E-mount for Nikon MILC, good idea or not?

Started Sep 23, 2017 | Polls thread
cosmicnode Veteran Member • Posts: 3,182
Re: Pretty sure this is the last thing you should expect

bobn2 wrote:

cosmicnode wrote:

bobn2 wrote:

cosmicnode wrote:

bobn2 wrote:

aut0maticdan wrote:

No doubt. It have the batis 25 and loxia 35. I think they are pretty ideal lenses for a small compact MILC. I would hope a Nikon mount gets similar treatment.

nikon would do well making a similar flange distance with wider mount. It would overcome some shortcomings of emount.

Yes, I'm not arguing against a new Nikon mount (that after all is Nikon's decision to make) nor that if they develop one, making its throat larger would not be be a good idea. I'm simply saying that a lot of what has been put about concerning the e-mount is based on incorrect optics.

As for the decision itself, it has merits and demerits, and actually depends on what Nikon does. The e-mount gives them a quick in to an existing infrastructure and allows Nikon lenses to compete in what is a decent market, while bringing about lens competition for Nikon products earlier than would otherwise happen.

A new mount keeps the early market to themselves. Even with a new mount, there are consequences of different choices. If they choose a longer register, they pretty much rule out adapters from other formats. I can see them going with a 34.85mm register and a 49mm throat, simply because of the historical association with the Nikon S rangefinder (though I'd expect it would be a modern bayonet).

It's difficult for Nikon to find a register that would allow lenses from other manufacturers to fit via an adaptor, if they wanted to. The rear of a Sony lens is 12mm off the sensor and similar for Fuji a new mount that allowed a slim adapter would probably have the sensor protruding from the body to allow for that. Only Nikons biggest competitor Canon would benifit from a adaptor if Nikon used a 18mm registration, although if Sony supported the A mount it would also be able to fit.

The register is the distance from the focal plane to the mount flange. The back focus, which is the distance between the last element and the focal plane is different and varies from lens to lens.

I am not talking of the back focus but the physical dimension between the metal of the lens mount to the sensor, 18mm minus the material which actually makes up the material of the bayonette approximately 6mm, thus the rear of the lens barrel is 12mm away from the sensor.

OK, yes, that's somewhat inevitable, but there's no reason it couldn't go smaller than 12mm, especially, if as you suggest, the bayonet mount had a throat large enough for the sensor to protrude into it (the register would be negative) such a system could be very flexible indeed, because it would allow all sorts of things other than normal lenses to be mounted, including a wide range of adapters.

12mm is plenty for electronics and motors, those things can be tiny (and don't have to be contained within the cylinder of the adapter). The patent would be similar to the Minolta A to E mount adapters that Sony makes. Sure, it would stop them doing that, but that's not a brilliant idea anyway. I would guess Nikon's more likely to have on-sensor PDAF.

But its not 12mm there are two thicknesses of mounts to remove from this distance probably 2-3mm front and rear, this leaves very little for anything but a slim curcuit board and electronics, certainly not enough for a aperture operating lever even if the motor was outside the adaptor

You're overestimating both the thickness of the mounts required - 2mm is an over estimate. Also, typically in adapters such as this, the circuitry isn't sandwiched between the mounts, it's in a pod underneath or arranged around the periphery. Even were it all built as a sandwich and 2mm was accurate, 12-4mm = 8m, which isn't a 'slim' circuit board, it's a fat one, and even has room for motors of the right form factor.

I have a FT1 at hand from the face of the front mount to the rear of the contact pads and aperture lever is 9mm so it's possible to get a slim mount as you propose with the motor outside of the adaptor. I think it would need a larger bulge outside the adaptor for the motor though.

-- hide signature --

"I say we take off and nuke the entire site from orbit, it's the only way to be sure."

 cosmicnode's gear list:cosmicnode's gear list
Nikon D300 Nikon 1 V1 Nikon D800 Nikon D500 Nikon AF-S DX Nikkor 35mm F1.8G +14 more
Post (hide subjects) Posted by
Keyboard shortcuts:
FForum PPrevious NNext WNext unread UUpvote SSubscribe RReply QQuote BBookmark MMy threads
Color scheme? Blue / Yellow