need.

To some degree, we saw that happen with The Z6II/Z7II: the dual EXPEED6 chips gave Nikon twice the CPUs, GPUs, and on-chip memory, but now the communication between chips became the gating element. Performance was never going to increase enough going that route to be a long-term solution. And it's costly.

shuncheung said:

Moreover, those AI features and video capabilities will be power hungry. Not only CPU processing power is an issue, Nikon may need yet another new battery (new version of the EN-EL18??) to power that chip and the camera.

Click to expand...

That would be a no. Process size decrease gives you two benefits that you have to balance: performance increase and power reduction. This has been the whole thing that Apple has mastered so well with the Apple Silicon chips: each generation is giving a solid set of both benefits.

shuncheung said:

As far as how to produce such EXPEED processor in a timely and cost-effective manner, that is something Nikon will have to figure out, in order to stay competitive. Hopefully the cooperation with RED will generate more synergy. Those RED cine cams are low-volume but expensive products.

Click to expand...

My understanding is that RED was highly interested in EXPEED for their future. They were falling even further behind than the main camera companies in terms of specialized ASIC chips, because that's so costly to iterate anywhere near state-of-the-art. So another question is whether EXPEED7 will be RED-ready, too.

Thom Hogan said:

shuncheung said:

An EXPEED 8 is a must if Nikon is preparing some Z9ii hardware that can last another 3 to 5 years into the future with more new features arriving via new firmware in the next few years.

Click to expand...

But that's part of my point: at this point, Nikon needs a process size decrease, and badly. That's determined mostly be Socionext, so Nikon would be on their schedule.

You can continue to add additional IP (algorithms in hardware) to a chip, but unless there's corresponding increases in processing (CPU/GPU/NPU, memory speed, etc.), you won't get the performance increases that you need.

To some degree, we saw that happen with The Z6II/Z7II: the dual EXPEED6 chips gave Nikon twice the CPUs, GPUs, and on-chip memory, but now the communication between chips became the gating element. Performance was never going to increase enough going that route to be a long-term solution. And it's costly.

Thom Hogan said:

Moreover, those AI features and video capabilities will be power hungry. Not only CPU processing power is an issue, Nikon may need yet another new battery (new version of the EN-EL18??) to power that chip and the camera.

Click to expand...

That would be a no. Process size decrease gives you two benefits that you have to balance: performance increase and power reduction. This has been the whole thing that Apple has mastered so well with the Apple Silicon chips: each generation is giving a solid set of both benefits.

Thom Hogan said:

As far as how to produce such EXPEED processor in a timely and cost-effective manner, that is something Nikon will have to figure out, in order to stay competitive. Hopefully the cooperation with RED will generate more synergy. Those RED cine cams are low-volume but expensive products.

Click to expand...

My understanding is that RED was highly interested in EXPEED for their future. They were falling even further behind than the main camera companies in terms of specialized ASIC chips, because that's so costly to iterate anywhere near state-of-the-art. So another question is whether EXPEED7 will be RED-ready, too.

Click to expand...

The new ZR would tend to indicate that it is. Maybe the ZR is sort of a test bed so they can see how it all works in the real world.

shuncheung said:

chambeshi said:

lightaffaire said:

Droster said:

I think that's actually a sound business move. You want people to move on from the 4 year old product. Us existing Z9 users may not necessarily have to buy the immediate successor, but Nikon also needs to give people who don't already have the Z9 a good reason to buy the new product over the old one.

Remember, we are not owed any updates outside of bugfixes which they are obliged to fix. You paid for the product at the point of purchase. Any updates that we get is a gesture of goodwill. When we keep going "I want more gestures of goodwill, I deserve and demand it", the companies will be like "this is not worth the backlash, I'll just do the bare minimum".

Click to expand...

I don't agree with your point of view and logic when applied to just the Z9.

The Z9 was the first nikon mirrorless flagship and they were late to the party compared to Sony etc.

Hardware wise a great product but the initial Firmware did not take advantage or could not drive the HW to its full potential. They had togo with the ship early (HW ready / FW not fully ready) and ship often (lots of FW iterative updates) to get a product into flagship owners hands or risk defections.

Thats the reason the Z9 was given so many updates to get the FW upto the point it can fully drive the HW.

Holding back the latest FW features added to the Z8/Z6III is a mistake and gets flagship owners wondering what happened to the flagship getting new features first and then a trickle down to the other cameras in nikons range.

Click to expand...

Most recently, Nikon executives have confirmed some of the features added in firmware updates were responses to customer feedback and specific requests.

Nikon's Firmware Strategy is integral to its marketing and client relations.

Nikon prioritized its Firmware Strategy with the Z System well before the Z9. "....We want to do regular scheduled firmware updates to keep the products up to date for a long time... "

https://www.dpreview.com/interviews...nterview-nikon-we-are-at-a-transitional-stage

Click to expand...

It is a delicate balance, since Nikon (for the most part) does not charge for new firmware upgrades, they cannot keep on releasing new firmware without making money, directly or indirectly. In the first 2, 3 years of a new camera's product cycle, perhaps additional features will attract more customers to buy those cameras, new from Nikon, but after a while, there are too many used one already on the market. Releasing free firmware upgrades will mainly benefit existing customers, and a lot of people will buy used ones instead of new cameras from Nikon. After perhaps 4, 5 years, Nikon will need to introduce new, more powerful hardware anyway, and they will make money from selling new cameras.

Take the Z6ii and Z7ii as examples. When Nikon introduced them in 2020, they emphasized about having dual EXPEED 6 processors, but those generation 2 bodies never got much better than their original generation 1 ones. Perhaps some (a lot?) people thought Nikon would introduce new firmware to make those gen 2 far better, but those people were disappointed. It took Nikon another 4 years to introduce the Z6iii with a new sensor and the Z9's EXPEED 7 to produce a superior camera in the Z6 family.

Click to expand...

Sounds analogous to how Fuji treated its first flagship, the X-H1. Fuji claimed it had an uprated version of the X-Trans III generation dual core CPU. Before it, Fuji had an impressive track record of updating existing models with new firmware as their code base matured. A big example was the X-T2 gaining 4K video, years after the camera's initial release. Fuji unveiled the forward thinking, semi-pro video capable X-H1, and at first did some significant updates such as the addition of sync IS with v2.0... then six months later the X-T3 came out, and Fuji promptly stopped doing anything with the H1. The T3 got a variety of updates while the H1 languished for years, getting only minor updates to add new lens compatibility. The autofocus issues were never truly fixed, but it's 'good enough' most of the time. It's still a great camera on its own, I used mine today.

Fuji went from Kaizen to, you get what you get. I think they lost something when they did so, and I'm glad that so far Nikon doesn't seem to be following them in abandoning older hardware within a year. I don't feel abandoned with my Nikon Zf.

I’ve seen enough of Z6 , Z5 and Z50 refreshes from Nikon - it’s time to focus attention on Z7 , Z8 and Z9 refreshes now.

m_black said:

MrHollywood said:

I think there's at least some indication that the lack of firmware support for the Z9 flagship MIGHT be all about the Z9II, which is likely already being tested.

Following the release of the Z9II, the Z9 will likely gain some of the new firmware bumps, but Nikon wants to maximize Z9II initial sales, so they are making the Z9 seem "dated" by holding back on firmware for it.

Personally, I think it's a poor business move, IF that's the actual story. Maybe Nikon will kill my theory with a big update before the Z9II is announced.

For me, the Z9 does what I need and more, so I'll be in no hurry to grab a Z9II for the first year. After a bit I'll sell one of my Z9's and likely make the jump. But I wonder how many folks here will get on that Z9II preorder list???

Robert

Click to expand...

For the Z9II to be really compelling it will have to have hardware changes that the Z9 is obviously incapable of adding by firmware. The EVF from the Z6III for example, 4” LCD from the ZR, Wifi 6, dual articulating and swivel rear LCD, 32bit audio, possibly the OZO audio from Nokia found in the ZR. Then we’d be cooking with gas.

Click to expand...

All good points and if its wifi6/7 then consider removing the LAN port and reuse space for something else.

ISO noise and any improvements in people AF detection would be great.

Would love to see the charger die a death and move over to USB-C 100W charging via port in the battery or battery holder that plugs into body. Everything I use is now USB-C charging apart from my Z9.

HTTP-REST API so camera can sit on the network and its easy to integrate into workflows and scriptable.

ahinesdesign said:

No one but Nikon knows what the Z9 II will be or when it will launch.

Click to expand...

OCT 2026, and a preannouncement 1-3 months before that.