Nikon mirrorless system?

[P.D.P.]

If Nikon release a mirrorless camera system like some are predicting, who here will get one?

 

[kundalini]

I think Nikon is late to the party. With a CCD sensor, it is likely to be a compact camera rather than the burgeoning m43 format.

Nikon V1 and J1: the new mirrorless cameras from Nikon | Nikon Rumors

I am a Nikon shooter, but just bought into the Oly m43 with an E-P3 and have a great time with it.

 

[Derrel]

That is one SEXY-LOOKING camera!!! OMG--the styling looks so, well, so European!!!

Nikon-mirrorless-interchangeable-lens-camera-2.png

 

[usayit]

I think the rumors of a Canon and Nikon mirrorless system has bee floating around for what?... 2 -3 years now.

If they go through with it... it validates what Olympus and Panny have been doing with M43 which only gives them more push. If they go through with it... I sure hope they do better than Sony.

 

[Overread]

It all depends what angle they approach it - if they approach is as a new camera line or if they approach it as something like another line of their entry level DSLRs or as a high end point and shoot; depending on the angle will have a big effect on what features it has - Nikon I would expect to put more into it - Canon I'd be worried that their marketing department would get a hold of it and we'd quickly see something with a lot of potential, but being hobbled significantly.

 

[Rosshole]

10 days and you can get yours...

Nikon 1 Cameras | Interchangable Lens Cameras from Nikon

 

[Nikon_Dude]

It will be interesting to see how these cameras do in terms of sales. Personally, I'm not sure they'll sell as well as they are hoping. At the price they want for them, one can easily pick up an entry level dslr, have access to more and less expensive lenses. (Granted, you will be able to use F-mount with an adapter, but then that somewhat defeats the purpose of having a "compact" system, as you are using full size lenses).

The buyers that are interested in serious photography will likely do their research, and probably end up going with a dslr. Your point and shoot buyers who just want a better quality picture and don't know much about cameras will be scared away by the 10MP sensor. I'm sure it will take great pictures, but the one thing your average joe schmo and soccer mom know about cameras, is that bigger number = better. Especially when it comes to megapixels. They likely have a phone with an 8MP camera, and find it hard to justify spending $700 on a camera that is only "2MP better". Going to be a tough sell to this type of customer when the competition offers 16MP or 18MP cameras. They can also pick up a P & S for a few hundred less that to them looks better on paper (more MP, more zoom).

What I am really interested in seeing is how the 60fps with electronic shutter pans out.

Also, as an slr user, my biggest issue when picking up even a higher end P & S is the lack of dedicated buttons. From the images on Nikon's website, I see the same issue here. Does not look like one will be able to change shutter speed, aperture, iso all without digging through the menu. Might have been done intentionally, since maybe the target audience will all be shooting in auto mode anyways, but it will probably tick off more advanced users, or even those beginners who pick it up with the intention of using auto and then start learning more about photography.

 

[kundalini]

......
The buyers that are interested in serious photography will likely do their research, and probably end up going with a dslr. Your point and shoot buyers who just want a better quality picture and don't know much about cameras will be scared away by the 10MP sensor.

There is another market that you haven't taken into account. Those that have and use larger dSLRs but are space limited or tired of hauling the rig around on a "fun" events, such as vacation travel trips, family events, street parties, etc.

I'm sure it will take great pictures, but the one thing your average joe schmo and soccer mom know about cameras, is that bigger number = better. Especially when it comes to megapixels. They likely have a phone with an 8MP camera, and find it hard to justify spending $700 on a camera that is only "2MP better". Going to be a tough sell to this type of customer when the competition offers 16MP or 18MP cameras. They can also pick up a P & S for a few hundred less that to them looks better on paper (more MP, more zoom).

This has been a marketing tactic that has worked on the general populace. Those that are able to do their homework will realize that the MP count of a sensor does not produce a better image. It's the size of the photosite that will be a benefit, not the number of pixels on a sensor.

.....

Also, as an slr user, my biggest issue when picking up even a higher end P & S is the lack of dedicated buttons. From the images on Nikon's website, I see the same issue here. Does not look like one will be able to change shutter speed, aperture, iso all without digging through the menu. Might have been done intentionally, since maybe the target audience will all be shooting in auto mode anyways, but it will probably tick off more advanced users, or even those beginners who pick it up with the intention of using auto and then start learning more about photography.

Have you looked at brands other than Nikon? Some of the Oly and Panny cameras have dedicated PASM buttons, wheels and such just like a dSLR. Although I prefer the forefinger wheel to adjust the aperture on my Nikons, I can still make those adjustments via the back panel (not menu diving) with my Oly.

 

[Derrel]

So...

...Who thinks the Nikon 1 system will be a runaway sales hit? who thinks the Nikon 1 system will be a modest-to-good sales success? Who thinks the Nikon 1 system will be a poor seller? Who thinks the Nikon 1 system will be a total failure, and off the market within two years?

Does it have what it takes to get "traction" in the real-world of stores and internet sales sites? I am not sure it does.

 

[Nikon_Dude]

There is another market that you haven't taken into account. Those that have and use larger dSLRs but are space limited or tired of hauling the rig around on a "fun" events, such as vacation travel trips, family events, street parties, etc.

Maybe it's just me, but if I don't want to take the slr because of the size, I won't be taking one of these either. I would bring a smaller point and shoot, something like a canon sx230.

This has been a marketing tactic that has worked on the general populace. Those that are able to do their homework will realize that the MP count of a sensor does not produce a better image. It's the size of the photosite that will be a benefit, not the number of pixels on a sensor.

I agree with you. I just think that the majority of people not already into photography will NOT do their homework.

Have you looked at brands other than Nikon? Some of the Oly and Panny cameras have dedicated PASM buttons, wheels and such just like a dSLR. Although I prefer the forefinger wheel to adjust the aperture on my Nikons, I can still make those adjustments via the back panel (not menu diving) with my Oly.

I was only referring to the Nikon.

 

[usayit]

Nope.. I don't think it does either.. I'm not convinced that Nikon had their heart set in the system.. much like previous P&S with their branding.

At the price they want for them, one can easily pick up an entry level dslr, have access to more and less expensive lenses.
...
The buyers that are interested in serious photography will likely do their research, and probably end up going with a dslr.

Mirrorless was never slotted to compete with entry level DSLRs in terms of price nor functionality. Their intention was to fulfill a different set of needs in the market. The market slotted above bridge cameras. Furthermore, "serious" photographers have been paying attention. As already noted, serious photographers who own full DSLR systems have been buying into the system.... for those times and situations when their needs are different. It is this attention that has recently brought to market high end lenses.... namely fast primes including the Olympus 45mm f/1.8 and Leica Summilux. Let's not forget that regular consumers outnumber serious photographers by a good margin; it wouldn't be a bad thing to market something towards that audience. The olympus e-pm1 is a clear step in that direction... size of a P&S with the features of a mirrorless interchangeable lens.

I had a similar discussion on another forum coming from the other direction... "When will they come out with a professional mirrorless?". Personally, I think they have a long way to go..... as the needs of the professional is not a good fit for mirrorless at this time. Journalists though... I can see them jumping on board at some point in time.

 

[kundalini]

Maybe it's just me, but if I don't want to take the slr because of the size, I won't be taking one of these either. I would bring a smaller point and shoot, something like a canon sx230.

I've never owned a P&S, so I cannot say for sure. However, my partner just bought a Canon S95 for some business trips she will be taking overseas and we are heading out for a week in the mountains on Saturday. So, we'll see.

I prefer having options and have always used interchangable lens systems. Being limited to whatever the fixed focal lengths of the optical zooms on these new high end P&S doesn't fit my style. Here's an example of the D700 w/ 70-200mm lens versus the 80-300mm equivalent (in extended position) on the Oly. I can still have my fun without sacrificing.

As usayit mentions, the mirrorless cameras are not in direct competition with dSLRs, nor P&S shooters. It's another spoke on the wheel.

 

[dots]

Not intended as a film vs digital debate but ..

"When will they come out with a professional mirrorless?". Personally, I think they have a long way to go..... as the needs of the professional is not a good fit for mirrorless at this time. Journalists though... I can see them jumping on board at some point in time.

Those have been around for decades. Those cameras use film and the film can be scanned. What 'professional' needs a pocket camera but cannot tolerate the delay of developing the negs, scanning them and sending them over the internet, an hour or two after they may have delivered memory cards or begun to massage RAWs towards what comes pre-toned onto a roll of blank film? Press photography is made with SLRs and (often as not) long lenses. What 'professional' has their cost/profit model turned on its head by having to buy a couple of rolls of film and have them scanned?

I find the idea a bit spurious that 'professionals' (en-bloc) need a new pocket sized/compact system because it doesn't viably exist, otherwise.

 

[Overread]

I think the new mirrorless hybrid cameras are going the same way that liveview and video in DSLRs went - everyone complains about how useless/not for them it is and in a year or two everyone will own/want to own one and use them and wont' think anything wrong about it at all

 

[Derrel]

My feeling is that Nikon should have looked at the unmitigated DISASTER that was the APS-C film format...an all-new, proprietary format is a double-edged sword. One side cuts your enemies, and the other side cuts your own flesh and bone. But enough metaphor: Nikon should have gone with the m4/3 format, and used the leverage of Panasonic and Olympus and THEIR fine, fine lenses!!! My personal feeling is that Nikon could have, should have, tried to leverage an already-existing format and lens flange-to-sensor specification, and made a camera that could use all the OTHER m4/3 lenses and lens accessories. That would have been a safer strategy, and would probably have allowed them to gain immediate traction among the already-existing user base. If their cameras, or lenses, proved to be significantly better than competing offerings from Oly or Panny, then Nikon would have easily out-sold those two companies in whatever segment their superiority made their offerings truly compelling.

Part of me thinks that Nikon does not want ANY competition, at ALL, and somehow convinced themselves that their biggest strategic and marketplace advantage would be to attempt to leverage the Nikon F mount and the 60 million F-mount lenses going back to 1959. By making their very own format and flange-to-sensor distance specification, they totally SHUT OUT the lenses made by Panny and Oly and Leica for the m4/3 cameras, effectively creating their "own user base", and not "sharing a user base". I'm sure there is a bean-counter justification report that outlines the brilliance of striking out on one's own, into uncharted territory, without a supporting cast. You know, kind of a three-men-in-a-rocket-ship-let's go-to-da-moon!! type of pioneering spirit. Nikon is a very proud company, prone to creating engineering marvels, and is a company that once took the 35mm SLR from a novelty (Exakta,Asahiflex) with crappy functionality, and created the first true "35mm SLR System Camera" in the Nikon F of 1959, which ran until basically 1972 or so, until the F2 came on the scene...

It's interesting to me though, how the USA did a similar thing....we went to the moon a long time ago ( a MAJOR achievement, for certain), but have never been back...the F System was a major achievement, but it was born out of the same old 35mm film format Leica had established over 25 years earlier. The camera market is global. Sheer unit sales volume of P&S cameras is shrinking, as cell phone cameras get better,and better,and better. I'm not sure that in this new economy, and this stage of technology, that Nikon's new 1-system is going to be all that profitable. If they had made a NIKON m4/3 camera, I think their chances for good sales would have been much higher than with this all-new "everything".