We know exactly what its going to look like and people are furious about it im going to tell you all about it, but first i want to thank our sponsor squarespace, which makes websites really easy for you. It can be a store, it can be a portfolio for your work or just about anything else. You can imagine, take appointments from clients, sell prints directly online, you name it, you can do it easily go to squarespace.com tony and when you love it use the coupon code. Tony and theyll give you 10 off thanks for making this possible squarespace and thank you to nikon india, which posted a preview, video early on a youtube channel and then immediately took it down. But of course you cant take stuff down from the internet, so other people downloaded it and then everybody shared it and now everybodys laughing at nikon india, because, oh man, how dumb do you have to be to post something early right like what kind of a would Get the day of a video wrong, i mean whos whos, even ever, or maybe the most compelling spec is 20 frames per second raw, with continuous shooting lets. Try to unpack what this means. What i think this means is, it can continue to shoot without filling up the buffer, meaning these raw files will be unloaded to the card at the same pace that theyre being captured, and thus you never have to worry about buffering that can be kind of a Big deal, though, at the same time its something that the canon r3 and the sony a1 have also overcome, so it is also just reaching parity.

Now. This is one of the things people are really mad about theyre, saying 20 frames per second. The sony a1 is 30 frames per second. The canon r3 is 30 frames per second. Why is it not 30 frames per second and then theres the other side being like? Oh, no real photographer needs more than three frames per second. Why are we arguing about if you care about high frames per second, then this is interesting to you. I do i shoot sports and i shoot wildlife and let me tell you when i shoot 30 frames per second with my sony alpha one theres, so many situations where i only get one frame, thats perfect and i know with 30 instead of 20 frames per second, That i get an extra 50 percent more options and my pictures are going to be a little bit better because you get to pick that split. Second, when the bird tosses, the fish up in the air or just as the balls say that again, just as the ball touches the fingertips of the receiver in football, but the fact that nikon is only putting 20 frames per second and 45 megapixels on this gives Us an idea of the current state of their technology because it puts them on parity with the canon r5, which launched in july of 2020, so nikon does seem to be behind. As far as throughput goes and theyre producing far fewer images than the sony alpha 1, which has a similar number of megapixels but is cranking through 30 frames per second raw.

But nikon has found a way to bury this and in fact overcome it, and one of the big questions is going to be whether theyll be successful. At that another spec said they were providing the worlds fastest scan rate, and this sounds cool like its from science fiction but ill. Tell you what it means. The scan rate is the rate at which the data is being read off from the sensor and if you have seen our video on the differences between electronic and manual shutter, you know that electronic shutters can introduce flickering and banding under artificial lights like those that im In front of right now, and especially for sports photographers shooting indoor sports with high shutter speeds, this can be image ruining. So this is a very important spec when theyre saying the worlds fastest scan rate theyre saying that its reading faster than the canon r3 or sony alpha, one which are the current leaders. That means less concerns about rolling shutter, less concerns about flickering so good on nikon. Now earlier, nikon said 20 frames per second raw, continuous shooting they also sit 120 frames per second continuous shooting. This is weird. This means that the 120 frames per second number is not raw. What this could be is simply video output to still images. For example, a lot of these new cameras, the sony, a7s iii, the canon r5 – they can shoot 4k at 120 frames per second. What, if you were to take each one of those 4k frames and write them out as a jpeg file, now youre shooting continuous stills at 120 frames per second.

This sounds amazing for those of us interested in capturing high speed, still imagery, who dont want to record video and then go back and extract individual files. So what are the downsides of this well theyre, probably the same as the reasons that we dont shoot. Video, when we just want high frames per second stills, typically shooting at these high frame rates, does not give the camera the opportunity to focus in between the frames and thus continuous, focusing might completely stop this 120 frames per second ill bet. You anything is with autofocus disabled, its almost certainly a lower resolution, which can be achieved in a couple of ways. It might be achieved via cropping, but with cropping. It could give you say, 4k with a one to one readout from the center or it could read the full width of the frame and either skip lines or bin pixels together, just two different techniques for essentially reducing the image from a higher resolution sensor. Either way you end up with a significantly lower quality image. I think photographers are going to be willing to tolerate the lower quality image, especially those coming from a 20 megapixel camera, but they will not be willing to tolerate the loss of autofocus. Nikon has launched several teaser videos lately highlighting different aspects of it. I think one of the coolest parts is that the af tracking now tracks peoples eyes which their current tracking does animals eyes, which is new to nikon, but not new, to sony or canon, as well as cars and motorcycles.

People were saying they were fake and my first take was: oh thats. Definitely not a viewfinder recording. They definitely just captured video of these cars and then used video tracking in post to track a fake, auto focus point along the subjects. The reason i thought that is, it seemed too perfect, but i went through frame by frame and i actually found some flaws – a few places where it did jump around, and that was enough to convince me that it was indeed real. This means nikon has made big advances in subject tracking, but i do have big caveats that go along with this. This is all footage provided by the manufacturer, and that means theres the opportunity to cherry pick. They could have done 400 different, runs and picked the one that came out the best. They also seem to be tracking the subject, but not shooting the subject. When you press the shutter button down, the camera suddenly has to do far more work, and i have seen autofocus tracking really drop down once you start shooting. But of course you only really care about it. When you have the shutter pressed right, we also have not had the opportunity to review the still images resulting from a sequence like this and ive seen so many cameras where the autofocus tracking looked excellent, but then the photos were actually out of focus im. Looking at you canon r3, because you do not know this, but i reviewed a bunch of the marketing material from canon and a lot of those photos were out of focus.

As i saw something weird in the sequence where the long jumper runs towards the camera, you can see the autofocus changing. If you look at the background, focus is being pulled forward as the runner comes towards the camera, but once the shooting starts, i dont see the background changing anymore, and thus it seemed like once the shooting started, the autofocus stopped and then nikon very quickly shows you A sequence of what looks like still photos, but to me they dont look sharp at all. They look extremely blurry, and this makes me think that in that example, sequence, the camera stopped tracking the running subject. This makes me think that the camera might have been in release priority instead of focus. Priority photographers will really only use release priority in situations where they want to show off the high frames per second of the camera. This is what canon did in the canon r3 marketing material, i believe and thats why they did achieve the high 30 frames per second with the canon r3, but did not achieve pictures in focus. I think thats. What nikon did too now. This doesnt necessarily indicate good or bad for the canon or the nikon. It just shows you that the manufacturer is using unusual techniques because they want to highlight one specific feature, but that those techniques dont necessarily reflect real world performance theres. Only one way we find out about real world performance and thats to get the cameras in our hands, so we can review it for you and that should be happening soon be sure to subscribe.

For that another mind, blowing spec from the leaked video is 8k at 60 frames per second, but it actually had a little asterisk there that asterisk indicated it would be coming from a future firmware update. Let me be your marketing translator. I used to be the director of marketing and strategy for a fortune, 100 tech company, so i kind of know how this goes. I think nikon wants to advertise being the worlds first. 8K 60 frames per second camera, but that 8k 60 frames per second is going to come with a severe limitation such as. Maybe it only records for a few seconds or a couple of minutes and if they were to launch bracking 8k 60 frames per second. But only for 30 seconds, everyone would immediately bust on them for it and the marketing would actually go negative, but if they say coming soon and they remain mysterious about it, they get to push off that negativity for a while and everybody will sort of enjoy the Vaporware spec, at least until pre orders are fulfilled regardless current state of the art is 8k at 30 frames per second and nikon demonstrated in the videos that not only can they do ak at 30 frames per second, they can do it for at least an hour And 20 minutes, which is something the canon r5, cannot nearly do so maybe they have the same tech as the canon r5, but they figured out better cooling.

It certainly makes sense, since the nikon z9 has such a large body on it. Another curious spec is double coat on optical low pass filter, okay, first, what is an optical low pass filter? This is basically a little very thin plane of glass that they put over the sensor that very slightly blurs things. This reduces artificial color little like reds blues greens, that you get in tight knit fabrics, especially if youre a fashion or a wedding photographer that can be kind of annoying to remove. But it reduces the sharpness of the image, and this has people really mad, because optical low pass filters in general are for sports fashion and video cameras without an optical low pass filter like the nikon d50, the sony a7r iii, the canon 5ds are. These are for wildlife, landscapes and astrophotography, and at least for me i was mostly excited about the prospect of using the z9 as a wildlife camera to replace my aging nikon d850 on my 600 millimeter f4 lens here. The setup is great, but if it were shooting 20 frames per second silently well, it would be a lot greater. I dont know if i would upgrade if it has at least a heavy optical low pass filter. Olpf again, though, we have to get this in our hands and test it, because an olpf can be almost transparent, adding almost nothing or it can be very heavy, completely ruining detail for sports cameras. They tend to be really heavy so well have to see.

This also has gnss global navigation satellite system, which is an updated version of gps and an updated version of the en el 18c, which you can see. I have here in my d850 grip, its just the big honking battery. These things are like more than a hundred bucks new, so i totally understand that photographers, coming from a nikon d5, which uses the same battery, would want to be able to reuse their current batteries. The new versions are usb c chargeable, something i really appreciate supposed to have two cf express cards. I suspect these are going to be the most common type b and i think theyll also be backwards compatible with your xqd cards, mostly so all the d850 and d5 users who bought xqd cards like myself, can continue to use them. So how much is it going to cost? We dont know this yet, but its definitely going to be in the 6, 000 to 7 000 range, because nikon doesnt want to position it significantly below the canon r3 because that would make them seem like they were putting out a weaker product. But i dont think theyre going to want to position it significantly higher than the nikon d5 lets quickly go through how the nikon z9 compares against the canon r3, the canon r5 and the sony alpha 1.. Compared to the canon r3. The nikon has 45 megapixels versus 24 megapixels. That is a huge advantage, but it seems like its only going to shoot 20 frames per second raw, whereas the r3 will shoot 30 frames per second raw, so thats a huge disadvantage here, youre choosing between megapixels and frames per second.

Now the sports people are going to be happier with the r3, with the lower megapixel count, but 30 frames per second, the wildlife people are going to be happier with the z9, with the high megapixel count and the lower frames per second. The nikon has a cool two way: tilt screen, thats very versatile for people who are always behind the camera, but those of us who shoot some video as well would want to choose the r3 with its much more versatile flip screen, which makes it a better hybrid Camera, of course, the r3 doesnt shoot 8k at all, so the nikon wins as far as video resolution goes compared to the canon r5. Its actually really close. The canon r5, of course, is only ’00 dollars. I dont think the nikon z9 is going to come anywhere. Close to that, i think its going to be way more, but theyre frames per second raw and megapixels absolutely match, and this means these two cameras are going to produce very similar results, but at very different price points again. The r5 has a flip forward screen so its better for hybrid shooters, but it only shoots 8k at a measly 30 frames per second, while the nikon z9 advertises 60 frames per second. But again i think theres going to be a severe limitation on that. So it actually seems like the nikon z9s closest competitor is the canon r5, and i can better watch themselves if they put the specs up against the r5, but the price up against the sony alpha 1.

. The sony alpha 1 has 30 frames per second and 50 megapixels. That means that its shooting 50 percent more frames per second than the nikon z9. With a similar amount of detail. That means the sony has a huge advantage. Sony is also a much smaller form factor without that built in vertical grip, though i personally just put a vertical grip on mine to make shooting portraits easier because we live in an instagram world, where i need to shoot vertically on a regular basis. The alpha 1 only shoots 8k at 30 frames per second, i know pathetic, and the alpha one only has a tilt screen, whereas the nikon has that two way tilting screen. So the nikon wins for that two. I dont care. How much you love it. You cant buy the z9 right now, but you can get yourself a squarespace website just head to squarespace.com, tony whatever project you have. Whatever idea you have whatever business youre thinking about building starting with a web presence is a great way to organize your thoughts, collect your information and move forward, get your own domain name so youre, not so, and so at gmail.com, im tony at northrop.org and ive had That, for like 20 years now, 25 years now, its so nice to have a permanent spot on the web anyway get started today. Squarespace.Com tony get 10 off with the coupon code. Tony thank you squarespace in the comments down below id like to hear what you hope for the nikon z9 and whether youre actually thinking about buying it.