Z9

[Duff photographer]

Howdo all,

Morten Hilmer's ongoing Svalbard series here, now with the revealed Z9 in use with F-mount lenses. Actual in the field use, but not much information to be gleaned. More of his series will be posted as and when so hopefully there will be a lot more feedback on the camera.

About halfway in (14 mins), he shoots some Purple Sandpipers. Looks like some very solid eye detection going on which, for birds, is a big deal for us lot that shoot them (they move faster and more erractically than people and dogs do). Video clips look good too. Other brands have been okay but a bit iffy and good shots are frequently missed (friends, pers. comm.), including Sony, so it'll be interesting to see how this feature on the Z9 deals with a whole range of birds and field conditions (will want to see some in-flight shots). Looks very promising and may be the best in class (i.e., THE best).

From the specs and the price point, my D500 order has been put on hold (a D500 plus a Z7II, to cover what the Z9 does, brings it very close to the new price of the Z9, but with the Z9 potentially doing all a little bit better). If the Z9 performs better in DX mode than the D500, in all respects, then I will have to sell a few things off, or wait for a Z replacement for the D500 (which seems likely bearing in mind the commercial success of the D500, possibly, maybe).

Cheers,
Duff.

 

[Jan Brittenson]

Preordered here too. Maybe it'll arrive by 2023!
The 100-400 is more of a travel lens for me, and undoubtedly I'll end up getting one eventually...

 

[Mexecutioner]

Preordered one as well. Has been a while since I had a D3, D3S and D4. Very good memories and looking forward to coming back to Nikon.

 

[glenerrolrd]

Matt Granger has an excellent first look on the Z9 on YouTube. Has excellent illustrations of AF performance compared to a Z6/Z7 II . Also shows a 200/2 on both the Z9 and the D6 .

 

[Duff photographer]

I also added an FTZii because there's some talk the old FTZ won't fit on the Z9 -- not confirmed either way though...

Hi Jack,

That doesn't make sense to me, so I checked Morten Hilmer's video I gave a link to (post 101). At 15.55 in the video, it's clear he's using a FTZ mk I (so the rumour's that the old FTZ doesn't fit the Z9 are the usual rubbish). The new FTZ II improvement is ergonomics only according to Nikon's website. A video capture of Mortem's set-up with the older FTZ is below....

Cheers,
Duff.

 

[Jan Brittenson]

Preordered the FTZ2 also...

 

[Darin Marcus]

I figured it was a typo and most likely supposed to be a 16mm??? But what do I know. A twener f1.2 lens at 26mm could make some sense as it bridges 24 and 28, but judging by it's size it's not likely an f1.2 lens...

I am not sure it is a typo because it appears in both roadmap charts - the one with only focal lengths, and the one with lens shapes for the unreleased ones (https://www.fredmiranda.com/forum/topic/1725659/0#15749708).

However, just like the expected 24-105mm turned into a 24-120mm at release time, the 26mm might turn into a 16mm

In any case, it is going to be a compact non-S lens just like the 28mm and the 40mm, and appears to be about half their size.

 

[Jack]

Hi Jack,

That doesn't make sense to me, so I checked Morten Hilmer's video I gave a link to (post 101). At 15.55 in the video, it's clear he's using a FTZ mk I (so the rumour's that the old FTZ doesn't fit the Z9 are the usual rubbish). The new FTZ II improvement is ergonomics only according to Nikon's website. A video capture of Mortem's set-up with the older FTZ is below....

Yes, thanks -- it became later clear it was due to comfort when using the vertical grip -- I like the idea of a trimmer one so am leaving my order open anyway

 

[Jack]

I am not sure it is a typo because it appears in both roadmap charts - the one with only focal lengths, and the one with lens shapes for the unreleased ones (https://www.fredmiranda.com/forum/topic/1725659/0#15749708).

However, just like the expected 24-105mm turned into a 24-120mm at release time, the 26mm might turn into a 16mm

In any case, it is going to be a compact non-S lens just like the 28mm and the 40mm, and appears to be about half their size.

26mm compct by itself really makes no sense given they've released the 28 pancake already.
I wonder if it could be an "anamorphic" for video?
Or perhaps the 28 is not really all that good on Fx, so they have fine tuned a 26 for Fx ??

 

[jduncan]

Howdo all,

Morten Hilmer's ongoing Svalbard series here, now with the revealed Z9 in use with F-mount lenses. Actual in the field use, but not much information to be gleaned. More of his series will be posted as and when so hopefully there will be a lot more feedback on the camera.

About halfway in (14 mins), he shoots some Purple Sandpipers. Looks like some very solid eye detection going on which, for birds, is a big deal for us lot that shoot them (they move faster and more erractically than people and dogs do). Video clips look good too. Other brands have been okay but a bit iffy and good shots are frequently missed (friends, pers. comm.), including Sony, so it'll be interesting to see how this feature on the Z9 deals with a whole range of birds and field conditions (will want to see some in-flight shots). Looks very promising and may be the best in class (i.e., THE best).

From the specs and the price point, my D500 order has been put on hold (a D500 plus a Z7II, to cover what the Z9 does, brings it very close to the new price of the Z9, but with the Z9 potentially doing all a little bit better). If the Z9 performs better in DX mode than the D500, in all respects, then I will have to sell a few things off, or wait for a Z replacement for the D500 (which seems likely bearing in mind the commercial success of the D500, possibly, maybe).

Cheers,
Duff.

Hi,
If you like birds, maybe this other video could be illustrative:

Very controlled situations, not stuff like this

but it shows that the Z9 is above the Z7 II by a wide margin. By the way. Mark Smith used to be a Nikon shutter

I have little criticisms for Nikon, maybe the lack of an actual shutter (good to be on the press, but I am concerned about artificial lights), and the viewfinder is pretty old technology (spec wise), I can't understand why leave such and obvious flaw. Nikon wa the viewfinder leader when the Z was introduced. In any case, it seems they did their best. Only time will tell if it's too little too late or the start of a renaissance by Nikon. I hope is the second one.

As a Nikon shutter, this is a good day.

Best regards,

 

[Duff photographer]

Hi,
If you like birds, maybe this other video could be illustrative:

Very controlled situations, not stuff like this

but it shows that the Z9 is above the Z7 II by a wide margin. By the way. Mark Smith used to be a Nikon shutter

Thanks for that. The second video didn't take me to the Z9 to Z7II comparison, but all good

I have little criticisms for Nikon, maybe the lack of an actual shutter (good to be on the press, but I am concerned about artificial lights), and the viewfinder is pretty old technology (spec wise), I can't understand why leave such and obvious flaw. Nikon wa the viewfinder leader when the Z was introduced. In any case, it seems they did their best. Only time will tell if it's too little too late or the start of a renaissance by Nikon. I hope is the second one.

Yup, the lack of a shutter seems to be of concern to some, but those that have used it under lights have said there's no problem, so we shall see. I'm not at all bothered about the 3.69 million dot EVF. I rememeber Leica coming out with the first 3.69 EVF, and everyone raved about it, how natural it looked, ground-breaking, etc., etc. As I understand it, the Z9's is a native 3.69 million dot (60hz) at all times, no flickering, zero lag (some makers interpolate the image to cover up the lag in their EVF's), and apparently brighter and larger than previous. Again, we shall see. From the sounds of it, they've made what they've already got much more solid and reliable while advancing in other areas. I'd have build quality/reliability any day over the latest and fastest that might, or does, fail.

Cheers,
Duff.

 

[Swissblad]

Z9 is prerdered along with an extra battery at $220 LOL!

I was also hovering over the 100-400, but given it's an f4-f5.6 and I have the 70-200/2.8 and both converters, I've decided to wait and see how much better optically it is at 400mm than the 70-200 plus 2x. If it's as good as the 70-200 without converters, it will be a no brainer; if it's as good as the 70-200 with the 1.4x it remains interesting; if it's about the same as the 70-200 with 2x then, it falls down to the "meh" category for me. I already --still-- have a good copy of the 200-500 so my needs are not urgent. In fact I'd really prefer something like the 180-400/1.4x or a 600 PF in Z mount, but those may not happen for years, or even ever...

Ricci has a good overview of this lens - looks very promising.

 

[Jorgen Udvang]

The "low" resolution EVF is probably a deliberate choice. Higher resolution/higher frequency requires more processing, and other manufacturers are forced to lower the frequency/quality under certain circumstances. What Nikon has done is to install an EVF that can perform at its optimum no matter what, including blackout-free bursts. That gives a predictable, stable view, which I think is just as important as higher resolution and/or frequency.

I would obviously have preferred higher resolution and frequency, but I think Nikon made the rate choice here, and statements from reviewers seem to reflect that. Interestingly, Olympus was criticised for more or less the same when they launched the E-M1X, but again users don't seem to mind.

Nikon has launched a camera with better specifications and performance than what was expected, and at a lower price. In addition, their lens selection for Z-mount has grown to cover what most photographers need with some exceptions, and they have done that in only 3 years. This is a quantum leap, and a much bigger jump than what they did with the D3. Fanboys of other brands mostly won't change to Nikon because of this, but when it comes to "real" photographers, many who have been sitting on the fence will probably come over. This is three cameras in one (hi-res, sports and video) in a way we haven't seen before. This is their high-end mainstream camera, D3, D3X and D700 all-in-one. If there is a Z8 in the pipeline, my guess is that it will be an ultra-high resolution camera to compete with Fuji. Until then, there will be waiting lists for the Z9. Good for Nikon.

Edit: In the video above, Stephan Wiesner also points out that there is no viewfinder lag whatsoever. Impressive. Also, lower resolution helps battery life.

 

[ptomsu]

The Z9 is a brave milestone for Nikon. I applaud them for that.

The shutterless design is an industry first - actually a real WOW - and it seems to work. Imagine, there is no longer a shutter which would need replacement after several hundred thousand of shots, this one is really groundbreaking.

I had also expected a higher res EVF, but from what reviewers say it seems to be very good. And I only can say that the EVF which is in my Z7II is the same resolution and I am very satisfied how it looks and works and the Z9 EVF seems to be further improved - so OK for that as well.

The new 100-400 S is very interesting for me as I always was on the fence for it over the last 20 years, since I sold my first then F mount 80-400. Have shot with that lens so many great images and that new one really tops that in all areas.

Overall very happy and proud that I am a Nikon shooter (again)

 

[ptomsu]

BTW - even Jared Polin seems to like this camera - go and enjoy ....

 

[Darin Marcus]

26mm compct by itself really makes no sense given they've released the 28 pancake already.
I wonder if it could be an "anamorphic" for video?
Or perhaps the 28 is not really all that good on Fx, so they have fine tuned a 26 for Fx ??

I have no idea at this time - it really looks like a head scratcher

In any case, I am quite excited about the new technologies (hardware and software) Nikon developed for the Z9, and I hope many of them will show up in a future Z6 camera (with a different sensor of course).

 

[Godfrey]

The Z9 looks a stunning piece of kit, and I enjoy reading about it. But as my pursuit of Photography continues, I find I need less and less the latest Wunderkamera, and their complexity gets in the way more than it helps me.

I still enjoy reading about them and enjoy the excitement that those who do need or desire them thrill with...

G

 

[bensonga]

Howdo all,

Morten Hilmer's ongoing Svalbard series here, now with the revealed Z9 in use with F-mount lenses. Actual in the field use, but not much information to be gleaned. More of his series will be posted as and when so hopefully there will be a lot more feedback on the camera.

Cheers,
Duff.

Thanks for sharing this Duff. I really enjoy the video and have watched a few his others which I also liked. Have shared it with some of my friends here in Alaska.

The Z9 looks very impressive, but is definitely not a camera that I need.

Gary

 

[Jan Brittenson]

Most photography is opportunistic. I may head out intending to shoot coastal landscapes but find thin pickings, but the light and conditions combine to make it a great day to shoot pelicans flying low as they round Pillar Point northbound. There is a broader meaning to the term "the best camera is the one you have with you" in that the more your camera can competently do (and yes, it's often about the camera, really - ever tried to shoot landscapes on 135 film? Waste of time, IMO even Rob Galbraith wasted his time doing so) - the more likely you are to have a camera, in a broader sense. One camera for two uses is almost always superior to two cameras, one for each use. More gear is almost always a detriment. Bigger gear is almost always a detriment. If you ever shot wildlife with big teles on tripods you know why - the big lens isn't hand holdable, and using a tripod is almost always a compromise in camera placement, a compromise in background juxtaposition, exact light angle, perspective, distance, etc. All the things that matter more than the difference in optics between a 500/4 and a 200-500 zoom. The compositional power inherent in handholding always trumps minor optical minuses. Exactly where the line is drawn is very subjective of course, but I've personally no interest in creating ever more technically perfect but visually uninteresting "head and shoulders" portraits of wildlife. No context, environment, no story, nothing happening... meh, bland. To me that's uninteresting. I look very much forward to mating the Z9 to my 500 PF... that day can't come soon enough!

 

[ptomsu]

Looking at all these videos makes me even want this camera more

Both for stills and video