Nikon Faithful

[Ad Astra]

I am keeping faith in Nikon producing the goods with the Z series at some stage and not jumping ship for now.

Thom Hogan has a good viewpoint.

https://www.zsystemuser.com/nikon-z-system-news-and/for-those-with-sony-paranoi.html

Nikon were the last to join the full frame mirrorless manfacturers and it will take time to catch up. I wonder what the other Z lenses hinted at in the above article might be. With CP+ at end Feb maybe we will see some exciting announcements from Nikon.

 

[Steve]

I agree with Thom. I have said it again and again that I think we'll see higher-end bodies from Nikon. As I've mentioned before, Nikon was a bit behind in DSLR development and then they dropped the D3 and blew everyone away. Anytime I personally consider making a full switch to Sony, the D3 pops up in the back of my head and reminds me that Nikon can sometimes really surprise us.

 

[Warren D]

I'm more interested in this pending decision that Nikon may make. Call me nosey.....

 

[Demodave]

For me, I have looked at Sony, and with the introduction of the A1. I contemplated a switch. Then I looked at my images. I looked at my investment. I liked what I saw. I too would like continuous birds eye AF across the entire screen, in fact I could have used it along with 20 fps this past weekend with eagles. But in the end, I like Nikons ergos, Nikon colors, and Nikon lenses. So I'll try and be patient and not chase the newest. I have a Z7II and a Z6II, and along with the D850 and D500, I'm still getting great pics and having fun. And in the end, thats what its all about.

Not to say when the Z8/9 or whatever comes out that I wont put down my deposit.....

I'm in the Nikon camp. PS, the Z' are working great for me!

 

[Roaring 40s]

I was waiting to see Nikon's FF mirrorless and was also down on the waitlist for the 500 PF.

The Z's didn't meet my needs and expectations (Nikon thought near-enough was good enough) and I was treated with contempt over the lens so I invested in Sony. There are lots like me. I kept the D500 as it outperforms the A9 with small perched birds but Sony will fix that sooner or later.

We are now in a very different market for serious cameras. The R&D costs haven't dropped but the number of units has dramatically so amortising those costs is slower. Nikon has some tricky choices to make and there's no guarantee it will make successful ones. As Thom Hogan observed, the JP corporates aren't good at engaging with their customers, and that can easily be fatal in this climate.

 

[Warren D]

For me, I have looked at Sony, and with the introduction of the A1. I contemplated a switch. Then I looked at my images. I looked at my investment. I liked what I saw. I too would like continuous birds eye AF across the entire screen, in fact I could have used it along with 20 fps this past weekend with eagles. But in the end, I like Nikons ergos, Nikon colors, and Nikon lenses. So I'll try and be patient and not chase the newest. I have a Z7II and a Z6II, and along with the D850 and D500, I'm still getting great pics and having fun. And in the end, thats what its all about.

Not to say when the Z8/9 or whatever comes out that I wont put down my deposit.....

I'm in the Nikon camp. PS, the Z' are working great for me!

It seems like many are assuming that what Sony marketing says is true. Until the A1 is released into the wild, we won't know for sure just how well things like bird eye tracking works. Theory and execution often differ.

 

[Roaring 40s]

It seems like many are assuming that what Sony marketing says is true. Until the A1 is released into the wild, we won't know for sure just how well things like bird eye tracking works. Theory and execution often differ.

Yep.
Put an A9 or A7R III on AF Priority rather than Release Priority and watch the fps drop. And that applies to the D500 too.

 

[Strodav]

The big question is will Nikon Photography be given the time they need to catch up given their current financial situation. I also wonder if they have the R&D / Engineering resources they need to compete with the R5 and A1? I'm not giving up, but am not planning on making any major purchases right now.

 

[StefanSC]

The big question is will Nikon Photography be given the time they need to catch up given their current financial situation.

I would say yes. They run a tight ship and they have been on a profit streak until 2019 so it is not hard to believe they can withstand a few years of loses.

Ironically, I would think Sony might be at risk in the long term. The camera division financial results are hidden in some business unit so it is not clear if they are profitable or not (the way Sony has been launching cameras and discounting older generations, I strongly belive they are losing money to gain market share).

I also wonder if they have the R&D / Engineering resources they need to compete with the R5 and A1?

Yes. Nikon R&D and Engineers are very good. Their marketing department, customer interactions and management on the other hand... yikes...

 

[Venkatesh VT]

I am keeping faith in Nikon producing the goods with the Z series at some stage and not jumping ship for now.

Thom Hogan has a good viewpoint.

https://www.zsystemuser.com/nikon-z-system-news-and/for-those-with-sony-paranoi.html

Nikon were the last to join the full frame mirrorless manfacturers and it will take time to catch up. I wonder what the other Z lenses hinted at in the above article might be. With CP+ at end Feb maybe we will see some exciting announcements from Nikon.

I love my 500 PF lens with D 500/ D 850 and plan to.stay with Nikon DSLRs unless Nikon brings out a Z 500 PF version .( Though there seems to be no announcements about it till now)
Nikon had a great opportunity with Z 7ii to show case it's quality.Sadly it did not rise up to the occasion & Sony's A1 has made the divide very deep.Some how Nikon did not seem to have taken the software part of cameras very seriously and is only trying to catch up now
While A1 may be good Sony has nothing to offer in term of PF lens ( Sony's 200 600 is not at par with 500 PF) .
Hence I am hoping for a D 880 which would be at par with A1 and I can make my purchase of it and breathe easy

 

[Warren D]

I found some interesting info buried in one of Thom's mirrorless articles. He says that Nikon has been doing a lot of Research in new sensor designs (basing that on patents filed). For a while, they weren't getting any new patents but recently there has been a big increase in patent activity. Thom suggests they might be looking at a new sensor design based on new technology, maybe putting the processor on the chip or some other not-done-before innovation. Nikon seems far from dead as some seem to suggest. They have always kept their R&D top secret and their engineers have been some of the best in their field. Just because they are silent doesn't mean they aren't working. It sure would go a long way if they would make some of their plans public but they never have and doubtfully never will.

 

[thelordofthelight]

Products like the D3/4/5, D500, D850 were state of the art when they were released, they still are some of the best DSLRs. I am sure Nikon can and will come up with state of the art mirrorless bodies. It is just a matter of when and not IF.

Also, the other side isn't always greener....I liked some of the benefits offered by mirrorless and was too impatient with Nikon's mirrorless offerings back then so I bought a Sony A9 and 200-600 lens to use it alongside my D850. I am not sure if i had a lemon but i was not happy with the results. The blackout free viewfinder was mind blowing and the AF performance looked like some kind of a magic on the EVF but...when i started reviewing my images at 100%, that's when i realized what you see is not what you actually get! The AF squares/ tracking boxes were so accurate and sticky on the EVF whereas the images were not tack sharp...

While photographing moving subjects like BIF, with my Nikon DSLRs, i used to find it so easy to categorize my images in to 1 star (unusable files), 5 stars (perfectly sharp at 100%) and 3 star (very slight blur at 100% but perfectly usable when viewed at the actual size). With my D500/D850, i always had about 70% of my images at 5 stars whereas with the Sony A9/200-600 combo, about 70-80% were 3 stars. I always felt the focus was not 100% precise and was slightly off when viewed at 100%. The camera/ lens was perfectly ok with static subjects. Also, i didn't like the sony colors and the way their lenses rendered the images...Some users were also reporting AF precision issues on the A7R4+200-600 combo.

In fact, i remember one of the articles by Thom Hogan where he touched upon the above problem where he says the sony images were almost sharp vs Nikon Z images that were perfectly sharp.

I realized what an amazing ecosystem Nikon has. Amazing DSLRs, state of the art lenses that render so well, lovely colors, solid built etc. I just sold the Sony gear and decided to continue using Nikon DSLRs and add a mirrorless body when Nikon comes up with the one we are all waiting for..The mirrorless equivalent of the D850 or the R5/A9/A1 equivalent.

 

[Roaring 40s]

Hogan also says that Nikon is governed by bankers, and they're just looking for a steady return.
What's needed is solutions to user problems. In mirrorless that means lag and blackout free but the Z bodies don't do that. The S lenses are good though as you might expect from an optics company.

 

[William (Bill) Anderson]

I've used Nikon cameras exclusively beginning with the F2 because of their claim for "No Planned Obsolescence". I've heard it said that we 'date our cameras' but 'marry our lenses'. Cameras changed over the decades but Nikon was faithful to their word by preserving lens mount compatibility up to and through the DSLR. As noted by Steve in a previous post; nonetheless, given the wider lens mount for all mirrorless cameras and assuming that we'll eventually want native mirrorless lenses, we'll need new and expensive lenses (in addition to cameras) even if we hold on to our old F mount equipment. Right now, Sony's long GM lenses and recently announced a1 are offering bird photographers: 1) 50 MP, 2) 30 FPS, 3) 8K video, 4) 9.44m-Dot EVF, 5) dual CFexpress card slots, 6) AF to f22 (which means that we can use TCs at f-stops of 8+), 7) bird EYE, etc, etc. What are we waiting for?

 

[Roaring 40s]

For bird shooters Sony's AF is patchy. See post 12 above - that's been my experience too - and easy static shots can simply fail full-stop. The A1 may do better than this but it's an evolution, not a revolution, and doubtless continues in the Sony tradition of using hybrid AF. That means finishing with CD for accuracy and starting with line-type only PD sensing. That means those high frame rates are theoretical. With BIF when I set priority to AF they drop unless there's good light and a plain background. CD is good for accuracy but it's slow and that may account for Sony bodies accepting near-enough focuses (balanced AF/Release which is the default).
Bird eye AF will work if the camera has clear view of an eye - which means it'll work sometimes, which means if you have to get the shot you'll do it the way you're currently doing it.

 

[ccirelli]

"Nikon's targets are a little different than Sony's."

I don't know why people (click-baiters & naysayers) can't accept this without constantly crying that Nikon's sky is falling. Nikon is a very different company than Canon & Sony. The timing of when & how they release new technology is not by accident, it's by design. Nikon's approach has its advantages. They're not knee-jerk reacting to the current specs war as much as the others are (because it's not all about specs... and I think most Nikon people understand that).

I also feel most bloggers / vloggers conveniently understate the massive financial & logistical impact that Covid restrictions have had on ALL camera companies (in addition to smartphones taking a bite out of consumer-level cameras). Their sensationalism shapes public opinion. How about a little breathing room to let Nikon adjust, as the world gets itself vaccinated and markets reset themselves?

I have no desire to shop around for a Sony or Canon kit. It's fun to talk camera tech and keep up with new stuff, but I'm with Nikon for the long haul.

 

[JANuser]

I'm a long term Nikon user, but I'm not going to play the fanboy card and say all they are doing is great and wonderful, because that simply isn't reality. They make some excellent gear, some of which is the best out there right now (like the D850/500 F5.6PF), some of it is far from it (mirrorless camera bodies). Personally it doesn't matter if Nikon is a market leader in everything, I have too much money into Nikon gear to justify switching to anything at this point.

That said, if Nikon's timing was really as designed and perfectly timed, they would be market leaders, not sliding back constantly. Nikon has been a follower in the market for a long time now, no way around it. They are as much part of the spec war as anyone, just not in all areas. In still photography Nikon is doing very well, both DSLR and mirrorless. Maybe not in the eyes of wildlife shooters, but for most things it is more than good enough. Nikon is a photos first company, and that is hurting them in the eyes of reviewers, most of whom are hybrid shooters. Like it or not that is the reality. These days hybrid shooting is becoming more and more important for anyone who earns a living from the trade, and not being a leader in that area is hurting Nikon.

Nikon has been bleeding marketshare year over year since 2013, it didn't just happen because of COVID, and anyone who doesn't realize that hasn't been paying attention. For better or for worse, worse in Nikon's case, the people who are driving sales now are the people who make the click bait YouTube videos and blogs. Traditional marketing technques cannot keep up, or make up for, the power these influencers have on products.

 

[Roaring 40s]

Hogan observed that Nikon doesn't listen to its customers and doesn't think in system terms. Eg. if you bring out DX bodies then you need all the bits that support them, like flashes; not just a limited range of lenses.
Like it or not, the bloggers and reviewers shape market opinion.
Edited

 

[ProperFrame]

I am currently holding off on purchases of Nikon glass. Will give things about a year to shake out and develop. Then consider what Nikon has in the works and will rent an A1 and 600f4 for 3 days. Will get out in the field and shoot non stop the D850 and A1 in the same conditions and see if it blows me away. If it is "meh" then I know not to drop 20K on Sony gear. If I get the Sony in the field and it snaps off 5 or 6 frames of a bird in flight and then loses it in a rolling EVF flicker I will have my answer. Do I "need" the 14 or 15 frames I can grab with the D850 on one swing? Not all - but the 2 or 3 of the group is the goal. So I think the choices are based on each individuals shooting. Mine is mostly wildlife and with lots of motion if I could choose.

 

[DavidT]

I agree with Thom. I have said it again and again that I think we'll see higher-end bodies from Nikon. As I've mentioned before, Nikon was a bit behind in DSLR development and then they dropped the D3 and blew everyone away. Anytime I personally consider making a full switch to Sony, the D3 pops up in the back of my head and reminds me that Nikon can sometimes really surprise us.

I agree with you. I’m kind of sick to my stomach about leaving Nikon. I do wonder if the more I use the Sony once I receive the a1 if it will change my mind and make switching an easy choice or tell me to go back to Nikon.

 

[Tom-Neth]

I like all my Nikon stuff and certainly don't like white lenses. But their marketing and customer communication is from a different century.

 

[Steve W]

Switching systems is always a tough call, worse when you’re heavily invested in good glass. If you have that much cash to burn and see Sony etc as your future, then jump right in.
Fact of the matter is that Nikon makes some very very good lenses and the current crop of cameras is well resolved. Is the Z7II as good as a Sony, maybe not but then my daily drive isn’t a Porsche or Ferrari either. Question is really do you need what’s on offer or simply want it?
We used to think that 5 frames per second was blazing. Now 10 - 14 FPS is pretty common. If you’re not getting what you want at 10 fos, I’m not sure 20 FPS will make much difference. You need to ask yourself, are my skills and needs such that you’re being limited by the equipment or am I still the limiting factor.
Some people are hung up on the size of mirrorless compared to DSLR. I cast my mind back to mobile phones. The early generation phones were large, bulky things. Phones got progressively smaller until they were hard to operate and battery life became an issue. Take a look at cell phones now... they get bigger and bigger with each subsequent iteration.

 

[fcotterill]

Based on the (incomplete) data in photosynthesis, < 100 000 D3's were sold, and not many more copies of the D4 and D4s (in total); even less D5's and barely 1500 D6's are listed. Some of the biases in this comparison are obvious, but the point is at its peak of the DSLR market, in any era (i.e. D3, D4, D5....) sales of prosumer/hobbyist cameras far exceed the Pro model of the day.

The D5 exemplifies that it's the technology it brings to photography that really sells: notably the D5 AF engine. This Tech-Cascade probably applies to every camera company.

The sales strategy of the Bleeding-Edge sensor (with top AF) might differ - it's tricky to minimize the unit costs of the latest sensors, so one has to ask if A1 type technology will flow outwards, or rather downwards into more affordable cameras. We see this leverage of Nikon's EXPEED processers, however, as Nikon tends to follow up quickly in a range of new cameras (e.g. After EXPEED6 in D6, then D780 and recently pairing this cpu in the Z II's etc).

But the MILC model raises interesting differences, with on-sensor AF. The newest camera sensors carry big overheads.... It takes due time in the market for unit sensor costs to drop & R&D investment to be recovered from sales (hopefully).

Similar constraints hold for optics, which are also the biggest net cost to the photographer, besides long lead-in times of R&D.

Buying the Halo Camera of the moment - e.g. a D5, D6, A1 - with the cutting edge features does not happen for must of us. Fortunately, the D500 and D850 are relatively more affordable... And Compare our lenses, which last (most of) us far longer. Realities underpinning our investments in lenses still rule for many photographers. Cameras come and go, and bleeding-edge features are too often unaffordable/not justifiable. As it has been - and always well be so - the System that Rules Supreme - defined by the lenses for the camera-mount.

 

[SandyW]

I think that those who switch to Sony and this camera will be very happy. I think those of use who stick with what we have will also be happy. The next few years are going to be very interesting in more ways than one! I wish I could afford all the toys I want.

 

[Steve]

I think that those who switch to Sony and this camera will be very happy. I think those of use who stick with what we have will also be happy. The next few years are going to be very interesting in more ways than one! I wish I could afford all the toys I want.

I agree 100%. The thing is, I believe a lot of people get caught in the trap of thinking unless you have the "best" camera (which is subjective depending on the shooter), then you are somehow missing out. The truth is, there is a LOT of overlap between cameras and brands and they have more in common than people think. The differences between roughly equivalent levels of camera (mid-range, pro etc) from brand to brand are minor when it actually comes time to pretty the shutter.