Nikon camera control pro 2 free crack free

Looking for:

Kolari Vision goes inside Nikon's Z9 in its latest camera teardown: Digital Photography Review.Nikon Camera Control Pro Crack With Activation key[] - Crack 

Click here to DOWNLOAD

     

Nikon camera control pro 2 free crack free -

 

Switching off Auto Dynamic Range helped with reducing shadow noise. Thank you Glen I've recently bought an A7 with the original firmware. I didn't fully test it before updating to the v2. I noticed a quite improvement in the start up time and responsiveness but couldn't compare the IQ before and after. All in all , I'm happy with it. How well does this camera support manual focussing and are there any issues working with manual lenses or even adapting vintage manual lenses?

And is it possible to remove the AF Start from the shutter half-press, assigning it to a separate designated button instead? I'm using the A7 with old Minolta, Canon and Vivitar lenses and it works perfectly.

And yes you can move AF to another button. This is a very old question, but in case you haven't got the answer it is quite simple: The mm is a lens designed for a smaller sensor APS-C and it's image circle does not cover the full frame sensor. What you are seeing is a lack of coverage, this can be avoided by either using it in crop mode the lenses intended format or using a FF lens instead.

You guys are kidding right? I don't like Sony but I'm not so blind to say they are a weak company. They produce pretty much every piece of electronics you can think of.

Wake up people, Sony is here to stay. After a decade of losing money on TVs, and four consecutive net loss-making years, Sony is running out of time and money. I won't buy camera from a company that might not exist anymore soon in the near future. Look at Apple, they had been suffering for so many years before becoming one of the biggest company in the world. With articulating at horizontal is mechanizm strong enough to hold up Hoodman 3X loupe without supporting with finger? Especially in darker environments.

It's not as bad in bright light conditions. The pictures themselves are perfect and exactly what you'd expect even when viewed on the lcd screen of the camera. I have a NEX-7 and was considering upgrading to the A7. After reading this review I have second thoughts.

It's definitely a step up but the improvement in IQ is not as much as I expected, given the significantly larger sensor size. If something built in metal, it's built is great, if plastic then so so From my own lessons learnt, do not take all these comments in the net so serious.

I've been shooting with nex for two years and started wonder how fuji x systhem is, due to a lot of reviews with huge praises Let me tell you, two years of sel35 usage, 0 dust spec in the lens, but after two weeks of very careful usage with xf35, there are a lot of dust specks in the lens, on the rear element that can not be cleaned without disassembling the lens.

So, very slow and noisy focus system of Xf35 whereas sel35 is light years faster and almost zero noise Also, xf35 has non internal focusing system, all the fron element moves front and back, moving parts that can be easily damaged if you drop it.. So where's the praised built quality? So another very praised lens, XF, reviews says awesome, terrific, outstanding sharpness, built quality bla bla bla Bought it, used it two weeks and shocked to see how cheaper, twice lighter SEL produces sharper, greater photos That's another BS SEL is definitely producing sharper images across the frame, in the center, a lot better Totally amazing camera.

I just says "preparing for tranfer for minutes bofre transfer starts. I think this is more play memories issue than sony a7 issue. So I put airplane mode on, batteries will last longer too. Because there are better built cameras out there and the A7 pales in comparison therefore it can not be excellent.

Build quality today need be just good enough to enable the camera to last its likely useful life - which is at best years. Could the A7 be more robust? We see no complaints that it is falling apart under even tough use. No D type recalls. I recall when the Canon T90 was introduced in plastic - horror! They're still in use today. For a camera likely to be obsolescent within a decade, it's built very well. It will last far longer than most complainers will care to own it. You comment that the distortions can't be turned off in jpeg.

But according to my menu structure they can, individually, or completely. Whether you can turn off the correction depends on which lens you mount - some of the lenses are designed with the correction as part of their design, so you can't turn off the corrections for those the menu option is ghosted-out when they're mounted. Since eyesight progressily failing, and ears incresing in acuteness, if i record at 60p, is audio of higher quality tan recording 30p?

Often times the sound is more powerful of ear than eye. No reson to use up card space if mainly for audio. No, the audio and video are not tied like that. You change the settings for each separately, I haven't read the full specs on the A7 but I don't think it allows you to change much about how it records audio.

If you switch to 60FPS the audio stays the same only the video is encoded differently at the end. Anybody know of anything in the works? East west, Any lens that requires use of polarizer to optimize, otherthan specific intended use of polarizer, is certainly a lens i would never purchase. Put a 55mm Polarizer filter on, any will do. Screw the sunshade into it , so you can rotate for polarization max effect 5.

Use DMF 7x fine focus, in auto or P modes 6. Results will astound you at 24x playback magnify! Contrast increases through a polarizer, so the AF system is faster and sharper. Will DMF mode fine tuning focus, the results are amazing. Its not the lens folks, its the poor skills of the photographer. Regards, Don Eastwestphoto. I'm sorry but I strongly disagree, I know the AF is to blame sometimes for a lens's lack of sharpness. So I tried it manually focused which is a breeze on the A7 thanks to the peaking.

This lens is cruddy and soft, end of story. Plus I don't want to bloody DIY a focus filter in order for a lens to perform properly, that's just plain shoddy.

I want to spend more time taking pictures and less time twiddling a polarizer. I'm Sorry, but I strongly disagree to you Carl. My sony is pretty awesome for sharpness, its just that, it requires right light to be sharp enough. I have done some outdoor shooting with this lens, and have received some real sharp images and pretty ok sort of bokeh, well I never expected to have any bokeh from this lens in the first place. You must learn, how to use your camera and lenses first, before speaking about it.

Aridom, I agree. I found myself shooting with my kit lens a lot last week when I was walking around with my daughter and month-old grandson.

I was shooting in restaurants and stores as well as backyards in shade, on playgrounds etc. It is not quite as sharp as my great legacy primes - but shockingly close, given its price. DxO doesn't get it always right, but they did on the , even though they mounted it on the not-recommended-by-Sony A7r. It's a vastly better lens than its critics claim, and as DxO noted, arguably a vastly better buy than the pseudo-Zeiss. I am alternating between my old Hexanon AR 50mm legacy prime lens and the Sony kit lens.

Love the perfect IQ delivered by the Hexanon takes me back 38 years! I have been looking for a full format camera with a tiltable screen that's in my budget for a long time as tripods don't come up to my eye line. I was hoping this to be it but although the spec sheet says RAW is uncompressed format the conclusion says RAW is compressed and lossy. I'm not sure I like lossy RAW files in case one needs or wants to re edit them etc.

Could this be Sony's way of helping to differentiate between this and their other more expensive cameras. I wonder if the A7R does the same. Need some serious advice Since the kit relatively small in relation to other FF zooms, how poor or good is its IQ?

Would a better aps-c zoom on a have just as good print quality as on a7? I agree, Marc. People have gushed all over the because it costs x the kit lens, but still needs to be stopped down and limited to a mm range to perceptibly demonstrate superiority to the kit lens.

The kit has a plastic mount, which makes it lighter and probably more rugged than the metal , too. I have a 24mm Canon FDn f2 that - wide open - blows the doors off any at 24mm at any aperture. Marc and mel, thanks. An additional question Exposures made only on sturdy tripod, approx. No, the difference is not likely to be visible without serious cropping. One of great "chicken little" issues in the history of optics.

There is no "proofing" against stupid camera handling. Ok, regarding the posterization I've downloaded the arw and the uncompressed nef page 13 of the review, bottom and put them in lr 5. At each file there is a loading time where you can see the posterization effect in both.

After loading there is no posterization. So, my opinion is that dpreview was using an older lr. I use a calibrated Dell Ultrasharp U P. Because the issue your link is talking about is completely pointless. Absolutely doesn't effect the usage of the camera. Here how you can meter the exposure yourself, if the screen is pitch black you are way under exposed. Of it is completely white, you are way over exposed. Not for street shooting or any fast moving situation. Focusing is horrid to non-existent if you want to capture the moment.

After spending two weeks street shooting for the most part - all things considered you need to be on a tripod or to have lots of time to focus first. So forget capturing a "moment" that is fleeting. There are still many features that are just plain wrongly done or not thought thru from the standpoint of real world usage. The a7 is better from many standpoints but still lacks the focusing capability of even a low end DSLR. Very disappointed. Sony just can't get this line of cameras up to professional standards yet.

Too bad. Would love to see them really make a full-frame mirrorless light weight camera be worth the money. But then their lens choices are just weird. What is the world are they thinking. I don't want to put a 2 pound lens on this camera. That totally defeats the go lighter mantra. Went street shooting with a group last night with the kit lens. It was fantastic. Yep, with the kit lens! I did not use a tripod. Focusing was dead easy if you know what you're doing. If the kit lens can perform as well it did at night, then I have no worries at all about what the FE 35mm can do.

I always wonder what kind of seriously weird lighting people must be shooting under when they complain the A7 is slow to focus. Sure, it's not D4 fast but it is not miss-your-shot slow either. It's far better than any of the previous NEXes, and practically instant in daylight. I didn't know my zeiss 35mm was 2 pounds. Certainly doesn't feel like it. I think Charles comments are just wildly exaggerated.

I was taking pics of my daughters on swings yesterday and it tracked them fine. I don't see any difference from my nex6 and my a7 when it comes to focusing. Briefly tried hands-on in Sony store. I Liked the compact size and light weight, still being a FF. Overall spec is worth drooling over Maybe I am spoiled by K-5II Loving the reviews and specs. My only concern is the focus hunting I'd love to be able to shoot selfie-interviews without worrying about this problem.

Has anyone crafted an electronic focus limiter for these cameras? Even if it's a really binary, crude setup like the old school lenses with a switch? Wouldn't this help a lot? I've had the A7 since January. I finally popped for the A7 and I love it! It's going to be my new wedding, portraiture and fine-art camera. Looking forward to getting the battery grip and some fast Zeiss glass for it in the future. This cameral fills the bill for me.

Light, compact and full frame. I think it's the future of cameras. When for example dialing a larger aperture, the camera will only increase shutter speed, it will not reduce ISO. Sony needs to fix this ASAP with a firmware update! I have this working perfectly with every other camera even my compact cameras RX and Canon S95 can do this perfectly right, not to mention all my DSLRs.

I don't expect to see this sort of cock ups on a camera of this level. AutoISO is one of the very best features of modern digital cameras, but somehow Sony was able to mess it up here, even though they get it right for compacts. I've put it on auto ISO and shutter priority, and yes, it does start of on f4.

But a bit of moving around eg. Aperture priority when raised to the max produces a lower shutter speed. Doesn't really bother me. Switch to manual. I'm glad your having fun, but it doesn't change the fact that Auto ISO on this camera doesn't work at all as it should. I think Sony should allow allow the user to set the min. And Max settings for aperture and shutter speed during these auto modes. Them trying to predict what people want doesn't work. There anything wrong with that it just shows that we all have different needs.

I think must people would want max aperture speed to match the lens attached. So a firmware update where people can customize these settings would be great. For now if I want the max aperture I shoot in manual mode or aperture priority mode. I remember my little nikon E? Wonderful apeture priority body, even accepted pro f lenses. Soooo much fun to find a dark scene at night, set it at f22, focus, on tripod, hit the shutter, and maybe an hour later Nikon still says that camera cannot shutter past one second.

Anyway, don't use auto iso, put on apeture priority, set iso in safe range for available light Lots of fun. I am considering purchasing my first full frame camera and like what the A7 kit has to offer in size, Raw photos, HD videos, Wifi and price.

I am however concerned about the reviewers comments about the disappointment in JPEG photo quality. In looking at the sample JPEG photos illustrated, as an armature photographer, they look very good to me compared to what I am used to. I have had my a7 since the beginning of December. I shoot in both Jpg and raw. I shoot jpg day to day of my kids, family, and casual stuff.

I got tired of always shooting raw and having to process photos that I was just gonna share on Facebook or with family and friends. So I shoot raw for paid work or shots that are really important to me.

That all. Being said, the Jpgs out of the camera work great and look nice. Dpreview comments on the jpg output was mostly regarding the higher iso noise reduction.

If you reduce the in camera noise reduction you will get a much better Jpg at higher iso settings. So far I have zero issues with the Jpg output on my a7 although raw is gonna get you better results as usual.

I should also mention the following about the as well: the camera is really versatile. It being so small and having the nfc feature can take the camera anywhere without it be in convenient and instantly share photos from it with my phone. So I get take the types of shots I get with a high end camera and share them like I shot them with a smart phone.

It's really the first ff camera that is practical for everyday use. Thanks for the great feedback Paul and Quezra. Wow what detail and knowledge!

You sold me on the A7. Now my only decision will be whether to purchase the kit lens or the Zeiss Or would I be wiser to start with the kit zoom lens and add other Zeiss lenses at a later time?

I would go with one of the primes actually. Go with the 35mm if want to keep it compact and go with the 55mm if you want the best in image quality. The 55mm was rated the second best lens DXO labs has ever tested. Both lenses are great on the A7.

If you must have a zoom I would just stick with the kit lens and buy one of these primes to compliment it. Not a big deal. Note the final thought Is it right for you? Sorry to say it, but I have not experienced ANY issues like these and I have shot hundreds of frames. I never shoot JPEG's so cannot comment on those. Be aware that mounting Legacy Lenses by means of Adapters can give rise to issues such as Colour Shift.

This is very well documented, especially with Leica lenses and is nothing new. The problem can be circumvented with a bit of software called CornerFix, see:. If you are not an experienced Photographer you would do well to stay out of this application. Unfortunately, Leica lenses are some of the best optically and if you already own some of these, you will want to crack the issues. Sorry, I have pasted the incorrect link to the single image referred to in Part 2. It should read:. Once you have opened the image on Flickr you will see three White Blobs in the bottom right of the Lightbox view.

The detail resolved and the Dynamic Range are very good for a Single Frame capture. Having read this review, I thought that I might share some images and thoughts about this new Sony Camera System.

All have been shot using Available Light and the majority from a Manfrotto Carbon Fibre tripod as this is the way I work. Hey DPR, do you have an eta for the A7r review? I agree, picture quality is pretty similar across the board. The only way manufactures can be individual is to concentrate on styling, function. Sony has announced delays in delivering certain cameras as a result of the Kumamoto earthquakes. Read more. Sony has released firmware update 3. The update primarily brings new lens support and is available to download now from Sony's support website.

Giuseppe Milo credits his interest in landscape and architectural photography with helping to shape a series of street photos he calls 'Faceless. Take a look at a selection of his photos and learn more about his history with photography. Sigma's been on a roll with their mirrorless Art series lenses.

Does the new 24mm F1. It brings a new, 25MP sensor and bit 4K capture at up to p. We've put it to the test, both in the studio and out in the field. In our tests it delivers big performance and offers a few good reasons why you might choose a 12th-Gen Intel laptop over a Mac. Canon's high end APS-C mirrorless camera has plenty of compelling features, but is it worth the price? Jordan took it on vacation to find out. But is it enough to outclass the competition? We dive deep to find out where it excels and what it's like to fly.

These capable cameras should be solid and well-built, have both speed and focus for capturing fast action and offer professional-level image quality. What's the best camera for shooting landscapes? High resolution, weather-sealed bodies and wide dynamic range are all important. In this buying guide we've rounded-up several great cameras for shooting landscapes, and recommended the best.

If you're looking for the perfect drone for yourself, or to gift someone special, we've gone through all of the options and selected our favorites. Although a lot of people only upload images to Instagram from their smartphones, the app is much more than just a mobile photography platform. Roger Cicala, ". Man you need to stop using that quote, you are no better than the people Roger is referring too.

You have been downplaying Sony in the exact same way that you blame others for since as long as I can remember seeing your name here. Posting that quote just make you look like such a hypocrite. Nikon, Canon and Sony might have some different design choices but they all make great cameras, used by pros and amateurs alike. No need to downplay anyone, be happy with what suits you. Plus soldered joints main enemy is heat fluctuations. So if Nikon's boards are designed to avoid that, then even more bonus for Nikon.

The usual sad, predictable 'other brand' fans showing up like desperate ex's to trash Nikon and Canon again? They wouldn't be here if Nikon wasn't doing things right. So welcome, hurt feelings and all, lol. If Nikon is doing things right, how come they lost millions of customers to that "other brand"?

They lost millions of customers to phones. As far as the "other brand" who knows what the exact number is - somewhere in the mid six figures, I'd guess. They've got great camera and lens systems. But Nikon is also doing incredible work in building its mirrorless systems. In ten short years cameras have advanced in technical competence to a greater degree than most any consumer technology. That's a good thing. You don't grasp this. You seem to harbour some weird disorder that propels you into conflict with other people.

Somebody so concerned about other brand users trashing their brand is more than likely somebody that does the same given their opportunity. Those that don't do it simply don't care enough of all the predicted fodder. Nikon is a terrible company that has lost millions of customers to Sony. And Sony, and therefore by extension, YOU, are a superior man who dominates and bends to your will all those undeserving peons that dare breathe the same air. Will you require any more appeasing of your substantial control issues, or has our grovelling been sufficient?

Sony only sells a few million ILC's per year, mostly to repeat customers, some even owning multiple brands I highly doubt that Nikon has lost "millions of customers" to Sony. Sure they've lost some through the years What has happened is that Nikon and the other camera brands, including Sony, has lost millions of customers to the smartphone. TRU: You are correct. I should have said millions of sales.

My last Nikon was a D When I switched to mirrorless it was a Sony A7R3. Since then i purchased 3 more Sony cameras and a bunch of lenses. So Nikon lost only 1 customer, but 4 camera sales, plus lenses. I know, Nikon fans don't miss me. Retired film users: "That's not real photography!

In my day all you needed was two toilet roll tubes and a coke bottle. Well, as far as the mount is concerned. Six screws or six hundred screws is not a factor on to itself. How big are the screws what are they made of, etc. Did anyone use mathematics, as would.

Again what is the materials of the mount. Remember Nikon, as do all, use Mechanical engineers to do stress analysis on such important parts.

Cameras record images. Digging into the stud or body of the building. Mount directly onto body is stronger. Like beam to column. Unless the body isn't strong you would add reinforcement. Nikon has tons of big telephoto lenses over the years, I am sure they know what they are doing. We can't say everything is engineered for dropping at extreme heights. Engineers design things with some safety net but not over-engineering. As for the thickness of the sony mount. They wanted the slimmest body.

They either used the slim to add the sensor to mount depth. I also think that is an aesthetic design look thing, not for structural reasons. Why add an extender when you don't need it? My old nex3 and a7 were very thin bodies.

I have a nikon film camera it has 4 screws, the nikon dslr has 5. Never have any mount tissues. Nzikon Zs are 4. I believe most of not all Nikon film cameras were four screw, although some mounts were stainless better and cheaper cameras were plated brass lesser. For a technical article such as this, it would be useful if the editor picks some comments which they believe sheds more light about the technical aspects of this article.

Yes, we have a lot of people playing like they are structural engineers with both the background to make certain assessments and the information on the camera to do so. The critics don't even own a single piece of Z system gear, do not intend to, but somehow feel compelled to comment. I wonder what their agenda is? Why are you defending this so hard, just let it go, its only a camera. That Nikon and Canon makes cameras like tanks that can take anything. I don't think there is anything in the article that should worry any user of a Z 9 or any other part of the Z system.

The Sony E mount is bolted with 6 screws and uses a thick alloy as their mount on a full magnesium body. Also the E mount alloy is much thicker compared to the mount diameter itself. The Nikon Z mount uses only 4 screws, and mount looks very thin compared to the very large mount diameter. It's no surprise it will be more fragile. Also the larger mount diameter means it's subject to more torque.

It doesn't help that the camera is also extremely heavy. I was surprised when the Sony A1 teardown revealed that their heat sink capability wasn't as robust as the claims:. Another TRU irrelevant comment. Seriously when you write something like that you make it seem like you think he has a point. You validate hiss comment. Sorry, Mike We see this throughout the entire discussion. As mentioned, some Sony promoters are toxic and come into discussions of a non Sony branded product to trash it.

What they do is take a review It's a common tactic in political campaigns but to see it on these discussions does suggest a coordinated strategy. This is why Sony gets a bad reputation online. The proper response is not to always respond to the point, since it is not offered in good faith and has been debated ad nauseam in the comments below. All one has to do is to look.

The proper response is to counter the true agenda, which is trying to position one brand above another. MikeRan: may I remind you that this is a discussion of a Nikon product? I and others would have been more than happy to discuss the Z9 without the Sony promoters showing up and trying to cast Sony as somehow superior and to denigrate Nikon. But this is what happens over and over again on discussions of all things not Sony.

Same thing happens on Sony articles. You, DavitorR5, photography-lover,etc, all come in to tell everyone that your Nikon is better than any Sony. Where am I coming in here bashing Nikon?

Which comment? Please include links. I bet Roger regrets ever writing that quote with all you Sony haters refusing to allow Sony shooters to enjoy their cameras. MikeRan: Please And yes that has created some pushback in some Sony articles Look at this discussion. It's been overwhelmed by the usual suspects of Sony promoters, seizing on one data point and blowing it all out of proportion to try to discredit Nikon.

It is the exact same thing we see in politics with "oppo" attacks. And frankly, that's why some even suspect some coordination because it's almost like there are talking points that are parroted over and over again, just like a political campaign.

Nikon on the other hand uses multiple body designs, for example the Z9 will be a one and only camera design, that will last years and will be replaced by the next new design. So if there's something inherently wrong with the Nikon Z9's design for example the thin 4 screwed mount , it doesn't really matter because there won't be many Z9 sold, and the model will be sold only for a short duration. And if something goes wrong with the Z9 outside of the warranty covered time, it's a win win situation for Nikon because people will have to pay to repair the broken Z mount.

MikeRan: I bring up that Roger quote precisely because it is so accurate in describing what goes on with too many Sony promoters seeking to denigrate other brands. It's spot on and it must have taken a remarkable amount of Sony promoters comments knocking other brands for Roger to post that. You know that and we all know it. As for Sony bodies, well If one user case can justify trying to slander Nikon then the many use cases of Sony failure surely also show design flaws.

Thoughts R Us - "I bring up that Roger quote in order to launch personal attacks on other posters, and try to deflect from the actual subject at hand". That is a rather meaningless and ambiguous statement. What does that really mean? Do you think many people care about what you write here? Do you have an exaggerated sense of your importance or impact here? We all know what's happened In fact one of them is that the lens mount is frequently loose And by your definition that is definitely a design flaw.

Thoughts R Us - "Do you think many people care about what you write here? MikeRan: I hope you are true to your promise and this is your last post here, at least for the day And yes, I answer back. It's not my fault that Sony promoters are so sensitive about Sony reliability that they jump in like sharks to try to attack another brand.

But we know the long history of reliability issues with Sony cameras, We see the long laundry list of common problems with the A1. So if one use case somehow proves Nikon to be flawed, then these multiple use cases must prove Sony to be seriously flawed. So do I qualify in your mind as "many people? BTW, you know that I was simply using the word "slander" as a generic term and not a legal one, correct?

Your response is rather odd. And what's funny is that it appears that the Sony A1 has problems with loose lens mounts, and with port failures Thoughts R Us - "you know that I was simply using the word "slander" as a generic term and not a legal one, correct?

We can debate semantics all day long And ironically have come around to the fact that your logic implicates Sony in many ways as having design flaws worse than Nikon. Thoughts R Us - it's too late for you to fix your mistakes, and launching personal attacks on myself and other posters out here, over and over again, won't make you look better, lol. Paisley Park This is evident with Sony because Sony is a larger manufacturer of products than Nikon or even Canon.

Subaru does that and they're successful. Z5 and Z9. This would be higher cost products and most likely lower margin. When poorly designed, no 6 screws or 12 for that matter will fix that. It just added useless weight. Do you even have a Z camera? The mount ring doesn't look excatly "very thin" to me, but exactly the opposite. The Z mount also has four tabs and four springs beneath those tabs to support a lens, instead of just three. This actually makes the connection between a lens and mount ring more secure with less play and movement.

DarkShift has a great point: we have in this discussion many critics who do not own a single piece of Nikon Z system gear and never intend to. I wonder what their agenda could be? As to the assertion by Vignes and Paisley Park that a single body style is best for all models in a lineup First, there is the question of how good the body style is.

With Sony the body style is boxy, generally regarded as having the worst ergonomics and handling, and not that sturdy. Then there is simply the idea of offering choice to your consumer and serving customers of different preferences. Someone brought up a car company like Subaru doing the same thing as Sony, with basically one body style. But last I checked Subaru wasn't one of the major car companies and a niche player.

All of the major car companies offer the choice of at least a few different body styles. Toyota does it, Honda does it, Subaru does it.

Some platforms are even shared between brands Toyota-Subaru , Peugeot-Citroen , etc. Nikon and Canon are good too, but Sony has been in the modern imaging business for longer. They released the fist camcorder in , and the first digital camcorder in So they do a little better in design, ergonomics and operational refinement.

Also Sony uses a naked magnesium outer shell which feels nicer to touch. Not a big fan a the glued fake rubber that other brands like Canon or Nikon do. Physics would disagree, Bigger mount means less force on the screw from torque. Which is easier to stop turning a steering wheel or a screw driver? Or do you mean torque from the lens allying force to the screw but again there bigger mount is better.

This time imagine trying to glue a 1m steel rod weighing 5 kgs, end on, to a wall. If the same 5 kgs of steel was turned into a 1m pipe and glued to the same wall which would be harder to break off?

The base, effectively forms a class 2 lever so a bigger diameter means better mechanical advantage for the screw.

If you like how far does the screw lens have to move the screw for each degree of rotation. If it's further then the torque required will be greater. I've owned three Sony A7 series bodies, and the ergonomics in all of them are plain horrible compared to Nikon or Canon. It seems that the designers didn't have clue what photographers really want. For example, the mode selecter and swith between video and photo mode was apparently only lately separated in the last models.

Most likely because Nikon and Canon had it done much easier way previously. Paisley Park: yes, car manufacturers do re-use a platform across different models, but they do also offer different platforms. Toyota and Honda do not use literally one platform for all of their models; they could not and still produce the range of vehicles that they do. They do what Canon and Nikon do: re-use across some models, but develop a few platforms to offer broader choice to end users.

As to the Sony platform: well, let's just say that no one ever gave Sony cameras an award for ergonomics or usability.

Sony has some wonderful engineering on the inside but their industrial design is lacking. They've always been known for cutting edge tech inside but frustrating user controls.

I even have a Sony alarm clock at home that is rather difficult to set given that's it only an alarm clock. By comparison my iPhone alarms are super easy to set. For a Sony hater you talk about them an awful lot… actually it makes sense…. Gotta put them down at every opportunity.

Your Sony hate knows no bounds! I don't think so. I think you bring up that quote because you are trying to get a rise out of other contributors. You have stated in the past that you find this sort of interaction 'fun'. It explicitly breaks the "Stuck Record" rule.

Not TRU. Also trolling. Park's comments on the structural integrity of the Z-mount design are a wonderful example of the Dunning—Kruger effect. TRU: NO. Still can't get over the fact that the Z9 won almost all of the awards last year instead of the A1, can you? Still can't get over the fact that the Z9 is the better camera than the A1, and a better value at that. BTW here's something Kolari wrote about the A Here's a few other nuggets about Z9: "Another benefit of not having a shutter is that there is no chance of an internal LED light leak".

To prove that one can find flaws with any camera, including the A Shutter Is Stuck, Shutter Replacement. Lens Mount is Loose.

Camera Has suffered impact damage. Was dropped or jarred. Water, Liquid, or Moisture Damage. I was not disputing that all cameras might need repairs, even A1. I was talking about the fact that the big, heavy, built like a tank z9 has a design flaw.

That is not built like a tank. That is all. There is a sampling of one, versus all of the other satisfied users out there. If the Z9 has a "design flaw" based on a sample of one, then the A1 has a whole bunch of "design flaws" and based on more samples.

My bet is that over time, the A1 will have a track record of more breaks in the field than the Z9. Also, please show us your credentials in structural engineering and data analysis. I won't hold my breath. That list you make happen on all brands and the first on all that has a mechanical shutter.

Malling: sorry, but some of those A1 common repairs could suggest a design flaw, at least by your reasoning. Then there is "Spots of Debris on Sensor. There is a reason why Nikon and Canon minimize the adjustment knobs on top of their pro level cameras Nikon use sony Semiconductor sensor as well, we can debunk that myth right there and now and so dos so many others.

If you drop a camera you can shatter that top display on a Nikon and Canon, yes it actually happens dos it make it a design flaw. Top dials break and stop working on all brands and so do ports, these are of the shelf parts and it fail just as often on Nikon and Canon, because these are you guessed it made by some of the same companies, I never heard from any resellers or repair they get more in from one specific brand and most often these goes bad because of user behaviour more then anything else.

TRU you sound so desperate. Like you are personally insulted someone questions Nikon…. Mike, the only ones who seem desperate are the usual voices for Sony who show up in a discussion about a Nikon camera to try to downplay it and position Sony as somehow superior.

Ha you forgot about all the comments on the articles about the IBIS mount or the class action lawsuit over the shutter failure that lost class action status and has since been thrown out by a judge. A customer sent in pictures of a failed mount.

And the crowd goes wild, including you, who even said there are no cases of a failed Z9 mount, when the article your commenting on shows customer photos of a failed Z9 mount. MikeRan: Yes, there is one data point and the Sony promoters go rabid and run with that to try to discredit Nikon and build up Sony. That's what I am talking about.

Look at the Sony promoters who go from one data point to claiming a "design flaw" without merit and without any of the requisite engineering expertise or data analysis to back that up. It's laughable. As I showed if that's the case then the Sony A1 and indeed all Sony models have "design flaws. MILCman: you don't cite any more than one user case. You cite observations in a teardown. And as others have mentioned, sometimes there is a trade off between doing something with more durability rather than repairability.

So for instance, the A1 has had issues where their ports fail So maybe the Sony design isn't so great after all? Let's face it: no one accuses Sony of making ultra durable bodies. There was an article on DPR a while ago where it was said that Sony has the worst reliability of all brands, with the most repairs. TRU: Do you really not understand that a flange mount with 6 equally spaced bolts is a LOT stronger than 4 bolts and critical observers would consider Nikon's design a flaw?

Obviously they are just listing anything and everything that can go wrong, not actual common faults. All the YouTubers doing cell phone drop tests can now graduate to mirrorless camera mount tests where they suspend weights from a tele lens and see how much the mount can hold. All for fanboys to argue about something as silly as screw count. What do you think hold all that weight, do I need to mentioned broken lens ring on several , Sony two first gen!

Why do you think that happened because of to few fastening points and lack of reinforcement. I thought Nikon fans cared about build quality. This is what the Sony crowd tries to force: a debate over tech specs rather than actual performance, and even then, without full understanding of the engineering involved. While Nikon and their representatives proudly show off the Z9 in an array of challenging environments, Sony shows off their A1 in pristine conditions.

I wonder why? All that weight? The tripod foot? Feel free to do some drop tests so you have more to rely on than screw count. Not all lenses are mm primes you know. Also every time you change lens you put torque on the mount and it wears, a more rigid build mount simply last longer. Nonsense, I have posted multiple videos of Sony cameras being used in harsh environments in response to you but you seem to forget very quickly. Nikon specifies a recommended weight. So whether you use straps or monopod etc you should have the lens support the weight.

So this is all pointless and the chest bumping done by the typical posters hear looks silly. Let's face it: Sony fans have an inferiority complex due to the long list of Sony reliability issues through the years.

It continues today with their flagship A There is a long list of items that are commonly repaired in the A If one use case is enough to condemn the Nikon body, then all of these use cases for multiple issues suggest severe flaws in the A1 design. When the reports of warped or broken mounts on Z cameras start coming in, THEN you can start talking about it. Until then, you're just blowing smoke. That mount weakness mention has sparked so many comments and criticism here.

The main reason is those overly hyped marketing statement by review sites like solid build or if you want a robust body… this is the one. Review sites should just stick with their usual test and review. Or do a tear down, investigate and then put statements like robust or build like a tank etc.

Otherwise, all this are just emotional driven statements without facts. Like how is it built like a tank, did they drop test the body with lens or did they drove a car over the camera etc. There is no mount weakness; if there were we would see complaints all over the forums from Z9 users already. It's been out long enough and enough users have one, esp the pro users who really abuse their camera gear. The only reason why there are so many comments on it are due to Sony promoters trying to denigrate another brand.

It's very simple. Look at who are making the comments. Sony promoters will come into any discussion of another brand and find something to nitpick. But Sony promoters will take that with other brands and run with it and amplify it out of proportion. I remember there was one Nikon lens where the reviewer said it was a tiny bit slower in focusing than some others but Sony promoters turned that into trying to paint it as the slowest focusing lens around, almost unusable.

In reality the lens focuses very fast, just not literally the fastest. Thoughts R Us for years you have been saying that Nikon Pro bodies a built like tanks and that Sony just is not in the same league. I am sure that the Z9 is just fine, but objectively the lens mount, the weakest point of a interchangeable lens system, is weaker than on the Sony bodies, so you are the last person who should be lecturing others.

Do everyone a favour and show for once, some humility and stay silent Thoughts R Us I find it funny your straw man argument and keeping on dodging the criticism.

I do not think anyone has been arguing that the Z9 is not a great camera and perfectly suitable for what it is designed for. Just time to accept that you have been wrong in the past with your "truck and sport car" ridiculous analogy, these sport cars might actually be up for the task after all if they are tougher than the Z9 where it matters the most ;- Thinking of which The only BS thing in my camera is the Sony Card that keep their breaking their cheap plastic.

Its all over the internet and never have I had such a cheap plastic that the XQD card reader. I have been using my Z9 and before that other bodies like z6 in very harsh tropical island conditions and never have had any issues. That A1 was very likely dropped by a photographer wearing gloves because it is small for such usage. When someone make extreme claims being from a manufacturer or reviewer and it shows not to hold water this obviously results in what we see…. Nikon Z9 is no better build it offer not a slight better build then any other, anyone proclaiming so completely overlook some rather serious issues brought up in the tear down.

Thoughts R Us so hilarious, I so knew you would have deflected the issue exactly saying what you did. You are so predictable, and not in a good way. Always and escape plan ready ;- like little kids arguments. So your argument is that the Z9 grip is so good that there will never be a chance for a photographer to drop it and that is the reason why Nikon could underdesign its mount. Thank you for the fantastic engineering solution explanation.

It seems very objective and sensical. Even then it did have some damage. The Z9 will runs rings around an A1 in any tough environment for prolonged use. It certainly inspires far more confidence. I'm sorry if you cling to one data point to try to overcome your inferiority complex regarding Sony durability. Show me your credentials in structural engineering and a detailed analysis. Oh wait, you don't have those. Armandino, the answer to your question about Z9 surviving a tumble like A1 has already been answered.

The Nikon mechanical experts here have already stated that Z9 mount is designed to break off if subjected to impact. Thoughts R Us besides that your argument is simply based out your own guessing and there is absolutely no evidence of what you are saying, you are still deflecting the initial observation: The A1 demonstrated to be able to take a tumbling that the Z9 might possibly not be able to, in direct contrast to your generalized statement that the Z9 is built like a tank and the A1 is subpar.

Secondly you are still avoiding the obvious: my criticism is directed toward your inability to have an adult conversation. It is not about the cameras, so you are still making a straw man argument about me, Sony, and inferiority complex. Which is again a way of deflecting unless I am just overestimating your brain activity, and you are actually a kid who figured out how to get in your dad's computer.

Vignes Chris Drake drove a car over his Olympus camera and it still works, although the lens didn't make it. Show me the reports of mount failures on Z cameras.

Where are they? The Z6 and 7 have been out for almost 4 years. A search for mount problems on the internet reveals Hey, armandino, would the Sony have survived the baseball? Deliverator It seems that from an engineering standpoint the Sony or Canon mount appear to be stronger. I am glad to see that the Z9 took the beating in this situation. I never thought the Z9 mount to be weak, I am sure Nikon has plenty of experience in camera design and knew what it was doing with the Z mount.

Ah yes we have the usual biased post by the OP to try to denigrate any brand other than Sony and try to make Sony look good. We get it, Sony good, other cameras bad. Your pillow cases, bed sheets, blankets and PJ's are all adorned with the Sony alpha logo. We get it.. But I guarantee you no one ever picked a camera brand based on repairability.

They pick a brand with a reputation of not breaking in the first place. You will of course retort with irrelevant cherry picked out of context data points to suit your argument and I will counter with how they are irrelevant cherry picked out of context data points.

So let's stop the dance. From here on out, how about you just say "hi" and we'll all know that you're in a Nikon article to say how Sony is better without saying the specifics.

I'll do the same in a Sony article. I agree. I would definitely prefer that any ports to external devices where a cable can be snagged, yanked, or tripped over be connected by ribbon cables to the main logic board. How can anyone use it? Pro Sony comment unprovoked. In a Sony article: - cool - great - awesome - Nikon requires more finger power to turn on. In either scenario, Nikon actual users, try to correct the misinformation. The list of Sony commenters above are Toxic with a capital T.

I really think you need to take those Nikon glasses off, there is a ridiculous amount of Sony bashing in Sony news. TRU among others just to name a few, hardly any fact, and then Sony user spend ages on correct false Nikon trolls religious beliefs.

Second, no one needs you or anyone to "correct" our beliefs about gear other than Sony. That is unbelievably condescending and rude. Sony makes great sensors Nikon using a Sony sensor is a positive, not a negative. Nikon adds their own secret sauce to the Sony sensor, as most who do who contract out to Sony for their sensors. So Nikon users do get something special and different. Canon makes their own sensors and they are excellent as well.

In spite of the usual tech spec arguments, Canon sensors are used to capture all sorts of great images the world over, by pro's and hobbyists alike. We should also be glad that Canon makes their own sensors, as it probably wouldn't be healthy for Sony to literally monopolize the image sensor business. V isn't even that near D on a keyboard We shall see.

See the tear down article you have a picture and story of the first failure, and we are not that many months in, what dos that tell you! With the two first gen. Sony It was less an issue as it was just enthusiast body that was not used with that heavy lenses, but this is designed and meant to be used in rough conditions and will use long heavy , mm primes etc.

I cannot stress out how problematic that is if we look at issues prior with a similar design with lighter lenses. IBIS was always much worse in the Sonys I've owned, propably due to smaller movement possible result of smaller diameter.

Also, the biggest problem with the Sony A7R was, despite being mirrorless, its unbeliavable strong mechanical shutter slap, due to bad shutter design and lack of EFCS. The wobbliness of the mount made this effect worse, there was often small play between the camera and lens. Funny you mention 3rd gen Sony, and maybe take a look how much lens mount ring cost in the case of damaged Sony 2. The price of usd for just the lens mount ring repair sounds very high, and the cost would propably be even higher with high end teles you mentioned.

The Z9 repair quote was not apparently that much higher compared to the lens repair ;. Also all IBIS of major brands is measured within 0,5 stop so it is almost borderline irrelevant.

Why do you think Sony redesign it and tossed in two more screws and reinforced it and why do you think Canon do the same with one less screw. If you look at how this break off it was identical to the first two gen sony. MILC they didn't solder ribbon cables, they eliminated ribbon cables in favor of soldering the external connectors to the board. My practical repair and troubleshooting experience is with touring light and sound consoles, controllers and amplifiers, production computers — and, on the hobby side, installing and maintaining two-way radio systems for off-road vehicles.

Plus cameras — though in general I leave those repairs to the pros. For durability solder wins. There will always be exceptions that prove the rule. Yes, it is cheaper in the long run. Especially when it comes to production. Cost of repairing gear pales in comparison to the cost of time lost to failure. Those are the only board mounted connectors I have had to attempt a re-solder. Ribbon cables are considerably more grief. But in a camera the leverage of a user lifting the weight of the laptop against the solder joint of a connector doesn't exist.

Bashing: a harsh, gratuitous, prejudicial attack on a person, group, or subject. I guess they can leave out things like the button lighting, make the screen tilt-only and reduce battery life probably a given since it would use EN-EL Maybe the GPS has to go as well, although that would make me sad.

The Z-system replaced our X and GFX-based Fujifilm cameras which have always been plagued by unresolved bugs and some major reliability issues. So far the Z-system has been a huge relief and is a great companion for our H6D's.

Well done, Nikon. Yeah exactly my experience. Never been so pleased with a system in over 20 years of doing photography. The lenses is the biggest advantage of the Z system. Just phenomenal coherently performing lenses. Those thermal pads for the heat sink look very thick and of the cheap foam type. They could have used much higher performance thermal pads Even cheap laptop computers do it a lot better.

Thermal design is a bit more complicated than that Joining the external fan club? As if you can see any kind of thermal transfer or other characteristic from those photos Now if there was an actual problem, please let us know.

And no, cheap laptops doesn't do it better, even RTX cards have shit thermal pads from most manufacturers. Good thermal design doesn't lead to overheating and shutdown. Poor thermal design leads to short recording times and thermal contamination of images. It looks like Nikon beats both Sony and Canon.

Here's what we do know That's all any user will care about. Thoughts R Us - "What is not relative is ultimate ruggedness and durability.

This Z9 has it. MILCman: I still don't see your structural engineering degree that suggest you have any credibility to comment on your perceived criticisms All I know is that there are several active forums for Z9 users and they almost unanimously love the camera. And the camera remains still hard to find to this day.

Thoughts R Us - you got nothing here, because there is no defending a weak lens mount that only has four screws that are threaded directly into the body casting. MILCman: funny how you started out criticizing the thermal design and when I called you put on that, you switched to your favorite argument on the lens mount. Thoughts R Us - you didn't call anyone out on anything, because you can't argue with the fact that the a1 has better watt-hour battery life. A common definition of quality to "To specification".

The pads seem to perform - therefore there seems to be nothing to complain about. The Nikon F-mount had a smaller diameter, and 5 screws. Starting to see a pattern here? Nikon, on the other hand, seems to screw the ring directly into the frame. MILCman You were talking about the number of screws. Not saying what they wrote is wrong. Congratulations, you can count screws.

Your comments on the structural integrity of the Z lens mount is idle speculation. I've yet to see a complaint online in any forum of a failed Z lens mount on any Nikon camera from the Z 50 to the Z 9. PRO bodies are big and heavy and they are build like a tank.

However, it looks like the problem is that the screws are just screwed into the magnesium alloy body, and evidently, the material failed to take the strain and broke apart, causing the screws to rip free. Additionally, with some cameras, e. See Milling's post above. And it is a very easy job, after all, Nikon has so many short comings ;-.

I see what you did there. But that won't diminish my tongue-in-cheek comment about "sony fans". Many people wonder. The comment of whitelens is without a single bit of information. And then, every well designed mount has a designed point of failure in order to protect the camera body against unrepairable deformation or fracture. In the case of Nikon, it's the four screws, fortunately, as they are easily replaced. The original article's author has no clue what he is talking about.

The art is to use screws which are both robust enough and fail easily enough. Did anybody investigate this delicate balance? There are millions of examples in millions of products where a more simple solution is the better one all things considered. There is simply zero ground for making the comments you are making except your willingness to paint Nikon in poor light. I comment because Nikon and reviewers make unsupported claims without backing it up, then after a teardown it shows the claims where not true….

If the camera was dropped with the lens attached and it hit concrete near the front of the lens, that's an awful lot of torque on the mount. And by the way, on the matter of "cheaper to replace the lens": if that's the lens I think it is, it actually costs MORE than the Z9. And most lenses are cheaper to replace then cameras only the large tele primes are the exception. Now go and direct your company and take some pictures with your Fujifilm FinePix Sfs.

Thank you very much for this article, I always wanted to know what the inside of a Z9 looked like. About right that this gets dozens of comments and loads of irate techie guys fighting over brand components, screws and heat sinks.

While an award winning photo post gets maybe 6 comments. A lot of blokes are into photography for the gear and tech, not the output. You are on a GEAR site. Not a photography site. Maybe that explains your confusion about the commentators.

K27 - true, but my point still holds. Most people who comment on this site are far more interested in the tech side of cameras than the image side and I suspect they wouldn't know a decent photo if it hit them in the face, but can talk knowledgeably about the number of screws in various lens mounts For me personally, I think the cameras we have today far exceed the needs of most people who use them, but I sti like seeing how much further we can push the technology.

What gearheads often miss are the intangibles in photos, the emotion that an image elicits as opposed to how many mp's it has or how sharp it is. For me photography is first and foremost about that and what camera was used is incidental.

They are two seperate hobbies and neither is better than the other. Many people enjoy both, some just one of them. But that doesn't mean one of them is not valid as a hobby. Gear and tech blokes are pressing many buttons on their keyboard, while photographers are pressing few buttons on their camera's. It's basically the same thing. Maybe that explains your confusion about the commentators". Video: In Nikon Z Kolari made several comments about the mount being a weak compromised design.

Not what one would expect in a flagship professional camera. The screws didn't shear, the area around the tapped holes on the front plate cracked. The repair in this case would be quite expensive requiring a replacement of the front plate. But the lens looks intact, so most likely the mount was designed as breaking point to prevent even worse damage. Remember reading somewhere the quote for the repair, and it was not too high after all IMO. Well when more people drop their Z9s or found with cracked mounts then it would be more apparent if it is a liability I guess.

Camera's are not designed to be hammers or to be sat on. There are other tools for that. Unbreakable mount would transfer the energy to somewhere else. So fewer screws is somehow better? I would prefer more screws so this happened less often. And when this does happen, there is a very good chance that either the lens, the camera, or possibly both are going to be dropped onto the ground.

And that could be a very expensive repair. Quotes From The Article: With some cameras, e. If the Z9 had that additional inner ring, it might have taken the strain better and reduced the damage, and we may have been able to repair it by replacing that part. However, in this case, it looks like the only way to fix that would be to replace the whole front panel. We will indeed have to see. These constructions usually have points which are supposed to break in order to facilitate a less intrusive repair.

Exactly, and what does the seconday plate help, if it will be ripped off anyway? It has to be connected somehow to the body anyway. As said, the quote for repair was not actually that high, and could have been worse. This article has been already quoted several times by Sonny fanboys trying to attack Nikon, and Dystopia seems to be following the agenda ;. DarkShift: Now you are trolling - saying stuff to provoke an argument.

Your post has been reported to the moderators. Lenses don't come off by itself like that. There has already been some substantial force to the mount, and the tearing seem to be very clean. Front plate of the camera is cheaper than the lens that was attached to it Z 2. You obviosly haven't been following some other threads here about this finding number of screws in the lens mount. It seems to be latest revelation that some Sony users are using to target Z9 - they seem to have run out ideas :D.

Here's a youtube video of an R3 mounted on a drone chasing a race car. The drone crashed and the R3 takes a tumble. The lens mount was still attached to the body, but the rest of the lens sheared off. They switched lenses and kept going with the R3. It looked like it broke that way to minimize the repair. I'm sure it is best that the body was still working and the lens only needed a new mount.

Kona Mike, one could argue they could keep spare bodies instead of lenses if the cameras were getting busted. TRU is sulking because canon added that feature he had been bashing for years to his R5 via firmware last week. That is the ability to set a high temperature overheat threshold. The same can happen to the sensor assembly, too, which also needs to be calibrated.

My guess is that Nikon simplified the bayonet mount assembly as much as they could. So, some costs had to be cut. DarkShift, yea, I'm sure with an impact strong enough to break a lens off the preferred outcome is that your camera has the front ripped off.

What happens to the lens? I'm sure it will be perfect after that impact, you know with all that precision glass in it. Yea, make any excuse you want and tell your self anything to feel good. Just remember the lens is going to have problems after that impact, so why should the body too? It is a weak mount, get over it. I'm sure they will beef it up for the next pro body, get over it and move on.

I won't get baited into the argument re Canon cameras that Mike alluded to, as this is an article on Nikon.