< ! --Digital window verification 001 -->

Nikon mirrorless camera will have a CMOS sensor

Pin It

The latest updates: Nikon's mirrorless camera will have a 10.1 MP CMOS sensor (there was some confusion about the sensor type earlier). The exact sensor size should be 13.2 x 8.8 mm. The camera will have a dust cleaning option.

This entry was posted in Nikon 1. Bookmark the permalink. Trackbacks are closed, but you can post a comment.
  • http://AdairCreativeGroup.com Ron Adair

    This camera will suck because the sensor is 8.8mm tall instead of 8.93mm tall. FAIL!

    • Henrik1963

      Why is minus 0,13 = FAIL?

      • Bart B

        minus 0,13 sucks !!!

        • Hamuga

          I used to have a minus 0,13 for a neighbor.
          Then the jerk ran over my dog.
          I HATE him so much!

      • PHB

        I think he might just be commenting on some of the idiots who hink the only significant feature of a camera is the size of the sensor.

      • http://AdairCreativeGroup.com Ron Adair

        Because -0.13 means a boring frame ratio of 3:2 instead of the much more aesthetic ratio of 2.95964126:2, which every serious photographer from the last 10 years knows is the new and emerging standard standard.

        I am so sick of these camera manufacturers holding back the tech just so they can milk more $$$! out of us with later releases. If it’s true that this is really 13.2 x 8.8 instead of 13.2 x 8.93, I am jumping ship, probably along with every other Nikon shooter on the planet. The only people that will stick around with Nikon are those that don’t have a clue about what photography is REALLY about, i.e., the new settled upon ratio for high quality images.

        Let me put it this way—if it fits in a 4×6 frame right out of camera, I won’t buy it. WAKE UP NIKON!!!!

        • http://AdairCreativeGroup.com Ron Adair

          Correction: if it fits in a 4×6 frame right out of camera, nobody will buy it. WAKE UP NIKON!!!!

        • Astrophotographer

          I’m so out of touch. he I thought the new aesthetic ratio was going to be 2.71828183:2!

    • MJr

      I think this sensor might just be bigger than you guys give it credit for.

      It’s twice the width of 1/1.7″ and that means not two but 4 times the surface area …

      This one shows the Nikon Mirrorless inbetween:
      http://i267.photobucket.com/albums/ii301/moviemonster6/sensorsizes.png

      With the size of the P300 and a nice prime it could be one very interesting enthusiast compact that beats the S95 and P300 by miles.

      Sure m4/3 is even bigger but if you think like that, aps-c is again bigger, and why not full-frame. Nikon thought this out. Small body, small lenses, and it fills the gap between m4/3 and 1/1.7 enthusiast compacts perfectly.

      Plus it’s 3:2 and that sure as shit beats 4:3.

      • http://www.flickr.com/eparks Eric

        I actually prefer the 4:3 ratio (better for portraits), but aside from that I agree. I think this could be a good sensor size for a compact body. I bought an Olympus XZ-1 and have been really impressed by it. This Nikon should do everything the XZ-1 does and then some. It’s pretty simply really, if you want a DSLR replacement buy a m4/3′s or Sony NEX (I’ve already pre-ordered a NEX-7 for that purpose), but if you want something small to compliment a DSLR then 2.7x makes a lot of sense.

        Besides, why do some people (looking at soccer moms/dads everywhere) need APS-C or larger for sharing photos online? They don’t. APS-C is just overkill for most of those people. I’d wager 2.7x is more than large enough for most consumers out there. Heck, I’ve made 8×10″ prints from an iPhone 3Gs that looked fine. Street photographers will also be attracted to this system. Not everyone needs a 20mp DX or FX sensor.

        • SxMW

          Well, with that logic, why does someone need interchangeable lenses to post photos online? You said yourself an iPhone is enough…

          I think the big question is, are there really enough people out there who think the quality of the XZ-1 is simply not enough, but that an E-PM1 w/ the 1.7/20mm lens to too big? Even if there are, Nikon’s lenses better be tiny…

          • Eric

            The iPhone is fine for some street snaps (which is what I printed), but it’s a might bit difficult to take photos of your kids from 200′ away with one. Interchangeable lenses or a super zoom is needed for that. I’m guessing this new Nikon will be just about perfect for that need as well as for those people looking for a travel camera. If they make a tiny ultra wide zoom hikers everywhere will flock to it if nothing else.

            That said, the Panasonic GF3 is indeed tiny, so these lenses better be pretty dang small because I can’t imagine needing a body smaller than a GF3.

  • Ren Kockwell #4

    #YIPPEE

    • Sergey

      It was easy to keep THIS camera a secret. Very few people care about it.
      (-:

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

      But if they end up matching them in ISO performance….
      Any idea if they will be priced above or below m4/3rds ?

    • iamlucky13

      Not by linear dimensions, which are of interest to field of view and depth of field considerations, but by area, which correlates to light gathering capacity.

      It’s 51.6% of the area of the M4/3 sensor – all else being equal, you would expect a 1 stop performance difference.

      It’s also just under a stop and a half bigger than the 1/1.7″ sensor size.

      It seems clear where Nikon was aiming with this sensor.

    • RichST

      Or put another way, twice the size of a 2/3 sensor (which is 8.8 x 6.6)

    • Tonio

      But lens size and weight go down as the square and cube of sensor size, and the wide mount allows for folding lens designs which gives us a pocketable camera with useful lens that was have in our pocket vs. a barely pocketable camera with pancake lens or unpocketable camera with useful lens that we don’t have in our pocket. Nikon could stick an FX sensor in a small form factor but it wouldn’t be pocketable with a lens attached.

      The clue here is: a camera you have with you gets better image quality than a camera you do not have with you.

  • nathan

    I might buy this if it doesn’t cost $1k. It sounds like it’ll be very small yet good quality (better than my current P/S) and it’ll take my F-type lenses in a pinch.

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

    I AM SMALL

    • Paul

      You mean I am smalls.

      • http://www.nikonreviewcentral.com NRC

        +1

  • MJr

    13.2 x 8.8 = 3:2

    WIN !

    • Carlos R B

      good to know…at least one thing to be happy about it…

    • Recent Convert

      32% larger area than the Minox spy camera of yore (11 x 8)

  • Greg

    Isn’t someone going to complain about it not being a D800 or D4

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

      Shuks ! not a 400 5.6 VR …..
      there.. I complained just for you! :P

  • Lulz

    Yep.still sick of hearing about this camera

  • Carlos R B

    very little interest….10mp ina APS-C OK, in this sensor size, no chnce, btw, will it be 4:3 ratio? if so, even worse…at 3:2 resolution will lower…

    • Mistral75

      will it be 4:3 ratio?

      13.2mm ÷ 8.8mm = ?

      • Drunkcaballo

        “13.2mm ÷ 8.8mm = ?”

        1.5! = 3:2! I Win!
        A+

  • Mikycoud

    Oups, there goes the rumored CCD. Shame… That would have been interesting video wise (no rolling shutter aka jello effect)

    • RichST

      True, but CCDs have problems of their own, especially a nasty vertical streaking effect with bright lights

      • PHB

        I have a Canon Vixia video camera with a CMOS sensor and no jelly roll.

        The significant feature on jelly roll is whether the the shutter is mechanical or electronic. The new camera will apparently have an electronic shutter so no jelly roll.

  • http://www.lightpaintphotography.com ItsaChris

    Nikon has done a great job of keeping this camera secret.
    normally we see some real image leaks by now. The small sensor does not bother me and I am very interested to see what nikon thinks would make a good portable camera/lens.

    • Sergey

      It was easy to keep THIS camera a secret. Very few people care about it.
      (-:
      ( sorry for double post )

      • http://www.flickr.com/eparks Eric

        First, I think people do care (based on the number of comments I’ve seen on related posts). Secondly, if they don’t they should. I’d wager in 2-3 years this camera system will be outselling Nikon’s entry level DSLR’s and it will also have completely done away with enthusiasts compacts.

        • http://www.flickr.com/genotypewriter genotypewriter

          First, I think people do care (based on the number of comments I’ve seen on related posts).

          They could also be deeply disturbed.

  • Jadewatcher

    I just hope that this announcement passes by quickly, so that we can concentrate on probable future announcements that are actually oriented to the high-end market..time is running short and end of october is definitely a deadline if they intend to deliver anything DSLR for holidays..

    • MB

      And you of course wait for holidays to buy you next top gear as all high-end users do, right?
      For people that actually do something with their gear the sensor specs are more than adequate. If only the rest of the system is at the same level.

      • Jadewatcher

        Marketing shilling a bit, are we? I still shoot Medium Format film for my “pro” work if that’s what you tried to imply, that i would be one of those who “need” a particular camera to make “pro” or “artistic” photos.

        The problem is, with digital you are being made a slave to technological improvement, and by this rule, every new item just gives you more tools that you didn’t have before. That’s not occasional or accidental: it is – designed – to be that way, so that a constant sense of need and scarcity is created out of thin air.
        In the film days, sensor capabilities were not under control of the camera manufacturers. This has obviously changed with the advent of digital, so we are left to wait what are options they offer us and then decide for ourselves. And most of us just don’t want to buy old tech when they know that new tech is imminent. Sure, i can still get old tech if new one doesn’t satisfy me..but to judge new tech, first and foremost i have to SEE it, at least some of it, to make up my mind. Clear enough this time, i hope.

  • RichST

    Makes a lot more sense given the rest of the specs. Still no word as to the manufacturer?

    • Ric

      by Nycon

    • MJr

      *Not Japan*

  • http://www.leonardobaraldi.com baraldi

    I think that to be a useful device should have a maximum 1.5 crop factor (as in APS-C) and so we can use the lenses famous how 35mm/2D and 50mm/1.8D.
    Per hour, I see no market for the mirrorless in Brazil.

    I wanted the D800, D400 and D4. maybe an upgrade to the DX Nikkor lens 17-55 2.8

    • EK

      So I guess that means that Canon APS-C cameras are useless? Apparently a lot of people are getting ripped off with their 1.6x crop!

  • ion

    I will buy IF:
    - ISO performance is at D7000 level
    - we have f/1.4 and f/1.2 primes on the roadmap (more easy to design & produce for such a small sensor compared to FF, lighter and cheaper)

    • scurvy hesh

      ditto

    • alex

      +1

    • http://www.facebook.com/dsloanphoto Daniel Sloan

      I will be amazed if the ISO performance matches that of the D7000. I think matching the D300(s) would be a reasonable expectation, though, and am hinging my plans to purchase this primarily on this.

      As for the wide aperture primes, an f/1.2 is extremely unlikely, and an f/1.4 is still unlikely but possible. Unfortunately, a 50mm f/1.4D mounted on this camera wouldn’t make for a very good general lens.

      • PHB

        Yes, I can’t see why sooo many people have their knickers all in a twist over one ISO stop.

        It is still going to beat any 35mm film ever made for noise.

  • FM2Fan

    I wish, such sensor would have large FX brother soon … the speed of reading out frames is a significant improvement.

  • Robert Falconer

    It’s going to be very interesting to see how many of these cameras sell…and to whom.

    I’d love to see Nikon’s market research results that led them to the conclusion this camera could be successful…because personally, I just can’t see it. There’s nothing exemplary or ground-breaking about it. And the idea that anyone is going to mount F-lenses to it? That just defeats the whole point of a compact mirrorless.

    • galolon

      Amazing. You have all this insight about a product yet to be released.

  • http://cdsharper.zenfolio.com CSharp

    I’d be interested to see a comparison between this and the P7100

  • Johan

    Canon claims a two step improvement, between the S95 and the new S100. Provided this is true, and provided the new (three times larger) Nikon sensor is on the same technological level as Canon’s new 1/1.7″ sensor, I think this might actually work.

  • rhlpetrus

    Almost 16mm diagonal. And it is exactly 3:2 factor.

  • AtlDave

    Crop factor = 2.73.

    Now everbody that wanted APS-C or FF can complain with much greater accuracy.

  • Dean Forbes

    small sensor = DOA

    • Monkey Nigh Mow

      +1

  • Back to top