Will we get a new Z9 firmware soon?

[agrumpyoldsod]

Hybrid Log-Gamma (HLG) technology is a High Dynamic Range (HDR) standard that allow for photographs with a wider range of tones, minimising loss of detail in highlights and shadows. Compared with Standard Dynamic Range (SDR), it increases the amount of detail that can be expressed in the upper half of the tone range for greater rendering potential. It matches SDR in the level of detail that can be expressed in the lower portion of the tone range to ensure compatibility with non-HDR displays. [Nikon Technical Guide HLG]

Working on and Processing Lossless RAW HLG images.

Having done some simple tests LRC/ACR has a way to go AND there is no evidence it recognises BT.2020 as such. Certainly the outputs from NX Studio (NXS) of images shot in HLG are more appealing than SDR for those situations when a single shot HDR would make a difference.

NXS identifies images that were shot in HLG Tone Mode and brings up HDR profiles to use - behind the scenes it will also recognise the Colour Space being BT.2020.

Adobe (LCR/PS), Capture One and DxO all need to step up their games with the equivalent of NXS’s HDR Wide gamut options. Currently both Adobe and Capture One will process Lossless RAW images from the Nikon Z8, but those shot in HLG appear muted compared to when seen in NXS and it is unclear how/if they utilise BT.2020 or simply treat the image as though it was in Adobe RGB or similar. NXT provides an indicator, others do not.

Why worry and what to do about it -- the following illustration shows examples of the Gamut for a number of the common colour spaces AND proves that we should all set our software to work in ProPhoto RGB, which is the largest space and encompases all others including BT.2020 (or REC 2020) [ITU-R Recommendation BT. 2020, more commonly known by the abbreviations Rec. 2020 or BT.]

Very few monitors [none that are affordable by most of us] can display the full colour gamut of Adobe RGB let alone Rec 2020. The most important thing is to be as consistent as possible through the whole process and not limit our work until we have chosen how the output is to be used. [I strongly recommend selecting ProPhoto RGB as the working space for all software that allow it. THEN downsampling the output to fit how the output will be used/viewed. Remembering that the bulk of the web is still in sRGB].
The chart also shows how limiting working in sRGB (Rec 709) is when compared to the other larger colour spaces.

While not Display HDR 1000 certified, my pair of Pro Display XDR can work with content encoded in BT. 2020. These display will accurately reproduce colors within its native P3 gamut, but obviously since BT.2020 is larger than P3 it will adjust colours to fit P3. Both my displays are capable of 1600 nits and both displays are periodically calibrated to ensure they are accurate. In the HLG Technical Guide Nikon recommend using HDR Video (P3-ST-2028) - I prefer P3 (1600 nits) - but will continue to test to see which works best for me.

I accept and understand the warning the Nikon included in their HLG guide. BUT to be honest -- working with wide gamut data and viewing it are two different things. For those of us who have worked on HDR photos for decades we know this already -- but thanks for the reminder Nikon. This has been and will be the case until affordable monitors capable of accurately and fully displaying ProPhoto RGB colour space emerge. Yet many of us go ahead setting our tools to use this as the work space recognising the final output will be "less" due to the limitations of the media used to display or view them.

The First "issue" how to most efficiently process Lossless RAW images shot with the Tone Mode set to HLG and the current limitations of the tools I am very familiar with to maximise the benefit of shooting in HLG -- vs-- having to use NXS.

AND THEN it is about understanding the choices I may wish to use -- simply put will shooting HLG save me time or provide better results than I can achieve shooting SDR with brackets or other techniques.

I like MANY folk who shoot HDR images -- in 16-bit, bracketed exposures or now in HLG use TONAL Compression tools (like Photomatix Pro 7) and techniques (including basic 32-bit HDR in PS) to make choices how wider gamut work make uses of the data we collect and then deliver output in formats and colour space appropriate to how these outputs will be used.

Currently I will follow the same workflow I use when shooting with my Hasselblad -- which is to use the Manufacturers Software (Phocus or NXS) to complete basic RAW image processing - then export the "converted file" as a 16-BIT TIFF file in Prophoto RGB colour space - which I then work on in LRC/PS and other tools -- this simply means my process is more disjointed and destructive than I prefer and the intermediary step generates large TIF files.

NX Studio's working space is ProPhoto RGB and I have chosen to export the TIF in ProPhoto RGB and have confirmed this is what happens.

All my other tools also utilize Prophoto RGB as their working space as a result there should be no loss of colour data while switching application.

It is only at the final step when I generate output do I choose the appropriate colour space and soft proof the deliverable.

Based on my initial trials -- the workflow I outlined above is the route I would use were I to choose to shoot Lossless RAW HLG. This may change when Adobe,Capture One and DxO catch up.

I can confirm that NX Studio 1.4.0 includes an Adjustment Panel for Portrait ENhancements - which includes Skin Softentening and Portrait Impression Balance and the ability to replicate what is applied to JPG/HEIF in camera to Lossless RAW files -- if that is what you choose to do. [Yes Skin Softening only works on Human subjects]

The following is a simple example -- a screen shot of 2 TIF images compared in LRC -- Left being SDR and Right being HLG both shot flat and simply processed in NX Studio with almost no adjustments shows the potential benefit of shooting -- obviously as a screenshot it is is sRGB color space so significantly less dynamic than what I see on my screen and can send onwards should I choose to.

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

 

[MotoPixel]

Hi - I watched the vid, which is about processing vids not stills; read the technical guide Nikon issued on HLG; and did research to discover both Sony and LUMIX (Panasonic) have been using BT.2020 for a while in both vids and stills.
Now Nikon jumps onto the wagon but I for one was not ready AND I do not want to have to learn/rely on NX Studio with all its limitations and restrictions to get the best out of my Lossless RAW images.
Having done some simple tests LRC/ACR has a way to go AND there is no evidence it recognises BT.2020 as such. Well not in Z8 files, whereas NxS does - swapping into hdr raw mode. Adobe, Capture One and DxO all need to step up their games with the equivalent of NXS’s HDR Wide gamut options - all 3 work in ProPhoto RGB the widest working space — so why do images processed in NXT ‘look” more…..

Again, with regards to HLG modes, either video or still, unless one's final output is destined for a true HDR spec'd display, capable of around 1000 nits of brightness, I can't imagine a valid technical reason for shooting in an HLG mode, video or stills, other than as a testing and understanding exercise. For stills destined for print or SDR display, RAW is the appropriate choice. I guess a reasonable analogy would be outputting stills in an Adobe RGB color profile for use on the internet where sRGB displays are the de facto standard.

You're absolutely correct that all the usual suspects in photo editing haven't embraced this yet as the need just isn't there...and won't be for some time. Even to view and edit the files properly (marginally), the least expensive way to do that is a consumer 42" OLED or QLED display that conforms to the HDR10 spec. To get a proper HDR grading monitor, you're talking some serious money.

I get the sense that many don't really understand what HDR is really about and the key differentiator is in raising the observed display dynamic range by drastically increasing the peak brightness capability to 1000 nits while keeping the black level at the same level as we have when the display brightness of our displays is typically 120-200 nits. Then you have to have enough signal levels to spread out over that very broad range to not end up with horrible banding. 8-bits won't cut it...hence the minimum 10-bit requirement for HDR...and HLG (Hybrid Log Gamma) uses a special gamma curve to spread those 10-bits (or more) out to provide an optimum grey scale with as little banding as possible. The wider color gamut is a separate issue/benefit. That's why often times when you walk into a showroom with the displays all showing some jaw dropping scene that's like looking out through an open window on a bright sunny day...or a nighttime scene that is eye candy. And all that in no way limits you from displaying soft, dreamy images that can set any mood you wish.

Some may know all this, of course, but I get the sense that many don't.

 

[O]

You are right that some car manufacturers and motorcycle manufacturers have offered pay to unlock features but when you look at the consumer response to this it tends to be very negative overall. The reason being the car customers bought already has heated seats and now they want even more money to be able to use them, hardware they already paid for when they bought the car. Enabling software that uses a licensed codec is one thing, but charging to enable physical hardware you already paid for is another. I don‘t think we will see this practice last long. Another thing that makes this difficult from a purely software perspective is that you now add additional overhead of supporting multiple firmwares versions with different features that each require testing for bugs. In some cases, like enabling RAW codecs where you need to send in the device to enable and pay additional fees, it doesn’t add a lot in terms of overhead but what is the customer experience like? Most would say having to send in a device is a negative. If you look at mobile phones, which are also heavily software driven, you generally get updates including supported new features free each year until the device is considered obsolete by the manufacturer. Regarding the camera industry which is much smaller, do you think they would sell enough slight variations of each camera with modest improvements to outweigh the development and support costs or does it make more sense to offer improvements to existing models to help keep them fresh, continue to sell them and maximize profits using existing hardware, keeping them up to date. The other option is to fragment the firmware, possibly making it impossible to support or releasing a new model to enable a basic feature, neither are great for customer satisfaction. I’m sure the manufacturers have looked at the cost benefit of different models and are trying to use what they think will work best.

A very interesting point of view, it makes a lot of sense in some ways.
The world is a different place, we live in a digital world, people are basically living on digital cocaine, at some point paying is inevitable either by subscription or built in margin.
Look at Adobe with PS LR etc subscription based, it was painful at first but now its the norm that now everyone else is trying to follow, the generation of people today cant live without a phone or the internet, Microsoft has gone the same route, if you look into the companies that depend on it and their cost of using it in cases is horrific, and like insurances they cost only goes one way.

I don't feel people are unhappy with their Z9, i think they just feel cheated a little, they paid big money for a flag ship camera especially after suffering the pain waiting for it to be available, and then agonizingly finished in the field, that is history now, but to now to have a camera that essentially is the same just smaller, while brilliant, it makes the Z9 a little diluted be it psychosomatic or not.

With modern software we know things can be added advanced changed with out having to always update the hardware as much, so yes Nikon could add a few things that differentiate the two models a little otherwise why buy a flagship unit, what those changes are who knows.
The Z8 is at its limit dealing with heat, the Z9 has greater a little more head room to deal with heat.
Do i feel the Z9 is future proofed somewhat, no i feel its obsolete by what has been delivered in the Z8 and the Z9 will move up a level to head of the A1 II, R1 pending arrival, its the way the chess game may play out.

I feel, opinion only, the game is basically won or lost with glass, Nikon is in 3rd place with cameras but maybe for a short while just in first position with glass.
The competitors are looking to catch up with lighter smaller sharper edge to edge glass focused manly for video, of course it wont be cheap.

Lot to be said for maybe looking back at a good DSLR like a D850, D6, or an older style car you can fix or service your self at least your off the spinning wheel.

Like some new cars that only dealerships can fix, all heading into subscription fixed price services because you need the firmware updates or fixes, gymnasiums the same thing with subscription membership, all painful to get of the ground but now the norm, the current generation is used to these paying methods.

PS a lot of new vehicles usually burst into flames on even moderate impact.

Yes fully electric cars is a welcome technology, but we will pay dearly for the electricity as utility's are being privatized.

Only an opinion

 

[O]

Very true and it's what pushed me over the edge to finally make the transition from DSLR to mirrorless when the Z9 appeared. With the capability in the cell phones now for not only HDR video, but essentially HDR stills, it's a matter of time until true HDR stills will be a thing that people will come to appreciate on their HDR TV's at home. It's going to take a while, but it will come. If you think about the look of well-produced 4K, HDR video content on say a 65"-85" OLED display, or even the QLED displays, you can produce and display some stunning still imagery that you have no other technology option to achieve. That has the potential to add a new dimension to still photography for advertising, entertainment, art, etc.

Absolutely, i have been saying for a few years now, things are changing and rapidly, the technology embryo is in phone development as its in the filed or hands of users everyday with detailed feed back.

A phone, connectivity, wallet, video, camera, computer, all in your hip pocket, even many of the features are now in a watch.

Video killed the radio star, video is killing the photography star, sadly its happening and faster than we think.

The camera industry is testimony to this by the direction they have been taking, the direction and demand for video is from the internet with its platforms like Tik Tok, Instagram U Tube etc. The vast majority or material is captured and loaded with phones.

The phone industry can get into the camera industry, the camera industry cant get into the phone industry, PAK MAN will eventually win.

Its not the phones that drive the internet, its the internet who developed the need for phones to vertically integrate, the internet cant survive with out phone like devices, or iPad's, lap tops etc. The wholly grail are the satellite's, the old saying, they who have the gold rule, OK, today its they who have streetlights rule, the internet, phones, etc are just the operational arm.
End users, consumers are addicted and generational who have been built through evolution to depend on all this. Its called CONTROL through dependency, the casualty is change in this case still photography as we have known it.

Long lenses for wild life is the only safe haven just for now, hence Nikon's focus. Sports action like football etc will be all or more from video or drones transmitted live.
No1 is Phones No 2 is Drones both are vertically integrated with video streaming that the internet demands, money shots stills if ever even needed will come from Video faster better sooner than we think, am i negative pessimistic and party pooper, no, just like a sailor or pilot, while things are fine it pays always to look ahead just a little and be aware of conditions and how quickly they can change............it doesn't mean one needs to be fearful or panic, change is the essence of life, as long as its used for the good.


Only an opinion

 

[O]

A rather cynical view on your part "O"...time will tell, so let's revisit this in a year or so and see where we are.

As for the way the Z9 was rolled out, what would you have preferred, they wait 6-9 months to complete the software development to the level of Ver 3.1 and then release the product or get it out there, get some sales going, learn where they made wrong assumptions and react to customer feedback, etc? I'll take the latter option every time...it serves me and it serves the company. Yeah, that makes us beta testers, in a sense, but so what...at least with a more software based technology, you're not as locked into the dedicated hardware of previous technology.

I'm not sure how the new technology points towards greater obsolescence if the camera does what you need it to do...especially when Nikon chose to delete the mechanical shutter. And, it will always be far less expensive to pay for a software upgrade than buy a whole new camera, no? You can't blame obsolescence on the companies unless they disable a product after a period of time.

As for your cell phone analogy, I waited 3 generations from iPhone 4 to 7 and then 5 generations from 7 to 12, which is what I'm still using...might upgrade when we get to 16 or 17...or not. That's mostly on the user, though at some point the IOS evolves to the point that many apps adopt new features that require the new iOS and it wont' run on older devices...progress, I guess, but it's a give and take that is part and parcel of technology.

Look forward to a revisit in the future, i have marked the calendar, LOL, should be fun........

Actually i would have rather waited for the Z9 to be finished, and i recall it was around 14 months for 3.10 to arrive, what hurt was the launch, the promise the hype, the over sell, the wholly grail, are you ready for it marketing attitude, it was launched and promised to be revolutionary, it was the futurist thing from the claims, it was basically a Z6 Z7 replay, that was offensive misleading and simply proved you cant trust what they say. So cautious i am defiantly as history and experience has made me and many others that way.

It was Nikon's agenda to do what they did, they really dropped the ball. COVID, micro chips, was a great smoke screen to justify and buy time.
Unfortunately if you treat people bad enough long enough, like a dog you will break that connection and trust.

Add to that some QC issues that shouldn't belong to flagship products, it was a cluster stuff up, sold as pure GOLD.

Your right, i have a slightly cynical view but it comes from experience of being over promised and under delivered.......a bit like politicians do LOL.

What i mean about obsolescence is that given the new technology and how fast it moves, add to it lots of new AI features, the level of competition, and urgency to be the first to capitalize using it, and the spin sold, newer products more often will be forthcoming, some in hardware form others with software and a face lift, cameras, phones, computers, AI is the trend now, its at the top of the Google add words list, even a loaf of bread is advertised saying made lovingly with AI LOL, Your organic avocado was grown using AI to save water and energy.

Back on the page, i mean look at how long the Z6-Z7 lasted then the Z6II Z7II then then the Z9 now the Z8, things are going to get even more hectic, we are going to see so many presets, just look in your phone, that's the style of whats coming in cameras.

Many of the feature additions through downloads will come in software so charging for them is highly profitable/possible and will be the norm based on history. If the payers out way the complainers its a done deal.

If i am wrong, i am sorry and really care so, LOL.

My personal focus is to try and stay on Photography, even if it means going back to a D6 D850 D4s just to have peace and relax LOL, gee never had an issue getting killer money shots with them and or the glass,

or better still i can simply sell everything except a D850 and 70-200 FL, 200-500 and buy the latest I Phone..........that will do everything i need perfectly LOL.

Surfs up mate see ya

Only an opinion

 

[Anuj Singh]

We should at least for those few features in z8.

 

[O]

We should at least for those few features in z8.

I feel it will be incorporated in the next Z9 upgrade..............and probably more........the intention was not to cloud the Z8 value as it needs to get traction first.
Those with deep pockets buying a Z8 isn't an issue but the global economy and slow growth with cost of living issues for effecting the main stream it will be interesting to see where things end up, i hope well for all.

 

[hrv]

since the release of the Z8 there is constant whining about updating the Z9 firmware to make it more like the Z8 or better so their Z9 is clearly superior again

Who was whining @Steve W?

Most of us are excited about the new features coming our way and further improvements to our Z9.

Unlike with some other devices, like cheap surveillance cameras for example, Nikon, Sony and Canon still provide quality and support their products for a longer period with firmware updates that fix bugs, as well as improve behaviour in many cases. Certainly with Nikon's flagship camera, we can expect small updates for potentially years to come.

This is part of what we pay for and each time that there is a now "gift" on the horizon, we look forward to it.

 

[fcotterill]

Nikon is committed to regular Firmware updates, and they have stated as such, and delivered.

Nikon interview: "We’re at a transitional stage"

In a wide-ranging conversation, Keiji Oishi gave us an insight into Nikon's strategy at all levels of its business, and shared some details of the new D6.

www.dpreview.com

The Z9 Wishlist, coordinated by Brad Hill early 2021, still has a fair number of key features, which would not be difficult to add in firmware.

Some significant improvements have been added, in v2.0 and v3.0 particularly.

Z9 1st Impressions & Firmware Wishlist: Brad Hill

Thom Hogan dives straight into features about which many of us await enlightenment https://www.zsystemuser.com/z-mount-cameras/the-z9-blog/ "......Nikon had told me earlier that you couldn't turn subjection recognition on or off via a button. They're wrong. As Brad Hill has also noted, there's...

bcgforums.com

Z9 firmware wish list

I’m curious, for those using Nikon’s Z9, now that version 2.0 has been released, what is still on your wish list for future firmware? I know some would like smaller form factor and some of you would like a Sony/Canon label slapped on, but curious what others think it’s lacking that could be...

bcgforums.com

 

[JoPoV]

You paid your money for the features that were on offer

I think Nikon won't let their flagship 1 camera with less capacity as their flagship 2 camera.
Would have like to get a D850 AF faster than D5, but off course it wasn't.

 

[JoPoV]

Video killed the radio star,

You succeeded to get this #### song in my head !
Bad guy !

 

[Steve W]

Who was whining @Steve W?

Most of us are excited about the new features coming our way and further improvements to our Z9.

Unlike with some other devices, like cheap surveillance cameras for example, Nikon, Sony and Canon still provide quality and support their products for a longer period with firmware updates that fix bugs, as well as improve behaviour in many cases. Certainly with Nikon's flagship camera, we can expect small updates for potentially years to come.

This is part of what we pay for and each time that there is a now "gift" on the horizon, we look forward to it.

Who? Since the Z8 came out...... I’ve lost count. So many people are just never satisfied.
Its like the latest model of your car has more power or features than yours. You take it for a service and expect it to be upgraded.
At least the camera manufacturers give you firmware updates, the car dealers even charge to update your gps maps.
Seems I’ve touched a nerve with a few. Nuff said. I’ll make no further comment on the matter.

 

[Feiertag]

Who? Since the Z8 came out...... I’ve lost count. So many people are just never satisfied.
Its like the latest model of your car has more power or features than yours. You take it for a service and expect it to be upgraded.
At least the camera manufacturers give you firmware updates, the car dealers even charge to update your gps maps.
Seems I’ve touched a nerve with a few. Nuff said. I’ll make no further comment on the matter.

Right on. I enjoyed reading your honest opinion.

 

[ButlerKid]

Who? Since the Z8 came out...... I’ve lost count. So many people are just never satisfied.
Its like the latest model of your car has more power or features than yours. You take it for a service and expect it to be upgraded.
At least the camera manufacturers give you firmware updates, the car dealers even charge to update your gps maps.
Seems I’ve touched a nerve with a few. Nuff said. I’ll make no further comment on the matter.

Maybe you should change who you listen to..... The old saying is "half full or half empty".............. On various forums I frequent, people are ecstatic about the Z8. I try to avoid all the negative stuff on the internet these days.

 

[O]

I think Z9 owners are very entitled to be a little taken back or disappointed or have some expectations with the Z9 that's not even 18 months old and is basically cloned by the Z8.

People with deep pockets probably couldn't care so much but there are a lot of people out there who work hard and save for a long time to get into a Z9............

Frankly the Z9 has been devalued in the used market somewhat now, i mean who wants to buy a used Z9 for the same money or less than what you pay for a Z8 new with full warranty.

A Z8 is $4000 USD, what would you pitch a used Z9 at to sell............$4000, $3000, $2750 USD ?

I understand new models generally have improvements technically etc, that's normal, but gee Nikon only finished pipe lining the Z9 in February = to (14 months) and in May a cheaper killer lighter smaller clone model of the Z9 comes out, hey that's business i guess.

The fact that people are expressing them selves obviously says there is some disappointment out there.

I feel respectable resale of flagship cameras appears to be becoming a thing of the past.

I feel as i have said for a long while, more models more frequently is the future, just like phones, after all the camera industry its down globally by nearly 50% last time i looked a while ago, i can see why.

I feel that we will see the Z9II late 2023 or early 2024, the Z9 wont compete from 3rd position with the A1 II, and R1.

I also feel the Z8 is designed to

a) move D850 or DSLR owners to mirror less
b) move the pretty much out of date spec performance wise Z6, Z6II, Z7 Z7II owners to the next level, with a all in one do everything model in mirror less......as the D850 was to DSLRS.

Very happy that the Z8 is hear and many people love it.

Only an opinion

 

[agrumpyoldsod]

I think Z9 owners are very entitled to be a little taken back or disappointed or have some expectations with the Z9 that's not even 18 months old and is basically cloned by the Z8.

Only an opinion

I own 2 Z9 and am not remotely disappointed by the arrival of the Z8 (I have two Z8 as well) -- I regret but those who are simply do not understand the use case for a Z9 vs a Z8 and consider anyone selling a Z9 now will be foolish unless they have a very clear use case for a smaller/lighter and in some areas less highly performing camera.

 

[fcotterill]

A Z9 owner feeling cheated by the Z8 rates in the empty glass realm IMHO. Every new camera and lens arrival is greeted by the cynical tyre kickers and doom & gloom brigade, but it's best to ignore them in their echo chamber. I have held back from Z8 temptations, and I have the Z9; after much to&fro, I've settled my aim on adding a 2nd Z9 for a matching pair.... In summary... Extremely happy for all the merry Z8 owners. Its launch has in fact lowered Z9 prices in Specials and Used sales. So this Z8 arrival is a win-win for all sides.

Nikon have executed a shrewd tactical advance by repackaging the Z9 technology into a different chassis, and making it that much more affordable. The more success to Nikon the more benefits flow to its installed client base in future products. It will be extremely interesting to see how they continue in future cameras to market their EXPEED7+Stacked Sensor technology.

 

[Geoff_G]

I own 2 Z9 and am not remotely disappointed by the arrival of the Z8 (I have two Z8 as well) -- I regret but those who are simply do not understand the use case for a Z9 vs a Z8 and consider anyone selling a Z9 now will be foolish unless they have a very clear use case for a smaller/lighter and in some areas less highly performing camera.

Well said. I'm not seeing the "problem". I'm not a pro but I jumped head first into mirrorless when the Z9 came out. If the Z8 and Z9 were both available back then I'd have chosen a Z8 100% of the time. Now I have both and I am not pissed off that my Z9 lost some resale value. It is what it is boys and girls. So what if Nikon instead came out with a Z9II? That would have done Z9 sales and resales no darn good at all. Point being, some camera was going to come out to nip at Z9 sales and resales. It just happens to be a Z8.
But again, there is a fine point being missed here when comparing the Z8 and Z9. Yes, they have many of the same capabilities. But the Z9 is a tank like camera built along the same lines as their Pro Film and DSLR bodies. The Z8 Sereebo body is nice and light but not nearly as robust.

 

[O]

Well said. I'm not seeing the "problem". I'm not a pro but I jumped head first into mirrorless when the Z9 came out. If the Z8 and Z9 were both available back then I'd have chosen a Z8 100% of the time. Now I have both and I am not pissed off that my Z9 lost some resale value. It is what it is boys and girls. So what if Nikon instead came out with a Z9II? That would have done Z9 sales and resales no darn good at all. Point being, some camera was going to come out to nip at Z9 sales and resales. It just happens to be a Z8.
But again, there is a fine point being missed here when comparing the Z8 and Z9. Yes, they have many of the same capabilities. But the Z9 is a tank like camera built along the same lines as their Pro Film and DSLR bodies. The Z8 Sereebo body is nice and light but not nearly as robust.

Great balance of points responses made and respected in this and the few previous reply's, its healthy to share views as it can help people be persuaded to consider better understanding. Its been the way of our parliament LOL. And it doesn't always mean one has to agree or disagree.

For me, I have looked at the Z8 -Z9 combo, while the Z8 is brilliant for size and weight for my needs i have decided i will stay with my Z9 for now, if i was a two body person it would be a matched pair, at the moment i prefer investing in a little more glass than another body that is so much the same.

When ever i have two cameras or similar i find one sits on the shelf far to long unused.

Some club members wanted to sell their Z9 to get the lighter smaller Z8, ok, their concern was..........as follows when the dealer said you wont get as much for your Z9 now the z8 is out as most peoples choice is now the Z8 based on price size and weight. So which ever way you want to cut slice it there is disappointment and a little pain...........i mean that doesn't make releasing the Z8 wrong, its an excellent camera and move.

The Z9 retails new for $8999 AUD, used sells for $6500-$6700 AUD, with current prices after 18 months only of $7700 AUD means a used Z9 price of around $5700AUD, the Z8 is new $6950AUD with full warranty, so the Z9 purchased 14 months or 6 months ago now needs to be looked at selling for far less as many but not all buyers would prefer the Z8 because of the size and weight and virtually equal performance.
Local city camera store moving Z9 product,, sometimes its even lower. The Z9 is already

But gee whiz in just over 12 months for a flag ship to start discounting, 14 months actually, its very different from the norm. I mean many people used to see buying this type of gear an investment to a degree, sadly that has changed.

Price/resale value is a means to sell and reinvest in a upgraded product therefore matters for most people, but not all.

Only an opinion

 

[MotoPixel]

A lot of good points here...some I agree with, others I don't...even within the same post. Interesting to read through all the comments.
I think one thing that we have to keep in mind here with regards to valuation, or lack thereof, is that the concept of a "Flagship" has/is morphing. In the not so distant past, flagship bodies were not at all general purpose, do everything cameras. They were designed and priced for professionals and their more targeted use/reliability cases. Certainly, they had qualities sought by a niche set of hobbyists that did not mind the cost of entry, but this group was not large enough to materially impact the overall sales volume of flagship products for either Nikon or Canon. Myself, I would never have considered buying a Nikon or Canon flagship, regardless of price. For my own use, the qualities of high FPS, low-light performance , ruggedness, did not outweigh the the size and low resolution of those bodies. Most pros are invested in a system and hold onto their equipment until it dies or it's capabilities are eclipsed to the point that they can no longer compete as they desire in their market.

The Z9/Z8 are an entirely different animal in that they embody as close to a "do it all" at a high level (including video) camera as exists today, Canon and Sony are in this as well. The market for these "Flagship" cameras has expanded well beyond the professionals as well-heeled hobbyists dabble in the this part of the market and their fickle, "latest thing" and GAS tendencies create a more dynamic used market in this space. With that, prices will be more volatile and subject to unanticipated distortions as new products/technologies emerge...this will be a wild ride!

Cheers!

 

[Geoff_G]

Great balance of points responses made and respected in this and the few previous reply's, its healthy to share views as it can help people be persuaded to consider better understanding. Its been the way of our parliament LOL. And it doesn't always mean one has to agree or disagree.

For me, I have looked at the Z8 -Z9 combo, while the Z8 is brilliant for size and weight for my needs i have decided i will stay with my Z9 for now, if i was a two body person it would be a matched pair, at the moment i prefer investing in a little more glass than another body that is so much the same.

When ever i have two cameras or similar i find one sits on the shelf far to long unused.

Some club members wanted to sell their Z9 to get the lighter smaller Z8, ok, their concern was..........as follows when the dealer said you wont get as much for your Z9 now the z8 is out as most peoples choice is now the Z8 based on price size and weight. So which ever way you want to cut slice it there is disappointment and a little pain...........i mean that doesn't make releasing the Z8 wrong, its an excellent camera and move.

The Z9 retails new for $8999 AUD, used sells for $6500-$6700 AUD, with current prices after 18 months only of $7700 AUD means a used Z9 price of around $5700AUD, the Z8 is new $6950AUD with full warranty, so the Z9 purchased 14 months or 6 months ago now needs to be looked at selling for far less as many but not all buyers would prefer the Z8 because of the size and weight and virtually equal performance.
Local city camera store moving Z9 product,, sometimes its even lower. The Z9 is already

View attachment 62858

But gee whiz in just over 12 months for a flag ship to start discounting, 14 months actually, its very different from the norm. I mean many people used to see buying this type of gear an investment to a degree, sadly that has changed.

Price/resale value is a means to sell and reinvest in a upgraded product therefore matters for most people, but not all.

Only an opinion

When I was deciding on the Z9 I hadn't figured on a Z8 - a mini Z9 no less - so soon. So that was surprising. Before any talk of the Z8 I was 'holding out' for a Z6iii but I embraced the 8 instead. My Z9 will not be my primary camera any longer but it will be 'glued' to my 500/4E which I prefer over the Z8 in that use.
As to having two identical cams - functionally - for me - they are. Both are setup the same and I know what to expect and where to go to change whatever.

I do think having the chances of continued FW updates for both cams will improve now that the Z8 is out. Going forward there will be a [faster] growing user base for code that's pretty much identical the two cams.

 

[O]

A lot of good points here...some I agree with, others I don't...even within the same post. Interesting to read through all the comments.
I think one thing that we have to keep in mind here with regards to valuation, or lack thereof, is that the concept of a "Flagship" has/is morphing. In the not so distant past, flagship bodies were not at all general purpose, do everything cameras. They were designed and priced for professionals and their more targeted use/reliability cases. Certainly, they had qualities sought by a niche set of hobbyists that did not mind the cost of entry, but this group was not large enough to materially impact the overall sales volume of flagship products for either Nikon or Canon. Myself, I would never have considered buying a Nikon or Canon flagship, regardless of price. For my own use, the qualities of high FPS, low-light performance , ruggedness, did not outweigh the the size and low resolution of those bodies. Most pros are invested in a system and hold onto their equipment until it dies or it's capabilities are eclipsed to the point that they can no longer compete as they desire in their market.

The Z9/Z8 are an entirely different animal in that they embody as close to a "do it all" at a high level (including video) camera as exists today, Canon and Sony are in this as well. The market for these "Flagship" cameras has expanded well beyond the professionals as well-heeled hobbyists dabble in the this part of the market and their fickle, "latest thing" and GAS tendencies create a more dynamic used market in this space. With that, prices will be more volatile and subject to unanticipated distortions as new products/technologies emerge...this will be a wild ride!

Cheers!

Well said, and i agree with some of the well made points, i guess the operative word is volatile and interesting, things have changed a lot.

I feel the next few years will be revolutionary in many ways.

As Steve says, date the camera marry the glass, its resonating.

I wouldn't be surprised if one day we will see smart phones or such on quality lenses act like a console does for drones LOL.
All the processing hardware etc battery's are all in the lens...........WOW that would be cool.

I think we are in for some real dynamic change going forward and i feel we will see this in Canon and Sony models going forward.

The CEO of Canon once said connectivity transmission is were they need to be in the future.

I feel we will see 2 or 3 minutes videos be transmitted as quick as a text in the near future.

You have a Camera, a lens, then there is software being the vascular system and brains that pulls it all together.
To me Smart Phones have been the source and inspiration for R and D technically but also pivotal to connecting with or growing the consumer needs, the wholly grail being the internet.

Only an opinion

 

[O]

When I was deciding on the Z9 I hadn't figured on a Z8 - a mini Z9 no less - so soon. So that was surprising. Before any talk of the Z8 I was 'holding out' for a Z6iii but I embraced the 8 instead. My Z9 will not be my primary camera any longer but it will be 'glued' to my 500/4E which I prefer over the Z8 in that use.
As to having two identical cams - functionally - for me - they are. Both are setup the same and I know what to expect and where to go to change whatever.

I do think having the chances of continued FW updates for both cams will improve now that the Z8 is out. Going forward there will be a [faster] growing user base for code that's pretty much identical the two cams.

Excellent, sounds like the right tools for the application, love the 500 F4, i do really admire the Z8, to me its more like a D850 but with the Z9 benefits, just keep enjoying photography at all cost.

I like my Z9 and D850 combo, and being i guess hybrid in the DSLR/Mirror less field is OK for now, i find when i can make most photos with either system that are essentially the same regardless of body of glass used is my motivator/challenge, satisfaction.

I know the Z glass has an edge in sharpness in most cases but not all.

I have to shoot my 85mm 1.4G differently to the 50mm 1.8s to get the images looking virtually identical, but the G has a nicer background blur when on equal F stop, i find i cant tell much of a difference if at all between the 70-200 FL or the Z version...........that said i am not microscopically comparing them.

I am more driven by composition, mood, color dynamic range, bleeding sharpness is last on my priority list, acceptably sharp is good enough.

I even took my old 150-500 Sigma out of the trunk in the car and on the D850 Z9 got some lovely images in the back yard of the white cockatoos feeding in amber colored trees with leaves falling in the afternoon golden hour, amazing light colour with a WOW, if you pixel peep at 200% you can see the lens isn't as tack sharp, but who needs it to be.
The color light mood is what got the WOW.

On my list is a camera that is small light around 12 fps 60-80mp with more dynamic range or colour than the D850 or at least the same..........for what ever reason psychosomatic or not i like the files out of the D850 at times over mirror less.

The way phones make images has to come to the cameras we use sooner or later.

Only an opinion

 

[coachjohn57]

If there is a firmware update for the Z9 in the near future, my wishlist would be for it to include “zebras” in the EVF for highlight warnings and for it to continue to update the focusing system for a wider variety of birds and animals - not that it’s half bad now!

 

[Loggitie]

Maybe you should change who you listen to..... The old saying is "half full or half empty".............. On various forums I frequent, people are ecstatic about the Z8. I try to avoid all the negative stuff on the internet these days.

"half full or half empty" => or the glass is 2x too big