29 replies to this topic

[Art]

I watched one of FRO-KNOWS videos.  He is a New Yorker who does camera reviews and was the first to go ballistic on the Nikon Z one slot phenomena.

 

He got me thinking about something .... the FUTURE of DSLR's!

 

Why?

 

So, we have all talked about, complained and speculated on mirrorless technology.  Now that Nikon has landed two feet firmly on the ground and their direction and future is road mapped, a thought came into my head.  As technology moves forward, yesterdays news is typically left to die a slow and painful death on the vine!

 

Go back to film for a minute ....

 

In the late 50's, the SLR made its debut and the film photography industry never looked back.  The zenith with Nikon seemed to be the F5.  The F6, although a wonderful camera and is still available, never had the same cache as the F5.  Then came DSLRs.

 

So, we seem to have come to the same pinnacle ....the D5, the D500 and the D850.  We might get some tweaks ... and "x" here (D5x) an "s" there .... but by and large, the future of these cameras is written in stone.  It only stands to reason that R&D moving forward, will be vested in the new generation of technology. I don't think, many more improvements are going to be made on the D5 or the D500 or the D850.  These seem to be the top of the mountain for this particular lifeline and moving forward, they will simply slip into history while the new mirrorless line takes over.

 

To me, this would seem to make sense.  I think, moving forward, you are going to see them give lip service to introductory level DSLR's, and maybe add a tweak to the high end, but all the new sensors, bells and whistles moving forward are going to end up in the Z line.

And, I think this is going to happen quickly.  I think in the next 2 years.

 

Why do I think it will happen quickly?

 

Well, when I went to the Nikon Z event, and I played with both the 7 and the 6, these are very serious designs.  They are rock solid cameras and a solid first step.  They have the new lens mount and they are going to obsolete everything you have bought that was made in the last 50 years!  FTZ is there to simply stop people from having heart attacks.  It is a very well thought out and excellent touch, but all the new designs moving forward will be Z mount.  It just stands to reason.

Why on earth, would they design a new 600mm F mount lens?  Think about it!  I think the last F mount lens may be the 500mm fresnel lens and moving forward .... its all for the Mirrorless future road map.

 

I am starting to feel the writing is on the wall!

 

Feel free to debate .... 

[Dennis]

No debate here. I normally do not jump on first gen, I didn't go for the D800, but I have a D850. I think the FTZ is as you stated, just for heart attacks and reaching back a bit. The D850 features do not work on all cameras. Focus stack requires an AF-S, so my 105/2.8 D is not playing.

 

I wasn't thinking of replacing anything with getting a Z. But, the FTZ also limits what lenses it uses as well. I see this tread continuing. It's just a matter of time before Nikon switches. I think their might be a D6, the up coming Olympics for example. But, I also believe there will be a mirror less in that mix as well.

 

F mount will be for DLSR and will be phased out.

 

DX, I believe that is going to be the first to go out. Nikon just doesn't want to say it is dead out load yet.

 

I have a D4, and it tracks better than the D850.

 

I have a D850 and that will be my go to for landscapes and portraits. Might even use it for some wildlife in DX more.

 

The Z will be my travel lens. I'm sure I will be able to "borrow" Cindy Z7 if I think I would need a large sensor. But the Z6 will be the travel body. I have made 5ftx7ft prints using my D4. The z6 will be more than enough to do that kind of work. What I see with the Z7, the sensor is great. 

 

So, at my age, I'm should be pretty well set. It is going to be an interesting few years.

[Art]

I have to agree, it will be interesting moving forward.

 

I don't think Nikon wants to say anything about DX because the D500 is still a very, very good seller and an excellent camera.  So, why kill that until it dies on its own merit.

 

I know the Olympics is a big deal, but I wonder if they are going to surprise with a new Z camera that is just killer technology? That would be a game changer, wouldn't it!

 

I don't think we have long to wait, I expect some big news in January, if it is going to happen.  That will give them time for the summer and the Olympics.

 

I am not sure about the D6, but I could be wrong.  Why would you drop the big coin on a D6 knowing it is already history?  I don't know if I would have gone for the D850 if I knew the Z line was coming out.  The new mount changes everything! 

 

Here, a D5 is $8500, so you have to figure a D6 is going to come in higher.  Why would you bother?  Its not like you can't get by with a D5 for a few more months!

[Dennis]

Well, I know a D6 in our eyes is a stretch. But the big sports shooters and agency will go for it. Can ikon make Z track like a D5 in 1.5 years. They need to get it in their hands before. I guess we will see. Also, the Z mount dont have lenses for the Olympic in their road map. Hard to tell on this.

Yes, had I known the Z was coming, I would have held off the D850. Its done now. And Im happy where Im at.

Yeap, D500 is the last. Nikon can make a Z in DX and hit two birds with on stone, entey level and advanced wildlife shooters. So, yeah, DX DSLR are history.

[Sailjunkie]

Interesting comments, gents.  I agree with both of you.  When it comes time to upgrade from the D810, I will seriously consider mirrorless before choosing another DSLR.

 

However, the re-emergence of film cameras suggests that there may always be some type of niche market for DSLRs.  Not so much nostalgia (um, we ARE talking about DSLRs  ), but for people who don't want to invest in higher-end mirrorless cameras. 

[ericbowles]

I can't think of anything you said that is far off the mark.  Maybe the timeline as I see a bit longer life for DSLR cameras, but that is more related to lens needs rather than fundamentals.

 

I see the big advantage of mirrorless in two area - optical performance and software.  Light weight is coming, but could be delivered with a DSLR and is not unique to mirrorless.  Optical performance is more at the wide end than the long end.  The new lens mount allows faster lenses with better optical performance across the frame.  With longer lenses - 100mm and longer - the difference is much smaller since the field of view is smaller and light is already more directly entering the lens.  Software improvements are much more important with an EVF.  The ability to zoom tighter through the viewfinder for precise timing and focus is a big advantage.  The EVF is better in low light.  Expanded Dynamic Range is likely to be delivered with RAW images.  The heads up display aspect of an EVF is already making its mark with focus peaking, but could go further with focus and exposure.

 

I expect to see the consumer DSLR line shift to mirrorless in the near future.  The DX camera line could shift in the same time frame, but could take longer due to the D500 and the crop factor benefits with longer lenses.  It's very hard to justify 3-4 sets of interchangeable lenses, but there are cost and price advantages for DX lenses compared to FX.  But either way, you need a consumer or economy lens lineup for the Z-mount.

 

The Coolpix lineup seems to be a slam dunk for mirrorless.  

[Leaviathan]

This article supports the theory

 

https://petapixel.co...ath-dslrs-near/

[Leaviathan]

Even though they just came out with a D3500

[Leaviathan]

Why would they step on their own toes only a year after this announcement?

 

https://www.dpreview...r-december-2017

[Dennis]

Customer demands. Even Nikon had to acknowledged that they were losing customers from their base to mirrorless. It rumored that Nikon started development three years ago. and that the body they began with had less features than the one they just released. Is the Z7 (or Z6) the best out there? Well, I think it is standing head to head. The complaints that are out there is more nit picking. Several voices seem to have generated a rumor that Nikon was making a mirrorless camera to replace the DLSR. And so, Nikon didn't step on their own toes, and people loss their cool. 

 

I saw some of the supreme court footage, because they had it on at work. I saw 3 D5's, 3 D850's and about six canons. But, when I looked closer, one of those canon's was really a Sony. First time I saw a Sony used for something other than portrait or landscape. I have seen some sony's at some sports events locally, but mostly Nikon. One of the photog's that I follow and purchase stuff from; drop his canons for sony. The big boys also could see that.

 

So yes, DLSR is on the way out. The question is, when. 

 

The Olympics are just around the corner and in Nikon's own backyard. Japaneses buy local, so a lot of cameras about. Will sports photogs trust a new system for the Olympics? Really, there is only 1.5 years for Nikon to get a D6 level mirrorless in their hands to let them try and get conferrable with it. Also, there are no sports lenses in the road map, their is only a 70-200/2.8 coming out next year. And will Nikon cut off the D850 sales? Again, it would be a nice feather in their cap is folks walked around Japan is a D850, D5'S and a D6.

 

One would have to think that Nikon knows that this offering is expensive. And needs to make entry level Z's. As the Z7/6 is only a band-aid to the bleeding mirrorless is doing to DLSR. Also, Nikon needs a feeder system. Nikon can't really have two lens systems going forever. Realistically, I only see one DLSR coming out of Nikon in the next few years, and that will be either a D5s or a D6. But, like Art said, who will buy a new D6? Sport houses will, that will be a write off.

 

Like Art said; If I had known the Z7 was coming out this year, I would not have bought the D850 this year. But, I'm going to keep it. It's going to be an interesting 1.5 years.

[Leaviathan]

How good of a camera do you really need for Senate confirmation hearings? You'd think there would be plenty of Fuji and Pentax suitable for that, not to mention other brands. When I look at photos of these public events, photo quality isn't something I consider. To me it simply ads a visual to the story.

[Art]

How good of a camera do you really need for Senate confirmation hearings? You'd think there would be plenty of Fuji and Pentax suitable for that, not to mention other brands. When I look at photos of these public events, photo quality isn't something I consider. To me it simply ads a visual to the story.

 

Boy, from where I sit, image quality is everything.  But I have to agree, a Fuji, Pentax, Olympus etc could easily deliver some great grumpy-people images from that Senate confirmation. But, its like anything else, once you start stocking your kit with Nikon, you are not going to substitute an Olympus because you are at a Senate hearing. And, chances are, these guys only carry one brand with them anyway.

[Leaviathan]

 

Boy, from where I sit, image quality is everything.  But I have to agree, a Fuji, Pentax, Olympus etc could easily deliver some great grumpy-people images from that Senate confirmation. But, its like anything else, once you start stocking your kit with Nikon, you are not going to substitute an Olympus because you are at a Senate hearing. And, chances are, these guys only carry one brand with them anyway.

I agree you need pro quality photos, but that isn't what people look for when looking at a story on the news where they're flashing different stills on the screen, for most the story would distract from them studying the photos in depth.

[Dennis]

Well, remember that these photographers do other events. They need shooting speed, even for grumpy people. In these positions, They don't have a lot of time to grab a shot. When things get moving and crowds form around the grumpy VIPs, You life your camera over every one and shoot one handed. I was actually surprised to see an D850. But, then again, these folks have two or three camera's around their necks. Nevertheless, it is what it is.

 

There are wedding shooters out there that say, I can't live without two card slots, that second slot is my backup. And I know, and I was one of them, a pro would have two or three camera's as backup, and a assistant or two that also have two or three cameras on them. So, everyone has different needs. Do I need a fast pro camera for a wedding, yes. When the bride and groom comes down the aisle together, everyone swarms them. You only have less than seconds to capture them. But, then, I charged $3-$5k a wedding. If you miss them kissing, what will a second card slot do for you?

[ericbowles]

Art makes a great point. For the advanced/pro market, image quality is a huge benefit of the bigger mount - and mirrorless facilitates a bigger mount.  For the amateur market - and for the volume markets - small size and light weight with good ergonomics is important.  For some of that market, a consumer camera is the entry point for a future advanced/pro customer.

 

The D3500 body is still 38% lighter than the Z7/Z6.  The D3500 only weighs 21 grams more than a Sony A6000 mirrorless - less than the 31 grams of change in my pocket or my 37 gm car key and remote.  But the D3500 is 10% cheaper and newer technology.  I can't imagine a consumer would understand the difference - or care unless they are buying based on marketing rather than specs and real world use.

 

I think a consumer will consider choosing Nikon or Canon based on high end image quality, but the photos they produce are still consumer level.  So what they really need is great software in the camera to overcome mistakes and make their photos look better.  That's the big thing that the iPhone cameras have done.  Full Auto mode with default settings needs to be exceptional - and overcome the dozens of potential novice mistakes without a lot of complicated scene modes.  I can't tell you the number of times I've stood next to someone with a D850 and had them remark their iPhone produces a better photo.  They know why - and can make the edits needed - but the average consumer buyer might not understand or care.

[Dennis]

So ture Eric! 

[Art]

Well put, Eric!

[CedarBranchNikon]

I just researched the mirrorless camera and from what I understand there is no eye-level viewfinder.    You see an "electronic" image on a screen. Right? Like a low-priced digital camera? I own a GE (???) digital that gives you a choice between screen or viewfinder, and the zoom is through the viewfinder until you zoom out so far then you go "electronic image". I would like to think there will always be a market for DSLR with so many great used cameras and lenses out there. It will come down to DSLR or phone camera for most and the "pros" will be using mirrorless, IMO. BTW, I loved using my inexpensive Nikon 55-200 at Walt Disney World. I also observed several people still shooing film. By the count, I shot 621 photos although I will delete some and do a lot of editing. It is times like this I love digital. Can you imagine processing that much film. Ya'll have a goodern.
 

[Leaviathan]

With no viewfinder how does one get creative? Especially in those situations when you want the subject to be a hair out of focus in favor of having what's behind it in focus

[Art]

The viewfinder in the Z line is awesome!  Trust me.

 

I did not get to do a micro analysis of it, but it is bright and huge and very comfortable to work with.  I didn't notice anything at all out of the ordinary.

[Leaviathan]

I would be worried about having to use reading glasses to focus on it, to make sure the correct part of the photo will be in focus. If the screen is large enough it might not be an issue.

[CedarBranchNikon]

Just curious, does anyone make DSLR's other than Nikon and Canon? While in WDW, those were the only cameras I saw. I will also say I am surprised at the quality of photos taken by smart phones. I carry an inexpensive Galaxy Grand Prime and the camera function appears to be on the same level as an Instamatic 104, if you are old enough to remember them. My biggest complaint about phone cameras is while trying to use a "real" camera in a crowd, people are constantly sticking their phone right in your field of view. 

[james23p]

Pentax does and Sony sort of the A992 but its the only one.

Jim

[james23p]

Oh I think Leica still makes.

Jim

[Art]

I would be worried about having to use reading glasses to focus on it, to make sure the correct part of the photo will be in focus. If the screen is large enough it might not be an issue.

 

You don't need glasses.  The view finders today have Diopter adjustments.  You turn the dial until you see the numbers in the viewfinder clearly and you are all set up.

[Leaviathan]

Pentax does and Sony sort of the A992 but its the only one.

Jim

Sigma SD1

[justshootit]

I think it's a natural progression since the market seems to be barrelling in that direction anyway. Im not crazy about the fact that my older AF-D lenses are becoming obsolete, but I've been thinking about upgrading anyway, and the only lenses I'd really need are a 14-24-ish lens, a 24-70 and an 85/1.8. If I go mirrorless, I'll wait and get those in the Z mount. I really hope to see lenses as small and light as the current 50/1.8 in the Z-mount.

I mentioned in another post that there is rumor of new sensors in mirrorless cameras that will allow flash sync at any shutter speed without the need for high speed sync. I love that idea as high speed sync has inherent power loss and color shift problems and is generally a pain in the butt as are it's cousins hi-sync and hypersync.

[ericbowles]

I would be worried about having to use reading glasses to focus on it, to make sure the correct part of the photo will be in focus. If the screen is large enough it might not be an issue.

 

I handled the Z7 and Z6 today.  The EVF is much better if you use reading glasses.  You just adjust the diopter if needed, and everything you can see on the LCD is visible through the EVF.  There is no more taking reading glasses on and off.  I hate using LiveView because I have to put on my glasses - but with a diopter adjusted EVF, you can see clearly without glasses.

[Leaviathan]

I would have to check it out, sounds promising though.

[justshootit]

Hmmm. One thing I'm seeing that bugs me. A 50/1.8 in the Z mount is $500 bucks. The AFS VERSION IS $200. Is it really that much better or is Nikon price gouging??