The Mighty Nikon Z8

The Nikon Z8

It seems to me that over the years, there has been a camera that we might call the "top amateur camera." I believe with a few companies that it might even have been an official term. At least internally, sometimes externally. It's sort of the sweet spot for people who are into photography but don't make their livings with their cameras.

I am brand agnostic, but I grew up in the era when Nikon went unchallenged as the top professional 35mm brand (not the case in this century), and over the years I have only shot Canon for one stretch, although I loved the Canon I had. So I tend to know more about Nikon than I know about most other brands. Just not as a "fanboy." And it seems to me that Nikon has generally had that "top amateur model." The Nikkormats in the days of the early F's. The N8008 in the time of the first autofocus F model, the F4 (I had both and usually shot with the N8008). The F100 at the end of the film era. The 6-MP D100 in the early days of DSLRs. The D700 hit the sweet spot perfectly. Then the D800 and D850 starting a decade or so ago. Maybe it's from Nikon that I got the idea! True (deep, dyed-in-the-wool, dedicated) Nikonophiles can correct me if you think I'm off base. For instance, it's not always true that there is a split between the top pro and top amateur models: the F3 was deeply loved by both constituencies—and well suited to both.

Working for the people I've always worked for turns the usual hierarchy on its head. All my life I've worked for students, advanced amateurs, "shutterbugs," enthusiasts, techie mavens, and art photographers (I qualify that last as being a label, not a claim). The top amateur models always rank higher than the top pro models. They're more desirable. Example: would you rather have an OM System OM-1 or an Olympus E-M1X? Not one in 20 amateurs would spring for the latter, if my guess is correct. Even though the latter is cheaper right now, because of the vagaries of fortune. Then again, the legacy Olympus E-M1 Mark III, new, is cheaper still. That's the one I'd pick, at this particular historical moment. (But I digress.)

Sure, you can shoot a pro model if you want to. But why would you? Pro models always had drawbacks for amateurs. Usually (but not always) higher cost, complexity, and size and weight. You paid for durability and dependability that amateurs simply didn't need. Burned in my memory is the sight of two F4's from the Gulf War, painted sand color, sitting on the repair bench at Pro Photo in the heart of Washington DC. Those two cameras looked like they were at least 10 years old. They were in getting refurbished for another "tour of duty." Actual age of the two cameras since new? Six months. Amateurs, who generally tend to pamper their gear, don't put their cameras through hell. So why pay for it?

Anyway, Nikon has done it again. They've introduced the "top amateur" camera in the Z lineup: the Z8, which has most of the trickle-down features of the Z9. (You couldn't make me carry a Z9. I'd feel like a dork, for one thing.)

There's one "little" problem with the Z8, which we'll get to tomorrow.

Mike

Original contents copyright 2023 by Michael C. Johnston and/or the bylined author. All Rights Reserved. Links in this post may be to our affiliates; sales through affiliate links may benefit this site. As an Amazon Associate I earn from qualifying purchases. (To see all the comments, click on the "Comments" link below or on the title of this post.)

Featured Comments from:

Jon Porter: "I've never liked the practice of reviewers assigning cameras to users as professional, amateur, entry-level, etc. There are only three categories of gear—high-end, mid-range, and low-end—which are used interchangeably by all levels of photographers.

"Plus another issue is defining what a professional photographer is these days. Ask a dozen of your readers and you'll get a dozen different definitions. I define a pro as someone whose primary income is from taking photographs, not the guy who shoots an occasional wedding or works in the camera department clerk at Best Buy. Others would argue that anyone making money through the broad category of photography is a professional."

Bambang: "Z8 is today’s version of F100."

F. Hall: "I might have gone to Nikon when mirrorless was taking off but the one thing that held me back was lack of 4:3 aspect ratio which I had mostly settled on by then. I wonder why we can't set it to whatever we like when it comes down to it.

"When a camera strongly bills itself as a hybrid camera I seem to lose all interest but that is just my mind messing with me. Using anything but a smartphone to photograph (or not having a smartphone on you) puts you squarely in the dork category. I am well past the age to care about that, and I have doubts that you really care about it either. This assumes dork means an unstylish, not with-it person."

Terry Letton: "Ya you can look like a dork if you act like you don’t belong there, but the reverse is also true. If you have good equipment and act confident and shoot appropriately it can be to your benefit.

"Of several possible illustrations I’ll just use one. I enjoy shooting motor sports but seldom actually get to do it. I was at the New Hampshire NASCAR race and decided I wanted to shoot Qualifying. I had my 5D Mark II and a borrowed big white 100–400mm lens. I stood close to the chain link fence so it would be out of focus and began to methodically shooting each car in turn as it pulled to the front of the line and took its run. Partway through I snuck a peek at the security guard who I had been expecting to shoo me away. He was instead keeping others from bothering me. I made sure to thank him on the way out."

Stephen S.: "I worked at a camera store through the early 2000s that had a clientele of predominantly amateurs and advanced amateurs, and only a few professionals. We regularly sold entry-level film SLR cameras from several brands; Canon, Nikon, Pentax, and Minolta to the amateurs. To advanced amateurs? It was tons of Nikon F80 (N80) and a lesser quantity of F100 bodies, but virtually nothing from any other brand. One single Minolta Maxxum 7, one single Pentax MZ-S, one single Canon EOS-3 and a few Canon Elan 7 bodies. Nikon truly had the advanced amateur market all to themselves, at least where we were located."

Comments

[Ken Tanaka]

"(You couldn't make me carry a Z9. I'd feel like a dork, for one thing.)"

Ahem.

Becoming a Sigma Fan

[Peter Wright]

If we couldn’t make you carry a Z9 (plus lenses of course), you couldn’t make me carry a Z8. As I get older, my tolerance for carrying heavy gear has evaporated. As a mainly B&W photographer, I use a Leica Q2M, which I very much like, and for more general work a Leica CL. I was thinking that the CL should get replaced by a Q3, but then I got to asking myself; why spend that much money for a camera that is not really central to what I do? Now I am almost certain the CL will indeed be gone, but that my next (and only) color camera will be the upcoming iPhone 15.

[xf mj]

count me as an amateur who decided to leap for the em1x over the om1. but that's because i decided to build an olympus system around their very nice 40-150mm f2.8 and because i could buy a low-shutter count used one for only $850, probably due to people dumping for the om1. really holds great. i have been an olympus digital shooter since 2009 (and a regular fanboy of them here on TOP) so i am used to the limits of the sensor. the thing is *solid* and the extra size marries well with olympus's longer/bigger pro lenses.

so we're talking an $1800-2500 kit (one with, say, one or two of their very high quality lenses; i have the 40-150 and the 17mm f1.2) for the price of a body. this is all for a hobbyist who is less into autofocus and more into enjoying many of the wonky features related to its fast multi-shot capabilities. seemingly built like a tank and fits well in the hand

i have some nice landscapes, a few bird shots, and some great portraits of my 11mo daughter as a result. maybe i have to work for the IQ and to get the shot, a lot of misses for every hit. but the little one can't seem to break it when she chances upon messing with its dials and switches. did i mention the low cost and low wear of the used body already?

[Will Duquette]

I got an OM-1 just a couple of months ago, replacing the original OM-D EM5, and I am delighted with it. Fits my hand perfectly, the controls are right where I want them, and it just feels better than the EM5. For me.

[Albert Smith]

I am using a D700 still to this day for my Nikon F mount lenses (haven't taken the Voightlander 40mm f/2 off it in a year), and while I have embraced the advantages and Benefits of mirrorless (Fujifilm), I can't think about buying into yet another system.

That could change if the rumors are true (see link) about Nikon releasing a full frame version of their Zfc. I could fix my error of not buying the Df back in the day.

https://digital-photography-school.com/nikon-zfc-rumors/

[William Lewis]

Haven't been able to make the jump to the Z series - too many nice F lenses for one thing. So I just splurged over the past month on two new to me Nikon bodies:

F4 for film - yeah, you didn't like it much but I'm not using it for work so it's excellent for me :) Only the Canon A2E or T90 were close to this good in film in my previous experience.

D810 for digital. Amazing DSLR and it fills my desires of what the "top amateur camera." should be quite well. Only one generation back for a change. That's a close to current as I've ever been ;)

Between these and my Leica M 240 I am so set, I can't imagine ever needing a Z anytime soon.

[nextSibling]

I guess I'll just never be part of the scene where an 'amateur' (of any kind) camera is $4000 (before lenses). I'm sure it's a delight in many ways, but I'll stick with my Z5 for now, which already does more than I'll ever need.

I've used Nikon for decades. Grew up on a hand-me-down FM. My used-to-me, first 'pro' camera, F3 was a gem. Survived over a dozen countries and a bunch of early-career event and wedding abuse. Now there's one of those cameras we regret selling.

Fooled around with some others, Olympus in particular, until recently, when I just couldn't live without shallower depth of field any longer. Nikon felt like returning to the fold. And the modern Z lenses, even the more budget ones, seem to have solved all the problems of the older series, and more. Good grief, I sound like an advert.

[Luke]

I can finally call myself an Art Photographer, because, as you say, "it's a label, not a claim"!

[John Krumm]

I would happily use this camera, but it’s not a must purchase. The original Z6/7 cameras were so good, and still work so well, I’d only buy this if fast moving objects were my main interest. Give it a few years and I might pick one up used. Now the rumored ZF (compact full frame retro) might be another story, since it would directly target my base consumer impulses. I also wouldn’t need it, but I would want it.

[Dennis Ng]

I bought a z9 on end May when z8 just came out. After using z9 I can say I like z9 not the light weight one. If you want light weight, a zfc is better (with kit lens or some prime lens). For one camera that rest your mind it is ok in most situations. I still reserve landscape with my Hasselblad digital back. And frankly for most photo is still my iPone 14 pro max.

The problem of z8 is like z7. Any bigger lens (even my 400 F4.5) could not balance with it. I shocked when I first time can hand handle all my 5 pounds lens without trouble.

For the Alaska trip for this z9 I just carry it with the 445 x1.4 just like nothing. Complement with an iPhone I did the expensive trip with Nature Trek. Just have a bino (or mono for me) and somebody else carry his sporting lens. Then all good.

[SteveW]

Well, Ken Tanaka made my day with a good chuckle!

Dorks rule.

[Tom Burke]

These days I tend to be reading, or viewing, discussions about the best camera system on a smart phone. Currently the smart money hovers between a top Samsung and the Google Pixel 7 Pro (I think), with my personal choice (iPhone 14 Pro) getting an honourable mention.

I have bought a Canon Mirrorless APS-C body plus a 70-200 RF lens to cover the focal lengths that the smartphone doesn’t. But it doesn’t get much use, and it might well have been a silly thing to do. The phone cameras keep getting better and better and increasingly it’s all I want to use.

[Cynistrategus]

FYI the EM1 Mk3 can be had for like $799 refurbished during holiday sales from the OM Outlet. The one I bought had 20 shutter actuations, I think they're just moving new stock.

[Wolfgang Lonien]

Yeah, I remember the F3, that was quite a bit of camera. I had a Canon A1 like my brother during that time, and after a while I wanted the polar opposite, a Nikon FM. But on that one I couldn't see the viewfinder pic that good, wearing glasses, a Konica from a friend or my own Canon were better in that regard...

Nowadays, my wife has the Oly E-M5 Mk2, but I prefer the swivel-up/down display of my E-M10 Mk2 over it, that's also mostly the reason why I never went for an E-M1. Maybe a Z5 would be nice, but then again, that tiny puny E-M10 is more than I need TBH...

[Jim R]

I just pried open the wallet for a lightly-used G9. That's the closest my budget can come to any mirrorless model made in the past five years with my preferred feature subset. The Z/R bodies are all too new, α/X generally don't have one or two specs I crave. I'm well invested in µ43 lenses, so this will be fun, and quite the step from my e-M1 'Classic'.

Maybe I'll even make a video now and then!