# Industry News: Nikon announces the Nikon Z50 APS-C mirrorless camera body & DX Z-mount lenses



## Canon Rumors Guy (Oct 10, 2019)

> *MELVILLE, NY (October 10, 2019 at 12:01 A.M. EDT)* *– *Today, Nikon Inc. announced the next Z series mirrorless camera, the DX-format Nikon Z 50, along with two new companion NIKKOR Z lenses, the NIKKOR Z DX 16-50mm f/3.5-6.3 VR and NIKKOR Z DX 50-250mm f/4.5-6.3 VR. The new Nikon Z 50 takes full advantage of Nikon’s larger Z mount, providing creators of all types with the most innovative optical system for superior image and video quality. The compact and lightweight Nikon Z 50 was made for unique individuals seeking a camera that has the speed, portability and style to keep pace and share their creative storytelling and imagination, especially when paired with the new ultra-compact 16-50mm zoom and the slim 50-250mm telephoto zoom lenses.
> 
> 
> 
> ...



Continue reading...


----------



## Arod820 (Oct 10, 2019)

So where’s the Canon version? And nobody say the M6.


----------



## Chaitanya (Oct 10, 2019)

Quite funny how Canon M6 II looks better than Z50 even with optional viewfinder.


----------



## criscokkat (Oct 10, 2019)

Chaitanya said:


> Quite funny how Canon M6 II looks better than Z50 even with optional viewfinder.


Better specs in almost everything but the mount and lens as well.


----------



## Chaitanya (Oct 10, 2019)

criscokkat said:


> Better specs in almost everything but the mount and lens as well.


Sigma is going to make lenses for Ef-M mount so thats also an advantage for Canon apart from decent primes which Canon themselves are selling. Also it will take atleast 2-3 years before there are good crop Z mount lenses made by either Nikon or 3rd party makers.


----------



## criscokkat (Oct 10, 2019)

Chaitanya said:


> Sigma is going to make lenses for Ef-M mount so thats also an advantage for Canon apart from decent primes which Canon themselves are selling. Also it will take atleast 2-3 years before there are good crop Z mount lenses made by either Nikon or 3rd party makers.


i'd still prefer the upgradibility of using the full frame z lenses.

My same argument applies to canon making an rf mount aps-c. (insert ob canon "Please take the M6ii internals and place them in a R body, or even an RP body, add a bit more buffer and call it a day") edit: (and take my money!!!)


----------



## Kit. (Oct 10, 2019)

criscokkat said:


> My same argument applies to canon making an rf mount aps-c. (insert ob canon "Please take the M6ii internals and place them in a R body, or even an RP body, add a bit more buffer and call it a day") edit: (and take my money!!!)


For use with which lenses?


----------



## mpb001 (Oct 10, 2019)

Chaitanya said:


> Quite funny how Canon M6 II looks better than Z50 even with optional viewfinder.


I was thinking the same thing. I use a 5DIV, but would rather use a M6II with detachable EVF for portability. Plus it has the 32 MP in a new sensor.


----------



## JohnyT (Oct 10, 2019)

Now we know why the EOS M5 II has not been released!


----------



## JohanCruyff (Oct 10, 2019)

Kit. said:


> For use with which lenses?


EF, EF-S, RF lenses and (future) RF Aps-C lenses.


----------



## Kit. (Oct 10, 2019)

JohanCruyff said:


> EF, EF-S, RF lenses and (future) RF Aps-C lenses.


_Which_ RF lenses?

What is the actual market for a crop camera _now_ for use with _future, not yet even announced_ lenses?

What is the selling point compared to an EF-S or an EF-M mount camera?


----------



## criscokkat (Oct 10, 2019)

JohanCruyff said:


> EF, EF-S, RF lenses and (future) RF Aps-C lenses.


Exactly, all of the above. I would use my adapter for the 18-135 ef-s standard lens to start unless they came out with a wider full frame 'kit' than the current 24-105 f4. I'd then continue to use it with the 70-200 2.8 ef, along with a few ef primes. But I could then start working on buying r mount lenses, especially when they release the f4 versions and 1.8 primes that seem like they will be coming out next year. 

I'll buy and reach for the occasional expensive lens category. I also would probably consider buying a full frame body in the future, but would want the aps-c for sports. I almost bought a 6dmii but decided to wait a bit. I rented a R and loved it, decided mirrorless is my future as well, i just want to wait for aps-c for my primary shooting (bmx and other bike racing).


----------



## flip314 (Oct 10, 2019)

criscokkat said:


> i'd still prefer the upgradibility of using the full frame z lenses.
> 
> My same argument applies to canon making an rf mount aps-c. (insert ob canon "Please take the M6ii internals and place them in a R body, or even an RP body, add a bit more buffer and call it a day") edit: (and take my money!!!)



I think in a couple years we'll see an RPII that's full frame and exceeds the 90D for specs while matching the cost. I'm becoming more and more convinced that there's no future for APS-C RF.


----------



## AlanF (Oct 10, 2019)

"Unlike its full-frame siblings, the Nikon Z50 lacks any physical form of dust reduction for its sensor, instead relying on the ability to capture a dust-off reference photo which can then be used to remove dust from your images automatically in software for as long as the dust particles predominantly remain in the same locations."

Ye gods!


flip314 said:


> I think in a couple years we'll see an RPII that's full frame and exceeds the 90D for specs while matching the cost. I'm becoming more and more convinced that there's no future for APS-C RF.


To exceed the specs of the 90D, that RPII would have to have an 80+ Mpx sensor and an OVF. There is a real niche for high density sensors and OVFs, and the 90D fits it really nicely. If it sells well, we'll see more of them - cameras that combine the best of mirrorless and mirrored.


----------



## andrei1989 (Oct 10, 2019)

wait where's the bashing of the 1.5x crop for 4k video?


----------



## M. D. Vaden of Oregon (Oct 10, 2019)

criscokkat said:


> i'd still prefer the upgradibility of using the full frame z lenses.
> 
> My same argument applies to canon making an rf mount aps-c. (insert ob canon "Please take the M6ii internals and place them in a R body, or even an RP body, add a bit more buffer and call it a day") edit: (and take my money!!!)


If that's your argument, that's about it.

I have an M5 and completely enjoy it. No real limitations, because I have a 5DS, EOS R and 5D mk ii which really open the real door to the main event of shooting.


----------



## psolberg (Oct 10, 2019)

good of them not to introduce a new mount just for cropped sensors on top of the already disruptive switch to Z. All the full frame Z glass will just mount w/o clunky adapters and even "crop mode" should work on full frame bodies using cropped sensor glass. In other words: how it should be because you're in the same lens system so you shouldn't be expected to rebuy all your glass for cropped or full frame. If you're already taking the plunge and going or did invest in mirrorless, your Z lenses should just mount regardless of which Nikon Z body you own.


----------



## Joules (Oct 11, 2019)

psolberg said:


> All the full frame Z glass will just mount w/o clunky adapters and even "crop mode" should work on full frame bodies using cropped sensor glass.


The flipside to that is that each lens you put on your compact camera is now 8mm wider than if you used a APS-C specific mount like Canon Ef-m (And Sony E ).

The EOS M system is the most efficient way to get small and light. The Nikon APS-C mirrorless offering already makes a compromise in that regard due to the mount.


----------



## AlanF (Oct 11, 2019)

I seem to recall, but my memory may have failed, that there was a recent list of optimal flange diameters for lens design and the EF-M was particularly good. Perhaps someone can dig it up.


----------



## flip314 (Oct 11, 2019)

AlanF said:


> I seem to recall, but my memory may have failed, that there was a recent list of optimal flange diameters for lens design and the EF-M was particularly good. Perhaps someone can dig it up.











Canon's EOS-M mount is the best designed mount, according to Fujifilm


In a presentation at the X system summit, Fujifilm came up with Value Angle. In essence, the value angle takes the mount's flange distance and the size of the mount against the size of the sensor. All three of those parameters define how easy or hard it is to design lenses. The formula of...



www.canonnews.com





Look at Sony all alone at the bottom of the list... Their fans always have some excuse for their (relatively) lousy mount though, even though it was clearly never designed for full frame sensors. Unsurprisingly, it does have a very good APS-C score.


----------



## AlanF (Oct 11, 2019)

Thanks flip314! A top guy at Sony once defended their mount by saying that size doesn't really matter! It is important to see that the M mount is the best for APS-C.


----------



## JohanCruyff (Oct 11, 2019)

Joules said:


> The flipside to that is that each lens you put on your compact camera is now 8mm wider than if you used a APS-C specific mount like Canon Ef-m (And Sony E ).
> 
> The EOS M system is the most efficient way to get small and light. The Nikon APS-C mirrorless offering already makes a compromise in that regard due to the mount.



Canon (and other can choose) to:
1) use the same Mounts => less efficient for pure APS-C users but, if the customers switch to Full Frame, they won't have to sell all of their lenses (and the APS-C camera can be kept as a backup body)
2) use different Mounts => more efficient for pure APS-C users, but if they switch to Full Frame, they will have to sell all of their lenses (and/or if they want to use the APS-C as a backup, they will also have to keep all their lenses: 22mm APS-C AND 35mm Full Frame, 15-45mm APS-C AND 24-70 Full Frame etc.).

Maybe Canon is the only player that one day will be able to offer their customers both the M APS-C system and the R (Full Frame plus APS-C), who knows?



...another option - for premium users who feel the need a backup body - would be to use R-style and RP-style full frame bodies, together with small RF pancakes: in that case, one would not miss the APS-C sensor at all.
But… but… where are my RF pancakes?


----------



## lawny13 (Oct 11, 2019)

Simply speaking not everyone has EF-M or EF or EF-S lenses when they purchase an RF body. In that respect those people (me included) it less likely or very cautious about buying non native lenses. Especially when it comes to the whole “high speed display” setting that is only available for RF glass

So... I have the R and it is of fair size. The M cameras and now the DX-Z bodies look to be quite small in comparison. But it seems extremely silly to me to buy into a second camera system. Like I would love to have the M6II with the RF 35 mounted to it as my everyday on the go camera. Instead I will stick to the R with the 50stm adapted on to it. 

Thing is that it isn’t only limited to that FL example. If I spend 3k almost on the 70-200 I would like the option of using that expensive piece of glass on a APS-C body that I own rather than having a lens that replicates that FL range but is likely to not be optically as good.

THAT is the reason why having the same mount for FF and Crop is a nice option to have. 

If it were the case I would own a M6II right now. Since it is not the case it is fair game to consider Fuji and nikon for my crop sensor needs since going EOS-M would entail the same exercise of maintaining a separate system. 

Now if I owned a bunch of EF lenses it would be a different proposition.


----------



## SteveC (Oct 11, 2019)

lawny13 said:


> Simply speaking not everyone has EF-M or EF or EF-S lenses when they purchase an RF body. In that respect those people (me included) it less likely or very cautious about buying non native lenses. Especially when it comes to the whole “high speed display” setting that is only available for RF glass
> 
> So... I have the R and it is of fair size. The M cameras and now the DX-Z bodies look to be quite small in comparison. But it seems extremely silly to me to buy into a second camera system. Like I would love to have the M6II with the RF 35 mounted to it as my everyday on the go camera. Instead I will stick to the R with the 50stm adapted on to it.
> 
> ...



Yes, the current situation definitely works better for people who have a bunch of EF glass already, than it will for people totally new to things who'd like to have both and want to buy the latest/greatest stuff.

I actually buy EF glass sometimes, even though I own no full frame camera, because it will work on the M I have now and the R I intend to get, someday. If I ever end up specializing in something I can probably drill down and get two or three RF lenses for it (assuming I pick a specialty where such a thing exists--Rs tend to be fairly "short" so far).


----------



## AlanF (Oct 11, 2019)

You could put the new $8000 58mm f/0.95 Noct on the Z50, which would be equivalent to a 87mm f/1.4 on an FF, to have a portrait lens rival to the 85mm f/1.2 on the R with an added 2/3rd stop advantage.


----------



## TinTin (Oct 11, 2019)

The Nikon Z mount would score 80 for an APS-C (DX) size sensor, which beats the EF-M mount.

The Canon RF mount would score 68.4 for a Canon-size APS-C sensor (so, also higher than the EF-M mount, but not as high as Nikon).



AlanF said:


> Thanks flip314! A top guy at Sony once defended their mount by saying that size doesn't really matter! It is important to see that the M mount is the best for APS-C.


----------



## koketso (Oct 11, 2019)

AlanF said:


> I seem to recall, but my memory may have failed, that there was a recent list of optimal flange diameters for lens design and the EF-M was particularly good. Perhaps someone can dig it up.


Yes. It was more like a research paper done bu Fuji. It confirmed three things:

1. Canon's EF-M mount is the best mount ever made, even though it's full potential may never be realised.

2. Sony's E-mount has limitations in the lens design that show it was never made for Full Frame, just like what Canon's VP said a couple years back when him and his Sony Alpha counterpart were taking digs at each other.

3. Nikon's DSLR mount is, at worst - rubbish, at best - really outdated. So Nikon absolutely needed to make the Z mount, and the Z mount will replace their other DSLR mounts going forward as it is adaptable to even a DSLR.


----------



## AlanF (Oct 11, 2019)

TinTin said:


> The Nikon Z mount would score 80 for an APS-C (DX) size sensor, which beats the EF-M mount.
> 
> The Canon RF mount would score 68.4 for a Canon-size APS-C sensor (so, also higher than the EF-M mount, but not as high as Nikon).


Thanks for looking deeper into this. You are absolutely right if you plug in the 55mm diameter of the Z flange into the equation you do get 80. Looking into it more deeply still, they use the inner diameter of the lens mount in the calculation.What they should be using is the actual diameter of the circular black mask further back in the mount, which is much less. It look like in the photo that the inner mask is about a10mm smaller.


----------



## Jasonmc89 (Oct 11, 2019)

criscokkat said:


> i'd still prefer the upgradibility of using the full frame z lenses.
> 
> My same argument applies to canon making an rf mount aps-c. (insert ob canon "Please take the M6ii internals and place them in a R body, or even an RP body, add a bit more buffer and call it a day") edit: (and take my money!!!)


Come to think of it that pretty much is the camera I want!


----------



## AlanF (Oct 12, 2019)

We all have our opinion of TN and his comments about Canon But, he does the same to everyone now. The Nikon folk are up in arms about his latest broadside on the Z50. Everything about it is wrong, especially the size of the mount. TN just thrives on badmouthing. I suppose its more entertaining and doesn't require the effort of producing a proper review.


----------



## Del Paso (Oct 13, 2019)

AlanF said:


> We all have our opinion of TN and his comments about Canon But, he does the same to everyone now. The Nikon folk are up in arms about his latest broadside on the Z50. Everything about it is wrong, especially the size of the mount. TN just thrives on badmouthing. I suppose its more entertaining and doesn't require the effort of producing a proper review.



A typical example of why I hate such unqualified reviews.
Fortunately, there are more reliable sources, like TDP, L.Rentals, Optical Limits, Northlight Images etc...
No, I didn't mean the one relying on us to feed his family...


----------



## Kit. (Oct 13, 2019)

AlanF said:


> I suppose its more entertaining


Does anyone watch TN for anything else?


----------



## SteveC (Oct 13, 2019)

Kit. said:


> Does anyone watch TN for anything else?



Chelsea, but I suppose that too would fall under "entertainment."


----------



## AlanF (Oct 13, 2019)

Kit. said:


> Does anyone watch TN for anything else?


I am very much afraid that many do take him seriously.


----------



## tron (Oct 13, 2019)

All these videos are quite of the blah blah type. Shouldn't people be more interested in hard facts sites like the-digital-picture, lens rentals, optical limits, etc?


----------

