Nikon mirrorless definitely on the way

snerkler said:
I’m prepared to be disappointed ;) But what’s the incentive? To not p off existing customers and because they’ll be playing catch up on lens lineup

I don’t think it will be class leading either if we’re comparing to DSLRs as well, but I’d be surprised if it’s as good as Sony’s latest A7’s too.
Click to expand...

Those customers will then have to stick with what they have till they accept less performance via adapted or are willing to pay for the upgrade when it arrives.

As for speed, it's as much body as lens but Sony's lens and af speed so far increased with each body update. The 55 on the A7 MK1 was slow in comparison to DSLR but on the a7mk3 it is ridiculously fast.
 
Last edited:
twist said:
What would the incentive be in making adapted old glass as good as the new stuff they want to push? For a manufacturer the money is in the lenses and accessories, plus mirrorless lenses are different designs. Sony has come a long way in being able to use Canon glass.... doesn't matter about A mount, it's dead and the E mount glass is much better.

I think you're going to be dissapointed if you expect 100% same performance.
Click to expand...

The incentive is that current Nikon users will buy the new camera (in droves) because they can afford to without buying a whole new set of lenses - and there will only be a few of those available from the start anyway.

Their current lenses will be fully functional via an adapter and perform very well, though a new range of native mirrorless lenses will wring the last drop of performance from the new camera/s, probably in terms of AF but also in styling and ergonomics. Buyers can transition to them over time.
 
Last edited:
HoppyUK said:
The incentive is that current Nikon users will buy the new camera (in droves) because they can afford to without buying a whole new set of lenses - and there will only be a few of those available from the start anyway.

Their current lenses will be fully functional via an adapter and perform very well, though a new range of native mirrorless lenses will wring the last drop of performance from the new camera/s (probably in terms of AF). Buyers can transition to them over time.
Click to expand...

Which is what I said in previous posts and why adapted isn't a bad thing when done correctly. He's not going to get 100% native performance from adapted no matter how much he wants it. It should be good though.

Nikon would've been crazy not to release the adapter.
 
Last edited:
StewartR said:
Maybe. But in the DSLR world, Nikon's AF is definitely inferior to Canon's in terms of raw speed on static subjects. I'm not competent to judge how the advanced tracking modes compare with one another, but for a static subject the difference is clear. With Nikons, blink and it's in focus; but with Canons, it's in focus before you'be had time to blink. Obviously on-sensor AF is a different game to off-sensor AF, and the speed might be down to the motors in the lenses as much or more than the camera's abilities - but regardless, if Nikon do deliver class-leading AF on their new cameras it would be a bit of a surprise to me.
Click to expand...

I'm not sure it's right to compare what Nikon has done in the past with what they may achieve in the future. But if you do, the Nikon-1 had one of the first on-sensor phase-detect AF systems and was widely regarded as the best at that time. And DPReview, one of the few websites I trust on these things, credits the Nikon D5 with the best overall AF system, bar none. If it comes to speed vs accuracy, I'll take accuracy every time ;)
 
HoppyUK said:
.......credits the Nikon D5 with the best overall AF system, bar none.
Click to expand...
I've seen this on every review I've read to date, with the D500 being the best APS-C AF to date too.
 
snerkler said:
I've seen this on every review I've read to date, with the D500 being the best APS-C AF to date too.
Click to expand...

Broadly speaking, AF speed is down to the lens and the drive mechanism, but accuracy is mostly determined by the camera. Very broadly.

Focusing static subjects in good light is easy, and I think some mirrorless cameras actually hold the speed record there already. But it's moving subjects that really sort the men from the boys, especially when the light is low and contrast drops - which is where, to date, phase-detect DSLRs excel. Manufacturers claims and demonstration events can be misleading and we'll only know how good the new camera is when it's been properly field tested.
 
HoppyUK said:
Broadly speaking, AF speed is down to the lens and the drive mechanism, but accuracy is mostly determined by the camera. Very broadly.

Focusing static subjects in good light is easy, and I think some mirrorless cameras actually hold the speed record there already. But it's moving subjects that really sort the men from the boys, especially when the light is low and contrast drops - which is where, to date, phase-detect DSLRs excel. Manufacturers claims and demonstration events can be misleading and we'll only know how good the new camera is when it's been properly field tested.
Click to expand...
I agree ,demos should be in poor light to sort the men from the boys,in camera speak that is :ROFLMAO:
 
HoppyUK said:
Broadly speaking, AF speed is down to the lens and the drive mechanism, but accuracy is mostly determined by the camera. Very broadly.

Focusing static subjects in good light is easy, and I think some mirrorless cameras actually hold the speed record there already. But it's moving subjects that really sort the men from the boys, especially when the light is low and contrast drops - which is where, to date, phase-detect DSLRs excel. Manufacturers claims and demonstration events can be misleading and we'll only know how good the new camera is when it's been properly field tested.
Click to expand...

DPR says this about the A7iii "But we have to admit that we were really impressed with our keeper rate on the a7 III, whether shooting at 8fps with live view or 10fps without. Sure, you lose out on absolute burst speeds when compared to dedicated sports cameras like the Sony a9, Nikon D5 and Canon EOS-1D X Mark II, but in terms of focus accuracy and reliability, the a7 III can hang with the best of them."

Talking about a camera that is less than half the price of those mentioned, I was skeptical when I preordered the A7mk3 as Ive used a lot of MILC over the years alongside my DSLRs and found them lacking in the AF department (Im very demanding of good AFC, AFS meh) but its better than my D750, better keeper rate, faster FPS and one of the best things is the frame coverage, 693 OSPDAF points that track over 96% of the frame (all selectable points). Eye AF feels like cheating. I dont think DSLRs have an edge anymore, mirrorless had the accuracy advantage and now it has the speed.
 
Last edited:
twist said:
DPR says this about the A7iii "But we have to admit that we were really impressed with our keeper rate on the a7 III, whether shooting at 8fps with live view or 10fps without. Sure, you lose out on absolute burst speeds when compared to dedicated sports cameras like the Sony a9, Nikon D5 and Canon EOS-1D X Mark II, but in terms of focus accuracy and reliability, the a7 III can hang with the best of them."

Talking about a camera that is less than half the price of those mentioned, I was skeptical when I preordered the A7mk3 as Ive used a lot of MILC over the years alongside my DSLRs and found them lacking in the AF department (Im very demanding of good AFC, AFS meh) but its better than my D750, better keeper rate, faster FPS and one of the best things is the frame coverage, 693 OSPDAF points that track over 96% of the frame (all selectable points). Eye AF feels like cheating. I dont think DSLRs have an edge anymore.
Click to expand...
but do you like it?:rolleyes::ROFLMAO:
 
twist said:
DPR says this about the A7iii "But we have to admit that we were really impressed with our keeper rate on the a7 III, whether shooting at 8fps with live view or 10fps without. Sure, you lose out on absolute burst speeds when compared to dedicated sports cameras like the Sony a9, Nikon D5 and Canon EOS-1D X Mark II, but in terms of focus accuracy and reliability, the a7 III can hang with the best of them."

Talking about a camera that is less than half the price of those mentioned, I was skeptical when I preordered the A7mk3 as Ive used a lot of MILC over the years alongside my DSLRs and found them lacking in the AF department (Im very demanding of good AFC, AFS meh) but its better than my D750, better keeper rate, faster FPS and one of the best things is the frame coverage, 693 OSPDAF points that track over 96% of the frame (all selectable points). Eye AF feels like cheating. I dont think DSLRs have an edge anymore, mirrorless had the accuracy advantage and now it has the speed.
Click to expand...

I agree. The best mirrorless AF systems have caught up with DSLRs. It's taken them a while, but I'm sure there's more to come plus some key inherent advantages like full image area coverage, subject recognition and tracking, Sony's eye-AF etc. All fantastic features :thumbs:

TBH I think both Nikon and Canon have been waiting until mirrorless tech is able to at least match DSLRs, and if that time is now the future looks rosy. The goal is to not only get rid of the mirror, but the mechanical shutter as well - a complex component that carries a lot of cost, size and weight - with shutter functions taken care of by electronic switching of the sensor. We're almost there already. And the ultimate goal is a global* electronic shutter that is immune to rolling shutter effects and flash sync problems.

*global shutters expose the whole frame in the same instant - no scanning the sensor line by line
 
HoppyUK said:
I agree. The best mirrorless AF systems have caught up with DSLRs. It's taken them a while, but I'm sure there's more to come plus some key inherent advantages like full image area coverage, subject recognition and tracking, Sony's eye-AF etc. All fantastic features (y)

TBH I think both Nikon and Canon have been waiting until mirrorless tech is able to at least match DSLRs, and if that time is now the future looks rosy. The goal is to not only get rid of the mirror, but the mechanical shutter as well - a complex component that carries a lot of cost, size and weight - with shutter functions taken care of by electronic switching of the sensor. We're almost there already. And the ultimate goal is a global* electronic shutter that is immune to rolling shutter effects and flash sync problems.

*global shutters expose the whole frame in the same instant - no scanning the sensor line by line
Click to expand...
that would make us all Happy :D
 
HoppyUK said:
I agree. The best mirrorless AF systems have caught up with DSLRs. It's taken them a while, but I'm sure there's more to come plus some key inherent advantages like full image area coverage, subject recognition and tracking, Sony's eye-AF etc. All fantastic features (y)

TBH I think both Nikon and Canon have been waiting until mirrorless tech is able to at least match DSLRs, and if that time is now the future looks rosy. The goal is to not only get rid of the mirror, but the mechanical shutter as well - a complex component that carries a lot of cost, size and weight - with shutter functions taken care of by electronic switching of the sensor. We're almost there already. And the ultimate goal is a global* electronic shutter that is immune to rolling shutter effects and flash sync problems.

*global shutters expose the whole frame in the same instant - no scanning the sensor line by line
Click to expand...
I've no doubt that mirrorless AF is there. Maybe not 100% there compared to a D5 or 1dx but how many of the tog population have one of these, use them to their potential and actually will see any benefit compared to any other decent camera because of the way/what they shoot? So as far as I'm concerned mirrorless AF is there for my needs, and I'm sure 99% of togs. The preference of EVF vs OVF will rage on for a while I'm sure. On this topic EVF isn't quite there yet due to the tiny lag still present, but it's a gnats and I'm sure in a generation or two this will be gone. Global shutters/super fast read out times will be the norm. As and when this happens I'm sure I'll become a mirrorless shooter full time, especially if the body is noticeably smaller and lighter than my D850, and of course I can afford to swap and/or I can use f-mount glass (assuming I stick to Nikon). I can't honestly see anything that DSLR will have an advantage over mirrorless with (except the pure preference of looking through optics rather than at a screen), yet mirrorless will have the advantage of the same AF regardless of VF or LCD, most likely lighter and smaller (hopefully without too much loss on ergonomics), and the bells and whistles that EVF allows. It will probably be another couple of years before these last little 'flaws' are ironed out, just in time for me wanting to change my D850 ;)

I agree that Canikon appear to have been waiting for this point when mirrorless can match DSLR performance. Allowing Sony to do the leg work obviously avoids as large an R&D cost, however by waiting they now have to play catch up as far as lens lineup and a developed system is concerned.
 
HoppyUK said:
I agree. The best mirrorless AF systems have caught up with DSLRs. It's taken them a while, but I'm sure there's more to come plus some key inherent advantages like full image area coverage, subject recognition and tracking, Sony's eye-AF etc. All fantastic features (y)

TBH I think both Nikon and Canon have been waiting until mirrorless tech is able to at least match DSLRs, and if that time is now the future looks rosy. The goal is to not only get rid of the mirror, but the mechanical shutter as well - a complex component that carries a lot of cost, size and weight - with shutter functions taken care of by electronic switching of the sensor. We're almost there already. And the ultimate goal is a global* electronic shutter that is immune to rolling shutter effects and flash sync problems.

*global shutters expose the whole frame in the same instant - no scanning the sensor line by line
Click to expand...

Totally agree, Canikon have been (wisely imo) waiting for that R&D to be done by others. Panasonic, Fuji and Sony have been doing work on both organic sensors and global shutters... with they'd hurry up.
 
twist said:
Totally agree, Canikon have been (wisely imo) waiting for that R&D to be done by others. Panasonic, Fuji and Sony have been doing work on both organic sensors and global shutters... with they'd hurry up.
Click to expand...

Not just Canon's mirrorless system, they've been doing the same with their DSLR range too. :cool:
 
twist said:
What would the incentive be in making adapted old glass as good as the new stuff they want to push? For a manufacturer the money is in the lenses and accessories, plus mirrorless lenses are different designs. Sony has come a long way in being able to use Canon glass.... doesn't matter about A mount, it's dead and the E mount glass is much better.

I think you're going to be dissapointed if you expect 100% same performance.
Click to expand...
Because for a long time Nikon will be relying in the F mount 300mm, 400mm, 500mm, 600mm even 70-200 f/2.8 and more. A near perfect adaptor allows Nikon to say that from launch you can use their camera for any situation. There is less (if any) advantage of a “mirrorless” lens over a DSLR lens at those lengths, and Nikon can continue launching F mount lenses for the 1000s of DSLRs out there knowing they can be used on the 10s (okay exageration) of mirrorless Nikon’s sold.

Given that Nikon have likely been considering mirrorless for several years, I would suspect the newer E type aperture lenses would be close to perfect.
 
Eloise said:
Because for a long time Nikon will be relying in the F mount 300mm, 400mm, 500mm, 600mm even 70-200 f/2.8 and more. A near perfect adaptor allows Nikon to say that from launch you can use their camera for any situation. There is less (if any) advantage of a “mirrorless” lens over a DSLR lens at those lengths, and Nikon can continue launching F mount lenses for the 1000s of DSLRs out there knowing they can be used on the 10s (okay exageration) of mirrorless Nikon’s sold.

Given that Nikon have likely been considering mirrorless for several years, I would suspect the newer E type aperture lenses would be close to perfect.
Click to expand...

Have they really? Their approach to a competitor (retro smaller) was the laughable DF, they have had the worst OSPDAF of all manufacturers. I love Nikon but to say they've been pondering a solid milc system in my opinion is laughable. They are playing catch up.... Much more than canon who have DP.

I genuinely hope Nikon pulls the rabbit out the hat. You're saying as if I don't understand the importance of Nikon having an adapter... I've been saying that was their only option for ages.

Just look at Sony as a case study.
 
Last edited:
Nikon and Canon have the huge advantage of a very loyal customer base, brand recognition, excellent retailer relationships (due to the first two points) and extensive global professional support.

They only need to be within maybe 75% of the ability of an a7RII initially to start hoovering up some serious mirrorless sales figures, particularly Canon who are essentially the default brand for many buying a camera. Nail the first party adaptor and they can dine off that for a good few years whilst they flesh out the native glass.

A lot are saying they need something unique or game changing for it to take off, but I just don't see it. Look at the incredible effort Fuji and Sony have put in, yet as far as I'm aware the distinctly half hearted EOS-M series still comfortably holds its own in terms of mirrorless market share.
 
twist said:
<snip>You're saying as if I don't understand the importance of Nikon having an adapter... I've been saying that was their only option for ages.

Just look at Sony as a case study.
Click to expand...

It can be read like that because of statements like "What would the incentive be in making adapted old glass as good as the new stuff they want to push?" and the tone of your posts.

The incentive for making current lenses with an adapter perform as well as possible is obviously to make the new cameras as appealing and accessible to the greatest number (okay, you get that ;)). And in so doing, current lenses will retain their value better, making trade-ups easier and generating goodwill. Nikon doesn't actually have to do much to new native-mirrorless lenses to make everybody want them anyway, even if it's just cosmetic styling with some magic new finish and a bit of marketing spin.

Nikon has every incentive to make their current lenses perform as well as possible, and no incentive to hobble them in some way. However, it wouldn't surprise me if the same could not be said for third party optics... :eek: I really hope that doesn't happen though, as it would pee off a lot of people and could seriously back-fire.
 
Last edited:
Well it appears from an update to the Nikon teaser site the new camera will have a new lens mount and new lenses at launch and also an adapter for F mount lenses to be used.

Also I'd say Canon and Nikon have probably been carrying out R&D while watching how Sony have got on with the A7 series probably to guage how the market would react to a full frame mirrorless camera. Yes Sony have a good lead but I doubt the big two will be far behind with there launch products. I also don't see why they have to be equal or better than say the A7mk3. Surely you buy a camera based on how it feels and ease of use over top trump tech specs?
 
It does say the adapter is in development so may not be ready for release. I’m interested to see how this is priced..
 
ian-83 said:
I also don't see why they have to be equal or better than say the A7mk3. Surely you buy a camera based on how it feels and ease of use over top trump tech specs?
Click to expand...
I guess it depends on your viewpoint and what you need from a camera, most buy for IQ, others for speed, others for ISO abilities etc and some prioritize these over ergonomics etc. :)
I think they need to come close to what the Sony A7 III can do including its £2k price point.
 
Riz_Guru said:
I guess it depends on your viewpoint and what you need from a camera, most buy for IQ, others for speed, others for ISO abilities etc and some prioritize these over ergonomics etc. :)
I think they need to come close to what the Sony A7 III can do including its £2k price point.
Click to expand...

Definitely if your using a camera for a living it needs to have certain specs. Also I know keen enthusiasts will want certain specs if there keen on landscape or sports etc.

They definitely have there work cut out as the A7 III seems a very good benchmark camera to go up against.
 
Hurry up Nikon and release full details so you can take my money! [emoji3] or at least let me make my up mind about where to go next as I've deliberately waited for the Nikon mirrorless system to be announced before decided whether to stay Nikon or go Sony.
 
Stu Meech said:
Hurry up Nikon and release full details so you can take my money! [emoji3] or at least let me make my up mind about where to go next as I've deliberately waited for the Nikon mirrorless system to be announced before decided whether to stay Nikon or go Sony.
Click to expand...

Why not get a D850 (or a used D810) and be done if you want a body upgrade?

Mirrorless cameras tend to be small and fiddly, chew batteries, not as robust and cost a mint. Given what you do I'm not sure it is a good fit.
 
SFTPhotography said:
Why not get a D850 (or a used D810) and be done if you want a body upgrade?

Mirrorless cameras tend to be small and fiddly, chew batteries, not as robust and cost a mint. Given what you do I'm not sure it is a good fit.
Click to expand...
Because if I do go mirrorless I want to reduce weight, not increase it with a D810/850. Plus not really sure I need over 24mpx. At the moment it's only a thinking stage, I may very well stay with the D750 as it's still an excellent camera and has served me very well.
 
Eloise said:
Because for a long time Nikon will be relying in the F mount 300mm, 400mm, 500mm, 600mm even 70-200 f/2.8 and more. A near perfect adaptor allows Nikon to say that from launch you can use their camera for any situation. There is less (if any) advantage of a “mirrorless” lens over a DSLR lens at those lengths, and Nikon can continue launching F mount lenses for the 1000s of DSLRs out there knowing they can be used on the 10s (okay exageration) of mirrorless Nikon’s sold.

Given that Nikon have likely been considering mirrorless for several years, I would suspect the newer E type aperture lenses would be close to perfect.
Click to expand...
I agree this is the only way forward for Nikon, fingers crossed the adapter works. I concede what Twist says in that it won't be 100% as good as native, but if it's 95-98% as good then I'm sure it will be good enough.

Nikon "considering" mirrorless and actually taking it seriously are two different things ;) I've no doubt Canikon have been watching the A7 series very closely over the years though.

ukaskew said:
Nikon and Canon have the huge advantage of a very loyal customer base, brand recognition, excellent retailer relationships (due to the first two points) and extensive global professional support.

They only need to be within maybe 75% of the ability of an a7RII initially to start hoovering up some serious mirrorless sales figures, particularly Canon who are essentially the default brand for many buying a camera. Nail the first party adaptor and they can dine off that for a good few years whilst they flesh out the native glass.

A lot are saying they need something unique or game changing for it to take off, but I just don't see it. Look at the incredible effort Fuji and Sony have put in, yet as far as I'm aware the distinctly half hearted EOS-M series still comfortably holds its own in terms of mirrorless market share.
Click to expand...
I do worry that this may be the case. The reason that I say worry is that they may be relying on brand loyalty rather than going whole hog and develop something properly that will match the current market. I would rather them delay another 6 months or so and make sure it's competitive rather than releasing something that's only as good as the original A7.

Where this Nikon release and the Canon M series differ is that the M series fits more into the consumer market, whereas all rumours are pointing towards the Z-mount being aimed at the enthusiast and maybe even pro market. As such people in this market are much more critical and have more serious demands, and are less likely to accept a half baked attempt. I may be wrong but I would hazard a guess that the majority of Canon M users don't know and don't give a monkeys about tracking, don't give a monkeys if the AF can nail focus in a millisecond and be bang on using f1.4 glass etc etc. Most might not even take it off auto (sorry for those that are more serious and do have the M series, you obviously aren't the ones I'm talking about here ;)). I'm not saying you'll not get some rich consumers buying the new Nikon and approach the camera in this way, but I would imagine the larger percentage will be pretty serious togs.

HoppyUK said:
It can be read like that because of statements like "What would the incentive be in making adapted old glass as good as the new stuff they want to push?" and the tone of your posts.

The incentive for making current lenses with an adapter perform as well as possible is obviously to make the new cameras as appealing and accessible to the greatest number (okay, you get that ;)). And in so doing, current lenses will retain their value better, making trade-ups easier and generating goodwill. Nikon doesn't actually have to do much to new native-mirrorless lenses to make everybody want them anyway, even if it's just cosmetic styling with some magic new finish and a bit of marketing spin.

Nikon has every incentive to make their current lenses perform as well as possible, and no incentive to hobble them in some way. However, it wouldn't surprise me if the same could not be said for third party optics... :eek: I really hope that doesn't happen though, as it would pee off a lot of people and could seriously back-fire.
Click to expand...
I think it would be a very bad move to 'hobble' the adapter. Now there's nothing to say that as they produce new z-mount lenses that they perform even better, and over time people may want to gradually buy z-mount glass, but for me f-mount has to work 95% minimum as well as they do on DSLRs. IF f-mount does work very well then Nikon can focus on making some lighter glass to fill voids in the FX lens lineup, such as the 24-70mm f4 that I believe is one of the lenses that will be available at launch. If they can then start making some lighter slower teles such as a 400mm f4 or f5.6 then they will be able to offer a genuinely lighter alternative to their DSLRs (with compromises in light gathering obviously).

andy1868 said:
Well, kind of an announcement. Full frame mirrorless with new mount, along with an adapter in development. Not really anything that we didn’t already know, or thought we knew.

https://www.europe-nikon.com/en_GB/...acebook-social-july-2018-ml-da-trailer-launch
Click to expand...
Just confirms what was said on Nikon rumors really (y)
 
SFTPhotography said:
Why not get a D850 (or a used D810) and be done if you want a body upgrade?

Mirrorless cameras tend to be small and fiddly, chew batteries, not as robust and cost a mint. Given what you do I'm not sure it is a good fit.
Click to expand...
TBH I have large hands and find the EM1 the best camera I've used in terms of ergonomics (not used it with heavy glass though) so if the new Nikon is similar to this it would be great.

Stu Meech said:
Because if I do go mirrorless I want to reduce weight, not increase it with a D810/850. Plus not really sure I need over 24mpx. At the moment it's only a thinking stage, I may very well stay with the D750 as it's still an excellent camera and has served me very well.
Click to expand...
Mmmmmm, D850 ;)
 
twist said:
Have they really? I love Nikon but to say they've been pondering a solid milc system in my opinion is laughable.
Click to expand...
Well unless the rumours over the last few years have been completely made up... yes they have been considering mirrorless for a relative long time.
T_J_G said:
It does say the adapter is in development so may not be ready for release. I’m interested to see how this is priced..
Click to expand...
It also says the body(s) and lenses are “in development”. So not sure if you’re reading more into the “adaptor is in development” than it really implies.
 
snerkler said:
I think it would be a very bad move to 'hobble' the adapter. Now there's nothing to say that as they produce new z-mount lenses that they perform even better, and over time people may want to gradually buy z-mount glass, but for me f-mount has to work 95% minimum as well as they do on DSLRs. IF f-mount does work very well then Nikon can focus on making some lighter glass to fill voids in the FX lens lineup, such as the 24-70mm f4 that I believe is one of the lenses that will be available at launch. If they can then start making some lighter slower teles such as a 400mm f4 or f5.6 then they will be able to offer a genuinely lighter alternative to their DSLRs (with compromises in light gathering obviously).
Click to expand...
There’s no reason to think that Z mount lenses (longer than say 50mm) will be inherently smaller / lighter than equivalent F mount. And until Nikon mirrrorless dominates the Nikon lens mount; a near perfect adaptor and continue f mount lenses makes sense so you can sell your new lenses to the whole of the market. Yes Z mount wide angle makes sense and “specialist” lenses such as the rumoured 35 f/1.1 and 50mm f/0.95 but Nikon (IMO) will want to continue F mount sales for a long time even beyond any future discontinuation of F mount cameras.

New lenses in the future may work better - just like 70-200 f/2.8E is better than 70-200 f/2.8G Mk2 is better than 70-200 f/2.8G ... but that might not be inherently from being native Z mount vs adapted F mount.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top