It is a Non-Story
But Nikons behavior the last months shows that there is some inner truth behind. Lots of F-mount lenses and SLR cameras were discontinued (without even having proper replacement in the Z-line) - even the D500. Not too long ago Nikon promised to support both lines. Sad story but the shrinking market and Nikons limited capacities (all used up to establish the Z-lines) lead to evident outcome- even though mirrorless cant fully replace SLRs. I hope they will sell existing stuff for a long time and provide support.
With several SLRs and lots of F-mount lenses, plus two Z-bodies and a few selected lenses plus FTZ adapters I will be fine hopefully.
I think the issue is messaging - Nikon's messaging has been inconsistent and less than straightforward in the past, e.g. when they were transitioning from DX to FX DSLRs, until the very end they claimed that full-frame was only for research and not for products and suddenly they launched FX and gave less attention to DX development since, especially in the lens lineup. Thus people have come accustomed not to take Nikon's messaging at face value. When Z system was launched Nikon was saying they will continue the development of both systems according to their advantages, which some believed and many did not.
I personally find mirrorless to have advantages in the kit weight and size, and clear image quality benefits for short focal lengths. However, I find the lag in EVF and shutter release in my Z6 II to be disturbing and am unable to time single shots accurately like I can with my DSLRs. It feels like a slap on the face to be told that this is what I have to use in the future. A lot of others love the potential of the eye AF and ultra high fps for making it easier to capture shots with precise focus (exhibited in the higher end cameras such as the Z9). For me this is a large change in shooting paradigm with the unfortunate consequence of having to rely on high fps to capture moments which places my experience and understanding of subject behavior and ability to predict interesting moments to a lesser role in the process, and shifts a lot of the work to image selection in post-processing. I find this objectionable. Nikon seemed to agree in their messaging that sports photographers are picky about the timing of shots and can see the EVF lag, which is why they consider the optical viewfinder an advantage over mirrorless cameras. But as soon as they had the Z9 this messaging ended and they now just tout the virtues of the new technology and discontinue DSLR lenses and cameras.
It would be nice to see more clear and honest messaging from Nikon rather than opportunistic marketing of whatever they have on offer rather than what is best for the customer.
I am disappointed that they have not put the D6's all-cross-type sensor array into a D850 successor as I was sure they would do that. After having using the D6 for a while the D850's AF seems like a poor cousin, but I sometimes need the higher image quality of the D850. Now the Z9 offers roughly similar image quality to the D850 but with the improved Z lenses and new autofocus technology giving it the advantage in capturing correclty focused images in rapid situations (from what I've been able to read; I don't have a Z9). But I really love the optical viewfinder and am reluctant to give it up at least for now. I do appreciate the Z lenses, for example, the Z 24-70/2.8 I find just wonderful and unexpectedly good for a zoom lens of its type. However, the inconsistency in timing of shots between the Z6 II and my DSLRs bothers me a lot, it really wrecks havoc in my process. I dislike the small body with the limited controls and having to go into menus for a lot of basic shooting settings. I find it annoying that the 10-pin connector is missing (the MC-DC2 terminal is more wobbly and seems more easily damaged by impact to the side of the camera - I feel I need to use an L bracket to protect stuff that I mount to the connectors such as the WR-R10). While there is the Z9, and maybe it alleviates some of my concerns with the viewfinder, it's costly to purchase such an expensive camera along with a set of new lenses. The Z9 is a bit of an odd duck philosophically as it doesn't exhibit the widely-praised small size and light weight advantages mirrorless cameras (yes, it is slightly smaller and lighter than the D6, but competing cameras such as R3, A1, and A9 II are considerably lighter), but I guess it is a more comfortable fit for (us) DSLR users who get more familiar set of controls than there are in the smaller bodies.
I really do like what Nikon are doing with the Z lenses; the 24-70/2.8 I mentioned is fantastic, and there is a full line of f/1.8 primes with premium treatment of optics and good build, instead of being mechanically the poor version of the f/1.4's like with the DSLR AF-S primes, and the optical quality is just great while prices are only moderately higher than the F-mount versions. And the 105 MC is wonderful. In-camera VR works great. But I still find the wide range of lags across cameras to be disturbing and would like Nikon to work on shortening that also in the smaller and less expensive models. The changes in paradigm are enough to make me even reconsider doing photography or moving into something else.
I do understand that commercially it is difficult for Nikon to continue developing both systems when the majority of users have already deduced they will abandon the DSLRs. Personally I would have preferred to continue to purchase F-mount gear (there is plenty of room for improvement in some areas of the lens lineup, such as normal lenses, 135mm primes, and FL 200/2 and FL 300/2.8, and as mentioned the D850 successor could have benefited from D6 technology).
