Maybe It's Time to Say Goodbye to Nikon

Maybe It's Time to Say Goodbye to Nikon

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. 

Usman Dawood's picture

Usman Dawood is a professional architectural photographer based in the UK.

Log in or register to post comments
214 Comments
Previous comments

246 comments! Great job on the SEO!

Not a bad thing, I think :)

Usman... you have the lowest rating of all the writers on here, maybe its time...

Admit it, mate! You are just jealous. Ultimately it was a good polemic.

What a naive, irresponsible headline.

Not so doom and gloom, Graham. I found it on a humorous side, actually. He is just saying in his words that D6 is only for people who are heavily invested in Nikon and it might not be attractive enough for professional sports shooters from other brands to switch other. I think that with the recent introduction of so many new options (e.g. mirrorless) Nikon or Cannons flagships wont attract many switchers regardless of specs. What do you think?

Good point, Graham. Still, how exactly do you see the process of tapping into that wealth? Should Fs offer them to speak out? Bresson was't big on giving lectures though. For visual people it is easier to create images.

Chuckles. Oh shoot! Did I offend the Nikon Gods? I am ready to make amends :-)
P.S. Are Russki Bots still in vogue?

This is a childlike article unworthy of publication. Worse, it seems to be funded by Nikon's competition. I agree with the consensus that Fstoppers has hit rock-bottom. The platform seems comprised of fanboys, not photographers.

There has been no comparison of the AF system from the D6 to the 1DX Mark III or A9 II, nor has there been any comparison of (really) what matters most: high ISO capability.

It is sheer nonsense to believe a new camera has to have "every bell and whistle possible" on it to be a worthy purchase.

The truth is, most photographers don't bother with 95% of what any camera can do. The people who can actually afford this camera basically want 1) a super-rugged camera, 2) blazing-fast AF, 3) unlimited buffer, 4) an incredible choice of professional lenses to match it with, 5) the best high-ISO performance possible to handle challenging light conditions, and 6) ease and flow with their connectivity.

Hey, that sounds like the D6.

All the rest of the "bells and whistles" won't matter to me, if the Canon/Sony offerings fall behind (again!) in high-ISO capability and AF, when compared to Nikon. Nikon is always The Standard of high-ISO image quality. As someone who shoots an 800mm, Canon's option is not as good as Nikon's either ... and Sony doesn't even have this option.

AMEN !!!

Exactly!
Spot the phrase-fresnel telephoto lenses for the Sony mount.
Just saying...

Dumb article

It's really simple. Did Nikon disappoint in updating the D5? Yes, they did. Is the D6 a bad camera? Not at all. If you start from scratch, might there be better offerings to find? Maybe, yes. If you own a D5, D4 or D850 as a professional and are looking for a reliable and incredible fast body.... should you sell you complete ecosystem of gear, accessoires, with an huge loss and buy everything new from Canon or Sony, create new editing filters you've been using for years, put your photo gigs on hold and learn to work with a completely new system and professional service? Of course not, that would be extremely stupid.

And yet, that last line is the message this article is sending out.

You shoot with Canon? That totally skews your thesis for me, man. Also, it's not so much brand loyalty as economics. *My* major, primary investment is glass; I get a new SLR every few years. I'm not going to hop brands in order to start a new lens collection. These speculative articles are silly regardless of which manufacturer is getting bashed; they really just come out to read like "Here's why what you like is wrong".

You shoot with Canon? That totally skews your thesis for me, man. Also, it's not so much brand loyalty as economics. *My* major, primary investment is glass; I get a new SLR every few years. I'm not going to hop brands in order to start a new lens collection. These speculative articles are silly regardless of which manufacturer is getting bashed; they really just come out to read like "Here's why what you like is wrong"

Oh I understand all now. He's from Yorkshire.

Sadly I don’t have the accent :-(.

What got deleted?

Even as a Z6/7 & D750/850 shooter I've just switched away from Nikon. I love the Z bodies and image quality, but Nikon has spent the last 2 years proving that their commitment is now on f/1.8 primes and affordable zooms. I understand they're probably doing that "safe" thing by owning the niche that Sony and Canon aren't currently focused on (affordable glass), but as a wedding and portrait photographer it's incredibly frustrating. Adapting Sigma Art lenses is fine and all (but is it really?), but when Canon is putting out incredible f/1.2 glass that actually makes use of mirrorless tech (and that larger lens mount Nikon bragged about?), I finally caved and lost hope that Nikon would put any effort into their mid-pro market for the Z system. Nikon is just asleep, and it's a bummer.

It wasn't a non-sensical decision. Produce high quality lenses at a lower price point and maximise consumer uptake. As to the f/2.8 trinity, the 24-70 has already been released and the other two are being released this year.

Shrug.

I never met a single wedding tog' who wasn't able to get around with f/1.8-2.8, Chris. Could you elaborate futher on what frustrates you exactly with f/1.8 primes?

I gotta tell you the 85mm 1.8 is stunning.

The current Z F1.8 primes are all superior to any Nikon F1.4 "pro"lens. Their sharpness is clinical. I thought my Sigma Art 35 & 50mm F1.4 were incredible, but then I saw samples out of the 50S & 35S on Nikon Z.

Let's get real. If you use your old F1.4 prime for wedding or any professional work, you rarely use it on F1.4 because at that aperture, DOF is a b*tch. Also, you lack some sharpness and have some aberrations and vignetting. So you stop down to F1.8. The thing is with the Z lenses.... they are already sharp and without aberrations wide open so they invite you to use them at F1.8.

Oh, sure. I like switching brands and having to buy completely new sets of lenses, accessories, etc. is so awesome.

I mean, who doesn't have a spare $50,000 laying around these days for just this purpose.

If you are shooting pro equipment then you are probably so heavily invested and used to one system that it doesn't matter what the competition is doing. Both Nikon and Canon will always get the job done and are heavily relied upon by industry professionals. Lots of big photogs don't even own the gear, it's just provided for them as part of a bigger rental package or digi tech package. This is stupid.

Very interesting topic and caught my attention
In fact, Nikon always offers the best in relation to its products, cameras, especially lenses, and I don't think I will use Sony or anything else. Why?
Because Nikon level exceeds expectations...
switching to another Cameras depends on the PHOTOGRAPHER AND HIS NEEDS!

Nikon level exceeds expectations? Let's be real. That can hardly be said about the D6. The consensus is that it's more like a D5s. Was everybody expecting a D5s and got more than that? No.

It would be stupid to switch your brand for this, but let's just be honest about the D6.

You are outdoing yourself Usman, that’s probably your most ignorant post ever. If you have shot with the D5 in the situations where these cameras matter you know it’s head and shoulders above the 1DXII in terms of AF, low light DR, colors and WB. Which are the most important aspects of those cameras. So it makes no sense whatsoever to comment on the D6 without having tested it’s AF. None at all. And there are very good reasons to believe that the AF of the D6 is a very significant improvement on top of the best.

I have shot with the D5 a lot and now use an a9II in parallel with my z6/Z7 and GFX-100. The eye AF of the a9II is great but overall it’s AF isn’t better than that of the D5 in many situations. I am pretty sure that the D6 will be clearly ahead.

I find the UI of the D5 to be miles ahead when shooting with large super tele lenses.

I have never seen in my D5 images the bad banding I got last week in the overexposed parts of an a9 II image shooting into the sun. A great image otherwise.

Sony still has only a very partial super tele lineup, Canon is missing a 120-300mm f2.8. The list goes on and separates the needs of actual potential users of the D6 from those of a fanboy of your caliber.

The reality is that things are a lot more nuanced and complex than you make out to be.

He's the typical Canon fanboy.
All Canon releases are flawless for him.
Nikon is crap.
Fuji should die.
Olympus doesn't exist.
Sony is trying ( leaving a door open, and also trying to appear as unbiased )

In all fairness this was a great f'n article! Most comments and engagement I've seen in months!

The author seems to talk only of Full Frame DSLR's. IMO all cameras, Nikon, Canon, etc give great photos. The new very sophistocated focus systems are a little overkill. My Nikon D5100 with the 55-300mm lens(not recommended for sports!) gave me great soccer photos almost all the time. Its focusing system is now antiquated, but it still did the job for me. The new advances in DSLR'S is, once again, overkill. For amateurs like me the new focus systems are unnecessary, and are only meant to sell more cameras. Money is the Great Motivator even for Nikon and company.

Maybe it’s time to say goodbye to fstoppers. There’s too many other sites offering content that isn’t so annoying and sensational. Bye!

Hi Tyler. Mind sharing? Which ones you would rather recommend?

It has lost its sense of direction over the past year or so. It's what happens when its founding member has his video epiphany.

Came here for the comments haha.

I'm sure you didn't leave disappointed!

You point out logical fallacies in comments, but don't have the ability to look for the same in your opinion piece.Enjoy being the Stephen A. Smith of fstoppers. Removing fstoppers from my feeds/social.

"lol."

I can't believe this is still showing up in my news feed.....lol This is not news it's a Canon shooter writing an opinion piece on a D6 though he has never tested the D6 lol

Thanks for the comments which made me aware of this.

Please send me your Nikon gear and I will make good use of it for the next decade.

I've read that the Nikon D6 has substantial improvements in connectivity that will facilitate a sports or journalist photographer getting photo's submitted quicker. I don't recall the details. Also based on the discussion above, if you don't need the deeper buffer of the Canon and you don't need high quality autofocus on the LCD screen (dual pixel) then you may as well stick with your Nikon system. Admittedly those are two features that might be extremely useful to a portion of the candidate audience.

It has become fashionable to jump on Nikon, say negative things about Nikon, and that's so unfortunate because the new Z system is quite robust especially with firmware v3, owners love their Z systems and the Z mount lenses offer astounding quality at (mostly) reasonable prices -- (the 24-70mm f/2.8 is best in class; primes are typically f/1.8 though)

Inflammatory, pointless article (and I'm a Canon shooter) designed to incite a war, just for the sake of clicks. I rarely come to Fstoppers anymore and I suspect that the decline in visits from me will continue. Instead of writing crap like this, could you write something useful? Maybe a technique blurb or some such?

If Sony would Buy Me Out, I would Gladly switch !

Are you sensing a theme here, Usman? I notice you stopped arguing with everyone at some point.

Architectural photographer commenting on sport/wildlife camera. Have you even shot with it? AF is key, but you glossed it over with "very minor and mostly unnoticeable differences". fps is nothing if you can't catch focus. Camera is not even out and you've already gave it a death sentence. Very irresponsible writing.

Reading the article it just seems to me it's just choice I've been using Nikon four years and we'll stay

He's right, but not because of the D6. Obviously it was light on upgrades because Nikon is probably putting all of their R&D into the Z system. But, the market for ILCs is shrinking rapidly, and there won't be room for 3 major brands. Within 10 years Sony will buy out Nikon, or Nikon will bite the dust, being the smallest of the 3. Personally, I'm leaving for Canon when the R5 comes out. I wouldn't touch a plastic Made in China Sony camera.

Why would Sony buy Nikon? Following GM trend with fords, dodge, etc if only. Leica is small as well and they manage somehow.

The D6 is going to be a refreshed flagship camera for one of the leaders in the industry. In 2020, how much more innovation and advancement beyond connectivity can take place in a flagship body used by professionals who have utilized these tools for years?

Long established in the discussion (and reality), is that a pro who shoots with any brand isn't likely to jump brands because the next version of a flagship doesn't beat it's competitors on a spec sheet. If the camera system is working for them reliably, they're likely to go with familiarity unless they are growing frustrated with service and reliability.

And to surmise that Sony buys anyone? Interesting take; what makes you say that? I'm a Nikon user, but not an apologist. It could be any brand that you use / love. The premise of the article is based on specs, and not real-world use.... especially by someone who shoots Canon and (as pointed out), wouldn't be a in line to call out 'fault's given his use of cameras to begin with.

Let's not forget the belligerence in his response to comments here....

More comments