NIKON...MIRROR LESS NOW WITH FIRMWARE UPDATE

1356764

Comments

  • WestEndFotoWestEndFoto Posts: 3,191Member
    To that point, Fuji’s APS-C for casual use and medium format for serious use would warrant consideration. So would Canon. Both make fine lens and their photon detectors will continue to get better.
  • PB_PMPB_PM Posts: 4,122Member
    None of the large manufactures has preserved mount compatibility when they moving to mirrorless, without adapters, (Sony, Fuji - had F-mount DSLRs, Olympus, Canon all changed mounts), so expecting Nikon to not do the same would be foolish. The only one that tried was Pentax, and that was an utter failure. That’s why I’ve only been buying second had Nikkors at much lower prices, rather than new glass. Buying new F-mount glass in the last 3-4 years, knowing that a mirrorless system was coming soon, was kind of foolish, unless the user was going to stick with a DSLR long term.
    If I take a good photo it's not my camera's fault.
  • HankBHankB Posts: 222Member
    Am I missing something?  Is there any possible reason an F mount adapter for a Nikon mirrorless would be any more complicated or any more expensive to produce than a full function, run of the mill extension tube?

    A Kenko 3 tube set sells at B&H for $124, that's $41 apiece [including manufacturer's profit].

    Take that $41; add a few bucks for Nikon's higher quality [maybe]; then subtract all profit at the manufacturer's end — I think it is apparent that Nikon would be smart to forgo a profit on adapters [or even subsidize the adapters] from loyal F mount customers at this transitional stage. We can't be talking about much money to buy prudently priced adapters in order to continue to use your good Nikon glass.

    As I said in a previous post, there is Nikon precedent for providing at or below cost, a modification for transitional compatibility of lenses already on hand.
  • PB_PMPB_PM Posts: 4,122Member
    edited March 2018
    HankB said:

    Am I missing something?  Is there any possible reason an F mount adapter for a Nikon mirrorless would be any more complicated or any more expensive to produce than a full function, run of the mill extension tube?

    Nope, but if Nikon makes it, add $100-150 to the price. Look at the price of third party (Sigma, Tamron etc) teleconverters and then look at the price of the Nikon ones, that's your answer.

    "As I said in a previous post, there is Nikon precedent for providing at or below cost, a modification for transitional compatibility of lenses already on hand. "

    The Nikon 1 to F mount adapter was $250, so expect something around the price. Nikon isn't going to loose money on it, they cannot afford it at this point.
    Post edited by PB_PM on
    If I take a good photo it's not my camera's fault.
  • WestEndFotoWestEndFoto Posts: 3,191Member
    PB_PM said:

    None of the large manufactures has preserved mount compatibility when they moving to mirrorless, without adapters, (Sony, Fuji - had F-mount DSLRs, Olympus, Canon all changed mounts), so expecting Nikon to not do the same would be foolish. The only one that tried was Pentax, and that was an utter failure. That’s why I’ve only been buying second had Nikkors at much lower prices, rather than new glass. Buying new F-mount glass in the last 3-4 years, knowing that a mirrorless system was coming soon, was kind of foolish, unless the user was going to stick with a DSLR long term.

    I certainly considered this when I spent a wad of money last fall. However, despite my bluster, I think that Nikon will manage to find a solution that will not piss me off. And even if they do, I will just continue to use the old gear until it is obsolete. It is not like a bought a D300 that falls behind a stop every generation.

    One way forward for Nikon might be to develop an APS-C solution in mirrorless and fill out a lens line. They will market that to people that want small and light. After all, if you are a real pixel peeper and demand the absolute finest sharpness, then you are probably not buying small and light, but big and heavy Nikon and Sigma 1.4 lenses and a mirrorless camera will not make much of a difference. Fuji and Sony mirrorless cameras are getting bigger as they chase improved image quality and ergonomics.

    Then I would start developing mirrorless for the f-mount and focus on quality and the benefits of mirrorless that are not "small and light".

    But we will see......
  • BabaGanoushBabaGanoush Posts: 252Member

    OK, call it a prepaid expense if you don’t like “investment”. I will even conceed that I am improving compliance with GAAP if I make that concession. It still has a market vale that even at 60% is over $30k. I started buying heavily in Nikon in 2012 because I was confident that if I bought a lens, that they would continue to iterate cameras that could use the lens and that such iterations would not produce a decline in performance.



    So as an example, if Nikon replaces Native f- mount DSLRs with something that requires an adapter and the performance of my, say 400mm 2.8E declines as a result, then my next purchase will not be Nikon regardless of how well it performs.

    Nikon iterates not only on camera bodies, but on camera lenses. Do you punish Nikon each time it updates a lens you already own? Of course you don't. So why would you punish them for "updating" your entire system with a new mount? The camera and lenses you own will continue to work fine for many years and provide you with high quality images; otherwise, if they did not suffice for you now, as they should in the future, why did you buy them in the first place?
  • WestEndFotoWestEndFoto Posts: 3,191Member

    OK, call it a prepaid expense if you don’t like “investment”. I will even conceed that I am improving compliance with GAAP if I make that concession. It still has a market vale that even at 60% is over $30k. I started buying heavily in Nikon in 2012 because I was confident that if I bought a lens, that they would continue to iterate cameras that could use the lens and that such iterations would not produce a decline in performance.



    So as an example, if Nikon replaces Native f- mount DSLRs with something that requires an adapter and the performance of my, say 400mm 2.8E declines as a result, then my next purchase will not be Nikon regardless of how well it performs.

    Nikon iterates not only on camera bodies, but on camera lenses. Do you punish Nikon each time it updates a lens you already own? Of course you don't. So why would you punish them for "updating" your entire system with a new mount? The camera and lenses you own will continue to work fine for many years and provide you with high quality images; otherwise, if they did not suffice for you now, as they should in the future, why did you buy them in the first place?
    If they continue to produce DSLRs or mirrorless that are native to the f-mount, I have no issue. If they come out with a mirrorless with an f-mount adapter that is inferior to whatever they produce that is native to the f-mount, I will buy what is native to the f-mount and I have no issue. But if they then discontinue iterating native f-mount cameras, then hello somebody else.

    Directly answering your question, I do not punish them for iterating a lens that I own as I bought that lens expecting the quality that lens will produce. I did not expect an upgrade to the next generation. But if they no longer keep delivering cameras that that allow me to maintain that lens quality as my cameras wear out and need replacing, but only give me the option of accepting a lower quality because I need to use my lens on a new format mirrorless with a less than perfect adapter, then I may as well buy a Canon camera and use an adapter (and Canon is a fine product). Meanwhile, my new gear will be another manufacturer that produces lenses that mount on cameras with no adapters.

    If Nikon abandons the f-mount, then their adapter better be good enough to work on all 20 of my lenses at least as well as my D850, which include the following non-retired lenses:

    NIKKOR 15mm f/3.5 AIS
    NIKKOR 20mm f/2.8 AIS
    NIKKOR 24mm f/2.8 AIS
    PC-E NIKKOR 24mm f/3.5D ED
    NIKKOR 28mm f/2.8 AIS
    AF-S NIKKOR 28mm f/1.4E
    Voigtlander 40mm f/2.0 Ultron SL II
    NIKKOR 50mm f/1.2 AIS
    AF-S NIKKOR 50mm f/1.4G
    AF-S NIKKOR 58mm f/1.4G
    AF Micro-Nikkor 60mm f/2.8
    AF-S NIKKOR 85mm f/1.4G
    NIKKOR 100mm f/2.8 Series E
    AF-S NIKKOR 105mm f/1.4E
    AF DC-NIKKOR 135mm f/2D
    AF Micro-Nikkor 200mm f/4D IF-ED
    AF-S NIKKOR 400mm f/2.8E
    AF-S Fisheye Nikkor 8-15mm 1:3.5-4.5E ED
    AF-S NIKKOR 14-24mm f/2.8G ED
    AF-S NIKKOR 24-70mm f/2.8E ED VR
    AF-S NIKKOR 70-200mm f/2.8E FL ED VR

    Otherwise, www.screwedbynikon.com can be had for $12.99 per annum.
  • snakebunksnakebunk Posts: 888Member
    @WestEndFoto: Just make sure you don't punish yourself. Noone will thank you for punishing Nikon, so do what is best for you.
  • WestEndFotoWestEndFoto Posts: 3,191Member
    edited March 2018
    OK Snakebunk.

    Who is Noone?
    Post edited by WestEndFoto on
  • mhedgesmhedges Posts: 1,427Member
    I hadn't even thought about AIS support. That would require the adapter to have an aperture feeler and to feed info back to the camera, right?
  • PB_PMPB_PM Posts: 4,122Member
    I wouldn’t hold my breath for CPU data input for AI/AI-S support via a metering tab. That said AI lenses work with the lower end Nikon DSLR bodes in live view, so you’d just have to work out the exposer on the screen/EFV. You wouldn’t get any EXIF data that’s all.
    If I take a good photo it's not my camera's fault.
  • WestEndFotoWestEndFoto Posts: 3,191Member
    edited March 2018
    I think that we all understand the fine line that Nikon is walking.
    Post edited by WestEndFoto on
  • WestEndFotoWestEndFoto Posts: 3,191Member

    OK Snakebunk.



    Who is Noone?

    You mean "none". I am pathetic at this sort of problem.
  • spraynprayspraynpray Posts: 6,236Moderator
    He means 'no one'.
    Always learning.
  • snakebunksnakebunk Posts: 888Member

    OK Snakebunk.



    Who is Noone?

    You mean "none". I am pathetic at this sort of problem.
    Ok, I thought it was a philosophical question. English is not my native language so I get it wrong sometimes, but I think you understand me :).

    Anyway, used F-mount cameras and lenses will probably be inexpensive if/when Nikon introduces a new mirrorless mount. One way to go is to live on that market for a number of years, and slowly switch to something new. That is probably what I will do. Also, half of my lenses are Sigma global vision and can be converted to a different mount. I think they will soon introduce that service for Sony E mount as well.
  • HankBHankB Posts: 222Member
    edited March 2018
    PB_PM said:

    I wouldn’t hold my breath for CPU data input for AI/AI-S support via a metering tab. That said AI lenses work with the lower end Nikon DSLR bodes in live view, so you’d just have to work out the exposer on the screen/EFV. You wouldn’t get any EXIF data that’s all.

    I believe that all data including EXIF is passed through, AF-S lenses still focus, and VR functions through Kenko extension tubes. If this is correct, there should be no reason lens data couldn't also be passed through a proper F mount/Mirrorless adapter.

    To further the analogy, all functions [except screw drive focus] work with Nikon teleconverters, and they are mechanically like extension tubes with internal optics.

    Also consider that Nikon would make any firmware tweaks necessary to facilitate that adapter operation, whereas Kenko extension tubes [I believe] function without any Nikon support.
    Post edited by HankB on
  • PistnbrokePistnbroke Posts: 2,030Member
    Just make it silent without blackout and flash capability and make it quick.
  • PB_PMPB_PM Posts: 4,122Member
    edited March 2018
    HankB said:


    I believe that all data including EXIF is passed through, AF-S lenses still focus, and VR functions through Kenko extension tubes. If this is correct, there should be no reason lens data couldn't also be passed through a proper F mount/Mirrorless adapter.

    We were talking about AI and AI-S lenses, which have no CPU contacts, thus there is nothing to transmit. You only get CPU lens data from those lenses when mounted on supporting cameras, that have an AI metering tab and a focal length/maximum aperture data entry system. I doubt Nikon will bother for an adapter that would only officially support AF-I and AF-S lenses.
    Post edited by PB_PM on
    If I take a good photo it's not my camera's fault.
  • mhedgesmhedges Posts: 1,427Member
    Right and if you include that then it raises the cost for every adapter. It’s another example of how backwards compatibility could make everyone pay for something few people use.
  • WestEndFotoWestEndFoto Posts: 3,191Member
    mhedges said:

    Right and if you include that then it raises the cost for every adapter. It’s another example of how backwards compatibility could make everyone pay for something few people use.

    Well, perhaps Nikon will have a few different models of adapters.
  • flipflip Posts: 111Member
    It's easy to ask that nikon meet the competition, what sony has already done. But that's not going to get them market share increases of any significance imo. I frankly could care less if the "f" mount lenses adapt well or not to a new ff mirrorless. Yes there is the cost savings etc. and yes we want everything to integrate, right, but i dont see that as being nikon's best move.

    I am really blown away with their latest dslrs and their lens offerings starting with the 24 1.8. The "e" lenses are essentially without peer, 105, 28, 19, 400 and 600, 180-400 and they are optimized for nikon top line cameras. Why on earth would you want to use these on a smallish, more intimate mirrorless, mismatched in size and handicapped by an adaptor. Seems silly. Why bother. In fact Sony's building a 400 2.8 to fit with it's current high end mirrorless is ego taking over from rationality. Like trying to hitch a pop up tent trailor to a toyota hybrid. Good luck with that excursion.


    To win the next round and maintain momentum, nikon needs a revolution of sorts.

    I am thinking 16 bit color, in camera vr = eliminate need for tripod in most situations, ff, 36 mp, grad and nd filters as in camera options(landscapes), refined externals with a small range of pancake to noctilux lenses, blisteringly sharp, mostly primes, great for street, portraits or landscapes, and at a fraction of leica costs. In fact, make it 50 mps and make the need for mf mostly obsolete. And lastly, add ai s/w which, when you sort all images you like including those from others (your favorite images) the camera creates chooses the "right" exposure, color, aperture, ss, etc based upon "you". To me a rather interesting way of having your "Style" come through all of your images. Let the camera choose. Hmm.

    Kind of crazy idea which i find really interesting. Add a drone with the same ai algorythms, and just imagine.

    So the other crazy idea i have is the result of wanting to use multiple cameras with different lenses or the same lens but different apertures at the same time. Can technology get to a point of allowing this to occur with one camera and say a single zoom lens.

    It's frustrating to see several different compositions in a situation and not be able to take multiple images using different lenses at the same time.

    In fact, why cant we have a camera see simultaneously at all apertures and integrate them all without a multishot in combination with external s/w, as with the d850. Wouldnt that be cool.


    I know, off the charts, but i do think adding greater intelligence to cameras will be the next step into the future.
  • rmprmp Posts: 541Member
    OK, I vote for FLIP and Thom Hogan to join the Nikon design team. :-)
    Robert M. Poston: D4, D810, V3, 14-24 F2.8, 24-70 f2.8, 70-200 f2.8, 80-400, 105 macro.
  • WestEndFotoWestEndFoto Posts: 3,191Member
    I see a lot of merit to that. But a 50 mp sensor does not mean you can have NF. You need NF lenses for that, so I don’t see that as a reasonable expectation.

    Perhaps a 30mm by 30mm square sensor with Flip’s thinking informing the design.
  • flipflip Posts: 111Member
    Thanks for the kind thoughts, but ideas as you know are cheap.

    And some of these ideas cant be realized with the current optical limitations is my guess. Another revolution would be to somehow eliminate the effects of lens diffraction so that we get the same level of highest resolution at every aperture instead of the bell curve effect albeit with some exceptions like the 105e which is almost at the same level of resolution throughout. Now wouldnt that be great! I think nikon was discussing this issue recently in the context of a 100mp ff sensor.

    And why cant we get an algorythm within the camera that sees with front tilt. Actual physical tilt does not change the perspective/composition, sooo, why cant it occur in camera thereby reducing the need for smaller apertures when we choise this option.

    Nikon needs to id and patent what it can to move the barriers 10 fold. This incremental stuff is fine but you cant win the war without giving your customer what it never knew could be done, it never knew it needed, and what it then cant live without once they have it. Take ttl and af - those were revolutions.
  • flipflip Posts: 111Member
    Nikon's silence since the d850 and Canon's recent aggressive statements to bring a ff mirrorless system to market are def worrisome as far as nikon's future in photography is concerned. Can they stay a relatively healthy stand-alone company in even 2 years.

    I recently counted 36 lenses on their website they could easily discontinue as obsolete. The fact that they still have them in inventory speaks to that they are unable to move beyond the past but also that they are willing to sell less than favorable optics to the public. They may have produced too many and cant get rid of them. slow moving inventory reflects on poor decisioning and implies a lack of market perception. Jit inventory control still has value and staying lean and immediately responsive to the market are very valuable traits.

    Why do they need 6 different 18-55 dx lenses. Beyond me. It's crazy.

    If i looked at my technology and saw nothing formative and ingenious for the near future, i would def consider selling assets, patents and know how and exiting, getting investors a reasonable return before the bottom falls out.

    Dont see how they can compete with canon at the lead and sony and fuji biting at their heels. They all have nikon in their sites.

    I hope others have more positive thoughts on this than I.

    I've been in companies where there was vision but inadequate focus, lack of innovation or ability to execute in a very competitive market. Nice ceo but couldnt get it done. I left.

    To do well and stay at the top you need all those ingredients, not just a few or one. It annoys me to no end that nikon is not able to function on all cylinders all the time rather than once every few years.

    One can say that the slower process is cultural, but if that is the case, how are canon and sony moving so quickly. Excess cash flow for r&d? Yes that's part of it.

    They are not yet a luxury seller like leica and it's not clear to me how they modify their image to be perceived as one unless they start a new branding program for ultra end products. That did not save hasselblad.

    Still, i do really enjoy many of their products and hope they can innovate themselves out of their limitations to at least stay the course which is probably what management is hoping for.

    C'est la vie.
Sign In or Register to comment.