New Nikon 16 MP Portrait lens Retro Camera

CJ_6118

Hi .. has anybody heard of a New Nikon camera that will be of a retro design.. It will be 16 MP - A Portrait kind of Camera .. Less features but the ones it will have will be top quality ? I believe it will not have a Video for example . Any Rumours ? Thanks

donaldejose

Just two points:

1. ALL DSLRs are "retro design" by this point in time.

2. The approximately 16 mp "Portrait kind of Camera" already exists: just put a 50mm or 85mm or 105mm lens on a D3, D700, or D5100 or D7000 and you will have images of "top quality."

Benji2505

I sure would love to see a Leica-like design with FF sensor, F-mount and viewfinder. I'd buy it in a second, but I have a feeling that Nikon is leaving this market to the Fujifilms and Sonys of this world. The market is existent: you wait 1 year for the new Leica M, which has a pretty steep price.

Symphotic

I'd pay list for a digital full frame Nikon S with a 5 cm f/2 lens.

PB_PM

Just two points:
1. ALL DSLRs are "retro design" by this point in time.

In what way? The form of DSLR's are limited by physical constraints, but that does not mean all of them have a retro design. Now if Nikon replaced the D800, with a D900 that shared the same physical design as the F90, that would be retro design.

Msmoto

The semantics of the term "retro" may be confusing. I usually think in terms of the current VW Beetle....retro only in a broad stretch of one's imagination.

For a camera manufacturer to produce a camera with limited(retro) features would not be wise when the electronics in the body are not the expensive part. Think of all the capabilities of the Nikon consumer DSLR's.

I think the DSLR is a design which will eventually be replaced by the rapidly evolving electronic viewfinder, once the image in the eyepiece looks live, as if it were ground glass and the focusing system is perfected. My guess is we will see this within a few years in a pro body by both Nikon and Canon. But, a too rapid movement forward can be a disaster from a marketing perspective.....as in Nissan 300ZX...LOL

heartyfisher

@CJ_6118 isn't that the coolpix A you just described?

PB_PM

The semantics of the term "retro" may be confusing. I usually think in terms of the current VW Beetle....retro only in a broad stretch of one's imagination.

For a camera manufacturer to produce a camera with limited(retro) features would not be wise when the electronics in the body are not the expensive part. Think of all the capabilities of the Nikon consumer DSLR's.

I think of retro in these terms (from the New American Oxford Dictionary)

Retro: imitative of a style, fashion, or design from the recent past: retro 60s fashions.

I think we need to separate retro camera and retro design. Using a retro design with modern tech is totally acceptable. See the Leica M series, the Fuji X series etc.

If Nikon made a retro body, it should be based on one of the 1980's F bodies, with dials for ISO and shutter speed. Throw in the film advance knob as a way to turn the camera on and off. Keep the F-mount and minimize the gadgets. Yes a limited number of people would buy one, but heck it would be full frame, charge $3000 for it.

donaldejose

I use the term "retro" for the DSLR because it still has two things from the 50s and 60s which will soon be dropped: the mirror and the optical viewfinder. When those two items are no longer needed designers will be able to design from a clean sheet of paper and the shape of the camera can change significantly. For example, you won't need the space taken by a mirror box and the EVF can be located anywhere since it no longer needs to be aligned with the lens. The use of a mirror box and OVF dictate a DSLR shape the same as the old film cameras of the 50s and 60s. Modern technology will soon free designers from these constraints. Thus, I see the current body design of the DSLR as the last in the line of cameras such as the Nikon F. The next generation of digital bodies will likely be more like the old rangefinder designs which did not use a moving mirror and did not need to have an optical viewfinder in line with the lens.

Some people use the term "retro" to refer to the metal/leather and dial/lever look of the old rangefinders and SLRs rather than the black plastic and buttons/menu look of the current DLSRs. I am not using it in that sense. The whole concept of a mirror and OVF will be considered "retro" in just a few years so we are now using the last generation of that old design.

Msmoto

I think Donald has a good point.....and I can see an eye level style viewfinder which will move from the rear to the top of the camera. Eye close, looking at 45° like a Hasselblad 500C or an old Rolleiflex... the elimination of the mirror box will allow almost anything and excellent functionality.

We may see some very interesting camera bodies in the next five years.....

Benji2505

I have a feeling that the Leica M is more the role model everybody is going after in the moment.

Tradewind35

5 years is a long time in consumer electronics and the widgets inside the bodies of the future will of course change. As a hand held device for capturing images however, what the thing looks like and how if feels in the hand will still matter. I like intelligent Retro Design - by that I mean the latest state of the art technology presented in a wrapper which captures the style and qualities of previous generation classic engineering.
The latest VW Beetle captures this well but another example is the (BMW) Mini.
The old British Austin/Morris Mini was a classic in its day. But by modern standards unsafe, cramped, uncomfortable etc, etc. Still brilliant fun to drive however.
BMW came up with the hugely successful modern Mini which captures the sense of fun of the old without sharing a single component from the old - a triumph of intelligent retro design.
The camera equivalent would be if Nikon could capture the simplicity, purity of form and functional simplicity of say an FM3A - and wrap up the very latest technology in a body which does away with multiple scrolling through menus, sub menus and options. Give it an intuitive user interface - a few quality knobs, dials and buttons. Good photography does not need three quarters of the options buried in modern DSLRs. An I Phone does not need all the fluff to take great photos. Volume sales will of course go to mainstream models with all the bells and whistles or the camera phones at the opposite end of the spectrum but a substantial market must be out there for cameras which are simply nice to use.
Simple can be beautiful - particularly if it is very complicated inside.
Robin

CJ_6118

Thanks for the above comments - I may off explained it rather badly .. All I know this Camera is been released in the next month or two ? By the comments so far - know one has actually heard what this camera is or will be ??? I am assured it will be out soon !! cost £2,000 or just below .. Time will tell .. Watch this space I guess ? What ever it is Retro or not ?

donaldejose

Bose audio equipment could be an example of simple user interface but good quality output.

It would be interesting if Nikon could produce a very simple/durable retro design body like the NIkon FM. Although many people complain about the time it takes to find features deeply embedded in complex menus I find it hard to believe people will give up the ability to access so many features. Perhaps the answer is two part: allow access to commonly used functions via buttons and provide access to less frequently used functions via menus. But that already is what distinguishes the "pro" control layout" from "consumer control layout." If someone wants a simpler camera Nikon offers the D3200 and D5300. If someone wants a backup camera the best one is the same body as your main camera or just use the last generation of your current body or one step down from your current main body.

CJ_6118

@CJ_6118 isn't that the coolpix A you just described?

Dont think so.. not sure what I am describing - My source will not tell me the details ... been very secretive. No one is talking about it !!