@They Caged Non: the issue is (and forgive me dpreview for stating the obvious), most photographers left this site years ago and have moved onto Facebook groups (I hate Facebook, but I am now a member of several groups which I do enjoy). What's left on this site is mostly trolls and fan boys, but nothing of substance (and a few people like myself who still visit from time to time). The facebook groups are civil, there is no talk about how Sony is superior or Canon sucks, it's just people taking pictures and sharing techniques - it's like being on another planet. I still come for the wonderful reviews and articles, but the forums and comments are mostly filled with garbage.

@wats0n
sadly you are correct, I used to visit dpr daily and now it is monthly. IR is closing their doors and only blog/rumour sites seem to be doing well.
Good example is the whining about the price of every new camera. Pretty sure that every camera comes out at a ridiculously high price to skim the early adopter cream and then experiences continuous price decreases. The camera market has worked this way for at least 50 years. The people complaining either have never actually purchased a camera or maybe are just stupid? IDK.

"most serious photographers left this site years ago" I can concur as comments left in good faith get you banned or blocked by moderators... pathetic

We like cats and complaining.

Seems like right now Canadians are getting the shaft on camera prices.

We always do. Roughly 25% difference in currency and then a 13% tax depending on the province you live. So we see $1000 USD and that’s like $20,000 CAD ;-)

It's not just cost, it's also warranty service. Nikon Japan licences territorial rights to Canada and the US separately. If a Canadian buys a Nikon product through a US retailer, they cannot get warranty service in Canada. It has to be shipped back through customs to the US facility.

Canadian dollars are worth exactly 0.76 USD. If the Z50+16-50 in $1300CAD that’s exactly the same as the US price of $1000USD. What’s the problem?

What’s the problem? Canadians get paid in Canadian money so they don’t get a conversion rate and their cost of living tends to be a little higher and their salaries can sometimes be lower than in the US.

For the fun of it, I bought a refurbished Nikon D3200 body for only US$125 (Nearly the same thing as the D33, 34,3500 in sensor and AF system). The 18-140 kit lens for $150. Sure that's a big lens but I like big lenses anyway. I already have other full frame glass to stick on this body should the need arise. My problem with the Z50 is the pricing. It's a really good camera but the price judo isn't competitive. Otherwise I'd have picked up one both for stills and videos.

@EXkurogane, you can even pick up a D5300 with flip screen for next to nothing now, and it has slightly better features and ergonomics than the 3200

Maybe it's your monitor.

Spmatphones normally produce so call more pleasing colors with aggressive editing like way overly saturated and contrast, it is easily be fooled by it

This definitely has unwise defaults for JPEG saturation and contrast. Strange choice for Nikon to pump it up like that... perhaps this is trying to make more of a market distinction between the FF and APS-C products?

I dig the look. It’s a more classic photography approach, I would call it punchy. For whatever reason, in the digital era rich, nuanced blacks don’t get the love they deserve.

When I import the RAW-files of my Nikon D7500 into Lightroom, by default they have 5% of black cut off, which gives a contrasty look, but also makes the shadows too dark. This looks like the JPGs have been treated the same way by default.

almost every shot looks blury and out of focus on my screen

@barium
New glasses or a new monitor are in order...
I thought you weren't trolling?

Supposedly from E.B. White :

To foreigners, a Yankee is an American.
To Americans, a Yankee is a Northerner.
To Northerners, a Yankee is an Easterner.
To Easterners, a Yankee is a New Englander.
To New Englanders, a Yankee is a Vermonter.
And in Vermont, a Yankee is somebody who eats pies for breakfast.

So, in any case, Richard, you are a Yankee, as I am a "foreigner".. ;-)
And, maybe, I am a sort of Yankee too, because I do not mind to eat pies for breakfast as I really like pies. :-)

The correcf spelling is Nawlins, possibly With an apostrophe at the beginning but not necessary.

FYI only, not to correct Richard ;-)
I know this is old post but I would like to add that, considering :
- that New-Orleans comes from the French city name Orléans,
- the way we, French, pronounce Orléans,
- the different ways to pronounce New-Orleans I have found on the internet,

the most academic way to pronounce New-Orleans, should be "New AHL-lee-ins". If not "New OHL-lee-ins"...
But the American, among you, surely know...

"The 20.9 MP crop-Nikon sensor remains the worst Nikon sensor of the last decade. "

I would love to see some evidence of that claim.

The Nikon DX 16 MP, 24 MP and 20.9 MP have all been real winners. I think you've been nipping the high MP cool aid.

Still use my 16 MP FF with great pleasure at faster editing and more than enough resolution for events, posters, brochures and web.

This coming from a guy that has an oversaturated and over processed horse as his avatar...LOLOL

well the subject matter isn't one's gallery or avatar and not even this Nikon Z50 but the pictures it produces, this is what matters in the end and unfortunately there's nothing special about them, nothing a 7 years old D7100 couldn't do.

@Richard, that’s the flipping screen, isn’t it?

It’s all in your left hand trickery.

2-second self timer, trust the face detection, press the shutter and throw the camera away. That's why I look so anxious.

Z50 - outdated 20MP sensor, no touchpad AF point select, 2 native f6.3 lenses, embarrassing AF tracking.

Far from a win; I'd be surprised if Z-DX is alive in 18 months or ever gets more than 3 native lenses.

@BrentSchumer
At least the Z50 ergos won't give me carpal tunnel :)

Fuji has no choice...they are a closed system with no ability to move up and the Canon APS-C lenses for their mirrorless cameras are considered a joke for the most part and far from class leading.
As far as ergos goes, your comment shows that you have not handled the Z50 as the ergos on that camera are vastly superior to anything Canon, Fuji or Sony have put out.

@BrentSchumer

It is a new sensor, and if you think 20 megapixels isn't enough for a sub $1000 camera, could you explain why you would need anymore?

Also, do you have any evidence to back up your claim that the camera has "embarrassing AF tracking"? The auto focus tracking is on par with the Fuji and Canon. The Sony has slightly better AF, but that is it's only selling point, so it should be best in class. But the auto focus on all four cameras is great.

@Lupus: If EF-M is a joke, what does that make Z-DX? What's worse than a joke? 2 F6.3 lenses and a bunch of unstabilized FF glass.

DPReview agrees: https://youtu.be/6Cx0NdbvB24?t=542

@BrentSchumer You are just making things up, a slightly tweaked d7500 sensor, that sensor doesn't have phase detection, so it would need to be more than tweaked. There is no evidence that this isn't a new sensor.

As for the print and crop comment, if you need to do that, they have the z7, the 4 more mega pixels in the a6400 is not going to make any difference. Also the megapixel vs print size debate has been proven wrong, a lot of award winning images were shot on 2/4/8/12 megapixels and printed.

@BrentSchumer
Man your jealousy is palpable!!!
We all know you really, really want a Z50.
If you didn’t, you wouldn’t spend so much time on here trying to convince yourself otherwise.

Don't hold your breath! Better to go for FF Z mount or Fujifilm X System if you want to stay with APS-C

Why would they come out with DX specific 28 ,35, and 85, when you can use the incredible Z FF lenses.
Nikon currently has a 24, 35, 50 and 85 Z FF... so the 24 is the 35 equivalent, the 35 is like the 50, and the 50 is about 75, lastly the 85 is like a 135!
Nikon Is coming out with a 20 and a 28 and 40 pancake for the Z cameras.
By using the FF Z lenses, you will be able to use it with 2 systems, and also will be using only the sweet spot of those given lenses in the DX mode.

Because it's a bad compromise. Why do you think there are APS-C lenses at all from companies like Sony? Even Nikon made one (lol) regular APS-C lens for DX (the 35/1.8). Why would it do that?

You pay with weight, size and money for an image circle you don't need. It's a bad deal for the customer (pretty nice for Nikon of course).

The only reason to even use an APS-C body if you already have a FF body is for wildlife, but only if the pixel density of the APS-C sensor is actually higher. Another reason might be size but of course then you would also want smaller APS-C sized lenses.

If you want to have a dedicated APS-C system, however, you wouldn't want to pay for something you don't need. Unless you intended to support Nikon as some sort of charity case.

Ok, you see it as a compromise, I see it as an asset...
I see it as being able to buy into a system and be able to kill 2 birds with one stone (or one lens).
I do expect that Nikon will come out with more DX lenses eventually, but for now I am loving the little Z50 with the Z14-30 S (21-45 equivalent).
It is well balanced and the images that i am getting out of that lens are absolutely stunning.
If you haven't tried it, go to your local camera store and try it out, you will be blown away by the size, balance and image quality!

Look, I am thinking of a regular customer. People who buy 2000+ FF bodies plus a bunch of pro lenses and then add an APS-C body are an extremely elite portion of the user base.

When somebody asks me to recommend them a camera, they are usually talking about a 300-1000 dollar price range and they have no clue about lenses. I want to give a good recommendation with their budget and future expandability in mind. I don't want them to be forced to buy a 1000 dollar FF wide-angle zoom just to get some nice wide-angle shots.
I don't want them to spend 1000 dollars on a Z 24/1.8 just so they can have an approx. 35mm equiv. prime. That's ridiculous and shouldn't be necessary.

Yes, it is a new system but my critique is because of the past. How can I be sure that there will ever be an affordable 1.8 DX 35mm equiv. prime when they haven't made one in 18 years for F-mount? And during a period of extremely high DLSR sales no less?

The Z FF lenses are a horrible fit for this camera. Who would buy huge and unstabilized lenses at $600+ for a camera that's soon going to be on firesale for $650? A $650 nifty fifty? Come on!

Every other company releases crop lenses to use with their crop bodies. If the lenses were available you'd be touting those lenses; instead you're pretending that missing lenses are a feature.

@ BrentSchumer
The camera literally just came out, give them a chance to buildout the system before you start complaining!

As far as Z FF lenses on this camera, you obviously have not tried the Z 14-30 S, it feels like it was made for it!

All I know is that in one fell swoop, this camera addresses many of the shortcomings of most mirrorless APS-C cameras... a proper high quality viewfinder, proper build, great ergonomics, great menu system, upwardly mobile system.
You may not like it, but I am loving mine!

Nikon are likely to dump the Z-DX mount after releasing just three f6.3 zoom lenses.

The Z 14-30s is a great example of why using Z FF lenses is horrible: $1,100, no stabilization, and the crop factor makes the lens an awkward 21-45mm FF equivalent instead of a real ultrawide zoom. Whereas Canon will sell you a native mirrorless 11-22mm lens for $350.

@BrentSchumer
Let me speak slowly...
This camera just came out.
Give them time to build out the system before you complain.
The 14-30 is an incredible lens, have you ever shot it?
Being able to use the sweet spot of the Z 14-30 will yield far better results, especially edge to edge on a DX sensor (you know for landscape, architecture, group shots) which is what you want in a wide angle lens.

You sure are protesting and spending a lot of time on this camera for someone that has very obviously not handled it...I think you are intrigued and secretly covet this camera...there may be a Z50 in your future!

BrentSchumer, there is no Z DX mount. Only Z mount for both DX[Crop] and FX.[Fullframe]

There's plenty of options for crop lenses in AF-S DX or FX right now via adapter.

I see high contrast, I say high contrast. It is really simple to say what you see. You should try it some day.

The natural profile removes all that, or just shoot raw. Nikon's standard profile is over processed, but they offer a flat and natural to get a more natural image, takes two seconds to change the profile and you're good to go.

If there are any shots from the gallery you'd like me to re-process in one of the camera's flatter profiles, let me know.

@Lord Powershoter I couldn't agree more. Thais is why I switched to Fuji.

@D7000ShooterUK
I always laugh when Fuji users comment on the lack of DX lenses in Nikon.
Fuji has a large line-up of APS-c lenses because they have no choice...
Fuji makes some very high end APS-C lenses because they have no choice...

Fuji is a closed system with no upward mobility, the cameras are really nice, but if you need a high speed camera for sports shooting (D5, 1DXII, A9II) they don't have one.
If you need high megapixels (A7RIV, Z7, D850, 5DSR) they don't have that option.
If you need FF, they don't have that option.

You can purchase MF in Fuji, but then you have no compatibility or usability between lenses.

@Lord Powershoter

"It's a very nice body and the two lenses seem to be great as well. But I would never recommend this to anybody unless they didn't plan on buying any more lenses."

The target audience for this camera are the people who buy the two kit lenses, and maybe a prime, which the 35mm 1.8g DX is about $160 and most sites offer a free FTZ adapter with the z50. If the photographer plans to grow, the 1.8 z primes are best in class and allow them to move into a full frame body in the future. The same formula Canon and Nikon built their success on with the F and EF mounts.

@worldaccordingtojim

Okay, so if a beginner Z50 user wants to get a 35mm equiv. prime, they have to get the Z 24mm 1.8 for 1000 bucks? And then when they move to FF they have to buy the Z 35mm 1.8 because the 24mm will be too wide?

It doesn't make any sense.

The reason Canikon were able to build their success, was because at that crucial time, there was no significant competition. Also Canikon always had a good price/performance ratio going for them, not least thanks to 3rd party options like the Sigma 17-50/2.8.

Before Fuji there was never a proper built-out APS-C system. And they just got there. Just like Sony arguably just got there with the A7iii to provide us with a true FF alternative to Canikon.