# Industry News: Nikon plans to have 50+ Z-mount lenses by 2025



## Canon Rumors Guy (Apr 19, 2022)

> Canon recently let it be known that they plan to release 32 RF mount lenses by 2026, which seems to be a very aggressive approach to the system. Not to be outdone, but Nikon has now come out and said that they plan to have 50+ Z mount lenses by 2025 in their latest investor relations release.
> More than that, Nikon also plans to put more resources into their video features for content creators. Nikon’s place in this segment has always been thought of as weaker than offerings from Canon and Sony,  Whether that’s fair or not is up for debate.
> Nikon’s current plan
> 
> ...



Continue reading...


----------



## neurorx (Apr 19, 2022)

Nikon's recent pricing hopefully will help reduce Canon's.


----------



## Antono Refa (Apr 19, 2022)

What's a "2+ lens attach rate"?


----------



## bbasiaga (Apr 19, 2022)

Antono Refa said:


> What's a "2+ lens attach rate"?


My guess is that means getting users to add 2 more lenses on average to their kit. 

Brian


----------



## bbasiaga (Apr 19, 2022)

Totally tongue in cheek here, but at this point I could announce 50+ lenses for my camera system and ship just as many as Nikon seems to be able to ship.  

Seriously though this could be interesting. In a few years I could see adding a used Z9 and a couple of select lenses to go along side my Canon gear, particularly if Nikon fills some key gaps in glass and price point that Canon doesn't fill - and at prices more like the old Canon pricing. My big current fear is Canon is going boutique like Leica did, with ridiculous pricing providing high margins while driving volume down. 

Brian


----------



## neurorx (Apr 19, 2022)

bbasiaga said:


> Totally tongue in cheek here, but at this point I could announce 50+ lenses for my camera system and ship just as many as Nikon seems to be able to ship.
> 
> Seriously though this could be interesting. In a few years I could see adding a used Z9 and a couple of select lenses to go along side my Canon gear, particularly if Nikon fills some key gaps in glass and price point that Canon doesn't fill - and at prices more like the old Canon pricing. My big current fear is Canon is going boutique like Leica did, with ridiculous pricing providing high margins while driving volume down.
> 
> Brian


Yes me too! I can't imagine what an R1 will cost when we have Nikon and Sony now with flagships priced comparable to an R3.


----------



## unfocused (Apr 20, 2022)

I admire and applaud Nikon for being aggressive. They seem determined to recapture some of the market share they have lost to Sony over the last few years. Will their approach benefit Canon owners? I hope so.


----------



## northlarch (Apr 20, 2022)

Placed an order for the Z9 and 800PF myself. That was RF supertele budget and it went to starting my investment in another system. I’ll sit tight with any RF spending for a bit; happy with my R5 and 100-500 for now, but Canon is crazy with their pricing and what they’re offering these days.


----------



## Del Paso (Apr 20, 2022)

bbasiaga said:


> Totally tongue in cheek here, but at this point I could announce 50+ lenses for my camera system and ship just as many as Nikon seems to be able to ship.
> 
> Seriously though this could be interesting. In a few years I could see adding a used Z9 and a couple of select lenses to go along side my Canon gear, particularly if Nikon fills some key gaps in glass and price point that Canon doesn't fill - and at prices more like the old Canon pricing. My big current fear is Canon is going boutique like Leica did, with ridiculous pricing providing high margins while driving volume down.
> 
> Brian


Unfortunately, for me at least, Leica seems to be very successful with this strategy. In the past, buying a Leica lens was not yet a choice between eating or photographing. I too hope Canon won't follow this example, but the risk is extremely limited, the two companies having totally different structures. (Boutique vs. automated industrial production).


----------



## Jones (Apr 20, 2022)

This makes me wonder where the R7 is that should have arrived "as early as March". Not much we heard about it since February.


----------



## neurorx (Apr 20, 2022)

fred said:


> R1: 100MP - 50 fps - 16K @ 60fps, 8K @ 240fps - $10,000
> 
> LOL


Add no to little noise at ISOs of 25600 then we are all good.


----------



## Exploreshootshare (Apr 20, 2022)

neurorx said:


> Nikon's recent pricing hopefully will help reduce Canon's.


Nikon stated in the same press release that they are going to raise their prices by 20%. So, I guess the Z9 and 80mm lens pricing were "statements" to attract pros, but their aggressive pricing won't carry over to their entire line-up.


----------



## Exploreshootshare (Apr 20, 2022)

Well, in the report Nikon states they want to "have 50 Z lenses available by 2026". Given Canon stated they're going to release about 8 lenses annually, Nikon and Canon will be almost even by 2026. The interesting question is: how will their line-up differ from each other.


----------



## Billybob (Apr 21, 2022)

Exploreshootshare said:


> Well, in the report Nikon states they want to "have 50 Z lenses available by 2026". Given Canon stated they're going to release about 8 lenses annually, Nikon and Canon will be almost even by 2026. The interesting question is: how will their line-up differ from each other.


Well, my biggest question in this regard is whether Canon will offer affordable (rather than "budget") variable-aperture DO lenses to match Nikon's offering of pf lenses?

I could get quite excited about a 600mm f/5 DO lens for $6000 or even $7000.


----------



## neurorx (Apr 21, 2022)

I keep hoping Canon will offer lenses the other brands don't. The 28-70 f2L is a great lens and shows innovation. One could also argue that the smaller, lighter 70-200 2.8L is as well. I had hoped we would see more of these lenses with the RF mount. I think Canon could have done better than the current 100-500 and super telephoto lenses. Let's hope we see more of the former as Canon is capable.


----------



## Deleted member 381342 (Apr 21, 2022)

neurorx said:


> I keep hoping Canon will offer lenses the other brands don't. The 28-70 f2L is a great lens and shows innovation. One could also argue that the smaller, lighter 70-200 2.8L is as well. I had hoped we would see more of these lenses with the RF mount. I think Canon could have done better than the current 100-500 and super telephoto lenses. Let's hope we see more of the former as Canon is capable.


The RF 70-200's, 100-500, and 28-70 are system sellers in my book. While the 100-500 is a bother with a TC, as a bare lens it gives Canon users something no one else has. The RF super-tele lenses on the other hand are really disappointing and I keep waiting on the first of their new design mirrorless lenses to show face.


----------



## Exploreshootshare (Apr 21, 2022)

neurorx said:


> I think Canon could have done better than the current 100-500 and super telephoto lenses.


I think the 100-500mm is absolutely magnificent. The only thing a Mk II version has to improve is the capability of using TC all the way making it a 200-1000mm e.g.


----------



## Exploreshootshare (Apr 21, 2022)

Billybob said:


> Well, my biggest question in this regard is whether Canon will offer affordable (rather than "budget") variable-aperure DO lenses to match Nikon's offering of pf lenses?


I'd love to see Canon (or any other manufacturer) exploring superzoom lenses with variable aperture to make them affordable and attractive to a lot of people. The 600mm/ 800mm F11 were a great start, but how about a 300-700mm with a F6.3-11 aperture. (250-750mm or F5.6-F8... you get the picture)


----------



## neurorx (Apr 21, 2022)

Photo Bunny said:


> The RF 70-200's, 100-500, and 28-70 are system sellers in my book. While the 100-500 is a bother with a TC, as a bare lens it gives Canon users something no one else has. The RF super-tele lenses on the other hand are really disappointing and I keep waiting on the first of their new design mirrorless lenses to show face.


When Sony and others have a faster 200-600 lens under 2000 with great optical quality and TC compatibility it didnt seem Canon was making a huge leap with the 100-500.


----------



## Doug7131 (Apr 21, 2022)

neurorx said:


> When Sony and others have a faster 200-600 lens under 2000 with great optical quality and TC compatibility it didnt seem Canon was making a huge leap with the 100-500.


The Canon is a 5x zoom vs the 3x zoom of the sony. That is a massive difference in range. The Sony also starts at 200mm vs 100mm of the Canon which greatly reduces its usability in many situations. The Canon is also half a kilo lighter than the sony. Overall the 100-500 is a much more versatile lens.
Also remember that Sony also sells a 100-400mm for £2500.


----------



## Deleted member 381342 (Apr 22, 2022)

neurorx said:


> When Sony and others have a faster 200-600 lens under 2000 with great optical quality and TC compatibility it didnt seem Canon was making a huge leap with the 100-500.


Sonys is a 100-400 like Nikon. The consumer 200-600 is not a comparable lens. There is more to a lens than its f-stop and focal range. That Sony is also equivalent to a 300mm when at 600mm and focusing on something close.


----------



## tonblom (Apr 22, 2022)

Photo Bunny said:


> Sonys is a 100-400 like Nikon. The consumer 200-600 is not a comparable lens. There is more to a lens than its f-stop and focal range. That Sony is also equivalent to a 300mm when at 600mm and focusing on something close.


I don't know the Sony, so nothing negative about that lens, but the Canon keeps focus when I zoom in, which is important for me. At 600mm I cannot find the object and I also don't see why I would need a close focussing distance for 600mm?


----------



## Deleted member 381342 (Apr 22, 2022)

tonblom said:


> I don't know the Sony, so nothing negative about that lens, but the Canon keeps focus when I zoom in, which is important for me. At 600mm I cannot find the object and I also don't see why I would need a close focussing distance for 600mm?


You want a small song bird to fill your frame and it should do at 600mm when the Sony 200-600 is at 600mm you will get the field of view of a 300mm when you are close to a small song bird. Basically you have a more pixels on the bird with a 100-400GM and even more with the RF 100-500. If your subject is big and distant then the 200-600 performs correctly. There are always compromises to lens designs.


----------



## Exploreshootshare (Apr 22, 2022)

neurorx said:


> When Sony and others have a faster 200-600 lens under 2000 with great optical quality and TC compatibility it didnt seem Canon was making a huge leap with the 100-500.


Here's a repost of post I did about a year ago, but it makes sense once again: 

I just don’t get why people still compare the RF 100-500mm to Sonys 200-600mm lense. Those lenses feature completely different designs for different purposes.

RF 100-500mm - 200-600mm
77mm Filter - 96mm filter thread
20 cm - 32 cm
1.45 kg - 2.1 kg
0,5 m - 2,4 m Minimum focus

If you look at the purposes intended, it is even clearer:

RF: possible walk-around lense 
Sony: most „sit and wait“ lense… (birders e.g.)


RF: landscapes, sports, wildlife (77mm thread allows regular filters…) 
Sony: almost exclusively wild-life
The narrower end and the exceptional minimum focus makes the RF 100-500mm a great sport lense for example for soccer, handball (huge in Germany) while the 200-600mm isn’t suitable here.

In addition, the RF 100-500mm is an L lense, the 200-600mm is not a G Master lense, a fact which a lot of users complained on the sonyalpharumors site when the lense was released. Since the 200-600mm features weather sealing and still is not a GMaster lense, it likely says that the image quality is not the best possible. (while it is still good IQ)

The Sony 200-600mm is a great option for wildlife photography. And yes, it is an offering Canon does not have. But Canon has a different, much more versatile and way more handy option. Comparing those lense just doesn’t make sense.

I don´t wanna trash the Sony 200-600mm lense here, because it great lense for what it is. But I’m sick and tired of people bitching and moaning about the fact, that the 200-600mm is* one third of stop faster between 472-500mm* and people literally comparing apples and melons. Furthermore, they only compare a single tiny fact…


----------



## neurorx (Apr 22, 2022)

Exploreshootshare said:


> Here's a repost of post I did about a year ago, but it makes sense once again:
> 
> I just don’t get why people still compare the RF 100-500mm to Sonys 200-600mm lense. Those lenses feature completely different designs for different purposes.
> 
> ...


Wow, what a response. I just don't think the 100-500 was a big improvement of a lens over my 100-400 II. 200-600 at least gives me some additional reach at a reasonable price point, which was my point.....but wow, what a reply.


----------

