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!

And Nikon launches a Mirrorless....

Lonnie Utah

New member
So this means nikon ends up putting out a nonsensical mirrorless because they can't make their own large chips. Sony knows the future of the camera market is Mirrorless ICL (and cell phone CCD sensor based cameras). They already have early establishment with the NEX line. In short, they learned their lesson with the betamax.

You stated that the Nikkor brand is older than the Nikon brand and they were lens makers first. I predict a return to their glorious past...

Sony can't make lenses, Tamron does make them for Sony.
And that would be Carl Zeiss, thank you.

And with a little digging, it's not hard to discern that you have a direct affiliation with Nikon/Mitsubishi...
 
T

Tanegashima

Guest
So this means nikon ends up putting out a nonsensical mirrorless because they can't make their own large chips. Sony knows the future of the camera market is Mirrorless ICL (and cell phone CCD sensor based cameras). They already have early establishment with the NEX line. In short, they learned their lesson with the betamax.

You stated that the Nikkor brand is older than the Nikon brand and they were lens makers first. I predict a return to their glorious past...



And that would be Carl Zeiss, thank you.

And with a little digging, it's not hard to discern that you have a direct affiliation with Nikon/Mitsubishi...

1. NEX cameras are so ridiculous, they look like a credit card with a lens attached. They aren't as compact as a p&s, neither universal as a bridge, not a good working tool as a DSLR, and not even "cute" as a M43 camera.

2. Carl Zeiss doesn't even make Carl Zeiss photographic lens, do you think they make lens for Sony?

3. So what if I had?
 

Terry

New member
By the way Lonnie,
In my opinion - this post undermines your entire argument as to why they chose a 2.7x crop. If Nikon has the ability to design sensors, and access to a manufacturer with a fab to manufacture their designs, there doesn't seem to be a reason why they would be boxed in to "accepting" a sensor size that is not of their choosing.

The one from nikonRUMORS? Didn't I say designed AND manufactured 100% by Nikon? Well, it's well understood fact that nikon may have "designed" the sensor (many speculate that Nikon simply gave sony the specifications they wanted), but it was manufactured in a Sony production facility. It's a well know fact that Nikon has no silicone wafer production ability of their own (Jorgen's post backs me up on this), so no matter how hard you try, you can't win this argument.

Edit: From that same article...




http://www.chipworks.com/en/technic...echnology-blog/2008/03/dslr-sensor-economics/
 

Lonnie Utah

New member
They don't manufacture the Zeiss branded Sony lenses.
True, but the CZ lenses were originally developed and designed by Zeiss, and Zeiss oversees the production in Japan, and they QA/QC the lenses to make sure they are up to their specs. It's also true that Ziess isn't in competition with Sony making camera bodies either, so you're analogy, while not without truth, is a little skewed. (To me the original issue is having a critical part for your cameras being made by your direct competitor).

To me lenses are a bit different than bodies as there are multiple manufactures that make lenses for every system, so you have multiple options on what you can buy for your own camera. One can put Nikon/Canon/Sony, Sigma, Tamron, tokina, etc etc lenses on a Nikon/Canon/Sony system. The decision point for most consumers when they buy a new camera is what manufacture to go with. Once you are "locked into" a mount system, weather it be Nikon, Canon, Sony, Pentax, etc, you are pretty much forced to use the camera offerings from that manufacture as they are released. (Of course one always has the option to sell your gear and change systems) This isn't true for lenses for the reasons stated above. The subtle point here, is why would folks want to spend more money for an identical sensor in a Nikon vs Sony offering. (The answer there has always been the native lens lineup for the Nikon system, although, I personally believe that's a false argument. However, I can also see why it wins people over).

We've drifted a little far afield here, and my original premise/question still stands. Does Nikon still put a small sensor in this camera if they had the ability to produce an APS-C sized sensor? I think the answer is no, for all the obvious reasons everyone around the internetz has already stated.
 

Lonnie Utah

New member
By the way Lonnie,
In my opinion - this post undermines your entire argument as to why they chose a 2.7x crop. If Nikon has the ability to design sensors, and access to a manufacturer with a fab to manufacture their designs, there doesn't seem to be a reason why they would be boxed in to "accepting" a sensor size that is not of their choosing.
Yes, it does, IF their sensor maker is Sony.

1). Sony already has a strong foothold with the NEX system. The NEX7 is selling like wildfire, and the 5n is doing strong business too. Sony doesn't want to lose this advantage.

2). Nikon sees the success of the NEX system, the so called writing on the wall, and wants to jump into the mirrorless ICL camera game. They go to their old "partner" Sony and ask about using a Sony APS-C sensor in Nikon's new ICL camera.

3) Sony does not want to lose it's already established advantage in the ICL camera market. Sony tells nikon to look elsewhere.

4). Nikon still wants to jump into the ICL camera game. Logically they still want to put the largest sized sensor they can in their ICL camera. But they have no source for an APS-C (or even m4/3) sensor and can't afford to wait until they can make one on their own. They see how large they can scale up the sensors from their coolpix cameras, and this is what we get. A small sensor, 2.7 crop factor, low resolution offering.

This is a camera that is aimed at the intermediate market, but with a price that is too high for that market ($1149 for the V1 and the 2 lens kit, $649 for the J1 and the 10-30mm zoom). Personally, for $150 less, if one wanting to stay "brand loyal", I'll get the coolpic p7100. Sure the sensor is smaller and it's a lower video resolution, but I get real pocketability, much better controls, a standard flash hotshoe, stereo sound (the 1 is mono :huh:) and an articulating screen. Did mention it was $150 less?
 

Lonnie Utah

New member
Nikon is already buying and using the sensor that is in the NEX cameras. So is Pentax.
For their DSLR's, not mirrorless. And it's the sensor that's in the 5n, not the NEX-7.

Sony could simply refuse to sell anymore than what is needed/contracted for the d7K or the K5, forcing Nikon and Pentax to look elsewhere for their mirrorless cameras. Do you really think it's a coincidence that both of these makers, after using Sony sensors in their DSLR's, use their own sensors in mirrorless offerings?
 
T

Tanegashima

Guest
Yes, it does, IF their sensor maker is Sony.

1). Sony already has a strong foothold with the NEX system. The NEX7 is selling like wildfire, and the 5n is doing strong business too. Sony doesn't want to lose this advantage.

2). Nikon sees the success of the NEX system, the so called writing on the wall, and wants to jump into the mirrorless ICL camera game. They go to their old "partner" Sony and ask about using a Sony APS-C sensor in Nikon's new ICL camera.

3) Sony does not want to lose it's already established advantage in the ICL camera market. Sony tells nikon to look elsewhere.

4). Nikon still wants to jump into the ICL camera game. Logically they still want to put the largest sized sensor they can in their ICL camera. But they have no source for an APS-C (or even m4/3) sensor and can't afford to wait until they can make one on their own. They see how large they can scale up the sensors from their coolpix cameras, and this is what we get. A small sensor, 2.7 crop factor, low resolution offering.

This is a camera that is aimed at the intermediate market, but with a price that is too high for that market (http://www.amazon.com/Nikon-10mm-10..._m=ATVPDKIKX0DER&pf_rd_r=114ECP9PFKPRSNS1X581 for the V1 and the 2 lens kit, http://www.amazon.com/Nikon-J1-10-3..._m=ATVPDKIKX0DER&pf_rd_r=11K7MCS7M4C5YF32QCT4 for the J1 and the 10-30mm zoom). Personally, for less, if one wanting to stay "brand loyal", I'll get the coolpic p7100. Sure the sensor is smaller and it's a lower video resolution, but I get real pocketability, much better controls, a standard flash hotshoe, stereo sound (the 1 is mono :huh:) and an articulating screen. Did mention it was less?
It's the SAME sensor.

There isn't yet a camera from Sony with the NEX7/A77 sensor, so what? :loco:

Look, we already know that Sony is taking over the world. You are going to win big. We will all be forced to buy Sony cameras. Our cameras will stop working because Sony makes the sensors for Nikon and puts a little bomb in every one of them.
 
T

Tanegashima

Guest
Cool story bro. CZ doesn't make lenses, so does Sony.

Yes, Sony puts a bomb in every sensor they "sell" to Nikon and Pentax, and when they want, our cameras will explode and break our lenses and will kill us all.

Putting a MF lens in a M43/NEX body is stupid, it's so stupid to use MF this days, even more with and EVF… Is like owning a mercedes-benz body with an steam engine.




And Nikon and Pentax don't need to tag with Sony. Nikon can start 'fab. of sensors anytime they want. And they can tag with Foveon or Fuji for example. Fuji makes already a pretty good APS-C sensor.
 

Terry

New member
The refresh for the Pentax is due out in October it will be interesting to see which sensor they use. I do think that Pentax likes high ISO capability so perhaps they may want the 5n sensor and not the NEX 7 sensor but I have no insight into that.
 

Lonnie Utah

New member
Putting a MF lens in a M43/NEX body is stupid, it's so stupid to use MF this days, even more with and EVF… Is like owning a mercedes-benz body with an steam engine.
Yeah, results and image quality would say otherwise. If you haven't had the opportunity to photograph with a NEX using legacy MF glass, I can tell you it's the perfect blend getting back to the roots of photography and utilizing modern technology. There are so many great legacy lenses out there (like the Leica rangefinder lenses) that have been forgotten simply because of autofocus. Personally, I use my old Olympus OM lenses, and the images are spectacular. It's has been so much fun shooting this way and has re-energized mine, and many others interest in photography. However, shooting this way is virtually impossible with the V1/J1. Even a pretty wide 24mm lens becomes a 65mm on the v1. Sure you can mount F-mount lenses on it, but even the widest offering, the AF-S DX 10-24mm f/3.5-4.5G ED, becomes a 27-65mm on the 1 series. For someone that mainly shoots superwide, 20mm and below, the entire 1 system is useless. Cruise over to the Sony forum here or Flickr and look at all the folks adapting legacy lenses to the NEX system. You'll see the results are fantastic.

http://www.flickr.com/groups/nex-old/pool/

The following is a true story. Once upon a time (1993), a large crippling snow storm hit the Southern United States. Many people were stuck on the roads in their cars. Well, when the storm cleared, an old farmer got out his tractor, the large combine type, and started pulling cars out of the snowbanks. When he reached the woman in the Mercedes and asked her if she needed assistance, she said "I don't want you hooking your tractor up to my $50,000 Mercedes". The old farmer looked at her and said, "It's OK lady, I really didn't want to hook my $250,000 tractor up to your $50,000 Mercedes anyway..."

Moral of the story, when you have folks Steve Huff putting the $10,000 Leica Noctilux 50mm f/0.95 on a NEX-5 and comparing it favorably to the Leica M9, it speaks pretty highly for the system. This is something that the 1 series will never be able to do, simply because of the crop factor and reduced DOF of the small sensor.

Good luck with this offering Nikon. :thumbup:
 
T

Tanegashima

Guest
Yeah, results and image quality would say otherwise. If you haven't had the opportunity to photograph with a NEX using legacy MF glass, I can tell you it's the perfect blend getting back to the roots of photography and utilizing modern technology.
No, it is not.

It may be OK for you, but for me is nonesense!

I don't care how much pretty the good results are, if the photo is just uninteresting.

I want good IQ, yes, but I also want usability, I want a good method of getting AE and a good AF!

It's more important for me a good picture of a good moment than 1000 of excelent pictures of a uninteresting subject... just because the lens is cool.

There are so many great legacy lenses out there (like the Leica rangefinder lenses) that have been forgotten simply because of autofocus. Personally, I use my old Olympus OM lenses, and the images are spectacular. It's has been so much fun shooting this way and has re-energized mine, and many others interest in photography. However, shooting this way is virtually impossible with the V1/J1. Even a pretty wide 24mm lens becomes a 65mm on the v1. Sure you can mount F-mount lenses on it, but even the widest offering, the AF-S DX 10-24mm f/3.5-4.5G ED, becomes a 27-65mm on the 1 series. For someone that mainly shoots superwide, 20mm and below, the entire 1 system is useless. Cruise over to the Sony forum here or Flickr and look at all the folks adapting legacy lenses to the NEX system. You'll see the results are fantastic.
Yeah... Leica lenses forgoten... really... :ROTFL:

If you really want to shoot with MF rangefinder lenses, you get a M9.

If you really want to shoot with MF reflex lesnes, you get a 5D Mark II or a D700 and a split prism or microcolar focusing screen and shoot.

Not a compromise like a NEX5.


Moral of the story, when you have folks Steve Huff putting the $10,000 Leica Noctilux 50mm f/0.95 on a NEX-5 and comparing it favorably to the Leica M9, it speaks pretty highly for the system. This is something that the 1 series will never be able to do, simply because of the crop factor and reduced DOF of the small sensor.
Yes, but a Noct-Nikor hooked to a D700 will be ages better than a Noctilux with a NEX5 or even a M9.

Or a Canon 50mm 1.2L hooked to a 5D Mark II, with AF.
 

Lonnie Utah

New member
Tanegashima,

I'm not going to disagree with you, because I want your company to continue this line of thinking...



...and get left (farther) behind.


Bottom line: The NEX7 dominates the 1 series. No comparison.
 

Terry

New member
Tanegashima,

I'm not going to disagree with you, because I want your company to continue this line of thinking...



...and get left (farther) behind.


Bottom line: The NEX7 dominates the 1 series. No comparison.
They are targeted at completely different users.
 

raist3d

Well-known member
Almost anyone who complains about shallow DOF that has a Pen or Panasonic micro four thirds needs a good look at the mirror and realize they are making a bit of a double standard argument. The very same thing could have been said (and has been said) about micro four thirds *even* vs APS-C. It's all where you draw that line according to needs.

You can still do a portrait shot with shallow DOF on a Nikon 1 and more so as more lenses come down the line.

I really think Nikon has a hit with the consumer market. The thing that seems to be missing is the price.

- Raist
 

Lonnie Utah

New member
They are targeted at completely different users.
I agree, but if you look at the price points, they aren't THAT much different (a few hundred dollars)...

The NEX-n5 with the kit lens is $200 less expensive than the V1 with the kit lens and beats the v1 in almost every specification. Smaller, lighter, better sensor, higher iso, faster lenses, and better video capability. And this doesn't even get at the ability to put other lenses on the system. Now tell me again why anyone would want the V1?
 

Terry

New member
I agree, but if you look at the price points, they aren't THAT much different (a few hundred dollars)...
Well, what has been universally said is that the Nikon is over priced. But that "few hundred" is really 33% more for the Sony.

I'm not defending Nikon in any way. I have the NEX5 and have the NEX7 on order
 
T

Tanegashima

Guest
Almost anyone who complains about shallow DOF that has a Pen or Panasonic micro four thirds needs a good look at the mirror and realize they are making a bit of a double standard argument. The very same thing could have been said (and has been said) about micro four thirds *even* vs APS-C. It's all where you draw that line according to needs.

You can still do a portrait shot with shallow DOF on a Nikon 1 and more so as more lenses come down the line.

I really think Nikon has a hit with the consumer market. The thing that seems to be missing is the price.

- Raist
That's it!

I Completely agree!



For most people, a portrait is turning on the camera on the widest setting and stretch the arm while doing a stupid face... :D

So a camera like this even will be an overkill...
 
Top