FF Mirrorless...High or low end

It seems pretty much confirmed that Nikons first mirrrorless camera will be Full Frame.

Is there any idea whether it will be high end or low end?

If it's aiming to achieve D8xx like quality in a weather sealed metal body then I expect it to launch at well over £2000.

But Canon's first mirrorless is a budget £600 device, albeit APS-C. But with FF sensors not costing so much these days a simple plastic non sealed body could be on the market at £800.

Or perhaps all levels, A DM3xxx, DM5xxx, DM7xxx, DM5xx, DM7xx, and even a battle tank DMx

Have there been any clues as to what type of lineup there might be?
Tagged:
«1

Comments

  • mhedgesmhedges Posts: 500Member
    Well nothing full frame is what I would call low end. I would expect something similar to the D850.
  • WestEndFotoWestEndFoto Posts: 2,702Member
    Where is it confirmed that mirrorless will be full frame? The weight of the internet buzz is not a confirmation of anything.

    Second, I would predict low end, as DX and high end FX. DX will be a low mount and will be targeted to current DX low end DSLR users. I predict that the FX will be something like an updated DF or a D850 designed for the studio.

    But I have absolutely no evidence to support this. This is purely my gut.
  • OttoVonSchriekOttoVonSchriek Posts: 4Member
    Well yes.....it is all just rumours. Maybe they should make a special site, just for rumours :D
  • BVSBVS Posts: 362Member

    Where is it confirmed that mirrorless will be full frame? The weight of the internet buzz is not a confirmation of anything.

    Second, I would predict low end, as DX and high end FX. DX will be a low mount and will be targeted to current DX low end DSLR users. I predict that the FX will be something like an updated DF or a D850 designed for the studio.

    But I have absolutely no evidence to support this. This is purely my gut.

    Thom's prediction is that there will be two low end DX mirrorless cameras released around May, and an A7 (non R) level competitor released around Photokina.

    Personally, I think this makes sense. Low end DX and lower end FX is where the volume is, and it's easier to get away with a small set of native lenses, which is what they'll be starting with. Heck, for DX they could just release a kit lens, a tele zoom, and one standard prime and be almost equal to the Canon EF-M lineup.
    D7100, 85 1.8G, 50 1.8G, 35 1.8G DX, Tokina 12-28 F4, 18-140, 55-200 VR DX
  • mhedgesmhedges Posts: 500Member
    If that’s so then I wonder how they would do the mount. For DX the F mount is plenty big even for “closer to the sensor” mirrorless. Of course it would still need an adapter to use current DX lenses without focus limitations .
  • PistnbrokePistnbroke Posts: 1,578Member
    just give us the Z mount and an adaptor for DX ...I just hope its not 20MP but it will be . I ain't going to rush ..Nikon made some crap in the past,the clunk clunk D800 for one and the D850 ain't even Quiet.
  • DaveyJDaveyJ Posts: 869Member
    I hope the mirrorless is both a DX low end and FX. Why? I could not in later years afford the FF!
  • HankBHankB Posts: 215Member
    And you can speculate an argument for higher end DX as well, to capture the mirrorless D500 market. It could be a great sports camera that could bang off 20 frames/sec.
  • spraynprayspraynpray Posts: 5,828Moderator

    just give us the Z mount and an adaptor for DX ...I just hope its not 20MP but it will be . I ain't going to rush ..Nikon made some crap in the past,the clunk clunk D800 for one and the D850 ain't even Quiet.

    My D850 is silent when I want it to be. Oddly, I'd turn on a beep if I could for normal use as it is so disconcerting to not have a reaction of any kind when pressing the shutter.
    Always learning.
  • HankBHankB Posts: 215Member


    My D850 is silent when I want it to be. Oddly, I'd turn on a beep if I could for normal use as it is so disconcerting to not have a reaction of any kind when pressing the shutter.

    A silent camera could/should have a menu controlled, discrete and discreet optical indicator like a brief flash from an indicator in the viewfinder
  • spraynprayspraynpray Posts: 5,828Moderator
    It is silent in live view so there is no viewfinder. I can make the shutter button beep when I push it halfway using the viewfinder, but it doesn't beep in live view.
    Always learning.
  • HankBHankB Posts: 215Member
    My point is that in live view, for example, there could be a menu choice to display an indicator on the LCD that flashes for each shot, much like the record indicator for video.
  • vtc2002vtc2002 Posts: 364Member
    All you have to do is look at the number of shots left on the top LCD display to make sure that the number has decreased by one or more shots.
  • flipflip Posts: 98Member
    Def, high end ff if they have the lens range i need, camera vr and at least 36mp.Dx would be an unnecessary compromise and x- pro 2 or leica tl are both competent enough if i wanted one. I am fully engaged with my d800s so it would need an aesthetic design and a host of new features for me to add it. unlikely to replace my dslrs. Silent shutter would be nice option.
  • WestEndFotoWestEndFoto Posts: 2,702Member
    Thom’s recent article “attachment rate” sums up my thinking on why Nikon will keep the f-mount for full frame mirrorless.

    But I think a new mount for a smaller format, say DX, makes sense.
  • mhedgesmhedges Posts: 500Member
    edited March 29
    That would be a mistake. F mount is too small to do full frame mirrorless without compromise.
    Post edited by mhedges on
  • WestEndFotoWestEndFoto Posts: 2,702Member
    I think having to use adapters is a bigger compromise.
  • HankBHankB Posts: 215Member
    edited March 29
    Nikon retained so much of its customer loyalty by absolutely ingenious engineering to adapt new technology to an old old lens mount. I can’t think of another product line in ANY industry that has so brilliantly retained backward compatibility. The F mount run has been pure genius!

    But mirrorless is a QUALitatively different introduction of technology in that it includes the one-time opportunity to greatly reduce the wasted space of flange to sensor distance. To capitalize on this one time opportunity will at least require adapters for DSLR lenses, so why not go whole hog, increase the mount diameter, and eliminate the mount advantage Canon has held for decades.
    Post edited by HankB on
  • WestEndFotoWestEndFoto Posts: 2,702Member
    And what is Canon’s mount advantage? It hasn’t translated into superior af performance. The best af money can buy is the D5. The second is the D850.
  • snakebunksnakebunk Posts: 782Member
    @WestEndFoto: I don't think the mount has anything to do with af performance. From what I've read the F mount diameter is rather small and it causes problems for lenses with a very large aperture, I think Canon has an advantage there. And then of course the flange distance can be smaller with a new mount (it is more of a new standard then a physical change in the mount). Hope I am not wrong.

    It is a pity that Nikon 1 wasn't dx. It could have been a great system still alive and Nikon would already have one foot in the mirrorles world. It would have made it easier to continue with F mount for full frame cameras since Nikon would already have a system for smaller cameras.

    Thinking ahead, an alternative way for Nikon to go is to continue with F mount for mirrorless cameras and aim at a new medium format mount in a few years time. But my guess is that they want a new fx/dx mount that enables them to make small cameras similar to Fujifilm.

    Sony are focused on full frame and Fujifilm have skipped full frame in favor of both dx and medium format. I hope Nikon can find a strategy that is as clear and focused.
  • mhedgesmhedges Posts: 500Member
    snakebunk said:

    @WestEndFoto: I don't think the mount has anything to do with af performance. From what I've read the F mount diameter is rather small and it causes problems for lenses with a very large aperture, I think Canon has an advantage there. And then of course the flange distance can be smaller with a new mount (it is more of a new standard then a physical change in the mount). Hope I am not wrong.

    That is my understanding too. And the narrow diameter would make it very hard to shorten the distance between the mount and the sensor.
  • HankBHankB Posts: 215Member
    mhedges said:

    snakebunk said:

    @WestEndFoto: I don't think the mount has anything to do with af performance. From what I've read the F mount diameter is rather small and it causes problems for lenses with a very large aperture, I think Canon has an advantage there. And then of course the flange distance can be smaller with a new mount (it is more of a new standard then a physical change in the mount). Hope I am not wrong.

    That is my understanding too. And the narrow diameter would make it very hard to shorten the distance between the mount and the sensor.
    For this same reason — small diameter mount limitations on full sensor coverage — there is speculation that it makes it harder or impossible to fully cover the moving sensor needed for an in-camera image stabilization system. While Canon hasn’t YET gone the sensor based stabilization route, they wouldn’t have the obstacle that faces Nikon with this inevitable near future change.

    I also wonder, and this is just speculation on my part, if the narrow mount is the reason why after 3 tries, Nikon still can’t match Canon’s 70-200 f2.8 pro lens. The focus breathing issue is a deal breaker for some portrait photographers. I believe this is just about the most important pro lens there is, and Nikon would certainly match Canon here if they could.
  • WestEndFotoWestEndFoto Posts: 2,702Member
    edited March 30
    HankB said:

    mhedges said:

    snakebunk said:

    @WestEndFoto: I don't think the mount has anything to do with af performance. From what I've read the F mount diameter is rather small and it causes problems for lenses with a very large aperture, I think Canon has an advantage there. And then of course the flange distance can be smaller with a new mount (it is more of a new standard then a physical change in the mount). Hope I am not wrong.

    That is my understanding too. And the narrow diameter would make it very hard to shorten the distance between the mount and the sensor.
    For this same reason — small diameter mount limitations on full sensor coverage — there is speculation that it makes it harder or impossible to fully cover the moving sensor needed for an in-camera image stabilization system. While Canon hasn’t YET gone the sensor based stabilization route, they wouldn’t have the obstacle that faces Nikon with this inevitable near future change.

    I also wonder, and this is just speculation on my part, if the narrow mount is the reason why after 3 tries, Nikon still can’t match Canon’s 70-200 f2.8 pro lens. The focus breathing issue is a deal breaker for some portrait photographers. I believe this is just about the most important pro lens there is, and Nikon would certainly match Canon here if they could.
    Huh!!!

    Canon has been outmatched. Not that I would complain about Canon's great lens, but check this out.

    http://www.dslrbodies.com/lenses/nikon-lens-reviews/nikkor-zoom-lens-reviews/nikon-70-200mm-f28e-fl-ed.html

    The conclusion:

    This is the best 70-200mm I’ve used to date, from any manufacturer. Snappy focus, good VR, dramatic sharpness throughout, no terrible faults. It’s very easy to recommend this lens.

    And the focus breathing issue is solved. I bought this lens about a month ago, I have the holy trinity now. It is suburb lens.
    Post edited by WestEndFoto on
  • HankBHankB Posts: 215Member
    Yeah, you are right…Nikon fixed the breathing and matched Canon’s 70-200 on the THIRD try. But the point remains, why was it so hard for Nikon in the first place? Why did it take so long?

    And again, does the small diameter F mount limit sensor based image stabilization, and does that restrictive diameter make it impossible to reclaim the flange to sensor distance for mirrorless that is required for a DSLR's mirror box? (That space can be saved for more compact mirrorless cameras or be used for extra battery capacity).

    Does the narrow mount make it harder and more expensive to make good lenses?

    There is a happy medium between Nikon’s design extreme philosophy of sticking with old legacy decisions for an entire human lifetime, and say Apple’s extreme practice of capreciously changing ports every few models.
  • vtc2002vtc2002 Posts: 364Member
    I have access and have used the Canon and Nikon 70-200mm lens both of them extensively. From my experience the Nikon 70-200E version is close to the Canon version as far a sharpness but for me the reversing of the zoom ring and issues with quality control are a problem for Nikon. The reversing of the zoom ring creates a significant issue. For one it does not fall at a natural place when you bring the lens up to shoot. When you raise the lens you tend to grab the lens at its center for balance. With the Nikon you have to move your hand past that center of balance and I find it very uncomfortable to hold the lens for a extended period of time. In addition, when I shoot a sports event such as a basketball game, I carry two or three cameras. One camera with a 300 or 400mm to catch the action at the far end of the court, one camera with a 70-200mm for the action at the near court and a camera with either a 14-24mm or a 24mm for post game court shots. Having a camera that has a different zoom/focus setup causes problems. I have missed so many shots when I switch cameras to shoot near court action because the zoom ring is different from the one tat I was just using. I no longer use the E version and will either use the G version or use the Canon version on the 5D Mark IV. Even if I am shooting a event that I only have one camera with the 70-200 E lens it takes some time to adjust to the focus ring placement. We have 5 copies of the Nikon E version and 2 of the copies we had to return due to auto focus accuracy. Even after adjusting the only way that we could get a in focus shot with them was by using Live View. We have three versions of the Canon lens and AF focus accuracy has not been an issue. I do not buy Nikon's reasoning for moving the focus ring on the 70-200 and unless they do the same to all of the holy trinity it will continue to be an issue.
    Focus breathing is no where as bad as the G version but it is still present. It is very minor.
    I bought the 70-200 E version for personal use and agree that it is a great lens but it has it's issues which I tend to agree with HankB that are related to the F mount. Whether they are or not the issues are not helping Nikon.
    As far as the Mirrorless camera is concerned, Nikon's two biggest competitors are Sony and Canon. Sony already has a Full frame Mirrorless camera in the market and Canon has announced that they will be delivering a FF Mirrorless camera in 2019 (perhaps sooner per Canon Rumors). If Nikon does not deliver a FF mirrorless camera that competes with Sony or prior to (or even close to) when Canon releases their's I do not see how Nikon will be a player in that market space. I do not know why Nikon would want to compete in the DX mirrorless market space which is quickly becoming saturated.
Sign In or Register to comment.