The game is about tho change

<p>Watch out Sony! </p>

<p>http://www.mirrorlessrumors.com</p>

<p>I said the other day that folks shouldn't expect that Nikon and Canon are just going to idly stand by and let Sony take over the camera market. It looks like we are in store for some very exciting news as soon as next month. </p>

<p>So, what?!</p>

<p>Make of it what you will. My take is that Nikon is going after Sony's market share. </p>

<p>This could be interesting. The Samsung NX1 is a fairly large body. If Nikon builds in two card slots, a full-sized sensor, a larger battery and possibly an high resolution EVF, they could be a contender. Sony has a big head start, and Samsung doesn't have much of a lens selection, none for full frame.</p>

<p>Will Nikon be willing to compete with their own DSLR lineup? Will they play nice with Zeiss?</p>

This is the least exciting thing I've read about mirrorless cameras since the Canon M10 announcement.

Zeiss? The Sony-Zeiss lenses certainly don't measure up to Zeiss lenses. Nikon can produce competitive lenses without

Zeiss.

<p>I wouldnt say the game is about to change, at least not anytime soon. But this does bode well for there to finally be some sort of serious entry from one of the big two into mirrorless cameras. But what I glean from this is the fact that Nikon obviously had NO major mirrorless development of its own going on. Not if it felt the need to buy out Samsungs mirrorless business. I suppose they could have purchased it for the patents involved but more likely they needed it to try to get a leg up on mirrorless since so many others have pulled ahead and even Canon are saying that they are developing something for this market.</p>

<p>Either way its a good thing. I'm glad all that Samsung has done in the market wont be a complete wash. Samsung cameras were great but they were the Rodney Dangerfield of mirrorless....they just didn't get any respect. Hopefully Nikon will use this to jumpstart their efforts to make a serious mirrorless, either apsc or FF.</p>

<p>So much of their success is going to be how they (Nikon and Canon) choose to design their cameras. If they choose to see their mirrorless offerings as subservient to their DSLR's (highly likely) then design decisions will be made concerning mounts and lenses that have the potential to gimp or even ruin long term realization of the cameras effectiveness. If, on the other hand, they can be forward thinking enough to understand that the strength of mirrorless isn't in tying it to an aging system, but rather designing it from the ground up as a new system full of promise....then they will most likely have a winner on their hands.</p>

<p>Heres hoping. I have wanted the big two to get serious about mirrorless for a long time now. Between this information and other news that Canon is most likely working on something then there will be some good times ahead for sure.</p>

<blockquote>

<p>The Sony-Zeiss lenses certainly don't measure up to Zeiss lenses.</p>

</blockquote>

<p>Have you heard of the FE 55/1.8? And anyway, it really doesn't matter. Lenses are so good today that you can almost be assured that there are no dogs out there. Are some of them overpriced? Oh sure. <em>But if you cant capture compelling imagery from any of the main lenses from Sony or anyone else then put your camera down and GO HOME.</em></p>

<p>I'm mean, jeeze....all I use on my a7 are old lenses from the 60's and 70's. And my photos look pretty darn good.</p>

<p>ps. I will also add this link which goes to the actual article as opposed to the OP's link which just leads to mirrorless rumors.<br>

http://www.mirrorlessrumors.com/hot-rumor-nikon-bought-samsung-nx-mirrorless-tech/</p>

I don't know if the game is about to change but I just bought my second mirrorless full kit with the Canon M3. It

contains the 22 mm f2, the 11-22 WA, the kit 18-55 stm, and the 55-200. Last year I sold a similar Sony N5N kit.

I like the small size of both. I paid a little over a thousand for M3, EVF and lenses. I still have and will keep my 7D2

and L lenses for sports and wildlife. The M3 fps is slow and the evf lags a bit in initial capture but works great in

bright light. However it has a 24Mp sensor and like the original M produces high quality images. I really think

mirrorless is coming. While I understand there are better mirrorless cameras than the M3 my specific priorities lie in

image quality and price. The Canon M lenses are according to most reviews are good quality and inexpensive and

that allowed me to make the buy. The Sony A7 bodies are quite good but out of my price range particularly when I

have to maintain a mirrored system as well. I have a large investment in Canon lenses but I probably won't use

them on the M3 as I bought ir because I live in a lively seacoast town where there a lot of boats and water and I like

to go walking with a light kit with WA, kit lens and maybe the 55-200. They fit in a small bag. I like to shoot people.

I will seriously consider a full frame body when and if you can seriously shoot sports with it and use the legacy

Canon lenses; and, when it can capture multiple pictures as well as my 7DII which is pretty damn good at 10fps and

has exceptional capability to capture moving targets This is a standard that any mirrorless system in my opinion a

mirrorless camera has to meet to replace my mirrored body. After taking a few pictures with the new M3 the 7DII

with the 100-400 II seems awfully damn big and heavy.

<blockquote>

<h1 >Some disruptive Samsung rumor coming soon! Nikon, Canon and Sony fellow should not miss to read this one!</h1>

</blockquote>

<p>Headline found at the link provided by the OP. I'm having trouble getting excited about this leak.</p>

<blockquote>

<p>Zeiss? The Sony-Zeiss lenses certainly don't measure up to Zeiss lenses. Nikon can produce competitive lenses without Zeiss.</p>

</blockquote>

<p>Yes they do and Nikon hasn't. I have several of each, and Sony G, Sony/Zeiss and Zeiss are all first rate. The only Nikon lens that comes close in sharpness is the 55/2.8 AIS Micro-Nikkor, but the bokeh is not all that good. Nikon does okay in the 400 - 600 primes, but their shorter lenses and zooms are relics of another age.</p>

<p><em><strong>Subject: The game is about tho change</strong></em><br>

Maybe not .... <br>

<a href="http://nikonrumors.com/2015/12/02/10-reasons-why-nikon-acquiring-samsungs-camera-business-doesnt-make-any-sense.aspx/#more-99691%20">10-reasons-why-nikon-acquiring-samsungs-camera-business-doesnt-make-any-sense </a></p>

Given the tendency of one thing to lead to another I predict a great future for complexity. At least complicated alliances. Plus a great future for the crystal balls of rumor sites. Right now it's even betting money that the Fed will raise interest rates. Soon. And that, don't quote me, will mean that the dollar to yen ratio will change. And camera companies like C and N will cut costs by joining together or selling off divisions. I got this from a renowned rumor site, yet I forget which one. No matter. Anyway, let's agree that Sony and Panasonic have done well for consumer electronics outfits. One of whom still makes a fine rice cooker. Toaster oven. Both are not doing so hot on TVs but Samsung is doing well in TVs and cell phones and tablets. Cameras, meh... I have said it was and is a complicated business.

<p>This tendency in the media to proclaim every bit of news as "game changing" is pretty tiresome. It's a new camera (maybe), or Nikon getting closer to developing their own sensors. Which will result in a product to take photos and videos, just like existing cameras already do. Hardly changes the game, really.</p>

<p>That is a <em>really</em> uninteresting mirrorless rumor. So Samsung have a sensor...that Nikon might use. Big deal.</p>

Well, Wouter, maybe you've been out of touch, but historically Nikon and Canon have leapfrogged each other with models

that have changed sales for each. That is a game changer in the sales arena, and everyone in the business hopes that

they will benefit from this type of thing. It might be a yawner to you, and some others, but it is a game if survival to some

of the companies. If you look around, some camera companies are now extinct. That didn't happen by choice.

<blockquote>

<p>Sony-Zeiss lenses certainly don't measure up to Zeiss lenses</p>

</blockquote>

<p>My understanding is that Zeiss makes in-house only medium format and non photography optics. They are involved in the design and specification of Sony-Zeiss and Zeiss named products and as far as I know the differences if any are in the manufacturing precision and control. Where are each of these (sub-contracted or partnership) Zeiss designed lenses made? I don't know for sure, but I have heard good things about the 16-35 mm Sony-Zeiss Vario-Tessar (zoom) for E mount and have just ordered my first ever zoom for an RF or mirrorless camera, together with one of the more recent Sony A7 mirrorless bodies. Probably unlike future Nikon mirrorless the Sony can well accept my longer than 35mm Leica and V-C optics. I got tired of waiting for Leica to catch up or produce less expensive RF cameras, so Sony is a large part of the solution for me. Nikon or Canon are not even on my map.</p>

<blockquote>

<p>Well, Wouter, maybe you've been out of touch,</p>

</blockquote>

<p>Or maybe I just have my two feet on the ground, and I don't get wow-ed anymore with every "game changing" release. The last year I read about 25 reviews of cameras that were told to be game-changing. And some of those sell well, and some not. One of them was a Samsung, by the way. Apparently it did not change enough game.<br>

And guess what? A photo is still a photo. You still need to be a competent photographer to get the best out of any of those cameras. So, I don't think the game really changes; digital did to some extent, but these iterations upon iteration? Evolution, bog standard evolution. So maybe the players change, and who sells most, but that's hardly game-changing, that's just how the market flows. And predicting that seems hard enough - for years I heard people say that Samsung would make a serious dent in the market (and of course, they would be game-changing). Well. Here we are.<br>

I know perfectly fine what is out there, and what my money could buy me. I wouldn't consider myself out of touch. Maybe I'm just a tad more cynical about what changes the game, possibly because I think a camera is a tool to be used, not some spec sheet to salivate over.</p>

<p>I have Zeiss lenses for Hasselblad and Sony. If anything, the Sony versions raise performance to a new, higher level.</p>

If one of the least successful makers of mirrorless cameras buys the unsuccessful mirrorless business of another of the

least successful mirrorless companies, the result is going to be an incremental change at best.

<p>Here is a bit of an update to the story.</p>

<p>http://petapixel.com/2015/12/03/samsung-denies-nikon-nx-rumor-reportedly-has-a-full-frame-mirrorless-ready/</p>

<p>Some interesting bits here. If in fact Samsung has a full frame camera (or just sensor) ready to go then there may be some behind the scenes goings on here that the rumor sites are just catching the fringes of.</p>

<p>A very strong scenario here could be that Samsung realizes its brand recognition just isn't going to work for it in the camera market. So instead it ties itself to Nikon as a their sensor manufacturer and then shares some of its mirrorless tech and patents with Nikon in a partnership. This has the huge advantage for Nikon in that they can now break away from reliance on Sony for their sensors. A Nikon/Samsung developed mirrorless camera using name recognition and camera design history of Nikon combined with the great sensors and mirrorless experience of Samsung could be a match made in heaven.</p>

<p>Lets not forget....Samsung sensors are the highest rated apsc sensor made if I remember correctly. And they were the FIRST to bring a BSI sensor to the (non phone) camera market. Sony hyped their BSI sensor in the a7 series and would like everyone to think they were first to market with this but Samsung beat them to it.</p>

<p>My only fear...again...is that Nikon is just way to bolted down to the F mount and the existing lens line they currently have. It will take a monumental effort of will for them to break from this and design their new mirrorless with a fresh mount built around the strengths of mirrorless, not the weaknesses of the DSLR. Sticking with the F mount will also alienate anyone who want to adapt old lenses to their new camera, because any with experience in this realm knows you cant really adapt squat to the F mount due to it having just about the longest flange/focal distance out there.</p>

<p>Putting the F mount on their new mirrorless camera would be a HUGE long term mistake. And its one I see them easily making. I really, really hope I'm wrong.</p>

<p>i heard this rumor was unavailable in most european markets. </p>

What ever happened to Foveon game change? Remember Foveon, that novel system?. That was real and not a rumor. Did it go anywhere. I really am curious. Now will LG develop a camera system one day in Korea? Latter is Siegel Speculation, i.e not even a rated on a scale . Less than one to five veracity so maybe down to back fence /crackerbarrel chit chat level. I just don't keep in touch any more. Busy with chasing gals and feral cats out of the yard...

 

Hmm. Could this be the first Casual thread where noses are a bit out of joint re the market and consumer impact of a rumor. One that has not been microwave -baked.

 

Sorry , I got to wonder what is left of photo net when it goes the route of DPR forums,-- at least a couple of them.

 

( PS. I like the " Play nice with Zeiss" quip. Thanks Edward Ingold. Hell man, I can use that rhyme one day. So all is not lost. Aloha all.)

<blockquote>

<p>My only fear...again...is that Nikon is just way to bolted down to the F mount and the existing lens line they currently have.</p>

</blockquote>

<p>Whatever mount Nikon decides to put on its mirrorless - it better be fully compatible with the currently available DSLR lenses - or that mirrorless will be still born. I am not saying it should have an F-mount - but it definitely needs to have an adapter that guarantees full compatibility with the current lenses (not the old screw-driver ones - that would be asking for a bit too much).</p>

<p>Sony has been very slow on providing lenses for the NEX and still quite slow doing so for the A7 cameras. Expecting Nikon to come out with mirrorless and a full set of lenses all at once is quite unrealistic. How long will it take Leica to build a lens system around the SL? There's one lens available (24-90/2.8-4), and two announced (90-280/2.8-4 and 50/1.4); that's all for the time being. That maybe sufficient for some - but it doesn't make a system. Sure, one can adapt a lot of lenses to the SL - the high price of the camera body will see to it that not many will go that route, especially given the obvious limitations.</p>

 

<p>So, Sony starts to catch up with Nikon in terms of lensing just a little more and this is supposed to make Nikon nervous (and Canon)? I doubt it.<br>

</p>

<blockquote>

<p>This is the least exciting thing I've read about mirrorless cameras since the Canon M10 announcement.</p>

</blockquote>

<p> <br>

Oh, yeah... an interchangeable lens camera with no flash hot shoe. Wow. Bigger fails are few and far between. Perhaps you were kidding.<br /><br>

<br>

I don't think Nikon and Canon think that the future market for mirrorless is going to be large heavy full-frame cameras, and I think they're right, and I think fanboi's warning that the sky is falling on them based on rumor sites is just a little premature.<br>

</p>

<blockquote>

<p><br />If one of the least successful makers of mirrorless cameras buys the unsuccessful mirrorless business of another of the least successful mirrorless companies, the result is going to be an incremental change at best.</p>

</blockquote>

<p> </p>

<p>yup.</p>

<p>LG cameras: not a bad idea. Foveon is still around, but I am not sure why Sigma keep it going, I suspect they hope that with further development it will take off, but I can't imagine it is making Sigma any money.</p>