Nikon Z5

1234568

Comments

  • WestEndFotoWestEndFoto Posts: 3,328Member
    snakebunk said:

    @WestEndFoto: When you compare EF and Z lenses, do you include lenses from third parties? And how do you compare lenses that are missing for the Z mount? For example the very high quality 600/4 and 400/2.8 Sony lenses.

    First, Sony makes good products and I hope they survive. I really hope that Canon, Fuji, Sony, Nikon, Leica and Phase One survive. They all bring dynamism, diversity and competition to the market.

    Second, Sony does make some good lenses. The advantage with Nikon vs Sony is all of Nikon's Z lenses are good. Not so for Sony.

    But Sony can fix that. My argument is a little more subtle and strategic.

    Sony's mount was designed for APS-C but got adapted to full frame. That didn't matter when it was competing against the f-mount. Sony's mount was still superior from the perspective of lens design flexibility.

    But Canon and Nikon, especially Nikon, did not make that mistake with their new mounts. If you are a lens designer. you want to be designing to the Z mount. For the same cost, the lens can be smaller and/or have better IQ.

    That means that Sony has to add additional cost to their lenses to match Canon and Nikon on size and quality. Even if it is only $50 per lens, and it is probably more, Sony has to forego profits of about $100 million per year to match Nikon and Canon.

    The same advantage exists for Nikon over Canon, but the difference is smaller and possibly non-material.

    Regarding third party lenses. I wonder if the likes of Tokina, Tamron and Sigma will have to pay a royalty to Nikon to make lenses for the Z-mount even if Nikon makes them backwards engineer the af. And why not? It is Nikon's mount and they should benefit. Sigma didn't take the significant commercial risk that Nikon did in bringing out the Z mount. So they shouldn't get a free ride.

    I speculate that every Nikon lens has an encrypted unique identifier and every Nikon camera has a table with all the unique identifiers already released or to be released over the next 50 years. The table would not take that much space up. Then when a someone bolts a non-Nikon lens onto their camera, the camera would know it and it could do things like cripple or de-activate the AF or even the camera. As a business person, I would support that. As a photographer, I would also support that as it would give Nikon the choice of not-permitting third party lenses or forcing them to pay a royalty. That would be good for Nikon which would be good for anybody investing in the system.
  • tc88tc88 Posts: 482Member


    PS, are you in Japan?

    That's just one of the first article I found on Google. You see, it's always easier to pick bones in others' imperfect data instead of supplying your own data. That Tom's article you supplied did the same thing. I have asked a very straightforward question and that hasn't been answered. Are you arguing Nikon is still #2 in the overall ILC (that includes both DSLR and mirrorless) worldwide market? Please, don't use words like may, could, next year, etc.
  • tc88tc88 Posts: 482Member
    PB_PM said:

    And now this thread should get back to taking about the Z5, not Sony vs. Canon vs Nikon...

    Every product Nikon puts out does not live in its vacuum. What kind of features are put in, what kind of price it's set, how well it will do, a lot of those are constrained by the competitive landscape. So it's nature for the discussion to involve the competing products.
  • snakebunksnakebunk Posts: 921Member
    @PB_PM: Ok, I will let you discuss the Z5 after this post. But I think that buying a camera like the Z5 is not so much how it compares to Canon EOS RP or Sony A7 II but rather if you want to be on the Z mount or choose another system.

    @WestEndFoto: I agree with the Z mount being good because of its large diameter. It is however not much of a concern to me since I almost only use long lenses. I would also prefer if there was a licensing model where third parties would get all mount details in exchange for some of their profits. It would be a win-win I think. Maybe something like the L mount alliance. I don't know if Nikon doesn't want it or if third parties are not interested.


  • tc88tc88 Posts: 482Member
    edited July 25


    Sony's mount was designed for APS-C but got adapted to full frame. That didn't matter when it was competing against the f-mount. Sony's mount was still superior from the perspective of lens design flexibility.

    But Canon and Nikon, especially Nikon, did not make that mistake with their new mounts. If you are a lens designer. you want to be designing to the Z mount. For the same cost, the lens can be smaller and/or have better IQ.

    That means that Sony has to add additional cost to their lenses to match Canon and Nikon on size and quality. Even if it is only $50 per lens, and it is probably more, Sony has to forego profits of about $100 million per year to match Nikon and Canon.

    Whatever the Z mount advantage, it's probably at #5 position or lower on the list of things that will mostly affect Nikon's survival. Basically, very minimum effect.

    A counter example to you, Nikon's own f-mount. Even though it's considered way more constricted, it did all right in the DSLR time frame.

    The cost saving only happens to the production cost which allows Nikon to save some money. BTW, your $50 per lens number and $100 million overall saving per year, I highly doubt. It may save Nikon $50 on a $2k lens, but certainly not $50 on the 24-50. But those high priced lens sell for much smaller volume and is less price sensitive to the $50 change.

    But there is a significant fixed cost that's the development cost which involves having engineers running the simulations, iterating the prototypes, customize the automatic tooling, etc. And with a shrinking overall market and ever smaller market share, fixed cost becomes an even higher portion of the overall cost. Nikon has a much smaller base to spread that fixed cost. So at the end, I doubt it's making much effect on Nikon's prospect at all.
    Post edited by tc88 on
  • WestEndFotoWestEndFoto Posts: 3,328Member
    OK TC88, I respect your opinion, but I think you are crazy to invest in a serious Nikon system if you think that. A body and a couple of lenses at most.

    When the Sony gear heads move on to the next cool thing after Canon and Nikon regain market share and Sony is no longer #1, I am sure that Nikon will welcome you back.

    Now where is decent competitive medium format? I can’t even get a crisp iris on a full body shot with this Nikon/Canon/Sony full frame shit!
  • tc88tc88 Posts: 482Member
    edited July 25


    When the Sony gear heads move on to the next cool thing after Canon and Nikon regain market share and Sony is no longer #1, I am sure that Nikon will welcome you back.

    This is all rhetoric without substance.
    Post edited by tc88 on
  • WestEndFotoWestEndFoto Posts: 3,328Member
    Of course it is TC88.
  • tc88tc88 Posts: 482Member
    edited July 25
    Haha, we are in agreement. :smiley:

    The way I see Z5 is that it fills a position on Nikon's line up that it has to have if it wants to maintain the current market share. They realized that can't move down the Z6 to fill that position because of the card slot issue.

    As such, it's just a run of the mill camera. I think Nikon will already be happy enough if Z5 can help to keep the current market share since the sale of Z6/7 is probably in stand still by this moment. It probably will have a small sale during black friday. Then a small price drop next year. Unless sale really lags behind projection (which I don't think is that high anyway), or Sony lits a fire under it, I doubt we will see it at $1k anytime soon. Over time though, I expect it to gradually migrate down the price ladder, just like what Sony does with A7 versions. I'm not sure Nikon with bother with a Z3.

    Basically it's a status quo item, not a camera intended to change Nikon's fortune.
    Post edited by tc88 on
  • WestEndFotoWestEndFoto Posts: 3,328Member
    edited July 25
    I agree with that as well. I think that Nikon will bother with a Z3. I would really like one if it has a Z50 body to pair with the compact primes. But I agree with you because I am not sure.
    Post edited by WestEndFoto on
  • tc88tc88 Posts: 482Member
    edited July 25
    My personal take on the possibility of Z3.

    If there is no A5, then I don't see the downward price pressure to release Z3. If A5 (supposedly without EVF) is released, then Nikon will pay close attention on how it's received. I have no idea on how a camera like A5 will fare in today's market place. If it's successful, then Nikon may respond with a Z3. The issue then is the execution. It can remove either the EVF or IBIS or both. Removing one may not be enough to differentiate it down, and there is also the need for VR kit lens if IBIS is removed. Of course it can also change to plastic body. Now if all these take more than 12 months to execute after Nikon decides on such a model, nature price progression and competitive pressure over time will have already forced Z5 to a level that leaves not much room for Z3 to position. So unless Nikon hits everything in stride on Z3's execution or it already has it close to go just in case (which I doubt with the resource limitation), it may very well become another too little, too late situation.
    Post edited by tc88 on
  • PB_PMPB_PM Posts: 4,222Member
    Given the price points of the Z50 and Z5, a Z3 really doesn't make a lot of sense, unless it appears as a high end DX body.
    If I take a good photo it's not my camera's fault.
  • WestEndFotoWestEndFoto Posts: 3,328Member
    I think if they take the Z50 and replace less than 20 parts including leaving out IBIS and including the viewfinder and replacing the APS-C sensor with the Z5 sensor, sell it for $1,000 - $1,100 US, expand the compact prime selection to a half dozen VR compact prime lenses, then Nikon will have a real winner with little development cost and time.

    Keep in mind, this would serve two markets.

    1.
    Entry level FX with great Nikon ergonomics.

    2.
    Portable FX for people like me. I could keep it in a small nice bag and discretely bring it to any business meeting. On the weekends, I plan to carry a Z7s with the 1.8 primes this way.
  • PB_PMPB_PM Posts: 4,222Member
    edited July 25
    I just don't see it happening, the Z5 is the entry level model. Nikon's biggest problem, which your favorite writer Thom Hogan has pointed out many times, is that they offer too many models and configurations. It's no less true now than when he wrote about that 3-4 years ago. Nikon needs to trim fat, not add to it, to remain viable. What Nikon really needs is a Z40, an entry level DX model to take the place of the D3xxx/D5xxx family of cameras, not another low end FX model.
    Post edited by PB_PM on
    If I take a good photo it's not my camera's fault.
  • snakebunksnakebunk Posts: 921Member
    It would be fun if Nikon made a super compact full frame camera like the Sigma FP:

    https://www.dpreview.com/news/0408050048/the-sigma-fp-will-be-getting-a-major-2-0-firmware-update-in-summer-2020

    I find different kinds of cameras more interesting than just filling up every price bracket with more or less stripped versions of Z6/Z7.
  • mhedgesmhedges Posts: 1,581Member


    Regarding third party lenses. I wonder if the likes of Tokina, Tamron and Sigma will have to pay a royalty to Nikon to make lenses for the Z-mount even if Nikon makes them backwards engineer the af. And why not? It is Nikon's mount and they should benefit. Sigma didn't take the significant commercial risk that Nikon did in bringing out the Z mount. So they shouldn't get a free ride.

    I speculate that every Nikon lens has an encrypted unique identifier and every Nikon camera has a table with all the unique identifiers already released or to be released over the next 50 years. The table would not take that much space up. Then when a someone bolts a non-Nikon lens onto their camera, the camera would know it and it could do things like cripple or de-activate the AF or even the camera. As a business person, I would support that. As a photographer, I would also support that as it would give Nikon the choice of not-permitting third party lenses or forcing them to pay a royalty. That would be good for Nikon which would be good for anybody investing in the system.

    I got into a very long argument with someone on the main blog about the legality of this. The other person was convinced it would be illegal. I tried to explain that it most certainly was not and offered video game console manufacturers being able to lock their systems as an example but they weren’t buying it.

    Personally I don’t think Nikon locked it down that tight. There’s no evidence that they did. It could potentially cause problems from authentication fails even with authorized hardware.

    The fact that we have a working AF adapter for the Sony lenses suggests that the system isn’t airtight. There are at least some exploits available.
    snakebunk said:

    @PB_PM: Ok, I will let you discuss the Z5 after this post. But I think that buying a camera like the Z5 is not so much how it compares to Canon EOS RP or Sony A7 II but rather if you want to be on the Z mount or choose another system.

    Agree, especially in the case of the A7II. The RP is at least a current model. I don’t think there are a lot of folks who are on the fence about getting into the Z system but then decide against it in favor of a five or six year old camera. The folks who want a cheap A7II likely already bought it.

  • PB_PMPB_PM Posts: 4,222Member
    edited July 26
    nm
    Post edited by PB_PM on
    If I take a good photo it's not my camera's fault.
  • WestEndFotoWestEndFoto Posts: 3,328Member
    MHedges, what evidence do you have that it isn’t illegal?

    Also, since the throttling is software in the camera and Nikon will want its G glass to work for quite a while, they may turn it on later. Perhaps a low initial “throttling setting” that gets turned up over a period of years.
  • snakebunksnakebunk Posts: 921Member
    If there is a software lock I would guess the key for old lenses is in the FTZ adapter.

    I would also guess that if there is a lock it is bullet proof. There is enough logic in modern lenses that adding a bit of school book encryption would not be a big deal.

    I started another thread about third party Z mount support.
  • PB_PMPB_PM Posts: 4,222Member
    edited July 26
    It's the same game it has always been, they have to reverse engineer a lens to get the codes.

    I suspect the reason there are no third party (Auto focus) lenses for Z-mount has more to do with the lack of marketshare than anything else. Tokina, Tamron and Sigma aren't going to bother if they don't think it will be profitable. It's also possible that due to the size of the lens mount it would require a totally different lens design than what they can make more universally for other mounts, which would be a big turn off for them since that would increase production issues.
    Post edited by PB_PM on
    If I take a good photo it's not my camera's fault.
  • CaMeRaQuEsTCaMeRaQuEsT Posts: 346Member
    edited July 26
    I am waiting for the reviews to decide whether or not the Z5 is for me. The main attractions for me are: the many specs shared with Z6, the (posible) shared D750 sensor with slightly better DR at or near base ISO compared with the Z6's, twin SD card slots, and longer battery life. I don't care much about its slow FPS since I mostly shoot single-frame, or its APS-C-only 4K crop as I still shoot at 1080p60. I did wish it had an articulating screen, but Snapbridge can be used as a workaround, and improved AF over the current Z6's capabilities, which might still come later when the S generation Z7 and Z6 are introduced.

    As it stands, the only deal-breaker is its current price: the Z6 has been sold by the gray marketers for as low as $1300 body-only (currently about $1460), $1700 with the 24-70mm f/4 S (currently about $1920). Nikon wants $1400 for the Z5 body, $1700 with the 24-50mm f/4-6.3. It just doesn’t make any economical sense, at least to me, as I don’t live in the US and won’t be covered locally by any warranty from Nikon anyway because they don’t have a presence in my country.

    The A7II and RP are usually cheaper from their authorized US retailers than from gray marketeers, which is an anomaly, and it means that both Sony and Canon are as aggressive or more selling these two cameras in the US as they are in the rest of the world, and Nikon will have to do the same if they are really interested in pursuing the entry-level market, which includes newbies to FF mirrorless that are yet attached to any single system, current D750 and bellow users (all the way down to the D1, Nikon 1 Series, and even Coolpix) wanting to move to FX mirrorless and don’t need the Z6’s higher frame rates and full-frame 4K, and budget-minded customers in general wanting an inexpensive FF mirrorless camera like me. That’s a very big pool of potential buyers, as the current popularity of both the A7II and the RP does attest, as seen from their sales rankings over time from both Amazon and B&H that, whichever way anyone wants to slice them, I consider are valid metrics for getting an educated guess on a camera’s sales popularity at a given moment.

    One would think that the newer RP should easily trounce the much older A7II in sales, but in reality, they are neck and neck. This is because neither one is the complete package: the RP is functionally faster, more mature, has 4K, and better AF, but the A7II still has a better sensor, IBIS, and a much larger pool of native lenses, including lots of inexpensive 3rd party ones. The Z5 is going to be a more complete package, and with appropriately engineered smart adapters, it can even cheat away and use native lenses from any other mount in the market (there are already very effective E-to-Z and EF-to-Z adapters in the market, and RF-to-Z and L-to-Z are physically possible).

    I am sure that Nikon will soon sell the Z5 at prices closer to the A7II's and RP's, as I am sure that lots of people are on the fence because of its high intro pricing, and if Nikon is not able to move the volumes they have initially calculated, they will have to resort to dumping them into the gray market, just as they did with the Z6. Finally, make no mistakes: the Z5 is Nikon's mirrorless FF price and volume leader by design:

    https://dc.watch.impress.co.jp/docs/news/1266896.html

    https://dc.watch.impress.co.jp/docs/news/1267189.html
    Post edited by CaMeRaQuEsT on
  • tc88tc88 Posts: 482Member
    snakebunk said:

    If there is a software lock I would guess the key for old lenses is in the FTZ adapter.

    Yes.
    PB_PM said:

    I suspect the reason there are no third party (Auto focus) lenses for Z-mount has more to do with the lack of marketshare than anything else. Tokina, Tamron and Sigma aren't going to bother if they don't think it will be profitable. It's also possible that due to the size of the lens mount it would require a totally different lens design than what they can make more universally for other mounts, which would be a big turn off for them since that would increase production issues.

    I agree with that. To take advantage of the Z mount, the lens need to be customized. The universal design can be used through the F-mount version and FTZ. That way they avoid dealing with the Z-mount directly too since at some locations it may be illegal to reverse engineering the encryption.

    But most importantly, I think the market share is too small for them to bother with.
  • mhedgesmhedges Posts: 1,581Member

    MHedges, what evidence do you have that it isn’t illegal?



    Huh? I thought we were on the same page here. Why would it be? They created they system and it’s their right to control who uses it. Exactly the same as video game consoles. Or the iPhone. Apple/Nintendo/Sony/Microsoft would be perfectly within their rights to not allow any third party apps. Apple didn’t at first and nobody suggested it was illegal. As it is all those companies have their ecosystems locked and third parties have to pay royalties.
    snakebunk said:

    If there is a software lock I would guess the key for old lenses is in the FTZ adapter.

    I would also guess that if there is a lock it is bullet proof. There is enough logic in modern lenses that adding a bit of school book encryption would not be a big deal.

    Again then how do you explain the Techart Sony E mount adapter? No FTZ and Sony lenses AF on it. To me that implies no lock, or if their is one then it is trivial to bypass.

    Agree with the other statements about the lack of third party lenses. The barrier to that is user base. Both Sigma and Tamron have a handful of mirrorless lenses developed for Sony that would be fine on RF or Z. And honestly I do expect to see them released for RF and/or Z at some point. Especially in Sigma’s case - I don’t think they can survive on L mount and Sony sales alone long term.
  • WestEndFotoWestEndFoto Posts: 3,328Member
    OK MHedges, I got confused.
  • CaMeRaQuEsTCaMeRaQuEsT Posts: 346Member
    First review of a production Z5 body is out (only 4 weeks after its official introduction, and 2 weeks before official market release), from HK's DCFever.com:

    https://www.dcfever.com/news/readnews.php?id=28587

    Takeaways:

    *Touch screen has "full" touch AF functionality (they don't go deep into details as to whether AF point movement can be done with the touch screen in stills).
    *Can finally erase the same image from both SD cards at the same time.
    *Camera is made in Thailand, affording Nikon some production cost reductions.
    *Native high ISO images are almost as good as Z6's (the Z5's look better to me).
    *AF works and performs similarly to the Z6, but in low light situations the darker kit lens slows down response times when compared to the 24-70/4.
    *IBIS works well during video panning, but a gimbal will give better results when doing run and gun.
    *Full HD uses line-skipping of the full sensor width, negatively affecting IQ (you can see very obvious moiré artifacts on their 1080p60 sample, which are absent on their 4K30p sample even when watched at 1080 resolution).
    *Z5's intro price is close to Z6's current street price.
    *Samples with the 24-50 look Ok to me, though I think the 24-70/4 is still the better lens,

    The jaw-dropping leaked Panasonic S5 specs and the rumors of a Sony A5 have cooled off my initial enthusiasm for the Z5. I fully expect a pricing war in the not too distant future, what with so many entries vying for the same customer in the low budget category.
Sign In or Register to comment.