Thom Hogan

Sometimes I have to complain about my customers ;~). It seems that everyone is now sending me an email asking if I'll update my Complete Guide to the Nikon Z8 to cover the new C2.00 firmware. This is akin to asking me "have you gone out of business?" If I do decide to answer such emails I've learned to also include "I don't have a target date for when I'll be done with that." 

I'll repeat: yes, I'm working on a revision to my book, no I don't know when it will be done.

I understand that you want to know how these features work. But there's a lot more to things than just adding a quick rehash of Nikon's sparse Supplemental Manual. For instance, Pixel shift shooting. While most people are just asking "does it work"—yes, it does—they're missing something that Nikon glossed over: you can now set a button+dial customization for it. I have to find all these little things, integrate them into 1000+ pages of already dense material, rationalize customizations with other choices, and much more to justify a new edition of a Complete Guide. 

I do have some comments about the firmware update, however. 

• Nikon continues to have an issue with firmware update completion. If you start a firmware update, walk away, and come back to find the screen black and press the shutter release partway, the camera will spring back to life as if it is finished updating. Virtually all of the firmware update issues I've encountered or helped others with can be attributed to this "finishing up" issue. The proper way is to monitor the camera during an update, wait for the "Turn off the camera" message, and turn off the camera. If for some reason you don't do that and have an issue: (1) try resetting the camera; or (2) reinstall the firmware update and wait for the message and do what it says. What appears to happen—and things vary with how a camera is set at the time—is that update completion not done correctly can leave the camera in an indefinite state. Some variables are muddled, and then when you try to go and do something, you encounter a bug because of that. This problem is totally on Nikon, and Nikon customer support doesn't know the drill I just wrote about, above, so will do silly things like say "send the camera back to Nikon for repair." It doesn't need repair. What needs repair is the way Nikon handles update completion. 
• Auto capture is interesting, but seems like beta work still. First off, the UI is totally bonkers for Auto capture. Second, sequence and settings seem nuanced in a way you can't figure out until you actually do trial and error. Third, there are times when it won't seem to work, and it's difficult to tell whether or not you did something wrong or the camera did. In general, it works well with well considered settings on a largish recognized subject that isn't moving too fast. 
• Nikon continues to think that Type A, Type B, etc. are meaningful names for options, probably because they don't know what the option actually is and how to describe it. For example, the shutter sound Type: one of the primary benefits of the five sounds is that people with frequency-based hearing issues can find a sound that they hear more clearly. However, this then gets strange when you start using high continuous bursts, as the sounds aren't that well thought out in terms of that. Nikon needs a Product Marketing Manager who knows what they're doing, and has enough authority over the engineers to keep them from just "doing some engineering things" and moving on to another problem.  
• People have asked for focus distance info forever, but be careful what you ask for. In manual focus, you're now shown a remarkably precise focus distance (e.g. 0.43m, or 43 centimeters). I can pretty much guarantee that the distance isn't exactly .43m, nor can you just measure a distance to subject and set that using this new gauge (partly because ED glass focuses differently at different temperatures). There's also a lot of lag in presenting you the current distance. The usual reason people ask for distance is to calculate DOF, which opens up another can of worms: which theory of DOF are you going to apply? 
• Yes, autofocus performance changed, but don't ask me how (yet). First up, we have the new Birds subject choice. That's something that seems to work like the Z9 change, but I still have more testing to do. But buried in the notes for the update are suggestions that other things changed, as well, particularly 3D-tracking. But one thing every Z8 user should note is that Nikon is now saying previous firmware versions didn't recognize AF fine-tuning options correctly when subjects were detected. I hate these vague and obscure "something changed" notes, as it takes me quite a bit of time to reverse engineer what really happened. Nikon really needs to let a couple of technically minded pros talk to the engineers in Tokyo, so that we can convey to Nikon users what Nikon marketing is incapable of. 
• Not noted by most was an interesting change. NX MobileAir can now download and upload Save menu settings files. It seems that this is Nikon's response to all us pros asking for a better solution for settings files. It isn't great, but it's a step. Simple ask: when we download from the camera, let us name that file; when we upload from the mobile device, let us pick a named file. Done. (Well mostly; this is still a two-step process that requires a USB-C cable and we want a one-step internal-to-the-camera process that can be controlled by buttons.)
• NikonUSA is back to being NikonUSA. Despite my asking for early access to the update and willingness to sign an NDA, that didn't happen. What also didn't happen is that NikonUSA marketing didn't even send me the press release when they did release the firmware update I knew was coming. 

Nikon today released firmware 2.0 for the Z8 camera, and as with the major numbered Z9 firmware updates, it's a doozy:

• Pixel shift shooting has been added (from Zf).
• Rich Tone Portrait, Flat Monochrome, and Deep Tone Monochrome Picture Controls have been added (from Zf).
• Additional bracketing value options have been added.
• Birds has been added to AF subject detection options (from Z9).
• Auto capture has been added (from Z9).
• Full format has been added (from Z9).
• Pre-release capture buffer time has been extended to 300 seconds (from Z9).
• Focus point border width was added to CSM #A11.
• Non-CPU lens data now allows user specified values (not just previous Nikon-used ones).
• White balance and exposure compensation can be changed when using Recall shooting functions.
• Exposure delay mode has been added (from various previous cameras).
• Added new control customizations. 
• Added focus distance information during manual focus.
• N-Log video recording now allows LO ISO values (from Z9).
• Hi-Res Zoom now has new speeds available.
• Slow motion video recording (30Px4, 25Px4, 24Px5) is now available in FullHD (from various previous cameras).
• Playback has several new or changed options.
• and at least two dozen other small changes, support for power zoom lenses, as well as bug fixes.

One thing to note about this firmware update is that if you're using other Nikon software, you may need to update it: Camera Control Pro 2.37.0 or later, IPTC Preset Manager 1.3.0 or later, NX Studio 1.6.0 or later, NX MobileAir 1.1.4 (iOS) or 1.2.0 (Android) or later, NX Field 1.4.0 or later, and you must also use the just announced update of NX Tether (2.0.0).

As usual, the firmware and supplemental manual are on the Nikon download site.

First up, we have firmware update for the Z5 (1.42), Z6 II (1.61), and Z7 II (1.61) that corrects one issue relating to camera date and time not being set correctly on cameras not used for an extended period of time. Nikon's update site

Second, DxO PhotoLab 7.3.0 has been fully updated to support the full set of lenses on the Zf camera.

Having had lots of experience with the Z-mount Nikkors now, and as part of my year-end site updating (now basically complete), I made a full pass through my reviews—particularly ratings—tweaking some of them a bit. My overall satisfaction with a number of lenses has changed just a bit with continued use. 

Better

Lenses that I like more now than when I first reviewed them:

• 50mm f/2.8 MC — This little lens isn't a top performer, but I'm liking it more over time, particularly since it's easy to stuff into a bag, just in case. I'm finding more and more reasons to take it out of the bag.
• 14-30mm f/4 S — I'm still not 100% comfortable with the absolute corners, which will get munged due to the distortion correction necessary on this lens, but generally for the types of uses I make of this lens, that just never really shows up in my images. 
• 17-28mm f/2.8 — I liked this lens in my review, and it still is growing on me. Like the previous lens, you need to be careful about corner usage, but the central area is going to be excellent.
• 24-120mm f/4 S — I found it solid in my review, and it's continued to perform for me. I've gotten to the point where I simply don't care about its small deficiencies. 
• 400mm f/4.5 VR S — The joy of carrying just overcomes that stop-and-a-third extra exposure necessary. For most of my uses, the change in aperture from my f/2.8 just doesn't show up as busier backgrounds, at least not at the level I'd be concerned with.

Worse

A few lenses seem to be languishing in my use, and it's because I'm no longer enamored by them:

• 35mm f/1.8 S — One of the first three lenses for the Z-mount, it just seems a little blah for its size now. I keep finding that at around that focal length, I'm opting for the far smaller 40mm f/2 more often, even though it just doesn't hold up in the corners as well.
• 24-70mm f/4 S — Another of those first three lenses. It's still one of the strongest kit lenses you can get on any system at this focal range, but my use of the 24-120mm f/4 S shows that the modest focal range of the kit lens dulls my opinion of this original zoom somewhat.
• 24-200mm f/4-6.3 — As Nikon keeps knocking Nikkors out of the park (and some off the wall), this lens just keeps coming up short for me. As a superzoom, it is probably better than most expect, but it's a superzoom, and has all the issues that get intermixed with trying to extend to such a huge focal range. If you're buying it for 200mm, I'd say no these days; you have better options. With the 24-120mm as your primary zoom, get a 70-180mm f/2.8 at some point to give you the longer telephoto range. You'll see the difference at 180mm almost immediately.
• 100-400mm f/4.5-5.6 VR S — I've specifically knocked this lens down from Highly Recommended to just Recommended. Yeah, that's probably a surprise to most of you. But the 180-600mm pretty much obliterated it at the long end when you look at price/performance at 180-400mm. I'm down to now saying that the 100-400mm belongs in the three-lens, slower aperture kit (e.g. 14-30mm f/4 S, 24-120mm f/4 S, and 100-400mm f/4.5-5.6 VR S; see below). That set takes you through a much more than adequate 14-400mm range in about the best combo you can find. 

Kits

So, speaking of kits, here's what I now tend to say make solid choices as a base zoom kit:

• Consumer zoom trio: 17-28mm f/2.8, 24-70mm f/4, and 70-180mm f/2.8. Way more competent than you'd expect, and without breaking the bank.
• Middle zoom trio: 14-30mm f/4 S, 24-120mm f/4 S, and 100-400mm f/4.5-5.6 VR S. Competency defined. 
• Pro zoom trio: still comprises the three f/2.8 S lenses: 14-24mm, 24-70mm, and 70-200mm. Nothing matches them from corner to corner from 14mm to 200mm, but you pay a price and a weight penalty for that.

You can mix and match if you want, but I find that abilities within each of those three trios are extremely well matched, meaning that you don't have to think about anything moving from one lens to another. 

We've been through this before, and it appears we're going through it again: Nikon's crack marketing team keeps having to walk a fine line with product names. The issue is between legacy naming and present day naming, particularly when either starts hitting limits. 

The first time things truly broke down for Nikon was with the N90 to F100 transition. Up to that point, single digit was a pro model, double digit was a consumer model. Except the N90 straddled that to start with. And then there was the N (North America) versus F (everywhere else) thing. 

You'd think that by the time digital rolled around, someone would have said to themselves "maybe we should rationalize our naming scheme," but instead Nikon just lumbered on. F5 begat D1, F100 begat D100, and N80 begat D70 (gave themselves a little room there, didn't they? ;~). Of course, if you iterate by 10 each successive model, a D90 would eventually have nowhere to go. Which is exactly what happened in 2010. 

Which led us to four digits = consumer, three digits = prosumer, and one digit still indicating pro in the second decade of DSLR. Fortunately, DSLRs started dying out before Nikon could exhaust digits again. 

So why the heck did Nikon change naming strategies with the Z System? Suddenly one digit was full frame, two digits was crop sensor. Of course, at this point 5 through 9 are already taken, which has led Nikon to adding a new II suffix. The problem with that, as Sony has discovered, is that this sort of forces you into iteration upgrades; you can't change the basic definition of the product easily without adding another modifier (as Sony has done with S and R). But then your numbering starts to drift and no longer clearly indicates technical generation across model names correctly.

I'm surprised that Nikon put the 5, 6, and 7 models out so tightly, then had 8 and 9 models filling the final places. I would have though that they would have used the 3, 5, 7 idea initially (e.g. Z3 instead of Z5, Z5 instead of Z6), as that was something they did in DSLRs to give themselves naming room. But perhaps someone argued that using 3/5/7 might get people thinking some were APS-C cameras ;~). Naming just ain't easy.

Meanwhile, the Zfc and now Zf basically are "if it has dials, it's an f." Nikon says the c stands for "casual," but I'm pretty sure it stands for "crop" (or at least the C in APS-C). 

One problem is that it isn't product marketing that's really driving new models, model changes, and model iterations, it's engineering. I've seen this in internal references: R&D tends to refer to the product they're working on with either legacy naming conventions or the term "new model." Thus, while marketing is the one responsible for the ultimate name, they're being caught by R&D's thinking in what's about to become a naming issue.

From more than one source I've gotten the suggestion that Nikon is less interested in just doing mindless iteration of established models at this point, but rather looking for unique model opportunities coupled with targeted iterations of a few current models. As we've seen from the Zfc and Zf, a unique model may actually go outside the numbering schema Nikon established for the Z System. 

Three specific possible future models seem to be impacted by the naming constraints: (1) video; (2) very high speed; and (3) very high pixel count. Each poses a different problem to the naming that was originally established. 

For instance, video. The natural thing to do would be just add a V, as in ZV6. Or perhaps just Zv (to mimic the Zf naming). Unfortunately, Sony beat Nikon to the ZV naming convention, so that would be poor marketing on Nikon's part to attempt to use ZV in any way. Okay, how about just V6? Well, that doesn't say "Z-mount", sounds like an automobile engine, and implies a full video lineup, which I'm not sure Nikon is ready to do. Thus, we're led to something more awkward, such a Z6V. Personally, I'd go with Zc (for cinema). 

The very high speed camera that seems to be in prototype already (or at least a mule that's passed around a bit), really is a pro-centric camera. Or rather, would appeal mostly to some specific pros, such as sports photographers. If you were to put it in a Z9 body (for EN-EL18 battery use) Nikon has a legacy naming path they could use here: Z9h. But what if it's in a "new body"? Oops, it's the Z9.5 (it can't be 10, because then it would be DX crop using Nikon's current naming schema). What I've heard is that there is a thought to just give such a camera a simple letter (as in Zh). 

This opens up a new naming path for Nikon: niche and speciality cameras get letters. 

The curious thing is that if you look at the front of a Z8 or Z9, there's no name identification shown. The trio of other full frame cameras (Z5, Z6, Z7) all use the same basic body, so it makes sense to advertise the model name on the front. The Zfc and Zf don't have any plate space on the top to identify model, so they, too, get the front name splash. But this inconsistency of naming position also is something that Nikon marketing never really resolved.

Naming is always an issue in tech. It's part of how you present the tech to the potential customer. Sony made a bit of a mistake going extreme with Mark Roman constructs. We now have one Sony model that's at Mark VII. By going that route you start to get into the "oh just an iteration" expectation on the part of the potential customer, plus once you get beyond III you have to start explaining roman numerals to some people. Perhaps all that's okay if you keep previous generations on the market at "sale" pricing, but as Nikon once discovered and Sony is now discovering, that just eats your profit margin in order to protect market share. Not a long-term winnable game.

I'm curious to see how Nikon will handle upcoming camera names. I'm guessing that no matter what Nikon may decide to put out as new models in the future, more letter-naming options are coming.

I've pointed out both the simplification and complication that the Zf places on the user in several articles (and in my book). The simplification comes in the way of "not that many customizable controls," while the complication comes in how the dials and button+dial things interact. 

Here are the basics of how I'm working with the Zf at the moment:

1. I tend to be either a Manual exposure or Aperture-priority exposure user. Which one I use depends a bit on what I'm doing, but given those two modes and my other choices, I need the Front Command dial to control apertures and the Rear Command dial to control shutter speeds to work consistently quickly. Thus, my shutter speed dial is set to 1/3STEP.
2. I don't use Automatic ISO, as even with the nuances in the settings on the non-dial cameras, it can set things ways I need to override. Thus, surprisingly, with Auto ISO turned off, the ISO dial is useful to me. It's very easy for me to control ISO with my left hand directly without removing my eye from the viewfinder. However, there's a downside to that: you need to avoid the C position because that locks the dial, and you need to verify ISO often because the dial can be turned accidentally in camera handling if you're not careful.
3. Because I'm in Manual exposure mode a fair amount of the time, I wish the exposure compensation dial did have a lock on it. In Manual exposure mode you don't want the dial on anything other than 0, because anything else changes the metering bar on you, and it's easy not to notice that this is the case (you have to look elsewhere for the +/- icon). I can't use C because I'm using the two Command dials for aperture and shutter speed some of the time.
4. If I'm doing something where Hybrid Button Focus is what I want, I configure my Zf differently than my Z8/Z9: I leave focus on the shutter release and put AF-ON+AF area mode=3D tracking on the AE-L/AF-L button. The reason for this is that I don't have many more buttons to configure on the Zf, so have to settle on the simplest approach. This does mean that I also have to have a way to get out of Hybrid Button Focus quickly, which leads to:
5. My DISP button is programmed to show the first item on MYMENU. That button is right above the actual MENU button, so top button is first thing on MYMENU, bottom button is go to last MENU item used.
6. I need a way to change the viewfinder, so the Fn button gets the former DISP function. But I also reduce the number of viewfinder variants to two (Custom Setting #D18), which means this button becomes a toggle ;~).
7. I like a Focus Mode/Area button (particularly since I have the shutter release set to focus), so the red movie button becomes that.
8. From there, it becomes putting the 12 most important things I need to set on the i button menu, and loading another five frequently used menu items on MYMENU.
9. Finally, I dial in Lossless compressed raw, and my other regular photo settings. 
10. Save everything in SETUP > Save/load menus settings > Save menu settings onto an older, small SD card I carry with me, and I'm (mostly) done. I put mostly in parens because if I ever have to re-load those settings, I'm not done. I still have to manually check items #1, #2, and #3, as they aren't part of that file!

I outline and elaborate on how you make these decisions and what some of the better choices are in my Configuring and Using the Zf book.

Don't copy my settings blindly. Every time I write down specific settings, some readers just automatically set their camera the same. That isn't likely to work for you long term. We each have our own needs and photography style that has to come into play when setting our cameras. That's why it takes hundreds of pages in my book to describe the thought process you need to go through when making your decisions. However, I've provided my basic settings here because some have questioned whether I can really use the Zf for my photography. The answer is, I can, with some simplifications, while avoiding complications. 

Now that we're in the world of USB charging, I'm getting more and more complaints about "my battery isn't charging in my  Z System camera." Things didn't become simpler with USB charging, they became more complex. Today you have to run a checklist to make sure things are working as they should:

• Am I using a USB-C PD 15w or higher charger?
• Am I using too much power from a multi-port charger? (e.g. another device is taking so much power that the port you're plugged into is now <15W)
• Am I using a USB-C PD charge compliant cable?
• Am I using the correct USB port? (e.g. bottom one on Z8)
• Is the battery I'm using in-camera charge capable? (e.g. EN-EL15B or EN-EL15C)
• Is SETUP > USB power delivery enabled?
• Is NETWORK > USB set to MTP/PTP?
• Is the camera turned Off? (In standby also works, but sometimes increases the timing for the next one)
• Did I wait long enough for PD negotiations to resolve? (often an issue with batteries that were fully depleted)

Holy Miles Morales, that's a lot of dependencies, and I'm not sure I've caught them all. But more often than not, one of the above is tripping someone up on the Zf, Z8, or Z9 these days. 

Update: several people have emailed me saying their non-Nikon camera "just worked." Well, maybe. A number of the earlier USB power uses are going to run up against the "common charger" problem in Europe. While the camera may currently charge off of 5W USB-A, that's not going to work when you see that European offices, homes, airports, cars, and more are all using USB Power Delivery only. Also, some of the settings in the Nikons are there for a reason: there are conditions where you don't want charging to happen when a USB-C connection is present. While it's true that they're uncommon, I appreciate the ability to deal with them when they do arise.