Nikon releases the Z8 mirrorless camera

The two specs I am most interested in - what is the fastest flash synch with the electronic shutter (might be slow - might be very fast)?

What are the specs of the EVF? As that is the critical feature for those coming from SLR.

Haven’t found info on either yet.

Alex

From dpreview review - HDR brightness in EVF would be legit

“The Z8 has the same viewfinder as the Z9, which means a rather low-sounding 3.69M dots (1280 x 960px). However, the low-lag feed delivered from the parallel readout design of the Stacked CMOS chip means it gives one of the most responsive, lifelike viewfinder experiences we've yet had. Nikon says it's able to preview HLG footage, which suggests it's an panel that can achieve HDR brightness levels.”

https://m.dpreview.com/reviews/nikon-z8-initial-review#index

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

The LCD resolution of this camera is lower than the D850. Combined with the lower resolution EVF this is for my a serious issue

I am frustrated with the low resolution LCD of my A1 however the EVF more than makes up for it

I don't understand why you should be skimping on display for a £3999 camera, higher resolution EVFs are expensive but expected at this price point

55 minutes ago, Interceptor121 said:

The LCD resolution of this camera is lower than the D850. Combined with the lower resolution EVF this is for my a serious issue

I am frustrated with the low resolution LCD of my A1 however the EVF more than makes up for it

I don't understand why you should be skimping on display for a £3999 camera, higher resolution EVFs are expensive but expected at this price point

I agree with this. The issue I have is that I shoot wildlife (action) top side as well, and I've looked at Sony's lens offering for what I do and it's not comparable, not for my price point anyway. Maybe if I was mega rich. Canon is always an option...

Anyway, resolution is a big concern, as I want to 100% make sure I have properly focused my shot by zooming in to pixel peep. I've got very good eye sight, and even with my D500 I would seriously struggle to know if it's REALLY tack sharp, or just kinda sharp. However, looking at the A7RV, it's almost the same as the Z9, which again is surprising.

So perhaps the issue I had with DSLR was processing power, and the way it renders 100% zoomed in photos is not really one of poor resolution, it is one of being able to *render* an image properly when zoomed in? I've not found the answer to this yet, nor have I tried a Z9 - so I am patiently waiting for the Z8 end of this month, as frankly, I have no other option given my top side wildlife + glass investment.

I agree with this. The issue I have is that I shoot wildlife (action) top side as well, and I've looked at Sony's lens offering for what I do and it's not comparable, not for my price point anyway. Maybe if I was mega rich. Canon is always an option...
Anyway, resolution is a big concern, as I want to 100% make sure I have properly focused my shot by zooming in to pixel peep. I've got very good eye sight, and even with my D500 I would seriously struggle to know if it's REALLY tack sharp, or just kinda sharp. However, looking at the A7RV, it's almost the same as the Z9, which again is surprising.
So perhaps the issue I had with DSLR was processing power, and the way it renders 100% zoomed in photos is not really one of poor resolution, it is one of being able to *render* an image properly when zoomed in? I've not found the answer to this yet, nor have I tried a Z9 - so I am patiently waiting for the Z8 end of this month, as frankly, I have no other option given my top side wildlife + glass investment.

40 minutes ago, Interceptor121 said:

Not sure how nikon does it now generally you need to save full rez jpeg and raw otherwise you are displaying the low rez embedded jpeg
Doing this with the A1 I am zooming into a 50 megapixel file using a 2 megapixel evf so you need to go 20x to be 1:1


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Wow, "today I learn". I had no idea this was the case, I thought it had a built in raw processor and always wondered why zooming in to a raw-only image was so horrendous.

Wow, "today I learn". I had no idea this was the case, I thought it had a built in raw processor and always wondered why zooming in to a raw-only image was so horrendous.

Does this new camera represents a improvement to the D850 launched 6 years ago?
Is the auto focus system soo good too convince current D850 owners to make the switch?
Sometimes it looks to me that mirrorless made us lose 6 years of Nikon's DRSL development.

6 hours ago, Joss said:

Does this new camera represents a improvement to the D850 launched 6 years ago?
Is the auto focus system soo good too convince current D850 owners to make the switch?
Sometimes it looks to me that mirrorless made us lose 6 years of Nikon's DRSL development.

 

What DSLR development are still possible? I believe the new requirements of the public can't be accomplished by a camera that is designed to only take photos. This was the consistent message in a panel of manufacturers interviews at CP+ few months ago

DSLR broadly take only pictures and there is no market for devices that just take a picture

Of course DSLR could take videos in live view but that is not anything anyone is interested in as of today

9 hours ago, Interceptor121 said:

Every raw file has a jpeg normally thumbnail size
If there is a raw processor is to create a jpeg
There are programs that can extract it. It is a good learning on why you never ever save raw only


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

The "thumbnail" is used for the icon whereas the embedded jpeg is full size and used by viewer-editors such as Photo Mechanic which is what I use. One can look at an image >100% while using Photo Mechanic. This is also why it is so much faster than Lightroom.

3 minutes ago, Tom_Kline said:

The "thumbnail" is used for the icon whereas the embedded jpeg is full size and used by viewer-editors such as Photo Mechanic which is what I use. One can look at an image >100% while using Photo Mechanic. This is also why it is so much faster than Lightroom.

I was thinking specifically in-camera - zooming in to check focus is sometimes a false-positive for me, in camera, under water. I don't do it too often, but there are times I have a static critter I'm shooting, thinking I've got the perfect shot, go off and shoot something else, get to the computer and think "I should've stayed with the subject for longer". I've no problem reviewing on the computer

2 hours ago, Interceptor121 said:

What DSLR development are still possible? I believe the new requirements of the public can't be accomplished by a camera that is designed to only take photos. This was the consistent message in a panel of manufacturers interviews at CP+ few months ago

DSLR broadly take only pictures and there is no market for devices that just take a picture

Of course DSLR could take videos in live view but that is not anything anyone is interested in as of today

A hypothetical future DSLR could have subject selection a la mirrorless using improved AF sensors (basically a second image sensor) and or using live view with or without a hybrid VF.  This hybrid VF would be both an optical VF as well as an EVF. I understand there are patents for such. Obviously we are talking substantial costs. Mirrorless especially without a shutter is cheaper. However, for now, my understanding is that stacked sensors are a bit pricey.

2 minutes ago, sinetwo said:

I was thinking specifically in-camera - zooming in to check focus is sometimes a false-positive for me, in camera, under water. I don't do it too often, but there are times I have a static critter I'm shooting, thinking I've got the perfect shot, go off and shoot something else, get to the computer and think "I should've stayed with the subject for longer". I've no problem reviewing on the computer

Keep in mind that you are looking at the back of the camera through the housing window as well as your mask window and some water. Some optical interference there. If I chimp for focus I look for the focus symbols but these are only available for certain AF modes and vary with camera model (thus this is rare) so mainly chimp for the histogram and looking out for blinkies.

A hypothetical future DSLR could have subject selection a la mirrorless using improved AF sensors (basically a second image sensor) and or using live view with or without a hybrid VF.  This hybrid VF would be both an optical VF as well as an EVF. I understand there are patents for such. Obviously we are talking substantial costs. Mirrorless especially without a shutter is cheaper. However, for now, my understanding is that stacked sensors are a bit pricey.

2 hours ago, Interceptor121 said:

Why would you do that? Subject recognition already work with the standard image pipeline of a mirrorless camera?
Chip costs are driven by volumes
Phones are stacked soon there will be enough volume to drop also cameras


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

I can think of several reasons. The one most cogent for me would be the ability to use screw-drive AF lenses (especially the adapted Nikonos RS lenses) and also have eye recognition (probably the most valuable part of subject recognition). The preferred details (see my previous posts) would be to have the hybrid VF with LV AF via phase detect (unlike all Nikon DSLRs except one model - they use contrast detect which is all but non-functional for moving subjects) as this would enable the feature over the whole frame unlike that typical of FF SLR AF sensors. A further possibility would be to use a pellicle mirror instead of a standard camera mirror, do away with the standard SLR AF sensor, and just use the on-sensor AF while at the same time retaining the optical viewfinder aspects of the hybrid VF - this could also be shutterless and thus quiet like the Z8 and Z9.

An alternate solution would be to have an F mount mirrorless camera that supported screw-drive AF. Maybe this what is planned for the Zf????????? My sardonic guess is that Nikon will not because their Z plan has as a goal to sell more, lots more, lenses. I have news for them, my Z body count is now 2 Zs,  Z lens count is 1 (the original kit lens). I have three FTZs (both versions) as well as a bunch of dumb adapters to use my existing lenses- F, EF and even Leica rangefinder (screw mount and M) lenses.  My most used lens on the two Zs is the 300mm PF lens (> 10K pix in just one day!!).

Another reason that may be more cogent to others is for transition. This is based on some of what I heard during my trip to Palau in February that was led by Stephen Frink. Apparently many long time SLR users are quite challenged when using mirrorless. For example I have been using SLRs since the late 1960s when I was a teenager. Adjusting to AF and then digital was done in small steps. Stepping to mirrorless requires quite a significant mental re-alignment of how one shoots. I have read folks calling this workflow but this word already has other connotations in digital photography so might be a bit ambiguous.

I can think of several reasons. The one most cogent for me would be the ability to use screw-drive AF lenses (especially the adapted Nikonos RS lenses) and also have eye recognition (probably the most valuable part of subject recognition). The preferred details (see my previous posts) would be to have the hybrid VF with LV AF via phase detect (unlike all Nikon DSLRs except one model - they use contrast detect which is all but non-functional for moving subjects) as this would enable the feature over the whole frame unlike that typical of FF SLR AF sensors. A further possibility would be to use a pellicle mirror instead of a standard camera mirror, do away with the standard SLR AF sensor, and just use the on-sensor AF while at the same time retaining the optical viewfinder aspects of the hybrid VF - this could also be shutterless and thus quiet like the Z8 and Z9.
An alternate solution would be to have an F mount mirrorless camera that supported screw-drive AF. Maybe this what is planned for the Zf????????? My sardonic guess is that Nikon will not because their Z plan has as a goal to sell more, lots more, lenses. I have news for them, my Z body count is now 2 Zs,  Z lens count is 1 (the original kit lens). I have three FTZs (both versions) as well as a bunch of dumb adapters to use my existing lenses- F, EF and even Leica rangefinder (screw mount and M) lenses.  My most used lens on the two Zs is the 300mm PF lens (> 10K pix in just one day!!).
Another reason that may be more cogent to others is for transition. This is based on some of what I heard during my trip to Palau in February that was led by Stephen Frink. Apparently many long time SLR users are quite challenged when using mirrorless. For example I have been using SLRs since the late 1960s when I was a teenager. Adjusting to AF and then digital was done in small steps. Stepping to mirrorless requires quite a significant mental re-alignment of how one shoots. I have read folks calling this workflow but this word already has other connotations in digital photography so might be a bit ambiguous.

14 hours ago, Tom_Kline said:

I can think of several reasons. The one most cogent for me would be the ability to use screw-drive AF lenses (especially the adapted Nikonos RS lenses) and also have eye recognition (probably the most valuable part of subject recognition). The preferred details (see my previous posts) would be to have the hybrid VF with LV AF via phase detect (unlike all Nikon DSLRs except one model - they use contrast detect which is all but non-functional for moving subjects) as this would enable the feature over the whole frame unlike that typical of FF SLR AF sensors. A further possibility would be to use a pellicle mirror instead of a standard camera mirror, do away with the standard SLR AF sensor, and just use the on-sensor AF while at the same time retaining the optical viewfinder aspects of the hybrid VF - this could also be shutterless and thus quiet like the Z8 and Z9.

An alternate solution would be to have an F mount mirrorless camera that supported screw-drive AF. Maybe this what is planned for the Zf????????? My sardonic guess is that Nikon will not because their Z plan has as a goal to sell more, lots more, lenses. I have news for them, my Z body count is now 2 Zs,  Z lens count is 1 (the original kit lens). I have three FTZs (both versions) as well as a bunch of dumb adapters to use my existing lenses- F, EF and even Leica rangefinder (screw mount and M) lenses.  My most used lens on the two Zs is the 300mm PF lens (> 10K pix in just one day!!).

Another reason that may be more cogent to others is for transition. This is based on some of what I heard during my trip to Palau in February that was led by Stephen Frink. Apparently many long time SLR users are quite challenged when using mirrorless. For example I have been using SLRs since the late 1960s when I was a teenager. Adjusting to AF and then digital was done in small steps. Stepping to mirrorless requires quite a significant mental re-alignment of how one shoots. I have read folks calling this workflow but this word already has other connotations in digital photography so might be a bit ambiguous.

Hi Tom, Sony has a lens adapter that allows me to use screw-drive lenses like the old Sony/Minolta Fisheye lens on all of my Sony mirrorless cameras. All of the current features including eye AF work with this simple adapter. I am sure that at some point Nikon or some after market manufacture will introduce a similar Nikon screw-drive adapter.

On the issue of transition I also started shooting underwater in the 1960's with a Nikonos II with a 28mm lens. I made the transition from a Nikonos RS which I used for over fifteen years to both digital and mirrorless at almost the same time with a short stint using Olympus 4/3 DSLR cameras before moving to M43 cameras. I did not find the transition all that challenging since I have always used manual settings. Unlike 121 I am not a video shooter so all of the hype about "hybrid" features holds no value for me other than that some of the video features also improve the stills capability.

https://www.dpreview.com/articles/1345194531/the-state-of-the-camera-industry-according-to-the-people-who-make-cameras

I saw Thom Hogan do an on-line presentation on the Nikon Z8 that was sponsored by the Creative Photo Academy yesterday (Friday) afternoon (Alaska time).
What I perceive as the biggest game changer from this presentation is the use of 10-bit HEIF files instead of jpegs (which are 8-bit). He shot an example (live) of a small high contrast set-up. The camera was wired so that we could watch the VF images; most importantly the histograms. What had been blown (highlights) for the jpeg was not blown for the HEIF. Keep in mind that he was using a pre-production camera body. The implication is that in the future we may be able to chimp 10-bit images rather than 8-bit that has been the digital standard until now. This will make a chimped image much more realistic exposure-wise when shooting raw files.

I saw Thom Hogan do an on-line presentation on the Nikon Z8 that was sponsored by the Creative Photo Academy yesterday (Friday) afternoon (Alaska time).
What I perceive as the biggest game changer from this presentation is the use of 10-bit HEIF files instead of jpegs (which are 8-bit). He shot an example (live) of a small high contrast set-up. The camera was wired so that we could watch the VF images; most importantly the histograms. What had been blown (highlights) for the jpeg was not blown for the HEIF. Keep in mind that he was using a pre-production camera body. The implication is that in the future we may be able to chimp 10-bit images rather than 8-bit that has been the digital standard until now. This will make a chimped image much more realistic exposure-wise when shooting raw files.

8 hours ago, Tom_Kline said:

I saw Thom Hogan do an on-line presentation on the Nikon Z8 that was sponsored by the Creative Photo Academy yesterday (Friday) afternoon (Alaska time).
What I perceive as the biggest game changer from this presentation is the use of 10-bit HEIF files instead of jpegs (which are 8-bit). He shot an example (live) of a small high contrast set-up. The camera was wired so that we could watch the VF images; most importantly the histograms. What had been blown (highlights) for the jpeg was not blown for the HEIF. Keep in mind that he was using a pre-production camera body. The implication is that in the future we may be able to chimp 10-bit images rather than 8-bit that has been the digital standard until now. This will make a chimped image much more realistic exposure-wise when shooting raw files.

You may already do this,  adjusting the JPEG quality settings in camera when shooting RAW applies those settings to the embedded JPEG and this is what is displayed and used to calculate the histogram at least on most manufacturers cameras.  Reducing the contrast setting on the JPEG will extend the range on the highlights a little allowing you to get closer to clipping the highlights with your exposure.  You could readily experiment with JPEG settings to get closer. 

Extended bit range for the embedded JPEG with HEIF will certainly be an advantage.  It may even help with showing sunballs in the EVF?