Nikon officially announces the Nikon Z 9, and it’s a remarkable $5499

jayphotoworks

EOS RP
Aug 11, 2016
268
112
The Z9 certainly makes the R3 seem considerably overpriced to me. I thought it was overpriced when introduced but placed an order anyway. My only real disappointment with the R3 at introduction was the 24 MP. I really wanted 45 MP and hesitated for three hours opening day to place an order, so likely will not be receiving it in the first batch.

Even before the Z9 introduction I was waffling on the R3. This weekend I will probably make up my mind whether to cancel the R3 and place an order for an Z9 and Z7ii and some starter lenses and begin selling off some of my Canon lenses. With the fully electronic shutter, what appears to be even a more sophisticated AF system, equivalent handling (although a bit different) and frankly a better back LCD for a wildlife-landscape photographer and the 45MP, the Z9 simply appears to be a better camera for less money.

The question remains about some important lenses. The 400/2.8 + 1.4x looks great but how heavy? The 100-400 looks great and is certainly light and compact enough, but optically how good? Canon's 100-400 ii and 100-500 are superb and the best lenses per dollar I have ever had. Can the Nikon match that? They could not with the old F mount lens. I very much like my 24-105/4 RF lens and use it for landscapes without hesitation as I did the 24-70/4 L IS before it. The old F mount 24-120 was a decent lens but not up to D850 standards.

Encouraging about a switch is many if not most of the Nikon S lenses have been superb and in some cases preferable, at least optically, over Canon RF lenses. Examples are the 24-70/2.8 and 70-200/2.8 and the 14-24/2.8. That said, we are talking pixel peeping and not real world usage in the field making real prints to sell for someone's wall.
The price of the Z9 is really attractive. Nikon has taken a back seat for so long while giving up market share to both Canon and Sony that they pulled out all of the stops for this one. Sony took a similar position a few years back with the A9 vs 1 series in the pro-space. However appealing, I can't consider a system switch easily anymore like I used to when I was still shooting Canon lenses for cinema and Sony lenses for hybrid. Since moving 100% to Sony for both, with established workflows for everything from audio to stabilization and a ton of lenses, the Nikon is a non-starter for me, but I am quite envious of the specs and initial impressions and the $.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 user

rbielefeld

EOS 90D
CR Pro
Apr 22, 2015
176
408
$5500 for a flagship camera in the Z9 at 45mp and $6000 for a non-flagship camera in the R3 at 24mp. That is very interesting. Of course res is not the only selling point, but it is interesting that Nikon went higher mp for their flagship and priced it under Canon's non-flagship that has relatively low res. So, then the R1 should be at least 45mp as anything less would look strange to potential buyers and be bucking what the other major camera makers think consumers want in a flagship body? It seems necessary of course for the R1 to be more expensive than the R3 with speculation of it being near $8000. Hmm, $8000 for Canon flagship versus $5500 for Nikon and $6500 for Sony. That seems a bit off to me. I wish the R3 would have been in the $5000 range leaving the R1 room to come in at $6500; in the range of the Nikon and Sony Flagships. With the R3 at $6000 I don't see the R1 coming in at anything less than $7000 and most likely $7500+. Oouch! If that is what transpires.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 3 users

entoman

wildlife photography
May 8, 2015
893
1,016
UK
Just about the most complete specification of any FF camera on the market, and a crazy cheap price that will surely tempt a few people (especially DSLR owners) away from Canon.

Undercutting the cost of the less well specified R3 (and the er, Sony a1), it leaves Canon in an awkward place.

I think the R1 is still at least a year away, and when it’s released it will have virtually identical specs to the Z9, and only be differentiated by the presence of eye-control AF point selection.

If Canon continue selling the R3 at its current price, and bung another $1000-1500 on top of that for the R1, they might find a lot of pros switching to Nikon.

I’m not in the market for a gripped pro sports/wildlife camera, but if I was, Nikon would get my money.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 2 users

Del Paso

M3 Singlestroke
CR Pro
Aug 9, 2018
1,580
1,796
I guess for Nikon it's a matter of surviving in an increasingly hostile environment. Their market share is no longer impressive. So their decision to increase it via a highly attractive pricing seems to be the right one, hi-end Canons and Sonys are a lot pricier. This could also put Canon and Sony under price-pressure, good for us...
Euro 6000 for the R 3 will be hard to justify.
I hope they'll succeed in becoming a serious competitor again.
PS: I still love my F2, one of the greatest cameras ever made!
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: 3 users

AlanF

Stay at home
CR Pro
Aug 16, 2012
9,667
14,589
The pricing of the Z9 shows once again how Canon is price gouging the UK. The prices in the UK are 15% higher than in the EU, which has the same warranty and VAT as us.
Nikon Z9 £5299 in UK, $5496.95 in USA, €5999 in EU
Canon R3 £5879 in UK, $5999 in USA, €5999 in EU
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 users

HenryL

EOS R3, R5
CR Pro
Apr 1, 2020
353
957
Looks like a great option for Nikon (or potential) Nikon shooters. Having watched the DPR and Fro's video's, it seems to me that getting beyond the press release and a quick read of the specs this isn't overall better than the A1 or R3. Particularly compared to the R3, I see it specs higher on MP count, low-light AF, and dual CFExpress slots. Sure, there are other things like FPS, but there are plenty of caveats to go along with those. Ultimately, when viewed not on individual specs but overall capability/usability, it achieves parity with the R3 but certainly not better (other than price).

It may be just me, but I'm curious about the repeated references to the Nikon designed and developed sensor. In the past, where Nikon used sensors manufactured by Sony, were they Sony designs as well, or did Nikon design and hire out Sony's manufacture? I'm guessing that's the case the way this sensor is being described, I really don't know though.

So, of course time will tell, but I'm sure it will be well received. As do all product nowadays, in due course it will have many fans and some detractors, too. Between the three big dogs in this race, they all eventually will push each other and incorporate features pioneered by the other so if for no other reason that than, I'm glad to see this announcement.
 

Hector1970

EOS R
CR Pro
Mar 22, 2012
1,419
793
The pricing is interesting from Nikon.
It certainly makes the Canon R3 feel expensive and the R1 if its 7000/8000 as being very expensive
Considering moving to RF is in itself akin to moving to a new brand , you may also be switching to new RF lens . I
Its an appropriate time to look around at options. Canon needs to be careful not to price itself out of some of its market.
The actual performance of the Z9 will be important. If its focusing is inferior to Canon or Sony or the electronic shutter causes issues it wouldn't be good for the camera regardless of the price. It's got to work well. I hope it does. A strong Nikon is good for Canon users.
If Canon had planned to make the R1 as 24MP camera it may make them think again.
For me the IDXIII and R3 should have been at least 30MP. It would have been a good file size / performance trade-off.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 users

frjmacias

EOS R5 and EOS M50
May 14, 2020
63
61
30
Monterey, California
I will be completely honest. As an R5 shooter, I had no interest in the Z9 prior to hearing the pricing today because I assumed it would be much higher, but with the insanely competitive price, I might have to purchase a body. Of course, changing over systems when I am already invested in RF glass does not make financial sense, but I might add it as a separate kit with a few Nikon lenses. Impressive camera from Nikon, and this is great for the competition!
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 user

angelisland

EOS M50
Mar 30, 2021
31
46
CA and NY
For $1200 more than my R5 + grip; seems like a sweet deal on a very promising camera.
2x CFExpress B (!), fast readouts, no shutter, no overheating...
 
  • Like
Reactions: 5 users

bgoyette

EOS 90D
CR Pro
Feb 6, 2015
119
73
I think Nikon sees their window to grab back some market share. Lots of folks not yet converted to mirrorless, especially in the Pro Sector...Canon and Sony have been pushing the cost of everything up, up, up...Nikon comes out with some of the best specs yet and kicks the price point down. I think its a smart move, especially with the steady erosion of Nikon's market share the last 10 years.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 6 users

john1970

EOS R5
CR Pro
Dec 27, 2015
494
647
Northeastern US
I suspect that the R3 probably has marginally better AF, a (much) bigger buffer for RAW, and smaller size. For me, if I didn't need more MP and preferred dual-CFexpress card slots, I'd prefer the R3.
The DPRreview indicated a 40 shot, 2 sec buffer @ 20 fps with 45 MP lossless compression 14-bit RAW using a Sandisk 128 GB card, which I know is not that fastest card, but it gives you an idea. R3 appears to have a better buffer which one would expect given the 24 MP vs. 45 MP sensor.
 
Sep 5, 2018
1,124
1,202
Scotland
I think Nikon sees their window to grab back some market share. Lots of folks not yet converted to mirrorless, especially in the Pro Sector...Canon and Sony have been pushing the cost of everything up, up, up...Nikon comes out with some of the best specs yet and kicks the price point down. I think its a smart move, especially with the steady erosion of Nikon's market share the last 10 years.

They have a big enough install base that if this pulls some over their marketshare will go up without needing to poach Canon customers. The amount of D850/500/5 user I have spoken to that just weren’t interested in the Z6 and Z7 because their existing cameras were better or at least perceived better. Canon won everyone over with a (more expensive for its class) R5 and Nikon will hopefully do the same I’m with its aggressively priced Z9 and much better FTZ2 adaptor.
 
Sep 5, 2018
1,124
1,202
Scotland
The DPRreview indicated a 40 shot, 2 sec buffer @ 20 fps with 45 MP lossless compression 14-bit RAW using a Sandisk 128 GB card, which I know is not that fastest card, but it gives you an idea. R3 appears to have a better buffer which one would expect given the 24 MP vs. 45 MP sensor.

When I get mine I’ll be more interested in how fast it is ready after a second or two than how long it can run.
 

TravelerNick

EOS 90D
Dec 4, 2020
121
67
It may be just me, but I'm curious about the repeated references to the Nikon designed and developed sensor. In the past, where Nikon used sensors manufactured by Sony, were they Sony designs as well, or did Nikon design and hire out Sony's manufacture? I'm guessing that's the case the way this sensor is being described, I really don't know though.

Nikon's flagships have I think all (or close to all) used Nikon designed sensors. Some made by Sony. Some fabbed by others.

Sony off the shelf sensors are used for the volume stuff not this level.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 users

TravelerNick

EOS 90D
Dec 4, 2020
121
67
The DPRreview indicated a 40 shot, 2 sec buffer @ 20 fps with 45 MP lossless compression 14-bit RAW using a Sandisk 128 GB card, which I know is not that fastest card, but it gives you an idea. R3 appears to have a better buffer which one would expect given the 24 MP vs. 45 MP sensor.

Watch the Matt Granger video. His tests are much different.
 
Sep 5, 2018
1,124
1,202
Scotland
It may be just me, but I'm curious about the repeated references to the Nikon designed and developed sensor. In the past, where Nikon used sensors manufactured by Sony, were they Sony designs as well, or did Nikon design and hire out Sony's manufacture? I'm guessing that's the case the way this sensor is being described, I really don't know though.

That is kinda like saying that AMD sell TSMC processors. And the business unit that sells Nikon sensors also sells the Sony camera business unit sensors. Nikon likely sells equipment to Sony that is required to make sensors, given what a bit part of their business is.
 

wyotex43n

EOS M6 Mark II
Jan 24, 2016
76
59
A little surprised how many people think this price is a game changer. 20fps raw which is the same as an R5 which is less money.
I know that's not apples to apples but switching brands based on comparing the price to an R3 sounds like a gross overreaction.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 3 users

unfocused

EOS-1D X Mark III
Jul 20, 2010
6,751
4,706
68
Springfield, IL
www.mgordoncommunications.com
Some perspective here might be in order.

Nice camera. Nice specs. Nice price.

Is a $500 price difference enough to make R3 buyers cancel their orders? No. Is the 45 mp sensor enough to make R3 buyers cancel their orders? No. Are any of the other specs impressive enough to cause R3 buyers to cancel their orders? No.

As an R3 buyer, I might be a little miffed, but I'm not about to go all in on Nikon.

Is Nikon taking a loss on the Z9? No.

Congrats to Nikon on their new release and aggressive approach. But, the sky isn't falling for Canon.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 6 users

definedphotography

EOS M6 Mark II
Mar 13, 2020
62
64
Is a $500 price difference enough to make R3 buyers cancel their orders? No. Is the 45 mp sensor enough to make R3 buyers cancel their orders? No. Are any of the other specs impressive enough to cause R3 buyers to cancel their orders? No.

Not on their own, but all those things combined I'd bet a number would reconsider their R3 order. The real proof though will be with the reviews of the Z9. If it lives up to the specs, its a monster of a camera for the money.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 users

kirbic

I'm New Here
CR Pro
Jun 20, 2016
14
20
Lots of talk about how competitive the pricing is, and I do agree. A part of that is probably the lack of any mechanical shutter. That's huge from a manufacturing perspective. There would seem to be no moving parts left in this beast, apart from IBIS. Delete the mechanical shutter, move production to a low-cost country... the price suddenly makes sense. Nikon certainly needs to price aggressively to try to regain market share.
Well, competition is good! I'm certainly not jumping off the Canon ship.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 3 users