There is some speculation that the event may be astro focused, but I'm skeptical. I would love for Nikon to release a camera that isn't effected by the RAW filtering that makes them ill suited for a lot of astrophotography. Sony has updated the A7RV to remove any filtering that effects astro, but I'm skeptical that nikon is even aware that it is a deal breaker for a lot of astro shooters.
At the moment if the z6iii has improved AF and a 33mp sensor, I'm going to be picking one up. If it is a repackaged ZF, no chance.
nhmorgan wrote:
At the moment if the z6iii has improved AF and a 33mp sensor, I'm going to be picking one up. If it is a repackaged ZF, no chance.
That is close to what I expect as the base line. Nikon will definitely up the AF to at least the Zf level. This with a more agile ergonomics and configurability package will make it a much improved camera, It will appeal to a wider audience than the Zf as well. I expect some new features unique to Nikon in the Z6III as well. No idea what they will be however.
If Nikon uses the same old 24 mpx sensor that has been in the Z6 and now in the Zf it will be a disappointment. It would indicate to me that the Z7III will also not have a big increase in resolution. That would leave Sony with 33mpx and 60mpx for non stacked sensors, and 24mpx and 50mpx for stacked and GS sensors. That would not be a great competitive position for Nikon to be in.
1bwana1 wrote:
That is close to what I expect as the base line. Nikon will definitely up the AF to at least the Zf level. This with a more agile ergonomics and configurability package will make it a much improved camera, It will appeal to a wider audience than the Zf as well. I expect some new features unique to Nikon in the Z6III as well. No idea what they will be however.
If Nikon uses the same old 24 mpx sensor that has been in the Z6 and now in the Zf it will be a disappointment. It would indicate to me that the Z7III will also not have a big increase in resolution. That would leave Sony with 33mpx and 60mpx for non stacked sensors, and 24mpx and 50mpx for stacked and GS sensors. That would not be a great competitive position for Nikon to be in....Show more →
Even that's the scenario, they'll be fine. It always comes back down to price. Even if it's $200~$300 more than the Zf, it'll be fine as long as it's lower than the R6ii and a7iv which are both at $2.5k.
Price is an important factor, even in the case of the Z9 where the lower price most certainly is one of that factors that helped it to sell more than what a flagship would traditionally sell. Even more so in this segment where people start to look at their wallets more than the pros who can justify their purchases as a work expense and the equipment can earn it's worth back in work.
The R6 Mk2 seems to be garnering a lot of praise. It seems to be the one to beat. Mainly the AF and the handling has won folk over. And their 200-800 is a hit. It will be interesting to see if Nikon can match or top it in concert with the 180-600. The primes are too expensive for that segment so it will probably need a bump in resolution over the R6/2 to match up. At least for wildlife, apparently other genres exist
It depends on how Nikon wants to position the Z6 III and there are serious disadvantages that go hand in hand with a sensor that has such a slow read-out as that of the A7IV.
Rolling Shutter, the whole E-Shutter experience gets f.... up with such a slow read out, lossless compressed only 5-6 FPS max, 10 FPS only compressed RAW or jpeg, movie performance...
I think Nikon is doing everything right by focusing on performance and speed with the Z6 III, the advantages should clearly outweigh the small gain in resolution for the majority.
Just as Canon ultimately did with the R6 II.
If you want more resolution, go straight for the Z8, Z9, or be patient until Nikon presents a Z7 II successor.
However, gimping a Z6 III in terms of read out speed to the level of the previous Gen, as would be the case with the sensor of the A7IV, would definitely be the wrong way to go.
Especially as the Z6 III tends to be the next generation compared to an A7IV, where an A7V will probably be the competitor in the foreseeable future, alongside the R6 II.
"Our first look at the rolling shutter rates suggests this isn't an especially fast sensor. 14-bit readout of the whole sensor for stills takes around 1/15 sec (~66ms), which is around seventeen times longer than the super-fast a1 takes to read out its sensor. This means silent shutter mode is likely to result in significant distortion with moving subjects."
You would suffer far more disadvantages from the slow sensor read out than you would really benefit in practice from the relatively low resolution increase.
Nikon should offer something faster, in line with the Canon EOS R6 II or even faster, which will help not only with autofocus but will improve the "E-Shutter experience" and movie performance as well.
nhmorgan wrote:
At the moment if the z6iii has improved AF and a 33mp sensor, I'm going to be picking one up. If it is a repackaged ZF, no chance.
You are describing a repackaged Zf minus the 24MP sensor, so you will likely be happy with whatever the Z6III ends up being. In the Zf and presumably also the Z6III, you are getting Expeed 7 + Z8/Z9 AF algorithms, which is as much as they can realistically offer without including a stacked sensor for zero blackout and the higher sampling rates.
On the sensor side, whether it's the same 24MP sensor they are using now or a new 33MP one, it isn't going to make much of a difference I don't think. Sensor performance (ISO & DR) plateaued so long ago that these days you are basically just choosing your preferred resolution and readout speed, which are reflected in the price (stacked sensors are very expensive to manufacture). The jump from 24MP to 33MP is only ~15% in terms of linear resolution so it will marginally noticeable in terms of cropping ability. If Nikon can offer a faster camera at 24MP, I think that would be a better way to go, especially with the Z8 being as cheap as it is relative to the closest competition. Some of it also probably depends on their plan (or lack of) for a Z7III.
If you need much more than what you see in the current Zf, you will probably need to move into a stacked sensor body and the Z8 becomes the obvious choice, which itself is an absolute bargain relative to the closest competition. As usual I hope I'm wrong, but I doubt Nikon will make the Z6III into what is essentially a Z8 in an even smaller body. If they do somehow surprise us with a stacked sensor in the Z6III, then all bets are off I suppose - they have already shown they are willing to shake up the market and undercut the competition by thousands, so fingers crossed for some Z6III surprises
People begging for 33mp and meanwhile I just shot a conference room event on my D4S and D5 and I'm just like "please put sensors like this in a mirrorless body."
And it has the D610's AF system I know about the DF. How they made the camera less attractive than the D4S is astounding. RoamingScott wrote:
There is so little to be gained by the bump to 33mp, but people love to think it’s the resolution holding their photography back
Yea there was a registered camera so we know there's at least one coming, but history would suggest, we're not going to see it until at least 2 to 4 months later.
Whys is it that many seems to believe 33mp = same as Sony A7 something camera? If Nikon is changing Z6’s sensor, it will be a big deal, and probably they will use it for the next 5-6 years. It is a serious investment and R&D for Nikon. Why would Nikon do all the research, design and just slap an off the shelf sensor? D850, Z8,9 sensors are Nikon design Sony made sensor. Why wouldn’t it be like that? Nikon design their sensor, someone, like Sony to make it to the spec? Referring to read out speed of Sony camera does note seem relevant here. It could be a 35-6 mp native 8K res sensor. I am just trying to understand the logic of what seems to be prevalent argument.
I still get studio use out of a D810 because the 33mp matters enough vs 24mp. Also, when I'm shooting sports and events, 24mp comes up a little short in the crop department. Even a little extra would help. I don't shoot video much, but 33mp also offers more flexibility in video especially if Nikon offers flexible framing. Also, while the AF is improved on the ZF, the sensor seems to be holding it back from being on the level of z8/z9. So basically, I'm on board if Nikon offers an improved sensor from the old Z6 sensor.
CanadaMark wrote:
You are describing a repackaged Zf minus the 24MP sensor, so you will likely be happy with whatever the Z6III ends up being. In the Zf and presumably also the Z6III, you are getting Expeed 7 + Z8/Z9 AF algorithms, which is as much as they can realistically offer without including a stacked sensor for zero blackout and the higher sampling rates.
On the sensor side, whether it's the same 24MP sensor they are using now or a new 33MP one, it isn't going to make much of a difference I don't think. Sensor performance (ISO & DR) plateaued so long ago that these days you are basically just choosing your preferred resolution and readout speed, which are reflected in the price (stacked sensors are very expensive to manufacture). The jump from 24MP to 33MP is only ~15% in terms of linear resolution so it will marginally noticeable in terms of cropping ability. If Nikon can offer a faster camera at 24MP, I think that would be a better way to go, especially with the Z8 being as cheap as it is relative to the closest competition. Some of it also probably depends on their plan (or lack of) for a Z7III.
If you need much more than what you see in the current Zf, you will probably need to move into a stacked sensor body and the Z8 becomes the obvious choice, which itself is an absolute bargain relative to the closest competition. As usual I hope I'm wrong, but I doubt Nikon will make the Z6III into what is essentially a Z8 in an even smaller body. If they do somehow surprise us with a stacked sensor in the Z6III, then all bets are off I suppose - they have already shown they are willing to shake up the market and undercut the competition by thousands, so fingers crossed for some Z6III surprises ...Show more →
nhmorgan wrote:
I still get studio use out of a D810 because the 33mp matters enough vs 24mp. Also, when I'm shooting sports and events, 24mp comes up a little short in the crop department. Even a little extra would help. I don't shoot video much, but 33mp also offers more flexibility in video especially if Nikon offers flexible framing. Also, while the AF is improved on the ZF, the sensor seems to be holding it back from being on the level of z8/z9. So basically, I'm on board if Nikon offers an improved sensor from the old Z6 sensor.
Although I don’t shoot with D810 that much any more, I agree. The difference between 36MP and 24MP so actually quite noticeable. I find 36 is a good middle of the road resolution. 24MP is just a tad too short in my opinion. I love the cleanness of low light high iso shots of 24 MP sensor though. If it comes down to that, hmm, not sure which I prefer in the end. Haha.
I have a hard time trusting many of the rumor sites particularly on YouTube. I mentioned how the Z9 with a lower megapixel sensor could easily be a Z9H months ago , and others chimed in with thoughts. 3-4 days later the rumor sites started reporting the same thoughts, it’s almost like they read the forums and pick random BS to put out there just to bring in the clicks.
This eonded up being just an error on Nikon Germany's website.
At one point the site showed QTY 11 for cameras but with only 9 models listed. Nikon Rumors in their haste to report rumors didn't bother to look at models. If they did, they would have noticed that the Z6 and Z7 were not shown. The Nikon Germany corrected the error and now everything matches up.
