Inspiring

Question

Is the Nikon Z Line Innovative?

Forum|Forum|7 years ago
August 29, 2018
3 replies
3420 views

Is the Nikon Z Line Innovative

…or is it just Nikon’s version of what Sony has being doing with their alpha line of professional and semi-professional cameras?

First, let’s go way back to almost 60 years of photographic history when Canon, Minolta (now owned by Sony and renamed as such), and Nikon introduced to North America their camera systems, in March 1959. At that camera show in Philadelphia, the Nikon F dazzled to an instant leadership role. The Canonflex was so popular that all inventory sold-out. And, the Minolta SR-2 became the affordable, quality alternative.

The three Japanese camera companies didn’t invent the Single Lens Reflex (SLR) camera. They popularized the big camera system with all the lenses and accessories.

The “reflex” part of the name referred to the mirror and prism portion of the camera, which allowed you to look in the viewfinder and see the light coming through the lens. The mirror reflected the light up into the prism and to your eye. The trick to the system was to get the mirror to swing out of the way when you pressed the shutter release, so the light would fall onto the film.

Of course the SLR became a dSLR once the film plane was replaced by a digital sensor. Kodak began to toy with adapting Nikon film camera to a low resolution sensor in May 1991, Nikon, Canon, and then Minolta dove into their own dedicated dSLR cameras from February 2001 through February 2004. During those three years the dSLR went from being an object of curiosity to serious replacements for professional film cameras.

Along the way, Adobe introduced their Camera Raw 1.0 (ACR) plug-in to Photoshop in February 2003 and some serious professional photo development was born.

Four years after acquiring Minolta’s camera line (January 2006), Sony pulled the “R” out of dSLR with an August 2010 mirrorless version of their alpha (“a”) line. A year later, they began to introduce the same technology into the Sony high end a77. In a mirrorless world, the traditional SLR viewfinder no longer has a direct view of the light coming through the lens. The viewfinder is a little video screen.

Is this to say that it’s just taken Nikon 8 years to copy what Sony did?

“Yes.” and “No.” Sony acquired a Minolta line in transition. The alpha “A Mount” lens was a bold move for Minolta, which took the financial strength of Sony and the optical ingenuity of Zeiss, to capture imaginations. The Nikon “F Mount” has undergone many gradual transformations, but it’s still rooted in 1959’s Nikon F.

Where’s Nikon going with the “Z Series” cameras and “Z Mount” lenses? That’s a very closely held secret. The F Mount lenses adapt to the Z Series cameras and 90-some of the current lenses are fully functional on the new Z cameras. It’s clever technology. The lenses are smaller, but the lens mount is bigger, letting in more light.

Will the D Series Nikon cameras get replaced with the Z Series cameras and the Nikkor Z lenses will soon make the F Mount part of fading 1959 history?

We have shot with Canon, Minolta/Sony, Nikon, Pentax, and Olympus. We have come to know that Nikon doesn’t just introduce a couple cameras and 4 lenses. Their technological culture is focused on long range goals. Our guess is that Nikon has some very big things planned and they have revolutionary imaging endeavors that will roll out in the years to come.

But, if Sony and Nikon are fully invested in mirrorless professional gear, is Canon going to sit back and rest on their aromatic laurel leaves? That’s not going to happen either.

Another interesting aspect of this is that Canon and Sony are deeply invested in professional video and digital filmmaking, an arena Nikon has not fully entered. Completely reimagined technologies open new opportunities.

Has Nikon not just made the first moves at projecting their future forward, but could they be igniting huge fires under their competitors business models.

This should get much hotter than what happened in March 1959. An imaging revolution could be starting. After all, doesn’t the media technology sector need to dream big about the next 59 years of image-making?

This topic has been closed for replies.

D Fosse

Community Expert

Don't forget that Sony and Nikon were in two very different places. Sony had an empty lot, they could build this from the ground up. That's not necessarily a good position, because they are going to make a lot of initial mistakes and learn as they go.

Nikon, OTOH, had to fit this into an existing ecosystem. They have probably been running this as a secret side project for years. They're not really "behind", they just had to bring this up to speed, to go beside, and complement, their existing product line. They had to make sure the Z is ready. They can't make mistakes.

In short, Nikon and Sony are more or less side by side in this. And Canon will likely join soon, with their own product that they have been working on for a long time.

Brian StoppeeAuthor

Inspiring

https://forums.adobe.com/people/D+Fosse wrote
They have probably been running this as a secret side project for years. They're not really "behind", they just had to bring this up to speed, to go beside, and complement, their existing product line. They had to make sure the Z is ready. They can't make mistakes.
In short, Nikon and Sony are more or less side by side in this. And Canon will likely join soon, with their own product that they have been working on for a long time.

A high up exec at Nikon alluded to this, to Janet & I around 2007. It was in very early R&D stages and took a VERY long time to be in a place where the technology was possible.

Our guess is that this is similar to things Apple and HP develop for years but cannot move forward until their suppliers can deliver.

Ussnorway7605025

Legend

https://forums.adobe.com/people/Brian+Stoppee wrote
Is the Nikon Z Line Innovative
…

in a word NO

this is great design... everything a pro needs right there where they need it

however the rest of the camera is a bad joke

this is structurally unsound... what happens when you need to turn the camera on its side on a stand?

and this is just retarded... a screen needs to be viewable from different angles for selfies, macro work

this camera was pushed out the door because Nikon is behind the times and not making sales... and they are behind the times because they are old people who don't understand that the world has moved on

D Fosse

Community Expert

They had to do it this way. They had to ensure continued full usability of the F lenses, and at the same time they had to build a new mount for upcoming native lenses. An adapter may not be an elegant solution, but it works. In this segment, customers have invested a lot of money in glass.

They also very obviously went to great lengths to maintain all controls exactly where they are on a D-series body. Again, I think that's basically a smart decision - and possibly explains why it looks so disproportionate and disjointed. Like it was randomly put together from spare parts.

It did come a bit too late. My plan going forward is that the Sony system gradually phases out the Nikons. Yes, I'm that impressed with the alpha. It's a beautiful piece of work, and the Sony lenses are superb.

Brian StoppeeAuthor

Inspiring

https://forums.adobe.com/people/D+Fosse wrote
It did come a bit too late.

We're pretty sure this is Nikon's 1% downpayment on a much larger plan.

D Fosse

Community Expert

I think Nikon basically did the right thing here.

My first pro camera was a Nikon F3 way back, and I currently use a D810 and a D800. All this time I've really come to appreciate the versatility and universal compatibility of the F-mount.

I recently got a Sony A7R II because I need the silent shutter in some situations. That was before the Z was announced, and I needed it then, so no regrets. But it did become a very significant expense because I also needed new lenses. Things would have been very different if I could just keep using my old lenses.

There's one big problem with the Nikon Z: it's an ugly little creature. That's right. It shouldn't matter, it doesn't when you work, but it does when you're in the store.

The Sony is an impressive piece of equipment. Very tight and well put together, to the point where it feels like a solid slab of metal in your hand. Like a good wristwatch. The Nikons, on the other hand, have more of a "car" feel: a metal skin with moving parts inside, clanking around. They're sturdy enough, the D800 has hit the floor on two separate occasions, one of them from seven feet up. I picked it right up and nothing was broken.

Nikon make a big deal out of the bigger Z mount, with a lot of fluff about "letting more light in". That's nonsense. The reality is that the back element is much closer to the sensor, so that has to be bigger to avoid vignetting and a too steep angle to the corners of the sensor (even assuming it projects a perfectly flat field). It just needs more room. With the back element further away that's not a problem, or not nearly as big, which is why F lenses + adapter works splendidly.

Brian StoppeeAuthor

Inspiring

https://forums.adobe.com/people/D+Fosse wrote
The Sony is an impressive piece of equipment. Very tight and well put together, to the point where it feels like a solid slab of metal in your hand. Like a good wristwatch.

In all candor when Janet & I began to research this piece, we realized that we missed out on the introduction of the Sony a77. In retrospect, it was somewhat clunky.

Since we're in the Baltimore-Washington area, we see many tourists. She of them carry the Sony A7R II in their belt. It's like a mobile phone to them. We also see professional nature photographers out hiking a biking through the region. Small systems are essential.

Sign up

To post, reply, or follow discussions, please sign in with your Adobe ID.

Sign in to Adobe Community

To post, reply, or follow discussions, please sign in with your Adobe ID.

Scanning file for viruses.

This file cannot be downloaded