News & Opinions about the mirrorless camera market appear below, latest article first. Over in right column—bottom if you're reading on a small screen—you'll find the News/Views Archive, which lets you go back in time to look at articles that have trickled off this page. If you're looking for older articles, click here for the deeper news archive.
If you want to read an article below without the sidebar and other distractions, just click on its title.
No 2024 Holiday Buying Guide
As the holiday buying season starts I typically make at least a few recommendations or point out cameras that are a cut above the others. This year, however, I'm going to take a different tack.
First off, if you've already got a mirrorless camera (or even a Canon or Nikon DSLR), you should probably stick with your brand. Familiarity of control is a very important aspect to taking photos at a high level. Photos are moments in time, and you capture those moments either (1) randomly; or (2) in control, by not struggling with settings. I'd argue that if you're capturing peak moments randomly you should learn your current gear better or just buy random cameras ;~).
We now have at least three clear UX approaches (dials, button+dial, overloaded controls), and within that we have variations. Fujifilm and Nikon approach the dials cameras differently, for example, while Canon and Sony tend to overload controls differently. Couple this with things like the orientation of Command dials (Canon vertical, everyone else mostly horizontal), button positioning, and a host of other control differences, and it's a pretty complete new learning experience you'll encounter when you move from brand to brand.
I believe that you don't want to be learning a new camera, you'd rather want to be able to use a new camera much as you used your previous one, only now with more performance in some respect, or perhaps with new features you can take advantage of.
One can argue the feature bit, I suppose, as at any given product level you'll find one camera company having a slightly different feature set than another, but frankly, virtually every full frame mirrorless camera these days has a pretty extensive set of features that's tough to outgrow. Even in the crop sensor cameras this tends to also be true once you get above the US$1000 price mark.
Overall, in terms of new cameras, we are now back in that game of leap frog where whichever company most recently introduced their model at any given price point appears to be "ahead," but this tends to give the "buy the latest" crowd a false sense of superiority. Whatever "lead" the latest camera has over others that tends to go away when the other frogs leap again, and now you'll have a false sense of inferiority ;~).
Pick a lane and stick to it. I believe Fujifilm, Canon, Nikon, Panasonic, and Sony have all demonstrated that they're still iterating and their frogs keep leaping over others, so whatever gain you think you get from the latest and greatest is mostly ephemeral. Which gets us back to my first point: if you also have to master a new camera to get that gain, by the time you can take advantage of it the frog you were riding has probably jumped again.
If you truly don't have a mirrorless brand to ride as you move into the buying season—for instance, you're abandoning all your DSLR gear to move on—I still wouldn't put much emphasis on camera features or performance. Instead, I'd be paying attention to lens sets. Here, we have some more interesting stories that might make a difference to what you purchase.
First, as an early mover, Sony has an advantage in terms of how many different lenses are available (though there are also now a lot of duplicate and overlapping focal lengths). A four year+ head start meant that Sony had at least three full cycles of new lenses moving to fruition before Canikon made their first move. Broadly speaking, from conception to announcement, lenses from the camera companies take about three years to brew. First year centers on getting the design right, second year focuses on what's necessary to move it to production (including beginning to pour and polish the appropriate glass), and the third year puts it into production (first as prototypes to test, eventually as inventory to manage day one sales). Most of the camera companies have six to eight new lenses entering this cycle a year, which results in between four and eight showing up three years later.
Thus, Sony's early entry had them brewing plenty of FE-mount lenses before Canikon even woke up and created RF and Z. Sony is now on second generation iterations of many of their lenses, as well, meaning that they've studied how to make their initial offerings better while Canon and Nikon were still creating their initial offerings. If you value certain focal length and aperture combinations, the story here is that they may already in the E/FE mounts, but not yet in the RF and Z mounts.
That said, if you look at how fast Nikon ramped the Z-mount lens offerings, they're creating new lenses on a faster pace than Sony was in their first few years. As I write this, Nikon has 35 full frame autofocus lenses available, and third parties account for another 26. Which brings up another important point: Canon is still not allowing third parties to make full frame RF lenses. If you don't like Canon's offerings, you probably should avoid RF.
Meanwhile, Panasonic and Leica have partnership with the L mount that means you have multiple companies iterating for those cameras, including the third partner in the alliance, Sigma. This brought the L-mount offerings up at an even faster rate than Nikon's Z, though with a lot of duplication. The story here is that, particularly in the 24mm to 200mm range, there's plenty of choice, but as you move outside of that, the choices dwindle.
Canon appears to be restricting anyone from making full frame RF lenses (but not crop sensor RF-S), which to me makes their story more narrow than the others, at least right now.
Thus, more so than camera, I'd argue that you should take a long look at the lens lineup for a brand if you're thinking about moving into mirrorless for the first time, or switching from an existing mount. While DSLR-to-mirrorless mount adapters for the most part work (e.g. Nikon's FTZ adapter), I'm not a big fan of them as the additional mount means you need to be more careful handling your camera, as well as the fact that mount tolerances can gang up in a way that would require you to understand AF Fine Tuning of lenses.
In terms of specific cameras at different levels, I see a lot of parity these days.
For example, at high prosumer point we have the Canon R5 Mark II, Nikon Z8, and Sony A7R Mark IV. I can point to something each camera does that the other doesn't, or some performance aspect where one is slightly better than the other, but for 95%+ of photography you'd do with them, I'm not sure any of that really makes a difference. It would make more of a difference in how well you understood and handled the camera (back to my first point). Ditto the Canon R6 Mark II, Nikon Z6 III, Panasonic S5 II, and Sony A7R Mark IV.
For crop sensor cameras, there's much more variation going on, and it's difficult to line models up across makers. But even there, I've now used pretty much all of them, and it really starts to come to down to capability-at-price. The Fujifilm X-H2s and OM Digital OM-1 Mark II are probably the best choices at the moment for all-around capability that includes action, but they're also the two highest priced crop sensor models.
Thus, I'm not going to call out specific products this holiday buying season unless someone offers a XMAS deal that is so good you can't ignore it. As of today, there aren't any.
A Slow Year in Mirrorless
Here's the tally so far:
- Canon — R1, R5 Mark II (plus a Cinema C80)
- Fujifilm — X-T5, GFX 100S II
- Leica — SL3
- Nikon — Z6 III
- OM Digital — OM-1 Mark II
- Panasonic — GH7, S9
- Sony — ZV-E10 II
That's 10 total cameras (five full frame, two APS-C, two m4/3, one medium format).
In 2023 we had 17 mirrorless cameras introduced. At the peak in 2019 and 2020 we had 21 cameras introduced both years. Given that I only know of three more cameras that will be launched this year, we're on pace to have the fewest new models introduced since 2017 (12) or 2010 (11).
The "official" reason for this is stated by the camera makers as "parts shortage." I don't really believe that, though I do think that Sony Semiconductor is doing a bit of choking the camera makers on sensor production, as they're still at fab capacity trying to meet all their other demands (mobile, security, autos).
Each of the camera makers has a bit different problem they're dealing with:
- Canon — Too much inventory, basically. It's difficult to introduce new models into a market where you haven't emptied the shelves of previous models. Moreover, since the way you can do that is to lower the prices on the previous models, new model introduction works best at the top end, where the deep-pocketed folk who are impatient lurk for any small improvement, regardless the cost. For Canon, for instance, they still have 5D Mark IV (DSLR) and R5 bodies to clear out. The R5 Mark II is currently US$1200 more expensive than the older R5 model.
- Fujifilm — Too many models, particularly given their overall market share (8%). The X100VI using the 40mp image sensor basically puts a strain on sensor supply for the X-T50, X-T5, and X-H2. Good thing the latter isn't selling well any more and the first undercuts the second ;~).
- Leica — Same camera in many guises. Leica is set up for low unit volume at high prices, thus you can get an SL in three different sensor sizes, or 60mp in several different models (including non-mirrorless). I do have to wonder how long they can juggle these balls.
- Nikon — Only one hit camera at a time, please. The Z9, Z8, Zf, Z6 III roll has been interesting to watch. Nikon's in no hurry, apparently, despite having dropped to third in ILC.
- OM Digital — Not making money. We finally have reliable reports of OMDS's financials out of Tokyo, and they're still a money losing operation, despite having taken a flyer at selling pre-packaged curry, among other oddities.
- Panasonic — Not making progress. Despite being one of the more active companies in introducing mirrorless cameras in the last two years—more active than Nikon, for example—their market share isn't moving and one has to wonder whether the products are meeting the CEO's stated gross profit margins.
- Sony — Taking a break. After introducing five mirrorless models last year, marketing and sales still has plenty of work to do getting those moving off shelves. R&D seems on holiday as a result.
While my tongue is in cheek a bit with the above, I see the lack of 2024 product introductions as a warning sign that camera makers are more wary of what's happening in the market than they state publicly. As I've stated before, once DSLRs mostly die off—which I expect to happen in the coming quarter—the likely ILC sales volume is going to have a difficult time hitting 6m units a year (about the current level) with just mirrorless alone. It wouldn't take much of an economic disruption—war, recession, tariffs—to make even 5m units tough to hit. Thus, I think the camera makers are perfectly happy with a reduced new product parade for the time being.
Nikon, in particular, seems to have anticipated this and slowed the beat of their drummer way, way down. Sony now seems to be on a release year, rest year cycle (from 2019: 5, 2, 6, 2, 5, 1).
Thus, if you felt that the news section of this site was a little sluggish this year, don't blame me. True, I could have announced about three zillion Chinese prime lenses, but I simply just added them to the database instead.
More on Mirrorless Market Shares
Just another take on the previous article. Nikkei reported a bit more information about market shares from the TSR data (previous article), including actual unit numbers. Here's the same chart using Nikkei's additional information:
And here are the Nikkei reported actual sales volumes underlying that chart (not CIPA shipment volumes):
- Canon 1,960,000 units
- Sony 1,530,000
- Nikon 630,000
- Fujifilm 380,000
- Panasonic 140,000
- OM Digital 120,000
What wasn't disclosed in the public information was the relative speed at which the top four are growing. Neither TSR nor Nikkei made public the exact same information from 2022, however we can compare the mirrorless data to 2020:
- Canon gained about 11% in market share
- Sony lost about 3% in market share
- Nikon gained about 6% in market share
- Fujifilm lost about 4% in market share
That makes sense, as Canon and Nikon were the late entrants to mirrorless and just getting started with their serious mirrorless efforts through the pandemic-impacted years.
The question now is whether those 2023 numbers are fairly locked in, or whether there are still going to be substantive shifts when we see the 2024 results. I suspect that the size of the various end-of-year discounts will tell you a lot.
Are Market Shares Meaningful?
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.
Canon's Big Day
Today Canon announced the US$4300 R5 II and officially launched the US$6300 R1. These are two of top three cameras in the RF lineup—the R3 is the other—so Just as Nikon did earlier with their Z8/Z9 combo, Canon is making a strong new statement about the top of their camera lineup.
The star of the early morning (in the US) press release salvo is clearly the R5 II, so let’s start with that.
What's New in the R5 II?
The big news here is all internal, as Canon has focused on making technology changes at the heart of the camera. Pixel count and basic body bits don’t change.
The biggest internal change is the move to a stacked BSI CMOS image sensor, which provides up to 30 fps, though with rolling shutter. Initial reports put the R5 II’s rolling shutter impact about halfway between the Nikon Z6 II and the Nikon Z8/Z9. I’m hearing something close to 1/160 (the Z8/Z9 is slightly greater than 1/250, and the Z6 III is about 1/70). Curiously, this new fast imaging chain doesn’t save bit depth data, like the original R5 did.
Eye Control in the viewfinder for directing focus has now made it’s way down to the R5 II (it’s in the R1 and R3). Like the R1, the R5 II gets the DIGIC Accelerator chip to help handle real time focus decisions, including those new Action Priority focus modes (for soccer, basketball, and volleyball), as well as being able to recognize people you’ve pre-registered with the camera (up to 10 sets of 10 people). Pre-capture also makes its way to the R5 II.
Many of the gains for the new camera come on the video side, including better heat management, including a new 4K SRaw video mode that’s full frame oversampled.
How's the R1 differ from the R3?
Again, the news is mostly about internal technology changes, though the R1 body is bigger than the R3. Here, everyone is mostly looking at how the R1 exceeds or improves the R3, though. That happens primarily in the focus system: the first quad-pixel mirrorless arrangement gives the R1 better focus discrimination on the vertical axis. A new Action Priority focus mode appears in the R1 (and also the R5 II) (I wish I had a dime for every time I’ve typed the word mode in my long career of documenting cameras). To achieve some of the advances, there’s a second DIGIC Accelerator chip in the camera.
While the image sensor is still just 24mp, the viewfinder jumps to 9.44m dots, with a 0.9x magnification. The mechanical shutter goes to 12 fps, the electronic to 40 fps. The image sensor is stacked, so rolling shutter is highly improved, but it’s unclear exactly by how much as I write this.
Video gets some boosts, with 6K/60p being the maximum capability. Dual CFexpress Type B cards help keep the card keeping up with the high data rates.
One thing that is already a discussion factor among pros is whether the Canon professional would be better off with the R1 or R3. I haven’t had a chance to use the former, so can’t really say. But Canon’s press release announce of the R1 didn’t really shine where it comes to making that decision. Of course, most of us don’t have to make that decision until fall 2024, as the R1 is being announced pre-Olympics, but won’t be available to the general public until much later.
Overall…
Only the R5 II was available to most media outlets prior to the launch, which is why you’re seeing so much more information about it today. Technically, it’s the more important camera, and Canon has badly needed to achieve parity with the Nikon Z8 ever since that camera appeared. For the most part, it seems that they’ve done that, and has managed to get a teeny bit past the Nikon frog in their jump. One way that Canon did better this time is in the accessory bits, where Nikon still doesn’t have additional hotshoe communication, or grips with Ethernet support built in.
But the timing and manner in which Canon made these launches seems meek. Basically, the announcements were made outside of business hours in Japan (7pm), the United States (3 to 6am), with only Europe getting mid-day announcements (and right at lunch time in, say, Paris). Those are not what I’d call “strong launch times,” where you can completely get people’s attention. Of course, given that neither camera will be available to the public prior to sometime in August (or later in the case of the R1), maybe Canon’s saving their ammunication for after the Olympics.
Still, it seems odd to me to announce major products this way.
Meanwhile...
Canon executives said the following in a recent press interview overseas: "there are...lenses with specifications that have never been seen before and that no one can imagine yet. We would like to develop those." My question about that is whether or not Canon has enough insight with photographers any more to develop lenses that haven't existed before, and that once the public discovers what Canon creates, will want them. I suspect instead that Canon is looking for "halo" products, ones that they can point to and say "see, we're leading."
The mantra among customers these days is "smaller and lighter." That comes from a number of areas, including an aging core base, airline and venue restrictions, and even the whole notion of not looking like a geek with a tech shop on their back and hanging from straps.
The Canon RF 28-70mm f/2L was one of those "haven't existed before" lenses. It's also over three pounds in weight and more expensive than most Canon cameras. I've seen a few pros pick this one up and then begin complaining about things (95mm filters, size/weight hanging off the front of lighter body, etc.). The thing about making something completely new is that, for it to really be meaningful in the market, it has to delight users. I'm skeptical about this.
I mentioned that I wasn't sure that I'm not sure that Canon has enough insight to what the photographers are actually doing and asking for. This month CanonUSA made a large set of layoffs and buyouts, including apparently, Rudy Winston, someone I've had the pleasure of interacting with and learning from. After Chuck Westfall died, Rudy was sort of a go to for both pros and media to get useful information here in the US.
Petapixel has published a response from Canon about the layoffs (and again, many if not most were people accepting a Canon buyout offer, not actually being terminated by the company): "Canon's recent reorganization was made to streamline operations and promote efficiency, in order to help achieve the necessary levels of performance that are required to meet our targets and remain competitive in a fast changing industry." This is corporate speak for "by eliminating employees we save money; we'll just make everyone left work harder."
I've written the following for almost all my career: when companies cut back on key knowledgable personnel that were effective in creating things or working directly with customers, they lower the quality they provide their customers. Lower the quality, and over time you'll lower your sales. Lower your sales, and you'll be downsizing again in the future. It's a death spiral if you think this is the plan to execute ad infinitum.
Canon's new cameras look good. However, they're at the top of the lineup where you actually need more people to help train and support those buying the cameras, not less. One of the things about Rudy was that, when I came to him with a narrow knowledge of a few Canon offerings, he was able to put that in context of the full lineup for me and show me things I either hadn't understood or had completely missed. I wonder who's going to do that for me tomorrow?
The Sony APS-C Vlogger Gets Updated
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.
Free Z6 III Webinar
As we have for the past three Nikon cameras (Z9, Z8, and Zf) Mark Comon and Thom Hogan will have a free Creative Photo Academy presentation based on their experience with the just-announced Z6 III on Wednesday June 19th at 5pm (EST). Click here to sign up for this event (pick a ticket from the bottom option). It will be available the next day as a recording for those of you outside the US who signed up and were sleeping while we were talking ;~).
Nikon Introduces the Z6 III
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:
"Do I Upgrade?" Advice
To keep the generic "do I upgrade?" questions from proliferating in my In box now that the Z6 III has appeared, here are my current thoughts, in somewhat concise form (subject to verification using a production camera, which I should have in a couple of days):
- D6xx/D750 user — Yes. There's now a mirrorless camera that pretty much pushes everything you have well forward except for perhaps basic image quality (24mp full frame has been relatively stable for a decade in image quality, though you do get better raw bit depth, small files, and new Picture Controls).
- D8xx user — No. If the Z8 didn't already entice you, the Z6 III likely won't (or you had the wrong camera in the first place). The Z8 is still the most appropriate mirrorless camera for a D8xx user.
- Z5/Z6 user — Yes (but consider also the Zf). The Z9 generation of cameras offers more performance and more features, all of that quite useful. You now have two choices that offer that (Z6 III and Zf).
- Z6 II user — Probably. I generally recommend waiting two generations to upgrade, but the Z6 III is a pretty substantial upgrade over what you have. Plus you waited about the same amount of time as two generations ;~).
- Z7/Z7 II user — No. This is a tricky one. If you were using your Z7 model mostly for landscapes or architecture on a tripod, the pixel-shift of the Zf and Z6 III give you more (96mp) and better pixels to work with and the answer might be Yes. However, for everyone else there is now a product space between the Z6 III and Z8 that needs updating, and I believe Nikon will eventually address it, so you wait.
- Df user — No. The Zf is the proper camera for you. Yes if you got tired of retro dials and glued together UX.
Why no advice for the D# pro DSLR body or consumer DX DSLR owners?
The D# pro DSLR body owner should first consider the Z9, and then contemplate whether a Z8 works for them. Moving down to the Z6 III body loses a great deal (battery life, customization, etc.).
The DX DSLR owners have a lot of things they need to answer before they can consider upgrading at all. Nikon's Z DX lineup is very bottom-targeted and limited, all of which means potential weight and price penalties when you start considering FX bodies to replace your older DX DSLR.
Of course GAS (gear acquisition syndrome) says Yes and your credit card says No. Your significant other might want to give their advice, so consult them (i.e. happy spouse, happy house). The Internet fora will say both Yes and No, very loudly and at the same time. Nikon is shouting Please Yes. I'll let you resolve all these answer discrepancies on your own ;~).
Worth the Wait?
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?
