Thom's Latesthttps://www.zsystemuser.com/nikon-z-system-news-and/who-is-nikons-customer.html

He hit the nail on it's head. The Dx offering is poor. Z70/Z90 required urgently to stop customers 'moving away. Not everyone like heavy bodies and lenses.Seng

Couldn't agree more. Nikon needs to release something like a Z70 yesterday in order not to loose customers.The step up to FX is VERY expensive if one for example want to replace DX-lenses like Sigma 18-35 f/1.8 and 50-100 f/1.8 not to mention tele lenses...

We all know the world has changed, but probably differ on exactly how. IMO, there's less and less rationale for crop sensors. I spent the entire 13 years I had a D200 waiting to be able to afford a ff sensor camera and never would have bought the D200 if I had the money for ff. The advantages for image quality and narrower DOF really matter. Cropped is good for BIF, but how big is that market really? If they can't/won't fully support crop sensor cameras with a proper lens selection, Nikon should just make the hard decision, discontinue them, and concentrate on ff stuff. I'd rather they did a great job with a narrower product line, than spread themselves too thin.

Nikon has let many of those become Fujifilm and Sony customers due to neglect.This is something I don't understand. I bought the Z50 because of its price point, and at the time I bought it, there was nothing that competed. Fuji cameras at the price point of the Z50 lacked weather sealing, shot slower, has slower AF, did not have modern ergonomics, fewer customizability options, had poorer performing lenses, higher quality lenses cost similar to FX Nikon lenses, and were similarly sized. Fuji cameras' price per density unit (g/cm^3 or w/e you want to use) is not efficient when compared to full frame cameras they compete against. Fuji cameras definitely competed poorly against the Z50 kit at the same price point.I kinda understand Sony, though I found the ergo of their APS-C line to be quite bad, particularly the EVF and grip.  Also at the price point of the Z50, the Sony offerings lack weather sealing. The thing Sony has going for it is the significantly better AF and glut of affordable lenses. But the body itself is simply worse.

Not everyone want to carry FF cameras and lenses. They are too heavy for causal/hobbyist users. Also not cost effective unless you make living from photography. Camera manufacturers want to make more money and concentrate on expensive equipment and want all users to follow that path. This is one reason camera sales declined and lots have moved on to mobile phones for their needs.If there are good quality dx cameras and lenses, some might come back from mobile or they either move on to other manufacturers who cater for their needs or rely on phones.Seng

s.seng wrote:Not everyone want to carry FF cameras and lenses. They are too heavy for causal/hobbyist users. Also not cost effective unless you make living from photography. Camera manufacturers want to make more money and concentrate on expensive equipment and want all users to follow that path. This is one reason camera sales declined and lots have moved on to mobile phones for their needs.If there are good quality dx cameras and lenses, some might come back from mobile or they either move on to other manufacturers who cater for their needs or rely on phones.SengI'd argue the reason crop has become less popular was the increasing quality in mobile phones, not vice versa.There are also relatively light ff kits (though you give up faster lenses to do so). You can compare weights yourself.Imo, dx is a dying market, just like mft was (until it actually died).

That's kinda a flawed logic, because if phones can take over APS-C, it doesn't take that much more to take over FF too. The reason APS-C has fallen behind more than FF is because camera makers hold back features in almost all of their APS-C bodies, because they paternalistically decided that DX=casual....but the casual segment of the market has been gone since years by now, so they will of course struggle selling such bodies.

chambeshi wrote:Thom's Latesthttps://www.zsystemuser.com/nikon-z-system-news-and/who-is-nikons-customer.htmlI know Nikon is now concentrating on professionals and higher end customers, or nuts like me, but they need attractive APS-C products to lure buyers into the Nikon ecosystem.The average consumer who may have an interest in photography is not going to jump from their cell phone to an expensive full frame camera and numerous lenses. That is a huge financial commitment most non professionals don't want to make.Although the three DX offerings are similar (to us), the average consumer sees a retro camera, a camera that reminds them of their cell phones (Z30) and a camera that looks like a traditional DSLR. While I would love to see a mirrorless D500, I think they will move more product and attract more buyers with an upgraded Z50 or an actual advertising campaign for the Z30, which has a better focusing system if you don't mind the lack of an EVF. Younger people are used to taking pictures with no EVF, so a drop in price, and the much promised DX 12-28 lens,  would help. The full frame 28mm and 40 mm are also great for a camera like the Z 30 since they are small, light z and inexpensive.

ghostfox_1 wrote:s.seng wrote:Not everyone want to carry FF cameras and lenses. They are too heavy for causal/hobbyist users. Also not cost effective unless you make living from photography. Camera manufacturers want to make more money and concentrate on expensive equipment and want all users to follow that path. This is one reason camera sales declined and lots have moved on to mobile phones for their needs.If there are good quality dx cameras and lenses, some might come back from mobile or they either move on to other manufacturers who cater for their needs or rely on phones.SengI'd argue the reason crop has become less popular was the increasing quality in mobile phones, not vice versa.There are also relatively light ff kits (though you give up faster lenses to do so). You can compare weights yourself.Imo, dx is a dying market, just like mft was (until it actually died).I started my Mirrorless journey with Panasonic G1 and progressed until G80. Then they introduced G9 which was heavier than some FF cameras and even heavier Videos centric GH series. They dropped out of mid sized cameras. I jumped to Sony RX100M7 but their buttons are too small and then moved to Zfc. If Nikon don't improve the dx line-up I may consider moving again but currently no plan to do so.My days of carrying SLR film cameras with multiple lenes are over. I am a causal photographer and just enjoy the hobby. There are lot of people like me in this situation would love to carry on taking photos with lighter gear.Seng

Franz304 wrote:That's kinda a flawed logic, because if phones can take over APS-C, it doesn't take that much more to take over FF too. The reason APS-C has fallen behind more than FF is because camera makers hold back features in almost all of their APS-C bodies, because they paternalistically decided that DX=casual....but the casual segment of the market has been gone since years by now, so they will of course struggle selling such bodies.It's really not. For casual shooters (who bought heavily into crop sensors), phones do 90% of it perfectly, and with ai tricks you get pretty close on the last 10%. Otherwise there are a few crop bodies you can mount lenses to for wildlife, etc.I expect nikon to make a z version of the d500 st some point, but I don't think it's what they should do.

s.seng wrote:ghostfox_1 wrote:s.seng wrote:Not everyone want to carry FF cameras and lenses. They are too heavy for causal/hobbyist users. Also not cost effective unless you make living from photography. Camera manufacturers want to make more money and concentrate on expensive equipment and want all users to follow that path. This is one reason camera sales declined and lots have moved on to mobile phones for their needs.If there are good quality dx cameras and lenses, some might come back from mobile or they either move on to other manufacturers who cater for their needs or rely on phones.SengI'd argue the reason crop has become less popular was the increasing quality in mobile phones, not vice versa.There are also relatively light ff kits (though you give up faster lenses to do so). You can compare weights yourself.Imo, dx is a dying market, just like mft was (until it actually died).I started my Mirrorless journey with Panasonic G1 and progressed until G80. Then they introduced G9 which was heavier than some FF cameras and even heavier Videos centric GH series. They dropped out of mid sized cameras. I jumped to Sony RX100M7 but their buttons are too small and then moved to Zfc. If Nikon don't improve the dx line-up I may consider moving again but currently no plan to do so.My days of carrying SLR film cameras with multiple lenes are over. I am a causal photographer and just enjoy the hobby. There are lot of people like me in this situation would love to carry on taking photos with lighter gear.SengZ5 with a 24-120. It's pretty light, great image quality. You also have the new 70-300 which does a good enough job for the price. Things change, and people adjust, just like you have before.

rangel28 wrote:chambeshi wrote:Thom's Latesthttps://www.zsystemuser.com/nikon-z-system-news-and/who-is-nikons-customer.htmlI know Nikon is now concentrating on professionals and higher end customers, or nuts like me, but they need attractive APS-C products to lure buyers into the Nikon ecosystem.The average consumer who may have an interest in photography is not going to jump from their cell phone to an expensive full frame camera and numerous lenses. That is a huge financial commitment most non professionals don't want to make.Although the three DX offerings are similar (to us), the average consumer sees a retro camera, a camera that reminds them of their cell phones (Z30) and a camera that looks like a traditional DSLR. While I would love to see a mirrorless D500, I think they will move more product and attract more buyers with an upgraded Z50 or an actual advertising campaign for the Z30, which has a better focusing system if you don't mind the lack of an EVF. Younger people are used to taking pictures with no EVF, so a drop in price, and the much promised DX 12-28 lens, would help. The full frame 28mm and 40 mm are also great for a camera like the Z 30 since they are small, light z and inexpensive.Agree 100%This is also a primary tactical advantage of the D500 to attract and support budget sports and wildlife hobbyists. So relatively affordable DX for both tiers are essential. The more features that Nikon can bundle in at the product cost the betterBasically the DX Uwide is missing key lens IMHO as the kit zooms and budget muffin 28 40 and 50 macro are dual format for the Z system

rangel28 wrote:The average consumer who may have an interest in photography is not going to jump from their cell phone to an expensive full frame camera and numerous lenses. That is a huge financial commitment most non professionals don't want to make.Most of them are using smartphones that cost more than a Z50 and replacing the phone every two or three years. Plenty of buyers are using phones that aren't much cheaper than a Z5.It's more likely low priced cameras are a harder sell to people buying high mid range or flagship phones not that Nikon needs cheaper cameras.

Has anyone really looked at the size of these markets?There are 250 smartphones sold for every ILC camera.  99.6% of smartphone owners will never buy any ILC camera even though they buy a smartphone every 3-5 years.60% of the ILC camera market is entry level, low margin products.  That market has declined by 80% and the volume will never return.  The smartphone is good enough.The entry level camera market continues to shrink.  It's marginally profitable or unprofitable even though it represents 60% of volume.   It requires mass market advertising, extensive sales and marketing support, and the lifetime value of a customer is remarkably low.  How much money can you make when 80% of your sales are through Amazon, Walmart, Costco and Target?  Those companies wrote the book on low costs and thin margins.  Only a small percentage of entry camera owners ever buy an enthusiast level or professional camera.Nikon has a clear strategy to focus on the enthusiast and professional segments.  They have clearly communicated a plan to move away from entry level completely by 2025.There is plenty of room for DX cameras in support of enthusiasts and content creators.  It's behind the FX enthusiast segment in terms of priority because the FX segment overlaps with the pro segment and is completely in the target market.  But you will see DX cameras over the next couple of years targeted at enthusiasts.Price points for cameras start at $800-1000.  That's high enough to eliminate the one time entry level purchase.  But look at Apple - their high end iPhone 14 Pro is the top seller, and the market below $1000 is relatively small.  They sell more high end phones than the entire camera industry sells ILC cameras of any type.Don't expect Nikon to change their stated strategy.  They are more than 4 years into a strategy that is both profitable and efficient with capital.  The quality of the products is excellent.  It may not serve the low end customer, but it does work for the markets they choose to serve.

TheWillRogers wrote:Nikon has let many of those become Fujifilm and Sony customers due to neglect.This is something I don't understand. I bought the Z50 because of its price point, and at the time I bought it, there was nothing that competed. Fuji cameras at the price point of the Z50 lacked weather sealing, shot slower, has slower AF, did not have modern ergonomics, fewer customizability options, had poorer performing lenses, higher quality lenses cost similar to FX Nikon lenses, and were similarly sized. Fuji cameras' price per density unit (g/cm^3 or w/e you want to use) is not efficient when compared to full frame cameras they compete against. Fuji cameras definitely competed poorly against the Z50 kit at the same price point.I kinda understand Sony, though I found the ergo of their APS-C line to be quite bad, particularly the EVF and grip. Also at the price point of the Z50, the Sony offerings lack weather sealing. The thing Sony has going for it is the significantly better AF and glut of affordable lenses. But the body itself is simply worse.Last I saw Fuji sold more mirrorless cameras than Nikon sold mirrorless. I like Nikon, especially the lenses, and I’m definitely staying put. But understand it or not, a lot of people are buying Fuji’s cameras.As to Thom Hogan’s blog post, I think Nikon’s Z lenses shows who they are going after. I think their lenses (in terms of quality) are outpacing the camera bodies a wee bit. But the 800 PF and the 400 f/4.5 tell me Nikon is targeting enthusiasts and some pros who understand how to use an existing body to get quality photos. And perhaps that’s why the 200-600 has been delayed. Nikon doesn’t yet have a great body to pair it with for the masses that will buy it. But I think the lens and camera body are coming soon. And after that, I predict Nikon will smoke Fuji for the #3 spot in mirrorless.

TheWillRogers wrote:Nikon has let many of those become Fujifilm and Sony customers due to neglect.This is something I don't understand. I bought the Z50 because of its price point, and at the time I bought it, there was nothing that competed. Fuji cameras at the price point of the Z50 lacked weather sealing, shot slower, has slower AF, did not have modern ergonomics, fewer customizability options, had poorer performing lenses, higher quality lenses cost similar to FX Nikon lenses, and were similarly sized. Fuji cameras' price per density unit (g/cm^3 or w/e you want to use) is not efficient when compared to full frame cameras they compete against. Fuji cameras definitely competed poorly against the Z50 kit at the same price point.I kinda understand Sony, though I found the ergo of their APS-C line to be quite bad, particularly the EVF and grip. Also at the price point of the Z50, the Sony offerings lack weather sealing. The thing Sony has going for it is the significantly better AF and glut of affordable lenses. But the body itself is simply worse.I had a Z50 and moved over to the XT3 which was superior in almost every way. Same price used vs the Z50 at the time (since it was new; probably too much of a difference now). The XT3 has far better AF and FPS, better ergonomics, customization, EVF, less blackout, weather sealing, and far more lenses than Nikon dx z could offer. Not sure which Fuji lenses you used compared to Nikon's 3 DX lenses, but Fuji has a lot of great lenses. The only thing better the Z50 did was offer a nice grip, smaller size, and access to z glass (though FX glass on it often was rather large).For the record, I also have the Z6 and it definitely has its place in my gear selection, plus several Nikon lenses (F and Z mount), which are excellent. But Nikon DX is very weak; it's why I got an X-H2S for wildlife/sports.

s.seng wrote:He hit the nail on it's head. The Dx offering is poor. Z70/Z90 required urgently to stop customers 'moving away. Not everyone like heavy bodies and lenses.SengThe Z70/Z90 is the Z version of the D500. And that is a heavy camera, a Z6II with a crop sensor. The most used lenses are tele lenses as the AF-S 70-200, AF-S 500 PF, AF-S 80-400, AF-S 180-400 and the AF-S 120-300. All heavy lenses.So I think you ask for a Z50II with more DX lenses.

chambeshi wrote:rangel28 wrote:chambeshi wrote:Thom's Latesthttps://www.zsystemuser.com/nikon-z-system-news-and/who-is-nikons-customer.htmlI know Nikon is now concentrating on professionals and higher end customers, or nuts like me, but they need attractive APS-C products to lure buyers into the Nikon ecosystem.The average consumer who may have an interest in photography is not going to jump from their cell phone to an expensive full frame camera and numerous lenses. That is a huge financial commitment most non professionals don't want to make.Although the three DX offerings are similar (to us), the average consumer sees a retro camera, a camera that reminds them of their cell phones (Z30) and a camera that looks like a traditional DSLR. While I would love to see a mirrorless D500, I think they will move more product and attract more buyers with an upgraded Z50 or an actual advertising campaign for the Z30, which has a better focusing system if you don't mind the lack of an EVF. Younger people are used to taking pictures with no EVF, so a drop in price, and the much promised DX 12-28 lens, would help. The full frame 28mm and 40 mm are also great for a camera like the Z 30 since they are small, light z and inexpensive.Agree 100%This is also a primary tactical advantage of the D500 to attract and support budget sports and wildlife hobbyists. So relatively affordable DX for both tiers are essential. The more features that Nikon can bundle in at the product cost the betterBasically the DX Uwide is missing key lens IMHO as the kit zooms and budget muffin 28 40 and 50 macro are dual format for the Z systemI only had one DX lens with my D7200 and then D500 (200-500, 80-400, 300mm), so for wildlife/sports shooters, they may not need much telephoto lenses for DX z mount, the FX glass would work fine for most, I think in that scenario

Who Is Nikon's {Z} Customer?A person who was done with mirrors flipping up and down.