New Nikon Full Frame Mirrorless Being Field Tested Now!

haroldp

So which leica lenses would people use, if an adaptor was available

WATE (wide angle Tri-Elmar 16-18-21 f4), 50 / 2.0 Summicron, 35/2.0 Summicron, 21/2.8 Zeiss Biogon, 12 / 5.6 Voigtlander.

All compact and excellent.

... H

funtagraph

And all manual focus. I really don't understand why you're not fully going Leica digital? I'm afraid you'll be disappointed once Nikon comes out with their mirrorless version - with those lenses you'll be lost without focus peaking on a normal display in bright sunlight.

Ironheart

But we will have focus peaking on a (hypothetical) nikon mirrorless, no? In any event the Leica Noctilux-M 50mm f/0.95 ASPH is what I'd go for

haroldp

I have gone Leica digital, an M9 and 2 M8's.

Superwides need a separate viewfinder on the M9, and the M240 has a detachable EVF which is not nearly as good as Sony's (it is an Olympus part) , a 24 mp sensor no better than Sony's, and 4 times the price.

The Sony also adds VR to these legacy lenses.

I love the Leica optical Viewfinder experience, but with EVF the Leica has no advantages and some disadvantages.


............. H

funtagraph

I have gone Leica digital, an M9 and 2 M8's.….

:-??

Camera collector, then?

What do you expect the Nikon mirrorless to be great in, what your Sony, Nikon or or Leicas can't do? I'm also sort of collecting cameras, last count was 4 Nikons, 3 Sigmas, one Canon, one Sony and 3 film cameras. But the more I have, the more I keep thinking "that would be a nice chance to get a good shot - with the camera left at home."

haroldp

I use Nikon's and Leica's for very different missions. In general, for subjects that move (not counting earthquakes), I use Nikons with wide lens variety and availability, autofocus, good high ISO performance and VR.

For walking around cities, I use Leica's.

The Sony a7II, for me is an alternative to the Leica M240 (the new M), since Superwides need a separate viewfinder on the M9.

My mix has not changed since 1968 when it was a Nikon F and a Leica M2.

Regards .... H

funtagraph

Interesting. But still no answer to my question. Or do you see the Nikon FF mirrorless for objects that move? I first had the idea "he wants an earthquake camera" but with regards to Nepal this is black humor .

haroldp

I will add that a Nikon mirrorless that was at least as good as the Sony a7II, that could take my Leica lenses and my Nikon lenses would be preferable to me (over the Sony) for many reasons.

- 1 body with a lens mix on a trip
- Similar PP wokflow
- The lenses exist
- I have them

One reason Sony facilitate other lens mounts, is that if their native FE lenses were the only ones available, nobody would buy any of it yet.

.... H

sevencrossing

@ haroldp
Do you have or have you tried the Sony a7II?
If so what lenses have you used ?
and what this IQ like compared to your D810?

haroldp

@funtagraph

If a Nikon mirrorless could use my Nikon lenses, supported VR , and autofocus was as good as the D810, I would use it for things that move (like Eagles and Bears). Current mirrorless designs (Fuji X-T1 and Sony A7II) use phase detect elements on the sensor and are approaching (but not there yet) DSLR's in focus speed.

@Sevencrossing
I do use the Sony A7II with Leica mount lenses.

I have used WATE (wide angle Tri-Elmar 16-18-21 f4), 50 / 2.0 Summicron, 35/2.0 Summicron, 21/2.8 Zeiss Biogon, 12 / 5.6 Voigtlander.

The only issue I have found is that the 12mm needs the correction module in ACR to fix severe edge vignetting and distortion. The Sony is better in this regard than the Leica M9.

It's IQ is more like the D3x than the D810, with better (about 2/3 stop) high ISO performance.

Regards ... H

WestEndFoto

One reason Sony facilitate other lens mounts, is that if their native FE lenses were the only ones available, nobody would buy any of it yet.

.... H

And I think that this is the reason that Nikon is not going to make it easy to use other manufacturers' lenses on their mirrorless. It is also another reason that a mirrorless is likely to use an f-mount and maintain the flange to focal plane distance.

sevencrossing

@Sevencrossing
I do use the Sony A7II with Leica mount lenses.

I have used WATE (wide angle Tri-Elmar 16-18-21 f4), 50 / 2.0 Summicron, 35/2.0 Summicron, 21/2.8 Zeiss Biogon, 12 / 5.6 Voigtlander.

The only issue I have found is that the 12mm needs the correction module in ACR to fix severe edge vignetting and distortion. The Sony is better in this regard than the Leica M9.

It's IQ is more like the D3x than the D810, with better (about 2/3 stop) high ISO performance.

Regards ... H

Thank you H

with luck, Nikon might make a mirrorless equivalent of the WATE

For landscape, I dont need a wide aperture or high ISO

Just the something as good or better and lighter than my D800 and the 16 -35 f 4

henrik1963

I have been eyeing a Sony Alpha 7 for some time now. But I want Nikon to make one for me.

I don't see any use for a smaller camera than the Alpha 7. I do see the benefit of the fatter grip on the 7II. A camera should be a useful tool. Nikon could make a shirt-pocket-camera like Coolpix A with an EVF.

And keep the original F-mount. You are asking for problems with shorter mount to sensor distance.

Fix the AF-problems with on sensor AF and fix the EVF lag and I am in line for at new camera :-)

haroldp

I also would prefer it from Nikon for obvious reasons.
Given that optics can be installed anywhere in the tube, I do not see any inherent disadvantages in a shorter flange to FP distance, I do see some disadvantages in needing an adapter for 'F' lenses, but there are also some advantages in a more modern mount. It can be wider, and have better electrical connections.

For me, being able to adapt Leica lenses is a real advantage.

To be clear, my Sony A7II did not displace any Nikon purchase, it displaced a Leica M240 purchase for reasons I stated in an earlier post, and if Nikon's mirrorless cannot take Leica lenses, I will keep the A7II.

We all have different situations and priorities.

Regards ... H

sevencrossing

Out of interest.
what is the accepted definition of "mirrorless"
Coolpix cameras don't have a mirror
Nikon describe the coolpix A as compact camera with DSLR performance
Amazon list the Nikon 1 under DSLR
Wikipedia define them as MILC mirrorless camera with interchangeable lenses
Canon describe them as Compact System Cameras with the quality of a digital SLR

haroldp

Technically, anything that does not have a mirror is 'mirrorless', but the definition I have seem most often and which makes the most sense is :

Sensor 4/3 or larger
EVF or live view
Interchangeable lenses

Cameras fitting that definition are viable competitors for DSLR's in many applications.

... H

sevencrossing

Sensor 4/3 or larger

... H

So that knocks out the Nikon1

WestEndFoto

Out of interest.
what is the accepted definition of "mirrorless"
Coolpix cameras don't have a mirror
Nikon describe the coolpix A as compact camera with DSLR performance
Amazon list the Nikon 1 under DSLR
Wikipedia define them as MILC mirrorless camera with interchangeable lenses
Canon describe them as Compact System Cameras with the quality of a digital SLR

Canon should know better than to try to attempt that deceit.

haroldp

Sensor 4/3 or larger

... H

So that knocks out the Nikon1

This is all arbitrary.

I personally would not consider the Nikon 1 as a DSLR replacement for my general purpose photography because of it's small sensor. This may change as technology improves.

I would and do use FF (Sony) and APS-C (DX) (Fuji) mirrorless for most subjects that do not move quickly.

As of late, my D810 is welded to my 400/2.8 tce-20III.

I do not claim to be an authority except for my own needs.

... H

henrik1963

For me: Mirrorless = DSLR sans mirror.

WestEndFoto

There will always be a group of users that will want the biggest format, either possibly or practically, to achieve superior light gathering power and resolution. Ephemeral engineering and cost considerations aside, format size is the limiting factor for low light ability and resolution (in anticipation of a predictable objection, sensors will soon not be limiting factors, but lenses).

There will always be a strong market for full frame.

What it is serviced by, DSLRS or some alternative, is the question.

PS:

I will always want the biggest baddest format I can carry. However, a nice interchangeable mirrorless lens system based on a square 24mm sensor would grab my fancy for casual around town shooting.

Msmoto

Let's go with 24mm x 32mm sensor....LOL or... 27.2mm x 34mm...the maximum a current FX lens can resolve based upon diagonal

haroldp

Aren't they resolving 24 X 36 now ?

... H

sevencrossing

Aren't they resolving 24 X 36 now ?

... H

Mine are

henrik1963

Sensors may have been the limiting factor. But today we have far better sensor output than film output.

Next in line to be improved is lenses. Bad news is that lenses will prove to be expensive to improve.

I think the next push will be software that can deal with imperfections created by sensors and lenses. That will let us use smaller sensors and smaller lenses in the future = DSLR quality in a smaller and lighter box.