Nikon mirrorless definitely on the way

You could make, an import preset, to take these changes out but seems strange that Nikon / Adobe would go this route.
 
johnnypanic said:
You could make, an import preset, to take these changes out but seems strange that Nikon / Adobe would go this route.
Click to expand...

Seems to be more likely an Adobe issue. Can't see how Nikon could control whether LR resets raw file back to defaults.

Didn't realise that this tie up had happened to be honest. I like that it's there so hopefully this issue is rectified quickly.
 
and he'd probably be super grateful if you bought it through his affiliate links, a big thanks to his sponsors too!
 
trevjm said:
Amateur Photographer magazine have also stated it is the best mirrorless camera on the market...
Click to expand...

Great that two..... let’s see if it win’s camera of the year awards etc.
It might be a good first attempt from Nikon but to state it’s the best mirrorless on the market seems a little optimistic in my opinion. ;)
 
Riz_Guru said:
Great that two..... let’s see if it win’s camera of the year awards etc.
It might be a good first attempt from Nikon but to state it’s the best mirrorless on the market seems a little optimistic in my opinion. ;)
Click to expand...

I must admit I find it bit overboard... but what do I know :)

Still wouldn't mind getting my hands on one though but not at current prices :)
 
If I’m being honest, I really wanted Nikon to bring out something better, I’m not ruling Nikon as I may Switch to them in the future :)
I like the Nikon brand as it was my first real camera.... the Nikon D40 :D
 
Fraser Euan White said:
Kai W reckons the Z7 is the best FF Mirrorless at the moment - this camera is becoming more attractive by the day :)

View: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qRV-he2e1MU
Click to expand...

To be honest for a certain group of folk it probably is the best FF mirrorless, I know everyone seems to get hung up on the AF but personally I couldn't give a hoot about fast, accurate, super Eye AF!! I shoot landscapes, travel and architecture - they're not going anywhere! - for that I want high MP, detailed shots and for that the Z7 is on top - I also personally rate the body build and controls higher than the A7R3.

Generally though.- no its not better than an A7r3, it falls short on AF and obviously as a system its not there yet as there's only 3 native lenses, for a lot of people though (existing Nikon users) and especially that sub-set of users that don't need fast AF, the Z7 looks pretty awesome, better in the flesh than reading the spec sheets.
 
Riz_Guru said:
If I’m being honest, I really wanted Nikon to bring out something better, I’m not ruling Nikon as I may Switch to them in the future :)
I like the Nikon brand as it was my first real camera.... the Nikon D40 :D
Click to expand...

My first good camera was a Nikon 35mm SLR long before digital appeared and I had it and used it for something over 20 years but even so to buy into a brand just seems so alien to me... Just buy the best thing for you no matter what the badge.
 
chrism_scotland said:
To be honest for a certain group of folk it probably is the best FF mirrorless, I know everyone seems to get hung up on the AF but personally I couldn't give a hoot about fast, accurate, super Eye AF!! I shoot landscapes, travel and architecture - they're not going anywhere! - for that I want high MP, detailed shots and for that the Z7 is on top - I also personally rate the body build and controls higher than the A7R3.

Generally though.- no its not better than an A7r3, it falls short on AF and obviously as a system its not there yet as there's only 3 native lenses, for a lot of people though (existing Nikon users) and especially that sub-set of users that don't need fast AF, the Z7 looks pretty awesome, better in the flesh than reading the spec sheets.
Click to expand...


Hi Chris,

that is two independent reviewers stating it is the best FF Mirrorless and they have used all cameras and have no ownership/brand loyalty bias (granted maybe have a profit bias but this is usually very small). I haven't held a Z7 yet but have held a Sony and TBH I found the AF not as good as my D4. It takes a lot more than just AF performance to make a good camera though; it is the sum of all it's parts and quite often more.

On paper a Mazda MX5 looks like a poorly spec'ed sports car but when you drive one the result is far greater than the sum of it's parts - it is a long way behind it's market leaders on the spec sheet in virtually all areas but it is still the best sports car to drive at almost any money.
 
Fraser Euan White said:
On paper a Mazda MX5 looks like a poorly spec'ed sports car but when you drive one the result is far greater than the sum of it's parts - it is a long way behind it's market leaders on the spec sheet in virtually all areas but it is still the best sports car to drive at almost any money.
Click to expand...

That's a poor analogy, the Z7 looks great on its spec sheet.

What gives me pause for thought on the Z7 are its top end price point, the AF for its class, the existence of the D850 (given its performance and price) and the lack of native glass (in the sense of compelling modern designs only found on the Z mount), nothing to do with its spec sheet.
 
Fraser Euan White said:
Hi Chris,

that is two independent reviewers stating it is the best FF Mirrorless and they have used all cameras and have no ownership/brand loyalty bias (granted maybe have a profit bias but this is usually very small). I haven't held a Z7 yet but have held a Sony and TBH I found the AF not as good as my D4. It takes a lot more than just AF performance to make a good camera though; it is the sum of all it's parts and quite often more.

On paper a Mazda MX5 looks like a poorly spec'ed sports car but when you drive one the result is far greater than the sum of it's parts - it is a long way behind it's market leaders on the spec sheet in virtually all areas but it is still the best sports car to drive at almost any money.
Click to expand...
What Sony did you try?

I tried both d5 and 1dx2 and for me the A9 blows both out of the water
 
simonbarker said:
That's a poor analogy, the Z7 looks great on its spec sheet.

What gives me pause for thought on the Z7 are its top end price point, the AF for its class, the existence of the D850 (given its performance and price) and the lack of native glass (in the sense of compelling modern designs only found on the Z mount), nothing to do with its spec sheet.
Click to expand...
Also spec wise i would say the z7 is better then the Canon
 
As Simon has alluded to, I think the Z6 and 7 have a real problem with the D850 looking over their shoulder. If you own a D850 I see no incentive to even consider the Z series at this point. Whilst the larger mount may give more scope for lens design it’s not as though you can’t get good glass in the old mount. I’ve just bought a Sigma 24-35 f2 and it’s bloody sharp on the D850. So good that it competes very well with primes in those focal ranges.

Same with Canon, the 5D4 is just a better all round camera than the EOS R. More versatile and, if you can only afford one body for all your photography, a better bet.
 
Phil V said:
Whilst valid, that’s the problem with forums, this camera may not appeal to you or I but I’ll bet that won’t stop it selling by the bucketload.
Click to expand...
Because of the nikon brand. Brand helps a ton. If pantex made the exact same camera, would it sell well?
 
jonneymendoza said:
Because of the nikon brand. Brand helps a ton. If pantex made the exact same camera, would it sell well?
Click to expand...

Why do you disapprove of other people’s reasons for buying anything Jonney? It’s none of your (or my) business! Completely irrelevant why someone else chooses a particular product
 
As a long term Nikon user, currently with an old D700 and various AF-D lenses, I've decided it is time for an upgrade of both cameras and lenses. I find myself seriously tempted by the Sony A7 III (or R version) as I don't see the same negatives in using mirrorless as I did when I looked a few years ago.

Am I mad and can you talk me out of it?
 
manwithanikon said:
As a long term Nikon user, currently with an old D700 and various AF-D lenses, I've decided it is time for an upgrade of both cameras and lenses. I find myself seriously tempted by the Sony A7 III (or R version) as I don't see the same negatives in using mirrorless as I did when I looked a few years ago.

Am I mad and can you talk me out of it?
Click to expand...
Nah, come over and join the dark side :D
 
simonbarker said:
Well, if you switch your username won't make much sense anymore?
Click to expand...

Haha! That is a strong argument and I would struggle to deal with the long-term ramifications...

Has anyone made such a switch and been left filled with regret and a burning hole in their pocket?
 
manwithanikon said:
Haha! That is a strong argument and I would struggle to deal with the long-term ramifications...

Has anyone made such a switch and been left filled with regret and a burning hole in their pocket?
Click to expand...

Burning hole in pocket - yes
regret - no

Though to be honest the burning hole isn't so bad since I sold my a-mount DSLR gear before it fully went out of demand. It will happen to Nikon and Canon too eventually, you are better off switching mounts now than when no one wants your lenses or body.
 
Last edited:
manwithanikon said:
Has anyone made such a switch and been left filled with regret and a burning hole in their pocket?
Click to expand...

I switched from Nikon to Sony, I have some mixed feelings about the experience but it was mostly positive.

It worked out a lot more expensive than I thought, I was actually hoping to come out ahead and instead ended up spending about three times as much as I'd planned.

The biggest advantage I gained from switching was not the camera (I was already using an amazing camera) but rather the lenses, it's a nice benefit to Sony that you have a slew of fairly new designs but you really do pay for that privilege.

If I could change one thing on the A73 it'd be the viewfinder, it's good but not great.

There's some things I miss, the AF is pretty amazing on the Sony in the right conditions but I find it a bit worse in a studio, my Nikon would happily and reliably putter along consistently doing its job whereas the Sony feels like a rocket ship that sometimes decides to blow up half way. Even so, I expect most people will use it in situations where it shows its strengths.

Having the ability to convert lenses is more useful than I first thought, not to underplay the usefulness but it's hard to ignore the advantages of a native lens but it lets me have a couple of cheap lenses for lengths I rarely use (which I couldn't justify for the price Sony currently asks) and I just bought a tilt shift which I couldn't have done otherwise. Which makes me a little sad this won't be an option with Canon RF and Nikon Z lenses.

It's a harder choice now Nikon and Canon have their systems out but I would suggest you figure out what lenses you plan to use before jumping on a new body.
 
manwithanikon said:
As a long term Nikon user, currently with an old D700 and various AF-D lenses, I've decided it is time for an upgrade of both cameras and lenses. I find myself seriously tempted by the Sony A7 III (or R version) as I don't see the same negatives in using mirrorless as I did when I looked a few years ago.

Am I mad and can you talk me out of it?
Click to expand...
You're not mad, I seriously contemplated the move from a two system set up (D750 and Olympus EM1) to a Sony A7RIII. Several things stopped me, the first and main one being the ergonomics of the Sony as I found the grip too cramped in terms of space between the grip and lens (even the EM1 has noticeably more room). The next thing was the slight EVF lag when panning, I know I had all the optimal settings as there was a Sony rep on hand to change all the settings. The next thing was the balance with heavy lenses such as the 70-200mm f2.8, not too bad with the camera in landscape orientation but as soon as I turned it to the portrait orientation it didn't feel right. And lastly the cost. I chose to buy a D850 instead to replace my D750 ;)

On launch of the Nikon Z7 I contemplated the switch again and whilst the Nikon feels much better ergonomically (both in terms of grip room and also balance), the AF performance was noticeably worse than my D850. Not bad by any stretch, but for the cost to change I would not be willing to take a hit on performance. It also had the same minor EVF lag, fps with exposure change is low, and then there's the lack of native lenses and all current native lenses are extremely pricey.

If you only shoot landscapes and portraits etc then these mirrorless will be fantastic and probably better than DSLR due to live view and the extra bells and whistles, but if you shoot sports and pan a lot then they might not be for you, unless you look at the A9.
 
snerkler said:
You're not mad, I seriously contemplated the move from a two system set up (D750 and Olympus EM1) to a Sony A7RIII. Several things stopped me, the first and main one being the ergonomics of the Sony as I found the grip too cramped in terms of space between the grip and lens (even the EM1 has noticeably more room). The next thing was the slight EVF lag when panning, I know I had all the optimal settings as there was a Sony rep on hand to change all the settings. The next thing was the balance with heavy lenses such as the 70-200mm f2.8, not too bad with the camera in landscape orientation but as soon as I turned it to the portrait orientation it didn't feel right. And lastly the cost. I chose to buy a D850 instead to replace my D750 ;)

On launch of the Nikon Z7 I contemplated the switch again and whilst the Nikon feels much better ergonomically (both in terms of grip room and also balance), the AF performance was noticeably worse than my D850. Not bad by any stretch, but for the cost to change I would not be willing to take a hit on performance. It also had the same minor EVF lag, fps with exposure change is low, and then there's the lack of native lenses and all current native lenses are extremely pricey.

If you only shoot landscapes and portraits etc then these mirrorless will be fantastic and probably better than DSLR due to live view and the extra bells and whistles, but if you shoot sports and pan a lot then they might not be for you, unless you look at the A9.
Click to expand...

Holding any camera in portrait orientation with a large lens and without a vertical grip is uncomfortable at best.

I shoot action with A7RIII just fine. While there are some issues with Nikon mirrorless I am sure with firmware updates or by next generation they'll also be largely up to par.

Nikon mirrorless definitely felt nicer in hand. The touch screen is very nicely implemented on the whole.
 
nandbytes said:
Holding any camera in portrait orientation with a large lens and without a vertical grip is uncomfortable at best.

I shoot action with A7RIII just fine. While there are some issues with Nikon mirrorless I am sure with firmware updates or by next generation they'll also be largely up to par.

Nikon mirrorless definitely felt nicer in hand. The touch screen is very nicely implemented on the whole.
Click to expand...
I don't mind it tbh, but my point was about balance, I felt on the Sony it created more torque on my hands (y)
 
nandbytes said:
Holding any camera in portrait orientation with a large lens and without a vertical grip is uncomfortable at best.
Click to expand...

Maybe none of my lenses are large enough, but I normally support the setup with the hand under the lens around the balance point, so that the hand on the camera s there to steady & work the controls.
 
ancient_mariner said:
Maybe none of my lenses are large enough, but I normally support the setup with the hand under the lens around the balance point, so that the hand on the camera s there to steady & work the controls.
Click to expand...
Yep, me too but the A7Riii still felt off balance somehow to me.
 
nandbytes said:
.....I sold my a-mount DSLR gear before it fully went out of demand. It will happen to Nikon and Canon too eventually.....
Click to expand...

You are having a laugh aren't you? It's not going to happen in your or my lifetime - Canon or Nikon. These are still the Pro Systems of choice.... only the collapse of the Yen will break them.

I have a 60's 85 f/1.4 Nikkor which I can use on all my Nikon cameras (that have an option to change lenses). One thing Nikon did do was make that 'F' mount work for nearly ever!
 
chuckles said:
You are having a laugh aren't you? It's not going to happen in your or my lifetime - Canon or Nikon. These are still the Pro Systems of choice.... only the collapse of the Yen will break them.

I have a 60's 85 f/1.4 Nikkor which I can use on all my Nikon cameras (that have an option to change lenses). One thing Nikon did do was make that 'F' mount work for nearly ever!
Click to expand...

No one wants to adapt lenses forever. If that's your chosen path then good for you.
Everyone will eventually want to buy native lenses. Otherwise why do you think manufacturers spend the time and effort not to mention cost involved in developing lenses and new mount.
You can adapt a-mount lenses on to e-mount too and four-thirds lenses on to m43 bodies but not many people want to do that.

Pros don't keep the system alive or even make them a success. They are not early adopters, they follow afterwards when the system is mature and reliable. How many pros do you think bought and used Sony e-mount to make it a success? It's amateurs and enthusiasts that buy it first.

Canon and Nikon have a large user base so it'll take longer for that happen for sure but EF and F mount will go down the route of a-mount eventually.
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top