Nikon announces ful-frame mirrorless system...with new lens mount.

A few comments... As a Nikon shooter for the last 50 years, seriously, I don't plan on going to either of the new bodies. I might consider the next D860 in a couple of years when it comes out. At my age I'm not switching my work flow. My current bodies are D3s, D810 & D500. The D810 with a couple of lenses work for most cruises.

 

Over the last 50 years Nikon was better, then Cannon was better, then Nikon, then Cannon......... Today I see little difference at the professional level in bodies, pick what you like and are most familiar with.

 

framer

Your second point is SPOT ON. For the last few years, Sony was offering something *different* than you could get from Nikon and Canon. But now with Nikon and Canon entering the market... we will go back to there being very little difference between the cameras. They may leap frog each other from time to time, but there really won't be major differences.

As to your first statement -- watch out... There is a a very real chance that there never will be a D860-- Your only option might be mirrorless. (I'd say the odds are in favor of there being a D860... but it might be the last of the line)

They still make film cameras...

I'd bet the Pro bodies will be updated every few years for the next 20 years. The DXXXX bodies and lower end FX bodies will be gone in 10 years or less.

They still have that D850 back ordered and it been out a year.

framer

They still make film cameras...

 

 

 

I'd bet the Pro bodies will be updated every few years for the next 20 years. The DXXXX bodies and lower end FX bodies will be gone in 10 years or less.

 

 

They still have that D850 back ordered and it been out a year.

 

 

 

framer

Canon and Nikon no longer make film cameras.

When you hit a certain threshold, things can switch quickly.

Which would you rather shoot—-

camera A and Camera B are identical except:

— Camera A has better autofocus, camera A can shoot 20 fps, camera A has a viewfinder that never blacks out, Camera A has a shutter life of 400,000 actuations, and camera A is $400 cheaper.

Camera B costs $400 more, it has worse autofocus, it has a shutter life of only 200,000 actuations, it can shoot 8 frames per second, and it has an OVF.

Willing to take a worse camera and pay more just to have an OVF?

That’s the near-future of mirrorless vs dslr.

I suspect you’ll have overlap for another tech generation but then mirrorless will replace dslr. (And something new will start to replace mirrorless)

I think you misunderstood me. People who have switched to Sony will likely stay with Sony. People who currently shoot Nikon will likely stay with Nikon. Canon will stop leaking once they release a full frame.

You didn't notice the removal of the sarcasm filter just below that. ;)

Dave

I'm willing to bet the first accessory is a battery grip.

Otherwise, they are a couple of good looking, capable cameras.

Dave

I think you misunderstood me. People who have switched to Sony will likely stay with Sony. People who currently shoot Nikon will likely stay with Nikon. Canon will stop leaking once they release a full frame.

 

Tell me, if Nikon offers a camera and lenses that overall, are just a tad better than Sony all around, will you switch? No, I'm guessing you won't. You're happy with your Sony. Even if Nikon was slightly better, you wouldn't rush out the door.

 

Same will now happen with Nikon shooters -- Even if the Sony A7iii is slightly better than the Z6... why would they switch brands?

I agree with this - switching systems is a lot more difficult than choosing a system, so those with legacy are generally going to prefer to stay within that legacy. Honestly, it doesn't even matter if the offering is fairly significantly worse than the competition...many will still choose to stick with the system they're already invested in. Many of the entry- and mid-level Canon releases over the past few years show that - by almost any review and any measure, they've been anywhere from somewhat behind to significantly behind competitors, yet still outsell all others.

The only existing system users willing to switch will be those who have a very specific limitation with their current system that strongly affects much of their photography, and that new system addresses that issue perfectly. And even then, they've generally got to be someone willing to take some financial hits, or be financially secure, to make the switch.

The Nikon full-frames look like a solid first debut - two decent looking bodies, doing a pretty good job of staying as close as possible to existing controls, menus, and output as Nikon DSLRs, while clearly copying many of the best features and designs from well-established and class-leading mirrorless systems, clearly lots of inspiration and design study of Sony's FE bodies, to be expected. Whether they'll be class-leading, class-equalling, or just slightly behind won't really matter too much...just being so close to the top of the class for a first effort is a good sign, and as with Sony and Olympus and all others, they'll work out their flaws and bugs and missed features in the second and third gen.

Comparison of the new Nikon Z cameras and the Sony A7riii and A7iii... pros, cons and recommendations:

https://enthusiastphotoblog.com/2018/08/23/nikon-z-vs-sony-alpha/

Comparison of the new Nikon Z cameras and the Sony A7riii and A7iii... pros, cons and recommendations:

https://enthusiastphotoblog.com/2018/08/23/nikon-z-vs-sony-alpha/

Comprehensive and well thought out.

Nicely done, Adam.

Dave

Canon and Nikon no longer make film cameras.

When you hit a certain threshold, things can switch quickly.

 

The nikon link is broken but I was able to check out the page and also B&H, the F6 is still being sold.

The FM10 has been discontinued.

framer

The nikon link is broken but I was able to check out the page and also B&H, the F6 is still being sold.

 

The FM10 has been discontinued.

 

framer

Yes, they are still selling the F6 -- a 2004 release. So by that standard, if Nikon does go all mirrorless, you may still be able to buy a D850 in 2030..

Canon officially terminated film cameras:

https://www.theverge.com/2018/5/31/17412708/canon-film-camera-ended-sales-eos-1v

Looking at the Z6 and Z7, it's clear to me that Nikon has no intent of killing off dSLRs any time soon. They clearly positioned these cameras a bit differently, partially probably to protect dSLR sales.

But regardless of their intent, I suspect dSLRs will be mostly gone by about 2025.... with the possibility of some stragglers like the F6.

Comparison of the new Nikon Z cameras and the Sony A7riii and A7iii... pros, cons and recommendations:

https://enthusiastphotoblog.com/2018/08/23/nikon-z-vs-sony-alpha/

Very nice. There are a couple of things I haven't found the answer to which I'm dying to know about.

1) For the Nikon lens adapter, is it like other adapters where you lose a stop in light? That's typically how other adapters work and why I prefer native lenses. That pretty much negates Nikon's "advantage" of its existing dslr line of lenses for me (that and the bulkiness defeats the purpose of the smaller size of the mirrorless design).

2) Does the Sony a7iii have a more simple/less effective image stabilization system then its bigger brothers? I remember seeing a chart somewhere that had the Nikon mirorrless and the higher Sony's listed as 5-axis IS, but the a7iii was noticeably different and had "sensor shift" as its description of in body stabilization. If it does have a cheaper system, I wonder how much less capable it is.

While I wish the Sony was weatherproofed (if water can get into the battery compartment like that one YouTube test showed, I consider the Sonys to have zero weatherproofing abilities), I still have no desire to switch back. Sony has years head start in native lenses now for mirrorless, and I would notice the size differences between the two as I'm not a large guy and I already think the Sony full frames are on the bulkier side.

Very nice. There are a couple of things I haven't found the answer to which I'm dying to know about.

 

1) For the Nikon lens adapter, is it like other adapters where you lose a stop in light? That's typically how other adapters work and why I prefer native lenses. That pretty much negates Nikon's "advantage" of its existing dslr line of lenses for me (that and the bulkiness defeats the purpose of the smaller size of the mirrorless design).

Micro 4/3 user here - but I have been keeping track of the announcements and reviews

The like most legacy to mirrorless adapters, the Nikon FTZ does not have any optical impact. It provides a Nikon F mount at the appropriate distance from the sensor plane, and relays control and signal information between the body and lens. For autofocus apparently the lens must supply is own motor [be a modern lens]

See https://www.dpreview.com/articles/0039746111/what-s-the-nikon-z-like-with-adapted-lenses

Apparently use of the adapter drops to '3 axis' image stabilization, but apparently optically stabilized 'VR' lenses will work with the in body stabilization [like the Micro4/3 'dual' or 'sync' IS].

2) Does the Sony a7iii have a more simple/less effective image stabilization system then its bigger brothers? I remember seeing a chart somewhere that had the Nikon mirorrless and the higher Sony's listed as 5-axis IS, but the a7iii was noticeably different and had "sensor shift" as its description of in body stabilization. If it does have a cheaper system, I wonder how much less capable it is.

 

While I wish the Sony was weatherproofed (if water can get into the battery compartment like that one YouTube test showed, I consider the Sonys to have zero weatherproofing abilities), I still have no desire to switch back. Sony has years head start in native lenses now for mirrorless, and I would notice the size differences between the two as I'm not a large guy and I already think the Sony full frames are on the bulkier side.

I don't know how many axis Sony IS uses - I would almost assume 5 for any modern camera [my 2015 vintage Olympus is 5 axis]

Sony will likely not have dual/sync IS - unless they introduce lenses with optical image stabilization, similar to the way Olympus introduced the feature into their lineup vs Nikon [like Panasonic and Fuji] introducing in body stabilization to complement existing stabilized lenses.

1) For the Nikon lens adapter, is it like other adapters where you lose a stop in light? That's typically how other adapters work and why I prefer native lenses. That pretty much negates Nikon's "advantage" of its existing dslr line of lenses for me (that and the bulkiness defeats the purpose of the smaller size of the mirrorless design).

Actually, with mirrorless bodies, most adapters don't lose any light - with the exception of the Sony LA-EA2/4 adapters that have a translucent mirror built in. Most other adapters, including the new Nikon, the Sony LA-EA3, the Metabones & Sigma adapters, etc are glassless adapters which set the spacing of the lens the appropriate distance from the sensor and adapt the electronic connections, nothing more.

2) Does the Sony a7iii have a more simple/less effective image stabilization system then its bigger brothers? I remember seeing a chart somewhere that had the Nikon mirorrless and the higher Sony's listed as 5-axis IS, but the a7iii was noticeably different and had "sensor shift" as its description of in body stabilization. If it does have a cheaper system, I wonder how much less capable it is.

No - the A7III has a similar 5-axis in-body stabilization system as do most other recent Sony bodies. It has been tested and rated to between 3 and 4 stops of stabilization.

Note per OldBear's comment "Sony will likely not have dual/sync IS - unless they introduce lenses with optical image stabilization" that most Sony lenses in the FE lineup actually are stabilized optically, and the Sony sensor-based stabilization does work together with the lens-based stabilization in those lenses.

While I wish the Sony was weatherproofed (if water can get into the battery compartment like that one YouTube test showed, I consider the Sonys to have zero weatherproofing abilities)

Of course, you can use whatever definitions you want to - but I would personally say it's a bit unfair to consider a camera to have zero weatherproofing if it's not 100% weatherproof at all times...unless the claim is that the camera is 100% weather sealed, which it isn't, then it's still fair to say the camera has some weatherproofing. My guess is that Sony didn't consider the weatherproofing for a camera placed on a flat surface, but elevated a few inches up, with heavy water splashing up from underneath. Certainly something for them to consider in the future - but given most outdoor photographers who need weatherproofing will be handholding a camera and shooting in the rain, almost all of the exposure will be from the top of the camera and down the sides, and water will not be forcefully applied to the battery door as in that test. It's not an excuse for Sony missing that detail since others got it right, but at the same time it's a little unfair to dismiss all the other sealing in the camera that passed the test from the top, sides, and lens mount.

Seriously the killer is only one card slot. They seem to have all the specs for a pro body then one card slot. Guess I'll be waiting for round 2.

framer

Very nice. There are a couple of things I haven't found the answer to which I'm dying to know about.

 

1) For the Nikon lens adapter, is it like other adapters where you lose a stop in light? That's typically how other adapters work and why I prefer native lenses. That pretty much negates Nikon's "advantage" of its existing dslr line of lenses for me (that and the bulkiness defeats the purpose of the smaller size of the mirrorless design).

 

2) Does the Sony a7iii have a more simple/less effective image stabilization system then its bigger brothers? I remember seeing a chart somewhere that had the Nikon mirorrless and the higher Sony's listed as 5-axis IS, but the a7iii was noticeably different and had "sensor shift" as its description of in body stabilization. If it does have a cheaper system, I wonder how much less capable it is.

 

While I wish the Sony was weatherproofed (if water can get into the battery compartment like that one YouTube test showed, I consider the Sonys to have zero weatherproofing abilities), I still have no desire to switch back. Sony has years head start in native lenses now for mirrorless, and I would notice the size differences between the two as I'm not a large guy and I already think the Sony full frames are on the bulkier side.

1. Nikon FTZ adapter, and most adapters, has no negative impact on image quality. No light loss. It’s just extending the flange distance and relaying AF signals.

2. The a7iii has a very advanced 5 axis IBIS system. For some reason, the a7riii is rated to an extra half stop. 5 stops on the a7iii and 5.5 stops on the a7riii. Not sure of the reason for the slight difference. Early reports I’ve seen suggest the Nikon Z system is a bit less effective.

Many Sony lenses also have optical stabilization, in which case the OSS and IBIS work together. On my 24-105/4 I get an absolutely incredible level of stabilization, like shooting 1/4th of a second at 100mm.

3. Sony weather sealing is flawed but not worthless. I’m perfectly comfortable shooting in rain or snow. In a monsoon, I’d probably pick another camera.

I’m a Canon man from waaaaay back.

Use an EOS M great for some things.

T will only go full frame mirrorless if it is substantially smaller than a DSLR and uses EF lenses.

 

T will only go full frame mirrorless if it is substantially smaller than a DSLR and uses EF lenses.

Unless Canon adopts a "fat" rangefinder design to accommodate the longer flange to sensor gap in EF lenses, the body wouldn't likely be substantially smaller.

With Nikon's move, I'm starting to think they may go the same way with an EF adapter for legacy lenses.

Rumor has it we will see in September sometime.

Dave

One one thing that caught my eye was that new 500PF f/5.6. The specs are insane. I am now considering selling my 400/2.8 to get this 500.

framer

On the Z front I've heard the battery life is poor, how are the specs compared to the A7.

framer

 

On the Z front I've heard the battery life is poor, how are the specs compared to the A7.

 

framer

About half the Later FZ100 powered A7 bodies 330 vs. 710 (CIPA...actual mileage may vary.)

Dave