Nikon announcenment

[sniper5]

it is rather marketing than a announcemnet:

Loading…

www.dpreview.com

But better than nothing like in the past...

I really hope for a revival of the Nikon 1 system. A V4 with

- senser equal or better than J5 at an aggressive price (around 500-600 USD)

- Enable all focus points for the Nikon lens adapter for DX/FX lenses

- Big good buffer, fast writing speed to card, same fps, fast AF in low light and for AF tracking for sports.

At the same time some more FFL with F1.2/F1.4 with a extreme high IQ at reasonable prices to get fast market share.

If all this would be done, it would be a homerun for Nikon longterm. Make money by selling tons of that stuff. That is better than high margin and no market share for that lens mount.

 

[Wu Jiaqiu]

my guess is a bigger sensor system with a premium price to match

 

[sniper5]

my guess is a bigger sensor system with a premium price to match

This would then only be a "me too" product. No USP. Sooner or later everything will be mirrorless. For every sensor size. So this is nothing special.

With the Nikon 1 system at the right price and with the right sensor quality and lenses, Nikon could really shine.

 

[Wu Jiaqiu]

my guess is a bigger sensor system with a premium price to match

This would then only be a "me too" product. No USP. Sooner or later everything will be mirrorless. For every sensor size. So this is nothing special.

With the Nikon 1 system at the right price and with the right sensor quality and lenses, Nikon could really shine.

but it's a new mirrorless system they are developing, i don't think the Nikon 1 will be going forward. i wonder if they will go with something to challenge Dslr's or something completely different

 

[Fredrik Glckner]

my guess is a bigger sensor system with a premium price to match

I agree.

Nikon's biggest strength right now is their lineup of quality Fullframe lenses. The new system has to either capitalize on:

* This legacy lens lineup

* Nikon's brand name

Going for only item 2 would be very risky. So I'm guessing the system needs to be able to use the legacy lens lineup. And that means at least APS-C size sensor, probably Fullframe.

With Nikon 1 they tried to capitalize only on Nikon's brand name, albeit with an FT-1 adapter for some value from legacy lenses. And they went for the volume market mostly.

The volume market has pretty much disappeared, and where you find the big margins per unit now is Fullframe.

Nikon 1 user

nikon1user.blogspot.com

 

[VadymA]

Nikon's biggest strength right now is their lineup of quality Fullframe lenses. The new system has to either capitalize on:

* This legacy lens lineup

* Nikon's brand name

Going for only item 2 would be very risky. So I'm guessing the system needs to be able to use the legacy lens lineup. And that means at least APS-C size sensor, probably Fullframe.

With Nikon 1 they tried to capitalize only on Nikon's brand name, albeit with an FT-1 adapter for some value from legacy lenses. And they went for the volume market mostly.

The volume market has pretty much disappeared, and where you find the big margins per unit now is Fullframe.

But with FF or APS-C mirrorless as the only MILC option, wouldn't it be just a matter of time until people start complaining again about the size and weight of such system including lenses and start running to other brands? Those new lenses are not getting any smaller, every new release is bigger and more expensive than its predecessor. Sticking with the old glass is not necessarily a good business strategy either. So I don't really see how a much larger system, such as APSC or FF MILC, would present any real competition to N1. If we talk about size and weigh advantage, the N1 is the only real deal, and will be no matter what other MILC systems they come up with. MILC is a replacement to a DSLR, not to another MILC that is considerably smaller and less expensive. Imagine how much a 200-800 lens would cost for a FF MILC and how big would it be? Even m43 lenses are considerably more expensive that N1 in most cases. So I truly believe that N1 would fit perfectly as a viable addition, not a duplication, in any future Nikon MILC eco-system. And it is a much better option than a fixed lens compact either. From this, I think abandoning N1 would be a big strategic mistake for Nikon. N1 should be a viewed as a piece that completes the entire "MILC tool set", in size and price, not the one that replaces any of the larger components. Without N1, Nikon customers like me, who need compactness and quality, will have no choice but to look elsewhere. Is this really what they want? I guess we will find out soon.

 

[norman shearer]

my guess is a bigger sensor system with a premium price to match

This would then only be a "me too" product. No USP. Sooner or later everything will be mirrorless. For every sensor size. So this is nothing special.

With the Nikon 1 system at the right price and with the right sensor quality and lenses, Nikon could really shine.

Got to agree here. The N1 does have a USP. Even just the J5 sensor in a V4 body would lift sales. That sensor gets into m43 territory with even less bulk/weight. Some more faster lenses are also needed to keep that ISO low. Maybe offering more primes like the 18.5mm - which has a very good price/performance ratio.

Getting the price right is critical though..

 

[justmeMN]

The volume market has pretty much disappeared, and where you find the big margins per unit now is Fullframe.

APS-C is the sensor size with the huge volume. In addition, it gives a camera company the flexibility of making low-end, medium priced, and high-end models. With FF, you are stuck in a high-end-only niche. Big margins don't mean much, if you have tiny volume.

 

[Fredrik Glckner]

But with FF or APS-C mirrorless as the only MILC option, wouldn't it be just a matter of time until people start complaining again about the size and weight of such system including lenses and start running to other brands?

Are people complaining about size?

I think a lot of existing Nikon users are happy with the size of DSLR cameras and lenses.

So I don't really see how a much larger system, such as APSC or FF MILC, would present any real competition to N1.

I don't think Nikon 1 is on the competitive map anymore. The system is pretty much discontinued.

Most users are more inclined to get a compact camera with an 1 inch sensor than a Nikon 1 system today.

Imagine how much a 200-800 lens would cost for a FF MILC and how big would it be?

Most people don't use such an extreme tele lens. It is a niche product.

And it is a much better option than a fixed lens compact either.

Why? The fixed lens compacts are better in terms of features, with much brighter zooms in a more compact package.

Without N1, Nikon customers like me, who need compactness and quality, will have no choice but to look elsewhere.

Well, the Lumix GM1 is still around the same size as the smallest Nikon 1 camera, and it has a bigger sensor. You could get the Lumix G 12-32mm and Lumix G 20mm lenses, and you have a very, very compact package with good quality.

 

[Paul Pasco]

Pretty much agree with all you said. I think m4/3 hits the sweet spot for sensor/lens size with potential for small bodies. Many don't realize that if you make those fast zooms for the N1 that people clamor for, they will still be quite large which is why the DLs would have been so nice. I fell into the N1 system by fate (gift), liked it, so I built on it. I have a FX and DX bodies and lenses if needed but I don't use them much anymore, too big and heavy

 

[Wu Jiaqiu]

Pretty much agree with all you said. I think m4/3 hits the sweet spot for sensor/lens size with potential for small bodies. Many don't realize that if you make those fast zooms for the N1 that people clamor for, they will still be quite large which is why the DLs would have been so nice. I fell into the N1 system by fate (gift), liked it, so I built on it. I have a FX and DX bodies and lenses if needed but I don't use them much anymore, too big and heavy

 

[Paul Pasco]

Pretty much agree with all you said. I think m4/3 hits the sweet spot for sensor/lens size with potential for small bodies. Many don't realize that if you make those fast zooms for the N1 that people clamor for, they will still be quite large which is why the DLs would have been so nice. I fell into the N1 system by fate (gift), liked it, so I built on it. I have a FX and DX bodies and lenses if needed but I don't use them much anymore, too big and heavy

 

[Wu Jiaqiu]

Pretty much agree with all you said. I think m4/3 hits the sweet spot for sensor/lens size with potential for small bodies. Many don't realize that if you make those fast zooms for the N1 that people clamor for, they will still be quite large which is why the DLs would have been so nice. I fell into the N1 system by fate (gift), liked it, so I built on it. I have a FX and DX bodies and lenses if needed but I don't use them much anymore, too big and heavy

 

[nigelht]

Pretty much agree with all you said. I think m4/3 hits the sweet spot for sensor/lens size with potential for small bodies. Many don't realize that if you make those fast zooms for the N1 that people clamor for, they will still be quite large which is why the DLs would have been so nice.

The fast zooms still have the 2.7 crop factor. Which is still 0.7 more than m43. Thats more than the difference between FX and DX.

I don't see any significant advantage of m43 over APS-C. 2.0 crop vs 1.5 is meh.

J5 pixel density is 17.91 MP/cm² (2.36 µm).

OM-D EM-M1 Mk 2 pixel density is 9.06 MP/cm² (3.32 µm).

OM-D EM-M10 Mk 2 pixel density is 7.15 MP/cm² (3.74 µm).

D5600 pixel density is 6.62 MP/cm² (3.89 µm).

I'd rather just get a 24MP APS-C and crop to m43.

FX + CX makes more sense as a 2 camera combo than any other.

 

[Vera Cognome]

If all this would be done, it would be a homerun for Nikon longterm. Make money by selling tons of that stuff. That is better than high margin and no market share for that lens mount.

Ah yes. The "self stuff at a loss but make it up on volume" approach. It's sort of like saying a $50,000 Ferrari California would sell well.

At face value, the announcement is a major paradigm shift for Nikon. Instead of worrying about cannibalization, they are saying "we should compete in the mid-range and high-end DSLR." That implies one model in the 70D/D7500 price range. The also need a "fun" entry level model.

With the 1" sensor Nikon took on the "bigger is better" bias among US men and got smoked. Since the best predictor of Nikon products remains what Canon already has, I'm guessing Nikon will cough up a imitation M-series DX hairball rather than trying to rev up M43 with 1-series autofocus technology. The only way the 1-series survives is an epic case of groupthink.

 

[Parry Johnson]

I think Nikon will release two models - one DX and soon after an FX model. There are very few mechanical parts in the N1 bodies, so design is something they can carry forward to other models a la J1/V1.

Whichever one they introduce, it will likely have full compatibility with AFS lenses but not linkages such as older AF or AI mounts. That will keep new lens sakes coming, which is where Nikon really makes its money, not body sakes. Existing Nikon owners will be happy (except N1, of course).

I don't think CX mount will survive. Perhaps the technology came too soon, as there's still too much noise/ too little dynamic range in a tiny sensor. However, one way to look at it is that medium format and large format film eventually have way too 35mm, even though technical overall quality was reduced. Sometimes SMALL can do more. Thus, DX is the current best - case scenario.

 

[Richard Murdey]

my guess is a bigger sensor system with a premium price to match

This would then only be a "me too" product. No USP. Sooner or later everything will be mirrorless. For every sensor size. So this is nothing special.

By that logic every new dSLR Nikon releases is a "me too" product and nothing special. My D750 says otherwise.

Thomas Stirr made an interesting comment recently. He said (paraphrasing) that "he didn't even think of Nikon 1 as a mirrorless camera" . I know what he means, and I agree. The system is better defined by characteristics other than the absence of a mirror.

There need be nothing "me too" about a new Nikon mirrorless camera, whatever the sensor size. It might be very much like what is already available, true, but it might be significantly better. And all that has nothing to do with sensor size and everything to do about "nikon-ness".

 

[Luis Augusto]

I think Nikon will release two models - one DX and soon after an FX model. There are very few mechanical parts in the N1 bodies, so design is something they can carry forward to other models a la J1/V1.

Whichever one they introduce, it will likely have full compatibility with AFS lenses but not linkages such as older AF or AI mounts. That will keep new lens sakes coming, which is where Nikon really makes its money, not body sakes. Existing Nikon owners will be happy (except N1, of course).

I don't think CX mount will survive. Perhaps the technology came too soon, as there's still too much noise/ too little dynamic range in a tiny sensor. However, one way to look at it is that medium format and large format film eventually have way too 35mm, even though technical overall quality was reduced. Sometimes SMALL can do more. Thus, DX is the current best - case scenario.

I seriously hope it doesn't. I just bought a used J3 and fell in love with it. I already bought a 30-110, ordered a 18.5 and I'm considering a 32. I'd gladly trade about 3 stops of ISO performance (relative to an APS-C sensor) in exchange for a lighter compact system, if Nikon makes a couple of faster lenses (something like the 18-50mm f/1.8-2.8 from one of the cancelled cameras) and makes a compact camera with an integrated EVF (like the RX100), I think 95% of the time it wouldn't matter that the sensor is smaller.

 

[edform]

I don't think CX mount will survive.

Sadly I think you're right.

Perhaps the technology came too soon, as there's still too much noise/ too little dynamic range in a tiny sensor.

Rubbish Parry! Look at this...

Loading…

www.imaging-resource.com

Download the file and blow it up to 100%, then examine it in detail. It is simply stunning. Look at the reflected images in the girl's eyes. You can see the buildings of the courtyard in which she's standing and, in particular, a white painted iron circular staircase. The camera is a Sony DSC-RX10, the original model. Neither noise, nor dynamic range was a problem for this image. True, the performance as light level drops falls short of that provided by bigger sensors, but your dismissal of the technology just doesn't stand up to the facts. The Nikon 1 J5 has the same performance as the RX10 - it probably has the same sensor, so a new generation V model could be a complete stunner.

However, one way to look at it is that medium format and large format film eventually have way too 35mm, even though technical overall quality was reduced. Sometimes SMALL can do more. Thus, DX is the current best - case scenario.

I won't put my hand in my pocket - won't even dream off doing so, but I'd rush to join the line for a new N1 V-model and I'd probably be trampled to death in the rush.

 

[Crashton]

I won't put my hand in my pocket - won't even dream off doing so, but I'd rush to join the line for a new N1 V-model and I'd probably be trampled to death in the rush.

--
Ed Form

I'd be in line with you to buy new N1 V-model with viewfinder. Hey Nikon are you listening?