The GetDPI Photography Forum
Great to see you here. Join our insightful photographic forum today and start tapping into a huge wealth of photographic knowledge. Completing our simple registration process will allow you to gain access to exclusive content, add your own topics and posts, share your work and connect with other members through your own private inbox! And don’t forget to say hi!
Anyone changing system to the new Nikon mirrorless?
- Thread starter biglouis
- Start date
V
Vivek
Guest
I am tired. I think I am stuck with my simplest of the cameras, a monochrome converted Sony RX1, for a while.
I am still trying to figure out if I can shoe horn a swivel LCD mechanism from the G1 to the RX1(m) to make it more versatile...
I am still trying to figure out if I can shoe horn a swivel LCD mechanism from the G1 to the RX1(m) to make it more versatile...
V
Vivek
Guest
That said, if I win a lottery, I will go all in with Leica. 
biglouis
Well-known member
In my case if the numbers came up I'd go all in with a CFV-50 and 503CW and lenses.That said, if I win a lottery, I will go all in with Leica.
Each to his own camera porn addiction
LouisB
iiiNelson
Well-known member
Mid probably invest into a camera company simply as a larger stake shareholder if I won the lottery... and if we taking “Halo cameras” then maybe I’d add a Phase One or wait it out to see if they come with a Mirrorless solution... or just get a Fuji GFX 100 since it’s almost “perfect” (in theory) when they’re released.In my case if the numbers came up I'd go all in with a CFV-50 and 503CW and lenses.
Each to his own camera porn addiction
LouisB
V
Vivek
Guest
In my case if the numbers came up I'd go all in with a CFV-50 and 503CW and lenses.
Each to his own camera porn addiction
LouisB
biglouis
Well-known member
Now, maybe I should eat my words but this is the first thing I've seen which might (possibly) make a mirrorless Nikon a bit more attractive. Sure, it would have to be adapted but this is a bit more like it:
https://www.dpreview.com/articles/3889977670/shooting-with-nikon-s-new-500mm-f5p6-pf-in-kamchatka
https://www.dpreview.com/articles/3889977670/shooting-with-nikon-s-new-500mm-f5p6-pf-in-kamchatka
ptomsu
Workshop Member
This new PF lens makes Nikon even more interesting - at least for me. And it seems to combine pretty nicely with a Z camera, even with adapter.
Godfrey
Well-known member
Of course it's highly opinionated. Why not?
But I disagree with your two reasons to "go mirrorless". For me, "mirrorless" ... or rather, EVF based cameras ... solve some of the fundamental deficiencies of SLRs with respect to presenting a clear, bright view in poor light with which one can focus properly, allow visualization of DoF clearly, and offer a bunch of other advantages towards doing photography that no reflex or optical tunnel viewfinder can offer. Size and weight are not the massive advantage; versatility and adapatability are. And, of course, EVF cameras offer disadvantages that other camera types didn't have as well ... It's all a matter of which compromise works best for me or you.
Of course, I love the fact that the different formats (mFT, APS-C, FF, larger..) all offer advantages and disadvantages quite similar to what different formats offered with film cameras. And I'll pick exactly which EVF camera suits me best based on these advantages, my lens choices, etc.
Nikon is offering a camera to compete at the level of their semi-pro and pro DSLR range, not a compact. That's all. I don't need that sort of camera anymore, and am more taken with smaller bodies to use with my existing lens kit, and prefer the APS-C format Leica CL since it is so compatible with my Leica M and R lenses. I complement the CL with the Leica M-D, and that's really all I need having sold my Leica SL because it was more than I needed and too expensive a kit to be a shelf queen most of the time. The CL and my lens kit also obviates my need for the Olympus E-M1 and E-PL7 finally, so that equipment will now be sold.
But I don't consider that Nikon has lost the plot or missed the point at all. I just don't need anything of their current line of EVF cameras.
G
k-hawinkler
Well-known member
I prefer image B from the link. Quote:
A is the Nikon 500mm F5.6E PF and B is the Nikon 500m F4E.
iiiNelson
Well-known member
Me too but I believe the point was for a person to decide if the extra stop, weight, and $7-8k was worth the difference. For me it probably wouldn’t make the difference initially but then I bet the PF performs best somewhere between f/9-f/11.I prefer image B from the link. Quote:
A is the Nikon 500mm F5.6E PF and B is the Nikon 500m F4E.
k-hawinkler
Well-known member
Thanks Tre. Understood.
If one has to shoot between f/9-f/11 anyway to get a convincing IQ, I believe my A9, FE 100-400, and 1.4x TC could match or exceed the result of the 500mm F5.6E PF.
I would also hope that an A9, FE 400/2.8, and 1.4x TC similarly could match the excellent result of the Nikon 500m F4E. :thumbs:
Jorgen Udvang
Subscriber Member
I agree, and I'll most likely stay with m4/3 and Pansonic for now. The economic consequences of changing system will in no way be compensated by enough increase in quality for what I do, and I'm very happy with the small size of my current system. I suspect that some other people will change though, so it might be time to be on the lookout for some bargains on used m4/3 lensesOf course it's highly opinionated. Why not?
But I disagree with your two reasons to "go mirrorless". For me, "mirrorless" ... or rather, EVF based cameras ... solve some of the fundamental deficiencies of SLRs with respect to presenting a clear, bright view in poor light with which one can focus properly, allow visualization of DoF clearly, and offer a bunch of other advantages towards doing photography that no reflex or optical tunnel viewfinder can offer. Size and weight are not the massive advantage; versatility and adapatability are. And, of course, EVF cameras offer disadvantages that other camera types didn't have as well ... It's all a matter of which compromise works best for me or you.
Of course, I love the fact that the different formats (mFT, APS-C, FF, larger..) all offer advantages and disadvantages quite similar to what different formats offered with film cameras. And I'll pick exactly which EVF camera suits me best based on these advantages, my lens choices, etc.
Nikon is offering a camera to compete at the level of their semi-pro and pro DSLR range, not a compact. That's all. I don't need that sort of camera anymore, and am more taken with smaller bodies to use with my existing lens kit, and prefer the APS-C format Leica CL since it is so compatible with my Leica M and R lenses. I complement the CL with the Leica M-D, and that's really all I need having sold my Leica SL because it was more than I needed and too expensive a kit to be a shelf queen most of the time. The CL and my lens kit also obviates my need for the Olympus E-M1 and E-PL7 finally, so that equipment will now be sold.
But I don't consider that Nikon has lost the plot or missed the point at all. I just don't need anything of their current line of EVF cameras.
G
biglouis
Well-known member
My experience with BIF on the Panasonic is that f5.6 is about the end of the range in order to keep the iso low enough to avoid noise - which we all know is the achilles heal of m43rds.I prefer image B from the link. Quote:
A is the Nikon 500mm F5.6E PF and B is the Nikon 500m F4E.
I've never considered a full frame because of the size of a 500-600mm lens but given that the weight of the new 500 PF is only 200g heavier than my 200/2.8 that is a bit of a game game changer. And also the fact that the Nikon will probably yield decent image quality at iso3200 where my G9 really craps out at about iso2000.
Not that I am about to change systems but I am not afraid of admiting to a hasty conclusion in my first post.
LouisB
Elderly
Well-known member
/\ This. And I'm looking forward to PF lenses for micro 4/3rds to take it back to why I bought into the system (with a GH1) in the first place ………….. SIZE, or should I say lack of it.
iiiNelson
Well-known member
The rendering is a bit sterile IMO but I always felt the Nikon 200-500/5.6 is a great safari/wildlife zoom assuming your camera is great at high ISO and you want to go FF (or APS-C). It’s a little large (especially compared to Micro 4/3) but the focal range is about “perfect” for most wildlife to stay out of danger and not be viewed as “an imminent threat” from most animals... though truthfully most “prey” animals tend to be a little skittish when they detect any sound, smell, movement, or instinctual feelings of “bad juju.”
I’ve been looking at getting a long telephoto zoom or prime as of late because I do want to start photographing more of North America’s wildlife. A lot of the interest was spurned specifically because there’s many conservation efforts of animals like the Elk and Black Bears returning to the Eastern United States in hintable populations that were overhunted/killed to extinction in parts of the country 50-150+ yeas ago due to Western expansion and colonial wars with native Americans. My preference is leaning to the Sony G Master since it’s my primary digital system (and I love the extra resolution for cropping when wanted) but I’ve been considering the Micro 4/3 options as well since I still have my G1.
Elderly
Well-known member
Who needs a long lens? ;-). This was at 22mm on my old 14-150mm on a EM5.I felt a little like the prey, as there was NO glass between me and that lion!
