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]

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!

[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.

[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.

[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.

[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.

[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!

[MissionMan]

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!

I don't have an issue with size creep on mirrorless if it extends battery life. The current 300 photo battery life is dismal so I think if extending the camera slightly (without a grip) would extend battery life, it's a worthwhile trade off. I've had events where I have shot in excess of 3000 photos. That's 10 batteries in mirrorless land and I've heard of mirrorless wedding photographers going through 15 batteries in a weekend.

On the EVF front, I tested the XT-2 with 120fps viewfinder and it is really reaching a point where its seamless enough now to offer a real alternative. Previously the lag was problematic. The only issue from what I understand is that if you run at high frame rates, the view through the viewfinder can look a little broken and you end up moving ahead or behind the action. This is one of the reasons why I would like the combination of both a DSLR and mirrorless if possible. To me, the ultimate would be a mirror of sorts that reflects onto a EVF allowing you a optical and digital option, and I'm not talking about the X-Pro 2 version, I'm talking about a real combination which I think will be feasible. The thing I like about the EVF is the what you see is what you get approach instead of adjusting after each photo. I also like the option of shooting black and white through a black and white EVF.

Interestingly enough, my move may be to F at some point if Nikon don't release options soon. I'm in no particular rush, but if the opportunity arises, the switch will happen.

- - - Updated - - -

I'm hearing you Arthur.

I started my DSLR journey with a Pentax K20D which I rather liked. I then got caught up in the 'newer has to be better' hype and upgraded (?) to a K5 which I was not quite so enamoured with. My main passion was birding and I think that I did OK with my SMC Pentax-DA* 300mm F4 ED [IF] SDM (Thank you Lance) but I was hankering for more reach and that just wasn't available in the Pentax mount.

I also decided that I must have the extra megapixies and FOV of a full frame so I went to the Nikon D600, had the sensor changed, and was rather happy with it but it didn't have all those extra megapixies that the D800 had so another switch. I didn't mind the D800 except for it's dismal handling of anything over ISO800, which bugged me enough to move it on.
I've acquired a D7200 as a stop gap till I decide on where to jump to next.

My new interest is nightscapes and the D810 with it's lack of an OLPF seems like a logical move. The D810a is not really tempting as I think it's pricing is a rip-off.

In the midst of all my kerfuffling Pentax have done what I couldn't wait for and released a well specced 36MP full frame, with some tempting features for astrophotography, and at a substantially lower price than the D810, which is overdue for and upgrade anyway. Nikon aren't saying when, or even if.

There is still no reasonably priced FF long lens available, the only option being the Sigma 500mm f/4.5 EX DG APO, although Sigma and Tamron may decide to add Pentax to their list of compatible mounts if the K1 gets a following.

When comparing the specs of the Pentax K1 and the Nikon D810 one can't but help get the feeling that Nikon (and Canon) have been ripping us off, and have been for ever. Who is supplying the grey market sellers who can offer pricing of 20% and more below the cheapest authorised dealers prices.? OK, you get a 'factory warranty' for the extra, but if they got their QC right that wouldn't be a factor.

I'm pretty much over Nikon, and Canon lost me when they decided to change their lens mount.

And if I did decide to go back to Pentax I still have the incredible M 50mm f1.7 and the legendary Tamron SP Adaptall 70-210 f3.5 to start with.


Wonder why I kept them.

When you say reasonably priced, do you mean long zooms or fixed focal length? Didn't Sigma just release a 500mm f/4 sports that should be reasonable priced?

[John King]

I don't have an issue with size creep on mirrorless if it extends battery life. The current 300 photo battery life is dismal so I think if extending the camera slightly (without a grip) would extend battery life, it's a worthwhile trade off. I've had events where I have shot in excess of 3000 photos. That's 10 batteries in mirrorless land and I've heard of mirrorless wedding photographers going through 15 batteries in a weekend.

With mirrorless, the CIPA shot count statistic is all but totally useless!

The on time of the camera is the major factor. With my E-M1, the battery will run the camera continuously for about 3 hours, whether I take 3 shots, 300 or 3,000.

Having all the various 'sleep' mode features set to the shortest possible times will dramatically extend battery life. The EVF is the main user of battery power, more than the rear display - about double the drain. I generally switch the camera off between shots, but this is probably only about 50% of the time. I have shot all day using a battery that started the day showing that it was borderline discharged. With the E-M1 MkII, it uses a different battery with much higher capacity.

The optional grip extends shooting life considerably, and changing the battery in my grip takes a matter of seconds. I have the camera set up to use the grip battery first, then it automatically switches to the camera battery when exhausted. Change the grip battery, cycle the power switch and it reverts to using the freshly charged grip battery.

The MkII (FINALLY) comes with a decent power indicator - percentage of shooting time left. This has been overdue in Olympus cameras for about 10 years ... .

On the EVF front, I tested the XT-2 with 120fps viewfinder and it is really reaching a point where its seamless enough now to offer a real alternative. Previously the lag was problematic. The only issue from what I understand is that if you run at high frame rates, the view through the viewfinder can look a little broken and you end up moving ahead or behind the action. This is one of the reasons why I would like the combination of both a DSLR and mirrorless if possible. To me, the ultimate would be a mirror of sorts that reflects onto a EVF allowing you a optical and digital option, and I'm not talking about the X-Pro 2 version, I'm talking about a real combination which I think will be feasible.

Just did a side by side test with my E-30 (OVF) and my E-M1. Even with the EVF frame rate set to the low speed, there was only an almost imperceptible difference between them, and no shearing or tearing.

The E-M1 MkII has quite a deep buffer - around 140+ RAW shots at full resolution (20 MPx). Buffer clearance rates are also very fast compared with the E-M1 MkI.

The thing I like about the EVF is the what you see is what you get approach instead of adjusting after each photo. I also like the option of shooting black and white through a black and white EVF.

Yeah, It is certainly an interesting way of viewing the subject ... even my M2 and M3 Leicas shooting KB17 showed the scene in colour in the VF ... .

[John King]

. . .

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!

For those who are not well informed, the smaller µFTs cameras are tiny, and bodies often weigh less than 350 grams. The tiny Panasonic GM1 weighs a mere 204 grams, with battery.
There are sizes and types for every conceivable taste.

If you insist on comparing horses with apples you get GIGO, Arthur ...

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!

Have you bothered to look at the IQ wide open?
Sample shots?
I thought not ...

At least I don't have to carry 12 kgs of gear with me, or maybe hire a porter, plus carry a mandatory, massive tripod ...

Sorry, but these kinds of ill-informed and inflammatory statements make me think that I am back at DPR.

[RANT (almost) OVER]

[MissionMan]

For those who are not well informed, the smaller µFTs cameras are tiny, and bodies often weigh less than 350 grams. The tiny Panasonic GM1 weighs a mere 204 grams, with battery.
There are sizes and types for every conceivable taste.

If you insist on comparing horses with apples you get GIGO, Arthur ...



Have you bothered to look at the IQ wide open?
Sample shots?
I thought not ...

At least I don't have to carry 12 kgs of gear with me, or maybe hire a porter, plus carry a mandatory, massive tripod ...

Sorry, but these kinds of ill-informed and inflammatory statements make me think that I am back at DPR.

[RANT (almost) OVER]

I don't think he was being inflammatory. I think he was just stating that the big selling point of mirrorless has always been size and in this case, size isn't the winner.

Interestingly enough Thom Hogan also seems to think Nikon has lost the plot and thats a big thing for him to say:

http://www.dslrbodies.com/newsviews/...ng-direct.html

[I @ M]

For those who are not well informed, the smaller µFTs cameras are tiny, and bodies often weigh less than 350 grams. The tiny Panasonic GM1 weighs a mere 204 grams, with battery.
There are sizes and types for every conceivable taste.

If you insist on comparing horses with apples you get GIGO, Arthur ...



Have you bothered to look at the IQ wide open?
Sample shots?
I thought not ...

At least I don't have to carry 12 kgs of gear with me, or maybe hire a porter, plus carry a mandatory, massive tripod ...

Sorry, but these kinds of ill-informed and inflammatory statements make me think that I am back at DPR.

[RANT (almost) OVER]

Thanks for letting us know that we are ill informed.

Thought I would have a go at comparing fruit in an effort to show all the ill informed members of this forum how much a huge DSLR dwarfs a mirrorless body ----- yep the Olympus ( which you seem to be totally patriotic to ) is so much smaller than a DSLR and weighs a lot less, oops, rewind that, it aint much smaller and weighs more than a very competent DSLR.

Visual evidence can be seen here.

Now --- back to the subject of Canon and Nikon and their respective offerings at Photokina.