19 replies to this topic

[Dogbytes]

I was browsing the Nikon website, the other day, fantasising about how well a D5 might be able to track a racing Lurcher, when it occurred to me that the mid-life upgrade (D5S?) is about due - it being two years in January 2018 since the D5 was announced. We also hear that there are a pair, at least, of high-end mirrorless cameras (FX and a DX sensor-ed versions) in the works for next year. There was some talk, this year, about Nikon being in poor financial shape, forcing the cancellation of a couple of projects. All of which leads me to wonder whether Nikon might wish to reign in it’s rather rambling product range rather than making the situation worse. Presumably the D5S is pretty much finalised, but what about the D6 - due, if recent product releases are adhered to, in 2020?

Mirrorless, despite the steady improvements that have been made in the last ten years, still suffer from a few issues that keep DSLRs a viable option. I myself moved from mirrorless to a DSLR after about ten years because, for me, the advantages of mirrorless were outweighed by the disadvantages of slow start-up time, lag in the EVF, poor battery life and hideously expensive lenses. I imagine that these disadvantages will be overcome, as progress continues to be made, and that Nikon must think that they have overcome them because they’ll need to have if they seriously expect to market a professional mirrorless system.

Of course, even if the technical hurdles are completely overcome, there is still an elephant in the room - that of the F-mount itself. Professionals, in particular, tend to have a large collection of glass which, almost without exception, they’ve been able to swap from pro body to pro body as they upgraded, only swapping to a more modern lens when circumstances and finances make it convenient to do so. It is inconceivable that the Nikon Mirrorless system would retain the F-mount. One of the advantages of mirrorless bodies is the relative compactness, due to the lack of a mirror box, which results in a shorter flange focal distance. So even if it were possible to mount a legacy lens, it wouldn’t be able to focus properly. Of course you could just add an adaptor to the front to bring the flange focal distance back to the F-mount’s 46.5mm and then the lenses could work pretty much perfectly - so long as the correct electronic hook-up could be made. That might keep those with a collection of expensive glass onside in the interim period. Having said that, it would be extremely unlikely that Nikon would include an in-body focussing motor for pre-AF-S lenses. Also, the diameter of the F-mount is becoming restrictive in terms of lens speed, given the all stuff the a lens mount contains these days compared to 1959, so an opportunity could be seized to grab a bit more real estate.

One of the things that might help persuade enthusiasts to buy into, and hence help establish, the new system would be if the pros used it. Nikon have hinted that this would be a professional system which leads me to wonder whether the D6 could possibly be a mirrorless camera, that would certainly give some kudos to the system. If so, would Nikon want to wait until 2020 to introduce it? Or would they, perhaps, let the D5 soldier on in its current form for another year and then introduce the mirrorless D6 in 2019 - the 60th anniversary of the F-mount?

It would surely be prohibitively expensive for Nikon to develop and maintain ongoing development of two, parallel, professional systems and the lenses to match, something will have to give and logically that would be the reflex system.

So, could the D5 be the last professional Nikon SLR?

[TBonz]

I don't think mirrorless is there yet...and, at this point, the D850 is the last pro body DSLR...not suggesting that it will be the last or not...I am guessing there will eventually be a D6 - and maybe an M1 - or whatever they call it as the mirrorless version of the current PJ flagship.  But you may end up seeing the first "pro" mirrorless as more of a D8xx or D5xx vs. a single digit body...maybe back to 2 digits?

 

I am sure they can figure out a method to work with F-Mount lenses...the size and weight are less important than the money the pros have tied up in glass and the functionality that they require.  I just don't believe that the technology with mirrorless (that has been released) has gotten to the level where a pro would consider it at the same level as the current DSLRs.  I know that at a minimum none of the pro sports photographers have found any current gear "good enough".  

[Dogbytes]

I tend to agree. However the D5’s party trick is its sheer speed and that is a lot to do with its computer systems. Okay, there’s the build quality too. No one has tried, up to now, to build a mirrorless body with that kind of specification, so no matter how good or bad they might be in other respects, the top end sports pros wouldn’t touch them.

[ScottinPollock]

I find it almost inconceivable we are still using an SLR mechanism in a digital camera in the year 2017. Proof that both Canon and Nikon are the Kodak of the digital age.

 

And then there are Sony's inexplicable design decisions of insufficient size for sufficient battery and cooling.

 

Mirrorless could have been "there" years ago if Nikon wasn't so worried about what they were going to do with 99 different, current lenses with a mount made obsolete by a superior mirrorless system. So, simply, they didn't go to work on one until Sony and Fuji forced their hand. Now they're in a world of hurt.

 

I love that Nikon has always been seemingly able to build better cameras even while driving a car with two flat tires… think of what they could have built without all that legacy tied around their neck.

[dcbear78]

My take...

 

The D5 update is still some time off. What's to update? Not much has improved significantly. Plus Nikon has moved away from the 2 year cycle. D8x0 went into 3, nearly 4 years. So too will D7x0, which is next in line for an update.

 

From what I have read Nikon have not wanted to go the mirrorless route until the technology was there to create a system comparable with a DSLR currently available. EVF and on sensor focusing have been the major drawbacks that have made mirrorless not as good..... Until now. EVF's in the latest Sony A9 and Fuji XT2 in particular are now every bit as good as an OVF (or better). And so too is the on sensor focusing with Canon leading the way.

 

Problem is Nikon so far has not displayed anything with an EVF that is worthwhile. Not to say they don't have the tech ready. I believe they will sit on it until it is market leading/equalling. But Nikon has a terrible record for on sensor focusing. This is what I believe is Nikon's Achilles heal and what is holding them up. They won't release a mirrorless camera until this is just as good as their contrast detect focus system, which is the leader in the market.

 

They have recently announced one full frame and one crop with D500 sensor is in the works. They won't lead with a flagship camera. I think the full frame will be a D750 replacement, with the D6x0 series cancelled.

 

I am hoping for a new mount to allow wider apertures and smaller lenses. It should be simple for them to release it with an F mount adapter. All they've got to do is put all the parts that were on the inside of the camera, on the outside. I hope they don't go too small though. Nobody believes the mirrorless is lighter myth any more. Well, I know it is, but not substantially once fast lenses are attached. I'd rather bigger, with similar ergonomics that we have on the current bodies and a HUGE battery.

[Ron]

I found the point about getting pros on board amusing. Nikon used to be the 'go to' system for pros, and not just because of their product but also because they invested significant resources supporting pro photographers. Now, it's Canon that gets most of the kudos for Pro support although I've heard that they're slipping a bit in this department as well. As for Sony, from what I hear, they don't seem to care. I guess if you happen to be a Nikon Ambassador this isn't such a big deal. Otherwise, it could be. Amateurs and 'pro-sumers'? LOL 

 

2018 is an Olympic year so we'll likely see how support plays out in that context. Also, if there's gonna be a D5s, or other pro body upgrade, we may see it come late December or early January.

 

It's hard to predict how Nikon (or indeed any of the major camera manufactures) are going to go with mirrorless. But I'm convinced that Nikon will eventually produce a pro (or pro worthy) mirrorless body. Whether they keep the F mount is another story entirely. There are pros and cons to both sides of the F mount argument. And, as much as we would all like to keep our F mount glass collection once we jump to mirrorless (and we will eventually jump), it may end up being impractical. Minolta, Canon and Pentax have all faced similar conundrums in the past and they all eventually swallowed the pill and changed their mount. Sometimes more than once. 

 

Mirrorless is still in it's infancy but it's potential is staggering. I feel that we are in a similar position to when the first (serious) digital cameras hit the market.

 

--Ron

[TBonz]

The Olympics is a good point...It will be interesting to see if they do something prior.  If so, I hope it is a solid step.  I think both the D500 and the D850 were big, solid steps over their predecessors.  Not sure it will be that easy to do over the D5, but I'm hoping.  I personally would like to continue with my glass whenever they go mirrorless and I would expect most pro shooters would feel the same way.  It would be quite expensive to purchase a full "suite" of lenses that PJs would pretty much require from the start while at the same time, taking away quite a bit of value from their existing lenses that they would likely need to sell to afford the new glass.  The other piece is that by forcing a full change of gear (body and glass), it opens up the "opportunity" to switch brands with basically no cost penalty.  If you keep the glass the same, there is value to staying within a system assuming the system can address your needs.

[Ron]

Keeping the same lens mount has been Nikon's ace in the hole for many years. I do believe that it will be difficult for them to change it, but I'm not taking that off the table.

 

Nikon has recently said that, going forward, their focus will be on the high end market. That's where they'll spend their R&D bucks. I think that perhaps the mid level cameras (particularly the D7xxx line) have been eating into their pro profits. Why spend the money on a pro body when a mid level body can produce the same results? Case in point; the D7200 has slightly better image IQ than the D500 at half the cost. Sure, the D500 is a pro level body but not every pro necessarily needs a camera built like a tank. Better to spend the difference on lenses. So, I believe that the mid level may probably stagnate a bit while the upper level gets the new features.

 

Anyway, back to the first point. Pros tend to change their glass more often than amateurs. Or so I'm told. I do know a number of photographers who rushed out to get the new 24-70 and 70-200's as soon as they came out even though there was nothing wrong with the 24-70 and 70-200 lenses they were already using. I thought they were nuts but the general consensus seemed to be, gotta keep up! Now, I realize that all generalities are false (including this one) but if the above is even partly true, what does Nikon lose by changing their pro lens mount on a (truly pro) mirrorless camera?

 

Only Nikon can figure that out... and, of course, this thinking could be totally nuts as well. It's not like I haven't been wrong before. LOL

 

--Ron

[ScottinPollock]

I dunno… I wouldn't want to be the guy making the decisions at Nikon. On one hand, preserving their significant stable of glass may be a big deal, but if doing so compromises their mirrorless offering in any significant way, they're screwed. And would they even bother to support all the gelded lenses with mech aperture? That fiddly little plastic lever in a mirrorless?

On the other hand, if they really got the mirrorless right (seriously more right than the A9 and XT2), wouldn't the pros line up to buy new glass as Ron has noted? I know this might put consumers off, but didn't Nikon already say (or at least insinuate) that is not their focus?

And are Fuji and Sony going to figure out that cameras that need pro glass to get the best out of them don't need to be small. What if we see an A11 the size of a D850, with serious heat-piping and an all day battery. How is Nikon gonna get that "seriously more right"?

My ouija board says new bodies and new glass, with maybe an adaptor for the really big 'E' glass.

[dcbear78]

I dunno… I wouldn't want to be the guy making the decisions at Nikon. On one hand, preserving their significant stable of glass may be a big deal, but if doing so compromises their mirrorless offering in any significant way, they're screwed. And would they even bother to support all the gelded lenses with mech aperture? That fiddly little plastic lever in a mirrorless?

My ouija board says new bodies and new glass, with maybe an adaptor for the really big 'E' glass.

This is my thought too. If they do keep the F mount it is possible they may eliminate support for mechanical apertures. Current E series lenses. Plus I've just picked up a Tamron 70-200mm G2 and notice they too have gone to electronic aperture control. Maybe they know something we don't?

[TBonz]

I am sure they replace their lenses more often than consumers, however that still doesn't necessarily mean changing out all bodies and lenses at the same time...it may mean getting an updated 24-70 or 70-200 every once in awhile and scattering "lens swaps" between updating bodies and other lenses...

 

Let's pick the trinity - 14-24, 24-70, 70-200 and add on a 50 1.4, 85 1.8 and a 400 2.8 for sports...leaving out many other potential lenses, bodies, flashes, batteries, etc. you are still pushing $20000 just in lenses based on current prices.  So by the time you add in at least two bodies, a flash or two, a few extra batteries, you could be well over $25000 in doing a full replacement...

 

By this point, I expect there will be those (pro and consumer) who will whine if Nikon leaves any lens behind.  But, I think the suggestions above for supporting at least the newer lenses would work out well.  Maybe lenses from the last 10 years (roughly) are supported and begin releasing a new suite of lenses with the change...

 

I know a few pro photographers who have tested and found the A9 "Nowhere near ready" (their words) to shoot sports at a professional level.  So, I expect there is still a good amount of work to do...not sure if Nikon is that far along, further or way behind, but I hope they do come out with something to lead the way when they do...

[ScottinPollock]

there will be those (pro and consumer) who will whine if Nikon leaves any lens behind

I am not sure Nikon cares much about that $(c;$. As (seemingly) nice as it would be to have an F mount mirrorless, given the fact that Canon (with a more modern mount than Nikon) chose not to do it on the M series, I kinda think there are probably some major challenges for Nikon in that regard, not the least of which is that they've yet to cut bait on the mech apertures. As I mentioned previously, if they do go new mount - with adapter, I think all gelded, non-E lenses will be left out in the cold (and that's a lot).

Contemplating this simply makes my head hurt, but I have pretty much come to the conclusion that whatever it will be will not be for me. It will be expensive, initially limited, targeted at the pro market, and void of a lot of things that make Fuji and Pannies fun. So… I just ordered my first mirrorless and it will be here tomorrow (guess I'll know in a week or so if it was a good idea).

[Dogbytes]

I just ordered my first mirrorless and it will be here tomorrow (guess I'll know in a week or so if it was a good idea).

Well don’t keep us in suspense! What is it?
Whatever it is, I’m sure it’ll be a lot of fun. I don’t think there’s a bad mirrorless system out there - they’ve had to try very hard to get it where it is.

I had mirrorless (Olympus) for ten years and my reason for getting rid had nothing to do with the quality of the system but when I had to choose a replacement, having a completely blank sheet to start (apart from budget!), my D610 won for various reasons. None of those reasons are ones that mirrorless could not, theoretically, compete with - it just hasn’t yet. However they were just my personal priorities.

Money no object? For me, right now, I’d choose a D5 because for what I do now that would be best and there just isn’t a mirrorless as good as the D5 is at what it does. I’m sure I’d be perfectly happy with an A9 so I guess, for me, that is the bar Nikon has to clear. I’m sure they will, I do think the D6 will be mirrorless, there will be a new mount but there’ll be an F mount adaptor - the only question being how functional it is.

I won’t be able to afford it but I’ll be glad it’s out there

[ScottinPollock]

Well don’t keep us in suspense!

Panasonic G85

tl;dr - If you're interested in my decision making process I offer it below, but be warned there is not much science involved. It is more of a gut feeling/past experience type of thing.

The Brands:
Fuji - Let's just say that if the X-T2 had IBIS and a flippy screen this would have been an absolute no-brainer. But I want to play with low element count, manual and vintage lenses, and for out and about IBIS was one of my requirements.

Sony - Didn't even give it a chance. The model I would have gone for would most likely have been the A6500, but I find Sony's handling/ergonomics to be among the worst out there. I want to have fun and not be fiddling with a poor interface. Not to mention I have had a lot of Sony gear over the years (I mean a lot), and my assessment is that while it performs well, it is overpriced, and most of what I have bought has failed prematurely.

So this pretty much left me with M4/3 (yecch). But when I thought about it, my work on 24Mp sensors was never delivered in anything near that resolution, except for prints. And those prints sit on my walls along with the majority of the others being in the 6Mp to 12Mp range, and I can't see the difference (I don't print posters). In fact, dealing with 24Mp images seems more of a chore than an advantage. Most of what I do in post has to be done on the deliverable image size else it is lost (or grunged) when re-sampled.

Noise is also a concern. But like resolution, I see all of these image samples from "reviewers" online that are at 100% on monitors with a pixel pitch of 80-150 ppi. Who in the world would view a 24Mp (or even 16Mp) image under those circumstances in real life!? I suppose I can see the differences they point out if I look at my prints with a jeweler's loupe but what would be the point? Now I don't do billboards or posters, and if I did, 50 to 100Mp medium format would probably be my tool. Nevertheless, noise is still a concern and it will be interesting to see how much more I see and what I can do about it. Maybe an F0.95 Mitakon. (c;

Olympus - Actually, I misspoke earlier. My first "mirrorless" was an Oly C2020. Loved it. But the Oly I would have went with (em5 mkII) doesn't have 4k, and I found the ergonomics of the small body and menu system to be fiddly at best (it felt very droppable). Plus I think Panasonic does noticeably better on contrast based autofocus with their DFD algorithm.

That left Panasonic - The GH5 seemed a bit overkill being aimed at pro video (although the 6k photo bursts and configurable focus pulls would be nice to have); there is just so much there I would never touch. So that my friends left me with the G85.

[Dogbytes]

Panasonic G85tl;dr - If you're interested in my decision making process I offer it below, but be warned there is not much science involved. It is more of a gut feeling/past experience type of thing.

Sounds like a perfectly reasonable decision making process. I have had extremely good results with MFT. I’m sure it’ll produce great results.

[ScottinPollock]

Sounds like a perfectly reasonable decision making process. I have had extremely good results with MFT. I’m sure it’ll produce great results.

I thought so... but it turned out not to be the case. It's going back!

Here's why... Nikon Can Learn a LOT from Panasonic... AND Vice Versa! - Other Camera Brands - NikonForums.com

[JASMAZ-77]

The D850 is out I would consider that a professional camera.

[Dogbytes]

The D850 is out I would consider that a professional camera.

Yes it is. I have to admit that I didn’t foresee that. Obviously, I knew Nikon would develop the 8xx series but I didn’t imagine that it would get D5 focusing and metering! Then there’s the updated build quality...

Well, the Z series is with us now and it’ll be interesting to see how it performs in the real world. I stand by my original post though - there’ll be no D6.

Got to say, if I were in the market for a new Nikon at this moment, I’d buy a D850.

[TBonz]

The proof will be in the real world use when we see what the new bodies can and will do...

 

The reality is that they did come out with the start of a new line of lenses and they effectively figured out how to keep the old lenses working for those who want to use them.  

 

Not trying to start an argument here - I have no idea if there will be a D6...or a D5s...or a D987.45...number doesn't matter, but I do expect there will be additional "pro" DSLR bodies released.  If you look at the sidelines of any football game (American or otherwise), I expect it will be quite awhile (if ever) before every Nikon camera is mirrorless.  There is going to have to be that real world proof of durability and long life before many photo journalists will do anything other than listen and test when they have a chance.  I think the one card slot will be something the PJs would want changed.  Same with a lack of a grip and battery life.  Those aren't there YET.  So I think there's time for at least one or two more true pro DSLRs before mirrorless takes over completely.

[Ron]

I believe that Nikon Rumors recently reported that Nikon has trademarked the D6 moniker. Not sure why they wouldn't have already done that.... oh, say years ago, but then I'm not in marketing.

 

--Ron