Chris and Jordan ventured into the frigid Canadian winter for their full review of the Nikon Z fc, earning Chris a beard full of ice. The good news? All those old-fashioned dials worked great with mittens. Watch this week's episode to see their verdict on this retro-looking camera.
Too bad they made it larger than the Fujifilm X-T1. Had it been in the size of the X-T100 it would have been really interesting. If it had a full frame sensor, I could have lived with the gigantic body, but not for an aps-c sensor.
When you disassemble both, you will figure out why. Just compare the thickness of film with that of a sensor, mainboard, and LCD. Not to mention that two LR33 batteries are far from Zfc's Li-Ion pack...
Let's imagine that this camera remained with the F mount, although without a mirror ... - everything will fit - and a large battery and an FF sensor ... well, my fantasies.
And to add to that: Were I ever to complement my D850 with a camera "like my FM2n and FM3a", this would be it, with the 28/2.8 of course. Sounds perfect to me!
Like other users on the site, and an actual Fuji X user, I don't agree with the DPreview TV team using every opportunity to advertise the former.
I believe that the X system is overpriced when it comes to comparable performance, and lenses like all new XFs, including XF 27mm/2.8 WR is a good example - inferior performance to the Nikkor 28/2.8 S, at a higher price.
The X system was build as an APS-C one, introduced 8 years before Nikon Z50. I remember the day when there were only 4 lenses for X Mount - XF 35/1.4, XF 60/2.4, XF 56/1.2, XF 18-55, and there was nothing else.
With the Z system, you can use so many F mount lenses, and all Z mount Full Frame lenses, which are optically superior in most cases than the X equivalents, sometimes - also cheaper.
You can also upgrade your Z system with a full frame camera, while that's no option on Fuji X.
This is why I believe constant references to Fuji are misleading and inaccurate as they look biased and one-sided.
Its un-fair to compare FF vs. APS-C/DX. Second, the 28/2.8 Nikkor is a fine lens, albeit very plasticky, even the Lens mount. 3rd, the 27/2.8, whileas not being cheap, is an extraordinary performer, and the new Mk. II iteration does feature an aperture ring, which the Nikkor doesn't have - despite the Zfc being a "vintage" modeled DSLM after the FM/FE(2) design.
The Z50/Zfc does lack a ton of DX Lenses, bc of that, i switched after D70-D7000.
Last, but not least, the Fujinon does feature weathersealing. And Nikons best lenses costing a ton, and weighting a ton (in terms of long focal lengths - or high-end zooms, too)
The Fujifilm X-Mount system started Jan. 2012 and with 3 XF type Lenses. I am using Fujifilm X since late 2012 with the X-E1, so i do have >9.5 years usage, experience with the System.
Horses for courses, let the church into the village, you've never seen this, from a pro landscape photographer, after 6 years:
Sirkhann: Fuji markets an APS-C system with (not unjustified) professional pretentions, lens arsenal and all. That comes at a price. To customers and to Fuji.
Considering that I have my X system since X-E1, and I also have a Z system, I think I'm in a way better position to compare both price, and performance of the two.
I also have XF 27/2.8, and I can also comment that this, like many other Fuji lenses, are being produced in various factories, and there is significant sample variation in these, unlike the Z lenses.
Also, Nikkon Z S Line lenses feel better built than Fuji X. Most of my X lenses are older versions without weather sealing, so they not only optically inferior to Zs at comparable price points, they are less sturdier too! I don't know where you saw the professional standards, but build quality and durability is what Nikon is know for in the professional world.
Gear are just tools, to get the job done, all right?
I prefer the classic approach with direct dials & knobs, buttons from the X-System over anything. And "FF" is 2022 not being needed. I have two FF systems from Canon & Sony, but none gives me the same kind of feeling, like Fujifilm.
And speaken of manual focus lenses - the joys my old SLRs & Rangefinders are giving me, can't being replaced with any modern, digital whatever, from haptics & feeling, emotional PoV. Only by a Film Rangefinder M-Series Leica, but these are simply out of my league. That is being better build than any digital <brand here> which is being after some few, or couple years unlike Leica only a fraction being worth of it's new price.
I guess you haven't seen the vid above, nevermind. :) It's stupid, to compare FF vs. DX/APS-C, every system does serve a purpose - something you don't get. Unless you've had 10 different samples of the exact same lens, i consider your post about sample variation simply fake news.
@Marc Petzold: I was on a ten day holiday a few weeks ago, the gray and cold season in West Flanders. What did I take with me photography wise?
D850, 35/1.4G and 85/1.4G. The latter one was hardly used.
FM2n, 24/2.8 AiS and 50/1.2 AiS, two rolls of Tri-X.
Which combination gave me the most "haptic" satisfaction? The FM2n obviously, metering off the sidewalk and all that, but the D850 is a very close second, because it handles so well once in aperture priority and the rear dial on exposure compensation. Everything falls to hand, it just feels natural.
Marc, I'm sure you have your taste and preferences, like everybody else.
I'm suggesting that certain conclusions are deprived from bias so that they can be as neutral as possible, helping each and every person, interested in the topic, to be able to make a fact-based decision.
My opinion is that Fujifilm is being portrayed in very favorable light, which leads to unmet expectations and disappointment to many of us.
Statements like "FF is not needed in 2022 when we have APS-C" can be also repacked as "APS-C is not needed in 2022 since we have m4/3 and SmartPhones". And the same applies for the GFX. I believe you now understand that your personal truth is far from universal, or even from the reality, considering that the APS-C market is actually shrinking, compared to FF...
Sirkhann: Not sure what you're saying here. I'm sure Fuji aficionado's will differ."
Fuji aficionados are not the easiest group to have a fact-based conversation with, as the main driver to be into that system is more emotional than pragmatic anyways. And they need a lot of approval for their beloved system, otherwise you become an enemy.
Nice review but unfair to not mention the perfect fit 28mm f2, 40mm f2 and 50mm f2. Sure they’re full frame but the 28 and 40mm lenses are as light or lighter than many apsc lenses and comparable in price.
And the Nikon 85/1.8S isn’t really any more expensive, large or heavy than the Fujifilm xf 90mm f2.
Sure, still not a lot of lenses, but it’s those two primes will cover A LOT of customers. Most amateurs buy a single prime and would be well served by either the 28 or 40mm.
I think that's the reason why most companies don't make a lot of aps-c lenses. There's just not enough demand.
Most users of less expensive and smaller APS-C cameras are not looking for a wide lens selection, and usually a few lenses with the more popular focal lengths will satisfy them.
There's a reason why neither Nikon, Canon nor Sony have not gone aggressively into aps-c lenses. If the demand was there someone would move in to satisfy it.
Let's look at Fuji. They have a small niche, and even they seem to have slowed down on their aps-c releases. So it's not like they've achieved the sort of sales results that would merit the attention of the "big 3."
So you are right: what is available for the ZFc is be sufficient for most.
Kudos to Nikon on this classically-styled, APS-C camera. It's a great-looking camera, and should sell well to enthusiasts with a bent towards classic SLR styling and old-school ergonomics and controls.
The lens issue seems a bit overblown, in my opinion.
That said, I think the Fujifilm SLR and rangefinder-style cameras are just *beautiful*. Fujifilm has this niche in their DNA, while this Nikon seems a little like a gimmick. Some of Nikon's design decisions just seem a little off-base too, like the ISO dial without an auto setting, and the funny-looking aperture window. It's as if they wanted a camera in this space, but didn't want to go all-in.
I hope this camera is a success and helps move future cameras away from sterile-feeling menu or button/dial-based digital settings, and back towards the more tactile camera interaction that I love so much with about Fujifilm. And, I hope Fuji learns a little from this and shifts its new offerings back in this direction too.
"I hope this camera is a success and helps move future cameras away from sterile-feeling menu or button/dial-based digital settings, and back towards the more tactile camera interaction that I love so much with about Fujifilm."
Fuji is still a tiny segment of the market, so it looks like most people prefer more streamlined setups. Though many new lenses offer a marked aperture dial (ironically not Nikon's, though) that offers a tactile element to scratch that itch. I just picked up Sigma's 65mm lens with an aperture dial and like having some controls put in my left hand.
Let's agree you can enjoy shooting beautiful photos with it. A fine recreational secondary camera for Nikon photographers. Others would probably still prefer Fujifilm - a more robust APS-C system overall with even more consequent classic UI especially on the X-Pro and single-digit X-T models.
"i don't see any reason why a digital camera in 2022 should mimick looks of some film cameras mid of last century." Photography as a hobby purchase is skewed towards the aged, and nostalgia sells.
"Looks like Nikon has not learned anything from their Df disaster." Putting lipstick on the Z50 has resulted in a successful camera with lots of press buzz, so they've likely learned to keep up this approach.
I played the Z fc few times and really like everything there except for the APS-C sensor. the day Nikon put a ( 45 ish MP) FF sensor in there will be the day I put in my pre-order in.
I think also, partially because of the large mount opening too. I mean the Zfc is slightly larger than the Z50, but i couldn't see it being much smaller than that.
Nikon, offer one in black, and offer up 3 pancake (small) prime lenses with it. 18mm (28mm equiv), 26.5mm (40mm equivalent), 33.5mm (50mm equivalent) w/close focus. Wide, perfect street, and "standard" 50mil bonus macro. Then we'll talk.
Yeah I hear you. Can't hurt to voice needs. Afterall, the market of photographers they are courting is shrinking by the day. Becomes ever more important to listen to whom are left. If they don't well, that's their choice.
There is still a good possibility a "Zf" may still be on the way in the coming years -- perhaps something with basically the Z6 internals in a retro shell (if NIkon plays the same card as they did with the Zfc in relation to the Z50).
I'm personally on the fence on the Zfc since it does lack IBIS, although I could get over the resolution and sensor size (as I don't find it to be all that limiting in practice for most people) but for various shooting scenarios, IBIS is handy to have and I would sort of miss it after shooting with the Z FF bodies. For some things, you don't need IBIS, but for handheld, it's helpful especially in low light.
@vegetaleb It's not so much bad marketing, but rather price point. No other cameras from Sony, or Canon at least have IBIS at this price point (sub $1000) in that format . Not the EOS M or Sony a6000-series (except the a6300 and a6500, but those are not in production anymore as far as I know). It has more to do with differentiation, and not eating into the Z5 sales, which only costs about $400 more. If they gave the Zfc IBIS, it would kill both the Z50 and Z5 sales most likely, and Nikon didn't want to do that. And based on what I've read regarding sales for the Zfc, they have exceed Nikon's expectations so I don't think Nikon necessarily made a bad decision here. In fact it looks like (so far) it's paying off, whatever they are doing/did.
The Fujifilm XS-10 ticks all boxes, for 999 bucks, and it does have IBIS as well. It's only missing weather sealing, and the bigger EVF from the X-T3/T4 Series. But it's still better, than the small A7C EVF. No other sub 1k camera does have all these features as APS-C/DX DSLM, with the biggest lens choice from all vendors into APS-C format.
Yeah if there isn't any real need for the retro look/feel, then the D7500 is certainly worth keeping and using. Any changes to the imaging system is likely not significant enough alone to justify an upgrade IMO
I'm still waiting for an Apple iphone 14 with a rotary dial on the front. I like antiques more than most, but these retro designed devices reach back and for the most part fail. Desperate attempts to evoke emotion when the tech is mediocre. This camera speaks to that in spades.
Selling like hotcakes, Silver Award, and high praise from reviewers = "Desperate Attempt" and "Mediocre" "proof of the failure of retro" in the DPR comments section.
It's like some people just live to attack certain products they don't like.
Weird because Jordan showed a screenshot of how the video from this camera is outperforming the Full Frame Z5. And from what Chris was saying the camera performance is not below that of the other DX mount Z50 and it's tech is comparable to modern cameras, certainly not "antique".
And the number of modern APS-C cameras in production in the sub-$1000 price point have IBIS isn't exactly huge to begin with. It just sounds like typical DPR comment keyboard warrior negativity; spending more time treating cameras as a popularity competition than actually shooting with them.
I was under the impression the ZFC was actually better than the Z50, particularity for video as it has features the Z50 doesn't, like eye tracking in video. It also has a much better screen design in that it flips out from the side versus the Z50's almost shameful flip out at the bottom.
I don't like the 'uncomfortable to hold, retro for the sake of being retro' design, but spec-wise as an APS-C camera it got my attention when I was shopping for a new system.
I wouldn't say a low volume seller. At least it sounds like it exceeded NIkons expectations for launch, and since it's only been out for less than a year, we have yet to see it's long term impact, but so far, I'd say the impressions are pretty good. Not perfect, and needs improvement, but still not bad either for a "first" attempt at a retro digital camera.
I will only partially agree with Calibur in that it's a "good" (not great) camera, but with limited appeal. But then again I don't think NIkon intends for this to replace or outsell the Z50 (or any other Z body). It's more of a "niche" camera so it's appeal will be limited, but probably bigger than most people are giving it and Nikon credit for.
One day, after many cameras and more dials, I started dreaming about going back 30 years to the great feel of my old Nikon FM2: solid build but rather small, simple manual controls, fewer buttons, lenses with an aperture ring and depth of field scale (as on my old Nikkor 35mm 2.8. ai), and above all a large and clear viewfinder allowing for easy manual focus…
So going retro is not mainly an issue of design (although I love great camera looks like to Z fc’s, too), but of a certain user experience that some, but not all, miss in current cameras.
Instead, the Nikon DF and Z fc “retros” - as many have written before and this video confirms - offer a mixed half-retro/half modern solution which seems to make life rather more complicated.
As for me I solved my problem with a second-hand Leica Q…
Yep the FM2 was a great camera. I always hoped the DF would have been the digital FM2 but it really was not, shame really, I ended up buying a Sony A7 and an adapter to use my manual focus Nikkors. I'm still using it today.
Still to this day the digital camera I always had the most fun using was a Olympus EM5-II. With a small prime on it walking through the streets it felt just like doing the same with my old film SLR. It's possible to mix the fun of an old camera with the tech of a new camera, it can definitely can be done. But even just looking at the Df I knew that brick wouldn't do it; but the Zfc looks like it could pull it off.
I bought one as ‘slow me down, take my time’ camera with the 28 SE (and I shall buy the 40 as another compact prime time to fit it) as I did with my old Df, and for that it’s magnificent . Ergos, handling etc are entirely subjective, who cares what someone else thinks?
It’s an entirely different animal to the Z50 of course, and that’s part of its appeal - it isn’t a ‘Z6II lite’ sitting there - and the tilt/touch screen offers different opportunities with field work which I carry out for a Heritage Charity.
I will never buy DX lenses for it, in some respects I regard it as a 1.5 T/C for my FX lenses!
interesting to see how many people still fall for "retro" design in cameras (and many other products). no wonder Nikon puts a bit of retro lipstick on their Z50 "pig", when a bit of window dressing on their Z50 "pig", when they can charge 20% more money for it.
personally i actively dislike anything retro *designed*. One if the reasons i am not interested at all in Fuji's system. (Lack of FF option is even more important for me). i always prefer sleek, minimalist, functional design in the mostcompact form factor possible - over retro exteriors.
A superb Nikon "Z80" as a truly worthy mirrorfree D500 successor - and in the same "no holds barred" spirit - would have been much more interesting than a retro-styled Z50.
There is nothing to “fall” for. A retro design has legitimate appeal. And the Z50 is not a pig. It’s got a great feature set and is an appealing camera.
Liked the video. It is a pretty camera, but looks to be more than just a pretty face. While I agree it would be lovely to see a full frame version, I still think that for a wide range of photography a smaller sensor makes great sense.
Gorgeous camera. Interesting to see so many Fuji and Sony fanboys who never used it trying to belittle it. Yes, it is small in a good way. I have shot most Fuji X from the first three generations, and I prefer Nikon fc.
Lenses don’t need a DX mark to be useful on this little beauty ;)
Re "Interesting to see so many Fuji and Sony fanboys who never used it trying to belittle it", do you really find it interesting? And how can you tell? Do you check their gear lists to distinguish them from Nikon owners that also have reservations about this camera? Wouldn't you agree that comments like this are of exceptionally low quality?
Even if they're not all Fuji and sony fanboys the "haters" make themselves very apparent. I'll bet most don't own any camera, or at least they own something but never actually use it. They're just internet "keyboard photographers" whos experience is all hypothetical and in their heads.
The absolute bile in over in the Fuji article right now is testament to it; not only do they hate it but if you like it you're an idiot and don't know what real cameras/photography is. I swear it's like many people commenting on DPR define who they are off what they hate, not what they love. And that's just sad.
It seems that us Fuji users can’t comment on the Z-fc without being dismissed as biased and irrelevant. The sad thing is many originally came to Fuji in search of a camera which worked in a similar way to the old Nikon film bodies we loved. One of the most satisfying cameras I ever used was the Nikon FE2 (equipped with manual and aperture priority only) and I would love to have a digital version of that camera.
Sadly this isn’t it, and the problem isn’t so much the camera itself but the system. There are next to no native lenses, and those there are lack the aperture ring to replicate the original handling. Putting the aperture control and display on the body is a fudge, as is the PASM mode lever. I know that the PASM dial dates back to cameras like the FA, but it was a compromise then (necessitated by the limitations of the lens system) and still now for the same reason.
Like it or not, the closest approximation to the classic Nikon F system today is still Fuji’s X mount range.
No they didn't... I'm huge Nikon fan even though my main system is around R6 now... but I also have and love the Z50 which is not only better deal but it has better ergonomics as well. There isn't really anything Zfc can do better then Z50 for much more money... 🤷♂️
Stating that there is no lens suited for ZFC apart from 2 or 3 kit zoom lenses is like creating fake news. You should prepare and argument your videos professionally. - The 40 F/2 or the 28 f2.8 will have the exact same weight than their fuji counterparts and target APS-c audience. - other full frame lenses like the 100-400 weight the same as their Fuji counterpart - Viltrox has launched 3 APS lenses with AF for Z mount - The roadmap hints at several additional APS-c lenses in the near future.
Please DPreview don't start inventing fake news / fake drama. A video or an article clarifying the truth is much needed.
As usual, the dpreview commentariat miss the point. This Zfc is a what passes for an entry-level camera these days. Not cheap, not dumbed down, but still aimed squarely at the casual, younger end of the market - not the older system-enthusiasts as, um, tend to make up the majority around here. Nikon needs to offer a matching, compact standard zoom (16-50, check) and a retro-styled, compact, wide-of-standard prime (the 28/2.8 SE, check), and, boom!, that's mission accomplished so far as the necessary lens options for this camera go. A customer who wants high quality, macro and telephoto and wide-zooms and fast primes, Nikon's reasoning goes, is either buying into Fuji from the start, or is ready to step up from the Zfc to the system-enthusiast Z-mount cameras. Fuji owns retro-compact system-enthusiasts, but retro-compact casuals are still very much up for grabs, as the wide interest and positive reception of the Zfc in non-camera circles shows.
The Df was a singular but very significant disappointment. The publicity and pre-launch hype, followed by what was, outside of Japan at least, an overwhelmingly negative reception, has given the camera almost mythic status as The One Nikon Got Wrong.
In Japan at least, a used Df now sells for 50% more than a D750. So maybe it has the last laugh after all.
@Stonejack Df was absolutely not a failure. It was not perfect, but remains to this day one of the most satisfying digital camera I ever used from an ergonomics, haptics, user experience and image quality point of view (I do have a subjective preference for traditional analogue commands and controls). The Df was a bit too expensive to become a mass market success, but its second hand prices are holding up way better than the other DSLRs from that era, which kind of proves its appeal. I still use mine today with great pleasure. I have way more fun walking around with the Df and a good prime lens than with my much more advanced Z7 for example. I know that I am far from being the only guy on earth feeling that way.
Maybe we will have some day a FF Z equivalent, but I am in no rush to ditch my Df.
The Df was built on the wrong mechanics platform. Instead of putting some aluminum on top of a D600/D610 they should have used a D800/D810 mechanism. On the Df you can't even change the aperture while it is stopped down with the DoF check button. And it feels far from any FM/FE series camera the spirit of which it was supposed to continue.
I am surprised to hear the df described as a significant disappointment. Certainly those that used it seemed to love it. Regardless, I don't think the df merits the string of Nikon retro failures implied by the title. I really do wonder sometimes.
The Nikon Df is one of the best cameras I ever owned. Insane amounts of mojo and raw image quality. A joy to use. Could be used either like an F5 or F4, F4 or F. This is what a lot of revivers didn’t understand - that the Df really was a Nikon enthusiasts camera, for those who have experience with those older film cameras. And for those people the Df was god like.
Got the X-Pro 2 as well. A great camera too but could never touch the Nikon Df.
If there’s one thing clear with the Df it is that it’s owners absolutely love it to death. It’s one of the extremely few cameras that isn’t a throw away gadget. The Df is a camera for the ages. When the Nikon D810, Canon 5Diii, Sony A7ii are all forgotten the Df will live on I’m sure. There’s no digital camera out there that works with Nikkors going back to the 1959. There’s no other digital camera as fun to use with old manual Nikon lenses.
No. Fujifilm got retro right. Nikon just copied the aesthetic and attempted to market it as groundbreaking. By the specs alone, Nikon has brought nothing new to the table. Even though the ZF-C is a new camera, it's specs are either barely on par, or lagging behind the competition. 20.9Mp & 4K at only 30FPS??? Unless your already deeply invested into the Nikon ecosystem and looking to upgrade camera bodies, there aren't any compelling reasons to buy this over the Fujifilm X series camera, Sony A6400 - A6600, many Micro 4/3 cameras or Cannon's offerings.
Lol, You mean the fact that I've owned Nikon, Sony, Canon, and about 5 different MFT cameras? The whole reason I really like this Zfc is it reminds me so much of my Oly EM5mk2 (and by the transitive property my Nikon FE, because that's why I liked the EM5).
I've owned many cameras too, including the Nikon (D800). I'm simply stating the facts. Some people will undoubtedly love the Nikon Z FC, others will not. From a tech and spec standpoint, this camera is already behind the curve. Especially for an APS-C camera. Unless someone is a die hard Nikon fan, or loves the design and ergonomics, there isn't many reasons to buy this camera over other offerings. There also aren't many Z lenses (yet) which subtracts from the overall appeal. Again, something that can be remedied by using an adapter. No camera is superior to another. That's subjective. From a spec, feature, and mount maturity standpoint, this camera starts out with a disadvantage. Another reason to buy this camera (my opinion) is the ultra low price tag. Even though the specs aren't that great, this camera is easily worth more money. If this happened to be a full frame camera and not APSC, it would be a changer for Nikon and a win for everyone hoping to enter the full frame market.
@Roger C: "Nikon just copied the aesthetic and attempted to market it as groundbreaking."
So what you're saying is after Fujifilm "copied the aesthetics" Nikon (founded 17 years before Fujifilm) introduced in 1959 with the original Nikon F SLR camera, now Nikon copied Fujifilm?!?
Some of you guys here really do have rich imagination.
@PostModernBloke - we're talking SLR, not rangefinder cameras here - because Fujifilm X and Z fc cameras are after the "retro SLR" look, not RF look ... I'll say it again - Nikon made their first SLR camera in 1959 (Nikon F), while Fujifilm made their first SLR in 1985 (Fujica AX-Multi Program). So it was actually 1985 that Fujifilm first copied Nikon ... ;)
Any way you twist this - Nikon most definitely did not copy anyone's look with their Z fc - they practically invented that look more than 60 years back.
@Photo_AK Actually Jingles. The first Fuji SLR was the Fujicarex (1962). with a fixed lens. The first interchangeable lens SLR Fuji made was the Fujica ST701 (1970) with the M42 screw mount.
Im not saying Nikon did not come first with the SLR thing, but at least get you fact straight.
Absolutely agree with the conclusion - needs to be full frame and it would be the perfect compact interchangeable that Nikon is so lacking. Have a lovely little 45mm f/2.8P Nikkor AIS that sits and gathers dust, but what a perfect marriage it would be with a full frame Zfc. In fact I would settle for something as basic as a mirrorless Df or even a FE2 - no bells and no whistles, just a solid shooting machine.
It wouldn't be a perfect marriage. You'd need to use the FTZ adapter and the whole thing would like rather odd. For aesthetics, that combo would look just fine on the Z6/7.
Yes, you are right. My drift was for Nikon to have a smallish compact full frame, body and Nikon Z 28mm f2.8 SE or the Z 40mm f2 are the ideal bedfellows.
I'm surprised that people want A on ISO dial. I guess most people, including Chris, have never used Nikon Df regularly, which is the only other Nikon camera with classic controls in digital era.
Actually, AUTI ISO mode on Nikon is more complex. You can set max ISO, min shutter in settings menu. Min ISO is set by position of dial when switching to AUTO ISO. Say, if you set AUTO with max 1600, min 100. The camera will behave in AUTO mode from 100-1600, unless you manually specify a higher ISO(like 6400) with the dial. You still need the dial. The exact behavior varies as per the mode you may be in (P/A/S/M). Only the full "Auto" mode makes the ISO truly automatic.
An "Auto" mode on dial will imply you cannot use any other position of dial in conjunction with Auto mode within camera. It is a rather smart implementation and Nikon has very good reason to create this workflow as it is more useful than "switch to Auto".
If Max ISO is low, such as the range 100-400, one can still enjoy using ISO dial, even in AUTO mode within M mode(if I understand well).
I expected Chris to highlight this smart design. Can any existing Z fc user(I'll have mine in a few months) pitch in and explain the various ways in which AUTO ISO setting works in conjunction with the dial?
In Fuji(X-T series), even when ISO dial is set to A(Auto), you still need to go into setting to specify Auto 1/2/3. Unlike Fuji, AUTO ISO mode allows the entire range of shutter speeds(1/4000-30) for Min Shutter(useful when you don't want blurry photos in less than optimal light).
I didn't even think of that but you're right, you would have to spin the dial down to the "Auto" setting anyway, might as well just set it to 100 and let the dial act as a lower limit to the configured auto range. You can have much more nuanced control over your ISO with the current way Nikon has setup.
I shoot a lot during sunrises where I have the Nikon configured with an upper ISO limit where I don't like how noisey it gets (usually 3200 or 6400) and as the sun rises I shoot at lower and lower ISO. This way you just leave it on auto with the 3200 upper limit, and the dial at 3200 or 1600, and as the light increases slowly lower the bottom limit so the camera stays in the range I want.
Actually, the ISO dial is the most effective way to rapidly change shutter speed in A mode. As you say, the min and max ISO are set in the menu. If the camera chooses a slow shutter speed to keep ISO low, you can modify the speed by simply turning the dial to a higher ISO value. I use that often when I want to stop movement. In M mode the dial is ineffective if the camera is set to Auto ISO. In S mode it will change the aperture, although this is of limited use in my view.
I agree that DX lens support is lacking, but at least mentioning the 50 macro, 40/2 and 28/2.8 in addition to the three they show on screen couldn't hurt. They are quite suitable for DX size-wise.
It's true. Whether the lens of APSC or FF crop is neither here nor there, the 28/2.8 SE in particular is the ideal standard lens for the Zfc: small, light, and inexpensive.
That said, if a wide selection of compact, fast prime lenses is your thing, then Fuji has more to offer than Nikon Z, crop or no crop.
I'll skip it... It seems to me that one pays a premium for nothing other than some retro aesthetics and that overall, in terms of performance/price ration this camera really isn't that great... even if I would agree that it does look pretty cool. I think that what Fuji has done is far more attractive in that the nice retro aesthetics is consistent in their whole line and not offered as a premium feature.
It's also the most compact Z-mount camera Nikon has put out. Size matters. Personally I'd like one that I could use as a street shooter camera and as a backup camera at the same time. Take the lens off and it will fit in real tight places in a camera bag without one of those fat handgrips like the rest of the Z cameras.
I find auto ISO easy to use on the Z fc but I understand it can be a problem for shooters who use ISO 400 as base ISO on a sunny summer day.
Also I have other small usable Z lenses that the reviewers forgot to mention such as Z 28mm/2.8 and Z 40 mm/ 2.0. The other Z lenses work quite nicely too ;)
The camera seems to be well built and looks nice, but then it has major faults like the missing A position on the ISO dial. Not to speak of its kit lens being a cheap plastic imitation of those unbreakable Ai lenses, which aren't what they used to be, either, when adapted to an APS-C camera, with a huge, unwieldy adapter to boot, except if you'd use a Speed Booster which actually exists, but of course not from Nikon. Or the fact that still not even the good old AF and AF-D lenses can be used with AF on any Z-mount camera, even though some of them could be a good match for their beautiful compact design.
Actually, the Auto ISO feature is very smartly implemented, just read comments above. I have an x-pro3 and often have to go into the menu to change the auto ISO behaviour.
So do I with my Olympus, and is not even very sophisticated and I'm missing things there. Nikon has always had smarter Auto-ISO implementations at least in their more advanced cameras.
Now that I've read up on it, it seems that, in M, Auto ISO plus ISO dial are working as I would expect, except for me having to go into the menu to even activate Auto ISO. I can set and forget the highest ISO in the menu, and in shooting the ISO dial setting is irrelevant.
In P, A, S, though, I need to remember to set the dial to ISO 100 if I don't want the current setting to act as default or lowest ISO, something which just wouldn't make sense to me. And I often do increase ISO manually even in good light because I often use longer lenses...
Sometimes the images are a reflection of the joy the photographer experiences using the camera. Chris has said as much about the Z fc on many occasions. I certainly experienced this effect when switching from Canon DSLR to Fujifilm.
Now that we know both Chris and Jordan continue to function at -24C, perhaps a few more cameras could be given their day in the scenic freezer? For most of us a chance to photograph icebergs or polar bears is a once in a lifetime trip and it would be good to know if any cameras and lenses would actually fail the freezer test. You guys could start the research by inviting a few Canadian photographers for a beer……
A small list of DX(or affordable FX) lenses for Z mount: (all lenses under $1000, with many under $500) 28mm f2.8 40mm f2 50mm f2.8 macro 12-28 (expected) 24mm (expected) 26mm pancake (expected) 16-50 kit 50-250 kit 18-140 kit Viltrox 23/33/56/13(maybe) Viltrox(24/35/50/85) TTArtisan 32mm f2.8 Nikon Z 35/50 That's 20 lenses. Technically, most primes in Z mount lie under $1000 in US, but they look ridiculous on Z bodies. Similarly, FTZ adapted lenses look ridiculous, except for long primes.
Z fc is a unique body. Most Z DX bodies will look like Z 50. So ergonomics with larger lenses is fine. In fact, some equivalent lenses are cheaper than Fuji equivalents, with better optics and no focus breathing.
For Z fc, 28mm f2.8, 50mm f2.8 macro and 12-28mm wide, looks like a very good combo when outdoors. Hopefully, Nikon will launch more DX primes by year end.
Nikon never made a DX format wide-angle prime for their DX format DSLRs, and it kept me away from that system for years. Given that evidence, I very much doubt they'll start making DX format Z mount wide-angles. I suspect they view DX as a teaser for FX and don't want DX users to get too comfortable with their choice.
As for this camera, for a couple of hundred more you're in Z5 territory, so there's even less reason for it.
Like Jordan pointed out; the Zfc is more video oriented and better video performance than the Z5. Which seems weird because it's retro styled (and the previous Df had no video), but it performs well with video and many of the people who want to do hybrid shooting would probably want to go with the Zfc. It's just a happy coincidence that the "young hipsters that like retro"* will also be more likely to be hybrid shooters making their social media content.
*It's totally unfair to make this strawman about young hipster shooters, not because they're wrong but because old curmudgeons like me also like having a quality hybrid, and it should be seen as a benefit.
The Viltrox 33mm 1.4/f with AF is awesome. Very solid build and ring quality. All metal. Nice DoF. Low price. People should be reviewing more by this company. Also, note that they reverse engineered for other mounts too.
"but they look ridiculous on Z bodies" - I meant DX Z bodies, in particular Z fc.
I hope Voigtlander releases a few of their compact mirrorless primes, until now in FE mount, for Z mount. And I hope a FF Zfc is released at some point. (I just wonder if it is possible to fit a CFEx slot in such a compact body)
Nikon needs a full frame version of this camera, and they need more DX lenses. Launching a second DX body makes obvious sense in view of their run down of DX DSLR production. But it's very strange indeed for them to have launched a DX body paired with two FX lenses when they have a pretty good FX lens line already and hardly any DX. As it is, with a DSLR setup and no full-frame articulating display option in Nikon in ML or DSLR and a serious shortage of crop-sensor lenses, if I wish to vlog, I probably have to go to a different platform. Or use my phone. Thus the phone wins by default and Nikon loses another sale.
Nikon is releasing lenses as fast as they can and there are new DX lenses on the roadmap. If you think an iPhone is better than the Z fc then that pretty much sums up either your knowledge or your intent.
Except your phone, if it's like mine, only films in super-wide angle making anything in the near-field grotesquely distorted. That's why my iPhone would be horrible for v-logging.
The Nikon Z fc comes with a 16-50 zoom lens so I can choose the focal length, making it infinitely better than my phone.
Although I like the fact that other brands are getting in on the fun, I have to admit that some of the B-roll showing closeups of the dials gave me a very strong sense of deja-vu of my Fujifilm bodies. Not just the retro dials but also the XC and front and rear dial placement are very "re-imagined".
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nikon_F Nikon F in 1963 (was flagship model by then like Z9 now): Body $233 and 50mm F2 was $90 extra and 50mm f1.4 was $155 extra. That is all together less than $2000 2022 dollars. Compare to the $5500 Z9, but the Z9 has MUCH more to offer...
Nikon should charge US$10,000 for the Z9. Right now people are selling Z9 on eBay for this price, instead of letting some NPS sell this camera and make a profit, Nikon should've tried to earn that themselves.
The low price is one of the things making the camera such a hot product. Everyone and their mother is pre-ordering one. Priced at $10K and you might be able to walk in a store and pick one up.
Monty is completely right, I don't know how many cropped DSLRs Nikon makes but as they phase that out, surely they will add at least 1 or 2 more cropped cameras to the mirrorless lineup.
I wouldn't be surprised if they make a full-frame retro-looking Z camera. What's nice, with the crop sensor they are able to keep the price down and use less expensive lenses. Should give it a larger potential customer base.
Personally I want a FF version because us FF lens owners are jealous the DX guys got this cool little camera. Also I have an old FE that I like to take out from time to time for fun and personal photo practice. But I'd like to do the exact same thing without having to worry about using a whole roll of film and developing it when I get home.
"Because all vintage Pre-AI, AI, and AI-s lenses are full frame?" I think people are over thinking this release. It seems likely that Nikon marketed the Zfc as a casual fun camera with style. They released this to that target audience. In my opinion, the next market up is going to buy a Z5 and the majority likely will not be using outdated film lenses on any of these new bodies. those people are more worried about performance and the better Z lenses.
The Df was very expensive (US$2750), has lower megapixels than the cheaper D610, and has inferior AF compared to D800 of the same price. If Nikon were to make a Zf with Z7II prices, Z5 AF, and even lower resolution, then yes, you're right, it won't sell. But I doubt Nikon would do that. I am expecting a Z6II with Zfc appearances and a roughly 10% price hike over the Z6II.
Found the article: "When the dust settled and people realized that the Df is basically a DSLR with a retro design, D4 sensor and D600 guts that came with a $2750 price tag at the time when Nikon was pushing D800 sales in the same price range, all the prior feedback and excitement turned into a bunch of hate. And very rapidly." - Nikon Df Review - Photography Life
"Was the Df a hot seller? I seem to recall it wasn't." Because it was grossly overpriced compared to other FX DSLRs. And the milked it forever with no updates, so it fell behind in resolution and other specs.
The Z fc pricing isn't so out of line. Maybe lesson learned?
This is not the Df. This is proving that Nikon learned its lesson from the Df. Even a FF Zfc, with absolutely nothing changed except replacing the sensor with the sensor from the Z5, would still be a better FF retro camera than the Df was.
The Df was designed to work with vintage lenses. A Z mount camera can't without an adapter, and the adapter that exists doesn't do much beyond physically hold them in place.
At this point, there's little-to-no prospect of another camera to use vintage Nikon lenses. If you want to use them, invest in a film body or a Df.
Edit: I use a Panasonic S5 with Nikon-mount cinema lenses. It works really well, although it's nothing resembling a retro experience.
"The Df was designed to work with vintage lenses." That is another reason to release a mirrorless Df / fullframe Zfc. Vintage lenses work better on MILFs (mirrorless fullframe cameras) than on vintage bodies, at least they have better focus assist and a brighter EVF image. And to get the vintage FOV, the body should be Fullframe.
Most likely because the FD was never a great success.
However the FD was never a great succes, because it looked as if it was made by Frankenstein. Ugly in many ways whereas this Z fc has the right looks and size for a retro camera.
I too think that Nikon could sell more of these cameras if it would have been Full Frame. I also think it might inspire many Fujifilm users to move away it this camera would be based upon the Z6II and if Nikon would be willing to also make a lens-lineup that has this look. You can already custom setup the ring on the lens as if it were an aperture ring.
As the year comes to a close, we're looking back at the cameras that have clawed their way to the top of their respective categories (and our buying guides). These aren't the only cameras worth buying, but when you start here, you really can't go wrong.
Around $1000 is increasingly becoming the entry point for modern interchangeable lens cameras. We look at what you can get for your money, and which we think is best.
2021 was a busy year at DPReview TV, with over 100 new episodes added to our YouTube channel! In this retrospective, Chris and Jordan look back at some of their most memorable moments from the past year.
We've shot our standard studio test scene with Nikon's latest APS-C offering, the Z fc. Take a look at how it performs in both JPEG and Raw modes under daylight and tungsten-balanced lighting.
We recently got our hands on a production Nikon Z fc and we wasted no time taking it out and about in the Seattle area. As expected, the results are pretty good - see for yourself in our sample gallery.
The Sony a7CR is a high-resolution addition to the company's compact full-frame a7C series. So what did we make of it and where does it leave the a7 IV that it sits just above?
Lomography's LomoChrome '92 is designed to mimic the look of classic drugstore film that used to fill family photo albums. As we discovered, to shoot with it is to embrace the unexpected, from strange color shifts to odd textures and oversized grain.
The LowePro PhotoSport Outdoor is a camera pack for photographers who also need a well-designed daypack for hiking and other outdoor use. If that sounds like you, the PhotoSport Outdoor may be a great choice, but as with any hybrid product, there are a few tradeoffs.
The Sony a7C II refreshes the compact full-frame with a 33MP sensor, the addition of a front control dial, a dedicated 'AI' processor, 10-bit 4K/60p video and more. It's a definite improvement, but it helps if you value its compact form.
Why is the Peak Design Everyday Backpack so widely used? A snazzy design? Exceptional utility? A combination of both? After testing one, it's clear why this bag deserves every accolade it's received.
If you want a compact camera that produces great quality photos without the hassle of changing lenses, there are plenty of choices available for every budget. Read on to find out which portable enthusiast compacts are our favorites.
What's the best camera for travel? Good travel cameras should be small, versatile, and offer good image quality. In this buying guide we've rounded-up several great cameras for travel and recommended the best.
What’s the best camera for around $2000? This price point gives you access to some of the most all-round capable cameras available. Excellent image quality, powerful autofocus and great looking video are the least you can expect. We've picked the models that really stand out.
Above $2500 cameras tend to become increasingly specialized, making it difficult to select a 'best' option. We case our eye over the options costing more than $2500 but less than $4000, to find the best all-rounder.
As the year comes to a close, we're looking back at the cameras that have clawed their way to the top of their respective categories (and our buying guides). These aren't the only cameras worth buying, but when you start here, you really can't go wrong.
Plenty of amazing cameras, lenses, accessories and other products came through our doors in 2023. After careful consideration, healthy debate, and a few heated arguments, we're proud to announce the winners of the 2023 DPReview Awards!
The Sony a7CR is a high-resolution addition to the company's compact full-frame a7C series. So what did we make of it and where does it leave the a7 IV that it sits just above?
Lomography's LomoChrome '92 is designed to mimic the look of classic drugstore film that used to fill family photo albums. As we discovered, to shoot with it is to embrace the unexpected, from strange color shifts to odd textures and oversized grain.
Sony's gridline update adds up to four customizable grids to which users can add color codes and apply transparency masks. It also raises questions about the future of cameras and what it means for feature updates.
At last, people who don’t want to pay a premium for Apple’s Pro models can capture high-resolution 24MP and 48MP photos using the iPhone 15 and iPhone 15 Plus. Is the lack of a dedicated telephoto lens or the ability to capture Raw images worth the savings for photographers?
Kodak's Super 8 Camera is a hybrid of old and new: it shoots movies using Super 8 motion picture film but incorporates digital elements like a flip-out LCD screen and audio capture. Eight years after we first saw the camera at CES 2016, Kodak is finally bringing it to market.
In this supplement to his recently completed 10-part series on landscape photography, photographer Erez Marom explores how the compositional skills developed for capturing landscapes can be extended to other areas of photography.
If you want a compact camera that produces great quality photos without the hassle of changing lenses, there are plenty of choices available for every budget. Read on to find out which portable enthusiast compacts are our favorites.
Sony, the Associated Press and 'Photo Mechanic' maker Camera Bits have run a month-long field-test to evaluate capture authentication and a subsequent workflow.
A color-accurate monitor is an essential piece of the digital creator's toolkit. In this guide, we'll go over everything you need to know about how color calibration actually works so you can understand the process and improve your workflow.
What's the best camera for travel? Good travel cameras should be small, versatile, and offer good image quality. In this buying guide we've rounded-up several great cameras for travel and recommended the best.
It's that time of year again: When people get up way too early to rush out to big box stores and climb over each other to buy $99 TVs. We've saved you the trip, highlighting the best photo-related deals that can be ordered from the comfort of your own home.
The LowePro PhotoSport Outdoor is a camera pack for photographers who also need a well-designed daypack for hiking and other outdoor use. If that sounds like you, the PhotoSport Outdoor may be a great choice, but as with any hybrid product, there are a few tradeoffs.
Sigma's latest 70-200mm F2.8 offering promises to blend solid build, reasonably light weight and impressive image quality into a relatively affordable package. See how it stacks up in our initial impressions.
The Sony a9 III is heralded as a revolutionary camera, but is all the hype warranted? DPReview's Richard Butler and Dale Baskin break down what's actually new and worth paying attention to.
What’s the best camera for around $2000? This price point gives you access to some of the most all-round capable cameras available. Excellent image quality, powerful autofocus and great looking video are the least you can expect. We've picked the models that really stand out.
DJI's Air 3 and Mini 4 Pro are two of the most popular drones on the market, but there are important differences between the two. In this article, we'll help figure out which of these two popular drones is right for you.
The Sony a7C II refreshes the compact full-frame with a 33MP sensor, the addition of a front control dial, a dedicated 'AI' processor, 10-bit 4K/60p video and more. It's a definite improvement, but it helps if you value its compact form.
Above $2500 cameras tend to become increasingly specialized, making it difficult to select a 'best' option. We case our eye over the options costing more than $2500 but less than $4000, to find the best all-rounder.
The iPhone 15 Pro allows users to capture 48MP photos in HEIF or JPEG format in addition to Raw files, while new lens coatings claim to cut down lens flare. How do the cameras in Apple's latest flagship look in everyday circumstances? Check out our gallery to find out.
Global shutters, that can read all their pixels at exactly the same moment have been the valued by videographers for some time, but this approach has benefits for photographers, too.
We had an opportunity to shoot a pre-production a9 III camera with global shutter following Sony's announcement this week. This gallery includes images captured with the new 300mm F2.8 GM OSS telephoto lens and some high-speed flash photos.
The Sony a9 III is a ground-breaking full-frame mirrorless camera that brings global shutter to deliver unforeseen high-speed capture, flash sync and capabilities not seen before. We delve a little further into the a9III to find out what makes it tick.
The "Big Four" Fashion Weeks – New York, London, Milan and Paris - have wrapped for 2023 but it's never too early to start planning for next season. If shooting Fashion Week is on your bucket list, read on. We'll tell you what opportunities are available for photographers and provide some tips to get you started.
Comments