« New Nikon Mirrorless System Will be Medium Format! No It Won't! | Main | Wealth of Choice? Really? »

Tuesday, 14 August 2018

Comments

We have seen phones with stripped-down elements of cameras (point-and-shoot cameras) for years. They have taken the camera industry's broad market share. What the camera manufacturers haven't done is to reverse the formula, and make sophisticated cameras with stripped-down essentials of phones embedded, to extend functionality, usability, and thus situate sophisticated cameras in the phone ecosystem. I'm not expecting Canikon (or the other camera manufacturers) to be this adventurous in their approach to new products. Sheesh, all they really need to do is to connect to the phones we already have using connectivity software of the requisite usability and sophistication in the camera firmware. Not likely!

I have a K1, so not only do I root for the underdog, I root for the old dog with a walker. I'm not very concerned about the other mirrorless camera companies. I think they can do well enough. I'm a little concerned about what we will see for sale in 10-15 years, given the trends. I have a feeling that decent new cameras are going to be very, very expensive by then. And the used market will continue to grow more important.

I hope they're really good cameras, because Canikon are in the camera business. Sony is in the electronics business. I don't trust Sony -- I suspect the minute the camera business no longer looks like a long-term winner, Sony'll dump it. The hints we're getting from Nikon suggest that the Canikons will be large cameras with big lenses. Olympus and Panasonic are first and foremost about compactness with excellent photographic quality, but quality that would not match full frame cameras (except for video purposes, where they are as good as is currently necessary.) So we're getting the differentiation that we once had between snapshot cameras (iPhones), 35mm film (micro 4/3), medium format (FF digital) and large format (larger than FF digital.)

From a system perspective, why shouldn't shooters with large investments in wonderful Canon or Nikon glass get mirrorless bodies to go with? This does not pertain to me, but if I still owned thousands of dollars worth of Canon lenses, I would be rejoicing.

What I 'hope' happens depends on what they do. If the design is wildly innovative and useful: e.g. is a digital, mirrorless version of a Nikon S3 or FM, has the connectivity of an iPhone, and allows me to use my AiS lenses now sitting unused on a shelf, then I hope it sells like hot cakes. On the other hand, if it is just a response to the Sony A7, then I hope it bombs and makes the marketplace more competitive. On the other (third) hand if it is indeed just a boring up-date, but sells very well in spite of that (the most likely event), then I hope second-hand D8xx prices collapse and I can pick up a low cost D810 to use with those above mentioned lenses.

It can't do any harm having more manufacturers in the fray, can it?
Although I have 2 mirrorless cameras, I am not yet ready to dump my DSLRs because there is no system yet that I think can convince me to do so.
One of the main problems is battery capacity.
If Nikon mirrorless FF have a good sized grip and use existing EL15 batteries, that would be a step in the right direction.
First and foremost I love photos, then lenses.
Cameras just need to operate when I need them to.

I remember when I was astounded that Nikon uses a lot of sensors made by Sony. Now Maybe Nikon will use a lot of menu software ideas from Nikon or something.
I'm down to one camera, a Sony, but 4 of my 6 lenses are Nikon (legacy). Maybe the Industry giants should share some technology (with paying) with the niche brands to perpetual the Photographers that enjoy the craft without taking a haircut when a new idea appears.

The main weapon Canikon have to drive Sony out is their legacy lens base. And that is only effective if they're able to produce a lens adaptor that significantly outperforms those available for Sony bodies.

Fuji and the m43 pair address a different market, where the size of the kit - driven by the physics of lens size - is key. I'm less concerned about that happening.

When I was a professional portrait/wedding photographer Nikon Professional services said that I was not big enough to merit their services. Combine that with the arrogant rep who served our area and you create someone rooting against them. Great products, horrible marketing and arrogance. I switched to Canon back then (25 years ago) and was far better treated. Now I am mirrorless and retired, quite happy.

Nikon has real experience with innovation. Their last 3 product innovations failed miserably! I hope the road to the familiar is more successful for them.

I don’t really consider Nikon that large. In general, I hope all companies survive and old brands, esp. Contax, are resurrected. Ain’t gonna happen.

At the same time, I think Sony followed the software model of innovation, i.e. selling sub-optimal products and having the consumer pay for each step that brought more optimization.

I also rather see Canon and Nikon survive than Sony, but that’s because Sony doesn’t seem to be a camera but rather an electronics manufacturer. Sony for example hollowed out the goodness it got from buying Minolta.

On the other hand, it would be a real pity if Fuji, Olympus or Pentax would disappear. But I think they occupy a different segment than the FF mirrorless and that they’ll be able to survive in their niches, though Pentax may have to struggle.

I say no. But I don't think the other mirrorless should really succeed either.

My problem with the modern digital camera, or more accurately, with the cameras that the camera companies (all of them, not just Canon and Nikon) make, is that they are all just a relatively poor re-hashing of the basic consumer and professional camera design that was finalized about 60 years ago ...

I had a pretty good rant queued up on this subject and then I noticed that you said it for me without being ranty. 😃

Anyway, none of this is all that surprising, but it's too bad no one who really cares and has deep enough pockets is around to make something truly interesting in this space.

Well, considering that Olympus, Panasonic, Fuji, Sony, Ricoh, and Canon are big conglomerates with other "side" businesses, perhaps Nikon is the underdog here.

But that notwithstanding, I don't "hope" for any outcome - if they make a product I want at a price I can afford, great. If not, I'll keep shooting my existing Nikons for as long as I can even if Nikon goes kaput, then switch to something else or find another hobby. It's just a business in which a bunch of corporations are seeing how much money they can make. I can't imagine rooting for the success or the failure of a product, business or a corporation the way people root for sports teams.

[...Which is funny to hear in a way, as I'm one of those who tends to say that sports is just a business in which a bunch of corporations are seeing how much money they can make.... :-D --Mike]

If whatever Canikon delivers isn't better than what the Panasonic GH5 delivers in video plus inputs and outputs it's a none starter for me. The other deal killer would be an unreasonably high retail price. If I can buy a Panasonic G9 + a Panasonic GH5S for less than the Canikon product(s) then I have no interest in the Canikon mirrorless. I am not rooting for anyone. It boils down to value as I define it since I'm the one cutting the cheque.

Canon and Nikon today are two different beasts. Nikon is the first in line to be the next Pentax, since it is the only player left that has the majority of its revenue coming from cameras and lenses, and it has been consistently losing market share. I would hardly call Nikon the underdog, but I bet that in a few years we will all root for Nikon the same way we root for Pentax today.

Do I want Nikon to succeed? If they come out with an A9/A7 clone, then I want them to fail. I am really hoping they come out with something new and special, like and A7 type body with 44mmx33mm "medium format" sensor with a "full frame" crop mode.

I don't really care about Canon.

I'm hoping that they will succeed for the only reason is that I hope it will bring down prices due to a more competitive landscape. But I realize that will never, ever happen. I am not a wealthy person but I live a good life with no real money issues or challlenges, but the pricing to get yourself into a full frame system with a few decent optics is outrageous. I realize the R&D and then manufacturing start up is costly but my gosh it's gotten out of hand. I give much credit to smartphone companies for constantly improving cameras and video capabilities. Most of us own a smartphone for very practical reasons so why not just shoot images on your phone and the heck with a digital camera and lenses that will cost you dearly. This I consider to be the main reason digital camera sales are tanking.

Canikon finally realized that they could stand to go down the same road as Big Dog Kodak, should they fail to take stock and keep with the times. They certainly see SONY as their main competitor, and their soon to debut cameras are a direct alternative and competitor to their mirrorless offerings. Cheaper, more compact Panasonic and Olympus offerings probably won't be that affected, nor will niche product Leica- Fujifilm... hhmmmm.

I want them to succeed enough to hopefully spur more innovation from other camera companies, but not so much that they overwhelm the market and drive the smaller guys out of business. In my fantasy world, Canikon will announce some sleeper micro four thirds cameras and I will live happily ever after :)

Kinda depends on what Nikon (and presumably Canon) come up with.
If it's a 'me too' camera aping the features of Fujifilm & Sony's mirrorless efforts, then they deserve the declining market share they're likely to see for not being first and not being better despite batting second.
If they come up with a clean sheet of paper design with some really innovative features (something truly useful for photographers, not just feature-bloat), I do hope they succeed wonderfully.
Too many ominous signs around the photographic hardware business these days; some good news would be great.

As often happens, I’m with you all the way. The existing mirrorless brands deserves to succeed.

Nikon should succeed if they make a good product. I don't agree with you about Canikon being the corporate bully. The real opposition here is Apple, the trillion dollar gorilla.

In comparison, they are all underdogs.

The notion that camera companies like Nikon could have prevented the encroachment of the camera phone if they had innovated and embraced sharing, social features etc is completely wrong-headed. Not only would it have not worked (they'd still lose vis a vis platform and convenience of a single device) but they'd have alienated their core customer by dumbing down their instrument. Maybe they know better how to run their business than the armchair commentators?

Re: underdogs, don't forget Nikon still makes the trend-bucking and DXO-defying 58mm f1.4 - a true gem only a bean-counter (and pixel-peeper) could hate.

I love Nikon. All my film gear was and is Nikon and I had a D700 that served me so well until I foolishly sold it. In the meantime, for various reasons - mostly budgetary - I got into using Fuji gear and loved it. For ages I used only the first x100 and x20 and that mostly served my needs. I recently snagged the X-T2, along with the 35 f2.0 and I'm thrilled with the combination.
I'd like very much for these two coming Nikon cameras (and the new lenses) to be great, but unless they can compete on price there's really nothing they can offer that would make me leave Fuji at this point.

Mike wrote, "And I find myself nagged by this sense that Canikon already have enough pie."

Thats like saying in November that the farmer has enough corn and soybeans. Time marches on, seasons change and technology advances. The company that doesn't develop new products and incorporate new technologies into those products will sooner or later go out of business. Would photography be better without Canikon?

According to Wikipedia, Canon has been regularly introducing new products of the sort that TOP readers use.

5D Aug '05 $3300
5D MkII Sep '08 $2700
5D MkIII Dec '12 $3500
5D MkIV Aug '16 $3500

At the same time Canon developed a successful and still growing line of Cinema cameras and lenses that expanded their pie at the expense (I guess) of existing successful competitors. Or maybe Canon expanded the market by driving innovation and competition.

While this was going on, Sony and others were introducing mirrorless, small sensor and mirrorless-small sensor cameras with no meaningful response from Canicon.

The marketplace for cameras and lenses is healthier than its ever been. Market health isn't measured by the absolute number of competitors but by the quality and selection and price of the products and services for sale.

You can see my comments of a few days ago re: Sony's size vs Nikon and Canon. Canon will do just fine without the camera biz if need be. Nikon is sort of tied to the camera biz in spite of their other lines of business.

I hope that Nikon and the other traditional camera companies at least make some sort of a splash in mirrorless if for no other reason than giving Sony some competition.

Mike, I sincerely hope that they both do well. Both companies GOT to their respective positions because they were pretty good at what they do.
Both companies have given the photography world some wonderful stuff. Because of their history and size larger companies do tend to get complacent, they tend to make good stuff, a little behind the curve.
That will always open opportunities for smaller more nimble companies.
I wish them well also.
Sony and Fujifilm have done great jobs with innovative offerings that have benefitted all of us, while changing the competitive landscape.
m4/3 was a conscious decision by Only & Panny to define themselves by a single sensor size, they appeal to lots of people, and make fine products, but I wonder if long term they may have boxed themselves in.
I've never been comfortable sitting around wishing for people or companies to fail.
A shrinking market creates a zero sum game where in order for one company to succeed at a greater rate , other companies have to succeed at a lower rate. One company is not "Putting another out of business" If that eventuates, Consumers will have done it by choosing one company's offerings over another's.

If you are a large company, you have both the inertia and benefits of past successes. The inertia is a disadvantage, the past successes and installed base is an advantage. A small company (or large company with a small camera division, has the advantage of dexterity, and the disadvantage of a much smaller installed base to market to.
Just look at how both Sony & Fujifilm have grown through offering innovative products. (Apple & Samsung as well) We photographers are all better off for their competition. We should be rooting for all of them.

But we also need to remember that the condition of the camera market is not the result of some companies having white hats and other ones have black hats, it is due to the march of technology, and how people define and what they expect from 'Photography' and how those companies responded.

NO ONE in the camera industry understood smart phones early enough, as a result, their pie is shrinking. The ones that respond best for the needs/ desires of most people, usually win.

Serious photographers have always been the tail of the dog, and have always needed large consumer sales to support a small number of enthusiasts/ professionals. By ineffectively competing with smart phones camera companies created this situation.
Perhaps there was nothing that they could have done to compete better, but the result is half their collective market disappeared.

"Wishing" for one company to succeed and another to fail won't change that.

Let's see, how is the takeover/purchase of Minolta (Konica/Minolta) by electronics/gaming/entertainment/financial-services giant Sony NOT a case of a corporation using their wealth and strength to take over businesses? And as for Canikon already having enough pie, a quick search indicated the following operating incomes:
Sony 500-billion Yen
Canon 128-billion Yen
Nikon 38-billion Yen
Seems to me that Sony is the 800-pound gorilla in any room.

But to your question, I hope Nikon succeeds beyond everyone's expectations, knocking it out of the park, much as they did with the D1 in its day, or with the introduction of the D3/D300 several years later.

I hope Canon is able to answer the challenge that I hope Nikon presents them with.

I do not hope to see Olympus or Panasonic (or even Leica) edged out of the business.

But neither do I want to see some giant conglomerate with so much industry leverage dictating what the future of photography will look like, nor setting the standard for what cameras should look like, how they should operate, and so on.

-gkf-

I'll say this: if Panasonic and Olympus crash and burn with MFT, I'll be buying the latest, greatest Panasonic stills camera (as in the G9 right now) and a spare 20mm lens just to be sure.

Success breeds competition, which spawns improvements. So to that extent I hope Canon and Nikon "succeed" with their new cameras.

Beyond that, however, I could really not care less. I suspect I've spent well into six-figures on Canon photo (and, previously, video) equipment since the 1970's. I've rarely been disappointed and don't regret any of it. They made wonderful products (and I still use my 5D4). But I have adopted mirrorless systems (Sony, Fuji) as my primary platform and have no intentions to make another shift ever. My attentions these days is nearly exclusively on photography rather than cameras.

Of course, at 64 I'm probably not the car that Canon and Nikon want to chase. If they have any sense they want to catch people half my age (or younger!). To that end I would question whether or not creating a new "system" camera makes any sense whatsoever.

Well, I think time will tell.

Hey, first a shout out to other Pentaxians---K1(waiting for it to come back from upgrade service) and Z owner here.

I don't see Sony going out of business. Too big (hardly and underdog!), too much traction. Panny is also big, and has video DNA on its side. Oly? Question mark. Pentax? Also a question mark, but they seem like some kind of evolutionary offshoot that has found a survival niche despite everything, and they are the only company that has a camera or camera line at practically every format, kind of unbelievably---and the base is pretty loyal. Fuji? Interesting question. Their foray into digital medium format is looking as much like a hedge now as a nod to their heritage. Leica? A luxury brand that will survive.

With regret I left my old dog with a walker. My kids (20+) are usingbmy ME Super and LX. But i needed an extra stick if I was to carry the K1 ...beautiful though it is.

So I have jumed from the frying pan into the fire

Now m43 system and Fuji x100f ...I seem dedicated to the little guy. In England I vote liberal for Christs sake!

On one ovcasion the little guy became the big guy. Having always used Apple ... when it was quite clear they were going down the swannee I bought two Performas so I could stay with them to the bitter end ...I should have bought shares!!!

Exactly who is the little guy? Sony 2017 sales, 75 billion. Nikon 2017 sales, 6 billion. I root for users, not companies. Sony pushed Canikon to be better. Now Sony will get better. Smaller companies come and go, true in any field. One is on top today, in the basement tomorrow. Remember Blackberry? What do I hope happens? I hope the Canikon versions of the Sony’s are successful and we all win by getting better and more choices.

Here's what I hope happens regarding the new Nikons:

1) I hope this is a win, win, win, win, win.....for all - meaning no company plunges toward oblivion and that some good innovation results from a BIG 3 (Canikon & Sony) now having to slug it out in the full frame mirrorless arena; Fuji joins the slugfest at the APS-C level; and m4/3 holds its own as well as the 1-inchers. The high-end camera world will be better retaining a plethora of sensor sizes and producers (so Pentax and other "little guys" need to survive too).

2) I place Sony and Canon as the corporate "Goliaths" and Nikon as a unique underdog. It has done well because it has been creating great cameras with very refined ergonomics. Before I switched to Fuji to get a lighter and smaller camera/lens combo, I had used many film and digital Nikons and found them all very easy to use (especially when I compared them to comparable Canons). Nikon knows how to arrange things that all the other makers struggle to figure out. I hope Nikon will succeed in transferring their ergonomic know how to the mirrorless world. I also hope - but am not holding my breath - that they don't make everything "electronic" like aperture adjustment. The existence of real aperture rings is just heaven on earth to me. That is being picky I know!

3) 54 years ago I walked out of a real camera store with a Nikon-F and was on my way toward a life long passion in photography. I'm hoping to buy one more significant camera before parting this earth. Returning to Nikon - if it deserves my return from Fuji - would be my hope.

I root for the underdog. Wasn't it the underdogs (Olympus and Panasonic) that came out with mirrorless to keep enough market share to stay in the camera business? If nothing else, being the underdog is incentive to be innovative. As far as Canikon, I'm cool with their full frame mirrorless attempt if it isn't just a copy of what we already have (Sony). I hope they succeed if they bring something new or a big enough improvement in what already exists such as a vastly improved hybrid auto focus.

I’ve been primarily a Nikon guy since 1968. But now I love my Panasonic GX8. I got tired of waiting on Nikon to do a serious mirrorless camera. But I love Nikons. I love the way they render files. So much so that I’ve set up Camera RAW so I can apply Nikon processing to my GX8 files. I’m looking forward to seeing what Nikon comes up with. Over the years I’ve come to expect one of two things from a Nikon announcement like this. They might have spent all this time getting it right. They just could come out with a camera that raises the bar and opens new possibilities. It could happen. Or, they might come out with something that does the job, but no better than what is already out there, and likely with some issues that will have to be fixed in a later model. I don’t think I need to remind this crowd of some recent examples of that.

Whatever they announce, I’ll be interested. But no matter how good it looks, I’ll assume it won’t actually be available for at least 9 months. I won’t be getting in line to get one. I’ll wait for the dust to settle, see what the issues are and what advantages it offers, then wait for the price to go down when the frenzy ends.

Meanwhile I love my two GX8s and will just keep making photos with them. Might even go ahead and buy that 7-14 I’ve been eying.

I'm with you, rooting for the underdog. I hope Olympus wins the mirrorless wars, but the ship is not very big, and one or two good torpedoes might put them under. I see the SS SONY on the horizon, and they've already got a large force in the battle. OK, I'm all metaphor-ed out. :)

I'm having an awful lot of trouble imagining Panasonic and Sony as the underdogs given their respective sizes relative to Nikon.

I'm also skeptical that Nikon succeeding in the FF mirrorless market would have much, if any, effect on m4/3. Are there customers that are seriously wrestling with whether to go fullframe or m4/3? And if there are, they've had Sony as an option for years now.

It depends on what you mean by succeed. I think Nikon is looking for a way to stop its apparent freefall in sales volume. Neither company needs to destroy all smaller competitors to realize success. Both appear to see the same shift in market direction and see the need to stop swimming upstream.

Sure, I’d like to see both Canon and Nikon field competitive lines of mirrorless cameras. It’s clearly the way of the future. More competition is likely to drive more innovation, even if it’s on the part of Panasonic, Olympus, Fuji and Sony. However, phone cameras have become so good they’ll continue to dominate the true mass market. Can’t think of anything that would reverse that.

The Nikon mirrorless is not an SL killer. Only an SL is good enough for Leicaphiles. They want to use there M and R lenses. It's introduction will have no impact on Olympus or Panasonic. It's for a completely different market. Canon users will wait for Canon's announcement. In the end, I doubt Canon will screw up their mirrorless camera so bad that Canon users are going to abandon their systems. And Nikon users will stick with their systems. The issues are: 1) will it cannibalize Nikon's DSLR sales (yes), 2) will current Sony users switch (maybe in a generation), 3) will new users adopt it over Sony (yes to a large extent), and 4) will it attract current and prospective Fuji users (yes).

More than Canon whose equipment I've been using for the past 14 years since 'going digital', I'm rooting for Nikon, whose film gear I used for the first 25 years of my career. Nikon's use of Sony technology to build world-class cameras topping Sony's own use of its sensors, gives me hope that my all-time favorite glass (Nikkors 50 f/1.2, 85 f/1.4, 105 f/2 DC) can adapt onto a new Nikon FF mirrorless, allowing me to take these funky Canon adapter rings off, and shoot 45MP captures with greater dynamic range and low-light capabilities than anything Canon has offered me these past 8 years. The more manufacturers that come to mirrorless, the merrier. Each new entrant will push all the rest to continue to innovate, keeping prices in line and benefiting all users!!

I'm not sure you can call Sony an underdog with their huge electronics footprint, but in the camera business, I guess they are. I'm cheering for them because Sony seems to be the only camera manufacturer doing any serious R&D. We seem to get most sensor innovation from Sony (stay tuned for universal shutter) and they have invested a fortune in developing a great line of lenses. It would be awful if Canikon copies Sony and forces them out of business.

However, I'm a realist and even though I converted to Sony bodies (A7RIII and a6500), I kept a lot of my Canon lenses just in case Canon entices me back with their mirrorless effort. Sony still has a few things to learn about water sealing and ergonomics (e.g. camera controls and menus).

My belief is that competition is a good thing and Sony has kept a few things back to respond to Canikon when they introduce their "me too" mirrorless full-frame cameras.

I do agree with your assertion that even Sony has missed the mark when it comes to real innovation. None of the major camera companies have implemented a true touch screen interface (remember the Samsung Galaxy camera with an Android interface: https://www.gsmarena.com/samsung_galaxy_camera_gc100-4961.php) and they all lag Google and Apple in development of AI features. I don't see any chance that they can catch up either.

If a mirror-less camera eliminates the need for a prism,why can’t the body design be really thin...basically flat...similar to what Sony has engineered. What this might look like is a 1” (or less) body and a lens mount. That I would buy...

Knock out Sony? Much more likely the other way around. Sony has already overtaken Nikon as #2 in US ‘full frame’ interchangeable lens camera sales, and has an aggressive overall market position attack plan going forward. Kevin Raber at LuLa has expounded on this, and the mirrorless ‘revolution’ in general, since 2014 (along with the late Michael Reichmann). Still crappy menu system and ergonomics, though.

I sold a Canon D40 and moved to the Fuji X-T1. While a real improvement in many ways there are many unnecessary complexities. E.g. - Why do custom settings include less than half the menu possibilities? I want C1 landscape, C2 cityscape, C3 portrait, C4 group casual etc. Over all I'm pleased but this seems to be the end of the line. When do I get editing software that can be used every few weeks without needing retraining?

Hi Mike,
I prefer it the other way around. I want Canikon to succeed, on the assumption that they build good mirrorless cameras, or cameras that are better than what is currently available in APS-C or FF - assuming that is their target market. Better cameras are better for me. I can’t imagine Canikon wanting to enter m4/3, as they have no lenses in this space. I don’t see Canikon being a direct competitor to m4/3. People choose different sized sensors for different reasons.
If Canikon just come out with equivalent “me-too” products, then it won’t change the landscape much, unless they make the price attractive enough to switch from Sony or Fuji.
If Olympus, Panasonic, Sony or Fuji et al are threatened by Canikon, then they need to move beyond mirrorless and into the next transformative development, be it computational, curved sensors or whatever. Which again, is better for me.
Unleash the speculative storm :-)
Cheers
Ross

I had to look up "copacetic". What a wonderful cromulent word! As an ex Canon , now Olympus owner, a very thoughtful blogpost, as usual.I'd like to think my cameras will last me out.

I think you might have this backwards. I suspect Sony, for instance, could just buy Nikon with some loose change they find behind the sofa.

I hope the new Nikon Z models are excellent. I've had many niggles with my D800E, it makes amazing files, but it has been less than 100% reliable and trustworthy over the years.
I have a Sony A7 (infrared converted), it is not a pleasurable thing to use, but it gives good files and does what I need it too. I also recently bought a Fuji mirrorless (X-E3) and some small primes (fujicrons and a couple of others) to go with it as a travel/street kit. I'd been holding out for Nikon to make this type of mirrorless camera, but when the rumours and hints all pointed to large, FX mirrorless bodies I went with Fuji.
Ideally I'd want to get a D850 to replace the D800E, but the price and our AU$ is making that look like a leap too far. Perhaps the mirrorless Z7 with the lower manufacturing costs and parts count will be an attractively priced alternative. Lens compatibility and the F-mount to Z-mount adapter will be important. I have a considerable investment in F-mount FX lenses and no real wish to try and replace them all with Z-mount alternatives in the short term.

A very difficult question, and therefore a good one.

Are we talking gut reaction (possible biased by whatever we already own and have spent a small fortune on), or a well-considered response?

A lot of people got tired of waiting for Canikon to get with the program, and have already moved on to one of the major mirrorless systems. That'd be me. I used to shoot Nikon, but have moved on to Sony mirrorless (a6500 and A7 III). Still have a few Nikon bodies and pro lenses in the dry cabinet though. For many of us ship-jumpers I'd guess the gut reaction is sort of "nyah nyah nyah ...".

But if you think about it, competition can only be healthy and beneficial for everyone in the long run. So no, I don't want them to fail. Personally, I will not be moving back to Nikon any time soon. Not only because the Sony gear I'm using is excellent and ideal for what I am doing, but because it would involve a significant investment in yet another system. I'm sure many others who have moved on feel the same way. There's also what we've seen in the way of innovation from Canikon in the last decade (i.e. not much). It has taken a little too long, and I think that has damaged the images of both players. It has for me.

No matter how good the new Nikon mirrorless system turns out to be, it will be really hard for them to catch up. But at least they're still in the game.

The whole Canon / Nikon / mirrorless thing reminds me of a famous pair of adverts in some computer trade rag, in (I think) the late 1960s.

IBM, who had up until then made only large mainframes, were introducing their first (relatively) small minicomputers. They ran an advert saying 'IBM's entry into the minicomputer business legitimizes the market'. In the next issue one of the existing minicomputer companies (I think Data General) ran an advert saying 'the bastards say: "welcome"'.

A few points seem to me to be incontestable:

1) Given the inherent cost-of-manufacturing advantages of mirrorless, unless dSLRs have some immutable functional advantages (which they apparently do not at this point), mirrorless will win in each format/size.
2) For serious users, optics dominates our cost, weight, and attention. Optical cost and weight are -- for FOV, resolution, and aperture equiv lenses -- basically determined by sensor diagonal.
3) Photography and cameras are a declining market dominated by high engineering fixed costs. Smartphones have both pulled the rug out from under the volume that supported this engineering, as well as set a "floor" above which all cameras must perform to justify their purchase. This will not change.

Taken together this says to me that we should expect the mirrorless wave to continue in all formats, that current firms will struggle to capture the remaining customers, and that consolidation is almost certain.

i care more about my lens choices than i do about bodies and the independent makers (Tamron & Sigma) have really enriched those choices since 2010. i hope that the volumes in the lens mounts created in full frame continue to support their efforts. So "yes" i hope that Nikon sells a lot of them, and so does Canon.

The comments preferring camera companies to Sony on the grounds that Sony is an electronics company are kind of weird. Photography now is an electronics business and will become even more so in the future. The big electronics companies can draw on research and development from across a much broader technological base than the traditional camera companies. More and more Canikons will be assembled from the components of the electronic companies and then have a Canikon badge popped on top.
I prefer mirrorless for three reasons. I love having a histogram available in the viewfinder before I take a shot rather than having to go back to check and possibly redo the shot after I have taken it. I like the evf gain in low light. Yes, live view is possible in dslrs but it is clunky by comparison with mirrorless. I travel by plane and I want my camera gear with me in hand luggage not down in the hold. I can carry what I need with FF mirrorless in hand luggage but not with dslr.
I suspect that once the "real" camera companies put their seal of approval on mirrorless and those who are influenced by such things try it, the move to mirrorless will accelerate as others find the same advantages.

I want the coming Canikon mirrorless cameras to succeed if they can do so without forcing the purchase of replacement lenses.

With half a century of my collecting some of the very best manual focus lenses, all with Nikon F mounts on them (either as manufactured by Nikon, Zeiss, or Voigtlander, etc., or as Leica R lenses converted to F mount by Leitax), with many of those lenses being apochromatic (i.e., superb but seriously expensive), I have zero interest in starting all over again.

Short lived electronic lenses which lack manual focus and manual aperture control that are therefore tied to one camera system, unrepairable 5 years after the lens model production stops, and can't be adapted to what comes next, have very poor cost/benefit over time.

Very upset with Nikon's abandonment of adequate support for DSLR manual focus, for example, with the D850 not having an electronic viewfinder for live view, nor interchangeable focus screens. If this was done as an anti-competitive marketing decision to interfere with photographers' ability to accurately focus the superb Zeiss F mount lenses, Nikon deserves to fail.

If Nikon doesn't do everything they can to support adapted F mount lenses, including manual focus, on their upcoming mirrorless full frame cameras, and fails to document the new Z mount to assist third party lens adapter manufacturers, Nikon will be pushing me to finally give up and switch to Sony, after being with Nikon since my dad gifted me a Nikon F when I went off to college in the '60's.

I was kind of neutral about this topic, until I read the first sentence of the first Featured Comment: "Nikon has innovated its way to the best DSLR on the planet in the D850."

Sorry, that just fills me with annoyance. How can anyone call it "innovation" when the end product is just another bog standard DSLR, with one or two of its bog standard features honed and refined to a point 10% along the straight line path of NOT innovating??

I get the impression from interviews with Nikon that they see themselves as fundamentally demand followers.

In reading through the comments so far, I sense a lot of anxiety, even cynicism regarding Nikon's yet to be released Z mirrorless cameras. Could it be that T.O.P.'s readership (I suspect it has a high percentage of male baby boomers like myself) subconsciously fears a day when the only affordable digital cameras for purchase will exist inside iOS and Android boxes, and gee-whiz bang computational image gymnastics will be the only practical way a modern "photograph" can be made?

Memories in Sendai of smug sneering at Fuji's path-breaking turn to mirrorless likely faded once it became clear that the market was measurably turning away from DSLR body and lens tonnage. The wonder is why the numbness lasted so long at Nikon. They're playing catch-up now and couldn't care less about abandoning the F-mount, expecting a Fuji-feature clone and a new mount to save the day. I stopped buying new Nikon gear nearly 2 years ago when innovative stasis, CRM indifference, and virtual abandonment of DX gear showed how rudderless the company had become. Suspect we're looking at a flop-in-the-making.

For Nikon, this is a huge gamble.
Of course they have been, for years, considering mirrorless. Mirrorless cameras are cheaper to manufacture. What corporation wouldn't want that ?
But, being about one-tenth the size of Canon or Panasonic, and one fifth of Sony, and having most of their income coming from cameras and lenses, they can't afford to alienate their current customers. Their employees' livelihood and retirement depend on it.
Canon abruptly switched to an electronic mount years ago, upsetting many lens owners. Nikon has been slowly migrating the mount, allowing users to keep using their lens investment.
When Sony had very little market share to lose, and a parent corporation with deep pockets, they 'innovated' ( tried lots of different things, and abandoned customers of previous products ), which would put Nikon out of business.
Now is the time, in Nikon's considered judgement, to move into mirrorless. Perhaps they are jumping too early. Or too late. Maybe there never was a great time for them.
I wouldn't ascribe evil intentions to them. Like most, they are trying to get by. And they make some terrific products.

So, being a bit curmudgeonly (I've lived long enough to earn it), I'll say that I'm tired of "real innovation." I'd like to see Nikon just evolve their current cameras: drop the mirror, gain a really good EVF, and engineer the correct lens mount. Offer an adapter to use legacy lenses, CHEAP, or include it with the camera for a couple of years.

I don't hope that they'll succeed or fail. Why should I? But I don't think that Nikon will succeed with their new mirrorless, at least not to any significant extent. Not because of a lack of engineering expertise - the D850 for example demonstrates that they have plenty. What I think they lack is the leadership and marketing skills to succeed - to understand what this relatively new segment of the market wants and to explain the quality of their products. In saying this I admit that I have been very much influenced by Thom's writings on Nikon.

Sure, they'll sell some of their new mirrorless. Something with Nikon on the front will always sell to some extent. But they're rather late to the party and for many of us, the boat has sailed (pardon the mixed metaphor). We have made significant investments in alternatives and aren't about to jump back now. For me, Nikon is the past, not the future.

Don't understand why mirrorless cameras have a pentaprism shape, Very happy to move to Xpro 1 and 2 years ago, as a pro and my clients love I am cutteng edge with Fuji with lenses to match. Nikon has too many legacy lenses to catch up and they are a tiny company.

I wish them well with their new camera and it's puny sensor......

-X1D fanboy-

:)

Well, I'm hoping for mirrorless to progress for serious action photography. It ought to be the best for that, without the blackouts and so forth, and the mechanical complexity that makes focusing so hard in a DSLR. This shows that Nikon also sees the market interest in mirrorless; whether this camera will make any contribution I couldn't say, but if Nikon tries hard they certainly can make a contribution.

Hope the new Nikons are awesome, like the JBL 705P speaker of cameras. :-)

The way I see it Nikon and Canon are going after Sony. Will be bloody and I don't fancy Sony's chances.

Nikon and Canon have by far the largest installed user base of FF cameras. I expect 90% of their initial sales will be DSLR users with existing Nikons and Canons, plus a few disappointed Sony customers returning to the fold.

I don't know where Sony is going to generate new sales from, since up till now, most have been defectors from Canon and Nikon.

I also think there is going to be a lens mount dilemma if either company wish to bring out a lens-compatible APSC range. What will become of Canon's existing (and popular) M series I don't know. The throat diameter seems a little small for FF.

I don't think MFT or Fuji are under threat. They are clearly differentiated from the FF market.

Déjà vu, is Nikon going full frame DSLR?
The Canon full frame 11mp EOS-1DS was released September 2002 followed five years later by the full frame Nikon D3 August 2007.

Who's the giant crushing the ant? Sony (Mkt Cap. $69.275B) is much larger than Nikon (Mkt Cap. $7.6B). :)

[Nikon has a much larger share of the camera market and a much more prestigious name. Consider the ease with which Canon surpassed Sony in mirrorless sales in the Japan home market, with far fewer, and less impressive, products. Nikon is likely to suck a lot of sales from its competitors even if it doesn't come to market with superior products. --Mike]

I'm a Canon user but only because I got in the game a long time ago and have an expensive Canon lens arsenal. The thing that doesn't thrill me about Sony thus far is the build quality is not on par with Canon or Nikon's higher end bodies. I'm hoping Canon creates a mirrorless camera that I can use my current Canon lenses on. If that's not the case then I have some thinking to do because I love mirrorless.

I own two camera bodies and four lenses from the Nikon 1 system. I wish Nikon had worked to ensure that the Nikon 1 system was a success. But I suppose that it was too low brow for their current apparent aspirations of being a high-end camera and lens manufacturer. I guess I hope that their new mirrorless system is a success. But I also hope that they produce gear that fit the modest budgets that many of us enthusiasts have.

As has been pointed out, Sony is a rather large company too. I'm not worried about the fate of Sony et al.,as they will continue to innovate, maybe more so with the added competition. Also (and this is only relevant because you asked your readers to say what they think SHOULD happen),I don't cry for Olympus. Remember the accounting/stock manipulation scandal and coverup a few years ago? I

Over the years I have owned cameras from Canon, Pentax, Nikon, Leica, Fuji & now I am a Sony A7rIII owner. The camera just works it does what I want & gives me flexible files & is great value for money as is the A7III

I want Nikon's Z series cameras to succeed, but ultimately that fate is in their hands & the key will be lenses. There will just be 3 or 4 Z mount lenses to start with, so an adaptor to take older Nikon lenses is a must without sacrificing AF performance

Nikon should also be working with 3rd party lens manufacturers like Sigma, Tamron & Voigtlander to ensure that there will soon be plenty of Z mount lenses. I suspect due to corporate greed this will not be happening & the independent lens companies will have to reverse engineer the Z mount, which will take much longer.

This is a very interesting question. I agree with your thoughts. I have a Fujifilm X-T2 which is so good I probably won't ever buy another SLR. Canon and Nikon will not make a success of mirrorless until they drop their consumer targeted SLR models. They won't be doing that, so I hope they fail and Fuji / Panasonic / Olympus go from strength to strength with their mirrorless offerings and retain customer support.

Canikon have no choice in the matter, they have to sell what the customer wants.

Leica hasnt been competitive when it comes to bang for the buck for a long time now. For example in respect to the SL you can buy the Fujifilm GFX or Nikon D850 and get the same or better for less, easily. Thus nothing changes with Canikon mirrorless.

"Innovation" is a buzzword that usually stands for more or less helpful features that have been introduced to distract from the fact that the camera doesnt excell in the really important photographic categories.

To hear "innovation" as an argument for Leica is truely weird. Leica is the most conservative camera company; the most recent M mainly removed features. The only thing they are really innovative about is that they try to reinvent camera ergonomics, which they did with the T, S, and most recently the CL.

Nikon specifically is actually very innovative when its important, i.e. when it comes for example to lens and sensor performance, or autofocus performance.

Like Craig Yuill, I also have two Nikon 1 bodies (a V1 and I finally managed to find a low-mileage V2 for a reasonable price last week!) and four lenses. And I like them.

Shame they didn't originally sell them for a sensible price, may have built up a reasonable market for them. Assuming they didn't keep bringing out new models all the time...

It is hard to imagine a logically consistent argument for Nikon failure at any level. Why on earth should we want it? Photographers, like all consumers, benefit from a robust set of choices being made available to them. A desire to "punish" a consumer electronics company is childish, at best, sociopathic at worst. If you like their products, buy them. If not, don't. It really is that simple. Your immortal souls are not at stake, folks, and this ain't religion.

Or maybe it is. Have we become like warring religious factions? Delft vs. Prague? That's a disturbing thought, but maybe not as outlandish as some in common currency.

Always fascinating that there are so many comments about gear and companies and comparatively fewer comments on photography

I find it a little funny that Nikon is seen as the big 'bully' here, when they're one of the few companies where photography is the core of their identity. Canon, Sony, Panasonic, Ricoh are all bigger, Nikon is a big player in THIS market, but ultimately they're in serious risk of become irrelevant if they don't ship a solid mirrorless line.

So yes, I very much want them to succeed. Great products don't just happen - like Apple, Nikon launches strong, makes changes slowly, and then on occasion surprises again. But the foundation of iPhone was laid way back before 2007; the Z cameras have been in waiting for a while too.

The Nikon 1 line was....a lot of whoops. But it was innovative, and interesting - it was just answering a whole basket of questions few people were asking. The Z's are clearly a 'safe' bet, building around the amazing D850 sensor tech and hopefully showing that Nikon has listened to all the gripes from their own and other manufacturer's users - battery life, ergonomics, etc. The new lens mount is nifty, I'd love to see a new NOCT-Nikkor, especially if the upcoming 24mp model is truly a low-light machine and not just a 'budget' full frame version.

Admittedly, I'm a Fuji shooter precisely due to many of the issues you and others here raised - but I want Nikon to be pushing hard again.

POINT OF ORDER SIR.

It is surely a long established British tradition to favour the underdog whereas Americans glory in triumphalism.

I want them to succeed, but in the way that I want them to. If they get some traction with their SLR-style bodies, but not enough to sit on their thumbs, it would be great if they made rangefinder-style bodies. If they have a hybrid viewfinder, so much the better. We’re past the point of worrying about Leica going out of business, so it should be ok.

And while we’re at it, I’ll add that Nikon’s large Z-mount can fit a decent panoramic aspect ratio sensor. Square format is another possibility, for those jonesing for an LCD-based camera similar to a TLR/Sony R1/Rollei Hy6 sort of camera.

FWIW, I think all this talk of "innovation" misses the point. There have been many innovations in digital photography over the past few years -- the Sigma Merrill sensor, for one -- but as the Merrill sensor has shown so far, innovation in and of itself is no guarantor of success. What's more important is to answer a need or solve a problem that is important to the customer, not the manufacturer. Nikon of late has shown a perverse tendency to overprioritize things that it thinks are in its own best interests, with the interests of needs of consumers and photographers an afterthought. The predictable result: declining sales. So whether the new Nikons should or should not succeed is irrelevant to me. What they had better do is give photographers a compelling reason to buy them, otherwise Nikon will once again suffer the consequences.

I think mirrorless is the next step in camera evolution following SLR and rangefinder designs. Mirrorless has come a long way. The EVF of a modern mirrorless camera (Sony A7RM3 or Leica SL) will satisfy all but the most stubborn. The AF of a Sony A9 is almost as good as the top SLR and what it lacks it probably lacks because Sony made it rather than a limitation by technology.

The question is not whether or not Nikon will succeed in mirrorless, but whether or not Nikon will survive the next decade.
Leica has a found a way to keep its head above water by courting an apparently large group of rich enthusiasts who are willing to pay a premium price for a limited edition Leica. That is: premium vs. the standard price of a Leica not vs. whatever us mortals are paying for gear.
Does Nikon have any other strategy but to just keep selling cameras? They'd better make their cameras worthwhile and future proof. Mirrorless.

I admit being a "Nikon Guy" and the reason is pretty simple. The way a camera feels both in your hands and up to the eye is what matters most. The image quality, color rendition and most file attributes may differ somewhat from camera brand makers, but the end result can easily be made to look the way we each prefer. Even straight out of most of the current popular cameras, the image files are on par. It then comes down to ergonomics and what we are comfortable with. Mirror-less cameras are the coming trend. Besides my Nikon D500, I have been using a Sony A6300, which is just o-k, but if Nikon can come up with a mirror-less body that passes the touch/feel test, then I'd embrace it.

If this out-of-touch, late-to-the-party interloper manages to strike the death stroke to Leica and Sony, then these new Nikons must be kind of amazing. Bring it on, I say.

Why do so many people bemoan the fact that cameras today still follow a tried and true operating paradigm and show no "innovation". Doesn't that mean that the paradigm is good?

"The backgrounder here is that I was shocked at how easily Canon overtook Sony for the number one rank in mirrorless cameras in the Japan home market.... – Mike

Actually, if memory (and data from CIPA) serves, Canon took the number one rank from Olympus, not Sony.

I think the bottom line is when customers shopping for cameras think of companies, they think Canon first and foremost; its hard to argue with the data. The vast majority of customers that drive overall market share don't care about specs, FF, or 693 AF points. They just want a quality camera that takes good pictures. Ask anyone who works in a camera store. Why should these folks spend $2000 on an A7III when they can buy an M50 for $630?

People love to criticise what they grotesquely call "Canikon", but a mere teaser video from Nikon is enough to get the photo community all fired up.
This said I believe it's foolish for Nikon to go mirrorless. They have the full-frame DSLR segment comprehensively covered, so this camera is unnecessary. Maybe they felt the need to satisfy the geeks who believe mirrors are a thing of the past and drool when they hear (or read) the word "electronic". They are not very numerous, but they're quite loud on the internet.
And there's one good reason for Nikon and Canon to scorn "computational photography": the latter is a deceptive moniker intended to make smartphone cameras' flaws sound acceptable.

I propose that instead of Canikon representing the camera marketing behemoth everyone needs to worry about, we change it to Sonikon.

Canikon will do what they will do. They’ve been reluctant to this point, to compete against themselves with EVF cameras - as they see it as just carving a hunk out of their existing DSLR sales.

There’s a reason we don’t have a Santa Fe Airlines. Sante Fe thought it was in the choo choo train business, rather than the transportation business.

Canikon cling to being in the SLR business. As Michael Reichmann said years ago, if they don’t eat their own baby, someone else will. My sense is that their efforts will be tepid, and most likely too late. And I’m fine with that.

Rand

What you're really asking is if I want a mirrorless camera to come to market that is ergonomically viable.

Canon, Nikon and Leica are the three digital camera companies whose products I've personally found to be usable without wanting to beat your head against a wall.

Sony and Olympus are hopeless. Good luck finding enough time to shoot between endless bouts of fidgeting with horrendous settings and menus. Fuji goes 95% of the way and then uses the remaining 5% of their capabilities to ruin whatever progress they've made. I've tried them all, and when I'm under the gun and just want to shoot none of these cameras are, in my opinion, reliable.

After years of putzing around with mirrorless I returned to the DSLR because they were fully realized functional tools. If the companies that produce these tools - Canon and Nikon - want to start dropping mirrors out of their bodies all the more power to them as long as they don't lose their existing functionality.

Would I buy a Nikon FF mirrorless? Well, maybe. Assuming it can use my existing lenses. And assuming I need an EFV instead of an OVF. I think there's a great case to be made for both electronic and optical finders, so if the price is right they could convince me to either switch or pick up a second, mirrorless body.

A rather unfortunate thread to have started: never realised people actually hated camera companies enough to wish them failure.

Nobody is forcing anybody to buy anything, folks, you are still free to keep your hands in your pockets.

I have used Nikon since the F and would do so again. That others preferred Canon never upset me - why would it? That said, I have no desire to buy another camera from anybody. My basic D200 and D700 do anything I can think of doing with cameras that's still legal. The lure of photographic genres where either would be useless has not happened for me. I like to do the same old same old I enjoy.

It must be a terrible thing to be driven by fashion and the Joneses.

Oh yes, I want them to succeed. At least, I'm still only lukewarm about mirrorless and digital. I could do with a jolt of "how did they come up with that". The Nikon One was a bit of a Cherry Coke, I'm hoping this one will go down better.

I have so many, many questions for New Nikon: Will they do more firmware updates, like Fujifilm, or treat the camera as a disposable like Sony? Will the portrait grip have super-powers for video and cost the earth? Will they finally have an upgrade for the 24 megapixel sensor? Will they have good AF for all generations of their F-mount autofocus? What kind of flippy display will they use? Will live view do incredible things for manual focus lenses? How will they manage ergonomics with both compact lenses and big telephotos? Will they have a decent 35mm equivalent lens? Will they compete against premium small camera's like x100 and pen-f? Will battery life be anywhere near the DSLRs'? How about the flash system? What's the shutter going to be like, will EFCS work? Will the camera have a sensible price for mass-market appeal? Really, the list of things New Nikon could excel at is endless.

Have the right answers, and New Nikon might succeed. I definitely wish them good luck (and another advertising agency).

I've been skimming the comments to see if anyone states the obvious. Several have said essentially the following: Competition is good for the consumer. If Nikon's mirrorless models compel the rest of the manufacturers to respond with something better, that benefits all photographers regardless of brand preference.

I hope that iphone brings out a camera with a swivel screen.

I was a Nikon user since the film era, but three years ago I changed to Fuji and I'm not going back. My very next camera will be a m4/3 (I'm learning to do serious video), maybe the GX85.

I admire Sony cameras, but I think Fuji, Panasonic and Olympus deserve more customers because of their commitment to lenses. I just can't get emotional thinking about the lenses from Sony and Canikon, so I'm not counting the days for the new Nikon.

What I want to happen depends on the mirrorless offerings that Nikon and Canon introduce. If the new cameras offer nothing new and innovative but are just mirrorless updates to their current SLR models,
I hope the cameras don't sell well. Maybe then Canikon will realize that it is time rethink what a new modern camera should be. Now if the new Nikon is a fresh, innovative, useful design, I hope they sell well and lead to all of the manufactures rethinking of what can be done to make their cameras better.

Someone mentioned Nikon's arrogance. I worked in camera retail for a number of years. My experience is that Nikon has become more arrogant as time has gone on. So, it could be that if the new Nikon mirrorless does not do well, Nikon arrogance will be an obstacle to rethinking anything. The same can really be said of Canon as well.

I should say though, having been a photographer for over 35 years, what I would still love to have is a simple digital camera much like a Nikon FM or FE or an Olympus OM1 or OM2. I don't really need a lot of whistles and bells. I long for simplicity at a price that would be somewhat affordable, Leica M digital M models are just not in my price range.

I am so distressed by the array of possible consequences that I had to go buy a 1949 Leica 135/4.5 Hektor LTM lens in order to settle myself down.

Yep, me to, go underdog. Is it fair that they (Canikon) can do so little, deride so much and still flip and jump on/push in when it suits?
Hopefully the growth that the more innovative "sharks" have managed will be enough to hold their share of the photographic ocean from the lazy and slow changing "whales".

Well, I recently bought the M50 mirrorless hoping to go from my Olympus EM-10 for better onboard flash capability and those canon colors. While there are some great aspects to the current canon mirrorless, I was ultimately not swayed enough from the benefits of the Olympus system to change. It is such a herculanean effort these days to learn a new menu system to the degree that you need to shoot effortlessly without having to reference a manual for six months. One of the main reasons I am selling this recently acquired Canon mirrorless camera is that it is over-reliant on the touch screen for changing settings, rather than through dials and buttons. As I've gotten older I need glasses for reading, so changing settings on a crowded touch screen or within giant menu system is not as desirable for me as a physical button or dial. So I don't know - most people who are enthusiastic about cameras now are getting kind of set in the particular menu ecosystem of their current cameras which is going to be a big impediment from people switching as (relatively) effortlessly as it was in the film era. This recent effort has reinforced my belief that there is no perfect camera and you just need to find one that does a lot of things you like and put up with its minor quibbles...and get out there and use it.

I want the Nikon and Canon cameras to succeed. Actually, I want all the current camera makers to succeed. It is a benefit to photographers to have as much choice in gear to use as the market sees fit to deliver. It will drive innovation and provide better tools. While it wont make anyone a better photographer, it could spark ones interest to further thier own pursuit of this creative craft and art.
In my case, having smaller gear has prompted me to always carry a camera, in addition to my cell phone, resulting in some photos I would have missed making.

How will we get better cameras if we're wishing for a smaller marketplace? I hope for a great camera from Nikon that will push Sony to make an even better cameras and kick Canon to finally up its game as well.

Or, I suppose, we can just use our iPhones....

The comments to this entry are closed.