I'm in the midst of using a Canon R7 for my eventual review in sansmirror.com. One reason why I continue to try out and use competitive brand products is to get a better sense of where the Nikon products are.
Obviously, Nikon doesn't have an R7 competitor as I write this, though I'm reasonably sure that Nikon will eventually introduce a higher-end DX model that might be competitive. It would foolish for Nikon not to, actually, as the broad D100, D200, D300, and D500 base that Nikon spent decades building would simply all defect to a competitor if Nikon doesn't do so. Some Nikon faithful have already left, and the competitor they leave for tends to be either Fujifilm or Sony. With the R7, Canon has also introduced itself as someone the D### users might also consider when moving to mirrorless.
So what would a Z70 have to look like to keep Nikon's D### user base from converting to competitors like the R7? Oops, I have a bit more work to do before I get to my R7-triggered comments.
I see three DX models Nikon must produce in order to round out their crop sensor lineup (and don't get me started about lenses, buzz, buzz):
- Z50 II — Nikon really needs to move this model up a notch now that we have Zfc and Z30 variations of it. Candidates for that move are (a) new image sensor, (b) new EVF, (c) better AF system, and (d) possible sensor-VR. I'd bet that Nikon would likely opt for (a) with some (c). Basically, move the Z50 more from the D5600 side it was favoring to the D7500 side that's at a higher level (the Z50 currently straddles the D5600/D7500 model levels).
- Z70 — The D70/D7xxx models were the base of Nikon's true enthusiast customer, and a Z70 has to pick up where those models left off. That means a particularly well specified camera that doesn't feel like it's lacking something. I'd argue that Nikon would need to do some level of (a), (b), (c), and (d) for this model. I'd also argue that this camera has to be essentially the D7500 replacement, which also means it has to go a bit beyond where the D7500 currently is if the Z50 II is moving closer to that level.
- Z90 — Now that the X-H2S specs are known, any model with the Z90 numbering would have to be nothing short of a DX Z9: high performance in every aspect, with the most solid build of a DX camera Nikon can manage. That means state-of-the-art (a), (b), (c), and (d). In essence, this model has to replace a D500, and do that well.
Let's talk a bit about where I feel the competitors currently slot in. Sony is really in between the Z50 II and any future Z70 with their most recent A6### models, while the Canon R7 is really in between where the Z70 and Z90 would be. As noted, Fujifilm with their X-H2S is clearly targeted where a Z90 would need to be.
The Z50, Zfc, and Z30 triplets feel like they're being pushed down in the market by all the more recent competitors and the rumored coming ones. I have little complaint with the triplets as a base upon which to build out Z DX. My Z50 gets a lot of use as a backup and casual walk-around camera, and is clearly up to the job.
The R7 is really the first APS-C mirrorless camera I've seen to date that truly puts Nikon on notice, though. Yes, I know the Fujifilm crowd is going to start barking at that comment, but as decent as the Fujifilm cameras to date have been, they've not been state-of-the-art in autofocus performance, have created their own twins and triplets in self-competition, and the zoom and telephoto lens offerings I've found to be a little on the wanting side. That was made clear to me when I kept putting the kit 15-45mm f/3.5-5.6 lens on my Fujifilm bodies instead of the 16-50mm, 16-55mm, or 16-80mm. Moreover, I don't have an X-H2S in my hands yet ;~). So my comment is about older, existing Fujifilm bodies.
In my first outings with the R7—coupled with the budget 100-400mm f/5.6-8 lens, which makes for a compact long telephoto kit—I felt a lot more like I was back with something in the D7500 to D500 range, probably a bit closer to the D500 than D7500. Note the things I said Nikon needed to do for the new models I suggest, above. Well, the R7 has (a) in a 33mp sensor that's essentially state of the art. The R7 certainly has (c) in that Canon seems to have cobbled the R3 autofocus into the R7 somehow. Plus the R7 has (d) with its sensor-based IBIS. Couple all of that with 15/30 fps and no significant feature crippling I can see, and the R7 is a solid new APS-C contestant that's going to attract a lot of buyers. Buyers that used to buy a Nikon DSLR.
Don't get me wrong, the R7 isn't without faults. It has the worst mechanical shutter shock at low shutter speeds I've seen (and the electronic shutter has some clear rolling attributes to it). The buffer isn't as good as I'd like considering the other abilities. Some of the controls and customizations are a little awkward, though not ultimately problematic. The video side is a bit less than I'd expect out of a higher-end camera these days. The build quality looks cheaper than it is. The EVF experience isn't as smooth as I'd like. As you can see, I'm building up a pretty good list of things where a competitive camera could steal Canon's (current) thunder. (Are you listening, Nikon?)
But here's the thing: the Canon R7 is already out on the market with a range of RF telephoto lenses that are budget and handling friendly (though a bit low in light gathering ability). Where's Nikon? Apparently off with Ferris Bueller. And I don't expect them to return until 2023. So Canon now has a clear shot at the holiday season buyers. Former Nikon buyers.
