Has Nikon fallen asleep

[Ken Miracle]

The demise of Dx is more an issue when it comes to attracting new users to bird photography. just look at the price difference of a D500 + 500pf vs a z8 + 800pf. Neither are / were cheap but the step up is now significant. For wildlife, DX was a more convenient and affordable entry drug to later upgrade from. At the time DX also allowed for faster frame rates (unless you added the grip and pro batteries to the D850) and I expect the equivalent today would be rolling shutter (should be lower on DX than FX for the same pixel density). If one can afford a z8 and 800pf, the point is indeed moot but the hobby has become outrageous and FX only is not helping new users to jump in.

In my DSLR days I recommend the D500 (for less $ a D7200) and Tamron 150-600 G2 or Sigma 150-600 sport to a lot of newcomers that were parts of birding trips or classes I lead and for some that is still a good choice if willing to buy a used D500.

My wife used a Z50 with adapted f mount lenses the Tamron 18-400 until she moved to a Z7II and Z400 f/4.5 since replaced with the Z28-400 that set up is quite light and versatile for her and her bad back and arthritis. Recent price drops on the Z7II have put her set up in reach of more birders.

Shortly after I got into photography the D300s was my first Nikon body coming from a Canon Rebel borrowed from my wife (who has been in photography since 1975). Then the D500 came out and over time we bought three two for me and one for my wife I used one with a battery grip, balanced well with my longer and heavier lenses, and one without a grip with the Tamron 18-400 that I took out chasing chukars and following my gun hunting and falconry friends around in the steep and rugged mountains and canyons in Idaho and Oregon.

I did add the grip to my D850 and the adapter door for the EN-El 18 batteries used in my D4s and later D6. For me the grip was a no brainer since I already had batteries and they became interchangeable with my other body. Since I had made the investment in D850 the grip and big battery = higher frame rates was the beginning of the end for my D500. My birding lenses back then were Tamron 150-600 G2 a Sigma 150-600 sport, a Tamron 18-400 (way better than it should have been) and a Nikon 200-500 nice lens but my copy was a lemon and went back and forth to Nikon 3 times before it go fixed and sold because it made me nervous. At the end of my DSLR the 500 pf was added and a then got a great buy from Nikon USA on a refurbished 600 mm f/4E to go along with my D6. Yup it got spendy even back in the DSLR days.

Now my primary birding rigs are 2 Z9's, a Z6III and Z800 and 600 pf and z mount Tamron 150-500. So no not cheap but funded by selling off all my DSLR and f mount glass by 6-22 before the used prices started dropping like a rock.

 

[Brian L]

I agree with you on “Z500” for the mirrorless lineup; and also some accompanying DX compact fast lenses in the 12 - 80mm range for travel and walks. Fuji is rocking this segment - Nikon not so much.

 

[JAJohnson]

The pdf's mention developing more lens production facilities - including lenses other than for cameras.
Whether this results in more lenses as a percentage being produced in Japan rather than overseas is for the future.

Regarding Nikon’s lens production in Japan, for the foreseeable future I think that ship has sailed. Nikon’s facilities in Thailand have ramped up production well. I believe the more immediate question is in regard to Nikon’s capacity in China.

 

[Andy A.]

dont really miss DX anymore - Z9/8 gives enough cropping reserves.
the Z glass offering is very,very good as well meanwhile but I do miss:
a lightweight Z 300/2.8 (just like Sony's), 200mm/f2 Plena & a longer macro beyond 105mm e.g. 180/2.8 Macro

My F mount 300PF works great on the Z9! But a Z variant would be welcome for sure.

 

[FB101]

In my DSLR days I recommend the D500 (for less $ a D7200) and Tamron 150-600 G2 or Sigma 150-600 sport to a lot of newcomers that were parts of birding trips or classes I lead and for some that is still a good choice if willing to buy a used D500.

My wife used a Z50 with adapted f mount lenses the Tamron 18-400 until she moved to a Z7II and Z400 f/4.5 since replaced with the Z28-400 that set up is quite light and versatile for her and her bad back and arthritis. Recent price drops on the Z7II have put her set up in reach of more birders.

Shortly after I got into photography the D300s was my first Nikon body coming from a Canon Rebel borrowed from my wife (who has been in photography since 1975). Then the D500 came out and over time we bought three two for me and one for my wife I used one with a battery grip, balanced well with my longer and heavier lenses, and one without a grip with the Tamron 18-400 that I took out chasing chukars and following my gun hunting and falconry friends around in the steep and rugged mountains and canyons in Idaho and Oregon.

I did add the grip to my D850 and the adapter door for the EN-El 18 batteries used in my D4s and later D6. For me the grip was a no brainer since I already had batteries and they became interchangeable with my other body. Since I had made the investment in D850 the grip and big battery = higher frame rates was the beginning of the end for my D500. My birding lenses back then were Tamron 150-600 G2 a Sigma 150-600 sport, a Tamron 18-400 (way better than it should have been) and a Nikon 200-500 nice lens but my copy was a lemon and went back and forth to Nikon 3 times before it go fixed and sold because it made me nervous. At the end of my DSLR the 500 pf was added and a then got a great buy from Nikon USA on a refurbished 600 mm f/4E to go along with my D6. Yup it got spendy even back in the DSLR days.

Now my primary birding rigs are 2 Z9's, a Z6III and Z800 and 600 pf and z mount Tamron 150-500. So no not cheap but funded by selling off all my DSLR and f mount glass by 6-22 before the used prices started dropping like a rock.

Very similar evolution to mine (except I jumped to Sony A1 instead of waiting for z9) from Dx and 3rd party zoom to D500 to D850 with primes.
This is what I miss today when I look at all the brands - there isn’t that entry point anymore that gives ‘enough’ of the big boys performance at a fraction of the price. The D300s and D500 used to play that role, canon also had an option or two as well (not as complete as the d500 which was a true unicorn); now, you need to jump to OM system to get that value proposition.

And maybe that’s where we are headed (or have arrived already), more specialized brands that are not trying to be the photography company for every use, but that fill a number of chosen niches. In a much smaller market that’s probably wiser.
If that is indeed the destination then I’m least worried about Nikon, they clearly made wildlife photography a top priority, but i am not sure where it will leave our niche with Sony and canon. Probably addressed as a spill-over from professional sport photography, but then we will have to deal with systems priced accordingly. Which would make the lack of attractive DX solutions even more impactful.

 

[Bubbahotep]

I think one thing Nikon can try is to change the form factor on their bodies for a new line of entry level cameras so that they’re like smart phones. Younger people like portrait format more than landscape. This makes the transition from cellphones to cameras easier.

 

[Tom Reynolds]

FB101
I agree. From Nikon's POV there is no OM System's OM-1/100-400 equivalent camera in Nikon's lineup to introduce new and budget conscience wildlife shooters to the Nikon line.
-Tom

 

[Mal Paso]

Silicon is the second most common element in the earth's crust. Processing has come a long way from the days we would use the whole round disk to make solar panels. The cost to make a new DX sensor will not be significantly less than a FX sensor and the Balance of System will be the same. Once DX moves beyond the current sensors any cost savings evaporates.

 

[Tom Reynolds]

MAL-

What you say is true but the crop of the sensos extends the effective reach of the rig meaning a smaller, lighter lens. In my view, for most casual bird photographers 800mm effective reach is needed. Even with Nikon's pf primes, crop sensor rigs come in smaller, lighter and cheaper.

I think the discussion here is not about what a professional or semiprofessional bird photographer should use to get the best photographs. Frankly the Z-8/600pf is hard to beat for size, weight and cost.

The presented Nikon problem is that an OM Systems OM-1 with a 100-400 sigma-based lens can be had for about $3K, weighs in below 4 pounds, and is an excellent performer for birds. The argument is that Nikon needs an equivalent offering to introduce new casual bird photographers to the Nikon line. The D-500/500pf did that.

 

[Ken Miracle]

Very similar evolution to mine (except I jumped to Sony A1 instead of waiting for z9) from Dx and 3rd party zoom to D500 to D850 with primes.
This is what I miss today when I look at all the brands - there isn’t that entry point anymore that gives ‘enough’ of the big boys performance at a fraction of the price. The D300s and D500 used to play that role, canon also had an option or two as well (not as complete as the d500 which was a true unicorn); now, you need to jump to OM system to get that value proposition.

And maybe that’s where we are headed (or have arrived already), more specialized brands that are not trying to be the photography company for every use, but that fill a number of chosen niches. In a much smaller market that’s probably wiser.
If that is indeed the destination then I’m least worried about Nikon, they clearly made wildlife photography a top priority, but i am not sure where it will leave our niche with Sony and canon. Probably addressed as a spill-over from professional sport photography, but then we will have to deal with systems priced accordingly. Which would make the lack of attractive DX solutions even more impactful.

My first foray to mirrorless was short and sweet but served the purpose very well. Fuji X-E2 and a couple of lenses 18-55 and 55-200 for 2 trips. In the footsteps of Paul to Greece, Turkey and Italy and then to the Holy Land Israel and Jordan in 2015. They even got a few BIF shots but that was not their forte. I sold them off after the trips and in 2016 was using D4S and D500 in Africa. When the Sony A1 came out I was using D850 and D6 and my primary teacher and camera supplier was not a fan of mirrorless yet. At the time he was the only full line Nikon and Canon dealer in Idaho and now also West Yellowstone. He became a Sony dealer because of the demand for the A1 but kept with his D500's and D850 for his pro work until the Z9 came along. Now he and Sony are splitting the sheets, I have not seen him in person to find out why, and he is staying with Nikon and Canon.

 

[Ken Miracle]

I think one thing Nikon can try is to change the form factor on their bodies so that they’re like smart phones. Younger people like portrait format more than landscape.

Instagram, tik tox etc.. = portrait format. Apple in their phone classes teach people how to use their phone cameras in landscape format and now the newest iphone adds feature the new camera controls on the side of the body being used in landscape format

 

[macwalter]

The only way a DX body makes sense to me is if it has a Higher pixel count say at least 26mp so you would see a significant increase in reach.

 

[Parfumeur]

A 105mm using the Plena optics formula. 135 mimic the ZEISS 135mm f/2 Apo Sonnar T*, and great for keeping proportion of horse (conformation) for the equestrian photographer - Thank you Nikon, but a 105 is more human oriented for the fashion, glamour and portrait photographer.

 

[tomcat]

The company is fine. I just don’t like the fact that my friend is probably going to buy a Canon APS-C mirrorless because Nikon’s offerings in DX are truly sub par in terms of autofocus and frame rate.

I have the Z fc body and a couple of DX lenses. AF for me is great and I use it for daytime sports, soccer and baseball. Image quality is fantastic and the AF-C + dynamic area AF are on par with the Z6 series. It is true though that it is no D500 and I do miss the higher frame rate captures

 

[tomcat]

The only way a DX body makes sense to me is if it has a Higher pixel count say at least 26mp so you would see a significant increase in reach.

I have a Z fc and the pixel count of 24 is great

 

[beano]

Silicon is the second most common element in the earth's crust. Processing has come a long way from the days we would use the whole round disk to make solar panels. The cost to make a new DX sensor will not be significantly less than a FX sensor and the Balance of System will be the same. Once DX moves beyond the current sensors any cost savings evaporates.

For consumers though, the cost-saving comes in the glass. Nikon will probably roll out a new series of dx lenses, and capture the available market, as opposed to playing only non the high-end.

Time will tell, but there is a gap at present.

 

[Tom Reynolds]

The Fuji X2-HS is a 26mp APS-C camera. Stacked BSI. The problem is the 150-600 zoom is 3.53# excluding hood and tripod collar. The Fuji 500 f/ 5.6 is 3#.

The Canon R-7 is a 32mp 1.6 crop. Slow non stacked sensor. The 100-500 zoom is 3#

The OM System OM-1 is a 20mp m4/3 2x crop, Stacked BSI. The 100-400 f/6.3 is 2.4 pounds.

 

[fcotterill]

Consider a high performance, relatively gracile Z90 MILC with PreCapture RAW, up to 30fps RAW and the full Z9 AF system, plus Z6 III EVF. Sensor resolution=24mp perhaps higher. Weight = 600-700g

It should be priced around US$2000, considering RRP of the Fuji flagship with its stacked APC sensor etc

Pair your Z90 with a 28-400 or 180-600 priced around $1800, which frame 24mp Pixels/Duck at 3.4o and 2.6o equivalent FoV to a 600mm or 800mm, respectively. A Z90 with the 400 f4.5S or 600 PF will be the ultimate light weight birding units: total weight < 2kg. A high performance DX Z MILC can only strengthen the unique market strengths of Nikon's ergonomic guild of light F and Z telephotos.

Alternatively, with a Z90 one can build a light weight AFS F-mount system with one or more F-mount pedigree telephotos) - notably 300 PF, 70-300 AFP DX, 500 PF - at extremely competitive Used prices. Obviously, pairing a TC14 with the 300 PF and 500 PF delivers even more Pixels per Duck [EDITED]

 

[beano]

Consider a high performance, relatively gracile Z90 MILC with PreCapture RAW, up to 30fps RAW and the full Z9 AF system, plus Z6 III EVF. Sensor resolution=24mp perhaps higher.

It should be priced around US$2000, considering RRP of the Fuji flagship with its stacked APC sensor etc

Pair your Z90 with a 28-400 or 180-600 priced around $1800, which frame 24mp Pixels/Duck at 3.4o and 2.6o equivalent FoV to a 600mm or 800mm, respectively.

Alternatively, build a light weight AFS F-mount system with one or more F-mount pedigree telephotos)... notably 300 PF, 70-300 AFP DX, 500 PF - at extremely competitive Used prices. Obviously, pairing a TC14 with the 300 PF and 500 PF delivers even more Pixels per Duck

Yes, that would be a monster dx setup.