Death of the F mount

Discussion in 'Nikon' started by kevin_beretta, May 12, 2021.

  1. Coincidence? The ByThom post for today addresses the OP of this thread with significant detail.

    DSLR Lens Discontinuation Continues

    byThom.com/Newsviews Today's post
     
    gabriel_heyman likes this.
  2. An interesting piece indeed. I am quite happy I bought a D850 in 2018 and a Df this year. Based on my prior use of the D700, the D850 will last me another 10 years. The Df is getting most of the mileage though these days. In the lens compartment I am quite ok as well. I don't think I need to make a decision in the next 10 years either way. But I do think lenses like the 14-24 f2.8 might go up in value quite a bit once those are no longer made. But maybe it will be like your house; it may go up in value but it's meaningless unless you sell it.
     
    Erik-Christensen likes this.
  3. I don't own any valuable F mount lenses. But if I do and the prices go up I would certainly consider selling them and go mirrorless for less. I was hoping for the prices to go down to get some of the more expensive lenses in the F mount.
     
  4. Me too!

    Sadly, I'm looking for long & fast teles, but as Nikon don't make ANY for Z mount, those adapted F-Mount lens prices are not going to go down any time soon!

    Road-Map promises don't cut it.
     
  5. Well, the strange thing is that one of the best lenses out there - the 55mm f/3.5 Micro-Nikkor - can still be bought for a 2 figure sum. I've measured mine at resolving 200 lppmm. Probably more, since my chart and garden length prevented me going any higher.

    There are possibly other under-rated old lenses to be had 'cheap', but they've not come to my attention yet.

    OTOH, there are plenty of under-performing old lenses that mysteriously command high prices. The 75mm f/1.5 Jena Biotar that I used back in the 1960s, for example. Not worth a damn wide open IMO, and easily beaten by an 85mm f/1.4 Samyang at a fraction of the current asking price.

    There's no accounting for taste, as they say, nor fashion, nor Internet meme.
     
    John Di Leo and kevin_beretta like this.
  6. But I already have that lens. Regardless I know what I want just wondering if the prices will go to the right direction.
     
  7. What are your guys views on your reasons for making or not making the switch to the Z cameras?

    For me, dSLR already is very good and while I won't mind nicer newer gear nowadays gear has less appeal to me and considering for me I generally share them online with people I know or I only make modest prints for myself. Others don't wants prints. For travelling, I have gone for something smaller that is smaller than full frame mirrorless but I have gotten the used older models. I have already spent enough on photographic equipment for a hobby.

    Is it for something newer? The mirrorless user interface / experience? For video use? You really are going to take advantage of the newer optics and with your usages? Something else?
     
    ray . likes this.
  8. Sandy Vongries

    Sandy Vongries Administrator Staff Member

    I can do everything across a broad spectrum of photo genres with current equipment. I have too many lenses which fit my current cameras without much disliked adapters. I have several small, quality mirrorless which do an fine job for casual photography. For anything serious, I grab any one of a variety Nikon DSLRs back down the years. New doesn't always mean better - things are gained and lost.
     
  9. Simple: Nikon currently doesn't offer a mirrorless body that satisfies my needs. In addition, Nikon has not yet released some of the lenses I would want; most of what's currently available doesn't suit me. I can, however, do what I need to do with my current DSLR setup - so a move to Nikon mirrorless is only in the cards once a suitable camera body is available at a reasonable cost (even if it means to have to use an adapter for my most used lens (500PF)). Other manufacturers already offer suitable camera bodies (not necessarily at a price point I am willing to pay though); but going that route would require me to give up and replace my entire selection of F-mount lenses. Where Nikon stands will likely become clear once the Z9 has been released; expectations certainly are quite high and hopefully Nikon can meet or even exceed them.
     
  10. If I move away from the F mount, which is highly unlikely, I would make the jump to a GFX100S Fujifilm and keep the Nikon Df and a few lenses for travel. But then substantially move to medium format mirror-less. I have toyed with the idea of putting up my <10K D850 and a set of lenses up for sale as a batch to fund part of this. Z mount in itself does not provide an improvement enough to warrant a move.
     
  11. What is the reason for that mirrorless body that satisfies your needs?
     
  12. I remain unconvinced that there is any real need for mirrorless and have found no compelling reason to go there. If Nikon drops the F mount it will be, in my eyes, just more of a marketing effort. I have no doubt that the NikonZ and Canon R cameras produce excellent results but why spend another $10k or more to replace gear that gives excellent results now? The improvements from the D1 and D100 through the D5 and D8xx are huge and it’s been money I was glad to spend but I’m not seeing that value now.

    Rick H
     
    Gary Naka likes this.
  13. AF Performance at least at par with and ideally of course better than the D500 and D850 for avian photography - which I currently believe none of the Nikon mirrorless bodies offers. I only recently got the D850 and am surprised that its AF performance is somewhat less than that of the D500. Naturally, the AF area coverage on the D850 is nowhere near as extensive as that of the D500 - but I also find that the D850 sometimes struggles to acquire focus or track properly - both in situations where I am quite certain the D500 would not have the same issues. I am also solely interested in stills photography, so whatever advantage mirrorless brings to the video realm is lost on me.

    I test-drove the Z7 when it came out and was not impressed. Granted, substantial progress has been made since then through firmware upgrades and the release of the Z7II. Renting one I could update my knowledge of its performance - though it usually takes a few days to familiarize oneself with a new camera. Purchasing one outright at this point appears to be too much of a risk - especially given that I am satisfied with how the D500 and D850 perform.

    My other photographic needs are fully satisfied with a D810 and F-mount lenses as well as a small mirrorless systems consisting of the Sony A7RIII and three zoom lenses covering 12mm to 400mm.

    My thinking is along the same line - though it does not involve medium format. Fairly certain that given the right Nikon Z body, I will gather most of my F-mount system and trade it in.
     
  14. I never said he did. If anything the video says wait unless you have a pressing need for a function on the mirrorless camera that is not on your DSLR. The link title is what You Tube and PhotoNet synthesized.
     
    Erik-Christensen and Mary Doo like this.
  15. ShunCheung

    ShunCheung Administrator

    To me, mirrorless does not replace DSLRs, at least not yet. In these days sometimes I go out with four camera bodies, one FX DSLR, D500 plus my Z6 and Z6 ii. I usually use the Z6 to capture video, which is an area I have expanded into since getting the Z6. Frequently I do use all four within one day.

    My primary motivation for mirrorless are:
    • Better lenses, especially wide angles. Without the need to leave some 40+mm between the mount and the sensor for the mirror to bounce, lens designers have a lot more flexibility. Today I have a 14-30mm/f4 that accepts conventional 82mm front filters, no bulging front element. I also have a very good 24-200mm superzoom that I haven't seen in the F-mount.
    • High frame rate: I shoot a lot of hummingbirds with rapid wing motion. I think 30 fps will soon be common and I'll have a lot more frames to choose from. The mechanical mirror limits the frame rate to around 15 fps so so. Higher frame rate will also improve the quality of sports and other action images. You simply have a lot more samples to choose from to raise the standard.
    • EVF: wonder for low-light situations, including indoors, and video capture. Perhaps I still prefer the optical viewfinder for daylight situations, but even than I am quite happy with both types.
    Other benefits include quieter operation and a much simpler camera. The mirror is difficult to manufacture and error prone.

    In the last 1990's, I could also shoot all sorts of subjects with 35mm film, but DSLRs let me shoot a lot more action: wildlife and sports. Digital removed the per-frame film cost, which would have made it way too expensive for me to shoot action the way I shoot now.
     
  16. There are so many Nikon bodies around and 10x times or more lenses around all with F-mounts, so I think, there is sufficient for everybody and none of the present members of the site need to worry of being short of any Nikon gear unless we refuse to pay the asked prices.
     
    bgelfand and FPapp like this.
  17. That won't be the problem, the chalenge is in the availability of spare parts , nikon tend's to make spare parts and maintenance un-available within a set number of years after a product (be it lens or camera) expires..
     
    FPapp likes this.

Share This Page