Just published: Production sample images from the Nikon Z9 (with Raws)

I think the files have considerable quality above the R3 and 1DXMKIII.

However, fast moving athletes in stadium and bright outdoor lighting will be a better test for me.

I'd also like to see some studio shots to get a sense of IQ in ideal situations. To see fabrics and skin will show how superior it is in IQ to the 20MP and 24MP 1DXMKIII and R3 respectively.

On first glance if you've shot and edited extensively with the 1DXMKIII you will notice the enhanced IQ of the Z9. Skin texture is better by far as is hair detail. I don't see the waxy mush of the R3 and 1DXMKIII.

2 days agopermalink

Tracking is key and how the Z9 focuses and allows for tweaking for professionals will be important. Knowing AI SERVO and the various cases intimately some of us on the 1DXMKIII platform will want a brief overview of Nikon's modality.

Moving from the 1DXMKIII to the R3 or the 1DXMKIII to the Z9 will require investments in glass. Would Nikon consider an inducement to get more sports professionals to switch over? Perhaps R3 Shots with a converter and a EF 2.8 300MMII and a Z9 with a converter and the same lens.

2 days agopermalink

As Canon shooters move to Nikon, knowing we can use our Big Whites as we gradually get Nikon glass, would bring more Canon pros over.

Nikon's new 400mm with built in 1.4TC sounds Iike an amazing lens, but perhaps we don't buy that day one.

Getting out of the sports 20MP "jail" is now here and the only competition for the Z9 is a possible R1 and knowing Canon it will cost more than the Z9 and just barley match the resolution. The history of the 1DX 1DXMKII and 1DXMKIII and R3 shows me that Canon holds back resolution purposely.

2 days agopermalink

The R1 seems like a 2023 camera so it's just vaporware now but still a valid reason why some would wait vs jumping to the Z9

2 days agopermalink

Hungryloon

"These samples could have been taken with a decent phone"

... says while checking the rendering of children inside the space needle shot from a mile away with an all-around lens in no light.

2 days agopermalink

Lion-O

Shots look fine, but nothing that I couldn't do with my D850 or any other modern camera. I'm not sure why so many people seem to have GAS. Most of these new cameras lack innovation, and are overly expensive. I know, I know, the MUH SPORTS shooters and "journalists" need them to get the job done.....yeah, OK.

4 days agopermalink

notpc

Don't forget the "Mah big hands" types.

3 days agopermalink

AcerK

This test shoot is totally useless.. you can take photos of stationary objects with a film camera and result will be same..

This camera has to be tested with fast moving objects to test the AF. You can't just take a photo of a rock and call it a day.

4 days agopermalink

dmanthree

I think you'll see that once conditions allow it. But having that "bicycle guy" ride on icy streets for an AF test might be a bad idea. This is just a preliminary shoot.

4 days agopermalink

AcerK

Uhh doesn't have to be a bicycle.. there are sports, people moving quickly.. why a bicycle?

3 days agopermalink

dmanthree

I guess for consistency with previous AF tests where they moving subject is a guy on a bike.

3 days agopermalink

User9611243045

Hey I just want to say it's really great to see such nice shots of Seattle all the time. I appreciate you representing how beautiful our city is :)

4 days agopermalink

2JoeA7R2

The “snapshot” gallery demonstrated the Z9 is at least as capable a camera as an old iPhone. You could have just stipulated that in txt. I would have believed you.

4 days agopermalink

h3zky

Not here to start WW3 but it's interesting to note that even the entry level camera could likely be able to capture similar images, which kind of takes us back to photographer vs camera dilemna and shows that it takes much more than expensive camera to make a good photograph

5 days agopermalink

PankajDubey

Looks like Z9 can't do sunshine :D

5 days agopermalink

Jagganatha

I have looked again, and as Dyun says the noise here is something i would need to see treated with DXO PL5's Deep Prime, if it works as well as it does with other similar-sized files of the same quality, because here are a sterling set of snaps nobody would want to forcibly have in their current condition. When those sports jpegs at highish ISO appeared before Christmas their crude blocky noisy quality put me right off, and here again, though much improved i see nothing to write home about- unlike Green Planet on the BBC, where an american genius has made possible 8K timelapse pans where you can watch as the camera passes over a forest canopy whilst its leaves change colour !! and no noise. If we now take the Green Planet's ordinary standard of footage as the bog-standard level for high-end gear like the Z9, YouTube samples show the Z9 its equal at low isos with the best AF i have ever seen ( "I got my hands on the Nikon Z9..." Nigel Danson)

5 days agopermalink

Sardonic G

Drove all the way down to Long Beach for some of those shots I see. That's dedication.

6 days agopermalink

Dyun27

DxO PhotoLab 5 needs to hurry up and add support for the Z9 RAW files. The Nikon NX software is terrible at noise reduction and Lightroom is not much better. Thanks for providing the RAW samples!

6 days ago*permalink

Apparently there are problems with Adobes raw conversion of Z9 files. Check out Petapixels review where they compare the output from Adobe with Nikon NX. Huge difference. Hopefully Adobe updates its software

6 days agopermalink

What about NOT relying on default raw converter settings? Default is just a starting point, and differ between raw converters.

3 days agopermalink

Aye, tuning can of course always be done, but I’m a huge fan of out of the box good looks. But it seems to be about more than just colours. Also the look of the noise, sharpening et c

2 days ago*permalink

@ Einride: This is about raw, not out-of-camera jpg.

For the jpg files, there are tons of in-camera settings to adjust the files to what you prefer. Else you just have to accept what engineers have decided is a "useable average". No camera will deliver the "best" files in every situation.

2 days ago*permalink

Yes but there is a huge difference in workload if you have raw that look great straight out of camera and only need minor tweaks. A classic example in my experience is the D4 vs the D800. The D4 raw files were incredibly good from the beginning whereas the D800 files needed a lot more work to look as good.

And sometimes you never get there because you don’t necessarily know what you’re editing towards. So a camera with great colours out of the box will save a lot of time and often give better end results.

Hence why the single digit Nikons traditionally have very good colour from the beginning. Time is a resource.

2 days agopermalink

@ Einride: So one camera shows best color in all situation and every condition (sun, share, rain, day, night, flash, color cast by reflected light, etc.), while another is worse in every case? Well, I don't think so. Also note that camera models within the same brand vary noticeable when OOC jpg files are compared. Raw is about raw converter profiles.

Why are people unable to pick which camera model/brand was used from looking at pictures in blind tests? If one camera model or brand was better than the rest, the result should be obvious!

2 days ago*permalink

Well Magnar, what can I say? All I can say is that different cameras have different quality colour in their raw files. It makes a huge difference for workflow and workload. That is a fact. Starting an edit with a picture that looks better saves a lot of time and makes the job more fun and inspiring.

The Nikon single digit pro cameras typically have nicer colours and one needs often just make a minor contrast adjustment.

That’s my experience. You may not agree, which you clearly aren’t, and that’s ok.

1 day agopermalink

@ Einride: Fact is that you would fail just as much as everybody else if you was challenged to do a blind test. Then, where is the HUGE difference?

So now Nikon has the color? What happened with Canon, that was touted as THE color (even if color between their camera models differs quite noticeable). And what about raw converters, since all will give visibly different results with the same file when using default settings?

Also, have you ever worked with a calibrated raw file flow, using different cameras? If so, you would know what calibration is about, and how little the captured raw data from each camera plays a role. Just measure raw data with a decent calibration tool, and you will be surprised how nuances are taken care of. Raw is a bout profiles. So much for your nonsense raw data "theory".

1 day ago*permalink

No reason to be rude Magnar. I am only speaking from my own experience of working with raw files in my own business. I don’t understand why you keep talking about blind tests. I’ve photographed for many years and sometimes using different cameras, for example the D4 and the D800, at the same event, then having to spend considerable more time working on files from one camera than the other. Some cameras have better colour raw files. That means less time editing and just generally more fun making pictures.

I don’t care very much about internet opinion on image quality. I care about my own opinion and experience trying many different cameras, and before that films and paper. And in my experience and opinion, Nikon cameras have the best colours. By that I mean that the files requires the least amount of work to look great.

4 hours agopermalink

@ Einride: I don't think confirmation bias is a god starting point for discussing camera color. Also, how do you explain "better colour raw files" when raw is primarily about profiles? Just wondering.

3 hours agopermalink

Magnar, why do you keep being rude? I don’t know why you are accusing me of having confirmation bias? Care to explain yourself?

What I am taking about is photographing the same event with two different cameras, loading the raw files into a computer and then getting both to a satisfactory result.
Sure you can always do work arounds to solve any give situation, but personally I’d just prefer to use the camera that gives me the best results and with files that require the least amount of work to get there.

3 hours ago*permalink

@ Einride: I am asking since I want to know what you build this "some cameras have better raw color" claim on. From what I see, your reference point is what you are used with. That's okay for your personal work, but not helpful for judging or discussing camera color in a wider perspective.

3 hours ago*permalink

Tahir Hashmi

I'm just here to compliment Barney on the excellent shots in the gallery and his commendable determination to shoot some brilliant shots even during a snow storm.

Actually, the snow shots here are some of the most illustrative ones I've come across -- subtle and detailed. And that's another reason why I like this gallery. Any camera can make pretty pictures in good light. It takes a great imaging sensor to produce the kind of detail and tonality in these shots.

Loved this gallery!

1 week agopermalink

Lotus Cat

It takes a good photographer first. I'm just sayin' 😉

5 days agopermalink

Ursli

Is snowing and snow storm the same?

5 days agopermalink

dmanthree

Hardly. Snowing means the existence of flakes. A storm might include a ton of snow, wind, etc.

But you knew that, right?

4 days agopermalink

Daiken

Hi Barney! Just a question, when processing the RAW files and applying sharpening, what was your 'Masking' slider set to? If you don't set it somewhere around 50+, I find that the sharpening can introduce a lot of noise into flat area of the picture like in the sky. I think that's what a lot of people are criticizing here in the comments.

1 week agopermalink

Andrew Schwartz

Personally I think this is a very nice gallery that pairs up well with Barney's Gear of the Year article --- and I really don't understand all the anger behind the negative comments. To my eyes, it does a good job of illustrating the more precise autofocus vis-a-vis the Z7 (especially the lower light photos with dark contrast figures, which on my Z7 usually requires manual focus). And for people (like myself) who just walk around and take some pictures, the tradeoff between that autofocus precision vs. price + form factor is pretty much going to be the basis for deciding whether to upgrade or not.

1 week agopermalink

TOMSDPR

Good to see that money and AI still can't buy miracles.
Even with a 2022 high end camera it still depends on the natural light and weather if the final product looks fantastic or pretty ordinary ; )
The kind of pictures in this gallery certainly do not display the potential of this camera but they are most probably the best you can get in the dawn of 2022 in Seattle.

1 week ago*permalink

BackToNature1

The miracle of the camera was never about IQ. Period.

1 week agopermalink

engbert

These samples might have been taken with a decent phone.

6 days agopermalink

cosmicnode

My house phone is a decent one but I cant seem to find a camera on it. 😎

5 days agopermalink

Ruekon

It's a pity that these samples have been processed with ACR. OOC jpegs of preproduction samples often looked better to me, in particular with regard to noise. Also see the ISO 5000 Nikon supplied sample (3/21 in https://www.dpreview.com/news/9956913841/nikon-announces-z9-professional-mirrorless-camera), compared to the ISO 2000 sample 13/90 given here.
OOC jpegs would show the whole package, including also potentially improved noise reduction algorithms with Expeed 7.

1 week agopermalink

Jpegs throw over half the image information away. Why would you want to want to judge something based off something handicapped instead of seeing it's full potential?

1 week agopermalink

Ruekon

This article additionally provides raws with full sensor information. Independently, the shown samples are jpegs anyway. The question is how those jpegs have been generated -- with camera provided algorithms or with third party software. The latter should not lead to worse results in a camera review.

1 week agopermalink

MILC man

@Ruekon - "The question is how those jpegs have been generated -- with camera provided algorithms or with third party software."

you didn't look at the link i gave you, because it's clearly labeled "Out-of-camera JPEG"

6 days agopermalink

aris14

This 24-120mm lens looks great...

1 week agopermalink

Niko Todd

I can't see any lens problems. I can't also see how exactly it is better than the D6, as it was marketed, if I remember correctly! In AF tracking - most likely, but in low-light?! Nope!
Because what I do see, though, is a lot of noise. Even in the mid ISO's like 1000.

1 week agopermalink

tools4fools

I've read before that noise levels are almost the same than the z7II up to 12800 IIRC. Looking at some of these samples I agree, lots of noise even iso1000-2000. However, that isn't my experience with the z7, not at all. That sharpening +40 in Adobe Camera RAW might be the culprit - I use Capture One and up to iso3200 I don't even bother to throw in Topaz Denoise AI. I get almost noise free images, and not at the expense of fine detail (and no noise with a little detail loss). Topaz takes it to iso6400 (and beyond, perhaps, but I usually don't shoot the heart of darkness, so never really went into these regions...) I think with different processing much better results should be possible in terms of noise. Not to forget that we are at 45mp vs 20mp in a D5/6.

1 week agopermalink

MILC man

@Niko Todd - "I can't see any lens problems"

i see some color fringing in this low-light shot at the stove, for instance... i thought dpr was going to use lens corrections from now on, but maybe i misunderstood: https://www.dpreview.com/sample-galleries/2427213861/nikon-z9-production-sample-gallery/9911635706

1 week ago*permalink

@MILC man - that's longitudinal chromatic aberration - ain't no correcting for that.

1 week agopermalink

Hubi2

Yes, there is an astonishing amount of noise (chroma noise) at ISO 1000, the Adope attempt to convert is ridiculous. The results with my Z7II are far better. In the moment the IQ for me is more than disapointing

1 week agopermalink

BobJ185

The very 2nd image in the gallery ( Museum of History..) is completely out of focus. Why would you even include such an image in the gallery? Otherwise overall rather unspectacular images IMHO. Just photos for the sake of photos.

1 week agopermalink

It's focused on the ice....

1 week agopermalink

Relaxed

Yes, it shoots.

High ISO samples are a challenge. I wonder how it stacks against its peers.

1 week agopermalink

HowaboutRAW

Relaxed,

ISO 25,600 looks better than the A1, about the same as the "R5". But of course, we don't have samples shot with the Z9 above ISO 25,600, where both the A1 and "R5" start to fail.

So it's very good, but we need more samples. And it's not likely bested the best high ISO bodies yet.

1 week agopermalink

Relaxed

Funny, you must know how an A1 may have shot those iso 25600 snaps.

While I am unlikely to jump to Nikon for the Z9 for many other reasons, I can see it pretty much delivers the same limited high ISO performance as our A1s.

I’m more concerned about that ISO 4000 image. Maybe it was pushed in post processing- shadows look incredibly noisy.

1 week agopermalink

HowaboutRAW

Relaxed,

No don't own an A1 -- and it's a camera body I largely like. But I have access to a Sony A1.

If ISO 4000 is of more concern to you than ISO 25600, and the Sony A1 (or Sony whatever) is better at ISO 4000 than the Nikon Z1, by all means the Sony body is for you.

6 days agopermalink

gonzalu

Thanks for taking the time to post these. Looking forward to being able to actually buy one this year LOL.

1 week agopermalink

Foskito

Contrary to most people, I love that weather. And those samples look great!

1 week agopermalink

You _think_ you'd love it because you are in Tokyo...

1 week agopermalink

Foskito

J A C S a long time ago I had to travel from Irvine Ca to Chicago every single week for 3 years; winter down there can be pretty miserable, and my fear of flying is thanks to those windy O'Hare landings.

1 week agopermalink

AbrasiveReducer

If DPR were independent from Amazon, DPR would relocate to an area with weather more conducive to testing cameras. I like Pike Place Market and the Space Needle as much as anybody, but unless you are demonstrating weather sealing, this just doesn't seem representative of the type of photos people buying a new camera will want to take.

1 week agopermalink

gonzalu

Huh??

Weird flex but OK.

1 week agopermalink

LJ - Eljot

Like the place they had been before, London?

1 week agopermalink

MILC man

@AbrasiveReducer - "unless you are demonstrating weather sealing, this just doesn't seem representative of the type of photos people buying a new camera will want to take."

i disagree, what if you live in seattle, the midwest, canada, alaska, etc.? this is what it would look like, so that's what those people would be shooting if they bought a new camera.

what you meant to say was that bad weather makes it difficult to show the capabilities this camera has.

1 week ago*permalink

hschnee

Barney, if it makes any difference, I greatly appreciate your fine work here and on so many other articles and stories. It makes me sick to see how many obnoxious and spiteful comments you and the rest of the DP Review staff receive. What is it about photography that attracts so many arrogant, hateful, discontented complainers? Is this what our art form is about? Is this what our world has come to?

Listen, people, as Barney clearly said, he was limited by bad weather and a global pandemic; and he still made great effort to bring us this valuable sample gallery that so many of us have been asking for. And we get it for free. Feel some appreciation. Express some gratitude. Be a good person.

1 week agopermalink

TonyF64

Well said. Couldn't agree more.

1 week agopermalink

I see only two comments which can be classified as critical to Barney's skills. Is two "many"?

1 week agopermalink

TonyF64

JACS
Yes, I think one is too many. It is one thing to offer constructive criticism, but this isn't that. We are a community. We should be respectful to each other.
Cheers

1 week agopermalink

Thank you! Your kind words are much appreciated.

1 week agopermalink

Felipe Rodríguez

I support every single word of your statement. Bravo.

1 week agopermalink

ScarletKnight

Living in the Seattle area myself and putting aside the technical merits of the pictures, the number of images with tents is an all-too-accurate depiction of the extent of the homeless issue here. It may have been unintentional, but kudos to Mr. Britton for including not only "pretty" pictures but also using photography to highlight a social issue endemic to many large American cities.

1 week agopermalink

whitelens

I live in Vancouver, British Columbia, so we have the same crappy rainy season.
I am just always in shock how such a rich and pretty city like Seattle has so many people living in tents.

1 week agopermalink

Thanks, it's the beginnings of a photo project, I think (still figuring out the shape of it). I will say though, to the city's credit, that during the sub-zero cold snap, a good number of spaces were opened up in emergency shelters (and as such, I'm confident that many of the tents in these pictures were unoccupied when I was out shooting). The pandemic has been hard on a lot of people.

1 week agopermalink

TonyF64

Enjoyed the gallery. Thank you.
I see a 40mm was used in a few shots, a couple at F1.4. Which lens was used?

1 week agopermalink

Keith Meinhold

Impressive. It is an expensive camera and it shows it very well in my opinion. Bravo Nikon. Not a camera for me (I prefer smaller and lighter cameras) but I the results look great. Interesting contrast (social contrast in the subjects of the gallery) too. The only thing that bothered me was the parked Mercedes with the wheels turned the wrong direction. ;-)

1 week agopermalink

HibikiTaisuna

I really like the photo of those pears/apples (?). Nice toning and plasticity and the composition fits.

Also like a couple of the beach shots. Such a nice atmosphere.

1 week agopermalink

J0s3phK

I genuinely liked some of the pictures

1 week agopermalink

A Owens

Very enjoyable and we'll constructed gallery demonstrating overall output of the system. Predictively, no surprises here although that 24-120 looks very nice.
Thank you too for not including token "action" shots for swivel-eyed pedants to pour over at 400% looking for OOF eyeballs and declaring AF to be perfect or hopeless and nowhere in between.
AF deserves a full and careful review.

1 week agopermalink

Rihass

It's not that the samples look bad. They look bad for the camera it was taken with. Looks like someone bought the newest phone and went to try it out.

1 week agopermalink

1 week agopermalink

GoDP

Jacques-Yves Cousteau was my hero in chidhood.

1 week ago*permalink

TonyC5D

Sorry but I see nothing here that would justify the price point.

1 week agopermalink

What would that look like?

1 week agopermalink

if you are justifying the price of a camera based on few samples only, then something is wrong somewhere else...

1 week ago*permalink

TonyC5D

@Barney.
Better than this, I know it has good advances in many ways but at £5300 I am unable to see the value over many cameras at lower price points. I know conditions were against you and am not criticising your efforts, sadly I just don't see any quality gain to justify the outlay.

1 week ago*permalink

piratejabez

At least 99.999% of the world's population will also not see justification in the expense. So what? The camera was not made for them (you and me included).

5 days agopermalink

phgordon

Nice photos. Still looks like several are landscapes shot 100-400 w/TC. Not necessarily best way to highlight either AF or sensor.

1 week agopermalink

bmoag

How are readers supposed to form a legitimate impression of the camera when all that DP offers are these amateurish snapshots that do not offer anything better than a first effort with a cell phone? At least DP is consistent about offering poor quality sample images from high grade cameras.

1 week agopermalink

And here we go again....

1 week agopermalink

Barney, you need to start taking readers comments on board! We can't be all wrong but yourself !😋

1 week agopermalink

photogopinion

Well, I’m sorry, but I agree. There’s nothing in that gallery which would suggest to me aZ9 is at all out of the ordinary. Or, to be blunt, couldn’t be from a decent point-and shoot.

1 week agopermalink

@photogopinion You think image 54 could be done with a point and shoot? Check the noise in the shadows.
These aren't supposed to be portfolio additions, or art gallery work. It's a sample gallery, we want to see how the camera works in different situations.

It's like complaining about the artistry of the camera test scene.

1 week ago*permalink

Maybe we should start a discussion (preceded by an explanation) of what a sample gallery's purpose actually is? Only for those who haven't grasped the concept. Yet.

1 week agopermalink

"Barney, you need to start taking readers comments on board!"

Oh believe me, I do. I love waking up to a bunch of strangers telling me that the pictures I shot during my time off are useless garbage. Hard not to take that on board. But I still go out and take them, because I'm a sucker, apparently. On a more serious note, samples galleries aren't reviews. If you look at the images in this gallery and truly feel like you've learned nothing about the image quality of the camera, then I'm sorry to have let you down so badly - but I'm not sure I believe you.

1 week ago*permalink

BackToNature1

Apparently the quality of the pictures are being judge mostly by the brand, not the actual results. That's pretty common when it comes to galleries these days. Have the same pictures but a different brand, an it's all of a sudden, they are the best thing since Sliced Bread.

Given the conditions, the winter, I actually thought the results were excellent. Some folks you will NEVER please. So I don't bother trying.

1 week ago*permalink

BrentSchumer

This is an online review publication for an industry in serious decline during a pandemic; there isn't the resourcing to send a representative to say the Australian open for a week of heart-pounding sports shots.

These galleries are here to let you get a broad idea of what is possible with a sensor. If you want to see commissioned images designed to work you into a frenzy and loosen your wallet you can start here: https://www.nikonusa.com/en/nikon-products/product/mirrorless-cameras/z-9.html

1 week agopermalink

photogopinion

Maybe I haven’t grasped the concept. It just seems to me I have trouble seeing exactly what aspect of the Z9’s technical performance many of the photos are supposed to show and how much ‘better’ it may be than others.

At least not without spending an enormous amount of time poring over the EXIF data of each one.

I’m not asking every staffer at DPR to instantly reincarnate into Cartier-Bresson, David Bailey or Ansel Adams (not showing my age, just trying to avoid invidious contemporary comparisons).

If a DPR ‘sample gallery’ is just intended as ‘a photo album of pictures I took with camera-X and several lenses’ rather than a form of technical addition to a review, so be it.

But I don’t know it really helps (me, anyway) that much in evaluating the Z9 against any other broadly comparable camera.

1 week agopermalink

Boss of Sony

The samples are not that important. Any recent 45MP sensor is going to be amazing. What you really want to know is how the camera handles, how fast it shoots, how it feels in the hand, how good is the stabilization and the video specs, how big is the EVF.

1 week agopermalink

The photos I find useful are ones that show low light performance, stabilization on long telephoto shots, sharpness in the corners, color rendition inside and out, skin tones, foliage colors, and any blur at slow shutter speeds.

The Sample gallery is fine. It would have been awesome if it was taken on an African Safari or a backpacking tour up the PCT, but as Brent said nobody has $3000 to take an impromptu tour to get 100 shots for a sample gallery. So you try to cover all your bases in the local neighborhood, an hope you don't get snowed on (I guess we know the weather sealing and low temperatures work work fine too),

1 week agopermalink

BrentSchumer

Photog, image quality is going to look similar on almost every 4xMP camera, assuming similar lenses. This one stands out for things like burst shooting rate, autofocus improvements, etc.

If you got Ansel Adams to shoot with this camera, it would look like any other current 4xMP camera he got his hands on.

1 week agopermalink

steviewa

@bmoag
I guess that you in the exact same situation and all round circumstances could miraculously get stunning pictures yeah !

1 week agopermalink

mferencz

I am sure it takes great pictures. Impractical for anything but Pro use. Z7II makes a ton more sense.

1 week agopermalink

Felipe Rodríguez

It depends on the kind of photography you practice, but, for the most part, I think your statement is quite right.

1 week agopermalink

Docno

Impractical? It was just voted camera of the year by the mostly non-professionals who frequent this site. <snigger>

1 week agopermalink

sure, stick to Z7II....

1 week agopermalink

Kit Lens Avenger

Nice, clean '80s Mercedes. But I don't see anything APS-C couldn't provide.

1 week agopermalink

Priceless comment.

1 week agopermalink

I think too many keyboard warriors miss the point of what a sample gallery is.

1 week agopermalink

Kit Lens Avenger

"..miss the point of what a sample gallery is."

So, they *meant* to be unspectacular.... kinda like Clark Kent?

1 week agopermalink

PANASONIC-CANON-ProUser

Love the painting of Jacques - Cousteau.

1 week agopermalink

User4286416121

Was going to mention that earlier. Came back and voila. Great minds
Number 10

1 week ago*permalink

Tourlou

Yep! Nice one. Been watching he's TV program all my youth.

1 week agopermalink

Eugene A

Some of the photographers in DPR Nikon Z forum do a much better job at demonstrating what the Z9 can do.

Just an example:
https://www.dpreview.com/forums/post/65796942

1 week ago*permalink

These are definitely soft compared to what we are accustomed to see from A9, A1, D3,D5 and D4

1 week agopermalink

GV65

The gallery is a fine range of lighting conditions, contrast ranges and colors. It’s what it is meant for, not a photo contest 🙄

1 week agopermalink

D_imagist

Holy cow....is that Belvedere?
I barely recognized him!
Quite the dog about town he has become ehh...?
As far as the gallery goes, the colors are meh-

1 week agopermalink

Not Belvedere :)

1 week agopermalink

D_imagist

@ Barney Britton, it ain't? My bad. Sure resembles him though. You guys should do a "where is Belvedere now" segment for our most popular pup!

1 week agopermalink

adamc027

Would still like to see shots indoors under artificial fluorescent and/or LED lights at a variety of shutter speeds to see how it handles banding.

1 week agopermalink

That 24-120 zoom is decentered or the VR/IBIS is decentering it; I spotted a few problematic shots and then stopped looking.

1 week agopermalink

Autriche78

Agree. I was expecting pretty stellar image quality and this isn't showcasing it, on my monitor anyway.

1 week agopermalink

Caleido

Which shots are decentered according to you?

1 week agopermalink

I posted comments on some of the shots I spotted.

1 week agopermalink

"That 24-120 zoom is decentered or the VR/IBIS is decentering it"

It really isn't.

1 week agopermalink

OK then. In any case, the softness is there.

1 week agopermalink

Caleido

I've only seen in it in 3 maybe 5 images in total. Most clearly in the shot of the water plane at the dock.

1 week agopermalink

It seems that some FL's are more problematic. Maybe around 40mm is one of them.

1 week agopermalink

photogopinion

There’s certainly something odd about several of those shots. Glad it’s not just me.

1 week agopermalink

jonby

Not really conclusive from images I've looked at so far. There is quite a bit of edge softness, but much of it could be the result of field curvature. There are some shots which suggest some decentering/focal plane tilting, but then it seems to go away in other shots, so it's probably focal-length and focusing-distance dependent, which to be honest is par for the course with 24-105-ish zooms.

1 week agopermalink

"par for the course with 24-105-ish zooms"

Exactly. Sharpness from this sample of the lens is actually (in my extensive experience) very good, and pretty uniform across the range of focal lengths. Interesting that there were few or no comments about supposed 'blurry pictures' in the dedicated gallery I shot on this exact same lens, just a week or so ago (shrug).

1 week agopermalink

Gesture

Great. The only cameras anyone needs or will ever need.

Would like more people pix, however.

1 week ago*permalink

Working on it - Omicron and sheet ice somewhat hampered my social options this holiday.

1 week agopermalink

Gesture

OK. Looking good.

1 week agopermalink

CaPi

A very interesting gallery - especially as I have some of the lenses. Thanks

1 week agopermalink

Why so many blurry shots? Being the ONLY camera of the year before launch I am afraid my expectations were a little high. Hopefully the full production unit will offer better IQ?

1 week agopermalink

CaPi

'Blurry?' Check where the focus areas lie. This is intentional - and to me educational.

1 week ago*permalink

I see a lot of sharp images, except few of faces being out of focus which goes back to bad skill of photographer who took the pictures.

1 week agopermalink

marc petzold

Perhaps the poster isn't familiar with DoF and the creative usage of that, therefor, it's all blurry for him.

1 week agopermalink

Rhaegar

It’s pylorus.

1 week agopermalink

@marc @CaPi: let's be serious for once. I know you love your brand of choice but what's DOF got to do with blurry images? And you can't call blurry shots anywhere near creative. Are you trying to suggest the photographer intentional produced blurry shots in the name of creativity? What kind of creativity is this? 😒 Beside the man behind this body of blurry shots is solely responsible in elevating Nikon D9 to Camera of the Year status.

1 week ago*permalink

Did you even read my comment?! I mentioned bad skill of photographer. Mostly very sharp. no idea what you are talking about.

1 week agopermalink

CaPi

@pylorus: I would be a more happy man if I had one brand of choice. Sadly that's not the case. ;-) I can't seem to shake Fuji no matter how hard I try.

This to me isn't a portfolio but test shots showing what you can do with gear and what the results may be. What is on display here are examples of: Grabbing focus on low contrast elements. Showing what Bokeh in certain situations will look like using this. etc etc.
This is not about portfolio type creativity or feats of skill. This is a gear site and experts in gear show what it can do without expensive vendor funded event parcours.

1 week ago*permalink

@CaPi: That's exactly my point. The shots lack definition and crispness expected from the camera of the year gear. To me they look more miss focused than anything else

1 week agopermalink

Pylorus: Stick to phone photography. Everything's (sort of) sharp there.

1 week agopermalink

"the man behind this body of blurry shots is solely responsible in elevating Nikon D9 to Camera of the Year status."

He is not. I think you'll find that was a poll of DPReview's readers. If you're referring to my opinion piece of December, that was one of a series of articles by DPReview editors. There's no 'one' choice.

1 week agopermalink