Will Kodak have a stand @ The 2014 Photokina

kenadams

I'd hate the thought of a swivel screen.

Judging from the main blog post, it doesn't exactly sound as if this will be positioned between the D610 and the D800's ... so not really sure what this is going to give.. a d5300 with a FF sensor would be kind of a waste.

Sports

The rumored FX looks nice, but in general for Photokina and the future:
New products should be products that could not be made yesterday. Or at least products that can become affordable to more people.
New products should not be just new combinations of old stuff. "Uh, let's hire a skater and pretend to build an action cam, but let's pick the old AF module and old shutter to save cost and not hurt D810 sales".
No, if they wanna do an action cam then do it right!!
Nikon has done it right many times, but they sure have done it wrong just as many times.

JJ_SO

I'd welcome the option of a SWIVEL screen, which is not a TILTING screen. If I interprete the rumors on the blog correctly it is not a fully articulated screen, it only has freedom in one axis, which I find sort of disappointing. For all the people who don't like that, there are plenty of choices in the whole Nikon lineup from beginner to high end pro. It's about time to bring out something better than a fixed screen. For people who see the benefits of an articulated screen, there's only the D5x00 series.

I find it funny how many people are writing about their expectations what the new thing should be - too late, it's done, designed produced and practically already packed for shipping.

kenadams

JJ, this thread is about exactly that, expectations.

I For all the people who don't like that, there are plenty of choices in the whole Nikon lineup from beginner to high end pro.

Uhm, no. This is my main problem - and that of a lot of people, seemingly - with the current Nikon lineup: You always have to compromise on things. For three things you like, there's four you don't like, or need. Sony seem to do it extremely well with their A7 series, and you don't see largely different bodies there. Why can't Nikon do it like this?

Ah well, it's not even released yet, why get all worked up :-D

Msmoto

@rmp

Yes, how true for me as well…. "And yes, I know I cannot make full use of the toys I have now - " ;;)

JJ_SO

@kenadams when I look on Nikon's website, only 3 models out of 18 (!) do have a non-fixed display. All three belong to the D5x00 series, which is not bad, but for sure, no tough cookie. If you can't find your camera within 15 with fixed displays, who says the new one will be just what you always wanted, only bad thing is the tilt-display? There are always things on cameras, we don' like/need and worse, we do pay for because Nikon is listening to whoever, but not most of us

As for Sony: The A7R has massive problems with shutter vibrations - that's what I read, no idea how true that is, but if Photozone.de has problems to get unblurred shots out of it and lensrentals, too, there might be some truth in. Maybe. Also, Sony is firing such an amount of bodies and lens-mounts and delivers only few high quality lenses that I only can say, I respect their efforts bit wouldn't feel well for my investments. And last bit: Sony has those evil tilt displays unbelievable, isn't it? Olympus has them, too, even in their old Pro model.

Nikon, on the contrary, is "only" stuffing new features in, but the concept behind their menus reminds me on early Windows versions. The function quantity is increasing and the effective usability suffers.

NSXTypeR

I find it weird that we have another FX camera but we haven't had a pro level DX camera in quite some time.

Oh well, I'll just have to wait and see what they come up with next.

Fritz

Action camera? A baby D4s? 51 points, expeed 4, 8+ fps, high buffer capacity and download rate, twin cf card slots, smaller and lighter than the 610?

kenadams

If you can't find your camera within 15 with fixed displays, who says the new one will be just what you always wanted, only bad thing is the tilt-display?

No argument, and I'm not saying that btw. It's just one thing for starters I don't like, there will certainly be more.

For the protocol, a large number of different models doesn't automatically make them well diversified. I like what Sony's doing here, think about it: take a D800 body, then make it an action/sports cam, an allrounder and a high resolution beast. It's that simple, and I don't think the one cannibalizes the other. Obviously, Nikon does not agree.

This new thing, whatever it will be, it won't be a super awesome camera with a swivel screen, like a 16-24 ish D810 with high buffer and high fps. It will once more be crippled in some way that is more deliberate then a consequence of design/construction constraints. At least, that's what I expect.

I'm in the market for used droids, uhm, a D800, I mean. And a TB raid to go along with it.

manhattanboy

Sounds to me much more like direct competition with the 5D Mark III at a much lower price point. Well done, Nikon.

I agree except the 5DM3 is not an action camera. If it took on the one series at that price point then I'd be impressed.
Nonetheless I do agree that the 710 will fall into that comparison slot with the 5D.
For action, the new 7D should be super high fps, I am thinking with mirror up probably 15-20 fps. So tempting if it is completely silent but fingers crossed Nikon has something good up thier sleeve as well.

Ironheart

If a camera you otherwise like has an articulated screen, then why not just leave the screen in its home position? Nobody says you have to flp it out. On the other hand, if you otherwise like a camera, but it doesn't have an articulated screen, you are just hosed. Especially if you are shooting way overhead or close to the ground... You could say the same about video, auto ISO or auto focus. Just don't use it if you don't want it, but don't hate on those of us that do. :-)

donaldejose

May I suggest to Nikon that they produce a new body with the same flange to sensor distance (so we can use all the old lenses) but delete the mirror and use an optical viewfinder?

Ironheart

They have done that. It's called the Nikon 1 V3 with the FT-1 adaptor.

donaldejose

No. A regular DSLR body with a FX sensor and no mirror but keep the sensor to flange distance so we can use all the old and current lenses.

PB_PM

Least we forget the Pentax K-01. Of course the downside of that camera was poor design and AF. Nikon already has a power AF system that they could use from the Nikon 1 series, which IMO is the best in any mirror-less system to date.

Photobug

JJ, this thread is about exactly that, expectations.

+1 Kenadams. short and too the point....We are just identifying our expectations.

heartyfisher

No. A regular DSLR body with a FX sensor and no mirror but keep the sensor to flange distance so we can use all the old and current lenses.

live view?

JJ_SO

No. A regular DSLR body with a FX sensor and no mirror but keep the sensor to flange distance so we can use all the old and current lenses.

I hope they would not limit a mirrorless the way you want to have it. Think again:

A different mount with shorter flange distance would reduce weight - I'm not willing to pay for useless air in a camera, are you? Moreover, the lenses could be designed without regarding a too large mininal distance because of the mirror, meaning, wide angle lenses will be a lot easier to design and thererfore could become cheaper.

A different mount with shorter flange distance would open up a lot more lens option, even Canon lenses could be adapted.

A different mount with shorter flange distance is already in the 1 series and all Nikon lenses can be adapted to it - this is the better way than to stick with old dimensions with no more practical benefit for a mirrorless.

rmp

Why not dream a little: ISO range of the D4s, image quality of the D810, size and speed of the V3, and price of a Coolpix. Such a camera was probably not possible yesterday, but tomorrow?

JJ_SO

you forgot intelligence, style and inspiration of a famous photog of your choice, downloadable via satellite phone in the camera. Just in case you stand in front of a rock and ask yourself how did bloody Ansel Adams shoot a stupid rock? zzzzipp and download zonesystem picturecontrol (R). Comes with assorted choices of tripod stands and suggestions to shooting position depending on season and daytime.

I mean, if you'rr already dreaming, why stop inmidst?

donaldejose

Mirrorless DSLR. It would be ok with me if they kept the same sensor to flange distance (I will pay for "needless air space" because it makes all current lenses usable) or reduce the sensor to flange distance (for yet to be produced lenses) and provide a distance adapter with the camera.

The "viewfinder" would not be limited to liveview. They should add a high def EVF so we can use the body with our eye to the viewfinder as we normally do.

JJ_SO

DSLR = DigitalSingleLensReflex, meaning "Reflex" stands for "mirror". If Nikon would go for new concepts, then please without carrying old concepts on.

Mirrorless is "always LiveView" - I don't understand, why the viewfinder should "not be limited to LiveView" - there is no optical viewfinder for mirrorless necessary. Or maybe misunderstood what you wnated to say?

WestEndBoy

There is a point that I think would be worthwhile considering now.

The value that Nikon or Canon have is their large ecosystem of lenses. Let's call these "aps". It is what makes the IPhone and Android so much more popular than Blackberry. Few aps are being produced for Blackberry now. We all know how Blackberry is fairing.

It is why Sony has such an uphill battle to fight against Canon and Nikon. Sony does not have many aps, especially when you consider that they have multiple “platforms” that are not cross-compatible unless you use adapters, which is sure to put off an important portion of customers.

It is probably one reason that Canan and Nikon tolerate Sigma, Zeiss, Schneider, Rokinon, Tamron, Tokina etc. They add to the “Ap Base”.

My above points could feed into a long and detailed discussion but that is not my intention. My intention is to make the following point:

For Nikon to come out with a new format, it has to generate a new line of aps. It has done this with CX. Nikon did this with DX, but one of the reasons for DX’s success is its easy interchangeability with the “FX Ap Selection”. DX is best understood as a price effective way of accessing the current “Ap Line” with the new technology of the day (digital sensors). It is why I believe that DX days are numbered. It is not about the platform (camera) but the “Ap Base” (lenses). The higher the grade of product being produced, the more aps are required. FX users are not going to be satisfied with the limited line of aps that keeps CX users happy. A mirrorless full frame option will require at least a couple of dozen aps and possibly 50. A dozen will be seen as a joke and not instill the user confidence required to invest in this system. 50 lenses are a massive undertaking that is widely underappreciated, both in terms of expense and time. 50 new aps in the FX line would be a 10 year project and consumer half of Nikon’s resources.

So I tend to forgive Nikon for not having run out and created a whole new line of aps to service a market that is untested, has not demonstrated any traction with pro users and shows signs of stagnation even with amateurs. If they get it wrong, the company’s shareholders risk being wiped out.

For this reason, I predict that a strategic shift towards mirrorless inter-changeable lens full frame camera will be a long time coming. A mirrorless camera using the FX line of lens is basically a DSLR in Liveview. How many users on this forum shoot a majority, or even a significant minority, of stills in Liveview with their DSLR? I am not sure that I have ever seen that behavior in the wild except when using a tripod.

JJ_SO

At first: It's "apps", like "applications". You don't save much characters by calling hardware a software term, and it's a bit confusing, because I could imagine to buy real apps for a camera - focus-stacking, time lapse (instead of having zillions of parameters in the menu), and even more software developed by Nikon - this can be an interesting part of making money and updating part of a cam without fiddling around with firmware. That was only a side note on apps. I prefer to call a lens "a lens"

The 1 system can use each of those 60 lenses by a comparatively simple adapter. I don't see a reason, why Nikon could not make a bit more money by selling this adapter an developing new lenses for a FX mirrorless. It wouldn't be very clever to let go the advantage of a smaller body size and weight. It would also be unwise to let go the advantage of easier lens-design and making lenses we could dream of today. 10 years ago nobody would have thought a 14-24/2.8 FX lens is a possible thing.

WestEndBoy

Pardon my grammer JJ_SO. But I am making a point that what drives value in camera systems, lenses (and other things, but lenses are the table stakes) is not that different from what drives value in PDA systems (applications) and that insight can be useful in better understanding camera systems. We can go back to lenses when we finish discussing the point.

I take your point on using the adapter for the Nikon 1 system to access the “FX Aps”. However, a Nikon 1 camera is a low technical quality system with less demanding customers that is more likely to tolerate adapters. This will be less appealing to professionals and serious enthusiasts willing to shell out $3,000 for an “Ap Platform” (camera). However, to your point, if Nikon decides to embrace mirrorless (let’s call it “FX Mirrorless), I suspect that this is the path that they will take. However, it will be stopgap until “FX Mirrorless” specific aps are developed. Will quality obsessed users (like me an many other users) tolerate an adapter? I think not. As an accounting and finance professional, I can use my favorite “Ap” (Microsoft Excel) on a Mac, but it is a very cumbersome experience and does not even work for some of the more advanced aspects of the program that I use (I use those million rows and 65,000 columns with formulae that fills half a page). Will professionals using a system embrace a platform that only has a few aps? Perhaps, but they are going to need to be really motivated. What will this subset translate into regarding sales?

Not saying it isn’t going to happen, but I think it is important to be mindful of the high hurdles that need to be surmounted.