« Fuji X-T2 Price Drop | Main | Devilish Question »

Monday, 09 July 2018


Feed You can follow this conversation by subscribing to the comment feed for this post.

Whatever they come out with the chances are better than even that it will require learning a new menu system. At 68 the mind has slowed and the hands have a mind of their own so a new menu and no in camera IS are off the table for me.

I predict that no one will produce a new mirrorless camera that I want to buy, unless Pentax surprises us with something weird.

Today I’m packing up and returning a GX9 to Lensrentals.com. My hands did not enjoy it, no matter how many times I used it. The files were nice though.

Media commentators of all sorts natter on because their job description is "natter on while mentioning specific things A, B, C" Literally, as in the contract may say something like "no more than 5 seconds of silence" and "you must mention X at least twice per hour" sorts of stuff.

As for Canon/Nikon and the wonderful new world of mirroless - will it arrive soon enough to sell some before really good zoom lenses on cell phones make it irrelevent?

Will really good phone, tablet, computer screens make prints irrelevent, and thus make Mike's claim that you don't really need full frame really true - just after full frame has come to rule the market?

Wait awhile and we'll find out...

I wonder if part of the reason it's taking Canon and Nikon so long is that they're trying to make mirrorless cameras that work the same as their DSLRs. My experience with my Fuji is that it works differently from my Canon, in some very significant ways.

In particular, the autofocus systems are radically different. Don't be fooled by the moniker "PDAF" with mirrorless. Although it works on the same basic principle, the hardware and software is totally different.

One example, on usage: mirrorless AF points are almost universally sensitive to vertical edges, while DSLRs usually offer a lot of cross-type AF points and most of the other AF points are sensitive to horizontal edges. Only the Oly EM-1 Mk II and the Samsung NX1 offer on-sensor cross-type PDAF.

When AF conditions get tough, mirrorless PDAF usually falls short of DSLR PDAF. For that reason, mirrorless cameras with PDAF tend to silently fall back to contrast-detect AF when PDAF isn't getting the job done. And that introduces more surprises for the photographer who's only accustomed to PDAF.

"Canikon will mirror each others' strategies"

and how are they going to do that once they have both gone mirrorless?

So if I understand you correctly, given the strong tradition of vertical landscape composition in Chinese art, I can expect my dream of a camera with vertical ergonomics to be answered soon at a price that I can not afford?

The sport of pool?

My expectation, having finally broken down and sold my beautiful 300 2.8 AF-I Nikkor, is that the new mirrorless Nikon will be the true camera the DF should have been and will support AF-I lenses. Having jumped ship to Fujiland, I'm curious, but no longer invested - the cost of the new systems is just going to be too high to make sense for me.

Wish 'em both well, and hope they're ugly as hell (to lessen the longing). I'm betting they'll look just fine- and cost alone will prevent me from any foolishness, esp when (should the need arise) I'll be able to pick up an XT-2 for a cool grand...

Here is my prediction. Someone will announce a new camera. It will be better than previous cameras, but not as good as future cameras.

Hmm, there might be a reason why I don't make my living making predictions.

Mirror, mirror in the camera, who is the ugliest in this area?

Up to „...lets get back on track...“ good insights. Otherwise, the guy who said „Predictions are difficult, especially when concerning the future.“ was right.
Sadly, Internet pundits are often very demanding for particular features and specs they personally want and when they do not get them, they become often nasty. One of them wrote once, he is outspoken on the net, and behaves himself face to face. Well...
Btw: Nikon D850 is beautiful!
Have a nice time, Robert

I couldn't argue with you about pretty/ugly, because it's too subjective. I never thought of my F5 as pretty, but I think it (or its Canon equivalent) was the best, most functional, most ergonomic film camera ever made, and so, in some sense, a thing of beauty. Pretty? Meh.

I doubt that either company will come out with a camera that is uber-expensive. The problem there is, you can buy a D850-class Canikon or Sony camera for $3,000 that has an enormous range of native accessories. Why would you pay more (in Nikon's case) for a system with a new mount and a limited range of native lenses? I would expect the new camera to cost less than $3000.

I'm most curious about size of the sensor, and the physical size of the body and lenses. If they are notably smaller than the D850-class cameras, but have either FF or APS-C sensors, then I think they could be a real hit. A ~50mp FF sensor in a small body with smaller lenses (but perhaps also taking f-mount lenses with an adapter) would be really interesting. Even more interesting would be a 4/3 aspect-ratio FF sensor with multiple aspect ratio options, but that ain't gonna happen.

What I really fear (think) is going to happen is we'll get routine, boxy ~24mp cameras that'll be no functionally better than my m4/3 Pannys and that'll be more or less blown off by the picture-taking world.

I gotta say, though, this is the first time in perhaps six or eight years that I've really been curious about upcoming cameras.

A long time ago, IBM ran an advert saying that their entry into the minicomputer market legitimized the market. In response Data General ran an ad which said 'the bastards say, "welcome"'.

Of course, getting on for half a century later IBM still make computers,while few people can even remember the names of the minicomputer makers. I hope the same is not true in this case.

I am surprised that everything in DSLRs is not purely electronic at this point. Who needs a physical shutter? I admit though that I am completely ignorant of what-all's involved in such a design. It would be great if the camera could just snatch a still image from the video that the sensor is already apparently producing. No loud shutter. . . I am sure I am oversimplifying this.



I think you are right about Canikon following each other, but to crack the mirrorless market they are each going to have to offer something special.

Canons existing aps-c mirrorless offerings have been very lacklustre in my opinion. Of all the camera makers Fuji stand out for me because they do in fact seem to listen to us old American and British grumps.Sony don't like to listen much but they are the principle innovaters. It all depends on which market niche a company is aiming at. Canikon thought that they had the whole market sewn up but have just realised that actually they didn't.

Well, probably a little more cynical than necessary, but not really inaccurate. Corporations in dominant market positions behave differently than those in who are 'breaking into' a business or market.
The consumer tends to anthropomorphize corporations as good or bad based on their own immediate point of view. There is nothing 'Wrong' with that except that the characterization is rarely accurate.
In their home market, Canon's Dslr market share has risen to over 60% and they have surpassed Sony to fill the #2 spot in mirrorless. So by that measure they have been doing well in a contracting market. Nikon has been very very quiet, but even there if they get a mirrorless camera really right, they will sell a bunch. If they swing and miss like the Nikon 1 that will be a problem.
When it comes to Nikon & Canon, they have given photographers some of the greatest tools we have ever enjoyed, they deserve some respect for that.
Weather or not they carry that into the future is anyone's guess.

"Upstarts" tend to be more aggressive, and iterate more. That is often seen as more consumer friendly, but they are basically fighting to be noticed. This has produced some wonderful products for which we should all be grateful, as well as provided clues to all involved about where the camera market is really headed. When that becomes clear, deeper pockets CAN become an asset. But todays deep pockets or market share are never a guarantee of anything other than a temporary advantage that can be used successfully or squandered.

As you alluded, the best strategy tends to be just see who makes the stuff that floats your particular boat, and buy that. Because as strident as folks tend to become over such things our opinions are at best, of mild import to the decisions corporations make in Japan.

That is not to say they don't care, but that there are several factors about which they care more.
The upside is that I can never remember a time where more excellent picture taking solutions were available ....but nor can I remember a time with more strident arguments.

What will be, will be, ....in the meantime we should all take great pictures.

All this without mentioning that it will be a second mirrorless system for both Nikon and Canon!

In my corporate IT past life, I experienced vendors promising software capabilities that I sorely wanted/needed for my shop. In many cases, the promises were never kept. We called that "vaporware."

When software actually was delivered, quite often it worked in ways that no one wanted to use. We called that "shelfware."

It seems that the concepts, if not the exact words, can apply to camera makers as well.

It seems hugely like a no win situation for Nikon, but I really don't think that is the case. Almost everyone weighing in on "what Nikon should do" has a hardened position on what Nikon should do. So, no matter what Nikon delivers, many folks will immediately cry foul.

That said, I think cooler heads will ultimately prevail, and the next camera offerings from Nikon will find solid ground to land on... just as long as Nikon doesn't orphan or cripple nearly 60 years of F mount glass.

Having loads of Nikon lenses and shaky hands (plus a 44" printer), I find the recent rumors of Nikon making a pair of Sony A7x type of bodies very promising. With IBIS I could again shoot full frame handheld and Nikon will have better ergonomics than Sony and should know their lens protocols to make an adapter that allows PCE lenses to be stopped down.

... and the new systems will have entirely new lens mounts so we have to buy a new range of native lenses ...

As a Canon 6D guy who does not shot video, I've not had much to get excited about in quite some time except for maybe Dual Pixel AF in Live View. I've just finished reviewing the rumor mill hubbub and found mention of a complicated new Canon lens mount/adapter/speed booster thingy that seems to support variable flange distances. Only time will tell but this sounds like something a large established company might do to provide backward compatibility.

"Who takes the next shot in our pool tournament? Find out...after the break." - Ron Burgundy

Interesting to read these comments.
As I expected, the anti-mirrorless-dslrs-are-Gods camp is made almost entirely of retirees or soon to be.
Another thing I've found is that most of those blog comments here and elsewhere are from decidedly aged folks.
(Like me. I'm 64, so don't go all nutty, OK?)
But when I go out to the streets, what do I see?
Young folks carrying heavy FF dslrs with huge lenses?
Miniature mirrorless cameras and lenses while playing with menu systems?
Just smartphones.
If there is no clear message there about modern photography, I must be day-dreaming...
(quite possible, I'm 64 after all! :) )

". . . sometimes Japanese companies target mainly their home market, or women, or Japanese teens, and beardy grumpy white-male American and British enthusiasts argue over these products just like the development teams for those products gave a flip about their opinions. No no, Grampa."

Olympus has been doing this with the Pen line from the beginning. Actual changes in underlying capabilities occur far less often than name and cosmetic changes.*

The E-PL7 introduced real improvements. The E-PL8 is almost purely cosmetics and marketing. (more AF points?) Like some earlier iterations, the E-PL9 actually loses some function, while again looking, accessorized and marketed differently. (Added visual help for newbies, better video, even weaker pop-up flash, as the accessory shoe for the prior one is gone.)

Both have a selfie LCD mode below the body, which can't be used with a tripod. I'm surprised the E-PL9 has a tripod socket; there is no mention of one on their site or in a couple of reviews, nor pix of the bottom. I had to do an image search to find out.

I'm just happy to have an E-PL7. I am far from stylish enough for an E-PL9. Anyone here need a Protective Leather Lens Cover, for $45? \;~)>

* Absolute rule: each new model must add, radically change or delete the finger grip.

"Who needs a physical shutter? I admit though that I am completely ignorant of what-all's involved in such a design. It would be great if the camera could just snatch a still image from the video that the sensor is already apparently producing. No loud shutter. . . I am sure I am oversimplifying this."

Many contemporary mirrorless cameras have full electronic shutters as an option. Some do the video frame capture thing. Some do shutter things well beyond that; anticipation, bracketing, and so on.

There are technical limitations with image quality consequences such that mechanical shutters can't yet be eliminated for all uses.

Well it seems clear that Canon and Nikon will have to make some major changes if they want to stay in the consumer photo business as major players. They’ve dragged their feet for years, making half-hearted attempts at “new” systems, mostly foolishly.

But it also seems clear, at least to me, that the era of big consumer camera systems is coming to a close. Nearly all the data, from camera sales to demographics, point towards this end. And as a casual observation I can say that it’s relatively rare for me to encounter anyone using anything other than a phone to take pictures during my travels.

Me? I really need nothing new. I’ve just declared a wrap to an eleven-year project and am at a bit of a coma, concentrating more on printing, publishing, and organization/editing than production. Honestly, I doubt that I will ever again shoot nearly as much as I have for the past 15 years. So whatever shift Canon and Nikon undertake, if anything, will be little more than a curiosity to me. I don’t see any more Canon purchases in my future (and never bought a Nikon in my life).

Nikon just need to do the digital version of FM3A, or the legendary FM2, or the simple beauty of FM10. that's it. done deal. like i proposed to 'em to do via e-mail about 16 years ago.

Last fall I picked up a Sony A7RIII as a replacement for my D800E. Image quality wise it has been a good decision. Slightly better image quality and slightly smaller. The in body stabilization has allowed me to get better quality handheld as the light gets dim (almost none of the lenses I used on the Nikon were offered in stabilized versions). And I really like EVF. But I miss the intuitive controls of the Nikon. So I'll be watching the announcement with interest.

I suppose my wish list for Nikon is not realistic, but here's what I hope to see in its second iteration of mirrorless:

-- a 24 x 36 mm sensor with high enough resolution to allow 12- by 18-inch prints at 300 dpi, but few enough pixels to support 4K video at 24, 30, and 60 fps without sub-sampling and reducing the image capture area

-- a video auto focus system that doesn't hunt the way Nikon's DSLRs do when used in real time

-- a view finder on the user's left side of the camera

-- seamless integration with Nikon FX lenses

-- more dedicated buttons for commonly used features/fewer requirements to scroll through menus

-- lighter and smaller body than current FX DSLRs

Ignoring the predictions thing and instead jumping on your tv sports commentary comment. My father was in the habit of watching football (soccer for the non-European readers) with the tv volume off and the radio commentary on. Obviously the radio guys had to do a better job and didn’t have words to waste on pointless punditry.

There it is - the elephant in the room! Someone has mentioned it - a digital FMx model. How come the FM’s had a mirror box and we’re still an ideal size? The problem with DSLR’s is the typical structure with a circuit board and a lcd panel stuck behind the sensor, which itself is thicker than a frame of film ever was. If we relocate the circuit board and lcd or perhaps get rid of the lcd altogether then maybe Nikon can keep the F mount and still be compact.

It's funny how in the last couple of years or so I've seen Leica and Pentax listed in the same sentence and it seems to be becoming more common. Leica have stuck to their rangefinders and Pentax seem very committed to the Optical viewfinder whereas everyone else is heading to the mirrorless Nirvana.
I'm a bit surprised that you have not yet commented on the new HD Pentax D FA*50/1.4, some say it is a Sigma ART clone (hogwash), some say its a Tokina design (again hogwash), some say it is going after the mighty Zeiss OTUS 55/1.4 (different focal length and the Zeiss is an APO so not really an apples to apples comparison). I personally think it will relegate the ART to the 2nd division on overall rendering (usual suspects being OOF transition, bokeh quality, contrasts, resolution across the frame) and step into the ring to challenge the mighty Leica Summilux-M 50/1.4 as best of the 50s. Fans of the faded Pentax brand will find out for sure on the 26th.

The comments to this entry are closed.



Blog powered by Typepad
Member since 06/2007