Will Nikon mirrorless take better advantage of DX size?

Started 2 months ago | Discussions thread
PTMcH Regular Member • Posts: 208
Re: Will Nikon mirrorless take better advantage of DX size?

Nikita66 wrote:

Razor512 wrote:

While a smaller mirrorless camera with a short flange distance can lead to an overall smaller size, but the size differences are often small enough that it does not change the travel arrangements of the gear. for example, if you move from a D7200, to n A6400, you would likely still use your same camera bag.

Possibly, but the box for the a6400+kit lens is about a 2/3 the size of the D7200+kit lens box. That's a lot, and I do plan to downsize my gear bag (I travel a lot). (Granted, the Sony lacks the Nikon's bulky wall charger.)

And weight: a6400 is about a third lighter.

Suppose Nikon did a crop sensor mirrorless ILC that kept the size of the D7200, but gave you the same sensor as the A6400, but thanks to a larger body, you get a full body width heatsink for the sensor and SOC, and thus if recording externally, there is no record limit due to thermals.

The a6400 has no video recording time limit. The overheating issues of previous a6xxx cameras seem to have been mitigated.

Now suppose they also allowed for a larger battery, (e.g., a 10.8V 2500mAh). since fewer internal components are needed since you do not need to worry about the large mirror system.

But the EVF consumes more power. I admit a battery charge in the Sony is pathetically short lived.

Imagine if the area that would normally house the phase detect module and various motors and gears, to instead house a daughter board containing an NVMe m.2 slot where if a user does something like install a Samsung 970 pro into their camera, they could have endless burst shooting without worrying about the buffer, and possibly record 14 bit raw video since you would have storage that can do 2.64GB/s writes (it could be like a boost mode for Nikon cameras) m.2 SSDs are also significantly cheaper with better performance across the board compared to XQD and current planned CF Express cards.

Couldn't quite finish that paragraph, but, are SSDs what buyers want?

Overall, instead of just making things smaller just to be smaller, why not use that space for something else that will improve performance and functionality?

Your premise basically ignores the history of electronics; all electronic devices and components have always gotten smaller in development's inevitable march forward.

If they go with a DX mirrorles, they will likely still keep the same z mount and may just make lenses where the mount and barrel size are the same width, but with smaller lens elements inside.

This would be illogical. If you don't mind the bulk and weight, then you should go FF. Why take the sensor size hit? DX should be about small and light.

Light weight does not always equal to less fatigue.  I can take my D5200 with Tamron 16-300 (total wt. 1.1 kg) on a 4~5 hours photo hike and feel easy & comfortable holding the camera the whole time.  Meanwhile, when I take my A6300 with 18-200 (930 g), usually about couple hours into the hike, my hand starts to cramp from holding the camera.   A6300 takes more effort to hold it because its size and weight balance.

 PTMcH's gear list:PTMcH's gear list
Nikon D5200 Nikon D7100 Nikon 1 J5 Nikon AF Nikkor 50mm f/1.8D Sigma 17-50mm F2.8 EX DC OS HSM +9 more
Post (hide subjects) Posted by
Keyboard shortcuts:
FForum PPrevious NNext WNext unread UUpvote SSubscribe RReply QQuote BBookmark MMy threads
Color scheme? Blue / Yellow