Nikon Introduces the Retro, FX Mirrorless Zf

[zakslm]

I'm not a Nikon user and have not owned a Nikon SLR, DSLR or mirrorless camera but I enjoy reading some of the topics and discussions on this forum.  

In my opinion, the Nikon F Photomic and the Nikon F2 were the best looking cameras every made.  If Nikon came out with a retro mirrorless camera that looked like a F Photomic or F2, I'd be very tempted to switch!

[iosif_astrukov]

Looks like another instagram camera to me.... 

Third retro disappointment IMO

 

[mike_halliwell]

We seem to have some new Nikon friends....🙂

2 hours ago, zakslm said:

I'm not a Nikon user and have not owned a Nikon SLR, DSLR or mirrorless camera but I enjoy reading some of the topics and discussions on this forum.  

In my opinion, the Nikon F Photomic and the Nikon F2 were the best looking cameras every made.  If Nikon came out with a retro mirrorless camera that looked like a F Photomic or F2, I'd be very tempted to switch!

That makes you a valid commentator........?

So switch..!

[BeBu Lamar]

2 hours ago, zakslm said:

I'm not a Nikon user and have not owned a Nikon SLR, DSLR or mirrorless camera but I enjoy reading some of the topics and discussions on this forum.  

In my opinion, the Nikon F Photomic and the Nikon F2 were the best looking cameras every made.  If Nikon came out with a retro mirrorless camera that looked like a F Photomic or F2, I'd be very tempted to switch!

Which version of the F or F2 are you talking about. Although my first camera was the F2AS and I loved it, I did think its large photomic prism was ugly. I think the F3HP is a very good looking camera.

Edited September 21, 2023 by BeBu Lamar

[zakslm]

Not being a "Nikon" person and not knowing the iterations of that model, I refering to this one:  https://www.kenrockwell.com/nikon/f.htm

As far as the F2, I was referring to this one or one of it's variants (chrome body, black prism):  https://www.kenrockwell.com/nikon/f2.htm

 

 

[zakslm]

43 minutes ago, mike_halliwell said:

We seem to have some new Nikon friends....🙂

That makes you a valid commentator........?

So switch..!

I don't know if makes me an commentator, or just an intruder!  

When considering my first SLR, I had narrowed my choices down to a Nikkormat, an Minolta XE-5 (had a black prism like the F2) or the recently introduced Canon AE-1.  The camera store owner suggested the AE-1 and I bought it and have been Canon ever since.  Had the Nikkormat been suggested, I'd probably still be a Nikon guy.

I got out of film photography about 15 years ago and sold most of my camera equipment and lenses.  So when I decided to get a DSLR early this year, I considered both Nikon and Canon and almost ordered a refurbished D3500 kit from Nikon.  However, the Canon cameras felt familiar in my hands and I went back to Canon and slid back down the slippery slope of cameras, lenses and accessories.

At one time, I worked with a couple of wedding and event photographers who shot Nikon N90s (or something like that) for their 35mm work and loved them.  One even switched to Canon when he went to an AF camera, but went back to Nikon as soon as he felt that Nikon's AF was "good enough".  

In any case, I do find some of the discussions on this forum enlightening, informative and entertaining even if I am intruding!  Also, many of the images you post on this forum are really nice and I enjoy looking at them!

Edited September 21, 2023 by zakslm

[Dieter Schaefer]

1 hour ago, BeBu Lamar said:

Although my first camera was the F2AS and I loved it, I did think its large photomic prism was ugly.

I think the F2 Titan is a good looking camera: https://blog.mingthein.com/2013/07/23/fd-shooting-with-the-legends-the-nikon-f2-titan/

1 hour ago, BeBu Lamar said:

I think the F3HP is a very good looking camera.

Edited 1 hour ago by BeBu Lamar

Agree. Maybe the viewfinder proportion is better with the non-HP finder though. Mine started out that way; I exchanged the viewfinder later (I wear glasses and the HP finder suited me better):

 

[mjferron]

As one who shoots with old retro cameras like Nikkormats I don’t see the need for a camera to imitate that style. They do not make new cars that look like 57 Chevy’s so why design cameras that look like old rangefinders and SLR’s? I prefer the regular Z style to the retros. But if it works for someone personally then that is fine too.

[mike_halliwell]

8 hours ago, mjferron said:

They do not make new cars that look like 57 Chevy’s so why design cameras that look like old rangefinders and SLR’s?

No, but there's a huge market for Resto-Mods, where people put better engines, brakes, suspension, aircon etc in 'old' classics... to get the best of both Worlds.

Like putting a 47MP sensor in an F3......😉

Edited September 22, 2023 by mike_halliwell

[ilkka_nissila]

8 hours ago, mjferron said:

As one who shoots with old retro cameras like Nikkormats I don’t see the need for a camera to imitate that style. They do not make new cars that look like 57 Chevy’s so why design cameras that look like old rangefinders and SLR’s? I prefer the regular Z style to the retros. But if it works for someone personally then that is fine too.

I think "need" is a strong word in this context, but since photography in its entirety is not necessary to sustain life (as a whole) and it is largely an activity that we do as part of enjoying life, one can then look at what kind of camera user interfaces would be enjoyable to use. The tactile sense is very important for humans and being able to adjust camera settings by feel (not even looking at the camera or turning the power on) is something I enjoy. I don't want to shoot film, however, at this point, as maintaining a film-based workflow would require more stuff and I try to avoid that. I know film enjoys a resurgence of interest, and I am glad to hear that there are people who shoot film cameras.

 

But in my opinion the Zf isn't about film or making a camera that looks like a film camera, but it's more about a different user experience. Normally when using a modern camera, one has to turn it on, and then look at displays and apply settings. With a Df, even without turning it on, or raising the viewfinder to eye level, you can set aperture, shutter speed, ISO and exposure compensation. With a Zf the setting of the aperture may require turning it on if it doesn't allow the use of the lens aperture ring (powered off), and this does break this concept a bit, but if you do turn it on, you can set the aperture by looking at the small display on top of the camera, and the other settings are with clicking dials. I hope with the third-party lenses that have aperture rings, the camera would let the user set the aperture on the ring, but I'm not 100% sure (I don't own these.) I know that there have been some complaints about how the manual focus Nikkors work on the adapter. But these are things that Nikon can work on based on user input and improve.

 

There is also a stylistic aspect, many people dress intentionally in a different way from others, and using a camera that looks a bit different can be a part of that. I think it can act as a conversation piece though regrettably cameras that look "retro" are quite common nowadays, so people might not notice it as anything unusual any more. I may get the Zf because sometimes I need to have a second camera with me and one that takes the same lenses as the camera I'm mostly shooting with. However, I may not need it to have all the capabilities of the primary camera, and it would be advantageous if it fits in a narrow compartment in my camera backpack so that carrying it doesn't increase the total weight or require a second bag. It would also be an advantage if it has a slightly different niche of excellence than my primary camera and in the Zf's case, it is the 24 MP sensor that (if it is similar to that in the Z6 II) will excel in high-ISO photography. Nikon has also developed the in-camera stabilization further and they also claim good low-light AF, which are two features that would perfectly fit my needs for a second camera. The drawbacks as far as I am concerned is that it doesn't appear to be able to be triggered by WR-R10 (as a remote camera) and it can't use it as a radio trigger for flash, so those are clear downsides. Finally it only partly uses the same memory cards that my other cameras use, and that's a bit of a nuisance as well. Unfortunately the WR-R10 incompatibility is something that I may not be able to get over as it would prohibit me from triggering the Zf as a remote camera from the primary camera using the equipment that I have; building another way of remote triggering might be possible but I don't think it is necessarily worth the effort. But I guess whenever Nikon makes a product, there are ups and downsides to it. 🙂 The vibes this camera is getting seem very positive on the gear forums in general. I just don't understand the lack of system-wide compatibility with accessories. Nikon could do it with the Z9 and Z8, why not here?

[ilkka_nissila]

Now I realize that e.g. Viltrox Z-mount lenses have aperture rings, so there must be a way of using them to control the aperture from the lens, otherwise making them would be pointless. So is it the case that native Z lenses can use aperture rings, but the aperture of adapted chipped lenses must be controlled from the camera body?

[BeBu Lamar]

3 hours ago, ilkka_nissila said:

II hope with the third-party lenses that have aperture rings, the camera would let the user set the aperture on the ring, but I'm not 100% sure (I don't own these.) 

I think it's not possible to have the aperture ring (one with engraved aperture number on the ring) with the Nikon Z. I think the interface with the lens and the control ring is incremental and not absolute. 

[ShunCheung]

The control ring on Nikkor Z lenses can be programmed to control the aperture, but of course that generic ring has no click stops. It is definitely possible to put a dedicated aperture control ring on the lens, if desired.

For example, the TTArtisan Z-mount lens has that feature: https://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/1725978-REG/ttartisan_c2520_b_z_25mm_f_2_aps_c_compact.html

Whether you want to buy a $55 lens (new) to put on your Z body is another matter.

[Hector Javkin]

One feature of the Z8 seemed very tempting: pre-release capture. If it works properly, it should be a huge aid in capturing the decisive moment. Just days ago, I wondered how long it might take for this feature to trickle down to a less costly, lighter camera. Then I saw the Zf announcement which includes pre-release capture. The dials-based interface is fine with me. I intend to purchase a Zf as soon as more user reports come in and any major bugs are fixed.

Ray Bradbury (below) may have had a better expression a moment earlier. I'll never know.

[ilkka_nissila]

4 hours ago, BeBu Lamar said:

I think it's not possible to have the aperture ring (one with engraved aperture number on the ring) with the Nikon Z. I think the interface with the lens and the control ring is incremental and not absolute. 

But why then does Viltrox sell lenses with physical aperture rings with Z mount? I am pretty sure these aperture rings do work (otherwise they would be left out) and there is no non-Z camera to which these lenses will fit (and focus at infinity).

[ilkka_nissila]

40 minutes ago, ilkka_nissila said:

But why then does Viltrox sell lenses with physical aperture rings with Z mount? I am pretty sure these aperture rings do work (otherwise they would be left out) and there is no non-Z camera to which these lenses will fit (and focus at infinity).

Voigländer Z mount native lenses also come with aperture rings that are reported to function normally. 

 

I hope Nikon also considers making some Z lenses with aperture rings. I think those would sell in fairly decent numbers to Z f and Z fc users.

Edited September 22, 2023 by ilkka_nissila

[c_watson1]

Can't help but wonder if the Nikon product development team behind this DOA pup isn't looking frantically for a seppuku clause management sneaked into their contracts. Fuji got this right in 2014 with the graceful little X-T1 and never looked back. Seriously, does Nikon ever listen to its customers?

 

[mike_halliwell]

I really wonder why Nikon introduced something as innovative (to Nikon) as Pixel Shift shooting in a retro body, when the flagship Z9 has only been out 2 years, and its successor, the Z8 only 4 months ago without it..... and for 1/3 the price no less!

As an old Z9 and new Z8 owner, I'm a bit miffed. 🤨

I have use for both the noise reduction AND the bigger pixel count features.

[ShunCheung]

I don't think pixel shift is that new a technology any more. To take full advantage of that, you need to set your camera on a tripod and your subject needs to be very still. To me, pixel shift doesn't seem to be a very useful feature. Since the Z9 is a sports, action camera (where the subjects aren't exactly still) and a pretty good video camera, I don't think pixel shift will add much to it. It may be a more useful feature on some high-pixel Z7 type body and those Fuji medium-format bodies.

[hjoseph7]

Looks a little less chunky and more compact than the original Df. I appreciate all the knobs because coming from film, I really never got use to the flywheels on DSLR's. Nothing bad to say so far even comes with a flip screen.  I wish I had the 2 Grand to splurge...   

[hjoseph7]

On 9/21/2023 at 6:26 PM, mjferron said:

As one who shoots with old retro cameras like Nikkormats I don’t see the need for a camera to imitate that style. They do not make new cars that look like 57 Chevy’s so why design cameras that look like old rangefinders and SLR’s? I prefer the regular Z style to the retros. But if it works for someone personally then that is fine too.

I kinda like the look of the Sony mirrorless cameras myself... 

[ilkka_nissila]

5 hours ago, mike_halliwell said:

I really wonder why Nikon introduced something as innovative (to Nikon) as Pixel Shift shooting in a retro body, when the flagship Z9 has only been out 2 years, and its successor, the Z8 only 4 months ago without it..... and for 1/3 the price no less!

As an old Z9 and new Z8 owner, I'm a bit miffed. 🤨

I have use for both the noise reduction AND the bigger pixel count features.

Most likely they are testing it in the Zf and getting user feedback from it before putting it into other new models in the future. You know whenever you buy a new camera, after a short time there will be even newer models that have something you want. 😉 Think of cameras as a subscription service with regular (large) payments.

Personally I consider the pixel shift feature of very limited use as even when photographing landscape, there is always some movement (due to wind, water flow etc., people or animals in the landscape) that ruins the integrity of the pixel shifted set. This means it had very narrow applications. Such as product shoots in a controlled environment etc. maybe. Yes, I know algorithms can fabricate some solution to the discrepancies but the resulting moment never existed in time.

 

I think it's much better to see Nikon put out a 100 or 200 MP camera eventually and then we can hopefully be rid of this fumbling around with multiple images captured and merged into one.

[mike_halliwell]

2 hours ago, ilkka_nissila said:

This means it had very narrow applications. Such as product shoots in a controlled environment etc. maybe.

Spot on! Any sort of copystand work, fine art, architecture. 

Depending on the type of work you do, I'd use this weekly.

I'd reckon some of Matt's tech 'still lives' could use this.....🙂

[mike_halliwell]

3 hours ago, ilkka_nissila said:

hopefully be rid of this fumbling around with multiple images captured and merged into one.

I think the noise reduction, rather than the higher pixel count is more important... full info per pixel is very useful.

[mike_halliwell]

22 hours ago, ilkka_nissila said:

Most likely they are testing it in the Zf

Putting Pixel Shift into a 24MPix retro camera designed for anything but keeping the camera still seems an odd feature to add, even for an experiment.