Jump to content

Can Nikon produce a mirrorless camera for SLR lenses


keith_bintley

Recommended Posts

<p>They could do this with an electronic viewfinder. I do beleive some of the 4/3 cameras are doing this; please correct me if I'm wrong.<br /> <br /> I understand the not wanting to buy new lenses to go with another body, and I don't think it would be a horrible move by Nikon to release something similar to 4/3 that could auto focus with AF-S lenses. Taking out the mirror and focus motor would enable them to really reduce the size. The only drawback is the electronic viewfinder that some people might not like.<br /> <br /> Honestly, the D40/60/5000 are already a step in this direction with the lack of focusing motors. I don't see why Nikon couldn't just go 1 more step and product something even more compact.</p>
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 53
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

<blockquote>

<p>Now imagine 10 years from now you tell people that we used to use a device that weighs more than one lb just to take pictures.</p>

</blockquote>

<p>That's already not true today - there is a plethora of P&S camera that can do that. But you can shrink a DSLR only down to a certain point before it becomes "too small".</p>

<blockquote>

<p>It seems that to assume that "good" cameras have to heavier is to assume that the only way to make safe cars is to make them larger and heavier.</p>

</blockquote>

<p>This has nothing to do with "good" but all with being able to hold it comfortably and stably. Of course, everyone is welcome to carry a tripod along with their m4/3 camera - though you might admit that this would be defying the mini-format just a tiny bit.<br>

I have not seen the EVF of the G1 - I state in my post that I have seen the one in the FZ50 and R1 - and both are nothing to write home about. And I do remember how the LCD panel first appeared on the back of a camera - and though its resolution has changed substantially since then, chimping is about all it is good for.</p>

<p> </p>

Link to comment
Share on other sites

<p>The G1/GH1 viewfinders are by no means an optical viewfinder, but coming from a CP8400 I found them extremely usable and would be willing to take their shortcomings in trade for their pluses over an optical viewfinder - especially compared to the optical viewfinders in the D3000/D5000 which seemed to me to be too cramped and hard to see with glasses. I found the G1/GH1 viewfinder to be extremely easy to use with glasses.<br>

Anyways, I would love for Nikon to come out with an electronic viewfinder, mirror-less design that can meter with MF lenses (and focus AF-S lenses too, but not AF-D). I have a 200/4 AIS and a 105/2.5 AIS that are quite small and would fit such a small body quite well (especially if it had sensor IS, which won't happen with Nikon). The only missing part is a small wide angle lens - the rumored 16-35/4 AFS would fit this bill quite nicely. A 12mm/4 DX would be the cat's meow!<br>

Nikon didn't get my $$ when I bought a Panasonic LX-3, and if they don't announce something soon they won't get my $$ when I buy a GF-1 or GH-1 and use Nikkor glass on them.<br>

- John</p>

Link to comment
Share on other sites

<blockquote>

<p>I don't understand all this whining and hand wringing over the size of a DSLR body. I don't have particularly large hands,</p>

</blockquote>

<p>Some of us want to have a camera with us all the time. Currently I have a Panasonic ZS1 in my pocket. A DSLR is too big to always carry with me but the Panasonic I have has a tiny sensor. I'd prefer some larger hence the interest in Micro 4/3.</p>

<blockquote>

<p>but a D40 or D5000 is too small for me to hold comfortably with anything but the smallest lenses.</p>

</blockquote>

<p>I have used my 70-200 f2.8 and even my 200-400 f4 with my D40X (identical body as the D40) and I thought it was fine. <br>

For me the ability to use existing Nikon F mount lenses on Micro 4/3 is a stop gap until either a native Micro 4/3 lens exists or for some specialized purpose where an equivalent Micro 4/3 lens may never exist. I don't actually have a Micro 4/3 body but the Panasonic GF1 and the pancake lens interests me as a "carry all the time" camera.</p>

Link to comment
Share on other sites

<blockquote>

<p>the Panasonic GF1 and the pancake lens</p>

</blockquote>

<p>This tiny 20mm/1.7 lens just received rave review at dpreview. Its IQ is as good as the Nikon AFS 50/1.4 and the Sigma 50/1.4. It achieves this with a faction of the size and weight.</p>

Link to comment
Share on other sites

<p>The G1/GH1 viewfinders are by no means an optical viewfinder, but coming from a CP8400 I found them extremely usable and would be willing to take their shortcomings in trade for their pluses over an optical viewfinder - especially compared to the optical viewfinders in the D3000/D5000 which seemed to me to be too cramped and hard to see with glasses. I found the G1/GH1 viewfinder to be extremely easy to use with glasses.<br>

Anyways, I would love for Nikon to come out with an electronic viewfinder, mirror-less design that can meter with MF lenses (and focus AF-S lenses too, but not AF-D). I have a 200/4 AIS and a 105/2.5 AIS that are quite small and would fit such a small body quite well (especially if it had sensor IS, which won't happen with Nikon). The only missing part is a small wide angle lens - the rumored 16-35/4 AFS would fit this bill quite nicely. A 12mm/4 DX would be the cat's meow!<br>

Nikon didn't get my $$ when I bought a Panasonic LX-3, and if they don't announce something soon they won't get my $$ when I buy a GF-1 or GH-1 and use Nikkor glass on them.<br>

- John</p>

Link to comment
Share on other sites

<p>I see it as very unlikely that Nikon comes out with something like th GF1 in the near future. I'll probably buy a GF1 myself as soon as the price settles a bit. I don't need that many lenses for it anyway, just 2-3 basic ones, the rest I'll adapt from my Nikon system.</p>
Link to comment
Share on other sites

<blockquote>

<p>This tiny 20mm/1.7 lens just received rave review at dpreview. Its IQ is as good as the Nikon AFS 50/1.4 and the Sigma 50/1.4. It achieves this with a faction of the size and weight.</p>

</blockquote>

<p>But the limitation for the 4/3 format is in the sensor.</p>

<p>One problem that hasn't been mentioned is that all Nikon F mount lenses (except for a few PC-E lenses) use a mechanical control to stop down the aperture. If you need to build that mechanical control into the mini camera, it really adds to its bulk. If you use an adapter, you'll end up with not only stop-down metering but also stop-down viewfinder.</p>

<p>It isn't all that simple.</p>

Link to comment
Share on other sites

<blockquote>

<p>One problem that hasn't been mentioned is that all Nikon F mount lenses (except for a few PC-E lenses) use a mechanical control to stop down the aperture. If you need to build that mechanical control into the mini camera, it really adds to its bulk. If you use an adapter, you'll end up with not only stop-down metering but also stop-down viewfinder.<br>

It isn't all that simple.</p>

</blockquote>

<p>No, I don't agree that the mechanical control for the aperture will add substantially to the bulk. Look at the FM10 film camera - it can use AIS lenses and it's only 2 inches in depth (<strong>Dimensions (WxHxD):</strong> 5.5 x 3.4 x 2.in. - from the Nikon website).<br>

The Panasonic G1 is 3.29'' x 4.88'' x 1.78'' (HxWXD). The FM-10 has a pentaprism VF to boot!<br>

- John</p>

Link to comment
Share on other sites

<p>>Can Nikon produce a mirrorless camera</p>

<p>Yes, it's called a Rangefinder. It's obvious Nikon can just slap a digital sensor into their S4 but I am not sure if there's a large enough market to warrant such an effort.</p>

<p>Sorry to veer off to something else but there's something called the hi-def video feature in DSLRs brewing in the market right now. Canon has invested $millions (may be even $billions) and is stirring the pot. If Nikon is not careful, it may miss the boat ... again ... like in autofocus technologies years ago ...</p>

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

<p>The whole idea about these mirrorless cameras with interchangable lenses is their compactness. Therefore, maintaining mechanical compatiblity with Nikon F mount lenses that tend to be fairly large relative to these compact cameras anyway makes very little sense to me. When you have a big lens in front, it totally defeats the purpose for these compact cameras.</p>

<p>Therefore, if somehow Nikon wants to enter this area, I think they are much better off designing a few new compact lenses with a modern interface that is smaller and not compatible with the F mount, such that they don't need to carry the baggage from a mount designed half a century ago for some totally different cameras.</p>

<p>Whether Nikon can compete in this new digital camera category and make money or not is another issue, something I am not qualified to discuss. But lack of qualification should not discourage anyone from providing opinions. :-)</p>

Link to comment
Share on other sites

<blockquote>

<p>The whole idea about these mirrorless cameras with interchangable lenses is their compactness. Therefore, maintaining mechanical compatiblity with Nikon F mount lenses that tend to be fairly large relative to these compact cameras anyway makes very little sense to me. When you have a big lens in front, it totally defeats the purpose for these compact cameras.<br>

Therefore, if somehow Nikon wants to enter this area, I think they are much better off designing a few new compact lenses with a modern interface that is smaller and not compatible with the F mount, such that they don't need to carry the baggage from a mount designed half a century ago for some totally different cameras.</p>

</blockquote>

<p>Exactly! The "Right" way to do it is to have a mount that is close to the sensor so it is easier to make those wide angle optics. Nikon could certainly do this and make a special new lens line just for this purpose AND make an adapter (for lots of $$$ of course) that will allow mounting of existing AI/AIS/AF-D/AF-S lenses. AF will of course only be with AF-S lenses.<br>

Will Nikon do this? I certainly hope they will. Will this camera be for the mass crowds? No it will not, thus it will be quite expensive and will probably be a niche market (like the m43 cameras tend to be).<br>

- John</p>

Link to comment
Share on other sites

<blockquote>

<p>and will probably be a niche market (like the m43 cameras tend to be).</p>

</blockquote>

<p>I just got back from two weeks in Yellowstone, Grand Canyon, Bryce, Zion, and a few other US National Parks. I probably saw 100 people a day with Nikon and Canon DSLRs but I had never seen a Panasonic G1 in person until this trip. I counted about 5-10 a day. I was shocked at how popular it seemed but they were always carried by people with families, not the "serious" looking photographers. The digital P&S crowd still outnumbered the DSLR crowd by about 5X.</p>

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

<blockquote>

<p>was shocked at how popular it seemed but they were always carried by people with families, not the "serious" looking photographers. The digital P&S crowd still outnumbered the DSLR crowd by about 5X.</p>

</blockquote>

<p>The popularity of iPod taught everyone a lesson: remember there was a time when we were obsessed by stereo equipment that must in some way to produce the highest fidelity. The speakers thus had to be big and not only did we need receiver, it was better to get tuner, amp, pre-amp, that were so powerful that they could together blow the window off your house. With iPod however we now realize that how much people are willing to buy something that is cool and convenient, a tool that we can take everywhere. It seems that O/N the high fidelity stereo business has become the thing of the past. The same thing is happening to photography, and I must add that this has already begun when camera first appeared in cell phone. Thus it seems that it is just a matter of time that someone will build a camera around a FF sensor, to make a compact camera with superior user interface, instead of putting a sensor in a decade-old SLR body. If Nikon does not get this done soon enough, someone will beat them to it, and it is hard to know what will happen to Nikon. Is it possible that one hundred years from now people will say that it finally takes a company good with electronics, such as Panasonic and Apple, to finally build the ideal DIGITAL camera. Well, why Apple, didn't they just reinvented the phone and just may drive Flip out of business? You just never know. Nikon was never a huge player in the rangefinder, but this may change if people start to abandon its system because of the weight and size penality. So next time when we take our 10 lbs rig to the beach for vacationing, just imagine if all of that can be shrunk into a 1-lb package.</p>

Link to comment
Share on other sites

<blockquote>

<p>The whole idea about these mirrorless cameras with interchangable lenses is their compactness. Therefore, maintaining mechanical compatiblity with Nikon F mount lenses that tend to be fairly large relative to these compact cameras anyway makes very little sense to me. When you have a big lens in front, it totally defeats the purpose for these compact cameras.<br>

Therefore, if somehow Nikon wants to enter this area, I think they are much better off designing a few new compact lenses with a modern interface that is smaller and not compatible with the F mount, such that they don't need to carry the baggage from a mount designed half a century ago for some totally different cameras.</p>

</blockquote>

<p>Exactly! The "Right" way to do it is to have a mount that is close to the sensor so it is easier to make those wide angle optics. Nikon could certainly do this and make a special new lens line just for this purpose AND make an adapter (for lots of $$$ of course) that will allow mounting of existing AI/AIS/AF-D/AF-S lenses. AF will of course only be with AF-S lenses.<br>

Will Nikon do this? I certainly hope they will. Will this camera be for the mass crowds? No it will not, thus it will be quite expensive and will probably be a niche market (like the m43 cameras tend to be).<br>

- John</p>

Link to comment
Share on other sites

<p>I'm seeing tons of new interest in lighter, high-end systems from people on message boards lately. I got so tired of lugging my D700 and lenses around that I bought a Panasonic LX3 before a recent trip to Guatemala and Mexico. I was hoping this would be my new travel camera and I'd be content to leave the heavy glass at home on most trips. Alas, I was disappointed with the image quality, but I loved the video and portability! I now wish I'd brought BOTH as they really serve totally different functions. I now realize that I will probably never be able to replace my DSLR with any P&S, just as I've never really been able to replace my tower computer with a laptop (believe me, I've tried). Bigger, heavier boxes can always deliver more and better features. When you're looking for ultimate quality you'll want to bring a DSLR (unless you're ready to move up to medium or large format). When you're looking for portability and ease of use you need a good P&S. Buy both and give up the urge to conflate them into one "super camera."</p>
Link to comment
Share on other sites

<p>Shun is correct. It's the large, heavy zoom lenses and their giant hoods that add weight & bulk.</p>

<p>The beauty of the G1, GF1, EP1, etc...is that you can mount the so-called pancake lenses from Olympus & Pentax, as well as the tiny, fast, superb Leica optics.</p>

<p>I think the best we can expect from Nikon is something along the lines of the Sigma compacts...and the upcoming Leica X1...or finally the APS sensor in a point & shoot.</p>

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'm in a similar situation. After using a few high-end small cameras (e.g., Canon G9), some smaller SLRs (e.g., D70, D3000), and for a year or so a Leica M8, I decided that I really wanted my D700 body and nothing else. So, I put a 50mm lens on it, and the combination is now very manageable. I got a small case that the camera just squeezes into, and it's a really nice travel/hiking package. For other times, I still have my huge lenses (e.g., f2.8 28-70mm).

 

--Marc

Link to comment
Share on other sites

<blockquote>

<p>Sorry to veer off to something else but there's something called the hi-def video feature in DSLRs brewing in the market right now. Canon has invested $millions (may be even $billions) and is stirring the pot. If Nikon is not careful, it may miss the boat ... again ... like in autofocus technologies years ago ...</p>

</blockquote>

<p>Blimey... and I thought the D90 was the first DSLR with video....</p>

<p>I agree with the point on size; this is vital to these "in betweens". Zoomlens and bigger sensor start to bite each other at a point. If that means (like with micro-4/3rd) getting a fixed-focal pancake lens is the way to keep it small, fine but then it's missing a point as a camera system for me. I'd want a choice of focal lenghts for sure (else I'd have a Sigma DP1/DP2 already). So either multiple pancakes, or something like the Leica tri-elmar lens construction (3 fixed focal distances in one lens) - that would work (for me at least) and still reduce bulk.</p>

<p>But yeah, if Nikon goes down this road, maybe they should let go of the F-mount, and design something properly for APS-C mirrorless compact. Maybe they could join forces with Canon there, or with Samsungs initiative.</p>

Link to comment
Share on other sites

<p>Despite the fact that i was blown away by the G1, I must also acknowledge its shortcomings as to not getting too carried away. The G1 is clearly not for action photography. The max frame rate is 3fps and there is a slight black out in the VF after a shot is taken, which limits its ability to track moving objects. Its high ISO performance is about the same as D80 although the D80 produces cleaner images in the shadow area. At the moment at least, for me and for many, G(H)1 is not a replacement for a capable dSLR, except when the weight is an issue (say for hiking, etc). These issues are inherited in the AF system and the relatively smaller sensor size of the m3/4 system so it may take a while to be ironed out. </p>

<p> </p>

Link to comment
Share on other sites

<blockquote>

<p>Keith:<br>

<em>No DSLR is small enough.</em><br>

Of course Nikon can do a mirrorless camera (they did some rangefinder in the past), but as you probably want to keep the lens to sensor distance, you won't gain too much size, except if you design it <em>à la</em> Rollei SL66.</p>

</blockquote>

Link to comment
Share on other sites

<p>I suspect that in 5 to 10 years time when 35mm sensors are relatively cheap, numerous manufacturers will produce non reflex digital cameras with interchangeable lenses, maybe Leica M mount. Modern 35mm digital SLRs are so big and heavy that there must be a market for something smaller. Just look at how micro 4/3 has captured peoples imagination in a way that 4/3 never did because it offers very real advantages.</p>
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now



×
×
  • Create New...