Editor's note: We have updated our reviews of both the Nikon Z6 and Nikon Z7, including scoring, to reflect both cameras' performance using the new firmware.
Nikon recently announced firmware update 3.0 for its Z6 and Z7 mirrorless cameras. Most notably, it includes AF system improvements that designed to replicate Nikon's class-leading 3D-tracking mode for DSLRs. We put it to the test to see how well it works.
Question- Why do Canadians refer to the current Nikon cameras as Zed 50/6/7 instead of Z50 or Z6 or Z7? I have noted another Canadian on video doing the same thing.
Because the letter 'Z' is pronounced 'zed' in most English-speaking countries (United Kingdom, Canada, India, Ireland, New Zealand, Zambia, and Australia).
It's 'zee' in US English but Nikon gave up trying to advise on the pronunciation about two days after saying it should be 'zee'.
So the Canadians you've heard are referring to them as Z50, Z6 and Z7.
Lol, and I was wondering why Nikon insisted that it was pronounced 'zee' instead of 'zed'. I thought it was just a marketing plan or some Japanese semantics game 🤣
I thought my DSLR from 2009 was good enough with focusing. How could we all have been so wrong? So how good is good enough now? Is Nikon at 90% or 50%? And what % of camera purchasers really care? 2% or 10%?
It is good enough. Most of this is just a scam to convince people to buy new cameras that they don't really need. By the look of the financial reports from the camera companies, the people are not falling for it. Good.
well, Nikon has learned well from Nikon 1, its first mirrorless cameras released in 2011. Nowadays, Nikon Z is a line of full frame and APS-C sensor cameras, in just 16 months the company released both premium S and kit Z lenses, released actively new updated firmware (for example, updated firmware for Z50 was released just after 2 months of the camera debut) and made Z6 a best video mirrorless hybrid camera in the market now. Of course, there always will be critics, but after making excellent DSLR and compacts, no one can deny that Nikon has a very solid line of mirrorless FF and already took 15% of full frame mirrorless cameras market share in Japan. As the company is aggressively improving its software (of already best hardware), it can only improve further.
Doesn't really matter to me. These are first-gen cameras that still appear to be in beta testing. If I go mirrorless, I'd only consider something that's a true D850 replacement, or I'd go with another brand.
@Hasa Ah, can't win an argument, so go right to the personal insults. It's OK, I'm used to it. I wouldn't expect much else from the keyboard jockies who post on here.
I made a statement, and others turned it into an argument. People who can't dispute the facts resort to calling people trolls. I don't really care what all of you waste your money on. Me? I will never buy a Z6 or Z7 because there are much better tools for the job. If Nikon can make a ML camera that surpasses the D850, I'll consider it, but until then, I'm not giving them a dime. They need to earn it.
The AF tracking for flying birds is still quite inferior to what Sony firmware in the A7R4 and A9, A9II can produce. I have not personally verified this, but real experts like Steve Perry and Mark Smith have and I trust their judgement. This means that for wildlife photography the z series is still not up to the DSLR standards and I will stick with my D850 and D500 for the moment before migrating to Nikon mirrorless.
Apples to oranges comparison. Last time I looked both of those Sony cameras are at least twice as expensive as my Z6. You get what you pay for. A fair comparison will come when Nikon releases the next camera that is high end and if it doesn't measure up then well you are correct.
I just came back from Fuji XT-3 and it is even worse for BIF especially when you consider there is only one Fuji lens you can do this with. Right now if you want to do BIF you go D500 or D850 or High end Sony. I don't know of any other MILC that are great at BIF other than Sony right now.
Sony's main advantage will be their lens lineup, but that will gradually ebb too. The new Nikon firmware really does improve the AF on the Z6, its a lot easier to use and its faster and more reliable at hitting its focus, still not perfect though, so probably we will get more updates.
@sillen - you have to admit that Sony don't have a great track record at hanging onto the sdvantages they have built up in other (non photographic) areas of their operations to date. I hope they continue to be a significant player in photography as they have been instrumental in upping everybody's game, but we'll have to see.
I know sony was pretty reluctant to make a more ergonomic body... but if they would be caught up by canon and nikon, what is that really stops them from modifying a bit the body form? After all they don't have to make it smaller, just add sub material here and there :) Previously they did that already, both with the better grip and being the first to introduce a really large battery. They also have the know how, after all nobody complained about ergonomics on their SLT series.
Sony SLT series were a product of Minolta not Sony. They were also already under development when Sony bought Minolta. So arguably something went wrong with Sony when they decided it was time to start building their own mirrorless cameras.
Why on earth would one like to build cameras with bad ergonomics and a highly unstructured menu system in the first place? Then somebody at Sony came up with the idea to use a lens mount designed for APS-C and use it for a Full Frame camera system.
The result of that decision now is that Sony depends upon SLR lens designs to build its system up into the future, while they should have been smart and started from scratch like Fujifilm, Panasonic, Canon and Nikon did.
They didn't do that because they wanted to, but because they know a larger mount has advantages in optical designs that allow them to built lenses with higher resolving power for higher resolution sensors. The lens mount is what will become the achilles heel of Sony on the long run.
As always you need to look at the details. Ergonomics are discussed in this thread. There is not a ”one answer” to what are good ergonomics. It depends on person and on situation. Eg what is the right size of a camera depends on the context in which it is used and the persons preferences. Do you want to be stealthy, do you want to travel light/compact, do you have large hands, etc. Do you preferr highly customizable body or large buttons or other. Based on sales volumes many seem to favor smaller camera bodies, but not all do that.
Sillen - In that regard I think Fujifilm nailed it pretty well. They are most fun to use cameras of all systems and overall winner imho when it comes down to all things you mention.
However the smaller sensor size, the worm effect X-Trans causes and the fact that Fujifilm does not offer any upgrade path to Full Frame will become their major problem over the long run if you ask me.
I see the step from APS-C towards the GFX to be too large for most users. Not only money wise but also system (size and weight) wise.
@Prosecutor - don't really know about that mount thing. Sure it has some advantages, but unless you really want F0.9 - 1.2 lenses with no vignetting, it is not really an issue. For the moment being, the situation simply is that Sony recent lenses are just as good as anything nikon has put on their Z, while Canon has put on the table some exotic, impressive lenses that because of the size and price can be a bit ... too much.
Simply put today Sony E has it's important advantages, as do the other brands. The legacy glass working "native" on canon and nikon is one very under-rated such advantage, pretty much dismissed by "forumists" however critical for working photographers.
By the way, I personally choose Fuji, so i am not "defending" Sony, or anything. But i am shooting for fun so i only care about the things i want to care. Just that we should care less about marketing speech and more about reality.
Badi - So can one already use Sony e-mount glass on Z systems with an electronic adapter. The advantages you talk about can all be found in the Z as well as it uses the shortest flange range. As for sharpness one can always argue and I don't want to get into a brandwar. Everybody needs to decide for themselves what fits him/her best. For me it is not Sony.
Sony had the advantage of being the first Full Frame mirrorless system, but as with everything being the first is no guarantee to stay first or being the best over the long run.
Sony is quickly loosing all of the advantages they have had. Nobody can deny that Canon and Nikon came from far and are closing in very fast and even faster than many here had even expected. Next generation of MILC cameras will all be very close to each other with nobody having a real advantage any longer over the other.
Buy whatever system suits you. No cameras are bad these days.
@ Prosecutor - Sony didnt "have" the advantage of being the first Full Frame mirrorless system. They "made it" an advantage by decision. You can extend that to other aspects as well, eg they decided to enable good 3rd party lens support. Now you have excellent 3rd party autofocus lenses like the Zeiss Batis line, The Tamron Di zooms and primes, the Samyang line, Sigma.... . As well as excellent MF lenses such as Zeiss Loxia line, Voightländer, .....
Sillen - Sony was FORCED to go mirrorless. They could not get any ground in the DSLR market. So all they could do was to gamble and put loads of money into mirrorless. That decision for them turned out to be a lucky draw.
The credits go to Sony, Fujifilm and Olympus for opening up a whole new product range. But the FF camera Sony has put onto the market back then was awful in all ways.
People had no other choice for FF then to go to Sony if they wanted mirrorless and so it was into their advantage. One can wonder if Sony would have been so successful if they had not been forced out of the market.
Once you start to look at the available market figures from an objective point of view, you will see Sony gained market share between 2014 and 2017. The last two years have seen a decline in that market share compared to Nikon and Canon
It is hard to say at this moment in time if they will stay the number one in MILC, become number two or end up in the situation they were in back in 2012
I would actually not be surprised at all if Sony in the end will step out. They have no history to keep products into markets that are under pressure.
VAIO is a typical example of Sony's way of thinking. Once they are under stress of not being able to grow marketshare they quit the market alltogether.
If it were not for Panasonic being also in this market Sony would probably have quitted already.
The rumors over reallocation of memory chips in favor of the PS5 and the thin rumors over an A74 are an indication that Sony is rethinking its photography business. They are no company that have photography into their DNA. They are a financial company foremost and treat their product range as such.
It doesn't matter if Sony sells sensor to Sony Digital Imaging or sell those same sensors then to their OEM customers. Without the development costs of new cameras, production costs, wharehousing and marketing costs they will loose nothing financially if they step out the market.
If one does an objective risk assessment on the photography market then this market is a high risk undertaking. High development costs with poor ROI.
Nikon can not go anywhere else. So they will stay onto this market as long as they financially can. Same more or less applies to Olympus. Fujifilm has photography into their heart and digital imaging is just 5% of their total revenue these days. Canon has a large stake in photography business but also for them photography is not their core business. As for Sony photography is far from being important to them too.
Why would one want to stay in a market that is shrinking by 15-20% on a yearly base and that will probably end up by 4 million pieces.
The most likely outcome is that the three largest players will each have about 25 to 30% marketshare. In the end it will just resolve in the sales of 800.000 to 1 million MILC cameras yearly each for Sony, Nikon and Canon.
The question is will Sony be satisfied with those numbers?
@ Prosecutor - you can pretend to know the decision material Sony had at different times, but you dont know. You think it was blind luck to go for mirrorless, to invest heavily in eye AF, to go for good 3rd party lens support, etc. You speculate about future market shares. There have been signs for a couple of years that the market is reshaping quite a lot right now. You may like it or not like it. You can speculate if the reshaping will knock out some companies who are slow to change to new tech and who are lossing market share. But its all speculation.
No I have no information over such things and you know that too.
I am just looking at this from an objective standpoint. I have no way of knowing if Sony will stay or leave this market.
All I am saying is that if you look at it without the emotion attached that leaving might be a wise decision from a financial point of view. It would not differ for Sony if they would remain or leave the camera market. Except by staying they take more risk.
It is a known fact that Sony wants to loosen its bond it had with consumer electonics and want to focus upon three pilars: Financial (banking and insurance), Entertainment industry and to be a component supplier.
I don't see how consumer electronics camera do fit into that productrange. Especially when this market is under such immense pressure.
It is also a known fact that many investors have more or less directed Sony to focus more on products that bring Sony a financial gain and focus less on consumer oriented products.
By looking at the current trend and supported with the current world economics it would just not come to a surprise if Sony would take such steps. Unimaginable for Sony users of course. I fully understand!
BUT... They have done it before (with VAIO) and why should they just not do it again?
It is a no brainer that Sony on the long run might not stay if the situation on this market gets worse.
It also doesn't matter for Sony components to sell the sensors to Sony Digital Imaging or to those who stay behind on this market.
For Sony components the same numbers of sensors would be sold anyway. Just to other (OEM) customers.
It also means; No product development, no production costs, no wharehousing needed and no marketing costs involved. Leaving is also less risk of failure of a product that doesn't stick.
That's the vision without the emotion. I am not saying they will make that descision, but it would be logical if they did from a financial perspective.
Samsung also declared they want to be top of the top, and even managed to do so with some incredible releases. But in the end for them the cake proved to be just a tiny cookie not worth fighting for. For Sony such a decision could make sense at some point or not. For Nikon, Sigma, Leica it would mean basically bankruptcy. Would Sony close photo business before Nikon? Of course nobody can tell, but clearly Nikon will try harder to stay in the game.
Sony will not go bankrupt without camera's. A complete different story for those that have their roots within this business. So indeed for companies like Nikon, Olympus, Sigma, Leica and all those well known traditional photography brands they will fight to stay. It is in their interest.
In the end it is a business decision and a financial decision over emotion and end users.
Sony could very well be planning a drawdown from their camera business.
Last year all of their new releases were lackluster, mostly just warmed over rehashes of earlier models with incremental updates. Even the A7R4, which some considered so great, was really the A7III with a bigger grip bolted on and a bit more megapixels.
They'll probably release an A74 this year that will be basically the same model with the bolted on grip and body of the A7R4.
The much sought after A7S3 remains a unicorn.
Many thought they'd release new super tele lenses to support their a9II and that did not happen.
We've seen this movie before with A mount. Prosecutor lays out the case well: Sony very well may not see it as a big enough business to stay in the camera market.
True and even more odd in light of the Sony R1, a true mirrorless with just 1mm between the lens and the sensor and hence vertical incident rays on the sensor. The "mount" on this non-interchangeable lens APS-C camera (Sony R1) obviously was at least the entire diagonal width of the sensor. R1 came with a 24-120mm equiv. Zeiss T* branded zoom lens.
The Sony VAIO PC line is a bad example of how Sony supposedly does not support their products. The PC business is probably one of the most cutthroat industries out there with the slimmest of profit margins. Sony was not the only casualty of the PC industry churn. IBM had to sell their PC and laptop business to Lenovo. Names like Gateway, Packard Bell, NEC, etc.. disappeared. Compaq merged with HP. Here is a list of PC makers that have come and gone.
@ TRU - if it wasnt for your history of 1000+ negative stories on Sony. You are systematically trying to smear the most successful FF system out there.
Tele lenses? Just the 600F4, 400F4, 200-600, all received as the best you can get. No other mirrorless system has that capabillity without adapters. And the Sony FE tele system has real usable 20fps, no other camera system whatsoever has that. A7r4 lackluster? There is no other camera out ther with that broad capabillity of top resolution, top AF system in both photo and video. Awarded camera of the year.
Sony's advantage is the lead they had because they decided to embrace the future sooner, there are tons of advantages that Sony cameras have over the newest and dare I say less mature systems from Canon and Nikon.
Don't get me wrong I appreciate the difference between what was a line of "protect the DSLRs" mirrorless cameras from Nikon and Canon and what's being offered now,, but as an example battery life (a difference over 400 shots less per battery compared to Sony) is still the big problem of Canon and Nikon.
Canon alone still has this silly mentality of protecting their higher end line by introducing software caps on the lower end products (No 24p in movie mode remember?) and this is something Fuji and Sony have been smarter about it. They were late to the party and it shows, they are trying desperately to catch up and they will but so far the "damage" their passive approach to adaptation to new trends is still looming on 'em for the moment.
Vanita - I mostly agree with you that Canon and Nikon have been very conservative in their approach to mirrorless.
But they have good reasons contrary to Sony. Sony was unable to establish themselves into the DSLR market so they created one of their own.
Nikon and Canon were in the luxury position to 'own' 70% of the total market. They milked the DSLR and waited to the moment MILC became mature and more mainstream.
Did Nikon and Canon enter the MILC market too late? Who knows? But they know exactly how large their existing userbase still is and by looking at total market Sony only has a 20 to 24% of total marketshare (MILC+DSLR)
Those who moved over to MILC have been the early adopters. Sony, Olympus and Fujifilm made the system to what it is today and it is here to stay. But it must have costed them millions of dollars in marketing.
Personally I think next gen cameras from both Canon and Nikon will be very close to what Sony will bring with their next gen camera and equal out.
VW will make diesel car that will burn 3 liters diesel per 100km. And later will made full electric car with very good mileage per charging, will, will, will.......... Since 2016 will .....
Jared Polin already published a one hour worth of test video and i think I'm inclined to believe his video more with this 3.0 firmware test. There is a noticeable improvement across the board including the eye and tracking af unlike what dpreview is claiming.
Yes, Jared's review is much better, but he also points out some issues. From his reviews it appears that Nikon is still behind Canon and Sony when it comes to focus tracking. I am a Nikon shooter, btw, so my intention is not to slag Nikon. This is just what I see from Jared's excellent reviews.
Jared has bashed Nikon over the last year and there is no way he can change his opinion overnight. It is his ego and attitude that stands in his way.
Even raging over a firmware update he did not even bother to download but for which he already had a strong opinion over was the point that made him look pathetic.
He made it a personal thing to go all out against Nikon so his current opinions are worthless these days.
Jarred is a buffoon and the only successful thing his done is marketing his Afro and T-Shirts. As a photographer he is far from impressive.
The only reason he has stopped bashing Nikon is because of the back clash he had from the Nikon community and the down votes.
YES, the Sony has better 3D tracking and AF overall and switching between Eye AF and Tracking is seamless BUT the Z series are also great and not far behind. In addition, some of us don't need to be tracking erratic subjects so often so for me personally the problem is minimal. If you are a Sports photographer and tracking is so paramount for your work, obviously there are better solutions than the Z bodies...
What really annoys me about Nikon's strategy is that they are not opening the AF protocol so we can have 3d party manufacturers joining the party and although Nikon might lose revenue in the lens department, I am sure many folks will have an easier decision agaist Sony and their current lens selection.
Jared is all out against Nikon ..not sure what reasons are but he is very ballistic against Nikon to the point where his opinions are not balanced. I used to see his reviews but he is not a rational reviewer. Northrop is doing better job these days
I like Jared for being straightforward, delivering the cold hard truth and will say your photos are trash straight in your face. He doesn't sugar-coat his words. That's the "ego" people label him for, but i don't see it that way.
It's hard to find such people in a world where everyone tries too hard to be nice to avoid offending mentally weak people. Sugar-coat img what's not good is just hypocrisy behavior to me.
I enjoy Jared's news segments and some of his humor, but I find his Nikon criticism a bit annoying. He knows that you can easily adapt the Sony f/1.4 primes to Nikon.
I am not a friend of Jared's and don't like the way he is forever promoting products in his videos, and I shoot Nikon and realize he no longer likes Nikon very much, but I appreciate that he gives the cameras a more serious test than many other reviewers. His review of the Z50 was actually very favorable, and one of the best I have seen.
@sunilkumar Jared, much like the Northups goes with controverted and ill informed videos to the public knowingly they will get lots of engagement, comments, shares, dislikes (which Youtube won't punish) and also engagement in his social media.
Pretty much they love to bank on the own drama they create to have large number of people viewing their videos and turning that into sweet, sweet youtube money.
It is sad that there are still people watching them.
@ EXkurogane, one thing is not sugar-coating and another is to trash a camera system just because the AF-C works better in another... also, if you follow Jared (it seems you do), since he started his channel, he desperately weighs everything with the word "Pro". Any lens not "Pro" isn't good enough, any equipment non "Pro" is garbage. The whole attitude shows that he relies only on "Pro" gear to do his job for him. I've taken better shots than Fro with a Barbie Toy camera.
Its a funny old game this product review business these days. These reviewers slammed the 35mm Z as being the worst lens of the year, then the 50mm Z as being sort of OK in parts and now no improvement in the firmware except animal eye AF. Pretty well the exact opposite of other sites. How does that happen?
Actually I believe they said the 50 was the worst lens of the year and then DPReview did a real test of the lens and gave it a Gold award, and said it performed better than the Sigma 1.4 ART
Strange, the 50mm lens was said to be the best mirrorless lens for the price and noticably better than the Sony costing twice as much. Lens Rentals said the Z cameras were built better than any Sony too.
Absolutely. Nikon didn’t equip the first gen Nikon Z cameras with enough processing horsepower. We see it in their laggy focus box response in continuous AF mode as well as in the inability for AF to differentiate complex backgrounds from faces. There aren’t enough CPU cycles available to process the data stream.
Ultimately it will only be the second or third gen Nikon Z’s that will be able to reach parity with Sony.
Compared to all other Mirrorless competitor's 1st gen bodies, both Nikon and Canon did an excellent job, getting it right to be great enough to be trusted in an assignment. for Example, Sony get it right only on their 3rd gen.
Don't listen to fPrime, he has never used much less owned any of the these cameras. He hasn't bought a camera in 12 years (take a look at his profile) but likes to come on any Nikon article to troll and sound like he knows what he's talking about... Truly sad individual
Nothing lately is as bad as the A7 was at release.
The Z6 is better than the A7 or A7ii ever were, and actually very usable for sports and action. There are dozens of BIFs shots in the Nikon forums that look better than most Sony images because the colors are so much better.
But back then the a7 was the first entry level FF mirrorless with no precedent to follow. Nikon however has already had experience with their blazing fast AF in their Nikon 1 mirrorless bodies, so theres more of an expectation to carry that over to the Z bodies.
But Nikon 1 is a 1" sensor (implying relatively deep DoF, less stress to AF) and also the lens elements are smaller/lighter and easier to move. While it's great, it can't directly be assumed that its AF performance be carried over to Z.
"[...] actually very usable for sports and action. There are dozens of BIFs shots [...]"
Well, this is no evidence of the performance of an AF system. You can see amazing sport and BIF photos taken with manual lenses. I am not great at manual focusing, but even i can get 1/100 a perfect eye-focused of my kid running in circles.
Also a person accustomed with a certain AF mechanism (say a reasonable, reliable one, some 1DX mk1) would get a better sport shots percentage using that compared to him using a better AF from a camera he didn't get the time to learn.
"Also a person accustomed with a certain AF mechanism (say a reasonable, reliable one, some 1DX mk1) would get a better sport shots percentage using that compared to him using a better AF from a camera he didn't get the time to learn."
Ah... no. To general. Sony or canon eye AF set to on, along with the AF box present (canon) to be able to set initial focus. Hand it to user not familiar with the camera or AF system, and tell them "place box on subject's fact, and then press and hold this button". Within 5 minutes of use they should be able to nail any shot of a person with eyes in their direction with the EOS R or any of the mk3, mk4, or A9 bodies out there.
As soon as face and eye AF became a thing it essentially allowed almost anyone to be able to nail focus with those cameras. And MILC is a lot easier for people to understant than a DSLR simply because of the adjustable size of the AF box. Box over face, or on eye... pretty self explanatory if you was me.
Look up Jared's youtube vid when you uses the 1DXIII as a mirrorless camera. It tracks very very well. So I go with the tech that is out (1DXIII and M6II) as indicators of what is possible.
The R, really was limited by processing power. DPAF requires the camera to essentially consider 2x 30MP sensors for AF. I don't know the details of exactly how they process it, but it needs to at least start with the full sizes since I don't see how they could read out just a portion (where the AF box is), especially since the sensor needs to be read out anyways for AE.
So if I were me, the 2 images (2x photosites) and for AF only use the pixels in the AF area, then average over all of them to determine phase and drive the lens. However consider full auto. The whole sensor would be used. And since there doesn't seem to be a difference in speed, it seems like it always just evaluates the whole image (2x). That is a lot of data.
However, the M6II and 1DXIII seems to be significantly faster in terms of AF. The 1DXIII might have a lower pixel count, but the M6II is up there. So I expect that the R5 will be slower in terms of AF, but I do think it would be able to at least AF and drive the lens in a sports situation on 5DIV speeds.
Perhaps the reason for the 20MP count on the 1DXIII is in fact not due to processor bottleneck (I don't think so and I hope not for the sake of R5 performance), but rather more to do with low light performance, faster refresh rates of the LCD, and buffer. The 1DXIII essentially will never slow you down, or lock you up, which is a priority for sports (besides the bug they need to fix of course).
Anyway. We will see, but the fact that this camera can do 8K with full DPAF tells me that it shouldn't have a problem processing AF for stills. Hopefully we don't have stop motion and laggy AF point update. Cause that gives a false impression of slow AF.
Lol. My bad. Kinda lost track of posts. Reread your comments and such.
Guess I agree with you.
We know what canon is coming out with. Curious what Nikon will come out with as upgrades to the Z7 and Z6. Think that they can push things up a notch since their Z bodies have a strong start.
"Unfortunately, when it came to the eye-detect for people, I still feel it was the same as it was before.." That says it all, thank you.
My sincere appreciation to both of your for your honest video and for cutting through the fake news (hyperbolic comments of the Z's supposed vastly increased tracking prowess on certain forums).
That is not the case from personal experience. Eye AF is far better than it was before, I use it everyday and I can tell you it is much improved. Not to mention that he has eyes that are far more recessed than most people. Take a look at the shot that they posted, his eyes are almost half an inch behind his lids.
I think the Sony eye-tracking prowess has been greatly exaggerated as well. If you’re looking for reliable critical focus from eye detect AF routines, then no manufacturer really delivers.
A9 and A99ii are great. There is a big dropoff to the other Sony's. There are several sites that took a few 1000 pictures at all settings and found if the correct settings are used Fujifilm has caught up to A6x00 cameras.
Why everyone does is find examples where the wrong settings are used to say a camera is not as good. Both sides do it.
I agree that the a9/a9ii are great and really the only worthy Sony's. The rest are not nearly as responsive. Someone let me borrow their a7r4 for a day, and granted that's all the time I've had with it, but it was sluggish by comparison and not impressive at all; the most overrated camera of the last year.
"if the correct settings are used" ... well that is part of the problem. If you have to adjust poor named parameters and testing for days to observe and note what works with what, then the system is not that great. By the way i use the X-T3 and find the AF tuning very ... poorly designed.
If you depend on a sharp iris in a portrait and you find you are consistently getting eyelashes sharp, then photographers will do an AF Fine Tune. I did, just to test it out and it worked fine with the 85mm F1.8 on my wife's eyes. If I were in it for a living I would be shooting tons of photos while a model would be changing poses and I am sure I would be happy with the results. I usually only shoot a couple of 100 photos at big family happenings and my Z7 is a huge improvement over my D800 and it is in an entirely different league compared to my Sony R1, that was however wonderful for landscapes - at F11. I have produced much beloved photo books and when I had to travel light - a truly amazing book .... using my Sony RX-100 II and the amazing iPhone images made by another guest, plus a lot of work in Lightroom. Of course these cameras give up when evening comes and the light goes down. So now I have the Z7 + 50mm F1.8 / 85mm F1.8 for low light :-)
No arguments from me with the video. I've had my Z6 since release date and while it was good and fine at release, even when photographing my kids with F-mount glass around the house (ISO 3200+), I greatly appreciate how much better and easier it has become.
Eye-AF has been so nice to use, and then the version 3.0 tracking for my 5 year old at indoor soccer practice was good too.
I appreciate the video and and I agree with all of it.
Thanks for the great video, Jordan and Chris! To me, it is not so interesting how the Z6 now compares to Sony or Canon but how it compares to my D750. AF implementation was the reason why I bought no Z6. Now, it seems to be quite an attractive package: silent shooting, the large area covered by AF, and IBIS are really interesting new features (for me).
I'm very pleased with my Z6, joining my D850 after my D750. I bought it on release date and for whatever I'm shooting, the Z6 is excellent. I prefer my D850 for birds and animals and landscapes, but the Z6 does everything.
The best part about the Z-system? Not the cameras, not yet anyway, it's the lenses. Please get the 24-70 f4 kit. It's better than any of the F-mount 24-70, at any price or any aperture.
I also enjoy the 35 S. It's so quiet and light and brilliantly sharp.
I was in the same situation: buy a second D750, wait for the D750 successor or buy a Z6. I went for the Z6 when it came out. Using two D750's and a Z6, now after more than a year, I can say the Z6 has its pros and cons. Anyone claiming it's only an improvement over anything DSLR, is just plain wrong or lying.
I'm hoping Nikon improves the system and addresses the cons. And don't let it be a pro body with a price tag of €5000. I'm having trouble with switching to a complete next gen system when for simple actions I have been doing the past decade with Nikon DSLR's, I now get a respons like "Yeah, you can't do that anymore, you need to work around it". Three steps forward, one step back kinda thing.
that focus tracking sequence of Jordan running on the bridge illustrates why video reviews are so important.
it clearly showed major focus drift issues with at least 5 out of the 19 or so frames.
that's not just a camera body problem, it's also due to Nikon using old stepper focus motor technology in the z-mount lenses... slow focus motors just can't keep up with fast-moving objects.
that is going to be a problem for everyday shooting, like with fast-moving kids.
even 3rd-party lens makers recognize the problem, Tamron for instance is addressing it with their new VXD (Voice-coil eXtreme-torque Drive) linear focus motor technology.
You really need to see the images. I've seen where images that were sharp even though it looks like focus drifted, and with my A6500, I've see where focus looked perfect, but the resulting images were not sharp.
no, you don't need to see the images in this example.
i watched the 4k version of this video on a 65" LG C9 oled TV, there is no question that the nikon af performance in that bridge clip is extremely poor.
compare it with this skateboarding sequence that was shot with the sony fe90 macro lens, it's 13 ooc jpegs, they are *all* in focus, and the target was moving a lot faster than jordan was:
No, he's being flamed because those who have bought into first gen Nikon Z are unable to tolerate any opposing viewpoints in either their forum or anyplace else on DPR.
@MILC man Come on, that skate scene has a near lateral movement of less than one meter and the dof is not terrible or difficult. He could have focused on the cone and the whole sequence would have still been quite in focus.
The sequence in this video has a guy running towards the camera, one of the hardest things to track. He's also jumping sideways. And all at F1.8 instead of F2.8. And a lot closer to the camera, so the DOF is a lot thinner.
Well, the Nikon is a lot better for video. The Sonys have such a low bit rate and inefficient codec (a crippled version of AVC) that people who are clueless about video are sticking powered zooms (huge joke in video world) on them to turn them in to the worst camcorders like what you see at Walmart for only $4000. Somehow Sony now has the worst IBIS in the industry too. Nikon beat them on the first try (as they did with weather resistance and build quality).
No sane Sony owner is going to put a power zoom on their camera for video. Its not 2003 and these are not cheap super zoom P&S cameras. Anyway, don't brag about Nikon video. Panasonic and Fuji do it better. Nikon is a distant third.
Under similar conditions(kid running towards the camera the 85s gets me 80% in focus, the 50s almost/sometimes 100%. The 35s is similar to the 85s. The 24-70s 2.8 and 70-200fl are similar to the 50s. (funny because the 35 and 85 use dual af "motors" and the 50 one.)
Focusing is more than adequate for most people who use these cameras. Fans and people who promote other brands will scream and say it isn't, but then how did we survive for decades without it? 😀 It is important to remember it is going to improve with more FW updates.
Also, I'd like to see DPR test "keepers per second". For example the A9ii might be able to get 19 keepers per second because it has great AF and can shoot 20 fps. The Z6 might only get 70% keepers overall, but per second it would be 8.4 because it can shoot 12 fps. The A7iii might get 80-85%, but that is 8-8.5 per second which is equal to the Z6. I think you'll find that for action, the A9ii, X-T4, E-M1.3 (the cameras with good AF and faster than 18 fps) are the best cameras because they get more keepers per second and most critical action moments do not last more than 1 second.
There is also the question How many lenses are available for the system, lenses with fast focus. Sony has quite a number of lenses certified for 20 fps. Fuji??
Most Sony lenses are not certified for 20 fps (70-200/4? nope) . In fact the A9 and A9ii won't even let you try. And since LED and other artificial lighting is such a problem for the A9 and other cameras with electronic shutters, Camera should also be rated with their mechanical shutter. The A9 can only do 5 fps, the A9ii only 10 fps, the X-T4 and NX1 can shoot 15 fps. Basically, the Z6 and most other cameras will get more keepers per second than the A9 in artificial lighting, because its mechanical shutter can only do 5 fps.
There are 23 lenses certified to AF at 20FPS. And an additional 26 lenses certified at 15FPS, including that 70-200/4.0.
What other full frame cameras can actually shoot at 15FPS with AF? For real. Not some theoretical perfect situation? Sony has 49 lenses certified to shoot at 15FPS or faster and they actually ACHIEVE those speeds with ridiculously high hit rates...
Oh and pretty sure the A9 will blow away the field with respect to keepers per second. Haha.
Also your assumption that artificial lighting invalidates the use of electronic shutter on the A9 is just not true. There are a very few situations where 1/160 readout speed isn’t fast enough. However in the vast majority of situations the A9 electronic shutter handles artificial light just fine.
Why do you paper spec warriors talk about 20fps with electronic shutter when all you get is jello when panning rendering the photos garbage.
Until global shutter, you need to use mechanical shutter fps since we should assume we are panning when talking about fps photography.
The camera also must be refreshing the EVF with continuous AF and AE as well otherwise you are just talking about paper specs and not real world usefulness again.
Or do you guys use 20fps for landscapes and portraits?
Steve. I actually shoot with the A9. And pan. And there is no jello. Any other camera will be impacted. The A9 impact is virtually zero. And the 20FPS is with full AF and AE with any of the 23 lenses listed in the spec. I have a few of them and confirm you actually get 20 exposures in the same second.
You should try it before you knock it. And if you tried an A7xxxx it doesn’t count.
Did you know it takes 1/250-1/300 sec for the slit of a mechanical shutter to move down the frame? Yep, your mechanical shutter has jello too. Oh. You don’t see it? Neither do I. Just like you don’t see it on the A9. While it’s technically there, you don’t see it... just like mechanical shutter.
I don't understand why people get so angry because the 3D tracking on the Zs doesn't have a 99% keeper rate.
My D750 has great 3D tracking but it is trying to get the face of my son in focus while with the Z we are complaining that the eye is not perfectly in focus all of the time... Not to mention that trying to move the focus point to my subject's eye and recompose was / is a pain in the butt compared to Eye AF.
And the fact that I can use MF lenses an find focus EVERY TIME while with the green dot on DSLRs, well... good luck. Plus IBIS, S lenses, FTZ, EVF, etc (I still have my D750 so I believe I am quite fair).
I find my Z6 AMAZING to use and even if the keeper rate is not breathtaking, I can easily afford to lose a few frames when doing 9fps no matter how fast my son is, I will still catch him eventually :) I don't need 10 different frames with 0,1 seconds between them...
Once you use a camera with a breathtaking keeper rate for any length of time it becomes very frustrating to use a camera that occasionally misses focus.
The A7 when it was launched 5 years ago was a revolutionary camera and the first mirrorless FF camera with AF. There was nothing like it in the world when it launched. The Nikon z7 was launched at a time when the technology was very mature so it wasn't half as impressive as the A7 launch.
Brendon - The A7 when it came out had 1 cardslot the A7II had two slots of which one was the outdated memory stick.
It is only with the A7III is where things more or less fall into place. However Sony still doesn't know how to create an ergonomically convenient camera to hold and operate, which may well be as important if not more important than a candy animal eye focus system that 'sees' the eye at 30 foot distance.
If you can't get eyes within that distance into focus then something is most seriously wrong with your technique.
I don't care which camera you use. I care for the complete eco-system.
The general devotion a brand has for photography and if this is in the heart of the manufacturer. I care more over how a system can evolve into the future than over a first generation camera.
With that I just have more faith in Nikon than I have with Sony. That on itself does not mean Sony makes bad cameras. They are just not for me.
"The A7 when it came out" it was a garbage version of the D600. It was worse in every way imaginable. It had no good lenses, did not focus well, and had terrible ergonomics and menus. It was not the first mirrorless FF camera, and even Sony made better mirrorless cameras (NEX 7, etc).
Prosecutor - I never ever said the A7 was a fantastic camera. I actually had one for over 100000 clicks and God knows I didn't really care for the focusing and it had lot more quirks. I merely said that at the time it was revolutionary as the first mirrorless FF camera and for all its quirks I used it professionally for 2 years and 100000+ clicks. Was it for everyone? Hell no but you can't compare the Z6 which is a decent but not revolutionary camera to one that was launched when mirrorless technology was in it's nascent stage.
@Starlord - The D610 was a good camera and better than the A7 but the A7 was a lot lighter and smaller and it had no oil on its shutter assembly which was a big plus point!
@brendan1000. Mirrorless was brought to market by companies losing to Canon and Nikon. Olympus bet wrong on DSLR 4/3 and to differentiate themselves they came out with mirrorless first; m4/3. Sony, having bought KM and promptly lost money for the next 10 years, was never going to surpass CaNikon. DSLR, SLT, APS-C mirrorless, they tired. They threw the last of their pasta at the wall with the a7 and it stuck. I don't think they expected it's success. The only thing innovative was shoehorning a FF sensor into a system never intended for FF. Just look at the mount without a lens on it and the mount seems to clip the corners of the sensor. No other brand is like that. I don't find the a7 innovative. I see it as their happy accident. But, I will give credit to the a7II and a7rIII for basically putting pressure on the big 2 to come out with mirrorless and fundamentally changing the market.
That shoehorning FF into a mount never meant for FF is a lie that has been reapated to death multiple times over.
The Sony E mount is a lot larger than any APSc only mount like the Fuji X mount or the Samsung NX mount so it was definitely designed for 35mm sensors from the beginning.
So yes it was the world's first mirrorless FF camera system with AF and it was the future given that even Canon and Nikon have joined the party a lot later.
It also shows in the design. All four corner of the sensor fall behind the mount and are covered by it. It can be easily seen.
Light fall off to the corners is a well known problem with the e-mount and optical engineers of several companies like Sigma also have said that making good lenses for the e-mount is an extra challenge over lenses for other camera manufacturers. They even said it looks much like this mount was designed for APS-C.
What Sony does is fall back to SLR designs to lengthen the flange range by using a built in adapter. Deepening the flange range is a way to hide the shortcomings of the mount.
Of course Sony will never admit it is using a lens mount that was not meant to be used for Full Frame. What else would you expect them to say?
It would basically be suicide for Sony to admit as everybody would fall over them including their customers for fooling them into a system with a faulty design layout at this 1.8cm flange range.
There is absolutely no evidence to support your so called facts. ZERO. Its a good theory but thats about it.
The E mount is about the same size as the Nikon F mount which is very much a FF capable mount and the Lecia M mount is even smaller in diameter than the E mount and last I checked it was a 35mm capable camera.
The mount diameter may not be the best designed for sure but to say it was built was APS-C is pure speculation on anyone's part and Sony on their part continues to churn out gems like the 24mm f1.4 GM, 135mm f1.8 GM and others even though they have a so called APS-C mount.
Sony would be stupid to tell the world what trick they perfomed.
However fact is that the optical formulas used in most e-mount lenses are copied from regular SLR and that indicates the mount is not suited for FF but made for APS-C. Everybody can also see that the barrel on many of their lenses is extended to enlarge the flange range.
Nuff said over 'no evidence'. That's clearly a smoking gun.
I am not discussing the optical quality of these lenses. Buy whatever you want. I don't care what system you use. Your response is emotional not rational.
Which Sony lenses are based of a DSLR design and ported to mirrorless ? Only Sigma does that. Since you said most I am assuming that means even the newer ones like the 24mm f1.4, 135mm f1.8 or maybe the 20mm f1.8 are all DSLR designs ? Or do you mean the 12-24mm f4 or the 55mm f1.8 ? Which are DSLR designs exactly ?
Brendon I am stopping this discussion as you are making it into another brandwar. I have seen enough of these. Your preference is clear and you made your point. You only ignore what is known over this mount and like to stick you head into the ground. All fine by me.
I am now going out to to take photos. Have fun with your Sony.
I merely said there is no real proof that Sony designed the E mount for APS-C only considering its a larger mount that the X mount and some other 35mm system mounts. I said there is no evidence other than circumstantial evidence. I admitted the Sony probably didn't put a lot of thought into designing the E mount at the onset but I said there is no compelling evidence to say it was a pure APS-C design at all. You were the one who said it was FACT rather than headsay.
Your evidence to your point was that most Sony lenses are DSLR lenses which I asked for proof since i am not aware of ANY lenses being DSLR designs (Sony branded lenses). So asking for evidence to back up so called facts becomes a brand war ?
I take it that means you don't really know if any Sony lenses are actual DSLR designs like you erroneously claimed.
To me it's already 3-d. I just need better eye-AF in low light, otherwise the AF is perfect for my needs. It tracks amazingly well and face detection is amazing as well.
Hmmm, I’d like to agree but: I have had quite a few AF failures in low but also in reasonable light situations where family members in the central area of the frame are simply out of focus (the background is), in fact there are whole series of shots where this is an issue. Never ever had this issue with D200, D300, D700, D800 and D750 (perhaps Single shots but not whole series).
I've seen all the reviews (Matt and Jared's included) and it is clear, that while improved in v3.0, Nikon's mirrorless AF is still dead last compared to both Canon and Sony's AF.
Where Nikon's AF is at today is the minimum performance Z should have had upon launch. That's sad considering that the Z's came out in late 2018.
Really? Why don't you use the compare mode at the end of the review Z6 review (conclusions) and take a look at AF bar between the Nikon Z and the Canon EOS R.
@fprime...be prepared to reap the wrath of those that think Nikon can do no wrong. It's blasphemy around this forum to speak out against Nikon. You're already called by Prosecuter a hater for speaking the truth.
Yes fPrime, The Sony 4th generations are currently better, BECAUSE you are comparing 4 generations and 8 cameras later to get to this point in AF performance for Sony. You are also comparing an A9II which is comparable to a D5/D6 in focusing, no other Nikon nor no other Sony is comparable to these cameras in focus... Again, you have no idea what you are talking about since you have never shot with any of these cameras much less owned one.
@Veloster75 - So true. I'm basically a Nikonista at heart, but I have to call the shots fairly if they are to improve.
The "Z"ealots here who want to make believe that their Nikon Z cameras have caught up to Sony and Canon AF will squeal but they know it will take another generation of Z cameras before Nikon's AF will be competitive.
Can people please start to report fprime. So he can be put under quarantine by DPReview staff. He trolls over every Nikon product and this trolling is now getting to the point that it is becoming pretty annoying.
@Prosecutor and others Canon, with the 1DXIII has proven to have the technology to pretty much match the Sony AF of the A9. What the R pr RP are capable of is irrelevant. I did not see a muscle display of mirrorrless AF technology in the D6.... fPrime comment is relevant and not a troll. I tried a Z6 with the new update last week. It works well when it works... Its unpredictability is what makes it weak compared to the others.
@Prosecutor - How aptly you are named. A fan of censorship, are you?
My comments are routinely ranked by others here as "Most Popular" exactly because they pull no punches. You would rather that only favorable comments be made about Z, wouldn't you? You are a sad individual.
@armandino Nikon D3, D4, D5 have always been the gold standard, I would assume the the D6 will follow this track record. Once the D6 ships we will be able to test all models against each other. The 1DXIII is having reports of getting locked up, so if you can't shoot, there is no point in having a great AF system.
@NexLupus, I doubt that you actually shot with a Z after that FW update. It improved the handling but neither the speed nor the accuracy nor the "stickiness". And that goes for Z 7 as well as Z 6. I still hope to see a day coming when Z's tracking mode is glued to the object like the Sony's are. Earlier on you blurbed about the "AF bar" - at first, that's metering and focusing. Not exactly a small field, and not exactly telling how good an AF-C really is. You tone and the rest of your statement remain not convincing.
@JJSo I have both Z6 and Z7 along with a D850. The AFC is much improved, not just the implementation. I have tried Dynamic area, AFC Wide and AF-A and all perform better and are stickier than the previous firmware. I use them everyday, so yes, I do comment from actual use...
@NexLupus "Nikon D3, D4, D5 have always been the gold standard, I would assume the the D6 will follow this track record." We are talking about mirrorless-on sensor- AF. With the D6 Nikon did not even bother trying. "The 1DXIII is having reports of getting locked up, so if you can't shoot, there is no point in having a great AF system." That is such a lame excuse to hide behind a bug while not recognizing the great achievements of the 1DXIII. You might want to check out Jared's AF comparison to see where Canon stands at with DPAF: https://youtu.be/VaYQ5yphhsE. This is real cutting edge AF performance freezing or not. Your comments are so obviously biased and off mark, difficult to take your statements seriously.
@armandino You are calling my comment biased, yet you are commenting on a Nikon article about a Nikon camera that you don’t own...despite being a Canon shooter.
Pot calling the kettle black much?
With regards to the 1DXIII, it looks like a great camera on paper, and it definitely is cutting edge, but for the Pros using these cameras they are concerned with one thing and one thing only... capturing the image. If the camera is locking up it is a brick for sports photographers
@armandino You are calling my comment biased, yet you are commenting on a Nikon article about a Nikon camera that you don’t own...despite being a Canon shooter.
Pot calling the kettle black much?
With regards to the 1DXIII, it looks like a great camera on paper, and it definitely is cutting edge, but for the Pros using these cameras they are concerned with one thing and one thing only... capturing the image. If the camera is locking up it is a brick for sports photographers.
Even if that were true, which I don't really care, Z6 and Z7 have such focusing system that only better focusing Nikon cameras are D5, D850 and D500. That being said and the fact that Z6 and Z7 are not professional cameras is kind of impressive. If all this older cameras like D750 were good enough to work with and create, why wouldn't Z's be equally good enough? And why does it matter if Sony or Eos R is better or not? In fact, only people who don't even own a Z camera care about if Sony is better. Kind of puzzling, isn't it?
@NexLupus it seems like you just keep on missing the point. This entire thread is about Nikon AF tracking performance using on sensor phase detect lagging when compared to Sony and Canon. It seems to me that none of your comments so far are relevant. I do not care if the 1DXIII is a great camera or not, not a camera I would buy, it is a dinosaur imo, my observation is that the 1DXIII DPAF is impressive and catching up with Sony A9 while Nikon is lagging. So just corroborating fPrime initial comment. This is factual and not rocket science.
@armandino - Thanks. Your point was well made. In my opinion NexLupus will never get it. He's bought a Nikon Z and now he has to jump on every criticism of it to defend it lest he face the reality that he bought an unfinished product.
I'd have no problem with him if he only trumpeted Nikon Z's known advantages like IBIS, ergonomics, or video. But instead he feels he has to deny its known negatives like its laggy C-AF and inability to pick up Eye-AF until the subject is with several feet of the camera.
People aren't stupid. They can see in three way tests that Nikon Z's AF is still struggling. For example, Jared Polin had all three mirrorless cameras (Nikon, Canon, & Sony) connected to Atomos Ninja screens as they simultaneously tracked a moving subject. Everyone could see that Sony's AF was stickiest, had the least lag, and picked up Eye-AF from significantly further away. Everyone, of course, except NexLupus who will always insist there's "no proof" that Nikon Z AF is in last place.
@fPrime You are correct, I have bought a Nikon Z7 and Z6, I have also purchased a D850, a D810 and a D750 before that. So who has a better grasp about Nikon focusing, you, a person that hasn’t purchased a new camera in over a decade and is still using a D700 or me that has actual functional knowledge of the different focusing systems and their nuances. Again you’re talking out of your horses a__ and just don’t realize how truly pathetic you look to the whole community when you troll.
With regards to the 1DXIII and A9II, why are you comparing AF systems from PRO $6500 and $4500 cameras to a $1600 camera, pretty dumb don’t you think?
Given how closely they were announced, it's clear that either Canon or Nikon, or both, rushed their first FF mirrorless cameras to market. Nikon's casualty was the AF, Canon's the poor sensor. At least Nikon can catch up later without releasing a whole new model.
Z6 and Z7 are not first mirrorless cameras by Nikon. Their first mirrorless camera series Nikon 1, of which there were 2 types and 4 iterations, were first made in 2011 and discontinued only before debut of full frame Nikon Z series.
Changing the tracking engagement to work more like their DSLRs is a welcomed improvement. One has to wonder why Nikon didn't implement it this way originally. It seems implausible they didn't know the previous Z method would be cumbersome for users. It's almost as if Nikon intentionally created friction in engaging the Z6/Z7's tracking to delineate its operation from the 3D tracking of its DSLR's - perhaps they believed the Z6/Z7's tracking functionality was too different or even inferior vs their DSLRs and they wanted to manage expectations of its use accordingly.
Probably because management decided it was time to market and speeded up development. The camera was probably ready to be released but the software team was not ready yet.
On itself the Z never has been a bad system, but it was marketed wrong and Nikon never had thought that Sony would use guerrilla marketing tactics to safeguard its hard worked position in this market.
Despite all the negative sentiment here and on youtube these cameras are in reality actually selling pretty well.
@steelhead3, The 3D tracking engagement process on Nikon's DSLR's predates the Z''s development by many years. The Z's development team would have to be new to Nikon or never used a Nikon DSLR to independently come up with a different 3D tracking engagement method by chance.
So how does it really compare now to the competition ? Does the z7 reach/overcome the A7R4 ? Does the z6 reach/overcome the A7III ? The EOS R ? The A7III didn't get the latest sony firmware, does that have a meaningful impact against the Z6 ? The EOS R got a huge FW update, like the Z6. It was tested by the DPReview TV, but the full review was never updated, are they comparable ?
The thing is, they never updated the EOS R review, the scoring doesn't reflect it's capabilities, that's a reason i asked the professionnal testers, which reviewed all cameras, for their input.
@Adrien D - Thanks for seeing through NexLupus's smokescreen. You are correct. Once DPR updates the Canon R review for their v2.0 firmware we'll also see DPR ranking the Nikon Z dead last for AF just like every other reviewer currently does.
@fPrime I own the Sony A7R3 and AF performance is ok but not great. A lot of missfocused images even with FW 3.0. Tracking is not as reliable as suggested in most reviews.
I guess that the A7R4 uses an updated FW with better AF algorithms. I only say AI. So when it comes to AF A7R4 > A7R3.
The comparison was never updated and Canon's R got updates, too. See https://youtu.be/1fju65OUzek. I don't know, fPrime, if you know the Z by own experience, but there's nothing to say against your ranking, I would see it the same order although I only saw reports and my personal experience is strictly limited to both Z bodies. Not exciting in terms of AF, none of them.
The z6 / z7 and the EOS R have proved to be, what they were intended for, a platform to test and improve their mirrorless software. As we move forward, software is were most of the innovation will be. If the z6 had a faster processor and dual card slots, it could be a camera that could be relevant for 10 years with firmware updates.
But Nikon and Canon have made huge steps forward in the past year on their software, specifically as it pertains to AF, when they release the next generation of bodies, they will be as competitive or beyond anything else on the market. This is more than likely what is driving Sony to take resources and concentrate on the PS5. Sony will exit the shrinking camera market, concentrate on their far more lucrative gaming platform, and continue to make sensors for Nikon and Apple.
Northrups already found its safe haven in Fujifilm the Fro is just done especially after his latest videos where he bashes Nikon without even trying to install the update. That comes down to trolling. No problem seeing Fro leaving the arena.
@Prosecutor - How aptly you are named. A fan of censorship, are you?
My comments are routinely ranked by others here as "Most Popular" exactly because they pull no punches. You would rather that only favorable comments be made about Z, wouldn't you? You are a sad individual.
This has been the nonsense prediction for years by jealous CaNikon owners. Personally I shoot Panasonic, but I acknowledge that Sony is number 1 for a reason and it’s rivals are at far higher risk of exiting the market then it is ....
@Prosecutor - I'm a realist. I don't expect any harsh comment about the Nikon Z's AF performance to be most popular when most of the readers here are from the Z community keen to hear what DPR think of firmware v3.0. There is a certain suspension of disbelief that sets in apparently when one buys a Nikon Z.
fprime - You never used this camera so you are not really obliged to talk over something you have never used. You can't speak so to say. Still your opinion is strong while it does not have any weight to it. You don't come with any facts nor experience with this product.
Your opinion is yours, but your attitude is that of a child. You are acting like a troll and you know it.
My advice to you is to work on your attitude and check for mental health problems over your hate against Nikon. What did they do wrong to you. Have they laid down your dog?
Sony has never been, and will never be number 1 by any metric. Canon has been number 1 in the market by share and sales, and they will be moving forward. Sony had an uptick as users wanted to move to mirror less full frame cameras, and that was the only choice, but their sales have been in decline the past two years, along with the rest of the market.
Photography is now an electronics technology. It is unlikely to be the big electronic companies that leave the field. They have the expertise to bring the needed tech from a wide range of their divisions to the camera department. Anyone want to bet against computational imagery transforming traditional optics, for example?
Have tuned into this camera recently as a possible complement to my existing system, and AF is a big reason.
Jordan, it seems to me that the "beastly cameraman" pic isn't a failure of Eye-AF, it's because his far eye is beyond the plane of focus. The near eye looks right to me, and you're shooting at 1.8/85mm. His head is off-axis enough to account for the difference. Am I missing something here?
If you watch the episode on a 4K display, you can see that it's slightly front focused on my nearest eye. My eyelashes/eyebrows are a bit sharper than my eyeball. Keep in mind this was shot with an 85mm F1.8 wide open, this very slight mis-focus would not be problematic in most situations.
Jordan, thanks for responding. Maybe I don’t know how eye-AF works, but I thought it only locked into one eye at a time. Given the FL and aperture, this *seems* like the behavior I would have expected. In any event, I’ll take a closer look.
Regarding the front focusing....has anyone ever done a test like putting the camera in single point focus, focusing on the eye of a still subject and seeing if it focused on the pupil or eyelash as it might do in eye autofocus?...I am wondering if this is an "eye-autofocus" issue or a more general focusing issue?
NIKON is very close to success in the MILC world but they must upgrade the z6/z7 to the next level : 1- SW : improve AF , as "real" NIKON's dslr AF , or as alpha's series one . 2- HW : buttons layout/custimization as their dslrs , dual card , vertical grip .
I agree with the vertical grip. Wish they had started with a system including a proper grip instead of just a battery holder. Pretty happy with the button layouts and ergonomics, however.
@J Yohan i prefer the d500 layout/customisiation on the the Z6/7 one :) . about the VB , i've no idea why NIKON take that decision , i can't find the reason for that .
Impressive to see them upgrade the tracking. And while Canon has better tracking in the 1DX III (mirror up), and Sony in all RTT cameras. Neither offers it in their mid-range bodies yet (A7 III or EOS R) so the Nikon Z6 is now right at the cutting edge in that segment.
Let's hope they keep improving it and update the interface once again in FW 4.0
Nikon will soon overtake canon sony in the mirrorles segments as the household name in photography. Beitter pill to swallow for the trolls, I know. So come get some
Nikon always had good cameras. D800, D810, D850 D700 / D750 / D500 / D3, D4, D5 etc... you could always argue they were ahead of the competition in some way. Yet their market share decreased for the last decade for every consecutive year, and they are in financial troubles.
So I am not so sure just another great camera is what will save them
@panther fan Very true, Nikon has arguably been making some of the best cameras if not the best cameras in select categories. Yet more people purchase Canon than Nikon. Just like more burgers are sold at McDonalds than at In & Out.
NexLupus, Canon-McDonalds analogy isn't fair to Canon. Canon also has great cameras and lenses but they have way better marketing and corporate management is more down to earth. I k ow exactly what I will get from a Canon camera but Nikon failed big time when they launched Z series because they couldn't explain how to use AF. First users (i.e. st.pod Youtubers) used Z cameras for 20 minutes and they each published 1 hour Youtube videos about how bad Z7 AF is (Nikon didn't even supply Z6 in the first presentation). Today with firmware 3.0 Z cameras are really great.
Nikon puts out quality products. They have their flaws...all companies/products do...but overall Nikon delivers.
The problem that Nikon has is that in today's instant internet reaction world, when you put out a new product it has to be more than excellent, it has to have some sort of "wow" factor to create the buzz. Sony did that for a few years, although lately they have not been so great at it, and it seems now that Canon has learned how to do that.
There has to be some sort of headline grabbing feature(s) that garners the attention, at least if you want the traction online.
The Nikon D780 is another example: an amazing device, but will have to most likely slowly build a following because the internet crowd mostly did not bless it upon its arrival.
The D6 is also getting that type of reaction, but it's audience is already there and doesn't care about internet reaction.
BTW, the lenses for the Z system are also proving to be excellent.
We took the Nikkor Z 100–400mm F4.5–5.6 VR S for a spin around Oregon and Washington to see what it's capable of when attached to Nikon's Z9 and Z7 cameras. Check out our sample gallery to see how it performs. And, before you ask, yes, there are cat photos.
Just for fun, we dusted off an old Nikon Micro-Nikkor 55mm F2.8 AI-S lens and slapped it on a Nikon Z7 and Z7 II to see what it's simple optical formula can do on a thoroughly modern full-frame camera.
We've taken a look back at our year of Instagram posts to the @DPReview account and compiled the 10 most popular cameras of 2020, based on most 'likes' to a single post.
The Nikon Z 24-200mm F4-6.3 VR is a multipurpose zoom lens for Nikon's full-frame Z-mount cameras. Check out our gallery of sample images to see how it performs.
Have significant firmware updates changed Chris and Jordan's recommendations? Take a look at their updated entry-level full-frame mirrorless comparison.
It says Olympus on the front, but the OM System OM-1 is about the future, not the past. It may still produce 20MP files, but a quad-pixel AF Stacked CMOS sensor, 50 fps shooting with full AF and genuine, IP rated, weather sealing show OM Digital Solutions' ambition. See what we thought.
Is the GH6 the best hybrid camera there is? Jordan has been shooting DPReview TV with the Panasonic GH6 for months, so he has plenty of experience to back up his strong opinions.
DJI's Mini series has always been a great entry-level option for beginners, hobbyists, or those willing to sacrifice features for size. But with its newest model, the Mini 3 Pro, DJI promises to bring pro features to its most compact model. Does it succeed?
Sony has just announced its updated 24-70mm F2.8 GM II and there are a host of impressive upgrades. We took this new lens around a very soggy downtown Calgary to see how it performs.
What's the best camera for shooting landscapes? High resolution, weather-sealed bodies and wide dynamic range are all important. In this buying guide we've rounded-up several great cameras for shooting landscapes, and recommended the best.
What’s the best camera for around $2000? These capable cameras should be solid and well-built, have both speed and focus for capturing fast action and offer professional-level image quality. In this buying guide we’ve rounded up all the current interchangeable lens cameras costing around $2000 and recommended the best.
Most modern cameras will shoot video to one degree or another, but these are the ones we’d look at if you plan to shoot some video alongside your photos. We’ve chosen cameras that can take great photos and make it easy to get great looking video, rather than being the ones you’d choose as a committed videographer.
Although a lot of people only upload images to Instagram from their smartphones, the app is much more than just a mobile photography platform. In this guide we've chosen a selection of cameras that make it easy to shoot compelling lifestyle images, ideal for sharing on social media.
Many cameras have a distinct sound. MIOPS partnered with German sound artist Kuntay Seferoglu to harness the diversity of camera shutter sounds and create the MIOPS Camera Symphony.
Panasonic's new 9mm F1.7 lens promises to deliver top performance in a pint-sized package. Does it raise the bar for ultra-wide angle lenses in the Micro Four Thirds system? Check out our sample gallery to find out.
Despite most units still not shipping for a few weeks, DJI has released a firmware update for its DJI Fly app that allows for activation of its new Mini 3 Pro drone, which will unlock the full feature set for the first ‘Pro’ sub-250g drone from the company.
It says Olympus on the front, but the OM System OM-1 is about the future, not the past. It may still produce 20MP files, but a quad-pixel AF Stacked CMOS sensor, 50 fps shooting with full AF and genuine, IP rated, weather sealing show OM Digital Solutions' ambition. See what we thought.
The app is developed by cinematographer and colorist Zak Ray, who's brought together over 1,000 lenses and 150 cameras into a comprehensive and interactive database app for planning out your shoots.
The leaked renderings and information suggests this new FPV drone will come in at around 500g (1.1lbs) and feature a CineWhoop-style design with protected propellers for safely flying in tight spaces.
The lens, which was previously avaialble for Sony E-mount, is fully manual, but chipped to provide support for focus confirmation and in-body image stabilization with compatible Nikon Z-mount camera systems. Cosina says the lens is set to go on sale next month, June 2022.
The total lunar eclipse will start tonight in most hemispheres and extend through midnight into early Monday morning. Here are some tips on where to view it and capture this rare event.
Is the GH6 the best hybrid camera there is? Jordan has been shooting DPReview TV with the Panasonic GH6 for months, so he has plenty of experience to back up his strong opinions.
The Sony a7 IV includes a new screen reader assistive feature that makes the camera more accessible for the many people who struggle with vision impairment and loss. It's a great first step in making photography and digital cameras more accessible.
Markus Hofstätter Is no stranger to massive DIY photo projects, but his latest one took three months to complete and resulted in bringing back to life a massive scanner that he now uses to scan his ultra-large format photographs.
Representation matters. Google is working to improve skin tone representation within its products and services and improve its AI technology to better understand images of people of all skin tones.
As we work towards our GH6 review, we've taken a closer look at some of the video options by shooting clips to highlight some of the compression options, picture profiles, image stabilization modes, the dynamic range boost mode, and low light performance.
By leveraging hardware acceleration, Adobe has managed to speed up 10-bit 4:2:0 HEVC video export times by 10x on macOS computers and Windows computers running AMD GPUs. Adobe has also sped up smart rendering, added HDR proxies and more.
Sony's new Xperia 1 IV smartphone promises to be a true flagship phone for content creators thanks to a true optical zoom, 4K/120p video and new livestreaming capabilities.
Adobe has finally brought Content-Aware Fill to Photoshop for iPad. Other new and improved features include Remove Background, Select Subject, Auto adjustments and more.
NASA's James Webb Space Telescope team recently tested the onboard instrument, MIRI, by imaging a portion of the Large Magellanic Cloud. The new image is incredibly sharp and points toward exciting possibilities when Webb begins scientific operations this summer.
We've taken Nikon's Nikkor 50mm F1.2 S prime lens around the state of Washington to see how it performs wide open, both inside and outdoors. Check out our gallery to see what sort of images it's capable of capturing.
Western Digital has announced new products in its SanDisk Professional series, including the Pro-Blade modular SSD ecosystem and faster SanDisk Extreme Pro SD and microSD cards.
SpinLaunch's kinetic space launch system uses a centrifuge-like design to launch payloads into orbit using significantly less fuel and at a much lower cost than traditional rocket-based approaches. A recent SpinLaunch Suborbital Accelerator test included an onboard camera.
DJI's Mini series has always been a great entry-level option for beginners, hobbyists, or those willing to sacrifice features for size. But with its newest model, the Mini 3 Pro, DJI promises to bring pro features to its most compact model. Does it succeed?
DJI has announced its new sub-250g drone, the Mini 3 Pro. It features a 48MP 1/1.3-inch CMOS sensor capable of capturing 4K/60p video, a three-direction sensor array and a slew of new and improved features.
When we reviewed DJI's Mavic 3 Cine drone in November it was still missing quite a few advertised features, most of which were added via firmware updates over the past several months. We tested these updates to see how much the Mavic 3 has improved.
While on holiday in southern Australia, Sydney resident Graham Tait became the victim of theft when someone broke into his car at a hotel and stole $10,000 worth of items, including a laptop and two cameras. Thanks to Apple AirTags, Tait quickly located his gear.
Venus Optics says the lineup will kick off with three primes: a 27mm T2.8, a 35mm T2.4 and a 50mm T2.4, all of which offer 1.5x squeeze in incredible compact form factors.
YouTube Channel DM Productions has published a video showing a collection of low-light test footage they allege were captured on DJI’s new ‘Mini 3 Pro’ drone.
Comments