Why Nikon must kill the D7100

[cgw]

Mirrorless is a big player here,

Show us the numbers?

 

[sashbar]

My question still stands though, I have seen many real world photographs where the D7100 produces FF quality photographs, but can the D3300 do the same in terms of picture quality?

I am not sure about producing "FF quality", but D3300 can surely produce images as good as D7100.

The only difference is - it is easier to consistently produce a perfectly exposed and composed shot with D7100 than D3300, because D7100 can be operated easier and faster, it has better viewfinder and more reliable AF.

But if you nail it, a D3300 image will be every inch as good as D7100. We can discuss the DxO laboratory ratings of two latest Nikon DX models to death, but in real life our shooting technique differences (or shall I say deficiencies) override all those minuscule technical differences that can be hardly, if at all seen on an average computer screen anyway.

 

[sashbar]

OK, I will play a mirrorless advocate here.

I think CaNikon will be soon in dire straits with their cropped DSLR ranges and huge legacy of DSLR cropped lenses.

If we look at the dynamics, mirror less are moving so much faster than the slow, incremental changes in DSLR world. Things that yesterday were a disadvantage of mirror less are rapidly becoming its advantages over DSLRs.

Just two years ago EVFs were clearly inferior to any OVF. Now, I believe X-T1 has changed the game completely, it's huge, bright, fast OVF is superior to tiny, dark cropped DSLRs OVFs, and all of a sudden we see added benefits of an EVF - close ups, focus peaking, split focus, split frames, you can open the menu right in your finder, you can see the shot how it will look, you have virtual instant metering etc. ... It is just a better technology.

DSLR are trying to make advances in cont. shooting speed. An added frame or even half a frame per second is a success. Because there is a bloody mirror that has to go up and down! With mirrorless, that is not hampered by a flapping mirror, 8, 10 frames per second is already nothing special. Expect 20 f/s soon. Now, what DSLR will have for an answer to that?

DSLR are still hanging on a better AF, but mirrorless are catching up with frightening speed.By the end of the day this is all about the brute force of a faster CPU, and CPUs,as we know, have strange tendency of getting faster every year or two. Plus added advantage of focusing straight on the sensor, without any focus mirror, need for calibration, back/forth focus issues etc. So the writing is on the wall here as well.

Next - lenses. Nikon has decent DX lenses range. Good, solid glass, albeit nothing like WOW. Can it compete? Well, mirrorless lenses have shorter flange distance, that means for the same APS-C sensor it is possible to produce slightly smaller, slightly lighter and slightly better quality lenses of the same manufacturing costs. We see excellent MTF glass and FUJI X-mount APS-C is another example. So economically mirrorless lenses FOR THE SAME SENSOR have a strategic edge. That means, sooner or later the huge advantage of CaNikon glass legacy will turn into a huge stone on their necks. Unless they bite the bullet, ditch it mercilessly and start producing their own mirrorless DX glass for their own mirrorless DX bodies. Judging by their suspicious unwillingness to add new fast DX lenses, they are already thinking about it.

Batteries with mirrorless suck compared to DSLR. Thanks to our Chinese friends we can have pockets full of el cheapo batteries these days. Probably, when mirrorless seriously attack the pro market, they will start manufacturing larger bodies with ample space for added/larger batteries. And added grips, like X-T1 does already.

The mirrorless technology has not yet matured, but it is maturing VERY fast. Still it is not quite here yet. That is why we see all those funny little bodies andfancy designs aimed at amateurs and tourists. Even those companies who marketed their cameras for pros, like top FUJI and full frame Sony, in reality do not aim at professionals at all. But as soon as technology is matured enough - and judging by the pace, it will happen soon, - mirrorless will attack the professional high end market mercilessly.

How exactly will it happen? Well, imagine a modern supersonic jet attacking a good, solid WW2 film era fighter equipped with two lovely propellers and a flapping mirror in between.

I predict: flat bodies with Huge screens, changeable grips and very large EVFs with all bells and whistles, 20-30 ("Do you want faster? Really? We have faster, Sir".) frames per second cont. mode and up to 1/30,000 sec electronic shutter speed, fast hybrid focus systems, probably even separate CPUs for display/EVF and focusing/shooting/processing, etc etc.

So as I said cropped DSLRs will soon get in serious trouble. The question is ladies and gentlemen, what is so special about Full Frame DSLRs that makes them feel any safer?


DISCLAIMER: This speech, ladies and gentlemen, was of course a bit tongue in cheek, and by any measure was not a dig at current DSLR cameras, that are beautiful pieces of modern engineering. Whatever happens, it will still keep producing wonderful images, especially in the hands of honourable members of TPF.

DISCLAIMER TWO: As English is not my first language, I always hesitate to write long boring posts like this one, so if some phrases sound weird, give me some slack, will you?

 

[goodguy]

Looking at your post "sashbar" it is painfully obvious there is one question unasked and unanswered, Where are the big two when it comes to mirrorless ?
Why did they each produced there quite unimpressive mirrorless bodies while companies like Oly, Panasonic, Sony, Samsung make mostly mirrorless and indeed they are getting better and better in an ever faster progress while the big two stick to their guns and make the old yet still superior (but not for much longer) DSLR.

I really don't know but I can try to look at it in a hopeful logical manner.
Both Canon and Nikon make their cameras first to pro's and second to everyone else, they must produce the best current technology has to offer and as much as many will disagree or dislike DSLR while stretched to its near limits still is the better overall package.
I think in both Canon and Nikon they are working on a pro-body mirorless to replace their DSLR's but until they will not have a proven superior camera to DSLR they will keep making DSLR.
They simply cant afford to make less then top notch pro cameras.
If they will loose their pro's vote they can close shop and go home.
So I am positive both Nikon and Canon will come out with Mirrorless once it is proven and superior to what DSLR can do and I am sure this will not be much longer to wait for.

I for one have no problem with that, actually I am excited and will love to see mirrorless to make the complete change but.....................................

I have only one BIG concern and I think everybody with good glass has same concern

Will these new tech mirrorless work with their expensive glass ?
If I will be able to use my 24-70 2.8 and 70-200mm on these cameras I will be a happy camper, if not I am not sure I would be happy and stick with either Canon or Nikon!!!

 

[sashbar]

Good guy - you will need an adapter to use even the best CaNikon DSLR glass with their mirrorles. Unless for some reason they decide to keep the long flange distance, thus making their mirrorless as bulky as DSLRs. Otherwise the need for an adapter kind of defeats this glass awesomeness. And this is one of the reasons why CaNikon with their huge number of top DSLR glass do not hurry to embrace mirrorless, methinks.

 

[astroNikon]

From a business, engineering and marketing side I wonder if there actually is high demand for high end DX glass.

If you look at all the DX cameras sold (and I do not know the numbers) I would guess that alot of d3x00 and d5x00 are sold with kit lenses and then the buyer buys nothing else for years after that. And some percentage probably end up in the closet, some get "some" use and fewer get heavy use.

Then there are the camera enthusiasts who move up the food chain to the d7x00 bodies and think FF and wonder when the DX line will go bye-bye.

I think until the DX sales collapse drastically you won't see the DX line disappear. It's geared towards the christmas/bday presents and generalists. There's also the bridge cameras (which I see alot of parents tote around, more than dslrs), and mirrorless and other P&S sized things. Of course the phones too.

You have to analyze sales numbers in relation to profitability to determine if crop dslrs are dead.

 

[qleak]

You have to analyze sales numbers in relation to profitability to determine if crop dslrs are dead.

I agree. Look at Ricoh's acquisition of the Pentax line of cameras. Clearly, Ricoh thinks there is enough of a market for crop dslrs that they even continued to design new crop sensor dslrs under the pentax name. Not only do they think they can make money, they can do it with a market share that is considerably smaller than canon and nikon.

 

[astroNikon]

You have to analyze sales numbers in relation to profitability to determine if crop dslrs are dead.

I agree. Look at Ricoh's acquisition of the Pentax line of cameras. Clearly, Ricoh thinks there is enough of a market for crop dslrs that they even continued to design new crop sensor dslrs under the pentax name. Not only do they think they can make money, they can do it with a market share that is considerably smaller than canon and nikon.

If Nikon shuttered the DX line, I'm sure most price sensitive existing and future buyers would go to Canon, Pentax or other systems. I would think few would go up to a FF Nikon due to cost. THEN future FF sales would suffer too as ppl would have Nikon/Pentax glass and would need a really good reason to switch brands.

Just think .. Canon/Pentax could capture all the crop sales. Less competition on the sales floor, more profitability, lower cost of manufacturing.

Most companies don't shutter a profitable "line". If anything they try to sell it, split if off into another organization or something.

 

[jaomul]

An awful lot of crystal balls in this thread

 

[qleak]

If Nikon shuttered the DX line, I'm sure most price sensitive existing and future buyers would go to Canon, Pentax or other systems. I would think few would go up to a FF Nikon due to cost. THEN future FF sales would suffer too as ppl would have Nikon/Pentax glass and would need a really good reason to switch brands.

Just think .. Canon/Pentax could capture all the crop sales. Less competition on the sales floor, more profitability, lower cost of manufacturing.

Most companies don't shutter a profitable "line". If anything they try to sell it, split if off into another organization or something.

I don't see any reason why they would abandon a fairly popular market share unless they are losing money. I don't see any evidence that they're losing money on the D7100. Look at the nikon cameras in flickr

https://www.flickr.com/cameras/nikon/

The D800 is the highest used FF camera and it is #7. Clearly there is a market for cropped sensors. Nikon will give the people what they want and adjust the quality to match the price. That's what most large multinational cooperations would do.

Even nikon and canon are rated #2 and #3 for camera companies on flickr (after iphones)
https://www.flickr.com/cameras/
Flickr: Camera Finder

Will future crop sensor cameras be as good as the d7100? I don't know, I think mine is awesome and I'm fairly confident that they will at least continue to offer something for crop sensor in the next 10 years.

Full frame sensors are not some magical pony. They have no reason to push customers into the saddle as long as they are making good money on crop sensors. IMHO, it's in their best interest to build brand loyalty in the crop sensors so that people will buy nikon if they decide to go FF. That's a fairly good incentive to produce a decent quality crop dslr.

 

[Braineack]

They should kill the D7100 because it's about time to blow the 7Dmii out of the water with the D7200.

 

[greybeard]

I think it will all be replaced with mirrorless type cameras DX and FX. Nikon will just have make their lenses compatible.

 

[goodguy]

Good guy - you will need an adapter to use even the best CaNikon DSLR glass with their mirrorles. Unless for some reason they decide to keep the long flange distance, thus making their mirrorless as bulky as DSLRs. Otherwise the need for an adapter kind of defeats this glass awesomeness. And this is one of the reasons why CaNikon with their huge number of top DSLR glass do not hurry to embrace mirrorless, methinks.

Its obvious an adapter will be needed for any kind of FF mirrorless Nikon will make, the question is other then the discomfort of adapter will these DSLR era lenses still work just as good on these bodies ?
AF as fast ?
Produce sharp and good IQ files ?

I mean (and that goes for both Canon and Nikon) if you can use your good glass just as efficiently on the new generation mirrorles this will give many people the time and breathing space to slowly in time sell or retire their older glass and move to the new generation glass.
This will also put less pressure on Nikon and Canon to design a whole new fast pro glass right at the time they will introduce mirrorless to replace their DSLR.

 

[sashbar]

I think it will all be replaced with mirrorless type cameras DX and FX. Nikon will just have make their lenses compatible.

How do you think they will do it?

 

[qleak]

I think it will all be replaced with mirrorless type cameras DX and FX. Nikon will just have make their lenses compatible.

I don't think they have to do anything. Look at canon did when they switched from the FD mount to the EF mount.

However most mirrorless systems will have a lower flange distance, so somebody will make an adaptor, there's just no guarantee an adaptor that preserves autofocus will ever exist.