Reading mode: Light Dark

Why even consider buying a new Nikon Mirrorless?

Go to last post
I doubt it, I just purchased the D850, which I enjoy and is extremely flexible, I have a full set of Nikon full frame lenses.

I am not a fan of adaptors, one more interface between lens and camera. I will wait and see, if Nikon pulls a real engineering rabbit out of the hat, I could be very interested, but the flexibility of the D850 is a very high bar
 
If you no longer need the DSLR and lenses we just sold you = too bad.
 
MShot said:
If you no longer need the DSLR and lenses we just sold you = too bad.
Click to expand...
Done right, the old lenses would work on the new camera.

This worked for Sony. It appears to be working for Hasselblad.

Jim
 
If they receive something nice, market it badly, and then it goes into firesale mode like the Coolpix A, it might be a good way for some enthusiast to scoop up a new body for cheap.
 
[Nikon does not have long experience with the technology.]

Does the 1 Series not count?
 
But saying they have NO experience with mirrorless cameras is incorrect, is it not?
 
johnchap2 said:
Rumor seems to be that when Nikon moves to mirrorless bodies current lenses would not be compatible, although maybe? there might be some kind of converter so these lenses could be used. The question, which I have not seen addressed, is why anyone would buy a Nikon mirrorless if their current lenses were not compatible and a converter to facilitate migration were not available. There are excellent manufacturers (Sony for example) that have been producing mirrorless systems for years and have probably gotten most of the bugs and idiosyncracies out, while Nikon does not have long experience with the technology.
Click to expand...
Basically for the same reasons Nikon users have ditched Nikon to move to Sony.. I know that wasn’t what you were looking for, but a great number have moved. I tried it and fortunately didn’t sell any of my Nikon gear and didn’t think Mirrorless was all that.
 
johnchap2 said:
Rumor seems to be that when Nikon moves to mirrorless bodies current lenses would not be compatible, although maybe? there might be some kind of converter so these lenses could be used. The question, which I have not seen addressed, is why anyone would buy a Nikon mirrorless if their current lenses were not compatible and a converter to facilitate migration were not available.
Click to expand...
Canon abandoned the FD mount, in about 1987. The EF mount replaced it. Canon did make an adapter, which was a mild-magnification tele-coverter, and which only worked with a few of the high-end telephoto lenses. It seems Canon made the right move, at the time.

Personally, I have no present interest in a Nikon mirror-deprived camera system, or a new mount. I hope Nikon remains in the pro SLR market, with F-mount lenses. The new Nikkor 80-400mm lens indicates that Nikon will do so. If adding a new Z-mount system helps Nikon survive, as a company, well, that is a good thing.

--
I wore a police badge and pistol, and made evidentiary images at night, incorporating elements of portrait, macro, still life, landscape, architecture, and PJ. (Retirement is in-process.) I enjoy using both Canons and Nikons.
 
Last edited:
With great regret, I have just sold my immaculate FM3a. I loved its size, build quality, weight and simplicity of operation. In short, it is a great and practical photographic tool. I also possess a DF which is large, heavy and not as simple to operate. If Nikon could produce a digital FX FM3a I would jump on it, regardless of lens mount. Potentially that's what Nikon may be pondering, sans mirror. My arsenal also includes the Fuji Pro 1 which is very good but still not up to FM3a standards in terms of weight with only fair auto focus. So I would welcome such a camera from Nikon, made in Japan, and that I can carry anywhere to shoot anything.
 
Last edited:
tissunique said:
With great regret, I have just sold my immaculate FM3a. I loved its size, build quality, weight and simplicity of operation. In short, it is a great and practical photographic tool. I also possess a DF which is large, heavy and not as simple to operate. If Nikon could produce a digital FX FM3a I would jump on it, regardless of lens mount. Potentially that's what Nikon may be pondering, sans mirror. My arsenal also includes the Fuji Pro 1 which is very good but still not up to FM3a standards in terms of weight with only fair auto focus. So I would welcome such a camera from Nikon, made in Japan, and that I can carry anywhere to shoot anything.
Click to expand...
Well - of course Nikon can.

Okay, they might not be able to put in a sensor and the electronic to run the sensor - which is thicker and heavier than a piece of film - without making it a bit bulkier and heavier.

And they might not be able to build in the electronic to do the image processing and the very extended AF- and Metering processings, without making the camera a little bulkier and heavier.

Maybe it would be necessary for Nikon too, to increase the size and weight a little to give you a back lcd and the electronic to control this -

but otherwise, of course Nikon can.
 
  1. They want a MILC camera
  2. They already own lots of Nikon F mount lenses
This thread is populated with people who failed to answer your question.

Rather than tell you why someone might want a Nikon MILC camera, they are instead telling you why they personally prefer DSLRs. They are telling you how much they dislike EVFs, or some other aspect of the mirrorless design, but not telling you why "someone else might want a Nikon MILC camera."

Obviously, if someone really dislikes MILC cameras they will not buy one from Nikon or from anyone else. We already know that lots of Nikon users bought Nikon 1 cameras. And many also purchased adapters so they could use their existing Nikon lenses with it, and still get AF ability.

Doesn't it make sense that some Nikon users, (specifically, those who WANT a MILC camera), would leap on a Nikon MILC system that is BETTER than the Nikon 1 was?

If you doubt this, then think about all of the Sony and Olympus DSLR users who bought into Sony and Olympus MILC cameras because they could use their existing DSLR lenses with adapters and still get full automation. The only difference for Nikon is their potential market of "users with DSLR lenses" is much larger. So they could potentially sell more of their own MILC cameras to them. And it sure beats losing those customers to a competitor.

It just makes too much business sense for Nikon to neglect these users, and continue to let them migrate to Sony E, Sony FE, Fuji X, or M4/3. The handwriting is on the wall. The mirrorless market share is slowly growing and the DSLR market share is slowly shrinking. In terms of BOTH market share and revenue.

Since CIPA started keeping separate MILC statistics, the MILC market share has doubled from 18% of the ILC market to 38%. And MILC revenue share has grown even more. This market cannot be ignored. And full frame MILC has the most profit potential.
Since CIPA started keeping separate MILC statistics, the MILC market share has doubled from 18% of the ILC market to 38%. And MILC revenue share has grown even more. This market cannot be ignored. And full frame MILC has the most profit potential.

Nikon will introduce Nikon Z for all the same reasons they introduced Nikon 1. Except this time, they will have a better product with much broader appeal.

Obviously, DSLRs still outsell MILC cameras by almost 2 to 1. But it isn't 4 to 1 any more, and it would be foolish for any major manufacturer to not be in BOTH markets.

The folks at Nikon are pretty smart people. They see how much success Canon has had with their EOS M system, and they are kicking themselves for not being in that market. It is hard to deny that this makes sense for Nikon, and will be a good thing for Nikon users who want to move to, or add a MILC system. A no brainer.

It may not be the right product for all the DSLR lovers who have filled this thread up, but it will be an important option for many others. And it sure beats having them migrate to competitors.

One final point.... around a year ago I posted a poll on the M4/3 forum asking "If you migrated to M4/3 from a DSLR, which brand did you migrate from?" Over 200 Dpreview members replied, which is a fairly large response for these polls.

Almost 30% of the M4/3 users who previously used DSLRs came from Nikon F mount. I bet Nikon was aware of this too.

43a7ee82674c450eb3fc59457e62709d.jpg



--
Marty
http://www.fluidr.com/photos/marty4650/sets/72157606210120132
http://www.flickr.com/photos/marty4650/sets/72157606210120132/show/
my blog: http://marty4650.blogspot.com/
 
Last edited:
sandy b said:
Well, more people buy Nikon cameras than any other manufacturer but Canon, So I would like to think they are doing a few things right. They make profits every year, which cannot be said for other companies. And they are making more money than last year. And they make the best DSLR lineup in the business. IMO.
Click to expand...
IMO Nikon is in a slow, but steady, decline. Unlike Canon, they a minuscule non-photography business cash flow to support their DSLR business.

IMIO Nikon's trajectory is a tragedy. Nikon has excellent engineering and manufacturing resources. These valuable assets seem wasted by a marketing philosophy that is decades behind their competitors'.
sandy b said:
Lets see what the camera looks like before we decide it sucks.
Click to expand...
I never said the Z would be a bad camera. I said I was skeptical about the Z based on Nikon's marketing strategies to date. I also said I would be pleased if my skepticism was wrong.
 
Geomaticsman said:
MrHollywood said:
But there's one powerful word that is meaningful to me for mirrorless and that's TRAVEL.
Click to expand...
In terms of slightly smaller overall size perhaps, but there doesn't seem to be much of a savings in weight from what I can see.

--
Gary with some Nikon stuff
Click to expand...
If you compare with Sony Alpha 7 you can save both weight and size with wide and normal lens but hardly with tele and zoom. A larger battery is however a must!

If you use old F-mount lenses with adapter you don't save anything but money:-)
 
Last edited:
The Ghost of Caravaggio said:
IMIO Nikon's trajectory is a tragedy. Nikon has excellent engineering and manufacturing resources. These valuable assets seem wasted by a marketing philosophy that is decades behind their competitors'.
Click to expand...
Please. This is a Nikon forum, so whilst you're entitled to your views, don't be surprised by a robust reply.

Nikon makes the best still FX cameras period - the D5 and D850, and makes the best action-orientated stills DX camera, the D500. The D7500's performance and IQ at its price point is also pretty compelling. At the lower end, nothing beats the IQ per $ of the D3xxx and D5xxx. If your hobby is video, or looking through an EVF, or taking pictures from strange angles with a tilty touch-screen liveview whatnot, then fair enough, there are better gadgets. But if your interest is looking through a viewfinder and capturing still images, I don't think anyone in history has made a better all-round camera than the top Nikon bodies available now.

Nikon lenses have a lot of competition, and I don't think one can argue there is a "best at everything" lens brand. But for me, Nikon has the best range of choices. Some excellent 1.4 primes and 2.8 zooms (admittedly in a range from "the best" (70-200, 105) to "still pretty good". But also some fast, good quality, relatively compact 1.8 primes and f4/variable zooms, and the older AFDs which are unbeaten for speed-size-value. Maybe Canon is as good or better, I don't know, but I don't really ever see a Canon lens (certainly not a Sony) which makes me wish I could have one. Of course at this point anyone can interject their favourite non-Nikon lens; but I am not going to be defensive about my pro-Nikon views in a Nikon forum.

So let's get to marketing. Certainly I think Canon and Sony are probably a bit better than Nikon. Canon's market share with (being blunt) what seems to me a generally "no better, often inferior" range of bodies suggests their brand, channel management and marketing are stronger. Sony, as a consumer electronics giant, do a lot of marketing. But, being honest, I don't often see much camera marketing anywhere. Who reads print magazines any more? Nikon certainly seems to have a prominent web presence. I don't see a lot of marketing from Fuji, Olympus or Panasonic.

But, more to the point, who on here cares? Who is going to admit that they did or did not buy a camera because one brand used some celebrity to do some cheesy ads and another brand didn't? And for the mass market, there are still only 2 brands anyone knows - Canon and Nikon.
 
Last edited:
Hi.

To answer your hadline - what would I consider to be important if buying a new Nikon Mirrorless.

It's actually two questions - buying Nikon mirrorless or even just buying mirrorless.

Nikon?

I'm used to Nikon - I have invested some money (not a fortune) in cameras and accessories for Nikon - but hey, they can still be used - my stuff is not getting broken or less usable, just because Nikon might change the entire system. To me, that would no be a catastrophe - but it might be a reason for not even considering mirrorless.

Nikon making a system, were the gear I have, can be used - well, then ahead to the next question - would I consider mirrorless at all?

As by now - no way - and that's because of the EVF, which my eyes do not like and trust. Until they are able to make an EVF that is as pleasant for my eyes as the OVF - and not confusing, what I am seeing with the one eye trough the viewfinder and the other direct at the scene - no mirrorless considerations for me.

Can Nikon do that - maybe - who knows. Sony has not been able to.

So the answer - I'm not.
 
Rexgig0 said:
johnchap2 said:
Rumor seems to be that when Nikon moves to mirrorless bodies current lenses would not be compatible, although maybe? there might be some kind of converter so these lenses could be used. The question, which I have not seen addressed, is why anyone would buy a Nikon mirrorless if their current lenses were not compatible and a converter to facilitate migration were not available.
Click to expand...
Canon abandoned the FD mount, in about 1987. The EF mount replaced it. Canon did make an adapter, which was a mild-magnification tele-coverter, and which only worked with a few of the high-end telephoto lenses. It seems Canon made the right move, at the time.

Personally, I have no present interest in a Nikon mirror-deprived camera system, or a new mount. I hope Nikon remains in the pro SLR market, with F-mount lenses. The new Nikkor 80-400mm lens indicates that Nikon will do so. If adding a new Z-mount system helps Nikon survive, as a company, well, that is a good thing.
Click to expand...
You mean 180-400? The f/4 one that was just announced?

Loading…

www.nikonusa.com

Or the 80-400 Mk II that's currently shipping?

Jim
 
May Nikon really should have bought out Samsung's mirrorless lock stock and barrel a couple years ago. Then they could've done some minor tinkering, rebadged it with the trust old Nikon brand, and perhaps turned around their whole business. But alas, right now they are slowly bleeding away from attitrition. Tragedy. I like Nikon stuff too.
 
Tog-meister said:
May Nikon really should have bought out Samsung's mirrorless lock stock and barrel a couple years ago. Then they could've done some minor tinkering, rebadged it with the trust old Nikon brand,
Click to expand...
That sure worked for Hasselblad, didn't it? :-)
Tog-meister said:
and perhaps turned around their whole business. But alas, right now they are slowly bleeding away from attitrition. Tragedy. I like Nikon stuff too.
Click to expand...
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

AWG_Pics
Why I will not move to mirrorless
6 7 8
Replies
149
Views
9K
AWG_Pics
AWG_Pics
N
Nikon DSLR and Mirrorless System
Replies
14
Views
2K
nikpharm
N
A
  • Question Question
Opinions on D700 vs D810?
4 5 6
Replies
106
Views
31K
Alte
A
G
When and why do you buy a "new" camera?
2 3
Replies
55
Views
5K
Ryan Schwartz
Ryan Schwartz
B
Nikon D7500 or Zfc or Z50II
Replies
17
Views
2K
Bohemian_storyteller
B

Keyboard shortcuts

f
Forum
m
My threads
Mobile site
About
Editorial content
Cameras & Lenses
Community
All content, design, and layout are Copyright © 1998–2025 Digital Photography Review All Rights Reserved.
Reproduction in whole or part in any form or medium without specific written permission is prohibited.
When you use DPReview links to buy products, the site may earn a commission.
©GPS Media - Guides, Products, Services.
Back
Top