In article .com,
Savageduck wrote:

In what way did they miss the mark, though?

Savageduck:
Start with the single memory slot.

Sandman:
Yeah, that seems to be the only valid complaint.

That and a few AF issues, such as no eye-AF

Neither does the D850 or D500, remember?

Sandman:
Same resolution, more focusing points, smaller camera, higher
frame rate.

Savageduck:
...er, not too much smaller

Sandman:
Huh? It's a lot smaller. It's by far the smallest FF digital
camera Nikon has ever made.

So Nikon is making in-house comparisons.

No, you a

Savageduck
Nikon mirrorless FF's launch. Sony FF sales about to drop. A lot.
08/24/2018 .com

"I think I will skip either one of these. Nikon missed the
MILC target with these two cameras, but it is a start, so
perhaps in 4-5 years they will have a good MILC which can
replace the D850, 0r even the D500, but not yet."

That's what you said, to which I asked "in what way did they miss the mark?"
above. You're the one that comparing it to the D850 and D500.

Savageduck:
, especially with the fat “S" glass designed for the Zs. In a
smaller world the M43, and APS-C MILCs have nothing to fear from
the FF MILCs.

Sandman:
But you compared it to the D850, not to lesser smaller cameras.

Of course I compared it D850. It uses the same sensor, and price
point so the comparison is fair. However, if I were in the market
for a Nikon FF camera today I would not be impressed with the Z7,
and I would buy a D850.

Cool, more power to you

Then one wonders what Nikon has in mind for all those D7100, D7200,
D7500, and D500 shooters who are waiting for a Nikon APS-C MILC.

Same as Sony. Grab the upper market first, then move down with innovations.
They're just five years late, but they do have an edge when it comes to
lenses, so... It's hard to say. If/when the Z line becomes successful,
you'll see Z60, Z600 and Z3000 or whatever for consumer versions as well, I
bet.

This is pretty much how cameras and most tech products work. You create a
top of the line products first and move down from there. You see it in the
Sony A7, Tesla Model S, iPod, iPhone and so on. You have to go in and get
the margins first, in order to trickle down the technology when it makes
money.

Sandman:
As far as I can determine, the D850 has it beat on shots per
battery charge.

Savageduck:
...and that is another issue. If Nikon is trying to produce a
pro FF MILC it needs to compete with the Nikon pro DSLRs with
all specs, including battery life.

Sandman:
Nikon is trying to compete with the A7, not their own DSLR's. A
non- insignificant part of the photographing world is moving to
mirrorless, and Nikon is missing out. In doing so, their target is
not to compete with their own top of the line DSLR's but with the
guys that keep snatching up their customers.

Unfortunately they are positioning themselves to loose a large share
of the consumer APS-C DSLR market they own, to the other mirrorless
options.

Of course, since they don't have a APS-C offering yet. See above. They are
late to this party, but this is the only way to do it. The prosumer/pro
market is where the money is. The consumer market is where everyone fights
with super thin margins.

Savageduck:
For now both the Z6 & Z7 are high priced prosumer MILCs with a
limited native lens availability (admitedly there is the promise
of the “S” lens roadmap).

Sandman:
Indeed, which is exactly where Sony was a bunch of years ago, with
the A7.

...and now Nikon is still a bunch of years behind Sony, and the
others.

There are no others. It's only Sony. There are only others when it comes to
APS-C. And there is very little money there. I am guessing, since I don't
actually have much data, that there aren't very many camera makes that are
making a lot of money from the consumer APS-C mirrorless market. The margins
are usually too small. The only reason there *is* a consumer camera market
is that most camera makers are hoping they will upgrade to their better
cameras where they make more money.

Some camera makers make only APS-C, but I believe they're still used to low
margins. Even for Fujifilm, cameras is a very small part of their overall
business.

Savageduck:
Using F mount lenses with the adaptor turns what should be a
reasonably compact system into an unwieldly kludge.

Sandman:
Huh? You're not making much sense. The adaptor increases the
flange distance, i.e. it adds bulk that is already present in all
current F-mount Nikon cameras to be backwards compatible. A Z6
plus the adapter would be as "unwieldy" as a D7100.

I would reserve judgement on that, the D7xxx family are quite
lightweight DSLRs.

They are, but the difference is pretty big:
https://www.apotelyt.com/compare-camera/nikon-d7100-vs-nikon-z6

Savageduck:
even with the adaptor none of their older screw focus lenses
will work. For folks looking for a FF MILC system they should
consider the Sony offerings.

Sandman:
That's already what they are doing. Sony is the only player, and
they're doing a marvellous job, with amazing offerings for
prosumer up to pro. That's the piece of the pie that Nikon is
losing and is wanting to get back. Backwards compatibility with
the F-mount is pretty crucial to that, seeing how Nikon has a
hundred times more and better glass than Sony could ever dream of.

Agreed. However, as promising as the Z-cameras are from the release
hype, they have a long way to go to catch up to Sony, and they might
well have damaged their APS-C market share.

No, the Z6 and Z7 haven't or can't damage their APS-C market share. People
that have or were considering Nikon's APS-C cameras have either bought a
APS-S Nikon or a APS-C camera from someone else. Nikon will - depending on
how the Z series works out - release mirrorless APS-C in the future. But the
release of the Z6 and Z7 haven't changed anything for these customers today.

While the A6XXX Sony series seem to be doing well, I don't think it's doing
as well as the Nikon/Canon APS-C cameras. The place where Sony is doing
really well is in FF mirrorless, i.e the A7/9 series. Or rather the A7
series, I don't know if the A9 have been an enormous success.

--
Sandman