No "consumer level entry" Z-series Camera by Nikon anymore?

Ha! Let's revisit the Nikon CX cameras......;)

 

Most people who knock them, never tried one.

 

They almost got it perfectly right with the 1" BSI-CMOS 21MPix sensored J5.... but then they dropped it....:(

 

It has a nice set of primes and zooms. Nikon Lenses

 

.... and if you need some serious 'reach' you can still pop the 500mm PF on it via the FT1 adapter. It has Nikon's highest pixel-density by some margin for a MILC.....:cool:

I don't knock the CX as it had its own lens mount. It's OK to share the F mount because FX sensor was too expensive and you simply can't abadon good F mount lenses but I don't like the Z50. It doesn't make sense to me. I think the Z5 is Nikon current entry level for the Z series.

I don't knock the CX as it had its own lens mount. It's OK to share the F mount because FX sensor was too expensive and you simply can't abadon good F mount lenses but I don't like the Z50. It doesn't make sense to me. I think the Z5 is Nikon current entry level for the Z series.

An "Entry level" camera priced at 160,- Euro for the cheapest usable configuratio ( camer + 50mm kit lense No memory..) ?

Ridiculous...

Hypothetical question, 'cos we'll never know..;)

But, I wonder how much they actually cost to make, physically, once the R&D costs have been factored etc.

Is a Z9 cheaper to make than a D6?

The degree of in-body mechanics in a Z9 is now very small. No mirror or shutter and no aperture stop-down mechanism. Everything else is pretty much solid state.

There's always dials and switches, but they're pretty universal.

Hypothetical question, 'cos we'll never know..;)

 

But, I wonder how much they actually cost to make, physically, once the R&D costs have been factored etc.

 

Is a Z9 cheaper to make than a D6?

 

The degree of in-body mechanics in a Z9 is now very small. No mirror or shutter and no aperture stop-down mechanism. Everything else is pretty much solid state.

 

There's always dials and switches, but they're pretty universal.

There is the IBIS mechanism. The protective shutter is much less expensive than the real shutter. I would think the mirrorless is less expensive to make and future advance in technology tends to favor it rather than the DSLR. I don't think they can figure out how to make less expensive pentaprism, shutter, mirror mechanism in the future. They would be able to improve the EVF greatly in the future like faster update rate and higher resolution.

The general trend with everything is to eliminate as much mechanical crap as possible and replace it with electronics and software. This has been going on for decades to reduce costs.

IMO, a big advantage of small sensors is greater DOF. OTOH, a big advantage of large sensors is less DOF. Depends on what you need. Combine something like a Z7 with the very good S-series lenses and you may find what you used to consider in focus, isn't. I'm having this problem with product photos using my Z6. Shots that used to be acceptable on film now require focus stacking to keep customers happy with the front to back focus.

The general trend with everything is to eliminate as much mechanical crap as possible and replace it with electronics and software. This has been going on for decades to reduce costs.

 

(snip)

It always seemed to me that Canon, with the AE-1, got SLRs into the "economy of scale" region.

Before that, 35mm was considered too hard for ordinary users, so we had things

like the Kodak Instamatic. If they could sell them for the right price, they could

make enough AE-1s to get enough economy of scale to sell them for that price.

Someone had to believe that, and fund the production plants and initial units

to get that price.

If you make enough of them, you can put a large amount of mechanical

crap, with very fine tolerance, together for a low price. The mechanics

and tolerance for the home VCR are pretty amazing. The mechanism

to pull the tape out, wrap it around the drum, and then move the tape

so the head tracks at the right place, to micron tolerance.

Before the AE-1, SLRs were priced for, and sold to pros. The Nikon F competing

with the Canon F-1, and both with a large variety of optional features, again

priced for professional use.

Then Nikon got into the market with the FM and later FE, priced again

for less than professional users. (Though as well as I know, also

popular with pros.)

At the time I bought my FM, I still liked and understood the idea of

a manual camera with built-in meter. I actually bought it just after

the FE came out, though.

Looks like Canon have gone 'All-In' with DX size MILC with the R7 and R10....:eek:

What's Nikons reply this time? :)

One of the comments heard so far was EOS M .... RIP.

An "Entry level" camera priced at 160,- Euro for the cheapest usable configuratio ( camer + 50mm kit lense No memory..) ?

Ridiculous...

wrong, should have read 1160 euro ...

... If you make enough of them, you can put a large amount of mechanical

crap, with very fine tolerance, together for a low price. The mechanics

and tolerance for the home VCR are pretty amazing. The mechanism

to pull the tape out, wrap it around the drum, and then move the tape

so the head tracks at the right place, to micron tolerance.

Certainly true in principle, but it gets harder every year. Not a lot of VCRs are made these days and a DVD drive is probably easier and cheaper. The overall trend is as I said. I've been in manufacturing my entire career and even with volume, mechanical parts have gotten worse and worse cost-wise. Part of it is labor- some things are hard to fully automate and wages have gone up even in the low-wage locations. Some of it is environmental. Shops that do plating and metal finishing have ever-stricter operating and disposal rules. Semiconductor fabs are no environmental picnic, but the huge volume of everything put in one place makes up for some of it. Think of it as pushing the volume savings upstream a bit. Any parts that can be stamped, molded or etched, combined with electronics, will be preferred. I don't know much about sensor VR assemblies, but they're probably the most sophisticated mechanics in a camera these days. Lots more mechanics in lenses and lenses cost a lot more these days!

Looks like Canon have gone 'All-In' with DX size MILC with the R7 and R10....:eek:

 

What's Nikons reply this time? :)

 

One of the comments heard so far was EOS M .... RIP.

Nikon does not and did not have a 32MP DX camera. The DX cameras stopped at about 24MP. And the D500 regressed to 20MP.

Nikon did not have a reply to the Canon 90D, so may not reply to the R7.

I have to compare the specs, but I think the Z50 is like a weak version of the R10. IOW Nikon has to play catch up.

BUT . . . that depends on the target market.

• If Nikon's target market is more consumer, then the Z50 might be on target.
  

• Canon's target, based on the performance specs, seem to be more high end/enthusiast/pro.
  The R7, like the 90D seems to be more tilted towards the pro level user.
  

I agree about the EOS-M.

Canon should have ONE APS-C line, not two. Two will just confuse and split the market, and dilute their R&D.

To me, it appears that Canon decided that Nikon's Z single mount strategy for FF+APS-C is better than Canon's two mount strategy of different mounts for FF ® and APS-C (M). And rather than keep spending more R&D money on the M, cut it and put it into the R-S line.

Then again, maybe Canon is splitting the APS-C market.

I did a "rough" comparison with their dSLRs.

The R7 is like an upgraded 90D

With a 32MP APS-C sensor, the R7 and 90D have no comparable Nikon DX dSLR. It would be similar to what a D8000 might be.

The R10, with no rear wheel, is operationally like an upgraded T8i.

The T8i is kinda similar to the D5600, in that it has one control dial.

The extra 'reach' idea of DX over FX, regarding pixel density, died with the D850. Agreed, the focus point distribution is better.

I guess a Z500 would need to be about 40/50MPix to gain a meaningful advantage.

The smaller DX sensor within a much larger Z body mount looks a bit weird on the Z50....:eek: