Nikon Mirrorless

[pdk42]

Originally Posted by Olybirder

I think Olympus will have to uprate the video specs on their new cameras. It is of no interest to me but it seems to be what 'young people' like. They have heard of Sony, Nikon and Panasonic video cams but probably wouldn't even consider buying Olympus. We old fogeys won't be around for ever to buy Olympus still cameras so they will need a higher profile in the video market if they are to survive.

Ron

I think you're right about young people wanting video - but they mostly just then post on Youtube and the quality requirements on that can easily be met with a smartphone.

[Rocknroll59]

So I take it none on here will be changing then , created a good discussion though.

Cheers

Peter

[Graham_of_Rainham]

I shall try one as and when they become available. My standard test is to shoot something with the camera set to default settings. Then another shot done entirely manually, preferably using my Seconik meter.

Also ergonomics are very important (the only reason I didn’t get a PEN F)

While all the reviews and other people’s opinions are interesting, I do like to have what I consider a real world experience of things I buy, much like a hiring a car, rather than just a test drive.

[pdk42]

They look like a great entry point for Nikon into FF mirrorless. Clearly the target is Sony since the Z7 will compete with the A7Riii and the Z6 with the A7iii. They've priced them a little higher, but not outrageously so.

As someone who has tried Sony and ultimately rejected it (twice !), I hope that Nikon succeed. However, even if the camera is an immediate winner, they have a long way to go before the lens range matches Sony, let alone m43.

Having said that, it's not a major competitor to the m43 system as far as I can tell. It'll be different people who buy them. For me, I've now settled on Olympus - sure the IQ isn't going to match FF in some circumstances, but for the majority of what I use a camera for the IQ is just fine - and the m43 system in other respects (range of quality of lenses, ergonomics and features on the bodies) puts all the others into the shade.

[Jim Ford]

Ignoring MF digital cameras, I've never understood why FF aka 35mm format is considered the 'be all ' of digital camera formats. The 35mm format is based on an early 20th Century cine film format - there's nothing magical or a technically compelling reason to adhere to it.

Jim

[pdk42]

Originally Posted by Jim Ford

Ignoring MF digital cameras, I've never understood why FF aka 35mm format is considered the 'be all ' of digital camera formats. The 35mm format is based on an early 20th Century cine film format - there's nothing magical or a technically compelling reason to adhere to it.

Jim

There's nothing special about any particular sensor size - it's just down to square mm. I guess FF has stuck since the 135/35mm format brought with it a huge catalogue of lenses and lens designs that could be drawn on. FF is also arguably a sweet spot of size/IQ that still seems to work today.

On the narrower point of these new Nikon cameras, I have a colleague who is a big Nikon DSLR fan - D850 and D500 plus all the best lenses. He's tried Olympus m43 but couldn't cope with the loss of IQ (he's a big pixel peeker ). He doesn't get these new Z cameras at all - his point is that although the body is a little smaller than the equivalent Nikon DSLRs, the lenses are just as big. He also thinks that for sport (he does a lot rugby shooting) his D500 is still head-and-shoulders above what any mirrorless can do. I think he's got that right actually.

I suspect these new FF mirrorless cameras will mean that Nikon will lose interest in their APSC DSLRs. I can't imagine them being able to simultaneously advance FF DSLRs, FF mirrorless and APSC DSLRs. I suspect the same might be true for Canon, whose EOS-M (crop APSC) seems to be doing very well. I can see that replacing their crop consumer DSLRs pretty quickly.

[shenstone]

Originally Posted by benvendetta

Makes the EM1 Mk2 a bargain! Clearly mirrorless is now he future given this important release from Nikon. It was never really in doubt.

I could not agree more - having moved to an EVF of quality (early ones were awful) I can't imagine going back

Regards
Andy

[Walti]

Originally Posted by pdk42

There's nothing special about any particular sensor size - it's just down to square mm. I guess FF has stuck since the 135/35mm format brought with it a huge catalogue of lenses and lens designs that could be drawn on. FF is also arguably a sweet spot of size/IQ that still seems to work today.

On the narrower point of these new Nikon cameras, I have a colleague who is a big Nikon DSLR fan - D850 and D500 plus all the best lenses. He's tried Olympus m43 but couldn't cope with the loss of IQ (he's a big pixel peeker ). He doesn't get these new Z cameras at all - his point is that although the body is a little smaller than the equivalent Nikon DSLRs, the lenses are just as big. He also thinks that for sport (he does a lot rugby shooting) his D500 is still head-and-shoulders above what any mirrorless can do. I think he's got that right actually.

I suspect these new FF mirrorless cameras will mean that Nikon will lose interest in their APSC DSLRs. I can't imagine them being able to simultaneously advance FF DSLRs, FF mirrorless and APSC DSLRs. I suspect the same might be true for Canon, whose EOS-M (crop APSC) seems to be doing very well. I can see that replacing their crop consumer DSLRs pretty quickly.

My expectation s that they'll get the 35mm mirrorless camera established, then develop an APSC version and drop the APSC DSLR, I am assuming of course that the existing lens portfolio most users have invested in will carry over.

[benvendetta]

Spot on there Paul!

Originally Posted by pdk42

They look like a great entry point for Nikon into FF mirrorless. Clearly the target is Sony since the Z7 will compete with the A7Riii and the Z6 with the A7iii. They've priced them a little higher, but not outrageously so.

As someone who has tried Sony and ultimately rejected it (twice !), I hope that Nikon succeed. However, even if the camera is an immediate winner, they have a long way to go before the lens range matches Sony, let alone m43.

Having said that, it's not a major competitor to the m43 system as far as I can tell. It'll be different people who buy them. For me, I've now settled on Olympus - sure the IQ isn't going to match FF in some circumstances, but for the majority of what I use a camera for the IQ is just fine - and the m43 system in other respects (range of quality of lenses, ergonomics and features on the bodies) puts all the others into the shade.

[Ricoh]

With Canon hot on Nikon's heels https://petapixel.com/2018/08/24/can...eid=2a426fcff6

I wasn't aware Canon were number 1, outstripping Nikon (and Sony in the US). From an academic standpoint, it will be interesting to see what they come up with. But no prizes for guessing the Canon mirrorless is bound to have loads of MP and backwards compatibility with the existing lenses. The market craves ever higher MP count, it seems.

[mik]

The new Nikon short comings defended by a Sony user


https://www.youtube.com/watch?time_c...&v=QKN68FwOkCM

[MikeOxon]

My first impression, from the photos, is that it's an ugly-looking thing! Only time will tell if their on-chip AF system can match the very effective tracking AF of their DSLRs, which is crucial for sports and wildlife photographers.


What I would like to see is an adapter that could retain the AF of my Nikon 300mm f/4 AF-S, when used on my E-M1 Mk.ii body. Metabones or anyone?

[Petrochemist]

Originally Posted by Jim Ford

Ignoring MF digital cameras, I've never understood why FF aka 35mm format is considered the 'be all ' of digital camera formats. The 35mm format is based on an early 20th Century cine film format - there's nothing magical or a technically compelling reason to adhere to it.

Jim

It's simply frame fixation.
35mm film is what they grew up with & some photographers just cant see beyond it.

[MikeOxon]

Originally Posted by Petrochemist

It's simply frame fixation.
35mm film is what they grew up with & some photographers just cant see beyond it.

There is also the fact that a huge number of excellent lenses have been designed to cover the 35mm format and their properties, in terms of angle of view, depth of field, etc., are familiar to their users. These aspects have to be re-learnt if you change format.

[Bassman51]

Originally Posted by MikeOxon

There is also the fact that a huge number of excellent lenses have been designed to cover the 35mm format and their properties, in terms of angle of view, depth of field, etc., are familiar to their users. These aspects have to be re-learnt if you change format.

More than designed, Nikon and Canon have each sold more than 100 million lenses for their mounts. That's a lot of customer lock-in to be mailed rained as long as possible. Hence the emphasis on the FTX adaptor.