Z5-4 = Z1 ... FX or DX Rumored ..who knows

PistnbrokePistnbroke Posts: 1,748Member
edited March 14 in Nikon Z cameras
Z5 all but announced by Nikon Exec, Claimed to have FX 24 MP sensor but what is cut to drop the cost to approx. $1000?
Well they cannot cut the focus accuracy (that's a joke. the focus accuracy I mean) so I guess a plastic body , no flippy screen ,slower fps, single SD, your guess is as good as mine.
What we have is here
https://mail.yahoo.com/d/folders/4/messages/AItHtnwO1pJ1XHiveAKIcBe20uw?.rand=esq2t0mi646nj
Post edited by Pistnbroke on
«13456

Comments

  • mhedgesmhedges Posts: 982Member
    edited March 1
    Again with the cracks on the Z focus accuracy. Have you used one? AF-S focus is as good or better than DSLR. AF-C could be better yes but is still very useable.

    Also this camera is obviously supposed to compete with the EOS RP which has terrible AF-C, much worse than the Z's by all accounts.

    My guess:

    D5500/5600 style flippy touch screen
    Lower spec EVF
    Fewer buttons
    Some reduced video features
    Single SD slot
    Plastic body

    $1400
    Post edited by mhedges on
  • PistnbrokePistnbroke Posts: 1,748Member
    edited March 1
    Well its not usable for bird photography on the Z7 so I wont be buying one. Next generation should be better. When its as good as the D850 I will think about it.
    Post edited by Pistnbroke on
  • donaldejosedonaldejose Posts: 3,131Member
    edited March 1
    Yes, the Z5 will be the D5xxx level mirrorless body in full frame. It will sell for approximately the same price as Canons low-cost body. We may later see a D3xxx for less than $1,000. But most of us here are anxious for the Z8 level body. Maybe we are seeing a pattern emigre? D5xxx becomes Z5; D6xx becomes Z6; D7xx becomes Z7; next the D8xx becomes Z8 and the next iteration of the D6 becomes Z9? Once the Z line is complete and has good native lens support the DSLR line will be phased out? When will no new DSLRS be produced? About 4 years from now when the top of the line pro body switches to mirrorless? I should add that a full frame Z3 and Z5 are going to be great values with great image quality. Maybe we will even see a plastic body Z4 which contains many of the guts of a Z9 (to emulate the D3 and D300 and the D4 and D400 parings) in a smaller and lighter package so the D400 becomes the Z4 but with a full frame sensor.
    Post edited by donaldejose on
  • PB_PMPB_PM Posts: 3,932Member
    I suspect they'll cut costs by having a greatly reduced number of focus points, which will be less sensitive in low light, lower resolution EFV and rear LCD, no flippy screen, and an all plastic body. Might even be kitted with a new variable aperture kit zoom, 24-85mm 3.5-5.6 for Z-mount that's not on the current road map. Maybe not compatible with the F-mount adapter, via a software trick? There will likely be firmware limitations on focus setting, auto focus modes, metering modes, video resolution (1080p only maybe, or 4k),
    If I take a good photo it's not my camera's fault.
  • mhedgesmhedges Posts: 982Member
    But is number of focus points on a mirrorless a real thing? Meaning, based in something physical on the sensor? I don't think it is. I think its contrived, and they can select whatever they want to be the focus points in the software. It's just a trade off between focus point size and the number of PD pixels available to get a signal.
  • PB_PMPB_PM Posts: 3,932Member
    edited March 1
    The phase detect focus points are physically embedded in the sensor, meaning they are electronically different from the other pixels, so yes they are real. Even if they were not, these types of decisions come from marketing departments to differentiate products.
    Post edited by PB_PM on
    If I take a good photo it's not my camera's fault.
  • mhedgesmhedges Posts: 982Member
    Right I'm sure they will use it for product differentiation. I'm less sure it actually saves them any cost.
  • tc88tc88 Posts: 299Member
    I think Z5 will just be physically Z6 with a single SD slot. They will disable some AF points, slow down the AF intentionally, reduce the fps. All those can be done through firmware. That's probably the most cost effective way to put out another product, with minimum engineering overhead.

    Consider Nikon tends to ask higher than Canon, it's probably going to have a MSRP of $1.4k. Also considering that Z6 is already effectively at $1.8k, and Sony A72 at $1k, Nikon should be willing to sell for $1.4k.
  • mhedgesmhedges Posts: 982Member
    I can't see them keeping it in the same body as Z6. Gotta think it will have an all plastic body to save cost. The overall look and design will probably be similar, though.

    Agree on $1400 price.
  • PB_PMPB_PM Posts: 3,932Member
    I wouldn't be surprised if the body was more D3xxx like, stripped of most buttons, fewer dials, the way Canon just chopped off the top of a Rebel and made it full frame.
    If I take a good photo it's not my camera's fault.
  • mhedgesmhedges Posts: 982Member
    I think it would keep the front and rear dials, but lose the separate AF joystick and some buttons. Also pretty sure it would lose the top screen.
  • NSXTypeRNSXTypeR Posts: 2,011Member
    I'm not sure if Nikon will be making a DX Z mount camera. I personally thinks it makes sense financially to be able to put out a cheaper camera, but on the other hand if they can find a way to make FX pancake zooms, there would be no need to make a DX Z mount. I think it's less confusing to think about lens compatibility that way. From a consumer perspective, lens compatibility is less confusing if you just make it all FX lenses.
    Nikon D7000/ Nikon D40/ Nikon FM2/ 18-135 AF-S/ 35mm 1.8 AF-S/ 105mm Macro AF-S/ 50mm 1.2 AI-S
  • PistnbrokePistnbroke Posts: 1,748Member
    edited March 2
    If I got it right (rare) the most expensive bit in the camera is the FX sensor so a DX would make sense but it seems not this time …..
    Post edited by Pistnbroke on
  • donaldejosedonaldejose Posts: 3,131Member
    The D3500 costs $500.00. The D5600 costs $700.00. If Nikon can produce an FX mirrorless body with kit lens for $500.00 they will do so and DX sensors will be relegated to point and shoots. (The old Coolpix A was a great point and shoot - I still us mine at times.) If the cost for a D3500 level mirrorless FX camera would be more than $700.00 Nikon may still make DX bodies. Adding a EVF must add more money than is saved by taking the mirror out. It will depend upon how low they can get that cost down and at what price point Nikon feels can be its entry point.
  • mhedgesmhedges Posts: 982Member

    If I got it right (rare) the most expensive bit in the camera is the FX sensor so a DX would make sense but it seems not this time …..

    No you are absolutely right. I think it all depends on how much of a future Nikon sees in DX cameras. Because they would have to also make DX lenses for it for it to make any sense, and in a way I think that's a bigger commitment than the camera.

    The D3500 costs $500.00. The D5600 costs $700.00. If Nikon can produce an FX mirrorless body with kit lens for $500.00 they will do so and DX sensors will be relegated to point and shoots. (The old Coolpix A was a great point and shoot - I still us mine at times.) If the cost for a D3500 level mirrorless FX camera would be more than $700.00 Nikon may still make DX bodies. Adding a EVF must add more money than is saved by taking the mirror out. It will depend upon how low they can get that cost down and at what price point Nikon feels can be its entry point.

    And don't forget those prices are for the kits, with one or two lenses included.

    Personally I don't see us ever getting to $500 for a FX body with lens. That would shock me. Its only recently that they were able to get under $2k, unless you count Sony's fire sales of their earlier models.
  • SportsSports Posts: 363Member
    If the price is something like 1400$, the price is much too high to attract most beginners. Beginners have lots of good options in the 400-1000$ range. The Z5 has to tempt people that already have a camera. So, given the stiff competition, I don't think Nikon can get away with releasing a "bad" camera. It should compete with the low priced mirrorless Sonys and Canons (and Fuji's, Panasonic's, Olympus', AND Nikon's own crop sensor bodies). It has to be good on paper, but also pretty damn good in real life. If it compromises IQ or AF or video, the Z5 will loose the battle. So, body, buttons, card, EVF, fps are the knobs to turn (down), IMHO.
    Nikon must build a Z4 (or lower) to attract beginners. Or keep the cheap DSLRs competitive. To get new users. That's pretty simple. If you don't have an ok offer at 500$ and at 800$ for that matter, you won't get new users, and ... and you will die. If Nikon wants mirrorless at the lower price points, they have to either build a "pretty bad" camera" or go DX. And if you, as a user, get a "pretty bad" camera from Nikon, then what are the chances you'll buy another Nikon?
    D300, J1
    Sigma 70-200/2.8, 105/2.8
    Nikon 50/1.4G, 18-200, 80-400G
    1 10-30, 30-110
  • spraynprayspraynpray Posts: 5,990Moderator
    That is a very well reasoned argument for a DX mirrorless @Sports. Nice one.
    Always learning.
  • PistnbrokePistnbroke Posts: 1,748Member
    Y
    The will buy another because they have a flash that fits and a lens ...once you go with one brand you are trapped.
  • tc88tc88 Posts: 299Member
    All indications say that Nikon has made the decision to forget about revenue and only care about profit. It has been on a course of trying to be a company like Leica and target high end.

    Yes, there is argument that low end cameras bring in revenue and up-graders. On the other hand, even the low end DSLR segments have been eroding fast, and there is question regarding how much money can be made there.

    It's unclear whether Nikon will survive in the end. Because when the low end dies out, the high end will be crowded too by then since Canon/Sony will have to move there too. But it's obvious that if it dies, it wants to die making money, not die losing money.
  • WestEndFotoWestEndFoto Posts: 2,881Member
    This is an old story from the Nikon film days. Nikon will be fine.
  • NSXTypeRNSXTypeR Posts: 2,011Member
    edited March 3
    Sports said:

    If the price is something like 1400$, the price is much too high to attract most beginners. Beginners have lots of good options in the 400-1000$ range. The Z5 has to tempt people that already have a camera. So, given the stiff competition, I don't think Nikon can get away with releasing a "bad" camera. It should compete with the low priced mirrorless Sonys and Canons (and Fuji's, Panasonic's, Olympus', AND Nikon's own crop sensor bodies). It has to be good on paper, but also pretty damn good in real life. If it compromises IQ or AF or video, the Z5 will loose the battle. So, body, buttons, card, EVF, fps are the knobs to turn (down), IMHO.
    Nikon must build a Z4 (or lower) to attract beginners. Or keep the cheap DSLRs competitive. To get new users. That's pretty simple. If you don't have an ok offer at 500$ and at 800$ for that matter, you won't get new users, and ... and you will die. If Nikon wants mirrorless at the lower price points, they have to either build a "pretty bad" camera" or go DX. And if you, as a user, get a "pretty bad" camera from Nikon, then what are the chances you'll buy another Nikon?

    Pretty much my opinion of DX mirrorless. There's no upgrade potential for DX mirrorless because the price point is so compressed. You'd pare off so many important features that you'd make DX mirrorless unpalatable. Look at the stink people made about the Z6 and Z7 not including dual card slots. Add the confusion of FX upgrades and compatibility and you'd make it impossible for a DX newbie to consider upgrading. I think Nikon would be better off using DX sensors for high end compacts. At that size, I'd rather not be fiddling with lenses and rather have a super all in one camera. Better yet, use a 1 inch sensor and forget about DX sensors.

    That is a very well reasoned argument for a DX mirrorless @Sports. Nice one.

    I think that's more a reason not to produce a DX camera. Especially if your lenses are DX, you have to dump your DX mirrorless lenses to take full advantage of FX mirrorless.
    Post edited by NSXTypeR on
    Nikon D7000/ Nikon D40/ Nikon FM2/ 18-135 AF-S/ 35mm 1.8 AF-S/ 105mm Macro AF-S/ 50mm 1.2 AI-S
  • sportsport Posts: 103Member
    Why would they want to continue dragging along the DX mess? They never finished development of lenses for DX the first time and there is no way they have enough staff to devote to it now.

    As for the Z5, it's probably going to be stripped down on the software side and have a plastic body. SD card slot would fit in on the consumer side as well.
  • WestEndFotoWestEndFoto Posts: 2,881Member
    I think Thom’s article on the future of DX in mirrorless is what they will do if they continue DX. Fill a few gaps that the current roadmap does not cover.
  • KnockKnockKnockKnock Posts: 368Member
    WEF, do you mean this article? http://www.sansmirror.com/newsviews/what-nikons-lens-choices.html

    I do hope they put a DX sensor in the Z6 and call that the Z5. By definition it'll have fewer AF points. Polycarb instead of magnesium alloy. Maybe SD card. I hope that's it. Same UI as the Z6 including viewfinder. $1299. A ballsy move would be to go slightly bigger than DX. Something like a 1.3 crop. Doubt that'd fly though.

    I don't think anyone wants to see a Canon RP competitor. What could they remove that wouldn't receive the howls of criticism the RP is taking?

    Save money by leveraging the work they put into the Z6-Z7. Maybe somewhere down the road there's a plan for a D3x00 and D5x00 replacement, but how much do you want to spend developing that from scratch?
    D7100, D60, 35mm f/1.8 DX, 50mm f/1.4, 18-105mm DX, 18-55mm VR II, Sony RX-100 ii
Sign In or Register to comment.