Canikon another dinosaur?

Started Jun 3, 2013 | Discussions thread
ed2002
Regular MemberPosts: 254
Like?
Re: Canikon another dinosaur?
In reply to PerL, Jun 4, 2013

PerL wrote:

One has to make distinction between size and technology.

What m43 and other mirrorless brings to the table is small size - a very needed and welcome trend shift. But the technology behind it - smaller sensor, EVF and CDAF - is for many a downside - not an advantage.

If Canon/Nikon adapts to the demand to smaller size by making an effort to really shrink the DSLRs to the size of the compact SLRs of the 70s and 80s, they have a good answer. I got a feeling that Pentax will be the first to step into this segment with their first FF camera. This is an opportunity reminding of the Olympus OM-1 introduction.

As for m43 to completly replace Nikon and Canon in 7-10 years: You wont see the exotic super lenses that would be needed in the professional arena. Producing super teles for a non existing market is a risky business - ask Olympus how many of the 300 2.8 lenses they sold for 4/3. It takes even Canon and Nikon years to complete their line ups - and they have a market. Look at the time it took for Canon to counter the 200-400 f4 lens from Nikon, and look at the price for the lens.

novaoz wrote:

Interesting article on MFT and why it will outlast Canon & Nikon, some of his argument is sound

http://chasinglightphotography.com/blog/

-- hide signature --

Peter from Norfolk Is.

Existing super telephoto lenses seem like a big compromise.  It may be that in the future we have these lenses and bodies built as one.  I think the canon 200-400 is a great example

http://www.dpreview.com/news/2013/05/14/canon-announces-ef-200-400mm-f4l-is-usm-1-4x-extender-telezoom-with-built-in-switchable-teleconverte

Its probably a great lens with 200mm f4 - 560mm f5.6.  Its also fairly expensive, expensive enough that you could build it with a camera body and appropriate sensor for about the same.  Its huge compared to the panasonic 100-300, its heavy and unwieldy.  Let's say you included A mirror and sensor to optimize a lens.  Say the body is mainly like the D7100 but with a 1.7 crop lens (or whatever is optimal).  Make it a 120-350 F4, and make the autofocus work best for f4.  Allow the view finder to do live view and optical.  There you have it a better beast.  Building the body onto the lens should cost at most $1K more, but optimizing it for that smaller sensor will save more than that cost.  It will be lighter and you can sell to both nikon and canon pros, and the crazy birders.  Good hybrid liveview focusing should allow for digital zoom.  Building it as one piece should help with the weather sealing, and you don't need a tripod mount for the camera, only the lens.  Body can be designed for that huge thing.

I'd like the cheaper, smaller version  A 1" sensor (2.7 crop) with a f 4-5.6 50-250mm (135-675) for about $1500 with good mirror pdaf and hybrid live view autofocus.  Nikon is very close to being able to produce such a beast.  It would have to combine elements of the 5200, 55-200mm lens, and the nikon 1 autofocus and sonly rx100 sensor.

Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
Post (hide subjects)Posted by
YepNew
(unknown member)
(unknown member)
GeesNew
Keyboard shortcuts:
FForum PPrevious NNext WNext unread UUpvote SSubscribe RReply QQuote BBookmark post MMy threads
Color scheme? Blue / Yellow