the black fox
Suspended / Banned
- Messages
- 17,082
- Name
- Jeff
- Edit My Images
- No
Nikon mirrorless definitely on the way
- Thread starter StewartR
- Start date
- Messages
- 43,206
- Name
- Alan
- Edit My Images
- No
Probably not but as a halo product
Nikon camera's, IMHO, have such an intuitive layout compared to many others (Canons are actually pretty good too) that a medium format one would be a top seller. One of the joys, or disjoys, of running workshops is helping people operate cameras in the field. The Sony/Fuji ones are unintelligible IMHO but the Canon, Nikon ones you can figure out without looking at the manual. These two makers are missing a big trick by not offering a superior system.
At what price?
I can't see Nikon offering a digital MF at any sort of price that'll make it a top seller but I suppose it depends how you qualify a top seller as I'd imagine that MF digital sells in relatively tiny numbers to something like the Sony/Fuji offerings that you find unintelligible. And then there's the question of the lenses you'd use with it.
Anyway, I'll believe a top selling digital MF Nikon when I see it.
Last edited:
- Messages
- 20,926
- Name
- Steve
- Edit My Images
- Yes
Probably around £7000-£9000 for the body and £3k for the lenses.
Plenty would buy it. It wouldn’t sell in the quantities d850s do but it would be profitable and brilliant and make good money for the company.
chrism_scotland
Suspended / Banned
- Messages
- 7,958
- Name
- Chris
- Edit My Images
- Yes
Anyway back to reality, when do we think we’ll actually see this start to be in the hands of users? If its anything like Nikon’s recent launches like the D850 its going to be a long long wait after its launched!
simonbarker
Suspended / Banned
- Messages
- 2,249
- Edit My Images
- No
That seems unlikely, where are they getting the MF sensor from? They'll not be building it themselves.
Even if it would be desirable it's hard to justify given they have no mirrorless DSLRs out and all their competitors will in short order, how could they justify not concentrating on where most of their business is going to be?
- Messages
- 20,926
- Name
- Steve
- Edit My Images
- Yes
Except people buy full frame SLRs and crop ones in droves - argubably there is no need at all to develop mirrorless cameras. The medium format market is relatively unsaturated and a move by a major manufacturer here could really shake things up.
Sony seem to make the sensors, or just develop further the D850 photosites into a larger sensor.
chuckles
Suspended / Banned
- Messages
- 4,470
- Name
- Barry
- Edit My Images
- Yes
Actually, is that not a contradiction in terms? I mean, there is no 'reflex' (mirror or prism) involved.
simonbarker
Suspended / Banned
- Messages
- 2,249
- Edit My Images
- No
I don't think that makes any sense for their business, you're asking them to let their main lines stagnate to go chase after MF for what? Even if they made an amazing system how long would it take them to build it up so it's comparable to competitors? How long before they recouped their investment? How big do you think the market for a MF system is?
As Sony don't seem to have MF sensor again I go back to my original question, where would they get the sensor?
simonbarker
Suspended / Banned
- Messages
- 2,249
- Edit My Images
- No
Sure but you knew what I meant, mirrorless systems that are direct replacements/competitors for DSLR systems.
- Messages
- 20,926
- Name
- Steve
- Edit My Images
- Yes
DSLR's sell well and will continue to sell. The D850 sells, the 5d4 sells. Nikon would remain a profitible company without ever making a mirrorless system.
Medium format is a very profitible path per unit sold and I suspect with developing a larger sensor based around the photosites used in the D850 would be a good way to go. Certainly better than developing a lesser camera given SLRs are better than mirrorless bodies.
Asked and answered already.
PS Looks like Sony are already on it - https://www.slrlounge.com/sony-medium-format-sensor-the-mega-pixel-arms-race-continues/
Last edited:
redhed17
Suspended / Banned
- Messages
- 7,316
- Edit My Images
- Yes
DSLR's are still outselling mirrorless, but both Canon and Nikon have to react to the trend of the increase in mirrorless sales compared to mirrorless cameras. The time to react to not impact on DSLR sales by entering the mirrorless market is the thing both companies must have been debating for years. I know Nikon have already dipped a toe in with their Nikon 1 system, which I think was an attempt to have mirrorless without any overlap to their DSLRs. It seems to have not been a success and is now discontinued afaik. Canon came in a bit later with initially limited feature mirrorless crop sensor M series. To cater for those that wanted a Canon mirrorless camera, but to also not overlap too much on their DSLRs, especially not the top crop and FF cameras..
Imho entering the mirrorless market seriously means FF and possibly also crop sensor cameras. It may mean a change in lens mount, new lenses, and feature and performance that gets close to, matches or exceeds what the other mirrorless manufacturers are doing, especially Sony. If either Canon or Nikon come in half-hearted, or badly designed, once they have decided to take it all serious and getting it wrong, I doubt either company have shown that they are able to quickly react to problems. If the Canon and Nikon mirrorless arrive and are underwhelming, and/or there is not a clear (I hate to use the word) roadmap, then Sony being the main company for mirrorless cameras could be a hard perception to overcome as time goes on.
These are very interesting times for Canon and Nikon. So far I have little interest in mirrorless other than admiring the innovation and the technology, so watch it all from a dispassionate point of view. I wish both would get going to start mixing it all up.
Volume and market position are critical. So there are no guarantees.
If you lose the number one or two position then you fight an uphill battle for acceptance. So the way you do things becomes inferior or non-intuitive - not because it is actually wrong but because it s not the way the companies in the number one or two position do it.
If you lose volume then you risk your fixed costs per unit sold start going up. That hurts you with development.
Nikon is in a bit of a rock and har place in part because of its success. They have a huge established user base to keep happy. They sat back and piggy-backed on other sensor manufacturers. Sony achieving critical mass for their own brand hurts Nikon twice - once as a competitor for customers - and as a competitor for sensory supply. Moreover if Nikon use Sony sensors then they are handing over some of their product cost to Sony and subsidising Sony's strategic sensor development.
Nikon will also be aware that in the 80s both Pentax and Olympus were significant competitors in the SLR market. Then came the shift to AF and by the early 90s both Olympus and Pentax SLR ranges almost faded away.
An exciting and stressful time to be in the comapny's design and marketing departments.
redhed17
Suspended / Banned
- Messages
- 7,316
- Edit My Images
- Yes
But for how long?
How much can they improve their DSLRs to make them appealing to upgrade. I have a D500, which I consider to be the best crop sensor camera atm, It does everything I need. I can't see what Nikon could do to make me upgrade to the next upgrade should there ever be one, which is not guaranteed. What can they do to the D850 which is a big improvement? How can Canon greatly improve the 5DIV?
The Sony a7 series have seen improvements to match DSLR features for the most part through each generation, especially AF, but the a9 was a huge jump in many ways. The tech in that may filter down to the a7 series, and then it will be interesting to see what they do with an a9 II. The a9 features are what Canon and Nikon should be aiming for, particularly battery life and AF intially imho.
- Messages
- 20,926
- Name
- Steve
- Edit My Images
- Yes
Sensor tech and AF moves on - but the SLR format is the best way for mid priced and expensive camera's to evolve. I fully expect 5d5 to be brilliant when it comes and d900 to be better again.
The a9 AF tech is already in the a7mk3.... So is the battery life... That's a 2k body.
redhed17
Suspended / Banned
- Messages
- 7,316
- Edit My Images
- Yes
I have no doubt they will be better, but how much better? Nikon have recently had a big jump from their 51point AF to 153 point. The 51point AF was Nikon's top of the range AF for almost a decade. The Sony a7 went from, in 2013, 117 AF points to 693 AF points in 2018 on the a7III. The a7R went from 24 AF points in 2013 to 399 AF points in 2015 a7RII, and still have that on thea7RIII in 2017. And those are AF points that cover the whole viewfinder, which DSLRs, especially FF can seemingly not do. I think Nikon may only refine the 153 point AF like they did with the 51 point for the D850 and D5 replacements. Canon may bring something to try and match Nikon. Neither will be able to match the AF coverage of mirrorless in a FF DSLR. Coverage isn't everything of course, but the a9 AF is very good from most reports, and that tech will, you would think, filter down the Sony range.
As for other improvements Sony did with each model, a7 - 5fps, a7II - 5fps, and a7III - 10 fps. a7R - 4fps, a7RII - 5fps and a7RIII - 10fps.
AF and frame rate are just two features that improved, sometimes huge improvements, as the sensor was getting better, as they do with other features have got better. Some of those improvements may have been enough for someone to upgrade. It would be interesting to see what proportion of a7II and a7RII user upgraded to their replacements compared to the D810 to D850.
Like it or not mirrorless innovate and improve faster than DSLRs have up to now, can Canon and Nikon move that fast?
Last edited:
redhed17
Suspended / Banned
- Messages
- 7,316
- Edit My Images
- Yes
And you would assume it will be in the a7RIV too if/when it arrives too and other cameras. Will Canon or Nikon have the battery performance needed to compete, or will it take a few generations to match/better Sony!
Canon and Nikon have to come in matching to bettering Sony particularly, as they may not have the legacy lens argument to rely on for people staying/choosing them.
Cagey75
Suspended / Banned
- Messages
- 17,146
- Name
- Keith
- Edit My Images
- No
Olympus might be about to put a spanner in the works, they have announced a "super high end" pro body, no details yet but they say it will surpass the already excellent EM1 mkII and take over as their flagship.
https://www.43rumors.com/ft3-more-confirmation-about-a-new-super-high-end-olympus-camera/
https://www.43rumors.com/ft3-more-confirmation-about-a-new-super-high-end-olympus-camera/
Last edited:
redhed17
Suspended / Banned
- Messages
- 7,316
- Edit My Images
- Yes
It would have to be amazing to dent the dominance Sony have in the mirrorless market. I hope they do something, the more people competing the better, as each pushes the other to be improve, but I don't think many would forgo Sony systems for Olympus, even though they can be fickle from what I have read in some threads.
Olympus upgraders and new mirrorless users are what they will have to target imho.
Cagey75
Suspended / Banned
- Messages
- 17,146
- Name
- Keith
- Edit My Images
- No
It would have to be amazing to dent the dominance Sony have in the mirrorless market. I hope they do something, the more people competing the better, as each pushes the other to be improve, but I don't think many would forgo Sony systems for Olympus, even though they can be fickle from what I have read in some threads.
There's suggestion of it being a completely new line, something like Fuji did with the GFX, I'm thinking a FF mirrorless with all the bells Olympus carry - the excellent IBIS [That Sony can't touch] the high res image modes the glorious build quality etc ... it'll be interesting to see what they do come up with
redhed17
Suspended / Banned
- Messages
- 7,316
- Edit My Images
- Yes
Would their current lenses fit FF?
Afaik their lenses have been designed for M43 and the size and weight reductions that gives.Maybe there will be more details before Photokina in September.
Cagey75
Suspended / Banned
- Messages
- 17,146
- Name
- Keith
- Edit My Images
- No
Would their current lenses fit FF?
Maybe there will be more details before Photokina in September.
They would bring out an adapter for the M4/3 lenses I imagine, using a crop mode on the new sensor. It's all speculation for now, but like I say, be interesting to see what the actual specs will be.
Damian Brown
Suspended / Banned
- Messages
- 2,685
- Name
- Damian Brown
- Edit My Images
- No
Spoke to a rep today and she said it could be any day now. Let's see 
- Messages
- 20,926
- Name
- Steve
- Edit My Images
- Yes
. Some of those improvements may have been enough for someone to upgrade. It would be interesting to see what proportion of a7II and a7RII user upgraded to their replacements compared to the D810 to D850.
Like it or not mirrorless innovate and improve faster than DSLRs have up to now, can Canon and Nikon move that fast?
D810 to 850 if you have the money is a worthy upgrade - I am holding out as I really want to go the whole hog to medium format.
Plenty probably moved from A71 to 2 then to 3 as the 1 version was so laughably bad (other than sensor) that upgrading was a must - not a niceity as it is such a deeply flawed machine. Sales might be growing as users of mirrorless upgrade as the bodies are so off the pace that it is easier to see improvements as they gradually get less off the pace but a top tier SLR from 6yrs ago still is a top camera.
Sony's ibis isnt as good because the sensor is twice the size. M43 sensor is tiny.
Cagey75
Suspended / Banned
- Messages
- 17,146
- Name
- Keith
- Edit My Images
- No
Panasonic also use that tiny sensor and yet Olympus still do IBIS better, they're doing something right. Sony also put IS in their lenses, and it's still not great.
Pentax, Fuji and Hasselblad all use Sony sensors in MF. Pentax and Fuji in the “crop” variety and Hasselblad in both crop and “full frame” variety.
100MP “crop” sensors are available though not yet used, with 150MP “full frame” varieties also on the way,
redhed17
Suspended / Banned
- Messages
- 7,316
- Edit My Images
- Yes
And yet Sony sell more cameras.
IBIS is a feature which may not be high in a lot of peoples must have feature lists imho. Sensor features, Resolution, Dynamic Range, High ISO performance maybe. AF performance probably. Lens options, yes for a lot of people. Ergonomics, including viewfinder amongst other things may be about IBIS for most, but I could be wrong.
There are many options, and you choose the best combination of features that will suite yourself.The A7 wasn't laughably bad - just not competitive with a FF DSLR in some situations based no the limitations of the day. But it was relatively cheap and it got the FE lens family started. It was very clear at the time what Sony's intent was - on sensor PDAF just around the corner - and they extended the range rapidly. They provided a PDAF adapter to fit A-mount lenses to the A7. Up to that point Sony's strategy had been blowing about a bit. From that point it had its colour firmly nailed to the mirorless FF mast and full steam ahead.
The A7r2 was the real turning point. That's when I started to see pros committing the A7 family - and started to see Sony cameras regularly on muy travels.
Right now you can get a A7 for not a lot of money.
Cagey75
Suspended / Banned
- Messages
- 17,146
- Name
- Keith
- Edit My Images
- No
And yet Sony sell more cameras.
IBIS is a feature which may not be high in a lot of peoples must have feature lists imho. Sensor features, Resolution, Dynamic Range, High ISO performance maybe. AF performance probably. Lens options, yes for a lot of people. Ergonomics, including viewfinder amongst other things may be about IBIS for most, but I could be wrong.
Sony would sell more even if their cameras were pure s**t let's be honest. I'm not even sure what sales have to do with it? I'm not getting anything from any manufacturer's sales, I only care about the performance of the gear.
If IBIS wasn't important, Fuji wouldn't have bothered with the XH1, Sony wouldn't have started to add it to their A7 line after the mk1 - I know my main reason for switching to Panasonic from Fuji was the IBIS, and many others have done the same. The smaller sensor is only relevant regarding high ISO IMO, and I tend not to shoot above 1600 no matter the body. IBIS allows me to keep that down too.
..... and the sensor is still twice the size in a similar size camera. Sensor size is also relevant for every sensor attribute. Iso, dynamic range, sharpness, dof.
Last edited:
r
It's really come of age for video.
For stills it's only a killer feature for a minority. It's really useful for travel and street.
It's really come of age for video.
For stills it's only a killer feature for a minority. It's really useful for travel and street.
Cagey75
Suspended / Banned
- Messages
- 17,146
- Name
- Keith
- Edit My Images
- No
When it's in the lens the sensor doesn't have to shift about, Nikon manage better VR in their lenses for full frame
Have you done that comparison? It's a shame Nikon or canon can't stabilise their non is lenses though isn't it?
Last edited:
No they wouldn't. It's been a hard uphill struggle for them in the sector.
The market is way more conservative athtn it thinks. It's tribal. And reviewers have often overlooked the significance of features that are not available on Canon or Nikon - because the brand dominance means that's their point of reference.
This means anybody offering a different product has a huge barrier to entry.
And internet wisdom is not always the most objective even if it is very widely sprad and asserted at times.
Cagey75
Suspended / Banned
- Messages
- 17,146
- Name
- Keith
- Edit My Images
- No
I've seen others do it, plenty of examples on YT. Sony's IS isn't my problem either way, it's theirs.
I could say i have compared, as I have owned a Sony dslr and I used Nikon lenses with VR for over 10 years. Of course that was a very old Sony [A200] and I'm sure their 'steady shot' has improved since then, but you'll be hard pressed to find anyone saying their IS is amazing, or better than Nikon's/Canon's let alone the mirrorless brands
Last edited:
simonbarker
Suspended / Banned
- Messages
- 2,249
- Edit My Images
- No
Yes they'll continue to sell but it's a shrinking market and if the choice is between Nikon and competitors using technology which is advancing faster then it's only natural Nikon is going to lose a lot of potential business by ignoring it.
Relying on people being stuck with their glass is only going to last so long and last time I checked Nikon was not doing well enough to be so complacent.
Yes they make more per unit and sell considerably fewer units but you're assuming they're completed units, they need to make the design the things then produce them and the glass to match them, it's a large investment that will take a long time to fully develop (how long do you think it would take them to make a good range of lenses for this MF system you propose?) and doing this instead of focusing on the larger part of their business? Seems unrealistic to me.
When are they available? How much do they cost? Will Sony making them available to Nikon?
And Olympus problem is their tiny sensor. They still using that ancient 16mp sensor in most of their line up and poor AFC?
It's a shame Nikon or canon can't stabilise their non is lenses though isn't it?
Cagey75
Suspended / Banned
- Messages
- 17,146
- Name
- Keith
- Edit My Images
- No
It's only a problem to people who decide it is. That tiny sensor produces excellent image quality, I have compared the Nikon D800E directly to the Panasonic G80 and besides massive file size, in good light, there's naff all difference. I'm not even sure what your point is, if any tbh? You keep ranting about this 'tiny' sensor as if it's a put down. People using M43 don't care about sensor size, their private parts are big enough perhaps
btw, Olympus use a 20mp sensor nowadays, sounds like you don't even know the gear you're slating
Last edited:
It's only a problem to people who decide it is. That tiny sensor produces excellent image quality, I have compared the Nikon D800E directly to the Panasonic G80 and besides massive file size, in good light, there's naff all difference. I'm not even sure what your point is, if any tbh? You keep ranting about this 'tiny' sensor as if it's a put down. People using M43 don't care about sensor size, their private parts are big enough perhaps
You mean like ibis isn't Sony's problem? You're ranting about ibis.
That last comment... Oh dear.
Last edited: