Industry News: The first Nikon Z 9 specifications

Codebunny

Elil
Sep 5, 2018
925
959
Scotland
Before switching from film to digital, I checked the offer on the market.
For me, Nikon DSLRs were specs-wise more interesting than the Canons. (As long as you are inexperienced in a new domain, specs seem to matter more than ergonomics or service).
But Canon had the 24 TSE II , so I bought Canon and never regretted it.
Then came the 100-400, my favorite, the TSE 50, 90 and 135...whispering to my ears (still saving for one of those!).
Conclusion: Canon did it right, unlike Nikon, to accompany the R's introduction with high-end lenses, neither soni nor Nikon have in their program.
It's the lenses that really matter (and the guy behind them, of course).
I know: the Nikkor TS 19mm is a wonderful lens too...

Nikon have the 500mm f/5.6 PF, which is at the moment a lens that can have its own body as nothing competes with it. Canon have a whole host of tilt shifts and the MPE65 which all warrant a Canon body. I mean it would be nice to go all in on Canon or all in on Nikon, but then I always have two bodies too. If you have a 600mm f/4.0 on your Canon R1 with a 2x converter, then a 500mm f/5.6 on a Z6 becomes a invaluable little extra if the subject gets too close or a wee fox gets curious.

For me I have been on Canon EF for over a decade. Nikon's Z mount and Z lenses look better for mirrorless and they have been giving wildlife shooters attention, so I have been seriously considering giving Nikon the decade then in 2030 maybe it'll be Sony or Fujifilm medium format mirrorless with 800mm lenses.
 

nighthawk82

I'm New Here
Mar 27, 2016
13
20
Ummm... so... save for a couple of small details (ex. dual CFX), this is EOS R5 specs for $7000? If this is the best Nikon can offer in their top of the range pro mirrorless flagship, Canon really has the chance to take a massive lead with the R1.
 

Jack Douglas

CR for the Humour
Apr 10, 2013
6,845
2,456
Alberta, Canada
Someone clue me in. Why can't a 1 series camera have two resolution modes so that those who don't like high MP photos can have their wish and the rest of us can have the benefit of those extra pixels? The R5 finally seems to have more 1 level features. Can someone who shoots with both a 1DX3 and the R5 comment on what features the R5 lacks that are very useful, such as touch sensitive AF point point movement. Is there a significant downside to not having X type AF points?

Jack
 

Codebunny

Elil
Sep 5, 2018
925
959
Scotland
Ummm... so... save for a couple of small details (ex. dual CFX), this is EOS R5 specs for $7000? If this is the best Nikon can offer in their top of the range pro mirrorless flagship, Canon really has the chance to take a massive lead with the R1.

Save for a couple of small details, how does the 1DxIII differ from the R6.

I am sorry to sound a big picky here but the R5 and the Z9 will never compete with each other. The R1 will compete with the Z9 and these bodies could have the exact same sensor as the R5 but be completely different animals to handle. At the very least you’ll be able to take a Z9 and R1 to places the R5 will stop functioning.
 
Aug 7, 2018
347
294
Someone clue me in. Why can't a 1 series camera have two resolution modes so that those who don't like high MP photos can have their wish and the rest of us can have the benefit of those extra pixels?

That is a fake resolution then. It would always put me into the difficult decision to decide if I take a high resolution photo, because in a certain situation noise, diffraction and other problems of a high resolution might not spoil the photo too badly, while in other situations some of those downsides will clearly be visible. So you will likely end up and always choose the highest resolution and still downsample it when needed. I prefer having the same "target resolution" at all photos that gives me some flexibility in situations with really good light.

Diffraction is a good example of what I mean. My 18 megapixel full frame camera allows me to use up to f/11 until diffraction becomes visible. With 45 megapixels this limit is at 7.1. So for a higher sharpness of the area in focus a high megapixel camera provides, I would have to sacrifice some depth of field. The same problem appears with moving subjects. More megapixels force me to use an even shorter exposure to avoid motion blur when having more megapixels.

Instagram is quite interesting in that regard. Instagram photos have maximum dimension of 1080x1350 pixels. So if I take a photo only for Instagram - which sometimes happens - I have this resolution in mind and for example take a handheld photo which is sharp at 1080x1350, but would look blur in a high resolution. When I take photos with 18 megapixels, I have 18 megapixels in mind and do not want to care about how that photo could look in 45 megapixels.

I can understand though that other photographers have 45 megapixels in mind while taking a photo. It would not be too difficult for Canon or Nikon to offer multiple options like Sony does with its A7 series. Canon did that many years ago with the 1D and 1Ds series, were the 1D sensor even was smaller (APS-H) altough it was in the ame body.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Jack Douglas

KristinnKr

I'm New Here
Oct 4, 2018
12
21
Lots of lack of understanding with regards to resolution in this thread. The sensor MP count in a camera is what is called in information theory the sampling frequency. Basically it's the (spatial) frequency at which the signal (i.e. the light focused by the lens) is sampled. It is a 100% truth that higher sampling frequency ALWAYS produces a more accurate sampling of the signal. While the difference is larger the higher the frequencies that are present in the signal are, it doesn't matter how low frequencies are present in the signal, there is always a difference.

And you most certainly aren't constricted to smaller apertures or higher shutter speeds. With a higher sampling frequency (i.e. more megapixels) you can always take the same picture with the same parameters and get a more accurate sampling (i.e. sharper image).
 

nighthawk82

I'm New Here
Mar 27, 2016
13
20
Save for a couple of small details, how does the 1DxIII differ from the R6.

I am sorry to sound a big picky here but the R5 and the Z9 will never compete with each other. The R1 will compete with the Z9 and these bodies could have the exact same sensor as the R5 but be completely different animals to handle. At the very least you’ll be able to take a Z9 and R1 to places the R5 will stop functioning.
I would prefer comparing apples to apples, so let's take the Nikon D5 vs the Canon 5D4, which is a direct analogy with Nikon Z9 vs Canon R5. Massive differences there, most notably the speed (12fps vs 7fps) and resolution (or lack of, in exchange for low light noise performance). So, once again, save for a couple of minor details (such as being able to record 8K for 30, or 60 or 120 or forever minutes instead of 20, something which at this point we are assuming!), this is exactly R5 specs, except it costs $7000. I do agree there's many other specs which are not revealed yet, but till now it's looking like an R5 MAYBE with better heat management and MAYBE with a miniscule AF advantage when using Eye AF. If Nikon aimed the Z9 at the R1, they fell very short and hit the R5 instead. Let's wait and see what the R1 offers. As I said, Canon clearly have the opportunity to take the definitive lead
 
Last edited:

Codebunny

Elil
Sep 5, 2018
925
959
Scotland
I would prefer comparing apples to apples, so let's take the Nikon D5 vs the Canon 5D4, which is a direct analogy with Nikon Z9 vs Canon R5. Massive differences there, most notably the speed (12fps vs 7fps) and resolution (or lack of, in exchange for low light noise performance). So, once again, save for a couple of minor details (such as being able to record 8K for 30, or 60 or 120 or forever minutes instead of 20, something which at this point we are assuming!), this is exactly R5 specs, except it costs $7000. I do agree there's many other specs which are not revealed yet, but till now it's looking like an R5 MAYBE with better heat management and MAYBE with a miniscule AF advantage when using Eye AF. If Nikon aimed the Z9 at the R1, they fell very short and hit the R5 instead. Let's wait and see what the R1 offers. As I said, Canon clearly have the opportunity to take the definitive lead

I can see where you are going however the R6 and 1DX Mark 3 are far more comparable than the D5 and 5D4. The R6 has the same sensor as the 1DX3 and it does 20FPS and arguably has better AF. However, the R6 is not a 1D body and doesn't compete with it. Like the R5 won't compete with the Z9 and R1.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Joules

nighthawk82

I'm New Here
Mar 27, 2016
13
20
I can see where you are going however the R6 and 1DX Mark 3 are far more comparable than the D5 and 5D4. The R6 has the same sensor as the 1DX3 and it does 20FPS and arguably has better AF. However, the R6 is not a 1D body and doesn't compete with it. Like the R5 won't compete with the Z9 and R1.
Yea, my point was, if the R5 won't compete with the Z9, in what way will that be (to justify the $3200 extra cost)? Because from these specs there is nothing that sets them apart (unlike when comparing the 1DX2/D5 to the 5D4). Ok I can presume battery life will be better, overheating more controlled (hopefully!) and probably being able to survive a direct bomb hit from an F-35. Previously, the gap between the 5D and 1DX range was more than just peripheral advantages. There was speed, cutting edge AF (which usually ended up in the NEXT generation 5D camera), noise performance, and other specs (ex. in the case of the 1DX2 vs 5D4, there was 4k60 which the 5D4 didn't have), in addition to the being able to survive a bomb blast. Unless the AF is truly out of this world, I still can't figure out where the $3200 difference is justified. But maybe it's just me. Hopefully the R1 will offer some more traditional spec advantages vs the R5 (such as 30fps stills maybe, at which point it becomes a video decomposed into individual still RAW files)
 

Codebunny

Elil
Sep 5, 2018
925
959
Scotland
Yea, my point was, if the R5 won't compete with the Z9, in what way will that be (to justify the $3200 extra cost)? Because from these specs there is nothing that sets them apart (unlike when comparing the 1DX2/D5 to the 5D4). Ok I can presume battery life will be better, overheating more controlled (hopefully!) and probably being able to survive a direct bomb hit from an F-35. Previously, the gap between the 5D and 1DX range was more than just peripheral advantages. There was speed, cutting edge AF (which usually ended up in the NEXT generation 5D camera), noise performance, and other specs (ex. in the case of the 1DX2 vs 5D4, there was 4k60 which the 5D4 didn't have), in addition to the being able to survive a bomb blast. Unless the AF is truly out of this world, I still can't figure out where the $3200 difference is justified. But maybe it's just me. Hopefully the R1 will offer some more traditional spec advantages vs the R5 (such as 30fps stills maybe, at which point it becomes a video decomposed into individual still RAW files)

Well the Z9 and R1 will have a few advantages even if they use 45MP sensors:
  • Faster focus on some super tele lenses (If they follow the 1DX line) due to the higher volt battery pushing the AF motor at full speed.
  • Professional weather sealing (A 1 series and Dx body will get the shot when a 5 series or D8xx will have stopped)
  • Backlit buttons
  • 2.5 Gbps ethernet
  • 20FPS mechanical and electrical with 14bit (R5 goes down to 12bit and 13bit)
  • You can use it them as a weapon
  • Dual CF Express instead of compromising with 1 CF Express and 1 SD
  • Noise performance (cooler system, faster dual processors)
  • Dedicated AF processor
  • Instant on EVF
  • Faster boot up time (this was a selling point of the early pro cameras where's a non pro body was ok to boot in 1-3 seconds). EVF responsiveness and startup time is going to be a big seller of the Z9, Z9II, R1, and R1II. It'll be the version 3 of these cameras before we see this as just being the expectation. It could even be the 16m dot EVF that is 'needed' for pro sports.
  • Then all the buttons and joypads and ergonomics
  • 0 - 45°C, 85% or less humidity vs 1 – 40 °C, 85% or less humidity
  • Maybe a global shutter and 1/16000 shutter speed
  • Maybe faster flash sync

The reason I bring the R6 and 1DXIII up is they share the exact same sensor but you are not going to take a R6 to places you need a 1DXIII. Even if they both get the exact same image and comparable FPS. The pro bodies have often had arguably worse sensors than the consumer of the same generation, the 5DIII put out better images and comparable low light to the 1DX. The R5 12/20 fps(14, 13, 12bit and with the battery being charged higher enough) isn't going to match a R1 or Z9 doing 20fps 14bit right down till the battery is empty.
 
Last edited:

Franklyok

EOS 90D
Oct 24, 2018
138
47
Well the Z9 and R1 will have a few advantages even if they use 45MP sensors:
  • Maybe a global shutter and 1/16000 shutter speed

I do not expect global shutter. May be faster faster sensor readout. That would mean more video fps and less rolling shutter with electronic shutter.
 
Feb 7, 2013
115
34
Seems possible and very good specs for their flagship ML FF but Canon and Sony will have similar / in certain places better specs. With the excellent releases from Canon R5 and R6, along with good specs in forthcoming Z6 and Z7 should get more users to transitioned from DSLR to ML locking people into one of the top 3 ML systems for good, all ML FF from the top 3 are superb now and you can't go wrong with either manufacturer; be it Sony, Canon or Nikon.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Codebunny

Codebunny

Elil
Sep 5, 2018
925
959
Scotland
I do not expect global shutter. May be faster faster sensor readout. That would mean more video fps and less rolling shutter with electronic shutter.

I am not expecting it ether, but it is something that Nikon, Canon, and likely even Sony will be working on. A global electronic shutter would allow for full silent shooting without compromise and jelly effects. The processing grunt required would be quite a bit past the R5. But thats why a R1 and Z9 have the big bodies for more processors.
 

Famateur

EOS R
Oct 9, 2012
845
229
ISO 64 – 25,600 seems a bit off, unless those are the good ISO's. Like if it does ISO 25,600 as good as a R5 then it is a-ok with me.

This was the spec that seemed weird to me, too. R5 goes to 51,200 at 45MP as an upper-mid-tier Canon mirrorless body. It seems odd for the tippy-top-tier Nikon mirrorless body to have a stop poorer low-light performance in 2021 (even if it is a bit better at the low end of the range).

Agreed -- if the Z9 25,600 is on par with the R5 25,600, then no problem...
 

Codebunny

Elil
Sep 5, 2018
925
959
Scotland
This was the spec that seemed weird to me, too. R5 goes to 51,200 at 45MP as an upper-mid-tier Canon mirrorless body. It seems odd for the tippy-top-tier Nikon mirrorless body to have a stop poorer low-light performance in 2021 (even if it is a bit better at the low end of the range).

Agreed -- if the Z9 25,600 is on par with the R5 25,600, then no problem...

Aye and the Z7/D850 processor can go higher I am sure. There are quite comparable if a little sharper than the R5 sensor due to the lack of AA filter I hear. Though I really expect everyones 45MP sensor of a given generation is going to be comparable. I do find Nikon colours look nicer for wildlife and Canon's look better for people. But I am sure a I can wiggle that round in Capture One to make ether match up. When I show off a picture from my Z6 or 5DII, no one ever 100% zoomed in to check the pixel level, nor commented that the colours looked right or wrong.

Edit: The Z7 is listed as 64-25,600 ISO so this might be where this spec is coming from, perhaps some of it is confused with the Z7II. I don't expect them to re-release the Z7II/Z7/D850 sensor in 2021, even if it is a cracker.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: Famateur

s66

-
Jan 9, 2018
6
5
I note Nikon's support of GPS, let's hope it's in-body unlike the crap Canon keeps putting in their recent models.
 
Last edited:

bbasiaga

Canon Shooter
Nov 15, 2011
437
481
USA
Someone clue me in. Why can't a 1 series camera have two resolution modes so that those who don't like high MP photos can have their wish and the rest of us can have the benefit of those extra pixels? The R5 finally seems to have more 1 level features. Can someone who shoots with both a 1DX3 and the R5 comment on what features the R5 lacks that are very useful, such as touch sensitive AF point point movement. Is there a significant downside to not having X type AF points?

Jack
To your last question, I think the DPAF on the R5 and live view mode on the 1DX III is significantly better at focusing than even the best x type AF points. I could be wrong, but that's my impression after reading a bunch of stuff about AF performance. I think it comes down to the fact that the image sensor itself gets more light, has more resolution and more powerful processor connected than the dedicated AF sensors in DSLRs. So while we've seen DSLRs get very good at AF, including basic tracking - we're seeing even more basic mirrorless stuff capable of identifying and tracking eyes, faces, and other objects. This performance capability seems to be one big item in favor of mirrorless as the future over DSLRs.

-Brian
 
  • Like
Reactions: Jack Douglas