Official Nikon Z9 Launch, Info, and Discussion Thread

[DaveR]

It is clear we are experiencing the Five Stages of Dream Camera Ownership:

1. Euphoria: Buy Dream Camera.

2. Anger: Hears competitor, long thought dead, has new camera with superior capabilities. Possibly calls Dreamer decisions made in haste into question...Unacceptable and hence impossible!

3. Denial: Dream Camera owner shoots down competitor's new, but still future, entry. Experience with new camera is selective and limited, and its advocates are quickly and easily dismissed as shills or incompetents.

4. Bargaining: As the fog of marketing dissipates, many features of the upstart appear competitive or arguably superior. Dreamers grudgingly start to reassess their value system and strive to position the newcomer as, just maybe, a worthy, but belated effort on the part of a struggling competitor with only a few, but nevertheless fatal, flaws. Best wishes are extended.

5. Acceptance: Competitor's camera emerges into the wild. Lots of photogs have them. The superior performance is unquestionable. Dream Camera owner, refreshed by a new sense of awareness, pivots to the next new shiny toy...The B-Next or the A-Infinity. As before, the more fog the better.

And that's what dreams are made of.

Excellent post but you missed out ....

6. Delusion. Dream camera owner spends considerable time arranging new dream camera outfit on a table and posts a picture of it. Then starts a thread on how interesting the serial numbers are.

 

[sid_19911991]

Ricci recently did a video discussing ISO being noticeably better on the Z9 vs Z7ii.

I did see that video by Ricci. I like his reviews & he does not seem to be biased despite being a Nikon employee. But I do not trust his expertise when it comes to noise & dynamic range performance.

Even in the interviews to Nikon higher-ups about Z9's ISO & dynamic range performance being better than Z7, they would sort of circumvent the question by saying it is better than Z7 as there is no rolling shutter etc.

We obviously can't conclude anything without proper testing by Steve or one of the pros, but if I have to speculate based on YouTube reviews so far, I would say Z9's chroma noise & colour recovery performance will be worse than D850 & Z7 ii & probably a stop worse than that of Sony A1.

 

[thelordofthelight]

Nikon is really good at tuning/ extracting the best out of any sensor. So I'm confident Nikon's 1st attempt at stacked sensor will be quite different from Sony's. I downloaded some of the RAW files shared by Matt Granger where he shot birds at high ISOs (4000-5000 range). When I looked at those raw files in NX studio, those look good to my eyes ( in fact slightly better noise pattern compared to D850). That's good enough for my needs but I'm sure we will see more technical stuff on DR/ISO from more qualified folks like at photonstophotos etc.
I remember Ricci was asked this exact qn. on stacked sensors being inferior to normal BSI sensors when it comes to DR/ISO and his answer was like "You are yet to see a NIKON stacked sensor " . We'll know in a couple of weeks.

I did see that video by Ricci. I like his reviews & he does not seem to be biased despite being a Nikon employee. But I do not trust his expertise when it comes to noise & dynamic range performance.

Even in the interviews to Nikon higher-ups about Z9's ISO & dynamic range performance being better than Z7, they would sort of circumvent the question by saying it is better than Z7 as there is no rolling shutter etc.

We obviously can't conclude anything without proper testing by Steve or one of the pros, but if I have to speculate based on YouTube reviews so far, I would say Z9's chroma noise & colour recovery performance will be worse than D850 & Z7 ii & probably a stop worse than that of Sony A1.

True, but it is Nikon's first stacked sensor. Sony's A9 i's stacked sensor is not great in terms of dynamic range. Stacked sensors have a reputation to be not as good for image quality.

Matt Granger's video worries me. I know the settings weren't perfect, but the chroma noise on the face of the subject was worrying.

 

[O]

Nikon is really good at tuning/ extracting the best out of any sensor. So I'm confident Nikon's 1st attempt at stacked sensor will be quite different from Sony's. I downloaded some of the RAW files shared by Matt Granger where he shot birds at high ISOs (4000-5000 range). When I looked at those raw files in NX studio, those look good to my eyes ( in fact slightly better noise pattern compared to D850). That's good enough for my needs but I'm sure we will see more technical stuff on DR/ISO from more qualified folks like at photonstophotos etc.
I remember Ricci was asked this exact qn. on stacked sensors being inferior to normal BSI sensors when it comes to DR/ISO and his answer was like "You are yet to see a NIKON stacked sensor " . We'll know in a couple of weeks.

Was asked for full payment today for the Z9 as i have been told my order will be here very soon and i am top of the list with the first batch, the Z II adapter will follow later along with the spare battery......i am being given a loan of the older Adapter till then........

As to the Issues of dynamic range.............i asked Thom Hogan will the dynamic range be at least the same as the D850 and Z7 II, he said he believes so but needs to spend time with full testing.......

I personally think that if you shoot at 10 to 20 fps and Not 30 fps or 120 fps things may possibly be different...........remember to get speed using high iso you have to throw out some dynamic range.............Only an assumption.

Nikon has the best image files in the business.............i would say they would tweak things slightly..........

Ambassadors are there to influence the masses and endorse marketing tactics..........Matt Granger is one i don't necessarily take seriously.........

I was considering buying D6 as i tend to rent one a lot.............but i opted to get the Z9.........i will give the Z9............. 30 days to prove itself in what i do or its on E bay at a discount..........

 

[Wes Peterson]

I was replying to a post by someone else other than you, about the A1 and D6.
I currently own Nikon D7500, D500, D850, 5 Nikon lenses plus an A1 and a single Sony lens. I never owned a D6 but I trust Steve’s judgement and when he reviews the Z9 I’m sure it will be amazing
Go cry about something else

And I was replying to someone other than you until you quoted me and replied. If anyone here is crying its the person who finds it necessary to defend a camera when someone implies that its possible in some circumstances its not the best option. Again, It doesnt look as though you intend on getting a Z9 and are happy with your A1 so what are you doing in this thread?

 

[abc123brian]

There are really only 2-3 people online I can think of that may be able to give a reasonably unbiased comparison between the flagships once the Z9 is available. Those be Steve Perry (A1, R5 and Z9 experience), Steve Mathies (A1 and Z9) and maybe everyone's favorite Mr. Fro who does have experience with all of them.

I'll compare them myself though. I've had A1 since March. I'm #1 after NPS on my dealer list for Z9. I owned the R5 for 6 months. I will be getting a 3 day test drive of R3/600RF from CPS Canada to compare that also.

I rarely find anyone pushing the AF to the extent I push it. People rave about the R5 AF but I found numerous ways to make it fail miserably compared to not just the A1 but the 2017 A9. I still think the R5 AF is excellent and better than any of the flagship Canon DSLRs I owned but it isn't the best out there.

I'll be sure to report my findings and I'll be sure to keep it all in a dedicated thread so I don't have to hear the complaints from the people who don't like to read about other gear.

I‘m with you on the two Steves, but with Fro I can‘t fully trust. I think most of the information in his videos is good, but he too often makes a mistake. His subject matter is also quite different than mine so while it gives me an idea it doesn’t confirm how it will work for me. I have a feeling subject matter will be the determining factor between the best AF.

I look forward to hearing about your experience with them and what conclusion you come to.

 

[bsinc1962]

It may not be needed for everyone but that’s the direction it’s going. Bsinc can take beautiful ram photos with a dslr but who knows maybe he will switch gears down the road for any number of reasons.

sorry for the rambling post but trying to explain where I am coming from.

I've been shooting a pair of Z bodies since the spring when I sold my last D5. Then again Rams aren't the toughest things to shoot once you find them.

Carry on folks.

 

[sid_19911991]

Nikon is really good at tuning/ extracting the best out of any sensor. So I'm confident Nikon's 1st attempt at stacked sensor will be quite different from Sony's. I downloaded some of the RAW files shared by Matt Granger where he shot birds at high ISOs (4000-5000 range). When I looked at those raw files in NX studio, those look good to my eyes ( in fact slightly better noise pattern compared to D850). That's good enough for my needs but I'm sure we will see more technical stuff on DR/ISO from more qualified folks like at photonstophotos etc.
I remember Ricci was asked this exact qn. on stacked sensors being inferior to normal BSI sensors when it comes to DR/ISO and his answer was like "You are yet to see a NIKON stacked sensor " . We'll know in a couple of weeks.

Yeah I agree, Nikon have historically done very well with sensor design. Hope that continues with Z9.

I guess Z9 ii will have the same image quality of Z6 ii along with high FPS & high mega pixel.

 

[la551ve3]

Slight correction.....Zed9

Right. I was wondering what he was talking about. Zee9? Is this yet another new camera? Only available in the US. Pity:(

 

[EricBowles]

Was asked for full payment today for the Z9 as i have been told my order will be here very soon and i am top of the list with the first batch, the Z II adapter will follow later along with the spare battery......i am being given a loan of the older Adapter till then........

As to the Issues of dynamic range.............i asked Thom Hogan will the dynamic range be at least the same as the D850 and Z7 II, he said he believes so but needs to spend time with full testing.......

I personally think that if you shoot at 10 to 20 fps and Not 30 fps or 120 fps things may possibly be different...........remember to get speed using high iso you have to throw out some dynamic range.............Only an assumption.

Nikon has the best image files in the business.............i would say they would tweak things slightly..........

Ambassadors are there to influence the masses and endorse marketing tactics..........Matt Granger is one i don't necessarily take seriously.........

I was considering buying D6 as i tend to rent one a lot.............but i opted to get the Z9.........i will give the Z9............. 30 days to prove itself in what i do or its on E bay at a discount..........

Last night Mark Cruz described the sensor and image processing as being quite different from earlier cameras. The image processor applies AI to both lightly sharpen the subject and suppress noise in low detail areas and out of focus backgrounds. It's a new and evolving way to process images as the RAW file is created. This may mean the traditional view of noise and dynamic range changes and may not be directly comparable. Bill Claff should have results shortly after images are produced from production cameras.

My understanding of the new file formats and frame rates is there is no adverse impact on ISO or noise, but the files may be smaller and processed to create JPEG output. Downsizing for the 120 fps rate will decrease noise, but it is a smaller resulting file.

 

[iustin]

Last night Mark Cruz described the sensor and image processing as being quite different from earlier cameras. The image processor applies AI to both lightly sharpen the subject and suppress noise in low detail areas and out of focus backgrounds. It's a new and evolving way to process images as the RAW file is created.

No, not as the "RAW" file is being created. If they do noise reduction and sharpening _on the RAW data_ (as opposed to the JPEG thumbnail embedded in it), then it's no longer a RAW file. Do you have a link to that interview?

I really hope this is not done on the RAW data, but instead only on the JPEG output.

 

[O]

Last night Mark Cruz described the sensor and image processing as being quite different from earlier cameras. The image processor applies AI to both lightly sharpen the subject and suppress noise in low detail areas and out of focus backgrounds. It's a new and evolving way to process images as the RAW file is created. This may mean the traditional view of noise and dynamic range changes and may not be directly comparable. Bill Claff should have results shortly after images are produced from production cameras.

My understanding of the new file formats and frame rates is there is no adverse impact on ISO or noise, but the files may be smaller and processed to create JPEG output. Downsizing for the 120 fps rate will decrease noise, but it is a smaller resulting file.

Thanks mate, interesting, all i want is at maximum 20 fps the files to be no lessor quality in dynamic range and accuracy of colours than the D850 then i will be happy, if not i will bin it.......i am not interested in 30 fps and defiantly not 120 fps..........

As to the banter of the A1 is better or the Z9 is better......you have to take it all as fun and stirring the pot like Nikon or Canon shooters do LOL.
The bottom line ..........Nikon has the best image files and even Sony admits that...........will Nikon hold that title going forward in the Z9 i hope so.
In the focusing game Sony and Canon are out front as we know.......Nikon is clearly 3rd even before the Z9 is delivered but the gap is closed a lot. Nikon is catching up but not quite there yet.

I think think Focus tracking has lifted the bar for keeper rates and Steve is a testimony to that...........
I feel Steve's review will be in line and show that Nikon has come a long way and closed the gap significantly but is just edged out slightly by Sony and Canon still............its only my opinion on what i have seen so far............The Z9 is good but not quite number 1.

 

[John Navitsky]

I really hope this is not done on the RAW data, but instead only on the JPEG output.

I suppose. But RAW files have gain applied, they aren't really RAW RAW. I suspect there is more "secret sauce" involved in current RAW files than we know. So if they did things like applying different amounts of gain depending on if it's in a shadow area vs highlight, would that really be so bad? Personally i have to fight dynamic range limitations all the time, so as long as they don't get too weird, it seems like it could be a good thing.

You can only see EXIF info for this image if you are logged in.

 

[O]

No, not as the "RAW" file is being created. If they do noise reduction and sharpening _on the RAW data_ (as opposed to the JPEG thumbnail embedded in it), then it's no longer a RAW file. Do you have a link to that interview?

I really hope this is not done on the RAW data, but instead only on the JPEG output.

Agree

 

[EricBowles]

No, not as the "RAW" file is being created. If they do noise reduction and sharpening _on the RAW data_ (as opposed to the JPEG thumbnail embedded in it), then it's no longer a RAW file. Do you have a link to that interview?

I really hope this is not done on the RAW data, but instead only on the JPEG output.

It will be posted as a Webinar link in Nikonians in about a week.

The image processing is different on the Z9. I don't believe it's something to worry about as it's applied with a light touch. It is AI based and used scene recognition as well as focus point location and contrast to identify areas that have no detail and locally apply a little noise reduction to those areas at the raw file level.

 

[RockvilleBob]

I suppose. But RAW files have gain applied, they aren't really RAW RAW. I suspect there is more "secret sauce" involved in current RAW files than we know. So if they did things like applying different amounts of gain depending on if it's in a shadow area vs highlight, would that really be so bad? Personally i have to fight dynamic range limitations all the time, so as long as they don't get too weird, it seems like it could be a good thing.

Indeed. Camera Raw gooses the image typically with their Adobe Raw profile. I do not use Lightroom but my guess is that Lightroom does the same, applying the same Adobe Color profile. One way to work with true RAW images is to use a camera linear profile specific for each camera when working with the image in Camera Raw. I have also found this profile permits better shadow detail recovery.

 

[EricBowles]

Thanks mate, interesting, all i want is at maximum 20 fps the files to be no lessor quality in dynamic range and accuracy of colours than the D850 then i will be happy, if not i will bin it.......i am not interested in 30 fps and defiantly not 120 fps..........

As to the banter of the A1 is better or the Z9 is better......you have to take it all as fun and stirring the pot like Nikon or Canon shooters do LOL.
The bottom line ..........Nikon has the best image files and even Sony admits that...........will Nikon hold that title going forward in the Z9 i hope so.
In the focusing game Sony and Canon are out front as we know.......Nikon is clearly 3rd even before the Z9 is delivered but the gap is closed a lot. Nikon is catching up but not quite there yet.

I think think Focus tracking has lifted the bar for keeper rates and Steve is a testimony to that...........
I feel Steve's review will be in line and show that Nikon has come a long way and closed the gap significantly but is just edged out slightly by Sony and Canon still............its only my opinion on what i have seen so far............The Z9 is good but not quite number 1.

I'm hearing that file quality is as good or better than D850. Colors remain a key strength. But the files are different. It seems Nikon has licensed intoPIX TicoRAW technology which they claim will result in a mathematically lossless reduction in file size of one-third with reduced power consumption.

 

[John Navitsky]

I'm hearing that file quality is as good or better than D850. Colors remain a key strength. But the files are different. It seems Nikon has licensed intoPIX TicoRAW technology which they claim will result in a mathematically lossless reduction in file size of one-third with reduced power consumption.

Do you have any references that support that the TicoRAW in the Z9 is mathematically lossless? I would assume this would have to be the HE* setting. I'd love it if this were true, but the info available to date has been very fuzzy.

 

[O]

I'm hearing that file quality is as good or better than D850. Colors remain a key strength. But the files are different. It seems Nikon has licensed intoPIX TicoRAW technology which they claim will result in a mathematically lossless reduction in file size of one-third with reduced power consumption.

Excellent

So the D850 produces a 90 mb or 100mb file so the Z9 will be 60mb??
How big will the Jpeg file be 30mb ?

 

[John Navitsky]

The manual suggests a D850 14-bit compressed RAW is around 52MB. So if you compare apples to apples they're about the same.

 

[iustin]

So if they did things like applying different amounts of gain depending on if it's in a shadow area vs highlight, would that really be so bad? Personally i have to fight dynamic range limitations all the time, so as long as they don't get too weird, it seems like it could be a good thing.

It is bad. Because if various parts of the image already have diferrent gain baked in, my +1 exposure will result in real +2 in some cases, +1 in other, so the noise increase is different across the different parts of the image.

Note we already have Active D-Lighting, and there are many cases where it does a good job. But it does it *on the JPEG output*, not on the RAW file such that I can't reverse it.

I don't believe it's something to worry about as it's applied with a light touch. It is AI based and used scene recognition as well as focus point location and contrast to identify areas that have no detail and locally apply a little noise reduction to those areas at the raw file level.

It's AI based - that's exactly what bothers me. If I wanted automatic, I'd just shoot with the iPhone all day. I want to stay in control of how the various parts of the image are processed, and be able to decide how much noise I want. The camera deciding I don't want noise - how the heck does it know what I want?

If Nikon really did this, I'd be royally pissed off. I always disable all in-camera noise processing and apply it - if and to what extent I want - on the computer, on the areas that I want, on a big screen. There are places where "auto" is good and has its purposes, but not in the RAW output of a - supposedly - professional camera.

Edit: Sorry for the rant, but I would be really, really surprised if Nikon is compensating stacked sensor DR issues by faking image data. Yes, noise reduction is faking raw data. It will be visible clearly in photons2photos graphs, so we'll know as soon as raw files are available.

 

[O]

The manual suggests a D850 14-bit compressed RAW is around 52MB. So if you compare apples to apples they're about the same.

Thankyou

 

[O]

It is bad. Because if various parts of the image already have diferrent gain baked in, my +1 exposure will result in real +2 in some cases, +1 in other, so the noise increase is different across the different parts of the image.

Note we already have Active D-Lighting, and there are many cases where it does a good job. But it does it *on the JPEG output*, not on the RAW file such that I can't reverse it.



It's AI based - that's exactly what bothers me. If I wanted automatic, I'd just shoot with the iPhone all day. I want to stay in control of how the various parts of the image are processed, and be able to decide how much noise I want. The camera deciding I don't want noise - how the heck does it know what I want?

If Nikon really did this, I'd be royally pissed off. I always disable all in-camera noise processing and apply it - if and to what extent I want - on the computer, on the areas that I want, on a big screen. There are places where "auto" is good and has its purposes, but not in the RAW output of a - supposedly - professional camera.

Edit: Sorry for the rant, but I would be really, really surprised if Nikon is compensating stacked sensor DR issues by faking image data. Yes, noise reduction is faking raw data. It will be visible clearly in photons2photos graphs, so we'll know as soon as raw files are available.

What dose this all mean should i be concerned ?

 

[RichF]

The manual suggests a D850 14-bit compressed RAW is around 52MB. So if you compare apples to apples they're about the same.

wonder once people get the cameras in their hands and start using it, which compression will be most common -

Lossless
HE
HE *

and if the choice of compression will depend upon ISO setting (perhaps high ISO will perform best at lossless vs HE)

 

[John Navitsky]

i’ll use the mode that is mathematically lossless and provides the best speed

(i'm _hoping_ that means HE*)