Death of the F mount

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

  1. The problem is you can wait and wait and wait, until you die.
    And during that time, you don't have use of the lens you are waiting for.

    So, if you want the lens, and the price is low enough, GET IT, and USE it.
     
  2. I can wait. Just need to find a point when it's the lowest. I am in no hurry. And if the price is going to go up I would sell some of the lenses I already have.
     
  3. Reading some of the comments you would almost believe it suddenly is impossible to make photos using F mount cameras.
    The more moderate comments merely predict that it will be impossible very soon. Maybe in a year or two - three.

    What has PNet come to...
    Sad.
     
    bgelfand likes this.
  4. Sandy Vongries

    Sandy Vongries Administrator Staff Member

    I can recall when "Film" died. Wonderfully affordable prices on great Nikon film gear (which later could be used with digital cameras). Currently the leading edge of opportunity for F Mount bargains. And yes, they'll still take terrific photos, film or digital!
     
    bgelfand and James Bryant like this.
  5. There's no reason that something like the D850 won't be taking pics in 20 years.

    It may be seen as a dinosaur by then and 'obsolete' but I'm sure it will work fine.

    Any of these cams that take a grip that takes AAs will never run out of juice and SD cards will be just fine.

    I'm sure there were similar worries when Canon changed mount in 1987!
     
  6. Yes for sure. The sky is falling down.

    Anyhow, who cares, if one is serious about photography, make the photo with whatever; cell phone, pin hole, self-made gadget... ;)
     

  7. Have you compared the prices of FX and DX lenses?
    The FX lenses are generally significantly more $$$ than the DX lens. Following are all list price off the Nikon web site, not sale prices.
    • 24/1.8: F-FX is $750, and the Z-FX is $1,000 !!!!
    • 35/1.8: F-DX is $200, vs F-FX at $530 and Z-FX at $850
    • 50/1.8: F-FX at $220 is the bargain of the FX bunch, and the Z FX at $600.
    If Nikon can make and sell a F DX 35/1.8 for less than half the price of a F FX 35/1.8, why not a F DX 24/1.8 for a decent price reduction over the F-FX lens.
    A LARGE portion of the DX market is the price sensitive consumer market.
    Yes I know making FAST wide lenses is not cheap. But, I have a m4/3 Olympus 17/1.8 that is listed on Amazon at $380. So Nikon "should" be able to do a F-DX 24/1.8 lens for significantly less than $750. Canon lists an EF-M 22/2 for $250.
    The other issue is simply market demand. Can Nikon sell enough at the projected price to cover the investment?
    But then, maybe the DX 35/1.8 normal lens is Nikon's "token" prime for the DX users. And maybe Nikon plans to do same for Z-DX, or not even have a prime.

    Looking at Canon:
    dSLR: Interestingly Canon's APS-C EF-S lenses does not have a 35/1.8 normal lens, but they have a 50/1.8 for $126.
    They also have two compact primes: the wide 24/2.8 at $150 and the 40/2.8 at $200. Sacrificing a stop of lens speed for the compact size.​
    mirrorless: EF-M series, they list the following primes: a wide 22/2 at $250 and normal 32/1.4 at $480.
     
  8. That is the point.
    If the price SLOWLY and continually drops over the next 20 years, the low point may be 20+ years from now.
    Let me know what you buy, in 20 years.
     
  9. Not sure how when I am 6 feet under. Do you?
     
    Last edited: Jul 6, 2021
    Gary Naka likes this.
  10. Will Photo.net still be around in 20 years?
    The world has changed so much in the last 20 years, I don't know what 20 years from now will look like.

    Well I "hope" I am still around, but who knows.
     
  11. I will let you know. I bought a VCR in 2004 for $150. I sold it last week for $300. Yeah VCR was dead.
     
  12. Photo.net was around (more than) 20 years ago. A lot has changed, as you say, but apparently that had little effect on PNet.
    But yes, there are no guarantees.
     
  13. 20 years is roughly how far we have come from the first commercially common DSLRs.......:D
     
  14. Well, we may still be around, but may need extra vibration-reduction technology. :eek:

    But the thing is Nikon already used up "Z", so will they recycle to A, B, C? ("D" is gone too). ;)
     
    Gary Naka likes this.
  15. I'm part way there with the need for VR to deal with my wobbles.

    Since Nikon used Z, maybe Nikon will go backwards Y > X > W
     
  16. My hands are surprisingly steady at this time - seems immobile to my eye when holding the camera with arms to my sides. But will sure to get worse when getting closer to the bucket.

    Nikon's random assignment of the alphabet makes no sense.
     
  17. Of all the things we could worry and moan about...
     
  18. I imagine the people who get F mount lenses on the secondary market is gonna be limited. Many people with these 20yrs of dSLR days already have their lenses. I have my 3 zooms and my 2 AF-D primes and 1 Ai prime. While I haven't upgraded them to the AF-S. It does the job the desire for more equipment is now no more GAS. I also don't have GAS for Z cameras either, no one I know are gonna tell the difference anyway when presented to them. Maybe the camera geek inside me might feel the urge rather than using a dated dSLR for the next 15yrs how long could people hold onto it for .....

    And yeah FX Z lenses are more expensive than F mount. Still wouldn't over time people would slowly purchase Z lenses cos that the latest tech.
     
  19. Depends what Nikon does with Z DX if anything significant more than now. In the F mount DX world. Apart from a F4'ish or a F3.5-4.5 UWA zoom lens and a 40mm DX macro and that 35mm F1.8 DX Nikon didn't have anything else.
     
  20. I guess regarding DX, it depends if Nikon are thinking of a Z version of the very well received D500.

    Something a bit rad like an 8K or 50MP sensor with 20fps to get some reach and speed advantage back to DX for wildlife etc.

    Or maybe a global shutter?
     

Share This Page