Nikon announcement inc (has to be..) I AM COMING (ohh err?)

Main thing is size. The Nikons, I think, use a 1/1.7" sensor like the P7100. The sensor will give you a better image than a compact or bridge, but it won't be as good as an APS-C or bigger.

It's a system for people who want good* pictures in a small and light package.


*assuming the picture quality is achievable.
 
It will be a Nikon mirrorless announcement most likely. I can't see them competing with micro four thirds mirrorless format, because Nikon are rumoured to be going with a 2.7x crop sensor for their mirrorless stuff. This means they can design the smallest mirrorless bodies on the market, but the depth of field control will be the worst. i.e. If you want to take images with nice bokeh (out of focus blurred background) then it's harder the higher cropped the sensor is. I don't have time to explain it properly now so someone else can. :)
 
Phate said:
What I'm trying to establish is what is the main drive for a mirrorless system! :)
Click to expand...

It basically makes a point and shoot system out of an SLR.
By removing the mirror the camera can be made smaller, that is about it really.

This doesn't change IQ but functionality. E.g., impossible/hard to get phase detection AF so autofocus doesn't stack up to an SLR. You loose the optical viewfinder and have to put up with a poor EVF.


The Sony mirrorless camera use the 1.5x crop APS sensor so no loss in image quality. But the lesnes have to be much the same size. So really, an Nikon 3100 kit makes more sense.

The microfourthirds mirrorless have a 2x crop factor so offer a step down in IQ, but still require somewhat karger lenses tahn most would consider pocketable.

The Nikon system has a slightly smaller sensor again, 2.7crop. So slightly lower image quality but hoepfully substantially smaller lenses. The sensor is still several times large than even large sensored compacts.
 
D.P. said:
The Nikon system has a slightly smaller sensor again, 2.7crop. So slightly lower image quality but hoepfully substantially smaller lenses. The sensor is still several times large than even large sensored compacts.
Click to expand...
My previous post was wrong, the mirrorless sensor is about 160% the size of the P7100 sensor so image quality should be significantly improved. Still doesn't make me want one though.
 
jaybee said:
It will be a Nikon mirrorless announcement most likely. I can't see them competing with micro four thirds mirrorless format, because Nikon are rumoured to be going with a 2.7x crop sensor for their mirrorless stuff. This means they can design the smallest mirrorless bodies on the market, but the depth of field control will be the worst. i.e. If you want to take images with nice bokeh (out of focus blurred background) then it's harder the higher cropped the sensor is. I don't have time to explain it properly now so someone else can. :)
Click to expand...

Well, you hardly buy 4/3rds if you care about depth of field, it's significantly better on a APS-C/DX sensor which you can have for the same money as 4/3rds kits pretty much.

I also think image quality will be right up there with 4/3rds, the sensors in those haven't much improved since they first launched so it's achievable for a new Nikon sensor with 2.7x crop to be as good I think.

While I can't see myself wanting one I think Nikon have the market well targeted, it'll be smaller than most of the mirror less competition with the same image quality. For all the serious photographers who want a 'pro' mirrorless (meet the M9 guys...) there are far more who want better than a compact but think a DSLR is too big and have never heard of depth of field. Nikon care about the money not the photo geeks.
 
A mirrorless camera makes it
1, more durable as the less mechanical parts means longer stronger living cameras.
2, Its silent shooting so you pesky wedding photographers can shoot until your batteries die.
3, It would allow for super high capture speeds if they ever improved or discarded the shutter.
4, smaller cameras (pros cons)

Completely redesigned for auto focus so don't expect pro cameras to see the feature until its kinks and work arounds are sorted.
 
You still get that lovely shutter slap.


I want FF mirrorless system camera. Why didn't Nikon do this? :(

Lenses are also getting more compact without the traditional constraints, check out this new Panasonic pancake zoom, it's tiny! :cool:

1442vs20-001.jpg
 
Last edited:
I'm well aware of that, still a nice feature to have :)

Equally the 10 fPS mode will likely be limited to around 8-9 shots before the buffer fills, slowing it down.
 
So nikon has released a Pentax Q etque CMOS with rather poor lens choices? To be honest, this was a poor sector to go down, smaller than a m4/3 but still not pocketable will put people off, especially their target point ans shoot crowd. Amateur to pro crowd are completely left out so as not to compete with its own market but with Olympus release of an even smaller body for m4/3 first quarter next year, I suuspect this is going to be a flop beyond Nikon fanatics and brand buyers.
 
Yep 2.7x crop. I'm out. What a bizarre decision.

bigredshark said:
Well, you hardly buy 4/3rds if you care about depth of field, it's significantly better on a APS-C/DX sensor which you can have for the same money as 4/3rds kits pretty much
Click to expand...

Loads of people went micro 4/3rds as it's a great compromise between having a camera capable of being "good enough" and still vvery, very compact with the benefit of interchagable lenses. The Sony Nex range arguably are more "pro" due to the larger sensor yes, but have you seen their lens line up if you can even call it that? It's hideous. There are no lenses worth buying for Nex. That system will always be plagued with lenses of similar size to DSLR so what's the point in it?

Micro 4/3rds on the other hand is worth it for compactness and has a very well established lens line up. There are also developments on the horizon with some very exciting new lenses coming to market. All it needs is a rangefinder style body like the nex7 that has a decent built in electronic viewfinder. (which will come within 6 months imo or possibly before xmas).

As for depth of field on micro 4/3rds...a lot of people seem to be doing ok with bokeh on m43rds actually. The new Oly 45mm f/1.8 is a great lens. 20mm panny pancake lens. Also there are f/0.95 mm Voigtlander lenses if you must have equivalent f/1.8 razor thin DOF.

I'm just saying Nikon 2.7x crop would mean huuuuge and expensive lenses if they ever wanted to produce something with serious DOF possibilities. The fast light gathering of larger apetures is still there of course, it's just the range of depth of field with higher cropped lenses. Micro 4/3rds will continue to shine in my opinion. Nothing can touch it now except Canon if they release something.
 
Depends on the image quality surely? if the Nikon D adapter works well and the quality's good, i can see quite a few people who wouldn't mind strapping their 70-200 2.8's onto a 2.7x crop for wildlife.
 
Who's going to pick this over 4/3 or nex kit? the sensor will have to have some magical capture capabilities.
 
Mr Jones said:
Silent shooting - everyone raved how quiet the X100 is? All that's moving is the shutter. No flip flop like DSLRs. I know it's a rangefinder style, but the same iah can be said for the micro four third system. One major point, when they can get over the buffer barrier, is faster frame per sec. Think sony and it's 10 fps through mirror, now mirrorless will save light loss and the machine gun flip flopping of mirror.

None that good yet, most focused on compact system instead of speed.
Click to expand...

Silent shooting? You haven't laid hands on one of Olympus' PEN cameras, right? :D
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom