Thom Hogan

The 35mm f/1.4 is interesting in a number of ways. The optical design, for instance, is another only-on-Z-mount type design, with the largest elements being far back in the lens and extremely close to the image sensor.

The bigger point, though, is how Nikon themselves positions lenses. In their catalog, they have:

• S-Line Prime (14 FX lenses)
• S-Line Zoom (7 FX)
• S-Line Special Purpose (1 FX)   Total S-Line = 22
• Other Primes (4 FX, 1 DX)
• Other Zooms (7 FX, 4 DX)
• Other Special Purpose (1 FX)  Total Other = 17

The just-announced 35mm f/1.4 fits into Other Primes, along with the physically smaller 26mm f/2.8, 28mm f/2.8, 28mm f/2.8, 40mm f/2, and DX 24mm f/1.7 options. 

S-Line lenses are clearly pro/prosumer in nature. Given how Nikon's management keeps talking about an enthusiast-to-pro oriented lineup, one might say the S-line lenses are at the pro end of that, while the Other lenses are at the enthusiast end. 

Note the balances.

• Neither S-line nor Other dominate. 
• S-line is solely FX at the moment, DX solely Other.
• S-line has a majority of primes, while Other has a majority of zooms.

What does all of this say about the future, particularly since we no longer have new Road Maps? 

Well, the position left unfilled on the last Road Map is still another S-line 35mm, likely f/1.2 given its location. The 35mm f/1.4 suggests that the Other Primes are not necessarily muffins or pancakes in size, which opens a realm of other possibilities. We still don't have another NOCT, which was something Nikon has said we would eventually get. Finally, now that unique F-mount lenses are being closed out, we're likely to find Nikon without a tilt/shift lens if one doesn't appear in the Z-mount soon. 

Given the balancing that Nikon has done in the initial (six years ;~) of the Z-mount, what comes next could be S-line or Other, and prime, zoom, or special purpose. I believe they'll skip around between those categories to slowly fill out a more complete lineup for both the enthusiast and the pro.

One slide in my presentation last week should be of interest to those of you who like to speculate. That slide described which Z System cameras are in the modern era now (EXPEED7), and which aren't (EXPEED6). 

To recap, the EXPEED6 generation of cameras has these attributes to consider:

• Compromised High Continuous captures — the viewfinder becomes a lagged slide show, not live.
• 8-bit video compression — pretty much just the aging H.264 options.
• Nikon 1 autofocus — the original Z6/Z7 system was an update of the Nikon 1 one, with Subject tracking, but not 3D-tracking, for instance.
• Established Picture Controls — in Nikon terminology, basically a carry on of NP2 first seen in DSLRs.
• Older card slots — XQD and UHS I were the design targets, though this group later got (slowish) CFexpress support.
• Tilt-only LCDs — with one exception, this group all had one-axis tilt mechanisms.
• Limited control customization — very paternalistic "you can only set these few things" customization.
• Cameras: Z30, Z50, Zfc, Z5, Z7 II.

The EXPEED7 generation kicked off by the Z9 changed the above things (and added more):

• Live view Continuous, and even pre-capture — the viewfinder is always live and doesn't black out on electronic shutter.
• 10-bit video compression and more — N-RAW, ProResRAW and 422, H.265, plus HLG all catch Nikon up in the video world.
• New autofocus — subject detection is the big gain, but other gains include true 3D-tracking, hybrid-button focus, user-defined large areas, and more.
• New Picture Controls — in NP3 we have three new original Picture Controls, plus now the Flexible Picture Control system.
• Newer card slots — still not perfect, but CFexpress V2 and UHS II capability is better.
• Adjustable LCDs — multi-tilt or fully articulating is now the norm.
• Near limitless customization — the parental controls have been (mostly) lifted, allowing you to customize your camera to your needs much more easily.
• Cameras: Zf, Z6 III, Z8, Z9.

If you want to speculate about the Z System's future, you have to either (1) tell me how the cameras in red become cameras in green; or (2) invent a new camera to add to the green list.

I've gone on record as saying that I don't believe Nikon will update the Z5 any time soon. This is the D6xx model for mirrorless: supremely competent at a rock bottom FX price. Nikon's going to milk the R&D recapture out of that camera until the cow can take no more. As the D6xx proved, that can be almost a decade.

Which leaves you only two real choices for #1: updating the Z50 or Z7 II. As for #2, the price point for FX that's now weak is US$3000, so be careful about how much you want to stick into an FX model to make it work in the lineup.

Nikon certified two cameras recently for release. One we now know was the Z6 III. The other? Could be a #1 (Z7 III?) or a #2 (Z70?). I don't know. The problem with my remaining contacts within Nikon is that they'll tell me about something they worked on, but they won't tell me what they decided to release. Sometimes they don't even know for sure themselves until upper management has given the final green light. 

I personally feel that whatever comes next has to be a #2. I know that's what I'd do with the product line right now. 

You're probably asking about "but why not a Z7 III?" Well, such a camera is possible, but it's really only possible in these forms: an updated Z7 body with (a) 45mp sensor; (b) 61mp sensor; or (c) 80mp+ sensor. The first (a) is problematic in how it would position against the Z8 (and Z6 III, for that matter). The second (b) means using what is now regarded as a slow sensor, so this would make the camera pretty much only a landscape type camera. The last (c) requires an entirely new image sensor, and I have to wonder whether Nikon had the fab time to pull off two completely new image sensors near simultaneously (remember, both cameras registered with licensing agencies close together). 

You're probably asking at this point "when will we know?" 

No one in their right mind would launch a new camera with the Olympics going on (did you hear that, Canon? ;~). Heck, marketing departments are probably even looking at Taylor Swift concert dates and trying to avoid them, too ;~). As I've written before, it's not good form to launch here in the US before Labor Day, due to people not paying attention due to things like vacations.

Thus my official speculation is a #2 some time after Labor Day. (For those of you overseas, that's September 2nd this year.)

Your speculation may vary.

As with the previous Nikon Z System camera introductions dating back to the Z9, I've been in a position of having fairly good pre-launch knowledge—and in some cases, actual pre-release camera in hand—of what a new Nikon model was going to be prior to actual launch [Disclosure: Nikon has supported me with information, demonstrations, and sometimes product prior to launch on the last four cameras, all in order to be able to accurately describe them at launch. I actually very much appreciate that, and believe that it helps accurate information proliferate at launch (as opposed to hyperbole and speculation about non-obvious things)]. 

Quite obviously, there are always leaks and rumors that get a lot of attention on the Internet prior to a new product appearing, and it's been amusing to watch them and all the responses and commentary they create. Some observations:

• Nikon has a China problem. Virtually every piece of pre-announcement information I saw on the Z6 III that was accurate, or even close to accurate, came out of China. China has become as important (if not more so) as North America in terms of sales for Nikon Imaging, so obviously Nikon wants launch excitement in that country, but it's coming at the expense of Nikon's usual secrecy. The most accurate leaks started as early as March, which is about the time that early bodies began circulating to Nikon staff.
• Nikon's technology strategy requires keeping secrets. Or more to the point: creating surprises. Dropping the shutter on the Z9 (and Z8) was a surprise. The Z8 as a true mini-Z9 was a surprise. The Zf, while not a complete surprise due to the Zfc before it, was a surprise in that it was internally very modern, including things like Nikon's first pixel-shift capability. The surprise in the Z6 III was basically the thing that the Sony fan boys keep denying: Nikon still designs and/or pioneers image sensors. I don't think Nikon's current marketing strategy truly works without a significant surprise. 
• There's a strong, loyal core of Nikon enthusiasts to consume and comment on rumors. Any good platform—whether cameras, autos, computers, phones, etc.—requires a strong group of passionate users to both promote and amplify the product-producing company's strengths and messages. I view lively and pointed discussion to be the sign of a healthy set of customers for the ecosystem centered around product. And I include coulda, woulda, and shoulda comments as useful in that context. We had a lot of that in the build-up to the Z6 III as leaks and rumors proliferated. We had more as the launch information became available to everyone. Other than some obvious trolling, I regard this as a sign that Nikon's core customer is still there.
• The "Sony does all the sensor work" myth has returned. Part of that came with the claim of Nikon somehow getting early access to the next Sony A7S sensor (hogwash). The reality is that Sony Semiconductor is an independent organization that also works closely with Nikon Precision at times. This coopetitive arrangement has existed for well back into the 1980's, and persists today. The tools—and often licenses—that Sony Semiconductor uses to create image sensors come from many places other than Sony. New ideas and techniques spawn both inside and outside of Sony Semiconductor. As has been reported by far more media than just me, Nikon has a fairly extensive sensor design group who's still quite active in patenting not-yet-seen technologies. That Nikon sensor group also works with Nikon Precision. Who works with Sony Semiconductor. And don't get me started on what happens behind the scenes with lenses. Each Japanese company has its strengths and weaknesses, but the long ago learned that some form of cooperation raises all boats. I regard this as necessary for the future of the Japanese companies, as China's entry into cameras and lenses is running full speed now.
• A Z6 III is mostly what you thought it would be. Nikon was pretty clear about their goal of emphasizing high enthusiast to pro cameras and working Z9 technologies down the lineup. Well, guess what? The Z6 III (and the Zf before it) are just more evidence of that. If—and that's a huge if—that is to continue, DX pretty much needs to be the next stop for that. I suspect, however, that more full frame options are coming. We'll know which before the end of the year.

Meanwhile, it appears that Nikon marketing has discovered adjectives: unmatched, powerful, exceptional, first, ultra-fast, blistering, immersive, brightest, and acclaimed. That's just in a first paragraph ;~). I was also surprised to see so many direct-to-competitor comparisons in their Z6 III launch materials. Not exactly a first, but much more pronounced in this iteration. This signals to me that Nikon is back to its old position of being a technology pioneer, and intends to stay there. All of which is good news for Z System users.

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. 

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:

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. 

This topic comes up with regularity, and the landscape is constantly changing, so it's probably time for me to once again update my current suggestions for Z System users.

Free is Okay

If you don't want to spend money, are only editing one image at a time, and don't mind some modest delays for some operations, then Nikon NX Studio is the raw converter you should try first. Based upon Silkypix, a well established Japanese raw converter, NX Studio is also the only raw converter that will guarantee that your raw conversion looks just like a JPEG would with your current camera settings.

The drawbacks to NX Studio are multiple: (a) it's slower than other converters at most basic operations; (b) it is still on the buggy side, and crashes are more commonplace than they should be; (c) if you're looking for AI and other advanced features, you won't find them; and (d) the documentation is poor and the UI is amateurish by modern standards. 

That said, Nikon knows how to get Nikon results out of raw files. The "black box" of Nikon raw conversion in NX Studio is exactly the same as in the EXPEED chips in the cameras, and this results in really good results if you understand Nikon Picture Control Speak. The recent addition of pixel shift support (Zf and Z8) is arguably cleaner, simpler, and better than the other makers have managed.

Adobe's Lead Widens

Adobe has been using that US$10/month you've been sending them wisely. They're not just sitting on their hands watching your money compound at their bank. More so than any other company doing raw conversion, Adobe seems to be pushing all aspects of their product with regular and substantive updates. 

Yes, AI is all the rage and that's getting added into Lightroom and Photoshop these days, but some of what Adobe is doing in this regard has made the clone tool a thing of the past, which produces better, more convincing touch-up results. Masking is now top notch and reliable. Two deep and broad products have gotten deeper and broader in their available tools and capabilities, pretty much exactly what any photographer who wants to keep current wants. Another benefit of using Lightroom or Photoshop: ubiquitous and excellent third party tutorials and documentation. 

The primary drawback I find with Adobe's two converters is this: the color model and speed-oriented math they use in the background doesn't product the best possible results without some user tweaking. More so than any other raw converter I find myself adjusting color in my Nikon NEF files when using Lightroom or ACR. 

If you're going to spend money on a raw converter, US$120 a year nets you a really good one (Lightroom and Photoshop's ACR). One that gets better with time. I know some of you dislike subscription models, but if you add up how much you've been paying for yearly updates to other non-subscription products trying to keep up with Adobe, you're going to find you're getting less for, in many cases, more money.

The Other Reasonable Contenders

I've been impressed with DXO recently. Their PhotoLab product is an excellent choice for someone who wants a really good default conversion (that they can still tweak). Coupled with the excellent built-in noise reduction choices and the library of lens corrections that go further than the maker defaults, you can go a long way with only a bit of fiddling with PhotoLab. Performance isn't the fastest in the world, but is acceptably fast on my MacBook Pro 14" (M1). 

Capture One has long been a leading raw converter, mostly because of their consistent and excellent color model. At one time, I would have put Capture One a bit ahead of the Adobe converters simply because the results without having to tweak were better. However, it feels like Capture One now is asking for more money for less useful updating, so my recommendation has gotten more lukewarm over time. Still, it's a strong, well-supported product. 

If you're looking for a bargain, Affinity Photo 2 is the clear choice. Essentially a Photoshop clone—without the AI—you can benefit from all the Photoshop instruction on the Internet for a very modest entry price (US$70). Serif, the maker of the Affinity software, is now part of a much bigger company, which is good news on the longevity front, which is where most software eventually has issues.

Macintosh users should also check out Raw Power (MacOS Mojave or later) or Nitro (MacOS Ventura or later). Created by the gentleman who headed up Apple Aperture, the US$100 Nitro is very modern converter that's nicely done, and can link in with Apple Photos to make for a true Lightroom challenger. 

Whattabout?

Yes, I haven't mentioned a large number of other possible products to consider. They've all now fallen out of favor with me for one of a number of reasons: incomplete implementations, over reliance on AI features, burying the most used controls, constant upgrade nags, bugginess, performance issues, constantly changing UIs/choices, sloppy masking, and a host of other issues.