Nikon is dying?

[Sharpshooterr]

Coming back to this discussion, I watched a very interesting video by Matt Irwin this morning, not talking about if Nikon is dying or not, but rather showing why he is switching back to Nikon, while also taking a poke at other Youtube photo personalities who tout brands B, C or D as being better for X, Y or Z reason (this usually only lasts until the next, newest shiniest thing comes out), whereas Nikon take a long term approach.

Frankly, I think he makes some good points, and shows where the Nikon Z mount is a better solution and where Nikon is being more intelligent / using a long-term strategy.




After watching that, and discounting all the hype the other camera channels make about Sony (Fro et al), and taking a view of what I would use my next camera for, odds are I will be buying another Nikon in a few years, and most likely a Z.

So here's a dumb question.

Could either Canon or Nikon, with their larger diameter mirroless mounts, be considering sensor formats larger than traditional full-frame? 54mm/55mm are both larger than than necessary for a 36mm by 24mm sensor. 36mm by 24mm only requires an inner throat diameter of around 44mm, which explains the 44mm of the Nikon F-mount and the 48mm Canon FD-mount. Canon's EF-mount is 54mm, and likewise Canon's RF-mount and Nikon's Z-mount are 54mm and 55mm respectively. Could either of these companies be thinking about medium-format mirrorless? They could possibly get upwards of 45mm by 30mm assuming a 3:2 aspect ratio. Obviously this would require the lens to present an image circle large enough to fill such an oversized sensor, but given that the RF and Z systems respectively are no longer especially tightly coupled to legacy film formats, might this be the future?

It seems like if the goal were just to be full-frame, they wouldn't have to go much larger than the diameters of their DSLR mounts, much as Sony has with E-mount at 46.1mm.

That would certainly be nice and I’ve brought that up before but my guess is no, since the smaller Nikon mount is obviously big enough for FF, that means that Canon’s much larger mount diameter gave them the ability to go MF(FF+) 30 years ago and it never has.
Supposedly the larger diameters are strictly to give the lens/body interface more capacity to transfer more data back and forth. Faster lenses are possible too!
Flange distance would affect the sensor circle a small amount. I would be very pleasantly surprised if canon had built that capability to throw a bigger circle on the sensor into all the new ML lens line but I’m SURE mathematician types would have already made those calculations and let the cat out of the bag by now.
I’ve thought that very thing for MANY years but maybe the goal is simply to densify the pixels into the same area as small pixels get cleaner.
SS

 

[TWX]

Flange distance would affect the sensor circle a small amount. I would be very pleasantly surprised if canon had built that capability to throw a bigger circle on the sensor into all the new ML lens line but I’m SURE mathematician types would have already made those calculations and let the cat out of the bag by now.

It makes me wonder if a camera manufacturer would create the equivalent of Canon's L-lenses that would work on a 36mm by 24mm sensor, but would have an image circle that's bigger for a bigger sensor, kind of like using a FF lens on an APS-C camera versus on a FF camera. Though it'd probably be more like using a FF lens on an APS-H camera vs a full-frame camera. If that were the case, then it may be that the current crop of lenses would be the normal FF lenses, and the special, more expensive lenses would be these larger image circle lenses.

Though admittedly this is all based on just reading into the largest sensor that could fit within the throat of the lens mount, and obviously I have not taken any measurements at all as to what the actual image circles produced by current lenses do. I'm sure that someone more enterprising that I am could mock-up a lens set the requisite distance from a piece of paper as the plane of focus and then play with zoom, if the lenses can be manually controlled.

 

[Sharpshooterr]

Flange distance would affect the sensor circle a small amount. I would be very pleasantly surprised if canon had built that capability to throw a bigger circle on the sensor into all the new ML lens line but I’m SURE mathematician types would have already made those calculations and let the cat out of the bag by now.

It makes me wonder if a camera manufacturer would create the equivalent of Canon's L-lenses that would work on a 36mm by 24mm sensor, but would have an image circle that's bigger for a bigger sensor, kind of like using a FF lens on an APS-C camera versus on a FF camera. Though it'd probably be more like using a FF lens on an APS-H camera vs a full-frame camera. If that were the case, then it may be that the current crop of lenses would be the normal FF lenses, and the special, more expensive lenses would be these larger image circle lenses.

Though admittedly this is all based on just reading into the largest sensor that could fit within the throat of the lens mount, and obviously I have not taken any measurements at all as to what the actual image circles produced by current lenses do. I'm sure that someone more enterprising that I am could mock-up a lens set the requisite distance from a piece of paper as the plane of focus and then play with zoom, if the lenses can be manually controlled.

I agree! That’s why I mentioned that I’m sure the mathematician types would have already gone there!! Maybe studies have shown that even if the capability were there, the market just wouldn’t be. I know a lot of people liked the aps-h but Canon got rid of it, as a Canon tech told me, that the higher mp 1Dx had the ability to crop to 1.3 with the same resolution as the lessor mp sensor of the 1.3.
It seems to me that crop is crop, but then 3 sized sensors is that much more R&D too.
Canon might find itself struggling as Nikon has to build all its lenses around a dying mount just to keep the legacy users happy. Legacy people probably don’t put as much money into the Nikon coffers as new lens buyers do and that could all contribute to a financial problem!
SS

 

[TWX]

Without knowing what existing lenses can do it's simply hard to say. My guess is that since each sensor is its own development anyway, and since all of these companies are already accustomed to developing multiple sensors for their full-frame, APS-C, and affixed-lens cameras of various types and sizes, that a larger sensor might not really be that big of a problem. After all, Ricoh and Fujifilm both have such sensors, and neither of those companies are sitting at especially domineering positions in the market. If they can make it work with presumably less resources than the larger companies, I don't see why larger companies couldn't get in on the act if they felt the market would respond well.

Since Canon has only 10 RF lenses and Nikon has even fewer, further expansion of their respective product lines might well allow for such even if their current lenses don't have the capability. Canon might be in a slightly better position to leverage this if they continue to differentiate consumer and professional cameras with their M-series versus their R-series since they have entirely different mounts.

 

[malling]

discontinued all mounts except the Z mount and use that mount on all new cameras and line up.

WHAT?!?!?! No Bro, say it ain’t so!!!
Not the mount that all the legacy people are gaga about?! That’s the only reason the loyal tribe is still there!!! LoL
SS

unfortunately it’s allot more expensive for manufacturers to keep on offering different mounts, then if they just had one in their catalog. There is a good reason why Sony did not launch a new mount back when they decided to go the FF route. Reducing the amount of mounts is a very effective way to cut costs, as everything will work across products and platforms.

Obviously Nikon will keep a DSLR mount as long as they have DSLR in their catalog, but you should not have more then one.

Nikon have made the right choice lately focusing their energy and money on the new system, it’s where the money is. Keeping legacy customers happy by keeping a line up alive that is giving your financial problems doesn’t seem like the right decision, it’s not like those customers are securing a healthy profit, they just want it to be available in case they need a replacement 5-10 years down the line. So I completely agree with you that the money is mostly in new customers, who might spend quite a substantial amount on new lenses and other essential equipment, Legacy users rarely buy much, except when something break or wear down.

I don’t think a larger sensor plays any role at all, I think Nikon have made it quite clear why, flang distance, faster transfer of data, and the ability to use very fast lenses. I don’t even think there is much of a demand for a larger sensor camera, it’s not like hasselblad Mirrorless is selling in wast numbers, sure Nikon could make it more affordable, but who would buy it, larger sensor required substantial larger and heavier lenses, is that really where the trend is, I don’t think so.

 

[TWX]

What do you guys see available locally, actually stocked, ready to be purchased?

I ask because when I bought my 77D that was a bit of a problem. We're pretty big on shopping at Costco and if I remember right they were pushing the T6i and SL1 for their Canon selection, and even now they're selling a 18MP Nikon kit instead of something newer. Target likewise, older cameras or lower-end. Target's offerings in-store are mostly limited to lower-end offierings, Canon's base T7, Nikon's D3500 and their older D5600. Certain Best Buy stores have well-equipped and well-stocked camera departments, but we hadn't figured that out at that point, the stored we originally shopped were not especially well-stocked. Since I wasn't buying an expensive full-frame camera I wasn't especially interested in going to the only camera-store left locally to me, which basically meant I ordered my 77D without handling one first, based on a combination of reviews, specification sheets, and physically comparing the controls/layout to my Rebel XS.

I know it's expensive to manufacture and ship a bunch of mid-range cameras speculatively to just consign them to retailers' inventories, but for a novice photographer that want the articulating screen, not being able to handle the cameras before buying is a barrier that might prevent them from making the purchase altogether. I have to wonder if stocking cameras without the articulating screens and without the dozens of autofocus points actually may do more harm than good, since potential new buyers that have never owned an interchangable-lens camera will look, see large cameras that don't overtly display features that call-out to them, and just look at these low-end DSLRs as relics of old, and that may reflect on the companies themselves, even if it's only a small part of their total catalog. Remember, the consumer that looks at these cameras may not really understand sensor-size, or depth-of-field, or ISO, and even if a T7 or D3500 has vastly more capabilities than their cell phone, those capabilities are not recognized by them.

The Best Buy in town that has the huge camera department has been handy. We haven't bought a camera there but we have looked, and we have bought lenses and other accessories. They have the Nikon Z-series, the EOS R, the EOS M-series, and current models from each lineup, plus Olympus, Sony, and maybe even Fujifilm if I'm remembering right. They even had one-inch cameras, a slew of Powershot G-series plus a couple variants of the Sony RX100 lineup. It might not be practical for retailers to have such large camera departments in every store, but if they look at their markets and can pick certain locations to set up this way then it may improve sales all of the way around, rather than presenting products that aren't especially exciting.

 

[malling]

If you don’t buy at your local shop, then that one place will stop existing, leaving you left with electronic chains that don’t care nor poses the necessary knowledge or buy at online vendors.

 

[Derrel]

There is no Nikon 18 megapixel dslr or mirrorless camera. Nikon has long standardized on 24 megapixels .Canon however went to 18 megapixels about 10 years ago.

As users of the Fujifilm gfx 50 showed, there are literally hundreds of 35 mm and DSLR lenses in existence which can cover the 43 by 33 millimeter sensor area of mezzo format digital. So the image Circle size of many Legacy 35 mm lenses is perfectly adequate to handle a medium format digital sensor, or in my terminology and that of Ken Rockwell, the mezzo format, the 43 by 33 size.

 

[Derrel]

Best Buy is actually a pretty decent Big Box store when it comes to stocking cameras and lenses. They also have a pretty good return policy.

in my area Best Buy might be the best camera store around, behind prophotosuppy. prophotosupply easily has 100 times more camera and lens inventory and many times more accessories, but compared to any other big box retailer Best Buy is Far and Away the leading store in my area.

 

[TWX]

There is no Nikon 18 megapixel dslr or mirrorless camera. Nikon has long standardized on 24 megapixels .Canon however went to 18 megapixels about 10 years ago.

I'll check again next time I'm at Costco, but I could've sworn that their small display of cameras had a Nikon box with "18MP" emblazoned in big bold text on it. I specifically remember that whatever the resolution was, it was lower than I expected to see on a new camera.

And I'm pretty sure it wasn't the 20.something of the D7500 that Costco currently shows on their website. I donno. It doesn't matter anyway.

 

[Derrel]

Misinformation doesn't matter .I want to get that new Canon 5D Mark IV 12- megapixel, maybe for my next birthday. I could have sworn I saw an ad for it on Amazon for just $800.

 

[TWX]

If you don’t buy at your local shop, then that one place will stop existing, leaving you left with electronic chains that don’t care nor poses the necessary knowledge or buy at online vendors.

I know. Trouble is, they basically cater to the professional with an immediate need that is willing to shell-out the money for something that otherwise is overpriced. I get that because they're stocking supplies those supplies are probably going to cost more than if they come from a catalog seller, but when things like cheap arca-swiss-compatible mounts (and I mean the generic compatible ones, not the real-deal) are three times the price, I just can't afford to give them much business for a hobby.

And it doesn't help that the guys in the new-equipment section (as opposed to the repair and used equipment section) have a certain attiude like you're inconveniencing them by asking them to help. Even when you're the only customer in their part of the store and there are three of them.

The people in the used-equipment and repair section are incredibly helpful though, both with answering questions and with a decent selection of used gear and supplies, marked-down as cheaply as the stuff in the new area is expensive. It's weird.

 

[Sharpshooterr]

There is no Nikon 18 megapixel dslr or mirrorless camera. Nikon has long standardized on 24 megapixels .Canon however went to 18 megapixels about 10 years ago.

As users of the Fujifilm gfx 50 showed, there are literally hundreds of 35 mm and DSLR lenses in existence which can cover the 43 by 33 millimeter sensor area of mezzo format digital. So the image Circle size of many Legacy 35 mm lenses is perfectly adequate to handle a medium format digital sensor, or in my terminology and that of Ken Rockwell, the mezzo format, the 43 by 33 size.

A company, as Fuji, can easily design a MF to use std. FF lenses by just adjusting the flange distance. And it was smart of Fuji to do so. Just like Sony designed its cameras so users could use Canon lenses on its bodies even before it put out its line of lenses.
I guess what some of us are hoping is that Canon has built their new lenses to natively mount them to a new MF body by just making a slight flange distance adjustment.
We could have FF and MF bodies using the same lens with no adapters!!!
SS

 

[Sharpshooterr]

Misinformation doesn't matter .I want to get that new Canon 5D Mark IV 12- megapixel, maybe for my next birthday. I could have sworn I saw an ad for it on Amazon for just $800.

Oh that will be easy! Just get an old Nikon D700 and with a sharpie write 5D mkV on it and you’ll have your dream camera!!!
I think you’ll even be able to use Nikon legacy glass on it TOO!!!
SS

 

[TWX]

A company, as Fuji, can easily design a MF to use std. FF lenses by just adjusting the flange distance. And it was smart of Fuji to do so.

I didn't think that was what they did though. As far as I am aware, the Fuji G-mount is exclusive to their medium-format cameras.

Wouldn't changing the flange distance result in a lens that might not focus to infinity? I mean, if this technique worked you'd see Canon EF users buying cheap EFS lenses and extension tubes for regular shooting to avoid vignetting.