Nikon Retro F-Mount Camera (FM2 Style)

Emcee

I can't find it, but 3-4 mo. ago a wedding tog wrote a guest post on Mansurovs'. She was using a film rig as her secondary camera on Wedding Day, and as a primary on non-wedding-day parts of shoots. She marketed herself as such, and claimed it brought her a lot of extra business as a differentiation tool. Many of the sample shots she posted, in my opinion, were top class. I could see my wife and many of her friends eating that right up, especially with a strong portfolio.

http://photographylife.com/why-i-shoot-film-as-a-wedding-photographer I think this is what you are referencing

proudgeek

Maybe that's where the hybrid concept comes in. Last generation styling combined with next-generation pricing.

Elvishefer

Maybe that's where the hybrid concept comes in. Last generation styling combined with next-generation pricing.

Ha!

sevencrossing

Maybe that's where the hybrid concept comes in. Last generation styling combined with next-generation pricing.

In 1969 a Nikon Ftn plus Motor drive battery and a a f 1.4 lens cost £525 today, adjusted for inflation, it would cost £7, 332 ( in the UK a D4 cost ~ £4500)

framer

My insider say's it a d610 in a retro style body, 24mp FF sensor, no video and it will be less than 3000 like low 2K price.

framer

Ade

In 1969 a Nikon Ftn plus Motor drive battery and a a f 1.4 lens cost £525 today, adjusted for inflation, it would cost £7, 332 ( in the UK a D4 cost ~ £4500)

Using the GBP makes the numbers artificially higher, because of relatively high inflation rate in the UK compared to other industrialized countries over the same time period. A better measure for international trade would be to use the US dollar (6.5x inflation over the period). The Yen, thanks to years of deflation, only saw 3x inflation over the past 40 years. Other countries, France: 7.38x, Sweden: 8.2x, Italy: 19.5x.

shawnino

I think the inflation numbers are a canard. In ripping this thing to pieces, at a $3000 price point, it's not what it would cost now, or then. It's that for $3K it comes up more expensive and less well tricked out than a D800, period. If you need a D3/4, buy one of those. Otherwise, choosing this over a D800 is in my opinion a fashion statement.

Now if @framer's insider has it right, and it's closer to $2K, that might be game on. But there's nothing magical about $2K as a number: it's that the body can line up as a direct alternative to the new Sony FF mirrorless, Nikon's own D600, and whatever the competing Canon piece is.

Let's hope for a great price point and that Nikon sells millions and millions--won't be buying it myself short-term but would love to see Nikon hit it out of the park so that the company is awash with cash to do daring R&D projects going forward.

NSXTypeR

Maybe that's where the hybrid concept comes in. Last generation styling combined with next-generation pricing.

I agree- at that price you won't be selling too many retro digital FMs. You might as well just pick up a D610. It shouldn't be expensive because they threw out the flash. I wonder if it will still have the screw drive AF though.

TaoTeJared

There are a number of specs that don't make sense (as not true) to me - $3k is just another one. 16mp sensor? Hell even if it was the D3s's 12mp sensor or with the D4 16mp type sensor I'm guessing you are at $1,700 or about the same as the D300s. There is a price gap between the D7100 and D610, has not been filled. That gap was occupied by advanced amateurs, and a retro FX grabs a segment of those for sure. (Still leaves out a slug of people though.)

For price reference:
-a7R = $2,300 - 36mp a7 = $1,999 - 24mp
-FX, F mount, AF, camera is going to be $2,000 at a minimum.
-D610 = $1,999 - 24mp Body only
-1 lens kit = $2,496 24-85 ___ 1 lens kit = $2,496 28-300 ___ 2 lens kit = $2,946 24-85/70-300vr

Everyone needs to stop hanging on the marketing word of "hybrid" which could be a hybrid shutter, hybrid viewfinder, hybrid control dials, hybrid..... Hybrid now is just the rejuvenated marketing synonym of "excellent patchwork."

Even if this was a DX 16mp camera with the retro look it would be a big seller. If it is a FX D4 sensor, it would seriously kick some major butt in high iso quality, knock Fuji, m4/3rds, Sony and Leica to the gutter for the documentary style shooters that those brands own now. Add good AF (D3200ish) that will just sell tons of bodies. It would also show that Nikon has finally poked their heads out of the "Nikon bubble" and actually looked to see what people are buying.

moreorless

The teaser makes the latest rumours carry a bit more weight for me as it does seem to be a higher end model.

If your talking say an OVF/EVF, top level AF, top level build camera I don't think $3000 is "pushing it".

spraynpray

@TaoTeJared: I am intrigued that you seem to think that the 'gap' is a price gap - I always think of it as a spec gap. The D400 could be IMHO 1800 - 2500 and a gap that big doesn't exist in the current line-up.

Gareth

Just thought of something;

PARTIAL STOPS

Does anyone see this as being an issue?

I know you can fix it in post easily if shooting RAW, but less is more when it comes to post.

henrik1963

I will join the fun of guessing: The clicking sound you hear before the picture is taken - is that mirror lock up for using EVFmode?

heartyfisher

I will join the fun of guessing: The clicking sound you hear before the picture is taken - is that mirror lock up for using EVFmode?

Not sure.. maybe .. but more likely the sound of the dials to set shutter speed etc..

NSXTypeR

I also wonder if there will be a little window so you can see the F stop of the lens through the viewfinder...

Elvishefer

I am starting to get the feeling that it will be more expensive than I originally thought.

I watched that teaser, and thought about the target market.

At first glance:

• The guy is very, VERY much into photography... he's in some back/country spot by himself.
• He's male. Not a soccer mom. Well dressed.
• He's an artist. Or thinks of himself as one. 'Finally, pure photography! Gosh!!!'
• He's a slow shooter - landscape, not bird in flight

I would almost expect this guy to be carrying a Leica.

The ad just *feels* expensive.

So, yeah, now I'm thinking this isn't going to be the sub $2k camera I thought it would be.

proudgeek

"Pure photography?" I didn't realize what I've been doing all this time has been tainted.

donaldejose

I think the point of the video is this guy is shooting "old styie." He is evaluating the scene, deciding upon what composition he wants, evaluating the light and saying to himself "f_ and 1/____ second" should capture it as I want to show it, THEN he sets the f stop by rotating the lens f-stop ring and you hear two clicks, then he sets the shutter speed by rotating the shutter speed dial and you hear another two click, then he shoots and you hear the mirror/shutter actuate. Those clicks you hear were put into the video to show you the new retro camera is designed to operate in the "purt" "old way" of first creating the photo in your head and then setting your f-stop and shutter speed by clicking adjustments rather than by command dials. I still remember using that method with my first Nikon bodies. Back then I shot slide film mostly so any missed exposure couldn't be corrected during printing. There is one thing I would do different than the video portrays. I would often bring the camera to my eye and measure different parts of the scene with my camera's built in center weighted light meter before I selected the f-stop/shutter speed I wanted to set (sort of using an abbreviated version of Ansel Adams Zone System for those old enough to know of this). Doubtless the camera will also have a command dial to allow you to set f-stop on G series lenses and a dial to set A,P,S modes for step-less shutter speeds.

Just my guess.

I think it would be a lot of fun (for me) to revisit this "old style" of camera operation and of course you can shoot this way with any new Nikon set to M. However, there is something nostalgic about setting your f-stop on the lens and your shutter speed with the shutter speed dial. True, you many not hit that perfect exposure but a "work around" could be to set your ISO to Auto with a range of 100 to 200 and exposure compensation to 0 which should allow the camera to move whatever exposure you set to what the camera metering determines is "perfect" by slightly adjusting the ISO up to one stop.

Tradewind35

"Old style shooting" - I like that. Does that mean you don't have to spend ages staring at a little screen on the back and twiddling your thumbs to scroll through umpteen menus - which is what I see so many dslr shooters doing while the action/scene moves on or changes without them capturing the best bits?
Yes please Mr and Mrs Nikon, keep it coming.
Robin

donaldejose

Yes, in the "olden days" we would evaluate the light hitting our subject, decide on the proper f-stop/shutter speed combination to use for proper exposure and the effect we desired. Once those choices were made we stopped thinking about settings and just concentrated on "capturing the moment" until we noticed the light had changed. Then we would stop shooting long enough to chose an new f-stop/shutter speed combination, set them and then go back to concentrating on the subject. Endless menus and immediate picture review never existed in the "olden days" to distract us. Of course, we didn't enjoy their benefits either!

Ade

A "hybrid EVF / OVF" doesn't seem necessary for "old style shooting".

I'm really curious about what this new camera will offer. (Good job, Nikon marketing). What will be special about this new camera, that makes it a better tool than the ones I already have?

Come on Nikon make me a believer.

MikeGunter

Hi all,

Pitichblack had it right in another thread - marketing.

The emperor is walking around naked.

If you like the camera, fine.

But don't like it just because the advertising is pretty.

You marry your partner for a lot more than just look - ask the the person who has a divorce.

My best,

Mike

mikep

While this is attractive , I cannot imagine why anyone would actually use it as a pro camera. The ergonomics of the newer bodies is what has been improved, plus, if this has D4 features... It will no doubt be very pricey.

And, why produce this when what we are looking for is a new full frame mirror less, or D400?

i agree completely with this POV

i love the way it looks, but it is merely a dslr in a retro-stlye body; there is nothing new here - unfortunately ...

id much rather see something FF, mirrorless, with F mount, kinda like that sony RX thing. or even a whole new mount but not this half baked nikon 1 stuff where you get to chose from about 3 lenses.

what we want is mirco 4/3rds size, but with dslr buid quality, versatility and performance ..... isnt it ?

PB_PM

what we want is mirco 4/3rds size, but with dslr quality, versatility and performance ..... isnt it ?

Who is this "we"? That's a broad generalization. I have no interest in such a camera. This Nikon (now rumored to be called Nikon DF) is far more interesting.

I had a mirrorless camera for a year, I thought wow it's smaller and lighter I'll use it more. Nope. I still took my DSLR 99% of the time, even thought it was heavier. The DSLR was simply easier to use without menu diving, and the battery life on mirrorless cameras is terrible.

TaoTeJared

@TaoTeJared: I am intrigued that you seem to think that the 'gap' is a price gap - I always think of it as a spec gap. The D400 could be IMHO 1800 - 2500 and a gap that big doesn't exist in the current line-up.

Nikon is first and foremost a company and they operate like one. Every camera company speaks to it's gaps (prices) in their quarterly reports and how they are going to address them. Nikon's last statement was talking about going after consumers or being consumer oriented (along those lines) which if you think about it, Nikon really hasn't ever done that - moved to the whim of consumers. They have their "Path" and they rarely ever vary from it. Been that way for decades. I hate to say it, but I think that path dropped the D400 spot from the line-up. It is obvious there is a market for a D400 price point. Add to that people have been wanting Nikon to create a retro F camera for years - but Nikon has never delivered. Put the two together and whola.

what we want is mirco 4/3rds size, but with dslr quality, versatility and performance ..... isnt it ?

Who is this "we"? That's a broad generalization. I have no interest in such a camera. This Nikon (now rumored to be called Nikon DF) is far more interesting.

I had a mirrorless camera for a year, I thought wow it's smaller and lighter I'll use it more. Nope. I still took my DSLR 99% of the time, even thought it was heavier. The DSLR was simply easier to use without menu diving, and the battery life on mirrorless cameras is terrible.

I bit broad yes, but that is what a very large market does want. All you have to do is look to see how many people are clammering over any mirrorless system. The amount of web blogs/sites basically dedicated to these systems has exploded in the last few years. And for those that don't, you have the rest of the line-up.

I would love to have one for a daily walk around shooter. For work, and hours of shooting handheld, probably not so - but that is why I have a D800 with a battery pack and a 70-200 weighing in at 6lbs - as odd as that sounds. I have a Domke F-5xz and a F-5xc - I call a walkaround system if it fits in those easily. The "fatness" of a D7100 is pushing it and the D800 w/50mm will squeeze in there, but I wouldn't call it "a fit." Both of those bags can hold 2 FEs and two lenses (50mm 1.4/105mm f2.5) or 2 Voigtlanders RF with a 50 f2, 35mm 2.5 and carry a 90mm f4 in them. If I could have a FX camera that I could get in a 50, 35 f2, and a 85/105 in it - that would make my year!