< ! --Digital window verification 001 -->

Picture of Nikon’s mirrorless camera mount

Picture of the mount and sensor of upcoming Nikon mirrorless camera named "X810" leaked on the Chineses forum Xitek:

Brief translation (thanks B.): the new mirrorless demo machine is here, temperatly named X810. The user is not going to post pictures of the whole camera due to trade secret and he do not want to lost his job. but he did post a picture of the mount as requested by other users. As we can see it is not a F-mount and the senser size seems to be 1/2.3 or 2.5. many users seems to be disappointed with the small sensor it has.

The mount on the picture is similar to various, previously filed patents from Nikon for a mirrorless camera:

This entry was posted in Nikon 1, Nikon Patents. Bookmark the permalink. Trackbacks are closed, but you can post a comment.
  • Blacro

    hah~ i didn’t know my tips were so fast posted.

  • http://rwophotography.com ChinChilla

    It has begun?

    :)

  • http://photoartbymark.zenfolio.com photoartbymark

    where is it, oh hold on let me get my macro lens, oh, now i see it

    • macro size

      That’s what she said.

      • mumbojumbo

        nice one :).. super likeee!

  • AtlDave

    Without knowing how large the diameter of the mount is we can just guess how big the sensor is. DPR has a picture of the Sony and Pentax mounts and sensors at http://a.img-dpreview.com/previews/pentaxQ/images/sidebyside1.jpg . Even with the small mount diameter the Pentax sensor looks really small.

    My guess is the Nikon sensor in this picture is the same 16mm, 2.7 crop factor sensor that has been talked about since these rumors started. It is certainly not APSC but does not look as small as the 1/2.5 sensor.

    • Worminator

      I came to the same conclusion. The sensor clearly has about 3x the area of the pentax Q (1/2.5″), as expected.

      My reaction was “Oh, so Nikon is really going through with this!?”

      Overall though I think this is a more interesting proposition than Pentax Q, since the sensor will be bigger than any “advanced compact” like Lumix LX-5, Canon G12 etc. so there is a real image quality benefit in addition to the basic advantage of interchangeable lenses. The camera should also be better balanced and have more variety of small, inexpensive lenses than Sony NEX and mFT.

  • http://tumbleweed-092.livejournal.com Slow Gin

    Very representative comments here. Pentax failed already with its Q system overkill and Nikon goes the same way. You may barely expect pricing of this particular X810 system to be safe for pockets and I bet my hair: people will continue to ask m4/3 and Sony NEX releases, they will avoid N/C/P mirrorless cameras because of this lone bloody reason – the price.

    • http://StandDevelopment.com Axel

      Can we say “Pronea”?

      • http://tumbleweed-092.livejournal.com Slow Gin

        +1

    • Sky

      Yep… sadly there’s no coming competition for NEX or m4/3. :( I hope at least Canon will do it right.

      Or maybe we all got surprised and will see the Fujifilm emerging with new bayonet and reasonably sized sensor???? That would be good, I’d love to see a return of interchangeable lens cameras from Fujifilm.

      Nikon screwed it in few matters. First: Smaller sensor means always being in disadvantage when it comes to high ISO, Megapixel race, and Depth of Field with it’s DSLR-alike photos that make APS-C mirrorless cameras so tempting.
      Huge external diameter of bayonet with contacts placed in sensor-area mean that we won’t see any cameras using different sensor sizes, and the lenses always will need to be as wide as bayonet what can lead to some silly constructions, like big black lens with tiny piece of glass inside. Small sensor also may mean an issues with getting UWA lenses (and bright UWA lenses) what kinda… spoils the fun for me (as I shoot a lot with UWA).

      What might be good are few things though: Prices. They don’t really have a right to demand for this needle-head more than Sony does for NEX, so hopefully Nikon system will be more affordable one. Telephoto lenses – gonna be much smaller and perhaps cheaper. Hyperzoom lenses might be possible with this one, and they won’t be huge bricks like Sony 18-200 is (even if it’s a great quality lens as for hyperzoom). Nikon also will have it easier to make lenses sharp across whole picture.

      We’ll see what comes from this Nikon invention, but for me? No thank you. NEX is by far more interesting, especially because you can use Nikon/Canon/tons of other 3rd party lenses with it while keeping the relatively proper focal length, not multiplying it by x2.

      I still would love to see the FF mirrorless camera though. I’d put one prime on it, something alike 50mm f/1.4 (50mm full frame lenses can be made small enough even without pancake design) and it’d be my dream-setup – small enough to put into pocket, proper depth of field, proper high-ISO quality, proper compatibility with legacy lenses…. but that’s just dream for now.

  • Zeddy

    Judging from the size of the screw, the sensor looks very small…

    • BornOptimist

      Judging from the screews on my D700 and GF2 (GF2 slightly smaller screews, but close enough to use as a guide) and also measuring the screews on pictures from E mount and Pentax Q mount, and compare that to known sensors sizes, this sensor is ca 12.8mm wide and height is 8.5mm. This is ca 15.4mm diameter, which is close to 2.7-2.8x.
      It is not remotely close to a 1/2.33″ sensor.

  • Benjo

    If true I’ll definitely pass.

    Brand loyalty disappears with these necessary new lens mounts, and I really only need a kit lens, wide lens, extra battery…$10 arca plate…that’s about the whole proprietary system. I chose m4/3 because they had the best complete system available, but in 5 years I’ll probably reevaluate and again go with whichever system is the best mix of size, IQ, value, etc. That could well be any manufacturer, doesn’t matter if it’s a Canon or a Hyundai, nor 4/3 size sensor or APS-C, but I can’t really see a sensor smaller than 4/3.

    If the sensor’s tiny, I’d rather have a compact. a 24-60mm lens would cover 98% of my needs in such a camera.

  • Jabs

    Here is a comparison plus a consumer explanation of DX and FX from Nikon USA.

    http://www.nikonusa.com/Learn-And-Explore/Nikon-Camera-Technology/g588ouey/1/The-DX-and-FX-Formats.html

    If you make a camera FOR a DX sensor only, then the camera mount or mount to sensor distance does NOT have to be the standard size as in when FX is the normal or expected and planned for size even in a DX dslr. FX and DX = the constant as in the mount to sensor distance, perhaps. When you get rid of the expectation of using an FX sensor in addition to a DX sensor in a body and mounting a lens from Nikon’s past lenses, then you have to figure out the part hanging out or behind the lens when it is mounted and past the lens mount flange, as in going into the body of the camera.

    If the lens does NOT go into the body anymore (as body is made for DX sensors only now), then you can now mount the sensor close to the lens flange and you now have a smaller camera with a big sensor as the sensor to lens mount distance is NOW shorter, hence eliminating the mirror sub-assembly and this distance seems to have given Nikon lots of benefits or leeway to make a smaller body and lens combo camera.

    Let’s see what is really is and what it can really do – patents are often designed to throw you off the path and protect the real direction of a Company – as in WHAT part of the patent were they really trying to protect = THEIR secret.

  • RaVax

    Let’s try to make some calculations.

    The sensor is not fully visible in the posted image, the upper part is covered by the enclosure, and we don’t know how much has been cut out (but we can try to guess it).

    Measuring the sensor in lens mount attack screws units, it’s length (the horizontal width) is about 4.3 screws (diameters).
    The height, the visible one, is about 3.1 screw diameters.

    Now let’s try to guess sensor’s height: The sensor could have 3:2 ratio or 4:3 ratio, not considering square sensors or other “non-popular” formats. So, if the sensor ratio is 4:3 then
    height=(length/4)*3, so (4.3/4)*3 = 3.225 screw diameters.

    A couple of notes:

    – We don’t know the screw size (diameter) but we can calculate a logical minimum and maximum values

    – Sensore size and screw are not at the same distance so the actual size of the sensor, which is recessed into the body, would be a bit LARGER although by a small factor.

    I would consider, as minimum and maximum logical values for the diameter of the screw head, I’d say 3 to 4 millimeters.
    In such range, sensor size becomes:

    4mm diameter: Sensor would measure 17.2 x 12.9 mm
    3mm diameter: Sensor would measure 12.8 x 9.675 mm

    So I’d say that in the best case the sensor size would be be very similar to the m4/3. In the worst case the sensor is quite small. It may even be very small, if a screw is 2.5mm then sensor would measure something like 10.75 by 8.06 mm.

    • potax

      a 3mm or 4mm screw head seems very very large for use in that type of application.. I am sure it’s lesser than that. It is very very likely to be less than that. 2.5mm seems to be more like it.

      • BornOptimist

        The Q mount seems to have screews around 3mm also. Same with D700 and Panasonic GF2, they are also close to 3mm. So I say it’s a 2.7-2.8x sensor

    • nobody

      “4mm diameter: Sensor would measure 17.2 x 12.9 mm
      3mm diameter: Sensor would measure 12.8 x 9.675 mm”

      A 2.6 crop 3:2 ratio sensor would measure 13.8mm x 9.2mm, which is well within the limits of that calculation (and about 4 times the size of the Pentax Q sensor).

      That would go very well together with the lens patents published here some months ago. And it would be a very good choice as a compliment to 1.5 crop DSLR cameras, IMO.

      Please, all you critics, understand this is not a system that’s going to replace the Nikon DX DSLRs. It’s an addition, not a substitute, to the D3100.

      • nobody

        According to my ruler, the screws in my micro four thirds Panasonic GH2 lens mount are 3mm in diameter.

        And according to RaVax’s plausible calculation this would go together very well with a 2.6 crop sensor that is tailored to the lens patents previously mentioned.

        That looks very well, IMO :)

      • RaVax

        I agree with what “nobody” said :-) except this sentence:
        > It’s an addition, not a substitute, to the D3100
        I believe it’s target will be more “advanced”, it will be (IMHO of course) the rebirth of the dead coolpix “pro” family (…, 5700, 8700, 8800) but with the big addition of changeable lenses. I believe they will make both a “smaller as possible” (“pocket size” wannabe) model and a more DSLR-like one. And I do believe it could gain quite a good market share…even if its popularity may be heavily influenced by lens/accessories prices. I say this because, usually, anything labeled Nikon is everything but cheap :-)

      • RaVax

        I agree with what “nobody” said except the sentence:

        > It’s an addition, not a substitute, to the D3100

        I believe it’s target will be more “advanced”, it will be (IMHO of course) the rebirth of the dead coolpix “pro” family (…, 5700, 8700, 8800) but with the big addition of changeable lenses. I believe they will make both a “smaller as possible” (“pocket size” wannabe) model and a more DSLR-like one. And I do believe it could gain quite a good market share…even if its popularity may be heavily influenced by lenses/accessories prices.
        I say this because, usually, at least here in europe, anything labeled Nikon is everything but cheap :-)

        Anyway…let’s wait and see!

  • fotomatt

    I think Fuji’s barking up the right tree with the X100. Now make it with interchangeable lenses like the Contax G1/G2 series (which had 16, 21, 28, 35, 45, 90 and a really slow zoom) to keep the size down and they’d do nicely. The APS-sized sensor (whatever that is, APS film was 419 sq mm, APS sensors seem to range from 329 to 519 sq mm depending on maker) (4/3rds is 225 sq mm) seems like a good idea. Going smaller than 4/3rds makes we wonder why I’d bother. I can already get a Panasonic LX-5 or Canon S95 if I want a small sensor.

    What I’d really like is a compact FX Nikon body. How about a Nikon FE-sized FX camera? That would be something to write home about!

    • georg

      +1
      I want a FX sensor built in a camera the size of an ~F3, too. I’d rather buy a camera with the sensor of the D3s in an enclosing of the size of a F3/FE than any D4/D800 which will or may come in future.

      • IanZ28

        Me too!

        I’ve been saying it for a couple of years now.

        Give us a FM3 / FE style full frame with a D3/D700 sensor under $2000.

        Don’t want a micro sensor anything other than my iphone.

      • zzopit

        Lusting for a Full Frame Digital F3/F4 since the day I was shooting with a N90s/KodakDCS420. I hear you brother!

        • Serguei_V

          I said same thing once here.
          They scoffed – Digital FM2 to shoot digital Kodachrome…
          But I say again: I need no video, no Live View, no bells and whistles, and I can be happy with ISO 25-100.

          • T140AV-Rider

            Good Luck getting that Kodachrome processed…

  • Rory

    Thank Gawd I bought the Fuji X100. Nikon is positioning this as a bridge camera between compacts and DSLR’s so it doesn’t cannibalize it’s other established markets.

    It seems that the X100 (noting it has its own flaws) is the current standard to beat in the small camera/large sensor/not crazily priced space.

    People can say that Nikon has nothing to worry about with the X100, given it is a “niche” product, but I love Nikon gear and I’ve spent my money on Fuji.

    I would love to see a full frame compact at a fair price (think: D700 sensor and price), even if it was a fixed lens to make it smaller.

  • John

    This will be a winner for me IF:
    – This can produce a camera roughly the size of my LX-3
    – IQ on the order of my old D80 or even my D300
    – Interchangeable lens size that keeps things compact – ESPECIALLY THE WIDE ANGLES
    – It has a very very good EVF
    – Has a decent set of lenses available at launch: 24-XX/3.5-4.5 zoom, 20/4 prime, 50/1.4 prime, and XX-200/4.5-5.6 VR zoom (all FX equivalent focal lengths)
    – Will be able to mount my MF and AF Nikkors with an adapter and actually focus my AFS lenses via an adapter
    – Built-in flash
    – More buttons/dials and less menus

    Nice to haves:
    – Good video
    – Swivel LCD screen
    – Swivel screen

    I am willing to trade size for IQ as long as the IQ is good enough and the size is significantly smaller than the current APS-C bodies + DX lenses, otherwise why bother?

    This would not replace my D300 nor my D700, but would be an addition to them and would cause me to sell my LX-3 AND not purchase any m43 gear.

    • http://tumbleweed-092.livejournal.com Slow Gin

      > – Will be able to mount my MF and AF Nikkors with an adapter and actually focus my AFS lenses via an adapter

      OMG! Huge lens and its rear-cap with sensor.

      • John

        So? If I want to mound my 35/1.8DX AFS on it why can’t I? If I want to mount my 50/1.8G – why can’t I? I have a 40/2 AI-P Voigtlander that’s a pancake. These aren’t huge lenses. I also have some really nice MF primes that I’d love to have a small body to mount to.

        • http://tumbleweed-092.livejournal.com Slow Gin

          Understandable. What I personally can’t understand is why people are trading convenience of DSLR ergonomics on weightlessness of those mirrorless EVIL compacts. My statement is simple: if tool isn’t handy – pass it. Granted, if you tired to carry bag with 8 kilograms of photographic gear, you’ll ask for alternatives, but lack of good ergonomics diminishes advantages of any EVIL system. I hate to handle tiny-sized camera with two fingers and try to change settings via button at the very right corner of it. Nothing matches with grip and fairly more convenient controls of SLR. I hate to compose via display because nothing matches with large and bright viewfinder in which you just look through: no distracting action around, no dimmed displays when the sun is shining on. Also, every EVIL sucks when you mounting telephoto lens on it. Grip thusly is awful, embarrasing, undeniably horrible.

          Only alternative to DSLR is a rangefinder. Lightweight setup with all goods of full-sized controls and a true viewfinder are sheer salvation for those who begging for not wearing burden of 8 kilo DSLR setup. IQ is awesome, ability to use ultra fast lenses with no restrictions of SLR system is inspiring, overall mobility and stealthyness are aslo on your side. Why Nikon has no plans to kill Leica M hegemony – is a very tough question. I still believe: that day will come.

          • John

            I make the trade because sometimes size/weight are THE driving factors, otherwise the DSLR + lenses just don’t come along and pictures don’t get taken.

            I get along just fine with my LX-3 and it’s controls, so the tiny controls don’t bother me if done correctly.

            This will NOT be a pro system that will be connected to a 400/2.8 AFS. It likely will have a very specific clientel.

            As for a rangefinder being superior – please make a list of all the problems of a rangefinder before making such statements.

            I just don’t understand why everyone sees things in black or while when the world is a really gray place in practice.

            • http://tumbleweed-092.livejournal.com Slow Gin

              Problems? Needs adjustment from time to time and requires very tight tolerances at the stage of production; has color shift with ultrawides. In all other senses rangefinder is an answer on a compact system question.

          • Eric

            For what it’s worth I’ve never really understood the ergonomic nightmare argument so many people make when talking about large lenses on small cameras. My NEX-3 was perfectly comfortable to use with long lenses. I just held the lens from the underside with my left hand and used my thumb on the shutter. Worked just fine. Besides, I carry a camera around more then I’m actually taking photos with it. So weight matters to me more than ergonomics. Heck, I spend more time reviewing photos on them then I do in actually shooting position, so if anything the camera should be more comfortable to use for that purpose.

    • Anna Seed

      Quite agre with you John. i want something small with a good sensor like the lx5, xz1 and small lenses though an f mount adaptor would give flexibility. An evf is a must too. A small travel system to compliment my dx/fx kit

  • McPIX

    Just a waste of engineering time – nothing more!!
    Waiting for the X100 successor …

    • Tony

      It will be long if you’re talking about Fuji’s EVIL.

  • Jabs

    Anyone remember the Nikon ‘Q’ rumor?

    So, it seems like Pentax and Nikon might have been working together to counter Micro 4/3rds as in someone producing a sensor and each participant making their OWN version of a body and system for this series of Products – interesting and SMART.

    Look up the newly announced Pentax Q

    Maybe Pentax Q = Nikon DX-4 (or X whatever?) = interchangeable lens smaller sensor camera designed by both companies but Hoya just bought Pentax, so what now. Does Hoya own Nikon or Nikon owns Hoya or do they just work together?

    The Politics of camera manufacturing?

    • lolly

      Ricoh is buying Pentax from Hoya … sale to be finalized later this year

      • Jabs

        Thanks!

    • BornOptimist

      This mount does not look anything like the Pentax Q-mount.

      • Jabs

        @BornOptimist
        Not the mount!
        I was speaking about maybe a shared sensor development, like how Nikon shares with Sony = collaboration to reduce costs and spread R&D plus have partners to sell all those chips to.

        • nobody

          This sensor seems to be much larger than the Pentax Q 5.5 crop sensor!

        • BornOptimist

          No, this sensor is larger than the one i Pentax Q. It is the same as described in all the patents over several years.
          The Pentax Q sensor is an ordinary Sony P&S sensor.
          BTW this mount has the same diameter as m43, and it also looks a lot like the m43 mount.

  • Carlos R B

    Goodbye, so long, farewell….HELLO NEX 7…Nikon are freaking kidding me?

    • yakker

      Bingo. I’d so much rather buy a Nikon than a Sony, but looks like they’re not leaving us a choice. Hopefully the NEX-7 is what it’s rumored to be.

  • http://www.ianleemusique.com Ian

    If this is really what they are doing I’m not buying it. I have no interest in a tiny sensor camera like this, I would buy a sony nex over it. I don’t think a non F mount is a deal breaker, but the sensor is IMO.

  • MB

    How they came up with 1/2.5″ ?
    According to intel I collected it should be more like this:

    And ratio is OK in this shot, so the sensor should be more then twice the size …

    • MB

      Nikonrumors ate the hreg so here I will try this:
      [url=http://www.flickr.com/photos/photo_mb/5962181166/][img]http://farm7.static.flickr.com/6024/5962181166_9dc97caec3.jpg[/img][/url]
      [url=http://www.flickr.com/photos/photo_mb/5962181166/]NikonXmount[/url] by [url=http://www.flickr.com/people/photo_mb/]photo mb[/url], on Flickr

      • MB
        • Paul

          So 3x + 2x = 17.3 mm
          [17.3^2/(2^2 + 3^2)] = x = 4.8mm

          So 3x = 14.39 mm
          2x = 9.6 mm

          Assuming 3×2, 14.39 mm x 9.6mm = 2.5 crop.

          • nobody

            My calculation is roughly the same: This could be the sensor and this could be the camera for the 17mm image diameter lenses according to the patents published here a few months ago.

            Since an FX sensor is about 43.27mm in diameter this would mean that the Nikon mirrorless camera system is about a 2.6 crop sensor system.

            Which is about 4 times as large as the Pentax Q sensor!

            • Jabs

              Interesting observation – detective work is hard when you have so many different hints designed to throw us all off -lol

  • http://www.BogdanSandulescu.Ro fotograf nunta

    I will be very disapointed with that small sensor. :( Nikon doesn’t know i allready have an IPhone 4 with interchangeable lens? :D

  • CK Dexter Haven

    More garbage to crowd the market.
    To whom is this meant to appeal?

    Anyone who wants interchangeable lenses should have an interest in sensor size. We’ve already got m4/3. Does anyone need a ‘bridge’ between that and the already established APS-C compacts? How many market niches are really useful?

    Christ, Nikon. Spend some more time helping PHOTOGRAPHERS.

  • http://nikonrumors Son of FE

    Well,
    I suggest we all complain to the head of Nikon’s customer complaint department.
    Her name is Mrs. Helen Waite. I have been told that if you have a complaint, that you should go to her.

  • Antsl

    I am seriously disappointed… I had hoped Nikon would do at least a APS-C format mirrorless camera, or ultimately a FF camera but no… they had to go and follow Pentax. The absolute nuff nuffs…. at least Pentax have the option of a large format camera too.

    Given that most people in the know realise that Nikon cannot make good compact cameras… what makes them think this thing will fly! Sorry… but I am not buying this.

  • getanalogue

    wait to see picture quality. until then, i will continue to happily take pictures with my iphone 4, 5 and D7000. no need for such a camera anymore, provided there is no sensational IQ hidden in the new mirrorless.

    • BornOptimist

      You are concerned about picture quality…and you continue to happily take pictures with an iPhone… Yeah you are concerned about picture quality

      • Troll?

        That is what his d7000 is for. I guess he was suggesting that if the Nikon EVIL was gonna have such a small censor, he might as well use an iPhone.

  • Manfred

    The best compromise is NO compromise! Next to my DSLRs I was already looking around for something considerably smaller, a cam which goes with me all the time.
    But I wouldn’t buy into a second system. First thought of a Bridge camera but they are still too large then I might take a DSLR as well. Furthermore they come with a thumbnail sensor.
    With NEX-cameras everything has to go via the display etc.etc.
    The first concept that convinced me, offering a decent balance between size, quality and function was the Fuji X100. Thus I was hoping for a rugged Nikon version of the X100. Last Photokina tons of non DSLR cameras were exhibited – not a single one had as much attention as the X100, though it was just a prototype model. Thus I don’t think that my estimation is too far off.

    Judged by the picture published, Nikon’s mirrorless endeavor looks like one more toy being thrown on a saturated market.
    We just have to accept, that there lots of people out there telling you “my camera makes good photos” and they are right. Their cam MAKES the photos, they just push the button. Many people just buy a camera for holiday and family & friends shots just to post them in Facebook and the like. They don’t bother about resolution, defraction, DOF and DR, actually most of them don’t even know what that is. If Nikon feels they got to get their share of this market, its fine with me. But they should ,please, reserve some engineering capacities for more serious products.

  • Elementary photogtap

    I believe the person who took this picture used the extra wide anglr lens, no wonder it is extremely small. Come on, bring us some telephoto shoot or macro just on the sensor.

  • Andreas

    This might be a long shot, but that curved line going over the mount looks a lot like my trusted Ricoh GRD III… even the texture of the plastic looks similar. If I didn’t know better (and I don’t :-)) I’d be tempted to say that the image is of a Ricoh mirrorless camera…

  • BornOptimist

    On this mount you have to twist the lens in opposite direction to F mount to remove/attach the lens.

  • Ricardo

    It will be a disappointed when the mirror less Nikon has a small sensor.
    Nikon must use a full frame sensor (D700 sensor) then it will be competitive with systems as 3/4 from Olympus and Panasonic and the APS-C from Sony and Samsung.

    With 3 or 4 prime lenses it will blow way Leica too ( 24mm 1.4, 35mm 1.4, 85mm 1.4 and a 135 1.8)

  • BornOptimist

    This mount is the same size as m43 (same dia), and it also looks a lot like m43. The screews are the same, both position and quantity. Lens locking pin is at the same position, but the three locking flanges are slightly different placed.
    Same dia as m43 – does that tell anything about the lenses? hope not.

    • broxibear

      It does…but the white dot to line up the lens is in the wrong place ?

      • BornOptimist

        Yes, and after some more measuring, the contacts are in a slightly different positions as well. So they are not compatible.

    • BornOptimist

      Hmm, when I look at the m43 mount and compare the locking flanges on these mounts, it actually looks like you could mount m43 lenses on this camera, but probably not mount Nikon lenses on m43 cameras (the space between the flanges are wider on the Nikon mount). Time to do some more measurements…

  • Nikonos

    Looks suspiciously like a sigma mount… anyone else see resemblance??

  • IanZ28

    No thank you Nikon! (and I’m a big supporter and fan)

    Good luck with this one Nikon. Couple of years too late and a few hundred dollars short. If I were buying into a new lens mount and the small sensors of these mirrorless camera’s at this point it would be the Pen which is already into it’s 3rd generation if I’m not mistaken.

    Why not just do what these camera’s are hinting at?

    A full frame digital FM3 for under $2000!

    – OR –

    A DX sensor M9 like rangefinder.

    We want better image quality. Not some tiny crappy sensored interchangeable lens compact. Nikon you’ve dropped the ball on this one if this is the product that is going to be released.

    • Not Conform

      +1 !!!

    • http://tumbleweed-092.livejournal.com Slow Gin

      No DX sensored rangefinder, go full-frame!

    • Oilymouse

      That’s it, keep barking at the company you love so much. Some people here say they are “off” to Sony of Fuji, in search for a new home. I say: so long.

      If this continues, Nikon will be a really cool company in my book soon. More like Pentax, Olympus or Fuji. Showing some guts and originality, instead of that boring risk-averse battle-for-the-masses with Canon. In the end, it only results in silly comments by fanboys that sum up all the reasons why they shouldn’t be in love with Nikon anymore.

      Any new system will only enrich the market as a whole more. The third generation PEN is awesome, and Nikon deserves a big cheer for trying to find it’s place in the post-DSLR world. Never before was photography so interesting from a technology perspective. Just enjoy the ride, but don’t expect Nikon to make the perfect camera for you all the time.

  • photdog

    Nikon became great with high quality stuff
    … and it will go down with crap like this
    They’d better remember their old core competencies.
    Make it Nikon-Level – or don’t make it

    • IanZ28

      Agreed!

      See a couple post above.

  • disiderio

    I’ve all but given up on nikon when it comes to anything but their SLR’s.

  • The Man from Mandrem

    I actually like the tiny CCD. I have faith in a “Moore’s law of Image CMOS, where each year the size and cost of an equivalent performing chip scales at some factor.

    None of the big guys are competing with GoPro and HDContour– who in turn don’t have the wide aperture interchangable lenses. I want something like a Q Mount with a tiny body, 2 hour storage, no display, blu tooth to iPhone with Apps to use it as a display, download+process images, and control the camera. That and housings so I can toss a camera in a clear ball with the kids, strap it to a cycle or a mast, put it in a tiny RC rocket sub or put it in an RC helicopter.

    Someone’s going to ultimately make that. I want Nikon to.
    You’d have thought some of Ashton Kuscher or Chase Jarvis’s Cool would have worn off on them, but sadly…

    • IanZ28

      Man from Mandrem,

      GoPro is essentially a compact camera (tiny sensor) with a fixed lens in a weatherproof shell.

      from their website:
      “Sensor Type: 1/2.5″ HD CMOS, 2.2µm-sized pixels”
      “Aperture: f/2.8 (high performance in low-light situations) @ 127 degrees FOV”
      “Video Format: H.264 compression, saved as Windows- & Mac-compatible MPEG4 (.mp4) file”

      Brilliant idea and execution. The quality and results are awesome for the price!

      However the “gopro” is a completely different animal than the still image machines we discuss here.

  • broxibear

    If Nikon and Canon battled on a chess board, LensRentals think it would look like this…
    http://gizmodo.com/5823597/if-nikon-and-canon-battled-on-a-chess-board-it-would-look-like-this

  • Jabs

    Hey Administrator

    Off Topic, but = Why we love our Nikon’s

    http://businesscenter.jdpower.com/news/pressrelease.aspx?ID=2011105

    Go Pro Nikon – Top of the heap – yippeee – lol

  • Ronan

    I’ll let the IQ and Quality speak for itself.

  • lox

    Wait, is this the thing that “reinvents photography” and “makes things come true that never happened before”? (I didn’t look through the archive for the whole interview.)

    Even to advanced users, this is absolutely useless. A compact camera with interchangeable lens, who requested that? I do hope that Nikon will not burn too much money here.

    I want a SIMPLE mirrorless camera with FULL MANUAL controll, a BIG sensor and FULL HD video capabilities. What’s so hard to understand about that? Argh, I will never ever see this come (with a Nikon label on it).

  • Ed212

    Wow that sucks. M43 it is. And this year!

  • photoSmart42

    This is a FAIL for me. Sensor is way too small. m4/3 proved you can make 2x sensors with small lenses. NEX proved it can be done likewise with an APS-C sensor, and Leica proves it can be done with a FF sensor. There’s absolutely no reason to go this small. I would have preferred APS-C, I would have enjoyed something in between APS-C and m4/3, I could have lived with m4/3-like size because of the system. Anything smaller is a no-go. Oh well.

  • ruhtard

    I am calling BS on this one. No way they would do this.

  • kevrev123

    I don’t believe it’s Nikon because that white dot at top makes me think the lens rotates clockwise to mount instead of anti-clockwise.

    I think this is Canon’s mirrorless.

    • BornOptimist

      It does rotate clockwise, but so does it in all the Nikon patents that exsist.

  • goose

    hey, maybe they’ll release 0.7/f lenses… or not possible?

    • Sky

      right… f/0.1 for Nikon!
      LOL

      I’ll be surprised if they gonna release f/1.4 lens. So far this is something on the edge of impossibility for mirrorless cameras.

      • Oilymouse

        You seem lost: M43 has the Voigtländer Nokton that comes in at a nice f/0.95.

        If you take into account the normal 4/3rds 1.4 lenses, as well as all the legacy stuff (Takumar, anyone?) you will find (like me) it’s hard to choose, really.

        Granted, if you want autofocus at f/1.4, you need to get the Leica 25mm. Nice lens.

    • http://tumbleweed-092.livejournal.com Slow Gin

      Fast lenses on a sensor that small is a pure nonesense. DOF matters.

      • Oilymouse

        Slow Gin, this seems a bit insane, because a) for shallow DoF you actually need f/1.8 or faster on M43 (obviously), and b) smaller sensors produce more noise and therefore need all the light they can get (obviously).

  • Piero Mauro

    I don’t think this sensor will be any less than a 1/1.7 similar to the one used in the P7000.
    The results of the P7000 are great mainly in outdoor. Now with good interchangeable lenses the result should be amazing. They still need to have a strong and professional touch and finish for both the lenses and body. Lenses will have to be used for several other bodies to come, so they need to withstand time.

    • http://www.tomx.eu Tomas X

      The sensor will be 1-inch. This is on the half way between 4/3 system and well known old 2/3 sensors of Nikon 8400 or Olympus 8080. The camera would be very small. Nikon does not want to make rival for D3100, but he wants make rival for compacts, ultrazooms and smaller cameras than m4/3.

  • paf

    biggest crap factor from Nikon to hit the marked to date…

    and on top of it, 4/3 from Nikon 2 years late…. (yawn).

    As for me – Ashton can have it and even make few babies with it. The X810L, X810P, X810Q… No thanks.

    Way to go Nikon to sink even lower.

  • http://www.tomx.eu Tomas X

    We know from the patents Nikon mirrorless will be 1-inch sensor. The wide end of the zoom lenses will be 9mm and 10.5mm.

  • nobody

    I must say I can’t understand all you naysayers! The mirrorless system is not supposed to replace the Nikon DSLR system, it’s meant to be an addition.

    It is not the system for enthusiasts, it’s the system for those who want something smaller than a D3100.

    With a 2.6 crop sensor it would sit right in between the 1.5 crop DSLRs and 4.6 crop compact cameras like the P7000. This would be a new market for Nikon and I’m sure this would sell very well.

    And it may even become interesting for enthusiasts as a second camera that supplements their DSLR. Just imagine that your humble 300mm f4 suddenly resembles an 800mm lens. Not bad at all!

    After all, this could prove to be a very good decision for Nikon.

    • Sky

      “It is not the system for enthusiasts, it’s the system for those who want something smaller than a D3100.” – I don’t know if you noticed, but people who want something smaller are enthusiasts – they look for supplementary camera for the DSLR, but one offering quality, not tiny-joke-sensor.

    • IanZ28

      Anyone can buy a D3100 and a couple of lenses for $600 or so. Those lenses can then migrate up into a higher quality camera body.

      Micro-crap sensor alienated mount system upgrades into ????????????

      I rest my case.

      The target market for this camera is either complete amateurs or idiots with too much cash. This has nothing to do with threatening DSLR sales. It has everything to do with being a marketing blunder.

      (I’m one who bitched at the naysayers about the 40mm f2.8)

      • Oilymouse

        You’re right: it’s a lens thing, and you could also take this the other way around: say you have invested a few thousand units in really nice lenses, would they be completely useless with this mirrorless system? How about possible future mirrorless systems by Nikon?

        P&S buyers just buy another camera/phone every two years, so they really shouldn’t care much about all this. I guess pro’s probably want to stick to their current FX lens base, so I doubt this is for them.

        That leaves the enthusiasts (aka forum dwellers), who either accept the lower IQ of the new system (and the fact they probably need to buy new lenses), or stick with their DSLRs and hope that Nikon one day offers them a (possibly hybrid) system that supports their lenses. Very possibly, the pro users will get such a system first.

        In sum: this new product category is actually tearing apart the (large) user base that buy entry-level DSLRs. They wanted a G3-like body with an F-mount and an APS-C sensor, 100% ready for their current glass investment. They are not getting this anytime soon, if ever.

        We have no idea whether the tradition called F-mount will simply die during the coming years, but there is no reason not to assume it actually will. In the meantime Nikon will have to build a complete new range of lenses for its mirrorless systems. This takes time and money.

        Real Nikon men & women, show your support: keep buying the latests DSLRs while the new system is invented. It’s a very good system, you know.

        Well, it’s gonna be either that, or Nikon coming up with that EVIL body that focuses all your G lenses at warp speed. And the year after, they will do it for FX, even supporting AF-D lenses via either CDAF or some hybrid scheme. Yeah!

        My bet is all-new lenses. F-mount will be around for the pro’s, but it will not be that relevant in the consumer market in 5-6 years.

  • Fubar

    not dissapointed…VERY dissapointed

  • dgm

    All these ‘disappointed’ comments are soooo funny.
    may be you’re right and then maybe your’re wrong.

    it is fantastic to see so many specialists able to judge the final product image quality just looking at the mount & the theoretical sensor size ! I bow to the collective knowledge displayed here!

    – Who would have guessed that the 4MP DX sensor of the D2Hs could produce so much details ?
    – Who would have guessed that the FF 12MP D3S could go to 100000 ISO?

    You’re turning NR, an excellent rumour site, into a whinning room. I am so VERY disappointed :)

  • http://www.earthrisephotography.com/ earthrise

    Shoot me down but I like it. Initially the concept left me cold but this is not a DSLR replacement, if I want low noise, high IQ and thin DOF I’ll use my FF DSLR. m43 and APS-C will always lag behind FF in these respects. The IQ coming out of the most recent 1/1.7 sensors for me is almost “good enough” for many purposes and this looks bigger. Pentax’s Q sensor is too small, it will always be a toy camera, but this might the sweet spot for small quality camera and lens. If the register distance is slim enough that it can take m mount lenses via an adapter and it does full HD video I’d be tempted to buy. Add me to the testing list :-)

    • Oilymouse

      Hear hear! Apparently, when you have a FF camera, you get the proper “perspective” on these things – haha. As a M43 user, I can tell you that the combination of legacy lenses and HD video in a small package is sweet indeed.

  • Peter

    Wow, big … not! Arent there enough small sensor cameras out there already?

  • Back to top