The new Nikon mirrorless system

[Jack Dahlgren]

But it's not clear in what kind of usage this was, for example, if the photographer is shooting frames in quick succession, then more images can be taken than if there is a lot of viewfinder and autofocus use and then only occasional images taken; the number of shots will be smaller in the latter case.

It would be good to know how long the camera can show the EVF image and continuously focus on one battery.

Yes, battery life will be very dependent on how you use the camera. One observation is that with the EVF you don’t need to look at the rear display so there will be some energy savings there if you are a heavy chimper. But for those who sit and wait with eye to the EVF, the battery may get depleted faster than those who only activate it when they bring it up to their eye.

I think we just need to wait and see, but considering how I usually shoot, I think it will be acceptable. Your requirements are likely to be very different.

[MILLIREHM]

Adding my few cents to the card and battery discussion.
The Nikon Df has significant space restrictions, which lead to the fact that it only had one card slot (and that was SD not the relatively XQD). It was not even possible to use an EN-EL15 form factor for the battery but rather had to rely on an advanced EN-EL14 design. This did not lead to overall rejection of the camera, the Df proved to be more than worthy despite this limited features. Luckily the Z-Series is using an EN-EL15 (like it was the advantage of V1 as the only member of the Nikon1 line). So i see no issue against buying and using a Z so far. Of course the Df is less energy consuming, currently it is not clear how many shots the Z series can do given the contradictional statements existing.

[gryphon1911]

Adding my few cents to the card and battery discussion.
The Nikon Df has significant space restrictions, which lead to the fact that it only had one card slot (and that was SD not the relatively XQD). It was not even possible to use an EN-EL15 form factor for the battery but rather had to rely on an advanced EN-EL14 design. This did not lead to overall rejection of the camera, the Df proved to be more than worthy despite this limited features. Luckily the Z-Series is using an EN-EL15 (like it was the advantage of V1 as the only member of the Nikon1 line). So i see no issue against buying and using a Z so far. Of course the Df is less energy consuming, currently it is not clear how many shots the Z series can do given the contradictional statements existing.

I'll also add to this from my experience with mirrorless cameras.

Coming from Fuji and Olympus as a background, just to level set.

Specifically talking about the Olympus OMD Em1 Mark II here.  The dynamic for the cameras in mirrorless may very well need to be changed from shots per battery to shots and power on time per battery.

What I noticed with battery power is much more about how long the camera is on versus how many shots it takes.  The EM1.2 could get pretty close to 1000 shots per charge, if I was continuously shooting with it.
In a blog post I did, I put the Nikon D500 against the EM1.2 at a hockey match. The Nikon did about 10-15% better on battery than the Olympus, given comparable shooting conditions.

Now, if I took a few shots, left the Olympus on and went about my business, came back and took a few more shots and did that...then I would be getting about 200-300 shots per battery.

However, I could get double that or more if I took a few shots, turned the camera off, went about my business, then turned it back on to grab the next series of shots.  That is one thing that the DSLR is still very much king on.  You can turn it on and leave it on and it used very little battery in that state.  Only when you review images or activate the exposure metering or VR does it start to really consume energy.

So, at the end of the day, if switching to a mirrorless camera, shooting discipline changes should most certainly be a consideration to maximize battery life.

[chambeshi]

Yes, battery life will be very dependent on how you use the camera. One observation is that with the EVF you don’t need to look at the rear display so there will be some energy savings there if you are a heavy chimper. But for those who sit and wait with eye to the EVF, the battery may get depleted faster than those who only activate it when they bring it up to their eye.

I think we just need to wait and see, but considering how I usually shoot, I think it will be acceptable. Your requirements are likely to be very different.

Twinned Questions in ignorance. Based on experience with the D850 Lv, I assume it is high reliance on the LCD that consumes much more power? As in using LV for long periods on a DSLR?  I foresee chimping with one's eye to the EVF will require adapting to a distinct change of tactics using a MILC

[chambeshi]

Adding my few cents to the card and battery discussion.
The Nikon Df has significant space restrictions, which lead to the fact that it only had one card slot (and that was SD not the relatively XQD). It was not even possible to use an EN-EL15 form factor for the battery but rather had to rely on an advanced EN-EL14 design. This did not lead to overall rejection of the camera, the Df proved to be more than worthy despite this limited features. Luckily the Z-Series is using an EN-EL15 (like it was the advantage of V1 as the only member of the Nikon1 line). So i see no issue against buying and using a Z so far. Of course the Df is less energy consuming, currently it is not clear how many shots the Z series can do given the contradictional statements existing.

VG points on these lessons of the Df release, with opinions divided. Prominent "reviews" , the trollosphere especially, flamed the camera. In crass ignorance IME. Although I have come to prefer XQD, the single SD is no hassle. Yet the Nikon Df has its own unique niche as a treasured gem

[Airy]

A very subjective statement:

my best camera ever : Df
my second best : OM-D E-M1

Maybe the Z6 will give me the best of both worlds. Anyway I feel totally relaxed and delighted about the news, no matter the yes-buts.

[fish_shooter]

I think Ilkka nailed it in post 273. It is possible that Nikon will add a non S-line, maybe a C-Line for compact lenses in the future, we shall see.

There is Z talk in underwater photography as well. Nikon's fame in this area was their water contact lenses. All Nikonos lenses other than the 35 and 80mm for the original mount Nikonos (Calypso to Nikonos V) are water contact lenses. That means the lenses were optically designed to work under water and do not work well or at all in air. The RS lenses although old will outperform all topside lenses placed behind single piece (of glass either flat or dome) lens ports typically used for underwater housings. For example, I am presently using an RS 20-35mm lens that was modified by Seacam with my D3X. However, it does not look like the FTZ will allow me to use this lens with a housed Z body. But there may be a solution, which I posted on Wetpixel. I am re-posting it here as I do not recall seeing many NG folks over there. At least paragraph 1 will be of interest here.:

The FTZ does NOT support screw-drive type AF. It might be possible for someone to develop one that does, either Nikon or a 3rd party. However, it might turn out that the communications protocols in the new Z cameras will not allow this, e.g., adapted lens AF is too slow (such as changing focusing direction).

 

But..... there is another alternative that seems more interesting to me. That would be to develop an RSTZ adapter for manual-focusing-only with Nikonos RS lenses like done on the RS camera bodies. This would require an adapter with a the screw drive in it but instead of communicating with the Z camera body, it would communicate with an RS analog control switch on the housing (e.g., with a cable)!!! If I recall correctly the RS manual focusing switch controlled focusing speed as well as direction. Therefore a functional analog (to the RS) would be preferred. This hypothetical RSTZ adapter would obviously have to be paired with a housing that came with this switch.


Tom - originally here- http://wetpixel.com/forums/index.php?showtopic=62720

[Jacques Pochoy]

My guess is that in some years we will see a Z-Nikonos as Nikon seems to have used the brand name in it's recent videos. Or a new Nikonos series based on the Zx technology !

I had a Nikonos V, great camera for using on a motorbike (weather proof and mostly shock proof). I had a LW 28mm/2.8 surface lens Nikon style with the other W 35mm/2,5. The shutter was more silent then the Leica M (even though it was more of the FM2 type, the housing kept it very, very silent ). Of course you had to guess/estimate the distance

[Anthony]

My experience of mirrorless battery life is similar to that of Andrew.

With the Fuji X-T2, I get 300-400 shots in normal use.  Shooting sport at 11 fps, even with a lot of image review, I get around 1,000 shots per battery.  In practice, I have never failed to get a shot because of lack of battery power.  It is really not a big deal.

[Jan Anne]

A Dutch review mentions a couple of things:
- 750+ shots per battery in a very warm Tokio
- Shutter quieter and AF faster then A7RII (which is not last gen)
- AF not as reliable as with a DSLR under challenging light conditions (which is no surprise)

The review (rather boring for the rest):
https://tweakers.net/reviews/6495/de-nikon-z7-in-de-praktijk.html

[arthurking83]

That QR plate you posted JA gives me hope that A Aed camera may be in my immediate future.
Looking at the grip as it is, I can't see that I'll warm to it. It gives nowhere for my small finger to rest, or if it does, it'll be cramped up.
Just a few more mm of grip height is all that I think I need.

So, dependent on the EVF quality, I think I may warm to a Z .. just waiting for stock now.

Oh! And the comment from the Nikon manager that Nikon fully intend to continue DSLR progression into the future is humorous(considering their recent history).
While they may intend to continue DSLR support, doesn't mean that it won't cease.
I'm fairly sure the market will dictate if the F mount has a future now.

ie. if the Z mount cameras are as good/better/cheaper .. then the most likely future for the F mount is that development will eventually cease. Of course in what time frame, is the great unknown.
Price wise, I think Canon and Sony will be the deciding factor as to where Nikon's pricing goes. Main reason Canon has always had the lead in DSLR/SLR terms, is that their pricing is more attractive to the general consumer.

[Akira]

A Dutch review mentions a couple of things:
- 750+ shots per battery in a very warm Tokio
- Shutter quieter and AF faster then A7RII (which is not last gen)
- AF not as reliable as with a DSLR under challenging light conditions (which is no surprise)

The review (rather boring for the rest):
https://tweakers.net/reviews/6495/de-nikon-z7-in-de-praktijk.html

One correction:

False: very warm Tokio
True: insanely hot and humid Tokio

 

[tommiejeep]

A very subjetive statement:

my best camera ever : Df
my second best : OM-D E-M1

Maybe the Z6 will give me the best of both worlds. Anyway I feel totally relaxed and delighted about the news, no matter the yes-buts.

Airy, interesting
I cannot say exactly the same but pretty close.  I think my D3S and D750 are in the mx and I have more fun with the Pen F than the EM-1 but not now, Monsoon  .  My Sony bodies are way down the list .  UI 
To afford a Z6, the Df and one EM1 would have to go but no need for a quick decision.  I will watch for reports on 50 f1.4G on an Z6/adapter.
Watching and waiting 
Tom

[Roland Vink]

When Nikon launched the Nikon F in 1959 it was probably intended to be produced in parallel with the well established rangefinder system. The accepted wisdom at the time was that rangefinders were superior for wide to standard lenses, and good for short telephoto, which covers the majority of photographic situations. The the SLR was viewed as a specialised tool for longer telephotos and macro. Nikon did make lenses such as the mirror-up 2.1cm to provide a super-wide lens for the F system, but these are a compromise, in the same way the reflex housing for long telephotos was a compromise for rangefinder cameras.

However, beginning with the Nikkor-H 28/3.5, Nikon showed that practical, high quality wide-angle lenses were possible for SLR cameras. Combined with TTL viewing which allows more accurate framing and DOF preview, the Nikon F soon showed it was a superior system. Sales increased rapidly and the rangefinder system was soon left behind and discontinued.

Will the mirrorless system replace the SLR system in the same way? I don't think the SLR system will be superseded so quickly. The user base is much bigger than the old Nikon rangefinder system was. There are still advantages to the SLR system, such as lower power consumption, and many prefer the optical viewfinders. However, if/when Nikon introduces a more budget-friendly "DX" Z camera, I think we will see resources and sales move quickly away from SLRs to the new system.

[Jack Dahlgren]

Roland, I think you are correct. I recall the old Usenet days when digital was in its infancy. So many people argued so fiercely that film would reign supreme due to its “infinite” resolution. So many petty arguments about how digital was not archival like film. Arguments about how digital chewed through batteries and of course those saying that cameras should have AA batteries in the event your batteries died and you had to go to a store to buy new ones.

The one slot/two slot thing reminds me of that time.

Main point is that the path of technology will eventually erode those obstacles. The mirror is an obstacle right now. It forces a certain flange depth sure, but more importantly there are so many things you can do computationally when it is gone. Reading directly from the sensor has many advantages and eliminates the problems of a moving mirror (mirror slap, oil spots, misaligned focus, blackout, weight, timing limitations and potentially cost). But erosion is a slow process. Transition from sheet film to roll film, TLR to SLR, rangefinder to SLR, Film to Digital, All took time and co-existed. The DSLR is close to its peak as a technology so it is hard to beat, but I’m confident it will get beaten. Not this year, but soon enough. You can tell it is happening ecause the arguments are so fierce. Change is hard.