p.2 #1 · NR: Nikon Z50 Mirrorless APS-C Camera To Be Announced Soon
chambeshi wrote:
Z-Mount is obvious. Nothing else
Well, Nikon could do something incredibly dumb like bring back CX mount. But given the name (Z50) then it's going to be Z mount.
Sep 23, 2019 at 12:09 PM
Steve Spencer Offline • • • • • • • Upload & Sell: On
p.2 #2 · NR: Nikon Z50 Mirrorless APS-C Camera To Be Announced Soon
mawz wrote:
Nikon needs to do the right DX Z-Nikkors, not the dozen 18-xx/xxx zooms and poor prime selection they did.
The two new lenses are a nice starter. Give us a Z 35/1.8DX and 10-20 f4-5.6 next to cover all the consumer bases. One 16-200 for the do-everything zoom types then give us a nice selection of small and fastish primes. 16, 24, 58 to round out the core set, a 10 & 14 for the UWA guys. Top it off with a 10-24/4, 16-55/2.8 and 16-80/4
And for gods sake, everything should be weather sealed.
If that looks a lot like Fuji's lens lineup, well there's a reason for that. Fuji got a LOT right and while they have a very limited lens line, what they do have is perfectly chosen.
As to teh FTZ, there's nothing wrong with it. Just update the camera firmware to make sure that lens data is in EXIF and we're good. A screwdriver FTZ is just pointless (I've had the Sony version, performance sucks and it eats battery) ...Show more →
I agree that Fuji's strategy has been very good (although of course not perfect), but I don't think the same strategy makes sense for a camera makers that also makes FF cameras with the same mount. Nikon would naturally want people to upgrade from the APS-C cameras they make to the FF cameras they make, so making high end zooms and primes makes little sense. Instead leveraging APS-C for a smaller and more compact system does make sense.
So in my view lenses like the two that are rumored, which are even collapsible make sense. A 16-55 f/2.8, however, would not. Here is what makes sense to me for them to make for APS-C:
Four zooms: two similar to the one's rumored, a 10-20 f/4.5-5.6; and an all in one 18-200 f/4-5.6.
Four primes: 16, 24, 35, & 55 all f/2 and all very small, obviously DX only.
Anything else you can adapt F or S glass made for FF and if you really want to stay with APS-C you can adapt F mount APS-C glass, but Nikon needs to be clear if you want better lenses and faster apertures you need to go FF. APS-C needs to provide something FF does not, and higher end glass with faster apertures is something that FF really does better anyway.
Plus big box stores, and other mass marketers. These are where a lot of beginning photographers buy.
Look at how many of the top 100 are APS-C. Currently Nikon is missing out in this category. Only two Nikon SKUs in the top 100 today, #21 & #92.
Some weird SKUs today that are misclassified as well. Ignoring those, everything else is consistent with recent results.
I am guessing Nikon will not try to be low price leader, but will build a better camera at a slightly higher price point. Which is what they should do.
p.2 #4 · NR: Nikon Z50 Mirrorless APS-C Camera To Be Announced Soon
Steve Spencer wrote:
I agree that Fuji's strategy has been very good (although of course not perfect), but I don't think the same strategy makes sense for a camera makers that also makes FF cameras with the same mount. Nikon would naturally want people to upgrade from the APS-C cameras they make to the FF cameras they make, so making high end zooms and primes makes little sense. Instead leveraging APS-C for a smaller and more compact system does make sense.
Yet that has been unsuccessful for Sony in the same space (as Sony's APS-C stuff has been stagnant in terms of marketshare for years). It's also in progress of blowing up in Canon's face as they face EF M becoming a zombie mount.
The reality is that regardless of how much camera makers want to sell FF, it's a smaller market by far than APS-C and smaller even than high-end APS-C. Fuji has ridden that into being the only maker with any significant marketshare growth.
The other aspect of this is that high-end normal and wide APS-C lenses can be significantly smaller that same-aperture FF lenses. Sony's new 16-55/2.8 is comparable to the S 24-70/4 in terms of size (non-collapsed of course)
So in my view lenses like the two that are rumored, which are even collapsible make sense. A 16-55 f/2.8, however, would not. Here is what makes sense to me for them to make for APS-C:
And yet people were after Sony for years for one, they finally delivered. Nikon has lost a ton of lens sales in F mount DX due to never updating their two core zooms (the 17-55 and 12-24/4)
Four zooms: two similar to the one's rumored, a 10-20 f/4.5-5.6; and an all in one 18-200 f/4-5.6.
Four primes: 16, 24, 35, & 55 all f/2 and all very small, obviously DX only.
I agree all of those lenses are needed. But Nikon needs high-end APS-C glass as well (and a high-end APS-C body). If they don't do high-end APS-C they'll drop the biggest growth market they have available, the prosumer market. The core of that market has not gone FF and is more likely to buy lenses than consumer APS-C buyers.
Anything else you can adapt F or S glass made for FF and if you really want to stay with APS-C you can adapt F mount APS-C glass, but Nikon needs to be clear if you want better lenses and faster apertures you need to go FF. APS-C needs to provide something FF does not, and higher end glass with faster apertures is something that FF really does better anyway.
Nikon doesn't make any F mount APS-C glass worthy of adaptation beyond the 10-20VR and the 70-300AF-P VR, and maybe the 85 Micro. All 3 of those are really consumer lenses.
DX can deliver fast lenses at a noticeable size advantage to the FF equivalent.
To look at like for like:
The 24-70/2.8 S is 805g, 89mm diameter and 126mm long, with an 82mm filter ring.
The Fuji 16-55/2.8 is 655g, 86mm diameter and 106mm long, with a 77mm filter ring.
The Sony 16-55/2.8 G is 494g, 73mm diameter and 100mm long, with a 67mm filter ring.
That's a noticeable difference for the Fuji and a massive one for the Sony.
High-end glass with fast apertures is actually an advantage for smaller formats in mirrorless (it wasn't for DSLR's)
p.2 #6 · NR: Nikon Z50 Mirrorless APS-C Camera To Be Announced Soon
carlitos wrote:
It will be interesting to see how many Leica M lenses this Z50 works with. Maybe 20Mp travelers camera.
If the system is well chosen, we'll have a nice set of Nikkors that work better than any M lenses for these uses. See Fuji's Fujicron selection for how to do that correctly.
p.2 #8 · NR: Nikon Z50 Mirrorless APS-C Camera To Be Announced Soon
Amol Thorat wrote:
This is exciting news! Probably won't go anywhere close to D500 but if it can do what D7500 can, I'm game.
I'm betting on this being a little downscale from the D7500 in terms of body, but similar performance.
If the leaked renders are correct, this is going to be a RF-style body with a pop-up EVF.
I'm looking at it for replacing my E-M5II, but not my E-M1 or D300 (which would need a SLR-style body that's larger overall, I basically want a D500/Z6 cross for that.)
p.2 #10 · NR: Nikon Z50 Mirrorless APS-C Camera To Be Announced Soon
BSPhotog wrote:
Could be rad as a lightweight camera. Does anyone think that Nikon got the memo that we (I) don’t want collapsible zooms, but instead pancake primes?
This is going to be consumer-oriented camera, which means Nikon needs both.
The consumers want little zooms. The serious guys want wee primes.
Nikon needs to have an answer to the Fujicrons on the lens roadmap the moment they release the Z50.
p.2 #11 · NR: Nikon Z50 Mirrorless APS-C Camera To Be Announced Soon
mawz wrote:
This is going to be consumer-oriented camera, which means Nikon needs both.
The consumers want little zooms. The serious guys want wee primes.
Nikon needs to have an answer to the Fujicrons on the lens roadmap the moment they release the Z50.
You are 100% correct about the urgency for Nikon to leverage on a series of pancakes like the Fujicron. And similarly wider base to fit Z-mount narrowing anteriorly. So share the compact design, cost less than faster counterparts, but not comprise on AF, IQ and build quality. Fuji have a 16 f2.8, 20, 35 and 50 - all f2. All the better if Nikon add 85 f2 and 105 f2.5. They should sell well IF they are FX.
p.2 #12 · NR: Nikon Z50 Mirrorless APS-C Camera To Be Announced Soon
Thus far I have seen no compelling reason to add a Nikon mirrorless setup to my Nikon collection which currently includes 850, 750, 500 etc bodies and more than 25 compatible Nikon lenses. I typically acquirer the latest and greatest, cost be damned. As a retired hobbiest, what am I missing?
p.2 #13 · NR: Nikon Z50 Mirrorless APS-C Camera To Be Announced Soon
ariel777 wrote:
Thus far I have seen no compelling reason to add a Nikon mirrorless setup to my Nikon collection which currently includes 850, 750, 500 etc bodies and more than 25 compatible Nikon lenses. I typically acquirer the latest and greatest, cost be damned. As a retired hobbiest, what am I missing?
Something that fits in a jacket pocket?
The big use case for the Z50 for a serious shooter is a light carry camera for when you don't want to haul a bag full.
It'll deliver SLR IQ without SLR size & weight.
I currently carry a Olympus E-M5II with their 14-42EZ pancake zoom and/or a small prime for this, before that I carried a Fuji X-T1 with a 23/2WR
p.2 #14 · NR: Nikon Z50 Mirrorless APS-C Camera To Be Announced Soon
chambeshi wrote:
You are 100% correct about the urgency for Nikon to leverage on a series of pancakes like the Fujicron. And similarly wider base to fit Z-mount narrowing anteriorly. So share the compact design, cost less than faster counterparts, but not comprise on AF, IQ and build quality. Fuji have a 16 f2.8, 20, 35 and 50 - all f2. All the better if Nikon add 85 f2 and 105 f2.5. They should sell well IF they are FX.
I should note that while I'd want that 105/2.5, I'd prefer those longer lenses be full on FX S lenses. I don't mind the size of the 85/1.8 S for its application on APS-C.
I'd also want to see a 135/2.8...It's a better match to the 85 when building a kit (I'd buy either an 85 or a 105, but not both, but would buy both an 85 and 135)
Sep 23, 2019 at 02:59 PM
Steve Spencer Offline • • • • • • • Upload & Sell: On
p.2 #15 · NR: Nikon Z50 Mirrorless APS-C Camera To Be Announced Soon
mawz wrote:
Yet that has been unsuccessful for Sony in the same space (as Sony's APS-C stuff has been stagnant in terms of marketshare for years). It's also in progress of blowing up in Canon's face as they face EF M becoming a zombie mount.
The reality is that regardless of how much camera makers want to sell FF, it's a smaller market by far than APS-C and smaller even than high-end APS-C. Fuji has ridden that into being the only maker with any significant marketshare growth.
The other aspect of this is that high-end normal and wide APS-C lenses can be significantly smaller that same-aperture FF lenses. Sony's new 16-55/2.8 is comparable to the S 24-70/4 in terms of size (non-collapsed of course)
And yet people were after Sony for years for one, they finally delivered. Nikon has lost a ton of lens sales in F mount DX due to never updating their two core zooms (the 17-55 and 12-24/4)
I agree all of those lenses are needed. But Nikon needs high-end APS-C glass as well (and a high-end APS-C body). If they don't do high-end APS-C they'll drop the biggest growth market they have available, the prosumer market. The core of that market has not gone FF and is more likely to buy lenses than consumer APS-C buyers.
Nikon doesn't make any F mount APS-C glass worthy of adaptation beyond the 10-20VR and the 70-300AF-P VR, and maybe the 85 Micro. All 3 of those are really consumer lenses.
DX can deliver fast lenses at a noticeable size advantage to the FF equivalent.
To look at like for like:
The 24-70/2.8 S is 805g, 89mm diameter and 126mm long, with an 82mm filter ring.
The Fuji 16-55/2.8 is 655g, 86mm diameter and 106mm long, with a 77mm filter ring.
The Sony 16-55/2.8 G is 494g, 73mm diameter and 100mm long, with a 67mm filter ring.
That's a noticeable difference for the Fuji and a massive one for the Sony.
High-end glass with fast apertures is actually an advantage for smaller formats in mirrorless (it wasn't for DSLR's)
I wasn't aware the strategy didn't work for Sony. They seem to have been pretty successful since they have introduced FF mirrorless and neither I nor you know whether they would have done better or worse of the same if they had concentrated more on APS-C. What we do know is that they have done well by not developing APS-C very much and focussing on FF. Personally, I think that is the better strategy for Nikon too. Sure, after Nikon makes the eight lenses for the Z mount I suggested *and* have a full slate of FF Z mount lenses then it might make sense to consider making a fast 16-55 f/2.8 for APS-C and then they will be able to judge that market more fully, but that is a long long way out and nothing that I believe should be a priority now.
As far as your comparisons, I don't agree with you about what is a FF equivalent. A 16-55 f/2.8 APS-C lens is closest to a 24-70 f/4 equivalent, if you care at all about depth of field or the total amount of light that is hitting the sensor from each lens when wide open. As you probably know the Nikon 24-70 f/4 S is a very strong lens and weighs just 500g, so there is no weight savings or size advantage for APS-C with a wide to short tele zoom if you compare apples to apples and not just on focal length but also on depth of field and on the total amount of light that is hitting the sensor. Of course if you compare a lens that in use is in effect over a stop slower, then it is smaller, but not if you really have an equivalent in focal length, depth of field, and the amount of light hitting the sensor as a whole.
I also disagree that APS-C is a growth market. Everything from every CEO says it is a contracting market and more the FF because it is more affected by cell phone cameras. Prosumer is a growth market, but it is particularly prosumers who are interested in higher end gear where the growth seems to be occurring.
p.2 #18 · NR: Nikon Z50 Mirrorless APS-C Camera To Be Announced Soon
mawz wrote:
I should note that while I'd want that 105/2.5, I'd prefer those longer lenses be full on FX S lenses. I don't mind the size of the 85/1.8 S for its application on APS-C.
I'd also want to see a 135/2.8...It's a better match to the 85 when building a kit (I'd buy either an 85 or a 105, but not both, but would buy both an 85 and 135)
To rephrase my post, it would be strategic failure if Nikon make only-DX primes. They already emphasized their aim to be industry leaders in the FX camera industry. Pancake primes will widen the options in choices to complement what Nikon is rolling out in the official roadmap of the Z system.
Yes, Steve Spencer is correct IMHO
The Z50 and a handful of DX MILC lenses - no more - are to start the photographer off on their journey. Unlike DX lenses, Investing in FX optics will take them the whole way :-) The only other values of a DX MILC will be its smaller footprint in pocket and images for events and travel.
p.2 #19 · NR: Nikon Z50 Mirrorless APS-C Camera To Be Announced Soon
New photographer here. I find this super interesting given my current considerations. I ended up starting this hobby with the X-T2, a camera that I can safely say I very much love to shoot with. My main photography interests are in wildlife/conservation/landscapes (did not see this coming at all, thought I'd enjoy setting up portraits or jumping on the street photo trend but I was incredibly wrong).
Now I say interest intentionally there because honestly things like BIF/Fast Action is still very far out of my wheelhouse. This has lead me to a weird form of GAS (mainly eyeballing the D500 specifically). I still plan on keeping my X-T2 and still pushing myself to learn more before I make any large purchases, but I will say this piques my interest even more. OVF's are great, but I currently rely on an EVF a bit too much right now with shooting manual lenses with focus peaking. I don't believe the Z50 will be like a geared toward fast action/wildlife or anything, but fwiw as a fuji user I'm raising some eyebrows.
