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

Discussion in 'Nikon' started by c.p.m._van_het_kaar, May 3, 2022.

  1. "And if Canon stops making M lenses, your only option for lenses, is to put an EF lens on with an EF to M adapter"
    Minor correction, you can also mount EF-S lenses on your M camera with the adaptor.

    It is unclear to me that the market for smaller than FF camera systems is big enough and profitable enough to entice the big 3 FF players to continue to seek out that market. For those that want smaller systems, Fuji and M43 both have extensive lens and camera options that I doubt the big 3 will try to match-up with future APS-C offerings. As far as entry level, most casual photographers and video takers are perfectly happy with the results from late model smartphones for images of friends, families, events, babies, and travel. If an upgrade is needed for youth sports or travel, I would likely recommend one of the long zoom P&S cameras using the 1" Sony sensor instead of recommending an MILC. There is still plenty of used ILC equipment out there for serious photographers with a small budget, so I would not worry about them yet.
     
  2. What's wrong with very inexpensive 2nd hand DSLRs? Learn the fundamentals first!
     
  3. "What's wrong with very inexpensive 2nd hand DSLRs? Learn the fundamentals first!"

    For people interested in photography, then absolutely (as I described at the end of my posting). For those who simply want photos of their kids playing youth soccer or baseball, or desire longer reach for vacation photos, the complexity of a DSLR and lenses is likely to be overkill, and much harder to use than their Iphone 13. Besides, a Sony RX100 (or similar from Panasonic or Canon) is a whole lot smaller than a DSLR, and with the later models, seems to have AF tracking that sticks to subjects quite well. Would work out well capturing an 18 month old running around the house.
     
  4. But can't I buy a better camera and get the kind of pictures the pro does?

    That happens more often than one would logically think. People with money will just throw money at the problem.
    I talked to a parent who was shooting a FF Canon kit, probably worth well more than $6k (camera, 70-200/2.8, + another lens). He was shooting in "Auto" because he did not know how to use the other modes. :eek:
     
    yardkat and mike_halliwell like this.
  5. That's why the pro bodies don't have a pop-up flash or the Green Auto mode......:D

    More expensive camera = better pics?, maybe, just maybe.

    More expensive lens = better pics? quite possibly!
     
    Last edited: May 5, 2022
  6. That "consumer level entry" as market segment doesn't exist anymore, only professionals or enthusiasts are using camera this days.
     
  7. I would not start with a DSLR for which the lense are not usable on future new "Z" acmera's , and if one brand ( Nikon?) cannot sell me a new entry level, i would look for another brand, i guess (canon, Sony, or even Fuji), after that there is a good chance that i would stay with that brand, once having invested a bit more in lenses..

    ANd maybe the "consumer - Hobbyist" market in teh U.S.A. is not that bifg in anymore, thet does not necesarily the truth for the remainder of the world..( other brands seem to do pretty well in the "affordable" market segment..)
     
  8. Which brand have inexpensive entry level DX camera? I just was in Best Buy:(
     
  9. About 80% of the lenses I use on my Z6ii are F mount... most notably, the 70-200mm 2.8 fl, the 300mm and 500mm PF.

    Admittedly, I am, like many here I guess, a dual F and Z mount user.

    Using the FTZ adapter, whilst a bit clunky, is entirely painless.

    Going Z from the start is optically very expensive, irrespective of the body to start with.
     
  10. Options are rather thin within those boundaries. Sony suspended their APS-C offerings. Canon's APS-C mirrorless mount (EOS-M) is different and incompatible with their main mirrorless mount (RF), has a very limited lens set (yes, EF lenses can be used but then you have to use an adapter and arguably are in the same situation as with F-mount lenses) and the RF lenses cannot be used on M, and M lenses cannot be used on RF cameras. So there is no upgrade path from M, and likely very limited future products. Purchasing into EF system (although that too is being wound down) or F-mount would be a better choice than M as the gear (including specialist gear not available for any mirrorless system natively) is extensively available on the used market and there is a huge variety of options many at rather low prices relative to their capability. M is probably going to end up like Nikon 1 (my guess). With DSLR products on the used market you can build an advanced system at maybe 1/3 of the cost of a new mirrorless system with comparable level of capabilities. So if cost is a priority then ignoring DSLR products doesn't seem very smart, unless you have specific need to mirrorless-specific capabilities such as silent photography (which you cannot rely on moving subjects unless paying for the advanced and rather expensive top models with stacked sensors). Budget and mirrorless just doesn't go together very well in the same sentence. So, Sony and Canon are not really options if you want a low-cost new mirrorless camera with comprehensive future upgrade options, in fact Nikon offers a bit more in that they have two DX Z cameras that can use full-frame and DX Z lenses, and there is even a DX pancake in the works. (Sony might return to APS-C in the future if the market and production cost changes, but there is no guarantee that this will happen. And Canon may start making RF APS-C cameras and lenses eventually, though there is no official word about it as far as I know.)

    OM Digital and Fuji may have something at low prices but they have no full-frame options (should one want to upgrade to a larger and more capable system). Fuji has a medium format system but then that's a whole another discussion not very relevant to a beginner and there isn't any advantage to starting out on Fuji APS-C and then going to Fuji GFX in terms of component cross-compatibility.

    The $400 entry-level interchangeable lens camera (and $600 kit) is a thing of the past,. As the enthusiast and pro markets have to support the camera companies now and fewer people buy cameras, the costs per unit will go up, not down. Moving to carbon-free energy and production and increasing environmental awareness can also mean higher costs independently of war and viruses.
     
    Last edited: May 5, 2022
  11. It's possible to get a Z50 + 16-50mm and 50-250mm twin kit lens for £950..

    Technically, how much is an iPhone 13?
     
    gabriel_heyman likes this.
  12. It depends on the particular model but it is comparable. However, people need the phone to get through their normal life's tasks, communication, finding information, navigation, it's not "optional" any more than paying one's electric bill. (Of course there are a lot cheaper phones available but people seem prepared to spend on their smartphones).

    A dedicated camera is now mainly of interest to those who either use photography in their work or as a passion.
     
    RaymondC, Nick D. and mike_halliwell like this.
  13. Indeed they do!

    Priorities, like nostalgia, isn't what it used to be....:p
     
    robert_davies|2 and Nick D. like this.
  14. I still think the camera phone is the modern Instamatic. Generally provides decent results and most people don’t want to carry a camera everywhere, they never have. I use the camera feature if I want to get someone an image immediately but otherwise stick to Nikon. I doubt I’ll ever bother with mirrorless because I still don’t see the point, don’t need it and don’t want to replace all that glass.

    Rick H.
     
  15. Having a 'tru-view' viewfinder, ie one that shows firstly what you will get, and post-shot, what you got, without moving away from the eyepiece can be handy to avoid bad cock-ups and quickly correct things.

    You don't need to replace all that glass, just the AF-D ones that won't AF via the FTZ. Everything else pretty much works as normal.

    One of the things I've noticed is a higher keep-rate with the Z6ii for semi-static, ie,
    not high speed action, which I think is due to better AF when using long zooms. Fine tune isn't so hot for variable focal length stuff. Even my 200-500mm isn't as soft at the long-end as it was with my D850.
     
  16. In the early years, FX sensors cost a lot more. Defect rate is approximately proportional to area. That is the way it works for all integrated circuits, not just image sensors.

    If the price difference in sensors is small enough, there is not so much reason to build DX cameras.
    As for existing DX lenses, the D700 knows which lens is in use, and adjusts to use a DX sized area,
    though that can be switched off when desired. (Some zoom lenses will cover FX at some focal lengths.)

    There are plenty of non-interchangeable lens cameras for entry level.
     
  17. I understand the early years but it doesn't make sense to do it now.
     
  18. (Regarding DX vs. FX sensor size.)

    It does seem that Nikon calls the Z50 entry level. Priced at $860, as far as I can tell without lens, does seem high.

    I got my (used) D700 about 6 years ago for less than that.
    (I don't know that there is a fair comparison between Z50 and D700, though.)

    I suspect that I agree, that the dividing line has moved up, so it is now the larger medium format
    sensors that many of us can't afford.
     
  19. The DX Z50 is 450gm body only.

    The FX Z5 is 590gm body only..

    Somehow, I don't think that's 'just' the smaller sensor mass!

    The Fuji GFX 50 is way cheaper than a Z9.... and you can get a good clean used GFX 100S for Z9 money.
     
  20. Comparing used and new items doesn't seem quite fair although many do that when making purchase decisions. Somehow one has to factor in the condition, wear, and risks of a used product. Inflation has increased quite a bit and so when comparing prices from several years ago with current prices, that should be taken into account. Today's $865 (US) is equivalent to $714 in 2016. Finally, one has to take into account the smaller volumes that Nikon cameras sell today, they no longer have the advantage of being able to divide the cost of development of a new processor across a lineup of cameras that sell in millions of copies per year like they used to. I think the Z50 is as cheap as they will get, of course in a few years the used Z50's will be cheaper. But it may be that in the future the least expensive model may get more expensive than the Z50 is today. The world is moving to clean energy and there is a trend towards producing goods more locally and these may rise prices.

    Medium format digital doesn't quite give the huge image quality advantage it used to give (in film) as the relative size of the typical MF digital sensor and 35mm sensor is smaller than it was with film. It's not that MF digital image quality isn't great (it is) but that now also 35mm digital (FX) image quality is already really good, and so there is no pressing practical need to go larger. To me the problem with MF is that while the images are beautiful, the EVFs of MF mirrorless cameras are very slow (there is a lag and updates to the image shown on the screen are sparse) and this makes them a poor fit to the way I work. In fact I have this problem with the Z6 II as well, if I'm photographing a subject with movement the total lag constituting of the EVF lag and shutter delay is greater than what I'm used to with DSLRs and this makes timing of movement very difficult without resorting to capturing multiple shots. I believe the Z9 largely alleviates that problem, though, at least I'm hoping it does, as it has parallel data streams. However, the Z9 has a 45 MP sensor which is less well fit to the kind of event photography that I want to do, and although I recently increased my computer's storage considerably, I still wouldn't want to shoot everything with 45 MP and prefer 20-24MP for practical reasons (as well as high ISO image quality, which on the Z6 II is wonderful). I'd sort of want the Z6 II sensor but with the Z9's faster AF and EVF capabilities.
     

Share This Page

1111