Nikon Introduces Mirrorless Z System

Nikon Z6 and Z7 - A Wildlife Photographer's Initial Perspective - Backcountry Gallery

Uh oh... I share his concern for wildlife. Think the super D500 will not go away anytime soon.

Does the new Z bodies have mechanical shutters? Are they compatible with current and recent flashes? Specifically SB-800 of which I have 3?

Yes they have mechanical shutters, and they are compatible with i-TTL, Nikon Creative Lighting System, and radio trigger/SB-5000.

 

Your SB-800 is fully compatible. However, the Z6 and Z7 do not have any pop-up flash to control a remote i-TTL flash.

I could care less what Sony does, I am 30 years steeped in the Nikon system, it just works for me and always will.

 

I put in a pre-order right away for a Z6 and the FTZ adapter, this setup will be perfect for some of the political journalism I do in which I need the mechanical shutter to be as quiet as possible and the electronic shutters just don't always work in the various lighting I work in.

 

Nikon just had a live panel on Facebook and everyone was getting over 1,000 clicks out of a charge, some got as much as 1,800. Like anything, it all depends on a world of factors but since I rarely chimp, I always get way more battery life than what I hear is average.

 

I look forward to getting this camera and seeing what the new mount brings in the coming years...I think that last part was *killer* move by Nikon.

Is Sony getting nervous? Or Canon?

Does the new Z bodies have mechanical shutters? Are they compatible with current and recent flashes? Specifically SB-800 of which I have 3?

You should get at least partial compatibility with the SB-800. Both Nikons have a mechanical shutter, which can be disabled for complete silent running.There is probably an option to have a front electronic shutter or use mechanical for both (two strokes0. TTL flash get's a little funky, if it's anything like the way Sony works. You basically take two shots each time, the first for exposure. This results in a substantial delay between shutter release and capturing the image.

"Nikon just had a live panel on Facebook and everyone was getting over 1,000 clicks out of a charge, some got as much as 1,800. Like anything, it all depends on a world of factors but since I rarely chimp, I always get way more battery life than what I hear is average. "

 

Sounds like whatever the CIPA rules/guidelines are, they are next to useless.

Manual lenses will be manual but have image stabilisation but I don't imagine in total there will be significant users.

I disagree. - What about all those Samyang & ZF lenses somebody seems to have bought? (On top of manual Nikon lenses that survived until today) Did they all end on Sonys by now and if not: Why should they urge their owners to pair another brand's MILC with them?

I am not sure what an average guy with somewhat limited funds should do these days but I faced not really enough light frequently enough to desire IBIS and also figured out that if I am going to shoot an old lens on a TTL focusing hand held camera, I 'll want that camera to stop down the aperture for me.

Those are my requirements to consider a heritage lens "integrated" into a somewhat contemporary kit. I tried manual focus on AF DSLRs and wasn't happy. - Maybe others have better eyes, so it works for them, for me it does barely. - I am sure a decent EVF with enough focusing aids would make things easy enough (even for me).

Manual focus took pictures back in it's days, so why not carry on using the stuff that is there? - If you add up prices for alternatives maybe a no-brainer? - I end at €3K for a kit of 4 stabilized primes (Canon 24, Tamron 35 & 85 Sigma 180mm) and still €2K5 with the 24mm skipped (since an old film lens might not be great, a zoom will shine on it's short end and nobody makes a stabilized prime for F-mount). With an old film kit at hand, I'd rush to get (or at least try) z-body and adapter. - After a previous shopping mistake I recommend bringing a friend who'll move a bit and mounting an at least 2 stops ND or color filter on a f2.8 lens to simulate a pub's lighting inside a store and judge EVF lag and handling before you'll buy.

For those who do street, vacation, travel type of photography. Nikon's only option is the Z6 or their DX dSLR the DX body weighs just as much as the Z6 right. Both which are on the larger size compared to other offerings on the market. I wonder what would happen to those users.

I always thought a D750 with 24-120 "kit" zoom makes a nice household &/ vacation combo, that delivers acceptable image quality over a bearable zoom range at portable 1.5kg. - While you can probably tie different packages of that weight (or even less), you 'll have to sacrifice something.

Is there any compact killer DX prime, for travelling street shooters, at all? - The Z mount offers cover the usual focal range but seem as bulky as the kit zoom. - I guess their IQ justifies it but... - Anyhow what makes a great street camera, beyond: "You'll have to like taking it out"?

 

If I had gotten into Nikon in the past, I'd be excited right now!

To attract new customers Nikon probably have to get one of their famous tourist zooms made and maybe even improved for Z mount.

Might be interested to try my Samyang 135mm f2, it's MF and non-VR, on a Z7. It's crazy sharp at f4 and it is really obvious if you have a hint of camera shake or wrong focus.

IBIS and MF Focus Confirm might work well??

This morning I was thinking through what AF-D lenses I still use that don't have equal or better reasonably priced AF-S replacements, and came up with my 180/2.8AF-D and 105/2DC. I guess a 70-200 AFS zoom could replace the 180, but I like the way the 180 renders people a little better.

 

The 105DC is unique IMO, maybe someday a screw drive adapter will come out, but I doubt it. It would be nice to have that lens nail focus on eyes a little more reliably in an AF-C setting (people move). It always seems that the best expression image out of a series will be ever so slightly out of perfect focus, but I get plenty of good ones with my current setup (D810). I doubt I could do better with manual focus due to relative subject-camera movement.

 

It is also possible that my expectations of improved AF accuracy delivered from a mirrorless system might be unreasonable, I stopped spending money on my small Sony system before upgrading form A7(I) to later bodies with expensive Sony AF lenses, so I don't know if the best Sony system is actually more capable than a D850 (or Z). Decided to wait on Nikon, looks like a good choice based on owning an extensive mostly AF-S Nikon lens system. Hopefully the Z system will work out well and cheap lens system adapters will become available so I can dump the Sony, the lenses in my (physically) small Sony kit are quite a mixture of mounts. Will wait for others to test the Z waters first, though.

 

One missing item from the Nikon S lens road map: an inexpensive small WA equivalent to the Sony 28/2 AF. The A7 & 28/2AF along with a small short tele in Nancy's purse make a great all day walking combo. The 35/1.8S looks large and is not inexpensive. Maybe the 24 on the map will be small.

It actually looks as if the 35mm is bigger than the 50mm!

While mirrorless may focus more accurately on the eye, a part of that accuracy is in how the autofocus is implemented in the lens. The motor needs to be able to make very small precise adjustments. I think with the DC Nikkors the cam to drive the motor is one source of lack of control but the other is that there is some LoCA and the wide open image is fairly low contrast and soft; it is quite hard for any AF system to get the focus exactly how you want it. The LoCA means the different colors would be focused at slightly different positions (in front of or behind the sensor) so the system has to decide which color it focuses on, and this can lead to variable results. It is a tricky business.

 

I think supporting AF-S/AF-P/AF-I and manual focus is a fair compromise in the adapter.

I think supporting AF-S/AF-P/AF-I and manual focus is a fair compromise in the adapter.

Adding an AF motor inside the adapter will be complex and will be bulky. However, most likely some third party will come up with such an adapter in the future.

LoCA...interesting things I never thought about that way, anyway not related to focus mechanism. Acording to my knowlege ED glass combined with multicoating and aspherical lenses minimizes the effects of residual chromatic aberratons gathering up all of these colour wavelenghts/lights to a point, focal plane in this case.

Did anyone see how to select the metering mode? The Z may have new metering system.

I also agree that not incorporating an motor in the mount adapter is a reasonable design choice that results in a smaller, lighter, and less expensive adapter, even though I have a few lenses that would lose AF capability on a Z. No AF with my 105/2DC is not a Z deal breaker for me.

 

Hard to believe that it has been about 20 years since AF-S lenses were introduced. I was surprised at how few AF and AF-D lenses I still have and use on a regular basis when I thought about it. I can manually focus those few lenses, of course, likely with more precision (zoomed view) than manual focus with the optical finder in a DSLR.

Is the Z mount a professional system? Not sure it would ever replace Nikon DSLRs.

Is the Z mount a professional system? Not sure it would ever replace Nikon DSLRs.

 

I believe it is indeed intended to eventually replace DSLRs, but it is not at clear on what time scale that would happen. Nikon intend to offer lenses with better image quality for Z than the F mount, but some of this may be hype. In the short term both systems will coexist.

It is nice to see smaller cameras. I love my D810, but its amazing how much bigger it is than the 35mm cameras I used to shoot with. I think in time DSLRs will be a thing of the past, but it may take at least 20 years for that to happen because of all the lenses out there and still being sold. Myself, I'll probably stop buying any more lenses unless it's a lens I can't do without.

Myself, I'll probably stop buying any more lenses unless it's a lens I can't do without.

 

Not buying something that one does not need is of course a sound principle. :)

 

However, I don't think it is looking like most F mount lenses will be losing value because of the introduction of Z mirrorless; the used market already showed some value loss to Nikon lenses which I attribute to poor LV AF and video AF in Nikon DSLRs whereas on the Canon/Sony side they were able to implement good video AF earlier, and this is probably one of the reasons why Nikon have lost market share to Canon and Sony. However, the Z video AF has been said to be a big improvement, so hopefully Nikon now gets on track for video users as well.

 

Mirrorless provides some benefits to old lenses not available on DSLRs. For example, there is in-camera VR that is available with every lens, even ones without CPU, if you enter the focal length data for the lens. There is focus peaking and zooming-in of the viewfinder image to assist in manual focusing. Manual focus lenses are also valuable for video as it gives a degree of certainty and control that is not available with autofocus, and the focus assist features are available also in video.

 

It seems likely that recent autofocus lenses also work well on mirrorless because the high resolution of modern sensors has increased the need for precise focusing and that also helps with mirrorless AF. Recent F mount AF-S Nikkors such as 24-70/2.8E, 70-200/2.8E, etc. have new motors where the AF stutters less, is quieter and more firm in its operation. If the implemetation of cross-operativity in the Z system is as good as I hope, the investment in F mount lenses should be reasonably safe, even if you want to "switch to" mirrorless. I do hope the adapted AF-S lenses work well. Quite a lot of manual focus lens users really seem to like mirrorless, and video shooters do, too, as it leads to smaller rigs in some cases.

 

Personally I think that DSLRs and mirrorless will continue to offer certain advantages over each other even if most images can be taken with either. It is great that Nikon is now going to offer options to those who prefer mirrorless and while supporting the infrastructure from F mount (lenses, flashes, remote triggers etc.)

Edited August 28, 2018 by ilkka_nissila

I'll be very interested to see how IBIS works with long non-VR teles.

 

.... and come to think of it, how (well) does it work with a VR lens? The minimal literature so far implies they work 'together'. So 4 stops for the lens and 4 for the body, humm.... +8 stops; really?

 

Maybe it's not additive?....;)

Is the Z mount a professional system? Not sure it would ever replace Nikon DSLRs.

Do you think MILC would replace DSLR? If the answer is yes then eventually the Z will replace the D.

Do Nikon users need another camera system? F will not be abandoned in favor of Z.

.... and come to think of it, how (well) does it work with a VR lens? The minimal literature so far implies they work 'together'. So 4 stops for the lens and 4 for the body, humm.... +8 stops; really?

 

As far as I've understood:

- With Z-lenses, the in-body stabilizer works on 5 axis;

- With F-lenses on the FTZ-adapter, the in-body stabilizer works on 3 axis, and the VR of the lens can cover the other 2 (so yielding a total system that should be equal or near equal efficient).

 

Personally I am not yet vastly interested in a mirrorless system, though from an ergonomic point of view I get the impression the Z-cameras would fit me/my hands better than the Sony bodies. I like it that Nikon has tried to stay close to the button layout of the DSLRs; it's proven working and eases transition. But the one concern I have at this point is whether there will be adapters for lenses of other systems as well - to me personally, that would be by far the biggest argument in favour of a mirrorless over a DSLR. Just simple manual focus adapters, as they exist plenty for Sony E, Fuji X and m4/3rds, would be fine.

 

Otherwise, I still fail to see why so many people seem to think there can be only one system in the future, and only one winner. DSLRs do not need to go away; sure they may become a niche market, but this constant argument that DSLRs will go away is so short-sighted to me. There is no consumer advantage in having less choice, and so far the market shows that niche products can co-exist and even be profitable enough; you can still buy a rangefinder, medium format and film today and multiple companies active in those niche markets are posting healthy results. So, let's hope we keep choice rather than having to pick one winner, whether we'd like or not.

As far as I've understood:

- With Z-lenses, the in-body stabilizer works on 5 axis;

- With F-lenses on the FTZ-adapter, the in-body stabilizer works on 3 axis, and the VR of the lens can cover the other 2 (so yielding a total system that should be equal or near equal efficient).

 

Personally I am not yet vastly interested in a mirrorless system, though from an ergonomic point of view I get the impression the Z-cameras would fit me/my hands better than the Sony bodies. I like it that Nikon has tried to stay close to the button layout of the DSLRs; it's proven working and eases transition. But the one concern I have at this point is whether there will be adapters for lenses of other systems as well - to me personally, that would be by far the biggest argument in favour of a mirrorless over a DSLR. Just simple manual focus adapters, as they exist plenty for Sony E, Fuji X and m4/3rds, would be fine.

 

Otherwise, I still fail to see why so many people seem to think there can be only one system in the future, and only one winner. DSLRs do not need to go away; sure they may become a niche market, but this constant argument that DSLRs will go away is so short-sighted to me. There is no consumer advantage in having less choice, and so far the market shows that niche products can co-exist and even be profitable enough; you can still buy a rangefinder, medium format and film today and multiple companies active in those niche markets are posting healthy results. So, let's hope we keep choice rather than having to pick one winner, whether we'd like or not.

 

Just like film can coexist with digital but if one wins it tends to be almost the only one. Just like Leica still makes rangefinder. They don't completely go away but to most people they don't exist.

.... and come to think of it, how (well) does it work with a VR lens? The minimal literature so far implies they work 'together'. So 4 stops for the lens and 4 for the body, humm.... +8 stops; really?

 

If you put in a VR lens via the adapter, the body provides roll compensation and the lens compensates for its usual two axis, so you get a total of 3 axis of compensation, a little better than using a VR lens without in-body compensation but it doesn't "add up" on the same axis.