Nikon Z5

tc88

donaldejose said:

All that and only about $1,000.

CaMeRaQuEsT said:

So Nikon might be able to pull off a profitable $900

It it sells for $1k and especially below, I can see it bringing in quite some interest. But I doubt Nikon's bean counters are going to approve that. We can certainly hope.

WestEndFoto

OK, that is a reasonable argument.

CaMeRaQuEsT

tc88 said:

It it sells for $1k and especially below, I can see it bringing in quite some interest. But I doubt Nikon's bean counters are going to approve that. We can certainly hope.

They have to do whatever is needed to meet this price, otherwise, they will not be able to compete in this segment. Also, they still need to make a cheap $100 kit lens, and here Canon has really set a high bar by doing a 24-105mm, however soft it actually is.

photobunny

CaMeRaQuEsT said:

They have to do whatever is needed to meet this price, otherwise, they will not be able to compete in this segment. Also, they still need to make a cheap $100 kit lens, and here Canon has really set a high bar by doing a 24-105mm, however soft it actually is.

The Canon 20-105mm to f/7.1 is not soft according to reviews I have seen. It is f/7.1 at the long end but that isn't going to be a big deal and is still better on the RP than the f/5.6 lenses that where bundled on crop bodies for almost no money.

donaldejose

"a cheap $100 kit lens" Why not scale up the excellent kit lens sold with the Z50? Just need larger diameter glass.

WestEndFoto

donaldejose said:

"a cheap $100 kit lens" Why not scale up the excellent kit lens sold with the Z50? Just need larger diameter glass.

Yeah, I am looking forward to Thom's review of that lens. What do you think of it Donaldjose?

PB_PM

WestEndFoto said:

SD is not dead, but it won't be relevant in six years.

Not in high end camera sports camera, sure, but most people don’t use high end gear. In 6 years memory cards of any type may not be relevant, who knows that’s all just wild speculation. People said SD was dead when XQD came out, and it’s still not the case. I’m guessing some form of SD card will still be in big ticket consumer products in ten years from now.

WestEndFoto

PB_PM said:

WestEndFoto said:

SD is not dead, but it won't be relevant in six years.

Not in high end camera sports camera, sure, but most people don’t use high end gear. In 6 years memory cards of any type may not be relevant, who knows that’s all just wild speculation. People said SD was dead when XQD came out, and it’s still not the case. I’m guessing some form of SD card will still be in big ticket consumer products in ten years from now.

You are right to push back with your alternative view. I am making a prediction that could be wrong. But I stand by my prediction and I welcome yours to keep me grounded in my "wild fantasies".

But PB_PM, I would urge you to consider the following:
-SD is dead in high end sports cameras TODAY.
-SD is dead in prosumer Nikon cameras TWO YEARS AGO in mirrorless - Exhibit A is the Z6 and Z7. But I admit that it has not quite died in the D7xx series.
-Six years is a long time.

I would also like to acknowledge your point about memory cards of any type not being relevant. I suppose that if a camera had a 4 or 5 TB internal memory and the ability to automatically ingest images into a workflow that included backup, then memory cards would not be needed. That would be a nice future, but alas, I suspect that it is more than six years out.

tc88

WestEndFoto said:

-SD is dead in high end sports cameras TODAY.

That's not true. A9 uses SD. It is the standard bearer of sports mirrorless. It has gained significant market share (albeit from 0), and many consider it on par with D5 and 1D, and have switched from Nikon/Canon. I doubt Nikon can even catch up to it in the next couple of years.

Your point is that high end format will migrate to main stream. That's just not true. In reality, history shows that the majority of high end stuff dies off or at most becomes niche. Think about Cray's supercomputers, IBM's powerPC, etc. XQD is just one small example. In fact, most time whether some format survives has a lot to do with other factors such as business support, perception, even world events and luck, than its actual technical merit.

WestEndFoto

tc88 said:

WestEndFoto said:

-SD is dead in high end sports cameras TODAY.

That's not true. A9 uses SD. It is the standard bearer of sports mirrorless. It has gained significant market share (albeit from 0), and many consider it on par with D5 and 1D, and have switched from Nikon/Canon. I doubt Nikon can even catch up to it in the next couple of years.

Your point is that high end format will migrate to main stream. That's just not true. In reality, history shows that the majority of high end stuff dies off or at most becomes niche. Think about Cray's supercomputers, IBM's powerPC, etc. XQD is just one small example. In fact, most time whether some format survives has a lot to do with other factors such as business support, perception, even world events and luck, than its actual technical merit.

Well, mirrorless is still a niche in sports cameras. We will see in a few years.

WestEndFoto

Here is a good article:

http://www.sansmirror.com/newsviews/2020-mirrorless-camera/stop-being-a-technophobe.html

PB_PM

I was think more along the lines of the cameras not having any internal memory, other than the buffer, and relying on cloud storage. It’s the way the computer industry is heading long term, so cameras will likely follow.

KnockKnock

I'm looking forward to the Z5, especially as currently rumored. Viewfinder and IBIS are surprising.

• I don't do a ton of video, but if I did a great solution to the crop is putting the Z50's kit lens on the Z5, or any of my AF-P DX lens trio on the FTZ.
  
• I do do a ton of still compositions, landscapes, product photography.
  
• The Z6 would be great, but is somewhat overkill for me and hey, price matters.
  

Standing by....

Pistnbroke

If we are talking quaity as in IQ and we have had advances in processing why do we keep the LPF in the 24 MP format ? removing it gives a 20-40% increase in sharpness if you study your DXO. Now if this Z5 was 45MP then I might be interested.

photobunny

PB_PM said:

WestEndFoto said:

SD is not dead, but it won't be relevant in six years.

Not in high end camera sports camera, sure, but most people don’t use high end gear. In 6 years memory cards of any type may not be relevant, who knows that’s all just wild speculation. People said SD was dead when XQD came out, and it’s still not the case. I’m guessing some form of SD card will still be in big ticket consumer products in ten years from now.

SD Express is coming and does compete with CF Express. Still not as durable but it has the speed to match.

Pistnbroke

Cloud storage is not eco friendly ..its not in the cloud its in Iceland ..pumping in cold air to cool the computers and exiting hot air without the need for an aircon unit ..global warming at its worst

PB_PM

And producing millions of tiny cards covered in plastic that creates toxic fumes during the production phase, and ends up in a landfill is more eco friendly? what a joke.

tc88

I wouldn't buy a cloud storage camera, and I would think many people too. Because a lot of places where you want to take pictures, you don't have internet. Then you end up having different versions of cameras with different internal storage. Just like iphones without expansion slots. You pay higher price for more internal storage that's really overpriced. You get the same memory storage as an expansion slot anyway. I hope camera makers don't get that idea. Because that will be the day of their demise. You suck up and pay that phone because there are other functionalities that you have to use. I certainly don't see that on a camera. That would just give people another reason to not buying standalone camera.

donaldejose

WEF: "Yeah, I am looking forward to Thom's review of that lens. What do you think of it Donaldjose?" I think it is a great and very light "pancake" plastic zoom. You can work around its f 3.5 to f6.3 limitation unless you want to shoot in very low light without a tripod or you are an f1.4 bokeh devotee. The lens is sharp enough for any use. For normal daylight or early evening shooting the ISO ability offsets any missing low f stop. For portraits with bokeh set the lens to 50mm (75mm FF equivalent) and move your subject as far away from a background as possible. You won't be able to achieve f1.4 bokeh but you will be able to achieve subject isolation from the background. Remember, you cannot expect to achieve 100% of the portrait look of a f1.4, f2, or f2.8 lens with this kit lens but you are not able to pocket those lenses mounted on a Z50 either. I take it when I want to put my Z50 in my jacket pocket and carry nothing else. When I use the Z50 around home or in my studio I often use an S f1.8 or f2.8 lens just to get that more open f-stop. My preference would be for a DX Z plastic kit lens that ran from 16 to 70 mm and ended at f-4 on the long end. It could be f 2.8 to f4. I hope Nikon produces such a DX Z lens as the kit lens with higher end Z bodies such as a Z70. Ken is correct (in his usual overstated style just like his colors are over saturated - but I like them). "This 16-50mm lens is absolutely brilliant. It's tiny, weightless, collapses for carrying, focuses super-close, has great image stabilization (VR), and is optically flawless. It's so good you ought to get a Z50 just so you can use it! Just turn the focus ring at any time for instant manual-focus override." https://kenrockwell.com/nikon/z/16-50mm.htm

CaMeRaQuEsT

Pistnbroke said:

If we are talking quaity as in IQ and we have had advances in processing why do we keep the LPF in the 24 MP format ? removing it gives a 20-40% increase in sharpness if you study your DXO. Now if this Z5 was 45MP then I might be interested.

The new breed of Z lenses can probably resolve 100Mp, so an FX 24Mp sensor without LPF will produce moiré artifacts when using these lenses. In fact, I believe that there is no Nikon lens ever made that won't moiré with such a sensor.

CaMeRaQuEsT

Pistnbroke said:

Cloud storage is not eco friendly ..its not in the cloud its in Iceland ..pumping in cold air to cool the computers and exiting hot air without the need for an aircon unit ..global warming at its worst

That's true, cloud storage just means that your information is located in a HD somewhere in the world, but that HD doesn't need to be continuously spinning while it waits for a read/write prompt. The root directory's info does need to be online 24/7 for immediate access, though, kept alive on the server's RAM, and that server does need to be on 24/7 while it waits for a read/write prompt, but servers nowadays run with lower energy needs than your typical smartphone, as electricity is a fixed cost for server farm operators and they need to keep costs as low as possible. Otherwise, Google wouldn't be able to offer unlimited 16Mp JPEG picture and 4K Youtube compression quality video storage for free.

tc88

It's "free" because Google peeks into those and trying to figure out what things you do and sell that information for money. Or it uses those for AI learning, or even worse, sell those (under the notion of "anonymity") to other AI companies. Or hope you run out the trial size and pay for more. If it can't monetize otherwise at the end, it may pull a flickr where you have to pony up the money for subscription or lose your pictures. Remember there is no free lunch. You pay it one way or another, now or later.

KnockKnock

In broad strokes, cloud data centers pose environmental threats and concerns. Sure. But they run computing at an efficiency that is impossible for individuals, business or organizations to match. If people tried doing this computing themselves instead of using cloud datacenters, the impact would be much worse.

Here’s a little more a little more nuance from an updated scientific source: https://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2020/02/200227144313.htm

Pistnbroke said:

Cloud storage is not eco friendly ..its not in the cloud its in Iceland ..pumping in cold air to cool the computers and exiting hot air without the need for an aircon unit ..global warming at its worst

Pistnbroke

Still not got an answer on the LPF...dont have one on the D850.
PS dont really care a fook..too old and will be gone and all you young lot can sort out the mess you made.

donaldejose

Pistnbroke: You don't shoot fashion models wearing plaid clothing so you don't see the moire issue at 24mp without a LPF. Once the mp pass about 45 you don't get moire as often so that filter can be eliminated. It is just a judgment made by Nikon in an effort to balance and effect, morie, which many users would complain about as a camera "defect" against increased sharpness which you can achieve in the bird's feathers by just getting closer. Nikon made that balance. It offered a choice when it produced the D800 and the D800e. Most people purchased the D800 anyway even though they knew they were giving up some sharpness. Perhaps Nikon will change that "balance point" but more likely they will just let the increased sensor mp progress solve the issue for those who care about it. Nikon could eliminate the LPF on its DX sensors since its smaller pixel pitch presents the same choices as the D800's 36 mp FF sensor. Nikon has not given the option of a DXe sensor without a LPF since there would be almost no takers in their judgment. When the DX sensor reaches about 30 mp we likely will see the removal of the LPF and a subsequent increase in sharpness. Nikon is just following the same convention choice it made at the time of the D800's 36 mp sensor.