1bwana1 wrote:
Yeah, I think the general consensus is that it will be a Tower manufactured sensor. Canon is able to design and manufacture its own stacked sensor. I see no reason that Nikon and Tower, with the stacked expertise of Experi, working together couldn't come with a perfectly suitable stacked sensor design.
In the end though I don't think people should make a big deal out of where the sensor is fabricated. What matters more is the whole package of the camera system. Sensor, body, economics, haptics, glass, that really is important for the end user. Nikon is building a quality native mirrorless lens line that holds up to the competition really well. From what I have seen, the body design will appeal to those who are inclined to like Nikon DSLR esthetics, handling, and shooting experience. That is very important in getting Nikon's reluctant users to migrate over to mirrorless. I think they will realize the benefits of and advanced, high performance mirrorless system finally once they experience it with their preferred logo on the front. It is important for Nikon that this happens. Currently Nikon's biggest competitor for their existing user base is Nikon's own DSLR line. This base is like a battery of stored consumer energy for Nikon. It can release great financial results when it is released. Canon also has this advantage. Sony doesn't.
Anyway, I am optimistic about the Z9 and Nikon in general right now.
Same. I'm just ready for Nikon to get their AF sorted so they can get some bodies out that will match the excellent glass that they have available, along with the Z mount telephoto lenses. They get those two things sorted and they will be in a really good spot going forward.
JasonTheBirder wrote:
Looks awesome. What will tip me towards this camera is a Z mount 600PF. But to be honest if the 200-600 is also outstanding, it would also be a motivating factor. Has to be really good though.
Based on the reviews and quality from the 70-200 Z, I think we're in for a treat.
45mp is that sweet spot. 50-60mp is quite a lot of noise when pushing it. 45mp stack sensor with rumored 30fps will be great
I could tell no meaningful difference between my files out of the two 45MP sensors I owned and the 50 and 61MP sensors I owned. Only my 51MP 5DSR sensor sucked...but that thing is old. 5 extra MPs going from 45-50 on a modern sensor design is not all of a sudden going to make the noise unbearable. In a blind test you'd struggle to find any difference.
1bwana1 wrote:
Yeah, I think the general consensus is that it will be a Tower manufactured sensor. Canon is able to design and manufacture its own stacked sensor. I see no reason that Nikon and Tower, with the stacked expertise of Experi, working together couldn't come with a perfectly suitable stacked sensor design.
In the end though I don't think people should make a big deal out of where the sensor is fabricated. What matters more is the whole package of the camera system. Sensor, body, economics, haptics, glass, that really is important for the end user. Nikon is building a quality native mirrorless lens line that holds up to the competition really well. From what I have seen, the body design will appeal to those who are inclined to like Nikon DSLR esthetics, handling, and shooting experience. That is very important in getting Nikon's reluctant users to migrate over to mirrorless. I think they will realize the benefits of and advanced, high performance mirrorless system finally once they experience it with their preferred logo on the front. It is important for Nikon that this happens. Currently Nikon's biggest competitor for their existing user base is Nikon's own DSLR line. This base is like a battery of stored consumer energy for Nikon. It can release great financial results when it is released. Canon also has this advantage. Sony doesn't.
Anyway, I am optimistic about the Z9 and Nikon in general right now.
I totally agree. Personally I am ready to migrate to mirrorless 100%. As much as I like D6 and D850, I love having AF point that cover majority of the frame. Every time I pick up my D6, I always notice this limitation. Yes, plenty of people produces many better photos than I ever could with much much less focus point in the past but having had this on mirrorless cameras for the last 6-7 years, I am really spoiled
I know at least one person who may get a hand on preproduction Z9 soon but not sure if he is allowed to say anything much,, most likely not, supposedly even his colleagues are not allow to touch or play with it. Exciting time is coming…..
Sorry Geoff those are very impressive specs. I can see a Z9 is more likely to be in my bag than an R3, however, neither will be readily available for at least 9-12 months IMO. I'm not into pre-ordering at top price and hate being a beta tester.
Z9 + 500 PF will be a dream combo. And there is the 200-600 to come.
arbitrage wrote:
I could tell no meaningful difference between my files out of the two 45MP sensors I owned and the 50 and 61MP sensors I owned. Only my 51MP 5DSR sensor sucked...but that thing is old. 5 extra MPs going from 45-50 on a modern sensor design is not all of a sudden going to make the noise unbearable. In a blind test you'd struggle to find any difference.
Not neccessarily noise level, but noise grain pattern on A7r IV is significantly worse and more intrusive than Z7 ii/A7r iii though, I find, even when reducing pixels to the same resolution. I remember when I got A7r IV initially, I was rather surprise to see higher than expect graininess even at iso 800 than what I used to with D850,A7r iii.
arbitrage wrote:
I could tell no meaningful difference between my files out of the two 45MP sensors I owned and the 50 and 61MP sensors I owned. Only my 51MP 5DSR sensor sucked...but that thing is old. 5 extra MPs going from 45-50 on a modern sensor design is not all of a sudden going to make the noise unbearable. In a blind test you'd struggle to find any difference.
Huh, what do you mean the 5DsR sensor sucked? IQ was superb, AF was the main issue, but it was still a bit better than the 5D3 IMO. As long as I didn't use TC's I found the 5DsR was a decent birding camera - well by Canon standards. Not a scratch on my D500.
suteetat wrote:
Not neccessarily noise level, but noise grain pattern on A7r IV is significantly worse and more intrusive than Z7 ii/A7r iii though, I find, even when reducing pixels to the same resolution. I remember when I got A7r IV initially, I was rather surprise to see higher than expect graininess even at iso 800 than what I used to with D850,A7r iii.
That's my impression too and why I didn't bother updating my A7RIII. The new grip and improved AF were welcome, but honestly I would have preferred a faster readout sensor that was still 42MP so ES would have been usable in action shooting and with the same excellent noise as the A7RIII.
Pixel Perfect wrote:
Huh, what do you mean the 5DsR sensor sucked? IQ was superb, AF was the main issue, but it was still a bit better than the 5D3 IMO. As long as I didn't use TC's I found the 5DsR was a decent birding camera - well by Canon standards. Not a scratch on my D500.
The discussion was about noise...the 5DSR sucked if you tried moving around shadows....sure it had great IQ in good light. No way it was even close to the modern 45-61 MP sensors when in low light.
Pixel Perfect wrote:
Sorry Geoff those are very impressive specs. I can see a Z9 is more likely to be in my bag than an R3, however, neither will be readily available for at least 9-12 months IMO. I'm not into pre-ordering at top price and hate being a beta tester.
Z9 + 500 PF will be a dream combo. And there is the 200-600 to come.
I don't see a single spec (other than that 120FPS 6MP image thing) that isn't already in a current camera.
They are pleasing specs. But nothing that innovates...just keeping up.
Unless the body design comes out different than the one spotted in Tokyo, it won't be a body on my radar anytime soon. And there is a lot of things Nikon has to do with the FW/customization to make this a worthwhile investment to me.
But the biggest issue for me is the lack of lenses. Yes I'd be happy to use my 500PF but I'm not spending $9K CAD to shoot my 500PF. And I'm not going to buy an overweight 600 FL (which only matches the 600II I bought in 2012). So unless there is a 600S available the Z9 remains a no buy.
I think if you have already migrated to another system, it would be hard to come back unless the AF is really ground breaking.
But for us who waited and stick around, this will be very worthwhile if the AF is on par with competitions. For me, it's the Z glass and the Nikon image that I'm used that made me stick around. I'm not going to lie, I've looked at Sony more than a few times.
mehrdad sadat wrote:
so this makes it like a canon R5 but much more money
Since when can R5 shoot at 30 FPS? Frame grabbing from 8k video is not equal to shooting photo at 30 fps, I think.
There isn't currently a competitor for the R5 just like there isn't currently a competitor for the A1. The closet competitor to the R5 is the A9 and not really a fair comparison outside of the stickier AF on the A9 in certain situations.
The Z9 is, on paper, a direct competitor to the A1. I wouldn't put the R3 in direct competition with the A1 although that is the case because Canon doesn't have anything else that matches or exceeds it spec for spec as of yet.
That is supposedly going to be the unannounced R1.
The R5 holds its own against the A1 but based on hardware the R5 is likely close to its limits on what it can do and I doubt we'll see much in the way of actual AF improvements outside of features being added if that even happens. The A1 on the other hand has a lot of room to grow - if Sony needs to add more to the camera, it can be done through firmware. It has the internals to support it.
arbitrage wrote:
The discussion was about noise...the 5DSR sucked if you tried moving around shadows....sure it had great IQ in good light. No way it was even close to the modern 45-61 MP sensors when in low light.
Sure, but again it was about 1 stop better than 5D3 for shadow DR, but what do you expect from 2014 tech. Also noise was better than 7DII which people managed to take good high ISO photos. I used 5DsR to IS6400 occasionally and it was just as good per pixel as 5D3 resampled down to around 24MP and had better detail and was still a bit better than 7DII cropped top same FoV.
arbitrage wrote:
I don't see a single spec (other than that 120FPS 6MP image thing) that isn't already in a current camera.
They are pleasing specs. But nothing that innovates...just keeping up.
Unless the body design comes out different than the one spotted in Tokyo, it won't be a body on my radar anytime soon. And there is a lot of things Nikon has to do with the FW/customization to make this a worthwhile investment to me.
But the biggest issue for me is the lack of lenses. Yes I'd be happy to use my 500PF but I'm not spending $9K CAD to shoot my 500PF. And I'm not going to buy an overweight 600 FL (which only matches the 600II I bought in 2012). So unless there is a 600S available the Z9 remains a no buy....Show more →
So you are underwhelmed by the A1 I presume? It's not like these cameras are a dime a dozen. And you have no idea about EVF quality, AF, battery life, 8K options. There's only so much you can do. What else should they have done other than a global shutter?
Also Nikon has already shown the lens roadmap, 400 f/2.8 and 600 f/4 Z S are coming, do you really think they will be same weight as FL versions?
canon repackaged the 5d4 into R1 so they had time to come up with a good camera. I think they are doing the same thing with R3, it is a repackaged 1dxiii/r6 with tweaked everything so they have time to roll out R1. Nikon, on the other hand, came up short with z6/7 and again with z6/7ii and now they are rolling the dice on a brand new camera. I hope they make it. I have not bought any mirrorless Nikon and sticking to d850/d5 till the dust settles. but I do think Nikon is becoming a boutique company and I think the sooner they realize it, the sooner they plot a course to be a successful company again. leica is a good example
