I am willing to wager a few hundred bucks that if we evere get a 7iii it will be a lot more than $500 more expensive than a 6iii. As Hogan has posted Nikon tends to price in increments of 1.4, so 2500, 3500, 4900 - which roughly are the 6, 8 and 9 price points. They need a $1500-$1700 body more than they need a 7iii so my guess it we will see 5ii sooner rather than later. The 7 bodies felt like a crutch to keep the faithful in the fold with a higher Mpx body that required minimal engineering over a 6. I would not be surprised if we never see a 7iii.
aman74 wrote:
What system are you on now? One thing lost in these discussions and a cameras spot in the marketplace is that this is the newest camera out…so when everyone else has something out in this price segment that’s new to their lineup, we can more easily compare.
It was said that this sensor will be exclusive to Nikon and Sony, so this could give Nikon and advantage over Canon and Panny in that regard for this class of body.
If you’re already in Nikon or definitely wanting a Nikon in this price and size range due to glass or whatever other reason leans you towards them I think this is a great release. Not much to complain about. Of course there’s always something, but overall it seems pretty great.
I’m looking to get back into photography and video and right now use a Sigma DP2M, great for what it does well, but what it does well is very limited, so I’m definitely interested in this release.
For me personally I just desire more MP’s. I think what they decide to do with a Z7III will be very interesting. I’m not even positive there would be one. If it’s 500 dollars more as someone said, isn’t that a little too close to the Z8?
I’d be a buyer at 500 more and more MP’s…but not at all convinced that will happen. This semi-stacked sensor allowed them to be very competitive in video, but pretty much eliminated them from offering a one-stop option to satisfy everyone that lies between this and the Z8.
So maybe there is a Z7 with higher MP’s and worse video, so their offerings become even more Sony-like in that that would be how the A7RV is positioned.
This makes the ZF a lot less compelling to many as well, as I figured it would. That it added this much more over the ZF I think surprised a lot, as proved by early predictions of this just being a ZF in a Z6III body.
I looked pretty hard at the ZF, but not because of the retro styling. It is definitely a looker, and I’d still consider it because it’s a bit cheaper, but for relatively little more this release does a lot more for a certain user. If the ZF wasn’t so seemingly unnecessarily large I might own one by now.
The Sony A7C and RC are very compelling for size, but I feel unnecessarily crippled in the EVF and with a lack of an electronic shutter. Very frustrating as someone who values a small size and high MP’s and doesn’t have the best eyes.
Everyone is so close to having the perfect camera available.
I should just be thankful basically the only compromise for me is size at this point.
I’m assuming the Z6III has the cool manual focus aid option the ZF does? As someone with not the greatest eyes for focusing, but who isn’t satisfied by modern lenses that seems like a great option to have. I imagine other manufacturers will be adding something similar. I’m surprised with the popularity of adapted lenses since the inception of MILC’s, that it took someone so long to offer something like Nikon did with the ZF. ...Show more →
Will be interesting to see if the Z6iii tech and ergonomics is enough to outsell the Zf or if the price of the Zf will drive sales. We'll see if the IQ & AF are different with the new sensor, but most of the features seem very similar to me.
GroovyGeek wrote:
With inflation being what it is, I shudder to think what an RRS L bracket for the 6iii will cost when it comes out. I am guessing $200+ for a no frills model. We do have alternatives and SmallRig is already coming out with cages.
You can use a generic L-bracket in the meantime too if you want. I keep a generic L bracket around specifically for that reason, then switch to a "proper" one when it is released but frankly I will probably stop doing that as I have never even noticed a difference in functionality. RRS was slow to market with the Z8 L bracket and the humanely priced options beat them to market, might be the same with the Z6III - we will see.
GroovyGeek wrote:
I am willing to wager a few hundred bucks that if we evere get a 7iii it will be a lot more than $500 more expensive than a 6iii. As Hogan has posted Nikon tends to price in increments of 1.4, so 2500, 3500, 4900 - which roughly are the 6, 8 and 9 price points. They need a $1500-$1700 body more than they need a 7iii so my guess it we will see 5ii sooner rather than later. The 7 bodies felt like a crutch to keep the faithful in the fold with a higher Mpx body that required minimal engineering over a 6. I would not be surprised if we never see a 7iii.
I won’t be surprised either, but that’s a big hole in the lineup. Many do not want the cost as size of the Z8. 24 MP’s is not enough for a lot of users, whether that is in reality or their perception is another matter.
CanadaMark wrote:
You can use a generic L-bracket in the meantime too if you want. I keep a generic L bracket around specifically for that reason, then switch to a "proper" one when it is released but frankly I will probably stop doing that as I have never even noticed a difference in functionality. RRS was slow to market with the Z8 L bracket and the humanely priced options beat them to market, might be the same with the Z6III - we will see.
Any specific brand that you have had good luck with? I have a few and they lack the anti-rotation function (just some anti-slip pads), and sooner or later come loose at the most inopportune time. Yeah, the RRS machining and anodization are top notch, but the price... it just hurts.
aman74 wrote:
I won’t be surprised either, but that’s a big hole in the lineup. Many do not want the cost as size of the Z8. 24 MP’s is not enough for a lot of users, whether that is in reality or their perception is another matter.
Don't know if I agree. In F-land we had the D750 at 24 MPx and $2300 initial price, and the D850 at $3300 and 45 Mpx, with nothing in between.
The Z6ii was $2k at 24 MPx and Z7ii at 45 Mpx and $3000, with nothing in between. Move the price scale up $500 and you have Z6iii and Z8. From a pricingn standpoint they need something below the Z6iii not between it and the Z8. Maybe that is the Zf and they drop the price to $1700 or thereabouts to address the casual user who may be attracted to the Zf form factor as a fashion statement
aman74 wrote:
What system are you on now? One thing lost in these discussions and a cameras spot in the marketplace is that this is the newest camera out…so when everyone else has something out in this price segment that’s new to their lineup, we can more easily compare.
I currently have: Canon r7, Fujifilm X-T5, X-H2S, Leica Q2, Ricoh GR IIIx, and a Nikon Zfc which I gave to my wife to use.
Used to own: Canon R6II, R5, Nikon Z7II, Z50, Leica SL2-S.
Spec wise I think the Z6III is better than the Canon r6II. I don't think Canon will do a R6III for several years and by that time maybe it could complete, but I've liked the Nikon's I've owned better than the Canons.
For landscape photography I like Nikon. I didn't care for the ZF when it was announced, so was looking forward to the Z6III launch. The Leica SL2-S was heavier as a system than I cared for so Z8/Z9 were out of the question. I wanted some of the flagship Nikon features without the size and weight and the Z6III does that for the price.
GroovyGeek wrote:
Don't know if I agree. In F-land we had the D750 at 24 MPx and $2300 initial price, and the D850 at $3300 and 45 Mpx, with nothing in between.
The Z6ii was $2k at 24 MPx and $2000 Z7ii at 45 Mpx and $3000, with nothing in between. Move the price scale up $500 and you have Z6iii and Z8. From a pricingn standpoint they need something below the Z6iii not between it and the Z8. Maybe that is the Zf and they drop the price to $1700 or thereabouts to address the casual user who may be attracted to the Zf form factor as a fashion statement...Show more →
“The Z6ii was $2k at 24 MPx and $2000 Z7ii at 45 Mpx and $3000, with nothing in between”
I don’t quite follow, 2K listed twice.
D750 and 850 was a long time ago so not a fair comparison.
It’s not just the price here though, it’s the size of the Z8. With Sony you can get more MP’s without having to get a huge body in multiple options. Canon has an option as well.
I’m not making a hard argument or anything, just how I see it. I’m sure their bean counters will figure out what they think is best for them.
I honestly don’t think it’s a small piece of market share that wants more than 24 mp’s, but doesn’t want a Z8 sized body.
Corrected the typo in my original message. z6ii debuted at $2k/24 MPx and Z7ii at $3k/45Mpx. Add $500 to both numbers and you have Z6iii and Z8. Size is more of a decision factor on the low end. The high Mpx cams are more likely to run large heavy lenses which make the bigger grip and larger size an advantage. You can find plenty of gripes here that the Z7 and Z7ii were too small. I guess there are lots of guys with large hands on this forum... Ahem.
aman74 wrote:
“The Z6ii was $2k at 24 MPx and $2000 Z7ii at 45 Mpx and $3000, with nothing in between”
I don’t quite follow, 2K listed twice.
D750 and 850 was a long time ago so not a fair comparison.
It’s not just the price here though, it’s the size of the Z8. With Sony you can get more MP’s without having to get a huge body in multiple options. Canon has an option as well.
I’m not making a hard argument or anything, just how I see it. I’m sure their bean counters will figure out what they think is best for them.
I honestly don’t think it’s a small piece of market share that wants more than 24 mp’s, but doesn’t want a Z8 sized body.
ArizonaImage wrote:
I think it's a little weird Nikon hasn't considered these things, yet, considered them on the Z8/Z9. It's a pretty important thing to have a sensor shield. Another thing is no redundancy for video recording, even though its geared more for video. But otherwise, it is what it is, it still checked all my boxes.
They just physically can't have both - the camera still has/needs a mechanical shutter. I agree it would be great if there was a shield but there is no room in the body. The clearance between the mount and the shutter is already extremely small. There are only 2 cameras on the entire market I'm aware of with a sensor shield (Z8/Z9) and the only reason they have them is because their stacked sensors are fast enough to completely forego a mechanical shutter so there is room for it. Everyone else seems to manage, though I can't say it wouldn't be better if it had one.
It might have got one if they put a stacked sensor in the Z6III, but that was never going to happen given its market position and price point. It's also possible Nikon wants to reserve that feature for their flagship bodies as they need to save some features for the flagships at the end of the day - there isn't much they are holding back as it is and they don't cripple their 'cheaper' bodies nearly as bad as everyone else which is something to be grateful for
Given the body size, I don't think they could do double CFE-B without a size increase. Those cards also get hot which is not good in a small body. The SD card slot is at least UHS-II but most cards are still only going to be 90MB/s minimum sustained write so that does limit options somewhat. Double CFE-B slots there would have probably made it significantly larger which the target market doesn't seem to want - and pretty soon it would just be a Z8 haha.
Driften wrote:
I currently have: Canon r7, Fujifilm X-T5, X-H2S, Leica Q2, Ricoh GR IIIx, and a Nikon Zfc which I gave to my wife to use.
Used to own: Canon R6II, R5, Nikon Z7II, Z50, Leica SL2-S.
Spec wise I think the Z6III is better than the Canon r6II. I don't think Canon will do a R6III for several years and by that time maybe it could complete, but I've liked the Nikon's I've owned better than the Canons.
For landscape photography I like Nikon. I didn't care for the ZF when it was announced, so was looking forward to the Z6III launch. The Leica SL2-S was heavier as a system than I cared for so Z8/Z9 were out of the question. I wanted some of the flagship Nikon features without the size and weight and the Z6III does that for the price. ...Show more →
GroovyGeek wrote:
Corrected the typo in my original message. z6ii debuted at $2k/24 MPx and Z7ii at $3k/45Mpx. Add $500 to both numbers and you have Z6iii and Z8. Size is more of a decision factor on the low end. The high Mpx cams are more likely to run large heavy lenses which make the bigger grip and larger size an advantage. You can find plenty of gripes here that the Z7 and Z7ii were too small. I guess there are lots of guys with large hands on this forum... Ahem.
I’m quite certain that gripe exists, but I don’t think that affects the majority, and they have their option in the Z8 now.
Like I said, high MP in a much more compact body exists in Nikon’s two main competitors lineups, and exists in Nikon’s as well, so clearly even Nikon realizes its importance. That camera just needs updating.
They’re just in a bit of a weird spot with their lineup now. It will be interesting to see what happens. Perhaps Sony has a higher res partially stacked sensor coming soon. That could make sense for their lineup and to sell to Nikon. I don’t know if that tech scales up well MP wise, but that seems about the perfect compromise.
I’d think it would still put them in a weird pricing situation to some degree, but not a totally ridiculous proposition by any means. Markets change fast. Things we thought of as rules that wouldn’t be broken in the past often are. Companies often cannibalize sales of one model to their overall benefit.
I dislike the flippy screen so much, but I also understand why Nikon decided to put it on this camera.
Most cameras in that category have it (A7IV, R6II,...). A category many vloggers, "influencers",... care most about.
I hope they don't start putting it on all future cameras.
For me the "fully articulating" screen is not ideal, as it is more time-consuming to adjust to position, and when used with tilt, it's off-axis.
For example, if it is in the "normal" position, i.e. centered towards the back of the camera like fixed screens from old, then to tilt it, one needs to open it to the side and flip it 180 degrees. At this point if I'm hand-holding the strap will have tangled up with the screen so I have to clear it and put it somewhere out of sight. The strap can also block the eye sensor so the LCD then goes blank. A huge mess if you ask me.
If I want to shoot close to the ground, i.e. some sundew shots in vertical orientation, I place the camera on a pillow on the ground. But if I now want to tilt the screen up so that I can see what I'm shooting, the screen becomes the lowest point and is difficult to keep in position while supporting the camera from the grip on top and by the pillow at the bottom.
If I want to shoot above the heads of a crowd, and again get a vertical shot, I have to turn the camera so that the grip is under the camera. I'm used to shooting with the grip on the right side or top of the camera, not below, and my wrist is very uncomfortable doing the reverse where the grip is below the camera. So again this is the most uncomfortable position for me for this very common need.
I've never produced so much as a mark or scratch on any of my digital camera screens, so folding the screen inside is not a considation for me. If it is folded in, then it takes a lot of time to set up the camera when I start using it: I have to fold the screen out and then operate the menus, again deal with the camera strap etc.
The only legitimate benefit I can see for this design is that it can be used for teleconferencing and other such situations where one wants to present a more professional appearance in Teams / Zoom videos etc. And of course many people will want to present how beautiful and happy they are to the world which I am not sure if it is a good thing or a bad thing.
I find the Z8's screen superior for my own uses; it can be used as is, or tilted along two axis of rotation without moving the position from the center of the optical axis, and the movements required are minimal. It can be used low on the ground or high above the heads of people, and I am free to hold the camera whichever way is convenient to me. The main drawback I see for the Z8/Z9 mechanism is that it's more complicated mechanically than the flip-to-the-side screen and probably there is some extra weight with the supports that are involved. And of course, it doesn't turn towards the front of the lens, so it's not ideal for the narcissist.
However, I accept that different users have different preferences for the screen, and my opinion is no shared by everyone. Just let everyone get the screen they prefer, and the market will sort itself out.
GroovyGeek wrote:
Any specific brand that you have had good luck with? I have a few and they lack the anti-rotation function (just some anti-slip pads), and sooner or later come loose at the most inopportune time. Yeah, the RRS machining and anodization are top notch, but the price... it just hurts.
I always struggled with the decision to spend the money for RRS over the much cheaper alternatives, but suddenly my choice got easier when RRS and others eliminated the wide strap slot from their brackets. I still use the old Nikon design hand strap which needs a wide slot. Time will tell which, if any, makers include it on their Z6iii brackets. I had to buy a Kirk bracket for my Z9.
GroovyGeek wrote:
The Z6ii was $2k at 24 MPx and Z7ii at 45 Mpx and $3000, with nothing in between. Move the price scale up $500 and you have Z6iii and Z8. From a pricingn standpoint they need something below the Z6iii not between it and the Z8. Maybe that is the Zf and they drop the price to $1700 or thereabouts to address the casual user who may be attracted to the Zf form factor as a fashion statement
I think if they came out with a Z5 II that would fill the gap. Not sure what they could put in it though that wouldn't compete with the Z6 II.
GroovyGeek wrote:
Any specific brand that you have had good luck with? I have a few and they lack the anti-rotation function (just some anti-slip pads), and sooner or later come loose at the most inopportune time. Yeah, the RRS machining and anodization are top notch, but the price... it just hurts.
I have two, one from Markins for standard bodies and one from ProMediaGear for gripped/pro style bodies. Both work great and do not move at all, at least with the usage they see from me. They do have the pads but they have not failed yet after many years so YMMV there. Part of the reason could be that I actually put a thin piece of foam between the plate and the bottom of the camera to guarantee no wear or abrasion marks ever show up on the camera (yes I am that anal haha).
CanadaMark wrote:
There are only 2 cameras on the entire market I'm aware of with a sensor shield (Z8/Z9) and the only reason they have them is because their stacked sensors are fast enough to completely forego a mechanical shutter so there is room for it. Everyone else seems to manage, though I can't say it wouldn't be better if it had one.
I thought the a1 was the first and succeeding models also have this feature, am I wrong about that?
