Is mirrorless the answer? I think not. An EVF is the answer.

Ist post only because I lost my old ID. Nikon user (and famous at that) - I wrote the Sony A7r vs Nikon 810 blog that had over 8,000 readers. In that blog I documented over and over how the D810 was superior to the A7r for total IQ.

Now equipped with a D850, a good selection of Nikon, Sigma and Zeiss lenses including a full Otus set, I find myself less than enthused with a Nikon mirrorless and refuse to buy a Sony because of unethical business practices.

IMHO - Nikon doesn't need a mirrorless camera - what they need is the Highest Quality EVF in photography. I am tired of using a clunky 3x loupe to get critical focus out of my Otus lenses and the D810/D850. I'd easily pay $1000 for a well designed EVF than I would pay any money for a whole new infrastructure of camera gear.

I still have all of these Leica lenses, Contax Zeiss, some M43, the f-mounts.... enough. I about ready to trade in all in for that little Lumix with the tilting EVF.

Nikon should think more like Porsche instead of follow the leader. Make enhancements every year to the 911 and eventually arrive at the line up they have today.

Tagged:

Comments

  • mhedgesmhedges Posts: 309Member
    How do you do a EVF with a mirror? Or to put it another way, why would an EVF camera need a mirror?
  • MunchmaQuchiMunchmaQuchi Posts: 11Member
    edited August 6
    The same way the camera uses the LCD now. Mirror goes up LCD, (or EVF) becomes functional. WYSIWYG when it comes to critically focusing a manual lens.
    Post edited by MunchmaQuchi on
  • mhedgesmhedges Posts: 309Member
    So how is what you are asking for different from a mirrorless camera?
  • MunchmaQuchiMunchmaQuchi Posts: 11Member
    Uh..... do you understand English? It's pretty clear in the first post.
  • sportsport Posts: 88Member
    I guess I don't understand English very well. How is what you are asking different from what mirrorless provides?
  • ggbutcherggbutcher Posts: 209Member

    Uh..... do you understand English? It's pretty clear in the first post.

    Well, I'm a little curious also. In a SLR, digital or film, the OVF is the reason the mirror is there in the first place, in order to feed the image as seen through the lens to a viewfinder. With EVF, there's no need to divert the lens view; the viewfinder image is just read from the sensor. Hence, no need for a mirror.

    I get your arguments for good EVF, but EVF just renders the mirror superfluous.
  • PB_PMPB_PM Posts: 3,729Member
    edited August 7
    Sony tried a hybrid approach with it's SLT (Single-Lens Translucent ) system, it didn't do so well. Nikon has always had poor rear LCD focuing, and even with some changes I doubt it will match the mirrorless system that is coming.
    Post edited by PB_PM on
    If I take a good photo it's not my camera's fault.
  • SearcySearcy Posts: 267Member
    I'm all for Nikon inventing the worlds greatest EVF but I can't see why you would want add a mirror to the mix. I'll be buying a Sony A7iii this winter unless Nikon changes my mind with their new mirrorless.
  • HankBHankB Posts: 172Member


    Nikon should think more like Porsche instead of follow the leader. Make enhancements every year to the 911 and eventually arrive at the line up they have today.

    Ironic mention of Porsche.

    Porsche has unparalleled, almost superhuman engineering skill and attention to detail which is the only reason they have managed to make the stupid, unstable, obsolete design with engine mass behind the rear wheels (like the death trap original VW Bug) actually work and not kill the driver (thanks to modern electronic stability management). Their mid-engine (“mirrorless”) Boxster and Cayman would easily outperform the 911 variants if their marketing people would only allow it.

    Porsche 924, 944, 928 all had to split their market with other great sports cars as does the Boxster and Cayman. But with excellent execution, Porsche has zero competition in the 911 niche. Protecting the 911 aura is the sole motive for limiting the mid-engine —“mirrorless”— Porsche efforts.

    Let’s hope Nikon’s marketing people allow their mirrorless be all it can be rather than “protect” their DSLR’s primacy. The DSLR is nowhere obsolete YET. But things are slowly shifting.
  • PB_PMPB_PM Posts: 3,729Member
    edited August 12
    HankB said:


    Ironic mention of Porsche.

    Porsche has unparalleled, almost superhuman engineering skill and attention to detail which is the only reason they have managed to make the stupid, unstable, obsolete design with engine mass behind the rear wheels (like the death trap original VW Bug) actually work and not kill the driver (thanks to modern electronic stability management).

    Not to mention that like many other "luxury" brands, they have terrible reliability after 2-4 years of use. Let us hope Nikon never gets that bad.
    Post edited by PB_PM on
    If I take a good photo it's not my camera's fault.
  • HikerHiker Posts: 190Member
    Searcy said:

    I'm all for Nikon inventing the worlds greatest EVF but I can't see why you would want add a mirror to the mix. I'll be buying a Sony A7iii this winter unless Nikon changes my mind with their new mirrorless.

    I was going to wait until the holidays to see what my options were regarding Sony, Canon and Nikon. Fate has a strange way of showing up at the right moment (except when I play the lottery apparently!). I was visiting a friend in a telescope/camera store in CA and they had 3 boxes of the A7iii. Two were already sold. My better half told the salesman to put the 3rd on hold and she bought it for me with the lens that I wanted, the 24-105 f4. I don't think you will be disappointed with the A7iii. I haven't really gone out to "break it in" yet. But I got some great shots in Sedona a couple of weeks ago.

    Love the EVF (despite what others think) love seeing my histogram in the EVF and it's well balanced with the current lens. Ergonomics? No problem with that. It's something one gets used to.
  • NSXTypeRNSXTypeR Posts: 1,926Member
    PB_PM said:

    Sony tried a hybrid approach with it's SLT (Single-Lens Translucent ) system, it didn't do so well. Nikon has always had poor rear LCD focuing, and even with some changes I doubt it will match the mirrorless system that is coming.

    That's exactly what I thought too.

    There was loss of light with the transparent mirror that resulted in performance losses with the Sony Alpha system that wasn't great. Not exactly ideal.
    Nikon D7000/ Nikon D40/ Nikon FM2/ 18-135 AF-S/ 35mm 1.8 AF-S/ 105mm Macro AF-S/ 50mm 1.2 AI-S
  • MunchmaQuchiMunchmaQuchi Posts: 11Member
    I have a 2011 C4s and it's extremely reliable. And true, P's rear engine has historically given it challenges but starting with the 997.2 and PSM and especially with AWD the 911 is as stable and neutral performing as a car can be. At the same time, P continues to develop the platform year after year and its undeniable that the 991.2s are the finest 911s and arguably the finest driver's cars in the world. Everyday reliable with hypercar performance and affordable for most Joes.

    I don't know if I'll buy a Z7 but I hope enough do to ensure that Nikon continues to develop it past Sony's top offering. Lloyd still claims the Sony files are fragile and that's what I found with them too all the way back to A7r and 11+7 bit.

    What I need to see from Nikon to buy the Z7:

    1. Same excellent files as D810/D850
    2. Ability to use legacy AF and manual lenses with an affordable adapter.
    3. Best in class EVF implementation - higher res/refresh/no jello effect/etc
    4. Rock solid chassis - it better be - lenses like the Otus 28mm will put a huge lever on the mount and if this alignment is compromised then it's all a waste.
Sign In or Register to comment.