Nikon Strikes Back At Sony With First Full-Frame Mirrorless Cameras (theverge.com)

After weeks of teases, Nikon has unveiled its first brand new full-frame mirrorless cameras to challenge Sony in the mirrorless market. As The Verge notes, the Z7 and Z6 are "basically a tit-for-tat response to Sony's A7III and A7RIII, and Nikon is aggressively going several steps beyond what Canon has attempted with mirrorless cameras." From the report: The Z7, coming on September 27th, has a 45.7-megapixel sensor, 493 focus points, and 64-25600 ISO. The Z6 will follow in "late November" with a 24.5-megapixel sensor, 273 focus points, and 100-51200 ISO. The cameras bring with them an all-new Z mount system that will debut with a 24-70mm f/4 "kit" lens. With the lens bundled, the Z7 will run $3,999.95, with the Z6 at $2,599.95. The lens runs $999.95 on its own and has a minimum focus distance of under 12 inches across its zoom range. A 35mm f/1.8 prime ($845.95) will be available at launch as well. There's also a 50mm f/1.8 prime ($599.95) coming in October that Nikon tells me has astounded some of its engineers with sharpness and edge-to-edge clarity. The company is releasing a $250 FTZ adapter that will allow these cameras to support Nikon's F-mount lenses. The adapter offers "full compatibility" (support for autofocus and auto exposure) with over 90 lenses. "Nikon is promising basic compatibility with approximately 360 existing F lenses for those that don't mind handling focus and exposure," reports The Verge.

Comments

Looks like a solid effort

[OYAHHH]

Straight outta the chute for Nikon. As an avid photographer, Canon gear here, it is nice to see some competition in what I think is a bit of a stagnant market.

Re:Looks like a solid effort

[OYAHHH]

I would love to have one of those f0.95 50mm primes they plan on releasing in 2019. Now that would be a fun toy to say the least.

Re:Looks like a solid effort

[Brett Buck]

You don't really need that, with current-day levels of ISO performance, you can literally take hand-held pictures of stars at night with a F3.5 lens, and little degradation of the quality.

  You may have needed F-.95 lenses in 1960, when Tri-X was as fast as it got, but not when you can easily operated at 5- and even 6-digit ASA levels.

Re:Looks like a solid effort

[OYAHHH]

I want it for the depth of field performance which is certainly not achievable with f3.5.

Re:Looks like a solid effort

[OYAHHH]

I have a 50mm f1.4 and I do pretty well with it focus wise. I would say i hit focus about 75% of the time.

I'm not expecting 50mm f1.8 performance from a f0.95 lens.

But, I certainly expect it will be easier to use than the world's most difficult lens, the Canon MP-E 65mm Macro lens. I have one of those and my ratio of good to bad is around one good to around ninety-nine bad.

Re:Looks like a solid effort

[Kjella]

Straight outta the chute for Nikon. As an avid photographer, Canon gear here, it is nice to see some competition in what I think is a bit of a stagnant market.

Seems to me Sony has doing a good job whipping themselves in the mirrorless market. Looking just at full frame they've had their balanced, resolution (r) and sensitivity (s) based lines. And the a9 that is a FPS monster.

a7 (2013)
a7r (2013)
a7s (2014)
a7 II (2015)
a7r II (2015)
a7s II (2015)
a9 (2017)
a7r III (2017)
a7 III (2018)

I won't compare them to other brands, but my impression from the reviews is that every one of them has been a quite substantial upgrade over its former "self". So much so that some people are whining over how quickly their old camera is dropping in value, well that's how progress works like when computers had crazy YoY improvements. It's the Canon/Nikon fans that have been waiting and waiting for when they're going to make a countermove, well this is Nikon's attempt. I guess it's okay but I don't think they're winning over many Sony customers, this is more like let's stop the bleeding and try to keep Nikon users on Nikon. I don't think many are buying this unless they are already pretty heavily invested in that system.

Re: Looks like a solid effort

[Malc]

I donâ(TM)t believe you. Maybe you only shoot static objects? People move though and with an in-focus depth of less than 1 cm, itâ(TM)s easy for example to get the tip of sonebodyâ(TM)s nose in focus and their eyes out of focus, which is essentially a useless photo. And yes, I also have an 80D and a 50mm f/1.4.

Re:Looks like a solid effort

[johannesg]

You don't really need that, with current-day levels of ISO performance, you can literally take hand-held pictures of stars at night with a F3.5 lens, and little degradation of the quality.

To take a halfway decent image of the milky way, you need something like ISO3200 (which is fairly noisy on most camera's, if they even support it at all), and keep your shutter open for something like 20-30 seconds at f3.5.

Re:Looks like a solid effort

[Tough Love]

To take a halfway decent image of the milky way, you need something like ISO3200 (which is fairly noisy on most camera's, if they even support it at all), and keep your shutter open for something like 20-30 seconds at f3.5.

And you can't just use a tripod, you need something like this otherwise your stars will all be little streaks.

Re:Looks like a solid effort

[thegarbz]

You don't really need that, with current-day levels of ISO performance

Huh? Who cares about ISO performance? Large sensor, low aperture, the point is to take photos that look like melted chocolate with a background of smooth jazz.

I'm waiting for the Panasonic GH6s

[future assassin]

and their organic sensor. My GH5s already does awesome video in ISO 12800 and is just as good or better in stills than my A7s was. In video at high ISO it walks on the A7s.

Some GH5s iso 12800/Zuiko 8mm FE 1.8 video in nightclub/rave

https://www.youtube.com/watch?...
https://www.youtube.com/watch?...
https://www.youtube.com/watch?...

Re:I'm waiting for the Panasonic GH6s

[OYAHHH]

My gut says we are talking apples and oranges. You're obviously interested in video performance which is fine. And I am sure your Panasonic is a great machine for that purpose.

Myself I am interested in stills photography. So the Panasonic just has never proved all that appealing.

To each his own I suppose.

Re:I'm waiting for the Panasonic GH6s

[future assassin]

I do more stills than video, the video there I was just learning video and the camera but I'm stills 99%. I have a couple dedicated Gh5s albums https://www.flickr.com/photos/...

I don't have the GH5s anymore as I mostly got it for video and will be too busy to hit up nightclubs and raves for several months so no point of having it depreciate anymore more in value but after going back to my Em1.1 I miss the Gh5s size and ergonomics. The button layout was so nice.

Re:I'm waiting for the Panasonic GH6s

[Cederic]

No. Flickr is also now owned by Smugmug, whose customer base under that brand includes a very large number of professional photographers.

Finally!

[fahrbot-bot]

I can pursue my hobby of photographing vampires with D/SLR quality results ...

Re:Finally!

[Solandri]

I realize this is an attempt at a funny. But the mirror was only used for the viewfinder. The light path to the film/sensor was always straight from the lens. And if you really wanted a SLR without a mirror which needed to flip up, you could always get a rangefinder even back in the film days. (Actually, the B&H article on rangefinders is a lot more informative and interesting than the wiki article.)

Those use a small mirror or prism in the light path to generate the image in the viewscreen. Contrary to most people's concept of how light works, blocking the light path in an out-of-focus plane does not create a hard shadow at the in-focus plane. It creates a soft shadow (look at the edge of the shadow of your head vs your leg in sunlight). And if the obstruction is small enough, the soft shadow only appears as a slight dimming of the overall image.

Re:Finally!

[Aighearach]

And yet, when I press the "live view" button on my DSLR, the mirror moves the heck out of the way!

Re:Finally!

[thegarbz]

Vampires live in the dark, liveview is worthless in the dark.

Re:Finally!

[ChrisMaple]

SLR without a mirror which needed to flip up

The Canon Pellix and Canon EOS RT. Alas, there is not yet a manufacturer of a pellicle DSLR.

No idea

[future assassin]

hence my I put on a watermark but too lazy to upload anymore photos on there.

Re:Nikon uses Sony sensors

[hcs_$reboot]

And dpreview[dpreview.com] talks a lot about the F-mount, but is not so enthusiastic overall.

Re:Nikon uses Sony sensors

[Aighearach]

Yeah, but who else are they going to name-drop when it isn't as good as the Pentax full frame?

NEED vs want

[Somervillain]

NEED and want are 2 different phenomena. I can find plenty of jerks who will tell me that all you need is an iPhone. I am confident a lot of people WANT a 50mm f 0.95 lens and would be happy to pay whatever Nikon asks.

I use a full frame DSLR with nice Sigma Art Prime Lenses because I WANT to take nice photos. This is not directly relevant because I am a Canon guy, but when they release their full frame mirrorless body later this year, if they offer a f 0.95 lens, I will be very interested. I take a lot of photos at f 1.4 now at dusk of my children playing when I get home from work. If it was sharp at f 0.95, I would be very intrigued by what it could offer. Also, I live in New England. Our days are shorter than a lot of the country and light is scarce when we're not working, so while you are right that we don't NEED a lens that fast, I would happily pay for one to get lower ISO photos in dim light (assuming it is actually sharp and usable at f 0.95. Sigma Art lenses are sharp wide-open, but lot of Canon lenses need to be stepped down for maximum sharpness).

Re:NEED vs want

[Tough Love]

You can never be too rich, or too thin, or have too fast a lens :)

Re:NEED vs want

[kobaz]

If you have proper spending/saving habits, you don't "need" credit actually. Credit is great with all the points (I currently get 3% cashback on everything I buy). I also pay everything off in the same billing cycle so I haven't paid interest in probably 20 years on a traditional credit card. So basically I'm making 3% on everything I buy... pretty sweet deal.

If you can't afford the $400 lens, don't buy it until you can. Sure, I might put $5000 on a 0% credit card to buy a few things, but I also have enough in savings and then some to pay it off in any month I want. And I'm not rich either.

Start Over?

[ewhac]

The Z7 [ ... ] has a 45.7-megapixel sensor, 493 focus points, and 64-25600 ISO. The Z6 will follow in "late November" with a 24.5-megapixel sensor, 273 focus points, and 100-51200 ISO. The cameras bring with them an all-new Z mount system that will debut with a 24-70mm f/4 "kit" lens. With the lens bundled, the Z7 will run $3,999.95, with the Z6 at $2,599.95.

Oh, sure. Start your lens collection all over again.

Meanwhile, you can get a Pentax K-1 full-frame DSLR body -- 36 megapixels, 33 focus points, ISO 100-204800, sensor-shift stabilization -- for well under $2000.00, and it still natively supports K-mount lenses manufactured 50 years ago.

Re:Start Over?

[siege72]

First: the Pentax is still a DSLR, not a mirrorless. Apples and oranges.

Nikon made the correct decision. The F mount has a number of limitations, especially with wide-angle and large aperture lenses. The large mount and short flange distance _theoretically_ means most DSLR lenses could work with an adapter (Canon, Pentax, Minolta). I've also read that the Z mount's size may allow for better IBIS.

Wait for the reviews

[nehumanuscrede]

Personally, I don't really have any major need for a mirrorless system since the body size reduction is rendered moot
once I start connecting up the big glass. In fact, the weight difference may alter the balance quite a bit on the bigger
tele-photos ( 300mm f/2.8 and larger ).

I suppose the on sensor stabilization would be a benefit for some of my lenses, but the majority already have VR and
those that don't I typically use with a tripod anyway. It's nice Nikon retains the use of F mount glass ( to the relief of all
the folks invested in it ) but an adapter is just another piece of hardware that can go bad on you.

In addition, since the sensor is always active during composure ( like all mirrorless and / or live view on a DSLR ) I
suspect it's going to burn through batteries at an accelerated rate necessitating the need to carry several of them.
( Heh, so much for weight reduction :D )

The lack of a secondary card slot is going to turn a lot of folks off to it. ( Though it does have Wi-Fi and Blutooth on
camera without external adapters ) Since they went with the XQD format ( not an issue for me as my bodies already
use it ) I can see why Nikon is offering their own branded versions of the card now.

Not bad for a first attempt at it I guess.

Will have to wait and see what the field reviews say.

Re:Sony A6000

[PixetaledPikachu]

You do realize that the need for flash use depends more on the lens than the sensor? Go back and learn photography 101.

He could be saying that the sensor produce very usable image at high ISO.

Canon

[Only Time Will Tell]

I'm hoping Canon wakes up from its long snooze and introduces some mirrorless bodies that can natively accept EF lenses.

Re:Canon

[h8sg8s]

That's the problem with mirrorless designs from existing camera companies with millions of lenses in the field. Nikon agonized over this for over a year before giving in the the adapter method of supporting existing lenses. Seems Cannon is still arguing internally on the subject. The problem is the "back of lens to focal plane" distance in mirrorless is much shorter than in traditional SLRs. Sony didn't have this problem because there were no lenses pre E or FE to deal with. We'll have to wait and see how Cannon deals with it.

Re: *FOCUS* point?

[ChrisMaple]

The great improvement in optics available to consumers in the last decade or so has been made possible by nano-coating, which substantially reduces reflections. Reduced reflections means more elements can be used, so more aberrations can be corrected. Sigma has been leading the industry with new high quality designs.

The down side of these super lenses for a full frame camera is that they're heavy, many of them over a kg.