Photokina...What the?

[MissionMan]

Is anyone else disappointed by the likes of Nikon and Canon at Photokina this year?

Nikon's big announcements...

A Gopro that was announced 6 months ago with two variations nobody really asked for and could probably be replaced by a mobile phone which is waterproof anyway, along with... wait...no, that was it. Biggest photography event of the year and they came up with a "buy a GoPro, save the Rhino" concept.


I was hoping they might finally have a play with a mirrorless body so I could get a second body to use my FX Lenses on but no such luck.

While this is happening, even Hasselblad in innovating beyond their traditional boundaries. Fuji is going MF, etc.

[Hamster]

I wonder whether Canikon have just decided they've gone far enough for now with the pros they're trying to target. MF too niche maybe?

P.S you can always switch to Canon and get and M5 as the "supplementary" ;-)

[MissionMan]

Yeah, but why not a mirrorless? I know of plenty enthusiasts with pro glass who are now ready to dump Nikon because they want a mirrorless system. They don't want two sets of glass so they'll sell their glass and go to Fuji or another brand.

If Nikon produced a mirrorless DX and FX body there would be heaps of people with glass who would be happy with the option. I'd be happy with a second body as mirrorless because it gives me the flexibility to pick whatever suits a particular requirement.

If they are working on one, why not announce it at photokina. If people know it's coming they'll probably hold off a switch rather than not knowing whether Nikon is even going to do something.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[ricktas]

The DSLR market is dropping year after year. I think they are at a crossroads and really do not know where to go from here. They probably see all the GoPro action stuff making it on youtube etc and decided to try and 'join them'. Rather than divesting and diverging into other realms they will probably realise in a few years that focusing on their core products and doing them damn well is what will make them a good company, rather than splintering off and trying to create to many products to get their toes into the water of all the different markets.

[Hawthy]

The latest iPhone software upgrade allows people with the iPhone 6s or later to shoot in raw, which provides people shooting with a phone a lot more to work with. (This annoys me because I only have the iPhone 6).

Maybe we need to face up to the inevitable and understand that, as phone camera technology continues to improve, consumer DSLR cameras might become less popular and become an unsustainable product for some camera manufacturers. It might go the way of film - still available but not a lot of investment by the suppliers. Pro-DSLRs have a much longer life, I think.

[MissionMan]

The DSLR market is dropping year after year. I think they are at a crossroads and really do not know where to go from here. They probably see all the GoPro action stuff making it on youtube etc and decided to try and 'join them'. Rather than divesting and diverging into other realms they will probably realise in a few years that focusing on their core products and doing them damn well is what will make them a good company, rather than splintering off and trying to create to many products to get their toes into the water of all the different markets.

Thats the thing that surprises me. It's not that hard for them to create a decent mirrorless with an FX and DX mount. They already have decent AF systems for mirrorless, the glass is there, they can create electronic viewfinders already and it would probably be a fairly low investment for them to trial it and see what happens. If it eats into their DSLR line, at least people aren't going to competitors so why would they worry. I.e. release a DF (full frame) and a DFX (DX) version camera, anyone who has glass can switch without investment and they don't lose customers to Fuji, Olympus etc. At worst, they may have to invest a little in pro level DX glass to compete with the likes of Fuji, but even some of that is covered by Sigma so its not that critical for them.

[MissionMan]

P.S you can always switch to Canon and get and M5 as the "supplementary" ;-)

From what I heard of the initial thoughts on the camera, it's already two years behind the competition. At least Canon is consistent...they were two years behind on sensors so it stands to reason they are two years behind on mirrorless

[Hamster]

From what I heard of the initial thoughts on the camera, it's already two years behind the competition. At least Canon is consistent...they were two years behind on sensors so it stands to reason they are two years behind on mirrorless

Haha. Yes, I just had a quick look at the M5 and it seems you're right. Dammit!

[arthurking83]

.....


I was hoping they might finally have a play with a mirrorless body so I could get a second body to use my FX Lenses on but no such luck.

.....

Or even a replacement for the now aging D810.(or even just an announcement that a replacement is under development!).

Not that the D810 is bad in any way .. still good considering it's actual age.
But Pentax have now shown it up in terms of IQ/price point ratio, and both Sony and Canon have surpassed it's pixel count and or dynamic range ability.

It seems Nikon spent wayy too much money on trying to get into the medical optics market, and now they have no money left to develop new cameras!

[Hamster]

Or even a replacement for the now aging D810.(or even just an announcement that a replacement is under development!).Not that the D810 is bad in any way .. still good considering it's actual age.But Pentax have now shown it up in terms of IQ/price point ratio, and both Sony and Canon have surpassed it's pixel count and or dynamic range ability.

I dont think Canon is showing it up. Yes, they may have more pixels in a 5Ds, but pixel count alone is meaningless, and noone is saying they leapt miles ahead in IQ with the 5Ds

[MissionMan]

Or even a replacement for the now aging D810.(or even just an announcement that a replacement is under development!).

Not that the D810 is bad in any way .. still good considering it's actual age.
But Pentax have now shown it up in terms of IQ/price point ratio, and both Sony and Canon have surpassed it's pixel count and or dynamic range ability.

It seems Nikon spent wayy too much money on trying to get into the medical optics market, and now they have no money left to develop new cameras!

Also don't think they have quite caught up. The latest sensor reviews I saw showed that even the lower MP 5dmk4 can't match the D810 in terms of dynamic range or high ISO performance and the D810 was released 2 years ago.

Then there is the buffer and card issue with the 5dmk4 which is very disappointing given the competitors at the moment.

That's not to give Nikon credit though, their sensors (or Sony's) are good, when you compare it to what their competitors are doing, it's not exactly ground breaking so I think both Canon and Nikon need a good kick in the pants or a change of management to bring in some fresh directions.

[John King]

Sorry that you guys missed out.

In Olympus land, we were lucky with a raft of new goodies.
Plenty of years where it's been the other way round.

But you did get the simply superb D5 and D500 this year .

[swifty]

Re: available glass for mirrorless F-mount. At least if you believe some of the commentary its not that simple with regards to AF.
Although Nikon has demonstrated fairly good on-sensor PDAF performance in the Nikon 1 series, apparently some of the inaccuracy is hidden in the deeper DOF of the smaller sensor format.
Some other manufacturers (mainly Sony IIRC) are doing a final CDAF adjustment step after initial acquisition with on-sensor PDAF which slows down the overall performance but Nikon's F-mount lenses are supposedly not optimised for the this.
So whilst many of the focal lengths are covered, the lenses may not perform as well in a mirrorless setup.
If this was the case, who would buy a mirrorless F-mount over a DSLR F-mount?

[MissionMan]

Re: available glass for mirrorless F-mount. At least if you believe some of the commentary its not that simple with regards to AF.
Although Nikon has demonstrated fairly good on-sensor PDAF performance in the Nikon 1 series, apparently some of the inaccuracy is hidden in the deeper DOF of the smaller sensor format.
Some other manufacturers (mainly Sony IIRC) are doing a final CDAF adjustment step after initial acquisition with on-sensor PDAF which slows down the overall performance but Nikon's F-mount lenses are supposedly not optimised for the this.
So whilst many of the focal lengths are covered, the lenses may not perform as well in a mirrorless setup.
If this was the case, who would buy a mirrorless F-mount over a DSLR F-mount?

I have no doubt there are some challenges but if it is under development, I think they're idiots for not announcing because they are haemorrhaging enthusiasts at a rapid rate and if someone is considering leaving, they are more likely to stay if they know its in development and likely to be released in 6-12 . I.e. if I wanted to move to mirrorless now and I have pro glass as a lot of enthusiasts do, I would be likely to stay if I knew Nikon would be releasing something as opposed to not knowing, which in Nikon's case could also mean they have no plans for anything, because the reality is both Nikon and Canon have been slow to look at mirrorless. Most people would probably stick around for 6-12 months than move systems.

[swifty]

It's true that the way Nikon appears to run seems very confusing to many of us. Maybe it's a cultural thing, who knows but we're not privi to everything that's going on.
Take for example the D500. How many faithfuls hung in there? Not a peep from Nikon, even going as far as specifically calling the D7200 the DX flagship when it was released.
They certainly don't like doing road maps unlike some of the other brands.

But to the issue of mirrorless, there appear to be two broad groups of users.
The compact but competent mirrorless group and the slower paced shooting/ultimate IQ group. There may be a third group for videographers.
We've now got Hasselblad and Fuji entering the ultimate IQ group in addition to Sony FE and Leica SL.
The sub APS-C appear to appeal more to the compact but competent shooter group.
My personal opinion is that Nikon can do only 1 well with their resources currently so which do you go for?
For the volumes that they need my guess is it's the compact but competent solution so my guess is a relaunch of Nikon 1 will a sensor up to 1.7X crop (from the current 2.7x crop) is on the cards. Basically half way between DX and m43.
I've tried m43 for years but have sold everything off currently to reevaluate mirrorless but it wasn't the IQ letting it down. The IQ were competent as well as some great features. My issue ultimately was the handling and execution.
If Nikon can do better in this respect with a 1.7X sensor then I might try mirrorless again.

They've just given some interviews that hints at a larger (than Nikon 1) sensor mirrorless but what that means is vague. But I think that's about as good a 'roadmap' as you're gonna get out of Nikon.

[I @ M]

But I think that's about as good a 'roadmap' as you're gonna get out of Nikon.

I am getting the feeling lately that any "roadmap" Nikon presents exists purely to procure new customers to the brand and to navigate older customers to Upper Koombuktta West.

I seriously see any new purchases in this household being from brands with P or F as their initials -------

[MissionMan]

It's true that the way Nikon appears to run seems very confusing to many of us. Maybe it's a cultural thing, who knows but we're not privi to everything that's going on.
Take for example the D500. How many faithfuls hung in there? Not a peep from Nikon, even going as far as specifically calling the D7200 the DX flagship when it was released.
They certainly don't like doing road maps unlike some of the other brands.

But to the issue of mirrorless, there appear to be two broad groups of users.
The compact but competent mirrorless group and the slower paced shooting/ultimate IQ group. There may be a third group for videographers.
We've now got Hasselblad and Fuji entering the ultimate IQ group in addition to Sony FE and Leica SL.
The sub APS-C appear to appeal more to the compact but competent shooter group.
My personal opinion is that Nikon can do only 1 well with their resources currently so which do you go for?
For the volumes that they need my guess is it's the compact but competent solution so my guess is a relaunch of Nikon 1 will a sensor up to 1.7X crop (from the current 2.7x crop) is on the cards. Basically half way between DX and m43.
I've tried m43 for years but have sold everything off currently to reevaluate mirrorless but it wasn't the IQ letting it down. The IQ were competent as well as some great features. My issue ultimately was the handling and execution.
If Nikon can do better in this respect with a 1.7X sensor then I might try mirrorless again.

They've just given some interviews that hints at a larger (than Nikon 1) sensor mirrorless but what that means is vague. But I think that's about as good a 'roadmap' as you're gonna get out of Nikon.

I think they could get away with a DX crop mirrorless if they bring out some better quality (smaller) DX only glass like Fuji.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[swifty]

I think they could get away with a DX crop mirrorless if they bring out some better quality (smaller) DX only glass like Fuji.

I think it's a good alternative compact but competent mirrorless solution actually.
DX lenses for F-mount are getting long in the tooth and in need of updates.
Some of the entry level DX cameras are actually quite small. Remove the mirrorbox and OVF for an EVF, change the styling slightly and release a few important DX primes optimized for mirrorless AF. I'd probably also take a serious look at that as a lighter travel option.
They have started some AF-P lenses. Is that a sign? But they are both consumer kit lenses.
One thing is I think Nikon needs to get out of the mindset that small = cheap/consumer. The larger enthusiast bodies are already well catered for. They Fuji X popularity should give them something to think about.

- - - Updated - - -

I seriously see any new purchases in this household being from brands with P or F as their initials -------

Phase One and Fuji GFX?
Did somebody win the lottery?? ;P

[Hamster]

I fall into the slower paced ultimate IQ group. I'm not splashing out $45k on a Phase one, and now Hasselblad and Fuji have gone medium format mirrorless I don't want to buy the "old tech" of the 645z, good though it is.
Meanwhile Canon (certainly) and Nikon aren't cutting it in the IQ stakes with the FF.
The problem I have is waiting for Fuji to create enough lenses for the GFX, or spending the premium for Hasselblad lenses on the X1D, or waiting for the Sony A9 (looking forward to that one). I'd better just carry on taking awesome images with the 5diii I have. After all, awesome is awesome no matter how many pixels you have ;-)

[arthurking83]

..... I think they're idiots for not announcing because they are haemorrhaging enthusiasts at a rapid rate and if someone is considering leaving, they are more likely to stay if they know its in development and likely to be released in 6-12 . ....

I really don't understand this business mindset!
Pentax for years promised a full frame camera, it probably helped them hold on to many customers, and now it seems many are extremely happy with the result, irrespective of the fact that it took so long, they turned out a supremely capable camera with much better features(overall), at a vastly affordable price point!

Fuji announced the development of their new MF camera!

With the internet so prevalent and pervasive today, it makes no sense to secretive about up coming developments like this.
Like MM says, it'd help maintain some inertia from die hard Nikon loyalists(which I probably was not too long ago).

I think Thom Hogan calls it 'leakage'.

It appears that many folks are abandoning Nikon's F mount, selling up lenses and the like and switching to whatever mirrorless format/brand.
An announcement from Nikon about any potential future mirrorless even with some scant details(just for the purpose of teasing!!) with the important caveat that it maintain compatibility with Nikon lenses!!! .. would surely slow down this 'leakage' issue for them.

Nikon's main issue is not about the products it makes and releases .. it's only problem is management.

I'm with Andrew.
The way it's currently looking, if I consider any new products over the next few years, there's a higher chance that the brand name will start with P or S ...

- - - Updated - - -

The other thing to be mindful of when it comes to mirrorless, is whether the size is the important differentiator, or the use of a live view EVF is.

To me, neither are. I'm more than happy with the size/weight of the D800 and any/all of my lenses.
I'm not a fan of EVFs(still) so my main issue with mirrorless cameras is the viewfinder.

But! .. what I'm seeing ATM, and haven't yet seen much written about it, is that sometimes too small can be a bad thing.

I've written about this ages ago, when I switched from the D70s to the D300.
D300 was a much larger camera than the D70s, so theoretically, the D70s would seem like it's the perfect all day companion.
But even tho it(D70s) was still a largish camera compared to any current mirrorless camera, the larger body of the D300 made for a more comfortable carrying ergonomics.
That is, I could easily carry the D300(and D800) all day .. in the hand, whereas the smaller D70s was a PITA(actually PITH!) to hold.
My hand would cramp up quickly.
I've never had any issues walking about all day, or most of the day with the D300/D800.
I don't believe that a camera should be locked away in a back/backpack/suitcase/whatever, or even carried around on a shoulder strap.(you did know that they are much more comfy when used a a shoulder strap, and not a neck strap! )
I prefer to get around holding the camera in my hand .. after all it's where it should be .. when it's needed!

So what I've noticed over the past few years, is that the smaller are becoming bigger(and usually a bit heavier).

it's not much now, just a few grams here and a few extra mm's there, but that seems to be what happened to the film camera world way back in the 90's too.
They got just a smidge larger, and then another smidge larger .. and so on, until we got to their current digital counterpart sizes.

It wont be too long before 'the smaller' or more compact mirrorless cameras will be as large and heavy again as current smaller DSLR cameras are!

Compare current faves Olympus EM1's (first version compared to MkII); Fuji's XT-1 and 2, and X Pro1 and 2; Sony's A7 series too.
They're all falling victim to the dreaded onset of size creep(same with cars!).

So on the one hand we have mirrorless manufacturers that don't specifically care if their next model adds some size/weight.
And on the other hand we have DSLR makers that pull out all the stops to reduce their cameras relative size/weight!
It won't be long before we see that DSLRs are actually smaller and lighter than (equivalent type/format)mirrorless cameras!

I have to say too I laughed when I read about Olympus's new 25/1.2 lens.
It's about twice the size and weight of any half decent 50/1.8 lens for most DSLRs.
A 25/1.2 lens is akin to a 50/1.8 for a full frame camera.
What's humorous is that the philosophy is supposed to be smaller/compact!