Why didn't Nikon go Nuvis for digital

[bill c.]

That previous question about digital formats has spawned some excellent

points, but I figured it might be a good time to sidetrack some of

the discussion. Here's what I want some opinions on.

 

Consider the Nikon Nuvis. It was an APS-format, which is close to what

all Nikon digital SLR sensors are currently. There is lots of

discussion as

to whether or not APS or full-frame 35mm is the best format for

high-end SLR digital, and there are several opinions on that. But what

I want to know is this: If Nikon already had an APS-sized camera, and

had already engineered lenses for it, then why in the name of the

almighty didn't they simply base their pro digital cameras on that?

 

The cameras were smaller and lighter, the lenses were smaller and

lighter, and the camera could also use the full-sized Nikon lenses

with the outer mounting ring. To me, this would have been the perfect

solution. So why didn't they capitalize on it?

 

-BC-

[jbq]

Because one of the problems with digital sensors is that fast near-telecentric lens designs require lens mounts larger than the sensor.

 

Notice that the lens mount of 4/3 system is almost exactly the same size as Nikon's F mount, even though it is supposedly designed for sensors with a 22mm diagonal (2x cropping).

[richard_rowe2]

Well Kodak did with the 315 and 330 DCS cameras. They also could use the regular Nikon lenses. I had a 315 for a while but it had a 1.7 X with the Pronea IX lenses and 2.6 with standard. I kind of liked the little camera tho. Richard