< ! --Digital window verification 001 -->

Nikon’s mirrorless F-mount adapter will support AF (plus new video mode specs)

Newer Nikkor lenses will be able to AF on the Nikon V1 and J1 mirrorless cameras with a new F-mount adapter

A quick update on the latest Nikon mirrorless camera specs I posted two days ago:

  • The Nikon-F adaptor for their mirrorless camera will support autofocus with AF-S and AF-I lenses (AF-I is the older integrated autofocus technology before AF-S, read more here).
  • The available mirrorless camera video modes will be: 1928x1080 at 60fps and 30fps plus 1280x760 at 60fps. The continuous shooting rate will be 10fps.
This entry was posted in Nikon 1. Bookmark the permalink. Trackbacks are closed, but you can post a comment.
  • noed

    Great. None of my lenses will AF. Well, except my kit lens..

    • MJr

      Screw AF-D !

      get it ? get it ?

      • max

        gut it ;)

    • Sahaja

      This is apparently a tiny plastic camera -would you wan to trust the mount and adapter with anything but lightweight G lenses?

  • thegregferris

    It’ll be 1920×1080. Those framerates match the sensor in the A77, which makes sense (pun intended). Which also means that the codec might be AVCHD2.0

    • thegregferris

      And by framerate I mean the video FPS, not the continuous shooting rate…

    • Paul

      The A77 has a different sized sensor.

    • Sky

      Codec might be different. There’s separate processor for video encoding on the camera, it doesn’t have anything to deal with sensor.
      And the Nikon sensor besides being a tiny dot comparing to A77 sensor is also rumored to be a CCD one.

      • http://www.flickr.com/photos/drscsi Dr SCSI

        “besides being a tiny dot comparing to A77″ ???
        The Nikon sensor will have 1/3 the area of the A77; this is hardly a tiny dot, but yes a smaller sensor indeed. I will say that I don’t think Nikon ever intended for their mirroless to compete against the A77.

        What concerns me though about the Nikon is the high photosite density of 8.4MP/cm squared, which is nearly doubling the density of the D7000 at 4.5MP/cm squared.
        I imagine the ISO capabilities will be poorer when compared to the D7000, but significantly better when compared to a CoolPix.
        Maybe Nikon did a study and discovered there was a point-n-shoot customer base that wanted interchangeable lenses at a price point lower than m4/3. If matched with fast Nikon glass, it may even attract DSLR shooters looking for something smaller, especially with the F mount adapter. A $150 35mm f/1.8 DX lens with an effective focal length of 95mm anyone? How about a $400 50mm f/1.4 FX with an effective focal length of 135mm and f/1.4?!? Now isolating your subject may be a little more difficult because of the cropped sensor, but think about the application in sports. For example, 135mm f/2 FX with an effective focal length of 365mm @ f/2!!! This would make this longer than Nikon’s 300mm f/2.8 telephoto and one stop faster, at about 1/4 the price! Plus, you will always be using the sharpest area of your FX and DX lenses, and higher shutter speeds can be obtained to freeze action. Again, the trade off will be a loss in bokeh and subject isolation. There is no free lunch!

        • Worminator

          F-mount lenses make limited sense on this camera. Too big, poor cost-performance, wrong focal length. The 35/1.8 is one of the few that on the face of it seem like a good match-up.

          I’ve written elsewhere, but: crop multiplier is not going to work the way people are calculating for ultra-telephoto use: the per-pixel image quality goes down as the pixel density goes up, and the sensor size goes down. So yeah it’s easy to get 1000mm, but the image quality will be no better than blowing up the center portion of an APS image.

          • http://www.flickr.com/photos/subhrashis busynbored

            That depends on the quality of lens you put on it…. :)

            Does anyone have a spare 400 2.8 AF-S I can test my hypothesis with ?

            • http://www.flickr.com/photos/drscsi Dr SCSI

              @busynbored,
              As I only have one 400 2.8 AF-S, I will buy a mirrorless and let you know how it works! Sorry, I don’t have a spare 400 2.8 to lend ya.
              :-)

          • Scott

            The DX primes would be well suited to this mount on the tele end. DX to mirrorless is a multiplier of 2.7 but using a 1.5x lens. So the equivalent lens usage would be about 1.8.

            35 1.8 becomes a pretty handy little portrait lens at 94.5 mm
            The 40 2.8 macro becomes a 108 mm 2.8
            The 85 3.5 macro becomes a 230 3.5 macro

            Obviously the telephotos become stupidly huge.

            • Worminator

              That was pretty much my point. 35mm thru 85mm DX lenses make some sense. Anything wider, the lens is far bigger and more expensive than it needs to be, and anything longer is limited to specialized, non-handheld applications like birding/spying/stalking.

              I’m sure people will put the system to some innovating use, it’s just the F-mount lenses are not, in sum, going to all that useful at 2.7x.

            • johan

              No, 35mm is ALWAYS 35mm.

              35*1.0 mounted on FX.
              35*1,5 mounted on DX.
              35*2,7 mounted on mirroless.

        • DeepC

          That will not make any sense because it the cropped area you are talking about not tha actual focal length. Your 135mm f2 will never give a quality of real focal length. Quality wise these mirrorless will be piece of furniture in the low light that too not very low.

          • Worminator

            And f2 is and f2 so far as brightness is concerned, and 135mm is 135mm so far as the DOF is concerned.

            The 135mm does not magically become a 400mm wrt DOF, just FOV.

            The results will be pretty much the same as 10 MP crop of the center section of the image produced by a hypothetical 48 MP FXor 24 MP DX dSLR.

            So in principle the image quality can be extrapolated from the sample shots of the A77 for example. Crop down to the center 10 MP frame, that’s what the Nikon mirrorless will give you.

      • Moth Flopwell

        NEX7 24MP

        This new Mirrorless Camera from Nikon..if NR got the MP right..is just …..10MP….what a joke…we are heading back in time when the D40X was queen!!! lol

        • Worminator

          Pixel count is not important. Pixel count is important.

          Make up your (tiny) mind.

        • Anonymous

          The Canon G12 does pretty good and it’s sensor is even smaller….

  • steve

    Well over at Canonrumors they say that Canon won’t be releasing DSLRs or mirrorless cameras this year. So if Nikon were to do both, they have the chance to really leap ahead of Canon.

    • WoutK89

      Or fall behind by playing their cards too soon in the DSLR game.

      • Anonimouse

        I think it’s beyond the point of a new dSLR being released too soon

        • Ren Kockwell

          +1

    • lolly

      If Nikon’s industrial espionage is doing its job then Nikon can leap ahead. I have no doubt that Nikon knows what Canon is going to release and vice versa. It’s a question of who has the better technology that will leap ahead and stay ahead longer.

      • Moth Flopwell

        NOT with 10mp. no way. Nikon is stuck on 12mp…and for this new camera just only having 10mp…is a HUGE STEP BACKWARDS…this damn camera is dead in the water.

        • Anonymous

          Dead because it is 10 mp? Even if the IQ was better than the ones with Gazillion mps?

        • Ren Kockwell

          Wow. What simplistic drivel. THIS CAMERA IS NOT COMPETING WITH NEX. PERIOD. How many times are you gonna kick that horse? Besides, if you don’t know that 24MP on a DX sensor is like roasting a hot dog over a volcano, then no one here can help you.

          • ich bins

            No problem if taking away the hot dog very quickly, haha. Sensor development is going better so we have to check our opinions.

          • Sahaja

            I expect 10 mp on this sensor is going to have pretty much the came pixel density as 24mp on an APS-C sensor – so if Sony are roasting hot dogs on a volcano, Nikon are too. Sony’s wieners are twice as big though.

        • nah

          this is not an slr. the sensor is not close to the size of an slr’s. go to sleep.

  • sflxn

    The secrecy and wait that Nikon has made us live through is building up to either an epic Fail or epic Wow. Just hurry up and show your hand, Nikon. The more you wait and let others innovate ahead of you, the more you look like you don’t know what you’re doing.

    I’m starting to come around to the opinion Canon and Nikon is tomorrow’s Leica… a bunch of has beens. Sony is looking like the new Nikon.

    • FM2Fan

      Leica is definitely not “has beens” – you seem to have overlooked the cameras of the last years at Leica.

      • sflxn

        Didn’t mean “has beens” as in they no longer exist. Leica has come back strong, but they will never be a primer mover in the photographic industry again. They have a strong fan base (counting myself), but even these fans know that Leica is a niche player.

        Canon and Nikon is allowing these consumer electronics guys do to DSLRs what Canikon’s dslrs did to Leica rangefinder. It only makes sense that the new players be the one to overthrow the kings. DSLRs won’t die and will be around for many more decades, but even Nikon concedes there are a lot of advantages of mirrorless and this form may be the guiding design of photography in the near future.

        • FM2Fan

          They do exist (losing them would be really bad), but the best times are gone. They took too much time for innovation. The S2 was a bit late compared to HD3 and HD4.

          Leica managed the collectors market very well – the brand is valuable although the mass market is defeniely not their ambition.

          Trouble is: Most innovations are about camera usage these days – Leica is only with the S2 present in that domain. everything else is “as is”.

          • MysterF

            What about the glass?
            Do you think sony and Samsung can make glass as Nikon and canon?… I doubt it so much

    • Tim Catchall

      Totally agree. It won’t be long before the top two camera manufacturers are Sony and Samsung. And Nikon and Canon only have themselves to blame.

      • MysterF

        What about the glass?
        Do you think sony and Samsung can make glass as Nikon and canon?… I doubt it so much

        • Sahaja

          What about the glass?

          The Sony / Zeiss 135mm f/1.8 and the other Sony / Zeiss lenses generally seem to be at least as good as Nikon and Canon equivalents.

  • EvanK

    No option for 24 FPS? What’s up with that?

    • Sky

      What’s up with 24FPS craziness amongst photographers?

      • http://AdairCreativeGroup.com Ron Adair

        If you have to ask, you won’t get it.

        I’m convinced that there’s something like 1% of people who claim that 30fps and 60fps is better, and they can probably be classified in the elitist “gamer” or “science-loving geek-photographer wannabe” crowd. Not that there is anything wrong with these people—just that the vast minority shouldn’t be dictating the status quo for the rest of us.

        Show me a right-brained art-dabbler, and I’ll bet they won’t be able to see past the manufactured “problem” of lower bandwidth, despite the aesthetic disparity.

        • Ruben

          If you have a monitor that displayes 30FPS, then yes, you would want 30fps. If you try to sync it up with other cameras that runs at 30fps, then yes, you want 30fps…
          The 24 vs 30fps has nothing to do with “gamer/fps hype”. It the simple fact that 24 is a pain to film with. Worse when you got artificial lighting, then you get waves running over your screen.
          I live in Europe, and we have 25. You can’t see the difference on that one frame EXCEPT it will F… your lighting, syncing and playback

          • http://www.bythom.com Thom Hogan

            Not exactly. 24 fps looks different than 30 fps. That has to do with both the perception of motion thing and the shutter speeds used. We have nearly a century of Hollywood films at 24 fps that have caused us to interpret one look as “film” against a bit more than a half century of 60i fps that we interpret as “video.”

            By leaving off 24 fps and only providing 30/60, a company says “this is a video-only camera.” Nothing wrong with that, but it means that there are looks you can’t achieve with said camera.

            • Ruben

              I know 24 looks a bit different, but that wasn’t my point(and i didn’t say 30fps looks more cinematic, because it doesn’t). I said the reason people want 30 is not because of “more FPS = better” but because it works better with lights that run on 60hz power and such. (25fps – 50hz)
              I don’t mind shooting 24, but i do mind scanlines in my picture

            • http://AdairCreativeGroup.com Ron Adair

              Correct me if I’m wrong, but this is controlled by shutter speed and not by fps. I have no difficulty getting rid of fluorescent flicker etc while shooting at 24fps.

          • http://AdairCreativeGroup.com Ron Adair

            I didn’t specifically mention 25p because I don’t live in Europe. Substitute 25p for my references to 24p, and the issue is otherwise the same.

            And I beg to differ—the only way someone could reasonably say that 30p/60p looks more cinematic than 24p is if they think the pinnacle of cinematic achievement is home movies, soap operas, or Monday Night Football in HD.

            As Thom says, if this lacks 24p/25p, this is strictly a video camera, and nothing more (unless you get it as a dedicated slomo cam).

            And the chances of Nikon offering 30p and 60p only seem awfully low. They would cut out any pro who understands (and is willing to pay for) the immense value of video in a stills camera.

        • Sky

          “If you have to ask, you won’t get it.” – oh do I? Or maybe I simply think that CAMERA role is to make PHOTOS first and foremost. Whatever it does a video or not – it’s just an addition, and one FPS this or other way won’t make any difference for people (US weird system excluded). Especially with a toy like this Nikon.

          Don’t start me here with cinema industry going to buy this camera and that the missing 24p will hurt them – noone serious will be interested in camera like that for video purpose.

          • http://www.bythom.com Thom Hogan

            Despite my personal objection to video in a still camera–it compromises still design features–for a product clearly targeted at consumers I’d agree that it should be video/still. The casual user really doesn’t want to carry around separate video and still cameras on vacation, et. al.

            • Dandydon

              Right, Thom, but a lot of D800 buyers will wonder what they could have had in a still camera if they didn’t have to pay for the movie mode (video or cinema). Personally, I don’t like the thought of paying for it, when that money could have gone to improving the still camera. Sure, it’s fine of the inexpensive p&s crowd, but not thte Pro line.
              Call me old fashioned,
              Don

            • Mark

              @Thom,

              I remain convinced that adding video features to a still camera changes the focus of development and causes compromises in design. I hope, sooo much, that Nikon don’t add video to their flagship cameras. But I am a realist. Or should I say pessimist.

              Mark

          • http://AdairCreativeGroup.com Ron Adair

            @Sky: Like I said before, you don’t get it. Clearly.

        • sirin

          +1
          i’d rather have the camera lack the 60fps, but keep the 24. 30 and 60fps are features. 24fps is a must.

          • http://www.bythom.com Thom Hogan

            But this is the problem with camera design: it follows fads. The current fad is 60P. Last year’s fad was 24P. The previous year’s fad was “any video at all.” It’s called follow-the-leader marketing. Only there’s really no leader ;~).

            • sirin

              yes, but that does not really explain why they would not include 24p at all. i guess Nikon’s mirrorless is not going to attract a lot of independent filmmakers, who need his framerate for a more cinematic look, but still – why not include it?

            • http://www.bythom.com Thom Hogan

              @sirin: depends upon who their target customer is, I suppose. Given that this is a consumer product, you want consumer marketing messages (e.g. “shoot video plus 2x slow motion” versus “shoot three different forms of video plus 2.5x or 2x slow motion depending upon your settings.”). Frankly, this is one thing Apple tends to get right: targeting product to audience and leaving off the extraneous fluff that just confuses the marketing message. Not sure Nikon can pull that off, but I’d like to see them try for a change.

        • SZRimaging

          Frame Rate should be dictated by either what you are shooting, or what the final output should be.

          That said, I have been shooting pretty much everything at 1080p24 and it turns out beautifully, and works perfectly for web distribution (99% of how I distribute finished projects).

          But, when shooting sports, 60fps can be a blessing, especially in post. It really depends on what you are shooting and what you are doing with it.

      • Roeder

        24 fps “simulates” the frame rate of cinematic film.

        http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/24p

        A cinematic camera uses a rotating 180 degree shutter that yields a 1/48 exposure time for each frame. You put the DSLR on 1/50 (closest shutter speed) and 24 fps and you end up with video that is the closest thing to the frame rate and shutter of cinematic film. There’s less of that jagged, overly crisp digital look with a higher shutter speed. Motion has a more fluid blur to it. (although potentially wobbly and gelled out when panning from rolling shutter)

        • Sky

          And that’s the point. 24p won’t be really usable in DSLR video as long as rolling shutter is as huge as it is now. (although Canon 1D and Sony A77 seem to manage this acceptably well)

          Besides that: “cinematic look” is more than a setting of a camera. As same as masterpiece photography isn’t about setting correct exposure. All this BS about “cinematic look” only makes newbie people confused.

          • SZRimaging

            As long as you avoid things like whip pans, I haven’t had too much issue with rolling shutter. That would be with a D7000 at 1080p24. That said, unstabilized or whip panning does introduce it a fair amount.

          • http://AdairCreativeGroup.com Ron Adair

            @Sky

            By the sounds of it, the details elude you. The D3s handles the rolling shutter artifacts beautifully, as does the D7k—certainly as well as the other cameras on the market today. Pretty much all current DSLRs have made huge improvements in minimizing rolling shutter artifacts, and they’re only going to get better.

            Nobody is saying that 24p is the only contributing factor to the cinematic look. But without it, kiss any chance of cinema style goodbye.

            On that same note, the best simulation so far (for those who don’t have 30k+ budgets) is by far the DSLR or mirrorless style camera. But again, it my guess is you aren’t able to identify the difference between something that is cinematic vs. not. This isn’t a problem in and of itself—but you’re not the demographic that’s being targeted with 24p. Not by a long shot.

            You don’t know what you’re talking about = stop talking about it.

  • Paul

    Finally some good video modes.
    Here’s hoping the DSLRs will have manual audio controls and monitoring.

  • RR

    Specs sound good except for the convertion factor 2.5x right? That means my 20mm is a 50mm?

  • C

    It is extremely odd that the video format is 1928 x 1080 & 1280 x 760. I can’t see any camera models having such odd numbers for video (jpg may be), as normally 1080p should be 1920 x 1080 and 720p should be 1280 x 720. I think it may be quite obvious that Nikon is testing the sources of leaking the information by providing odd numbers to this source. If they see 1928 / 760, that means this source is leaking information. So beware.

    • Paul

      Or it could just be a simple typo.

    • Nikon staff

      Thank you. The leak has been identified and terminated.

      • FM2Fan

        +1 but why terminated ? Promotion to product management or marketing is the adequate reaction isn’t it?

    • Dandydon

      I new a VP that used to do that…. he’s gone now.
      Carma gets you

  • http://brettmaxwellphoto.com brett maxwell

    Call me skeptical.

    An F-mount adapter wouldn’t surprise me, but with a 2.7x crop, won’t be very useful.

    The frame rates, both still and video, are what I highly doubt. Those are specs that would compete with professional models, yet with a small sensor and sub $1k price, it’s clearly not intended for professionals.

    • http://www.flickr.com/photos/drscsi Dr SCSI

      @Brett,

      A 2.7x crop will be VERY useful for those shooting tiny birds. My 400mm f/2.8 now becomes a 1080mm lens at f/2.8 and my DoF goes up a little. So now I get more range without having to use a 2x teleconverter, and I am two stops faster than the 400mm with a 2x TC while keeping it sharp!! This all adds up to faster shutter speeds and an ability to posibly freeze birds in flight. It will open all kinds of new possibilities not seen before. The only problem I see is with the photosite densities of 8.5MP/cm squared.

      As the camera is mirrorless, you no longer have a mirror slapping in and out of the way for stills. Video frame rates will depend more on the Application Specific Integrated Circuit (ASIC) chip for the video codecs; the more efficient they are, the more bandwidth they can provide. This is evolutionary in this market, not revolutionary. I am certain if you were to look under the hood of cameras offering the same video specifications that you would discover the same ASIC manufacturer exists in all of them.
      A professional doesn’t care about the price alone. They care about the results they can obtain with the tool in hand, at a pricepoint which makes business sense, and their ability to deliniate themselves from the masses using said tool.

      • Dandydon

        speaking of photosite densities, what on earth would we be looking at if the new smaller sensors were 18-24MP? I understand that that uninformed consumer will just want more MPs, but at what price. Dr. SCSI, care to calulate the density out for a 24MP 2.7 crop sensor. I’m tired of cyphering today.
        don

        • http://www.flickr.com/photos/drscsi Dr SCSI

          @Dandydon,
          At 24MP, you will have a density of 20.25MP per square centimeter, when factoring for a 2.7 crop. I wouldn’t be interested in anything that high, as I don’t thinks it would provide worthwhile ISO capabilities. I ocassionally shoot with an Olympus Zx-1 that I bought for my wife, and although the camera has an excellent zoom optic, image quality does suffer somewhat at ISO 800 and up; this is due to the insane photosite density and is typical of point and shoot cameras. If Olympus would take the optic specifications of the Zx-1 and increase its size to accomodate the m4/3 format, I really think they could clean house with just that lens alone. But I doubt they will do that since it wouldn’t allow them to market 4 other prime lenses to cover the same focal range.

  • Roeder

    All the nay sayers on here can STFU. This camera sounds promising and I’m sure the next full frame DSLR is going to blow everyone out of the water.

    • Anonymous

      +1

  • http://www.boehm.com.au Tim Boehm

    cool, that makes my nifty fifty a nifty one twenty five. Not sure what use that will be but I’m sure I’ll find somehthing

  • http://www.flickr.com/KaceyJordan CaryTheLabelGuy

    This will be fun with one of my super telephotos! My 80-400 would become a 216-1080mm monster.

    The video specs seem a little odd. I’m excited to see 60fps @ 1080p, but don’t want 24fps to go away. It is my frame rate of choice for documentary work as well as film making.

    • http://nikonrumors.com/ [NR] admin

      The above specs may not be complete or may have some mistakes.

      • http://AdairCreativeGroup.com Ron Adair

        Exactly—Nikon has nothing to gain by omitting 24p, and everything to lose. I’m betting this is incomplete spec.

      • http://www.flickr.com/KaceyJordan CaryTheLabelGuy

        Knowing Nikon and their perfection of 24p, I doubt very seriously 24p is not going to be included.

  • R!

    This is so stupid , with a sensor this small they should make a medium format adaptator!!!!!…..almost ready to swich brand.

  • 10MP

    So that’s what all the hype was about concerning the video features??? I seriously hope there is something missing because the 4 Sony cameras just released can all do that with bigger sensors and if I’m not mistaken Cannon T3i or whatever the heck it is can almost do it. I hope for the sake of the company there’s more than that otherwise this thing is DOA…and they could be in for some serious financial trouble, considering they have forecasted a substantial increase in sales and revenue for this next quarter???? I would be scared, very scared, if I were one of their Execs.

    • http://AdairCreativeGroup.com Ron Adair

      “Cannon [sic] T3i or whatever the heck it is can almost do it”

      It can’t do 1080/60p. That’s a pretty big leap from 720/60p.

      And the video from the Canon crop sensors isn’t anything to write home about.

      • http://www.bythom.com Thom Hogan

        Technically, it’s not a big leap at all. Most DSLR video is 720 in format to start with (they don’t sample 1080 pixels). The only thing that’s required is that your imaging ASIC be fast enough to do upsampling from 720 to 1080 in the compression cycle. We know Canon’s current DIGIC is capable of that, so it must be that Canon simply left that feature out. Either that or they have some less capable DIGICs in the low-end cameras still.

        • RichST

          I don’t think internal resolution is set at either 720 or 1080, it’s most likely a fraction of their sensor width (one-third, one-fourth, etc) depending on how they’re sampling. The one exception is the telecrop modes on some cameras. Even the best consumer video capable camera, the GH2, is not delivering quite all it can at 720, though much closer than other cameras. Downsampling a still on the GH2 to 1280×720 still gives you a better picture (but just slightly) than a frame grab off video. Get it down to quarterHD (960×540) and the two images become pretty much indistinguishable.

          That’s why I was hoping this camera might get its video by a full sensor scan, the resolution and IQ would be spectacular. It would be the first real camera built on the concept of convergence (which is coming). With a camera that is a true hybrid you should be able to pull a frame grab off the video and have it look as good as a 2mp still. And likewise your burst rate would be a bare minimum of 24fps.

          Normally I wouldn’t expect anything so bold from Nikon, they’ve been conservative and are now lagging behind when it comes to video, it’s just there had been some clues that this thing might have been a real hybrid (motorized zoom lenses, extremely fast EXPEED processor, relatively modest pixel count, the unusual smaller sensor size, etc). Now I’m really left puzzled as to what innovative concepts Nikon brings to the table to distinguish their new camera from the competition, who have a big head start (excepting Canon of course).

          • http://www.bythom.com Thom Hogan

            Well, things are changing. But in most of the video to date, the sampling is indeed set to some fixed number of vertical pixels (e.g. 720) regardless of the sensor size. That’s one of the reasons why we see a lot of cameras that can’t show you the exact crop of the video until you’re in a video mode.

            As for getting video from a full sensor, a 10mp camera would be about 3600 photosites across, which means you can’t quite get 2x 1920. Indeed, I’d think that the slight upsampling of 1800 (remember Bayer) to 1920 would be slightly problematic.

            Finally, I’ll make a bit of a bet here. I’m guessing that the NEX-7 and its 24mp are going to eventually disappoint a bit to expectations. I’m guessing that Nikon’s new system will actually be better received than anticipated. I can’t yet say why I bet the latter, but if you were to carefully read the specs that NR published you might notice a couple of small things that, taken together, should raise some eyebrows. For example, a P7100 is 10mp and has far smaller photosites and doesn’t have phase detect AF. We’re talking about a small camera. Could this be the P series Coolpix a lot of people have been waiting for? How does a G12 look compared to it? ;~).

            Mirrorless is going a lot of different directions, it seems. We have at least four very distinct takes on it: Nikon’s, Olympus/Panasonic, Ricoh’s, and Samsung/Sony. Each has defined a slightly different balance of features and performance. Each should entice some users if the companies get their marketing targeted correctly.

            • iamlucky13

              I’ve mentioned several times my hunch that Nikon may be planning a series of both interchangeable lens and point-and-shoot style cameras built around this sensor.

              I think it would be a great overall move for them. Like you’ve argued many times in the past – in the consumer market, they need to give their products clear advantages over cell phones.

              But the timing seems odd. They released the P7100 a month before the mirrorless. I guess we won’t be seeing a large sensor point-and-shoot from Nikon any time soon.

            • rhlpetrus

              I’m curious about the PD/CD AF comparison on the same camera with longer lenses, specially.

              I wished they had a slightly faster basic 10-30mm zoom, something like f/2.8-f/4. That would have been a noice lens. And what about a portrait prime, like a 30mm f/2, that would be nice.

              Hope Nikon develops lenses better than m43 so far (NEX lens system is horrible).

            • BornOptimist

              @rhlpetrus – Nikon has patented a 32mm f1.2, which is 90mm on a ff. Maybe this could be a decent portrait lens?

  • http://www.sdphoto.com.au Sam

    Looking forward to seeing someone put a 70-200 (or larger) on one of these. Becomes a nice 175-500

    • Sky

      Well, that’s certainly and advantage for some people – imagine mounting 500mm lens on that – you can shoot craters on the moon! lol ;D Pity that they will be covered by noise from tiny CCD sensor, but never the less – it’s something potentially impressive.

      • Carsten

        Noise is perhaps a lesser problem than resolution. The pixel density is so high that only the best lenses will give a satisfactory performance.

        Vignetting will be definitely not a problem:-)

        • BornOptimist

          It’s hardly much different than the new 24MP sensor from Sony. The pixel size are not that different (11.7 um^2 vs 14.8 um^2).

          • Carsten

            Well, this is correct and exactly what I expect from this sensor as well. But it will allow for a weaker AA filter and reduce artifacts from the demosaicing so that this can get clearer images, you may call it oversampling – with a 10MP sensor you don’t have this luxury.

            Or in other words: The pics will look like crops from a D400 (if this ever comes out and uses the A77 sensor)

          • http://www.flickr.com/photos/drscsi Dr SCSI

            @BornOptimist,
            That is still nearly twice the density of the D7000; what kind of ISO performance do you think we can expect? Plus, the Sony A77 hasn’t shown any stellar images yet.

            • BornOptimist

              That’s not the point. The point is what you can expect from the a77/NEX7 regarding low noice @ high ISO the same you can expect from the CX sensor.
              @Sky, the reputation of low noice from any sensor is by far created by Nikon using their own sensors (D3/D700/D3s).
              If you compare noice levels on D300 vs a700 it’s an easy winner. Same with D7000 and equ Sony cam – easy pick. It’s not so much about the sensor manufacturer but the image-handling in software.

            • http://picasaweb.google.com/roger.ethan.moore Roger Moore

              If it’s twice the density of the D7000, you can expect something like one stop worse high ISO performance. Given that the D7000 looks pretty good at ISO 1600 and still usable at ISO 3200, I’d expect the new cameras to do pretty good at ISO 800 and still usable at ISO 1600. For video, where noise is less obtrusive, I’d expect it to be usable at least a couple of stops higher than that.

          • Sky

            Only Sony has CMOS sensor and a good history of making stunning sensors. Nikon will use CCD sensor of the widely-appreciated company X known from stunning quality CCD sensors. So surely it will match A77 quality. [/sarcasm]

  • John

    Hmm . . . I hope the adapter will allow the use of AI/AIS MF glass and have AF assist/confirmation (like the D7K, D300, D700, etc.).

    Even if it can use existing Nikon glass the pixel pitch is so fine not many lenses can be sharp enough for this sensor, so some may be disappointed.

    • http://www.flickr.com/photos/drscsi Dr SCSI

      “I hope the adapter will allow the use of AI/AIS MF glass and have AF assist/confirmation (like the D7K, D300, D700, etc.)”

      The AF assist in the D3/D700 is very good, but in the D300, it is not as accurate. Hopefully, Nikon has perfected the AF sensor in this mirrorless model.

      You are right about the pixel pitch, but the image circle will be coming from the middle of the lens, typically the sharpest area. I wouldn’t try this camera with a f/4.5-5.6 zoom lens, but a good fast prime, even old fast primes are probably fine and will provide very good results.

  • http://toddwalkerphotography.com Vintage D200

    I’ve almost run the wheels off my old D200, ready for an upgrade. But if Nikon doesn’t shape up and release new DSLRs soon, I’m jumpin’ ship to another brand. I’ll be looking at Sony first.

    • Glenn

      I’m with you. It’s hard to believe how long Nikon has waited to update their DSLR’s. It’s not like the old days of 35mm film; each camera revision is actually a “film” upgrade as well. Sony’s on top of things, while Cannon and Nikon appear to be coasting on reputation.

      • http://www.flickr.com/photos/shigzeo/ shigzeo

        I’ll be jumping to something mirrorless, but nothing 2,7x crop. I am hoping for Fuji’s M mount (if it appears). Voigt lenses are cheap and sharp and small. That is what I want.

    • Ric

      Send me your lenses

  • NG42

    So much for this camera having unique video capabilities. Check out the new Sony Nex 5N. These cameras should be like $499 and $599 at most. They offer nothing over the competition except an inferior sensor. I can’t believe this is what Nikon comes up with. Slow lenses, tiny sensor, and a high price- this camera is as dumb as the Pentax Q. Nikon would like to imagine they live in a bubble where all they have to do is introduce a mirrorless camera and people will come flocking- because it’s a Nikon. Note to Nikon- other companies are doing it and doing it cheaper and better. This isn’t like the DSLR world where you dominate. Just scrap this camera and go back to the drawing board.

    • RichST

      Well I guess they’re going to let that superfast processor go to waste, I don’t see any numbers there that would call for anything remotely so demanding. Video specs are OK but it sounds like they’ll be generating it by the standard binning/subsampling/addition modes instead of doing a full sensor scan.

      • BornOptimist

        What you see here is the final output from the camera, not what you sample from the sensor. Nothing in these information say anything about how much strain they put on the Expeed3 engine. BTW is it even possible to sub-sample a CCD sensor?
        In CMOS you address each pixel, but that is not done on a CCD sensor

        • http://www.bythom.com Thom Hogan

          Subsample a frame grab sensor? Not exactly. Nikon has had several partial grab (channels) sensors along the way. The D200, for instance was a two-grab CCD. So it’s possible that they subsample, I suppose, but not likely. It’s easier to just grab all the information and throw some away.

          • BornOptimist

            Hi Thom
            The two channel readout from the D200 sensor was also it’s achillesheel. Because of this there was quite a bit of vertical banding in high contrast areas. I sent mine in for recalibration, but still there was a lot of banding. That camera has been the only Nikon DSLR I have not been satisfied with.
            I hardly believe Nikon will do this fadese by using multi channel readout again on a CCD sensor. This is also why I doubt the CCD rumor. I believe it’s a translation error from Chineese to English.

          • RichST

            A lot of the recent compact CCD cameras offer 720 video modes so they must be doing some sort of subsampling or binning to get there

      • http://www.flickr.com/photos/drscsi Dr SCSI

        Nikon did mention new features, right? Lets speculate here…In camera HDR maybe? Special effects for Cinetography? Maybe they have plans for the excess processor capacity.

        • Sky

          These suppose to be new features! Not the old one known from other brands. :)

          • http://www.flickr.com/photos/drscsi Dr SCSI

            @Sky,
            Maybe Nikon met new features in the sense that it is a new feature to the Nikon lineup. ;-)

    • Dandydon

      Sadly, you can go back through history and site time after time when the best product did not win the war. It’s all about marketing, and time to market, and image (NO Pun intended) Most consumers will not compare the hard test data. They will see little mister Demi-ex on the TV and run out and buy that camera. It’s a sad world.

  • grumps

    Nikon is really annoying my socks off again. We all know the sensor is small, but it’s silly that anyone would want to mount a tiny sensor to a big lens which totally destroys all the good:
    1)DOF will be huge making IQ no different to other point and shoots despite good fast lenses.
    2) Crop factor to any good ultra wide lens. So if you had a 14mm, it’s very likely to be larger than 30mm equivalent on 35mm (Somebody do the math).
    3)Front heavy anyone?

  • NiknWontRepairMyGray

    With such a tiny sensor, the depth of field will always be huge. No need for AF.

    • http://www.bythom.com Thom Hogan

      At f/4 and 10mm on this camera, if we focus at 5 feet the DOF will be 3.13 to 12.45 feet. The hyperfocal distance at f/4 is 8.3 feet. Yes, that’s more DOF than we’re used to, but it isn’t exactly as huge as you might think. Start zooming in and you’ll find that you need that focus system.

      • Dandydon

        Hey, has anyone thought of the opposite end of the focal length? How will you get a very wide FOV? The smallest I’ve heard is 10mm which translates to 27mm…not very wide. Even the 8mm lenses out there would be about 22mm.
        How would you get an effective 10mm lens? That would be 10/2.7 = 3.7mm. Anyone have an extra 4mm lens laying around for my new mirrorless for real wide angle?

  • http://nikonkrab.multiply.com/ HotDuckZ

    If they don’t make this adaptor I will cry like a baby. :(

  • Peter

    Someone explain how attaching a forexample AF-s 300mm to this will bring any subject closer if the image is cropped…?

    Or are we getting an adapter which brings the lens closer to the sensor, limiting closest focus distance?

    • Carsten

      No, the the adapter will be primarily a spacer to adapt the flange distance to the F-mounts distance. The effect of 2.5x focal is only caused by the cropping through the smaller sensor area

    • Dandydon

      The same way a D300 bring the image closer than a D700. I really doesn’t, it’s the same as if you took a crop out of the middle of the D700 to give you the equivlent of the 35mm equivilent on the D300. Clear as mud. It why DX folks get different DOF at 300 than a FX at 300. The DX DOF at 300 is like the FX at 200, only it has been blown up to look like 300. DX users get none of the other effects of a 300mm lens used, only the size look.
      God, I’m finding what I live with hard to explain. Know what they say, you don’t really know something until you try to teach it.

  • http://ronscubadiver.wordpress.com Ron Scubadiver

    So we get a mirrorless body that turns our 50 into a 135. Well, it’s a fast 135.

    • http://haroldellis4444@gmail.com Harold Ellis

      no, it will turn 50mm to 135mm with DOF of like f8, noise level like ISO6400 and blurry since it will be using only tiny area of the lens.
      Maybe some lenses will be able to resolve that but unlike you like birding from huge distances and low image quality, this adapter makes no sense for you

      • http://ronscubadiver.wordpress.com Ron Scubadiver

        A camera with a 2.7 crop factor makes no sense for me when micro 4/3 has a crop factor of 2.

      • rhlpetrus

        Why noise level of 6400? Compared to what and at what setting?

        And why blurry?

      • Dandydon

        I’m not fully understanding how the image of 500mm will look any crappier (is that a word) than the image from 10mm on a given sensor. If you used that same lens (200) on an FX 12MP camera and then crop in to the 2.7 crop factor, how many pixels would you have?…. centainly not 10MP, but with this sensor you will, no?

  • Paul

    Yes!! I’m so excited! I’m definitely gonna get one!

    • BornOptimist

      I’m holding out to see what user interface they use. If heavily depending on touchscreen, then ehhhhh…. I will wait. If a “normal” button/command wheel interface, then YES I’m also getting one.

  • forest

    For those into video and concerned about the small size of the sensor, all things are relative. The Sony HX9V has a tiny sensor (smaller than the new Nikon mirrorless) and can produce video that will blow your socks off for such a compact form factor. The HX9V is causing a stir in video circles as a serious ‘run & gun’ tool. Wait and see what comes out of the Nikon first before dismissing it.

    • http://ChasingTheInspiration.com A.Lwin

      There is no doubt that the video capability of this upcomming mirrorless camera may produce good quality video. However, with such a tiny sensor for making videos, one might as well buy a proper video camera. The reason why people like videos on (currently existing DSLRs) photo cameras is due to the larger sensor sizes, which brings forth all the creative advantage of photography into videos (thin DOF, low light capability, etc.) and not to mention the lower price. A proper video camera with APS-C or FF sensor costs several times more than a Nikon D3s.

      • forest

        A Lwin, I agree that DSLRs can have great attributes such as shallow DoF which you can only achieve with more expensive camcorders. There will be limitations with the new Nikon mirrorless, but the sensor size is still larger than many consumer camcorders, and in a much smaller body. If it can produce good clean video in low light it is an interesting alternative. However, image stabilisation and audio functions are also important and the Nikon may fall short in those areas in comparison to a camcorder. To state the obvious, a lot will depend on price. If the camera retails at around $900 then a good consumer camcorder begins to look more sensible.

        • Sky

          Yep, price will tell us most of the things.

          Though my best bet is that for the video you can end up better buy getting used Panasonic m4/3 camera – these have very good capabilities, bigger sensor, probably better low-light quality, and most likely: far far lower price. :)

  • AnoNemo

    The best part is that these little crappy Nikons will also have better video than Nikon’s entire FX line has including the flagship D3s for $5,000. I guess something is wrong with this picture.

    • http://ChasingTheInspiration.com A.Lwin

      To sum it up: Nikon didn’t think about how to implement the video feature in their cameras until now, they just wanted to boost sales by introducing video as a novelty feature. They may have introduced the video feature first with the D90, but Canon did a better job at implementing it. That cost Nikon a few years playing catch-up. But then we have to keep in mind that companies like Canon and Sony have a professional/consumer video recording device manufacturing devision, Nikon doesn’t. I doubt Nikon had ever thought that video with a DSLR would attract a lot of people, even from the professional field.

      • BornOptimist

        I don’t think it was how they decided to implemented it. They simply didn’t have the bandwidth in the Expeed engine of it’s time to implement anything higher than 720p. So they were forced to use pick between 1080i and 720p and choosed 720p

        • http://ChasingTheInspiration.com A.Lwin

          I agree about the bandwidth issues for the 720p and 1080p, however even with the 720p, the could’ve added support for 24(23.97)/25/30p(29.97), which they didn’t.

        • forest

          How Nikon implement full HD 60p (and I hope 50p will be available too in a PAL version) in this camera will be a new benchmark for them and will also show how they will do it in their next DSLRs too. Yes, I think they have been struggling to keep up on the video front but I’m hoping they have got their act together in the new mirrorless. I am always surprised how some people posting on forums like this are quick to condemn a camera even before they have seen anything of it and what it can produce. Let’s give Nikon a chance and not jump to conclusions.

        • RichST

          Sony was probably much more responsible then Nikon for determining whether the camera had 720 or 1080 video. 1080 on Sony APS-C chips didn’t show up until they debuted their EXMOR sensor last year

    • BornOptimist

      You compare a camera that does not even exist to a 2 year old camera, and complain that the new camera is better ???
      Why not compare the camera that does not exist to an other camera that does not exist, the D4. But you will probably still complain.

      • Anonymous

        Because he is a Canon troll that comes to this site to complain!

  • simpleguy

    first good thing i hear , is that they finally did able to acheive 60fps
    that probably means next dslr , will also be able to do 60fps , just hope they dont drop the good old 24fps

  • Joseph

    Hmm, if this camera supports unlimited time for recording (or at least more than 5 minutes!) as well as manual exposure control in regards to aperture and ISO I might get two for video work exclusively (concerts and events, DOF doesn’t matter).

    • Joseph

      17-35mm f/2.8 for a wide shot and 55mm f/2.8 macro for close-ups, both at like f/4, should look really good I hope. The 55 won’t AF but I don’t care.

      • http://haroldellis4444@gmail.com Harold Ellis

        in which world would be lens 45 – 94mm considered “wide” ?
        why would one even buy 1,3k lens which weights a kilo?

        • Joseph

          It’s wide enough for my purposes, and I already own the lens! duh

          • http://haroldellis4444@gmail.com Harold Ellis

            lol

  • AtlDave

    A high frame rate also means the camera will be able to read data off the sensor quickly while focusing. Hopefully with native CX mount lenses (or whatever name Nikon decides on) the new cameras will be able to focus quickly enough to rival entry level SLRs.

    With older F mount lenses I would not expect fast focus bases unless a translucent mirror and phase detect focus system is a part of the adapter. Apparently on lenses designed for phase detect focus the priority is for motors that can go between 2 points that may be far apart as quickly as possible while for contrast detect you need a motor that can make small changes at a very high rate. I am not sure about the explanation but that SLR lenses focus slowly when contrast detect autofocus is used it well established.

    I am not sure if I will buy one these adapters or not. If a phase detect system is part of the adapter it will be expensive. If it is not included focus will be slow. Being able to use my 35mm f1.8 and 90mm macro would fill in some gaps in the lens line up until native fast and macro lenses are available. And it would be fun to put my 70-300 on the camera to play around with but I already have to stop that lens down for best results on my D90, it would probably be soft when used on the new mirrorless cameras. But if I am going to lug around the big lenses I might as well take my SLR too and enjoy the advantages of the larger sensor and optical viewfinder.

  • Tim

    Who gives a damn to the mirror-less cameras?!!!

    What about the new D800? When on earth will this camera appear?!!! Next year probably!

    • Dweeb

      Weren’t people saying that last year?

    • bart b

      Who cares about D800 ?? Too heavy to carry around.

      • Ken Kochwell

        Real photographers need proper cameras and not ladies pocket cameras.

        • Bart B

          Size only matters in your pants, size doesn’t matter for what carry around your neck ;-)

          • Ken Kochwell

            I have a big python in my pants and my wife loves it. So size matters as it gives better results.

            • http://wealthbuilderbiz.com jdsl

              LOL!!

  • Ken Kochwell

    I do not give a flying f*&K about no stupid mirrorless camera.
    Give me a damn D800!

    • bart b

      Too expensive for 90% of Nikon customers. We don’t care …

      • Ken Kochwell

        Real men use real manly cameras.

        Girls and boy scouts want small pocket cameras because they are too weak to carry a big camera.

        • Bart B

          Then we should go out for a nice week walking in the mountains :-)

          Is your backpack big enough for everything you need (tent, food, Nikon DSLR, …) or do you need a separate bag to carry your photo equipment?

          • Ken Kochwell

            I can carry everything in one large rucksack as I am like Arnie -a big hunk.

            • bart b

              You sound more like a little child to me :-)

  • http://www.eleventhphotograph.com elph

    Maybe someone’s asked this, but why 1280×7*6*0?
    That really complicates things edit wise, why does Nikon always mess up the pixel lengths in their video mode?
    Though this is good, I’m still hoping the D800 will be able to do 120 fps video, if even for 20-30 seconds.

  • http://www.willstrange.co.uk Will

    Okay, I want in. I’m using an E-P1 at the moment but, small sensor or not, I would much prefer something that I can use my AF-S lenses and SB900 flash with seamlessly. Manual flash and adaptors are crap.

    • AtlDave

      Since I bought a SB600 I have become a convert to using bounce flash instead of natural light when taking pictures of people indoors. Even with a fast lens and the decent high ISO capabilities of my D90 trying to get a sharp image of a fast moving grandchild is hard without a flash.

      Unfortunately the new mirrorless cameras do not have a hot shoe. Hopefully they will be able to trigger a larger flash with the small internal or accessory flash. Even if they do I am not sure how well having a flash larger than the camera is going to work. While holding a large lens attached to a small camera feels pretty natural to me holding on to flash would not. While I am hoping there will eventually be some sort of flash solution powerful enough to bounce available for the mirrorless cameras I am not going to give up my SLR right away.

  • Carlos R B

    Thats great…a p300 size body with a 24mm lens (big size)…and giving you a 60mm something field of view…i dont get it…

    • bart b

      Same as Sony does wit the NEX series …. Don’t get it either …. :-)

  • KnightPhoto

    Hmmm… My 24-70 would be 65-190mm FOV. I’m OK with that for video work. And 70-200 provides 190-540 f2.8 FOV which could be interesting for wildlife video work.

    But how will the AF be, will it be able to provide decent continuous AF, and will a 3D-tracking AF Area-Mode be able to follow my subject more accurately than it does on my D7K?

    I would really appreciate a decent AF ability for video, whether it’s with my legacy lenses or some new ones I would have to buy. Rumoured lenses are too slow though (no f2.8 zooms) for what I want to do in video.

    Wouldn’t it be great if Nikon published a lens roadmap together with this announcement – not that I actually expect one ;-) !!

    • BornOptimist

      “Wouldn’t it be great if Nikon published a lens roadmap together with this announcement – not that I actually expect one ;-) !!”

      Yes, that would have been great. Even a development plan of what lenses they foresee, without revealing a timeline would have been great.
      But as you say – I would not hold my breath for anything like this will happen.
      We will receive the traditional marketing blurb “Nikon is dedicated to this system, and will expand both lenses and other accessories over time…”

    • http://www.bythom.com Thom Hogan

      Given that the camera has phase detect AF, one would expect decent focus performance.

      • AtlDave

        Do you expect the PDAF to be a camera feature or only available if the adapter for F mount lenses is being used?

  • sirin

    white full HD at 60fps is a “big step for humanity”, i don’t yet see what exactly would the EXSPEED3 be processing. it sounded to me like it could deliver at least 120fps at 720p. oh well… (

    • LGO

      1080p at 60fps at 28Mbit is really nothing to get excited about. Make that 60Mbit and things will start to get interesting and exciting.

      • sirin

        you probably missed my sarcasm. )

        • LGO

          :-)

          It would seem that the processor has enough to support 1080 @ 120fps. But I should hasten to add that this would not be in keeping with our expectation that Nikon will again disappoint us in the video capabilities of its cameras.

  • Roddy

    It would be much better if this was offered in red.

    • bart b

      You prefer pink ????

      • Ken Kochwell

        Bart you sound like a eunuch – grow some balls ! I’m sure you like to dress up in pink dresses.

  • The invisible man

    I like that mirrorless camera, I could use it as a rear cap for my 400mm f/2.8 !
    :)

    • D3S Guy

      LOL. good idea :)

      • LGO

        Don’t forget the adapter though. :-)

  • big eater

    You guys…. All this means is you’ll be able to use all those awesome Nikkors on a smaller format camera. What’s to complain about.

  • SZRimaging

    If the D300 successor has the same video modes, I may see me upgrading to it…. 60 FPS would be nice when shooting snow.

    • SZRimaging

      That should read snowsports (i.e. Skiing and Snowboarding).

  • Kevin

    Hopefully this mirrorless camera will give nikon revenue to channel it to some new lens/dslrs!

    • f/2.8

      It’s been a money pit so far. And it is fast looking like Pronea deja-vu.

  • ausserirdischegesund

    Photos on Fredmiranda:

    http://www.fredmiranda.com/forum/topic/1043154

    Have these been posted here before? Debunked already?
    Actually I quite like that design, looks classy and professional.

    • RichST

      Admin already has said it’s a fake

    • http://nikonrumors.com/ [NR] admin

      Yes, 100% fake – the source (a Japanese website) is known to produce PS mockups once a rumors hits the web. Note that this mockup came just few hours after my post last week.

      • ausserirdischegesund

        Thanks admin+RichST!

        Hard to remember all mockups and false rumours, even if you follow this site religiously ;)

  • Ciudad

    To do wildlife nature video and stills, you can go to the field with d3s + 600 f4. This is 15k $ and more than 6 kg weight, and you must put it on the sturdiest tripod you can get.
    or go with Afs 300 f4 + adapter + V1. This 810 mm f4 without mirror shake is less than 2k$ and 2kg . Obviously you can´t expect the same IQ, principaly in dim light, but if advanced sensor technology (retroiluminated?) can manage good isos (maybe 800), it can be very good tool.
    I`m in a hurry about comparations.

  • broxibear

    Here’s the mirrorless, it’s a lot smaller than expected and is being given out to NPS members http://www.liography.com/wordpress/wp-content/uploads/2011/09/DSC_6835.jpg not sure about the chain ?

    • RichST

      Wow, it really is small

    • BornOptimist

      Wow, then I have one already. I didn’t know it was the mirroless camera – silly me. On thing though, someone has already copied it, because mine is a different brand, but looks 100% like this.

  • Drunkcaballo

    Since when does everybody with a camera care about VIDEOGRAPHY, when a camera is meant for PHOTOGRAPHY.

    You all sound like someone who bought a Mazda Miata and are complaining you cant tow a boat with it.

    • Bart B

      And you use your cellphone also only for sms and phonecalls ?

      • Drunkcaballo

        I dont complain that my phone doesnt have interchangeable lenses for its camera.

        Yes video is nice, just seems like every thread on this forum lately complains about how far behind Nikon is on video. Nikon makes DSLRs. Yes video is nice to have, but I dont know about you, but I carry a DSLR to take pictures.

        And yes I barely use the camera on my phone. 9/10 times its to take a picture of a price tag, or specs of something when I am comparison shopping.

    • Roddy

      When I purchase a DSLR that costs between $2,000 and $8,000, body only, I feel like I am purchasing the F-250 of cameras. The Mazda Miata is the point & shoot of cameras. The F-250 should pull the Mazda and then some. I agree we should use the right tool for the job, but it seems almost trivial to add HD quality video to a large format sensor, even if it is only using a part of the sensor. It probably is.

      Now, I have to bring the F-250 AND the Mazda Miata to take high quality pictures and video. I don’t need the all the bells and whistles of dedicated professional video cameras. I just need the capability to capture impromptu action clips. I can post-process later. High speeds of 60FPS or greater would be nice, but I would settle for a dedicated tool.

    • ISP ©

      I am 100% with Drunkcaballo ! I dont care about video !
      I do photography…. Video is just a gadget for the masses… I dont need it !
      I want a good senser for photography period !

    • RichST

      It’s all about convergence. Why lug around (or pay for) two cameras when you can get away with one?

      It’s like saying nobody should ever buy a truck since you could always just buy a trailer to tow behind your car. Never mind that it’d be a nuisance and you’d have to pay twice

  • Dibyendu Majumdar

    Hi,

    Now that Nikon’s mirror-less camera seems to be a reality, it is remarkable that this camera was talked about in Jan 2010 here:

    http://forums.dpreview.com/forums/read.asp?forum=1007&message=34316077
    http://forums.dpreview.com/forums/read.asp?forum=1007&message=34362387

    Regards

    • broxibear

      Hi Dibyendu Majumdar,
      People from Nikon do read, and post, on forums like dpreview and here…it’s a pity they don’t LISTEN ! lol.

    • http://nikonrumors.com/ [NR] admin

      Well, dpreview was late because the first mirrorless reports on NikonRumors came on August 5th, 2009 (or maybe even earlier):

      http://nikonrumors.com/category/nikon-evil/page/17/

      I cannot see the specific thread you linked to, but my guess is that they were based on a NR post.

      • RichST

        Yeah look at that, you even had the basic sensor size nailed a couple of years ago

  • the visible man

    really wish nikons colors would be black and silver instead of gold. The black/ silver/ white look is dope. the red swoosh would look sick in white or even grey too.

  • Anand

    Zzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz….. DSLR yet? NO? Zzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz No DSLR? Zzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz….

    Hey Admin, can you wake us up when Nikon has playing these stupid games and introduce a worthy successor to the current lineup of the pro level DSLRs. And don’t bother waking me up for the “Red” version! Jeez!

    • DIX

      Stop whining, NR is sharing the latest news on Nikon products, regardless of how big of a deal it is. If they only made a post each time a new professional DSLR was announced, this site would get awfully boring. Don’t look at the posts if you aren’t satisfied with the material. Or better yet, go find another site to keep up to date on the news.

      • forest

        Quite. If some DSLR users aren’t interested in the new mirrorless, that’s fine. Then don’t read about it. Nikon have cover several markets to stay alive and they do their market research like any other manufacturer. They have obviously decided they just can’t ignore the mirrorless sector. They also have to include a video function to meet customer expectations. Nikon are moving forward and I hope they have a good product in this new camera.

  • http://www.kishorephotography.com Kishore

    wow 1080 at 60p
    hope the d800 does this , will buy it instantly

    • http://AdairCreativeGroup.com Ron Adair

      Agreed!

  • Breuker

    I found this in the Ricoh forum on dpreview:
    http://blog.livedoor.jp/e_p1/lite/archives/51737531.html

    First pictures of Nikon’s mirrorless camera’s?

  • Back to top