Call me mad, or perhaps a little deranged, but I do have a soft spot for a retro camera. More to the point, I love all dials with clearly marked functions. I dislike soft controls with a passion.
The new Nikon Zfc APS-C mirrorless is as retro as they come, alleluia! This little camera is festooned with wonderful physical controls: a dial for everything and everything in its dial. It doesn’t half look good, too.
Nikon joins Fujifilm in the APS-C in keeping traditionalists happy, in remarkable contrast to some other manufacturers who keep reinventing the wheel and never quite succeeding. By moving more towards the smartphone concept, with soft controls for everything, these other manufacturers undoubtedly neglect a vital part of the market.
I’d argue that the future for the “proper” camera lies in a more traditional approach rather than trying to beat the smartphone at its own game.
Give me dials and knobs any day, and this Nikon is dialled and knobbed to the nines. I could play a symphony on that shutter dial. Indeed, they couldn’t fit in another switch or button, so cluttered is the top plate (nicely, I think).
If this little camera had been made in Germany by a traditional manufacture well versed in manuals controls, I’d be praising it even more, mainly because I’d have the lenses to go with it.
So what do you think? Is this what you crave in an APS-C camera—traditional manual dials and settings— or have you bought into every new-fangled APS-C whim from Wetzlar over the past ten years? Is it time to reset the clock? Nikon clearly thinks so. Let’s have your views, people.
Join the Macfilos author community
We are looking for new authors to contribute gear reviews (especially Leica, L-Mount and popular compacts), your photographic journey, travel stories, opinion, and more. You don’t have to be an expert. We will help you with the writing and presentation and will ensure that your article creates maximum impact. Click the “Write for us” button for more information. Become part of the thriving Macfilos community of contributors and authors.
Can someone tell me why the Df was panned by so many, yet virtually no complaints about the Z Fc?
The most frequent complaints about the Df that I read were 1) no video (duh, it’s a still camera!), 2) didn’t like the retro controls (again, duh, that was the whole point!), and the resolution was less that the best at the time.
So I look at the Z Fc, and the only way it addresses those complaints is the addition of video, which for me is a negative, not positive. Z Fc has the retro controls, and the resolution is way below the state of the technology.
So if Nikon does introduce a FF version of the Z Fc, at face value that seems like a Df2. Would I buy one? An emphatic NO. I am still too much attached to my F mount glass, AF and MF lenses. Yes, I know lens technology has advanced, but I find the Z lenses to generally be physically much larger than their F counterparts. So one hand giveth (improved optical performance) and the other hand taketh away (too large). In any case I am very satisfied with the results I get from my lenses and my Df bodies. I mean, how much resolution does one really need? I am not making 48″ X 72″ prints.
Now this is an interesting rumor:
https://www.mirrorlessrumors.com/nikon-is-considering-making-a-full-frame-z-fc-version/
I sincerely hope they do!
Its a lovely looking camera , and for sure the design has me very tempted. I own (and love) an Olympus Pen-F , which is a similar nod to beautiful “classic” styling. It would have been even better if Olympus built lenses with aperture rings , and the ZFc has the same issue to my mind. But the real question for someone invested heavily in MFT is whether aps-c is a big enough jump in image quality to be worthwhile. I’m currently leaning towards “not quite”, and if it was then the different image feel of a sigma Merrill or Fuji Xtrans probably offers a better point of difference.
But if Nikon build a FF version with a Z5 or Z6 sensor, then I’d really be curious.
This camera is very tempting, it appeals to my old brain which learned photography in the 1970s with a Nikon FM.
I am pretty certain, however, that I would end up using this camera on “P” most of the time, and all those cool dials and knobs would sit idle.
I am tempted but…I am not sure what goes on with the company strategies. All these years people were asking for a revised DF with better controls and now they come up with an APSC camera, with a full frame prime retro lens. It does not make sense to me. Either release a full frame retro with this retro lens or release an APSC lens with the Z Fc. All we have are a couple of zoom lenses for APSC at the moment and the full frame lenses are too big, even the 28 SE looks much bigger than Fuji’s 27/2.8.
I agree with this. I used retro Fuji APS-C X-100 series + X70) until I could finally afford a used Df. I like the Df so much that I stopped using the Fujis. I would have loved a Df2 with the D800E sensor, but since we know Nikon is moving completely to “mirrorless” that will never happen.
I think the justification to go APS-C was the smaller form factor. The Df was hailed as a “digital FE”. It is most assuredly not on size alone. Yes, it is a lot more compact than a D800 series, not to mention D4 etc, but still a lot bigger than an FE/FM.
I will not switch to a Zfc. First, there is the lack of small form factor lenses mentioned. Then there is the 21MP sensor. I can get great 21MP images out of my little Nikon 1 J5. If I replaced my Df 16MP, I would want to go to 36MP. Lastly, call me snob, but I like the Made in Japan label on my Df.
If Nikon plays it well the Zfc will sell like hotcakes.
Now that Fuji seems abandoning Classico control concept with sx10, …
I really like the retro look of the camera. Nikon will have to develop small MC lenses like the Sigma or Sony line to have a decent aps-c offering. 28mm is 42 in FF terms. Shorter FOV don’t appear in their roadmap. I think it will sell well.
So it says weather resistant, that means because Mike like retro, will he get rid of his modern car and get a Morgan plus 4 and this Nikon, and cruise around with the top down? Really think that is a neat camera and hope Nikon makes tons of money.
That 28mm SE (special edition) lens really looks the part. It’s an FX lens, of course. I wonder if Nikon will release a similarly-styled fx camera in due course. And maybe some additional SE retro-styled lenses too. That really would be something. I’ve seen the add-on grip which is purely functional, it seems, but I suppose it’s too much to expect an MD-12 styled grip too. Oh well…it’s an intriguing proposition nevertheless.
“..It’s an FX lens, of course..” Really? With that small diameter front I’d have thought it’s a DX (APS) lens ..especially if you look at Nikon’s publicity pics with the slightly taller Zfc alongside a (film) FM2, which also has a – wider diameter, full frame – 28mm f2.8 lens on it.
“..I wonder if Nikon will release a similarly-styled fx camera in due course..” ..but they did! The Nikon Df of 2013..eight years ago. That’s rather bulkier, with about an extra third, at least, of the Zfc’s body height (..but they chose to fit into the body the autofocus motor for Nikon’s oldest autofocus lenses).
Yes, definitely an fx lens. Nikon’s website confirms this. My point in asking if they would release an fx camera was ‘modern mirrorless full frame Z mount’. I think most of us are aware of the flabby, old DF. I thought it was a poorly executed design.
“..I thought it was a poorly executed design..” (..Weep, weep.)
So Nikon shrink wrapped the Df under the hood of their APS-C mirrorless system. I think it is a neat idea, and sets the camera up inside Fuji’s price range. I cannot say I have closely followed Nikon’s move into their new mirrorless ranges, but note looking through a few articles that they are releasing the Zfc with a bereft Dx lens line up – sounds familiar to the situation with the CL/TL from Leica. Perhaps the difference here is that Nikon are showing an intent to produce more lenses for the mirrorless system. It will be interesting to see how this performs.
A truly gorgeous camera. If I was not fully invested in L and M mounts I would consider this. Certainly a great alternative to the CL. To quote Mike’s brilliant observation “Wow! real dials that do something and which display their settings at a glance.”, that is what my perfect camera is. I can glance at the camera and know what it is prepared for. I still may be tempted as it is so pure photography and not a camera trying to be a computer with a lens. It will be so intuitive to use for competent photographers not looking for AI features to enable then to take pictures. Bravo Nikon.
Looks nice, particularly with the classic Nikon look 28mm lens. Of course there is a big difference between looking nice and handling nice. I can never use the word ‘retro’ given the large number of vintage cameras in my collection. For me ‘retro’ is ‘normal’. The dial and screen for the f stop are a bit worrying, but you could get used to them I suppose. I will have a look at this if and when I ever visit my local camera shop here in Dublin. Note to Leica: there is now no Leica dealer in Dublin, but there are dealers for all other camera makes.
William
.
This is a baby Df ..and why not?
It’s got pretty much the same selection of dials and knobs, but with a smaller sensor.
It’s clearly smaller than the (beloved of many) Df, and with a smaller lens on the front ..and about half the weight ..though the Df is nowhere near as heavy as it looks!
The Zfc’s max ISO of 51200 (expanding to 100-204800) compares well with the Df’s 100-12800 (expanding to 204,800), but with those smaller pixels – and 21 mpxls of them – give such clean results in low light as the Df’s gorgeous full-frame (and therefore each one bigger) 16 mpxls? (..Dunno; I’d have to try one to find out.)
It seems similar, really, to the terrific little Olympus quarter-frame (micro four-thirds) retro-styled cameras which also have all the dials and knobs, but this has a slightly larger sensor, and should appeal to nostalgia lovers who swoon over the old, small, chrome Nikon film cameras, and really want a digital version.
Good look – I mean luck ..no; I do mean look! – to Nikon.
As for “..I’d argue that the future for the “proper” camera lies in a more traditional approach rather than trying to beat the smartphone at its own game..” ..did you ever mention that to a certain camera company based in Wetzlar, Germany, who created a silly phone-style camera, at a silly and extortionate price, and called it – if I remember right – the ‘T’ ..for, er, ‘Telephone’ perhaps?
Part of the fun of innovation is that we can have both the Df (and Zfc) and the Leica T/TL/TL2!
I owned (and loved) the Df and have returned to TL2 a couple of times (currently have it again).
Both have a lot of good, if very different, ideas about user experience.
The Leica T series pushed the limits of a touch screen based camera, especially the menu UI (which needed to be great in order to deliver on the promise of the device) and many of the ideas from it deserve to find their way into new cameras.
The Df (and now the Zfc, with some refinements) combined the PASM + front & rear dial based controls with those from a manual SLR built around solid AF system and one of the best FF sensors of its time.
Both of these are feasible, both are innovative, albeit in different ways. Both enable one to explore photography and encourage different approaches to photography.
What’s exciting about Leica is that they produce both the M series (including experiments like the M-D) and something like the T series, which could not be more different.
.
Oh, the Df is a great camera! ..and not only does it look ‘retro’ – sorry William! – but it works with almost every old lens which Nikon have ever made for the ‘F’ mount, including those early autofocus lenses which need a ‘screwdriver’ motor – inside the camera body – to do the focusing for them. And the Df’s wonderful in low light.
But the ‘T’..? That seemed to me like Leica trying – once again – to copy Apple: carving a camera from a solid block of aluminium ..like Apple’s laptops carved from a solid block of aluminium. And with a touch screen like an iPhone ..supposedly to make it easy for phone users to migrate to a ‘proper’ camera ..but at a silly price of £1350 (here in the UK) which was the price of just the body, but with no lens; and a lens for it cost either £1250 for the 18-56mm (27-84mm equivalent) zoom ..or a further £1350 (that’s 100 quid more than the zoom!) for the less useful 23mm f/2 (35mm equivalent) ..a total of £2,700 (!) for a camera which works like a phone, except that it can’t make phone calls! ..What market were they *possibly* going for? ..And did it sell well, and grab a huge market share? ..I think not.
“..What’s exciting about Leica is that they produce both the M series . . . and something like the T series”. The M series is “exciting”? It’s an old, heavy, manual focus camera from 1954. Whatever lens you put on it, you see only the view seen by a 28mm. It does have an over/under-exposure adjustment dial ..but – unlike this Nikon Zfc above – you can’t see what it’s set at! Not till you look (a) through the glass finder, or (b) through the add-on Visoflex electronic finder, or (c) check the screen on the back. If you set it to Auto ISO, you can’t see what ISO it’s going to give you, unless you use that add-on EVF, or check the screen on the back. Magnify the focus – for spot-on focus with the wide-aperture lenses which Leica prides itself on – and the image in the EVF, or on the back, bounces all over the place, as it doesn’t have any stabilisation. Compared with other cameras, it costs more and delivers less.
I own one (..no; two: an M10-P and an M9..) but not because I’ve drunk the Leica ‘Kool Aid’, but because I’d plenty of lenses for my M3, and wanted to use them with a more modern, digital camera.
So where’s the real innovation? Oh; leaving off the Bayer filter to produce a monochrome camera, and then charging more for leaving it off!
I always sound like Mr Spoilsport, don’t I? ..So let me enthuse for a moment: this new Zfc is a fraction narrower, left to right, than the M10-P, just a fraction taller (with its finder bulge on the top) but otherwise roughly the same size, but almost half the (unnecessary) weight of an M10-P! ..So it’s easier to carry around, costs less, has autofocus, has eye and face auto-detection, and the viewfinder will show exactly what the lens sees ..even with zooms.
I’ll try to enthuse now about a really great Leica ..erm.. ..but it’s all in the past, isn’t it?
Sorry.
I am with you David on the Baby Df front – you know I love my Df, one of the best camera’s I have ever owned, or used. And I still think the only place it could be bettered is in size. But I agree with the sensor point, the original Df FF 16mp sensor is well known for its low light capabilities – and I just do not see the same capability coming from the APS-C sensor.
The difference between my APS-C Leica X typ 113 with its 16mp sensor, and the Df FF one is huge in challenging light.
It will be interesting to see how the camera performs in the real world. I hope it works out, as it might just encourage Leica to get their act together with a CL 2, and perhaps invest in this end of the market.
I have the SL2s and it IS a really great Leica in use. If you are going to obsess on comparing features and specifications and pricing, you won’t think so. You do sound like Chris Nichols.You know, the guy who reviews cameras in this way, and is more of a sales assistant than a photographer, but criticizes every Leica he reviews because it doesn’t top the features list or focus as fast as the latest SONY for half the price.
The Nikon here is nicely designed but not nicely built. Pick up a Nikon FM/FE/ FM2 etc and it feels pretty flimsy. I liked it when cameras were solidly built even if they were heavier. Carrying an F series camera was never a problem and they were made in Japan tough.
Well, I didn’t like to mention Leica by name. But Whim of Wetzlar spills the beans…
There’s no doubt about its physical beauty, Mike – and doubtless a joy to hold as well as to behold. The same sort of seduction led me to buying a Fuji XT-20 two or three years ago (plus the lure of the “acros” simulation). But it seemed to need the equivalent of an aeroplane pilot’s licence, so I never learned to fly it. I seem to fall for small cameras, and the Sony NEXes and a6000+ have in the meantime pressed all the right buttons (in a manner of speaking) and ticked all the right lens boxes for me. But i will go into a dealer and at least play interested in this Nikon.
It looks like a beautiful camera. The big question though is how serious Nikon is about APS-C and how committed they are to keeping the momentum going. Other than Fuji nobody seems to take APS-C seriously. Will there be more lenses or is this it? Is there some kind of roadmap? Or are we expected to blindly trust Nikon? Is this just another additional body on which we are expected to use big and heavy FF lenses? Impossible to tell right now.
Well, Pentax (also) takes APS-C seriously. The question is, does anyone take Pentax seriously?
True, and I actually did think about Pentax when writing but then I guess I subconsciously completely forgot about them…
My apologies to the reader who left a comment under the original version of this article. He pointed out the typo in the heading (Xfc instead of the correct ZFc) and I had to republish, not realising that the attached comment would disappear Unfortunately I can’t recover this comment so, if you read this, perhaps you would re-post your views. Sorry about this.
B-but the caption under the last picture still says “Xfc”..!
Ah, well spotted. What you didn’t see was the original headline also said Xfc. Must have been a slip of the brain. A kind reader got in quick with a correction so I had to do something I’ve never done before – unpublish, correct and repost an edited version. I didn’t notice the caption but it will be changed by the time you take a second look!Thanks.
I reckon you believed it was a hybrid between Fuji and Nikon 🤣