Nikon’s new mirrorless system, coming in ... late September 2018

[BernardLanguillier]

Yeh, availability of one at a time like the 850. Can anyone buy one yet? 

I have been shooting the D850 for nearly 12 months.

The D850 has been available in stock everywhere for months but in the US.

Trump must be another Sony fanboy. 

Cheers,
Bernard

[BernardLanguillier]

Besides, various reports are starting to appear that the replacement of the D3400 may come soon in the form of an F mount based APS-C mirrorless body.

Nikon already has 3 AF-P zoom lenses compatible with contrast AF.

The D3400 is already pretty compact and lightweight, removing the mirror should further improve its bulk.

This could be an amazing support for the tens of millions of compact manual focus F mount lenses with legacy look that can be bought dirt cheap.

Cheers,
Bernard

[BJL]

Besides, various reports are starting to appear that the replacement of the D3400 may come soon in the form of an F mount based APS-C mirrorless body.

One last round of hopes for an "21st century EVF camera with an antiquated, overly deep lens mount designed for film SLRs and lenses in a different format size"? I do however hope that a more mainstream 24x16 format Z-mount body follows soon, once Nikon has stated its seriousness about EVF cameras with some high quality 36x24 format offerings.

BTW, unless I am missing something, Nikon's most recent "entry level 36x24 format" body is the almost four year old D750. (Or if the D610 is considered as the current entry level FX model, it is even older: October 2013.)  If so, does this hint that Nikon sees future demand for DSLRs mostly at the high end, where the fastest continuous AF, maximum compatibility with expensive F-mount lens collections and so on still favor them, while it is already winding down DSLR development at the lower levels? Wild speculation I suppose.

[BernardLanguillier]

BTW, unless I am missing something, Nikon's most recent "entry level 36x24 format" body is the almost four year old D750. (Or if the D610 is considered as the current entry level FX model, it is even older: October 2013.)  If so, does this hint that Nikon sees future demand for DSLRs mostly at the high end, where the fastest continuous AF, maximum compatibility with expensive F-mount lens collections and so on still favor them, while it is already winding down DSLR development at the lower levels? Wild speculation I suppose.

Nikon has been stating in their business reports for years now that they are targeting the high end, which clearly means that they see no significant revenue potential in the low end. I believe that they have simply been executing on this strategy. Their recent DSLRs have been focused on the best possible performance technology can deliver, so are their lenses.

As I have written several times, I think they are right. The low end will be dead to smartphones in less than 3 years just like compact cameras have died already.

There is really no reason why low end DSLR/mirrorless should do better. They are mostly used the same way as compacts were, meaning with only a standard zoom lens on 99% of the time that's not that good, nor that bright. The smartphones are now reaching the level of quality that people bought their low end DSLRs/mirrorless for. And if they haven't the next gen will.

Cheers,
Bernard

[BJL]

Nikon has been stating in their business reports for years now that they are targeting the high end, which clearly means that they see no significant revenue potential in the low end.

I am not sure if Nikon is talking about $1500-$2300 36x24 format camera when it says "low end"; after all, Nikon has introduced five or six less expensive DSLRs since the D750 (all in DX format).  Amongst DSLRs, "low end" is sub-$1000; in Nikon's camera range as a whole; it means the cheaper fixed lens compact cameras that every camera maker is moving away from.

And I repeat that the idea of phone-cameras replacing ILC cameras with sensors about twenty times larger with interchangeable lenses offering vastly better low-light/high speed abilities and wide zoom ranges is absurd; computational photography cannot magically overcome the fundamental (quantum mechanical!) advantages that come from far greater light gathering ability and true optical zoom. Note again those five or six newer and "even lower end" Nikon DSLRs.

[BernardLanguillier]

And I repeat that the idea of phone-cameras replacing ILC cameras with sensors about twenty times larger with interchangeable lenses offering vastly better low-light/high speed abilities and wide zoom ranges is absurd; computational photography cannot magically overcome the fundamental (quantum mechanical!) advantages that come from far greater light gathering ability and true optical zoom. Note again those five or six newer and "even lower end" Nikon DSLRs.

I fully agree with what you are writing, but the thing is that smartphones don't need to reach low end DSLR/mirrorless performance level to kill them (just like they didn't need to overtake compact digital cameras to kill them), they just need to reach the level of quality people need taking into account the huge usability advantage of the smartphone.

There are plenty of lenses add-ons for smartphones that enable optical zooming and this is only going to be improving moving forward.

Anyway, we will see moving forward.

At least Nikon seems to think that low end has no future. It doesn't mean they won't release any more cameras in that segment, just that it will probably not be a strategic area of investment for them.

I personally prefer them to focus their resources on high end bodies and lenses, this is where they have proven their ability to deliver unique value to the market.

Cheers,
Bernard

[BernardLanguillier]

https://nikonrumors.com/2018/08/21/breaking-the-first-leaked-press-photo-of-the-nikon-z6-and-z7-mirrorless-cameras.aspx/

Sounds good to me:
- identical UI btw the 2 models
- feels like a mix btwn Nikon and Leica - they have apparently streamlined the UI while keeping the essential physical controls available
- looks very solid
- they finally got rid of the cheap looking gold plating on the lens and simplified the naming

But anyway, I don’t believe that anyone was expecting them to mess up the physical part of these cameras.

It appears that the specs should follow soon.

Cheers,
Bernard

[BJL]

https://nikonrumors.com/2018/08/21/breaking-the-first-leaked-press-photo-of-the-nikon-z6-and-z7-mirrorless-cameras.aspx/

Now that we can see the sensor inside the mount, and assuming that the central light blue part is the active 36x24mm region, I eyeball the throat diameter as about 7-8mm more than sensor diagonal, so I would say around 50-51mm throat diameter. Which is enough to easily accommodate any optical design that works with Canon EF mount, so long as Z mount is under 20mm deep as rumored.

P. S. And mount external diameter of about 61-65mm.

P. P. S. The original source https://www.nokishita-camera.com/2018/08/z6z7.html has more images, including the three rumored lenses and an "FTZ" mount adaptor with tripod mount.

[BernardLanguillier]

Now that we can see the sensor inside the mount, and assuming that the central light blue part is the active 36x24mm region, I eyeball the throat diameter as about 7-8mm more than sensor diagonal, so I would say around 50-51mm throat diameter. Which is enough to easily accommodate any optical design that works with Canon EF mount, so long as Z mount is under 20mm deep as rumored.

Per the computation I just did in PS, I predict 55.5mm for the internal mount size (ignoring the inside mounting ribs).

Cheers,
Bernard

[BJL]

Per the computation I just did in PS, I predict 55.5mm for the internal mount size (ignoring the inside mounting ribs).

Cheers,
Bernard

Could be; my eye-balls's error bars might reach to 55mm! Agreed that it is a mistake to go top-left to bottom right, due to those ribs; I speculate that they caused the initial 49mm figure.

[BernardLanguillier]

Could be; my eye-balls's error bars might reach to 55mm! Agreed that it is a mistake to go top-left to bottom right, due to those ribs; I speculate that they caused the initial 49mm figure.

Now, on the other hand I didn’t take perspective into account, so you may end up being right.

I’d say 54mm.

Cheers,
Bernard

[DP]

https://nikonrumors.com/2018/08/21/breaking-the-first-leaked-press-photo-of-the-nikon-z6-and-z7-mirrorless-cameras.aspx/

is that 24-70/4 a double trombone ? ugly !

[Rob C]

If true, nice to see they have not forgotten old customers.

As ever, a zoom appears as unconvincingly pointless to me as ever. The only one I bought was the Nikkor 24-70 and I dumped it as rapidly as possible: I hate avoidable bulk.

No, my life never did depend on having a zoom to hand, and I seriously doubt that anybody else's did either. Junk insurance policy for the lazy.

:-)

[32BT]

If ugly only applied to that lens it wouldn't be all that bad. That camera may produce the very best pixels that the industry currently has to offer, but, boy, is that gizmo an easthetic horrorshow or what? Somebody here once mentioned that the best camera is the camera you actually want to pick up and take pictures with. Let's just say that I now realize why people are willing to spend the extra cash on a Leica.

[BernardLanguillier]

If ugly only applied to that lens it wouldn't be all that bad. That camera may produce the very best pixels that the industry currently has to offer, but, boy, is that gizmo an easthetic horrorshow or what? Somebody here once mentioned that the best camera is the camera you actually want to pick up and take pictures with. Let's just say that I now realize why people are willing to spend the extra cash on a Leica.

It goes to show that aesthetics is really a matter of taste.

I find it pretty appealing and the Nikon logo has nothing to do with that impression I can assure you. 

In fact the first thought I had when I saw it was “this is what a usable Leica should be”.

Cheers,
Bernard

[KLaban]

If ugly only applied to that lens it wouldn't be all that bad. That camera may produce the very best pixels that the industry currently has to offer, but, boy, is that gizmo an easthetic horrorshow or what? Somebody here once mentioned that the best camera is the camera you actually want to pick up and take pictures with. Let's just say that I now realize why people are willing to spend the extra cash on a Leica.

Reminds me of all the other cameras I wouldn't want to pick up.

;-)

[BernardLanguillier]

https://nikonrumors.com/2018/08/22/nikon-d850-vs-nikon-z6-vs-nikon-z7-specifications-comparison.aspx/

Cheers,
Bernard

[32BT]

It goes to show that aesthetics is really a matter of taste.

I find it pretty appealing and the Nikon logo has nothing to do with that impression I can assure you. 

In fact the first thought I had when I saw it was “this is what a usable Leica should be”.

Cheers,
Bernard

Of course, Bernard, if you come from an 850, it could be considered an improvement.... ;-)

[BernardLanguillier]

Of course, Bernard, if you come from an 850, it could be considered an improvement.... ;-)

 

Don't get me wrong, I love the look of a square block of polished steel, I just don't think it does such a good job as a camera.

Cheers,
Bernard

[gkroeger]

I want to pick up a camera that feels good in my hand, has the controls I need where I can reach them, and produces the best image possible. I spend most of my time looking through it, not at it, so I don't really care what it looks like. That said, the N7 looks pretty much like any other reflex camera... true, the grip sticks up a bit, but if that makes it easier to grip, so be it.