Comments on: Nikon’s President comments on the upcoming mirrorless camera again

By: serenade

serenade — Sat, 17 Jul 2010 23:10:08 +0000

I don’t think so. If they were so stupid they wouldn’t be so good.

The only way to go is a really good hybrid camera that meets high quality standards for photography AND filming. The two segments are in fact one – it is always photography – still or moving. The only thing that needs to be added is good (external) audio.

The company who comes first in recognizing this need for high-end-merging will attract a huge customer segment.

Low or little noise in high ISO and shallow depth of field is essential – which means – the bigger the sensor, the better it is.

By: serenade

serenade — Sat, 17 Jul 2010 22:54:39 +0000

it should be at least APSC sized to be of any kind of interest. There are enough tiny sensors crammed with pixels producing noisy results. can’t see it anymore.

By: serenade

serenade — Sat, 17 Jul 2010 22:51:50 +0000

a real innovation would be a full frame sensor in a much smaller body – give me FF in an EVIL body and I am really impressed!

By: serenade

serenade — Sat, 17 Jul 2010 22:48:06 +0000

the quality youtubers need is provided by all point and shoot cameras.
It would be hellishly stupid to focus on this market, it can always be served by the option to downsize a video – nothing interesting or revolutionary here

By: serenade

serenade — Sat, 17 Jul 2010 22:40:22 +0000

I hate all the “we have to exhibit ourselves on the internet” crazyness. The internet is crammed with stuff nobody really cares for.
If anything, than this kind of data will be misused.
But what could thrive in the future will be video sharing in a similar manner photo sharing websites work now – with a focus on selected groups to ensure some kind of privacy and with a focus on quality, editing and all kinds of creative endeavours to enhance and individualize the films shown.

By: serenade

serenade — Sat, 17 Jul 2010 22:11:22 +0000

no, not too much to ask for. A D700s would have been the most logic thing in the first place!

By: serenade

serenade — Sat, 17 Jul 2010 22:08:42 +0000

People went for the video ! The Canon 5D Mark II became a major hit in the independent filmmaking community!
- people expect – next to great photos – a video function – since it is only a software addition, it is very astounding and a bad marketing decision not to include it.

By: serenade

serenade — Sat, 17 Jul 2010 22:02:31 +0000

- full manual control over video! Sony (with Nex-5) made a huge mistake by not enabling it!
- external microphone (which works well with the camera and doesn’t produce background hiss)
- professional photos out of a video stream – I was waiting for it !!
- a small low light lens – 50mm 1.8 or sth. in this range – to enable shallow DOF for portraits and to keep the whole camera set small and portable !
- panorama out of the camera – standard by now

I hope the coming out will be soon !

By: om

om — Wed, 14 Jul 2010 17:18:18 +0000

What’s with all the rangefinder bashing? It has its plus and minus, just like SLR. Sure, it not an inovative way forward but RFs have their benefits. I personally love the viewfinder which allows you to see what’s happening around and anticipate action – perfect for street photography. No mirror blackout – allows me to see if I got what I wanted. No mirror slap – can get sharper images at lower speeds, etc, etc.
Saying rangefinders are “novelty” (eh?) and useless is kinda silly. You don’t llike it, fine, but they do have their place, even if niche. Photography is not just about tack sharp pictures, thank god! “Sharpness is a burgeaux concept” – HCB
For someone who requires 8 frames a second as a minimum rangefinder is not a match of course. But why slam it?

By: zeissdarling

zeissdarling — Wed, 14 Jul 2010 15:47:33 +0000

word!

By: broxibear

broxibear — Wed, 14 Jul 2010 11:19:17 +0000

I meant the Panasonic GF1, Olympus PEN series and Leica D-Lux cameras.
I agree I need a viewfinder to take images too but the prices are very steep:
Viewfinder for the Lumix GF1 £175
Viewfinder for the D-lux 4 £205
Viewfinder for the Olympus PEN E-P2 £220
As I said…EXPENSIVE.

By: Camera

Camera — Wed, 14 Jul 2010 07:24:23 +0000

good to hear that Nikon is coming back again with mirrorless lens. I think they should hit the markets at the end of this year. I always prefer nikon camera are the best. The picture quality from a nikon camera is great! it can’t be compared to others

By: Kensmokecrakrockwell

Kensmokecrakrockwell — Wed, 14 Jul 2010 04:51:22 +0000

Its called a d3x. I recall its a Nikon camera with more than 12MP. So it is true that they think beyond the 12MP range. Ever heard of it?

By: illo

illo — Wed, 14 Jul 2010 04:24:58 +0000

thaks good. at last one user with comon sense. full agree with you

By: PHB

PHB — Wed, 14 Jul 2010 01:23:26 +0000

I have always used continuous lighting as I shoot video.

Flash is the worst lighting system imaginable in my view. You can’t see the effect of the lighting until you take the shot. The flash upsets the model and is horribly intrusive.

The fact that strobes discharge so fast is great for motion stopping photography and rubbish for the other 99% of uses. Because the strobe discharges in a fraction of a second you can’t use a fast shutter speed or the front and rear curtains will be out of sync.

I predict that in the next few years strobe flash is going to be considered as obsolete as magnesium strip and flash bulbs are.

LED lighting is vastly superior on every front. It takes a fraction of the power and can belt out plenty of light without heating up the studio (the one disadvantage of my rig). At the moment it is pricey but prices are going to drop like a stone as the EU forces the phase out of fluorescent lightbulbs.

The intrinsic cost of manufacture for LEDs is actually smaller than any other form of lighting. Its only the insane volume incandescent and fluorescent bulbs that makes them so cheap. Between a quarter and a third of all power generated is used for lighting. If we switch to LED the power required drops by an order of magnitude. Less pollution, less carbon emissions, fewer new power stations need to be built.

And if that was not enough, LED lighting systems could in theory offer a choice of color balance.All they need to do is to add in some extra LEDs that can be turned on or off as needed.

By: NanDub

NanDub — Tue, 13 Jul 2010 22:43:01 +0000

So those so-called 2/3″ and 1/2″ sensors are not 2/3 inch and 1/2 inch in diagonal size? Damn! I was misled by the noting for almost a decade!

Then what do they mean by 2/3″? 2/3 of what?

By: Victor Hassleblood

Victor Hassleblood — Tue, 13 Jul 2010 21:17:59 +0000

You see a difference in quality long before you start to actually resolve the pixels and see them clearly singled.

Therefore I prefer not to go below 360dpi and this is a technical requirement of the magazines anyway. So my personal opinion does’t even count, nor yours.
Even with just 300dpi – as you say yourself printed “critical” – an A3 would already require 3,508 by 4,961px. Again do the math yourself and then tell me if you can cover more than a single page A4 with 12 MP or not.

This all are simple facts and is simple math. I sure don’t want some of what you are smoking. It apparently has negative affects on both, brain and eyes.

By: Anonymous

Anonymous — Tue, 13 Jul 2010 20:47:12 +0000

NR Admin, please post something new. This is getting boring.

By: T140Rider

T140Rider — Tue, 13 Jul 2010 20:35:16 +0000

If 12mp can’t do more than an A4 sized print then I sure would like some of what you are smoking.

There was some research quoted when the iPhone 4 came out with a 320ppi resolution related to the ability of the human eye and its abilty to see individual pixels.

If 300 is the critical figure then AFAIK, you need a lot less than 12Mp to print at A4 sizes.

Would you care to elaborate as to why you think that A4 is the max size for a 12Mp image?

By: Anonymous

Anonymous — Tue, 13 Jul 2010 19:59:31 +0000

Ummmmm
Panasonic G1/GH1/G2 all have built in EFV….
I personally don’t like holding a camera at arms length to take an image 95% of the time. The Swivel LCD is plus when I most use that method. Hope Nikon introduces some great Primes at the get-go — FOV= 28, 35, 50 to start and at least f/2.8 or f/2.5. And a kit zoom pair… Plenty of buyers are advanced shooters, and this will be their 3rd or 4th camera. I wish Panasonic would introduce a 25mm f/2 for their m/43.. I’d buy it tomorrow the 20mm is to close in FOV to my 17mm Oly…. But, Nikon could have a duel market. with a few short primes and 2 kit zooms at the begining. IMO.