NikonGear'23
Gear Talk => Camera Talk => Topic started by: Bear Dale on November 23, 2019, 23:52:25
-
I'm reading so much Nikon negativity across the internet with rumblings even that Nikon as a company might go under and disappear.
Thom Hogan's thoughts on what Nikon should do -
http://www.dslrbodies.com/newsviews/nikon-2019-news/november-2019-nikon-canon/my-proposal-for-nikons.html
I've only recently (2 years) come over to Nikon from Canon and all this doom and gloom I read!
I'm 57, I have a very nice collection of late model F glass and a D850, I can see myself riding out my photography life using 'flappy mirror' cameras and F glass.
-
Thom was making the point a few years ago that Nikon (and Canon) needed to change their strategy at that time, not down the road when the camera market was much smaller and there would be less freedom of action. He was right, and now Nikon is in trouble for not moving into full-frame mirrorless in a serious way when they were profitable and had more breathing room in the market.
Nikon now needs to consistently execute very well in both market strategy and product engineering if they want to make this transition successfully. I don't think they're in immediate danger of going under, but I think the situation is worrysome due to the inherent difficulty of selling a new mount with few native lenses. Why should a buyer new to Nikon buy into a rather limited system, or alternately buy F-mount lenses that can only be used on an adapter? Of course Canon has the same problem. For the time being, that relegates both firms to just trying to get some of their existing customer base to make an initial investment in mirrorless until there is a much larger selection of Z/RF-mount lenses.
At the same time I'm pleased Nikon has decent mirrorless bodies out now and excellent lenses to go with them. They just need to make the mirrorless bodies fully competitive with the corresponding DSLRs while they continue to flesh out their new lens system. My biggest beef with my Z6 is having fewer controls at my fingertips. Nikon's biggest problem over the years has been their reluctance to cannibalize their own sales, and this definitely showed up in their Z6 and Z7 models which have fewer features than the corresponding D750 and D850 models.
I'm older than you are and I also could manage well if I had to go the rest of my photographing years just using Nikon DSLRs. At the same time the potential of the Z mount is exciting. However, I'm not willing to rely upon it as a primary system until the bodies are better and the PDAF line issue is resolved, if it can be. Even then, I expect to still use some F-mount gear as long as I'm still doing serious photography.
-
Thom is the new camera Messiah.
He is also the Oracle.
We all hail Thom, the Ohh so knowledgeable to make few bucks out of click and bait articles.
The Oracles: Northrump - the guy with the afro hair - Steve Master Perry - Thein - The Village idiot vlogger with the glasses and balloon face - the three wise men and their elephant - and the moron who left Nikon for Sony - the Zeiss guy and few others.
A new religion is born and it is the Social Media Money Machine= SMMM
Everybody knows more that the Nikon Designers - Technicians - Maktg - Sales and Management.
Even the hotel doorman has solid advise to the Nikon people.
Similar to the TV football fans slouched on their couches with their slippers off. They know better than the Coach and Players.
Welcome to Social Media.
-
The Oracles: Northrump - the guy with the afro hair - Steve Master Perry - Thein - The Village idiot vlogger with the glasses and balloon face - the three wise men and their elephant - and the moron who left Nikon for Sony - the Zeiss guy and few others.
That's a bit unfair, especially to Steve Perry. I find his videos mostly very useful, in some cases a lot more useful than e.g. Nikon's manuals. He keeps his videos to giving factual advice, in contrast to, for instance, the Northrups and the "idiot vlogger".
Hermann
-
Bear, Don't believe everything you read on the internet. Especially don't lose sleep over it. Since finding nikongear a few years ago, the amount of blogger noise about new gear that I look at is now approaching zero.
Keep taking those excellent bird photos - John
-
Thanks for the replies, much appreciated.
I will say up front that I do like Steve Perry and have purchased all his Nikon books. To me Steve isn't like those other talking heads that just want views to pump up their
social media numbers, Steve is a photographer and his knowledge of Nikon and they way he is able to impart that knowledge has helped me,
I do think that Nikon will keep making DSLR's for a long time and will have at least one or two top shelf models available to people who don't want to go mirrorless.
There's over 100+ million F mount lenses out there, that's a lot of customers to cut off.
They made a film body only up to a little while ago, even when the used market was flooded with literally millions of Nikon film bodies.
-
Thom is the new camera Messiah.
He is also the Oracle.
We all hail Thom, the Ohh so knowledgeable to make few bucks out of click and bait articles.
The Oracles: Northrump - the guy with the afro hair - Steve Master Perry - Thein - The Village idiot vlogger with the glasses and balloon face - the three wise men and their elephant - and the moron who left Nikon for Sony - the Zeiss guy and few others.
A new religion is born and it is the Social Media Money Machine= SMMM
Everybody knows more that the Nikon Designers - Technicians - Maktg - Sales and Management.
Even the hotel doorman has solid advise to the Nikon people.
Similar to the TV football fans slouched on their couches with their slippers off. They know better than the Coach and Players.
Welcome to Social Media.
Yes, there are plenty of half-baked ideas presented and championed on the web, and a lot of 'advice' to camera companies consists largely of wish lists and wishful thinking to satisfy personal desires. There are plenty of emotion-driven fanboys out there, and also those who denigrate one or another particular company or product type obsessively. Still, I think we all have the ability to winnow through ideas and evaluate them on the merits or lack thereof, if we want to make that effort. Blanket dismissals aren't useful or informative.
Few if any are questioning the skill and excellence of Nikon's engineers and technicians. On the other hand, various poor decisions by upper management have long been obvious. The Nikon 1 fiasco is just one example.
The bottom line is that over the decades many companies have gone bust or at least lost their former glory due to short-sighted leadership. How did wealthy American auto companies go bankrupt in the last decade, or then-giant IBM lose the personal computer market they once owned? Daimler-Benz's acquisition of Chrysler was a complete fiasco. There are many other examples. Top management in any company never consists of infallible oracles that are not to be questioned.
Here is another thought-provoking piece, not to be taken as gospel but rather worth perusing and thinking about: Diglloyd on Nikon's future (https://diglloyd.com/blog/2019/20191124_0908-wither-Nikon.html). Is the person he quotes right? Maybe; I don't know. But the points he raise have implications not just for the camera industry but also for how we do photography and how we even conceive of it, as computational photography begins to extend from its current habitat in cell phones out to dedicated cameras.
-
My view:
Business conditions in photo equipment industry is a subject of, at best, peripheral interest. Nikon isn't going to install an orientable 100º vertically rotating EVF in a camera, so they're not listening to me.
On a positive note, Hogan's rewrites/expansions of the Nikon camera user manuals have been helpful to me in the past.
-
I like Thom, I take him with a grain of salt. I think he combines understanding of the camera business, including data, and what different levels of photographers want.
I don’t read that article as negative, he put a lot of effort into it, he wants Nikon to succeed.
Nikon is in a tough spot, the were way too slow to FF mirrorless.
Of course the clear path for Nikon success is a mirrorless Df, amiright??!
-
That's a bit unfair, especially to Steve Perry. I find his videos mostly very useful, in some cases a lot more useful than e.g. Nikon's manuals. He keeps his videos to giving factual advice, in contrast to, for instance, the Northrups and the "idiot vlogger".
Hermann
Yes, you are correct. He should be on the top of the list.
You do realize that he published a review on the launch of the Z 7 trouncing the camera and recommending that the Z7 is not suitable for Nature photography. The problem is that his review was NOT based on testing the camera but on a published Nikon Pdf. A review based on a Pdf for crying out loud!!!!!
So, you have to grant it to the guy breaking new ground by publishing gear reviews based on a Pdf of a camera not yet launched.
And he was trounced on the web for uttering pure rubbish.
In case you don't know about this, then now you know. And if you feel comfortable with such unprofessional behavior then good on you.
Steve Perry is a 100% commercial person. Nothing wrong with that until you start peddling wrong information the same way as his cohorts.
Some rely on youtube traffic to make money and his business plan is two folds. One is Nature photography trips and the other supporting the first by selling How To videos supported by offering free mini videos as click and bait.
All is not glitter in the land of Pdf Perry.
-
Thom Hogan cut his teeth in IT venture capital in Silicon Valley, and the late Galen Rowell helped him break into photography (and Nikon et al). I appreciate his comparisons of systems, and the massive effort he invests in his manuals. His reviews of lenses are usually accurate IME, and concur with the few others that are reliable. On his "buzzing" of Nikon, well his criticism does seem constructive for the ILC industry. For one, he identified the threats from smart phones over a decade back.
Designing and manufacturing excellent cameras and optics is all good and great, as long as it's matched by the company's service and support. Nikon has been irregular in this dept, and emerging clients expect more dialogue and this has to proritize firmware and "roadmaps" that give some guidance as to What and When (even if sketchy). Their service varies greatly over time and across regions. The resistance to licence repairs to reliable 3rd parties a common cause of many problems and delays etc Their website(s) are shambolic compared to Leica's or Sigma's. Recent experiences with decline of Nikon support S of the equator is underscoring the seriousness of these failures. The frustrations drive loyal clients elsewhere. (Thus some of us are watching the L-Alliance with interest; waiting on smart adapters is keep key telephotos is the main factor.)
To return to reviewers.... As with so many pros, it appears Steve Perry relies on tours and workshops and his e-books, which are excellent. The guy knows his stuff. He admitted his Z7 commentary was prompted by seeking a simpler answers to a deluge of emails asking for advice of the Z system wrt wildlife.
Steve's using a Z7, which he rates as excellent for macro and landscape but the AFC lets it down too often. This is also my experience for wildlife 14 months on. I'm not as enthusiastic as Thom Hogan in his report on his recent 'Mirrorless Safari', and in pvt discussion.... For closer subjects without clutter, mammals especially fine, but for birds against clutter, my D850 excels. Yet the DSLRs don't do silent shooting and lack all the positives features one takes for granted with the EVF.
The most prominent sources on utube are a waste of time and bandwidth.... and very few are worth watching. Written reviews stand apart and are far more open to critical peer review.
-
I more or less have to agree, most of the above are similar to Ken Rockwell in their own way,,, I guess this is a sign of the future; Fake News :o
What I find the worst is the endless repetition, like they try to preach their opinion to no end.
NikonGear.Net is more or less a byproduct of the Nikon shaming that was going on years ago also, this relentless Nikon Negativity brought us together even stronger here ;)
What is most interesting to me is the absolutely positive that Z6 has gotten from a lot of die hard video and movie shooters, that is truly remarkable with a first FF mirrorless camera from Nikon. Z7 has also been very well received among the photography forerunners.
I say well done Nikon 8)
PS Smart phones is the reason for the overall demise of the point and shoot cameras for good,,,,
-
Yes, there are plenty of half-baked ideas presented and championed on the web, and a lot of 'advice' to camera companies consists largely of wish lists and wishful thinking to satisfy personal desires. There are plenty of emotion-driven fanboys out there, and also those who denigrate one or another particular company or product type obsessively. Still, I think we all have the ability to winnow through ideas and evaluate them on the merits or lack thereof, if we want to make that effort. Blanket dismissals aren't useful or informative.
Few if any are questioning the skill and excellence of Nikon's engineers and technicians. On the other hand, various poor decisions by upper management have long been obvious. The Nikon 1 fiasco is just one example.
The bottom line is that over the decades many companies have gone bust or at least lost their former glory due to short-sighted leadership. How did wealthy American auto companies go bankrupt in the last decade, or then-giant IBM lose the personal computer market they once owned? Daimler-Benz's acquisition of Chrysler was a complete fiasco. There are many other examples. Top management in any company never consists of infallible oracles that are not to be questioned.
Here is another thought-provoking piece, not to be taken as gospel but rather worth perusing and thinking about: Diglloyd on Nikon's future (https://diglloyd.com/blog/2019/20191124_0908-wither-Nikon.html). Is the person he quotes right? Maybe; I don't know. But the points he raise have implications not just for the camera industry but also for how we do photography and how we even conceive of it, as computational photography begins to extend from its current habitat in cell phones out to dedicated cameras.
Thanks for the link. It cannot be a coincidence that so many Nikon-bashing opinion "pieces", wear boots resplendent in the Sony logo (although Thom Hogan's recent essay is more balanced).
It is strange how the author, Roy P, quoted as an authority "on the semiconductor industry etc.." overlooks the well known fact that Nikon designs its own sensors (which is why the IQ, colours etc are so excellent). Nikon cannot be ignorant of the direction(s) in which its future MILC sensors have to evolve!
Relevant facts derail his diagnosis and solutions. Nikon already has state of the art MILC optics (AFP with stepping motors etc). Stand to be corrected, but Linear AF motors appeared first in the AFP zooms (2017). Since August 2018, Nikon has the most strategic MILC lens mount, which can only be the inaugural release of a carefully planned strategy that's rolling out in the Z system. Nikon's release of 9 Z-Nikkors - all excellent - in 14 months is impressive by any standard.
https://photographylife.com/nikon-z-lens-roadmap
After all, it is founded on 2+ decades of Nikon's own R&D in mirrorless : besides Coolpix etc, the N1 system (it was not the utter failure of popular internet wisdom). The time was not then ripe for FX Mirrorless. A cynic might note Nikon may well have left Leica but above all Sony to pioneer FX MILC (which Leica are quietly refining....).... and a string of releases onward, Sony still have much unfinished work on haptics and menus ;-) ;-)
The two Z Nikkor roadmaps and Firmware updates released since August 2018 are refreshing improvements. These give investors in the Z-System a modicum of optimistic direction. But it's still frustrating to some of us that Nikon have not prioritized fixes to key features, missing / irksome in the Z6 and Z7. Some are standard Custom options in the D850, so it's a matter of time, hopefully.
-
What I find the worst is the endless repetition, like they try to preach their opinion to no end.
Many have opinions about what Nikon should do (usually grounded on their personal needs, which may or may not be photographic but for example understanding what to say to get a lot of viewers, which often involves some kind of provocative claims which may be true or false), but just because one has a blog or youtube followers doesn't mean they have the knowledge to suggest a course of action for Nikon as a whole that would lead to success. A lot of these commenters make errors in their arguments showing that they don't care to do their research about the products they speak of. It seems that many people who present themselves as experts do not care about staying truthful or at least making an efforts to that end; they assume people don't care or assume that the truth is a matter of which tribe you associate with. This is quite sad, and I can see it happening in scientific publishing as well, though not as much as in social media.
I do think that the Z product line is an excellent start. I like the shape of the Z6/Z7 bodies and the design of the controls, and the viewfinder is less distracting than other EVFs, and very sharp in the outer areas of the frame (compared to many other viewfinders I've tried). I know some don't like the controls, for example, they would like more buttons or a different placement of the image zoom buttons (+/-). I think a lot of mirrorless cameras have crammed too many small buttons in too small an area, making it harder to hold the cameras. The Z6/Z7 don't have this issue. The +/- are perhaps not in a good place if you want to use the EVF zoomed-in hand-held, but the EVF is kind of jumpy in that kind of use and Nikon probably designed it with the intention that it would not be zoomed-in when using the camera hand-held. For tripod-based photography of static subjects, I think it would work fine as it is, including button placement. For me, if I shoot hand-held, most commonly, the subject is a moving one or at least a living being capable of movement and I need to follow the overall composition and framing when I'm shooting, so I wouldn't be zooming-in to focus anyway, as it would lose the oversight of the frame edges, which are really important. Thus I think the most detailed and the most stable viewfinder without zooming is what I prefer, and Nikon did well in those areas.
The lens line and roadmap are (in my opinion) really well-thought-out and the Z Nikkors I've tried have been excellent. I haven't bought into the system yet, but with the rebates currently in effect, this could change quite soon. Interestingly some people complain that Canon have f/1.2 primes and an f/2 zoom and Nikon is "far behind." But Canon don't have a line-up of f/1.8 primes and I truly believe they form a more solid and viable base for the development of the lens system than a couple of exotic primes (which I am sure Nikon are developing as well, the 50/1.2 is in the roadmap and 58/0.95 is out). I love the image output from the Canon 50/1.2 - that's not the issue - but realistically how many people can afford those lenses and how many are happy with the large lenses used with relatively small camera bodies, and for how many people such lenses would be the best choice? There are those people but I think most people want a compact, high-quality base system that isn't based on exotic apertures. While there are other advantages (eye AF etc.) to mirrorless, I think most people want the cameras and lenses to stay small (not tiny, but smaller and lighter than DSLR lenses) and Nikon are producing a set of lenses which are for the most part compatible with this customer request. The 58/0.95 obviously is not, but again that's not a lens that most people will be buying. So the thing is that if they made a lot of exotics in the beginning, Nikon would be receiving complaints that they're out-of-touch with the buyers and their financial predicaments and need to go lighter, and now that they don't and are making intermediate-aperture but high-quality lenses, they're "behind". This is really weird. I personally would never have bought the f/1.4 Nikkors I currently have if the f/1.8's had come out first and by far think the f/1.8's are the more sensible option (because of overall bag weight and budget) for most users. Some claim that the f/1.8's are not "professional" lenses, which I think is just ridiculous. They certainly produce good results, and a lot of professional photographers have knee, ankle, back and neck problems after a lifetime of lugging gear around. As for the f/1.4's, f/1.2's, and f/0.7's (or whatever they decide to make), I am sure they will come out over time. I am delighted that I don't have to spend f/1.2 or f/0.95 amount of money to set up a bag of primes to get started. Yes, I do a lot of low-light photography, but in my view (having shot with a friend's Z7 and 50/1.8 indoors) sharp and well-designed f/1.8's do quite well in such applications, especially given the in-camera VR built into the Z6 and Z7 cameras. There is a certain elegance to the f/1.8 S line IMO; the lenses are unassuming and form a compact kit while not sacrificing image quality in any way.
I will probably go with a 20/35/85 f/1.8 setup (with the 20mm coming via adapter and the two other lenses native) as my interest for this type of camera is for portraits and event photography mostly indoors with quietness as a priority (over DSLRs). Because of the comparatively low price and very high quality, the 50/1.8 is going to be hard to resist, though. Although high ISO image quality has improved over the years, I still don't think f/2.8 is "quite there" for indoor event photos without flash; if there is daytime/afternoon window light, then yes, but after the window light is gone, I need larger apertures than f/2.8. f/1.8 is what I would consider adequate and the in-camera VR does give some leeway in portraits. What is slowing me down is that the focus isn't quite reliable in this kind of very low indoor light (tried only Z7 not Z6 so far). I can get good results most of the time but sometimes the focus goes on a road trip. I think this can probably be fixed via algorithm development. I don't need subject tracking as such as I'm quite comfortable moving the focus point manually around, but of course it is nice to see the more fancy stuff developed further, as for someone entering photography it may be that they don't want to deal with manual focus points at first, and if some other camera gives better results out of the box on all-auto settings then they will probably purchase that camera. So Nikon do need to put their attention to this area, even if it won't stop me from choosing their camera. However, I have no doubt they are working on it and capable of solving it.
I disagree completely with the idea that Nikon should stop F mount system development - I love the optical viewfinders and want to continue using them, including new products. I don't see Z replacing F for me in the time span of my remaining life, even though I am likely to add it (for the quietness advantages). I think Nikon actually are on the right balanced track in pursuing to develop both systems, even though the internet commentators hate them for it. I am cynical and don't believe most of the youtuber and camera review/blog sites have the photographers' best interest at heart. Rather, they want people to be (almost) forced to buy all new gear by clicking on the advertisements to their affiliates' sites. And they want this to happen now so that they can continue "influencing" rather than getting a proper job.
-
Ilka, I agree on all point you state - Thank you for a well formulated/founded post!
I never had knee or back pain but yes, if the f/1.8 series in F mount had been launched first I would have picked those instead of lugging around the f/1.4 versions. All of them,,,
They are by far good enough compared to f/1.4 although they also are slowish in AF at least for action they are too slow, but a sacrifice for slim dof and hitting the right sharpness for those high mega pixel cameras.
Z line is not for me except a [IR] modified Z7 or Z6 would make for a nice substitute for my D200 [IR]
I don't see Nikon stopping the F-mount!
-
Ilkka,
Wonderfully balanced observation of the current Nikon situation. Unfortunately such rational thoughts would never attract a mass Youtube/internet following.
EriK,
You have to realise your capacity to carry camera equipment exceeds most other peoples :-)
-
Thom is the new camera Messiah.
He is also the Oracle.
We all hail Thom, the Ohh so knowledgeable to make few bucks out of click and bait articles.
The Oracles: Northrump - the guy with the afro hair - Steve Master Perry - Thein - The Village idiot vlogger with the glasses and balloon face - the three wise men and their elephant - and the moron who left Nikon for Sony - the Zeiss guy and few others.
A new religion is born and it is the Social Media Money Machine= SMMM
Everybody knows more that the Nikon Designers - Technicians - Maktg - Sales and Management.
Even the hotel doorman has solid advise to the Nikon people.
Similar to the TV football fans slouched on their couches with their slippers off. They know better than the Coach and Players.
Welcome to Social Media.
...and then comes Noah's ark...
-
Bear, Don't believe everything you read on the internet. Especially don't lose sleep over it. Since finding nikongear a few years ago, the amount of blogger noise about new gear that I look at is now approaching zero. Keep taking those excellent bird photos - John
Oups, is there really another site than Nikongear?
Really?
;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D
-
...and then comes Noah's ark...
Nice little fp there ;) 8) Very cute!
-
Nice little fp there ;) 8) Very cute!
The images "from" the camera will follow shortly. :)
-
Nikon make the kind of equipment which I like to use and I have every reason to believe that they will continue to do so; although prices for high-end gear may have to be increased as the casual snap-shooters no longer buy a camera but turn to their iPhones instead.
20 years ago casual snap-shooters used Point-&-Shoots, and would never have considered buying a Nikon camera, so the wheel is only turning full circle — back to the way that it always was.
-
More agreement with Illka's post. Thank you. Well thought through and written.
-
I like Thom, I take him with a grain of salt. I think he combines understanding of the camera business, including data, and what different levels of photographers want.
I don’t read that article as negative, he put a lot of effort into it, he wants Nikon to succeed.
Nikon is in a tough spot, the were way too slow to FF mirrorless.
Of course the clear path for Nikon success is a mirrorless Df, amiright??!
Agree - I can add: His manuals for Nikons is the very best, very thorough.
-
Nikon makes wonderful camera equipment but is doing badly in the market.
That is an issue worth discussing, and is not Nikon bashing.
From my personal point of view, Nikon's failure to press forward with a mirrorless system was the cause of my moving to Fuji. I have the V1 and the AW1, but these cameras had control systems which seem to have been designed to put off enthusiasts. It may be that they were trying to protect their DSLR business, but if so it was a significant error of judgment. Had they developed the I range properly and introduced the Z range sooner, I would still be a Nikon shooter.
Ultimately, it is not about any of our individual personal preferences, but about what the market wants; and Nikon got this wrong. I hope the Z series will be a great success.
-
There is only one solution for Nikon; they need frequent updates of the Z-series bodies and push out lenses faster than the current road map suggests.
-
There is only one solution for Nikon; they need frequent updates of the Z-series bodies and push out lenses faster than the current road map suggests.
I don't know if this is the solution. But the suggestion that someone made that Nikon should invest in making its own sensors is obviously wrong. Nikon sensors get top marks in independent surveys, way ahead of Canon. Which makes its market underperformance even harder to understand.
-
I don't know if this is the solution. But the suggestion that someone made that Nikon should invest in making its own sensors is obviously wrong. Nikon sensors get top marks in independent surveys, way ahead of Canon. Which makes its market underperformance even harder to understand.
Nikon designs its sensors and in almost all cases, Sony manufactures them for Nikon. There are some that say this gives Sony and advantage. I think that is too simple of an evaluation of the business and strategy of the company. Nikon has a certain special sauce in imaging, the combination of the sensors, the ergonomics (haptics?), the continuity or legacy, the quality.... they need to keep playing to their strengths.
And of course come up with a Z-version Df2!!
-
From my personal point of view, Nikon's failure to press forward with a mirrorless system was the cause of my moving to Fuji. I have the V1 and the AW1, but these cameras had control systems which seem to have been designed to put off enthusiasts. It may be that they were trying to protect their DSLR business, but if so it was a significant error of judgment. Had they developed the I range properly and introduced the Z range sooner, I would still be a Nikon shooter.
Well, the issue now after they introduced the Z is that their sales are falling faster than before because during the time they don't have complete Z system many customers will wait for a more complete system and because the Z has nevertheless been launched, many have stopped buying F mount equipment. If Nikon had launched the Z five years ago, their fall would simply have been accelerated (since it would have taken a long time for the mirrorless sales to pick up the lost DSLR sales). With mirrorless, companies start largely from scratch building new systems so companies that had previously good positions in the market will fall from a high place. I don't see how this could have been avoided. However, in my opinion the Z products are really nice; I especially like what they've done with the optics and handling of the cameras. If people simply give Nikon enough time to build their new system, I believe they will eventually do fine. Personally my enjoyment of photography is dependent on the optical viewfinder and I don't contribute to the chaos (bought two new F mount Nikkors this year). I get the advantages of mirrorless cameras (and use some micro four thirds cameras at work for photogrammetry and video) but don't currently own one for personal use. I will eventually buy a Z camera and lenses because I like some of the lenses they've come up with but not now. I've spent money on new computer hardware and ligthing tools and can't really afford the purchase of a new system of cameras and lenses at this time. The low-light AF also has failed to impress me in the Z7 from what I've tried it. I think it can be solved using the following way: when the light is low, low enough that the data is too noisy to focus using, offer the user two options: increase focus area size (less precise AF point control but by spatial averaging, reduce the noise), and increase integration time (slower focusing but noise in the AF data is reduced by temporal averaging). I believe that both of these can be implemented using current hardware simply by working on the algorithms. They also need to offer "nearest subject priority" such as currently offered by group-area AF in DSLRs; this doesn't allow the photographer as precise pointing of the exact position on the subject to focus on, but by considering a larger area (5 points in Multi-CAM 3500; up to 13 points in Multi-CAM 20k?) the system is able to focus on subjects in dimmer light and can handle faster movement. Something that they also need to work on is focusing based on subject recognition (eye AF is an example of this) but to make that perform really well, they might need to improve the processing hardware as well; not sure what the bottleneck is. Anyway I am sure that Nikon know this and are working on solutions to the problems. Once they do, I believe the Z sales will pick up.
If Nikon had abandoned F mount system development I would probably have sold my stuff and moved to Canon or quit photography altogether (I really would prefer not to buy more than one system in a lifetime, as it is wasteful to have to spend a lot of money to barely stand still or drift backwards), so it's not clear how to keep all customers using only one approach and one product line. They need to look at diverse photographer needs and address them as well as they can. I think the main issue with Z is the AF; the lenses are great and the bodies are nice to use, and it only takes a couple of years to have most lenses that most people need available as native lenses. Even with the current AF for many subjects it works fine, it's mainly just the edges of the performance envelope (low light and fast-moving subjects) that need work. Some photographers have moved to Z7 and note the Z7 focuses more accurately than DSLRs for long-distance subjects, for example. I don't quite understand the negativivity, except that negativity and provocative comments get noticed and result in clicks. It's like people enjoy feasting on someone's misfortune.
Ultimately, it is not about any of our individual personal preferences, but about what the market wants; and Nikon got this wrong. I hope the Z series will be a great success.
I disagree, there is no "one market" which can be addressed by making a certain type of product, but many different users with different needs and preferences.
I do agree the 1 series was a mistake but then even that is not so clear looking at how well Sony are doing with their RX100 series of compact cameras that feature many of the 1-series features that Nikon were pioneering. Basically the market for that kind of small-sensor camera with high fps and fast AF is still there, but with a fixed lens rather than interchangeable lenses. No one has a crystal ball that can see what will happen in the future. ILC users predominantly want larger sensors, that much has become clear.
-
I disagree, there is no "one market" which can be addressed by making a certain type of product, but many different users with different needs and preferences.
I do agree the 1 series was a mistake but then even that is not so clear looking at how well Sony are doing with their RX100 series of compact cameras that feature many of the 1-series features that Nikon were pioneering. Basically the market for that kind of small-sensor camera with high fps and fast AF is still there, but with a fixed lens rather than interchangeable lenses. No one has a crystal ball that can see what will happen in the future. ILC users predominantly want larger sensors, that much has become clear.
You make good points, but we are left with the ridiculous situation that Nikon is contending with comparative newcomer Sony for second place behind Canon. For a company which makes great products and has an iconic position in camera and lens history, this is a sign that something is wrong; their marketing strategy is the most likely problem. And this may come from the corporate culture.
A few days ago Fuji opened a showroom in the Covent Garden area of London, which is a popular visitor destination, with many retail shops including a large Apple showroom. I went to see it a few minutes after it opened, but gave up a there were hundreds of people queuing to get in. There were special offers for the first hundred customers, but far more than that were there. The showroom is open, bright, lots of equipment to play with, and lots of emphasis on what could be done with Fuji equipment. It had an Apple-like vibe. It felt customer focussed not product focussed. The head of the Instax division of Fuji UK spent quite some time explaining to me how people use instant prints in social settings. It was an eye opener for me (and definitely not my world). The opening seemed to be a great success for Fuji, and the excellent location will ensure their visibility to the public.
The London Nikon showroom, in contrast, is in a side street near Oxford Street, but with very few passing visitors. You have to press a doorbell to be allowed in. The layout is traditional, with most product in glass cases. The staff are excellent, but the atmosphere is rather old fashioned compared with the Fuji offering.
I do hope that Nikon changes its approach to one which does justice to its excellent products.
-
A few days ago Fuji opened a showroom in the Covent Garden area of London, which is a popular visitor destination, with many retail shops including a large Apple showroom. I went to see it a few minutes after it opened, but gave up a there were hundreds of people queuing to get in. .... It had an Apple-like vibe. It felt customer focussed not product focussed.
.....
The London Nikon showroom, in contrast, is in a side street near Oxford Street, but with very few passing visitors. You have to press a doorbell to be allowed in. The layout is traditional, with most product in glass cases. The staff are excellent, but the atmosphere is rather old fashioned compared with the Fuji offering.
Great vignettes, I agree Nikon has to change -- not to be glitzy for the sake of it, but to be more customer-centric. What are the use cases day to day where (non-paid) photographers are deciding whether to bring a camera or a smart phone to a social outing and want images to move quickly from camera to phone to sharing. I am not saying that is true for all my photography, but i want that option of speed and flow for the times I want it.
Fuji does have this more in hand I can say as an owner of the X100F and an Instax instant printer.
-
Great vignettes, I agree Nikon has to change -- not to be glitzy for the sake of it, but to be more customer-centric. What are the use cases day to day where (non-paid) photographers are deciding whether to bring a camera or a smart phone to a social outing and want images to move quickly from camera to phone to sharing. I am not saying that is true for all my photography, but i want that option of speed and flow for the times I want it.
Nikon do have Snapbridge which allows 2MP files to be transferred easily (albeit slowly) to a smartphone. In the first versions it didn't work well, but in the D850 (from 2017) I never had much problem in using it when I wanted social media sized images easily to the phone. The initial connection can take a while though, but reportedly in the Z6/Z7 it is faster and more reliable to connect and transfer the images. Also Nikon removed the restrictions and now the cameras support also direct wifi connections with 3rd party software without needing to use Nikon's own app to open the connection. Thus while this had a rough start it seems to deliver now what was promised. True, the software is still very limited in what you can do with it, but as 3rd party software can be used instead, they have more features.
-
Nikon do have Snapbridge which allows 2MP files to be transferred easily (albeit slowly) to a smartphone. In the first versions it didn't work well, but in the D850 (from 2017) I never had much problem in using it when I wanted social media sized images easily to the phone. The initial connection can take a while though, but reportedly in the Z6/Z7 it is faster and more reliable to connect and transfer the images. Also Nikon removed the restrictions and now the cameras support also direct wifi connections with 3rd party software without needing to use Nikon's own app to open the connection. Thus while this had a rough start it seems to deliver now what was promised. True, the software is still very limited in what you can do with it, but as 3rd party software can be used instead, they have more features.
Snapbridge got a recent update which seems to make connections more reliable. For photographing my construction project I've built the world's biggest selfie stick by epoxying a small ballhead on the end of a 4.5 meter wind sailing mast. I use a bungie cord to attach my phone to the other end. Using snapbridge to connect to the camera to preview image, control focus and shutter/aperture settings works pretty well. I'm more satisfied with it than with any other options I tried.
-
I like Thom, and enjoy reading his musings.
Doesn't mean you have to agree with everything he says/writes tho.
As an example, Thom seems to think that Nikon(and more broadly camera makers) would either lose less sales, or potentially increase sales of products that 'connect' more readily to the flavour of the month social sites craze that the world is afflicted by.
I personally can't see it myself.
That is, by what metric would the current photo enthused person dump their smartphone and use a dedicated camera to shoot and upload the images instantly to instagram/facebook/whatever social site?
Also the 'buzz buzz' argument .. also can't see that as a plausible tactic to increase sales in any way.
It's not an uncommon situation for the photo geek to eventually upgrade from Dx to Fx, and getting 'stuck' with Dx only lenses has no long term future.
Been there, done that .. kind of regretted having spent money on Dx only lenses in a mild manner. Not totally tho, just that had I known after the fact, at an earlier(DX only) point .. I'd never have bought some of my Dx only lenses, only one was the Sigma 10-20 that I never regretted in any way.
But I think what'd be a more productive sales pitch by Nikon, is a return to the E series type sale pitch. Cheaper. Don't have to even be f/1.8 lenses .. f/2's and f/2.8's would be fine.
But $700 for a 'nifty fifty' for the Z mount ... doesn't equate to a very affordable system in total.
Where's the $200 lens for those that are 'interested' but not that interested. Being the best isn't a priority for everyone. Having the best also doesn't rate a mention for some of us.
Should be noted, I'm not rich by any measure. In fact I'm in the higher side of the poor end of the socio-economic scale .. for sure.
What available funds I do have tho, I spend on 'toys'. I'd say 50% of(not a lot) of my allowable income has been spent on photo related gear. Not counting the cameras themselves, 10% of that has been Nikon.
I've tried to tally up how much I've spent on all manner of accessories, primarily lenses, 99% thirdparty(and old obscure stuff) .. Nikon generally don't even rate a mention for me.
Nikon are either over the top financially or tech/user unfriendly. While I'm sure the 70-200/2.8 FL E is an awesome lens .. it's so far off my radar that I barely know it exists. SO again, I don't need the best, I'm only interested in good value for money.
But that doesn't mean only cheap stuff tho. 200-500 could have been in my bag too, but this is where the the techy/geeky side of their gear fails.
I went for the $1000 more expensive Sigma 150-600 lens primarily as it has the USB lens dock system as part of the overall system.
Having been bitten before with sub par Nikon products(80-200/2.8D), this is now a priority for me too. So where are their user settable geeky accessories?
Nikon are too self absorbed to notice what's happening in the world.
Any argument that Nikon lenses don't need 'lens docks' is BS too . many recent lens issues massively highlight why they DID and still DO need this kind of product range.
Had any Nikon exec even considered this as user problem that needed to be addressed?
Self absorbed is the only way to describe Nikon's current management mindset and product ethic.
This extends to software, accessories and products/engineering environment.
I'm convinced that Sony's full frame mirrorless success, is primarily due to the internet buzz that the keyboard warrior geek types have fostered over the lifetime of this camera.
The mindless mass consumer type .. the types that all bought into the good camera syndrome, then all gravitated back to the smartphone is good enough scenario don't care for forums/geeky techy stuff and so forth .. but they have to come from somewhere.
And if those that graduated from smartphone soccer mom school to geeky techy type photography scour the net for info, they read Sony A7, Sigma(and tamron) lens docks .. etc.
All they read about Nikon is boring, closed shop, no future, big heavy DSLR only, corporate morons(which they are) .. unfriendly customer satisfaction .. etc.
Great vignettes, I agree Nikon has to change -- not to be glitzy for the sake of it, but to be more customer-centric. ....
And this is my experience.
I've had bad experiences with Nikon corporate philosophy with some of my products. Met with resistance from my local Nikon (Aus) people. Issue with the 80-200/2.8 D and then the D800E(the 10 pin port).
Both obvious issues that were product fails, not user related.
80-200 issue, all I wanted was it to be tweaked so that it didn't backfocus. All they bothered about was it was out of warranty. I never asked about warranty. Not a customer focused ideology in sight!.
To the customer this reeks of liability avoidance on their part. I never brought the issue up, and was more than happy to have the lens work properly and pay for it. My instinct went with avoid the idiots as all they'[re interested in was not having to pay for the issue inherent in their product! Fail No. 1
Fail No. 2 was the 10 pin port on my D800E fell into the body, ie. came loose and no longer usable. Via email, all I got was that there was no recurring issue, and that it'd have to be assessed on a case by case basis. I know exactly what the outcome would be(in that I'd have to pay). Moron contact couldn't give me an estimate time and price. JUST REPLACE the 10 pin port .. how much? I wasn't asking for his personal bank data ... for crying out loud.
Couldn't give me an estimate as it needed to be examined!
I then replied I want nothing other than to replace the 10 pin port. . no service, no SLA, no examination .. NOTHING! .. just how much to replace the 10 pin port(even tho it was a week out of warranty) .. I'm happy to pay.
Sorry can't help.
ps,. I searched the net and found many cases of fallen in D800 10 pin ports on the net, and even a claim from Nikon Germany that it was an issue and would be fixed if out of warranty too.
I posted this info to the moron Nikon person I was emailing and it stopped there.
Nikon : customer centric .. two mutually exclusive terms .. and never the twain shall meet!
And just now, I read on DPR that Canon's new 70-200/2.8 RF lens is backfocusing in some instances. Could well be only a small handful of vocal keyboard warriors doing the shouting, but Canon's response was swift and precise!
They investigating, have found a possible issue and will be releasing a firmware update ASAP.
Contrast that with historical Nikon issues .. lenses, camera bodies whatever else. Nikon have always resisted use issues, as they have this self centric corporate mentality.
THAT's what Nikon's issue is.
I'm a bit of a masochist, and I'll endure morons(like Nikon) with my own workarounds .. eg. I buy lenses from companies that have even a small amount of customer focused spirit in them .. ie. the lens dock. If a problem is found, download the firmware, connect lens, presto!
If Nikon don't address the customer focused problem, they will continue to lose sales. I used to be a vocal Nikon proponent myself. I may have been an insignificant amount of noise on the net for them, but I know I've influenced some new to photography types directly.
Now my noise is more about the corporate ideology, and how bad it is(my experience) .. and I know there are others .. and it all adds up. New to photography types pretty much ALL use the net to find more info to help themselves, and for Nikon(who are too stupid to see this) .. ignore it!
Any more stupid own goals from Nikon(in terms of camera) and I'm out. I won't take any more camera body stuff ups at a personal level. Was going to buy a D850 and possibly a Z6 or 7 this year, but finances took a smashing this year(out of work). So maybe will next year if I can get back on my financial feet. But it may be some other newer/better model that they release in the interim. Probably won't ever buy a Nikon lens ever again .. to many better value for money alternatives to waste it on Nikon.
-
I don't really agree; all my issues with Nikon equipment have been resolved and I've always encountered the most positive and constructive response from Nikon. Some problems are harder to fix and take more time; there may not be a solution immediately available. However, this is not specific to Nikon.
In this thread starting from May (there were earlier threads on the topic so this is not the first report but it is the longest discussion on it):
https://www.fredmiranda.com/forum/topic/1595119
they discuss an IS problem with 600/4. It seems that Canon for a long time denied a problem exists and told customers that they have subject movement blur. Finally as the lens was about one year since launch, they issued a firmware update which alleviated the problem (but did not completely fix it). This is not too different to Nikon's response in a similar situation. Of course, the real fix is to use EFCS (but not all cameras support it in viewfinder shooting).
-
I don't really agree; all my issues with Nikon equipment have been resolved and I've always encountered the most positive and constructive response from Nikon. ....
probably a regional difference?
Do you have NPS membership?
I don't, and on the regional possibility, Nikon here in Aus has a fairly well known reputation for .. 'not so high customer satisfaction' .. for everyone.
Some folks get it, many don't(here in Aus).
I totally get that some gear can have issues at launch, but it seems that recently Nikon had hit many own goals with far too many of their modern high profile gear.
Obviously other makers have also had issues, never said they hadn't, but Canon's recent response .. the swiftness of their response to be more accurate, with the very recent 70-200 RF lens was good to hear about.
Can't help but wonder what Nikon's response would have been tho.
I guess time will tell, if some newly released product falters in some way in the future.
As an aside, maybe some regional Nikon outlets simply have differing customer satisfaction strategies, but my issue is with Nikon Aus, not Nikon's primary HQ. I've never dealt with Nikon other than Aus.
Maybe my reply should have been more specific in that Nikon HQ should be directing any regional base to be less abrasive towards their customers, if they are.
Many possibilities for methods for head office to keep a check on the regions effective customer relation quality .. and so forth.
Oh! and another aside(from many years ago).
A long time ago(here in Aus) Nikon HQ never had a direct presence here. The authorised importer were a company called Maxwells. I don't know when it all changed, but back in about 1998, my ex had an FG. ( I had an EM as well, but it was past it's best before date)
Anyhow, on a trip we discovered(too late) that it had leaking seals, so all images from it were light damaged. Some parts usable.
I knew Maxwells, due to some work we used to do, so one day while working popped in, chatted to an chap about it, he said come back in an hour .. due to work missed that day, but a couple days later when delivering another lot of stuff to them, same chap at the counter gave me back the FG, all fixed .. no charge.
Customer satisfaction was secured at that point, and to be honest no other camera maker was in contention when I bought my D70s back in 2006.
I consider myself a 'loyal customer' on the whole. This applies to many aspects, not just camera equipment.
One other experience I had on a similar note.
One of my favourite lenses had been the Tamron 28-75/2.8 for a long time. On both the D70s and then the D300 it appeared to backfocus. I searched the net for Tamron distributor in Aus, and it turned out to be Maxwells.
Contacted them by email, and explained the issue. A couple of days later they sent me a courier bag for me to ship the old lens(at this stage maybe ~5 years old).
It was not as much an issue as the N 80-200/2.8 tho, as the focus collar was movable even tho it was an AF-D type lens. All I needed to remember(easy to do) was to not so much move focus, but to counter the .05mm of slack in the AF-D gear train using the lenses AF collar. Just taking up the slack in the AF drive got me back to 'acceptable' sharpness(only at 75mm end).
Nikon HQ did themselves a monumental disservice having cut ties with a proper customer centric company, and gone it alone.
-
The reasoning behind this is, you guessed it, lenses. Given the fact that Nikon never filled out the DX lens lineup means that cameras like the D3500, D5600, and D7500 just shouldn't be in Nikon's future. They're dead ends without lenses.
Oh my god. I stopped reading at that point because of how stupid and funny that was. Before they give the author the position of CEO in the Nikon company, someone should tell him that someone using a D500 or any DX camera.. wait for it... CAN and WILL use DX or NON-DX lenses alike. There's no point making an entire line-up of DX lenses... there's already a good number of them and above all, there are a lot of F mount lenses in production that work perfectly fine with DX cameras..
And guess what? Some DX cameras like the D7000 even work with 50 or 60 year old Nikon lenses ::)
So let's have a laugh at that quote again, shall we?
They're dead ends without lenses.
Everyone, quick, sell your Nikon D500 for cheap, there's no lenses for your camera :o
-
Oh my god. I stopped reading at that point because of how stupid and funny that was. Before they give the author the position of CEO in the Nikon company, someone should tell him that someone using a D500 or any DX camera.. wait for it... CAN and WILL use DX or NON-DX lenses alike. There's no point making an entire line-up of DX lenses... there's already a good number of them and above all, there are a lot of F mount lenses in production that work perfectly fine with DX cameras..
And guess what? Some DX cameras like the D7000 even work with 50 or 60 year old Nikon lenses ::)
So let's have a laugh at that quote again, shall we?
Everyone, quick, sell your Nikon D500 for cheap, there's no lenses for your camera :o
Nikon's line up in DX vs the many more options in FX optics speaks for itself. Nikon is mirroring this strategy with the Z50 in the excellent 16-50 DX + 1 tele / travel DX zoom ....more than fine, in fact great for its niche. Otherwise investing in DX lenses is to head down a cul de sac.I moved incrementally to FX from DX and the D500 was my last, which I sold a year back with mixed feelings to afford the Z7. The only DX lenses I invested in were the 10-24 and 40 Micro-Nikkor. Otherwise FX and the D500 is still one of the very best wildlife cameras ever made but then so are the D850 and D5, with the D750 and D4 lineages not far behind.
The Z cameras are excellent, subject to improving AFC and missing options in the Custom menus (which we take for granted in DSLRs). Each and every Z-Nikkor is excellent. Overall, there is little to quibble about, especially looking at the Z Roadmap. OTH we still have yet to even hear about a fully functional FTZ adapter (ie for F-Nikon lenses older than DSLR era models). The silence from Nikon about a possible FTZd adapter with full exif for AIS lenses + S'driver AF detracts from what Nikon stands among many of its established clients. This is far more serious than some apologists try to make out: dismissing a FTZd as trivial. For one, these gaps in rounding off the Z System invite Nikon-Bashing: ie incomplete adapter support and delays to update AFC and Custom menus.
-
Recent cutbacks of Nikon's support (in S Africa and Brazil are 2 countries) don't bode well. Reliable timely service is vital to minimize disappointments and hold on to future upgraders. Negative experiences have the tendency to be shared in forums etc. Some switchers probably hesitate because of reports of shoddy service from Sony , well at least those not deceived by the youtube spin doctors. More strategically, the main camera companies must all realise they have to improve support to remaining customers to maintain loyalty in the shrinking ILC market.
Expansion of FX MILC systems opens up yet another threat to undivided loyalty to one brand (aka Lens-Mount). The L-Alliance is an entirely new strategy. This is one of 2 ways why it is feasible and affordable to build heterogeneous systems. Aside from a pure L-Mount system it will become easier and affordable to use DSLR lenses (eg EF and F) on Sony or L-Mount or Z Nikon cameras. These opportunities will grow as the rival FX MILC systems mature.
The keys lie in the parallel rise of 3rd party smart adapters. The ZE adapters for Sony on Nikon Z and ZEF also for Canon optics are recent. They are attracting attention. Similar adapters to L-Mount are likely. But it remains to be seen, (1) how smart such adapters are and (2) what %age of enthusiasts pursue these options. In this context, the strategic status of the Z-Mount is also interesting. It is the universal Lens-mount. So we may see a "mixed family" of lenses on a single camera.
-
Nikon's line up in DX vs the many more options in FX optics speaks for itself. Nikon is mirroring this strategy with the Z50 in the excellent 16-50 DX + 1 tele / travel DX zoom ....more than fine, in fact great for its niche. Otherwise investing in DX lenses is to head down a cul de sac.I moved incrementally to FX from DX and the D500 was my last, which I sold a year back with mixed feelings to afford the Z7. The only DX lenses I invested in were the 10-24 and 40 Micro-Nikkor. Otherwise FX and the D500 is still one of the very best wildlife cameras ever made but then so are the D850 and D5, with the D750 and D4 lineages not far behind.
The Z cameras are excellent, subject to improving AFC and missing options in the Custom menus (which we take for granted in DSLRs). Each and every Z-Nikkor is excellent. Overall, there is little to quibble about, especially looking at the Z Roadmap. OTH we still have yet to even hear about a fully functional FTZ adapter (ie for F-Nikon lenses older than DSLR era models). The silence from Nikon about a possible FTZd adapter with full exif for AIS lenses + S'driver AF detracts from what Nikon stands among many of its established clients. This is far more serious than some apologists try to make out: dismissing a FTZd as trivial. For one, these gaps in rounding off the Z System invite Nikon-Bashing: ie incomplete adapter support and delays to update AFC and Custom menus.
But if anything, buying a D500 meant you had access to more lenses, not fewer! FX and DX. So the initial statement of the gentleman in the article is simply false.
You see the switch from DX to FX or Z as an upgrade but is it really? I don't own either of those, so only you can tell us if -- taking into account the 1,500 euro difference -- the Z7 is definitely superior in every way, or is it a different camera and a different tool in the sense that both cameras are good in their separate roles.
Regards
-
I have got several FX and DX SlR and a Z6. But - besides I have accumulated dozens of FX lenses of all sort (ranging from old manual focus to the newest) there is only one DX lens in my arsenal (the 12-24 f/4 Nikkor I bought for the D200 my first DSLR ever) and I did not ever feel the need for more DX lenses at all for most of the time (well the 16-80mm F2,8-4 E ED might be worth going for it sometimes). And i have acquired only one Z-mount lens so far (but the FTZ Adapter of course). I see none of these lines as a replacement for each other. The Z is great in low light but i prefer optical viewfinder in good dayligtht, their ergonomy and speed is behind and to stay compact I need one of my pancake type lenses.
I could say I have got enough but nevertheless am interested that Nikon stays vital enough to develop additional products and accessories and keep mirrorless and SLR as a parallel development, so some things make me concerned that I consider management failures.
Personally no other camera is a replacement of what the D500 is doing for me, so despite rumors showing the opposite I hopefully wish that they keep at least a top-DX model in line and upgrade the D500 some time in the future. (That there wont be a Df2 is more acceptable)
I am looking forward to the D6 and hope it will be a significant leap forward but even a D6 wont be able to replace the D500 (as well as my current D4s could not). I am wishing Nikon lots of commercial successwith the Z50 but a Z- DX combo it is not of interest for me.
-
what really alerts me is this news
https://nikonrumors.com/2019/12/09/nikon-is-killing-its-authorized-repair-program.aspx/
combined with chambeshis message about similar things in Brasil and South Africa.
(BTW as i am Austrian and Austria is mentioned in nikonrumors update, As far as I have heard Nikon did not cancel the contract but its franchise partner - just recently got aware that repair facility is actually not run by Nikon itself was running in sever financial troubles and hat to stop business - repairs are sent to Germany actually, similar situation as we had some two decades ago)
-
... I agree Nikon has to change -- not to be glitzy for the sake of it, but to be more customer-centric. What are the use cases day to day where (non-paid) photographers are deciding whether to bring a camera or a smart phone to a social outing and want images to move quickly from camera to phone to sharing. I am not saying that is true for all my photography, but i want that option of speed and flow for the times I want it.
When I said Customer-centric, some of the replies were about customer service. I was thinking about the image flow and getting images off the camera. I guess snap bridge is improving so I’ll have to check that as well as other connection options with the Z6.
-
I guess snap bridge is improving so I’ll have to check that as well as other connection options with the Z6.
Yes; it's worth a try. There is both improvement in the performance of the old cameras but the Z6/Z7 are said to have faster pairing and transfers. I sometimes use the D850's Snapbridge to get first impressions images to friends about something I'm shooting in the field and although it is slow, it's fun to be able to communicate nearly in real time.
It's not only Nikon who have hiccups about effective use of cameras to create content for social media and sharing. Adobe has these mobile-based editing tools and cloud-based storage of images, and when I tried it it seemed very pleasant to use but I quickly ended up uninstalling it. I like the idea of having access to my photos from mobile devices anywhere, with the idea that edits are available immediately in the other devices. However, I found some issues. First, I have the images in my desktop computer as NEFs. If I want to send them to the cloud, and be able to edit them using desktop and mobile based tools, I first create a catalog in Lightroom Classic, import the images into the catalog and then synchronize with the cloud. Can I choose to upload images from multiple catalogs? No, I can't. So what happens when I upload the images is that LR creates another copy of the raw files in another directory (was it appdata, I don't remember) so now you have to have additional capacity in the internal drives for spare copies of all the images that are to be synchronized to the cloud. Then the images appear in the mobile applications. Already there are two things that I would consider impossible: not being able to work with multiple catalogs and the extra space for the copy of the raw images uploaded. I tested downloading the images from the cloud to Lightroom classic and some information was lost, I don't remember the details but I ended up frustrated and discarded the edits made on mobile and uninstalled the mobile applications. Maybe it has improved since? I am not motivated to try. Perhaps in 5 years I'll give it another try. It's not that I don't want fluid editing across platforms - that is valuable. But the implementation has to be sustainable in terms of preserving all the information of the original files and cannot make additional copies of raw files on local disc just to facilitate the cloud-based applications.
-
It's not only Nikon who have hiccups about effective use of cameras to create content for social media and sharing. Adobe has these mobile-based editing tools and cloud-based storage of images, and when I tried it it seemed very pleasant to use but I quickly ended up uninstalling it. I like the idea of having access to my photos from mobile devices anywhere, with the idea that edits are available immediately in the other devices.
[...]
Maybe it has improved since? I am not motivated to try. Perhaps in 5 years I'll give it another try. It's not that I don't want fluid editing across platforms - that is valuable. But the implementation has to be sustainable in terms of preserving all the information of the original files and cannot make additional copies of raw files on local disc just to facilitate the cloud-based applications.
It has improved but you may well still not like it. Lightroom Mobile is really fantastic now. Consider using it even on its own.
Lightroom now has two ecosystems, their Classic which can sync (as you pointed out) only one catalog to the cloud. Lightroom CC, which they now call just Lightroom, refers to their newer Desktop, Web, and mobile apps. You can ingest NEF into these (without file renaming I'm afraid) and the original NEFs go both into the Adobe cloud AND to your Classic synced catalog. I won't go into it more here, but I was heavily in a thread on the topic here: https://www.lightroomqueen.com/community/threads/workflow-advice-needed-cc-and-classic-with-multiple-compters.38956/
Towards being customer-centric, I think both Adobe and Nikon have the challenge of moving forward while staying backward compatibility. To stretch the analogy, Adobe went to Lightroom CC based on a whole new foundation with some rough linkage to the Classic, a hard move for them. Nikon went to Z mount with adaptability backwards, a new foundation. Arguably Nikon's spot was harder as it is physically manufactured things.
-
Long time Nikon users (30+ years). Relatively new here from a posting perspective. My take on Nikon is fairly negative as well for the following reason: Nikon is not doing much to help my older collection of lenses be functional on the Z bodies. I get that there's an adapter. It's functionally just an F mount for many of my lenses. Even the ancient D200 does more to support these lenses than the Z body + adapter.
I get that that Nikon needs to sell new lenses. And if I buy a Z body I'd undoubtedly get some new lenses. But if I have to buy new lenses to use a Z body, I have to question why I would not consider other options like Sony. What should be an obvious buying decision for me is now a question mark.
I have no issue with Thom. I approach his stuff from the point of view that his goal is to sell books and keep that in mind.
Great being back here. Appreciate all the great info you guys post.
-
Long time Nikon users (30+ years). Relatively new here from a posting perspective. My take on Nikon is fairly negative as well for the following reason: Nikon is not doing much to help my older collection of lenses be functional on the Z bodies. I get that there's an adapter. It's functionally just an F mount for many of my lenses. Even the ancient D200 does more to support these lenses than the Z body + adapter.
I get that that Nikon needs to sell new lenses. And if I buy a Z body I'd undoubtedly get some new lenses. But if I have to buy new lenses to use a Z body, I have to question why I would not consider other options like Sony. What should be an obvious buying decision for me is now a question mark.
I have no issue with Thom. I approach his stuff from the point of view that his goal is to sell books and keep that in mind.
Great being back here. Appreciate all the great info you guys post.
My older collection (AIS and earlier) of lenses work better on Z6 than on D200 or Df. Focusing is Sooooo much easier and adding image stabilization is great.
-
Maybe Nikon need another FTZ adapter which does away with the in-built aperture stop-down mechanism and replaces it with the AI follower (maybe a pre-AI linkage also). The adapter would give full functionality with electronic diaphragm (E) lenses, and stop-down metering on other lenses with an aperture ring. It would give better exif data for non-cpu lenses than the current adapter.
Ideally it would be nice not to have stop-down metering, especially for those who tend to use smaller apertures since the EVF will become noisy in low light, and with "permanent DoF preview" the DoF will become too large - focus peaking won't be able to distinguish "in-focus" from "nearly-in-focus". I'm not sure there is room in the adapter for the Ai-linkage and the auto-aperture-stop-down mechanism.
-
Nikon has a very bad habit indeed of issuing "hobbled" cameras without AI followers that provide less than full functionality with non-electronic lenses.
It goes a long way back to their entry level electronic cameras such as their film SLRs (F60, F50, F55 etc) as well as the first DSLRs (D100, D70, D70S, D40, D50,D90, D8-, D3xxx, D5xxx, D7500 and so on.........).
A Df approach is what is needed - a new FTZ adapter and in-camera firmware and menus providing the same lens compatibility that they offered with the Df (and even the F4 back in the film days).
Actually they could do a better lens compatibility job, if they wanted to, with the current FTZ adapter if they offered camera firmware and menus to get the most out of the current cameras and adapter. They don't even offer the little green focussing light (altough focus peaking and magnification does a more precise job I must concede).
Of course, I strongly suspect that I am dreaming! It will just never happen under current Nikon ownership and management. :(
Maybe Nikon need another FTZ adapter which does away with the in-built aperture stop-down mechanism and replaces it with the AI follower (maybe a pre-AI linkage also). The adapter would give full functionality with electronic diaphragm (E) lenses, and stop-down metering on other lenses with an aperture ring. It would give better exif data for non-cpu lenses than the current adapter.
Ideally it would be nice not to have stop-down metering, especially for those who tend to use smaller apertures since the EVF will become noisy in low light, and with "permanent DoF preview" the DoF will become too large - focus peaking won't be able to distinguish "in-focus" from "nearly-in-focus". I'm not sure there is room in the adapter for the Ai-linkage and the auto-aperture-stop-down mechanism.
-
Ideally there should be no need to discuss - let alone complain - about compatibility issues of the F-Nikkors with the Z System. AT the auspicious televised launch of the Z System (23 Aug 2018) in Tokyo, it did seem Nikon had delivered. As we know there is no Aperture reading in EXIF (ie no AI mechanism) and No AF with "Screwdriver" lenses.
The gripes persist on forums.
These gaps hit 2 groups of clients:
#1. The hobbyists and enthusiasts who enjoy adapting older lenses, not least Classic F-Nikon optics. They choose not to buy a Z MILC and stay with older DSLRs. No upgrades that could lead to also more sales of Z-Nikkors.... Loss to Nikon;
#2) Aspiring photographers on a budget. For this category, the camera is a big outlay and so a Z50 is affordable, but then there is the price of new modern lenses. If a FTZd was bundled with a Z MILC, then they could start off with Used F-Nikkors, and grow into Nikon over time. The alternative is the lack of compatibility sends them to another camera system.... Loss to Nikon
Earlier this year, I submitted a detailed document via official channels toward Tokyo. This is critical but aims to be constructive. The key issues are only ~25% of F-Nikkors are functionally compatible with the Z system; important AIS and AFD Nikkors are listed sold New, and there is a persisting investment in these older optics. Used especially. Even Nikon itself acknowledges the significance of this "Old Lens Revival". But will be very surprised if such feedback. I will post the transcript in following post... It leads to Point #3. Nikon has yet to honour its marketing claims. This is poor for such a traditional company, who launched its auspicious new camera system on the occasion of its Centenary :-(
Nikon has a very bad habit indeed of issuing "hobbled" cameras without AI followers that provide less than full functionality with non-electronic lenses.
It goes a long way back to their entry level electronic cameras such as their film SLRs (F60, F50, F55 etc) as well as the first DSLRs (D100, D70, D70S, D40, D50,D90, D8-, D3xxx, D5xxx, D7500 and so on.........).
A Df approach is what is needed - a new FTZ adapter and in-camera firmware and menus providing the same lens compatibility that they offered with the Df (and even the F4 back in the film days).
Actually they could do a better lens compatibility job, if they wanted to, with the current FTZ adapter if they offered camera firmware and menus to get the most out of the current cameras and adapter. They don't even offer the little green focussing light (altough focus peaking and magnification does a more precise job I must concede).
Of course, I strongly suspect that I am dreaming! It will just never happen under current Nikon ownership and management. :(
-
Submitted to Nikon April 2019
SUBJECT : Compatibility of F-Nikkor Optics with the Nikon Z System
When can we expect Nikon to honour marketing statements, and upgrade the FTZ adapter to enable:
1. Full support of AE with AI and AIS F-Nikkors on the Z System?
2. An acceptable autofocus on System Z cameras with "screwdriver" F-Nikkors including many AFD lenses, such as the superb Defocus-Control Nikkors, 200 f4AFD and 180 f2.8AFD?
Thanks to the built-in motor, the autofocus on D lenses works properly on the D850 and similar DSLRs. The ideal FTZd (to coin a term) needs a built-in focusing motor together with a functional Aperture-Indexing mechanism. There is a significant cohort of Nikon Owners, who will not hesitate to buy such an adapter for their Z Nikon cameras. As I explicate below, the FTZd will appeal to first time buyers too.
As we read, the marketing copy emphasizes:
“Great glass endures. That's why Nikon cameras—from the Nikon F in 1959 all the way to D850—have remained compatible with nearly all F-mount NIKKOR lenses. Why would things be any different with the Nikon Z? The Mount Adapter FTZ lets you keep shooting the lenses you know and love while also gaining the benefits of the new Z system. The legacy of compatibility continues.
And reading further:
“…So many possibilities.
Compatible with a huge selection of NIKKOR lenses.
The Mount Adapter FTZ works with approx. 360 lenses in total, 90 of which are AF-S, AF-P or AF-I type and have full AF/AE capability.”
More specifically, we read: “Nikon’s new mount system plays an essential role in the realization of this unprecedented imaging system. What’s more, the Mount Adapter FTZ allows long-time Nikon users to continue utilizing their existing NIKKOR F lenses seamlessly with the new system. Shooting with AE is enabled with a total of approx. 360 types of NIKKOR F lens from AI type onwards, while shooting with AF/AE is available with 93 types of AF-P/AF-S/AF-I lenses, ensuring the same operation as with the new Nikon mirrorless camera system.”
https://cdn-4.nikon-cdn.com/e/Q5NM96RZZo-RRZZFeeMiveET0gpU-PYm90DZMEpiBfbO3-FJzqncadCQDB7qgnqlp_FU1k8_9LXUEfLw9PlLkA==/Misc/NIKKOR-Z-Brochure.pdf
Only 25% of F-Nikkors are Z Compatible : The total given of 360 F-Nikkors must be an underestimate. For how many pre-AI lenses (ie older models) are adapted to Auto-Index on Nikon cameras? Moreover, is not “Shooting with AE is enabled with a total of approx. 360 types of NIKKOR F lens from AI type onwards” stretching the scope of an advertising slogan? At least 75% of these lenses do NOT register the aperture setting in the EXIF fields of a Z6 nor Z7 camera. This is infuriating in my experience. In light of the F-Mount legacy maintained into the higher level DSLR models, compatibility of only 25% (likely less) of F-Nikkors is a poor show in the support of acceptable functionality on Z Mirrorless cameras.
The above problems with the FTZ adapter continue to fan heated discussion on Online Photography Forums – two are Digital Photography Review and Fred Miranda. There can be no excuses here. Should you hasten to reply that these lenses are older pre-AFS models, there are dedicated Nikon agencies who still sell 8 AIS lenses as New, and no less than 11 AFD models. We must single out the two Defocus Nikkors – the 105 f2AFD and 135 f2AFD. These are unique optics not updated to any G or E portrait prime lens. There are many more Classic Nikkors: the 28 f2.8AIS, 55 f2.8AIS, 85 f1.4AFD and 105 f2.5AIS are four of my great favourites.
See: https://www.graysofwestminster.co.uk/products/lenses-manual.php and https://www.graysofwestminster.co.uk/products/digital.php
The Strategic Fulcrum : Nearly all these AIS and AFD F-Nikkors are in many cases unique and unavailable in G or E mounts (without switching to a Sigma or Tamron). Besides the bonuses of IBIS, Focus peaking, and VR, AF support on the Z6, or Z7 will be a big help to anchor swift focusing with AFD lenses, there are many Nikon owners who treasure these Classic Nikkors for their unique character in rendering the image. And do not overlook how many videographers still favour Classic Nikkors as the optics of choice; is not the video is market a focus of the Z system? The venerable, if not iconic, status of these Nikkors is one manifest reason why complaints will persist against dropping compatibility off the FTZ.
May I suggest Nikon marketing read through the discussion threads on online Forums - with due attention. It can be argued these posters can only represent a minority of the global population of Nikon owners of pre-AFS F-Nikkor lenses. Dare I suggest certain of these posts point out the strategic advantages to Nikon to prioritize closing the gaps in F-Nikkor compatibility? Beyond Nikon honouring the marketing slogans [viz. “Shooting with AE is enabled with a total of approx. 360 types of NIKKOR F lens from AI type onwards”] there are obvious strategic benefits to expand its customer base. For one, a fully functional FTZ adapter will give the leverage to emerging photographers to buy their first Z Mirrorless camera, because the FTZd will enable them to start with affordable Used F-Nikkors; as a first step into the Greater Nikon Ecosystem. These Classic Nikkors are the first critical step: the functional lens system they can grow, given time. Yes, they may not even buy a system Z kit lens, but the strategic benefit hinges on growing the percentage of younger buyers of a Z-Mount Nikon camera. For many, their purchase is the cusp of an investment. They will expand it to own Z-Mount optics.
https://www.dpreview.com/forums/post/62323663
https://www.dpreview.com/forums/post/61761736
This cadre of potential Nikon customers is exemplified by the students, on tight budgets, who buy into a Z Nikon MILC as their first proper camera, but they then struggle to afford new lenses. It would be a serious mistake to dismiss students and younger ranks as low spenders. Consider, given time, how many of these owners of a Z MILC will become higher income earners? Once employed, a notable percentage will fulfil their aspirations, and build up the Nikon system they bought into earlier (as a teenager, or thanks to an anniversary gift, or inheritance etc). Consider the alternatives open to aspiring photographers - buy a Canon or Sony kit, and get locked into that lens mount.
If the strategy is to set constraints: thus to try and force committed Nikon owners to buy G or E Nikkors, then please rethink the tactics very, very carefully. Many customers see through the obvious. In response, one hears some are selling up their older Nikon gear for new Canon or Sony etc. For not all are heavily invested in current Nikkor optics. In my case, these include 58 f1.4G, 70-200 f2.8E, 300 PF, 400 f2.8E, 500 PF, and all 3 teleconverters (to itemize eight optics). As the situation stands, I persist with the Nikon system begun in 1984, which I know and grown to trust. Thus, I also rely on AIS Micro-Nikkors, and keep shooting my other AI, AIS and AFD lenses. The latter make up a total of 12 optics; I keep at least 2 of these in active use since 1988. My list of current equipment is registered with my Nikon UK account.
Great Glass Endures : Nikon’s legacy of “Retro-Compatibility” has persisted with the top range DSLRs (D850, D5 and others), which maintain F-Mount compatibility. The lapse of support of acceptable functionality since the introduction of the Z system impinges on customer trust. The current FTZ undermines potential. It sours the user experience with these superb cameras. Effectively, Nikon has discarded practicable support of no less than 75% of the capable F-Nikkor optics, which remain fully functional on the top-tier DSLRs. Support of less than 25% F-Nikkors is nothing to be proud of. For their loyalty, committed Nikon owners deserve better reciprocal support.
So we should also think long and hard about the ‘Old Lens Revival’, as its aptly termed by Nikon’s own Optical Maestro, Mr Haruo Sato [1]. He describes how this new market has its own momentum, such that certain Classics now cost more, and are becoming harder to find - “Over the past few years, we have seen the revival of one old lens after another. I think that the primary reason for this is the fact that mirrorless cameras support mount adapters that allow users to play with a wide variety of lenses. Photographers are taking a new look at their old lenses, and rediscovering the soul that still resides in these once dead-stocked lenses. This is a wonderful thing. Many F-mount lenses especially have an incredibly long life if not discarded, enabling users to enjoy unique differences in their rendering characteristics.”
Great Glass endures, definitely. Surely, it is Nikon’s own Z cameras we should see spearheading ‘the revival of one old lens after another’? Many of us Nikon owners sincerely hope you close this glaring gap in FTZ compatibility with the Z Cameras. In today’s digital imaging market, the strictures and challenges of selling Interchangeable Camera systems demands exploiting the tiniest of strategic advantages. F-Mount compatibility has set Nikon apart since 1959. Has Nikon now dismissed this unique strategic strength? The choice rests with Nikon. Although we rely on the latest advances in optical and imaging technology in the newest Nikon cameras and lenses, quite a few of us are fiercely proud of our collections of Classic Nikkors! The current situation should not undermine the excellence of Nikon’s emerging flagship – the Z System. Please embrace and extend this unique opportunity. Many of us aspire to see Nikon’s status not only endure but grow.
[1] The Thousand and One Nights No.65 https://imaging.nikon.com/history/story/0065/index.htm
-
My older collection (AIS and earlier) of lenses work better on Z6 than on D200 or Df. Focusing is Sooooo much easier and adding image stabilization is great.
Thanks for this perspective. There clearly are some positives. And I agree getting VR is nice. But no recognition of the lens/exif data and no diaphragm control are big issues for me. I really have to try the camera to know good or bad focusing is with AI lenses. Of all the features I want AF/AF-D auto-focus is least important to me. I can see why Nikon would want to leave this out of the FTZ for cost and size.
Ideally there should be no need to discuss - let alone complain - about compatibility issues of the F-Nikkors with the Z System. AT the auspicious televised launch of the Z System (23 Aug 2018) in Tokyo, it did seem Nikon had delivered. As we know there is no Aperture reading in EXIF (ie no AI mechanism) and No AF with "Screwdriver" lenses.
The gripes persist on forums.
These gaps hit 2 groups of clients:
#1. The hobbyists and enthusiasts who enjoy adapting older lenses, not least Classic F-Nikon optics. They choose not to buy a Z MILC and stay with older DSLRs. No upgrades that could lead to also more sales of Z-Nikkors.... Loss to Nikon;
#2) Aspiring photographers on a budget. For this category, the camera is a big outlay and so a Z50 is affordable, but then there is the price of new modern lenses. If a FTZd was bundled with a Z MILC, then they could start off with Used F-Nikkors, and grow into Nikon over time. The alternative is the lack of compatibility sends them to another camera system.... Loss to Nikon
Earlier this year, I submitted a detailed document via official channels toward Tokyo. This is critical but aims to be constructive. The key issues are only ~25% of F-Nikkors are functionally compatible with the Z system; important AIS and AFD Nikkors are listed sold New, and there is a persisting investment in these older optics. Used especially. Even Nikon itself acknowledges the significance of this "Old Lens Revival". But will be very surprised if such feedback. I will post the transcript in following post... It leads to Point #3. Nikon has yet to honour its marketing claims. This is poor for such a traditional company, who launched its auspicious new camera system on the occasion of its Centenary :-(
Thanks much for this and for posting your letter to Nikon. You're way ahead of me on this and I appreciate you sharing.
-
I see the Nikon Z as a transition and for some an addition camera line to the F.
It will of course take many years to evolve into a complete system and obviously will not be a 100% or 1 to 1 transition since photography has evolved a lot,,, film to digital, high resolution and ISO etc. and the fact that many especial long tele lenses has zero advantage of the Z mount.Also most can definitely keep their DSLR F mount while slowly adding new Z lenses over the next decades ;) Just like when F mount was introduced - There was not 350 F mount lenses released during the launch! ;D ::)
Why not just enjoy the new Z system as an addition to the F
Surly everybody know that marketing is,,, not flawless in any business,,,
-
Thanks for this perspective. There clearly are some positives. And I agree getting VR is nice. But no recognition of the lens/exif data and no diaphragm control are big issues for me. I really have to try the camera to know good or bad focusing is with AI lenses. Of all the features I want AF/AF-D auto-focus is least important to me. I can see why Nikon would want to leave this out of the FTZ for cost and size.
Thanks much for this and for posting your letter to Nikon. You're way ahead of me on this and I appreciate you sharing.
Have we really gone so far that not being able to know the aperture at which a photo was shot is “infuriating” or is a “big issue”?
For most of the working life of pre-AI and AI lenses there was no such thing as EXIF. I do not think I’ve ever checked aperture in EXIF files. I can think of some cases where it might be interesting, but none where it is essential. Maybe I’m doing it wrong.
Controlling the aperture is a different thing. It is somewhat annoying to not be able to directly view it while photographing. However, the ability to always be in preview mode rather than having the lens at widest aperture while focusing more than makes up for it, at least in my opinion. My first Nikon was an FG with no aperture preview control so you could not be certain that what you saw in the viewfinder had the correct depth of field. Then I used view cameras which you could see exactly what you would get, but if you stopped down far enough, the image could be quite dim. Mirrorless makes all of that preview routine go away. It is incredible if you ask me. Turn the focus ring to get subject in focus. Turn the aperture ring until you have DOF you want. Press viewfinder magnification button if you want absolutely precise focus.
All I can say is that Z6 is far better with AI and pre-AI lenses than the Df or any film camera. Sure it is not perfect, but it is better in the ways that really matter to me.
-
Have we really gone so far that not being able to know the aperture at which a photo was shot is “infuriating” or is a “big issue”?
For most of the working life of pre-AI and AI lenses there was no such thing as EXIF. I do not think I’ve ever checked aperture in EXIF files. I can think of some cases where it might be interesting, but none where it is essential. Maybe I’m doing it wrong.
Controlling the aperture is a different thing. It is somewhat annoying to not be able to directly view it while photographing. However, the ability to always be in preview mode rather than having the lens at widest aperture while focusing more than makes up for it, at least in my opinion. My first Nikon was an FG with no aperture preview control so you could not be certain that what you saw in the viewfinder had the correct depth of field. Then I used view cameras which you could see exactly what you would get, but if you stopped down far enough, the image could be quite dim. Mirrorless makes all of that preview routine go away. It is incredible if you ask me. Turn the focus ring to get subject in focus. Turn the aperture ring until you have DOF you want. Press viewfinder magnification button if you want absolutely precise focus.
All I can say is that Z6 is far better with AI and pre-AI lenses than the Df or any film camera. Sure it is not perfect, but it is better in the ways that really matter to me.
I completely agree with you Jack! I was just thinking the same thing when I read your post. I do not have a single negative or slide with EXIF information on it. I think we have all become a bit spoiled with these nice new cameras.
When it comes to screwdriver AF lenses, someone might figure out how to make an adapter that works. I am guessing there is a market for it, but probably not as big as a lot of people imagine.
-
Jack and Bill, I am with you. There are many things I want from my cameras which are much more important than EXIF data. I am still paring down my lens collection but that is determined by their use and not MF/AF/EXIF. What I would like is for lenses, on dumb adapters registered in the non-CPU list to show me the FL, but having shot Sony with many lenses on dumb adapters, I can live without it. So far I have not come across any problem with my Z6 that I did not expect. I am not too sure that I will buy another camera of any type/brand in the future. I am very interested in a possible rumoured D780. If I cannot get the shot with one of my various cameras then it is me that is the problem. New cameras are almost always fun but very few have ever made me better. The biggest single change for me has been the ability to shoot totally silent but even that has some problems. Over time I have found my own workarounds for most of the things that troubled me with MILCs'. I still prefer OVF for some shooting.
Edit: I would most likely not buy an adapter just to have AF on my 85 1.4D or DC105 f2D (or others) .
Cheers,
-
Have we really gone so far that not being able to know the aperture at which a photo was shot is “infuriating” or is a “big issue”?
For most of the working life of pre-AI and AI lenses there was no such thing as EXIF. I do not think I’ve ever checked aperture in EXIF files. I can think of some cases where it might be interesting, but none where it is essential. Maybe I’m doing it wrong.
Controlling the aperture is a different thing. It is somewhat annoying to not be able to directly view it while photographing. However, the ability to always be in preview mode rather than having the lens at widest aperture while focusing more than makes up for it, at least in my opinion. My first Nikon was an FG with no aperture preview control so you could not be certain that what you saw in the viewfinder had the correct depth of field. Then I used view cameras which you could see exactly what you would get, but if you stopped down far enough, the image could be quite dim. Mirrorless makes all of that preview routine go away. It is incredible if you ask me. Turn the focus ring to get subject in focus. Turn the aperture ring until you have DOF you want. Press viewfinder magnification button if you want absolutely precise focus.
All I can say is that Z6 is far better with AI and pre-AI lenses than the Df or any film camera. Sure it is not perfect, but it is better in the ways that really matter to me.
I'll respectfully disagree. I could live without knowing the F-stop used for a given photo. I find it harder not knowing which lens was used. I find this particularly useful for macro work. The argument that we didn't used to have this information doesn't make sense to me. That's like saying people got buy without stoves for 200,000 years so we don't really need them. Why not just shoot film, since all of us over a certain age got by with it? These are features I've grown accustomed to having and appreciate.
Regarding stopping down, every Nikon camera I've owned had a stop-down preview. I don't doubt there have been Nikons without it, but it's a feature it's hard for me to imagine not having. Are you saying that always being in f-stop preview mode is a benefit? This seems like a bit of a stretch.
The Z cameras with my current lenses feel like a big step backward for me. As I said before, I'm I'm going to need to buy new lenses, I have no reason to stay with Nikon. It doesn't mean I won't. It does mean it makes sense for me to see what else is out there. Given my investment in Nikon glass buying a Nikon body has always previously been a no-brainer for me.
I completely agree with you Jack! I was just thinking the same thing when I read your post. I do not have a single negative or slide with EXIF information on it. I think we have all become a bit spoiled with these nice new cameras.
When it comes to screwdriver AF lenses, someone might figure out how to make an adapter that works. I am guessing there is a market for it, but probably not as big as a lot of people imagine.
We all have different preferences. The lack of a motor for AF lenses is not something I'm concerned about. I'd use it if it were offered. I don't mind having to manually focus my non-AF-S lenses.
-
...I could live without knowing the F-stop used for a given photo. I find it harder not knowing which lens was used. I find this particularly useful for macro work ...
At least, the Z6 and Z7 both allow you to store up to 20 Non-CPU Lens Data Entries. You enter the Focal Length and Max Aperture of the lens in the list and select the appropriate one when you mount the lens. The focal length and max aperture are stored in the image's EXIF data. Not quite as nice as a chipped lens, but better than nothing.
-
I'll respectfully disagree. I could live without knowing the F-stop used for a given photo. I find it harder not knowing which lens was used. I find this particularly useful for macro work. The argument that we didn't used to have this information doesn't make sense to me. That's like saying people got buy without stoves for 200,000 years so we don't really need them. Why not just shoot film, since all of us over a certain age got by with it? These are features I've grown accustomed to having and appreciate.
I'm not sure what you are talking about. Z cameras have 20 spots to register non-cpu lenses. Df has 10 as did many others. You have more functionality here, not less.
Regarding stopping down, every Nikon camera I've owned had a stop-down preview. I don't doubt there have been Nikons without it, but it's a feature it's hard for me to imagine not having. Are you saying that always being in f-stop preview mode is a benefit? This seems like a bit of a stretch.
I am saying that always being able to see what your image will look like is a benefit. How could it not be? You even state that it is hard to imagine not having. The old way where you had to press a button was because of limitations of the optical viewfinder, not because it was better.
The Z cameras with my current lenses feel like a big step backward for me.
We all have different preferences. The lack of a motor for AF lenses is not something I'm concerned about. I'd use it if it were offered. I don't mind having to manually focus my non-AF-S lenses.
We certainly do have different preferences. For me the Z6 is a huge step forward with manual focus lenses. How long have you been shooting with a Z camera? It takes some time to get used to the differences.
-
I'm not sure what you are talking about. Z cameras have 20 spots to register non-cpu lenses. Df has 10 as did many others. You have more functionality here, not less.
I am saying that always being able to see what your image will look like is a benefit. How could it not be? You even state that it is hard to imagine not having. The old way where you had to press a button was because of limitations of the optical viewfinder, not because it was better.
We certainly do have different preferences. For me the Z6 is a huge step forward with manual focus lenses. How long have you been shooting with a Z camera? It takes some time to get used to the differences.
Because it's harder to see and harder to focus. Not having the lens wide open before taking the shot is certainly not a benefit for me.
I don't have have a Z camera.
-
Because it's harder to see and harder to focus. Not having the lens wide open before taking the shot is certainly not a benefit for me.
I don't have have a Z camera.
No, it is actually easier to see, and easier to focus. You have to try it. I’ve been using mine for a year now. I would not go back.
-
Because it's harder to see and harder to focus. Not having the lens wide open before taking the shot is certainly not a benefit for me.
I don't have have a Z camera.
You should try one, it's so much easier with a Z.
-
I just wish that stills photographers could record a short voice clip against each stills image they take with a Z camera or the likes of the D850, D750 etc . Lens details could be part of the audio clip. I recall that the D5 has this facility.
At least, the Z6 and Z7 both allow you to store up to 20 Non-CPU Lens Data Entries. You enter the Focal Length and Max Aperture of the lens in the list and select the appropriate one when you mount the lens. The focal length and max aperture are stored in the image's EXIF data. Not quite as nice as a chipped lens, but better than nothing.
-
.....
Regarding stopping down, every Nikon camera I've owned had a stop-down preview. I don't doubt there have been Nikons without it, but it's a feature it's hard for me to imagine not having. Are you saying that always being in f-stop preview mode is a benefit? This seems like a bit of a stretch.
.....
I also think this is where Nikon made a serious mistake with the FTZ adapter system.
Sure have the adapter they currently do, but more importantly, for Nikon from a business perspective ... a full featured adapter would have leveraged the usability of all their previous lenses.
This has been said many times, over and over, but the primary issue with the Z system is the lack of native lenses, hence the FTZ helps with that. So the 'whole system' has an advantage that other systems may(or may not) have had too.
But as said, why go with a Z camera, rather than any other system if you can't leverage all those old semi compatible lenses?
So I'm sure for many that understand this, it may have crossed their minds in some way(ie. induced doubt) when the time came to make a purchase choice.
Therefore, the news that Sony's A7 outsells the Nikon Z pair by a fair number shouldn't come as a surprise.
Nikon should have approached the Z system in totality from the point of view that it will work fully with all the lenses that they currently sell, and the sad point is that the Z cameras don't.
I believe a botched marketing and product management choice from Nikon .. ie. Nikon's current woes are a direct result of mismanagement.
Note tho, the full featured FTZ adapter isn't an accessory that the Z owner has to purchase either, it's obviously an option, and in theory could have been priced even 2x the current FTZ adapter .. or more.
The enthusiast would then have had the option to buy or not. But as it is, Nikon aren't giving those potential customers that choice, they're making it for 'us'.
So imagine the marketing campaign that Nikon could potentially use with just this one optional device .. Choose Nikon Z, and have full access to 60 years of history and over 100+ million lenses
There's no come back here from Sony .. marketing advantage to Nikon!
At a time when camera sales are in free fall, every nano-advantage can only be a good thing .. a few more sales here, a few more accessory sale there .. etc.
As I remember it, when Sony first brought the A7's to market, they had two maybe three adapters(for A mount lenses) of varying feature sets, users then had the option to choose for themselves how much they desired one over the other.
So going from feedback, not just on here, other fora have also had similar opinions on the lack of such an adapter, and recently Thom also made mention of this point too.
I know I'm not yet interested in a Z camera of any type, till more about the 'whole system' is revealed.
So the issue is not so much with the Z system in and of itself .. that appears to be fine. The issue is directed more so towards Nikon's management tactics. The current situation could easily be redressed simply with the release of just such an adapter .. then a push from Nikon as to what it can allow for those that may be interested.
As for EXIF .. why not? It's always better to have included it in the data than not. Again, it comes down to options. Those of us that prefer it .. then have it. Those of you that don't want or need it, then have the option to remove it.
The option to remove it is trivia and easy. The option to add it is not so.
For my non connected lenses, I just add keywords, in the form of IPTC data, which allows me to search for images shot with lens X, set to aperture value f/whatever .. and with or without a TC and whatnot.
No harm in having that kind of access.
-
Arthur,
The FTZ works with current lenses with possible exception of a few specialty lenses which linger from over a decade ago. Those DC lenses call out for manual focus anyway. They know which lenses they sell and which have limited sales.
Losing the ability to autofocus screw drive lenses is not a big issue in my opinion, and I’d rather have a lighter reasonably priced FTZ than one which needs to include an additional focus motor - a noisy one which has been superseded a decade ago.
-
I use my Screwdriver AF-D lenses on my D850 no issues at all and many of them are definitely not superseded!
105mm DC f/2.0 AF-D is fast and perfect in AF on the pro cameras 8) Same with 24mm, 180mm AF-D f/2.8 and 50mm f/1.4 AF-D ;D All perform very well comparable i IQ to my AFS 24-70 f/2.8 E VR their sound is so muted that I really never had any issue at all with that.
The AF-S f/1.4 lenses focus rather slow to keep accuracy, a design choice that don't fit my shooting style,,,
Sure the pro zooms f/2.8 are fast, but difference in real world is not an issue for me!
Perfectly fine to disagree - Just don't try to change the rest of the world to agree with you :o
-
I use my Screwdriver AF-D lenses on my D850 no issues at all and many of them are definitely not superseded!
105mm DC f/2.0 AF-D is fast and perfect in AF on the pro cameras 8) Same with 24mm, 180mm AF-D f/2.8 and 50mm f/1.4 AF-D ;D All perform very well comparable i IQ to my AFS 24-70 f/2.8 E VR their sound is so muted that I really never had any issue at all with that.
The AF-S f/1.4 lenses focus rather slow to keep accuracy, a design choice that don't fit my shooting style,,,
Sure the pro zooms f/2.8 are fast, but difference in real world is not an issue for me!
Perfectly fine to disagree - Just don't try to change the rest of the world to agree with you :o
By superseded I mean no longer being sold. I don’t mean they are not fine lenses. If I changed it to no longer manufactured would it make a difference?
Not trying to change your mind, just pointing out why Nikon would reasonably make a decision to not support them. This is a thread about negativity and a lot of it comes from people who have not tried the Z cameras or have a wrong understanding of how they work or, people who think they have a better idea of how it should have been done. I’m a bit tired of negativity in general, so hope to reduce it through education and discussion. I’m am trying to change the world. Why not? It can be better.
-
You should try one, it's so much easier with a Z.
Yes and no. If you're in really low ambient light and e.g. photographing a group shot with flash, and use the lens stopped down, the image shown in the viewfinder is noisy compared to what it would be with the lens wide open. Also the in- and out-of-focus contrast is better wide open. I always open my lens wide open for focusing using LV even though it involves a lot of jumping through hoops to get there, because I don't trust what I see e.g. at f/11 in darkness. The user should be given the option of wide open composing and stopped down shooting (i.e. automatic aperture, a function which even the original Nikon F had) or if they choose to focus and compose stopped down, that could be a toggle at a press of a button.
Autofocus in low light would be similarly improved if they allowed the camera to focus wide open even for shots where due to depth of field reasons the lens is to be stopped down for the actual photograph. The Z cameras don't have good AF in low light, and anything that Nikon can do to improve it should be considered. Again, it can be a custom setting or a toggle assigned to a Fn button, not something forced on the users.
With regards to supporting motorless AF lenses, I think Nikon probably made the right compromise for the majority of users. LV AF isn't very good with most screwdriver AF lenses. I have tried to use it to focus fine tune my screwdriver lenses but the results of LVAF with them are all over the place, not something that can be trusted in the same way as AF-S Nikkors or better yet AF-P.
I think the reasons for the FTZ not supporting these lenses will become clear soon as the D780 is rumored to have the Z6's on-sensor PDAF, so we can see how AF would work in a mirrorless camera using screwdriver lenses (in live view the camera should perform similarly to the Z6), assuming it has the motor to drive these lenses and assuming that Nikon allows it to be used in LV. Currently Nikon note in the D850 manual:
"Using autofocus in Live View
Use an AF-S or AF-P lens. The desired results may not be achieved with other lenses or teleconverters."
I think it's just best to consider these manual focus lenses whereas mirrorless cameras are concerned and use them with autofocus on DSLRs. But perhaps Nikon surprises me and the D780 does well with them in live view.
Nikon have patented an adapter which would support motorless AF Nikkors and it includes a pellicle mirror and AF module, converting the Z camera into the equivalent of an SLT camera. However, they have so far not decided to bring such a product into the market.
-
Obviously the FTZ works with any F mount lens, and works more fully the more modern the lens is. Never doubted that.
.....
Losing the ability to autofocus screw drive lenses is not a big issue in my opinion, and I’d rather have a lighter reasonably priced FTZ than one which needs to include an additional focus motor - a noisy one which has been superseded a decade ago.
Again, the issue isnt' so much what they've provided, in terms of accessories, it's what they haven't. And a good management team, will understand that providing more options to cater to more people would be the ideal situation.
Nikon's F mount reputation(so I believe) was that they created a more fully featured system, then most other companies. Great spread of lens types available to more people with differing requirements.
ie. super expensive 6mm f/2.8 or 300 f/2 lenses for those that need(and can afford) them .. and on the flip side E series lenses for those that only need a lens .. of any type, but at a price.
So again, the issue is, a simple alternate adapter, irrespective of price, but that allows all lenses to operate 'normally' or fully.
-
By superseded I mean no longer being sold. I don’t mean they are not fine lenses. If I changed it to no longer manufactured would it make a difference?
Not trying to change your mind, just pointing out why Nikon would reasonably make a decision to not support them. This is a thread about negativity and a lot of it comes from people who have not tried the Z cameras or have a wrong understanding of how they work or, people who think they have a better idea of how it should have been done. I’m a bit tired of negativity in general, so hope to reduce it through education and discussion. I’m am trying to change the world. Why not? It can be better.
Fine, I get it ;)
-
By superseded I mean no longer being sold. I don’t mean they are not fine lenses. If I changed it to no longer manufactured would it make a difference?
Not trying to change your mind, just pointing out why Nikon would reasonably make a decision to not support them.
Hi Jack,
Completely understand your point but at real risk of being pedantic, the Nikon USA site shows 16 screwdriven AF and 8 Ai-s lenses still in the current lineup, and B&H Photo stocking virtually all of them, so you'd think some concession would be made to these and the ones already in the field.
Kind regards,
Richard
-
They make D500, D750, D850, D5 and soon D6 (and possibly D780). All of these cameras support most (reasonably) old and new F mount lenses. The D7500 gives support for CPU lenses but not metering without CPU. How many different camera models do you need? Given that Nikon sell far fewer cameras now than they used to (per time), I can't really blame them for not offering sufficient options.
-
Nikon has a very bad habit indeed of issuing "hobbled" cameras without AI followers that provide less than full functionality with non-electronic lenses.
It goes a long way back to their entry level electronic cameras such as their film SLRs (F60, F50, F55 etc) as well as the first DSLRs (D100, D70, D70S, D40, D50,D90, D8-, D3xxx, D5xxx, D7500 and so on.........).
Nikon's "very bad habit" enabled me to buy a DSLR camera (D40x) when other more highly functionalised cameras (D80 & D200) using the same sensor were too expensive.
-
Hi Jack,
Completely understand your point but at real risk of being pedantic, the Nikon USA site shows 16 screwdriven AF and 8 Ai-s lenses still in the current lineup, and B&H Photo stocking virtually all of them, so you'd think some concession would be made to these and the ones already in the field.
Kind regards,
Richard
Complaints about compatibility of older F-Nikon lenses with the Nikon Z cameras show no signs of fading. Yes, F-Mount specifications changed in significant steps, notably since the 1980s. This was long after Nikon introduced auto-indexing, when Autofocus demanded much juggling by Nikon. Features such as the ability to estimating Distance and log exif data etc has added more and more electronics into the lens. Since we have Electronic aperture control and AFP (which was developed probably in tandem with the Z system). All these features are well documented as are the implications for using older lenses on newer F cameras (and latterly Z Nikons). Simon Stafford's New Nikon Compendium is a useful synopsis up until ~2005. The reality is the enthusiast DSLRs have maintained the functionalities of key features with F-Nikkors of AI spec and more recent.
The realities for Nikon include: (1) a significant proportion of its users still use Nikkors of the AI, AIS, AF and AFD eras. They do so with consummate satisfaction. They want to maintain their lens systems with the same functionality on new Nikon cameras. This applies especially to the AI and AFD features to benefit from all the excellent MILC features in Nikon Z cameras.
(2) The new MILC systems are opening up the Old Lens Revival. These Classics appeal to a new market i.e. emerging photographers; and some of these youngsters experiment with film but are firmly embedded in all the technology that is "generation X" (unwieldy term that it is)
(3) My long argument above points out the current inventory statistics ie new AIS and AFD F-Nikkors, and this is allied to (4) The huge growth in smaller scale video (but also mainstream movies). This has also revived interest in selected Classic Nikkors.
The trend possibly began with Nikon dropping support for AI with the D7500, which invoked contempt from most users I know. At the release of the Z-system in August the Nikon marketing (uated again below) highlighted F to Z compatibility as a sine qua non of the Nikon heritage. In reality, the FTZ has fallen short. The repeated response against a broader option in FTZ adapters is invariably "...I don't need one, it will be too expensive.....be thankful for what Nikon has given us..." etc. Those with no need for such a device can ignore it.
It must be to Nikon's strategic advantage to close the gaps in compatibility. Its marketing could indeed be able to highlight the truth of the company's unique status etc. Yes, a FTZd sold at profit would also sell more new new Z cameras for Nikon. These sales will in turn leverage sales of new Z-Nikkors for some of these owners - supplementing inherited optics.
Appended quote from Nikon Marketing: “Great glass endures. That's why Nikon cameras—from the Nikon F in 1959 all the way to D850—have remained compatible with nearly all F-mount NIKKOR lenses. Why would things be any different with the Nikon Z? The Mount Adapter FTZ lets you keep shooting the lenses you know and love while also gaining the benefits of the new Z system. The legacy of compatibility continues."
And reading further:
“…So many possibilities.
Compatible with a huge selection of NIKKOR lenses.
The Mount Adapter FTZ works with approx. 360 lenses in total, 90 of which are AF-S, AF-P or AF-I type and have full AF/AE capability.”