Nikon FX / APS-C

Thom accused me today of being "knee-jerk." Definition: "(of a response) automatic and unthinking." Sounds like ad hominem to me. I am many things (wayward, eccentric, crackpot maybe), but I promise, I am not knee-jerk. I think way too much about this stuff.  :-)

But to further illuminate where I'm coming from, the thing that got me excited in Thom's original "Nikon Acquires RED" article is this part:

So how does Nikon pull in new users from the young that want to go beyond what the product they grew up with does?

I’m pretty sure the answer lives in APS-C (or as Nikon calls it, DX). That’s because of cost and size, first and foremost. You don’t go from carrying a phone in your pocket to a 35 pound bag-a-gear on your back in one step ;~). You also don’t go from letting the phone make all the decisions and heavy lifting to dealing with 2+ billion customization possibilities in one step, either. Finally, you don’t go from the modest phone sensor costs to global shutter full frame sensor costs in one step.

Thus my comment: the answer lies in APS-C done right. We’ll see how fast Nikon figures that out.

APS-C done right. That's the precinct where I would be happiest contributing, if I could have any say in camera design and market planning. (Big IF. Thom likes to be prescriptive with Nikon—his relationship with the company is that of a gadfly, in the noblest Socratean sense—but I don't have much stomach for telling companies what to do. Because not only do they not listen, they don't even want to give the appearance of having heard, lest there be litigation over the credit for ideas in the future. I've actually had companies [not in the photographic sphere] implement specific ideas of mine, in detail, unmistakably, after long, multi-part discussions, and then disavow knowing me and deny having heard from me after the products came out. I had never mentioned payment and didn't require any, but they had to be sure. That's corporate behavior. Covermyassism. And it makes sense from the corporation's perspective, if you conceive of a corporation being a juggernaut that must constantly cruise forward and feed itself like a shark, preying on whatever it comes across.)

But I digress. DX would be the area where my ideas about what cameras should be would be most at home. IF Nikon could get comfortable thinking of DX as a transition step between smartphones and full-capability FF mirrorless Z cameras; and IF Nikon could get over that period in its history when it intended to stay dedicated to DX, stubbornly not moving to FF (later FX) until it realized it didn't get to say; and IF it could get over the cultural imperative to festoon and becrud products with all possible features purely as lazy marketing; and IF it could get over the failure of the Nikon 1 cameras while at the same time realizing that the Nikon 1 cameras were actually pretty good cameras in some important ways....

...Ah, forget it. Never happen. I don't think I should bother discussing my vision for what such Nikons might be like. I'd be a gadfly on the hide of a rhino. The rhino never knowing the fly was there. I accept that I'm at odds with current camera culture and that's an end on it.

But that's the area I like. It occurred to me yesterday that the Integra Type S I drove the other day is the best car I've ever driven as well as probably the best car I ever will drive. Part of that is that it's right at the very upper edge of the category I'm at home in: go any bigger, more powerful, fancier, more exclusive, more expensive than that, and I would progressively lose interest more and more. I wouldn't drive a Lambo if I had the chance. No interest. Back when I briefly sold audio, the other salesmen would gather after work in the high-end room for a soak in the Wilson Watt-Puppies and the $35,000 four-piece Krell Audio Standard, each channel on its own separate 40-amp circuit. I, meanwhile, alone, would head to the mid-fi room to listen carefully to mini-monitors, box two-ways and three-ways with no bass like the Spendor SP-1, along with 85-WPC one-box power amps and barebones preamps—simple, purist, purposeful, elegant, accessible, and nothing at all pretentious, snobby or show-offy in any corner of the room. No interest in the "statement" Krells and Wilsons; no interest in statements. Listening in the high-end room to the "reference" system and audiophile-approved recordings, I would fidget and squirm, and try to remain polite. I didn't enjoy it. It left me cold.

But a thoroughgoing reconceptualization of DX as a gateway step between phones and the Z series? As an excuse to make a pared-down light-weight single-purpose RWD roadster of a camera? I'd be all over that. Thom would have to move over!

Mike

P.S. If I bought a new car now it would probably be the Civic Si. Pending a test-drive, which might not be trivial to arrange: the local Honda dealer told me there's a year-long wait list! But I'm pretty sure my next car will be electric, or at least PHEV (plug-in hybrid electric vehicle).

Original contents copyright 2024 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:

Dave Millier: "I recently purchased a Kia E-Niro EV. By no means a high-end EV, just a budget compact crossover with an all-electric drive train (there are ICE and Hybrid versions as well).

"What a car! Just makes petrol cars instantly obsolete. Accelerates like many a hot-hatch, but smooth as a Rolls. No stupid clutch to have to constantly pump as you stop-start along through the London rush hour at an average speed of 4 MPH. No choking tailpipe emissions. No gears to mess with. Most of the time you don't even have to brake, as it stops on its own when you lift on the throttle. Not quite a Tesla, but it does nearly 300 miles on a charge and (if you are crazy) the cruise control maintains your speed, slows automatically or speeds up again to maintain a set distance to the car in front, and it steers itself around bends! Terrifying, but it can do it.

"Best, Dave Millier, newly minted LRPS"

[The initialism means "Licentiate, Royal Photographic Society." More explanation here. Congratulations on that, Dave! —Ed.]

Nigel Voak: "I believe that DX was a stopgap sensor format that really does not make much sense in today's market. DX lenses are not much smaller or lighter than lenses made for 35mm sensors. Indeed the unexpectedly good 24–200mm travel zoom I use on my Z7 weighs about the same as its Olympus Micro 4/3 equivalent. The 17–55 ƒ/2.8 zoom I used on my D300 was a heavy beast of a lens probably not much lighter than a 24–70 ƒ/2.8 FF lens. Looking at the second hand market. There seems to be a big upsurge in the demand for 'vintage' glass. Especially at the wide end, these lenses make little sense on a DX- or smaller-sensor formats. Again specialist lenses like my shift lenses are best matched to 35mm sensors."

Mike replies: That 17–55mm you mention wasn't characteristic. It was an all-out professional lens made to match the pro-oriented DX cameras like the D500 while Nikon was still planning to stick with APS-C. Very big and heavy relative to its coverage. Also one of the best zooms I ever used, in the top 20, creme de la creme.

Dogman: "I won't hold my breath on Nikon ever taking the DX format very seriously. They never really did that with their DSLRs (after the introduction of the D3) except for a couple of lenses and one 'pro' model for use with their long telephotos. This after touting DX as the best choice for digital pro cameras (again, until they introduced the D3). Of course, my crystal ball is cloudy and who knows?"

John Camp: "Comment on Thom's post. I'm a longtime Nikon user, going back to the '70s, and Thom is one of the most useful resources on the net for people like me.

"But I disagree about the DX. They're not really smaller or handier and you don't have to have a 35-pound bag around your shoulder. I know that because my Nikon Z7 II has a 24–120mm ƒ/4 S mounted on the front and it fits nicely in what I believe is Think Tank's second smallest bag (the one they copied from Domke) along with Nikon's superb 85mm, a couple of batteries, a couple of cards and a charger.

"There really isn't much difference in the handling between a Z7 II and a DX, the lenses aren't much different, and if people are thinking of moving from a phone to a ICL camera, then there's also the prestige factor involved—why carry an identifiable 'amateur' camera where you could carry a full frame pro rig? There's a difference in cost, of course, but what about resale value if you decide to go back to your phone, or the new purchase cost if you decide to move up to FF?

"I'm aware of some of this because I have a X-T5 Fuji APS-C which is slightly smaller overall than my Z7 II, but then again, at the far end of things, the Z7 II is also slightly better. (The X-T5 is a fabulous camera. I could go the rest of my life needing nothing else. But the Nikon does have an edge.) IMHO."

Craig Yuill: "Nikon has been breaking my heart for a number of years. They created the Nikon 1 system, which I bought into shortly after it was introduced. Sadly, it was hampered by missing/crippled features, and lenses that were solid optically but could be unreliable mechanically and electronically. It was unceremoniously discontinued once the Z system was introduced.

"A few years ago I bought a D500, a superb DX-format DSLR, for bird photography. (It is a very fine general-purpose camera too.) I had considered buying one of their DX-format Z-mount cameras, but decided against it because of lacklustre AF and lack of IBIS. Unfortunately, it appears that Nikon is unlikely to introduce a DX camera with better AF, like some of the APS-C cameras that their competitors have on the market. One suggestion that annoys me to no end is to just buy a US$4,000 Z8 and crop down to DX. Yeah, right! I might have to look at another brand for a higher-performance crop-sensor mirrorless camera."

Mike replies: Yeah, actually this post of mine is extremely unrealistic. Nikon has demonstrated little commitment to DX and the smaller 1 System for many years now. It's not going to suddenly want to develop newthink small-sensor stepping-stone cameras to lure maturing smartphone photographers into the brand and eventually the Z system.

Comments

[John Krumm]

Really all Nikon has to do is release a low-budget Zfc with it's own version of film profiles (just copy Fuji here).

For Fuji, they have their in to the young. Not sure how many go on to buy the expensive digital Fuji's, but it might not matter to them. https://instax.com/mini99/en/

[SteveW]

I was a lifetime Nikon guy, but about 3 years ago I sold all my Nikon gear and moved to Fuji for reasons close to what you describe. The Nikon DX system fell short in regards to lenses, and I wanted to use compact primes. Nikon expects you to use large FX lenses on DX cameras. No thanks.

I really like the looks of the Z50...but not the lens choices.

I feel that I have arrived to Thom's "last camera syndrome" with my Fuji X-T4 and the 16mm f/2.8, 23mm f/2 and 50mm f/2 lenses. I cannot put together a similar kit of size or quality with the Nikon Z50. Ironically, I could get a Fuji X-S20 which would be close enough in size/style to the Nikon Z-50, but I'm quite happy with the X-T4 and I live in Oregon, where it's umm...wet, so I like the WR feature of the Fuji gear.

[gary bliss]

Mike --

You and i are in agreement that there is an immense merit to the PHEV concept from a consumer perspective. I live 51 miles from work in the outer DC exurbs (imagine the traffic) so, like you, the cost-per-mile is important. Yet there is one flashing yellow caution light on current PHEVs: reliability . . . of all of them, actually, according to Consumer Reports. Unlike "classic" hybrids they are not multi-gen refined, or "pure" EVs, which are inherently simple mechanical/electrical systems, and it shows in the numbers.

I'm going to keep an eye on them, but it will be some years before this will be resolved; i am expect that Toyota will get there first.

-- gary ray

[The PHEV is practical right now, because nobody is pushing comprehensive charging stations as an eventual replacement to gas stations (that would be government's job, but the government is dysfunctional and paralyzed now), but it's really the worst of both worlds. They have to provide electric and gasoline motivation in the same vehicle, don't get any cost savings anywhere, and each form of motivation tends to be a little weak, not to mention each stealing onboard room as well as resources from the other. Pure electric is the best solution, but not at the moment because it's too easy to get stranded.

Remember IANAE. --Mike]

[Bryan Hansel]

As sort of an aside, I liked the waterproof Nikon 1 camera. The lens selection was abysmal, but it was waterproof and I thought that it took great black and white images. There was something about that sensor that just felt right. I even won a sea kayak and a bunch of paddling gear with a photo I took with that camera. In the end, I sold it and moved on, but I thought it might be fun to own again.

[Daniel]

Moved back to Nikon after a long time with Canon. Canon switch was due to Big Fast glass in AutoFocus. Canon had it, Nikon lagged for more than 4 1/2 years. That is why you suddenly saw so many White lenses on sidelines - Nikon blew it, big time.

What I want in a mirrorless DX body is D500 performance. The "buy a Z8/9" crowd has the dollars and for some reason does not mind the weight. A D500 equivalent in a Z body is needed.

Then, make the horizon level feature like Fuji. A nice line across the viewing screen. Not a circular overkill that means we can't see the image. Quick shooting a running moose while being sure the horizon line doesn't go too far off plumb isn't too much to ask!

DX works for many of us.

[robert e]

I think a focus on DX is very possible, if only because RED, like much of the cine industry, has standardized around the Super 35mm sensor (a popular movie film frame size), which is more or less APS with a haircut. (RED also offers a larger sensor closer to 35mm "full frame".)

Which reminds me that these are two top sensor developers that are merging. That's pretty exciting to think about IMHO.

A somewhat awkward aspect of the merger is that RED cameras come with Canon RF or EF lens mounts. I figure changing the mount is not technically very challenging, but RED isn't about to alienate its existing user base, nor a de facto digital cine standard, so I assume Nikon's new subsidiary will continue selling movie cameras with Canon lens mounts. Maybe they'll switch to officially offering it as an option alongside the Z mount. Not a big deal, I guess, unless Canon gets mean about them using RF. Would it? Could it? Anyone?

[Jeff Hohner]

I just commented on your post "Any Color You Like..." about our new EV but I see the conversation has already gone there!

We went full EV to avoid the maintenance issues inherent in PHEVs, and we had some initial charging anxiety, but we've found the charging infrastructure in our area surprisingly well developed. Of course, YMMV. Ha ha. See what I did there?

[Albert Smith]

DX done right... for Nikon, they failed by not producing high quality glass for the format back in the DSLR days. I concurrently used a full frame D700 and the D300s, both having essentially the same specs other than the size of the capture. Nikon failed to give the DX body the bread and butter lenses that replicated the usual focal lengths used by film/FX format. Yes, you could mount a huge, heavy full frame Nikkor 24mm f1.4 on the D300 (or any DX body), but the basic full frame 35mm f/1.8 or better yet the f/2-D model on the D700 was a smaller package.

I don't see Nikon doing a dual track lens development program today. Nikon DX is the step child that I'm guessing the company would be happy to be done with.

Fujifilm, with no real anchor to be constricted by, was able to go with APS-C as the standard, giving us lenses that match what us old guys came up with in multiple speeds and sizes with no real dogs in the line up. I was happy when I could buy my first full frame DSLR, telling myself, "no more amateur formats".

Today my Nikons gather dust and my format of choice is APS-C for both size and weight with absolutely no compromise in quality.

[hugh crawford]

A 3/4 scale Nikon SP look alike with a few lenses to go with it would be pretty nice. Or the unloved EM which was actually pretty attractive looking.

[Roger Bradbury]

APS-C works well for me. At 24 or nearly 26 mp for the bodies I have, the image quality is more than good enough for anything I'll ever do. The range of depth of field I can get suits me very well.

There are no close equivalents in my brand's full frame range to the lenses I have, but two full frame bodies plus the three usual suspects of wide, normal and tele f/2.8 zooms weigh half as much again as the APS-C equivalents.

This is the Pentax system, by the way.

[Kye Wood]

Integra Type S?
Better than a Miata?
Say it isn't so Mike.
The balance. The finesse. Of a Miata. And you'd choose an Integra Type S as the best car? Really?

On the rest of the post. Well, I can't do FF for the same reason I sold the Fuji 35 1.4 lens some years back. It was just too good.

Gotta have some limitations to make it fun.

PS: Surprising of all surprises. The OM System TG-7 creates (for reasons that utterly dumbfound me) some of the most 3D images I've ever seen. It just doesn't make any sense.

But my god is that sensor a noisy beast. Without DxO Photolab to claw back the IQ, ya just have a mess on your hands.

[John Camp]

I have a PHEV and think they should be mandatory in non-electric cars. I got involved in looking stuff up in discussing PHEVs, and it turns out that the average American driver drives about 38 miles a day (this might be somewhat dated, but not more than a handful of years ago.) A PHEV will get you close to that, and some will exceed it.

The problem with pure electric is that most Americans are a bit afraid of it -- is it good for long distances? Not really. Is it good in the mountains, where charging stations are absent? Not really. Many of these concerns may be unrealistic, but people worry anyway.

The thing about a PHEV is, if they were mandatory, and people took the time to charge them (it's very simple to do at home) then, on average, Americans would be driving electric cars. The combination of gas and electric may be occasionally troublesome, but so is global warming, and mandatory PHEV or pure EV would go a heck of a long way toward preventing a lot of carbon from getting in the air. So the question becomes, is a person's personal taste for ICE vehicles more important than global warming concerns?

[Robert Roaldi]

I had a Nikon 1 V2 and used it mostly to shoot bicycle races. It was a terrific action system. Too bad it never caught on so that they never developed it further, i.e., weather sealing, faster lenses. Good results and feather light.

I had thought that Canikony would more fully develop their APS/C sports bodies and lenses but only Fuji really did that. That failure is a mystery to me. We have these magical sensors now but people still want to carry around large cameras/lenses. Except I keep hearing that sales aren't healthy worldwide.

[JH]

Ah, two of my favorite controversial issues in one post! Heaven!

Let's start with APS-C. My current/only real camera is a Nikon Zfc. (The other is an iPhone 14.) I'm totally into zooms and the Nikon selection for the Zfc is near ideal: 12-28, 16-50, 50-250 and all are quite good lenses. The electrical focus on the 12-28 is fabulous - I hope Nikon does more lenses like that.

The Zfc has been very successful, in part because it's retro and cool, and it reminds me of the Nikon FM I used for many years. And not like every other "licorice jelly bean camera." With some study of the nearly 600 page manual, I set it up so it works like a FM, and one button switches from B/W to color. Another button zooms the viewfinder for focusing or looking for details and I use it a lot. And BTW, all the lenses are lightweights.

When Thom started mulling over this DX issue, I sent a note saying I hope Nikon runs with the Zfc concept. Add IBIS for use with more legacy lenses, upgrade the performance, and how about a B/W version - I'll be in line for that. The Zfc could spawn a line of cameras for the next decade.

On to cars. I've noted here that I've owned a ton of cars, 60+, and raced a lot. As a scientist/techie, I also like to research technology. I drive a 2021 Honda CR-V with a tiny 1.5L turbo that averages 25-30+mpg on regular gas. I expect to keep it a while.

I've had EVs for several days test drives and like the idea for city runabouts, but I've studed them extensively and don't see the sensibility in having one, especially one with a giant battery for long trips.

First of all, driving around in a typical current EV, say a TESLA, you are carrying a weight that is over a ton greater than an equivalent gas car - about 1000 pounds of batteries plus the extra strength in the car to support all those batteries. The pickups have battery weights nearly as heavy as a Honda Civic. Moving all that weight requires energy and that takes power generated primarily by fossil fuels and delivered over long lossy transmission lines.

I live in a condo built in the early 1970s. We have two owners with TESLAs who inquired about installing a charger. The quoted price was a couple of grand for the charger and $30,000 to upgrade the electrical system for the high power needed. No deal.

Then there are the batteries. Batteries are the "blood diamonds" of this era - mined in 3rd world countries under poor conditions. Manufacturing is environmentally challenging. After a decade or so, the batteries will need recycling and that is an expensive, toxic process. And there will be lots of them - the batteries for a year's EV sales will pile up higher than a pyramid in Giza.

Because of the issue of the batteries and exotic metals in the drivetrain, estimates are the current crop of EVs needs to be driven 40-60,000 miles (~100km) to better the environmental impact of a normal internal combustion powered vehicle.

There have been several articles in US newspapers I read that EV sales are flattening or declining. A WashPost article interviewed several owners who kept their EVs only a short time. One bought a Ford Lightning pickup and quickly found its range was shortened by cold weather and trailer towing. Out here in CA where TESLAs have been the "cool" car choice for a while, many owners are not staying with EVs now they have had some experience with them or hate being associated with Elon Musk (Henry Ford wasn't such a nice guy either!) BTW, the new cool car seems to be the Bronco!

Then there is the question few asked - can the electric grid support mass changeover to EVs? The answer is becoming obvious - no - EVs, Data Centers and Bitcoin mining operations are already outstripping the electrical grid in areas.

I blame dumb politicians and greedy investors. (both redundant) If we focused on small short-range EVs for city use (BMW i3, Nissan Leaf, etc) and promote hybrids for longer trips, it would make sense.

[Bob Johnston]

I decided long ago that apsc is the sweet spot for a general purpose camera. Fuji are the only company that made the decision to not compete in the full frame arena and look how well they have done it. However, for lightness and compactness of lenses (more relevant than that of the body) combined with the only body on the market that is properly weather sealed, It's Olympus and OM Systems.

As for anyone making the simple camera that you want Mike, it's only Leica. Start saving!

[Thom Hogan]

Whole lot to unpack here.

First, the 17-55mm f/2.8 lens was released in 2003, 15 years before the D500, so your reply trying to conflate those is not accurate. [The point was simply that it was a pro-level lens when the market still expected APS-C to be the ongoing standard sensor size, including the sensor size of professional cameras. —M.] You might want to ask yourself why Nikon also came out with the FX 24-120mm in 2003 when they didn't have a full frame DSLR. It seems clear to me that the Nikkor side often telegraphs intention.

As to DX being unrealistic, they just bought a company who makes a DX video camera ;~). I continue to point out that all the camera companies have this issue of bridging potential new users from smartphones to dedicated cameras. That has to happen at a lower price point than they'd want to do a decent full frame camera at. The biggest cost in the camera is the image sensor, and you can't defeat physics: full frame will cost you both way more money and more time on fab than APS-C. Moreover, APS-C also has the physics advantage of bandwidth potential (all else equal in your in sensor electronics).

Avoiding APS-C for cameras at the moment would be like telling Honda to make Civics (smartphones) and Pilots (full frame) but nothing in between. Or another car analogy for you: 4-cylinder bangers versus V8's with nothing in between.

As for the camera companies not listening to customers, perhaps fearing lawsuits, that's true, but it's wrong. It would be one thing if the designers and managers of camera companies were active photographers and involved in active photo communities. That does not describe Canon or Nikon for the most part (Westfall and Goto-san were exceptions, now gone). You see a bit of it at Fujifilm and Panasonic.

The problem is that without being fully immersed in the community and using your products yourself, you don't see the pluses and minuses. Most of the recent Nikon firmware updates have come from listening to only a few customers. I tried to point this out to them recently with specifics as to what they missed; we'll see what happens.

As for "gadfly," it's the crazies operating beyond the edge of the known that eventually disrupt and improve pretty much anything. For most of my Silicon Valley career I was an internal gadfly. When I pointed out in the early 90's that we should just connect a CMOS image sensor to the CPU of our computer, I was laughed at. When I told the QuickTime group at Apple that I was going to do just that with the US$89 QuickCam in 1993, they laughed and told me I'd fail. Guess who has a camera in every device they make now (except the watch and earpods)? Same company is using the memory compression technique we came up with, too.

I'm post-career at this point, but I'll remain a gadfly. If anything, I can see more clearly now what needs to be done now that I don't have to do it myself ;~).

The point about DX lenses aren't that much smaller/lighter isn't truly accurate. Moreover, if DX lives between smartphones and FX, it doesn't have to be as "good" as FX, it has to be better than smartphones. On that level, you can make remarkably small and light lenses. Witness the 16-50mm f/3.5-6.3 VR DX. While you can make full frame bodies smaller, as Sony keeps trying to do, the minute you start pairing up lenses the equivalent kit expands. I guess I need to do another demonstration of this like I did a decade ago.

I'll point out that no one has made a more versatile and well-rounded APS-C camera than Nikon did with the D500. In my testing, the Fujifilm X-H2S can't match it (and many X-H2S users are trying to do so using adapted Nikon lenses). The only real downfall of the D500 was that the lens group was already done with APS-C and already trying to figure out mirrorless again.

As I've pointed out, Nikon's current DX idea is three physically different bodies carved from the same internals, and five lenses that barely give you coverage. One current problem is that smartphones have IS and the Z DX bodies don't. There are other issues, as well, but they are certainly not perfect transition cameras. The issue here is that others are sneaking in with different definitions of the bridge. For example, DJI with the Pocket 3 is using a 1" image sensor in a different form factor, and that solution is quite a nice step up from the smartphone.

Canon, Fujifilm, Nikon, OM Solutions, Panasonic, and even Sony are all thinking too in-the-box at the moment. The in-the-box customer is aging out. Growth will be in the out-of-the-box customer needs.

[Mike replies: I hope the Civic-to-Pilot and four-banger to V8 aren't accurate analogies. The Civic is on the edge of being a full-sized car (I think it was so classified before the last update and Honda shaved a bit off of the new one to get it back into the midsized category again) and the new Civic Type R has a dazzling state-of-the-art 315-HP four cylinder, more power than most V8 muscle cars had when we were teenagers. And V8's are going away fast--the Mustang V8 will soldier on, probably because Bill Ford loves it and considers it a halo product for the company, but even the next Dodge Challenger won't have a V8 as an option. The last V8 Corvette is on the horizon. Mercedes recently reintroduced straight sixes mainly because they can be built on the same lines as straight fours. I could be wrong but I think the only V8 Mercedes left on sale in the US are a few S-Class models and Maybachs. If FF "real" cameras as we call them are V-8's, we're in trouble.

Anyway, rabbit hole, sorry.]

[Speed]

This is not an all-or-none question. Canon now offers, DSLR Cameras, Mirrorless Cameras and Compact Cameras which they categorize by Skill Level, Style and Weight, Still and Video and Price. And they have dedicated camcorders as well.

When shooting an event I use both my real camera and my phone. Image quality is best from the real camera but the phone makes me just one more person walking around taking pictures and videos -- non-threatening and easy to share.

I'm going to have three cameras at the upcoming eclipse -- a full-frame mirrorless with a long lens and 18 stop ND filter on a tripod; a 360 degree camera on a ten foot pole/tripod to capture the crowd and hopefully the moon's shadow moving across the field; and my phone.

Is one better than the others? That depends. The phone pictures/videos will be easier to edit.

[robert e]

Funny how we're mixing discussions of what some consider a "compromise" sensor size with discussion of a "compromise" car drivetrain, in one comment thread.

But no sensor size is inherently a compromise (unless they all are)--it's a purely contextual label. On the other hand, the hybrid drivetrain seems to be exactly that. And you get all the pros and cons you'd expect--a "goldilocks" practicality for specific cases, at the cost of higher complexity, risk and inefficiency. Sometimes the best of both worlds, sometimes the worst, depending.

I find it amusing that two of the best cases for PHEV drivetrains are the suburban commuter/family car and the Formula 1 race car.

[robert e]

"[Nikon]'s not going to suddenly want to develop newthink small-sensor stepping-stone cameras to lure maturing smartphone photographers into the brand and eventually the Z system."

Wasn't that what the z30 and z50 were supposed to be? Anyway, I don't think a new concept here is far-fetched, but they'll probably aim at vloggers first, photographers second. Though I'm not so sure that young people are as siloed as we are about motion vs still.

[William Giokas]

I the reason why electric cars have issues is because the lack of charging stations. I drive a Prius hybrid and get 54 mpg. No worries about finding a charging station. I switched from Nikon to Leica using a rangefinder 240 . It has helped me improve my photography.
Bill

[richl]

lens, lens, lens...

[Jon Porter]

I bought a Z50 as a back-up for my Z6 and to use when I want a lighter and more compact camera kit. Nikon offers three excellent ZDX lenses, the 12-28mm, 16-50mm, and 18-140mm that are a joy to use. I don't expect Nikon to offer high-end ZDX gear as it doesn't seem like a good use of their resources to take on Fuji and Sony in the APS-C market.

[Robert Roaldi]

I can't buy the argument that APS/C lenses aren't much smaller than their FF equivalents. If it is the case, then it is surely only because Canikon haven't put much effort into it. I can't speak for Sony, don't know their product line very well. I did research the Pentax/Canon/Nikon APS/C body lens lineup and could not reproduce the flexibility of my Olympus system in APS/C with them, considering I need weather sealing for sports coverage and am trying not to carry too much weight. And then there's cost.

[Kirk]

Amazing that anyone would think the Acura Integral S at $54,000 is a reasonable price to pay for basic transportation but that a $7000 camera is far, far too expensive.

Given that most Americans are signing six year financing for their cars now the interest one might pay after making a 10% downpayment, calculated at 5%, equals a bit more than $7,000. So, actually, interest only is MORE than the full retail price of a brand new Leica SL3.

Cars depreciate. You can make money with a good camera. Even enough money to live well.

New strategy: Look for cars that cost under $30. Pay cash. Buy whatever camera you want. Or several.

[Whoa, Nellie! I never said it was reasonably priced, and I never called it an appreciating asset, and I'm certainly not buying one, now or probably ever. Last car I bought stickered $31k and was marked down to $26k because the dealer, in a State where the take rate on manuals was around 2.5%, was desperate to get rid of it. It will turn 10 this year, just ticked over 125k miles, and has generally given me very little trouble.

Anyway, the Integra Type S is far more than basic transportation. The engine alone is a masterpiece. The basic transportation version is the base LX Civic Sedan for $23,950, and it's a pretty nice car itself. --Mike]

[SteveW]

Mike replies: Yeah, actually this post of mine is extremely unrealistic. Nikon has demonstrated little commitment to DX and the smaller 1 System for many years now. It's not going to suddenly want to develop newthink small-sensor stepping-stone cameras to lure maturing smartphone photographers into the brand and eventually the Z system.

Yep....I think Nikon actually had it right with Nikon1 and should have expanded on that and just canned DX. The 1" sensor and FF sensor would have a nice spread, kind of like how Fuji has done with APS-C and Medium Format.

[Brad Robb]

Sony Still has their 6000 line of cameras. They are now up to the A6700 camera.

People complain they do not have a replacement for the A5000 line of cameras.

If you look at their APS-C line and look for a replacement for the A5000 line.

I think they are now using the ZV-E10 to replace the lower priced ASP-C cameras.

It is presented as a video camera but still has really good photography specifications.

The price is what I think a A5000 line of camera would be today.

[Mark L]

I bought a D500 and 200-500 nikkor for wildlife and surfing and am blown away how good it is for those pursuits.
I use L-mount cameras and lenses for my urban and industrial landscapes and an M240 for street and event work.
Horses for courses.
Oh and I sold my Z6 because although the zooms I bought were good every single prime I bought was so badly decentered they were unusable, like blurry down one side at f8, never mind wide open. I've been using Nikon's since 1976 and never seen such poor quality control.
So my D500 is not only dx but my only nikon.

[s.wolters]

Nikon tried a lot of things. They even panicked sometimes. The DL-line was completely developed and we even saw test shots and teasers on the internet. I would have bought one.
https://nikonrumors.com/2017/02/13/nikon-cancels-all-three-dl-cameras-because-of-profitability-concerns-no-word-on-future-development.aspx/

[Tom Stermitz]

I just went electric (Kia EV6), and couldn't be more thrilled. After one week, I can't tolerate driving my wife' clunky Subaru outback.

Winter 2024 is a remarkable moment where inventory is ahead of demand, and I got $17K in dealer incentives and tax credits (US & Colorado). The new tax breaks are KILLING the used electric car market.

The poor Niro buyers (apologies, Dave Millier) from the last two years are seeing prices collapse. It has gotten to the point where the 2022s are starting to qualify for a USED car tax credit - $4,000 off if the car is under $25,000. And it is a car that comes well-recommended.

All that said, if you are driving under 10k per year, hybrids or plug-in hybrids are probably the more economical choice. I did love my Toyota Prius despite its very modest acceleration.

[Dennis Ng]

The 17-55 f2.8 is the one coming out with nikon d1? D500 it is not?

Anyway when I need to do a bit event photography I use my z9 p,us z30! The combined result is quite good. As the event host found out … can you tell the difference between my photos with the one taken by iphone … yes. But how about the most expensive and cheapest z camera … No.