# Nikon go Mirrorless, pt 2 (Thom Hogan)



## Solarflare (Jan 5, 2017)

Nikon's Mirrorless Options | Sans Mirror | Thom Hogan



> Given that Nikon attacked GoPro in the action camera market and also tried to attack the high-end compact market with DLs before they tripped over their own toes, it's only a matter of time before Nikon opens up a new defense in the mirrorless realm. The simple matter of truth is this: Nikon is a camera company (over 60% of their revenues and even more of their profits). Not competing in the healthiest of the camera markets is suicide.


 Actually both GoPro derivates as well as DL havent been much of a success for Nikon.

And "healthiest" camera market in this case just means: a market thats about stable, or not shrinking as fast as others.





> 3. *Deprove the course*. Build a DX entry mirrorless system, ala what Canon has done with EOS M. This is trickier than it at first looks, as Canon themselves discovered through their experimentation.


  Canon EOS M sucks big time and isnt much of a commercial success either. And I dont see much of "experimentation" going on there. The native lens lineup for EOS M is barely functional at all. Was released with a normal zoom and a prime, took them ages to get a telephoto zoom, took them ages after to get a wide zoom, took them ages to get a macro. Now they have TWO superzooms, a ton of other zooms, and only two prime lenses, one of which is a very odd very short macro. ALL these lenses are rather dark and all zooms are plasticky. This is really not a great system. The only really good lens is the adapter to use Canon EF lenses.





> This course has two sub-routes to it: (a) use the existing DX mount; or (b) create a new mount (and offer a DX/FX adapter).


 Complete nobrainer, use a new mount and adapter.





> As I've noted before, you could build lenses in the future that use Nikon's existing mount but which use the empty space vacated by the mirror to keep their size down (that works fine for DX, not so much for FX).


 You could but you obviously really shouldnt, because that would look stupid/ugly, would make for stupid ergonomics, and would needlessly waste space. Just make a damn adapter.





> 4. *Choose Sony's course*. Build a new FX mirrorless system. Based upon my email and surveys, a lot of you reading this think that's the correct route. I don't. First, there's the signal it sends ("DSLR is dead"). That's a hugely dangerous signal for Nikon to ever consider sending, as DSLRs represent such a huge percentage of their sales and profits (at one time, over half). The only way this works is if the mirrorless cameras are better than the DSLRs (and clearly better than Sony's mirrorless entries), and a full set of lenses is available. Yeah, you just realized why it won't happen.


  Quite frankly I fail to see whats wrong with offering a mirrorless and a SLR option. Just make two great product lines and then let the people buy what they prefer to have. If Nikon finally drops the stupid Nikon 1 line, they should have enough development resources for that.

SLRs and mirrorless both have their respective advantages.

And I think many people would be happy to get ANY full frame mirrorless thats not superexpensive with an inferior sensor from Leica or these rather questionably built Sony FE cameras. Because one of the treats of such a camera is that you can adapt anything to them. Thus yes one could start off with a nice trinity of prime lenses (lets say 20/2.8, 35/2, 105/2.8 macro IS) and a Nikon F to Nikon XYZ adapter.





> 5. *Find a new course*. This is Nikon's 100th anniversary and Nikon started as a different kind of camera maker. So why not start again? In particular I'm thinking of a Nikon S inspired system that uses an optical rangefinder and shoots for staying small and classic.


 I'm confused as to why this is much different to point 4. Optical viewfinders are also in the Fuji X-Pro line, theres nothing original about them. Pure optical viewfinders should be left to Leica due to their limitations (need to be calibrated, only really works with primes in the range of about 28-75mm, maybe a bit more if the optics can be switched, either way also doesnt work with close focus/macro).


----------



## robbins.photo (Jan 5, 2017)

My advice to Nikon would be simple.  When Nikon decides it's time to come out with a full blown mirrorless option and really market it, have them present the camera and the adapter needed to adapt all existing F mount lenses as a package.

Take a look at Sony - yes, you can get an adapter for them - quite a few.  But some will AF, some wont, most reports say that even the really good adapters are iffy, etc... And the really good adapters are in the $400 and up range.  

Biggest hangup in mirrorless sales is the availability of lenses.  Yes, I would like to get a mirrorless at some point.  And yes, I realize that mounting a tiny camera on a large lens makes it s little unwieldy - but still I don't want to dump a ton of money in a system where I can't use lenses I already own and have to buy "equivalents" in another mount automatically.  I'd rather have that choice of when I buy those lenses that are actually made specifically for the camera.

So if I were Nikon, I'd get a few lenses in the lineup first, and package an adapter that allows full function of current F mount lenses with the camera body.  

But then again, I'm no Thom Hogan...


----------



## pixmedic (Jan 5, 2017)

you can sum up pretty much _*every*_ Thom Hogan article thusly....

"I know Nikon has been around for 100 years, and they haven't taken me seriously yet....but THIS TIME if Nikon doesn't implement my ideas they will definitely  be going out of business soon...I know ive been saying that for decades, but this time its for real!"


----------



## astroNikon (Jan 5, 2017)

I thought Sony was buying Leica ?

... maybe we'll see Hasselblads on DJI drones soon ...

and Nikon will still be in business ...


----------



## pixmedic (Jan 5, 2017)

I actually have more respect for Ken Rockwell as a photographic information source than Thom. 
every article he writes is crapping on Nikon while simultaneously trying out Nikons newest body and lens.


----------



## Destin (Jan 5, 2017)

pixmedic said:


> I actually have more respect for Ken Rockwell as a photographic information source than Thom.
> every article he writes is crapping on Nikon while simultaneously trying out Nikons newest body and lens.



And that says a LOT. Just ask Ken Rockwell, and the Nikon D7200 is THE BEST DAMN CAMERA that nikon has ever produced. And it works best if you use it with an 18-55 kit lens because they area just rockstar awesome!


----------



## Derrel (Jan 5, 2017)

pixmedic said:


> I actually have more respect for Ken Rockwell as a photographic information source than Thom.
> Every article he writes is crapping on Nikon while simultaneously trying out Nikons newest body and lens.



Same here. I've read Rockwell for a decade and a half, on and off. He actually tests out a LOT of lenses and cameras that photo hobbyists and even pros are interested in buying. He has tested so many wide zooms for DX...and with a consistent test bed-REAL PHOTOS!!!! Like shots of the palm against the setting sun, same neighborhood, for five years...SHOWS us what the flare and ghosting is like. Offers actual photos for download. Has owned and shot more lenses than probably anybody except Bjorn Rorslett, another famous Nikon gear-hound. Writes for people who want good pictures. Understands how Auto ISO can be utilized, etc. Tells people that good light is important. etc,etc. Does he have some negatives? Sure.

Thom, the guide book writer, well---he writes fantastic books. His *The Complete Guide to The Nikon ______*, that entire series of books/DVD's are well,well,well worth their cost, and are filled with amazing insights on how to actually use Nikon gear. Twenty, thirty times better than Nikon's bad manuals. Not talking Thom the blogger, talking Thom the Nikon Gear and Lens Expert: he knooooooooows his s**+.

But yeah...Thom the* blogger* and his business and marketing assertions/proclamaitions/predictions of woe....it's a blind spot he has, for sure. World's second-largest camera company, still in bid'ness, despite his advice. Huh.


----------



## robbins.photo (Jan 5, 2017)

Destin said:


> pixmedic said:
> 
> 
> > I actually have more respect for Ken Rockwell as a photographic information source than Thom.
> ...


Actually I think his favorite lens is the 28-200.  For a while there he was comparing everything to it... lol

Sent from my N9518 using Tapatalk


----------



## Derrel (Jan 5, 2017)

robbins.photo said:
			
		

> My advice to Nikon would be simple.  When Nikon decides it's time to come out with a full blown mirrorless option and really market it, have them present the camera and the adapter needed to adapt all existing F mount lenses as a package.



This is a tricky thing to understand...there are what? Isn't it 80 million Nikkor lenses that have been made? Not all, but the vast majority in F-mount. If these can be used on a mirrorless, that will surely hurt lens sales for the new Nikon mirrorless cameras. At least to existing customers who already own F-mount gear.

The G-series lenses do not work on vintage Nikon cameras, except at smallest aperture opening. The E-diaphragm lenses work properly and fully only on _the newer_ bodies. The AF-P focusing lenses work only on the VERY-newest cameras. These three lens technologies have been coming on slowly. The AF-P focusing protocol uses stepper motors in the lenses, and will NOT work on "older cameras" that are just a few years of age!

This tells us: something is brewing at Nikon HQ. Although I would like to be able to use a 1974 55mm f/3.5 pre-AI Nikkor macro on a new mirrorless...I have the feeling that *E-diapragm* and maybe *stepper-motor AF-P focusing*, andfast-fast still photo focusing and silent focusing for video, are both a part of the way forward. But it is tricky: anger the "old Nikon" crowd? Or make something really,really NEW, something that can shoot video, with no AF sounds, no AF issues, and can appeal to the SmartPhone Set and the New generation consumers?


----------



## runnah (Jan 5, 2017)

It feels like a big game of chicken between the big two, who will blink first.

Frankly at this point its starting to seem like a moot point as more and more the normal smart phone produced media is considered acceptable for mass media production. And when I say mass media I mean social media, polished presentation is a thing of the past.


----------



## astroNikon (Jan 5, 2017)

Canon did it a while back changing mounts.
Sony ...

I don't think those companies went out of business due to switching mount technologies.  Sometimes a change is needed to advance a technology.  With video, and noiseless lens motors needed I don't see how that is not a step that Nikon needs to make.

Backwards compatibility is a high cost game and adds tech to systems.  Think of how many times Microsoft has made windows backwards compatible for old software, or Apple making things backwards compatible with old apps (Ha!, NOT). Apple has instilled on it's user base if you upgrade the OS you'll probably have to upgrade most everything else.  The thing that turned me off to Apple.


----------



## robbins.photo (Jan 5, 2017)

Derrel said:


> robbins.photo said:
> 
> 
> 
> ...



Not so sure about this one myself.  Don't get me wrong, I understand the thought process.  If I can use my F mount lenses then I won't buy any for the new mirrorless system.

I might just be speaking for myself of course, but I would.  Since the idea behind mirrorless is to have a small, lightweight system then yes eventually I'd want to have lenses that match.  I wouldn't want to keep my 70-200mm 2.8 mounted on a dinky little camera body all that often.

But again, could just be me - but I really don't want to invest in any system that has a selection of say, half a dozen lenses most of which are in the 200mm and under range.  I've been very tempted to try the Sony A6000, for example, but the reviews I'm getting on the adapters are very mixed, even the very expensive ones seem to have intermittent problems.

I do agree that it's a balancing act for Nikon or any camera manufacturer - sometimes you need to make changes to improve the performance from where it was previously, and you always have to consider is that really worth the trade off of losing functionality on older bodies.


----------



## Derrel (Jan 5, 2017)

runnah said:
			
		

> Frankly at this point its starting to seem like a moot point as more and more the normal smart phone produced media is considered acceptable for mass media production. And when I say mass media I mean social media, polished presentation is a thing of the past.



^^^^^^^ THIS!!!!^^^^^^^ A thousand times over!

He((...maybe Nikon ought to get into the cameraphone business.

The new 10x optical zoom labelled Hasselblad, for the Moto-Z phones has me interested...I went Android recently after 5 years on iPhone... Sports-Illustrated is now plugging this *Hasselblad phone-attachment camera clip-on *with one of its bigshot 'photogs...on Facebook.

Imagine...a camera that snaps right on to one's smartphone, with a 10x optical zoom....hmmmm....


----------



## runnah (Jan 5, 2017)

Derrel said:


> runnah said:
> 
> 
> 
> ...



In my industry its becoming a huge trend. Clients want "the youtube look" or "raw look". More and more bloggers and journalists are showing up to events with a smart phone on a gimble and either livestreaming or doing very very basic editing before putting on youtube.

In some ways it's good because its more content than flash, but depressing to those who work in the industry.


----------



## Derrel (Jan 5, 2017)

My niece works as a field reporter in the Monterey, CA area for a network TV station there...yeah...I know what you mean, there's now a big emphasis on Facebook Live streams, throughout the day, and pre-event, and they are also shooting regular news assignments on smartphones, little Panasonics, little Canon's, little Nikons, and slapping video pieces together on their own MacBookPro unit.

In today's news business, she tells me that this is called, "*One-Man Banding*". Budgets for a camera guy, a sound guy, and a producer?? Pfffft....long gone.

I hope that this trend (raw-look video) will die off within a few years. I expect it will. Things are cyclical. I think the window of opportunity, and I mean REAL, significant, long-term opportunity for mirrorless cameras was totally MISSED by Canon and Nikon.  And now? Good, really GOOD smartphone cameras exist, and they suit what people want, right now. Small.Thin, Affordable. CONNECTED to Facebook and the 'net, with roaming data upload, WiFi,BlueTooth, Near Field Communication, and most critically---*easy sharing of still images and video*.

And that is the one area Thom Hogan justifiably beats Nikon up for: they have done a terrible job on keeping up with the real issue: how to get images to the web, or Facebook, or YouTube very FAST, and reliably, and with dumb-as-a-post-user interfaces. My God...I bought a cheap Android three weeks ago...I am now Bluetooth sharing, and uploading, INSTANTLY. I do not own a Nikon that can do that. I can WATCH TV on this phone!! And I DO! WTF do I want a mirrorless camera for?


----------



## astroNikon (Jan 5, 2017)

I was shooting a soccer game this past summer with my D750.  Pulled a few images during a quick break to my iPhone and posted on facebook for the families.  From way up in the stand, full size field, d750 w/150-600 (images you can't do with an iPhone).  A few quick iPhone adjustments and right to facebook.  Pretty neat.  I have to test the new d500 interface.  It was still a PITA though.  If I had an assistant there to pull the photos and post, I could shoot and someone else could post while sitting right next to me without pausing shooting.


----------



## runnah (Jan 5, 2017)

Derrel said:


> My niece works as a field reporter in the Monterey, CA area for a network TV station there...yeah...I know what you mean, there's now a big emphasis on Facebook Live streams, throughout the day, and pre-event, and they are also shooting regular news assignments on smartphones, little Panasonics, little Canon's, little Nikons, and slapping video pieces together on their own MacBookPro unit.
> 
> In today's news business, she tells me that this is called, "*One-Man Banding*". Budgets for a camera guy, a sound guy, and a producer?? Pfffft....long gone.



Talk about missing the boat. Youtubers with a single camera and no script can get viewing numbers that news stations would kill for.



Derrel said:


> I hope that this trend (raw-look video) will die off within a few years. I expect it will. Things are cyclical. I think the window of opportunity, and I mean REAL, significant, long-term opportunity for mirrorless cameras was totally MISSED by Canon and Nikon.  And now? Good, really GOOD smartphone cameras exist, and they suit what people want, right now. Small.Thin, Affordable. CONNECTED to Facebook and the 'net, with roaming data upload, WiFi,BlueTooth, Near Field Communication, and most critically---*easy sharing of still images and video*.



I think it will, most youtubers are slowly upping their production quality but its not a requirement for popularity. If Canon or Nikon were to make a "vlogging" specific camera they would clean house. 



Derrel said:


> And that is the one area Thom Hogan justifiably beats Nikon up for: they have done a terrible job on keeping up with the real issue: how to get images to the web, or Facebook, or YouTube very FAST, and reliably, and with dumb-as-a-post-user interfaces. My God...I bought a cheap Android three weeks ago...I am now Bluetooth sharing, and uploading, INSTANTLY. I do not own a Nikon that can do that. I can WATCH TV on this phone!! And I DO! WTF do I want a mirrorless camera for?



All of the camera makers need to work on this and hire some true UI designers. People want instant sharing. Heck I've often wished I could just post to instagram from my canon. This needs to be a feature that both manufacturers take seriously because it's what their customers want.


----------



## runnah (Jan 5, 2017)

astroNikon said:


> I was shooting a soccer game this past summer with my D750.  Pulled a few images during a quick break to my iPhone and posted on facebook for the families.  From way up in the stand, full size field, d750 w/150-600 (images you can't do with an iPhone).  A few quick iPhone adjustments and right to facebook.  Pretty neat.  I have to test the new d500 interface. * It was still a PITA though*.  If I had an assistant there to pull the photos and post, I could shoot and someone else could post while sitting right next to me without pausing shooting.



and this is unacceptable these days. It shouldn't be that hard to pair a camera with your phone or even use you phone as a hot spot and upload directly from your camera.


----------



## astroNikon (Jan 5, 2017)

runnah said:


> astroNikon said:
> 
> 
> > I was shooting a soccer game this past summer with my D750.  Pulled a few images during a quick break to my iPhone and posted on facebook for the families.  From way up in the stand, full size field, d750 w/150-600 (images you can't do with an iPhone).  A few quick iPhone adjustments and right to facebook.  Pretty neat.  I have to test the new d500 interface. * It was still a PITA though*.  If I had an assistant there to pull the photos and post, I could shoot and someone else could post while sitting right next to me without pausing shooting.
> ...


the biggest problem is the jpeg file transferred over is only of VGA quality.  Not the RAW nor Large Fine JPEG the camera can save.


----------



## Braineack (Jan 5, 2017)

runnah said:


> and this is unacceptable these days. It shouldn't be that hard to pair a camera with your phone or even use you phone as a hot spot and upload directly from your camera.



you can even set a shutter speed longer than 30sec on a Nikon, so don't hold your breathe that they'll do any firmware improvements for usability.  The menus look exactly like they did when the first DSLR came out, full of confusing worthless options.


----------



## astroNikon (Jan 5, 2017)

Braineack said:


> runnah said:
> 
> 
> > and this is unacceptable these days. It shouldn't be that hard to pair a camera with your phone or even use you phone as a hot spot and upload directly from your camera.
> ...


I do like the worthless option of if you USB connect your percolating coffee maker to the camera that it will take a picture of the coffee maker for each perculation.
It's really buried in the options of the D5/D500 though.


----------



## robbins.photo (Jan 5, 2017)

astroNikon said:


> Braineack said:
> 
> 
> > runnah said:
> ...


I wonder if pixmedic solved that problem with his new Nikon d 1/5th design...

Sent from my N9518 using Tapatalk


----------



## pixmedic (Jan 5, 2017)

robbins.photo said:


> astroNikon said:
> 
> 
> > Braineack said:
> ...



I also integrated amazons Alexa into my modded D100 and tweaked it's upload speed to a terabyte per second.
I just tell it whst to do and the camera does it


----------



## robbins.photo (Jan 5, 2017)

pixmedic said:


> I also integrated amazons Alexa into my modded D100 and tweaked it's upload speed to a terabyte per second.
> I just tell it whst to do and the camera does it



So your D100 has become Skynet?

Great...


----------



## Derrel (Jan 5, 2017)

Braineack said:
			
		

> The menus look exactly like they did when the first DSLR came out, full of confusing worthless options.



No, not quite right, and yet...

My Nikon D1 had 28 or 29 custom functions. ALL OF THEM were alpha numeric, with NO WORDS whatsoever. Custom Settings were 1,2,3,4,5,6,7,8,9 and so on, and they all had A,B or A-B-C choices. You needed the manual, or a cheat-sheet to know what was what. WB was WB, and numbers. ISO was ISO, but the menus were 100% alpha numeric. HORRIBLE system.

My D3x has 167 different Custom Functons I can set. And all are in English. So....the menus have become deeper, and yet, much, much easier to understand.

But at the same time, there are too many fields, and too many options, and we have Custom Function AND the pro cams have "banks", so, jeez...


----------



## pixmedic (Jan 5, 2017)

robbins.photo said:


> pixmedic said:
> 
> 
> > I also integrated amazons Alexa into my modded D100 and tweaked it's upload speed to a terabyte per second.
> ...


It just asked me if I want to play a game. 
Should I be concerned?


----------



## robbins.photo (Jan 5, 2017)

pixmedic said:


> It just asked me if I want to play a game.
> Should I be concerned?



I think we should all be concerned.  However, if you do start global thermonuclear war that might just be enough to cause Nikon to actually go out of business.

Then the few scattered, blinded survivors picking their way through the rubble can turn to each other and finally be able to say, hey, you know what, I guess Thom might have been right afterall...

So ya, there is that.


----------



## Derrel (Jan 5, 2017)

I've looked at mirrorless...for me, I wanna go CHEAP....Olympus is rumored to have a dreadful menu system, but I think I could handle it, and I want that 2x crop factor becasue I like telephoto work, so I've looked at a couple older Oly's...for me, the 4/3 ASPECT RATIO is appealing...I'm more interested in how people look in a 4 to 3 frame than in the almost-accidental, early Leica-inspired, 3:2 aspect ratio image.

Nikon's 1 system was...a joke to me...the first iteration was sold off at firesale prices thru big box retailers. had some neat lenses, like 10-100mm zoom, small, etc.. next iteration was wayyyyyy over-priced. I laughed at it.

What about Nikon going in with the former 4/3 Consortium manufacturer's group or industry group?


----------



## pixmedic (Jan 5, 2017)

Derrel said:


> I've looked at mirrorless...for me, I wanna go CHEAP....Olympus is rumored to have a dreadful menu system, but I think I could handle it, and I want that 2x crop factor becasue I like telephoto work, so I've looked at a couple older Oly's...for me, the 4/3 ASPECT RATIO is appealing...I'm more interested in how people look in a 4 to 3 frame than in the almost-accidental, early Leica-inspired, 3:2 aspect ratio image.
> 
> Nikon's 1 system was...a joke to me...the first iteration was sold off at firesale prices thru big box retailers. had some neat lenses, like 10-100mm zoom, small, etc.. next iteration was wayyyyyy over-priced. I laughed at it.
> 
> What about Nikon going in with the former 4/3 Consortium manufacturer's group or industry group?



having owned a few nikon 1's, i can honestly say the system had a few things in its favor. 
very compact, yet sported a 1" sensor. something you dont get until you fork out the cash for sony's rx100.
it had a really great AF system. it would focus fast. 

the biggest killer to me was a lack of fast lenses. they never made any "pro" lenses for it, and i think that in itself took it right off a lot of enthusiasts lists. 
the 10-100 lens was a great addition, giving people an "all in one" option, but there really wasnt much done after that. 

I absolutely hated the menu system in my olympus. maybe it was just that I got the cheaper en-pl5 PEN camera instead of a higher end model, but the controls felt very clunky, and i got a lot of noise starting around ISO800.


----------



## cgw (Jan 5, 2017)

I fell for the Fuji X100T. Its fixed lens cut GAS off at the knees, apart from the wide+tele conversion lenses. Not for all tastes and not cheap(though the X100F might change that)but so sweet as a street/candid shooter. Not sure Nikon should go that direction but a DX MILC with all the goodness of the D7200 and a killer EVF at a fair price might atone for recent stumbles and bring back a little fun to Nikon ownership. If Fuji can do it, why not Nikon?


----------



## Derrel (Jan 5, 2017)

Fuji is innovative, and has that FILM background. Fuji kocked colossus Kodak off of its pedestal in the USA, an incredible feat. And then...the film camera and film business shrivelled to next to nothing. Fuji worked with Nikon way back, before the D1 came out. Fuji has designed some amazing, all-new cameras. I bought their S1 Pro, S2 Pro, and S5 pro d-slr cameras: ALL of them were, in most ways, BETTER picture-makers than the Nikons of the era. Even built on second-tier Nikon bodies, and using Nikon F-mount and Nikon speedlights.

Better *picture-makers from Fuji*. Not better machines, but better picture-making devices.

The question, "If Fuji can do it, why not Nikon?" makes me want to say: becasue Fuji has soooooooooooooooo LITTLE of the market, that they can create a camera type, and be innovative, and NOT be tied down to a lens mount that dates to 1959. Fuji's camera business is part of a larger corporate parent, Nikon is an old,small company, and has a long, long legacy, tied basically to something they pioneered in 1959: the 35mm type SLR "system".

Nikon is Microsoft. Fuji is Apple. Nikon is Coca~Cola. Fuji is Rockstar.


----------



## Solarflare (Jan 6, 2017)

robbins.photo said:


> Actually I think his favorite lens is the 28-200.  For a while there he was comparing everything to it...


 Um. There is no 28-200 ... either you talk about the *AF-S 18-200mm f3.5-5.6 VR DX* or the *AF-S 28-300mm f3.5-5.6 VR*.

Both lenses are pretty old now, thus relatively cheaply available on the used market. And yes, for what they offer - are they are kinda excellent. In absolute terms of course they are still only tolerable, not actually good. Not that sharp, certainly not brilliant in respect to colors, etc.




Derrel said:


> Isn't it 80 million Nikkor lenses that have been made?


 IIRC they passed 100 million recently.




Derrel said:


> The G-series lenses do not work on vintage Nikon cameras, except at smallest aperture opening. The E-diaphragm lenses work properly and fully only on _the newer_ bodies. The AF-P focusing lenses work only on the VERY-newest cameras. These three lens technologies have been coming on slowly. The AF-P focusing protocol uses stepper motors in the lenses, and will NOT work on "older cameras" that are just a few years of age!


 The backward compability of Nikon F and thus access to used old lenses of high quality (only Leica is even superior with this, still being able to mount ALL Leica lenses, including screwmount ones with an adapter) is one of the main reasons I'm staying with this system.

AF-P has only been used with very cheap lenses. Considering that this technology is in every way inferior to the motors Nikon uses in highend lenses, I doubt it will ever find its way in lenses that would interest me.



astroNikon said:


> Backwards compatibility is a high cost game and adds tech to systems.


 Totally worth it though.




robbins.photo said:


> Since the idea behind mirrorless is to have a small, lightweight system then yes eventually I'd want to have lenses that match.


 Well, thats wrong. That is NOT the benefit of a mirrorless system. Switching to mirrorless does NOT suddenly and magically make the laws of optics change. Thus, if you want to be more compact you have to shrink the sensor and/or stay with smaller lenses, i.e. prime lenses, dark lenses, and/or lenses without autofocus (the later is why Leica M lenses are so tiny in comparison).

But have same conditions - and mirrorless will especially with telephoto lenses have hardly any advantage.

The only real optical advantage of mirrorless is that the distance between lens and sensor can be made very small. This only really helps with wide angles though, they can be less retrofocus. Until the digital sensor can no longer handle the steep angles. Telephotos, well I guess you could try to make them more extremely telephoto so they're even more compact, but overall my guess is rather they usually have to be even longer than their DSLR counterparts, because they have to compensate for the short flange distance.





Derrel said:


> What about Nikon going in with the former 4/3 Consortium manufacturer's group or industry group?


 MFT exists because the small companies wanted to unite against the big players. Thus Nikon is probably not welcome there.

I also would like to point out the only reason why 4/3 really exists in this form in the first place is history. When this started APS-C sensors have still been really expensive. But nowadays APC-S sensors are dirt cheap and there really is no good reason for putting 4/3 sensors into your system cameras except to keep excessive optics small.


----------



## robbins.photo (Jan 6, 2017)

Solarflare said:


> robbins.photo said:
> 
> 
> > Actually I think his favorite lens is the 28-200.  For a while there he was comparing everything to it...
> ...


It would be nice, just once, not to get a typo made such a huge deal.

Oh well.  Yes, the 18-200, and the whole point was Rockwell was absolutely in love with it and compared it to almost everything in every review he did for quite a while afterwards.



Sent from my N9518 using Tapatalk


----------



## astroNikon (Jan 6, 2017)

robbins.photo said:


> Solarflare said:
> 
> 
> > robbins.photo said:
> ...


I actually really want a 28-300 as a "do it all" single walkaround lens.
but I have other lenses on my list before that.  Hey, it's only money.


----------



## Derrel (Jan 6, 2017)

Solar, There *was*, indeed, *a Nikon 28-200mm lens*. I still own one. I shot it for several years as my 'weekend trip' lens. It was fine on 6- to 10-megapixel APS-C. I shot it on the Nikon D70 and Fuji S2 pro, and it was fine across much of its range, especially where I shot it, f/7.1 or f/8 mostly. There were actually TWO, different, 28-200 mm Nikkor zooms that I am aware of. I own the second version, the AF-S G model.

You MIGHT want to do more research of the focusing abilitry of AF-P in the new 70-300, via Thom Hogan's research: the cheap little kit 70-300 with A-P is now a vastly better lens than the decade-old 70-300 AF-S VR lens; better optics, and much better focusing, even on a cheap D3400. According to Thom Hogan. He was surprised by the performance of the lens, optically, and in terms of AF speed. Apparently, you do not want silent AF for videio, and PRO-lens focusing speed from a $128 lens? That is why AF-P exists; the avility to make a cheap, slow lens focus as fast as a $2,499 pro-lens. Pretty sure the AF-P stepper motor type tech will be migrated to more lenses.

But anyway...mirrorless....I dunno. Nikon's dilemma with the F-mount, AF-P, E-lectrical diaphragm actuation, G-series gelded mounts....we've hit a crossroads, lens-wise. I am not sure which way Nikon will go, nor which would be ultimately best for us, or them.


----------



## Solarflare (Jan 7, 2017)

Derrel said:


> Solar, There *was*, indeed, *a Nikon 28-200mm lens*.


 You are correct and I should have remembered that one. It even made Ken Rockwells "best 10 (actually 13) Nikon lenses" list.

Turns out the poster indeed was talking about the 18-200 DX though. Which also made Ken Rockwells list.


----------



## VidThreeNorth (May 17, 2017)

The Nikon 1 S2 recently "disappeared from the shelves".  From what I understand, if you use a cheap lens adapter, with no coupling, it does not support auto shutter speed.  But the "Nikon 1 NIKKOR FT-1 F-Mount Adapter" is not-a-cheap-adapter.  I know it gives a lot of lens couplings for V1 and J1 cameras, but what happens with the S2?  Does it at least support auto shutter speed, at least with some lenses?


----------



## fmw (May 21, 2017)

Now that I am in my second week as a Fujifilm shooter I have to say Nikon is probably doing the wrong thing.  I can buy lenses for the Fuji system from 12mm to 400mm from Fuji and lenses from several third party manufacturers such as Zeiss.  The lenses are better than the comparable Nikkors but they aren't cheap and a whole line of prime lenses is available.  Nikon has only a couple of primes for the DX system. 

The Fuji image quality is amazing.  The cameras and the lenses are made from magnesium and aluminum instead of plastic.  They are much smaller and lighter than their Nikon counterparts.  After 1/2 a century with Nikon, I can tell you they need to do mirrorless like there is no tomorrow.  They are clinging to obsolete technology.  They need to be looking over Fujifilm's shoulder.


----------



## jcdeboever (May 22, 2017)

fmw said:


> Now that I am in my second week as a Fujifilm shooter I have to say Nikon is probably doing the wrong thing.  I can buy lenses for the Fuji system from 12mm to 400mm from Fuji and lenses from several third party manufacturers such as Zeiss.  The lenses are better than the comparable Nikkors but they aren't cheap and a whole line of prime lenses is available.  Nikon has only a couple of primes for the DX system.
> 
> The Fuji image quality is amazing.  The cameras and the lenses are made from magnesium and aluminum instead of plastic.  They are much smaller and lighter than their Nikon counterparts.  After 1/2 a century with Nikon, I can tell you they need to do mirrorless like there is no tomorrow.  They are clinging to obsolete technology.  They need to be looking over Fujifilm's shoulder.


Yup, Fujifilm kinda kicked Nikon and Canons butt last year and so far this year. I think Fujifilm's approach to the market is wise. They don't seem to rush into the market as everything is well thought out and the quality is high. Attention to details is well noticed on my end. I think Nikon hit a home run with the D500 and I can see a full frame version of it coming next month. As far as mirrorless? I wonder if their even interested. Pentax is pretty much done unless someone snaps them up. I am waiting for the 80mm macro f/2 1:1 and the 8-16 f2.8 from Fujifilm.


----------



## sabbath999 (May 25, 2017)

Just an FYI to all, the "cheap" AF-P VR lenses work brilliantly on the Nikon 1 system (at least on the V2 I have tried them on) with the FT1 adapter... native focus speed (albeit center focus spot only) and the VR works like a charm.


----------

