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

2456

Comments

  • spraynprayspraynpray Posts: 6,236Moderator
    As an ex-program sec and chair of a large camera club I maybe see a different view to most members here. Most people join the club with crop DSLR's, no flash and only the kit lens (@pistnbroke). Some of them progress to buying other lenses and a flash, but of them only 25% or so progress up the gear ladder in this way or to move to FX. Certainly DX doesn't hold back the creative people from achieving high scores in the competitions just like having FX doesn't give members any great advantage. For someone who wants to take decent pictures, DX is all they need and certainly all they want to spend.

    No DX = less photographers or most likely more cameras-in-phones users if FX can only be sold stripped down to such a basic level of functionality IMHO as phone innovation and IQ is getting better and better.
    Always learning.
  • WestEndFotoWestEndFoto Posts: 3,195Member
  • PistnbrokePistnbroke Posts: 2,035Member
    I think you mean put a DX sensor in the Z5 and call it Z3 and abandon all the #DX lenses to the second hand market.
  • mhedgesmhedges Posts: 1,430Member
    Sports said:

    I don't think Nikon can get away with releasing a "bad" camera.



    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?

    Well I would argue that the RP is a bad camera, but I don't see it getting howls of criticism. Most of the reviews seem to be pretty positive just due to the price.

    I do agree that Nikon can't put out something like that. They would get crucified. For some reason the Youtube reviewer crowd seems much tougher on Nikon than on Canon when it comes to basing reviews on camera features. I guess they are used to Canon cameras having lackluster specs?



  • WestEndFotoWestEndFoto Posts: 3,195Member
    They could add a few extra features and charge more. Those that would criticize Nikon for catering to amateurs have their head up a dark place. I think the market knows that. Nikon should’t worry about those idiots.
  • tc88tc88 Posts: 416Member
    @spraynpray, I agree with what you say. However, whether Nikon management, or more importantly the investors at the banks hold the same opinion, is a different question. Also it's no longer necessarily a FX/DX differentiation at this time as compared to several years ago where FX costs a bundle, rather the price a starting photographer is typically willing to pay.

    If Z5 comes out 2020 or 2021, then yes, DX can be a possibility. But if as rumored first half 2019, I think DX is out of question. People have to understand that chip manufacturing takes surprisingly a long time to develop and qualify. If DX, it has to be a brand new chip unless people want a 10MP sensor. Also on the lens side, if Nikon can only put out 3-5 Z mount lens a year, and is already pre-announcing the 2020 lens, I doubt DX Z mount lens are anywhere close since we haven't heard anything related.

    So Z5 will be a stripped down version of Z6 if it comes out soon. I think the strategy of the camera makers, especially Nikon, has been using FX to attack the former high end DX market. Since the sensor price probably has and will continue to come down, I think that's a viable approach.
  • mhedgesmhedges Posts: 1,430Member
    edited March 2019
    Has anyone made a ~24 mp BSI DX sensor? As an alternative they could just use the D500/D7500 sensor and add PDAF. My understanding is that that the PDAF addition is pretty straightforward, and is more of a change to the microlenses/bayer filter than a change to the sensor itself.
    Post edited by mhedges on
  • spraynprayspraynpray Posts: 6,236Moderator
    We are all guessing, let's face it. Time will tell.
    Always learning.
  • KnockKnockKnockKnock Posts: 385Member
    ;)
    D7100, D60, 35mm f/1.8 DX, 50mm f/1.4, 18-105mm DX, 18-55mm VR II, Sony RX-100 ii
  • PB_PMPB_PM Posts: 4,122Member
    edited March 2019

    As an ex-program sec and chair of a large camera club I maybe see a different view to most members here. Most people join the club with crop DSLR's, no flash and only the kit lens (@pistnbroke). Some of them progress to buying other lenses and a flash, but of them only 25% or so progress up the gear ladder in this way or to move to FX. Certainly DX doesn't hold back the creative people from achieving high scores in the competitions just like having FX doesn't give members any great advantage. For someone who wants to take decent pictures, DX is all they need and certainly all they want to spend.

    No DX = less photographers or most likely more cameras-in-phones users if FX can only be sold stripped down to such a basic level of functionality IMHO as phone innovation and IQ is getting better and better.

    I agree on many points made here, having been in a camera club in the past.

    The thing is times have changed, and total camera sales are falling. Many people I know only use cell phones for photos, even those that have a DSLR or mirrorless camera. The bottom of the market is shrinking fast as cell phones get better cameras, and now days two or more focal lengths covered they don't feel the need to take a dedicated camera at all. Having seen this happen, I don't see much market for a budget DX camera at all anymore. Maybe with older camera buyers there is, but Nikon needs to attract future buyers, young people. The reality is that Nikon is having a tough time moving the last three generations of entry level bodies (D3xxx &D5xxx), which is why they are still available for sale new; in some cases 2-5 years after being discontinued.

    I think Nikon haves it right to stick with an entry level FX body and forget DX. There is really no need to develop yet another lens lineup and delay important FX lenses to develop a few kit zooms for a DX system that might not even sell.
    Post edited by PB_PM on
    If I take a good photo it's not my camera's fault.
  • NSXTypeRNSXTypeR Posts: 2,123Member
    edited March 2019
    PB_PM said:


    The thing is times have changed, and total camera sales are falling. Many people I know only use cell phones for photos, even those that have a DSLR or mirrorless camera. The bottom of the market is shrinking fast as cell phones get better cameras, and now days two or more focal lengths covered they don't feel the need to take a dedicated camera at all. Having seen this happen, I don't see much market for a budget DX camera at all anymore. Maybe with older camera buyers there is, but Nikon needs to attract future buyers, young people. The reality is that Nikon is having a tough time moving the last three generations of entry level bodies (D3xxx &D5xxx), which is why they are still available for sale new; in some cases 2-5 years after being discontinued.

    I think Nikon haves it right to stick with an entry level FX body and forget DX. There is really no need to develop yet another lens lineup and delay important FX lenses to develop a few kit zooms for a DX system that might not even sell.

    That's my stance as well. My Pixel 3 cost $975, granted I bought it when it was at its most expensive. With discounts now, it still costs $750 in change and it takes really good photos, especially with the computational photography. Nikon is likely going to have to dip into computational photography to justify their cameras. Just having a nice lens and sensor combo isn't going to cut it in the future. The low light capabilities from stacking multiple photos is insane in the phone, and I can't imagine what Google could do if they went to town on a modern Nikon camera.

    When a phone costs nearly as much as a low end full frame Canon camera, there's absolutely no room left for a DX camera. Add in high end 1 inch sensor compacts (Sony RX100), easily costing closer to $1100, and you really have no room at all in the middle. The Sony RX10 costs closer to $1500.
    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
  • Capt_SpauldingCapt_Spaulding Posts: 524Member
    edited March 2019
    I don't plan to buy any camera bodies for a while, but I confess I like having a DX. My D7200 has the same pixel count/resolution as my D750 and allows the extended "reach" that comes with a crop sensor. My D7200 extends my 200-500 to 750mm and still produces exceptional 6000 x 4000 images. To get close to that in an FX I'd have to go with a D850 or, perhaps, a Z 7. Either one is, for me, breathtakingly (read that as "prohibitively") expensive.

    I haven't found a phone yet that will produce that resolution at that focal length in a package I can put on a gimbal mount to shoot critters. If I live long enough to wear out my D7200, I really hope there's something to replace it.
    Post edited by Capt_Spaulding on
  • mhedgesmhedges Posts: 1,430Member
    I certainly understand the argument, and agree with it for “general “ type photography. But the one thing phones still don’t do well is telephoto, and I don’t see them getting much better at it any time soon. So I think there’s still a place for budget ILC there for stuff like kids sports or nature photography.
  • PB_PMPB_PM Posts: 4,122Member
    edited March 2019
    Just this this past week Nokia release a cell phone with 5, yes 5 cameras, with several different focal lengths. I have no doubt that the trend of adding more lenses with different focal lengths in cell phones will continue to fill the market.

    https://images.anandtech.com/doci/14033/IMG_0957-1.jpg

    It's kind of hard for us, traditional photography enthusiasts who are steeped in photography, to get this mass move away from dedicated cameras, but it's the reality the camera makers are facing. We are just used to wanting zooms or primes to cover everything, but many people just don't want the inconvenience of switching lenses or having something that big. Heck many young people today only care about taking selfies, and for that cell phones do the best job.

    IIRC the besting selling compact cameras right now are all waterproof budget models, because that is one area where cell phones don't cut it for people, none of which have big zooms. See where this is going? This is why Nikon has been saying over the past few years that it is looking for profit from high margin, higher end cameras rather than budget models. That is why I just don't see a DX model being part of the their strategy going forward.
    Post edited by PB_PM on
    If I take a good photo it's not my camera's fault.
  • PistnbrokePistnbroke Posts: 2,035Member
    Sony and others have DX mirrorless so perhaps Nikon must do one. Whats so difficult in putting the DX sensor in the Z5 and modifying the rear of an 18-55 and 55-300 to Z mount? If you want more you buy an adaptor or use Z FX.
    I am more concerned that Tamron have not made all there modern lenses compatible to Z mount via adaptor ...particularly my 100-400 !!
  • Ton14Ton14 Posts: 576Member
    Me too @Pistnbroke I had the 35mm f/1.8, super lens, but no firmware from Tamron, I sold it.
    User Ton changed to Ton14, Google sign in did not work anymore
  • SportsSports Posts: 365Member
    True, the DX market is going down (but so is the FX market, I believe, but slower).
    True, Nikon prefer to sell high-end products.

    But fact 1) is, all others (except Pentax, maybe) have decent mirrorless crop sensor systems. Fuji has a great system. Canon is surprisingly succesful. Olympus, Sony, and Panasonic all have decent offers and are actually pretty good.

    So, are all the others wrong?

    And fact 2) is, Nikon have been very successful with DX DSLRs so far. They got lots of sales and lots of upgraders going to FX this way.

    So, is it suddenly of no importance to get those beginners - the future enthusiasts - to buy Nikon? Is it of no importance that these people buy Fuji, Sony, or Canon, instead?

    I'm not sure what Nikon will do, but I think they'll leave money on the table and see users going elsewhere, if they choose to not be in the low-end game.
    D300, J1
    Sigma 70-200/2.8, 105/2.8
    Nikon 50/1.4G, 18-200, 80-400G
    1 10-30, 30-110
  • mhedgesmhedges Posts: 1,430Member
    That's the thing. I got into ILC because I could get a D5500 kit for $600 that gave very good to excellent image quality. Since then I have upgraded and spent more than I care to think of on Nikon gear, but I don't think I would have picked it up at all if the entrance price point was over $1000.

    Does Nikon expect people to go from high end smartphone cameras to $2k+ camera kits? I don't think that will happen very much.
  • donaldejosedonaldejose Posts: 3,337Member
    Let me suggest the new "entry level" DSLR or mirrorless camera will be about $1,000 kit zoom lens included. Why? Because people are used to spending about $1,000 for a smart phone. When they reach a point where the photos they can take with that smart phone are no longer sufficient for their desires and they look for a tool to take better images they should be prepared to pay about what they paid for that phone. This takes us to about the D7500 price point and above the D5600 price point. I would say to Nikon: look at the feature set and build quality of the D3500 which you now sell for $500. Can you scale it up to FX mirrorless and keep the price down to double the cost you now incur to produce the D3500? If so, you have the Z3 which can serve as the new entry level Nikon and you can forget making a mirrorless DX body. Time will tell. Personally, I would prefer having Nikon offer a full line of DX based mirrorless bodies and lenses starting at a price point of about $600.00. I would like a pocketable DX sensor Z body about the size of the old Coolpix A: something that will fit into a suit jacket or regular jacket pocket, not a pants pocket unless is a "cargo" type pants with side pockets. I will settle for a size that will fit into a holster I can clip on to my belt. Nothing hanging around the neck or needing a traditional camera bag. Something I can easily take everywhere I go. A fixed f2 pancake 35mm lens will be adequate. A 20 or 24 mp sensor is adequate. I can "expand" my view to 28mm by taking a step backwards. I can zoom my view to 70 mm by cropping. I can increase my bokeh by shooting at f2 and moving my subject far away from the background. I can be my own "zoom lens" so give me a pocketable pancake 35mm f2 lens like the Voightlander 40mm f2 lens but add autofocus. https://kenrockwell.com/voigtlander/40mm-f2.htm
  • tc88tc88 Posts: 416Member
    @donaldejose , great analysis.

    People also need to remember that whatever the development cost has to be mortgaged against the units sold. Years ago, at least the units sold for $500 DSLR is high, so that Nikon can try make a small per unit profit, but on a large volume. Now that market has shrunk enough, that there may not really be much net money made there. That’s why we haven’t seen any development of D3***/D5*** series, because it’s difficult to recover the development cost with the volume sold.

    In fact, in this case, when demand decreases, price has to increase, which further decreases the demand. This is a vicious cycle, and when it stabilize, the market usually becomes a niche market. Think luxury goods. Many people on this forum, (other than WEF :smile: ), may even be out of it.
  • spraynprayspraynpray Posts: 6,236Moderator
    edited March 2019
    @donaldejose - have you seen the image quality from the Huawei mate 20 pro with the Leica camera? It is really very good and also, one area where cameras are far behind, is the in-phone processing during exposure and with various apps.

    Post edited by spraynpray on
    Always learning.
  • mhedgesmhedges Posts: 1,430Member
    tc88 said:

    @donaldejose , great analysis.

    People also need to remember that whatever the development cost has to be mortgaged against the units sold. Years ago, at least the units sold for $500 DSLR is high, so that Nikon can try make a small per unit profit, but on a large volume. Now that market has shrunk enough, that there may not really be much net money made there. That’s why we haven’t seen any development of D3***/D5*** series, because it’s difficult to recover the development cost with the volume sold.

    Again I don't disagree that the market is in turmoil but last I heard the sales volumes for the 3XXX series was still very high. Easily the best selling Nikon ILC by sales units, and second only to the D850 by revenue.

    I think the reason we haven't seen a lot of changes in these is that they are excellent cameras already, and there really isn't a whole lot that could or needs to be done with them.
  • donaldejosedonaldejose Posts: 3,337Member
    I have not seen the IQ from the Huawei mate 20 pro with the Leica camera. I do agree with two points:

    1. Cell phone cameras are as good or better than the point and shoots people used used to buy and tons more convenient to use for people posting images to social media. That is why the point and shoot camera market has collapsed and will not recover.

    2. Computational photography and connectability needs to be incorporated into traditional DSLRs and new mirrorless cameras.

    Nikon should hire some software developers away from Apple and Google to develop software for the new bodies to come.
  • mhedgesmhedges Posts: 1,430Member
    They need to work on it, but realistically they won't be able to give it anywhere near the resources that Apple and Google can. Also I expect to see strong resistance from the more old-school photographers. There is already a lot of grumbling about how lens correction is baked into the RAW files on the Z's. I would guess computational photography would show up more in the lower priced models. Similar to the "Scene" etc. modes.

    It seems like Snapbridge works much better than it used to so that's something.
  • KnockKnockKnockKnock Posts: 385Member
    What if they put in the D4/Df sensor?! 16MP?!
    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.