Nikon mirrorless definitely on the way

Riz_Guru said:
Sony SF-G series SD cards are pretty fast... 300MB/s read and 299MB/s write :)
Click to expand...
Yeah I know, but I don't have any to compare ;) They actually work out more expensive than XQD if you consider the read/write speeds too :eek:
 
snerkler said:
Yeah I know, but I don't have any to compare ;) They actually work out more expensive than XQD if you consider the read/write speeds too :eek:
Click to expand...

I have fuji ones that I use in Sony lol which claims - "Reading Speed: up to 285 MB/s; write mode: up to 480Mb/sec"

Seems faster than Sony writing wise...
 
nandbytes said:
I have fuji ones that I use in Sony lol which claims - "Reading Speed: up to 285 MB/s; write mode: up to 480Mb/sec"

Seems faster than Sony writing wise...
Click to expand...
Seem fast. How can write be faster than read though? :confused:
 
Last edited:
nandbytes said:
fuji magic dust?

These - https://www.amazon.co.uk/gp/product/B01LHGLM5W

i am not sure really. I don't think its that fast tbh.

I have another pair from Adata which do 299mbps read and 260mbps write and is actually faster than the fuji lol.
Click to expand...

First review for the card;

"I just bought the Fujifilm SDHC C10 UHS-II memory card but I do have to clear up some information that is supplied on Amazon. The Read/Write times for this card are 285 mbps read and 180mbps write times (Amazon is claiming a 485mbps write time).

I have only briefly test the card, shooting 14fps on the Fujfilm X-H1 and the card worked well, clearing quickly. The read/write speeds are not the fastest on the market (that would be the Sony G cards) but they are fast enough to do the job needed shooting 4k video at 200mbps (I presume the buffer takes up the write speed discrepancy and will last 29m59 seconds)."
 
stevelmx5 said:
First review for the card;

"I just bought the Fujifilm SDHC C10 UHS-II memory card but I do have to clear up some information that is supplied on Amazon. The Read/Write times for this card are 285 mbps read and 180mbps write times (Amazon is claiming a 485mbps write time).

I have only briefly test the card, shooting 14fps on the Fujfilm X-H1 and the card worked well, clearing quickly. The read/write speeds are not the fastest on the market (that would be the Sony G cards) but they are fast enough to do the job needed shooting 4k video at 200mbps (I presume the buffer takes up the write speed discrepancy and will last 29m59 seconds)."
Click to expand...
So amazon list it wrongly :rolleyes: Just seen it says read speed, and write mode, shouldn't' it be write speed as well, or is there something else called write mode?
 
nandbytes said:
"Reading Speed: up to 285 MB/s; write mode: up to 480Mb/sec
Click to expand...

One speed is Bytes per second, the other is Bits per second - as a rough rule of thumb, in terms of transmitting data it takes around 10 bits to make a Byte (it is a rough rule)
 
f/2.8 said:
The wireless ssd drive suggestion is nonsense anyway no way is that a workable solution.

So many people online are defending Nikon's decision to choose only 1 xqd card stating that xqd is very reliable but failures do happen and there is no point pretending they don't. Several Nikon people saying xqd is ultra reliable yet back in real life there is quite a few people who have lost data from these.

Simple truth is if for example you are a wedding photographer and you choose to use one of these and it goes tits up you are to blame and when the client sues and your business is ruined you don't have a leg to stand on.

In the case of a camera or cards being stolen that isn't your fault as long as you taken reasonable precautions and that is absolutely what a judge would say. Using a camera with only 1 card when other options are available is not taking reasonable precautions.
Click to expand...

It really isn't a stupid suggestion; the Nikon wireless mode was initially designed for their Pro digital cameras so sports shooters inside a stadium could transfer images straight to an editor who could then 'pick images'. This isn't an ideal arena for the technology. Here is a video of it being used with a laptop - transferring to an SSD drive would be much quicker than into lightroom via a 'watched folder'. I have absolutely no interest in dual card slots - I have never used the second card slot but I am going to purchase the SSD drive as I like the solution of recording images 'in the field' straight to a Hard Drive that as soon as I walk through my front door it will connect automatically to my home network and will save the lengthy import process.

Phil V said:
Fraser
Has there been a sudden influx of pro photographers on motorsport forums telling you how to reprogram your ECU’s better or manage your business?

Because frankly the most frustrating thing about photography fora is the constant stream of clever dicks who genuinely believe they are fit to offer photography or business advice. Its at best exceedingly rude and at worst total nobbery.
Click to expand...

yes, sorry I do agree reading it back; it was supposed to be a bit 'tongue in cheek' after Raymond's protests of 'Are people here have something against progress or something?'

Apologies to @Radiohead - sorry Guy for the 'grump' this morning; I admire you for having to 'sift' through so many images - hats off to you wedding chaps; never imagined 4000+ images per wedding :-(
 
Last edited:
Quite laughable some nikon fans justifying to a pro shooter who is use to using 2 slot cards that 1 card slot is fine lol [emoji23]
 
What did pros used to do or still do? Guess it’s just the risk involved.

Pretty much enjoy having 2 card slots even being amateur but some pros still use such cameras as the D700.
 
JJ! said:
What did pros used to do or still do? Guess it’s just the risk involved.

Pretty much enjoy having 2 card slots even being amateur but some pros still use such cameras as the D700.
Click to expand...
What did pros do without an af system?
 
JJ! said:
Are you comparing an AF system to card slots?!
Click to expand...
Yup why not. Af wasn't invented since mid 80s? How did pros shoot without that like how did pros shoot without dual card slots etc.

Point is just because old cameras like d700 which pros used didn't have dual card slot, doesn't mean now it's ok to not have it despite almost every other ff nikon camera from then till now have it. Shall we take out all those af points and just have one in center for the z7 mk 2?
 
Sorry but I'm not having it from any people who are defending 1 card slot. Absolute nonsense.

There's no talking out of it at all.
 
jonneymendoza said:
Sorry but I'm not having it from any people who are defending 1 card slot. Absolute nonsense.

There's no talking out of it at all.
Click to expand...

I never defended it. I think it’s stupid. But comparing card slots to AF systems? Step away from the crack pipe!
 
Fraser Euan White said:
Every 'real world' test is stating battery life is better than expected with DP Review stating it was fine for a whole days shooting. (1000+ images) I personally think a back up battery is more important than a second card slot but we all have priorities it's just i have suffered more battery failures than card failures (none to date)
Click to expand...

Where did you get the whole day shooting bit from? Looking on the DPR article I get:

It's certainly going to be a significant shock to anyone used to DSLR levels of endurance.
Click to expand...

The number of shots stated isn't accurate because they measure it by cycling the camera's power between each shot, something DSLR excels at while mirrorless not so much, equally so mirrorless does better at total number of shots than a DSLR so saying it can do 1000+ isn't actually reassuring.

Using the A73 as an example, it scores twice the stated shots, can do several thousands shots easily but it translates into something like 4-6 hours worth of light but constant usage. Good enough in my view but that's more like half a full day and if the Nikon only manages around half that then it's a poor battery, hence my concern.

Which takes us to the same point as the previous issue, can't be certain of actual performance until it's properly tested/reviewed.
 
jonneymendoza said:
Yup why not. Af wasn't invented since mid 80s? How did pros shoot without that like how did pros shoot without dual card slots etc.

Point is just because old cameras like d700 which pros used didn't have dual card slot, doesn't mean now it's ok to not have it despite almost every other ff nikon camera from then till now have it. Shall we take out all those af points and just have one in center for the z7 mk 2?
Click to expand...

Not one of the best arguments in all fairness, pros still buy/use manual focus lenses out of choice.

I do agree though that it was a strange decision to just have one card slot but it's not a deal breaker for all pros, depends what they do.

I guess it could be worse, 2 card slots but a camera that leaks and water destroys both :)
 
Not to worry Sony announced a tough SD card today that's waterproof to fix this problem :D :facepalm:
Jase said:
Not one of the best arguments in all fairness, pros still buy/use manual focus lenses out of choice.

I do agree though that it was a strange decision to just have one card slot but it's not a deal breaker for all pros, depends what they do.

I guess it could be worse, 2 card slots but a camera that leaks and water destroys both :)
Click to expand...
 
jonneymendoza said:
Sorry but I'm not having it from any people who are defending 1 card slot. Absolute nonsense.

There's no talking out of it at all.
Click to expand...
I don’t think anyone’s defending it tbh, I think everyone expects dual slots on cameras of this price range. Sony rightly took the flack with the earlier A7’s, as did Canon with the 6d and 6d Mark II, and I think it’s right that Nikon are equally criticised. However, I think the people who are “defending it” are merely saying in the real world it’s probably not as big a deal as what it’s being made out to be. At the end of the day the Z7 would be a great travel camera for me and if it wasn’t for the price I could see myself buying it as a replacement for my EM1, single slot and all ;) As it is it’s just not worth £3k to me, nor can I afford that.
 
Last edited:
snerkler said:
I don’t think anyone’s defending it tbh, I think everyone expects dual slots on cameras of this price range. Sony rightly took the flack with the earlier A7’s, as did Canon with the 6d and 6d Mark II, and I think it’s right that Nikon are equally criticised. However, I think the people who are “defending it” are merely saying in the real world it’s probably not as big a deal as what it’s being made out to be. At the end of the day the Z7 would be a great travel camera for me and if it wasn’t for the price I could see myself buying it as a replacement for my EM1, single slot and all ;) As it is it’s just not worth £3k to me, nor can I afford that.
Click to expand...

Exactly. People are either fine with 1 card slot, annoyed but think it's workable or it's a an absolute no-no. All are perfectly valid, reasoned views. It's therefore a little tedious being suggested that to hold one of these views makes one a 'fan boy' or a 'hater' or whatever other childish crap is being slung around on this thread. It's a camera not a football team. It feels like I'm back in school at times.
 
JJ! said:
That mount size... game changer.
Click to expand...

Out of interest. Ignoring the f/0.95 58mm, are there other advantages to the flange size? It seems so radically different to f-mount that I wondered if it opened up other new possibilities? Or maybe Nikon just making sure they're not backed into a corner further down the line?
 
gad-westy said:
Out of interest. Ignoring the f/0.95 58mm, are there other advantages to the flange size? It seems so radically different to f-mount that I wondered if it opened up other new possibilities? Or maybe Nikon just making sure they're not backed into a corner further down the line?
Click to expand...

Hi, good reasons for the z mount:

https://photographylife.com/nikon-z-vs-nikon-f
 
gad-westy said:
Out of interest. Ignoring the f/0.95 58mm, are there other advantages to the flange size? It seems so radically different to f-mount that I wondered if it opened up other new possibilities? Or maybe Nikon just making sure they're not backed into a corner further down the line?
Click to expand...
The theory is that the rays won't need to hit the sensor at as an acute an angle and should give sharper corners.

The shorter flange may also allow any lens to be able to be adapted to the camera. As long as someone produces ab adapter. ;)

And the possibility of smaller lenses. That doesn't seem to be too high a priority so far.
 
redhed17 said:
The theory is that the rays won't need to hit the sensor at as an acute an angle and should give sharper corners.
Click to expand...

Assume the benefit of this is less convoluted path from front of lens to sensor, so benefits might be:

Better IQ potentially?
Less complex optics? I was going to use the word cheaper but, well Nikon's pricing!
Potentially better light transmission?
 
simonbarker said:
Where did you get the whole day shooting bit from?
Click to expand...

Hi Simon,
it was in the DPR Conclusions link I posted; here is what they said in conclusion to the battery life:

......... while Sony's latest Z-series battery is rated for around 700 shots. All that said, Barney's actual experience with the Z7 put him at ease; over the course of a 12-hour shoot, he recorded 1500+ images and several 4K video clips before the battery warning kicked in at 10% remaining. He wouldn't be opposed to venturing out for a full day in a new city with one battery for the Z7.
 
Fraser Euan White said:
Hi Simon,
it was in the DPR Conclusions link I posted; here is what they said in conclusion to the battery life:

......... while Sony's latest Z-series battery is rated for around 700 shots. All that said, Barney's actual experience with the Z7 put him at ease; over the course of a 12-hour shoot, he recorded 1500+ images and several 4K video clips before the battery warning kicked in at 10% remaining. He wouldn't be opposed to venturing out for a full day in a new city with one battery for the Z7.
Click to expand...
The battery rating is measured to CIPA standards which is a standard way of measuring battery life. The reason for having such a standard is so that one can objectively compare one against the other on a same scale rather than subjective opinions of someone off a forum or opinion of a cameras manufacturers marketing department. I am sure Nikons marketing if left to thier own will tell you battery will last 2K shots and sony will tell it'll last 5K.

So when you objectively compare z7 battery life its below many others inc. latest Sony bodies which should last about twice as long as per the standard measures.
 
gad-westy said:
This thread is quite something!

I keep hoping to read some new info. I'll come back another time. ;)
Click to expand...

Completely agree!

We are up to page 70 already and all we seem to here is the vast majority 'bashing a spec sheet'; most of whom have no intention of buying a Nikon Z series camera! I find it odd that when that 'single card slot' came to light they instantly said the camera wasn't for them, why are they still posting the exact same criticism numerous pages after!

Talk Photography - a forum where you would probably expect people to discuss the Image quality? I have made numerous posts in other threads that my enjoyment from photography comes as much from using the camera and taking the picture; the actual image produced isn't as important to me - I have yet to see anyone actually agree with this and everyone states it is the final image that matters most to them. Lots on this thread and others state they are 'not gear heads', yet the evidence in this thread would appear different.

Not one person has mentioned any of the sample images from the camera or the fact it will undoubtedly produce the same or maybe even better image quality than the D850 which is widely regarded as having the best image quality of any FF camera out there! Why is nobody talking about this?

If you post a link to a favourable report it is slagged off as 'Paid by Nikon, in bed with Nikon, sell a lot of Nikon, it's staged/scripted etc, etc...... or even just completely ignored!

The majority of these comments come from users who use competitors cameras as if they need to justify that their own purchase was the correct one and I still have the biggest cock in the town.

Yes it's fun to talk about the camera before anyone here can evaluate it, but that is all it is; fun and speculation.

Lets see how the Camera performs in the real world where it's undoubted stunning image quality 'off the sensor' may be just the ticket for keen enthusiasts (who apparently put IQ before gear spec) and save professionals endless time in Post production.

.......rant over!
 
jonneymendoza said:
Yup why not. Af wasn't invented since mid 80s? How did pros shoot without that like how did pros shoot without dual card slots etc.

Point is just because old cameras like d700 which pros used didn't have dual card slot, doesn't mean now it's ok to not have it despite almost every other ff nikon camera from then till now have it. Shall we take out all those af points and just have one in center for the z7 mk 2?
Click to expand...

Here's the thing, with technological invention comes increased expectation. When wedding photographers shot with film, many couples expected around 30 images to be delivered. They were usually formal staged shots with little to no reportage involved. With the dawn of digital it changed to expecting over a hundred. Now, with faster internet and cheaper storage the expectation is greater still. We show more photos in a blog post than many couples who got married 10 years ago would've receieved in total. We have delivered upwards of 1000 processed images. On a few occasions, we've delivered over 1000.

So, saying what did photographers do before AF or before digital, you have to consider the expectations of them. Could I do what I do now using film and MF? Absolutely not. Could I get away with delivering the same amount of photos that pre-AF film shooters did now in 2018? Absolutely not.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top