Jogger: Can they change the law of physics can make a 1/3.2 sensor capture as much light as an FF? If not, gtfo.
Maybe not FF. But an array of small sensors can approximate a large one.
sportyaccordy: I keep saying it... but CaNikon should just have made native mount mirrorless cameras. That would give them a reason to make a fuller range of DX lenses too.
The cameras would not be as big as DSLRs. A NEX camera with an adapter for example is still plenty smaller than a DSLR of the same mount. I'm unaware of any limitations that would prevent these lenses from working with on sensor AF as well. Hell, Canon already has OSPDAF on some of its EOS bodies and that works fine.
I keep saying it... but CaNikon should just have made native mount mirrorless cameras. That would give them a reason to make a fuller range of DX lenses too.
falconeyes: ok, this is interesting, #rear-lens-modules/smartphone jumping from 1 to 2.
The real party will start as soon as we see 3x3 lens arrays or 9 cameras. As this will be the barrier where the smartphone crop factor disadvantage (from the thin housings) will be egalized and even big cameras will be challenged to provide a reason to exist.
What is your beef with big cameras?
A 9 sensor array still won't - give you a choice of lenses- have the ergonomics of a dedicated camera- have an OVF- come anywhere close to full frame coverage
I think these are good developments but let's not get ahead of ourselves. Stand alone cameras will always exist in some form. However, 9 1/2.3" sensors do add up to 1 MFT sensor. So the lower end could be threatened.
Impressive stuff, but I am holding out for phones with a sensor array. They're coming soon and will really move cameraphones forward without the hassles or cost of 1 big sensor
KL Matt: Razor-sharp wide open. Wow.
Literally off the charts.
Rocker44: Sharpest wide-angle lens under a grand?Good for the landscapers with the smaller A7/r body.
A little too tele for landscape work. But I am sure Sony has a real deal wide angle coming
naththo: You need to watch out for vignetting at lower f stops like around F1.8 or F2 or F2.8 or so. That is very good lens I must say, very high level of sharpness but distortion is fairly significant that may be common through Sony lens even incorporated with Zeiss glass. I found that Sigma lens has a lot less distortion when combined with Nex 7 to compare to Sony fixed focal lens. Sony need to improve in manufacture over lens to have less distortion and vignetting that would be nice if they do so.
Most lenses of this type, regardless of quality, have heavy vignetting wide open.
Holy crap. That's pretty cool. Not quite enough to pull me away from NEX but definitely noteworthy. Wonder how this compares to the Sigma 18-35 1.8 and what the max aperture vs FL curve is like.
I'm really shocked. Hopefully a Df-10 is coming with everything fixed. This would have been much better with a cheaper FX sensor and a split focus prism, along with better sorted controls and a smaller body. It's amazing that this has no film but is so much bigger than the F3 it's supposed to emulate. Oh well.
sportyaccordy: This should have been an F-mount mirrorless camera. W/video, the D610 sensor and a price tag of ~$1500 it would have made a lot more sense. It should have blended the old with the new like Fujifilm and Olympus' cameras.
No mirror = one less thing to break, less weight, more design freedom. Nikon could keep the F-mount, but design new mirrorless F-mount lenses that fill up that space with optical elements, making the lens "smaller" without sacrificing much optically. They could make a smaller sensor and use that space for an optimized focal reducer. There are a lot of good smart things that could be done with that space. That extra flange depth is hardly "bulky". I'd gladly deal with that bulk and still be able to use Nikon's huge lens library on a smaller, lighter, simpler body.
This should have been an F-mount mirrorless camera. W/video, the D610 sensor and a price tag of ~$1500 it would have made a lot more sense. It should have blended the old with the new like Fujifilm and Olympus' cameras.
Adrian Tung: I've seen this camera up close, it is really big and bulky for an MILC-Android hybrid.
My personal opinion, not that anyone cares, would be:1) should have been in NX300 form factor with optional EVF attachment2) should have provided dual memory card slots -- one for Android usage (apps, music, documents, etc) and one for frequent removal and swapping (i.e. captured RAW photos)3) offer cellular communication (GSM, etc)*
* more of a curio than a serious suggestion... but it would be neat to be the first, no?
I agree 100%. Only thing that would further sweeten the pot would be a "cap lens" to enable carrying it in my pocket. My NEX C3 fits in my pocked without a lens easily.
This could almost work. I think for this application I would rather have a fixed focal length collapsable lens though. Make portability and IQ the primary objectives.
You know, on the outset these sound like great lenses, and I'm sure they are. But I think I will pass. The 16 2.0 for example sounds FAST. But on APS-C it's equivalent to 24 3.2 35mm. Meanwhile, I can get a Lens Turbo and an old 24 2.8, which would translate to a 16 1.8, for less money. A lowly 50 1.8 becomes a 33 1.2. Etc. etc. Plus I would be getting 2 lenses in 1 with each lens. Not saying these lenses are worthless or that the speed booster combos would be a match in IQ, but for me right now, ehhh. I mean a 24 2.0 an 50 1.4-1.8 would cover the span of a standard zoom with max apertures reaching 1.0 depending on the combo. Plus it's all MF anyway.
Fransv: Why are phones such a succes? Right, because user interface is appealing. Why not make WiFi or bluetooth transfer easier to social media. Room enough in SLR-bodies I would think.
Unless the DSLRs are given full connectivity, it doesn't matter. Most folks aren't connecting to WiFi everywhere they go and a Bluetooth connection will always be a clunky pain. They just need to put better cameras in phones.
Peter Kwok: Will DSLRs be killed by mirrorless, or BOTH of them will be killed by smartphones?
Current DSLRs are better than mirrorless in two areas, phase detect AF & real time optical VF. With better electronics & software, mirrorless will catch up on both areas in less than 5 years.
Consumers always favor convenience over picture quality. The current boom of DSLR is not normal. Back in the film day, consumers bought a lot more Kodak Instamatic cameras than SLRs. The SLRs had a short boom in the late 70's starting with the Canon AE-1. When 35mm P&S offered AF, consumers went back to the smaller P&S. Meanwhile, Polaroids sold well because it was fun passing photos around with friends.Smartphone are today's Polaroids, except their photos are a lot better. They are killing off cameras, starting from the small P&S. The big full frame cameras (DSLR or mirrorless) will survive. However, without the profits from consumer DSLRs, the development of lens & bodies will be reduced.
OSPDAF removes that advantage. A mirrorless EF or F mount APS-C camera will put the nail in the mirror.
marike6: Just got back from B&H in NYC, where everybody was walking around with their cameras. The overwhelming majority of people, lots and lots of people, were carrying FF and APS-C DSLRs, quite a few with high grade pro zooms.
Lots of armchair predictions about the direction the camera market is taking. But if DSLRs are dying, the huge number of people I saw walking around one of the world's largest camera shops apparently didn't get the memo.
Oh marike marike marike. If these folks have cameras already, who is going to buy them in the future?
Phones are successful because people HAVE to replace them often, and they can do a hundred different things. If Nikon wants to stay alive, it needs to make smartphones.