Nikon mirrorless definitely on the way

Fraser Euan White said:
mmmm............that really doesn't sound convincing TBH - Why would you want the Nikon Z6/7 to be fantastic when you don't intend to change your camera system for the next 3 years?



Nope; but will the Nikon Z6/7 be the current and only Nikon Mirrorless in three years time? - Hence it reinforces that it really doesn't matter to you how the Z6/7 performs?
Click to expand...
I'd like Nikon to succeed to. Nothing special about that, we need the competition and customers will only benefit from the advancements in tech. But offcource if Nikon keep staying a generation behind that won't happen.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
I actually don't think there is any excuse. What is being said now about Nikon was also the arguments against Gen II Sony's so Nikon should at least have bettered those specs by a mile prerelease not just match them.
 
Fraser Euan White said:
You quoted this from the article
Lastly, we were disappointed by the CIPA rating of 330 images for the EN-EL15b battery that powers the Z7. It's not a woefully bad score, but it's around the rating of Sony's 1st and 2nd gen a7-series cameras for which we regularly recommended carrying a second battery, while Sony's latest Z-series battery is rated for around 700 shots.

The very next sentence clarifies this position which is the 'real world experience' and what I quoted:
while Sony's latest Z-series battery is rated for around 700 shots. All that said, Barney's actual experience with the Z7 put him at ease; over the course of a 12-hour shoot, he recorded 1500+ images and several 4K video clips before the battery warning kicked in at 10% remaining. He wouldn't be opposed to venturing out for a full day in a new city with one battery for the Z7.
Click to expand...
Fraser
You claim to have an engineering background.

Surely you understand the reason we have international standards like CIPA ratings for batteries. And yes we understand they’re only an ‘indication’ but they’re a much more accurate indication than one users experience of one day’s use. As they’re the only level playing field we have.

And if you understand that, you’re surely trolling this point.

I’d take any DPR preview of a pre release camera with a pinch of salt, OTOH when they’ve tested a release product, I’m all ears.

By your own admission, you don’t really understand the user experience of mirrorless. As a long time SLR user who owns a mirrorless Camera, the massive + is being able to configure my shooting experience in a way a SLR can’t match, but the massive negative that comes with that is the constant worry about battery life.

Don’t get me wrong, I’ve always owned spare batteries, and been aware they can let me down, but a mirrorless Camera multiplies that awareness into a constant nagging doubt. And the last thing you want to read is that a new camera has a poor battery (compared to its competitors)
 
snerkler said:
Why wouldn’t you want IBIS?
Click to expand...
Why would you want IBIS?
It's mostly useless for me.
I shoot people for which I use flash or have shutter speed of at least 1/60 to avoid motion blur.
I shoot animals for which I use really high shutter speeds.
I shoot landscapes for which I mostly use a tripod.
I shoot macro and flowers for which I use tripod, flashes and flash lights.

For the odd time that I actually do need the IBIS or stabilization I'll either buy a lens with stabilization or make do without it. So the added bulk for that one odd time is not worth it.

I suppose it's very useful for video which I don't do much off. So might be worth it for that. May be canon can do a good job with just electronic IBIS for videos like they do with M5
 
Last edited:
redhed17 said:
Image quality, AF performance, user interface and Video performance can only be judged when these cameras are tested, and tested with final firmware.
Click to expand...
Indeed. Thom Hogan reports:
"I did notice that Nikon seems to be showing cameras with firmware 0.5 (or 0.53). Typically a month before shipment I'm used to seeing 0.9x versions with Nikon. I don't know if that's meaningful here, but Nikon is a pretty anal and engineering nerd culture. They have a long-established step process they use. I just get the feeling we're seeing these cameras a little earlier in that process than usual."

So if he's right, one might reasonably expect the production firmware to be somewhat more capable than the current pre-production version. How much more capable though? That's the question.
 
nandbytes said:
Why would you want IBIS?
It's mostly useless for me.
I shoot people for which I use flash or have shutter speed of at least 1/60 to avoid motion blur.
I shoot animals for which I use really high shutter speeds.
I shoot landscapes for which I mostly use a tripod.
I shoot macro and flowers for which I use tripod, flashes and flash lights.

For the odd time that I actually do need the IBIS or stabilization I'll either buy a lens with stabilization or make do without it. So the added bulk for that one odd time is not worth it.
Click to expand...
Does it really add bulk though? Would you want cameras like the A7 to be any smaller than they already are, look at the size of Olympus bodies too (yes I know the sensor is smaller ;)).

I see your point that it’s not useful for you, but I would think it is for the majority (big assumption) and just think it’s one of those ‘standard’ features you expect. Just like two cars slots ;)

I find IBIS a godsend on holiday, I’ve been able to handhold shots with a 1s shutter which is far better for me than lugging a tripod around a city etc for the odd occasion I might need a slow shutter (y)
 
snerkler said:
Does it really add bulk though? Would you want cameras like the A7 to be any smaller than they already are, look at the size of Olympus bodies too (yes I know the sensor is smaller ;)).

I see your point that it’s not useful for you, but I would think it is for the majority (big assumption) and just think it’s one of those ‘standard’ features you expect. Just like two cars slots ;)

I find IBIS a godsend on holiday, I’ve been able to handhold shots with a 1s shutter which is far better for me than lugging a tripod around a city etc for the odd occasion I might need a slow shutter (y)
Click to expand...

yes it would main difference between the A7 -> A7II -> A7III is the IBIS in terms of what's adding bulk. I want my A7 size body back. That body size was the reason I moved to e-mount from a-mount (A99) which btw had IBIS!

Can't get 1s handheld shots with A7RIII anyway.
 
snerkler said:
Does it really add bulk though? Would you want cameras like the A7 to be any smaller than they already are, look at the size of Olympus bodies too (yes I know the sensor is smaller ;)).

I see your point that it’s not useful for you, but I would think it is for the majority (big assumption) and just think it’s one of those ‘standard’ features you expect. Just like two cars slots ;)

I find IBIS a godsend on holiday, I’ve been able to handhold shots with a 1s shutter which is far better for me than lugging a tripod around a city etc for the odd occasion I might need a slow shutter (y)
Click to expand...

I think my IBIS 'wow' moment came when using an E-M5ii shooting in blue hour after sunset with a 2.8 lens and just hand holding everything. Up to 1 second(ish) though longer was possible if there was something to brace against. I did have a tripod with me but just didn't bother with it. It felt like a total revelation. I realise this doesn't sound so amazing nowadays but this was three years ago and I was used to big DSLR's, big tripods, packing the tripod up, putting camera in bag, moving to next location and starting it all again. Ultimately that set up gives better results but to be able to do something very similar just carrying a little camera around my neck and shooting at base iso was really quite something. As you say, for travel, holiday type stuff, that's just brilliant. I also found it fantastic for generally trying interesting compositions and angles without any of the faff. I also like it for video. Not something I do much of when I do, stabalisation makes a heck of a difference. Of course lenses have had stabalisation for a long time but it's not that prevalent in wider lenses and I've not yet used a lens only stabalised set up that seems anywhere near as effective a good ibis system.
 
Fraser Euan White said:
mmmm............that really doesn't sound convincing TBH - Why would you want the Nikon Z6/7 to be fantastic when you don't intend to change your camera system for the next 3 years?



Nope; but will the Nikon Z6/7 be the current and only Nikon Mirrorless in three years time? - Hence it reinforces that it really doesn't matter to you how the Z6/7 performs?
Click to expand...

Are you accusing me of lying? If you want you can read the article I wrote a month ago that petepixel published, where I articulate a hope that the nikon is brilliant.

The reason is lenses. I don't want to use large, heavy adapted lenses. By 2021 I imagined Nikon would have the native lenses I wanted. The road map shows my suspicions correct.

I also want the nikon system to push other systems. The nikon isn't even out and it's a generation behind sony in many key areas.
 
Last edited:
Fraser Euan White said:
Talk Photography - a forum where you would probably expect people to discuss the Image quality? I have made numerous posts in other threads that my enjoyment from photography comes as much from using the camera and taking the picture; the actual image produced isn't as important to me - I have yet to see anyone actually agree with this and everyone states it is the final image that matters most to them. Lots on this thread and others state they are 'not gear heads', yet the evidence in this thread would appear different.
Click to expand...

This is the equipment forum.

A very small percentage of Forum members have posted here, and those that have are particularly interested in discussing equipment - often at great length.;)

There are others such as myself that have a passing interest in gear and might have made a few quick comments, and there are probably dozens and maybe hundreds of others who are glancing at it now and then, and hundreds more who really more interested in photography generally, landscape and wildlife photography, etc, etc, who don't look at the equipment forum because it bores them!
 
IBIS is more useful than simply allowing slower hand held shutter speeds, you get the benefit when framing too, especially with longer lenses. I'd rather have it than not, but can always live without. Lens OIS is very good these days, so there is always the option. Those of us who like to dabble in old MF lenses really appreciate it though. It is a joy to use something like a vintage 200mm F4 and have it fully stabilized.
 
Last edited:
Cagey75 said:
IBIS is more useful than just allowing slower shutter hand held speeds, you get the benefit when framing too, especially with longer lenses. I'd rather have it than not, but can always live without. Lens OIS is very good these days, so there is always the option. Those of us who like to dabble in old MF lenses really appreciate it though. It is a joy to use smething like a vintage 200mm F4 and have it fully stabilized.
Click to expand...
Used to shoot with A7+70-400mm no problem.
IBIS never helped with framing on A99 or any of the sonys pre-A77ii DSLRs.
In fact you still can't get that feedback on Pentax. While I agree that it's useful it's not a deal breaker.
 
nandbytes said:
Used to shoot with A7+70-400mm no problem.
IBIS never helped with framing on A99 or any of the sonys pre-A77ii DSLRs.
In fact you still can't get that feedback on Pentax. While I agree that it's useful it's not a deal breaker.
Click to expand...

Really? On M43 cameras IBIS kicks in on half press of the shutter and you immediately see the difference. It's like a magic switch, from erratic jerks and wobbles to calm floatiness :D
 
Cagey75 said:
Really? On M43 cameras IBIS kicks in on half press of the shutter and you immediately see the difference. It's like a magic switch, from erratic jerks and wobbles to calm floatiness :D
Click to expand...

The same happens on Sony e-mount and latest a-mount bodies but not the older ones. Of course there is no way you can get that feedback in Pentax because of the OVF.
 
nandbytes said:
The same happens on Sony e-mount and latest a-mount bodies but not the older ones. Of course there is no way you can get that feedback in Pentax because of the OVF.
Click to expand...

It's been that long since I used an OVF I do forget little things like that!
 
nandbytes said:
yes it would main difference between the A7 -> A7II -> A7III is the IBIS in terms of what's adding bulk. I want my A7 size body back. That body size was the reason I moved to e-mount from a-mount (A99) which btw had IBIS!

Can't get 1s handheld shots with A7RIII anyway.
Click to expand...
Fair enough, you must be one of the very few that prefers the ergonomics of the gen 1 over the gen 2 and 3 ;) :p I didn't realise that the gen 2 only had one card slot until I've just looked at the specs, and the A7iii only has one UHS-II slot, the other os UHS-I. Doesn't this slow it down if you shoot RAW + RAW?

nandbytes said:
The same happens on Sony e-mount and latest a-mount bodies but not the older ones. Of course there is no way you can get that feedback in Pentax because of the OVF.
Click to expand...
Well you can still see stabilisation working with OVFs, if your lenses have it ;) I must admit my when using my 150-600mm the image shakes all over the place in the VF with the VC (IS) turned off. IS is really handy for this too as cagey says (y). Of course it's not a deal breaker, but if I had the choice of having it or not having it I choose it every time. For example I can get cleaner images with my EM1 and 12-40mm f2.8 than I can with my D850 and 24-70mm f2.8 purely because I can hand hold the EM1 about 5 stops slower shutter, which negates any ISO handling advantage of the Nikon and then some (y)
 
snerkler said:
Seems like you've forgotten lens IS too :p
Click to expand...

Yup :D I was thinking on it there, and though 'hang on, my Fuji 55-200 ... but that was evf also" - same with the Pany 100-300. Been a very long time since I used a VR lens with an OVF
 
snerkler said:
Fair enough, you must be one of the very few that prefers the ergonomics of the gen 1 over the gen 2 and 3 ;) :p I didn't realise that the gen 2 only had one card slot until I've just looked at the specs, and the A7iii only has one UHS-II slot, the other os UHS-I. Doesn't this slow it down if you shoot RAW + RAW?

Well you can still see stabilisation working with OVFs, if your lenses have it ;) I must admit my when using my 150-600mm the image shakes all over the place in the VF with the VC (IS) turned off. IS is really handy for this too as cagey says (y). Of course it's not a deal breaker, but if I had the choice of having it or not having it I choose it every time. For example I can get cleaner images with my EM1 and 12-40mm f2.8 than I can with my D850 and 24-70mm f2.8 purely because I can hand hold the EM1 about 5 stops slower shutter, which negates any ISO handling advantage of the Nikon and then some (y)
Click to expand...

in order:

I probably am in the minority which explains why we aren't seeing many of those sized bodies. But i am hopeful someone inc. nikon may do it. Nikon may do one as their "entry" level since they don't really seem to have anything APS-C shaped/friendly so far in mirrorless (though I would hope their AF is not "entry" level). One card slot won't bother me at the moment. If i end up shooting professionally it might do though.

Yes slows it down and not sure why canon and sony both did this annoying setup. There is a whole thread ranting about this by raymond :D

I already acknowledged the existence of lens OS ;)

also probably because you can pixel peep at 45mp which will show a lot more in terms of shakes etc than 16mp of EM1
 
Last edited:
IS is of very limited use to me. If you use long lenses I can see it being an advantage for some subjects but the slower shutter speeds at which IS would be an advantage are mostly absolutely useless for the pictures I want to take.
 
I like IBIS for when I'm shooting indoors and want to avoid banding. Can comfortably shoot at 1/100 during speeches and in churches and it's all sharp as a tack. It's something I'd miss if I didn't have it now.
 
woof woof said:
IS is of very limited use to me. If you use long lenses I can see it being an advantage for some subjects but the slower shutter speeds at which IS would be an advantage are mostly absolutely useless for the pictures I want to take.
Click to expand...

Even for standard shots there's a benefit though, say you are taking some nice low light images of your wife at a meal and you want them clean as possible. Well, shooting at 1/20th instead of 1/100th will allow lower ISO and still give a sharp image without much effort - so long as she doesn't move for that fraction of a second obviously
 
decigallen said:
I like IBIS for when I'm shooting indoors and want to avoid banding. Can comfortably shoot at 1/100 during speeches and in churches and it's all sharp as a tack. It's something I'd miss if I didn't have it now.
Click to expand...

what lens are you using?
at 1/100 I can take sharp images for anything up to 100-ish mm.
 
Cagey75 said:
Even for standard shots there's a benefit though, say you are taking some nice low light images of your wife at a meal and you want them clean as possible. Well, shooting at 1/20th instead of 1/100th will allow lower ISO and still give a sharp image without much effort - so long as she doesn't move for that fraction of a second obviously
Click to expand...
I'm struggling to think when I'd use speeds like 1/20 for any subject I tend to take pictures of. I suppose if you have a still life and want some movement around it but at home or when out and about in nature speeds below 1/50-100 or so will very probably show some movement somewhere in the shot. I suppose for shots buildings and the like. Anyway, with lenses in the 35/50mm sort or range IS isn't a necessity for me.
 
woof woof said:
I'm struggling to think when I'd use speeds like 1/20 for any subject I tend to take pictures of. I suppose if you have a still life and want some movement around it but at home or when out and about in nature speeds below 1/50-100 or so will very probably show some movement somewhere in the shot. I suppose for shots buildings and the like. Anyway, with lenses in the 35/50mm sort or range IS isn't a necessity for me.
Click to expand...
Different strokes and all that. Couple of examples where IBIS was handy for me. Granted they're not award winning shots, but they are holiday memories for me which are important imo.

0.5s

PC014313 by TDG-77, on Flickr

0.3s

P3260010 by TDG-77, on Flickr
 
woof woof said:
I'm struggling to think when I'd use speeds like 1/20 for any subject I tend to take pictures of. I suppose if you have a still life and want some movement around it but at home or when out and about in nature speeds below 1/50-100 or so will very probably show some movement somewhere in the shot. I suppose for shots buildings and the like. Anyway, with lenses in the 35/50mm sort or range IS isn't a necessity for me.
Click to expand...

It's just nice to have the option. I like messing about with slower SS just for fun sometimes. Say you want to get some nice Christmas tree light images, hand holding at up to a second feels great, or doing car trails hand held, or night buildings as Snerkler shows ... it's another aid to your artistry if nothing else.

Here's one I took at 1/8 hand held, standing in the middle of the road to get the Dublin Spire in, plenty slow enough to get people in blurred motion but keeping the buildings and spire sharp enough. And this was with the old em5 mk1
Dublin Spire by K G, on Flickr

The Christmas tree at 1" with the G80, not using anything for steadiness, these were when I was testing IBIS out, was new to me, as you can see by the name on the image
Hand-held tester @1 second by K G, on Flickr
 
Last edited:
nandbytes said:
Nikons winning at dpreview - https://m.dpreview.com/articles/3099846348/which-is-better-nikon-z7-vs-sony-a7r-iii
Click to expand...

Is it?

The a7R III has its advantages as well. In our opinion, it still has a better AF experience than the Nikon thanks to Eye AF and Lock-on AF, and its dual card slots will be a significant differentiator for a lot of users. It also boasts superior performance when it comes to continuous shooting and battery life. Sony has a much larger lineup of native lenses for its system, and the ecosystem of third-party adapters that has evolved around E-mount is impressive. Of course, Nikon's Z-mount has a lot of future potential, but its decision not to share technical details of the mount means third parties will need to reverse engineer it.
Click to expand...
 
snerkler said:
Interesting that the resolution of the Sony EVF drops when shooting, didn't realise that. I thought that EVF was mighty impressive so can only imagine how good the Nikon's is.
Click to expand...

Also found out nikon has focus stacking in-camera which is really awesome. does it give a RAW output at the the end?
This is something I really envied on Oly bodies.
 
Last edited:
I am going to watch Nikon closely going forwards...... Nikon Z7 body but with the Sony A9 internals mmmm now that would be a nice body. :D Z9 anybody.
 
Riz_Guru said:
I am going to watch Nikon closely going forwards...... Nikon Z7 body but with the Sony A9 internals mmmm now that would be a nice body. :D Z9 anybody.
Click to expand...

Yeah, the Sony tech in that Z body (with two cards) would be great. Can't imagine how good the A9 mk2 and A7 mk4 will be with the added competition in the market.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top