NIKON...MIRROR LESS NOW WITH FIRMWARE UPDATE

BabaGanoush

"Maybe you should read some real world reviews and tests. Sigma and Tamron are surpassing Nikon in the quality to price factor and in a big way"

I don't own any third party lenses for my D7200, but it wouldn't surprise me if there are some that are optically just as good if not superior to certain lenses from Nikon. My general impression is that Nikon makes a few outstanding lenses, but a lot of mediocre (i.e., average) lenses, and occasionally even some darn poor ones, too. Optical design used to be an art. Today I imagine it's all done by computer software, so no longer a "black art" just a few companies have the expertise to practice with consistent success. Maybe Sigma doesn't have exactly the same design software as Nikon, but it probably has its own that's the equal of Nikon's.

mhedges

We have gone a little off track here but..

To me you don’t save enough with 3rd party lenses to risk it, especially if you are talking gray market prices. At least, not if there’s a good first party lens that’s fairly equivalent. Between the reduced resale price and the possible compatibility issues after camera firmware updates and/or just plain getting a new camera body. I’d rather not have to worry about it.

spraynpray

@Hiker: Whilst I agree generally with what you said above, I can't help but notice you are consistently comparing third party lenses of a narrower zoom range which is not exactly fair as you always get better quality with a narrower zoom range. My favourite and most used lens is my 24-35 Sigma f2 - now there is a narrow zoom range!

I can't see me buying a Tamron though, they feel cheap and nasty to my hands. Sigmas though seem to be at least as good as Nikon or Canon.

WestEndFoto

Narrow for sure. I would just get a 28 and zoom with my feet.

Pistnbroke

The bottom of a bottle is better than the 24-120......oops

retread

Until a few years ago I had nothing but Nikkor lenses. I now have Sigma, Tokina, and Tamron lenses. All well built, sharp and good performers. Most of them in places Nikon does not have a comparable lens or offering something Nikon does not.

snakebunk

WestEndFoto said:

Narrow for sure. I would just get a 28 and zoom with my feet.

Or, for a longer range, get a 24-35 and zoom with your feet .

About the new mount, I think it is clear that Nikon should make it open to third parties. It seems like there are many enthusiasts that would rather change camera brand than limit themselves to a small set of new Nikon lenses (and old Nikon lenses with an adapter). If I was Nikon I think I would even invite Sigma and Tamron to get the specs of the new mount ahead of release.

snakebunk

What are your dream specs for mirrorless Nikon cameras? What do you want to see?

This is on my wish list:
1. Lense support from third parties, at least from Sigma.
2. AF and FPS on level with D5.
3. A big, ergonomic and weather sealed house with high build quality.
4. Built in GPS.
5. At least full frame sensor size.
6. Image quality and resolution on level with D850.
7. A quiet and long lasting shutter.
8. A large buffer and a future proof memory card standard (I am not sure about XQD, maybe CFast).

WestEndFoto

mhedges said:

We have gone a little off track here but..

To me you don’t save enough with 3rd party lenses to risk it, especially if you are talking gray market prices. At least, not if there’s a good first party lens that’s fairly equivalent. Between the reduced resale price and the possible compatibility issues after camera firmware updates and/or just plain getting a new camera body. I’d rather not have to worry about it.

Further, we should consider that Nikon has to support an F-mount (or mirrorless mount when they introduce that) ecosystem. For a third party to pick and choose what "accessory" to supply without having to support the cost of the new system is not fair to Nikon if Nikon is not compensated. I want Nikon to be compensated because I want Nikon to be financially healthy so that I can continue to benefit from the system. For that reason, I support Nikon over a third party whenever possible. The only third party lens I have is a Voightlander 40mm f/2.0.

And yes, some Sigma lenses will be sharper than their Nikon versions. But I would not take a Sigma lens (or a Sony camera, an issue that does not get the attention it deserves) in the rain like I do not hesitate to do with my D850 and gold ring lenses. I don’t want to deal with AF issues if I anticipate that AF will be important (the Voightlander is manual focus and is part of my landscape set, so I did not see this downside). I want something that will be serviceable and retain some resale value in ten to 15 years.

A case in point is Nikon at 50mm. This is the focal length that Nikon most tests my patience. Nikon needs a strong 50 made in the spirit of the 28 1.4E and 105 1.4E (I have both and they are excellent). I settled for the 58 which is actually a pretty good lens, just a little on the pricy side for what it is (I do not feel that the 28 1.4E and 105 1.4E are on the pricy side for what they are). But let’s consider for a moment my complaint about the 58, which is that “it is not that sharp wide open”. I was in a sports photography class put on by a very good Olympic sports photographer (Christopher) and I was taking my 58 off and moving back to shoot with my 105. Christopher asked why I was doing that and I told him that the 105 was sharper and I wanted to get a sharper image (and their was enough room for the 105). Christopher looked at me like I was smoking dope. Now Christopher is a professional sports photographer that had two of the three covers for Macleans (a well known Canadian magazine) during the Sochi Olympics. He does care about sharpness but “really”? I realized that I was taking my pixel peeping far to seriously. Now there are times…….I am shooting a D850 and buying that, I must have wanted lots of resolution. There are subjects where I will want that.

When we act like gearheads, and I will admit to being one at times, we are talking to ourselves. The rest of the world does not care that much.

WestEndFoto

snakebunk said:

What are your dream specs for mirrorless Nikon cameras? What do you want to see?

This is on my wish list:
1. Lense support from third parties, at least from Sigma.
2. AF and FPS on level with D5.
3. A big, ergonomic and weather sealed house with high build quality.
4. Built in GPS.
5. At least full frame sensor size.
6. Image quality and resolution on level with D850.
7. A quiet and long lasting shutter.
8. A large buffer and a future proof memory card standard (I am not sure about XQD, maybe CFast).

Number one in my view should not be on Nikon’s list unless Nikon has the ability to charge a royalty for the mount. I am not sure if the best way to enforce the royalty is by legal means or by disabling the camera when a non-Nikon lens is attached.

Nikon has to expend the money to develop the mount and support the eco-system. For a third party to come along and cherry pick does not strike me as ethical. Third party suppliers do not have to support the development costs for the cameras or fill out the ecosystem.

It is good for us, but only in the short term. If you don’t like what Nikon is offering you can go to Fuji, Canon or Sony. But unless the third party is paying a royalty that Nikon agrees to, you should not be able to use their lens on a Nikon camera.

My two bits.

mhedges

I would be very surprised to see active third party support. It’s not how Nikon does things, and not how this business operates in general. The only reason Sony did it was because they didn’t have an existing lens lineup. Nikon doesn’t have that issue, assuming the mirrorless body has an F mount adapter available day 1.

snakebunk

WestEndFoto said:

snakebunk said:

What are your dream specs for mirrorless Nikon cameras? What do you want to see?

This is on my wish list:
1. Lense support from third parties, at least from Sigma.
2. AF and FPS on level with D5.
3. A big, ergonomic and weather sealed house with high build quality.
4. Built in GPS.
5. At least full frame sensor size.
6. Image quality and resolution on level with D850.
7. A quiet and long lasting shutter.
8. A large buffer and a future proof memory card standard (I am not sure about XQD, maybe CFast).

Number one in my view should not be on Nikon’s list unless Nikon has the ability to charge a royalty for the mount. I am not sure if the best way to enforce the royalty is by legal means or by disabling the camera when a non-Nikon lens is attached.

Nikon has to expend the money to develop the mount and support the eco-system. For a third party to come along and cherry pick does not strike me as ethical. Third party suppliers do not have to support the development costs for the cameras or fill out the ecosystem.

It is good for us, but only in the short term. If you don’t like what Nikon is offering you can go to Fuji, Canon or Sony. But unless the third party is paying a royalty that Nikon agrees to, you should not be able to use their lens on a Nikon camera.

My two bits.

A license for third parties to have access to the complete mount spec and all changes is a good idea and could be beneficial for all I think.

I don't see anything unethical with third party products. It is common in many businesses, for example third parties developing software for a certain operating system. And in many cases it is a win-win scenario.

I do like what Nikon is offering, but if they make the new system closed and proprietary (which I think they can do with encryption), I will probably move to another camera brand at some point.

I feel like I am repeating myself now so I'll try not to talk about third party support for a while.

I am happy to see that you have moved away from punishing Nikon.

WestEndFoto

As long as they don’t render my lenses worthless, I will not punish them. I don’t expect that they will do that though.

heartyfisher

I have a number of nikon lenses ... with a reasonable range and also several(small number) third party lenses.. tokina, sigma, tamron, etc... they are all ok... especially the older manual focus ones.. however .. not a single issue with the Nikon lenses. with the Nikon Bodies that they are supposed to work with....
My old Tamron 200-400 works well with most of my cameras except the D610 (AF Hunts badly).
My Sigma 150 F2.8 Macro is nice and works well with all my cameras except with the D500.( cant Live View Focus at all .. sigma support just ignores me ... sigh ...)

So If i have a choice I would go with a Nikkor...rather than a third party ... but I wouldnt mind considering them if a third party fills a niche nikon cant...

Searcy

snakebunk said:

What are your dream specs for mirrorless Nikon cameras? What do you want to see?

This is on my wish list:
1. Lense support from third parties, at least from Sigma.
2. AF and FPS on level with D5.
3. A big, ergonomic and weather sealed house with high build quality.
4. Built in GPS.
5. At least full frame sensor size.
6. Image quality and resolution on level with D850.
7. A quiet and long lasting shutter.
8. A large buffer and a future proof memory card standard (I am not sure about XQD, maybe CFast).

Number one on my list and the only real reason I'm interested in mirror-less is a fast, clear, high quality electronic view finder. I would also have to have a fast and reliable WiFi connection.

Capt_Spaulding

I guess I'm a solid meh on this. With the gorilla mitts on the ends my arms and the type of shooting I do, I just don't think mirrorless would change my life for the better. I don't need a smaller camera - my D5100 was smaller than I found comfortable - I don't need hugely high frame rates, and silent shutters aren't something I've been pining for.

I do hope all who do want these things get your wish, but I don't see myself as a potential buyer - at least not at the moment.

Pistnbroke

Well I feel sad for Nikon ..a good friend has held on to his D700 and now moved to a Sony ar7r2 so that's a customer lost to Nikon...\I want an end to all this fine focus adjust which wanders and stuffs you bird photography and silent would be good..just pi$$ed off with Nikons slow progress

Pistnbroke

So canon register a FF mirror less at 30MP ..that's a fail for me . 30MP DX yes but not FX ...still it should put the $h1ts up Nikon and that's good.

HankB

Nikon clearly needs a management shakeup. Just far too many dumb moves that hamper the success they should be having with so much excellence in design and engineering talent. Kind of reminds me of General Motors. Both companies managed to piss away their former industry dominance.

Hiker

BabaGanoush said:

"Maybe you should read some real world reviews and tests. Sigma and Tamron are surpassing Nikon in the quality to price factor and in a big way"

I don't own any third party lenses for my D7200, but it wouldn't surprise me if there are some that are optically just as good if not superior to certain lenses from Nikon. My general impression is that Nikon makes a few outstanding lenses, but a lot of mediocre (i.e., average) lenses, and occasionally even some darn poor ones, too. Optical design used to be an art. Today I imagine it's all done by computer software, so no longer a "black art" just a few companies have the expertise to practice with consistent success. Maybe Sigma doesn't have exactly the same design software as Nikon, but it probably has its own that's the equal of Nikon's.

I have a Sigma 17-50 f2.8, Sigma 24-105 f4, and a new Tamron 100-400 f4.5-6.3. My Nikkor 70-300 is sitting in a box, unused. Why did I go all 3rd party and not just Nikon? Cost. Period. If I can get the same or better result for half or 2/3rds the cost that's the direction I will go. A car sales man told me once "we are not in the business of losing money". My reply was "neither am I". Not saying Nikon doesn't make good glass. It's just far and above my price range. As for a Mirrorless camera/lens setup? I would go Sony. Only because they have been doing it longer and it's a proven system. But then there is that cost thingy!!! I'll stay with what I have for now, D7200 and above lenses. Maybe when I win the lottery!!! LOL

Hiker

spraynpray said:

@Hiker: Whilst I agree generally with what you said above, I can't help but notice you are consistently comparing third party lenses of a narrower zoom range which is not exactly fair as you always get better quality with a narrower zoom range. My favourite and most used lens is my 24-35 Sigma f2 - now there is a narrow zoom range!

I can't see me buying a Tamron though, they feel cheap and nasty to my hands. Sigmas though seem to be at least as good as Nikon or Canon.

I bought the Tamron 100-400 based on Dustin Abbott's review on both the Sigma and Tamron. Yes Dustin shoots Canon, but his reviews are imho right on. I have only used the Tamron once at a wildlife sanctuary. The decent shots I got were sharp. Sigma and Nikon don't play nice together from what I hear.

retread

I don't think Nikon plays with anyone. I have two Sigma's and a Tamron. They work fine for me. My working kit is two Nikkor's, two Sigma's, a Tamron, and a Tokina. With the help of computer design quality lenses production is possible if you want to spend the time and use the right materials. Quality craftsmanship takes some time.

Pistnbroke

Hiker..did you use the tap in console with your 100-400 ? I abandoned mine and set it all to zero and then did the FFA in the old way on a target at about 60 yards. You have two problems . 1/ how far away is infinity and 2/ the settings will work only on one body. The +6 I have seems to be fine.

spraynpray

Hiker said:

Sigma and Nikon don't play nice together from what I hear.

I returned a 35mm Art because of too many missed focus shots in low light (only party light levels not astro), but my 24-35 is spot-on. My best lens purchase maybe.

snakebunk

Current Sigma lenses work nice with Nikon according to my experience. I have never had any real problem but af has improved on both lenses and cameras. I expect af to be more stable with mirrorless cameras.