OK. Now Can I Have My Damn Z90?

[MercedRiver]

Sounds like you need an OM1

https://cameradecision.com/compare/OM-System-OM-1-vs-Nikon-D500

 

[NikonMan09]

Finally, the Zf has landed. Looks like a great camera. Now, Nikon, can you give us an advanced-level DX model? I don't care what model number you attach to the body, but sure would like to see a rumor about an R7 killer in the works! Z70/80 or 90 would work equally well for the loyal customer segment that prefers an APS-C format. Or maybe the highly-esteemed number 500 that continues to live in rarefied air among its devotees.

That should be Nikon's top priority now!

 

[LTheWafflePWN]

Put it in DX mode and live happily ever after.

I guess I will never understand folks for whom this number is simply not a problem: $3996.95 without a lens. :-(

By that same token I will never understand folks that expect the performance of a pro Z8 or Z9 in a body the size and price of a Z5. It just doesn’t work that way. Sorry.

I don't really want to get wrapped up in this argument, but you can go back to at least a dozen threads before the Z8 of people arguing how Nikon would never put the performance of the pro Z9 in a smaller body and still make it significantly cheaper.

Yet, here we are, with a Z8 ("smaller Z9") that's $1500 less.

I really don't think it's impossible to for Nikon to make a high end APS-C camera. I don't even think it's unlikely to expect one. I mean, Canon has an R7, Sony the a6700, Fuji the XH2S, etc....

 

[Jim Keye]

Put it in DX mode and live happily ever after.

This misses the point on enough levels as to be kind of amazing.

 

[tsinvest]

Finally, the Zf has landed. Looks like a great camera. Now, Nikon, can you give us an advanced-level DX model? I don't care what model number you attach to the body, but sure would like to see a rumor about an R7 killer in the works! Z70/80 or 90 would work equally well for the loyal customer segment that prefers an APS-C format. Or maybe the highly-esteemed number 500 that continues to live in rarefied air among its devotees.

Hey, I have a novel idea (not trying to be a wise guy), how about getting an R7. I switched to Canon after being a Nikon user since 2006. The R7 has a 32mp crop sensor and one of the best autofocus systems available. I'm too old to wait so I bit the bullet and purchased a system that met my current needs. The R7 is a great camera and with either the 100-500mm lens or the 100-400mm lens you can get some excellent wildlife (bird) photos.

 

[SCoombs]

Put it in DX mode and live happily ever after.

This misses the point on enough levels as to be kind of amazing.

On which levels do you think it misses the point? I've read a huge number of threads on this and other than a much lower price - which is, as has been discussed, not may or may not be a realistic hope - I haven't seen a single other area raised in which the Z8 is not a near exact mirrorless replacement for the D500.

It's almost exactly the same size.

It has more or less the same sensor resolution in DX mode (plus the option to shoot in FX if one wishes)

It's got the top of the line AF like the D500 had.

I replaced my D500 with a Z8 and other than the price, it's almost the exact same camera, but mirrorless and with a bit more versatility.

I understand the price argument, but I don't see how it makes any sense to say it misses the point on any other levels than that.

 

[SCoombs]

Finally, the Zf has landed. Looks like a great camera. Now, Nikon, can you give us an advanced-level DX model? I don't care what model number you attach to the body, but sure would like to see a rumor about an R7 killer in the works! Z70/80 or 90 would work equally well for the loyal customer segment that prefers an APS-C format. Or maybe the highly-esteemed number 500 that continues to live in rarefied air among its devotees.

Hey, I have a novel idea (not trying to be a wise guy), how about getting an R7. I switched to Canon after being a Nikon user since 2006. The R7 has a 32mp crop sensor and one of the best autofocus systems available. I'm too old to wait so I bit the bullet and purchased a system that met my current needs. The R7 is a great camera and with either the 100-500mm lens or the 100-400mm lens you can get some excellent wildlife (bird) photos.

Camera systems don't make for easy switching because typically a person already has a lot of money in lenses. If people are objecting to the Z8 on account of its price, then switching to a whole other system would be even more expensive.

 

[Bob A L]

My guess is that you may have a long wait.

 

[BackToNature1]

Put it in DX mode and live happily ever after.

The a6700 the a9ii or the a1. Or the R7 the R3/R5. Nor should Nikon. Long overdue for a proper replacement for the D500.

 

[JasonMulvern]

Sounds like you need an OM1

https://cameradecision.com/compare/OM-System-OM-1-vs-Nikon-D500

The OM1 is very compelling and has so many features the Z50/30 lacks. There's some lovely compact lenses too, I am seriously considering it.

Someone mentioned the Canon R7 above, this is another great looking system.

The more you look at the competition in the APSC and M43 space the more you realise how dated Nikon's offerings here have become. Fingers crossed for something new soon.

 

[Droster]

Put it in DX mode and live happily ever after.

This misses the point on enough levels as to be kind of amazing.

On which levels do you think it misses the point? I've read a huge number of threads on this and other than a much lower price - which is, as has been discussed, not may or may not be a realistic hope - I haven't seen a single other area raised in which the Z8 is not a near exact mirrorless replacement for the D500.

It's almost exactly the same size.

It has more or less the same sensor resolution in DX mode (plus the option to shoot in FX if one wishes)

It's got the top of the line AF like the D500 had.

I replaced my D500 with a Z8 and other than the price, it's almost the exact same camera, but mirrorless and with a bit more versatility.

I understand the price argument, but I don't see how it makes any sense to say it misses the point on any other levels than that.

While I agree with most of it, the key difference here being the stacked sensor and how not everyone needs the stacked sensor nor wants to pay for it. The argument is also going to hold true for the Z7iii.

 

[SCoombs]

Put it in DX mode and live happily ever after.

This misses the point on enough levels as to be kind of amazing.

On which levels do you think it misses the point? I've read a huge number of threads on this and other than a much lower price - which is, as has been discussed, not may or may not be a realistic hope - I haven't seen a single other area raised in which the Z8 is not a near exact mirrorless replacement for the D500.

It's almost exactly the same size.

It has more or less the same sensor resolution in DX mode (plus the option to shoot in FX if one wishes)

It's got the top of the line AF like the D500 had.

I replaced my D500 with a Z8 and other than the price, it's almost the exact same camera, but mirrorless and with a bit more versatility.

I understand the price argument, but I don't see how it makes any sense to say it misses the point on any other levels than that.

While I agree with most of it, the key difference here being the stacked sensor and how not everyone needs the stacked sensor nor wants to pay for it. The argument is also going to hold true for the Z7iii.

This is an Interesting reply, because to my recollection the vast majority of people who are regularly talking about their desire for a Z90/Z500/whatever say they want a stacked ~33MP sensor, which I think is as of seeing the Zf specifications and price-point the biggest reason why getting what they want at the price they want doesn't seem remotely feasible.

On the other hand, if someone isn't interested in a stacked sensor, then the Zf seems to check all their boxes and so I'm not really sure what they are still waiting for at this point.

 

[Droster]

Put it in DX mode and live happily ever after.

This misses the point on enough levels as to be kind of amazing.

On which levels do you think it misses the point? I've read a huge number of threads on this and other than a much lower price - which is, as has been discussed, not may or may not be a realistic hope - I haven't seen a single other area raised in which the Z8 is not a near exact mirrorless replacement for the D500.

It's almost exactly the same size.

It has more or less the same sensor resolution in DX mode (plus the option to shoot in FX if one wishes)

It's got the top of the line AF like the D500 had.

I replaced my D500 with a Z8 and other than the price, it's almost the exact same camera, but mirrorless and with a bit more versatility.

I understand the price argument, but I don't see how it makes any sense to say it misses the point on any other levels than that.

While I agree with most of it, the key difference here being the stacked sensor and how not everyone needs the stacked sensor nor wants to pay for it. The argument is also going to hold true for the Z7iii.

This is an Interesting reply, because to my recollection the vast majority of people who are regularly talking about their desire for a Z90/Z500/whatever say they want a stacked ~33MP sensor, which I think is as of seeing the Zf specifications and price-point the biggest reason why getting what they want at the price they want doesn't seem remotely feasible.

On the other hand, if someone isn't interested in a stacked sensor, then the Zf seems to check all their boxes and so I'm not really sure what they are still waiting for at this point.

The OP did say a R7 killer. You don't need a stacked sensor to do that. And to beat the R7's $1.5k price point, we're not really going to get a stacked sensor.

And while the Zf does tick a lot of boxes and has a good amount of software goodies, there's still quite a bit left to be desired hardware-wise and leaves room for the conventional Z6/Z7 bodies to step in. An EVF with a higher refresh rate for example. The a7iv's EVF has a 120Hz refresh rate even without a stacked sensor so it can be done. Another bring the CFexpress slot and there's also the grip. The Zf is a nice 24MP camera, there's now room for more resolution options too.

There's quite a few things they can do hardware-wise and there's plenty of room to fit in two cameras in the $2000 to $4000 gap.

 

[Ad12]

£4000…. For crop mode? Don’t be silly.

 

[Ad12]

Put it in DX mode and live happily ever after.

£4000 for crop mode? Don’t be silly!

 

[Ad12]

Put it in DX mode and live happily ever after.

This misses the point on enough levels as to be kind of amazing.

On which levels do you think it misses the point? I've read a huge number of threads on this and other than a much lower price - which is, as has been discussed, not may or may not be a realistic hope - I haven't seen a single other area raised in which the Z8 is not a near exact mirrorless replacement for the D500.

It's almost exactly the same size.

It has more or less the same sensor resolution in DX mode (plus the option to shoot in FX if one wishes)

It's got the top of the line AF like the D500 had.

I replaced my D500 with a Z8 and other than the price, it's almost the exact same camera, but mirrorless and with a bit more versatility.

I understand the price argument, but I don't see how it makes any sense to say it misses the point on any other levels than that.

While I agree with most of it, the key difference here being the stacked sensor and how not everyone needs the stacked sensor nor wants to pay for it. The argument is also going to hold true for the Z7iii.

This is an Interesting reply, because to my recollection the vast majority of people who are regularly talking about their desire for a Z90/Z500/whatever say they want a stacked ~33MP sensor, which I think is as of seeing the Zf specifications and price-point the biggest reason why getting what they want at the price they want doesn't seem remotely feasible.

On the other hand, if someone isn't interested in a stacked sensor, then the Zf seems to check all their boxes and so I'm not really sure what they are still waiting for at this point.

Ergonomics. The ZF in a PASM body i.e. Z6iii - instant purchase.

 

[Vandyu]

Put it in DX mode and live happily ever after.

I guess I will never understand folks for whom this number is simply not a problem: $3996.95 without a lens. :-(

Of course it makes sense for price to be a major consideration, but I think a lot of the wishlists for this camera have extraordinarily unrealistic expectations for price. Do you really think taking essentially the Z8 and swapping in a 33MP sensor instead of 45 is going to reduce the cost by $2000?

No, but Nikon did manage to develop and produce the Zf for $1995.95. Now, isn't that about half the cost of the Z8? I know we are not comparing apples to apples, but I feel confident that Nikon could deliver a similar set of features in a Z90 for the under $2000 price point and sell enough to make it profitable.

As a matter of fact, when the Zf announcement came I had written up a whole post asking if the "Z500 people" (no ill will intended by that phrasing) would be satisfied now, because it seemed that on paper it was everything they'd wanted and at the price they'd wanted:s size, better AF, cost, higher end features, etc.

I never posted it because I suddenly realized that at on 24 MP, a DX crop would not be satisfactory. So the larger MP sensor - be it 33MP APS-C or 45 MP FF, is still missing.

However, do you see that to get what's in the Zf *and* that larger sensor is going to be well over $2000? It may even be *much* more, since people want a whole new sensor design at 33MP DX size and stacked. That's got to be at least $2500 and maybe even closer to $3000.

It would be interesting for Nikon to act in a parental way and devise a list of options for the mirrorless advanced DX that many of us are calling for. Sort of along the lines of "you can have this and this, but not that " for what's in your piggy bank. Remember when your parents said they would buy you "XYZ", but it had to be for both Christmas and your birthday? OK, maybe not. But, I think we are understanding that one cannot have all of the features of a $4000 camera for half of its price. I'm not quite as megapixel fixated as some. My last DSLR had a mere 10. WHAT???? :-O

 

[KDPeregrine]

As a huge fan of the R7's features (but not so much the controls and ergonomics), never mind a "killer", even just a Nikon equivalent clocking in around that price range would be lock for me.

For those of you proposing the Z8 or suggesting it would cost upwards of $3,000... lol, and might I also add, lmao

 

[goactive]

Why wait get the Sony a6700 it dose all this now and gives you better focus then the Z8 and Z9. And a much better lens choice than what Nikon has for DX.
It is replacing my two Z6s now for our work. I have two of them now an amazing little camera.

If Nikon dose come out with a new DX body will it have a better focus system and feature set than the new ZF as that is all ready behind the Sony a6700 in just about every way.

--
Started shooting digital back with the first 2MP cameras. Over 20 cameras later still going. I shoot for a living - family and people portraits, weddings, Sports and a little of everything.

 

[Vandyu]

Why wait get the Sony a6700 it dose all this now and gives you better focus then the Z8 and Z9. And a much better lens choice than what Nikon has for DX.
It is replacing my two Z6s now for our work. I have two of them now an amazing little camera.

If Nikon dose come out with a new DX body will it have a better focus system and feature set than the new ZF as that is all ready behind the Sony a6700 in just about every way.

Just read over some of the highlights on the Sony a6700 website. They certainly have put together a nice package at a reasonable price to meet the needs of a varied customer base.