Sans Mirror  

TSR, a Japanese market research company recently reported some basic market share information for mirrorless cameras, which was then summarized by Nikkei (the full report costs thousands of dollars to see):

While these numbers seem to say a number of things, there’s more hidden behind the percentages than you might think. 

For instance, Canon is reporting essentially a 50% market share for ILC (interchangeable lens cameras), but only has 41.2% in mirrorless. The discrepancy is that Canon is still selling a fair number of DSLRs, mostly lower cost Kiss/Rebels. Canon’s strength has not fully reestablished itself in the newer mirrorless world. 

The opposite is true for Nikon, who reports essentially that they’re somewhere in the mid 13’s for all ILC, which means that they’re holding their own in mirrorless (though this is still far lower than where Nikon was prior to their downsizing in the teens).

Sony, meanwhile, is continuing to benefit from being the first player in full frame mirrorless and having abandoned their DSLR lineup long, long ago. However, their mirrorless market share seems to be no longer growing like it was earlier this decade.

Each of the Big Three have a different problem that isn’t shown in TSR’s numbers, or even in looking at the history of the TSR numbers:

• Canon — Quite a few M series sales are in those numbers for 2023. I’m not sure that the low-end R models are fully replacing the now discontinued Ms. The lowest end R100 is still bigger and more DSLR-like than those M buyers were purchasing. I believe Canon is going to have to use price to make any further gains back towards their 50% market goal as DSLRs completely die off. I don’t know that they can do that without taking a hit to the bottom line, which may explain why there’s so much restructuring going on behind the scenes at Canon.
• Nikon — The good news is that from the Zf on up, Nikon has done a really good job of solidifying their product line, and that's showing up not so much as market share as it is in profits. Nikon’s real problem is two-fold: (1) they have a considerable user base still using DSLRs, and (2) they haven’t reallly shown how the bottom of the lineup will feed the top long-term. Coupled with Canon’s likely need to lower prices at the low-end, Nikon will have a harder time pushing Z30, Zfc, and Z50 models, so something has to change there. 
• Sony — The tricky part in evaluating Sony’s market share comes in Sony’s recent heavy push towards “content creator” cameras such as the EV’s and A7C’s. Much of Sony’s volume previously came from A6### and the three A7 models. That's now shifted, but that introduces the question of how often the new group Sony is pursuing is going to update. The thing is that even 4K is a low bar, and most of the creators are more concerned with speed-to-post than they are highest-possible-quality. 

The irony is that traditional MBA-think is that the rule of thumb is that the top two market share holders are highly profitable, the third marginally profitable, and the rest not profitable. Right now things seem to be completely upside down. Nikon appears to be making the highest gross profit margin off cameras, and Canon the least. That’s usually predictive of a future shift in respective shares.

Underlying all of this is the size of the overall market. Since 2020’s bottom (2.9m), mirrorless once again started growing again in unit volume, and is up to 4.8m units in 2023. I believe DSLRs will completely wind down by early 2025, so the potential is there  for something around 6m mirrorless units in 2025, or 100% growth in essentially five years. 

The big problem is envisioning any growth after that. Which means that this year and next are duke-it-out years to try to establish the top players before the next plateau in sales hits. Again, at the moment it seems that Canon can only make gains using pricing, while Sony is making gains by shifting users; leaving the only one of the Big Three to be Nikon with a chance to make big share changes naturally. (To wit: Nikon’s lineup needs updating now exactly in the range that would promote market share, Z30 up to Z5.)

The Japanese companies have proven quite adept at micromanaging their way through tough markets such as cameras. To a large degree, that was also due to a relatively stable currency and near zero interest rates that made corporate borrowing and stock dividends the easiest ways for Japanese banks to make money, even at low interest rates.

However, both those things are under huge stress at the moment. The yen/dollar relationship is now well outside of its historical range, and as inflation has returned to Japan, interest rates will have to change upwards, too. 

The ILC market is still Canon’s to lose, but more than any time since the original DSLR introductions, it’s easier to see them losing it. Sony has a proliferation problem they need to reign in; they’ve tried to niche a niche market, plus keep older models still on the market to give them the appearance of lower pricing. We’ve seen how this plays out in the camera market before: you’re better off with a smaller, strong core of products that you can clearly move forward in (near) unison. Nikon has shored up things with their best customers with the top of the lineup, but that still leaves a ton of previous customers they’re not serving satisfactory.

My sense is that, depsite the relatively large current market share differences, it’s still a wide open market for someone to make substantive moves. Again, the 2023 mirrorless volume was 4.8m units and it’s pretty easy to predict something around 6m units in 2025. That’s a pretty big increase to be fighting over, and I think we’re going to see some massive fights over it Real Soon Now. 

I don’t see Sony’s overall share changing all that much. Both their proliferation and older model discounting have essentially maximized their market share penetration, and those are not sustainable strategies. I can see Canon’s share slipping, though. Which leaves Nikon and Fujifilm to pick up not only that share but grab some of those new customers implied in the ramp from 4.8 to 6m units. 

That would actually be good news. Well, maybe not for Canon. A tighter market share race would force the camera companies to be more competitive and to design products that have differentiated and useful features.

Sony today announced the ZV-E10 II, a modest update to the original. The big news here is the use of the same 26mp image sensor as the A6700 and FX30 and dropping the mechanical shutter. The body also undergoes a bit of a bulk to accommodate the larger NP-FZ1000 battery. 

The new sensor provides 1.1x crop 4K/60 derived from downsampled 5.4K (and with 10-bit depth), and Sony has added things like vertical video support (with the LCD moving the overlays into the correct positioning). There are also 2:35:1 widescreen and cropped 4K/120 modes, as well.

Because this is an entry body, there's no sensor-stabilization, though video can be actively stabilized by using a ~1.5x crop (a 1.33x crop of the 1.1x crop). The ZV-E10 Mark II also doesn't get the latest BIONZ AI improvements, though at the US$1000 price point that is to be expected.

Along with the ZV-E10 Mark II, Sony also updated the 16-50mm f/3.5-5.6 OSS lens to a II model. The big difference here other than cosmetics and a bit of weight loss is that focus can now track while the lens is zooming. That's sort of a big deal for vlogging ;~)

Strangely, Sony has dropped the "Mark" from what usually would be "Mark II" and gone with the simpler roman numeral only that Nikon and Panasonic have been using.

Today Nikon launched the third iteration of their mid-range Z6 model, bringing more Z9-goodness down the lineup. The Z8 was a smaller body near-replica of the Z9, and the Zf was a curious "shove the electronics into a retro body" offering. The Z6 III is much more like a Z8 in a Z6 body with a 24mp instead of 45mp image sensor.

This article will describe the new camera in detail and stick mostly to the basic features. If you're interested in a comparison to other models, see my "How Does it Compare" article also posted today. If you're interested in more of an analysis, see the "Worth the Wait?" article. If you're mostly interested in how the Z6 III fits into the Z System lineup, check out the "New State of the Z System" article.

There's lots to digest, so let's dig in. (Warning: this article and the Z6 III data page may update as I learn more and begin using the camera. Disclosure: I was given a full briefing on the new camera prior to launch, but not a copy to use and handle prior to the actual launch event.)

As everyone expected and Nikon hinted at, the Z9-goodness is spreading downward in the lineup and has reached the Z6 level (while skipping over the Z7 for the time being). At the heart of the new camera is the EXPEED7 processor first seen in the Z9, and that enables so many of the recent advances in features and performance in the Z System. To wit:

• Pre-release capture
• Pixel-shift shooting
• HEIF image format
• High efficiency raw formats
• Skin softening and Portrait impression balance
• New AF-area modes and Subject detection
• Synchro VR
• H.265 and ProRes video compression
• Raw video capture
• Viewfinder size 

For most Z6 users, the autofocus, pre-release capture, and pixel-shift changes are probably the most welcome, particularly the first one. The Z6 and Z6 II both featured an autofocus system mostly derived from the Nikon 1, including the infamous Subject tracking option. The Z6 III now gets the Zf/Z8/Z9 focus options, which include user-defined areas and 3D-tracking. Moreover, the machine-taught subject detection system comes along, giving the Z6 III both the focus performance and control that its bigger brothers pioneered. Focus response is stated as -10EV normally (f/1.2 lens at ISO 100), and that's without invoking a low-light mode.

Yes, the image sensor is still 24mp. However for static subjects you can use pixel-shift to get pretty incredible 96mp files. Since many opted for a Z7 because of the "more pixels" for things like landscapes and city scenes, pixel-shift on the Z6 III (and Zf) sort of renders a Z7 III moot for the moment. 

The Z6 III sports what Nikon is calling a partially-stacked image sensor, which is designed to provide ultrafast readout—3.5x the speed compared to the Z6 II—to the EXPEED7 brain, similar to the Z8 and Z9, as many had hoped. It appears that Nikon is using top and bottom sides of sensor electronics to achieve most of the speed boost via an extra set of stacked (only in those areas) electronics.

The image sensor is stabilized similarly to the Zf, which means 8-stops of reduction. Synchro VR and Sensor Focus VR are both supported.

Meanwhile, the speed improvements on the 24mp image sensor have allowed for some new video capabilities: There's a 6K 60P, as well as 5.4K 60P, 4K UHD 120P, and FullHD 240P max video choices (the latter two are cropped). N-RAW and ProResRAW, as well as H.265 compressions all make their way into the Z6 III, as well. Maximum video recording time is 2 hours, 5 minutes. I'm told that's a hard limit (probably due to file construction while recording), and Nikon claimed to me that they've actually run the camera to those limits without overheating. Anyone recording audio should also note that the amplifier has been changed in the Z6 III. It now supports both line and mic inputs, and produces 24-bit data (up from 16-bit).

Many were worried about body size creep when the original rumors started to appear about Z6 III prototypes. The body has definitely put on a few millimeters and ounces, but it's still much smaller (and lighter) than a Z8. That keeps the Z6 III in the small, all-around travel camera category, which is a largish portion of the Z6 user target. I get it, you want to know the actuals, so here they are: 5.5x4x3" (138.5x101.5x74mm) and 26.9 ounces (760g). So .2" wider and deeper, and 2 ounces (55g) heavier. However, the body lines are slightly different, and internally there's been some changes to help with keeping the image sensor cool. Meanwhile, Nikon is stating that dust- and weather-protection should be equal to that of the Z8, as the body construction and seals are similar. 

In terms of controls on the body (buttons, dials, etc.) the Z6 III has the same basic controls as the earlier Z6 models, but it orients them in the Z8/Z9 positions. In other words, the playback button is now in the lower right back button cluster, not at the top left above the Rear LCD. The Protect/Fn3 button of the Z8 becomes the Release Mode/Protect button on the Z6 III.

Up top we have Mode Dial instead of a button, with the usual U# custom setting positions. Curiously, the light-the-top-LCD control has moved from the On/Off button to a separate one. Still, overall, Z5, Z6, Z6 II, Z7, and Z7 II users will find the body and its controls close enough to what they have and should be able to easily move over to the new body. On the other hand, fewer buttons than the Z8 body mean less customization possibilities. 

Two big adjustments to the body are the articulating Rear LCD and a higher resolution (5.76m dot) viewfinder. The EVF, in particular, is interesting in that it is brighter than any previous ones (4000 nits max; the Z8 and Z9 max out at 3000 nits), plus the viewfinder now supports the DCI-P3 color space. I'm told that the brightness of the EVF will vary with ambient light, though you can obviously set it brighter and darker if you'd like.

Nikon apparently doesn't want anyone looking at you using the camera to know which model you're using, as the model badging has moved from the lower front of the camera to the top plate where you hand is likely to cover it up. Again like the Z8 and Z9 (but not the Zf ;~). 

Power comes from the well-established EN-EL15 type battery. It's an EN-EL15C for the Z6 III, same as the Z8. But also as with the Z8, there are some footnotes to ponder if you're using an older version of that battery. USB Power Delivery is built in, which brings us to the charger situation: the usual MH-25A or MH-34 is recommended to charge the battery externally to the camera. Nikon claims the battery life is worst case 360 shots CIPA (with viewfinder), and 100 minutes for video. An MB-N14 Battery Pack will be available later this summer that provides 190 minutes via two batteries, and allows hot-swapping a battery. 

Remote control is either via the usual 10-pin rectangular connector (same as Z6/Z7) or ML-L7 Bluetooth wireless remote. 

Image storage on the Z6 III is done on either CFexpress or SD (UHS II) cards, as the camera has both types of card slot. Effectively this is a dual slot camera, however remember that performance is always predicated on the slowest card in the camera, which is highly likely to be an SD card when you're using the active second slot options (particularly if the card isn't UHS II). 

Two new elements appear in the Z6 III that haven't been in previous Nikon bodies. First up is a revised Picture Control system that allows users to blend new ones, which Nikon calls Flexible Color. The other is Nikon Imaging Cloud, which will provide downloadable Flexible Color recipes directly to the camera. Nikon is working with professionals and influencers to create useful new recipes. Both these items are not currently available for me to try, and its possible that their availability to users will come some time after the camera actually ships. 

Nikon has priced the Z6 III at US$2500 for the body only, and it will be available in late June (I suspect June 28th given Nikon's ship-to-dealer practices). As usual, Nikon Professional Service (NPS) members will be able to place a priority purchase order and cut in line, which may somewhat limit availability to non-members initially. 

For the full specifications, see this site's data page for the Z6 III. Overall, the Z6 III very much moves the original Z6 models up into the Z9-era, and then some. Nikon's packed a lot of power into this little box, both for still and video users, and I suspect it's about to become this decade's D750 (the little camera that could).

Bonus: So now we know what the Nikon teaser was actually hinting at.

• "I could capture even before I pressed the shutter. It's a game changer." Obviously: pre-release capture.
• "In a bright situation, if I can see better, I can create better." The 4000 nit, ambient-correcting, higher resolution viewfinder.
• "All the beautiful colors in a camera this small is something really exciting." Not so obvious. It could refer to the new Picture Control options or the raw video capability (4:4:4 color) in the smaller Z6 III body. 

Support this site by purchasing from our exclusive site advertiser:

A common question that comes up with cameras that iterate—as opposed to outright new models—is whether it was worth the wait as engineers worked at improving or adding things. 

This is a particularly interesting question in the case of the Z6. 

Try Open image in new tab in your browser if you can't read the individual items. Each vertical grid line is a month.

The initial Z6 was announced in August 2018, and shipped several months later. About two years later, in October 2020, Nikon introduced the Z6 II. The general consensus was that the Z6 II was a mild update that didn't add as much as Nikon suggested. Most of the discussion centered around autofocus performance and features, which many found to be a disappointing small step forward. 

Looking back, I'd say that the Z6 II mostly represented a "tuning" of the Z6, nipping at a wide range of small things to create an improved version of this important camera. While I didn't say so specifically in my review, I never really considered the Z6 II a camera that Z6 users should update to. It was too little gain for the monetary hit of moving from the older model to the newer one.

Here we are not quite four years later and we have the next transition: Z6 II to Z6 III. Did a longer wait yield a camera you should update to?

We're six years into the Z6's history, so at this point you'd want to know that Nikon has fully considered what a camera at this price level should consist of, and how it should perform. 

The good news is that it is easier to see the difference between a Z6 II and Z6 III. It's not surprising that Nikon's teaser said "ready to perform?" That's because most of the changes that have been made indeed center around performance. As a high speed camera, the Z6 III clearly is better than a Z6 II. As a video camera, the already near top-of-class performance of the original models has now made it to the very top. Focus finally has the full level of performance that DSLR users benefited from (and more). Had the Z6 III appeared in 2018, there would have been a stampede from DSLRs to mirrorless from the DX up through the D750 crowd. The addition of things like Pixel shift shooting just adds to the "goodness" of the Z6 III.

Unfortunately, the Z6 III doesn't live in a vacuum. No, I'm not talking about Canon R6 Mark II's and Sony A7 Mark IV's. Nikon users tend to stay Nikon users and while switching systems is a thing, it's not the bulk of sales, representing five to ten percent of a company's potential volume. 

No, Nikon made their own competitor: the Zf. The Zf is less expensive than the Z6 III, but also has many of the same features and some of the same performance capabilities. You'll want to look at my comparison article to get the full sense, but it wouldn't be too far wrong to say that a Zf is 90+% of a Z6 III, only in a retro-clad body with few user control customization options instead of the modern DSLR-derived mirrorless form with better customization. 

It's no secret that the Zf has been a very popular camera, perhaps more popular than Nikon originally expected it would be. With a proper hand grip attached, it's a very well-rounded camera that lets you control it in one of two ways: retro dials use, or modern button+dials use. The one clear downside to a Zf? No way to quickly restore a group of settings (via U# or banks). 

I don't think it's a coincidence that the Zf came out nine months before the Z6 III. Nikon appeared to not only want to pick up those that value legacy design, but also some of the "where is the Z6 III" crowd that wanted an update. So you also now have to consider whether the Z6 III was worth the wait after the Zf.

In the end, I don't think it matters how long it took to get to the Z6 III. The truly serious user with plenty of disposable income already upgraded to the Z8. Another impatient group found that the Zf's use of the Z9-derived functions was enough for them. I believe the big challenge for the Z6 III is to pick up the lower level DSLR hangers-on, some of the original Z6 owners, and any new to the (Nikon) market users. To that end, the Z6 III appears to be a remarkably well-rounded camera, which is exactly what you'd expect given the time period over which it has evolved. 

So now the question really turns to "where's the Z7 III?" And will it be worth the wait when it finally arrives?

It's been a while since I've done a full "camera line" summation, a short summary of how I believe things line up in the Z System. With recent introductions of the Zf and Z6 III, it's time for a re-do.

State of DX

The state of DX bodies has remained flat-lined for two years now, ever since the June 2022 release of the Z50 II without a viewfinder, aka the Z30. We did get two lenses almost a year later (27mm f/1.7 and 12-28mm f/3.5-5.6 PZ VR), however for the last year it's been crickets chirping. 

It's unclear if this is a deliberate walk away from the DX idea, or just a temporary lull. Other than on-going Fujifilm releases and a brief spurt from Canon, crop sensor APS-C has been mostly quiet across all vendors for some time now. I'm going to guess this is an image sensor problem. No, not the lack of a new sensor design, but rather the lack of enough new fab time.

Fujifilm is easy to understand in this respect: they've opted to put most of their on-fab time into APS-C. You get almost three times as many APS-C sensors out of a 12" wafer as you do full frame ones. So if you've booked a fixed amount of fab time (highly likely given the current situation) you can produce about three times as many APS-C sensors as full frame ones. Only Fujifilm would really want to do that. 

Nikon likely creates the current 20mp DX image sensor in sporadic batches and then uses the rest of their fab time concentrating on full frame sensor production, much of which is completely new (which requires fab testing time, as well). That DX sensor is now eight years old, which also suggests that Nikon hasn't fiddled with anything truly new in DX for quite some time. That doesn't mean they won't, but the longer we see no changes, the more likely it is that DX is being written off by Nikon. As I've long written, I consider that to be both a strategic and tactical mistake on Nikon's part.

State of FX

The product line currently runs Z5, Zf, Z6 III, Z7 II, Z8, and Z9, in that order of sophistication and performance. Price-wise, it looks like this:

Prices as of June 17, 2024. Discounts come and go.

That's pretty close to the old 1.4x pricing progression Nikon has used for quite some time. The Z7 II now sticks out in that progression because it's in its near-retirement time and thus being highly discounted. 

As Nikon promised, the Z9 technology from 2021 is being brought down the line: Z8 and Zf in 2023, Z6 III in 2024. All are EXPEED7, and the Z6 III, Z8, and Z9 are new image sensors (I don't see any change in the Zf's older image sensor). What's left on Nikon's FX plate is to bring EXPEED7 to the Z5 and Z7 models, and perhaps create a videocentric camera, as well. Given how long Nikon kept the D600/610 unchanged in the lineup, I think it unlikely that the Z5 will get a refresh any time soon, which would seem to indicate that the Z7 pricing position would be next for Z9 trickle-down. Note that I don't take a Z7 III model as a given, but something in that pricing space is highly likely sooner rather than later.  

So where are we with the models?

• Z5 — An entry model that is still quite competitive, particularly given the price point it normally sells at. It just clicks on.
• Zf — This is a very clear step up into a more sophisticated camera, but it's not a customization or remembered settings beast. The design is more for occasional, casual use. 
• Z6 III — The workhorse of the lineup, partly because it's at about the top of the "inexpensive enough for most to buy" range. The pixel-shift feature adequately covers landscape use, the pre-release capture adequately covers the wildlife/sports use. So you can also think of it as a well-rounded camera. 
• Z7 II — Heavy discounting tells you that Nikon knows that this model isn't holding the old price position any more. The Z6 III and Z8 effectively make it difficult to squeeze something in between, so I believe any new offering at this price point will have to be a clear "new offering." As in a clear design or content change of some sort.
• Z8 — The current heavy-hitter in the Z lineup. By that I mean it's the most common choice for those looking for a top-end camera, both in performance and features. 
• Z9 — Pops has squired plenty of progeny now. If you need the build toughness, big battery, GPS, and a few other minor additions of this model over the Z8, it remains the alpha. Firmware updates have kept the Z9 fresh, but I think we're nearing the end of those and the beginning of what's next. 

The Future of Z

Nikon, as well as the other camera makers, is in a tricky space now. Think of it this way: if you were to buy a Zf, Z6 III, Z8, or Z9 today, exactly what would provoke you to update those cameras some day? And how far in the future do you think that'd be? Looking back the other direction I still see quite a few of the D3, D4, D5, D6, D300, D500, D750, D8xx, and even many in the D90 to D7500 crowd still gainfully using their old DSLR. If the current Z lineup isn't pulling them forward into mirrorless, there's the strong chance for a volume "stall" to happen. This is one reason why I write that the US$1000-2000 DX range is critical for Nikon to address.

Sure, the gearophiles will continue to buy top level FX gear because they need bragging rights in having the latest and greatest. But these folk are not the bulk of the market. I still wonder if the overall market can sustain a 6m+ unit volume of interchangeable lens cameras each year. The current volume gains feel weak, and it wouldn't take much of an external shock—for example, an economic recession—to put sales in serious decline again. 

Nikon really only has two unique things that they can throw at the future: legacy and dramatic new engineering. They're leaning a lot on the legacy crutch at the moment (Zf and Zfc), and they no longer have the unit volume to justify R&D reinventing camera tech every year. That's one reason why they purchased RED: it gives them more space to work with that pays (and paves) the way with some new R&D. Bringing RED over to the Z-mount also will sustain the lens side of Nikon, too.