Nikon Plans `New Concept' SLR Camera as Early as This Year

Discussion in 'Nikon' started by mike_stemberg, Jul 9, 2010.

  1. The “new concept” model will probably have an enhanced function for video recording and may adopt the so-called mirrorless structure, Kimura said in an interview today in Tokyo. “It could be any time this fiscal year or the following year, as new models are starting to sell,” he said, declining to specify when the product will be available.
    ... read more.
    I wonder if they are just jumping onto the Micro FourThird cameras and similar concepts or might there be yet another approach.
     
  2. "a mirrorless" "single-lens reflex camera" to quote from the first two sentences. Definitely a "new concept" that I am afraid not even Nikon can pull off - unless there is a way to have a reflex camera without a conventional mirror in it that I am not aware of.
     
  3. i have seen somewhere yesterday that canon show a new video cam ( they should produce it in a near future) with only a
    touch screen no physical button... where you can get a 8x10 photo quality by selecting the frame that you need... kind of a
    RED camera but for the rest of us non millionaire : )

    also, couple month ago i was talking with a senior nikon rep in a photo event and he said that nikon was on a way on
    doing something big and new ... like 3d on a dslr...soon
     
  4. Isn't this "New Concept" pretty much a Point-and-Shoot with live-view and interchangeable lenses?
    All the same, the mirror and shutter mechanisms in general are definitely the Achilles' heels of current camera production. It's those mechanical parts that wear out. I can't remember any time that the "electronic" parts of a machine have failed on me (except maybe the first time you turn it on).
     
  5. ShunCheung

    ShunCheung Administrator

    SLRs, by definition, has a mirror to reflect the image to the viewfinder. Those "mirrorless" cameras are not SLRs.
     
  6. Shun forgive me if I am incorrect but I don't think the mirror itself is necessary for a camera to be considered an SLR I think the defining point of an SLR is that the camera user is looking through the photo capturing lens when framing and viewing what they are going to photograph.
    Not sure if I used the correct terminology but does that make sense?
    I have no idea what they do have planned but they might have made a camera with no mirror that still has a single lens and an eyepiece that the user looks through that shows them exactly what is through the lens by some means.
     
  7. ShunCheung

    ShunCheung Administrator

    Again, the R in SLR stands for reflect, no mirror, no reflect. The "mirrorless" cameras are single-lens but they are not reflect; they provide a new way to compose that was not possible with old-fashioned film photography.
    Anyway, terminology is merely a side discussion.
     
  8. Actually Shun the R in SLR stands for Reflex not Reflect. I think it refers to the action of an element flipping up or flipping down to move the light from going to the eyepiece to going to the exposing surface (sensor or film) so I am still not 100% convinced that a mirror is necessary in an SLR.
     
  9. Reflex refers to what happens in the prism.
    Looking at a little video screen viewfinder, you'd still be viewing what will be recorded (without parallax error) just like an SLR, so the difference is semantic.
     
  10. If the camera is SLR, it must have a mirror.
    Word "reflex" in human body does not mean reflection of light, but we are here about the photography subject and any camera reflexes or movements - if slow or fast mirror action, is not the reflex originally named in SLR.
    What is the purpose of this discussion ?
     
  11. ShunCheung

    ShunCheung Administrator

    Sorry Kyle, I meant reflex, but the reason remains the same. And it merely refers to the existance of a mirror, as TLRs (twin lens) have mirrors that do not move inside the camera.
    Without the mirror, it is not an SLR and your lens design is no longer restricted by the presence of the mirror. Therefore, mirrorless cameras are closer to rangefinders with interchangeable lenses such as the Leica M and Contax G, and you can use a totally different set of lenses, but mirrorless cameras are single lens so that your compose from the same lens as you capture, which traditional range finders are not.
    If Nikon gets into the mirrorless space, it'll be interesting to see whether they maintain compatibility with their traditional F lenses, which are designed for SLRs instead of rangefinders/mirrorless or they introduce a new set of lenses. If it is the latter, whether they will provide an adapter to mount F lenses. Part of the appeal of mirrorless cameras is their small size; using F lenses will compromises that big advantage to a large degree.
     
  12. I think they just used the term SLR incorrectly and they are coming out with a camera to compete with the micro 4/3rds and Sony Evil type camera's. Maybe it will have an electronic viewfinder along with live view. Sounds like it will have a good video feature on it. Probably will be popular with many consumers. I am curious if it will be a new lens line up or if they plan on using the same lenses that are already available..
     
  13. Or maybe they have come up with a new design that is completely unique and has no mirror but still has the camera user looking through the lens so instead of being like a TLR or a rangefinder where parallax is an issue this new design wouldn't suffer from that issue.
    I understand reflex refers to the mirror in that way now. I just was offering up maybe an explanation as to why they used the term SLR. It was just a thought anyway.
     
  14. Considering the gaps in Nikon's lens line up and the fact that the update of quite few older lenses is long overdue, I'd be pretty annoyed if Nikon now chooses to spend their apparently meager and insufficient resources on the development and production of a new line of lenses for a new type of camera. Not that I mind them exploring new revenue streams - but not at the expense of neglecting already existing product lines.
    Then again, something updated along the lines of the Sony DSC-R1 might not be a bad idea - the camera has a couple of nice features already. Fervent hope is for a DX size sensor and not a 4/3.
     
  15. Damon, you are incorrect.
    My Nikon F3, Pentax Lx, and two Bronica ETR-Si's all have removable prisms, and they do not cease to be SLR's with their prisms removed. Many medium format SLR's, such as Hasselblads and Mamiya RB/RZ 67's, are very commonly used a with waist-level finder, which has no prism.
    "Reflex" refers to the use of a mirror to reflect light coming through a lens, either the taking lens or one like the taking lens, which is used for viewing.
    A Rolleiflex is a TLR, a twin-lens reflex. A fixed mirror reflects the image coming through the upper lens onto a focusing screen.
    A camera cannot be a reflex camera without a mirror. And reflex has nothing to do with a mirror moving.
     
  16. Two things come to mind, the pellicle mirror used in cameras like the Canon Eos RT, and the beam splitter prism used instead of a mirror in the Olymous E10.
    The pellicle mirror being fixed and semi transparent allowed continuous viewing, though it seems to have had some disadvantages like difficulty in low light situations. Perhaps there's an improvement on that ? But not really mirrorless.
    I don't really understand how a prism works, but they alter the light path, so I suppose can be used in place of a mirror - the clever part to me is how it passes light through to the sensor and up to the viewfinder at the same time. But according to photo.net http://www.photo.net/equipment/olympus/e-10
    unlike the typical SLR, the Olympus does not have a mirror that flips up and out of the way during exposure. A permanent beam-splitting prism is in the imaging path​
    Even so it I expect what they really mean is, they have an EVIL model on the way.
    But that wouldn't be an SLR, and it wouldn't fulfill the same function unless there was a massive improvement in EVF technology. It might still sell though.
     
  17. I await this development with interest. In my opinion the concept of using a conventional mirror and shutter is outdated and I am sure the technical issues have been resolved a while ago. Live view is just one step towards this. I have been surprised how useful this is on D300S . I'll not be giving up the real finder as sticking the fixed live view screen on the back is ergonomically poor. The video camera model of design is much more appropriate as still and video cameras will become inseparable in the not to distant future.
    There are two barriers to the adoption of the mirror-less camera. Consumer resistance and the resolution of electronic viewfinders. If a camera manufacture could come up with a camera which has high resolution, low noise,dynamic range equivalent to human vision and HD Video, I'd happily accept the limitations of an EVF.
     
  18. There are more things against moving out of the mirror paradigm than just "consumer resistance" (actually looking at the kind of SLR viewfinders that consumers put up with you'd think they'd be dying to get rid of the mirror and optical viewfinder as they are implemented in consumer DSLRs). The phase-detect AF also depends on mirrors. If you want to get rid of the mirrors in a DSLR you need to base autofocus on the main sensor data and at least Nikon doesn't know how to do this properly (ever tried live view AF? It is really quite terrible.) Panasonic seems to be able to do it better but they use smaller sensors with inherently (slightly) greater depth of field. Anyway, without doubt Nikon will enter this mirrorless interchangeable lens digital camera market as this allows smaller cameras and that's what consumers want. The good AF and the good optical viewfinders that give DSLRs their motivation of existence are available only in the higher end models, anyway (D300s and up) so I'd expect the low end DSLRs to lose their mirrors very soon in those brands which haven't done so yet (of course, they won't be DSLRs any more since most of the acronym is about how many main mirrors there are.) The question is how does Nikon gain access to fluidly working AF algorithms that are based on the main sensor data (the problem is, I believe, the amount of data that needs to be processed, and the lack of directional information "which way to turn"). While I think optical viewfinders will exist in the higher end camera bodies for at least a decade more, I do think for the consumer models the time of the mirror is up since the pressure is to make the cameras smaller.
     
  19. Canon had a film EOS RT camera body. The mirror dimmed the viewfinder a bit, but *ala carte* in function, no mirror flap. The semi-transparent mirror design worked fine. I do not know who owns the patent on it, but the concept should work for a D-SLR body.
     
  20. ShunCheung

    ShunCheung Administrator

    AF speed is certainly an issue as Ilkka points out. Nikon's AF speed in the live view mode is currently a joke; indoors somethings it takes 2, 3 seconds for a simple 50mm lens to get in focus. But I am sure that is a problem they can eventually overcome.
    Another issue is that while LCD technology has improved a lot, IMO using the LCD to compose is still not sufficient for serious photography. Live view is good for shooting news or a party when you hold the camera overhead and have a crude composition. Otherwise, I still by far prefer an optical viewfinder. Again, that also may change over time as electronic viewfinders improve further.
    Finally, holding a camera a few inches in front of your eyes to compose is a lot more unstable than pressing the camera against your face for hand held shooting, especially if you have a bigger lens in front, something like a 70-200mm/f2.8.
    Therefore, to me, at this point mirrorless camera are mainly those smaller ones for consumers, in the sense that they are improved digicams that give you higher-quality interchangeable lenses. For more serious photography, I would prefer an SLR for many years to come. In other words, the main advantage for mirrorless is small size. Therefore, it probably does not make a whole lot of sense for Nikon (or anybody else) to maintain compatibility with those traditional F-mount SLR lenses, which are much larger. But regardless of which way Nikon chooses, I am sure there will be a lot of complaints about compatibility with the past or the lack of it.
     
  21. Yeah, despite all the obfuscation and overcomplication, reflex here does indicate a mirror. I'd suggest TTL for a mirrorless-through-the-lens camera, except that is already used for something else. How about TTLV (through the lens viewfinder) or just TLV ?
    The Canon pellicle stationary mirror had certain advantages, but the Nikon concept sounds more like an EVF.

    Another model was added to the EOS-1N line, "EOS-1N RS." The camera has a stationary pellicle mirror that ensures capturing that illusive (sic) moment because there is no viewfinder black-out at shutter release. and the fixed mirror also gives high-speed continuous shooting at the speed of 10 frames per second. [ca. 1994--from Canon Camera Story] {punctuation and spelling as in original}​
     
  22. "What is the purpose of this discussion ?"
    To remove those little bits of annoying fluff that collect in the belly button. Actually, the purpose was to report a statement made by Nikon regarding a future product. Unfortunately it is rather vague. Best wait and see.
     
  23. These kinds of cameras are a significant part of the future of cameras.
    I've handled and used one of the new Olympus mirrorless cameras and it is MARVELOUS to use.
    I don't think DSLRs will go away, but this new class will take over the higher end of P&S cameras, the lower end of DSLRs (that Olympus blows away anything at the bottom of the line of Sony, Pentax, Nikon, Canon, et al for many "serious casual" purposes), AND these will eat into some camcorder sales, too.
     
  24. This point of intersection between entry level DSLRs and fixed lens digital cameras has been brewing for some time. I thought about it when I got my first DSLR a few months ago. There is not that much difference in price between the Pentax K-x I got and a Canon G11. The Pentax is larger and somewhat heavier but it is much more versatile. I have K mount film cameras and lenses so the K-x lets me use the lenses. Once small digital cameras with rear displays instead of viewfinders appeared and once enough manual control was available, some interesting macro work could be done by just putting close-up lenses or reversed camera lenses in front of them. The market has a big mix of camera users. Some people buy an entry level DSLR with a kit lens and only use that lens. Others may buy an EVIL and/or MILC camera and want more lenses. If the MILC cameras using an APS-C size sensor allow for better high ISO IQ then that's an advantage which is worthwhile even if the camera or lens has IS. If high ISO performance is not so important then 4/3 MILC cameras already have high enough IQ for the size print most people will make.
    The entry level DSLRs are larger than MILCs but they aren't very heavy. A Canon F-1 or Nikon F2 or Nikkormat will be a lot heavier than most entry level DSLRs. Apart from the novelty factor of the smaller MILCs I don't know how many buyers will really want that many extra lenses. The person who wants or needs extra lenses will probably use a DSLR.
     
  25. I'll take my Nikon F and use it to crush those EVF wannabe cameras...
     
  26. Kyle Evans wrote "parralex errors" with Rangefinders and Twin-Lens.In case of my Leica M3, the frame finder far more accurate than Nikkormats and Pentaxes(SLR). Mamiya and Rollei showed the slight difference between the seeing and taking lens. The difference unless close-up, was minimal.
    The "EVIL" viewfinder is really needed with smaller sensors. The viewfinders suck on all the DSLR's using less than regular "35mm full frame format".
     
  27. Sorry Nikon, but some things just need to be mechanical. I will be loving the 6 Nikon mirror bodies of yours that I own (two N90s, three F100, one D300) for a very long time, thank you very much.
     
  28. I could never use an entirely electronic camera and be happy. I'd miss that unique shutter sound that has been a part of the romance of photography since it was invented.
     
  29. Incorporate that into a digital S-series rangefinder, preferably with an optical rangefinder as at least an adjunct to the EVIL, and I might never pick up a dSLR again. Especially with the FX sensor, there's a niche in an increasingly popular market segment - so far dominated by Micro 4/3 - that Nikon could exploit.
    If absolutely necessary I could adapt to an electronic finder, but I'd prefer an option for an optical finder if only as a composition aid. There are lots of little things I'm not thrilled with in the current crop of Micro 4/3 cameras. There's a niche where Nikon could excel if they commit to it.
    An affordable DX compact camera competitor to the Olympus Digital PEN's could be interesting too. The tricky bit would be compatibility with existing lenses, since Nikon seems to get little respect for their non-interchangeable lens Coolpix series in a very demanding and somewhat fickle market.
    "The viewfinders suck on all the DSLR's using less than regular "35mm full frame format"."​
    Nope, they don't. Not all of 'em. But that seems to be a popular sentiment.
     
  30. I absolutely believe that the mirror in a camera will go bye-bye in 10 years or less due to new display technology. It's all about speed, pros want 10+FPS now. And it's all about size. The FF mirror box on digital SLR cameras is huge. The D700 was a whale of a camera for me. Didn't like that part. The new OLED displays are far higher resolution than HD displays are today. We're talking putting a 1080p display in the viewfinder of a camera with a high power cpu powering it - it will look as good as reality, and perhaps even better. So I am sure Nikon knows that it's doing and look forward to a small full frame SLR-type camera, even if it doesn't have a mirror and has an OLED display instead. Something the size of a Leica X1 with 24mp and the image quality of the Nikon D3x is what I'm hoping for in the next 5 years. "And I'll buy it" - Tonio K.
     
  31. As Shun Cheung points out, one of the major reasons for going to a mirrorless design is the opportunity for smaller and lighter lenses. Going mirrorless won't make sense in the market without providing these smaller lenses, even though adapters may be provided for existing lenses as with the micro 4/3 cameras.
    I can't see Nikon (or other manufacturers) maintaining and updating *three* different lens formats for any extended period. As it is Nikon has trouble keeping up their lens lineup; for instance, where are the 85/1.4 and 180/2.8 AF-S lenses?
    My prediction is that *if* Nikon is successful with a mirrorless system, then they will phase out the DX format over time. The next step up from a fixed-lens camera will be a mirrorless camera with interchangeable lenses smaller than the DX lenses, and then at the top of the lineup will be full-frame dSLRs and their lenses. That outcome may still be years away, as Nikon might choose to put its toes in the water for a while with a fairly minimal mirrorless system (e.g. one or two cameras and three or four lenses) before really committing to a full line of mirrorless cameras and their lenses.
     
  32. Look carefully at the Bloomberg story: clearly, first of all, the reporter has no clue about camera categories. He/she is just the body on site in Tokyo or whereever this interview took place. IOW, the phrase DSLR means next to nothing. Second, much bigger news: stock price is finally starting a comeback probably based on rumors of this new product line. Nikon has announced intentions to VASTLY increase its camera sales over the next three years. Do you think they're going to do this with technologically groundbreaking expensive equipment appealing to serious amateurs and pros? Only slightly. Most of it has to be junk of one kind or another.
    On the other hand.... Nikon already has the highest rated non-full frame sensor on the market and if they could put that or something slightly higher level (like 14 or 18 megapixels) into a mirrorless camera with a built in EVF with live view equalling or bettering the new EVFs from Panasonic and Olympus (which are supposed to be way better than the last generation), they'd have a winner. But they cannot make the mistake of Samsung and SONY and create a mount that allows only their own (likely new) lenses. A big part of the success of MFT Lumix and PEN cameras has been in allowing people to use a very wide array of lenses. This hasn't stopped Panasonic at least from making money on their own lenses: first of all you can't buy the camera w/o one and second their 7-14mm and 14-45mm zooms, and their 20mm f/1.7 prime, are simply world class for that category, better than almost anything you can put on the camera to replace them. Surely Nikon still knows how to make superb lenses that cost under $500. Right?
    00WqYb-259145584.jpg
     
  33. So, nobody cares for the delay in the image you see through an electronic VF? With a mirror and a pentaprism you see what's going on in real time, the speed is that of the light. No electronic VF will ever match that performance. bye, Marco
     
  34. "So, nobody cares for the delay in the image you see through an electronic VF? With a mirror and a pentaprism you see what's going on in real time, the speed is that of the light. No electronic VF will ever match that performance. bye, Marco"
    This may have been the case a few years ago but looking at more recent cameras EVFs are improving. I'll agree that they are inferior now; as are the ones on point and shoots; but the mass consumer is more impressed with style and numbers of pixels than picture quality alone. At the high end; the viewfinder lag will soon be less of an issue than resolution which is dictated by physics and the size of the pixels in the screen.
     
  35. [[I'd miss that unique shutter sound that has been a part of the romance of photography since it was invented.]]
    This nearly made me spit my morning coffee out. Thanks for the laugh.
     
  36. ShunCheung

    ShunCheung Administrator

    [[I'd miss that unique shutter sound that has been a part of the romance of photography since it was invented.]]
    This nearly made me spit my morning coffee out. Thanks for the laugh.​
    Have you ever used some of those mobile phone cameras? Some of them can optionally play the sound of a traditional mechanical shutter when you are capturing an image. In modern electronics, there are a lot of those silly features. The only limitation is your imagination.
     
  37. 1. Speed of light: Our eyes and brains have a limited speed. Of course old movies like Chaplin's movies are jerking but have you complaint recently that our movies dont have fast enough refreshing rate?
    2. Shutter sound: many P&S have features that can make a similar sound to an SLR everytime you take a shot
    3. It's true that many people care more about how the camera looks and how they look holding the camera much more than how the picture comes out. Many would never take the pictures out of the camera and never print them either, just look at the pictures on the camera LCD and then delete them after some time
    4. Honestly, most of us dont mind carrying 2-3 lbs, only sometimes we dont think it's "cool" to do that. One would carry just a few things with a heavy brief case instead of a very light plastic bag
     
  38. Does anyone have nostalgia for the sound of a motor drive?
    In 5 to 10 years time we might be laughing about the digital cameras that had shutters!!
    BTW the comments about P &S reminded me of one of my elderly hotel guests who had a camera problem and could I help him fix it! He lost the "tweety bird sound on his digcam! Of course "Basil Fawlty" tore his remaining hair out searching through the menus to find it. I was made to look totally inept as a camera expert after not being able solve the problem!
     
  39. Had a response much earlier, but I guess the post didn't go through.
    My guess is an announcement of some sort of EVIL camera similar to Sony's NEX5 / NEX3 that just came out (with mixed reviews). Probably nothing groundbreaking though.
    A real "new concept" would be a D700x (with the sensor from the D3x), the sony/olympus live view system (i.e. very fast live view autofocus and shooting), in-camera stabilization / VR with the ability to auto-detect VR lenses and turn it off, 30fps 1080i HD video, a four-inch touchscreen with Wi-Fi and the ability to switch between the Nikon camera operating system and Google Android for web-browsing, email, and posting / texting / emailing pictures straight out of the camera.
    As Vince noted above, pro cameras aren't where the money is. We'll probably just see a whole grip of cheap consumer point and shoots with some new features.
     
  40. ShunCheung

    ShunCheung Administrator

    Had a response much earlier, but I guess the post didn't go through.​
    Left, I deleted your earlier post since you quoted an outside source extensively; that is a violation of their copyright. You also provided no URL link to your source (assuming that one is available). Please check your e-mail since I sent you an explanation.
     
  41. If it doesn't have a cell phone, who would buy it?
     
  42. Maybe Nikon will do the ILC right. Small body, large sensor, new small lenses, adapter for automatic use of all the Nikon F glass out there.
    Something for everyone. Those with too much money can buy all new glass. Those of us with too little, can reuse our humble collections.
    Maybe not necessarily too small a body, a large display is nice. One you can see in the sunshine.
    How about a touch screen, where you tell the camera where to focus!
    Paul
     
  43. Hi Shun. I doubt that Nikon would make this compatible with the F mount. I think that all major camera makers are trying to avoid, or at least delay the "comeditization"of their products, similar to what happened to the PC market. The name on the box is meaningless, they all come off the same off shore contracted assembly lines. (Except to their credit, Panasonic.)
    Surely this will be marketed to the masses that have never even heard of an F mount lens.
     
  44. I think I will save my pennies for a Leica M2 and a banjo. I have a built in light meter that runs on pancakes and coffee so I would not need a battery. I don't need a video camera because somebody already did Predator vs Golden girls.
     
  45. ShunCheung

    ShunCheung Administrator

    Hi Shun. I doubt that Nikon would make this compatible with the F mount. I think that all major camera makers are trying to avoid​
    Again, the main selling point for those "mirrorless" cameras is their small size, and they are no longer limited by a mirror box. It makes absolutely no sense to slap an F-mount lens onto it by default; doing so will totally defeat the small-size advantage.
    If you take a look at Sony's solution, while they have a set of lenses (so far 3 of them) for their NEX cameras, they also have a crumsy adapter to mount the Minolta/Sony SLR Alpha lenses onto the NEX's E mount. The adapter has a little motor to control the aperture in the Alpha lenses but still cannot maintain AF: http://www.dpreview.com/reviews/SonyNex5Nex3/
    Since the traditional F mount lenses also have a mechanical aperture diaphragm, Nikon will likely face similar difficulties if they want to provide the option to mount F lenses onto any mirrorless camera.
     
  46. "I'd miss that unique shutter sound that has been a part of the romance of photography since it was invented."
    I hate to be non-romantic but when photography was invented cameras didn't have mechanical shutters. You exposed the plate by removing and replacing the lens cap.
     
  47. I suspect that the reason autofocus might not work using traditional SLR autofocus lenses is that these are not geared for very fine movements which might be needed to determine which direction the focus is off. Olympus' adapter for their four thirds lenses on their micro four thirds cameras does maintain AF, or so I read, but apparently not as well as with native micro four thirds lenses.
     
  48. EVIL concept as a "bridge" between SLR and Rangefinder? May be....
    F Mount on EVIL camera? Can you imagine a Nikon Evil 1 with the 70-200 VR on?
    Might be useful to adapt some "unic" lenses like the 35/1,4 AiS....
     
  49. Nikon wants to change its small bayonet mount of its SLR/DSLR's a long time ago! This would be now a perfect time to start a new technology! We will see the first results at the Photokina in Cologne soon!
    Regards
     
  50. So, on a small EVIL camera, they need a bigger mount?
     
  51. I made a similar post earlier but never got published. Did I forget to hit the submit button or was it deleted?
    Any way, the rumor has it that this camera has a 2.5x crop sensor to position itself between the high end P&S and the m4/3 and NEX cameras. Losing the mirror can shrink the camera body and the lens to some degree; however, as the Sony NEX cameras demonstrate, it is hard to shrink a zoom lens if the sensor size is big. Thus it makes sense if Nikon were to take this route by offering a smaller camera/lens combo using a sensor that is smaller than the 3/4 sensor but still much bigger than those in the P&S. If the targeted consumers are the P&S crowd and dSLR users who are looking for a light travel camera, then one can overlook its many potential compromises: (1) the difficulty in getting shallow DOF, and (2) slow AF (due to Nikon's track records in CDAF).
    To take advantage of the new camera body, in which the distance between lens mount and the sensor is shortened, the lens can be made more compact. It is suspected that Nikon will introduce four new lenses to take advantage of this new form factor. It seems almost certain that many adapters will be available to allow the new camera to communicate with existing Nikon lenses, and I am sure some of these, especially those from Nikon, will allow the camera to control AF and/or VR. However if one uses a much larger lens, say the 24-70/2.8 on such a small body, it will be hard to balance and totally defeat the purpose of buying a small camera body to begin with. I tried to mount the 17-55/2.8 on the Panny GH1. Yes, it works well but what is point? These cameras together with pancake prime lenses will make a very portable system that can deliver very high IQ.
     
  52. ShunCheung

    ShunCheung Administrator

    To CC Chang: I don't delete posts very often other than cleaning up empty and duplicated posts, mainly on our Wednesday image threads. The only post I have deleted in this very thread was one posted by Left Ayyones due to the copyrighted materials he reposted here. In such situations I always send an e-mail explanation. However, other moderators and admins can delete posts also.
    Any way, the rumor has it that this camera has a 2.5x crop sensor to position itself between the high end P&S and the m4/3 and NEX cameras ....

    It is suspected that Nikon will introduce four new lenses to take advantage of this new form factor. It seems almost certain that many adapters will be available to allow the new camera to communicate with existing Nikon lenses​
    Now, I wonder who/where is the source of your rumor with such specifics about 4 lenses? If Nikon uses a small sensor with a 2.5x crop factor, which is smaller than 4/3, it is almost pointless to have a adapter for F mount lenses since even a 24mm wide angle will be like a 60mm short tele on FX.
    Since Nikon's own CEO is "leaking" information on various occasions, something new is clearly coming. However, this thread has reached a point that people are just posting rumors such as the lens mount changes, which I hadn't heard for almost 20 years. As I have pointed out before, so far in 2010, Nikon has not released any new DSLR (or any other camera with interchangeable lenses) at all. With Photokina starting on September 21, I would imagine that Nikon will have official announcements in the next month or so: http://www.photokina-cologne.com/thefair/dates_opening_times.php
     
  53. Hi Shun, most likely I forgot to hit the submit button. I understand that this site is not interested in "rumors;" thus, even if mine were deleted by someone, no big deal.
    A while ago, someone spotted a series of patents that Nikon submitted for the design of such a camera. It is not clear whether Nikon is intended to use these patents for their own cameras. However with the leak from Nikon recently, it makes this possibility alive in on-line forum again. I tried to post a link to such discussion in the forum from dpreview but was rejected by the system as linking to rumor site. Anyway if this info is not credible, it can just stops right here.
     
  54. ShunCheung

    ShunCheung Administrator

    CC Chang: If I need to delete your or anybody else's post, I'll let you know and explain why. You might not agree with my reasoning, but I have nothing to hide. The only exceptions are those "obvious" situations such as duplicated posts, blank posts, etc. We don't go around and randomly delete posts.
    For some companies, patents can be a major source of income. If some other company needs to use a related technology and infringes on their patents, those other companies have to pay up. Those patents may or may not actually lead to any products of their own. The last company I used to work for had a strong emphasis on patents for that reason; they viewed that as a cash cow and hired a bunch of patent lawyers.
    Since you expliciately mentioned that Nikon will introduce 4 lenses, I wanted to check whether you have specific information. If not, I'll treat that just like the many many other rumors posted to various web sites.
     
  55. If the camera is SLR, it must have a mirror...,but the mirror does not have to move (and wear). The pellicular mirror it is not something new (was introduced by Canon on EOS 1RS , back in the 90's). Maybe Nikon will implement this technology in futures cameras !? In this case the only moving part will remain the shutter . And this part is very easy to eliminate... . A redesigned diafragm (with 100% closure) + an electronic shutter will do the trick.
     
  56. The pellicle mirror was introduced in *1965* in the Canon Pellix and has continued to pop up now and then in various models of SLR. Nikon has also used it.
     
  57. Bill, didn't know Nikon ever had a Pellix mirror in a camera. Which one was that? I know the F3 has a semi-transmissive mirror to relay light to the meter, but that is not what a Pellix mirror is. A pellix mirror is a fixed mirror that does not move, and allows viewing and photographing at the same time.
     
  58. Nikon F3 High Speed Camera, 1996/7, with 13 frames per second using a pellicle mirror.
    http://www.mir.com.my/rb/photography/hardwares/classics/nikonf3ver2/variations/f3hspeed/index.htm
     
  59. There's another Nikon with a pellicle mirror, the F2H of 1976: http://www.mir.com.my/rb/photography/hardwares/classics/nikonf2/f2/variants/f2h/index.htm
    Also, it's a pellicle mirror, not a "Pellix" mirror: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pellicle_mirror
     
  60. Nikon is looking for a long time for an way out of the small SLR bayonet mount. This will provide now a good chance.
     
  61. ShunCheung

    ShunCheung Administrator

    Nikon is looking for a long time for an way out of the small SLR bayonet mount. This will provide now a good chance.​
    Wolf, this is the 2nd time you have posted such baseless statement to this thread.
    I am going to close this discussion; it has drifted to about various Canon and Nikon pellicle mirror SLRs anyway. Clearly Nikon will have something new soon, whatever "soon" means. Photokina is starting in late September. New product announcements from various manufacturers to be showcased at Photokina should be coming in August and September.
     

Share This Page