Nikon had a terrible sales quarter and is revising forward estimates.

[Jonathan F/2]

I honestly thought I was going to switch back to Nikon mirrorless, but it's looking more likely I'll be sticking with Sony mirrorless moving forward. Also with Sony officially supporting third party lenses and offering their own first party options, it's starting to look like the E-mount will have everything going for it. Sigma for example already has E-mount versions of the 14-24mm and it's significantly smaller, same goes for their upcoming 24-70mm 2.8 DN E-mount lens. Samyang has the amazingly compact 18/24/35/45 E-mount lenses (I own both the 18 and 45) available and their more recent 85mm 1.4 FE wipes the Nikon 85mm 1.4 G to the floor.

At the end of the day, it really comes down to the lenses. Adapting F-mount lenses isn't going to cut it on top of offering first party Z options. Nikon really needs to start thinking out of the box and infusing hungry/young blood into their corporate ranks. Nikon's not going to change unless they force retire all those old execs and number crunchers. Young people don't think photography with Nikon anymore. Nowadays it's smartphones, drones and mirrorless that rule the image/video making process.

 

[gchappel]

The lenses are actually why I switched from nikon to sony. I have tried adapters in the past- not a pleasant experience. I will admit I never actually tried the ftz, did not want to. I have a complete sony system with native lenses and it fits in a backpack. 24-600mm covered in 3 zooms. 4 native 1.8 lenses 35-135mm. All are light, fast, sharp- seem sharper than my nikon equivalents. I am happy with it. If nikon catches up I can always switch back---- but I suspect that horse is out of the barn
Gary

 

[Palouse]

I will admit I never actually tried the ftz, did not want to.

You just lost some credibility with me. However, the amazing quality of your work does speak for itself and all is forgiven

 

[Palouse]

Anyone wanna make a bet with me about whether that will ever happen? I would be happy to put a good bottle of wine on the line that it won't.

I'd strongly suggest you put time limit on that wager, because eventually the DX line will go away.

 

[Jonathan F/2]

Nikon should do a stripped down Z6, slap it into the Z50 chassis and sell it for $999 USD with a cheap 28-80 VR FF pancake kit zoom!

 

[Palouse]

^^What would you strip out?

 

[Jonathan F/2]

The lenses are actually why I switched from nikon to sony. I have tried adapters in the past- not a pleasant experience. I will admit I never actually tried the ftz, did not want to. I have a complete sony system with native lenses and it fits in a backpack. 24-600mm covered in 3 zooms. 4 native 1.8 lenses 35-135mm. All are light, fast, sharp- seem sharper than my nikon equivalents. I am happy with it. If nikon catches up I can always switch back---- but I suspect that horse is out of the barn
Gary

With Sigma introducing the 14-24, 24-70 and hopefully a native 70-200mm 2.8 E-mount lens, the Sony side will have a trinity collection for every budget from Tamron, Sony and Sigma. Though Nikon still has the advantage with more affordable telephoto lenses. I don't see giving up my 300mm PF until someone makes a compact telephoto prime for mirrorless.

 

[Mike Buckley]

Nikon won't eliminate their DX line until Sony or Canon eliminates their equivalent line, and I don't think either of those companies will do that.

I'd strongly suggest you put time limit on that wager

I don't see Nikon ending the DX line in less than five years. If by some surprise it happens later, that decision wouldn't be in response to today's situation. Besides, I wouldn't want to have to wait more than five years to collect my winnings. I'll negotiate the wine with the first person who wants to take me up on a bet that ends no more than five years from now.

 

[Jonathan F/2]

^^What would you strip out?

IBIS, 1/8000th mechanical shutter , XQD and build it in Nikon Thailand.

 

[Palouse]

IBIS, 1/8000th mechanical shutter , XQD and build it in Nikon Thailand.

Fair enough, but removing IBIS adds a cost to every lens.

 

[Jonathan F/2]

Fair enough, but removing IBIS adds a cost to every lens.

This will be for the cheap crowd who'll be fine with the kit lens. Nikon kit lenses are pretty good and they usually offer solid VR.

 

[Palouse]

This will be for the cheap crowd who'll be fine with the kit lens. Nikon kit lenses are pretty good and they usually offer solid VR.

OK, fair enough.

 

[Pa]

Nikon should do a stripped down Z6, slap it into the Z50 chassis and sell it for $999 USD with a cheap 28-80 VR FF pancake kit zoom!

That's pretty much what Thom Hogan suggested in the column I linked yesterday:

I'm going to ultimately create two other mirrorless cameras. The first is going to take the Z50 Mark II body and features and stick an FX sensor in it. Call it the Z5. This is a product that has to get down to the Canon RP pricing level. It's also a product that's going to require one or two new Z FX lenses (no IBIS means we need kit lenses with VR)

 

[Bear Dale]

When everyone is satisfied with using just a phone, that will be happy times.

There will be such a glut on eBay of lightly used dSLR's, F mount lenses (600mm & 800mm please) and Gitzo tripods, RRS Heads and lots of other goodies and at great give away prices.

Let the good times roll

 

[gchappel]

I will admit I never actually tried the ftz, did not want to.
You just lost some credibility with me. However, the amazing quality of your work does speak for itself and all is forgiven

Actually, I have no one that I know locally that is shooting with nikon mirrorless, so without purchasing or renting the equipment I had no way to try out the ftz adapter. I have used other adapters over the years, and they were never as good as native. So I had a strong bias. Might not have been the wisest reason for a decision, but that did it, nikon burned me before.
I did shoot with a friends a7riii and a9 with good sony glass. That convinced me this was a solid viable system.
I truly hope nikon can hit one out of the park- but it needs to do it soon.
Gary

 

[Clix Pix]

I am in total agreement about the use of adapters and such, and just do not want to put money into a system where right off the bat I'd need to use an adapter. Also, I figure that buying newer native lenses meant specifically for a mirrorless system would be much more beneficial than trying to use older lenses, some of which are REALLY old. Sure, a few are legendary lenses, but still.... Technology in making lenses has changed and improved significantly, too, right along with designing camera bodies. Since Nikon at this time is not offering any native macro lenses for their Z series cameras, and that is something important to me, well, yes, I'm going to look elsewhere. I'm sure that many others have done the same. The bottom line, as Gary has expressed here, is that in his case he bought into a system which satisfied his particular needs.

 

[Palouse]

My FTZ came free.

 

[Clix Pix]

For me it wouldn't be the cost of the adapter, it would be the need to use one at all.....

 

[acnomad]

Adapting F-mount lenses isn't going to cut it on top of offering first party Z options.

I will admit I never actually tried the ftz, did not want to.

For me it wouldn't be the cost of the adapter, it would be the need to use one at all.....

I know this is hard to believe, especially if you've had prior bad experiences with adapters, but the FTZ works perfectly fine. Not a nuisance at all, and besides, it's not a long term solution. It's intended to keep legacy glass relevant in a mirrorless world until the Z-mount lens lineup can be completed. (Bonus: the FTZ breathes new life and markedly improved performance into non-VR F-mount lenses)

Of course if you don't have F-mount glass and want to start a mirrorless kit from scratch, it would be more sensible to buy a Sony at this moment. And that's the challenge to which Nikon must rise.

 

[Palouse]

^^ well put, Andy.