Can Nikon actually, really do this?

drd1135

Zen Snapshooter
Jul 13, 2011
124
Lexington, Virginia
Steve
Sure they could. Will they? I think they should. They are struggling a bit now, and their nightmare scenario is to be squeezed out in a three-way fight with Sony and Canon for the pro market. JMHO, of course
 

wt21

Hall of Famer
Aug 15, 2010
123
Sure they could. Will they? I think they should. They are struggling a bit now, and their nightmare scenario is to be squeezed out in a three-way fight with Sony and Canon for the pro market. JMHO, of course
There was another article on NikonRumors, based on a Thom Hogan article, saying Nikon maybe end up on the right side, by waiting so long. They didn't waste any resources, e.g. an an EOS-M1. That might be smart, or it might be because of limited resources. Maybe the unit is staying in R&D until they can release a winner, but they can't wait too long, I would think.
 
Feb 6, 2015
124
Central Ohio, USA
Andrew
For me this is the big thing....

Whatever they release has to be a dead ringer. It can't be like the Nikon 1 series just scaled up. It needs to support legacy lenses either natively or via an adapter so that those of us that have supported them long term don't feel like we need to start over from ground zero.

I feel they are doing this, and this is my logic. The newer AF-P lenses they are releasing are a hint to me. There are a lot of lessons learned from the CX mount. Take what works from that and combine it with the sensor performance of even a D500 and they would have me seriously thinking of divesting from m43.
 

donlaw

Hall of Famer
Sep 14, 2012
124
Texas
Don
I look forward to whatever they release. They did a fantastic job on the Df with a few quirks that can easily be worked around. If they have a easy method for using the F mount, there is a ton of legacy glass to satisfy those who like to experiment.
 

davect01

Hall of Famer
There was another article on NikonRumors, based on a Thom Hogan article, saying Nikon maybe end up on the right side, by waiting so long. They didn't waste any resources, e.g. an an EOS-M1. That might be smart, or it might be because of limited resources. Maybe the unit is staying in R&D until they can release a winner, but they can't wait too long, I would think.

The other side of this waiting game is that many would have already picked a side. Just look at how the Window's phone is doing.
 

Biro

Super Moderator
Aug 7, 2011
124
Jersey Shore
Steve
More than a decade ago, I allowed a knowledgeable salesman at Adorama in New York to talk me into a Nikon D200. It was a highly functional, very high-quality DSLR - among the very best APS-C rigs you could buy at the time. But, after taking it home, the term "boat anchor" repeatedly came to mind when considering its size and weight. The camera went back 48 hours later.

I'd already been doing amateur photography since the 1970's and had a few compact digital cameras by then. But this was my first digital DSLR purchase. I ended up going with Pentax, although I strongly considered Olympus's original four-thirds DSLRs. I moved into micro four thirds only a couple of years later, even while running a Pentax kit.

Fast forward to a few weeks ago, when I was in B&H's brick-and-mortar store. I saw Nikon's D500 on display and picked it up. We all know how good the D500 is. It's not just good. It's excellent and class-leading. But, again, the term "boat anchor" immediately came to mind and I put the camera down.

Yes. Nikon had better move into mirrorless for professional-grade and serious enthusiast cameras very quickly. Their low-end consumer DSLRs (D3400, et al) are fairly compact and light, so they may have a bit more time there. But they'll have to move to mirrorless in that market before long.

Nikon has been making very high-quality cameras for a very long time. And so they have deserved their success. But they've been stuck in the past... protecting their traditional DSLR line at the expense of everything else - and that's not working anymore.

Nikon and Canon both - at this late date - seem to be waking up to the fact that the mirrorless revolution is real. Canon is further along, but that could change quickly. Because in the case of Nikon, this is an existential issue. They must make mirrorless work or they may, at best, lose their independence as a company, and, at worst, go away completely.

I wish them well. But I don't envision my becoming a Nikon customer again anytime soon. It's too late for that.
 
Last edited:

davect01

Hall of Famer
More than a decade ago, I allowed a knowledgeable salesman at Adorama in New York to talk me into a Nikon D200. It was a highly functional, very high-quality DSLR - among the very best APS-C rigs you could buy at the time. But, after taking it home, the term "boat anchor" repeatedly came to mind when considering its size and weight. The camera went back 48 hours later.

I'd already been doing amateur photography since the 1970's and had a few compact digital cameras by then. But this was my first digital DSLR purchase. I ended up going with Pentax, although I strongly considered Olympus's original four-thirds DSLRs. I moved into micro four thirds only a couple of years later, even while running a Pentax kit.

Fast forward to a few weeks ago, when I was in B&H's brick-and-mortar store. I saw Nikon's D500 on display and picked it up. We all know how good the D500 is. It's not just good. It's excellent and class-leading. But, again, the term "boat anchor" immediately came to mind and I put the camera down.

Yes. Nikon had better move into mirrorless for professional-grade and serious enthusiast cameras very quickly. Their low-end consumer DSLRs (D3400, et al) are fairly compact and light, so they may have a bit more time there. But they'll have to move to mirrorless in that market before long.

Nikon has been making very high-quality cameras for a very long time. And so they have deserved their success. But they've been stuck in the past... protecting their traditional DSLR line at the expense of everything else - and that's not working anymore.

Nikon and Canon both - at this late date - seem to be waking up to the fact that the mirrorless revolution is real. Canon is further along, but that could change quickly. Because in the case of Nikon, this is an existential issue. They must make mirrorless work or they may, at best, lose their independence as a company, and, at worst, go away completely.

I wish them well. But I don't envision my becoming a Nikon customer again anytime soon. It's too late for that.
I always wanted to get into photography, but the size of DSLR's in the late 1990's, early 2000's scared me off. I did not want to haul around a massive box. I stayed with a fine superzoom for that period of time, all the while realizing I was a bit handicapped.

Then I saw a Sony NEX-3 at my local BB and fell in love. it lacked a bit of the refinement that later models have brought, but it was the perfect combination of size and image quality I was searching for.
 

theoldsmithy

Hall of Famer
Jan 7, 2013
124
Cheshire, England
Martin Connolly
I'd be interested, but as with most things Nikon, my wallet would not. Its going to be priced well beyond the means of mere mortals like myself. That is also why I don't have a Sony FF.
I had to talk myself out of buying an A7 kit for £719 in Amazon prime day. I've only just got an a6000 for pity's sake.... but still, £719! And £100 Sony cashback! Oh well the deal is gone now.
 

Covey22

Hall of Famer
Feb 3, 2012
124
Thom Hogan calls the system switchers "Leakers." Folks who have feet in more than one brand are "Samplers." I'm one of the former, after years of being a Nikon system owner. Everyone's situation is different. I do miss the faster AF, especially in tracking, and the larger selection in long telephotos above 90mm. However, my back thanks me because I cut my carry weight down in half, and my post-processing is much faster now that I've tweaked the in-camera settings to a very acceptable starting point. And I can never give up WYSIWYG in the viewfinder now.

Nikon's critical decision point is in two places - what to do about the F-mount, and who do you target first - the high-end enthusiasts, or the entry-level shooters? Not very simple choices, and the action plan has big cascade effects. From a Monday Night Quarterback view, they need the F-mount natively; that puts them squarely up against Sony because the body size will never approach smaller Fuji and Panasonic/Olympus due to the physics. They've not had a good adapter experience with the FT-1, it had too many limitations against the focus system. As for the audience; the enthusiast and pro crowd end up paying more per unit shipped which ideally funds engineering commonality that makes it's way down to the entry-level/volume sales crowd. However, they need the volume up-front as well - if mirrorless is the future - because the leakers won't stop as the other makers are already ahead of the product life-cycle, and ramp up more affordable entry-level versions to keep market share.
 

Latest threads

Top Bottom