Would you buy a mirrorless APS-C Nikon camera?

[nerwin]

I know there have been rumors about a interchangeable f mount mirrorless APS-C camera from Nikon and if this does become reality, would you buy one? Especially if you could use your current lenses without the need of an adapter? I'd be interested if it has a high res EVF.

Whats your opinion? Should Nikon make a mirrorless APS-C or FX camera or just focus on their DSLRs and lenses?

I know someday mirrorless could take over DSLRs, but I still prefer to shoot with a DSLR because its more comfortable in my hands, larger grip and also I can looking through the lens optically and not electronically. Battery life is also amazing.

 

[Derrel]

Nikon sits currently at #2 in the camera business overall, right behind Canon. NEITHER company needs to make anything they do not want or wish to make, at this point in time; doing so would possibly only justify their competition and their efforts.

Nikon has a successful F-mount business...if they made a mirrorless camera system that used F-mount optics, I might be interested in it. If it were to be introduced and required all-new lenses, with an all-new mount, I would have little to no interest in it unless it had extraordinary capabilities. It's tough when dealing with hypothetical questions to envision all the possible wrinkles, but let's say Nikon WERE to make a mirrorless camera that was smallish, compact, light, and priced at $699 for a body that looked "sort of like" a Leica, or a Fuji X-series, but used F-mount lenses...

A compact body APS-C mirrorless...THAT would open up a vast option of ready-made lens options...but might hurt sales of current cameras and current and future lenses. Imagine a small,light, soap-bar style, with rounded ends, like a Leica III-series, paired with oh, a 50/1.8 D, a 24-2.8 D or the light 35/1.8 or the older 35/2 D, and the 85/2 Ai-S....OMG...

 

[fjrabon]

Well, I own a mirrorless Nikon aps-c, just not interchangeable lenses.

But for now I probably wouldn't buy a Nikon interchangeable lens mirrorless. Their current lenses aren't particularly small, except for a few af-d primes, which would be manual focus on a mirrorless Nikon. Maybe if they designed a few excellent small primes. As for right now their DX lineup mostly sucks. The 35mm f/1.8 is decent. But outside of that, everything they make for DX is really mediocre and Fuji whips it up and down the block. Their FX lenses would be laughably too large.

 

[fjrabon]

Nikon sits currently at #2 in the camera business overall, right behind Canon. NEITHER company needs to make anything they do not want or wish to make, at this point in time; doing so would possibly only justify their competition and their efforts.

Nikon has a successful F-mount business...if they made a mirrorless camera system that used F-mount optics, I might be interested in it. If it were to be introduced and required all-new lenses, with an all-new mount, I would have little to no interest in it unless it had extraordinary capabilities. It's tough when dealing with hypothetical questions to envision all the possible wrinkles, but let's say Nikon WERE to make a mirrorless camera that was smallish, compact, light, and priced at $699 for a body that looked "sort of like" a Leica, or a Fuji X-series, but used F-mount lenses...

A compact body APS-C mirrorless...THAT would open up a vast option of ready-made lens options...but might hurt sales of current cameras and current and future lenses. Imagine a small,light, soap-bar style, with rounded ends, like a Leica III-series, paired with oh, a 50/1.8 D, a 24-2.8 D or the light 35/1.8 or the older 35/2 D, and the 85/2 Ai-S....OMG...

Since those D lenses would almost definitely be manual focus (can't imagine Nikon building a focus motor into a mirrorless), the camera you're describing basically already exists. It's any Sony with an F mount adapter.

 

[goodguy]

Would I buy it ?
APS-C no because I am very happy with FF but if it would come as a Nikon mirrorless FF sensor and F mount lenses and would be proven to be better then a FF Nikon DSLR then sure I would get it.

 

[Derrel]

You've entirely missed the point...a Nikon F-mount camera would also have automatic diaphragm control with F-mount lenses from 1959 to 2015. If it were an F-mount it would have a HUGE, 50-year supply of manual focusing lenses from 16mm to 600mm, many available cheap; it could also use AF-i supertelephotos from the 1990's; and AF-S and AFS-G and the newest 300mm with electronic diaphragm and Phase Fresenl or PF technology...it alllll comes with the modern F-mount.

And "any Sony" with an adapter? I think the small-camera Sony mount is so gutless it could be snapped off with a 300/2.8 and even a minor hiccup...Thom Hogan expresses doubts about the A6000's flimsy mount being able to handle much in the way of bigger lenses. Not to mention, as Roger Cicala at Lensrentals demonstrated, even high quality adapters cut lens performance noticeably on high-resolution sensors. With a native mount lens you have TWO surfaces to worry about in the mount: the rear of the lens, and the mount. With an adapter, you have the rear of the lens mount, the front of the adapter,the rear of the adapter, and then the lens mount. You have FOUR surfaces that need precision to the tens of thousandths of an inch. Annnnd, if you have no autofocus, in fast-breaking situations, you're kinda screwed...

On a "pro Nikon" or "serious enthusiast" priced body, the focus motor is trivial to install, as is the AI coupler system...it could be made to work with EVERY series of lenses, from 1959-1977 pre-Ai: 1977-2015 Ai and Ai-S, the AF-i series, AF, AF-D, the handful of AF-G screwdriver lenses, AF-S, AF-S-G series, and the very-newest electronically actuated diaphragm lenses...like the 300mm f/4 PF. The supposition that Nikon likely would not bother putting an AF motor in a mirrorless is based on the idea that it would be built by a cut-rate electronics and TV manufacturer, instead of one of the world's oldest camera makers with the #2 position in the entire market. Think "Nikon Df" body, aimed at maximizing F-mount lenses...

Nikon is the last real camera maker in Japan...they likely would design this type of camera to benefit themselves, and their specific user base. The $40 focus motor would hugely elevate the worth of the camera, and could probably add another $499 of retail price point/value to it. Nikon has been striving, and succeeding, at earning higher profits on lower unit volumes; a mirrorless, small, FULLY-Nikon-system-compliant mirrorless done right could hit the streets at $3299 or $2999 or $2499 for all we know. Leica is at $7,499 right now...Sony hit with the A7 at $2499 and barely sold any...because they have NO legacy lenses and NO legacy customers either.

Nikon already has 57 years' worth of F-mount system "stuff" in circulation. Nikon's niche cameras have been $3495, $4999, and $7999 and then $2499 and $2799 over the last decade...they have a substantial clientele who wants a hell of a lot more than a Sony with a system built on promises of lenses, someday. Nikon knows not to try and win a race to the bottom, and has resisted that Dell Computer way of thinking.

 

[rexbobcat]

I feel like Nikon is too afraid of cannibalizing it's DSLRs to put out a mirrorless cam that can compete.

I mean, they have their Nikon 1 line, which are abysmal. I don't expect much on the mirrorless front from either Canon or Nikon in the near future.

 

[sashbar]

That would depend on what lenses Nikon could offer for this camera. I would not be interested in their current DX range, it is not really inspiring. Using it with an adapter makes it even less appealing.

I guess Nikon know that to be competitive on that market they would have to bite the bullet and start a brand new mirrorless lenses line from scratch.

These lenses should not be intentionally dumbed down compared to FF, they have to be more compact, better made (metal instead of plastic preferably) and have better image quality. In other words, something like the current FUJI. range.

 

[DarkShadow]

Nope,I would get a Fuji.

 

[nerwin]

Nikon uses Sony sensors right? So I think it'd be neat if they partnered up and made something similar to the A6000 but with a f-mount and really would be sweet if Nikon put a focus motor on it to use older lenses. I think it would be a really good camera, but yeah I could see it hurting the DSLR sales.

 

[fjrabon]

I feel like Nikon is too afraid of cannibalizing it's DSLRs to put out a mirrorless cam that can compete.

I mean, they have their Nikon 1 line, which are abysmal. I don't expect much on the mirrorless front from either Canon or Nikon in the near future.

Right, this is what I was getting at by suggesting that Nikon wouldn't put a focus motor in a mirrorless f-mount. They'd purposeful handicap it so that they wouldn't cannibalize sales of their higher end dslrs. And also to encourage buying new, more expensive af-s lenses instead of used af-d lenses. (There are times I get the feeling Nikon regrets making those af-d lenses so tough, since they're still out there being used 30 years later by active shooters, not as a collectible niche item, but still working pro lenses for a lot of people).

I think Nikon is incredible at making and marketing dslr bodies, the best in the game IMHO. But I've just seen them fall flat every time they've stepped out of that niche recently. The Nikon 1 system, the Df, the Coolpix A. All interesting ideas that Nikon simply didn't pull off for one reason or another. The 1 because it's a poorly thought system, the Df because it's an inferior copy of what Fuji is doing (that costs more), the Coolpix A because it couldn't compete with the other fixed lens aps-c mirrorless cameras since it had fewer features and cost more originally (and had the name of a soccer mom camera).

Could Nikon theoretically create a world beating mirrorless system? Sure. But holding out hope for it any time soon seems like holding out hope that teenage girls will post fewer selfies. It could happen but it would be such a dramatic 180 from what we've seen from them that it would be startling.

 

[nerwin]

I mean Nikon does have patents out for a camera like this so they are totally thinking about it. But then again, it's just patents.

If Fuji came out with a X40 with a 1" sensor, I'd be happy or I know this wont happen, but a X100 with a 16-35 f/2 lens. Ohhhhhhh...

 

[Braineack]

I'd buy a Nikon "E-M5 Mark II" if it had an F-mount.

 

[fjrabon]

I mean Nikon does have patents out for a camera like this so they are totally thinking about it. But then again, it's just patents.

If Fuji came out with a X40 with a 1" sensor, I'd be happy or I know this wont happen, but a X100 with a 16-35 f/2 lens. Ohhhhhhh...

Things I've heard from the Fuji camp about the Xpro2 are pretty amazing and I'm guessing an X200 will come out roughly modeled around those changes. Supposedly they're joint developing sensor tech with Sony that will fully wipe out the full frame low light advantage.

Now, I don't see the X200 having a zoom. I see Fuji leaving people to buy one of their ILC mirrorless if they want a zoom. I think the X*00 series will always be fixed lens. Though one interesting rumor I heard was a built in fixed lens that had 3 push button focal lengths. Sort of like the current system with the conversion lenses, except the conversion lenses are built in. But that sounds like wild speculation to me.

 

[Solarflare]

Would I buy a mirrorless camera ? - Absolutely, once there is a system around that fully realizes the special advantages of mirrorless, without introducing artificial problems over DSLRs that dont need to be there in the first place.

Small and compact is NOT a priority of mine. The reasons why I would like to have a good mirrorless camera are:

1. Increased AF area, thus more freedom for composition
2. Shorter distance between sensor and lens, thus simplified design of wide angle lenses, thus better image quality in this area (also they are smaller)
3. EVF, which is a mixed bag of advantages and disadvantages over an OVF, but overall I think it gives me more advantages for improved quality of the final image:
3.1. Good confirmation of focus (focus peaking, magnification, digital split screen).
3.2. Better control over exact exposure (life histogram, zebras).
3.3. Better control over white balance.
3.4. 100% accurate framing.
3.5. No danger to my eyes when shooting into the sun.
4. The AF of mirrorless cameras can be accurate without the need for calibration.

All in all I want a system that solves problems that my current DSLR setup doesnt solve yet. Without losing advantages I already have and dont need to get lost.


Would I buy a Nikon mirrorless camera ? - Yes, if they offer the system that realizes the aforementioned advantages of a mirrorless system the best way.

I would love to get a Nikon mirrorless, because then there would be an adapter from the Nikon F to S (assuming they reuse their old rangefinder Nikon S mount) with autofocus and I can keep using my Nikon flash and flash system.

But right now Sony FE is the best option, and its pretty good already.


Would I buy a Nikon mirrorless camera that keeps using the F Mount ? - No, because that doesnt give me the advantages I want from mirrorless.


Do I think DSLRs will die out in the long run ? - Not even rangefinders have truely died out, one still can buy the Leica M.

The SLR concept has some strong advantages that wont die, such as no current needed unless a picture is actually taken, so I think they may persist in the long run.

Nikon sits currently at #2 in the camera business overall, right behind Canon. NEITHER company needs to make anything they do not want or wish to make, at this point in time; doing so would possibly only justify their competition and their efforts.

I do not care about that. Whoever gives me the best solution for making good pictures will win.

I wont be interested in an APS-C solution, because otherwise I would have switched to Fuji X long ago.