The lack of a high quality DX zoom is annoying. It does suggest Nikon see DX as ‘casual’ and not ’serious’.
Not quite, they did have a few high quality DX zooms. I once owned a 12-24mm F4 lens, and there’s a 17-55mm F2.8 lens. You only need a couple of high quality zooms to make a huge difference. Plus these small FX primes (28mm, 40mm) work well on DX.Did you really expect any different?
This is no difference from the dSLR DX line.
Indeed.Nikon wants the serious $$$$ spent on the Z FX line, just like they did with the F FX line.
And the lenses aren’t designed/optimised for DX.However, you can put a Z FX lens on the Z DX camera, just like I do with F FX lenses on F DX cameras.
But the FX focal lengths don't always match DX well.
Indeed. Their DX line is a dead end. A very silly decision in my view, and yours I assume.And this is the same with Canon, for both the EFS dSLR and EF-M mirrorless APS-C lines. The GOOD lenses are with the FF line.
For Canon it is worse, there is a fork in the road. While the dSLRs share the same EF mount, the mirrorless use two DIFFERENT lens mounts; the APS-C EF-M and the FF EF-R.
For me this is academic, and I suspect many here have a Z50 or Z fc for general carry around, and a Z6/7 for when they need it.So, unlike the APS-C EFS dSLRs, which can use the FF EF lenses, the mirrorless APS-C M series cameras can only use the dSLR EF lenses via an adapter, they CANNOT use the mirrorless FF R series lenses.
As @Pa said, something similar to a Z-DX 16-80, would have been nice, but I expect the pro grade lenses to be a ways down the road. The "casual" user lenses are coming out first.