Nikon officially announced the Z 8, which is aimed squarely at the Canon EOS R5

[David - Sydney]

Try being an Aussie!

Canon Australia has been pretty reasonable with pricing as well as the 5 year warranty. Not much in the way of grey importers getting price traction here.

 

[Aussie shooter]

Not really an r5 competitor. It has a pretty big price jump. Awesome camera though. A z9 in a smaller body. Stacked sensor and all. But a thousand US dollars difference is a fair whack of money. Will certainly be interesting to see how soon canon bring a stacked sensor to a non pro body. It is good to see Nikon making a comeback but they do need to start getting top tier AF into affordable bodies now.

 

[Aussie shooter]

No, never!
Far too many poisonous snakes and other deadly critters!
(And Canon pricing too!)

No poisonous snakes in Australia and besides. While we do have plenty of deadly creepy crawlies we don't have anything that will chase you down and eat you in your front yard like they do in all other parts of the world except NZ.

 

[neuroanatomist]

Not really an r5 competitor. It has a pretty big price jump. Awesome camera though. A z9 in a smaller body. Stacked sensor and all. But a thousand US dollars difference is a fair whack of money.

One hundred US dollars isn’t. The R5 was $3900 at launch, compared to $4000 for the Z8. Clearly, the two cameras are aimed at the same price point.

It is good to see Nikon making a comeback but they do need to start getting top tier AF into affordable bodies now.

They released a new camera with nice specs. $4K is a big whack of money, this won’t be a huge seller for them in terms of units. It’s a bit premature to declare a ‘comeback’. If they just stop hemorrhaging market share that would be a big win for them, but we don’t even know if that’s happening.

 

[koenkooi]

No poisonous snakes in Australia and besides.

But you do have about a hundred different kinds of venomous snakes, which are worse!

While we do have plenty of deadly creepy crawlies we don't have anything that will chase you down and eat you in your front yard like they do in all other parts of the world except NZ.

The safety briefing for our new Australia office includes a long section about dropbears, does ambushing count as chasing?

 

[Aussie shooter]

But you do have about a hundred different kinds of venomous snakes, which are worse!

The safety briefing for our new Australia office includes a long section about dropbears, does ambushing count as chasing?

Yeah. Them drop bears are an issue. No doubt about that

 

[Aussie shooter]

One hundred US dollars isn’t. The R5 was $3900 at launch, compared to $4000 for the Z8. Clearly, the two cameras are aimed at the same price point.


They released a new camera with nice specs. $4K is a big whack of money, this won’t be a huge seller for them in terms of units. It’s a bit premature to declare a ‘comeback’. If they just stop hemorrhaging market share that would be a big win for them, but we don’t even know if that’s happening.

My bad. I thought it was around 1k US difference.

 

[Del Paso]

No poisonous snakes in Australia and besides. While we do have plenty of deadly creepy crawlies we don't have anything that will chase you down and eat you in your front yard like they do in all other parts of the world except NZ.

My bad, venomous , of course. But I'm still panicked at the thought...
Yes, when it comes to snakes, I'm a trembling - shivering coward.

 

[neuroanatomist]

Yes, when it comes to snakes, I'm a trembling - shivering coward.

Sorry!

 

[scyrene]

First an observation: this will only influence other manufacturers if Nikon's relative position improves. I keep saying (though it surely should be obvious) that they have to be more competitive on features and pricing because they are desperate to regain market share. Whether their strategy succeeds remains to be seen.

Second a question: is rolling shutter as big a deal as is sometimes made out? How did we manage for so long if the type of sensor that allows eg golf balls to be round and clubs to remain straight in images has only just started to become widespread? And do those "flaws" not add a sense of movement to an image, just as motion blur can do? It's nice to have the option either way, of course.

 

[AlanF]

First an observation: this will only influence other manufacturers if Nikon's relative position improves. I keep saying (though it surely should be obvious) that they have to be more competitive on features and pricing because they are desperate to regain market share. Whether their strategy succeeds remains to be seen.

Second a question: is rolling shutter as big a deal as is sometimes made out? How did we manage for so long if the type of sensor that allows eg golf balls to be round and clubs to remain straight in images has only just started to become widespread? And do those "flaws" not add a sense of movement to an image, just as motion blur can do? It's nice to have the option either way, of course.

This is rolling shutter, posted earlier today. It made burst mode with the R7 somewhat interesting. https://www.canonrumors.com/forum/threads/r7-discussion.41564/page-3#post-962074

 

[scyrene]

This is rolling shutter, posted earlier today. It made burst mode with the R7 somewhat interesting. https://www.canonrumors.com/forum/threads/r7-discussion.41564/page-3#post-962074

Ok wow that is... bizarre.

 

[Aussie shooter]

My bad, venomous , of course. But I'm still panicked at the thought...
Yes, when it comes to snakes, I'm a trembling - shivering coward.

How do you like this one I caught. Tiger. Considered practically harmless in Australia. Only the 4th most venomous snake in the world

 

[koenkooi]

[…]
Second a question: is rolling shutter as big a deal as is sometimes made out? How did we manage for so long if the type of sensor that allows eg golf balls to be round and clubs to remain straight in images has only just started to become widespread? And do those "flaws" not add a sense of movement to an image, just as motion blur can do? It's nice to have the option either way, of course.

You get around rolling shutter by using a physical shutter curtain to stop the exposure.
Now that more and more people are using a fully electronic shutter, rolling shutter, or the lack there off, becomes important.

My R8 has fewer than 10 shots with the physical shutter, but a few thousand with the electronic shutter.

 

[Del Paso]

How do you like this one I caught. Tiger. Considered practically harmless in Australia. Only the 4th most venomous snake in the world View attachment 209085

You are my hero!

 

[MiJax]

Seriously? Is your memory of what you write so poor? Let's review:




Admittedly, perhaps in your first post you listed rolling shutter second but you actually thought it was first in importance. In that case I apologize for accusing you of moving the goalposts, but you have your own poor writing skills to blame for that.

LMAO, Who is it with the problem of admitting they were wrong again? By the way, I blame your poor comprehension skills and low morals for trying to manufacture a point that you a can dispute.

 

[MiJax]

Frankly, the tech used is not important as the results. FSI/BSI/BSI-stacked is just the technology but please concentrate on the final measurements for comparison.

---

...Setting the tone is basically offering a good value for money product and maybe undercutting the competition in price but if it doesn't translate to long term revenue then that is a bigger problem.

The tech used is vitally important to the outcome. A stacked sensor is better in almost every way except cost and power usage. Honestly, your argument will stand up to a use case of non-action photography, but when the action picks up, the needle swings clearly to the stacked sensor. Not to mention, the other improvements that come from being able to move data off the sensor at significant faster rates. This clearly is an advantage that has a bit of runway to use.

Like you said, setting the tone is offering a better value for money. Nikon has done just that here. I can't see how this body will not have a clear advantage on the entire mid to upper end of the market. Its a match for any flagship, only coming up short to them by the slightest of margins, all while costing significantly less. Its spec'ed better than all of its peers in many categories with two significant exceptions (slightly behind Canon and Sony in AF, and Sony's A7R5 in resolution), at only a slight price bump.

I just don't see how this body is just a matter fact release. I don't see this release being any less significant than the R5, A9, D500, or 5D in the past. No one has ever given the market flagship performance at mid level prices (the R5 was probably the closest, with the A9's elevated price being a close second). We'll see if I'm right or wrong fairly soon, because Nikon is planning to flood the stores with a fairly strong supply from the release date. I feel like the proof will be in its adoption.

Personally, I think its a good thing you don't care about the hardware advancement shown on the Z8, at the price point. I honestly don't think Canon is going to match this hardware decision for years to come. I really hope I'm wrong on this one, but I'm not holding my breath.

 

[AlanF]

The tech used is vitally important to the outcome. A stacked sensor is better in almost every way except cost and power usage. Honestly, your argument will stand up to a use case of non-action photography, but when the action picks up, the needle swings clearly to the stacked sensor. Not to mention, the other improvements that come from being able to move data off the sensor at significant faster rates. This clearly is an advantage that has a bit of runway to use.

Like you said, setting the tone is offering a better value for money. Nikon has done just that here. I can't see how this body will not have a clear advantage on the entire mid to upper end of the market. Its a match for any flagship, only coming up short to them by the slightest of margins, all while costing significantly less. Its spec'ed better than all of its peers in many categories with two significant exceptions (slightly behind Canon and Sony in AF, and Sony's A7R5 in resolution), at only a slight price bump.

I just don't see how this body is just a matter fact release. I don't see this release being any less significant than the R5, A9, D500, or 5D in the past. No one has ever given the market flagship performance at mid level prices (the R5 was probably the closest, with the A9's elevated price being a close second). We'll see if I'm right or wrong fairly soon, because Nikon is planning to flood the stores with a fairly strong supply from the release date. I feel like the proof will be in its adoption.

Personally, I think its a good thing you don't care about the hardware advancement shown on the Z8, at the price point. I honestly don't think Canon is going to match this hardware decision for years to come. I really hope I'm wrong on this one, but I'm not holding my breath.

The problem for Nikon is that Canon brought out the R5 3 years ago, has sold a large number of them and the customers have stocked up with Canon lenses or have perfectly functional adapted EF ones. The Z8 might have some advantages but its main appeal is for Nikon’s existing users. A 3-year lead is not easy to overcome. A refresh of R5 firmware would narrow the gap even more and be a good ploy for Canon.

 

[neuroanatomist]

LMAO, Who is it with the problem of admitting they were wrong again? By the way, I blame your poor comprehension skills and low morals for trying to manufacture a point that you a can dispute.

Yes, if you can’t argue logically then by all means resort to ad hominem attack.

 

[David - Sydney]

The tech used is vitally important to the outcome. A stacked sensor is better in almost every way except cost and power usage. Honestly, your argument will stand up to a use case of non-action photography, but when the action picks up, the needle swings clearly to the stacked sensor. Not to mention, the other improvements that come from being able to move data off the sensor at significant faster rates. This clearly is an advantage that has a bit of runway to use.

Like you said, setting the tone is offering a better value for money. Nikon has done just that here. I can't see how this body will not have a clear advantage on the entire mid to upper end of the market. Its a match for any flagship, only coming up short to them by the slightest of margins, all while costing significantly less. Its spec'ed better than all of its peers in many categories with two significant exceptions (slightly behind Canon and Sony in AF, and Sony's A7R5 in resolution), at only a slight price bump.

You didn't follow my point well. In theory, a BSI sensor can capture 100% of light whereas a FSI can capture up to ~80% but DXO (love it or hate it) compares the R5 sensor vs A7Riii/iv and Z7 at the time of release...

"Current state-of-the-art BSI-CMOS sensors used in the Sony A7R III and IV and in the Nikon D850 and Z 7 (and in the new Z 7 II), and in Panasonic Lumix DC-S1R, offer lower noise levels and occupy the top positions in overall sensor dynamics in the 30-60 MP range. However, as we can see in the table below, the new 45 MP EOS R5 sensor has excellent maximum dynamic range at base and it is close to the best-in-class (BSI) sensors throughout the ISO range."

Canon EOS R5 Sensor review: A high water mark

Announced at the same time as the Canon EOS R6, the pro-oriented Canon EOS R5 is the current top-of-range model in Canon’s mirrorless EOS R system.

www.dxomark.com

A stacked sensor in theory will be the fastest read speed / less rolling shutter. Flash sync speed in eshutter is a good measure I guess but the sensor mp will also affect the read speed. but I am struggling to find one site that has been able to measure all the sensors - especially for stills.
For 8k video both the A1 and R5 are about 16ms.

I just don't see how this body is just a matter fact release. I don't see this release being any less significant than the R5, A9, D500, or 5D in the past. No one has ever given the market flagship performance at mid level prices (the R5 was probably the closest, with the A9's elevated price being a close second).

You have given 2 examples in the last 3 years to prove that the Z8 is unique?

We'll see if I'm right or wrong fairly soon, because Nikon is planning to flood the stores with a fairly strong supply from the release date. I feel like the proof will be in its adoption.

Every new release will have some supply to support pre-orders. Some better than others. Having a feeling is one thing... there have been some where the shipping dates have slipped because of supply problems. The proof will be in their market share and profitability.

Personally, I think its a good thing you don't care about the hardware advancement shown on the Z8, at the price point. I honestly don't think Canon is going to match this hardware decision for years to come. I really hope I'm wrong on this one, but I'm not holding my breath.

The Z8 is 3 years later than the R5. At no point am I saying that the Z8 is a bad camera. I am saying that technology in theory doesn't always translate to significant improvements in practice or whether they are even relevant to the majority of users given the cost disadvantage.

Each OEM will leap frog the other at times and Canon was late to the mirrorless party. The R5 leapfrogged everything else until the A1 and then Z9 which were much more expensive.
The R5ii is rumoured... how about you comment once it is released vs Z8
Nikon have a market share issue. I hope that they can become competitive over the long term and are not using lower prices to gain market share impacting their ability to innovate in the future. 3 strong competitors is good for everyone.