Nikon Z50 review

I buy based on ergonomics, then IQ. Z50 wins hands down! Wonderful to hold and use!

That combo really is awesome. It put my a6400 in the closet. I thought about selling it, but I don’t want to inflict that much pain on a fellow photographer.

I concur. For most people 12mp is sufficient. I recall a magazine for professional photographers stating in their review of the EOS D60 that 6mp was adequate for a full magazine A3 spread. Then proved it by a sample spread.

The 50mm 1.8 z fits nice on the z50, gives a great option for a prime and is currently under $500. They have a compact 28mm on the road map coming up. That's the benefit of a shared mount, you don't have to wait on APSC lenses. Canon prioritizes their full frame RF mount lenses, they already have more in a year then their EF-M mount that has been around for over 5 years.

Yeah, this 50/1.8s is expensive but one of then best 50mm lens on market. I think Nikon must have also some pro zooms for aps-c IMLC cameras, like he has for DSLR. For example, something like 16-55/2.8 and 8-16/2.8. But Nikon doesn't think so...

Forget About my posts, looked at nikons roadmap and did see that some lenses Will just be for z dx cameras. Makes more sense

@johans81
Your right, you’re not a lens engineer... but if we just take the kit lenses as an example, Nikon has already produced kit lenses that are far, far better than the competition.
So I think that your concerns are unwarranted.

For me, I owned a z6 and almost all the z lenses this was a no brainer for a small personal camera, and backup. Canon and Nikon always shared the mount, and it made sense. I bet long term canon releases an APSC camera on the RF platform and phase out the ef-m mount. with full frame cameras nearing the $1000 mark, it is becoming more common than in the past. But when Canon started the EF-M they had no intention of a full frame mirrorless. Thats the price of being on the bleeding edge. Nikon walked in year ago with all the trial and error already done.

Ken Rockwell has it and is beta testing it. He has a video up using it with the z50. For stills it looks like it works perfect, and the IS works with it.

If you haven't already, check out the bluetooth remote that works with Z50. It has quite a bit of buttons and even a couple customizable functions. You have to get used to turning on after time out and stuff but it's pretty handy. I esp love hooking up the camera to TV and play slideshow to family and friends right away. You can even start video rec with it. There are cheap knock offs too but I have Nikon remote. I'm glad I got it.

ML-L7 from Nikon. It's a lot more than just a shutter release. It was originally made for P1000 megazoom camera but it's compatible with Z50 as well.

Of course it can't MF for you but you can move around the focus point and zoom in for the focus aid with the remote.

lol... No you don't.
Nikon makes a remote shutter release like they do for all their cameras. In fact, ML-L7 is the model number.

Yeah and nikon z already allows for sony e mount and canon eos lenses with af. Someone said theres not enough lenses for z mount?

@zxaar: Canon had an adapter for their EOS M camera since start, it's not about how old the idea is.

@music4ever: I think Sony made their marketing around the ability to use adapted lenses from Canon FF and for a long time Sony was the only FF mirrorless camera you could use those lenses on. There were there first, that's all.

@larkhon

it is obviously about how old the idea is because one can not be excited about the idea after 5 years (hence nobody really cares if nikon can adopt the lenses on their mount). Canon did have adopters on M mount for long but their cameras are hardly exciting.

Anyway the main point is other than only true nikon users for general public it is hard to be excited about something they can do for ages on other mounts.

@Indik
"Someone said theres not enough lenses for z mount?"

Wasn't the mount diameter main thing about this mount. Then by adopting lenses designed on smaller mount dia , aren't you throwing away that advantages? Why you need such lenses when you can get $8000 ultra fast lenses on nikon mount.

There’s nothing mediocre about the Z50; it’s a joy to use and delivers fantastic results, wonderful to hold, it’s really impressive and has brought me back to Nikon after a 5 year absence.

Funny how the ergonomics don't look import on paper to pixel peepers that only look at specs and images at 200%. But once you own the camera, the only thing that matters is the grip, controls, EVF, things you interact with to take actual pictures. Suddenly owners that bought the M6II because of the megapixels, can't see the screen in daylight and wished they had an EVF, or the a6400 owners thought they needed the best EYE AF and realized there is no front dial, making shooting in full manual impossible.

Z50 is just another APS-C camera that is third rate compared to the competition. It's easily outclassed by Nikon's own D500. The Z line will not end well for Nikon. Wait and see. Eventually, they won't be able to give them away,

Why don’t you use one before making your ill informed trollish judgements?

@Peter Bendheim, people Troll because they are unhappy. Feel sorry for them.

Interesting contrast, my experience compared to yours. I had an M early on and later both an M5 and M6, and got really tired of waiting for Canon to fill out the lens lineup. IMHO 11-22, 22, and 32 were the only decent ones. And it's a dead-end system. So that stuff is now gone.

Just got a Z 50 to go along with my Z 6. Really like it. The 16-50 is a "more than kit" quality lens. It's also nice to have the same basic user interface on both cameras that I use.

Thé winner is a z 50 with Olympus stabilization, Fuji lens line up, anti dust from Olympus, Sony autofocus.
If they write the same scenario as the One series , not so many are going to invest into this body. They never never offered some good primes....
Today you can buy a Sony a7ii for less than this z50 .

That's a great point bdbender, and I like what I keep seeing about the Z 16-50. But I really like the idea of the little 22 mm so that's really the reason I have the M5.

I took it out today with just the 15-45 for photographing my toddler at the playground and I'm delighted. Very impressed by the touch-to-track-AF.

I'm glad Nikon finally released the Z50. I just wish they'd released it last year or the year before.

And would give us just a few Z-DX primes!

Actually a few points...
The folks that are bashing the Z50 are the usual suspects.
The Z50 comes with the best kit lenses (bar none) in the industry
The Z50, ergonomically, is the best feeling camera against all of it's competitors
The Z50 build and weather sealing is among the best (and far better than the Sony, Canon, and Fuji offerings) in it's price point.

I did consider the Z50 (and the A7iii and Canon R) but went for the Z6. I am soooo delighted. 24mp is plenty, the DR amazing, great colour output, very plastic raw files and the 24-70 f/4 is just bitingly sharp (wide open and across the entire frame). I can carry it all day over the fells without suffering. It feels really good in the hand, the EVF is simply lush. Have to mention the IBIS, which is superb. Brilliant camera.

"I much prefer to turn an aperture ring than go into a menu to change aperture"

You're diving into menus on Z50 to change aperture? Have you considered just turning the front dial with your finger? With the camera to your eye, you'll see the aperture value change in the viewfinder.

No worries, Upper Structures. In fact, if you've turned on Easy Exposure Compensation with the Nikon in A mode, you can adjust the aperture with the front dial and exposure compensation via the rear dial. Works in the opposite manner in S mode (shutter speed rear/exposure comp front). It is very intuitive and quick.

The lack of ibis is head scratching, really?? You do realize 1. The Z50 costs less than half of a Z6, and that ibis is expensive to produce??

@Oiche
You're shooting with a Pentax K70 and laughing at a Z50? Really???
The Z50 lack of Ibis puts it at exactly where it's competitors are (Fuji XT-30, Canon M50II, and M6II, Sony A6400).
The Z50 sensor is the same one being used in the class leading D500, funny how no one has ever complained about the sensor on the D500...
The kit lenses that are included are by far the best (sharpness, contrast, AF, edge to edge detail) of any of it's competitors.
The only folks dissing the Z50 are folks that have never handled or shot this camera...this little guy is a marvel by comparison to the competition.

That oversize mount still has advantages in that the rear of the lens can be closer to the sensor increasing the image quality.

The camera is targeted at people who will be marketed two OIS lenses. Why would you blow up the cost of this camera with IBIS??? Also who’s to say it’s smaller size can afford the energy use or maintain its proper temperature. So many IBIS zealots on the Internet these days it’s absolutely pitiful.

flee2010... What in the world does "artificially restricted in size" mean? Do you mean that Nikon could have made a bigger lens but they chose not to? Well... yes, I think that's kind of the point. I believe the lens is one of the reasons that the Z50 seems to be selling well so far.

An explanation from the side of DPR would be most wanted indeed.

Z50 is an excellent camera, deserves a score even better than 85%.

@Rudi Z
Also, the Z lenses that have come out are class leading in performance in almost every measurable parameter.
I notice that you joined a month or so ago, so I will cut you some slack...go out and shoot with the Z50, and or, any of the Z cameras and lenses and then make an opinion, don't just come on here making statements that are patently incorrect without first trying out the gear.

The kit lenses are actually really impressive results wise

It just seems like a bad move. The Z50 sensor has worse low light performance due to the physical changes made to the sensor to allow for a form of phase detect, while not improving SNR over the D7500, on top of that they then go and use a kit lens that has a smaller aperture. With them trying to push the APS-C line to mirrorless, they need to make a good kit lens, especially for the Z mount where there are no budget friendly lenses outside of a kit lens.

They should have done a 16-50mm f/3.5 constant lens to give it a strong start since they are targeting a market where customers are not looking to buy a $500+ lens; big spending comes when someone establishes a love for photography, that requires a good initial experience to keep them hooked.

Constant f/3.5 would be exact two things this camera is trying NOT to be: big and expensive (or more precisely: it’ll stop this combo from being cheap and small). There are no ways which will satisfy 100% of the users here. This camera is not for me. But I agree with Nikon in giving people the “cheap and small” option. Because 18-50/3.5 will excel at nothing: it will stop being cheap and light, while still not being especially great for low light or bokeh

It's very compact and still really sharp for what it is. I take this camera and lens with me in my jacket, it is that tiny. My d3200 body without lens has kind of the same dimensions as this one. It is truly amazing. And yes it is slow, but the sensor can handle high iso and it is a result of making it so compact. Do know it is only one third of a stop slower then f5.6, and other 'cheap' kitlenses normally end up with 5.6. So the difference isn't that big.

With most cameras you can assign parts of the screen to be the touchpad, so if you shoot with your right eye you would want AF on the right side of the screen. And it’s really not an issue to use a touchscreen with your eye to the viewfinder.

@Gary, they are compatible with adapters.

This is true if you only use lenses with OIS; however, IBIS + OIS is superior to OIS alone.

Practise keeping the shutter speed reciprocal to the focal length. Voila, no need for IBIS. (I don't know how we used to manage I really don't....)

While I agree generally, today the only apsc with IBIS is Sony’s a6600. And although I own an a6400 I just received my Z50, it is the Z that is an absolute pleasure hold in my hands and use! And the stabilization and IQ of the two very sharp kit lenses is superb! BTW, I also own an a7R4. The Z has superior ergonomics to it. The Zs ergonomics are vastly superior to all apsc sonys!

2joe I think Sony has Steady Shot on a number of apsc not just the 6600. I might be thinking of ones like the a58 and such, which might be out of production.

Sony is not the only camera maker with IBIS, Pentax has that function in every APS-C and full frame that they have made.

@2Joe: And the Fuji X-H1 for APSC DSLMs.

For me, IBIS is more important on the video end of things. Without it, you get a jittery mess. Olympus has fantastic built-in stabilizers, for stills and video. On my Olys, I can walk (smoothly) while shooting video and the camera makes it look like I'm on wheels.

"They haven't released an entry level mirrorless camera yet."

And there you have the gist of it.
Meanwhile they're losing important holiday sales to Canon, Sony, and others.

Camera is very personal - unless you know what the person wants no point wasting money on it - A few year ago I bought a Canon S120 P&S for my wife as a gift - she never uses it prefer the cellphone, so the camera is laying around - I used it occasionally.

Nikon 1 was blazing fast and had high potential. To bad Nikon made some mistakes and dropped it way to fast.

They are not lending you the camera. You buy it. And if you don’t like it you can return it as long as you didn’t drop it, submerge it, or carve it up. If 95% of people keep it, then it was a marketing success. Nikon is horrible at promoting themselves. But their products are great. And word of mouth and positive reviews by non-influencers often give their good stuff a critical mass of sorts that their PR department could not.

Stop your whining. No camera at this price or in this class has IBIS, or else the Z50 would be ridiculously priced. It’s already borderline affordable/expensive.

The E-M10 Mark III is a lot cheaper and offers excellent 5 axis IBIS.

But this Z50 is also a nice camera. A good first attempt for Nikon in the crop milc department.

but the e-m10 has 1/2 its sensor missing

No it isn't. Just a different size of sensor. That has some advantages and some disadvantages.

Advantage of APS-C compared to MFT; 2/3 stop faster.
Advantage of MFT compared to APS-C; smaller and lighter lenses. Leading IBIS. Faster readout.

no if the m43 lens has an equivalent field of view and DOF of a APS-c or FF the lenses are the same size or the m43 are strangely bigger
.i opened a thread on this some time back listing lenses and their equivalents APS-c and FF and stating their size and did not find one m43 lens that was smaller even though folk keep replying saying that xxx lens is small but i would find a smaller equivalent ...of course there is not an equivalent APS-c or FF for every m43 lens as would you buy a standard zoom that is F7 to F11.2 for FF
the only advantage i can see for m43 has nothing to do with sensor size ...it is that you can by an affordable weather sealed body
Of Course the small sensor has many disadvantages
manly with IQ like i proved that the cheap bargain basement Canon 50mm F1.8 on a 21MP ff camera resolved more detail (just) than the best £1200 GBP m43 lenses at equivalent F stops .,,,i don't see the point of m43

Strange, that in my local photo club I always have the smallest camera/lens combi with MFT. And there are plenty Fuji APS-C users. It say's enough that you have to trow in DoF to make APS-C work for you. That's fine, but everyone knows that overall MFT is smaller and lighter than APS-C.
Canon M is nice, but extremely limited with native lenses. There will never be L class lenses for it nor will there be a professional camera for it. If you want that you have to sell it al and buy again in Canon R mount.

YES you are correct if you don't need/want shallow DOF I have often looked at m43 for a small set up myself but finding m43 dont really have much of a advantage when i can just use a slower lens ..but the bit i can't understand is when folk buy the bigger bodys and the "pro" F2.8 zooms and the the very fast primes at hi cost which are as big or bigger than cameras with a bigger sensor ..its pointless ...you are correct when you say Canon M will never be pro grade system .i did touch on the fact you can get very good weather sealed m43 bodies relatively cheap ...but the results you can get from the M and lenses are very good ,,the 11-22mm is best in class.. that len is why i can't leave the M even though canon are not replacing the M5 with a M5ii that has me miffed The closest equivalent m43 lens is the Panasonic Leica DG Vario-Elmarit 8-18mm f/2.8-4 which is twice as big and 2 or3 times the price and not as optical as good

Plenty of swallow DoF possible with MFT.
Most of the time I have to stop down to get the subject properly in focus.

Of course they have to start somewhere, but that big Z mount is going to make their APS-C lenses larger and heavier than the competition. It's like Nikon is hedging their bets with this camera. Sharing the mount between the systems suggests a lack of commitment to the APS-C format.

Going back to Nikon's stated purpose, if you were a smartphone user looking to buy your first APS-C system camera, would you buy the Z50 or a much smaller, simpler Fujifilm X-A7 at something like half the price?

Here's why sharing the Z mount makes no sense. Take your example with someone owning a Z6 and a Z50. Going out with Z50 and the kit lens makes perfect sense. Going out with the Z50 and a big FF lens makes no sense as there's no gain to be had. If your Z6 was in for service would likely be the only occasion where a FF Z mount lens would be on your Z50.

A photographer with a FF Z system looking for small and light would actually be better off with another brand of APS-C or an MFT system.

Z50 + 16-50 is half the weight of Z6 + 24-70/4 and smaller than a D3500. It really is a lot of camera in a tiny package.

And if they gone with a dedicated APS-C mount it would have been even smaller and lighter.

Would you put the 24-70 f4 on the Z50 as your primary setup?

My point is simple, if you're only going to walk around with the Z50 and a kit lens, the big Z mount doesn't make a whole lot of sense. It makes me think Nikon intends to only produce a few APS-C sized lenses for this camera, expecting people to use the FF versions when looking for more glass. That kisses the size and weight argument goodbye.

Back to what I said earlier, if I was a Z6 or a Z7 user (fantastic cameras BTW), I'd be looking at another brand for my APS-C usage.

I've done two systems in the past (35mm with 645 and 35mm with 4X5). It really is no big deal if the uses for the two systems are sufficiently differentiated.

@pharles I disagree with you. Yes using FF Z glass on the 50 may add *slight* weight, but the system will still be light and compact enough. Albeit expensive, that glass is available for those who want it, and won’t be wasted when they decide to go full FF.

I think Nikon made a good choice. Canon’s M Series is very good with a nice selection of lenses, but there’s no FF upgrade path that Nikon offers.

Also Nikon will offer a Z mount DX 18-240 lens too. So there’s nothing to lose when buying a Z50 now and upgrading to a Z6 later. You can always sell those DX lenses.

One week ago, there were numbers coming out of Japan and the z50 was the No1 selling camera. I don't understand the complain about size, where does a camera small enough. I mean the z6 is the limit for me for a pro use, I even leave the cage on now as I see the grip much better for my hands and larger lens.
For the likes of the z50, I think any nikon user wants a small always carry camera with them. I don't want to deal with 3 type of mount, so easy to forget x or y lens adapter etc. And contrary to what is being said, Nikon gives the best upgrade path because 1 you can by z FF glass because until January this year , I have never shot with an IBIS camera and had no problem being a pro photographer. 2 With a z6 about 1800 now, you get can upgrade to a whole new world of FF camera, like only 300-400 more than a fuji XT3. A FF camera that will beat any Apsc camera like the Fuji hands down.

@pharles
For a guy that is in the habit of not commenting on cameras that you don't use...you sure have a lot to say about a camera you haven't even seen or held, much less even used.

You don't understand the size of the mount on the Z 50, that's OK.
I don't understand Fuji shooters that limit themselves to APS-C and spend almost the same amount of money as lenses that are full frame.

This little guy (Z50) is a perfect fit for my Z6 and Z7 kit.
It gives me a smaller camera when I just want something to tool around with, but that takes advantage of all of my class leading Z lenses.

@Pharles, Don’t forget the fabulous ergonomics of the Z50. The button layout is even better than the Z6,7. I have one. I like it even better than my previous all time fav cam: my 1970 Pentax 6x7.