chambeshi wrote:
"I've heard that Nikon has been trying to push it forward into October. I'm now getting reports from dealers who are scheduling preview sessions with Nikon product managers in the next two weeks."
I have heard that the announcement was scheduled for October 13th. However more recently heard that this was to be delayed due to some firmware challenges. Both of these from people who have hands on the camera. Who really knows?
In either case, it is not far away. It will likely be the new low ISO, high DR, low noise, leader in the high performance stacked sensor mirrorless market. It promises to be a great addition to the Nikon infrastructure. I am optimistic and interested in seeing what Nikon has come up with in the Z9.
multibit wrote:
Is it confirmed the Z9 will be 45mp ? I've never seen a high MP camera in one of the full-sized large pro bodies
Not really.
It is confirmed to do 8K. Regular aspect ratio 8K requires 39MP 3:2 sensor. DCI ratio 8K requires 45MP. Canon always uses DCI but I don't believe Nikon does.
Also Sony has 8K capable sensors down in the mid 30MP range that make use of otherwise masked pixels on the left and right to get to 8K where as the 3:2 photo sensor is not as high as you would expect.
It is confirmed to do 8K. Regular aspect ratio 8K requires 39MP 3:2 sensor. DCI ratio 8K requires 45MP. Canon always uses DCI but I don't believe Nikon does.
Also Sony has 8K capable sensors down in the lower 30MP range that make use of otherwise masked pixels on the left and right to get to 8K where as the 3:2 photo sensor is not as high as you would expect.
So therefore 45MP is certainly not confirmed.
But it should be high 30s or above.
Thanks Geoff that makes sense , I just got a feeling it might be lower mp's like the D6 and R3 .
D850, R5 , A1 etc high MP cameras seem to be in the usual sized bodies , maybe easier if used for landscape shooters and have that option for battery grip for action larger lenses .
It is confirmed to do 8K. Regular aspect ratio 8K requires 39MP 3:2 sensor. DCI ratio 8K requires 45MP. Canon always uses DCI but I don't believe Nikon does.
Also Sony has 8K capable sensors down in the mid 30MP range that make use of otherwise masked pixels on the left and right to get to 8K where as the 3:2 photo sensor is not as high as you would expect.
So therefore 45MP is certainly not confirmed.
But it should be high 30s or above.
I think it is pretty much a given already that Z9 will have 45mp and non Sony sensor.
Z9 definitely will be more of a competitor to A1 rather than R3. Still hope we will hear something
more definitive before the end of this month.
In a way, it make more sense to have high MP high FPS sensor in a big body as heat management will be crucial. Sony
really went out of its way to deal with heat. R5 is somewhat handicapped by its heat management when it comes to 8K video.
chambeshi wrote:
"I've heard that Nikon has been trying to push it forward into October. I'm now getting reports from dealers who are scheduling preview sessions with Nikon product managers in the next two weeks."
"Two months ago I would have said yes. But the on-going negativity I see from so many about Nikon's present and future has me worried that my yes has turned into a maybe."
Thom doesn't sound optimistic as he used to be, this isn't a good sign.
i think its more the dealing with the mob and its lack of perspective.
mine was a maybe from day one. one does not make a final decision on a device one knows little to nothing about. it does need to do the job i need it to do. i don't work off of hearsay. i don't need/want to be the crash test dummy. i can do a bit with $6K+
cvrle59 wrote:
"Two months ago I would have said yes. But the on-going negativity I see from so many about Nikon's present and future has me worried that my yes has turned into a maybe."
Thom doesn't sound optimistic as he used to be, this isn't a good sign.
Nikon is feeling pressure to release. They are late to the game. I have heard that the hardware is solid and locked in some time ago. But there are challenges with firmware. It is said that they are considering releasing with some features to be delivered in 2 firmware updates early next year. I hope that is not what they decide to do. I think it best to wait. Sounds like Thom may be hearing the same thing from his sources.
Firmware development is probably a continuous process. There will be some firmware update in the works most of the time, so I'd rather have them release it now and publish the updates later than to release it later when the updates currently in development will be included but subsequent updates will be in the development pipeline anyway.
You only get one first impression. Right or wrongly Nikon's reputation has been battered and bruised in the last couple of years. They will have to be shrewd with the balance of timing / features / marketing / co-announced lenses etc. in order to counteract those headwinds.
There is certainly a non-zero contingent of Nikon DSLR faithful waiting on this thing to decide whether they're going to switch away or not. It really does have to be a banger of a camera to keep them in the fold.
I think releasing a product with planned firmware upgrade is ok if it is not for a known bug fix or to correct something that is not working quite right at launch. That should have been hammered out before launch.
If it adds a new feature, it is reasonable in some cases. For example, Z6/Z7 output raw file to Atomos Ninja was a firmware upgrade that was announced at launch. My understanding is that Nikon was waiting for court's ruling on ProRes RAW between Apple and Red. The court made a ruling in November 2000 and firmware update became available in December. I think for something like this, there is no reason to hold back the launch.
Releasing Z6/Z7 then introduced eye focus a bit later was a bit more iffy. Again, I am not sure if the delay was because Nikon was slow at deciding to add this feature or if there was any patent/royalty issue or why it was not ready at launch. This did look a bit worse for Nikon, I believed.
blackadde wrote:
You only get one first impression. Right or wrongly Nikon's reputation has been battered and bruised in the last couple of years. They will have to be shrewd with the balance of timing / features / marketing / co-announced lenses etc. in order to counteract those headwinds.
There is certainly a non-zero contingent of Nikon DSLR faithful waiting on this thing to decide whether they're going to switch away or not. It really does have to be a banger of a camera to keep them in the fold.
Plus, they must actually deliver what they release in reasonable quantities.
blackadde wrote:
You only get one first impression. Right or wrongly Nikon's reputation has been battered and bruised in the last couple of years. They will have to be shrewd with the balance of timing / features / marketing / co-announced lenses etc. in order to counteract those headwinds.
There is certainly a non-zero contingent of Nikon DSLR faithful waiting on this thing to decide whether they're going to switch away or not. It really does have to be a banger of a camera to keep them in the fold.
Not everyone is browsing U-Tube videos all day long in order to sample first impressions. Most people decide to buy a new camera when they perceive an actual need or benefit due to the evolution or change of their work. Others buy a new camera when their old camera breaks down.
suteetat wrote:
I think releasing a product with planned firmware upgrade is ok if it is not for a known bug fix or to correct something that is not working quite right at launch. That should have been hammered out before launch.
If it adds a new feature, it is reasonable in some cases. For example, Z6/Z7 output raw file to Atomos Ninja was a firmware upgrade that was announced at launch. My understanding is that Nikon was waiting for court's ruling on ProRes RAW between Apple and Red. The court made a ruling in November 2000 and firmware update became available in December. I think for something like this, there is no reason to hold back the launch.
Releasing Z6/Z7 then introduced eye focus a bit later was a bit more iffy. Again, I am not sure if the delay was because Nikon was slow at deciding to add this feature or if there was any patent/royalty issue or why it was not ready at launch. This did look a bit worse for Nikon, I believed. ...Show more →
It still looked better than launching the camera several months later.
1bwana1 wrote:
Nikon is feeling pressure to release. They are late to the game. I have heard that the hardware is solid and locked in some time ago. But there are challenges with firmware. It is said that they are considering releasing with some features to be delivered in 2 firmware updates early next year. I hope that is not what they decide to do. I think it best to wait. Sounds like Thom may be hearing the same thing from his sources.
I feel it's better to get out the product if its in a ready state and worry about adding features as you go, rather than polishing it to the nth degree and delaying it several months. Sony greatly improved the features of the A9 over the course of 2 years via fw, but it was already fantastic out of the box. As long as Z9 has met all their performance and quality metrics release it and garner more good will with major feature updates especially at this price point.
Oct 02, 2021 at 11:33 PM
Steve Spencer Offline • • • • • • • Upload & Sell: Off
cvrle59 wrote:
"Two months ago I would have said yes. But the on-going negativity I see from so many about Nikon's present and future has me worried that my yes has turned into a maybe."
Thom doesn't sound optimistic as he used to be, this isn't a good sign.
If you read the article his source of some negativity is that he thinks Nikon might build an excellent AF system that can produce high level results, but it just won't be as automated as some of the competitors. If that is what Nikon does it bothers me zero. I am not a fan of automating things just so the user doesn't have to learn how to use it. I do recognize this is popular in general. It just isn't something I care about at all. I like to take the time to really learn to use a system and if a system well learned works better than an automated system even it it takes longer to learn. I will take the longer to learn better system every time over the automated system.
So if the Z9 has an AF system such that it takes some time and effort to learn it well, but when you do it works even better than the automated systems of the competitors, then I would definitely get the Z9 over the competition. I suspect, however, this won't be the decision a lot of people make. Automating things is popular and the Z9 might not do as well as Nikon hopes.
I also agree that nikon has a lot riding on this initial release. A $7k pro body really has little margin for error especially when you are as far behind as nikon has gotten. I am using two systems these days, Canon for wildlife and nikon for travel, people and hiking. Ive kept a few nikon lenses hoping they get the performance issues on the z bodies fixed, but the z9 is not likely a body I would buy under any circumstance. Too expensive for me. Where nikon is really in trouble right now is in the prosumer market. The r5 and r6 are terrific as are the equivalent Sony bodies.. And it's not like they are sitting still waiting to see what nikon is doing.
So I'm keeping fingers crossed hoping the z9 is as good as it needs to be.
