Remember when Pentax released the K-1 Mark II? In hindsight, that wasn't too bad.
The latest flagship camera from Nikon has been announced, the D6. Looking at the spec sheet, I'm really struggling to see why Nikon even bothered with this "update." I'm sure many of you will want to tell me about how reading the spec sheet won't tell me anything about a camera. To some extent, I agree with you, however, when an update is this minor, I think it's fair to judge the book by its cover.
What's New?
Not much really, but let's take our proverbial magnifying glass and see what see what we can find.
From what I can see, the new D6 is lighter than the D5. That's a good thing; I'm sure some of you out there will want to pay the extra amount for it. Other than that, the D6 offers a slighter faster burst rate, and the autofocus has been improved. Clearly, Canon has a lot to be concerned about.
This is a minor update and doesn't offer anything significantly beyond what many D5 owners already have. If this had been called the Nikon D5s, then one could argue that it's an appropriate update. Nikon has in the past offered minor updates in-between camera cycles. This is why we had the Nikon D4s before the D5 was eventually released. Even if that were the case, it still wouldn't make things any better, because the competition has moved on. The name of the camera isn't the problem; the camera is the problem.
Manufacturers like Canon and Sony are producing incredible cameras with exceptional features. Nikon, on the other hand, is still stuck trying to compete with the 1D X Mark II. Personally, I'm not really bothered about this, because Canon is still on the offensive, and I mostly shoot with Canon. I just think that this is a huge disservice to all the existing customers that shoot with these types of cameras.
Is It Time to Switch?
Unfortunately, it might be.
Flagship cameras generally offer the best and most cutting edge technologies. The D6 is supposed to be a flagship camera, and although it has the price point, it doesn't deliver on the features. If you're a photographer that shoots with these specific types of cameras, then it may be time for you to switch.
This is not to say that all Nikon photographers need to switch from their current camera systems, because Nikon has some wonderful options at lower price points. The D850 could be described as the best high-resolution DSLR camera, and I wouldn't disagree. The new mirrorless system from Nikon seems to be gaining in popularity, especially with the addition of raw video on the Z 6. If you're not a photographer that shoots with flagship cameras, then you probably don't need to switch. On the other hand, if you're a photographer that shoots with flagship cameras like the D5, then it's probably time you considered another manufacturer.
The attention and dedication that the D series of cameras should be receiving is seemingly not there. The D6 feels like an afterthought or a camera that they don't believe in as much as some of the other cameras they produce. Nikon used the same sensor they had in the D5. This would have been fine if it were the best at the time of its original release, but it wasn't. The dynamic range of that sensor was severely lacking in comparison to Canon. This is odd, because it's normally Canon that's behind on those types of specifications, yet the 1D X Mark II was well ahead of the D5.
Essentially, what Nikon has released is a competitor to the 1D X Mark II instead of competing with the current cameras on the market.
The Competition
Canon and Sony are the two main competitors for Nikon, and they haven't made things easy. The alternatives available for Nikon shooters are far more compelling for a whole number of reasons.
Sony
I understand that Sony has done something similar to Nikon with the a9 II. Arguably, Sony's attempt to "update" the a9 is worse than what Nikon has done; however, it's still a better option to switch to.
The first reason is the price point. The a9 and the a9 II sit at a much lower price than the D6. The original a9 is still an incredible option with its 20 fps feature. The mechanical shutter may be much slower in comparison, but for many, the electronic shutter could be enough.
The main feature that Nikon is pushing with the D6 is that the autofocus has been improved. If we're being completely honest, these improvements generally translate into very minor and mostly unnoticeable differences in real-world shooting environments.
Canon
If the Sony a9 series of cameras feel too small and almost toy like, then Canon is probably the one for you. The latest release from Canon is simply incredible. The 1D X Mark III costs pretty much the same as the new Nikon D6, but offers a whole lot more.
This latest camera from Canon also offers the ability to shoot at 20 fps; however, the major difference is that the buffer is huge. You can shoot up to 1,000 frames without reaching the buffer limit, and CFexpress will help quickly move those files onto your cards. The buffer in the Canon is five times greater than the Nikon. For many people that shoot with these types of cameras, Canon is obviously the better option in almost every regard.
Even for video, Canon has some of the best features currently on the market. This camera shoots 5.5K raw video internally. Even if you don't need that level of quality, you have lots of other options available to you both in 4K and 1080p resolutions. Couple that with Canon's Dual Pixel autofocus, and you have quite possibly the best video features in a DSLR.
Finally, Canon has the greatest number of lenses available. In my view, Canon produces some of the best lenses on the market, especially when it comes to long telephoto and zoom lenses.
Canon is quite obviously a better option than the Nikon D6, especially considering they cost pretty much the same.
Final Thoughts
I get the feeling that Nikon wants to concentrate more on the lower end of the market with their Z 7 and Z 6 mirrorless systems. They've clearly put a lot of investment into their new line of lenses. For photographers that shoot with flagship systems, this obviously doesn't help, however.
Up until recently, Canon and Nikon have been pretty interchangeable. Thing have now changed, and Canon is clearly the better option between the two. It doesn't make sense to spend the same amount of money to receive something worse.
Remember, brand loyalty doesn't help anyone except the brand.
I'm sorry, but I don't see the value in your article. You're writing an article that encourage readers to switch camera brands based on the lacking of features.
Instead you should encourage readers to take better photographs and to strengthen their brand as photographers and hobbyist.
What would have been a nice attempt is a well thought out article that provides statistical research among Nikon users.
Even if that means you're collecting your own sample size data. This would help you understand if Nikon users are content with those features and also help you to understand who Nikon is targeting their products to. In addition, it would also help Nikon as brand to know the most important features that they'd like to see during their R&D process.
All brands niche their products differently to appeal to their targeted group. Sony may appeal to a younger generation of users that welcomes fresh innovative features. Canon may appeal to video conscious users. Fujifilm users may care about their historical film simulations and film like camera bodies. Nikon users may want improved technology that doesn't require learning new features or affecting their workflow.
Reading articles like this doesn't make this website enjoyable for me. It makes this website less credible because it's full of writers that provides nothing but personal opinions. The only thing about this article that beneficial is meeting Google algorithms and SEO.
I value pieces that are based on field testing... this is photography, an art. Show me the results in a side-by-side if you're comparing brands, or if you're showing an older vs new model in the same line. Spec sheet opinions are a waste of time, not value-added. There are blogs out there that take months in reviewing gear based on putting it through its paces. That is valuable content, not this rubbish.
And certainly not the way this guy is going at people. Unprofessional. It's amateur day at the races.
Et Tu with the Nikon bashing Fstoppers? Look, If I'm spraying a thousand continuous shots it's because I just died and fell on my camera. Roll me over and you will see in those photos the last seconds of the bear attack. I know how to select my own gear. Before I buy a new camera I rent one and use it for a week. If the experience is good and I like the performance, fit, and feel, I will buy it. For me and most other photographers, I would dare to say, it's the content and composition of the end product that matters. Good equipment just gets out of the way and is a pleasure to use. Nikon products have been just that to me for 35 years now. I'll be damned if I'm going to get rid of perfectly good Nikon gear because another brand eye autofocus is 10% better or a Youtube gear vlogger tells me it's time to. People would enjoy photography a lot more if they focused on the job of taking great photos with whatever camera rather than analyzing spec sheets and constantly questioning their gear choices.
You obviously didn't shoot the D6 .. actually you didn't shoot any Nikon so you don't know what the hell you're talking about
I have all kinds of cameras Nikon ,Canon ,Sony ,Pentax ,Lumix and some Chinese piece of shit that I don't know it's brand .. so I know what the hell I'm talking about when I tell you that all these cameras are super good (except for the Chinese one) .. it doesn't matter what camera you're using as long as you are a professional photographer .. and reading your words I can tell you that you are not a professional photographer my friend
Just for the record I well choose the Nikon over any other camera any day .. but that's just me
As someone who shoots sports, F1, and concerts - any improvement is appreciated. We are invested in a brand already with lenses, batteries and other accessories that supports it. So unless the brand stops supporting professionals with good after sales, bug service, buggy software, or faulty hardware - no one in this field of photography will care much.
You can straightly ask a sports photographer what he/she thinks about _(insert new camera they're using)_ and they will definitely answer you with something similar to "It's good, better than the last one".
Remember, writing thoughtful articles to generate serious discussion doesn’t get clicks.
You and your ilk are the worst.
If you don't like the camera you can send it to me I'll use it
There's always a reason to flip to one system or another. And so many articles / YouTube videos on the topic that it feels a bit redundant as this was the hot topic of 2019.
The D6 isn't the definition of the future. Basing a shift off a single camera isn't the optimal way to go. There are so many factors and other products in the line such as lighting, modifiers, lenses, durability. For example I flipped to Sony but an easy thing to overlook is that they have a terrible hot shoe, so you're stuck buying Godox flashes with a plastic foot that breaks easily or shelling out for Profoto which is metal but an overpriced system that doesn't deliver on bang for the buck.
That's just one of many examples which makes the topic much more nuanced to what each person is looking for.
You are out of your depth which probably explains why you sound like just another clickbaiting youtuber, poorly informed and insecure. Go and read Brad Hill's blogs on the D6, based on his vast experience shooting in poor light etc on the Pacific NW, and his workshops and tours are heavily in demand. He knows Nikon very well and relies on the flagships.
Also you will do yourself huge favours to invest in serious reading of Thom Hogan and Roger Cicala. But only if you are actually interested in learning about the gear from the different companies.
Several pros have spelt out that they switched to Nikon for the D3: namely its better AFC and low-light shooting. Comparing the history of new features vs tweaks of D3 through to D5, and now to the D6 tells us more as to perhaps how Nikon have named these cameras:
https://photographylife.com/nikon-flagship-dslr-comparison
Looking back at the flagship D* DSLRs, the improvements have largely been incremental eg fps, although one might quibble 9fps > 11 fps is significant to capture that key gesture at a critical moment (e.g. golf swing, a bird landing).... the faster fps the better to grab the "Moment". This is often vital in sports and all action genres. A New AFC engine is the Mega-Tick of the great leap forward: thus D3 and D5 versus D3 and D4 upgrades. All the tweaks to video etc are merely minor, nice but sidelines - ie none = a Mega-Tick. (So perhaps Nikon engineers on the maxim of if it ain't broke, don't fix it.) If the AF engine gets redesigned / upgraded then it's a new flagship. This makes sense given the primary users of these cameras. As those with experience tell us, the D4 AF sensor had its limitations, and so it could be argued the D4 did not justify its moniker after the three D3 versions, but Nikon improved the D4 sensor.
Perhaps, the tighter girding of R&D over the past few years (with Z System urgencies and demands) explains why they did not merge more of what we see in the D780. But, again, which Pros really need more of such features?
Improved networking of the D6 = Yet another Mega-Tick
D3 > D4 > D5 each updated the sensor. With the D5 > D6 it's still 20mp - Oh the horror! but we do not YET know if these sensors are the same. If Nikon has improved D6 IQ at end of the of ISO range then another Mega-Tick. Especially if ISO100 gets better DR and the low-light ceiling has "darkened". If it turns out a +ve at either end (better both ends) then Wow, and Wow! This will be significant for actual photographers of sports and wildlife, who push the extremes.
Nikon pulls off bizarre blunders time and again, eg no grip with controls on the Z cameras. Considering how the D6 has turned out, viewed in retrospect the D6 teaser videos are even more bizarre than they did pre-release. Why the hell didn't we see glimpses of the new AF in action (using tested prototypes) - and in low light too?!?
However with the flagship FX DSLRs aimed primarily at Pros shooting top level action events, the R&D has consistently delivered a rugged tank of a camera that delivers, and above all a camera "that leaves nothing to chance" wrt capturing subjects in action scenes. The AFC is the crux. So we read the D6 AF sensor is now Multi-CAM 37K (D5 is Multi-CAM 20K), and layout of the cross-type sensors and software are major upgrades. If tough testing might in fact turn out to obviate the official claims, then there ARE problems.
Wow, you just won't stop will you? You're in a screaming, drooling panic that Nikon may be the dominant decades old maker that you fear, and that their cameras may be very good. Perhaps - *gasp* - just as good or better than Canon or anybody else.
I'm a full time Nikon shooting Pro.
The reason I shoot Nikon is ergonomic. They fit my hands, I'm a big fella, the d5 is a great sized camera
I have a choice of cameras, usually In the bag... D5, D500, D850
The D5 is the goto camera that I use when conditions are tough... Shooting a wedding reception on a roof terrace at night under half moonlight... It focuses every time, its the camera that gets the shot and pays the bills
Every other spec on the sheet is virtually irrelevant if the camera can't nail the shot consistently when the going gets tough
Day by day I'm shooting in sand, heat, on boats. I deal with water spray, beer being thrown, the rough and tumble of wedding busses etc... And on the next say I'm shooting archetecture and property in "slow shooting mode"
The current crop of Nikon's let me shoot what I need to without missing a beat
What's the problem?
Professionals value performance, build quality, and most of all the ability to get a shot. I can shoot when other photographers can't, and that's what pays the bills
Not jumping ship soon
You’re doing what’s best for you, that’s perfectly reasonable to me :-).
Wow! I am amazed that such a bullshit article made its way to fstoppers.
Maybe its time FStoppers stop pushing click bait articles so obviously :) :( Since for the post writer Usman does not matter that his reputation has just shuttered in front of the all audience thanks to his 'unbiased' Canon shooter opinion in front of his own Canon community same like others not just Nikon ones... Hello man, really? I have used many photo brands in my career , I have driven many car brands too and I have never gossiped about previous one once just for a sake of it... New era of writers who do not care what they write as long as we get 160+ comments to push the FS higher in google search... which works awesome as you can see... since positive or negative comment does not matter anymore since for google search it is just a comment. Where is the review post button with 5 stars options lets put it next to each post Lee and Patrick so you can get real idea how your writers perform in real world haha... then you can get them bonuses or the other way around ... Just saying, step up Usman and reply to your honest readers one by one, is not the dialogue about it? I SHOOT CANON I DON'T NEED TO SWITCH says nothing to me at least! What a fun way to start morning... thought for a sec this was April 1 but hey It is only March hey..? Cheers guys.
So I guess the author thinks that throwing away $20,000 worth of Nikon lenses makes sense in order to switch to Canon.
I guess I'll toss out my 1977 70-210 mm lens that works with my 2019 Nikon 810 which is sharp as a tack. Of course backward compatibility is worthless. BTW I payed $20.00 for that lens. I think I'll keep them and toss out any article by this writer.
Exactly
A real professional doesn't give a turd about what the specs are or what the other sparkly alternatives do, they care about doing the job properly, with the tools available
When there is a perceived need, a professional does a cost vs benefit calculation. No point in boshing 6k on a tool that's only going to be used on a couple of £500 jobs etc
Jesus christ what a vomit of 0% information clickbait.
Does this site have any QC?
Nikon has been making camera's of their own design for very long time never write them off. Canon got started by copying Leica they could not create a camera on their own to start.
Too many "lol"s in comment section from Usman... and overall feeling like Usman behave like a troll.
Funny article. I got a real chuckle out of it.
The D5 is considered a better performer than the 1Dx MK II when it comes to focusing speed and focusing in extremely difficult light. Colour depth and battery life is also better on the D5. If shooting video is your main concern then the 1Dx is your best option, but if you are using the camera for what it was primarily designed for, the D5 is exceptional. The D6 is simply an improvement on the D5 and has been improved in ways that will appeal to the working sports photographer and photojournalist, i.e. the ability to get really good looking images to your editors desk quickly.
Both cameras are extremely good, but a great camera is always more than a sum of its parts. How a camera handles and its ability to work in challenging light is paramount to the working pro, and mere specs do not convey this ability.
100% completely agree but you can't tell that to today's internet "experts". The only thing that matters to them is the spec sheet....everything else about the camera is irrelevant.
I'm a bit confused about this article in general as well as the writers responses to comments. From what I remember (even from a few years back) this website was a great resource for someone looking for facts on new items as well as actual tests involving said systems. All I'm seeing here in an opinion piece by someone who doesn't shoot or know Nikon. On top of that, the writer of the article, Usman, is being incredible unprofessional in the comments and simply trying to troll people into aggravated responses. This, in and of itself, makes me want to see him banned as a contributor on this website.
So, here are a few ideas:
- Post the specifications released and comment on them compared to the previous generation
- Have someone who is familiar with Nikon and uses Nikon as well as someone who doesn't shoot Nikon compare them
- Don't post biased "articles" (also known as opinion pieces in this case) stating that people should be switching from one brand to another
- Wait until you actually have your hands on the gear to comment on it.
There are so many issues with this piece and it is simply a waste of time. We get it based on all of your comments. You're a Canon die-hard. There is no issue with that, but if that's the case, then keep your opinion about other brands to yourself because no one wants to hear it.
“.... By specs on paper...” ????
... And YOU dare to write a review...!!!
Is this how ‘ companies PRODUCE mediocre review writers...’???
My doubts about the FStoppers has been planted....
Since you've not actually seen, touched or shot with the D6 how could you possibly have an opinion based on what it can produce? Oh, I remember.... you looked at a spec sheet!!!! What a joke!!!
Hello, Jim. I hear you trying to defend a stellar flagship. Honestly I root for D6 as well (full disclosure, I shoot Nikon primarily) But you sound a bit angry. Could I ask you why? Newbies are not going to dive into the system anyways, I assume they would prefer a newer mount of whatever brand, and seasoned users would not be phased a little by simple spec comparison. I feel that D6 will speak for itself once it reaches more people.
I'm certain the loss of revenue from your moving away from Nikon will be a catastrophic blow to their business.
I hope not. I want Nikon to do well.
Last year, most of my money in photography went to high quality prints. This year, all of it will be prints and albums and big acrylics. And trips of course, before another virus or high gas prices/taxes make that almost prohibitive. Others will just keep "buying high and selling low", which is what gear buying and selling is.
This article should be written by a Nikon shooter not a Canon funboy. I find the whole article a ridicule and bias in every turn.
I adore canon. I only want to own canon cameras. I know that is narrow minded. But wow. This article is a steaming pile of nonsense.
It genuinely comes across as if you literally have no idea what you are talking about. How are you even discussing a camera you have never even used?! And say goodbye to Nikon?! I mean hello? Have you ever seen the quality of a d850. It’s professional, amazing stuff. And Nikon are still totally in the mirrorless game.
You talk about canon like they are on a pedestal when they only literally just announced the R5 and the 1dx mkiii. Before those were announced, canon was falling behind just the same as Nikon was! Let’s give Nikon a proper chance. You can’t develop a revolution over night.
And what kind of website says it will never review a DSLR again?!?!?! When the 1dx mkiii is just about to come out and is reportedly incredible?
Thank goodness I came across this "article". I've been a Nikon shooter for over 30 years but after reading this I'm definitely going to dump my 3 bodies and 12 lenses and start over with literally anything else. Thanks again!
Quite possibly the most ridiculous article I have ever read
Such a poorly written article, reads like a self entitled gearhead. Arguing in the comments to make your point, without taking, what people here are correctly pointing out is, really bad form on your end.
This is like me writing an article: time to sell your BMW I don't like their new 7 series, it costs too much and doesn't offer the same comfort as the new Mercedes. Also, Audi is very good. But get rid of your BMW's. By the way, I have never owned or driven or test drove a BMW or the actual model I'm upset about. If car reviewers wrote about cars the way you wrote this subpar article, car reviews would be very very short. Well, must be a slow day in FStoppers world.
Are you high? Canon hasn't produced anything of note in over five years. If anyone should fold, it's Canon.
I think the article was really about if the D6 was that much of an improvement over the D5 to warrant it going into production. We anticipate better technology all the time. A better camera doesn't make you a better photographer, its just a better tool.
We are all very content and happy with our gear until something better comes along.
The D6 is designed for a very small portion of the camera buying market. News stories and sports shooters with high shutter counts. Who drives their 3 kids to school in a Porsche 911? I would imagine very few. However a Toyota Camry does the job a lot better even though it is obviously not the better car.
I don't *actually drive* Toyota, but time to say goodbye to them! Other automakers are innovating faster......
Fstoppers... becoming even more irrelevant every day.
Troll-ish "articles", clickbait titles, comparisons without having the hardware, the expertise & knowledge and tools to measure.
You bottoming out soon ?
A decent photographer can pick up a Canon, Nikon, Sony, Fuji and take good pictures. Doesn't make that much difference in the real world.
What is the point of articles like this? This isn't about technique, or inspiration, or learning. I stopped reading these "Why I Dumped This Brand for that Brand" long ago when Jason Lenier or Lanier started these things. You write, "I get the feeling that Nikon wants to concentrate more on the lower end of the market with their Z 7 and Z 6 mirrorless systems." Really dude? The Z7 and Z6 (which are damn good first gen mirrorless cams) are the start of what Nikon is doing. they aren't concentrating low end from here on. Their first Pro body in mirrorless is next, they just came out with more F-mount lenses and a new flagship full frame in the D6. They'll have 21 Z lenses by next year and so far the Z lenses have been terrific. If you don't want it don't buy it. You can have whatever opinion you want about the brand you like best but this crapping on Nikon from "influencers" just doesn't hold up. The Z lenses are terrific and I can have my opinion that articles like this are played out. There's very little difference from one brand to the other these days. Micro differences. Every year it will be less. Make photos, share technique, encourage each other in learning.
Hello, Jim! I find this article useful. It forced me to think behind the scope of specs and to understand more about our collective psychology. It created a cognitive dissonance and made people to open up a bit. Sometimes it could be a good thing.
P.S. I think its better to take this article with a humor. I believe D6 is an awesome upgrade for everyone who finds D5 awesome. Nikon is not doomed and faaar from stalling. I don’t expect many crossbrand movement because new Nikon or Canon flagships.
I don't think cognitive dissonance means what you think it means.
Nice one. Well it could be, Edward. What do you think I think then, mate?
In the most boring sense here is an example.
We all seem to hold a believe that published material should be objective and unbiased. At the same time we believe that most of the articles are subjective.
Back to you.
An article does not cause cognitive dissonance, rather, voluntary buy-in does. There is nore nuance than my soundbite would suggest; however, you are still wrong.
Interesting reply, Edward. I might be wrong, no denying. Could you admit your wrongness? Then is the last time you did?
Kidding aside, what do you mean by voluntary buy-in, I am not sure I get your point.
And more nuance to what?
P.S. you have some interesting, a bit cynical though, replies to other threads.