Nikon Retro F-Mount Camera (FM2 Style)

PB_PM

Thom Hogan wrote a good piece on this, and gives a good reason why Nikon might be going with the 16MP sensor, rather than the newer ones.

Ade

Being out of stock doesn't mean it's popular, it just means they were a limited production run camera. Somehow I doubt they sold in the millions, maybe a few thousand at best, considering the price tag.

For all we know, this retro-Nikon might also be a limited production run camera, a la the FM3a and the still-current F6. (The F6 might be a little extreme, I think they're only making 1 or 2 units a day now.)

Right now Nikon has 14 DSLRs with the Bayer CFA with minute feature distinctions between them. They should be courageous and introduce something different & exciting, not just make new cameras out of intentionally crippled old parts. Come on Nikon, put some magic into the new retro! One can only hope.

kyoshinikon

Im happy.. And Id buy it too. They actually made something at least a handful of us asked for...

KnockKnock

Just had a thought about old ergonomics. That rewind crank was actually really useful in stabilizing the body. In lieu of a bulky handle up front, having the thumb tucked-looped behind the crank really gave a good grip.

Of course we don't need to advance film anymore, but I wonder if that might be a Fn button of some sort - assigned to step through drive modes. Too weird?

Gareth

Here's a crazy idea that would distinguish this from the rest of Nikon's lineup.

LEAF SHUTTER

I will be all over this if they give it a leaf shutter, especially if they can get the shutter speed down to 1/8000th!

Msmoto

Leaf shutter....mmmm......

Monochrome......this sounds very interesting. At least to someone who bought Plus-X by the 100' rolls in the 1960's....

Does anyone know how monochrome affects the high ISO of a sensor? Does this mean a top ISO of 800,000 for the D4 sensor when changed to B & W? Yikes! Even the Leica monochrom has 10,000 ISO from a sensor design nearly 10 years old.

TaoTeJared

Here's a crazy idea that would distinguish this from the rest of Nikon's lineup.

LEAF SHUTTER

I will be all over this if they give it a leaf shutter, especially if they can get the shutter speed down to 1/8000th!

The D4/D800 already has 1/8000th shutter. Granted the flash is not the same. My X100 has one, about the only reason I want the X100s, I can sync that to 1/2000 with just about any flash out there. Leaf shutters are built in lenses so I really doubt it.
-----------

Just a note on video - that is part of the heat issues with the D300s, Canon 5dmkII, and many others is the heat generated by the system. It makes sense to leave it out if the housing doesn't provide enough heat dispersion. I find it hard to imagine but don't care either way.

It will be interesting to see if this is a Sony designed sensor. Obviously they have had to deal with the same limitations with their A7/r designs. I seriously doubt it is the D4's sensor (too many see the same # of MP and assume incorrectly it is the same sensor) I don't know of a teardown that has ever shown that to be the case other than the two lower DX consumer bodies. Either way I welcome the lower MP sensor, especially if it even is half as good as the D4. Hell even if it matched my D800 it would be great. I'm getting tired of shooting 30mb family photos.

TaoTeJared

Thom Hogan wrote a good piece on this, and gives a good reason why Nikon might be going with the 16MP sensor, rather than the newer ones.

Where is that at - haven't been able to find that article. Would like to read that one.

heartyfisher

Leaf shutter....mmmm......

Monochrome......this sounds very interesting. At least to someone who bought Plus-X by the 100' rolls in the 1960's....

Does anyone know how monochrome affects the high ISO of a sensor? Does this mean a top ISO of 800,000 for the D4 sensor when changed to B & W? Yikes! Even the Leica monochrom has 10,000 ISO from a sensor design nearly 10 years old.

The Bayer filter theoretically filters out 2/3 of the light energy from reaching the sensor. so by removing that filter you gain 3 times the light energy. ie about 1.4 stops. so you can add at least 1 stop on top of your current sensors high iso capability.

sevencrossing

Where is that at - haven't been able to find that article. Would like to read that one.

I don't seem to able to post a link but search

the-return-of-the-fm.

TaoTeJared

Does anyone know how monochrome affects the high ISO of a sensor? Does this mean a top ISO of 800,000 for the D4 sensor when changed to B & W? Yikes! Even the Leica monochrom has 10,000 ISO from a sensor design nearly 10 years old.

The Bayer filter basically filters out 2/3 of the light energy from reaching the sensor. so by removing that filter you gain 3 times the light energy. ie about 1.4 stops. so you can add at least 1 stop on top of your current sensors high iso capability.



Actually that is not correct at all. The focus on added sensitivity is mostly a Leica hype thing - their M9 was topped out at iso 2,500. The monochrome hit iso 10,000. I have read similar statements on a few leica threads and blogs but is completely wrong. My experience has been that leica shooters are wonderful image creators but horrifically technically illiterate.

Bayer sensors (no such thing as filter) capture light (actually reads intensity of) each primary color spread throughout the sensor in various patterns. Then it combines the sensitivity of each color to make multiple pixels through a massive calculation. So 3,4,6 pixels combine to create 3,4,6 pixels. In simplest of thoughts, 3 pixels = 1 pixel of output image. Then 1 or 2 of the previous pixels used then then reused and combined with different adjoining pixels to create another outputted pixel. And so on, and so forth.

What a monochrome sensor does is read light intensity at every pixel and each pixel = output pixel. The extra sensitivity is due to primarily 3 factors; 1) Less calculations = less error outs vs bayer sensor. (not much of a gain.) 2) each RGB colors actually limits a bit of light being recorded. In real life, each pixel is receiving the full spectrum of light, but only part of the spectrum is passed. This adds a bit more headroom but not much if even noticeable. 3) Now this is the biggie - what B&W sensor tech was designed for... Industrial use. Scanning barcodes (QR codes), handwriting, finding minute cracks and errors in things in mediocre lighting to surveillance. Many more millions of dollars have been pumped into developing B&W sensors so they can read at high isos - just not for consumer use. Kodak had been playing with B&W only sensors trying to get someone to use them, but Leica was the only one. (I think Leica's sensor is Kodak tech that got sold off to another company during the bankruptcy.)

Thorsten Overgaard gives really good articles on Leica and is a great photographer to boot. His article (here) gives a great compairson of the high ISOs. Many monochrome try-ers said they didn't see much of a difference from the M9 (minus they couldn't go beyond iso 2,500) and some have written that the new M 240 (24mp color) is almost as good (in B&W.)

One resounding criticism of the monochrome sensor is that you have to work every file. Straight out of the camera they look flat. The few dng files I have downloaded I have to agree. They also open a whole new realm of editing (much more leeway) and it is hard to do and would take some time to get use to them. To be honest, when I put a few monochrome 6400 images next to my D800, overall I couldn't see much difference. They are a very different look and the noise is less blotchy as there are no calculations but for end use, it's a toss up in my mind. Plus and minuses in both, and none are really comparable.

Gareth

...LEAF SHUTTER

Leaf shutters are built in lenses so I really doubt it.

Damn, I keep forgetting leaf shutters are in the lenses.

heartyfisher

@ TaoTeJared : Huh? of course there is a bayer filter with the 3 colours in a 2x2 pattern in a bayer sensor. a monochrome sensor simply removes this filter.

Of course to convert the bayer filter data we have all those de-mosaic algorithms. which "blurs" the image. so a Monochrome sensor will always be sharper as it does not need any de-mosaic-ing.

sevencrossing

even if you want a monochrome print, It make sense to shoot with colour sensor, as colour filters can applied in post

Ade

Actually that is not correct at all. The focus on added sensitivity is mostly a Leica hype thing ... My experience has been that leica shooters are wonderful image creators but horrifically technically illiterate.

Bayer sensors (no such thing as filter) capture light (actually reads intensity of) each primary color spread throughout the sensor in various patterns.

You got that backwards. There is no such thing as a "Bayer sensor". There is such a thing as a "Bayer filter", a commonly used color filter array:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bayer_filter

Understanding the basic principles above is required to understand why a Bayer filter affects ISO sensitivity. A Bayer filter doesn't work by spreading light throughout the sensor, but by blocking (filtering/absorbing) different frequencies light from reaching sensor elements.

In fact, a Bayer filter may block up to 50% of light from entering the sensor. If you google "light loss in Bayer CFA", you can see the the difference visually.

Msmoto

Sorry I asked...LOL

sevencrossing

any guesses what it will be called D400 ??? or D710 ????

Elvishefer

Elvishefer...sorry no video. See the updated specs.

I wasn't clear earlier... what I meant was, I don't want this camera to have video... but I didn't think Nikon would actually do it!

Still waiting on the Nikon brain fart though... there will have to be something wrong.

Symphotic

This could be a great idea, or it could be really cheesy. The FM2 was a great little enthusiast's camera: i really loved mine. I would say that in order to be "retro" the main feature would be a minimum of plastic. How are you going to make a 1.8G lens retro?

If it has the look and feel of an updated FM2, this could be genius on Nikon's part. And a D4 sensor? I'm all in if this is true. I could leave my D800 in the lab when I am out and about taking family photos or traveling.

NSXTypeR

any guesses what it will be called D400 ??? or D710 ????

FM-D!

PB_PM

This could be a great idea, or it could be really cheesy. The FM2 was a great little enthusiast's camera: i really loved mine. I would say that in order to be "retro" the main feature would be a minimum of plastic. How are you going to make a 1.8G lens retro?

If the want to make this really retro they need to make it a pancake style the lens to look like the E series 50mm F1.8/50mm F1.8 AI-S.

henrik1963

Still Wonder what "Hybrid" means?

PB_PM

Still Wonder what "Hybrid" means?

Nikon patented a hybrid viewfinder back in 2011, so I suppose it might be something along these lines.

moreorless

If the want to make this really retro they need to make it a pancake style the lens to look like the E series 50mm F1.8/50mm F1.8 AI-S. - See more at: http://forum.nikonrumors.com/discussion/1742/nikon-retro-f-mount-camera-fm2-style#Item_70

Doesn't seem like it would be that difficult to achieve given how recessed the front element is on the 50mm 1.8 G.

Seems to me that would be a great way to go up against the A7 as well, the latter might have a lesser flange distance but it looks to me that on FF this isn't nearly as great an advantage as on smaller formats.

Symphotic

Nikon patented a hybrid viewfinder back in 2011, so I suppose it might be something along these lines.

I like the hybrid viewfinder on my Fuji-X100s. What about if the new camera had no chimp-mode viewscreen on the back: just a veiwfinder with optical/electronic, and you would review your shots through the viewfinder?

To make the camera compact and thin, they would give up 100% optical view, but have it in electronic.