Take your photography to the next level and beyond...

  • NEWS

Why not join for free today?

Join for Free

Your total photography experience starts here

Exclusive 25% off Affinity Photo: Professional photo editing with no subscription!

Rumors: Nikon system versus Micro Four Thirds

mattw 14 5.2k 10 United Kingdom
27 Sep 2011 5:00PM

Quote:A1? Do you mean J1, V1?

Ah yes, the V1 - did a lot of damage in WW2.

If these new CSC aren't aimed at people like 'us' then at just short of a 1000, I'd love to know who they were aimed at.

How much? You have to be pretty desperate to have a small Nikon to spend that much money. You can get a lot of DSLR for less.

Quote:I'm waiting for the 2 series which will have a flashing multi-colour beacon on top, a small loudspeaker shouting 'look at me! look at me! and an optional pop-up revolving sporran for when I'm on holiday in Scotland.

That'll be the V2 then...

Join ePHOTOzine for free and remove these adverts.

keith selmes 14 7.4k 1 United Kingdom
27 Sep 2011 5:26PM

Quote:If Canon want to maintain or increase their market share they will have to produce a mirrorless design PDQ!
Depends if Nikon have correctly assessed this market sector. Also bearing in mind Canon and Nikon are not directly comparable companies, consumer cameras being part of their product range, and the rest of their business being somewhat different.

(I would include "pro" DSLR in "consumer cameras")
StrayCat 14 19.1k 3 Canada
27 Sep 2011 5:46PM
I hope Canon get the R&D right, and come up with something that makes use of their 60 present EF/EF-S lens lineup instead of going to a whole new format like M4/3, or Nikon. Nikon just seem to have done a half-a**ed effort in that direction.
Overread 9 4.1k 19 England
27 Sep 2011 5:55PM
Stray - but if the main intent of the mirrorless hybrid is to reduce the overall bulk and size of the interchangeable lens camera it defeats itself if the main lenses used are the same, big, DSLR ones. I'm not against using the same mount type (not at all) but the setup should allow for a separate range of smaller lenses to be used; otherwise if I'm using the same big lenses from my DSLR on my little mini-camera not only have I not really saved on bulk of the setup that much, but the smaller camera size means that holding it will be all the more tricky with a big lens on the front.
StrayCat 14 19.1k 3 Canada
27 Sep 2011 5:58PM
I might be on my own in my wants for a camera system; it seems to me that the direction the manufacturers are taking is to cram as much nonsensical little features into their new cameras, that they're getting rediculously tedious to navigate. I'd like to have a camera that takes high quality images, and video if you like, but leave the special effects to the post processing. The menus are getting so cluttered that it's frustrating to use the new cameras. I'd like to see them concentrate on IQ, and a straightforward, streamlined user interface, and forget at least half the marketing clutter that doesn't get used.
strawman 14 22.1k 16 United Kingdom
27 Sep 2011 5:59PM

Quote:I hope Canon get the R&D right, and come up with something that makes use of their 60 present EF/EF-S lens lineup instead of going to a whole new format like M4/3, or Nikon. Nikon just seem to have done a half-a**ed effort in that direction.
The problem is, if they do not do something new then the body size etc will always be wrong. For example the lens mount to sensor distance is a given on the EF and EF-S lenses so that limits how small you can make it.

I can see them making mirror less EVF type entry cameras, and they can use EF-s lenses. But they are just new entry level SLR type cameras.

To compete with m4/3 I think they need to at least have a small range of lenses in a mount with an EF adapter. So the standard wide to mid zoom, a mid to telephoto lens and a mega zoom (18-55, 55-200, and 18-200 in EF-S equivalence), plus a nice prime or two.

It could be in Canon towers that they think they can compete with the S and G series for those who want a compact camera and their SLR series, perhaps some without mirrors and EVFs. Perhaps to them they view those products service the needs of a m4/3 equivalent. After all if an entry SLR is low enough cost and small enough do you need more???

Just questions I do not know the answer.
StrayCat 14 19.1k 3 Canada
27 Sep 2011 6:05PM
Overread, I take your point, and it's a good one, at least make a system that can still use lenses that are in existence now. I realise that 4/3 lenses are usable on the m4/3 system with an adapter, but you don't get a fully functional lens in every case, and the top of line lenses aren't any smaller than aps C in my opinion.
Overread 9 4.1k 19 England
27 Sep 2011 6:14PM
Stray I can certainly sympathise with the menu and effects problems, it always confuses me even on bridge cameras whenever I find myself using one on the odd occasion. I think the thing is that that mirrorless are sitting between bridge and DSLR so I think that the manufacturers and marketing aren't quite sure as yet which market will pick them up the most (I'm sure they have theories and concepts but till its out for a good few years with real world data they won't know).

So I could easily see that a few years down the line, some manufacturers will have focused them on the bridge shooters moving up (ie more auto/fancy features for the less demanding user) whilst others will have them focused on the DSLR user after a smaller camera (maybe just as many effects, but a more DSLR streamlined menu operation).

The best, of course, would be a divergence of the brands so that there were "pro" and "amateur" type mirrorless cameras to cater to both markets.

Sign In

You must be a member to leave a comment.

ePHOTOzine, the web's friendliest photography community.

Join For Free

Upload photos, chat with photographers, win prizes and much more.