Nikon mirrorless for DX?

[goodguy]

I think moving to mirrorless is a personal choice, I know most people are happy with this choice but I also know of some that came back to DLSR.
As I said DSLR has its advantage, mirrorless still didnt catch up with DSLR in all ways and especially with its AF system it has few years of R&D to do.

For me putting aside AF issues the main problem with mirrorless is its small choices with FF sensors, there is only 1 and thats the Sony A7, good camera but it suffers from 2 main issues
Not impressive AF system and very poor lens selection.
If you are ok to invest in a system that is crop sensor and understand it will probably never go FF then Fuji is a good choice.
If Sony had good lens selection then their a6000 would be a good investment too.

So as I said its very personal what you want to go for and is the AF good enough for you.

BTW even the Fuji with good fast lenses you are looking at a fairly big system, fast lenses always mean BIG lenses.

 

[TheFantasticG]

Would've been awesome if Nikon had made the 1 series mirrorless.... But they didn't.


Sent from my iPhone using Telekenisisisisis

 

[sashbar]

I think moving to mirrorless is a personal choice, I know most people are happy with this choice but I also know of some that came back to DLSR.
As I said DSLR has its advantage, mirrorless still didnt catch up with DSLR in all ways and especially with its AF system it has few years of R&D to do.

For me putting aside AF issues the main problem with mirrorless is its small choices with FF sensors, there is only 1 and thats the Sony A7, good camera but it suffers from 2 main issues
Not impressive AF system and very poor lens selection.
If you are ok to invest in a system that is crop sensor and understand it will probably never go FF then Fuji is a good choice.
If Sony had good lens selection then their a6000 would be a good investment too.

So as I said its very personal what you want to go for and is the AF good enough for you.

BTW even the Fuji with good fast lenses you are looking at a fairly big system, fast lenses always mean BIG lenses.

I do not see Fuji FX as a compact system really. For that I have my little Ricoh. (Dropped it yesterday on a concrete floor, thought that would be it, and guess what - not a single scratch, works as flawlessly as before - it is amazingly well built, magnesium alloy all round. Had I broken it I would go to the shop straight away and buy a new one. I love this little gem).

What I love FUJI FX for is its versatility. You can use 27 mm pancake and it is a pocketable system, great for street. You can put it in your coat or jacket pocket. Or you can use a big 16-55 2,8 with the grip, and it is a solid system with the glass that is a true pro quality. Or you can use the "kit" 18-55 2,8 -4 that is small, light and crazy good. Or you can use a chunky, but rather compact 56 mm 1,2 lense that gives you paper thin DoF (was voted Best lense of 2014 btw). What I have learned is that a compact body and a variety of lenses give you very different options. This system is like a chameleon, the only thing that stays is the consistently high IQ, whatever the lense.

 

[greybeard]

The problems of adapting DX lenses to mirrorless have been completely addressed by Sony and others. Sony is even marketing a mirrorless FF A7 and has adapters for their FF Alpha mount. When and if Nikon and Canon move to mirrorless (and I think that the technology is moving in that direction) it will be interesting to see if they follow Sony's lead or come up with a totally different approach.

 

[Bebulamar]

If you want mirrorless in the DX size it's best to buy Fuji or Sony. Nikon isn't going to make a better system.

 

[wfooshee]

My previous post was answering why DX lenses (probably) wouldn't work on a new DX-sensor mirrorless. I said nothing about mirrorless being superior, you should abandon DX and go mirrorless, so I'm not sure where that response came from.

If for some reason you feel like you MUST go mirrorless, then yes, you will likely need to abandon your DX glass.

Adapters work, though. Adapters can make up the mount distance, and depending on camera and lens brands they might even keep all the functionality of the lens intact, but you lose the compactness that is present in mirrorless cameras.

Personally, mirrorless isn't good enough yet. It may be someday, even someday soon, but as pointed out, the AF doesn't work as well, and personally, I despise electronic viewfinders.

 

[sashbar]

The problems of adapting DX lenses to mirrorless have been completely addressed by Sony and others. Sony is even marketing a mirrorless FF A7 and has adapters for their FF Alpha mount. When and if Nikon and Canon move to mirrorless (and I think that the technology is moving in that direction) it will be interesting to see if they follow Sony's lead or come up with a totally different approach.

Adapting a DSLR lense to a mirrorless format is not a problem at all, all you need is a simple adaptor. Problem for you as a manufacturer will start if you keep producing same DSLR type lenses for your new mirrorless body. A dedicated mirrorless lense with the same characteristics and of the same image quality is cheaper to produce. So you will start losing to competitors due to higher manufacturing costs. This is pure economics on top of the fact that a dedicated mirrorless lense is somewhat smaller, lighter and more attractive for a customer. Canikon will simply have to ditch their current DSLR ranges. That is probably exactly what will make them the last ones to switch to FF and cropped mirrorless.

 

[greybeard]

The problems of adapting DX lenses to mirrorless have been completely addressed by Sony and others. Sony is even marketing a mirrorless FF A7 and has adapters for their FF Alpha mount. When and if Nikon and Canon move to mirrorless (and I think that the technology is moving in that direction) it will be interesting to see if they follow Sony's lead or come up with a totally different approach.

Adapting a DSLR lense to a mirrorless format is not a problem at all, all you need is a simple adaptor. Problem for you as a manufacturer will start if you keep producing same DSLR type lenses for your new mirrorless body. A dedicated mirrorless lense with the same characteristics and of the same image quality is cheaper to produce. So you will start losing to competitors due to higher manufacturing costs. This is pure economics on top of the fact that a dedicated mirrorless lense is somewhat smaller, lighter and more attractive for a customer. Canikon will simply have to ditch their current DSLR ranges. That is probably exactly what will make them the last ones to switch to FF and cropped mirrorless.

Will Sony keep supporting their A mount?

 

[sashbar]

mi

Personally, mirrorless isn't good enough yet. It may be someday, even someday soon, but as pointed out, the AF doesn't work as well, and personally, I despise electronic viewfinders.

The problems of adapting DX lenses to mirrorless have been completely addressed by Sony and others. Sony is even marketing a mirrorless FF A7 and has adapters for their FF Alpha mount. When and if Nikon and Canon move to mirrorless (and I think that the technology is moving in that direction) it will be interesting to see if they follow Sony's lead or come up with a totally different approach.

Adapting a DSLR lense to a mirrorless format is not a problem at all, all you need is a simple adaptor. Problem for you as a manufacturer will start if you keep producing same DSLR type lenses for your new mirrorless body. A dedicated mirrorless lense with the same characteristics and of the same image quality is cheaper to produce. So you will start losing to competitors due to higher manufacturing costs. This is pure economics on top of the fact that a dedicated mirrorless lense is somewhat smaller, lighter and more attractive for a customer. Canikon will simply have to ditch their current DSLR ranges. That is probably exactly what will make them the last ones to switch to FF and cropped mirrorless.

Will Sony keep supporting their Alpha mount?

How do I know?

 

[gsgary]

My previous post was answering why DX lenses (probably) wouldn't work on a new DX-sensor mirrorless. I said nothing about mirrorless being superior, you should abandon DX and go mirrorless, so I'm not sure where that response came from.

If for some reason you feel like you MUST go mirrorless, then yes, you will likely need to abandon your DX glass.

Adapters work, though. Adapters can make up the mount distance, and depending on camera and lens brands they might even keep all the functionality of the lens intact, but you lose the compactness that is present in mirrorless cameras.

Personally, mirrorless isn't good enough yet. It may be someday, even someday soon, but as pointed out, the AF doesn't work as well, and personally, I despise electronic viewfinders.

Rubbish the A7 range is as good as any dslr and better than most

 

[goodguy]

I think moving to mirrorless is a personal choice, I know most people are happy with this choice but I also know of some that came back to DLSR.
As I said DSLR has its advantage, mirrorless still didnt catch up with DSLR in all ways and especially with its AF system it has few years of R&D to do.

For me putting aside AF issues the main problem with mirrorless is its small choices with FF sensors, there is only 1 and thats the Sony A7, good camera but it suffers from 2 main issues
Not impressive AF system and very poor lens selection.
If you are ok to invest in a system that is crop sensor and understand it will probably never go FF then Fuji is a good choice.
If Sony had good lens selection then their a6000 would be a good investment too.

So as I said its very personal what you want to go for and is the AF good enough for you.

BTW even the Fuji with good fast lenses you are looking at a fairly big system, fast lenses always mean BIG lenses.

I do not see Fuji FX as a compact system really. For that I have my little Ricoh. (Dropped it yesterday on a concrete floor, thought that would be it, and guess what - not a single scratch, works as flawlessly as before - it is amazingly well built, magnesium alloy all round. Had I broken it I would go to the shop straight away and buy a new one. I love this little gem).

What I love FUJI FX for is its versatility. You can use 27 mm pancake and it is a pocketable system, great for street. You can put it in your coat or jacket pocket. Or you can use a big 16-55 2,8 with the grip, and it is a solid system with the glass that is a true pro quality. Or you can use the "kit" 18-55 2,8 -4 that is small, light and crazy good. Or you can use a chunky, but rather compact 56 mm 1,2 lense that gives you paper thin DoF (was voted Best lense of 2014 btw). What I have learned is that a compact body and a variety of lenses give you very different options. This system is like a chameleon, the only thing that stays is the consistently high IQ, whatever the lense.

No argument here, I know of pro's that moved for the X-T1 and the quality of the system is fantastic but match it to its fast zoom glass and you are getting a fairly big and heavy system which means the advantage of the Fuji is getting smaller.
If a user is ok with prime lenses no doubt its a tiny powerful system but using only prime lenses is not for everybody, using slow zoom lenses is very limiting.
So we go back to square one, you want a good flexible system you will get stuck with big heavy lenses, no matter how small the camera is.
And if you want a truly flexible system you must have FF and the lenses on that are even bigger.
Fuji is great but not for everybody.

 

[photoguy99]

No. The DSLR is the pinnacle of human achievement and will never be supplanted. I know because I bought one and it is awesome.

 

[bigal1000]

My previous post was answering why DX lenses (probably) wouldn't work on a new DX-sensor mirrorless. I said nothing about mirrorless being superior, you should abandon DX and go mirrorless, so I'm not sure where that response came from.

If for some reason you feel like you MUST go mirrorless, then yes, you will likely need to abandon your DX glass.

Adapters work, though. Adapters can make up the mount distance, and depending on camera and lens brands they might even keep all the functionality of the lens intact, but you lose the compactness that is present in mirrorless cameras.

Personally, mirrorless isn't good enough yet. It may be someday, even someday soon, but as pointed out, the AF doesn't work as well, and personally, I despise electronic viewfinders.

Rubbish the A7 range is as good as any dslr and better than most

Could not disagree more match it against a Nikon D810 with 36 MP and really good optical VF

 

[gsgary]

My previous post was answering why DX lenses (probably) wouldn't work on a new DX-sensor mirrorless. I said nothing about mirrorless being superior, you should abandon DX and go mirrorless, so I'm not sure where that response came from.

If for some reason you feel like you MUST go mirrorless, then yes, you will likely need to abandon your DX glass.

Adapters work, though. Adapters can make up the mount distance, and depending on camera and lens brands they might even keep all the functionality of the lens intact, but you lose the compactness that is present in mirrorless cameras.

Personally, mirrorless isn't good enough yet. It may be someday, even someday soon, but as pointed out, the AF doesn't work as well, and personally, I despise electronic viewfinders.

Rubbish the A7 range is as good as any dslr and better than most

Could not disagree more match it against a Nikon D810 with 36 MP and really good optical VF

A7r has 36mp and great VF

 

[bigal1000]

My previous post was answering why DX lenses (probably) wouldn't work on a new DX-sensor mirrorless. I said nothing about mirrorless being superior, you should abandon DX and go mirrorless, so I'm not sure where that response came from.

If for some reason you feel like you MUST go mirrorless, then yes, you will likely need to abandon your DX glass.

Adapters work, though. Adapters can make up the mount distance, and depending on camera and lens brands they might even keep all the functionality of the lens intact, but you lose the compactness that is present in mirrorless cameras.

Personally, mirrorless isn't good enough yet. It may be someday, even someday soon, but as pointed out, the AF doesn't work as well, and personally, I despise electronic viewfinders.

Rubbish the A7 range is as good as any dslr and better than most

Could not disagree more match it against a Nikon D810 with 36 MP and really good optical VF

A7r has 36mp and great VF

Then why did Sony switch their latest

My previous post was answering why DX lenses (probably) wouldn't work on a new DX-sensor mirrorless. I said nothing about mirrorless being superior, you should abandon DX and go mirrorless, so I'm not sure where that response came from.

If for some reason you feel like you MUST go mirrorless, then yes, you will likely need to abandon your DX glass.

Adapters work, though. Adapters can make up the mount distance, and depending on camera and lens brands they might even keep all the functionality of the lens intact, but you lose the compactness that is present in mirrorless cameras.

Personally, mirrorless isn't good enough yet. It may be someday, even someday soon, but as pointed out, the AF doesn't work as well, and personally, I despise electronic viewfinders.

Rubbish the A7 range is as good as any dslr and better than most

Could not disagree more match it against a Nikon D810 with 36 MP and really good optical VF

A7r has 36mp and great VF

Then why does sony's new A7s have 12.2 MP