Nikon Z5

CaMeRaQuEsT

Nikon has not used a LPF in any of its DX bodies since the introduction of the D7100. Nikon's 24Mp DX sensors have a pixel pitch equal to a theoretical 54Mp FX sensor, while their 20Mp DX sensors' pixel pitch is equal to their 47Mp FX sensor's, so moiré is harder to provoke on a Nikon 20Mp or 24Mp DX sensor than on the D800E's or D810's 36Mp FX sensor that had the same pixel pitch as the D5100's, D7000's, or Coolpix A's 16Mp DX sensor, all of which did have a LPF.

donaldejose

Good to know, so Nikon's decision is a cut off of about 45 mp in FF for the "need" for a LPF. The 36mp FF sensor was the last one which "needed" the LPF standard. As we move from 45 to 60 mp and above there should be no standard LPF in FF sensors.

WestEndFoto

You can still get moire. But the circumstances that can induce it are less likely.

snakebunk

The D810 (which I own) is the lowest resolution DSLR without LPF (I think). I have rarely had moiré problems when photographing birds, but it has always been possible to fix in Lightroom.

Pistnbroke

Thanks I am now educated

CaMeRaQuEsT

What do you guys think about the rumor that the Z5’s 4K will be cropped? 1.7x crop seems off, as the width of 4K is about 4,000 pixels, while all of Nikon’s 24Mp sensors are about 6,000 GB pixels wide, so the correct crop factor should be closer to 1.5x, meaning APS-C or DX sensor width, if Nikon in fact decides to only give 1:1 pixel reading for the Z5’s 4K signal and not also the Z6’s full sensor width/downsampled reading. Looking at DPreview’s 4K pixel peeping samples for the Z6 and the Z50, I can’t find much difference in their IQ, whether it’s the Z6’s 1:1 DX crop or full FX downsampled, or the Z50 full DX binned or the probably 1:1 crop with electronic stabilization, so this bodes well for the Z5’s 4K IQ, as it must not come worse than the Z50’s, right?. And along this thought, I do doubt that the rumor of no slow motion is true, seeing that the Z50 already has 1080 at up to 120p, just like the Z6. So, in conclusion, both the Z50 and the Z6 have great video chops (they are both way better than Canon's) and the Z5’s should be positioned somewhere in between them and not below the Z50’s, hopefully.

CaMeRaQuEsT

More pricing pressure for both the Z6 and the Z5 is coming just around the corner: the Canon R is rumored to be priced at $1500 after they introduce the R6. Also, the still very capable A7RII is currently at $1400, and both it and the A7II's prices might be reduced even further when the rumored A5 is introduced. Suddenly, a $500 FF camera seems to be closer to happening each passing day. The one outlier: Sigma's FP, without an EVF or even a mechanical shutter, sells for more than the Z6.

tc88

Well, my impression is the opposite. All the camera makers want to raise prices. They only seem to lower price when they have to compete. So any price pressure is welcome.

You can already get a FF D610 for $750 since last Thanksgiving. (I'm valuing the 50 f/1.8 for $150). Not accounting for video, I doubt Z5 will be appreciably better for picture taking.

CaMeRaQuEsT

tc88 said:

You can already get a FF D610 for $750 since last Thanksgiving. (I'm valuing the 50 f/1.8 for $150). Not accounting for video, I doubt Z5 will be appreciably better for picture taking.

I don't have or want a DSLR anymore. I really like the weight and size savings, but most of all I like the AF consistency, and to be able to preview how the picture is going to be exposed. I am very spoiled by mirrorless and I'm not looking back.

Pistnbroke

$500 ? $1000 would be a good start !

mhedges

The naming of the Z6/Z7 successors is uncertain at this point. Historically Nikon hasn't kept the model number and added a "mark ii" type prefix. But I'm not sure that's practical now given how they seem to be sticking with single digits for the Z's.

My guess is that there will be a Z6 ii and probably a Z7ii. I don't see why they would ditch the Z6/Z7 numbers - overall the cameras have been well received (especially Z6) - why lose that name recognition and start over?

donaldejose

Nikon should go with Z6.1 and follow that standard update convention with all the Z bodies. So Z6 followed by Z6.1 followed by Z6.2 etc.

tc88

mhedges said:

overall the cameras have been well received

What's Nikon's market share in mirrorless these days? I consider the last two years lost for Nikon. I hope it has better success the next couple of years.

mhedges

tc88 said:

What's Nikon's market share in mirrorless these days? I consider the last two years lost for Nikon. I hope it has better success the next couple of years.

I feel like we have been round and round about this already - what did you expect? They are up against an established 3rd generation system and a competitor with over twice the share in ILC and much better backwards lens compatibility for technical reasons. I guess you can argue Nikon should be at 20% instead of 15% (if that's correct, number is from memory) but still there's no way they were going to be in anything other than third place.

As far as the last two years being lost - what? So you are fine with just throwing away all the excellent lenses they have released? And Z50 (which has been well received and sold well by all accounts)? Z6 and Z7 may not be your cup of tea and that's fine but they are still pretty good cameras, and Z6 at least is very competitive with A7III now in all areas except top end AF, and noticeably better in some (ergonomics, EVF, rear screen, etc.)

donaldejose

Not "lost" two years. They are transitioning to all mirrorless products, which they have to do to survive. DSLRs will be "dead" in five years.

spraynpray

What is wrong with calling the Z series for example Z5, then Z5 mk2? Seems to work for Canon and Sony?

tc88

donaldejose said:

They are transitioning to all mirrorless products,

mhedges said:

what did you expect?

Well, Canon started the same time or later than Nikon in moving to mirrorless. It has been able to translate its DSLR market share into the mirrorless market share. But Nikon failed. That's why I said the last two years ware lost on Nikon. You can't keep on having excuses.

mhedges

tc88 said:

Well, Canon started the same time or later than Nikon in moving to mirrorless. It has been able to translate its DSLR market share into the mirrorless market share. But Nikon failed. That's why I said the last two years ware lost on Nikon. You can't keep on having excuses.

What they heck are you talking about? Last data I saw on FF mirrorless was 50% Sony 30% Canon 15% Nikon. So Canon was 2x Nikon. Seems about right considering Canon had just about 2x Nikon's share in DSLR.

tc88

mhedges said:

What they heck are you talking about? Last data I saw on FF mirrorless was 50% Sony 30% Canon 15% Nikon. So Canon was 2x Nikon. Seems about right considering Canon had just about 2x Nikon's share in DSLR.

Well here is one of the latest piece of information I came across. (www.bcnretail.com/market/detail/20200617_178085.html). Granted it's for Japanese market only, but you don't need to understand Japanese to guess what the lines and tables are. Show me how the Z6/7 can be considered "well received" by that table or plot. Also show me where you get your info where Nikon has 1/2 of the mirrorless market share of Canon. BTW, Nikon's market share in DSLR was 2/3 of Canon's, so 1/2 is already a big decline.

donaldejose

"What is wrong with calling the Z series for example Z5, then Z5 mk2? Seems to work for Canon and Sony?" Nothing, but why copy Canon and Sony? What does Mark mean anyway? Why not use the software version convention of 1.0, 1.1, 1.2 etc instead?

tc88

"Mark" is the English way of meaning "version".

CaMeRaQuEsT

Canon's f/1.8 RF primes are very interesting. The 35mm is a stabilized macro that sells for about half the Nikon 35/1.8 Z's price. The Canon is slightly softer than the Nikon and is not weather-sealed, but is smaller and lighter. Canon's upcoming 85/2 will also be a stabilized macro, while their upcoming 50/1.8 will be stabilized but not macro. Both should also undercut the Nikon equivalents' prices by a good amount. Nikon did paint themselves into a corner with their expensive 1.8 lenses, making them ill-positioned to fight in the entry-level FF ILC arena.

mhedges

tc88 said:

mhedges said:

What they heck are you talking about? Last data I saw on FF mirrorless was 50% Sony 30% Canon 15% Nikon. So Canon was 2x Nikon. Seems about right considering Canon had just about 2x Nikon's share in DSLR.

Well here is one of the latest piece of information I came across. (www.bcnretail.com/market/detail/20200617_178085.html). Granted it's for Japanese market only, but you don't need to understand Japanese to guess what the lines and tables are. Show me how the Z6/7 can be considered "well received" by that table or plot. Also show me where you get your info where Nikon has 1/2 of the mirrorless market share of Canon. BTW, Nikon's market share in DSLR was 2/3 of Canon's, so 1/2 is already a big decline.

Look you seem to have your mind made up and I'm really not sure there's much point discussing it further. But that's one snippit of a few Japanese retailers and with me not being able to read Japanese I can't make much sense of it. If I'm understanding it correctly it has Olympus doing "ok" and we know what just happened there.

Here's a report with Sony at 38%, Canon at 36%, and Nikon at 24% (2/3 of Canon's, if my math is correct):

https://www.digitalcameraworld.com/news/sony-wins-mirrorless-race-beating-canon-and-nikon-for-2019-full-frame-sales

Here's the report I used to get the 50/30/15 numbers ( granted, it's a bit old):

https://nikonrumors.com/2019/05/21/the-latest-japanese-full-frame-mirrorless-market-share-april-2019-sony-50-canon-30-nikon-15.aspx/

Can you give me some actual numbers to support your position? And where did you see that Nikon's DSLR share was 2/3 of Canon's? That's certainly news to me. My understanding was that Nikon would be ecstatic if they had 2/3 of Canon's share.

tc88

@mhedges, so with the first piece of data you are showing Nikon/Canon ratio on all FF cameras (including DSLR) is 2/3. Your second piece of data says Nikon/Canon ratio on FF mirrorless is 1/2. I think the implication is clear.

And also looking at the first piece of data you provided, it lists two years. from 2018 to 2019, Nikon/Canon ratio has come down from 29/38 to 2/3. Is that winning or losing market share?

Now if a company releases a new model and it holds the existing market share, it's called "fairly received". If the market share increases, it's called "well received". If the market share decreases, it's call "ill received". I think Z6/7 falls into the last category.

I understand you bought Z6 and felt good. No one doubts that. But when you project your own impression as that of the general population, that's when you are no longer objective and behaving only as a fanboy.

mhedges

tc88 said:

@mhedges, so with the first piece of data you are showing Nikon/Canon ratio on all FF cameras (including DSLR) is 2/3. Your second piece of data says Nikon/Canon ratio on FF mirrorless is 1/2. I think the implication is clear.

And also looking at the first piece of data you provided, it lists two years. from 2018 to 2019, Nikon/Canon ratio has come down from 29/38 to 2/3. Is that winning or losing market share?

Now if a company releases a new model and it holds the existing market share, it's called "fairly received". If the market share increases, it's called "well received". If the market share decreases, it's call "ill received". I think Z6/7 falls into the last category.

I understand you bought Z6 and felt good. No one doubts that. But when you project your own impression as that of the general population, that's when you are no longer objective and behaving only as a fanboy.

Whatever. I'm out.