NIKON...MIRROR LESS NOW WITH FIRMWARE UPDATE

Capt_Spaulding

@Pistnbroke : What are your thoughts so far on the 100-400? I'm still on the fence between it and the Nikon 200-500.

retread

I have borrowed the 200-500 from Nikon for a few hours and like it. Good sharp lens. I have not used the 100-400 but when I jumped it was for the 120-300 sport lens. It looks to be a keeper.

Pistnbroke

I bought a sigma art lens from ebay...had to send it back as I think it was set to some focus settings on a console and I did not have a console to re set it ...so watchout.
My policy now is to buy only Nikon unless there is an extreme reason (money) like the Tam 100-400 for the wife at £465. I don't trust Nikon not to fix the firmware to exclude other brands like they have done with batteries grips and flashes

WestEndFoto

The only time that I have bought third party anything was a Voightlander 40mm f/2.0 lens. It is manual focus and dirt cheap. Otherwise, it is not worth the trouble. I am busy and if a lens has a malfunction it might sit on my shelf for six months before I get around to it. So reliability is the most important factor for me. IQ is actually second and when Nikon is in second place, it is still pretty damn good. Money is third.

WestEndFoto

An interesting article from Thom:

http://www.sansmirror.com/newsviews/the-mirrorless-prisoners.html

HankB

Very interesting article. But I will add that Nikon and Canon can and should make adapters available at a low enough price that users can buy enough to just leave them on each lens. Swapping lenses, each with their own adapter already attached would be as seamless as a normal lens swap.

New mounts with reasonably priced, affordable adapters are not as onerous as the article implies.

snakebunk

I don't agree with the article since it, except for at the end, ignores the technical advantages that a new full frame mount will bring (like being able to build smaller cameras). If Nikon and Canon don't change mount Sony will continue to have this advantage. If it wasn't for this technical advantage there is of course no reason to introduce a new mount.

Personally I like big cameras and don't need super large aperture lenses, so I could probably live with the F mount. But not changing makes me wonder if Nikon will continue to have a strong market position.

Still an interesting article though and it is indeed a tricky decision that Nikon has to make.

mhedges

HankB said:

Very interesting article. But I will add that Nikon and Canon can and should make adapters available at a low enough price that users can buy enough to just leave them on each lens. Swapping lenses, each with their own adapter already attached would be as seamless as a normal lens swap.

That doesn't really make sense to me. Why not just have one adapter and leave it on the camera? Then you don't have to pay for (and carry) a bunch of identical adapters that can't be used simultaneously anyway.

If you switch to a native mount lens then take the adapter off with the F mount lens. Otherwise just leave it on.

And like I think I've said before, I would be surprised if the adapters wind up being cheap. Depending on your idea of cheap, of course. I would think they would be somewhere in the $100-200 range.

snakebunk said:

I don't agree with the article since it, except for at the end, ignores the technical advantages that a new full frame mount will bring (like being able to build smaller cameras). If Nikon and Canon don't change mount Sony will continue to have this advantage. If it wasn't for this technical advantage there is of course no reason to introduce a new mount.

Personally I like big cameras and don't need super large aperture lenses, so I could probably live with the F mount. But not changing makes me wonder if Nikon will continue to have a strong market position.

Still an interesting article though and it is indeed a tricky decision that Nikon has to make.

I agree with you. Nikon needs to get away from the limitations that come with the F mount. Limitations that only get worse with mirrorless. It's an unfortunate situation that they are in, but I don't see how you preserve the F mount and remain competitive over the longer term.

WestEndFoto

How do you remain competitive if you have no lenses Mhedges? If Nikon abandons the f-mount, except for whatever native lenses they come out of the gate with, they have no lenses and current f=mount sales will hemorrhage (if the technical advantages of mirrorless are so great why would anyone buy f-mount moving forward). Only the truly committed will tolerate adapters, which is a small minority of the Nikon user base.

donaldejose

My guess on Nikon's mirrorless mount: They will use a new mount and create an adaptor for old F-mount lenses. That way you can buy the new mirrorless body and one or two new lenses of the type you use most often (maybe a 24 to 120mm f4 zoom for full frame or a 50 or 85mm prime at f1.8 or f1.3). Then you have "the best of both worlds." You can have the best of modern features for your commonly used lenses and you can have full access to all your old less frequently used lenses. Over time Nikon will produce all their lenses in the new mount but people will always be able to use old lenses with the adaptor. Nikon should bundle the adaptor free (like it did with XQD cards and readers when Nikon first started using them) because it will remove the fear and hesitation people will feel about access to their existing lens collection. Then Nikon should sell that adaptor almost at cost of production. After all folks, an F mount mirrorless camera will not work with old F mount lenses anyway without an adaptor to occupy the space of the missing mirror box. Even if Nikon put an F mount on a mirrorless body an adaptor would be needed to use the existing Nikon lenses. Might as well make that adaptor use a new mount on the camera side and an F mount on the lens side.

WestEndFoto

snakebunk said:

I don't agree with the article since it, except for at the end, ignores the technical advantages that a new full frame mount will bring (like being able to build smaller cameras). If Nikon and Canon don't change mount Sony will continue to have this advantage. If it wasn't for this technical advantage there is of course no reason to introduce a new mount.

Personally I like big cameras and don't need super large aperture lenses, so I could probably live with the F mount. But not changing makes me wonder if Nikon will continue to have a strong market position.

Still an interesting article though and it is indeed a tricky decision that Nikon has to make.

Is the D3300 not small enough for you Snakebunk? And how many Sony cameras are much smaller than that?

Pistnbroke

I don't see that there is any argument you cannot make the camera thinner if you stick with the F mount as the hole is not big enough ....My take ..just get on with it .

mhedges

@WestEndFoto it's a tough spot they are in, for sure. Damned if you do and damned if you don't. Personally I think a well implemented adapter should be pretty much indistinguishable from the body being native F mount. But if they go with the F mount that means quite possibly giving up on IBIS and certainly giving up on the size advantages and the optical advantages you can get from no longer having to make room for the mirror.

I think a lot of it depends on who they first market the camera to. Will it be for professionals or enthusiasts?

If they go new mount then they should be able to come out with a decent basic lens selection quicker than Sony did, since they have much more experience.

HankB

mhedges said:

HankB said:

Very interesting article. But I will add that Nikon and Canon can and should make adapters available at a low enough price that users can buy enough to just leave them on each lens. Swapping lenses, each with their own adapter already attached would be as seamless as a normal lens swap.

That doesn't really make sense to me. Why not just have one adapter and leave it on the camera? Then you don't have to pay for (and carry) a bunch of identical adapters that can't be used simultaneously anyway.

My oversight, I should have stated that I was referring to a transition situation where one is carrying BOTH F-mount lenses, each with its own adapter, AND new native mirrorless mount lenses.

And this is not 100% painless [not a perfect world]. For example, each of your F-mount lens with their mounted adapters is now 1 inch longer — maybe too long for your bag.

You are absolutely right that when carrying only F-mounts, you would use only one adapter that would be left on the camera.

mhedges said:

And like I think I've said before, I would be surprised if the adapters wind up being cheap. Depending on your idea of cheap, of course. I would think they would be somewhere in the $100-200 range.

Under normal circumstances, the adapters probably should be priced in the $100-200 range. But this would be a special, transitional situation, and Nikon [and Canon] would, under the principle of "enlightened self-interest", bite the bullet and price the adapters at or below cost. Japanese companies have been so successful by taking the "long view", as contrasted with being short-sighted slaves of quarterly earnings reporting.

snakebunk

WestEndFoto said:

snakebunk said:

I don't agree with the article since it, except for at the end, ignores the technical advantages that a new full frame mount will bring (like being able to build smaller cameras). If Nikon and Canon don't change mount Sony will continue to have this advantage. If it wasn't for this technical advantage there is of course no reason to introduce a new mount.

Personally I like big cameras and don't need super large aperture lenses, so I could probably live with the F mount. But not changing makes me wonder if Nikon will continue to have a strong market position.

Still an interesting article though and it is indeed a tricky decision that Nikon has to make.

Is the D3300 not small enough for you Snakebunk? And how many Sony cameras are much smaller than that?

If you want to see how small a crop sensor mirrorless camera may be I think you shuold look at Fujifilm rather than Sony. But even when you look at Sony full frame cameras they compare favourable to the D3300 (if you like small cameras). It's easy to google different cameras if you want to investigate more.

The point is that cameras can be made smaller (in particular thinner) with a mount designed for mirrorless cameras.

vtc2002

It doesn't make sense to me that Nikon is taking so long to release a mirrorless camera if they were going to have an adapter for it to use the F mount lens. Reports/rumors that Nikon was going to release a mirrorless camera data back to 2014. Why would it take them 4 years to release a camera with an adapter and a couple of the most used lens for the new mount? Why can't they release they release a camera now? To me the logical answer is that the new camera will have a new mount and they are building a substantial set of lens to be released with the camera and they are trying to resolve some of the technical issues that the other manufacturers are having with their mirrorless cameras. Another possible answer is that they are oblivious to their current customers, market and competitors. Canon, Fuji, Olympus and Sony, all have pretty good offerings. Does Nikon think the market and customers will wait for them. There are numerous answers but none of them justify the delay.
I am not sure why so many Nikon DSLR owners are upset about the mirrorless camera lens mount not being a F mount. The DSLR was introduced in 1999. Everyone said that the film camera was dead yet there are still film cameras being produced and used. Nikon will not stop producing their DSLR's when they introduce a mirrorless camera. Nikon will continue to produce DSLR's for years after they release their mirrorless cameras. Why would they stop supporting their DSLR line that is generating revenue for them now or anytime in the near future? I think it will take a good 8 to 10 years for mirrorless cameras to come close to replacing the DSLR. I do not see Nikon abandoning their DSLR line for a long time.

[Deleted User]

Based upon what i have read, it is a rare lens that works perfectly without optical issues using an adaptor -I specifically recall the Leica M lenses on a Sony FF camera. If adaptors provide less af or optical performance than a lens built for the system, why bother. Most of us want to maximize lens capability, not have limitations. There is also the change in FL that comes with these tethering devices, albeit minor.

How many are currently using adapted lenses with Sony cameras. I would guess most will eventually migrate to the system lenses fairly quickly.

I think focus on adaptors is short sighted for a short lived trend. A stop gap.

The referenced article by Hogan overemphasizes the adaptor as a necessary component to success. It also fails to consider a perhaps more interesting game theory concept of the benefit of cooperation. It may not be coincidental that both Nikon and Canon are releasing mirrorless ff systems at the same time. There may be more downside in trying to produce a unique product than saturating the market with a competitive product to sony's offerings with more refinement. The degree of such cooperation would depend on whether canon considers sony or nikon a greater threat to its market position. Without this cooperation and with each competitor producing their own concept could cause one or more to fail. Perhaps this is why nikon has mostly been reactive to canon offerings in the last decade so to avoid going out on the proverbial limb. Of course many of nikon's cameras have been epic and first to market - yet it has clearly not given them the market edge. One should consider that designs and production are not created in a vacuum. You must look at and perhaps compare notes with certain competitors.

Just a different perspective on the game.

WestEndFoto

vtc2002 said:

It doesn't make sense to me that Nikon is taking so long to release a mirrorless camera if they were going to have an adapter for it to use the F mount lens. Reports/rumors that Nikon was going to release a mirrorless camera data back to 2014. Why would it take them 4 years to release a camera with an adapter and a couple of the most used lens for the new mount? Why can't they release they release a camera now? To me the logical answer is that the new camera will have a new mount and they are building a substantial set of lens to be released with the camera and they are trying to resolve some of the technical issues that the other manufacturers are having with their mirrorless cameras. Another possible answer is that they are oblivious to their current customers, market and competitors. Canon, Fuji, Olympus and Sony, all have pretty good offerings. Does Nikon think the market and customers will wait for them. There are numerous answers but none of them justify the delay.
I am not sure why so many Nikon DSLR owners are upset about the mirrorless camera lens mount not being a F mount. The DSLR was introduced in 1999. Everyone said that the film camera was dead yet there are still film cameras being produced and used. Nikon will not stop producing their DSLR's when they introduce a mirrorless camera. Nikon will continue to produce DSLR's for years after they release their mirrorless cameras. Why would they stop supporting their DSLR line that is generating revenue for them now or anytime in the near future? I think it will take a good 8 to 10 years for mirrorless cameras to come close to replacing the DSLR. I do not see Nikon abandoning their DSLR line for a long time.

The delay may have more to do with the inability to form a consensus, a strategic decision to see what the competition (Canon) is doing (because it matters) or both.

You may also be right that they may be building a new mount and a lens set, but somehow "that does not feel right". My gut says it is the first two items, even if they are building a new mount.

Your question about why DSLR users may be upset if Nikon introduces a new mount is missing the point. It has nothing do to with being a DSLR owner and everything to do with being invested in f-mount lenses, which for me are:

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

This is a substantial investment.

continued

WestEndFoto

continued:

Now, if Nikon introduces a new mount and starts to build a competing lens set, there will come a day where mirrorless really is as good at focussing as a DSLR or will be close enough that maintaining the separate f-mount system does not make sense. Then if I want a new camera, I will have to use the above significant investment with adapters. And since I bought the above lens set based on the assumption that it would continue to be supported without requiring the use of adapters, I would classify that as a betrayal by Nikon and I don't do business with people or corporations that betray me.

Please don't tell me that everything will be fine with adapters. I am not buying it.

Now I don't expect Nikon to do that. If you look at the lenses that I have, there is little or no benefit to a camera that will be light because the flange focal distance is less than 46.5mm. The 16mm flange focal distance on the rumoured z mount just needs an extra 30.5mm tube on it and it accommodates the f-mount just fine. How much does a 30.5mm tube need to weigh?

Yes, there is a potential issue with wide angle lenses, but I want a wide angle lens to be as good as my 105mm 1.4E. Is it really going to be any smaller?

You, see, I bought the above lenses set, not a camera. The lens set is Nikon, so my camera happens to be Nikon. I don't care much about weight but I care a lot about IQ, so my lenses are big. I don't see the point of a small light camera with poor ergonomics that force me to menu dive when I use big and heavy glass.

Now, if I am shooting small light glass because I care more about weight than IQ, then I will want a small light photon detector to bolt onto the glass. The z-mount might be pretty good. And an adapter that would sometimes allow me to use my big and heavy glass might be nice sometimes, but why would I do that when I will have a proper photon detector for it.

But do I expect that Nikon is going to risk alienating their user base because their is a subset of the market that wants small and light. I doubt it. Will Nikon cater to that small and light market. I hope so, because there is an important space between phone cameras and full frame.

So I expect Nikon to come out with a DX sized format or perhaps the z-mount which will be designed to service small and light lenses. The photon detectors will of course be mirrorless because the flange focal distance will be too short to accommodate a mirror.

I also expect Nikon to come out with a mirrorless offering for the f-mount. If you asked me to design a mirrorless photon detector that I would buy, it would be something like a D850 with a 36mm by 36mm sensor that allowed be to select any landscape, portrait or square format by spinning a dial and had focus detect across the frame. That would be a great studio camera and I would continue to want a DSLR for day to day or anything that had action. Maybe DSLRs would someday become obsolete because the focus on mirrorless may some day catch up to a top of the line DSLR (or perhaps that day will never come). I don't really case as long as I can continue to buy great f-mount lenses. However, my prediction for the first full frame mirrorless is a D610 upgrade. A DF is also possible and I would definitely buy that, though I would prefer a DSLR. It feels good to hear the mirror slap and the quite mode on the D850 is quiet enough for me.

My thoughts and opinions.

HankB

WestEndFoto said:

continued:

It feels good to hear the mirror slap and the quite mode on the D850 is quiet enough for me.

To me, the most magnificent sound on the planet is the rumble of a big, naturally aspirated, cross plane V8...and then there is the joy of banging through the gears on a six speed manual. But mirrorless  turbo 6s will soon close the gap with the most powerful V8s, turbo 4s have replaced lower power 8s, and million speed automatics are both faster and more economical than manual gear boxes.

I feel your pain, but that pain does go away with my turbo 6 at full throttle)

spraynpray

Ya can't beat cubes!

Just sayin'...

Capt_Spaulding

Manual(s) Uber alles. "We don't need no stinking" automatics.

WestEndFoto

HankB said:

WestEndFoto said:

continued:

It feels good to hear the mirror slap and the quite mode on the D850 is quiet enough for me.

To me, the most magnificent sound on the planet is the rumble of a big, naturally aspirated, cross plane V8...and then there is the joy of banging through the gears on a six speed manual. But mirrorless  turbo 6s will soon close the gap with the most powerful V8s, turbo 4s have replaced lower power 8s, and million speed automatics are both faster and more economical than manual gear boxes.

I feel your pain, but that pain does go away with my turbo 6 at full throttle)

Ah yes. I am stuck with an SUV that seats 8 - no sports car for me. But I picked a V8. And certainly not a minivan.......

PB_PM

WestEndFoto said:

Your question about why DSLR users may be upset if Nikon introduces a new mount is missing the point. It has nothing do to with being a DSLR owner and everything to do with being invested in f-mount lenses, which for me are:

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

This is a substantial investment.

continued

Those of us with a few bags and hard cases full of lenses may be rare, and not all that important to Nikon overall. Over the years Thom Hogan's surveys on lens ownership show that the vast majority of Nikon DSLR owners have an average of 1.2 lenses per camera body (the vast majority with 18-xx kit lenses or 18-xxx super-zooms and maybe a 50mm F1.8D/G (FX) or 35mm F1.8G (DX). That indicates that the impact of a new mount would be insignificant when it comes to purchase choices for the bulk of owners, who would just buy a new kit lens(es) with a new body.

So the question is, who will Nikon focus on, the 1% with 10+ lenses, or those who buy kit lenses and call it a day? Which group is actually generating more revenue for Nikon? My guess, not the 1%. For Nikon the answer is simple, the 95+% of buyers who own less than 4 lenses. With that in mind, a new mount, and likely flash system, with an available F-mount adapter is almost certain.

For Nikon it is a business decision. Owners who continue to use old glass cost them a lot of potential revenue. At the end of the day forcing users to buy new lenses will satisfy the only people Nikon excs (like other big companies) care about, shareholders.

In case you think I don't care about the issue, I also have a good stock of F-mount glass and don't relish the idea of having to buy new lenses to cover those focal ranges again.

AF 24mm F2.8n (same glass as AIS)
Tamron 28mm F2.8 AI-S (from FE film days)
AF 35mm F2.0D
Nikon 50mm F1.8 E Series (came kitted with FE)
Sigma 50mm F1.4 Art
AF-S Micro 105mm F2.8G VR
AF-S 16-35mm F4G VR
AF-S 24-70mm F2.8G
AF-S 70-200mm F2.8G VRII
AF-S 28-300mm F3.5-5.6G VR (travel lens)
Sigma APO 120-300mm F2.8 EX DG HSM
AF-S 200-400mm F4G VR I
As well as Nikon and Sigma TCs (since neither play nice with the other brand)

WestEndFoto said:

And since I bought the above lens set based on the assumption that it would continue to be supported without requiring the use of adapters, I would classify that as a betrayal by Nikon and I don't do business with people or corporations that betray me.

I honestly don't know why you thought/think Nikon would/will keep the F-mount in the transition to mirrorless, when literally every other DSLR maker has not continued forward with their legacy lens mounts. If Nikon does use a new mount, and they most likely will, you will have nobody to blame but yourself for making the assumption that Nikon would continue to use the F-mount. Nikon has never made a statement on the matter either way, so that's not Nikon betraying your investment, it is simply an assumption based on no facts.

retread

1.2 lenses per body. You got me thinking. Eight bodies, 5 are film I no longer use but won't part with. I regularly use two and some times the third digital bodies. 26 lenses but use 7 on a regular basis.

Better not let my wife figure this out!