Nikon 100mm f/2.5 medium format lens
Does that mean anything to you guys?
Nikon 100mm f/2.5 medium format lens
Does that mean anything to you guys?
I wouldn't get too excited, companies patent things as much as to stop others from making something (or the ability to sue someone if they do) as much as they do because they want to make the thing.
Rumors based on patents have been going on for...forever. It would be awesome to see medium format gear from a company like Nikon but I would not count on it.
They made really good large format lenes (like Fuji), some really hold up well on a 180 back. I just wonder if the market is big enough to support another player
Last edited by alajuela; 10th September 2013 at 22:10.
I wonder if the reason is that the D800 is pushing sensor limits, and the only way to increase quality is to increase sensor size?
If there is a new MF, I would expect a joint venture - the market is too small for a single company entry.
Some years ago there where some rumors, that Nikon would go to MF. I don't really remember when exactly.
Perhaps this rumors will come back or they think about since the Canon-rumors about MF.
P.S.: If your wife knows everything... it's mostly not good for your gear.
Read elsewhere and agree with that it's prob just for an awkward focal length T/S lens something to compete with Schneider 90mm (35mm) or 120mm (MFD) range.
Nikon did some MF lenses in the past - for Bronica and probably others with different labels. They KNOW how to do it.
here you will find all the infos
here is a list from there for all the Nikkor lenses they had.
- NIKKOR-D 40mm F4
- NIKKOR-H 50mm F3.5
- NIKKOR-O 50mm F2.8
- NIKKOR-P 75mm F2.8
- NIKKOR-Q 105mm F3.5LS
- NIKKOR-Q 135mm F3.5
- NIKKOR-P 200mm F4 (early)
- NIKKOR-P 200mm F4 (later)
- NIKKOR-P 600mm F5.6
Greetings from Germany
Nikon also made Mamiya TLR lenses.
Where to go from the D800? I'm sure Nikon considers a number of alternatives of which a Leica S kind of camera is one. Technology is already available to make an FX format camera with at least 200MP, but the lenses probably can't handle that kind of resolution. Increasing the size of the sensor, the mount and the lenses would be a very logical way of solving that problem.
What problem? There is no great reason to keep increasing resolution. I would hate to have a 200MP sensor--my hard drive fills up fast enough with 40MP. And 40MP is plenty for printing on 44" roll paper.
It's hard to imagine Nikon developing a whole new system (and they are a system company) to enter a very small, very competitive, and very expensive market.
There are some slightly more credible rumors about canon doing something similar. But I believe these are just based on some deal between canon and a European MF sensor company. Which could mean just about anything.
The "problem" is that more megapixels still sell, and if Nikon see that they will hit the ceiling with their current lens mount (which is much smaller than Canon's), they will have to look for a solution. New mounts seem to be the fashion nowadays. Only the last few years, we've seen Nikon 1, Leica S, Sony E, Canon EF-M, Pentax Q, Fuji X, m4/3, Samsung something and probably some that I can't remember.
The question is if it should be defined as medium format at all. If it becomes reality, the sensor size will most probably be similar to the Leica S, which is much closer to 35mm than traditional MF. It's not a "new market", just a kind of Super 35mm.
I have no idea if this will happen, but I wouldn't be surprised if it did. Already before the D3, it was rumoured that Nikon would bring out a new lens mount, since many doubted that the F-mount would be useable for 35mm sensors due to its size.
And while megapixels may certainly sell, there is more to cameras than marketing. Personally, megapixels are not my primary criteria for any camera. If you think megapixels are important, then you will come to another conclusion. In my experience so far, folks that have viewed 44" wide prints from a 22MP sensor and a 40MP have not remarked on any difference--all they see are really nice images.
Medium-format is defined as larger than 35mm in digital photography. The continued comparison to film formats is pointless. And when you consider that 6x4.5 was considered the "inferior" format in film, we just don't have sensors that are going to be large like a medium-format film cameras. The S is medium-format digital. Some feel it is not much different from 35mm, some do. Back in the silver age of film, some thought 6X4.5 was not much different from 35mm. This seems to lead to the conclusion that everyone has an opinion.
Mounts tend to be related to the camera and format. It would be really pointless to put a F-mount on a Nikon 1. Camera companies have been experimenting with mirroless cameras and naturally that will require new camera. They are not making new mounts as a fashion statement. The mirrorless market is just new. This happened in the beginnings of film when a whole host of formats and cameras were tried.
The F-mount was designed for 35mm film cameras. The discussion that was going on at several camera fora at the time was if the different nature of the digital sensor would require a steeper angle of incident to avoid degraded quality in the corners, which is also one of the reasons why Olympus followed the principle of telecentric lenses and a smaller sensor for 4/3. I believe the problems Leica had with the M8 were related as well. I've also seen claims that this is the reason why Sigma DSLR cameras have a crop sensor in spite of having one of the widest lens mounts around, since the Foveon sensor is inherently handicapped when light hits at an angle, due to the depth of the sensor "bins".
The fact that Nikon managed to solve this doesn't necessarily mean that their options are limitless, and although you and I can live with less than 200MP (all of my cameras except two, the GH2 and the Nokia, are 12MP or less), there are some who can't and lots who think they can't. I print up to 3 meters wide from my 16MP files, but there are others who think they need 20MP for photos that will probably never be seen on a larger device than the mobile phone they were taken with (the new Sony Experia Z1 for example).
The reason why Nikon can make a profit (hopefully they do) on a camera like the D800 isn't because of professional photographers and advanced enthusiasts, but gearheads and well healed amateurs who want the "best" whatever the price is. To a certain extent, that goes for medium format as well. When I look at MF cameras for sale at the auction site, surprisingly many have seen very little use, which I assume is due to the fact that they were owned by people who didn't buy them to use them but to own them. Most of my high-end cameras are bought mint condition, 5-10 years old and 80-90% below sticker price.
Seen from that perspective, a larger sensor Nikon with a new mount would make perfect sense. Leica and Pentax are already active in that category, which I would rather call "High End DSLR" than MF. Since there is no large format digital, how can there be a medium format?
It appears that more megapixels is increasingly becoming even more specialized than in past. A number of business articles have been pointing toward the need for larger sensors with a bit more modest meg count using larger pixels. Perhaps things like MF sized Nikon lens designs, or Canon rumors of MF development, are just hedges against the possibility of such a shift in the photographic market?
Many of us who experienced the "Fat Pixel" MF backs in past can attest to the "magical" IQ ... and while there were some short-comings back then, sensor technology has come a long way since.
Camera sales have been dismal and if that trend continues, something will have to change. Specialized gear alone cannot financially feed the corporate belly of the major players.
It was interesting how Apple positioned the new iPhone 5s camera advancements (and did it aggressively) ... a 15% larger sensor with larger 1.5 micron pixels rather than meg count ... the sample full res images from this smart phone camera on their site rivals demo images from some very expensive "real" cameras ... at least on screen where I'd bet at least 90% of all images shot today are ever shown ... and I'd bet of all images printed, most are 5X7 at best. If the P&S category isn't already dead, this iPhone and those like it, will pull the plug on the life-support.
The trick wil be getting a larger sensor into a smaller body ... A bigger Nikon, Canon or Sony larger than 35mm sensor camera won't cut it IMO. If they bring out a S2 sized camera it'll be to specialized.
BTW, I tend to agree with Jorgen ... old "size" terminology is fast becoming non-discriptive in the digital age. It was necessary as a reference point in past, but with each digital generation of users, the reference points dim because many never even shot with a film camera.
Gone are the days of optimising a Nikon FM to make an FM2 etc.
The quote about film is totally valid - most modern users have no clue about different formats etc.
Interesting - but disconcerting - times for the industry.
I think it could be a very interesting time IF the camera companies have the guts to truly leave the past behind and innovate. However, we may not like it as we grip onto our expensive gear ... LOL!
1 Member(s) liked this post
A provocative proposal Marc, yet I wonder how many users would be willing to think outside the box concerning new gear.
I guess what we need is something like the original HB 500, which was completely revolutionary at the time, or indeed the Leica M.
Both were game changers.
Any ideas of where the future could take us?
Perhaps this is an indication of possible future trends:
Whither Nikon? | byThom | Thom Hogan
At this point I'll be surprised if the D5 in August 2015 has a mirror. I'll take a wild stab at this right now even though we're still two years out: 24mp, mirrorless, augmented PD on sensor, 3m+ dot EVF, 30 fps silent electronic shutter, 12 fps+ mechanical shutter. Anything less than that will seem like a let down.
We "Traditional" photographers don't get it ... the future already happened
History is a great teacher.
There has always been two parallel worlds in photography ... the "real" game changer in photography was the Kodak Bownie invented in 1900 ... fundamentally the historical equivalent of today's cell phone camera.
The Hasselblad 500 and Leica M probably would not have existed without the Brownie, and cameras like it, drawing in enough people to be interested in photography. In essence, the Hasselblad 500 was a high end, high IQ "Brownie" in basic concept. The more revolutionary camera was the Leica because it was so small. Both were based on the use of better optics than any "consumer camera" offered. Leica and its' rival Zeiss, were optics companies, not camera companies ... and basically still are.
So, today's "game changer" is the cell phone, not cameras as we think of them. The difference between the Brownie and Cell Phone camera is that the Cell phone is everywhere, all the time ... because it is a multi-tasking tool.
The Hasselblad 500 (and cameras like it) became the "living dead" well over a decade ago, clearly indicated when wedding and event photographers in-mass switched to 35mm SLRs, then to 35mm DSLRs. The cost of adding a smaller format digital back to these MF 2 1/4 cameras was prohibitive, and remains so to this day. The Leica M survives on because it is a mirror-less rangefinder, and small with great optics ... the very reason it was invented in the first place.
Flash forward to today ... Cameras are now computers. So it stands to reason that computer innovation is the future of photography. Nikon, Canon and Fuji do not make computers. IMO, it is only a matter of time before a combination of computer hardware, firmware and software obliterates cameras as we now know them. Personally, at my age, this doesn't concern me all that much ... maybe the ONLY advantage of advancing age
In the meantime, I predict smaller cameras with big sensors, fatter pixels, and ever better optics (already happening) ... all designed around wireless transfer to web sites and social media. The trick will be to have an obvious and demonstrable visual improvement over the cell phone camera to the "common eye", while offering the same instant gratification, sharing and convenience. To date, the camera companies have not been successful at doing this, and sales of 4/3 cameras have not met expectations. If and when they fix that, I think bigger sensor/fatter pixel/killer optics cameras with some sort of Wi-Fi ability to upload to the web will cannibalize 35mm DSLR sales in mass. I'm already seeing a shift in wedding photography to smaller mirror-less cameras that make great images, and that trend will gain momentum exponentially in the next few years. NO ONE wants to lug around a brick anymore.
The real future of photography as we think of it lies in the eye and brain of those blessed with artistic talent, a well honed eye, and a ferocious creative drive. The innovation of tools will come to mean less and less, and the innovative, insightful image more and more. IMO, there will be a huge amount of casualties in both companies and users as the great divide relentlessly continues ... the homogenized masses all made equal in the democratic world of photography on one side, and the few truly creative visual innovators on the other side ... which when you think about it, isn't anything new ... it is just re-adjusting to the more normal balance that existed before.
One thing is for certain ... the future isn't what it used to be.
2 Member(s) liked this post
I really like this statement:
The real future of photography as we think of it lies in the eye and brain of those blessed with artistic talent, a well honed eye, and a ferocious creative drive.
Now let me grab my Brownie and go and train my creative eye...
Inside source rumors point to a new product planned for next year from Hasselblad. "Something totally new, unlike anything out there now". Perhaps the good belly laugh over the Lunar fiasco, and the impending demise of this great marquis are premature? Could it be that madness was just a stop-gap to milk the Brand for cash while something else was being worked on? Maybe jettisoning many former Hasselblad employees is actually putting into practice what Thom rants about regarding Nikon in your linked article?
Perhaps THIS is the real Sony connection? Sony DOES make computers, is already a leader in mirror-less, and is a sensor maker ... not to mention, has some sort of relationship with Zeiss.
Now wouldn't that be a big fat surprise?
Thanks for drawing my attention to Bert's work - well worthwhile studying.
There is a nice selection and commentary here:
Bert Hardy's photographs - in pictures | Art and design | The Guardian
Interesting to see that he was one the 1st Leica users as a photo journalist - revolutionary at the time. We have a lot to thank Oscar Barnack for.
1 Member(s) liked this post
Thanks for the link! Great photo's!
Just a note of caution - like many of the snapshots of that period - it appears the photo was staged: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Brownie_%28camera%29
Having written an article in the 1940s for amateur photographers suggesting an expensive camera was unnecessary for quality photography, Picture Post photographer Bert Hardy used a Brownie camera to stage a carefully posed snapshot of two young women sitting on railings above a breezy Blackpool promenade.
This was not uncommon - Ruth Orkin's "american girl in Italy" springs to mind: http://www.orkinphoto.com/photographs/american-girl/
BTW - I think we need to move this to the sunset bar... I will start a new topic there:
Last edited by Swissblad; 22nd September 2013 at 06:57.
Here comes a confession, and now I feel like a complete ignorant:
Those 10 photos by Bert Hardy are some of the best, most meaningful I've ever seen, and honestly, I hadn't even heard about him until now. Great inspiration. Next stop: Wikipedia
Next stop Wikipedia ..... rather Amazon - as I try to track down some of his monographs....
Nothing serious, I guess Nikon is just building a digital rangefinder camera with hybrid viewfinder like the fuji X100s, more compact than a Mamiya 7II but with a Sensor size of 55x44cm and 80 Megapixel. A set with the mentioned lens will sell for just below 5000 Euro and is going to be available at the next Photokina.
Never give up hope!!
It suddenly strikes me that, if the mirror goes, and it will sooner or later, keeping the F-mount doesn't make any sense anyway, since new cameras will probably have a much shorter flange to sensor distance. And with a new mount, Nikon is free to choose any sensor size they want, with larger being more likely than smaller. For those who want small, there's already the 1 with a sensor that is large enough for any amateur use.
This could allow Nikon to shed the shackles of retrofucus lenses without abandoning its mission of a backwards-compatible system.
1 Member(s) liked this post
Nikon used to produce LF lenses as well...
DO you remember few years back ( when the 5D mark one came out ) that everybody said the the F mount wasn't large enough for a full frame sensor...
But, i'm pretty shure that the next battle with be around the dynamic range...
my wish for the D810 : one more f stop latitude no more pixels !