I hope that Z9 II comes out yesterday so the tech can trickle down to something like a Z7 III. I basically want a Z8 in a Z6/Z7 style body. 45 mp, good enough sensor readout, great color, etc. I don't need more than 15 fps.
EB-1 wrote:
Of course the 60MP sensor is not for all around use. It's a very high IQ sensor, the best in FF/FX for several years now.
Nikon has lost most of my business any many others due to their narrow focus on action for stills. They need to wake up and smell the coffee. Everyone is not about flying BIFs and sports. At least they are making some prgress in video, though I have no personal use for it.
It's ridiculous that Nikon has not secured other sensor suppliers after all these years being dependent on the Sony.
EBH
You should get a Fuji, over on that Forum we are told they aren't a patch on others for 'BIFs and sports'
And someone else here reckons Nikon isn't as good as Sony or Canon at that either.
groob wrote:
Another serious question. Where do you find Nikon’s AF lacking? For my use, it is hard to find a single situation where it struggles.
I'm with you on this. While I'm sure that the latest Sony and possible Canon might have marginally better subject ID tracking, I am more than content with the AF performance I get from my Nikon Z9 and Z8. I photograph some of the hardest animals to track like breeching whale and dolphins, and if I do my job and study their patterns, I get extremely sharp well composed photos. If one can use their camera to track the motion of animals that disappear for sight completely and can somehow get the camera on them when the suddenly appear and nail the focus, I think the AF system is doing its job. I've posted a number of examples of what the Nikon AF can do w/ the slow-motored 180-600 on the 180-600 thread. I also have many examples of what the Z9 can do on the 400mm f2.8TC thread.
While other manufacturers might have AF that can grab the subject incrementally faster, I'm not sure that this will be a difference maker for the typical nature or sports photography enthusiast who relies on gear as opposed to knowledge of subject.
I tried shooting sea lions at the zoo in and out of the water...holy smokes I can't imagine much tougher a test for an af system than breaching swimmy stuff.
PixiPhotography wrote:
Depending on the subject, Nikon’s focus is either equal or 90% of what the latest from Canon and Sony.
That fine for now, but in a tech industry you have to keep moving forward or you will fall behind. I'm in another industry for 40 years and you see it all the time. Companies that become complacent suddenly are not doing so well a few years later. When I started with Nikon 50 years ago they were #1 or close to it. I've suffered through all the crap of shaft-drive AF, cropped sensors, sticking with DSLRs too long, etc. The markets are getting smaller and the Chinese will have full systems in a few years as well.
PixiPhotography wrote:
What's crazy is, the A7RVI's dynamic range is close to that of a medium format. Albeit, I've never run into DR issues with any of my Z cameras.
In fact, it a technical sense it's better than that, because these measurements factor in Circle of Confusion of the different sensor sizes. So the GFX 100 data is sort of getting the benefit of downsampling in this comparison. If you use the "GFX 100 (FF)" entry which is based on measuring just the FF35 crop, you get a better picture of technical per-pixel performance, and the A7r6 is actually *ahead* at low ISO. Now, that version of the comparison is probably less real-world-applicable, but still, it is interesting.
EB-1 wrote:
That fine for now, but in a tech industry you have to keep moving forward or you will fall behind. I'm in another industry for 40 years and you see it all the time. Companies that become complacent suddenly are not doing so well a few years later. When I started with Nikon 50 years ago they were #1 or close to it. I've suffered through all the crap of shaft-drive AF, cropped sensors, sticking with DSLRs too long, etc. The markets are getting smaller and the Chinese will have full systems in a few years as well.
EBH
Yep. One example was Blackberry who took their dandy time making something that resembles iPhone, and ultimately lost. They were complacent. But agreed, if China releases some cameras and lenses that are good, people won't hesitate to switch.
EB-1 wrote:
I was looking at Fuji X for some purpose, but hoping for the next round of bodies with faster readouts.
EBH
I still have no idea what your complaint is. What does Nikon's 45 mp sensor not do that you'd like it to do? Is there some area of photography you believe you're missing out on because Sony makes a sensor with 15 more megapixels?
EB-1 wrote:
That fine for now, but in a tech industry you have to keep moving forward or you will fall behind. I'm in another industry for 40 years and you see it all the time. Companies that become complacent suddenly are not doing so well a few years later. When I started with Nikon 50 years ago they were #1 or close to it. I've suffered through all the crap of shaft-drive AF, cropped sensors, sticking with DSLRs too long, etc. The markets are getting smaller and the Chinese will have full systems in a few years as well.
EBH
I just don't see the evidence for this AF complaint. It is hard to even put yourself in a situation where Nikon's AF has something less than a 95% accuracy rate, and by all accounts, any differences between Nikon's AF and Sony/Canon's AF is, at best, on the margins. While Nikon's AF was behind initially in the mirrorless realm, Nikon caught up via unprecedented firmware updates, the result of which is that the Z9 keeps pace with cameras three years newer. If that is not evidence of efforts to "keep moving forward," I don't know what is.
A Z9ii is coming soon enough and would almost certainly have been here already if not for the AI buildout. It is pretty hard to fault Nikon for not previously releasing the Z9ii when no one saw that buildout coming, and when Nikon has been forced to compete for resources against the largest outlay of capital in human history.
At bottom, the only functionality I think I am missing relative to other brands is pre-capture, which will likely be remedied with a Z9ii early next year. I am sure there will also be advances to AF, which I'll take, but AF competency is not something I even think about. So, again, if you're not shooting action, I cannot fathom what your AF complaint is.
RoamingScott wrote:
I have never seen a single photo by the biggest AF whiners that indicate they are utilizing their current gear to their full potential.
Right, I'd love an example of what we're even talking about. I was using my Z6iii recently when a red-shouldered hawk flew out of a tree while I had my lens down. In all my photography life prior to now, I wouldn't have even attempted a photo, but the Z6iii and 400mm f/2.8 grabbed the hawk instantly against a varied background, and I got my best hawk photos ever. I also just got back from taking 18,000 photos in Alaska, where less than 1% were OOF, including bears charging through water in low light.
