Nikon D6 formally announced by Nikon

[MILLIREHM]

I thought that Canon took over in early 1990s and has pretty much held onto that position, so this isn't really new! At sports events I always see many more Canons than other brands.

There were ups and downs. The introduction of the D3 helped Nikon gain some terrain.  I dont foresee this effect now but if so it will depend on which AF system is significantly better

As for what Canon did in the 1DX III what they produced is a new AF system for the viewfinder photography (as did Nikon) but without evaluating its performance, it's difficult to know if either of them is ahead.

We will have to await this. Nikon has more AF sensors and all cross type but that does not say too much

To me Canon have a comprehensive DSLR lens system which is their main strength. Canon's fast superteles are lighter than Nikon's.

BTW. I would not want to exchange my superteles against Canons

Nikon could have as well removed the video functions from the D6, i hardly or nev6er use this feature. it could even go without Live-View. I am using that on other bodies preferrable with flexible display but not with my current D4S

[Ilkka Nissilä]

We will have to await this. Nikon has more AF sensors and all cross type but that does not say too much

In my experience it does matter a lot if the subject doesn't have clear contrasty texture to focus on; with cross-type sensors it's easy to focus on faces. It really annoyed me a lot when using Multi-CAM 3500 series bodies so many years; the focus percentages using the corner points (1/3 on both axis) on faces in low light were really poor. With the D5 and D850, focusing is much better using peripheral points. The D6 adds the in-between regions to cross-type coverage, which should be good.

BTW. I would not want to exchange my superteles against Canons

Well, there we have agreement; I wouldn't want to give up my Nikkors (nor do I have any plans to). I have used other brands' lenses and don't find the images as pleasing, in many cases.

Nikon could have as well removed the video functions from the D6, i hardly or nev6er use this feature. it could even go without Live-View.

I too rarely shoot video, but if the LVAF were better, I'd use it more. My experience is in photography, not video, and it would take me a long time to learn how to do high-quality video. The whole mindset of video is different, as one needs to consider continuity of the timeline, one can't move the camera freely, etc. I think watching poorly shot video is unbearable and so I'd want to do it properly or not at all. I think video is a whole different world and don't really understand the motivation behind the so-called integration or convergence or hybridization of the two media.

However, Live view is very important to me,  as when taking photographs of static subjects, it allows focusing accurately and many other things. One might ask why would I take photos of static subjects with a D5 or D6, the answer to that is that if that's the camera I have with me when I need to take a photograph, that's the camera I'll use. Also, sometimes the subject is moving but camera position is nevertheless fixed on tripod. E.g. today I was taking photos of light art installations in Porvoo, a small town. At one point I was shooting over a river with a 135mm lens, the subject was colorfully lit huts by the riverside, with silhouetted figures inside (the people viewing the work). In this case if I had wanted to avoid blurring the people because they were walking through, I would have had to use a high ISO and the D5 would have been advantageous for that. Still, I was using a manual focus lens (Apo Sonnar) and LV was the best way to focus it in this situation. To me LV is very useful, I would say one of the most important features of a camera. It's the foundation of doing any precision work.

[chambeshi]

Several pros have spelt out that they switched to Nikon for the D3: namely its better AFC and low-light shooting. Comparing the history of new features vs tweaks of D3 through to D5, and now to the D6 tells us more as to perhaps how Nikon have named these cameras:

https://photographylife.com/nikon-flagship-dslr-comparison

Looking back at the flagship D* DSLRs, the improvements have largely been incremental eg fps, although one might quibble 9fps > 11 fps is significant to capture the right gestures at a critical moment (e.g. golf swing, bird landing).... the faster fps the better to grad the "WHEN" can be vital. A New AFC engine is the Mega-Tick of the great leap forward: thus D3 and D5 versus D3 and D4 upgrades. All the tweaks to video etc are merely minor, nice but sidelines - ie none = a Mega-Tick. (So perhaps Nikon work on the maxim of if it ain't broke, don't fix it.) If the AF engine gets redesigned / upgraded then it's a new flagship. This makes sense given the primary users of these cameras. As those with experience tell us here, the FX AF sensor had its limitations, and so it could be argued the D4 did not justify its moniker after the three D3 versions, but Nikon improved the D4 sensor.

 Perhaps, the tighter girding of R&D over the past few years (with Z System urgencies and demands) explains why they did not merge more of what we see in the D780. But, again, which Pros really need more of such features?

Improved networking of the D6 is the other Mega-Tick why it's no D5s.

D3 > D4 > D5 each updated the sensor. With the D5 > D6 it's still 20mp - Oh the horror of horrors!!! but we do not YET know if these sensors are the same. If Nikon has improved D6 IQ at end of the of ISO range then another Mega-Tick. Especially if ISO100 gets better DR and the low-light ceiling has "darkened". If it turns out a +ve at either end (better both ends) then Wow, and Wow! This will be significant for actual photographers of sports and wildlife, who push the extremes.

Nikon pulls off bizarre blunders time and again, eg no grip with controls on the Z cameras. Considering how the D6 has turned out, viewed in retrospect the D6 teaser videos are even more bizarre than they did pre-release. Why the hell didn't we see glimpses of the new AF in action (using tested prototypes) - and in low light too?!?

However with the flagship FX DSLRs aimed primarily at Pros shooting top level action events, the R&D has consistently delivered a rugged tank of a camera that delivers, and above all a camera "that leaves nothing to chance" wrt capturing subjects in action scenes. The AFC is the crux. So we read the D6 AF sensor is now Multi-CAM 37K (D5 is Multi-CAM 20K), and layout of the cross-type sensors and software are major upgrades. If tough testing might in fact turn out to obviate the official claims, then there ARE problems. If the AFC in the D6 is indeed a significant improvement, then the D6 is NOT a D5s contra Mr Hogan in his latest essay insinuating Nikon is too proud to call the D6 a D5s.... He should know better.

[MILLIREHM]

In my experience it does matter a lot if the subject doesn't have clear contrasty texture to focus on; with cross-type sensors it's easy to focus on faces. It really annoyed me a lot when using Multi-CAM 3500 series bodies so many years; the focus percentages using the corner points (1/3 on both axis) on faces in low light were really poor. With the D5 and D850, focusing is much better using peripheral points. The D6 adds the in-between regions to cross-type coverage, which should be good.

Yes it should be good, thats why i plan to buy it and thats the key issue where it might beat the new EOS 1

I too rarely shoot video, but if the LVAF were better, I'd use it more. My experience is in photography, not video, and it would take me a long time to learn how to do high-quality video. The whole mindset of video is different, as one needs to consider continuity of the timeline, one can't move the camera freely, etc. I think watching poorly shot video is unbearable and so I'd want to do it properly or not at all. I think video is a whole different world and don't really understand the motivation behind the so-called integration or convergence or hybridization of the two media.

However, Live view is very important to me,  as when taking photographs of static subjects, it allows focusing accurately and many other things. One might ask why would I take photos of static subjects with a D5 or D6, the answer to that is that if that's the camera I have with me when I need to take a photograph, that's the camera I'll use. Also, sometimes the subject is moving but camera position is nevertheless fixed on tripod. E.g. today I was taking photos of light art installations in Porvoo, a small town. At one point I was shooting over a river with a 135mm lens, the subject was colorfully lit huts by the riverside, with silhouetted figures inside (the people viewing the work). In this case if I had wanted to avoid blurring the people because they were walking through, I would have had to use a high ISO and the D5 would have been advantageous for that. Still, I was using a manual focus lens (Apo Sonnar) and LV was the best way to focus it in this situation. To me LV is very useful, I would say one of the most important features of a camera. It's the foundation of doing any precision work.

Dont misudnerstand me. I do see the value of Life View. But if I say a pro camera is developed for just one purpose (fast action) it is not needed, or it would require better Live-View AF. Here there appears to be little improvement in the D6, adn as the D780 and Z Series shows Nikon has not implemented its best available technology. I am using Live View for getting more accurate manual focussing in static situation (yes I can use a D4S or D6 for that type of shooting a swell) or together with tilted LC-Display for dynamic macro work where an AF-lens is needed and the yet implemented Contrast AF is some kind of a nuissance in all my bodies.

The same is true for video, this would deserve better AF, I am no Director but rarely used this feature at bird colonies with action ongoing and such like. Funny enough I did not even one video with the Z6 so far (althouth this should be the most advanced technology) which shows how low the importance of video is for my work


BTW. I'd like to see a D510 later  with the new AF module included.

[MILLIREHM]

Several pros have spelt out that they switched to Nikon for the D3: namely its better AFC and low-light shooting. Comparing the history of new features vs tweaks of D3 through to D5, and now to the D6 tells us more as to perhaps how Nikon have named these cameras:

https://photographylife.com/nikon-flagship-dslr-comparison

Looking back at the flagship D* DSLRs, the improvements have largely been incremental eg fps, although one might quibble 9fps > 11 fps is significant to capture the right gestures at a critical moment (e.g. golf swing, bird landing).... the faster fps the better to grad the "WHEN" can be vital. A New AFC engine is the Mega-Tick of the great leap forward: thus D3 and D5 versus D3 and D4 upgrades. All the tweaks to video etc are merely minor, nice but sidelines - ie none = a Mega-Tick. (So perhaps Nikon work on the maxim of if it ain't broke, don't fix it.) If the AF engine gets redesigned / upgraded then it's a new flagship. This makes sense given the primary users of these cameras. As those with experience tell us here, the FX AF sensor had its limitations, and so it could be argued the D4 did not justify its moniker after the three D3 versions, but Nikon improved the D4 sensor.

 Perhaps, the tighter girding of R&D over the past few years (with Z System urgencies and demands) explains why they did not merge more of what we see in the D780. But, again, which Pros really need more of such features?

Improved networking of the D6 is the other Mega-Tick why it's no D5s.

D3 > D4 > D5 each updated the sensor. With the D5 > D6 it's still 20mp - Oh the horror of horrors!!! but we do not YET know if these sensors are the same. If Nikon has improved D6 IQ at end of the of ISO range then another Mega-Tick. Especially if ISO100 gets better DR and the low-light ceiling has "darkened". If it turns out a +ve at either end (better both ends) then Wow, and Wow! This will be significant for actual photographers of sports and wildlife, who push the extremes.

Nikon pulls off bizarre blunders time and again, eg no grip with controls on the Z cameras. Considering how the D6 has turned out, viewed in retrospect the D6 teaser videos are even more bizarre than they did pre-release. Why the hell didn't we see glimpses of the new AF in action (using tested prototypes) - and in low light too?!?

However with the flagship FX DSLRs aimed primarily at Pros shooting top level action events, the R&D has consistently delivered a rugged tank of a camera that delivers, and above all a camera "that leaves nothing to chance" wrt capturing subjects in action scenes. The AFC is the crux. So we read the D6 AF sensor is now Multi-CAM 37K (D5 is Multi-CAM 20K), and layout of the cross-type sensors and software are major upgrades. If tough testing might in fact turn out to obviate the official claims, then there ARE problems. If the AFC in the D6 is indeed a significant improvement, then the D6 is NOT a D5s contra Mr Hogan in his latest essay insinuating Nikon is too proud to call the D6 a D5s.... He should know better.

There is a lot of truth in your words. As I have also called the D6 a D5s but without reading and thus knowing that Mr. Hogan appeared to have done the same. It might be true that ALL true pros are rational and just buy what they need (although I doubt that this goes for100%), but there are more flaghship buyers that are not immune to features. There was a similar situation in times of the NIkon F3 wher Nikon started to lose its lead in the -then assumed - conservative Pro-segment.
I was doing the D5s comparison because evidently Nikon is not using its best available techology in all aspects whereas Canon currently is doing. Nikons policy might also have in mind that they can sell a mirrorless flagship body (Z9?) filled with best technology and features of all usefull or useless kinds next year
Personally i can live without a lot of features, VR is useless and turned off most of the time.
Everybody who can count can see that 20 or 16 Fps is faster than 14 no matter to which extent the difference is really relevant

[Hugh_3170]

Wolfgang, I suspect that there may be another refresh to the FX sized Z cameras before then.

Nikon are pretty conservative and they are now a financially leaner company than they were even a few years ago and top end professional cameras such as the D* cameras and their successors must cost a fortune to design and build, so I reckon that just before the 2024 Olympics (i.e. the next Olympics in Paris after Tokyo this year) would be the earliest that such a mirrorless professional flagship camera might eventuate.

T.......................................................................................

Nikons policy might also have in mind that they can sell a mirrorless flagship body (Z9?) filled with best technology and features of all usefull or useless kinds next year
.........................................................................................

[MILLIREHM]

Wolfgang, I suspect that there may be another refresh to the FX sized Z cameras before then.

Nikon are pretty conservative and they are now a financially leaner company than they were even a few years ago and top end professional cameras such as the D* cameras and their successors must cost a fortune to design and build, so I reckon that just before the 2024 Olympics (i.e. the next Olympics in Paris after Tokyo this year) would be the earliest that such a mirrorless professional flagship camera might eventuate.

you are right that they have less financial power than they already had (and downcycles are dangerous). Currently they are refreshing Z6 and Z7 via firmware. I dont know whether there will be Mk2 versions of those. There is rumors of a Z8 with 60 mp Sensor which would equal for Z-mount what D850 is for F mount. I dont think they really can wait four years for bringing a Z9 but on the other hand it is better not to release a Z9 than releasing something that is not able to beat/or at least compete with Sonys A9.

BTW I called my dealer today to put me on the D6 waiting list - so far i am the first

[Ilkka Nissilä]

evidently Nikon is not using its best available techology in all aspects whereas Canon currently is doing.

Nikon probably don't want to put OSPDAF in their professional DSLRs because they consider the image quality slightly compromised by the OSPDAF sensors and in the DSLR, LV or video are not the primary modes of operation (the viewfinder is), so it's not strictly necessary to implement OSPDAF. Canon use dual pixel AF which doesn't cause striping or banding, but it can lead to much more processing power being needed (or slower operation, if such processing power is not available) because of the amount of data that needs to be read and processed. For example a 20MP camera needs a 40MP sensor for dual-pixel AF and 80 MP for quad-pixel AF should they decide that cross-type sensors are needed. Can Canon make such a sensor with read times competitive with Sony A9, so that they can implement rolling shutter free electronic shutter (1/150s read time instead of the typical 1/15s-1/30s)? With dual-pixel AF it may be not easy to achieve that. The 61MP sensor in the A7R IV has a read time of 1/10s so it's further away from rolling-shutter free silent shutter use in still photography. If Canon want to make a 61MP camera with dual-pixel AF they need a 122MP sensor whose read time might be 1/5s (I am not saying they can't solve the problem with new technology, but the tendency is for larger and higher pixel count sensors to have slower read times).

I think for consumer / newcomer adoption, LVAF is really important as many people are used to using the LCD of their phones or compact cameras and are unfamiliar with viewfinder use, so if they make first contact with an ILC in a store, and the LV AF is poor, they may not look at that camera a second time. And even for serious photographers, some need moving-subject tracking in LV for various reasons (I sometimes do). At least Nikon now provide good LVAF in the Z50, Z6, Z7 and D780 so camera stores can show these cameras as options. If they can't solve the banding/striping in the long run then it may be that they'll continue not to put the mirrorless camera sensors into top DSLRs. Of course this also means there may not be all top video features. D6 does have focus peaking so manual focus during video and LV should be easier in some cases than on a D5.

But other than that, I don't know what technology Nikon have available that they didn't put into the D6.

[MFloyd]

recap: not much innovation following the wishes of a small user base. Great upgrade for D3s/D4s users who skipped the D5

We don’t know yet what the “better AF” will bring. As a D5 user, it’s AF is already the best one currently available. As a sport /action photographer, I demand a lot of the D5’s AF; but if Nikon provides an even better one, I had no much second thoughts to made up my decision.

Another point is communication: having WiFi, Bluetooth (and positioning) available is a big plus point in the era of social media asking for near real time availability of images.

So, for me, even for D5 users, the switch is entirely justified.


_D568647.jpg
WEC 2019 Bahrain (Federation Internationale Automobile - World Endurance Championship)
Nikon D5
Nikkor 70.0-200.0 mm f/2.8E FL
ƒ/2.8  145.0 mm 1/125s  ISO 400

[MILLIREHM]

Nikon probably don't want to put OSPDAF in their professional DSLRs because they consider the image quality slightly compromised by the OSPDAF sensors ...

Thats a thought that also came to my mind recently

But other than that, I don't know what technology Nikon have available that they didn't put into the D6.

IBIS would be another example, D6 was rumored with that feature, Canon has implemented it, Nikon did not. BTW i dont miss it

They DID implement focus peaking as a new feature, I did not mention that

[Mexecutioner]

The 1DXMkIII does not have IBIS, the announced R5 will, but that is not a DSLR

[MILLIREHM]

The 1DXMkIII does not have IBIS, the announced R5 will, but that is not a DSLR

So the information i read somewhere about EOS 1 including IBIS was misleading, sorry
Yes R5 is not a DSLR

[Ilkka Nissilä]

So the information i read somewhere about EOS 1 including IBIS was misleading, sorry
Yes R5 is not a DSLR

Yeah, there were rumors of D6 with in-camera VR. It is possible to implement (Pentax, Konica-Minolta and Sony had it in DSLRs) but it adds complexity and may not perform as well as on mirrorless. As the image sensor is moved, the viewfinder image does not show the correction and the AF sensor may also be out of alignment with the moved image sensor. There is also the matter that a D6 is expected to be really rugged and additional moving parts may adversely affect that.

I think it would have been nice to have in-camera VR but I can understand why they would not do it. This is a case where rumor sites by dispersing inaccurate information can cause a feeling of a letdown when it turns out the rumored specs were just a figment of someone's imagination. Note that there was no mention of a new AF module in the D6 rumors. A while back a similar thing occurred with the rumored Z lens roadmap which turned out to be fake.

I am just excited that they made a new AF module and look forward to seeing how it performs. I am likely, however, to wait for the D850 to be updated with the new AF system rather than buy the D6. I am pretty confident they will do it since it allows them to leverage the AF system development cost over multiple camera bodies and the D850 is popular and well-regarded.

[MILLIREHM]

Had that kind of complexity-error with my old F4 and its builit-in viewfinder diopter correction getting lose, thus not showing any kind of sharp viefinder image any more

[Frank Fremerey]

We don’t know yet what the “better AF” will bring. As a D5 user, it’s AF is already the best one currently available. As a sport /action photographer, I demand a lot of the D5’s AF; but if Nikon provides an even better one, I had no much second thoughts to made up my decision.

Another point is communication: having WiFi, Bluetooth (and positioning) available is a big plus point in the era of social media asking for near real time availability of images.

So, for me, even for D5 users, the switch is entirely justified.


_D568647.jpg
WEC 2019 Bahrain (Federation Internationale Automobile - World Endurance Championship)
Nikon D5
Nikkor 70.0-200.0 mm f/2.8E FL
ƒ/2.8  145.0 mm 1/125s  ISO 400

I like to have GPS and WiFi builtin and I like a monolitic body like the one digit bodies ... Better AF is alright but I never use more than 10 fps and I prefer a higher resolution sensor.