LOL...

The suggestion made no sense before, and makes no sense now. *You* prefer landscape and are locked into that. Many of us aren't and prefer portraits to be in "portrait" orientation. My suggestion; skip over those nasty portrait orientation shots that seem to offend you.

Sorry, but I have read every one of your posts. Nobody here agrees with you. Go figure.

@AbrasiveReducer: I feel sorry for you that you don't seem to be able to derive any pleasure by looking at a beautifully designed camera. But that's okay. Enjoying the wide variety of great – and sometimes not so great – camera designs ist just one aspect of many why one can be into photography. And, of course, it is not the must important one. But to denigrate the joy thousands of us feel as nonsense is – sorry – just nonsense.

As photographers you think we would be the first to appreciate beauty in anything, including camera design.

Steve Jobs always talked about being at the intersection of technology and the liberal arts...that has been a key to the success of Apple, that they care about the human factors.

So yes you do need both: competent functioning along with great design. Too often in the camera gear world we have gotten too focused on esoteric tech specs and then wonder why the vast majority of people don't want dedicated cameras anymore.

If you only focus on technical specs you will for sure drive what's left of the camera market into the ground.

@AbrasiveReducer - How did you manage to select such an appropriate username?

"that has been a key to the success of Apple, that they care about the human factors."

Ipads horrible to hold, don't get good grip.
MacBooks aluminum cold to hands, sharp that you slit wrist because notch.
Their mouses are horrible, even the wireless touchpads.
Connectors behind the iMac, you never get to find those to plug something quickly, why use the wired keyboard two USB connectors. MacBook that USB connectors are so close together that wider than standard USB cable will require you to unplug one next to it.

Easy to add RAM with complex ejection system, to do it once or twice in the product lifetime, but then you have glued batteries or HDD that you need to dismantle half the computer to get access it, likely brake some very easily damaged critical wires.
Hardware by third party common from PC world, but apple adds something just to break compatibility, be it a moving connector just few millimeters to achieve it, or use firmware that will scramble the standard protocol.

@MK82: I didn't mean to start a debate about Apple...we can save that for another forum...but certainly Apple has been tremendously successful and a big part of that reason has been the design. You may not like it but apparently a lot of others do. And contrast Apple design with competitors...esp competitors before Apple entered the market. You don't like the iPad...well contrast other tablets before the iPad...clunky, awful user interface, etc.

@Docno: I understand what you say about habituation but many do continually value some of the more beautiful objects in their life...I guess it just takes a bit of gratitude and reminding ones self about it. As you note experiences matter and that is my point: that a beautiful well designed product can continually offer a better experience. The images and moments are unique to be sure, but the experience in taking them can matter to many.

Not necessarily this site, but too many reviewers are way too robotic and just into tech stuff. That mode switch to black and white is an incredibly winning design choice and yes, should be highlighted in reviews and samples.

No wonder the camera market is disappearing. Who is left to try to show the joy and excitement of photography with a dedicated camera? Notice when Apple advertises anything about its camera system it's all about the images and/or video, nothing about boring tech details. Their ads make you want to go out and take photos.

When Olympus added mode knob to PEN-F to switch between normal, color emulation and black and white emulation, it was just gimmick in eyes of the reviewers and people.

CREATIVE
ART
normal
COLOR
MONO

Nikon adds MONO mode, and....

That mode knob was excellent as well and should have been given more credit.

Once again, this is one reason why the camera market has declined to the extent it has: an obsessive focus on tech specs and overlooking what would be actual user benefits.

Those who deride this as a gimmick are not thinking like the average consumer.

If you only speak to gear nerds then you only get the small niche audience of gear nerds. And even that diminishes over time as even gear nerds realize that what they have is more than enough from a technical perspective.

I also get the impression that if Sony had done this then the usual YouTubers who reflexively praise anything Sony would have declared this to be the greatest thing since sliced bread.

@Mk82 But another company called Fuji, did the same thing with its film emulation and got very very popular because of this. This is life, perhaps it was too early, not implemented well or their no influencer at the time. Fuji has a camera that is so popular now because of influencers etc, that it is constantly soldout because it output some film like jpeg.

Yes the Fuji film emulations are great. And if reviewers talked up features like that as much as an extra fraction of DR or sensor read speed, then maybe more smartphone owners would consider buying a dedicated camera. That gives it a unique appeal.

And sure people can apply all sorts of edits and filters in post but most don't want that hassle. They want great OOC images.

If I were Fuji I would advertise their camera lineup as being a way to get the romance of film photography in digital. See what happens. Speak to the larger market not just the gear nerds (of which I am one!).

@GenaricName Yes, in some situations, JPG is plenty good enough. My point was, since Nikon spent time and money to add the option, that someone should cover it, and review it. Doesn't matter if it is JPG or not.

Also, in some situations good JPG output from the camera is a plus. If the camera can't spit out decent JPGs, that don't require RAW processing that takes more space, more time, and more energy, then it is a negative.

I'm not saying JPG is the way to go all the time, but without having a Zf yet, and not reading anyone talking about its B&W mode, I'd assume that even if RAW, in NX Studio, it "might" be possible to select one of the 3 modes and duplicate easily.

if no one cares about JPG, and how a camera performs B&W shooting, then Fuji and their simulations like Acros wouldn't be so "popular"...

@GenaricName Jared Polin......is that YOU?

The "New" 33Mp one is actually slower scanning and noisier than this 24Mp device so old doesn't necessarily mean "outdated"

Yes you measure technology by real advancement and not just by time. The basic design of the wheel hasn't been improved upon for centuries but it still works.

BTW, it's funny. Because on another discussion, when people pointed out that Sony was reusing tech on two of their new cameras, we were told it was a wise "modular" approach that was good for business. Now reuse of any tech is back to being "outdated."

So I will say that Nikon simply uses a smart modular approach in designing their models across their lineup.

FTR, all tech companies reuse technology in different models. It's the only practical way. No company can literally develop all new tech for every new model. The budget will not allow for it, nor will time allow for it.

@Leo Nardo Yeah and I would say full frame IQ was mostly peaking even early when the 36MP Sony sensors came out around a decade ago. Things just slowed to an complete craw after that.

2002 to 2012 was the golden era for seeing real differences in IQ in full frame. We are currently in that golden era for video IQ but starting to see the peak more since downsampled 4k is standard and 8K more common. I think these companies are going to really have some issues in the future once video gets so advanced everyone going to be really fighting over last piece of the high end pie unless there is major display tech advancements.

Enjoy.

http://www.ralphgibson.com/2016-the-vertical-horizon.html

Orientation is more fluid these days. :-p

Uh, the orientation of the photo is chosen to suit the subject matter. The gallery is not built around or for any particular orientation. Sticking to a single orientation is limiting and makes no sense to me.

It's a sample gallery not an art gallery showing. Nothing wrong with showing off both photos in landscape and portrait mode.

@Thought R Us .. what happened to "As photographers you think we would be the first to appreciate beauty in anything" or "If you want to attract the smartphone generation you better offer them some sort of great experience"?

@Matsu .. ROFL .. you nailed it. But too much fluidity will just flush everything down the drain. :-P

Many things could degrade a "visual concept" in a gallery of images, orientation is not one of them. Plus, these galleries need a good mix of subjects in order to serve their purpose and orientation is dependent on subject more than anything else. A sample gallery is functional rather than a work of art itself or an exhibition.

Imagine expecting a review gallery to be a full realized project … 😂

@grubernd: A sample gallery is hardly part of the experience of using a camera for the vast majority of prospective customers. As noted it's not an art gallery project.

+1

Can you reference which photos in the gallery you find the WB objectionable?

It's possibly just you. I have never had any issue with AWB on my Nikon DSLRS or the Z6s I now have.

@Horshack It may be a mix of awb and colour science, not just awb, however per your question: none are pleasant, 1,8,11,18,24,27,31,36, and 39 are particularly bad.

@Gwynedd, Thanks. The ourdoor WB shots you referenced look ok to me. The indoor shots you mentioned are off - I checked the full EXIF and see the photographer overrode the default Auto WB mode to Nikon's WB Auto2 mode, which is documented as "Preserve the warm color cast produced by incandescent lighting". I haven't used that mode myself but agree the results aren't to my liking either.

I've never had a problem with any Nikon camera, DSLR or mirrorless, with regards to colors/AWB. In fact usually Nikon produces some of the best OOC colors around.

A lot of people prefer Nikon's color to many other brands. I have little trouble and usually use the "natural" WB setting. That said, I don't find many of the gallery images "pop" as I think they should. No idea why. Remember, you can fine tune the WB to pretty much anything you want, so no reason to live with what you don't like.

I agree, right off the bat the first photo already shows some seriously disgusting skin tones of SOOC JPEG. The subject face looks greenish which is just... yikes. Indoor portraits exhibit a pink tint and don't look healthy at all, and I think those samples from recent Canon or Sony cameras look so much better.

I prefer Nikon's colour including WB to all other manufacturers.

I am running many nikon cameras DSLRs and mirrorless I found that all have yellow cast

In models with a mechanical shutter, Nikon calls fully-electronic shutter “silent photography.” On the Z6 and Zf, the sensor readout time is about 1/25 second. However, the SP mode shutter speed can go from 900 seconds (15 minutes) to 1/8000s.

This can lead to artifacts with fast-moving objects like a hummingbird’s wings.

If you want a quieter shutter, or to eliminate shutter shock, Nikon also has electronic first-curtain shutter (EFCS). Here, only the rear shutter curtain moves, at the end of the exposure. It provides quieter, no-shock imaging the artifacts. However, its fastest speed is 1/2000s. Most shooters choose Auto mode, which uses EFCS to 1/2000s and mechanical shutter on up to 1/8000 without you having to do anything.