Here's a real headline that appeared today with a Z5 announcement story: "Don't Trade in Your Sony A7III Just Yet, the Nikon Z5 Looks Pretty Gimped." (thephoblographer.com)
Now who in their right mind would be trading in a Sony A7 Mark III for a Nikon Z5? Why would you even think someone might consider that? Of course, that site goes further in a large pull quote stating "In a world where the Sony A7III exists, is there a need for a camera like the Nikon Z5?"
Let me answer that very confused writer's question: yes.
The world doesn't just consist of one camera maker making only one model for a high-end customer. There are millions of consumer Nikon DSLR owners who haven't yet updated to the mirrorless world, too. Maybe, just maybe, Nikon is catering to some of their legacy base customers?
Then, of course, there's this: on sale today, the Sony A7 Mark III still costs US$400 more than the Nikon Z5. It isn't even in the same price bracket. Technically, the price differential is US$600 if we compare MSRP and ignore Sony's current instant rebate.
The site in question has a long history of negativity in the headlines of their Nikon coverage, but I thought I'd take a moment just to see what their Sony A7 Mark III review said ;~). Are you ready for the lead paragraph? "...after all the time I spent with the [A7 Mark III] I am not sure who the customer is that may [sic] purchase it." Another statement further down: "Sony gets 80% right 100% of the time." Okay, then. Indeed, reading the Dislikes in that review it seems that they think only truly professional, top-of-the-line cameras should be made. So I guess they're consistent in disliking the lower-cost, entry-model cameras.
For the most part, Nikon's mostly-press-release-only Z5 announcement didn't have all the YouTubers and influencers stepping over each other trying to make a bigger splash, and most of the Web stories so far basically stuck to the facts with tame headlines. But there's always an exception...
