Vento
Offline
• • •
Upload & Sell: Off
|
 p.4 #11 · Why is the Nikon 35 1.2s and 50 1.2s so large compared to others? | |
RoamingScott wrote:
This is some WILD revisionist history, even for you 
It's not that wild, and at least in essence, it's quite close to the truth.
I remember well where I bought the Z6.
The alternatives in that price range at the time were the Canon R/RP or the Sony A7 III.
My basic premise at the time was to find the best MILC solution for adapting my MF lenses.
The Z6 was better than the Sony A7III in almost every aspect, except for its AF-C performance.
Canon was immediately out of the question.
As someone who also values the aesthetics of a product, the R/RP were an absolute no-go—ugly as sin.
Apart from that, Canon screwed me over once with the switch from FD to EF and the incompatibility of my lenses worth five figures, so never again.
Compared to the A7 III, the Z6 had a significantly better and higher-resolution EVF, a better, bigger and higher-resolution LCD, better IBIS, better low-light performance, and much better ergonomics.
EVF Nikon Z6 = 3 686 400-dot OLED, EVF Sony A7 III = 2 359 296-dot OLED.
LCD Nikon Z6 = 3.2' / 2 100 000-dot LCD, LCD Sony A7 III = 3' / 921 600-dot LCD.
I had absolutely no affinity for Nikon at that time.
My brands before that were Pentax, Canon and Mamiya.
Apart from a Nikon F-301, I had never owned any Nikon cameras before.
However, when analyzing the options, it quickly became clear that the Z6 was the best camera for my profile at the time.
The A7 III was actually behind in all these aspects, but it had a dual card slot, which was irrelevant to me, and was equipped with better AF, plus slightly better battery life.
But that was it.
In all other aspects, the Z6 was definitely the significantly better equipped camera and ahead of the A7 III.
Basically, Nikon got a lot right with the Gen1, and the models were better equipped than their competitors in many areas, but this was offset by the weak AF-C performance and the sluggish Expeed6.
In addition, a drama was created around the single card slot.
However, the Z6/Z7 were much better than their reputation at the time, which was almost exclusively reduced to the lack of a dual card slot and, rightly so, the weak AF-C performance.
|
The current Nikon is working hard only because its pants are on fire after the DSLR to mirrorless transition. Many companies gyrate between two phases. (1) pants on fire phase, where they have to work hard to survive, and sell with better value proposition, (2) slacking off phase when it has enough market share, and try to squeeze some extra pennies out of its customers without doing much. Nikon or Sony, they all behave the same. Nikon in DSLR time was very stingy on the firmware enhancements. In US, it also had the famous "impact damage" solution where it denies warranty by claiming product defects to be user caused. Basically then it was the slacking off one, and Sony was the hard working one. Now the situation is reversed. But if Nikon ever gain enough market share (a big IF though), I can bet it will revert to the other phase, and you can kiss away the frequent firmware updates then.