Nikkon Mirrorless incoming

[jonneymendoza]

Depends really. If you're just starting out then the ones which will release will keep you busy enough for now.

If you're a pro with a Nikon lens catalog who wants to switch, then yeah it will have a deciding factor.

Just read its got built in 5-axis VR. Same as the Olympus system. Nice!

But if your starting out, why jump the Z lineup with just 2 lens available now(the 35 is out october) vs sony that has over 25 lenses ready for you?

People will tend to go for a system that is more mature and sony and other mirrorless brands are.

 

[robj20]

It looks like its going to come down purely to whether or not you prefer the feel of the Sony or the Nikon, and lens selection. Because when it comes to comparing specs its basically just trading blows.

Good, this is what it should be IMO.

It's not how it should be, they should strive to beat the competition not match it.
No reason for me to change, of your starting out may as well go Sony, more native lenses and cheaper.
Yet to see how the Nikon performs lot less AF points.

I think what I wanted to see from Nikon is them to beat Sony at most things and push Sony to drop prices to compete.

 

[i know nothing]

Depends really. If you're just starting out then the ones which will release will keep you busy enough for now.

If you're a pro with a Nikon lens catalog who wants to switch, then yeah it will have a deciding factor.

Screw the pro's, what about amateurs like me on a budget who already have a couple/few Nikon lenses?

 

[Phate]

It's not how it should be, they should strive to beat the competition not match it.
No reason for me to change, of your starting out may as well go Sony, more native lenses and cheaper.
Yet to see how the Nikon performs lot less AF points.

I think what I wanted to see from Nikon is them to beat Sony at most things and push Sony to drop prices to compete.

They were never going to beat it on the first release of a Mirrorless camera, so they've tried to match it, spec wise.

 

[Phate]

Screw the pro's, what about amateurs like me on a budget who already have a couple/few Nikon lenses?

Then you buy the adapter?

 

[Raymond Lin]

It's not how it should be, they should strive to beat the competition not match it.
No reason for me to change, of your starting out may as well go Sony, more native lenses and cheaper.
Yet to see how the Nikon performs lot less AF points.

I think what I wanted to see from Nikon is them to beat Sony at most things and push Sony to drop prices to compete.

This does best Sony, the A72 and A7R2, which was on market when this started development, but I bet they didn’t see the A9/A73 coming and how far that has pushed things and it’s a bit late in R&D then to change some things for this release.

 

[Phate]

But if your starting out, why jump the Z lineup with just 2 lens available now(the 35 is out october) vs sony that has over 25 lenses ready for you?

People will tend to go for a system that is more mature and sony and other mirrorless brands are.

Because, as I said. Some might pick up the Sony and just hate the way it feels.

When I bought my first camera waaaaay ways back I held A Canon 350D and whatever the equivilant Nikon was. I got the Canon as I preferred how it felt. Then went from there.

It can have all the lenses it likes, it won't matter if you can't stand it in your hands - well, to some people at least. There was a guy on TP recently who really wanted to give M43 a go. he went to the store, picked up an Olympus, hated it so much hes abandoned the idea completely

 

[Greebo]

This article has a chart outlining what lenses Nikon will introduce over the next couple of years.

I wonder how much the F lens adapter will be? I think that has to be critical right? Or am I wrong?

£267. You can ore order it today..

 

[Greebo]

They were never going to beat it on the first release of a Mirrorless camera, so they've tried to match it, spec wise.

Which matches what people say in that it will take Nikon and Canon two years at least to catch up with Sony

 

[D.P.]

To you maybe. For me size is far more important, the reason im holding onto my A7R is because the newer A7's have grown. Would love the better AF and built in stabilisation but not at the expense of size and weight.
Would have loved Nikon to make something smaller, im not overly invested in Sony yet so a change wouldnt have been difficult.

If size is an issue then you need to drop the Sony system and move to M43.

 

[robj20]

If size is an issue then you need to drop the Sony system and move to M43.

Size is an issue but still within full frame, if you can show me an M43 that offers the same resolution, dynamic range, depth of field and low light performance, then i would change to M43 in a heart beat.
When size is an issue for me over those points i have my RX100.

 

[jonneymendoza]

Because, as I said. Some might pick up the Sony and just hate the way it feels.

When I bought my first camera waaaaay ways back I held A Canon 350D and whatever the equivilant Nikon was. I got the Canon as I preferred how it felt. Then went from there.

It can have all the lenses it likes, it won't matter if you can't stand it in your hands - well, to some people at least. There was a guy on TP recently who really wanted to give M43 a go. he went to the store, picked up an Olympus, hated it so much hes abandoned the idea completely

Is a feel of a camera worth more then if an actual lens you shoot with is available on the system?

I imagine that Many would first see what lenses etc are available right now vs the ergonmics.

The canon you chose is not fair though because canon and Nikon had teh same sort of lens lineup back then so of course you would consider the feel of the camera but what if now today you yourself was starting from scratch and wanted a FF mirrorless system. Would your first priority be how the camera feels ahead of lens selection, IQ on lenses and sensor, camera features etc?

Dont forget these are tools and ergonmics dont make a particular image , the actual lens you use, sensor, IQ and possibly even the camera settings help. not ergonomics and looks.

 

[D.P.]

Size is an issue but still within full frame, if you can show me an M43 that offers the same resolution, dynamic range, depth of field and low light performance, then i would change to M43 in a heart beat.
When size is an issue for me over those points i have my RX100.

Well you need to choose. If you want a FF camera the you will have bigger and heavier lenses and that will feel more comfortable with a bigger camera.
IF you prioritize size then you can't beat M43.

 

[D.P.]

Is a feel of a camera worth more then if an actual lens you shoot with is available on the system?

I imagine that Many would first see what lenses etc are available right now vs the ergonmics.

The canon you chose is not fair though because canon and Nikon had teh same sort of lens lineup back then so of course you would consider the feel of the camera but what if now today you yourself was starting from scratch and wanted a FF mirrorless system. Would your first priority be how the camera feels ahead of lens selection, IQ on lenses and sensor, camera features etc?

Dont forget these are tools and ergonmics dont make a particular image , the actual lens you use, sensor, IQ and possibly even the camera settings help. not ergonomics and looks.

You are buying inot a system though, so a short term outlook is pointless. Ergonomics change a little between camera generations but there is a lot of consistency. For example I find Canon DSLR incredibly odd with dials going the wrong way, mount is backwards and much more limited UI with equal models to Nikon lacking top LCD or having only a single dial for aperture.


Anyway, the most importan thing is how well the F-mount adapter works. These are nearly always disappointing but the F-mount adapter Nikon made for the Nikon 1 series was one of the better ones. The issue comes doen to the short flange height and unique micro-lens array required, plus the completley different AF system can cause lots of issues.

 

[robj20]

Well you need to choose. If you want a FF camera the you will have bigger and heavier lenses and that will feel more comfortable with a bigger camera.
IF you prioritize size then you can't beat M43.

I already have chosen, i am more than happy with the size of my A7R and lenses. What i don't like is the slow increase in size with each new camera.

Who's to say Nikon could have made a smaller version of the A72. It does look like the trend is to keep growing, so until a feature comes out that i think justifies the size increase i will have to stick with what i have.

 

[jonneymendoza]

You are buying inot a system though, so a short term outlook is pointless. Ergonomics change a little between camera generations but there is a lot of consistency. For example I find Canon DSLR incredibly odd with dials going the wrong way, mount is backwards and much more limited UI with equal models to Nikon lacking top LCD or having only a single dial for aperture.


Anyway, the most importan thing is how well the F-mount adapter works. These are nearly always disappointing but the F-mount adapter Nikon made for the Nikon 1 series was one of the better ones. The issue comes doen to the short flange height and unique micro-lens array required, plus the completley different AF system can cause lots of issues.

Which is my point?

You dont buy a camera for its ergonmics u buy for the system as a whole and lets all be 100% here. NO ONE here can say that the Z nikon system with its 2 lenses and two cameras is better then the SOny E mount system

 

[Raymond Lin]

You are buying inot a system though, so a short term outlook is pointless. Ergonomics change a little between camera generations but there is a lot of consistency. For example I find Canon DSLR incredibly odd with dials going the wrong way, mount is backwards and much more limited UI with equal models to Nikon lacking top LCD or having only a single dial for aperture.


Anyway, the most importan thing is how well the F-mount adapter works. These are nearly always disappointing but the F-mount adapter Nikon made for the Nikon 1 series was one of the better ones. The issue comes doen to the short flange height and unique micro-lens array required, plus the completley different AF system can cause lots of issues.

I guess this is what you are used to. I think Nikon’s mount is the wrong way myself, it is not just wrong way to Canon or Sony or Fuji or Olympus, it is the wrong way to every other thing in the world that screws down to lock, like the twist lock on a tripod, the plate on the tripod, a bottle cap, screw thread, drills, wheel nut, etc etc. Clockwise direction to go down, anti-clockwise to unscrew and lift.


Nikon’s mount is the opposite of that so IMO that is the wrong way.


As for ergonomics, it is also what you are used to, like the exposure compensation, I know older Nikon cameras when you turn the dial clockwise the needle goes to the left…that’s backwards, I know you can flip that around now but it really shouldn’t be an option on this as many things in the world you start from the left and go to the right, like opening a book, reading a sentence, you start from the left and go to the right. Who decides that it was logical to move the left (to minus) when you turn it clockwise? Move to the left, less light, move to the right, more light. More = clockwise, like you are reading more in a sentence, left to right.


It’s what you are used to, I am used to Canon, I am sure I can get used to a Nikon too, even that silly backwards mount.

 

[Drollic]

How do these lenses like the 24-70mm f2.8 that Nikon plan to release (and Sony already have) on FF compare to say a 16-55mm 2.8 on apsc both in terms of depth of field and required ISO? So say you're shooting a person early evening outdoors at the same equivalent focal length on both and both lenses at f2.8 and say 1/125 shutter speed. Much difference in the out of focus background and how much difference in ISO? Reasonable to assume if the apsc lens was needing say ISO 400 the FF camera would be say ISO 200-320 or?

 

[Wedge]

Not gunna lie I am gutted.

I was really looking forward to Nikon bringing out a mirrorless offering as good as Sonys, but it appears they have failed

New lens mount (which im sort of ok with) and a single card slot (I am not ok with) these things (amongst others) have left me feeling very flat

I have a D810 & D700 and was really excited about the prospect of going mirrorless, I have read and watched every Sony A7 review I could find and convinced myself that if Nikon make an equivalent camera i'd jump in .... Grrrr damn you Nikon!

 

[Energize]

Single card slot is an instant write off to me. Lens lineup seems mediocre, 24-70mm f2.8 is the bare minimum I'd expect, and no telephoto lens seriously?

Nikon seem to be repeating the same mistakes, the single card slot of the D7500 was a major turn off.