DX future

If Nikon replaces its entry level DSLR with a mirrorless version, does anyone know if they would be likely to be any problems with using the same mount? I supposed not, but read recently that they had patented a new 18-55 that was for a future DX mirrorless - why a new lens? are they just optimising for CD-AF or is it that they need a new mount?

if the body of the "new mirrorless: nikon is thinner..something about the flange/distance/throw of the focus point of the lens to the sensor will be "behind" the sensor plane.. so any lens design will be needed..

look at the Pentax K-01, they did not make this mirrorless body.. thinner (like the SOny NEX cams) so with this camera one can use old/mf and AF Pentax lenses..

http://www.dpreview.com/reviews/pentax-k-01

RobCMad said:

If Nikon replaces its entry level DSLR with a mirrorless version, does anyone know if they would be likely to be any problems with using the same mount? I supposed not, but read recently that they had patented a new 18-55 that was for a future DX mirrorless - why a new lens? are they just optimising for CD-AF or is it that they need a new mount?

Click to expand...

--
http://www.johnparas11.zenfolio.com

RobCMad said:

If Nikon replaces its entry level DSLR with a mirrorless version, does anyone know if they would be likely to be any problems with using the same mount? I supposed not, but read recently that they had patented a new 18-55 that was for a future DX mirrorless - why a new lens? are they just optimising for CD-AF or is it that they need a new mount?

Click to expand...

Part of, it not the whole appeal of the mirror-less system is its compact size. I'd expect the new lens to be far smaller than the one designed for the far bulkier dslrs.

--
UK wedding photographer in the Lake District
http://www.johnleech-weddingphotography.co.uk or http://www.jlwp.co.uk

Edit - other posters put it better.

jkjond said:

RobCMad said:

If Nikon replaces its entry level DSLR with a mirrorless version, does anyone know if they would be likely to be any problems with using the same mount? I supposed not, but read recently that they had patented a new 18-55 that was for a future DX mirrorless - why a new lens? are they just optimising for CD-AF or is it that they need a new mount?

Click to expand...

Part of, it not the whole appeal of the mirror-less system is its compact size. I'd expect the new lens to be far smaller than the one designed for the far bulkier dslrs.

Click to expand...

The flange to sensor distance of the Nikon F mount is 46.5 mm. It is a similar distance for most other reflex systems. This kind of distance is needed to provide room for the (literally) flipping mirror.

Mirrorless cameras do not have to provide this kind of room, so they can reduce the flange to sensor distance to a much smaller size. Typically for the current crop of mirrorless sytems this is in the range of about 18 to 20 mm.

The new lenses designed for theses sytems can have a much shorter rear projection distance, which will enable shorter lenses to be produced for the shorter focal lengths.

But this advantage will diminish as the lens focal length increases, and will probably be negeligible by about the focal length of 60 to 70 mm.

From that point on the image circle (i.e.: sensor size) and the focal length will be the determining factors to lens size.

Since most high performance mirrrorless sytems use DX size sensors do not expect any significant reductions to lens diameter of lenses of any focal length or to lens length beyond about 60/70 mm focal length.

Systems using smaller sensors (Nikon 1) can have lenses with smaller diameters, and also, due to the crop factor, physically shorter lenses as the focal lengths required will also be shorter.

I would expect most existing lenses to be useable with the new systems through an adaptor, the thickness of which will be in the rrange of about 20 to 25 mm. The longer the focal length, the less this extra distance will matter.

--
Cheers,

Peter Jonas

RobCMad said:

... but read recently that they had patented a new 18-55 that was for a future DX mirrorless

Click to expand...

Companies frequently patent things "just in case". Patents themselves have become a "weapon" in business. It doesn't mean they're going to make the lens, just that they're exploring the ideas and are keeping their legal options open.

Don't worry. These days they all leak their intentions well ahead of actually building a prototype. You have to learn to ignore these things.

They're not getting rid of DX and certainly not getting rid of the F-mount. That would be commercial suicide ( or close to it ) for Nikon.

--
StephenG

Peter Jonas said:

jkjond said:

RobCMad wrote:

Click to expand...

But this advantage will diminish as the lens focal length increases, and will probably be negeligible by about the focal length of 60 to 70 mm.

Click to expand...

Interesting stuff.

I'd still see compactness as the attraction of the mirrorless camera. So new lenses for up to the 60-70 length providing they can make them small and sexy, then maybe not such new ones beyond there. Its a market there the do-it-all superzoom would have far greater sales potential than a 70-200 f2.8, so I'd expect a lot of head scratching to crack the 18-200/300 kind of lens to get it both light and compact when in rest mode.

I saw the new olly OM in the flesh for the first time this week. Certainly very appealing design and size, along with the fuji x series - a dead giveaway to my attraction to retro and pocketable (assuming large enough pockets in every sense).

Peter Jonas said:

--
Cheers,

Peter Jonas

Click to expand...

--
UK wedding photographer in the Lake District
http://www.johnleech-weddingphotography.co.uk or http://www.jlwp.co.uk

jkjond said:

I'd still see compactness as the attraction of the mirrorless camera.

Click to expand...

Still talking about mirrorless cameras with DX size sensors.

Yes, cameras can and will be more compact (see Sony NEX), and also lenses from wide to about normal focal lenghts, short teles and normal zooms (18-55). Don't expect too much size reduction beyond that.

Member said:

Its a market there the do-it-all superzoom would have far greater sales potential than a 70-200 f2.8, so I'd expect a lot of head scratching to crack the 18-200/300 kind of lens to get it both light and compact when in rest mode.

Click to expand...

Don't hold your breath for any sooperzoom to get too much smaller. The long end will keep them just as big as they are now.

Check out this monster, a Sony 18-200 dedicated E mount lens.

http://www.photozone.de/sony-alpha-aps-c-lens-tests/539-sony18200f3563nex

It is not a little bit smaller than Nikon's 18-200 DX lens. As you can see in that comparision chart the Panasonic 14-140 is a bilt lighter and smaller, but it's because it is built for a smaller sensor (4/3rds)

Member said:

I saw the new olly OM in the flesh for the first time this week. Certainly very appealing design and size, along with the fuji x series - a dead giveaway to my attraction to retro and pocketable (assuming large enough pockets in every sense).

Click to expand...

Yes, cameras will get smaller, especially thinner. Then you stick one of those superzooms on them and they can look downright silly. You will still need a big pocket for a DX set up,

--
Cheers,

Peter Jonas

sjgcit said:

They're not getting rid of DX and certainly not getting rid of the F-mount. That would be commercial suicide ( or close to it ) for Nikon.

Click to expand...

Not getting rid of F-mount for sure.

Getting rid of DX? Well that's a different question.

Lets say in five years Nikon can get the cost of an FX sensor down to the same price as a DX sensor. Lets say Nikon can also make a 24-85 f/3.5-5.6 (based on the new 24-85 f/3.5-4.5) that is more cheaply built than the current one and has an MSRP of about $200.

Put that sensor in a D3200-esque body and put that cheap 24-85 kit lens on it, sell it for $700.

So why do we need DX anymore if all cameras can be full frame, just like they were in the old film days? To put it another way, why do we need an FX-sized mount, with room for an FX-sized mirror and FX-sized lenses, if we're only going to put a DX sensor in there?

This is probably why Nikon hasn't updated any of their "gold ring" DX lenses since 2003. Because when things get cheap enough, they're just going to drop DX entirely.

They're already planning it with the D600 - a full-frame sensor in a D7000-sized body. Sure, it'll be like $2000. But in five years, after everyone has a D600 or D610 or whatever... full frame sensors in everything. No more DX.

Crazy you say? We'll see I guess. Makes me scared to buy more DX lenses... but I still do anyway.

rob-t said:

Lets say in five years Nikon can get the cost of an FX sensor down to the same price as a DX sensor.

Click to expand...

This is a flawed assumption.

No matter what manufacturing processes change it will always be possible to get more DX sensors from a given amount of raw materials than you could FX sensors. That's just common sense.

For this reason alone DX will continue to be the sensor of choice for entry level DSLRs.

rob-t said:

They're already planning it with the D600 - a full-frame sensor in a D7000-sized body. Sure, it'll be like $2000

Click to expand...

They're planning this to produce the equivalent of an entry level pro model to replace the D300. That's a shift in their upper end model structure. They see DX as consumer and FX as professional. Prosumers can choose from either the start of the pro model range or the top of the consumer range.

Note that the D700 is replaced by two models in this structure - the D600 as a lower pro entry point and the D800 as the next model up. Reputedly the D400 is lurking on paper out there, but it's hard to see any place to fit that model, unless it simply replaces the D7000 ).

That's quite different from planning a shift to all FX systems. Removing DX would leave them at a competitive disadvantage compared to rivals ( who will be keeping DX and 4/3 type sensors ) in the all important consumer segment.

The only way they could do that is to switch consumers over to CX format systems, but there's no sign of much investment in building a CX system, so I don't see that happening. On the other hand they've a pretty strong entry level DX lens system.

--
StephenG

Peter Jonas said:

Check out this monster, a Sony 18-200 dedicated E mount lens.

http://www.photozone.de/sony-alpha-aps-c-lens-tests/539-sony18200f3563nex

Click to expand...

Sony kept it sexy when collapsed - but what an ugly brute when extended! I'm amazed they left it looking so unfinished.

Well I can't argue with the laws of physics. Maybe they'll take a new look at mirror lenses... then again! There are only two issues to resolve, if you disregard optical quality, though it looks as though Sony already pushed that down the scale on their superzoom.

Peter Jonas said:

--
Cheers,

Peter Jonas

Click to expand...

--
UK wedding photographer in the Lake District
http://www.johnleech-weddingphotography.co.uk or http://www.jlwp.co.uk