I like the idea that Nikon sees the D6 as its ultimate expression of what a DSLR can be in the same way as the F6 was its ultimate film SLR. This also gives them the opportunity of a four year buffer (ie: 2024 Olympics) to develop new tele-lenses for the Z-mount and refine their ideals for a professional mirrorless body. Remember, people are still using ten year old DSLRs reliably today and the current crop will still be operating ten years from now, DSLRs are only obsolete from a fashion point of view when you consider the quality of the photos that can still be taken with them.
Nikon so far for me has knocked it out of the park. Producing a new system fairly priced and up there in quality with anything on the market (lots above). The 1.8's are far better than the F-mount counterparts in every way including the 1.4's IMO. The introduction of just 1.8 lenses gets people into the system without spending $2K+ on intro lenses which in turn drives the system forward. The quality is there which no one can deny and the Wide 1.4's/1.2's will come but at a price not everyone can handle. In a company, blasting the consumer with only super expensive 5% market lenses would be a bad business decision. I love the new system and the lenses. Focal length has more affect on image than aperature for what 90% of people (even most pros) actually do. I have the 24-70 F4 & F2.8, 50 1.8 and 85 1.8 (on the way). All are amazing compared to my f-mount glass except for a select few pieces (IE: 105 1.4 & 200F2). Cant wait to see what is to come. It can only get better. Love the thoughts!
You use to buy a 1.4 because you had to stop lenses down to get good performance, but if the 1.8 is 100% wide open that's all you really need on a full frame. But with that said, the 24mm 1.4 GM is best wide angle lens I ever owned, and the best lens per dollar. It is nearly flawless, ultra sharp, light, top end build quality, small, and at $1400 it is the benchmark.
DSLR's are declining in sales rapidly, and All the Mfg's know it. Yes, there will be die hards that keep some bodies, but many are moving to Mirrorless especially Nikon, because there new line of Z lens's are superior to there existing F-Mount.
@@jfphotography69 I'll give Nikon 2-Year's and you will see they will have telephotos for sports and wildlife, and a new very high res. FF Mirrorless where the EVF will be better for all photography over OVF.
I'll bet dollars to donuts that within the next 2 years you'll see a virtual disappearance of Canon and Nikon DSLR models released. This last run of them will likely be the last. The developments in mirrorless is so off the hook and will be even more so over this next year that I don't see there being an exception.
@@leerothman7570 that's not an argument, no one knows what will happen in two years, except you of course. The DSLR is not going anywhere anytime soon.
RF lenses are stunning, but other than 35 1.8 RF, most lenses they released are over $2K and are giant. Nikon's delivery of smaller lighter and less expensive lenses, at least, at first, makes better sense for early adapters.
If that is what you think then I suggest that you google the Canon RF 24-105mm f/4L IS USM It is currently selling for $900 (reg $1100) and has excellent reviews and very versatile and great lens for an early adopter.
@@Tim596100 I had Canon RF 24-105 when I had Canon R, but I had trouble with it finding autofocus on a face looking directly at me from approximately 10 feet. Perhaps it was a camera issue rather than lens issue. But you are right about the price. Other than 24-105 and 35 1.8 and perhaps 24-240, any other lenses under $2K?
"any other lenses under $2k?" Yes, decades of cheapie second hand EF lenses that can be adapted with the adapter that can be bundled with the EOS-R. I don't know why you think Canon should focus on cheapie RF lenses first when people can do that with their old or someone else's old second hand lenses. What they are doing is focusing on taking advantage of what the new RF mount is capable of doing which wasn't possible before (basically because the old mount had to accommodate a mirror which the new one doesn't). A cheap RF lens would perform similar to cheap EF lens. One version of the EF to RF adapter even allows you to use filters like an ND between the lens and sensor. As for the focusing issue you mentioned, none of the reviews mention that so I can only conclude it was an isolated case or user error but probably not lens related in any event.
I agree, Nikon are underrated in what they have done. Small, light, ibis, great ergonomics and small light lenses. It really is the jack of all trades.
I am very interested in the 24 1.8 S, to add to my 35, 50 1.8 and soon 85 1.8 S primes. The 24-70 2.8 S is from all my tests simply the best zoom I have seen in and mount or brand. The consistent characteristics between all these lenses is sharpness corner to corner wide open. I don't know of any other brand or mount that is better. I have a large collection of F mount fast primes and 2.8 zooms, all costing far more than the S lenses that come close to the optical performance of the S lenses. For example, I have both the workhorse 24-70 2.8 G and E version Nikkor which were used daily for years. Both the Z mount 24-70 2.8 and f/4 are optically superior, lighter lower cost and lighter with better weather sealing. When the 70-200 f/2.8 is released, assuming that optical superiority of the S lenses is extended to the 70-200 it means I can sell off all my collection of F mount while they still have value. I have a few other lenses from Tamron and Sigma such as the 15-30 2.8 G2 and 50 1.4 ART which will also go away since my S 14-30 and 50 1.8 S are better, I will then retire the D8x0's After the 2.0 firmware update, I had no advantage with the D850 which I considered to be the best DSLR ever made. The focusing better in darker conditions with the Z6/7 than any camera I ever used at -6ev. The initial bashing of the Z cameras by RUclips gurus was a blessing, it forced me to see they were all clueless of how we really use cameras for work or play and how feel-in-hand, intuitive controls for full control in the dark, and ruggedness trump length of feature list and unsubscribed from a dozen. Their credibility was killed off by the irrational bashing of what I found to be the best choice. They all targeted single slot and lacking Eye AF and conflated SD with XQD which was as technically the equivalent to thinking 1980 5.25 floppy disk and PCIe+ bus SSD were identical in reliability and intelligence. That seemed to be intentional deception or astounding ignorance, in either case enough to discount anything they said about any other subject. They all ignored the low level of build quality and lack of weather sealing of the cameras they were pushing that topped off the suspicion of their honesty and/or expertise. After using them all, the only two brands of FF mirrorless I can recommend are the Z Nikons and Panasonic S1 series. The S1 are much heavier, however, heavier than full-frame DSLRs. Both series feature class-leading build and handling plus gorgeous EVF. The Z mount and the Nikon EVF broke down any sales resistance and pro body DSLR contentment I had. My only mirrorless experience was my friends who had bought into the Sony line. They spent more time fiddling with menus than shooting when out together shooting events or landscapes. I was very content to ignore mirrorless as toys after one of them had to replace his a7xx and a7xxx each because he had a habit of shooting outdoors and sometimes it rained.
I have a Z6 and the 24-70mm F4 Kit lens, I came from a D750, and D850 and a mixture of Nikon lens's and Tamron lens's. Other than the 24-70mm f2.8 Z lens, I think they are fairly priced, I'm selling off all my F-Mount lens, except for a 200-500 F5.6 I have, that I love! Why am I, these new Z Lens's are just terrific! Wow, on the Colors, Wow, on the contrast! When you nail the exposure on either Z6/Z7 and use the Z lens's, Oh that 50mm, the images have that 3D depth to them I can't get that with the previous, F-mount and camera bodies. Plus, you get 5-Axis IBIS, Not 3-Axis VR! I think Nikon's Z mount also works very well with there newer sensor's, Even though you want to say that in a FF lens using the same aperture from one mount to another, the exposure and depth of field should be the same. But, I think that on the Z lens's both the aperture and the exposure, and depth of field are better. I find getting exposure right or how I want it, is just so much easier with the Z6 as compared to the D850 I had. I'm all over the upcoming 24mm f1.8, I'm going Astro Man! Great perspective three Blind Guy! Sony Baloney, Rock it Nikon!
Absolutely agree. Nikon have made the z system accessible for the hobbyist. RF lenses and g lenses are just ridiculous in size and price. And no-one is going to see and or care about the difference between 1.8 and 1.4.
D6=f5 last of it's kind, the reason the d6 exists is solely because the z series won't be ready as of the Olympics. So I agree to the point of preventing defection. As to the possibility of people going back to dslr I think some will, but only in similar numbers to those who still shooting film over dslr meaning there will be no longterm development or market for them. Personally I think the d850 was intended to be the last dslr ever produced and the d6 is an apology/consolation prize for the lack a mirrorless equivalent, but the specs will bare that out.
I think you raise two particularly important points in this, and ones that are often considered counter-intuitive, so that makes them interesting. The first is, why 1:1.4 on a lens made for digital? Because isn’t 1:1.8 enough? Yes it is, at least on full frame, the smaller formats being a different matter. 1:1.4 is a legacy from film days. Fast lenses were an important part of a pro’s kit bag because it gave them an edge in getting the picture when light was low, and might have made the difference between hand-holding at 1/15 and 1/30. The trade-off was that performance at maximum aperture in these film-era lenses was almost always terrible, unsharp across the frame and loaded with chromatic aberrations - even with very expensive lenses, like the Nikkor 35mm 1:1.4 AIS, which I think is still in the catalogue. So a legacy 1:1.4 didn’t become fully useful until 1:2, but that didn’t matter if you were printing in a newspaper or a low-res CMYK colour magazine. Perversely, modern 1:1.4 lenses are invariably very good at maximum aperture: but with all the usefulness of variable ISO (or gain), you don’t really need them, yet they still seem to carry the cachet they did in the old days, in spite of being bulky and expensive. You also comment, significantly, that just maybe the Nikon D6 is still a DSLR because that is what pros still trust to bring home the bacon. There are many advantages to EVF and we all know what they are. But a news or sports pro spends his working days waiting an eternity for a shot in which the window of opportunity is seconds or even less than a second: the VIP passing in his limousine, the person coming out of court flanked by policemen or minders, the footballer leaping into the air to score or celebrate a goal. His camera has to awake and be fully ready in fractions of a second, because things happen quickly. He has pre-set his camera to give him the best advantage and then it’s down to trust, and trust, as we know, is important - it’s why he spends five grand on a camera. The last link in the chain is framing the picture, again, all trust, experience, skill and reaction. And in that situation, a clear, bright optical picture inside its frame, with no other distractions, is all he needs. It’s all he ever needs.
It makes sense to develop the D6 as their last DSLR for the olympics since the pro glass is owned by most professionals. The z mount is not mature enough yet. Dont get me wrong, I love the route Nikon is taking with the Z series. So much that I switched from my Canon DSLR. Picked up the kit (24-70) for 2000€ and a 50mm f.18 for 330€ with discount. Canons EOS R alone is almost this price, without a lens. There are no pro mirrorless bodies from these two companies yet, so why do you need pro glas right away? Canons glas costs like 2000€ per lens and the only possible body to pair that with is a semi professional EOS R? By the time these mirrorless pro bodies come out, Nikon will have the zoom trinity and some fast primes (50mm 1.2 e.g.) avaiable. Furthermore the current state of the z mount lures in lots of new customers. The average non pro enthusiast doesnt need a f1.2 or 1.4 for 2000€, let alone for travel. I prefer light and compact lenses that are easy to carry and cheaper. Yet they offer outstanding quality. My 300€ 50mm f1.8 is sharper and faster than anything i have owned. Do i wanna pay 1000€ more for 1.4? Absolutely not and most people will not care to either. Love the route of creating affordable cameras and lenses for a new mount first rather than going all pro with 2000-3000€ lenses. Canon does produce impressive lenses but this will get only a few pros excited that actually afford them for work. Nikon represents the path on how to attract new customers and especially young people, that value affordablility and weight far more than an extra half a stop of light. Good job Nikon, love my Z6 to death and certainly makes walking/travelling around much more easy while still being super sharp and reliable.
Sharpest video I have seen on You Tube, thanks for the description. The Z series have incredible character and sharpness to the lenses. You are the second Pro to recommend the Z series.
No matter who recommends or what: If I would be a pro, I would never buy a camera with just one card slot, no vertical grip option and only one tiny battery in the body.
My favorite Internet scholar Mr. Brownstone! Good to see you man! Jose from Puerto Rico here. I think it's smart that Nikon is moving in parallel with their mirror-less lineup when the D6 was announced. The gap is closing, but their are faithful legacy users of the DSLR's that need this ruggedness. Surely Canon is coming with their top of the line DSLR soon.
Nikon only need to put Hybrid EVF, activate infinite buffer, add few more Pixels, improve more the 3D tracking and It will be a hit. D5 is already a great camera but there are still room for improvement.
One of your best talents is framing my man. The ability to size up your scene for its elements and recapitulate them in a hierarchical manner such that it makes for compelling narrative. This is not only what photography is truly about, but it's what a videographer or by all means a RUclipsr ought to try and aspire to. Bravo
Hugh, thank you for urging photographers to seriously, seriously weigh the pros of 1.8 glass vs. 1.4 glass or even exotic "halo products." Of course, as you stated, everyone's mileage may vary. But still, any photographer who grabs a handful of 1.8 lenses for his or her bag is totally good to go! The money savings, the size/weight advantage...people, you're golden! The 1.8 field is better than excellent. You can't go wrong when you just get out there and HIT IT!
I’m thinking that a D6 might be in my future. I have a nice collection of high end glass in the F mount. And will probably have the opportunity to add to it as people upgrade to the Z mount. For me, it’s about the lenses not the camera. I don’t need to hurry after the latest camera to achieve interesting, quality, results.
WoW. The quality of your content, both video and audio are just brilliant. Please teach us mortals your lighting...AT LEAST. Thank you very much for your time and effort.
Hi Hugh, has something changed with your audio? One of your many qualities that I love and appreciate is the rich timbre of your voice. It''s not been the same for around 2 months. Please can we have your previous mic / audio system back?! Simon
From everything I've seen, it appears that the Z-mount 1.8 S lenses are as sharp as the F-mount 1.4 G lenses. I'll slowly migrate over to the Z series beginning in the next 6 months. As soon as Nikon has another price drop/sale, I'll probably grab the Z6 to compliment my D850 and D500.
Jeff Self Photography hi Jeff debating to upgrade my D7100 to either D500 or XT3. I been shooting all my life for fun, most of my clicks come from my travel and shooting my 10 yrs old sports. Any input I will be grateful
I've had a D3200 for about 3 years now and there are a number of limitations I'm running into because of its entry-level features. So I've been considering upgrading, and you're dead on, I'm having a difficult debate about whether I should go DSLR with high-end APSC or full frame or go just full frame mirrorless with the Z series. It's a lot more expensive, but with how you and a few other professionals are raving about the camera, it just might be the way to go despite it's relatively slow FPS in AF for stills.
I was just glad to see the 20mm 1.8 on the roadmap. So few makers have that focal length represented with a bright aperture, not even canon. I'm not an astrophotographer, but I know people will throw a fit if coma is not well-corrected on that lens.
The Nikon Z series cameras interest me more than the Sony cameras. There are some things that prevents me going the Nikon route: a) I have quite a few expensive UHS-II cards I will not be able to use, b) no battery grip, and c) no 12-24 zoom (Nikon seems stuck in 14-24). What I do like about the Nikon Z cameras: a) I can use my FE-mount Voigtlander 10 and any other FE-mount glass I might want to acquire (maybe the 12-24 even), b) focus stacking \ bracketing (seriously why doesn't Sony provide this?), c) thin filter stack for using M-mount glass, and d) high res LCD screen (something that Fuji and Sony both are bad at and it is something that my eyes really notice).
You post some great questions for sure, we live in interesting times for photography. I still remember the old film camera’s I started with, boy have we come a long way.
Thank you for the video. I hope Nikon does very well. As I understand it, the photographic and video drama is analogous to a seesaw. There are iterative improvements between companies. For what I do, I really like Nikon's 14-30 lens that allows for screw on ND and CP filters. But, I switched to Sony before that advancement. After using Nikon for about 15 years, Sony is not perfect, but it meets my needs and appears to me to be advancing the science of processing light into images faster than Cannon or Nikon. I can't afford to be on the leading/bleeding edge but regardless of which brand one buys into, advancement helps us all, regardless of brand affiliation, and improves our ability to convey and sell information.
@Cascade Stream Solutions Yeah, to meet the seesaw effect head on back then, I owned both Canon and Nikon DSLR (with two sets of lens trinity) to ensure that I could pick the best offerings from either company at any time. However, Sony was liked Intel with CPU, Nikon may have to follow Leica's path to offer better/cheaper products around the sensors and electronics.
I love my D850 but I am frustrated that while it is the best stills camera I have ever owned auto focus in video is not as good as I think a camera of it's quality and expense should be, so for the D6 I would like to see a camera as good at stills as video and I will definitely get one
I have a total "yes" vote for pellicle solution. Sony's SLTs were slightly ahead in that tech curve but generated no buzz. A99ii was a clear option for me but also a clear dead end for support.
The 24mn has a disappointing UK price £250 dearer than US price at $1000 it had been at the top of my budget but at £1049. ($1284) it's just to expensive.
Having extensively used the D500 and the A9 with birds I'd now say that Nikon has the capacity to produce a mirrorless with AF that's more reliable than Sony's. Sony has gone for quantity (a bazillion points when all you need is one) and AI smarts for tracking which several of us bird nuts find unreliable and not even the factory recommends it in this application. A mirrorless D500 with 24 mp sensor, burst buffering and IBIS - yes please.
Faster, better, more, more, more. I was in a camera store in 2016 when the Nikon D850 was just coming out. One of the veteran salesmen said to me, "We are selling the D850 as fast as we can get them, plus we have a long backorder. I have never seen anything like it." Exactly a mere 3 years ago. Now, the Internets has virtually relegated a DSLR to being the equivalent of shooting with the first 35mm autofocus camera rolled out in the mid-1980's by Minolta. Your grandfather might have paid cash for his first house, almost certainly for his first few cars. Imagine the look on his face if you told him you buy a new $700 phone every couple of years and a new camera body (and lenses and adapters) every 4 or 5 years. He'd probably tell you to just use the old Nikon F3 he has in the basement. Yeah, he hasn't updated the firmware in it, but it still works.
Interesting that a new DSLR rubs some people the wrong way, Nikon already makes Mirrorless so why all the hate that NIkon still makes DSLRs??. Even now Im looking at a D850 as my next camera not a Mirrorless.
I think, on a 24 mm 1.8 is plenty shallow enough as the subjects are not close up and ibis bridges the gap for speed often.Also it gives a decent gap to the expected z mount 1.2's
Canon, where is IBIS, where are affordable primes, where is second card slot, where is joystick, where is your DSLRish ergonomics? By the time Nikon release Z6 II Canon will release a competitor to Z6. What a shame.
Ordering the 24mm soon, still waiting for the 85mm, and am looking forward to owning both. As I understand it the D6 will have dual cfexpress slots, have IBIS, and be faster. If you could add autofocus capabilities to rival Sony it could be an excellent camera. As for the 120-300mm f2.8 that could be an epic lens for sports.
I think you nailed it Hugh with that last comment -- Nikon needs more time to develop the technology to catch Sony's A9, let alone the A9II, and Nikon are reacting in the only way they can by relying on their current knowledge and tech i.e. the "man with a hammer" proverb. This assumption is supported, I think, by the fact that here we are almost a year later after the Z7 was released and despite one significant firmware update adding eye-af, the Z7 and Z6's AF-C still cannot come close to competing with current Sony A7 offerings. As you said, the race is on. I think the D6 will represent the pinnacle of DSLR development for Nikon, but ironically it will not sell well and it will not do anything for Nikon's future.
A new sub here. Anyone that can captivate me talking about something so bland as photography gear with a storytelling charisma of Morgan Freeman and I'm in! haha Great content bud :)
Thanks for a great video! The black and white theme this time around is kinda cool. I'm always impressed with Nikon dslr's. There's an 80's spy movie spoof called "Gotcha" where a teenager runs off to Germany with his dad's camera that he pronounces the "Knee-Kon". LOL. While Nikon has many merits, I'm overwhelmed by the sheer majority of professional photographers I see everywhere using Canon dslr's with EF lenses. As a Mac user going back decades and an Amiga user before that, I can attest to the frustration of visiting local stores for parts, software or accessories and finding little or no support for my brand. I see Canon dslr lenses and support everywhere -even my inkjet printer at home was a Canon for a while- and Nikon camera lenses are just not as prevalent. Canon EF lenses are becoming the industry standard in video, film and television and the variety of EF cinema glass is staggering. I respect Nikon, but it's a shrinking underdog out there.
Some interesting poits as always. I have been using Nikon DSLR's since 2007 and had some ups & downs along the way. I think the D6 will be a monster DSLR; built like a tank, fast and accurate AF system, fast burst rate & deep buffer, super long battery life etc. It is aimed at pro sports shooters for the 2020 Olympics so although some speculate it may have IBIS and some sort of hybrid optical/electronic viewfinder I'm not so sure-too risky for things to go wrong at this stage before a major sporting event. I am just gonna stick with my Nikon DSLR gear for now and wait to see how the mirrorless market expands over the next few years before jumping fully into it.
Nikon is doing well chugging out an entire new product line and lenses to support it with the budget they have, as well as keeping the legacy line going. Sony have substantially more money, (yes I know the photography line is a different division of Sony like Nikon microscopes are different than the imaging division, but they do "borrow" from other divisions and the "company" as a whole). Of course it doesn't tell the whole story but just look at the two companies 2019 revenue : Sony, ¥8.665 trillion 2019 Nikon, ¥708.7 billion 2019
SIGMA must have come up with an excellent lens for Nikon to come along and copy it. But their version of the 120-300mm will be nearly 3x the price. I personally own the Sigma 120-300mm 2.8 and it's an excellent piece of glass for $3500.
Patron subber here I think DSLR have there place still , although DSLM is future but still they have their place , Go Nikon, btw great video, very sharp and 😍
Hey, Harry! Was talking about this very subject with a friend today. DSLRs will probably wind up the way film cameras are today: loved by a few (with good reason), but it will be a very small niche. Unless, of course, we run out of rare earth metals. 😬
There may be multiple reasons but I think one reason is that there has been a recent trend promoting the idea that blurry backgrounds are better. But this isn't entirely true. A picture isn't necessarily better when shot at a wider aperture. Other elements makes a good image such as light, composition, mood etc. Professionals employ these principles for compelling imagery. When looking at fashion images for example, photographers don't always shoot at wide apertures. When shooting, I try to vary my aperture settings to create variety as well as to provide a sense of place for the viewer.
I’m really excited to see what Nikon will do with their next mirrorless camera’s and hope they keep giving software updates. I’m close to pulling the trigger on a z6 and I’m glad Nikon is giving excellent lenses at great sizes but do wish they were a tad more affordable
As this video points out, the S-series lenses are as cheap or cheaper then all other brands and deliver better results. Quit moaning about price and go get a second job!
The Sony fe 24 1.4 GM is faster, lighter and smaller than the Nikkor. It is the sharpest prime I have used. Singing the praises of the Nikkor 24 1.8 seems premature if you have not used it.
@@3BMEP You were clear but also noted that the 24 1.4 was more expensive. Would you as a professional pay more money for a better photograph? wouldn't this be the deciding factor for you?
dematson The deciding factors would be “how much better?” (given how one defines better) as well as “at what price?” (given how one defines price). We aren’t just talking lenses, we’re talking systems.
@@3BMEP Yes we are. One reason I was an early adopter of Sony Mirrorless is because I am old (age 75), the gear is light and I do wildlife and landscape photography in the Sierra Nevada. In other words, I backpack my gear in. I will never be able to haul a medium or large format camera into the mountains like Ed Cooper so I see the A7R4 and a lens like the 24 1.4 as the closest I can get. For my money, his photographs of the Sierra Nevada are better than Galen Rowell. His film photographs were scanned and are huge digital files.
dematson 75 is the new 55! 😊 I understand your points - well taken. But this is also precisely why the Z system is increasingly interesting to me, and precisely why the 24/1.8 is exciting IF the IQ is as I hope (though there’s no denying the 24/1.4GM is the new AF benchmark). First: what proportion of your landscape shots are done wide open? Second: how much better will your images be at 61mp vs 45.7 or 42? Three: what other lenses are you bringing with you? Four: do you usually use a tripod, or is a fair amount of your work hand-held? How often will you use EyeAF or tracking AF given your landscape proclivities? The Z7 is 80g lighter than the ‘IV, $500 cheaper (vs only 5g difference for the two lenses and another $400 saved if one were to buy the 50/1.8). Z7 IBIS is better. It feels better - at least in my hand. This is not to knock your choice - it’s a massively competent and potent combo, and I’m thinking about the a7R IV myself given that we already own 5 E-mount lenses. But for anyone whose utility curve veers toward practical value and for whom these numbers are a stretch, $900 is transportation to or lodging while out in the Sierra Nevada range. It’s a lighter stronger tripod. A better backpack...
Hmm. Nikon respects its audience? Not it's telephoto shooters I'd say. DX? Nothing over 300mm. Sorry buddy, your more agile and compact body has to wear a full frame lens. Tough about the extra weight and cost. Same story with the Z line but with the added penalty of an adapter. In time we can expect to see a supertelephoto zoom and that's it. It's a half baked line-up, like the Z bodies are half baked compared to the mirrorless competition. No wonder sales numbers have been below Nikon's expectations.
Twice as expensive as A9...priorities are making money & obviously not providing a high priced camera normal people can buy a la A9 bcuz let's face it even if Nikon prices it $2,500 to $3,000 more than A9II it's a no brainer
@@3BMEP in previous videos you've complained about the cost & lack of 1.2 to 1.4 of Sony's 55m 1.8, 24mm 1.8, and 35mm 2.8 which are optically impressive. Yet all are near or around $1,000. Now that Nikon is following sony's path you praise it. Its ok. Not really gonna make a difference for me. I've used those lenses in for professional work. Clients love the results.
William Davis Ah. I think you’ve missed the point that the issue for me was that the Sony 24 and 35 1.8s are APS-C coverage lenses with FF FOV & DOF of approximately 2.8 - like the FF 35/2.8 FE. I shoot these FOVs at DOF equivalents of f/2, 1.8 or 1.4 often enough that these particular optics didn’t make sense for what I do. The Sigma 16/1.4 addressed my concern for a FF FOV & DOF equivalent of 24/2 on our a6400 - about what the Nikon 24/1.8 is on the Z6 or 7 - so I bought one. 👍🏻
It means the end of the mirrorless camera. It means Nikon is getting serious with its camera and lens business once again. It means Canon will have to update its 1DX camera. 👍 The Z system has been a total failure. As a consumer, I would not buy the current Z cameras.
I like the idea that Nikon sees the D6 as its ultimate expression of what a DSLR can be in the same way as the F6 was its ultimate film SLR. This also gives them the opportunity of a four year buffer (ie: 2024 Olympics) to develop new tele-lenses for the Z-mount and refine their ideals for a professional mirrorless body. Remember, people are still using ten year old DSLRs reliably today and the current crop will still be operating ten years from now, DSLRs are only obsolete from a fashion point of view when you consider the quality of the photos that can still be taken with them.
Nikon so far for me has knocked it out of the park. Producing a new system fairly priced and up there in quality with anything on the market (lots above). The 1.8's are far better than the F-mount counterparts in every way including the 1.4's IMO. The introduction of just 1.8 lenses gets people into the system without spending $2K+ on intro lenses which in turn drives the system forward. The quality is there which no one can deny and the Wide 1.4's/1.2's will come but at a price not everyone can handle. In a company, blasting the consumer with only super expensive 5% market lenses would be a bad business decision. I love the new system and the lenses. Focal length has more affect on image than aperature for what 90% of people (even most pros) actually do. I have the 24-70 F4 & F2.8, 50 1.8 and 85 1.8 (on the way). All are amazing compared to my f-mount glass except for a select few pieces (IE: 105 1.4 & 200F2). Cant wait to see what is to come. It can only get better. Love the thoughts!
You use to buy a 1.4 because you had to stop lenses down to get good performance, but if the 1.8 is 100% wide open that's all you really need on a full frame. But with that said, the 24mm 1.4 GM is best wide angle lens I ever owned, and the best lens per dollar. It is nearly flawless, ultra sharp, light, top end build quality, small, and at $1400 it is the benchmark.
For the mirrorless crowd out there, DSLRs are not going away anytime soon.
DSLR's are declining in sales rapidly, and All the Mfg's know it. Yes, there will be die hards that keep some bodies, but many are moving to Mirrorless especially Nikon, because there new line of Z lens's are superior to there existing F-Mount.
@@LeonKolenda not for sports and wildlife photography.
@@jfphotography69 I'll give Nikon 2-Year's and you will see they will have telephotos for sports and wildlife, and a new very high res. FF Mirrorless where the EVF will be better for all photography over OVF.
I'll bet dollars to donuts that within the next 2 years you'll see a virtual disappearance of Canon and Nikon DSLR models released. This last run of them will likely be the last. The developments in mirrorless is so off the hook and will be even more so over this next year that I don't see there being an exception.
@@leerothman7570 that's not an argument, no one knows what will happen in two years, except you of course. The DSLR is not going anywhere anytime soon.
I'd take the D6 and a couple of lenses anywhere. The Sonys? I wouldn't venture out of state with any of them.
RF lenses are stunning, but other than 35 1.8 RF, most lenses they released are over $2K and are giant. Nikon's delivery of smaller lighter and less expensive lenses, at least, at first, makes better sense for early adapters.
It's like canon want early adopters to be the canon pro users while nikon tries to please everyone.
If that is what you think then I suggest that you google the Canon RF 24-105mm f/4L IS USM
It is currently selling for $900 (reg $1100) and has excellent reviews and very versatile and great lens for an early adopter.
@@Tim596100 I had Canon RF 24-105 when I had Canon R, but I had trouble with it finding autofocus on a face looking directly at me from approximately 10 feet. Perhaps it was a camera issue rather than lens issue. But you are right about the price. Other than 24-105 and 35 1.8 and perhaps 24-240, any other lenses under $2K?
"any other lenses under $2k?"
Yes, decades of cheapie second hand EF lenses that can be adapted with the adapter that can be bundled with the EOS-R. I don't know why you think Canon should focus on cheapie RF lenses first when people can do that with their old or someone else's old second hand lenses. What they are doing is focusing on taking advantage of what the new RF mount is capable of doing which wasn't possible before (basically because the old mount had to accommodate a mirror which the new one doesn't).
A cheap RF lens would perform similar to cheap EF lens. One version of the EF to RF adapter even allows you to use filters like an ND between the lens and sensor.
As for the focusing issue you mentioned, none of the reviews mention that so I can only conclude it was an isolated case or user error but probably not lens related in any event.
I agree, Nikon are underrated in what they have done. Small, light, ibis, great ergonomics and small light lenses. It really is the jack of all trades.
I am very interested in the 24 1.8 S, to add to my 35, 50 1.8 and soon 85 1.8 S primes. The 24-70 2.8 S is from all my tests simply the best zoom I have seen in and mount or brand. The consistent characteristics between all these lenses is sharpness corner to corner wide open. I don't know of any other brand or mount that is better. I have a large collection of F mount fast primes and 2.8 zooms, all costing far more than the S lenses that come close to the optical performance of the S lenses. For example, I have both the workhorse 24-70 2.8 G and E version Nikkor which were used daily for years. Both the Z mount 24-70 2.8 and f/4 are optically superior, lighter lower cost and lighter with better weather sealing. When the 70-200 f/2.8 is released, assuming that optical superiority of the S lenses is extended to the 70-200 it means I can sell off all my collection of F mount while they still have value. I have a few other lenses from Tamron and Sigma such as the 15-30 2.8 G2 and 50 1.4 ART which will also go away since my S 14-30 and 50 1.8 S are better, I will then retire the D8x0's
After the 2.0 firmware update, I had no advantage with the D850 which I considered to be the best DSLR ever made. The focusing better in darker conditions with the Z6/7 than any camera I ever used at -6ev.
The initial bashing of the Z cameras by RUclips gurus was a blessing, it forced me to see they were all clueless of how we really use cameras for work or play and how feel-in-hand, intuitive controls for full control in the dark, and ruggedness trump length of feature list and unsubscribed from a dozen. Their credibility was killed off by the irrational bashing of what I found to be the best choice.
They all targeted single slot and lacking Eye AF and conflated SD with XQD which was as technically the equivalent to thinking 1980 5.25 floppy disk and PCIe+ bus SSD were identical in reliability and intelligence. That seemed to be intentional deception or astounding ignorance, in either case enough to discount anything they said about any other subject. They all ignored the low level of build quality and lack of weather sealing of the cameras they were pushing that topped off the suspicion of their honesty and/or expertise.
After using them all, the only two brands of FF mirrorless I can recommend are the Z Nikons and Panasonic S1 series. The S1 are much heavier, however, heavier than full-frame DSLRs. Both series feature class-leading build and handling plus gorgeous EVF. The Z mount and the Nikon EVF broke down any sales resistance and pro body DSLR contentment I had. My only mirrorless experience was my friends who had bought into the Sony line. They spent more time fiddling with menus than shooting when out together shooting events or landscapes. I was very content to ignore mirrorless as toys after one of them had to replace his a7xx and a7xxx each because he had a habit of shooting outdoors and sometimes it rained.
I have a Z6 and the 24-70mm F4 Kit lens, I came from a D750, and D850 and a mixture of Nikon lens's and Tamron lens's. Other than the 24-70mm f2.8 Z lens, I think they are fairly priced, I'm selling off all my F-Mount lens, except for a 200-500 F5.6 I have, that I love!
Why am I, these new Z Lens's are just terrific! Wow, on the Colors, Wow, on the contrast! When you nail the exposure on either Z6/Z7 and use the Z lens's, Oh that 50mm, the images have that 3D depth to them I can't get that with the previous, F-mount and camera bodies. Plus, you get 5-Axis IBIS, Not 3-Axis VR! I think Nikon's Z mount also works very well with there newer sensor's, Even though you want to say that in a FF lens using the same aperture from one mount to another, the exposure and depth of field should be the same. But, I think that on the Z lens's both the aperture and the exposure, and depth of field are better. I find getting exposure right or how I want it, is just so much easier with the Z6 as compared to the D850 I had. I'm all over the upcoming 24mm f1.8, I'm going Astro Man! Great perspective three Blind Guy! Sony Baloney, Rock it Nikon!
How is Sony Baloney . Their 24 mm f/1.4 is a gem of a lens with hardly any distortion and it has a proper aperture ring.
@@sadenb For me it's simple, sony is an electronics company, and Nikon is a Camera Company.
Your channel is such a great find. So articulate, well formed talking points, and no shouting!
Absolutely agree. Nikon have made the z system accessible for the hobbyist.
RF lenses and g lenses are just ridiculous in size and price. And no-one is going to see and or care about the difference between 1.8 and 1.4.
D6=f5 last of it's kind, the reason the d6 exists is solely because the z series won't be ready as of the Olympics. So I agree to the point of preventing defection. As to the possibility of people going back to dslr I think some will, but only in similar numbers to those who still shooting film over dslr meaning there will be no longterm development or market for them. Personally I think the d850 was intended to be the last dslr ever produced and the d6 is an apology/consolation prize for the lack a mirrorless equivalent, but the specs will bare that out.
I think you raise two particularly important points in this, and ones that are often considered counter-intuitive, so that makes them interesting.
The first is, why 1:1.4 on a lens made for digital? Because isn’t 1:1.8 enough? Yes it is, at least on full frame, the smaller formats being a different matter. 1:1.4 is a legacy from film days. Fast lenses were an important part of a pro’s kit bag because it gave them an edge in getting the picture when light was low, and might have made the difference between hand-holding at 1/15 and 1/30. The trade-off was that performance at maximum aperture in these film-era lenses was almost always terrible, unsharp across the frame and loaded with chromatic aberrations - even with very expensive lenses, like the Nikkor 35mm 1:1.4 AIS, which I think is still in the catalogue.
So a legacy 1:1.4 didn’t become fully useful until 1:2, but that didn’t matter if you were printing in a newspaper or a low-res CMYK colour magazine. Perversely, modern 1:1.4 lenses are invariably very good at maximum aperture: but with all the usefulness of variable ISO (or gain), you don’t really need them, yet they still seem to carry the cachet they did in the old days, in spite of being bulky and expensive.
You also comment, significantly, that just maybe the Nikon D6 is still a DSLR because that is what pros still trust to bring home the bacon. There are many advantages to EVF and we all know what they are. But a news or sports pro spends his working days waiting an eternity for a shot in which the window of opportunity is seconds or even less than a second: the VIP passing in his limousine, the person coming out of court flanked by policemen or minders, the footballer leaping into the air to score or celebrate a goal. His camera has to awake and be fully ready in fractions of a second, because things happen quickly. He has pre-set his camera to give him the best advantage and then it’s down to trust, and trust, as we know, is important - it’s why he spends five grand on a camera. The last link in the chain is framing the picture, again, all trust, experience, skill and reaction. And in that situation, a clear, bright optical picture inside its frame, with no other distractions, is all he needs. It’s all he ever needs.
It makes sense to develop the D6 as their last DSLR for the olympics since the pro glass is owned by most professionals. The z mount is not mature enough yet. Dont get me wrong, I love the route Nikon is taking with the Z series. So much that I switched from my Canon DSLR. Picked up the kit (24-70) for 2000€ and a 50mm f.18 for 330€ with discount. Canons EOS R alone is almost this price, without a lens. There are no pro mirrorless bodies from these two companies yet, so why do you need pro glas right away? Canons glas costs like 2000€ per lens and the only possible body to pair that with is a semi professional EOS R? By the time these mirrorless pro bodies come out, Nikon will have the zoom trinity and some fast primes (50mm 1.2 e.g.) avaiable. Furthermore the current state of the z mount lures in lots of new customers. The average non pro enthusiast doesnt need a f1.2 or 1.4 for 2000€, let alone for travel. I prefer light and compact lenses that are easy to carry and cheaper. Yet they offer outstanding quality. My 300€ 50mm f1.8 is sharper and faster than anything i have owned. Do i wanna pay 1000€ more for 1.4? Absolutely not and most people will not care to either. Love the route of creating affordable cameras and lenses for a new mount first rather than going all pro with 2000-3000€ lenses. Canon does produce impressive lenses but this will get only a few pros excited that actually afford them for work. Nikon represents the path on how to attract new customers and especially young people, that value affordablility and weight far more than an extra half a stop of light. Good job Nikon, love my Z6 to death and certainly makes walking/travelling around much more easy while still being super sharp and reliable.
Sharpest video I have seen on You Tube, thanks for the description. The Z series have incredible character and sharpness to the lenses. You are the second Pro to recommend the Z series.
No matter who recommends or what: If I would be a pro, I would never buy a camera with just one card slot, no vertical grip option and only one tiny battery in the body.
My favorite Internet scholar Mr. Brownstone! Good to see you man! Jose from Puerto Rico here. I think it's smart that Nikon is moving in parallel with their mirror-less lineup when the D6 was announced. The gap is closing, but their are faithful legacy users of the DSLR's that need this ruggedness. Surely Canon is coming with their top of the line DSLR soon.
Nikon only need to put Hybrid EVF, activate infinite buffer, add few more Pixels, improve more the 3D tracking and It will be a hit. D5 is already a great camera but there are still room for improvement.
One of your best talents is framing my man. The ability to size up your scene for its elements and recapitulate them in a hierarchical manner such that it makes for compelling narrative. This is not only what photography is truly about, but it's what a videographer or by all means a RUclipsr ought to try and aspire to. Bravo
Hugh, thank you for urging photographers to seriously, seriously weigh the pros of 1.8 glass vs. 1.4 glass or even exotic "halo products." Of course, as you stated, everyone's mileage may vary. But still, any photographer who grabs a handful of 1.8 lenses for his or her bag is totally good to go! The money savings, the size/weight advantage...people, you're golden! The 1.8 field is better than excellent. You can't go wrong when you just get out there and HIT IT!
I’m thinking that a D6 might be in my future. I have a nice collection of high end glass in the F mount. And will probably have the opportunity to add to it as people upgrade to the Z mount. For me, it’s about the lenses not the camera. I don’t need to hurry after the latest camera to achieve interesting, quality, results.
On your point about glass - BRAVO!!
Roger Whaley totally true!
WoW. The quality of your content, both video and audio are just brilliant. Please teach us mortals your lighting...AT LEAST.
Thank you very much for your time and effort.
Wahab Dilawar 🙏🏻😊
Hi Hugh, has something changed with your audio? One of your many qualities that I love and appreciate is the rich timbre of your voice. It''s not been the same for around 2 months. Please can we have your previous mic / audio system back?! Simon
From everything I've seen, it appears that the Z-mount 1.8 S lenses are as sharp as the F-mount 1.4 G lenses. I'll slowly migrate over to the Z series beginning in the next 6 months. As soon as Nikon has another price drop/sale, I'll probably grab the Z6 to compliment my D850 and D500.
Jeff Self Photography hi Jeff debating to upgrade my D7100 to either D500 or XT3. I been shooting all my life for fun, most of my clicks come from my travel and shooting my 10 yrs old sports. Any input I will be grateful
@@theeclecticphotographerajr5372 That's a tough choice. I love my D500. But I've heard great things about the XT3.
I've had a D3200 for about 3 years now and there are a number of limitations I'm running into because of its entry-level features. So I've been considering upgrading, and you're dead on, I'm having a difficult debate about whether I should go DSLR with high-end APSC or full frame or go just full frame mirrorless with the Z series. It's a lot more expensive, but with how you and a few other professionals are raving about the camera, it just might be the way to go despite it's relatively slow FPS in AF for stills.
Excellent video yet again. i had a question tho: how'd you come up with the name for your company? Just curious 🙂
😄 oh yes, me too. Hugh, please help and guide us out of this “curiosity maze” 🙏
I was just glad to see the 20mm 1.8 on the roadmap. So few makers have that focal length represented with a bright aperture, not even canon. I'm not an astrophotographer, but I know people will throw a fit if coma is not well-corrected on that lens.
The audio in this video is super crisp and clean. Have you changed something up recently?
my_obscure_epoch I’ve been testing the PicoMic. Review coming soon.
@@3BMEP I'm definitely interested to see that review, it really sounds great.
For the refurbished body or kit the FTZ adapter is not included. So add $199 to the prices given in the video.
The Nikon Z series cameras interest me more than the Sony cameras. There are some things that prevents me going the Nikon route: a) I have quite a few expensive UHS-II cards I will not be able to use, b) no battery grip, and c) no 12-24 zoom (Nikon seems stuck in 14-24).
What I do like about the Nikon Z cameras: a) I can use my FE-mount Voigtlander 10 and any other FE-mount glass I might want to acquire (maybe the 12-24 even), b) focus stacking \ bracketing (seriously why doesn't Sony provide this?), c) thin filter stack for using M-mount glass, and d) high res LCD screen (something that Fuji and Sony both are bad at and it is something that my eyes really notice).
You post some great questions for sure, we live in interesting times for photography. I still remember the old film camera’s I started with, boy have we come a long way.
Thank you for the video. I hope Nikon does very well. As I understand it, the photographic and video drama is analogous to a seesaw. There are iterative improvements between companies. For what I do, I really like Nikon's 14-30 lens that allows for screw on ND and CP filters. But, I switched to Sony before that advancement. After using Nikon for about 15 years, Sony is not perfect, but it meets my needs and appears to me to be advancing the science of processing light into images faster than Cannon or Nikon. I can't afford to be on the leading/bleeding edge but regardless of which brand one buys into, advancement helps us all, regardless of brand affiliation, and improves our ability to convey and sell information.
@Cascade Stream Solutions Yeah, to meet the seesaw effect head on back then, I owned both Canon and Nikon DSLR (with two sets of lens trinity) to ensure that I could pick the best offerings from either company at any time. However, Sony was liked Intel with CPU, Nikon may have to follow Leica's path to offer better/cheaper products around the sensors and electronics.
I love my D850 but I am frustrated that while it is the best stills camera I have ever owned auto focus in video is not as good as I think a camera of it's quality and expense should be, so for the D6 I would like to see a camera as good at stills as video and I will definitely get one
I have a total "yes" vote for pellicle solution. Sony's SLTs were slightly ahead in that tech curve but generated no buzz. A99ii was a clear option for me but also a clear dead end for support.
The 24mn has a disappointing UK price £250 dearer than US price at $1000 it had been at the top of my budget but at £1049. ($1284) it's just to expensive.
Having extensively used the D500 and the A9 with birds I'd now say that Nikon has the capacity to produce a mirrorless with AF that's more reliable than Sony's.
Sony has gone for quantity (a bazillion points when all you need is one) and AI smarts for tracking which several of us bird nuts find unreliable and not even the factory recommends it in this application.
A mirrorless D500 with 24 mp sensor, burst buffering and IBIS - yes please.
Faster, better, more, more, more.
I was in a camera store in 2016 when the Nikon D850 was just coming out. One of the veteran salesmen said to me, "We are selling the D850 as fast as we can get them, plus we have a long backorder. I have never seen anything like it." Exactly a mere 3 years ago. Now, the Internets has virtually relegated a DSLR to being the equivalent of shooting with the first 35mm autofocus camera rolled out in the mid-1980's by Minolta.
Your grandfather might have paid cash for his first house, almost certainly for his first few cars. Imagine the look on his face if you told him you buy a new $700 phone every couple of years and a new camera body (and lenses and adapters) every 4 or 5 years. He'd probably tell you to just use the old Nikon F3 he has in the basement. Yeah, he hasn't updated the firmware in it, but it still works.
Alderman Fred C. Davis great point.
Still also using my first camera, the FE and the FA. They were built like tanks and I love them.
Most manufactures offer two lineups of lenses. Are those Z lenses to be considered the base ones or pro? Or are they planning one middle lineup only?
Interesting that a new DSLR rubs some people the wrong way, Nikon already makes Mirrorless so why all the hate that NIkon still makes DSLRs??. Even now Im looking at a D850 as my next camera not a Mirrorless.
Maxwell Wellmax D850 is by all accounts a wonderful camera - enjoy!
Nikon 👌👏👍😎
@@3BMEP B&H and Adorama just lowered the price on the D850 so all is going according to plan lol.
Nikon doesn't regard the Z6 and Z7 as pro cameras. And they're right. Their new pro cameras, the D850 and D6, are are DSLRs. What does that tell us?
I think, on a 24 mm 1.8 is plenty shallow enough as the subjects are not close up and ibis bridges the gap for speed often.Also it gives a decent gap to the expected z mount 1.2's
Canon, where is IBIS, where are affordable primes, where is second card slot, where is joystick, where is your DSLRish ergonomics? By the time Nikon release Z6 II Canon will release a competitor to Z6. What a shame.
Ordering the 24mm soon, still waiting for the 85mm, and am looking forward to owning both. As I understand it the D6 will have dual cfexpress slots, have IBIS, and be faster. If you could add autofocus capabilities to rival Sony it could be an excellent camera. As for the 120-300mm f2.8 that could be an epic lens for sports.
I think you nailed it Hugh with that last comment -- Nikon needs more time to develop the technology to catch Sony's A9, let alone the A9II, and Nikon are reacting in the only way they can by relying on their current knowledge and tech i.e. the "man with a hammer" proverb. This assumption is supported, I think, by the fact that here we are almost a year later after the Z7 was released and despite one significant firmware update adding eye-af, the Z7 and Z6's AF-C still cannot come close to competing with current Sony A7 offerings. As you said, the race is on. I think the D6 will represent the pinnacle of DSLR development for Nikon, but ironically it will not sell well and it will not do anything for Nikon's future.
A new sub here. Anyone that can captivate me talking about something so bland as photography gear with a storytelling charisma of Morgan Freeman and I'm in! haha Great content bud :)
beerequalsheaven Welcome!
I like the mono.
Me too! 😎
Thanks for a great video! The black and white theme this time around is kinda cool. I'm always impressed with Nikon dslr's. There's an 80's spy movie spoof called "Gotcha" where a teenager runs off to Germany with his dad's camera that he pronounces the "Knee-Kon". LOL. While Nikon has many merits, I'm overwhelmed by the sheer majority of professional photographers I see everywhere using Canon dslr's with EF lenses. As a Mac user going back decades and an Amiga user before that, I can attest to the frustration of visiting local stores for parts, software or accessories and finding little or no support for my brand. I see Canon dslr lenses and support everywhere -even my inkjet printer at home was a Canon for a while- and Nikon camera lenses are just not as prevalent. Canon EF lenses are becoming the industry standard in video, film and television and the variety of EF cinema glass is staggering. I respect Nikon, but it's a shrinking underdog out there.
Real world, common sense talk.
Thank you, Hugh 👍
Some interesting poits as always. I have been using Nikon DSLR's since 2007 and had some ups & downs along the way. I think the D6 will be a monster DSLR; built like a tank, fast and accurate AF system, fast burst rate & deep buffer, super long battery life etc. It is aimed at pro sports shooters for the 2020 Olympics so although some speculate it may have IBIS and some sort of hybrid optical/electronic viewfinder I'm not so sure-too risky for things to go wrong at this stage before a major sporting event. I am just gonna stick with my Nikon DSLR gear for now and wait to see how the mirrorless market expands over the next few years before jumping fully into it.
Sounds like a plan!
Sounds like a plan!
Nikon is doing well chugging out an entire new product line and lenses to support it with the budget they have, as well as keeping the legacy line going. Sony have substantially more money, (yes I know the photography line is a different division of Sony like Nikon microscopes are different than the imaging division, but they do "borrow" from other divisions and the "company" as a whole). Of course it doesn't tell the whole story but just look at the two companies 2019 revenue :
Sony, ¥8.665 trillion 2019
Nikon, ¥708.7 billion 2019
SIGMA must have come up with an excellent lens for Nikon to come along and copy it. But their version of the 120-300mm will be nearly 3x the price. I personally own the Sigma 120-300mm 2.8 and it's an excellent piece of glass for $3500.
Fantastic as always. Supershort - never (haha).
Geoffrey Byers I hear you!
Patron subber here
I think DSLR have there place still , although DSLM is future but still they have their place , Go Nikon, btw great video, very sharp and 😍
Hey, Harry! Was talking about this very subject with a friend today. DSLRs will probably wind up the way film cameras are today: loved by a few (with good reason), but it will be a very small niche. Unless, of course, we run out of rare earth metals. 😬
Question: How many professional photographs are taken with an aperture setting
There may be multiple reasons but I think one reason is that there has been a recent trend promoting the idea that blurry backgrounds are better. But this isn't entirely true. A picture isn't necessarily better when shot at a wider aperture.
Other elements makes a good image such as light, composition, mood etc. Professionals employ these principles for compelling imagery. When looking at fashion images for example, photographers don't always shoot at wide apertures. When shooting, I try to vary my aperture settings to create variety as well as to provide a sense of place for the viewer.
I wonder if Nikon will introduce a D860 or upgrade from the D850 next year or are they going to go complete mirrorless ????
I’m really excited to see what Nikon will do with their next mirrorless camera’s and hope they keep giving software updates. I’m close to pulling the trigger on a z6 and I’m glad Nikon is giving excellent lenses at great sizes but do wish they were a tad more affordable
As this video points out, the S-series lenses are as cheap or cheaper then all other brands and deliver better results. Quit moaning about price and go get a second job!
Great video Hugh, agree with your sensible comments on Nikon and the run up to the 2020 Olympics is nail biting from a gear point of view.
🙏🏻😊
Well guys, I'm still using my D2X and D700 and loving them.
Don't try a Z6/Z7 because you won't use your D2X and D700 anymore!
The Nikon D6 better not Fuck up they need to beat the 1DX mark iii
More great analysis- thanks!
Thank YOU! 😊
new mirrorless lenses are so expensive.. 1k for a 1.8?
mps they certainly are a far cry from Canon’s nifty fifty or creamy 50/1.4 of yore. Did pay even $350 for that EF 50/1.4 way back then?
Another winning presentation Hugh, well done
That's why I take reviews as a grain of salt an that is it.....
The Sony fe 24 1.4 GM is faster, lighter and smaller than the Nikkor. It is the sharpest prime I have used. Singing the praises of the Nikkor 24 1.8 seems premature if you have not used it.
Was I unclear about these precise points?
@@3BMEP You were clear but also noted that the 24 1.4 was more expensive. Would you as a professional pay more money for a better photograph? wouldn't this be the deciding factor for you?
dematson The deciding factors would be “how much better?” (given how one defines better) as well as “at what price?” (given how one defines price). We aren’t just talking lenses, we’re talking systems.
@@3BMEP Yes we are. One reason I was an early adopter of Sony Mirrorless is because I am old (age 75), the gear is light and I do wildlife and landscape photography in the Sierra Nevada. In other words, I backpack my gear in. I will never be able to haul a medium or large format camera into the mountains like Ed Cooper so I see the A7R4 and a lens like the 24 1.4 as the closest I can get. For my money, his photographs of the Sierra Nevada are better than Galen Rowell. His film photographs were scanned and are huge digital files.
dematson 75 is the new 55! 😊 I understand your points - well taken. But this is also precisely why the Z system is increasingly interesting to me, and precisely why the 24/1.8 is exciting IF the IQ is as I hope (though there’s no denying the 24/1.4GM is the new AF benchmark). First: what proportion of your landscape shots are done wide open? Second: how much better will your images be at 61mp vs 45.7 or 42? Three: what other lenses are you bringing with you? Four: do you usually use a tripod, or is a fair amount of your work hand-held? How often will you use EyeAF or tracking AF given your landscape proclivities? The Z7 is 80g lighter than the ‘IV, $500 cheaper (vs only 5g difference for the two lenses and another $400 saved if one were to buy the 50/1.8). Z7 IBIS is better. It feels better - at least in my hand. This is not to knock your choice - it’s a massively competent and potent combo, and I’m thinking about the a7R IV myself given that we already own 5 E-mount lenses. But for anyone whose utility curve veers toward practical value and for whom these numbers are a stretch, $900 is transportation to or lodging while out in the Sierra Nevada range. It’s a lighter stronger tripod. A better backpack...
Hmm. Nikon respects its audience? Not it's telephoto shooters I'd say. DX? Nothing over 300mm. Sorry buddy, your more agile and compact body has to wear a full frame lens. Tough about the extra weight and cost.
Same story with the Z line but with the added penalty of an adapter. In time we can expect to see a supertelephoto zoom and that's it. It's a half baked line-up, like the Z bodies are half baked compared to the mirrorless competition. No wonder sales numbers have been below Nikon's expectations.
Twice as expensive as A9...priorities are making money & obviously not providing a high priced camera normal people can buy a la A9 bcuz let's face it even if Nikon prices it $2,500 to $3,000 more than A9II it's a no brainer
A refreshing viewpoint. Good video.
🙏🏻
Muffler Bearings
The death of mirrorless! You will now have to learn how to use a camera.
LMAO Sony has been making lenses like this for years. You complained about it. Now you say its magnificent if Nikon does it.
William Davis What precisely did I complain about?
@@3BMEP in previous videos you've complained about the cost & lack of 1.2 to 1.4 of Sony's 55m 1.8, 24mm 1.8, and 35mm 2.8 which are optically impressive. Yet all are near or around $1,000.
Now that Nikon is following sony's path you praise it.
Its ok. Not really gonna make a difference for me. I've used those lenses in for professional work. Clients love the results.
William Davis Ah. I think you’ve missed the point that the issue for me was that the Sony 24 and 35 1.8s are APS-C coverage lenses with FF FOV & DOF of approximately 2.8 - like the FF 35/2.8 FE. I shoot these FOVs at DOF equivalents of f/2, 1.8 or 1.4 often enough that these particular optics didn’t make sense for what I do. The Sigma 16/1.4 addressed my concern for a FF FOV & DOF equivalent of 24/2 on our a6400 - about what the Nikon 24/1.8 is on the Z6 or 7 - so I bought one. 👍🏻
Sorry that you're wrong about 35mm 2.8 its FF
24mm 1.8 aps-c
William Davis please read my reply more closely.
thought i saw you on the F train the other day
Your bed hair
My Rogaine hair. 😯
It means the end of the mirrorless camera. It means Nikon is getting serious with its camera and lens business once again. It means Canon will have to update its 1DX camera. 👍 The Z system has been a total failure. As a consumer, I would not buy the current Z cameras.
if you concluded after "so what?", your video would have been perfect.
Go back to film photography.
D6 lol more like d5s
pressed like in 20 seconds :)
wow I was under #20 commentor...