Nikon Z fc

Now, I'm happy to say that the Zfc is not that, and that I think Nikon did in fact put a lot of love into this camera, but it would be a shame in my m...

It actually did a really nice job, and overall it's a fun camera to use. It's dependable, it's pretty I don't know if I've mentioned that yet, and it'...

I think Canon had a high MP camera at the time I was buying, Dec 2020 / Jan 2021, but it was outside my price range. Anyways, the ultimate reason why I went with Nikon over Sony is oddly enough, the Nikon Z lens lineup was more attractive to me. Having native glass from the brand, which I'm sheepishly always going to prefer, had a better lineup of 1.8 primes.

I got mine the other day and it's a neat little camera. A lot of my experience is more getting used to a mirrorless setup, rather than something specific for the Z fc. I feel that it's not exactly a cheap option, you are paying for the aesthetic but it beats the D500 I also currently own for things like street photography – I feel that people would not look at me like I'm a paparazzi or something. I don't regret my purchase at all, as I said it's a neat camera and is really well suited to capture fleeting moments.

It also have an aperture ring, which is a nice touch. If you want a interchangeable lens camera, then the Nikon FC is the perfect one for you. It works great, the design is amazing and it’s the perfect entry point in the world of mirrorless.

Honestly you just answered you own question, but i'll answer it. Problems with the Nikon Z fc is the limited lens ability for DX/APS-C. **The Z50 and Z fc is that there's nothing standing out about those two cameras- just meh. ** **Why didn't Nikon make it like the Z5 which made anyone pay attention at the great value you could get?