The most pointless review you will read this week

If you are a photographer and haven't recently returned from 6 months in deepest Borneo, you may have noticed that Nikon has announced a new camera format and two new cameras.

Unfortunately my invitation to the Nikon launch party got mislaid in the mail and Nikon failed to provide me with a pre-launch copy. This is not a great surprise since I am hardly their core demographic since I have never owned a piece Nikon kit and I don't foresee myself ever doing so (someone should do a photographic version of the film sliding doors where the same person goes into a camera shop, and ends up buying a Nikon, Canon and Sony and we see how that decision changes their lives [The answer, not a lot and none of them end up sleeping with Gwynetth Paltrow])

It is therefore a pointless exercise for me to comment on either of these cameras, So I am going to stop right here...

Except....

the internet is largely exists to cater for those with little knowledge and big opinions, and who am I to fight that. I do also have a little knowledge of how technology is developed and  especially how large companies work, so let me enlighten you on that basis.

So here is my pointless opinion.

How to get ahead in advertising

One thing I must congratulate Nikon on is their viral advertising campaign. Over the last months they have sneaked teaser after teaser to the awaiting world, to the point it felt that Nikonistas have a collective orgasm when it was released.

But once the cigarette has been smoked and the post-coital glow has subsided it is worth examining what we really got here. Is it the best mirrorless camera ever (or "sex Mirrorless reinvented" as Nikon put it), or just a the camera equivalent of a one night stand, which will be embarrassingly forgotten when the true love turns up? (enough of the sexual metaphors - Ed).

In truth it is somewhere in the middle.

Up to the launch it has been a lot of fun reading the speculation on various forums  on what the camera will do.Things like it natively taking all F  mount lenses (it was never going to happen), 100 M pixel sensor (why ???), how it was going to wipe the floor with Sony cameras (it hasn't), and all sort of other features and claims.

What we got in fact was a competent mirrorless camera, close to , but not beating the market leader, but with excellent future potential, presuming the lens development map is kept to, and Nikon maintains a good pace of refinement and development.

In truth it was a bit like going into a lap dancing club and finding rather than the voluptuous super models displayed on the posters, a rather middle aged plump lady who looks disturbingly like your single mother of three next door neighbor (Look I warned you - Ed).

Some people in the pre-hype days suggested that this would be Nikon's iphone moment. However what people forget about the iPhone was, apart from the fact it was actually not actually very good,  is that it was totally different to what was out in the market at the time. The Nikon Z series on the other hand was never going to be that. It is coming into relatively mature market with already established products from Sony, Fuji, Olympus etc. In many ways it is more a Nokia android phone, an attempt of an established manufacturer to compete in another related market.

So what about the camera

Not having the camera to hand, there is not much I can say here. However a some things did stand out.

Firstly is the overall design and specifically the prominent viewfinder hump. Compared to the Sony A7 series, it is far larger and prominent and there could be technical and ergonomic reasons for this. However personally I think it is a design statement. It allows the shape of camera to retain a common design look and feel with the camera DSLR's and maybe a comfort blanket to those who had always disparaged electronic view finders until their beloved Nikon went to the dark side.

Secondly the button and customization options. The buttons by the lens and its ability to change the functionality of the focus ring, are interesting features, and maybe other manufacturers should consider. However I personally think you can never have enough cutomisation features and this camera could do with a few more.

I also like the LCD top plate. Presuming it is programmable so can display a number of different elements based on mode, it makes a good place to combine the essential camera information.

Finally the issue of the single memory card slot. This has been discussed at length on various forums  and opinions range from its a total disaster to the "i've never had a card fail, so why worry" school of thought.

My own opinion based on only recently having a camera with two slots is that dual slots is a feature you do not miss, until you don't have it, at which image loss paranoia kicks in. Certainly if my job and livelihood depended on it, it would be a feature I would demand.

It therefore seems a simple and curious omission. Some have suggested it is for performance reasons, but neither the Z6 or the Z7 is a speed freak, and the Sony camera manages with similar frame rates. Another possibility is to differentiate the camera from the pro D850 and D500. If so this is short sighted by Nikon and will not help grab sales back from Sony.

However I was more interested by the card type itself. Rather than going for the more ubiquitous SD cards, they chose the XQD format. XQD cards are faster than SD, but they are also expensive and pretty well only produced by 3 companies (2 being Sony and Nikon). By forcing XQD on users is akin to when Sony tried to push everyone to Sony proprietary memory sticks. Most people will not take advantage of the increased memory bandwidth of the XQD cards but have for increased costs. At the same time SD cards will probably get faster over time and have increased capacity. It is a pity that they could not have support both XQD and SD cards

Its all about the lenses

While no doubt disappointing to some, this camera was never going to be a Sony killer.

Sony have been developing their A series cameras for a number of years and have reached the point where only the most rabid Nikonistas would disagree that that they produce some fine cameras. Not only that but the native lens lineup matured to match the range and quality of its competitors. However this did not happen overnight and has taken a number of iterations to reach this point.

The idea that Nikon, despite their many years experience in DSLR's could just generate a rival  product markedly superior to Sony' s on their 1st attempt was laughable. To be honest it is impressive that Nikon has come as close as they have.

The other issue was that Nikon was going to need a new mount. I won't bore you with things like flange distances, etc, but you cannot just bang a DSLR lense onto a mirrorless camera, without large compromises.

When choosing a camera for the 1st time,  Nikon's ace in the hole has always been their existing F mount lens with its huge range of legacy lenses. The ability to be able to mount them on the new camera was a must do, especially because at its launch the camera will only have a few native lenses.

Therefore an adapter was essential to allow Nikon time to build there Z mount lens line up. To be honest if I was Nikon I would of just given one out to every purchaser for free.

What will be critical however is how well it works in practice. If anyone can build an adapter for F series lenses, you must assume Nikon can. However Sony showed with its own A-series adapter that they never work quite as well as native lenses.

However it should be enough to encourage Nikon users wishing to move to mirrorless to stay with Nikon, not least because changing lenses is expensive and time consuming. Whether it will be enough for those with no existing commitment to move to Nikon, is questionable. Apart from the brand name, and if you remove the adapter from the equation, the cameras offer no compelling reason to choose it over say the A7iii.

However the big worry for Nikon will be that rather expand its user base, it will just eat away at its own DSLR sales. This will mean they will sell the same number of cameras, but will need to support  two systems.

In reality Nikon is 2 years too late with this product. By delaying, they have given Sony time to refine both the technology and their lens lineup. However this is always the dilemma for companies in near monopolistic situations when introduced with a new threat.

How big is your Flange?

Which brings us to the most exciting part of the new Nikon system. The Nikon Z mount.

Nikon could of easily stuck with the dimensions of the F-mount. Its diameter happily supports full frame in the D850 and it would of reduced production lens costs. Instead they have gone with a totally new lens mount.

The most outstanding feature of the new mount, is its diameter which at 55mm is huge.

For example here are the diameters of equivalent mounts

Nikon F 44mm
Fujifilm X 44mm
Sony E       46.1mm
Four Thirds  44mm
Micro four thirds 38mm

As you can see it is about a 1 cm larger than most other mounts. in fact it is getting closer to the type of mount you would see on a medium format camera (Fujifilm G is 65mm).

So the question is why?

Unfortunately lens design and manufacturer is one of those arcane arts truly understood by few. If I could ask one question of Nikon engineer it would be what was their design process in getting to those dimensions and what is their future plans.

However here is just my own ill informed idle speculation.

Firstly Nikon, like most Japanese companies, have long term strategies.  The increased diameter allows the sensor size to increase past full frame with no lens changes. Whether anyone wants bigger than full frame is another question, but if the technology goes that way Nikon has got its covered (remember the F-mount has lasted almost 60 years)

Secondly it allows lenses with wider apertures and they have already announced a 0.95 f lens.

However this might come at a cost. Wider lenses are more difficult to make and therefore the cost of Z lenses might be prohibitive to some. Secondly the lens itself becomes bigger so negating some of the the mirrorless advantage.

However a more flexible future proof mount might just be the area where they Nikon could form a decisive advantage (I also wonder whether we will ever see a Nikon DSLR Z mount camera or at least a Z mount to F series adapter...discuss)

It will also be interesting to see whether 3rd party lens manufacturers such as Sigma will support the new mount. This would reduce the cost of ownership, but I am guessing they will hold back until they see the uptake of the camera and the new mount lenses in particular.

Conclusion

One thing important point is that this is a camera Nikon did not want to make.

Nikon has built its reputation on conservative gradual improvements. For example Nikon's F mount which sits on the majority of their cameras has been around and continually improved since 1959. Just think for a second how much the world has changed since 1959.

Also consider Nikon is not a big company. Those who live within the world of photography, think of Nikon as this giant monolith, but compared to both Sony and Canon it is relatively small and more importantly relies almost exclusively on camera and lens sales for its income. However camera sales have been declining for years now as smart phones sweep up the lower end of the market, meaning manufacturers have to concentrate on higher end systems, which have higher profit margin but fewer sales.

Producing a new separate, parallel, camera line is a big drain on resources on a company like Nikon and required a huge amount of investment in both development and production. Not only that but they will need to support 2 camera systems. This is a huge risk for Nikon and no doubt not taken lightly.

If Nikon could have their way they would introduce a new DSLR every few years and make a killing on lens sales. However, despite the hype, Nikon and Canon have been slowly losing users to customers like Sony. More importantly new customers in a declining market have been increasingly also going to mirrorless systems. At least Canon has a mirrorless system, but since the debacle of the J1 system, Nikon has been increasingly riding a one trick pony, and that trick has looked increasing tired and on its last legs recently. This is not some vanity product, but could be a make or break moment for Nikon.

In truth the overall winner of this is Sony. Not only do they produce Nikon's imaging chips, but by Nikon entering the mirrorless market, they have after many years denigrating it, confirmed Sony's camera strategy. After many years of denying it ,they have shown that the future is probably mirrorless. 

Also don't believe the tag line "Mirrorless reinvented". There is nothing new or innovate in this camera  I have no doubt that Sony have a A7 mark IV well into development so Nikon, so used to being a product leader, and now playing catch up. 

Personally I don't think that Nikon have the resources to fully support two camera systems so something will have to give. This will probably mean that we will not be seeing many new DSLR's out anytime soon. Also don't expect many new F mount lenses. This is not a disaster, since Nikon's DSLR lineup is pretty complete at present and any short fall in F mount lenses will get taken up by 3rd party manufacturers. However time will tell whether this is pivot or just Nikon dipping a toe in the water to see whether it is worth doing the journey.

It will be also interesting on how Nikon supports these cameras. Will they go the Fuji route of continual feature update or the Sony way of bringing out a new model every few years? 

The big question is now what will Canon do. Despite the rumors we have no idea whether Canon will actually introduce their own FF mirrorless camera. In many ways Canon are better placed than Nikon, with greater resources and already mature differentiating technologies such as dual pixel. 

Whatever happens, competition is always good, and never hurts the consumer (at least in the short term). It is definitely an exciting time to be a camera user.