Will there be a D7?

Now that Nikon will introduce the Z9 I think there won't be a D7. So #6 was the first model of the mirrorless and #6 was and will be also the last model of the SLR and DSLR. Edited March 14, 2021 by BeBu Lamar

I think there won't be a D7

I think you might be right!

I think there won't be any other DSLR from Nikon - no DSLR 850 successor, no DSLR D500 successor, no DSLR D7500 successor and most certainly none for the DSLR D780; all those models will be succeeded by mirrorless versions (or have, to some extent already with the Z6/Z6II/Z7/Z7II. The lower DSLR ranks are closed out already anyway.

 

If the Z9 turns out the camera it appears to be from what's known and rumored about the specs so far, then it by far exceeds what the D6 can do - and at least some of the specs can never be replicated in a DSLR anyway.

Edited March 14, 2021 by Dieter Schaefer

I don't think anybody imagined that there would be an F6 back in 2004, you never know with Nikon.

I think a lot will depend on how the pro uptake will be on the Z9 they plan to release this year.

I think you might be right!

I think there won't be any other DSLR from Nikon - no DSLR 850 successor, no DSLR D500 successor, no DSLR D7500 successor and most certainly none for the DSLR D780; all those models will be succeeded by mirrorless versions (or have, to some extent already with the Z6/Z6II/Z7/Z7II. The lower DSLR ranks are closed out already anyway.

I have pointed this out before on this forum, and went I mentioned that to a Nikon rep during a Zoom meeting in December 2020,

he seemed surprised, but he couldn't think of a counter example:

Prior to 2018, Nikon used to introduce about 6 or so new F-mount lenses a year. In 2018, they announced the 180-400mm/f4 early on and then the 500mm PF on August 23, at the same time as the new Z system. A week later they also announced the D3500. In the entire 2019, there were no new F-mount DSLR or lenses at all. In 2020, between January and February, Nikon announced the D780, D6, and the 120-300mm/f2.8. Those are the latest F-mount products to date.

If the Z9 turns out the camera it appears to be from what's known and rumored about the specs so far, then it by far exceeds what the D6 can do - and at least some of the specs can never be replicated in a DSLR anyway.

The sole purpose for the D6 was for the scheduled July 2020 Tokyo Summer Olympics, so was the Canon 1Dx Mark 3 announced a month earlier. And since 2018, the only three new F-mount lenses have all been super teles. As a long-time D5 owner, I have to say the D6 was a bit underwhelming. And since the 2020 Olympics didn't happen, the D6 and 1Dx3 have become mostly unnecessary (sorry Ilkka). Now that the D6 is barely one year old (announced in February 2020), Nikon already announced in March 2021 that the Z9 is coming and will supersede the D6. Normally, you don't bad mouth a fairly new, flagship product that way.

 

There is absolutely no doubt that there will never be a D7, as DSLR technology has reached a plateau. That is why after 4 full years, the advancements from the D5 to D6 is, at least IMO, disappointing, so is the transition from the D750 to D780. The D780 adopts a lot of the video improvements from the Z6, but without an EVF, I wouldn't shoot video with a DSLR.

 

Whether Nikon will introduce any more DSLR and F-mount lenses remains to be seen, but if there are any, there won't be many more. Nikon will continue to manufacture F-mount products to some degree, but the legendary F-mount is gradually coming to an end. And if the Z9 is not successful, pros will simply switch to Canon and Sony mirrorless. For those who prefer DSLRs, they are free to continue using the existing cameras. Some people are still using film SLRs manufactured 40, 50 years ago.

In 2020, between January and February, Nikon announced the D780, D6, and the 120-300mm/f2.8.

The last on the list is the real oddity.

 

Bodies are a piece of pie to design/build, lenses like that are HARD.

 

I wonder if it was somehow designed for Z and modded to fit F mount, knowing what they were planing. Lenses of that length have a lot of space at their rear end.

 

If it 'magically' re-appears with a different skin job for the Olympics Z9.....we'll know.:D

The last on the list (aka 120-300/2.8) is the real oddity.

There could be several reasons for that lens to appear at that time: Nikon had plans for at least another round of high-end F-mount DSLRs. The lens makes a lot of sense for sports and event photographers (why carry a 70-200/2.8 and a 300/2.8 if you can do it all in one?). IIRC, then the 300/2.8 hasn't been updated in quite a while. Sigma offered such a zoom for quite some time - Nikon thought they can kill two birds with one stone (update the 300/2.8 and make it a potentially more useful zoom (though the Nikon hardly competes with the Sigma on price). The 180-400/4 with build-in TC clearly was an answers to Canon's 200-400 with a 1.4xTC build in (which in turn was a one-up on Nikon's 200-400/4).

If it 'magically' re-appears with a different skin job for the Olympics Z9.

I doubt it will. And even if it does, the optical formula will be different from the F-mount lens. Together with the Z9 we'll see a Z-mount 400/2.8 for sure and most likely a 600/4 as well.

 

I find it interesting that Sony released a 400/2.8 first, followed by a 600/4; they also released a more budget-friendly 200-600 (either together with the 600 or at least close together); a 500/4 is rumored to make an appearance "soon". Canon opted to release a 100-500 and two f/11 budget teles (600 and 800). Both Canon and Nikon can adapt their existing DSLR-superteles though - an option that Sony also had (with their A-mount lenses) but that didn't work well in real life. I expect Canon to also release a 400/2.8 with the R1; that focal length seems to be the major workhorse for sports photographers; I think of 500/4 and 600/4 more in terms of wildlife photography. Somehow, 300/2.8 doesn't seem to factor high on the list for any of three.

Edited March 14, 2021 by Dieter Schaefer

I don't think anybody imagined that there would be an F6 back in 2004, you never know with Nikon.

 

I did! Nikon needed a camera that is less expensive to make than the F5 and can be sold for more.The F6 made perfect sense.

At the risk of sounding like a killjoy, what is it about mirrorless that is making everyone switch? All new glass or an adapter that sounds at best like a compromise, what is it? What can I do with these new systems that I can’t already do with F series or other dslr systems? I am no doubt missing something but so far it isn’t adding up.

 

Rick H.

At the risk of sounding like a killjoy, what is it about mirrorless that is making everyone switch? All new glass or an adapter that sounds at best like a compromise, what is it? What can I do with these new systems that I can’t already do with F series or other dslr systems? I am no doubt missing something but so far it isn’t adding up.

 

Rick H.

Same here. I understand the simplicity of the Z, compared to the D's and moving mirrors, etc. Granted, there still isn't the lens line up for Z's, vis-a-vis the D's, but that'll be coming. Looking at sports photographers, I still see a lot of D's. I just wonder, and I have read anecdotal evidence that there is a lag from the viewer to the instant of exposure.

I suspect that the degree of acceptance of the Z9 among pros as a suitable upgrade to the D6 (for sports and faster wildlife) will heavily influence Nikon's decision. The Z9 promises more pixels combined with a faster frame rate, made possible largely by the new stacked sensor design and the absence of a moving mirror assembly. If those pro users find the ergonomics or some other aspects less friendly than the D5/6 they presently use, we may see a D7 with the new sensor - it could offer the increased pixels and a frame rate faster than the D5/6 but not as fast as the Z9. So the business decision should be based on how many D7s Nikon thinks they can sell.

I think you might be right!

I think there won't be any other DSLR from Nikon - no DSLR 850 successor, no DSLR D500 successor, no DSLR D7500 successor and most certainly none for the DSLR D780; all those models will be succeeded by mirrorless versions (or have, to some extent already with the Z6/Z6II/Z7/Z7II. The lower DSLR ranks are closed out already anyway.

I would say a D850 successor is likely, a D500 successor is uncertain, and a D7500 successor is unlikely. The D780 is what those other DSLR successors would likely look like.

From my own experience: pro sport photographers will not use mirrorless Edited March 15, 2021 by mag_miksch

From my own experience: pro sport photographers will not use mirrorless

 

This is also my experience so far. In fall 2020, I went to two indoor sports events (they were in a time where there was audience allowed) and I only saw one mirrorless camera (it seemed to be some kind of Canon mirrorless) which seemed to be used for video from inside the rink. All the other accredited photographers that I could see were using DSLRs. However, this could change at some point, and it won't be the same for all sports. In some sports, silent photography could give the photographer a significant advantage.

I would say a D850 successor is likely, a D500 successor is uncertain, and a D7500 successor is unlikely. The D780 is what those other DSLR successors would likely look like.

Why a D850 successor? The D850 if I am not mistaken was designed for very high image quality and with rather slow frame rate. The Z can do that easier.

Why a D850 successor? The D850 if I am not mistaken was designed for very high image quality and with rather slow frame rate. The Z can do that easier.

 

It doesn't have "slow frame rate", it does 9 fps with grip and has no viewfinder lag. Currently available Z cameras can only do 5.5 fps in CH mode with real-time viewfinder; if set to a higher frame rate, you have to go to an extended mode where the viewfinder can only shot the shots after they had been taken, similar to watching a slideshow of the event. IMO this is almost impossible to use for panning moving subjects unless a lot of space is left around the subject (or where it was a moment ago). The D850 is an excellent camera for photographing action as its wide field of view (due to FX sensor) allows finding the subject more easily than a DX with the same lens yet the D850 gives similar pixel pitch as DX cameras (not quite the D7200's but almost the same as D500 and D7500) so you can get similar image quality if you need to crop by 1.5x or more. If the subject approaches closer than 1.5x crop would allow, you can still continue shooting without cropping the subject accidentally. And you can use the center AF sensor (this is where the best AF performance and also the best lens sharpness occurs) in more situations to keep the eye in focus and then crop asymmetrically to get the body still within the frame while with DX you'd have to move to using an off-center focus point in many situations where the subject is close. It has many advantages in the photography of action.

 

What a D850 could include is the D6 viewfinder AF system (which is simply wonderful for sports as it can find the closest subject (including faces) within the specified part of the frame), live view AF and video features from the Z7 II, faster buffering by more optimized use of CFexpress, improvements into the negative digitizer feature, improvements in focus shift, multi-focal length fine tuning of zooms, accurate and reproducible automatic focus fine tune (in the D850 auto fine tune produces a lot of variation in the outcome and averaging a dozen trials is recommended in my experience; with the D6 each trial gives the same result, +- 1, reducing the time spent on fine tuning and finally making it like it should be, automated), and I'm sure they could add many other features; I only listed the ones that would be easy to do since they already have the technology. The D6 also has built-in GPS which seems battery efficient, and glove mode in the touch screen so it can be operated easily in the winter. Both features that would be very handy to have in a D850 class camera which is often used in field work. There is also more customization than the D850 has; the i screen can be customized and Fn and other buttons can take up roles such as focus mode and focus area selector, "recall camera functions" which allows button press and hold to switch between current and stored settings for user-selected features. There is a number of improvements that Nikon have done in their other cameras and which could be easily incorporated in a D850 successor.

 

The fact that the Z9 aims to do 8K video (possibly also high-resolution stills at 20 fps or higher) and the existence of the Sony A1 and Canon R5 (and the customer reaction they got) show that there is a lot of demand for high resolution cameras that can do fast action as well.

 

Nikon could go even further and take the Z9's sensor and image processor and put them into the D850 body making it possible to do high-end video and likely very automated subject detection and tracking in live view (if the A1 and R5 are any indication of what is possible). This would make unit costs for the sensor and processor smaller for Nikon and make both cameras more economical (considering the performance). Before someone says that live view is dumb way of operating the camera, note that many people elect to do just that. Canon's C70 and Sony's FX3 and FX6 cinema cameras don't include any kind of a viewfinder at all, which suggests that the manufacturers thing many video users don't need the EVF. A D850 successor with Z9 components (or even Z7 II components) could be used in this way.

Edited March 15, 2021 by ilkka_nissila

And even if it does, the optical formula will be different from the F-mount lens

Err, why? It's an E lens, so no manual connections, VR is the latest version and the body just needs to be 30mm or so longer.

 

Why design a whole new lens? Seems a real waste.

 

From what I gather there's very little design changes needed on long lenses regarding the shorter back focus of the Z mount.

Err, why? It's an E lens, so no manual connections, VR is the latest version and the body just needs to be 30mm or so longer.

 

Why design a whole new lens? Seems a real waste.

 

From what I gather there's very little design changes needed on long lenses regarding the shorter back focus of the Z mount.

 

At least Sony and to some extent Canon have been using the space freed by the mirror compartment to put the rear elements closer to the sensor also in many of their telephoto lenses (Canon 100-500, 70-200/2.8 etc.; Sony 400/2.8 and 600/4). I don't know what the advantage is, but it may allow a redistribution of the weight in the lens to be closer to the body.

 

It is also possible and likely that the Z mount lenses will have different AF motor technology than the F-mount versions, e.g. the Z mount has a faster communication protocol between lens and body and this could be important for making AF work better for fast action in low light (where PDAF can fails, so CDAF may have to be used). And those motors that work well with CDAF tend to require lighter focus groups, so it affects the optical design as well. Sony and Nikon both have been using designs with two focus motors (even four in one Sony lens!) that focus independent focus groups so that leads to a redesign of the optical structure of the lens as it needs to accommodate these multiple focus groups. I don't think Nikon will make any Z mount lens with the same optical formula as they made in F-mount. There is always something that can be changed to improve performance considering the different focusing technology used in the body.

Edited March 15, 2021 by ilkka_nissila

The sole purpose for the D6 was for the scheduled July 2020 Tokyo Summer Olympics.

???

The few pro-snappers physically attending that sporting event - and stupid enough to use an unfamiliar new camera for it - would have paid for the R&D and tooling costs?

I find that difficult to believe.

 

Why are we so sport-obsessed that the introduction of a new camera model has to await some major running-jumping-throwing jamboree? And then resulting in some of the least aesthetically pleasing and interesting pictures ever produced?

???

The few pro-snappers physically attending that sporting event - and stupid enough to use an unfamiliar new camera for it - would have paid for the R&D and tooling costs?

 

The D6 has basically identical shape and controls to the D5 (except for the viewfinder hump) so it can be used almost exactly in the same way as these sports photographers are used to, though one does not have to, as the face(and eye)-detection AF and custom-group-area modes make it often unnecessary to touch the focus point selector during shooting when correctly configured, so it becomes much easier to use the camera to catch action (especially frame-filling action) than was with the D5. I wouldn't say it is an "unfamiliar new camera" - you can choose to use it exactly as before, or using a much easier approach. I think it takes less than a day of shooting to learn to take advantage of the new features so in that sense it wouldn't have taken anyone shooting at the Olympics off guard.

 

And it is customary that Nikon and Canon introduce major new cameras for each Summer Olympics. It's an event for showcasing the best technology in imaging. Since it's also their home event it is of particular significance. Unfortunately it was postponed and may still be cancelled IMO.

 

Why are we so sport-obsessed that the introduction of a new camera model has to await some major running-jumping-throwing jamboree? And then resulting in some of the least aesthetically pleasing and interesting pictures ever produced?

 

They don't wait for the Olympics, it's more like the Olympics motivates the manufacturers to produce new technology on a regular schedule.

 

I do think the D6 and 120-300/2.8 were developed especially for the Tokyo Olympics in mind but I disagree that this was their sole purpose, e.g. Steve Perry and Brad Hill have said quite nice things about the D6 and Brad Hill also about the 120-300 and both are wildlife and not sports photographers. The D6 has a lot of features which would be completely pointless at the Tokyo Olympics, for example, you don't need gloves to shoot at Summer Olympics (it has the unique glove mode for the touch screen) and it would be quite paradoxical to lose track of where the images were shot without built-in GPS. There are a lot of features in that camera which only make sense in the wider context of field use. However, the pandemic messed up the sports photography landscape and meant the camera would not have a showcase as was planned, or usage at various events of the season. I quite enjoy it and find it to be exceptionally capable especially for sports, unfortunately, currently all the events in my region are either cancelled or without live audience so I had only limited opportunity to use it for sports, and mostly have been using it for wildlife where it works fine but is not an ideal fit as there is no provision for detecting animal eyes or faces as there is for humans.

 

Because of the pandemic, the significance of live events has vanished and now people largely teleconference from their home offices, making a different set of priorities needed for camera design. Product photography probably continues as viable as before, and people are now more active in outdoor activities than before, and for both product and nature photography, high resolution is advantageous. 8K video may not be all that useful but it gives Nikon the opportunity to show that they are following trends and can produce a contemporary machine for imaging. I believe the Z9 won't be focused on around sports photography but a more general-purpose instrument. I think many of the people who will buy it will be amateur bird photographers who are well-off due to income from a different profession. And by "amateur" I don't mean in a demeaning way, but rather in the original meaning of someone who does something for the love of it.

Edited March 15, 2021 by ilkka_nissila

I think the Olympics has a special feeling to it, it is only every four years (in normal times) and so the athletes have to really try their best to peak at the Olympics, and a lot of spectators' attention is focused on this event. I don't really think it's so important what is being competed on, but that it gathers the best athletes from around the world in one place, and so it is kind a celebration of a unique kind. No other event gathers so many people from various backgrounds to together. I don't normally watch a lot of sports and I completely skip the (normally quite thick) sports section in the newspaper, but there are a few events which I do watch, and those include the soccer World Cup semifinals and finals as well as the Olympics. The Olympics includes a lot of sports with fewer viewers ordinarily but their presence at the Olympics makes more people watch them as well, so it showcases those sports to the larger audience. Because the events are not annual, one can really feel that every athlete tries their very best as it is their one chance to really make it. And the spectators also add to the feeling, which unfortunately may not happen this time.

 

I don't agree that the images are not aesthetically pleasing; quite the contrary I find them often remarkable, especially images shot by the major agencies such as Reuters and others who have the best access to the best camera positions. But I guess this depends really on what type of photography one likes.

I would say a D850 successor is likely, a D500 successor is uncertain, and a D7500 successor is unlikely.

At the beginning of this year, I would have agreed with you; after the latest Ikegami interview, I think they are all unlikely. The D6 will be the last F-mount body released.

 

The D780 is what those other DSLR successors would likely look like.

Agreed for a possible D880 - essentially Z7 (or now Z7II) technology in a DSLR body (the same way the D780 uses Z6 innards). A D550, which is the one I am hoping for the most, would be similar to the initial pairing D5/D500 by putting D6 technology into the DX body. The fact that the D6 was released alone already slims the chances for a D500 successor. As hard as it is to believe, but the D500 is already 5 years old!

 

The D780 was a surprise - coming more than 5 years after the D750 release and more than a year after the Z6. By contrast, the D880 could come 4-years after the D850 and within a year of the Z7II release if released by Fall of 2021 - which I find an unlikely scenario. And the longer the wait, the less likely the event. I think Nikon should rather focus on catching up with a Z6 III and Z7 III release sooner rather than later.

Err, why? It's an E lens, so no manual connections, VR is the latest version and the body just needs to be 30mm or so longer.

I think Ilkka answered that one already. AFAIK, the Nikon Z-mount 70-200/2.8 isn't just a 30mm long version of the latest F-mount lens either.

At the beginning of this year, I would have agreed with you; after the latest Ikegami interview, I think they are all unlikely. The D6 will be the last F-mount body released.

 

I think this is partly a distortion created by the pandemic which reduced professional photographers' work and also limited the opportunities of everyone to travel, see people and enjoy photography. Thus the demand for new cameras plummeted and users of existing systems continued to use what they already have rather than bought new equipment. I believe there will still be new F-mount cameras in the future, but right now Nikon are trying to catch up with Sony and Canon in mirrorless prestige and market share. Just before the pandemic Nikon were saying that they continue to develop both technologies, and I don't believe all these projects have been cancelled, but it's quite possible that sales of the D780 and D6 were so poor that they changed their minds. But it's a bit of a case of Nikon shooting in their own foot, by giving the D780 the Z6 sensor and live view and video features but removing the option to use vertical grip and not including the latest viewfinder AF technology. In the D6 similarly Nikon didn't put much effort into making it more general purpose, they only made minor improvements to video, for example, though one can argue that this shape of camera body isn't ideal for video anyway, but it left them with a PR problem despite the excellent AF of the camera in viewfinder photography. I believe that if Nikon had given the D780 a vertical grip option and Multi-CAM 20k it would have been much better received. And same with the D6: including Z6 sensor and video capabilities might have made it better-perceived among the camera review press. Even though at the Olympics the photographers can't really shoot video of the action, and for stills photography of sports the camera is really excellent.

What can I do with these new systems that I can’t already do with F series or other dslr systems?

20 or even 30fps, totally silent shooting, AF area coverage up to the edges of the frame, no need for AF fine tuning, blackout-free EVF (given the right camera sensor), improved lens performance due to shorter flange-to-sensor distance and - at least for Nikon - larger throat diameter. EVF lag may also be overcome or at least reduced to be virtually meaningless - I have not tried a high-performance mirrorless body (like the Sony A9/A9II or A1) to know whether or not EVF lag is still and issue with them. Granted, some of these are of importance only when shooting fast action. Eye-AF (human and now also animals and birds) is something I have not seen in any DSLR; at best face-detection is offered there. AF operation at the chosen aperture eliminates issues with focus shift.

 

Initially, mirrorless advantages cited were mostly smaller and lighter bodies - both not necessarily advantages in my book. Lighter is welcome - to a point. And one can also shrink body dimensions too much - at the expense of ergonomics.

 

But it's a bit of a case of Nikon shooting in their own foot

Nikon seems to do that a lot - I wonder if there are any feet left to shoot into :oops:

 

but it's quite possible that sales of the D780 and D6 were so poor that they changed their minds.

That - or just simply that something that made sense a year ago, no longer does a year later. Time had come for a certain camera successor - missed because of the pandemic - and now is past. I do wish for a D500 successor - but just like the D500, it would be a niche camera. Making its appearance highly unlikely. I actually don't mind if the successor was a suitably specified mirrorless body - but I don't know how high on Nikon's list that one is. It doesn't even have to be DX - but (to have similar pixel density) the Z7II currently isn't it. A possible Z8 might - at a an expected $4,000-$4,500 price point (equivalent to equipping a D850 to "almost" match D500 performance specs).