Z9 is coming

donaldejose

I expect Ken to get one and say it is technically great; but that he prefers the ergonomics on Canon bodies these days. Really all just personal preference in how he likes to use a camera. He also is a fan of Canon's recent lenses above Nikons. It is ok. People can have preferences. He just should not overstate his.

photobunny

donaldejose said:

I expect Ken to get one and say it is technically great; but that he prefers the ergonomics on Canon bodies these days. Really all just personal preference in how he likes to use a camera. He also is a fan of Canon's recent lenses above Nikons. It is ok. People can have preferences. He just should not overstate his.

He really likes the Canon RP. Not dissing on the RP, but if that is his benchmark for a full frame camera he likely really likes a compact body that can take great photos when set on full auto.

PB_PM

For about 8 years Ken said the D40 was the best camera ever made, and that the 18-200mm VR was the only lens anyone should ever need. The guy is a nut and flake.

Pistnbroke

I do seem to have the knack of saying something simple and causing a $hit storm.

donaldejose

Not a $hit storm. People have to understand Ken. Many are emotionally judging him by a false metric. Ken's personal preference (his metric for a "best camera") is not for the very best image quality all the time and the most possible controls. It is for "good enough" for "most of the time" when most of the shots are "snapshots." People don't need to spend more money or do more post-processing than they actually need. He doesn't even see the need to shoot RAW when he can set the camera to produce jpegs to his liking in camera. That's ok for most of his readership. The simplest way to get good quality photos for most of the photos the average person shoots with a camera above a cell phone is Ken's "best camera" for most people (not for NR readers!). He is correct that a bottom of the line full frame and a mid level crop sensor camera shooting in jpeg can be used to achieve excellent results. Look at this photo and click through to flickr to see the full size image (X-Large 6k) shot with a Z50 and 50mm f1.8 in JPEG using LED lighting. I shot this in both RAW and jpeg as a test of the Z50 sensor and 50mm f1.8 S lens for portraiture but didn't even need the RAW image because, as Ken says, I got the exposure right in camera and didn't need to change it in post-processing. I printed this at16x20 in 300dpi. Look carefully at it in full size and tell me it is not fully sufficient. No client is going to complain that it was not shot on a FF body or that it obviously was taken with a small "cheap" camera. That is what Ken is saying and he is correct. Of course, I have a Z6ii now and have ordered a Z9 and will want (and get) a Z8 when it comes out. I think of the Z50 as a "toy" or light walk around camera when I am not going to do anything serious; BUT WHAT A TOY! As Ken says about pro-level cameras "you people who need these bodies know who you are and why you need them." His website is not needed to help such people and he does not focus on doing so other than simply providing the basic specs for such bodies, saying they are excellent and noting he used to like Nikon but now likes Canon better. Ken is not alone. A lot of people have moved from Nikon to Canon or Sony recently. They can have their non-Nikon preferences without being hated. Ken is not a jerk or an idiot. His website is just not for pros who need the best gear and already know why they need it.

Photobug

donaldejose said:

/76080384@N03/51807620486/in/photostream/" title="Z50_0826_16x20_300ppi">

Really a great picture from composition to lighting. And the subject....WOW!

Enjoyed your comments on Ken. But the picture is just outstanding.

donaldejose

Thanks for the compliment Photobug. Isn't it surprising that was done with the Z50 and an inexpensive Z prime? The picture was published in the Rockynook book Mastering the Nikon Z50 as an example of what can be achieved with that body. I don't "need" a Z9 or a Z8 but I sure still want them! I am not Ken's "target audience." You can think of it this way; if your target audience is people who will want and buy a Z9 and a Z8 you have a very small audience. On the other hand if your target audience is the K-Mart or Walmart of photographers you have a much larger audience and therefore many more clicks and therefore can sell your adds for more money. So you earn more at the low end of the photography audience than you do at the high end. Ken is not dumb! He makes his living off his website (and what his wife earns as a pharmaceutical company rep.).

PB_PM

I would think that with good lighting you could get similar results from just about any modern camera, resolution aside. Controlled lighting makes a big difference. I know some studios were still using D2Xs until last year. For office head-shots nobody could tell the difference between it and D850.

Pistnbroke

Well most of my work was weddings shot in JPEG basic (810/850) With the camera on Aperture and auto iso, flash flipper and SB 400. Never had a complaint so I have some sympathy for kens approach but not his attitude to Nikon

donaldejose

Yes Pistnbroke. Most of my work is done in the studio shot in RAW to one card and JPEG fine to the other card. I start with the JPEG fine image and more than 90% of the time don't need to go back to the RAW image to lift shadows or do other things RAW can do. As Ken says "I shoot it right the first time, so don't need the big adjustments RAW gives us." LOL I saw your wedding shots and they are excellent, you don't need RAW adjustments either.
If we were shooting landscapes RAW would be very helpful to lift shadows but for our work fill flash is sufficient. Ken has become too Nikon negative in recent years. Maybe before that Sony and Cannon users felt he was too negative about the systems they liked? I don't know, never seeing his snide comments from their point of view. I just though he was right back then and wrong now! Ken has an unusual sense of humor; often deliberately overstating things because he thinks that is funny. Lots of people don't "get it" that an exaggerated snide comment is intended as a joke and just get offended by it.

donaldejose

Yes, PB_PM it is wonderful to be able to control key, fill, hair light and background light using LED lights in the studio. It is especially wonderful to be able to shoot WYSIWYG in a mirrorless viewfinder or LCD. Easy to "get that exposure right or nearly right (well within the adjustments available in jpeg)" with Nikon mirrorless bodies. I love them.

PB_PM

Pistnbroke said:

Well most of my work was weddings shot in JPEG basic (810/850) With the camera on Aperture and auto iso, flash flipper and SB 400. Never had a complaint so I have some sympathy for kens approach but not his attitude to Nikon

There is no doubt that for general use, and for people who are happy with out of camera processing the approch works. Thing is, most people on fourms like this, are not part of the "good enough" crowd, it's mostly tech heads (partly guilty) and perfectionists. For which that style will never appeal.

Photobug

donaldejose said:

Thanks for the compliment Photobug. Isn't it surprising that was done with the Z50 and an inexpensive Z prime? The picture was published in the Rockynook book Mastering the Nikon Z50 as an example of what can be achieved with that body. I don't "need" a Z9 or a Z8 but I sure still want them! I am not Ken's "target audience." You can think of it this way; if your target audience is people who will want and buy a Z9 and a Z8 you have a very small audience. On the other hand if your target audience is the K-Mart or Walmart of photographers you have a much larger audience and therefore many more clicks and therefore can sell your adds for more money. So you earn more at the low end of the photography audience than you do at the high end. Ken is not dumb! He makes his living off his website (and what his wife earns as a pharmaceutical company rep.).

Agree with your on many points. You put a good camera like the Z50 with a good prime you can produce terrific pictures. Great example in that photo.

Not sure why but as several have said, Ken has gotten more caustic on Nikon. Must not be getting freebies from Nikon anymore. I read his web page for a long time and five or years ago stopped when his opinions became ridiculous.

Pistnbroke

The one who has gone off his rocker is the angry photographer ..No photography turned into some social influencer in his own crazy world.

donaldejose

Yes, I noticed. Our old sources of basic information and entertainment are disappearing! I am also tried of Fro's egotistical personality. His video on the Olympus E-M1X release showed Fro to be a true narcissistic jerk. Who is good and tolerable to view anymore? Matt Granger did a nice complete job reviewing the Z9 recently. Tony Northrup is good on technical issues. Ricci is good on lens comparisons. Those three are about the best of the "old guys" left. Their opinions on the Z9 are the most credible. Fro, Ken Rockwell and Ken Wheeler (the Angry Photographer) not so credible and even have lost their entertainment value.

rmp

Thanks donalddejose for the reference to those three (I would add Thom Hogan and this forum.)

PB_PM

Steve at backcountry gallery is also very level headed about camera equipment. Laser focused on action shooting (wildlife), but really knows the ins and outs of the system.

WestEndFoto

Photography Life if they can figure out their financial model.

photobunny

PB_PM said:

Steve at backcountry gallery is also very level headed about camera equipment. Laser focused on action shooting (wildlife), but really knows the ins and outs of the system.

He is pretty great. I look forward to his guide on the Z9 AF so I can compare notes on what he is doing the same or different on certain subjects.

donaldejose

Yup, I agree with Tom, Steve and Photography Life. All better than Fro or Ken R and Ken W. This forum can be helpful answering questions but we don't write comprehensive books like Tom or make you tube videos like Steve (yet!). Some of us here could make videos. Maybe the forum should add a video section or allow linking to a video hosted elsewhere? Maybe NR needs to "get with" the video age?

spraynpray

donaldejose said:

Yup, I agree with Tom, Steve and Photography Life. All better than Fro or Ken R and Ken W. This forum can be helpful answering questions but we don't write comprehensive books like Tom or make you tube videos like Steve (yet!). Some of us here could make videos. Maybe the forum should add a video section or allow linking to a video hosted elsewhere? Maybe NR needs to "get with" the video age?

Feel free to PM @Peter Don.

photobunny

A interesting wee thing I have noted since the Z9 came out. I get more people asking about my Z6 and trying it out then finding it amazing in the photo blind and then being even more impressed with the Z9. Even around some forums there seems to be more confidence in trying the Z6/Z6ii for wildlife than before when everyone just said to switch to the Canon R5 or R6.

donaldejose

Good. Now when Nikon releases the 400mm f2.8 with built in 1.4x teleconverter making it also a 560mm f4 prime there should be even more interest in a Nikon system from wildlife shooters. Also, the Z8 and all following Nikon bodies should use the Z9 processor and AF system. Hope the Z8 and a Z body replacement for the D500 is released this year.

DaveyJ

Not many at that price. FroNows has that reaction and he used that 400 f 2.8 with the 1.4 tc lens. The 200-600 Z will probably sell a LOT of lens.

The Z version of the D500 would be the BIGGEST move Nikon could make in terms of sales and image of their company.

DaveyJ

Steve at Back Country is one of the best wildlife guys for helping photographers with gear and how to use it.