< ! --Digital window verification 001 -->

No, Nikon is not coming up with a medium format camera

nikon_mx
newnikonad
After numerous emails in the past few days, I have to make a blog post on that topic in order to answer all questions: I don't think Nikon will be announcing a new medium format camera at Photokina. I have said many times in the past that I will not report every rumor I see on the Web. I have not received any information about a medium format Nikon camera and I doubt somebody got it before me. I also do not see how Nikon can support another system in those difficult times. The Nikon MX medium format camera rumors are nothing new really and have been circulating since 2008 (see rumored design pictures above).

This entry was posted in Other Nikon stuff and tagged . Bookmark the permalink. Trackbacks are closed, but you can post a comment.
  • Allan

    “…. and I doubt somebody got it before me.”

    I suspect it can be hard, at times, to be you, Peter, with all the individuals asking you who are your sources.

    : )

    • ego

      That’s what I picked up on. I like this site but talk about an ego trip man….

      • http://nikonrumors.com/ Nikon Rumors

        it’s not ego, it’s called “reality”

  • http://scottwyden.com/ Scott Wyden Kivowitz

    Here’s to hoping!

  • manhattanboy

    I saw this rumor a few days back and thought it unlikely too…until I saw that Nikon has previously patented medium format lenses on what I consider a pretty decent website; check out this aforementioned website below:
    http://nikonrumors.com/2013/09/10/the-latest-nikon-patents-100mm-f2-5-medium-format-lens-rgbw-ae-array.aspx/

    • nwcs

      A lot of things get patented that never see the light of day. Nikon also has a patent on an RGB sensor design. Haven’t seen it in a product yet.

    • MyrddinWilt

      Thats not too surprising, the lenses have been on sale for years. That is essentially what the focusing element of the tilt/shift lenses is.

      Bigger sensors don’t make things better if you are designing a whole camera from scratch. The bigger sensor does not collect any more light than a small one, its the lens that collects the light and projects it onto the sensor. The further away the sensor is from the nodal point, the bigger it needs to be.

      There are some advantages to going bigger, but digital is not the same as film. We don’t start to push the limits of DX format until we get up to 200MP and for FX its approaching a gigapixel.

      FX is more than capable of doing everything that the Phase One can do today. The problem isn’t the sensor or the optics, its the processing power that lags. Without the processing power to pull data off the sensor, a 100MP camera would be a real dog to use.

      That said, the D800 is certainly fast enough for pretty much any use and there is a hole in the Nikon lineup that would be filled pretty nicely with a 48-72MP D4x.

      • george

        That’s until you take into consideration diffraction phenomena.
        Then you are more or less limited in the amount of pixels you can cram into an FX (or worse, a DX) sensor.
        Not to mention that a larger sensor does actually have greater light gathering ability than a smaller one.
        By your logic, a phone camera with a tiny sensor, but coupled with a hypothetical f/1.0 lens should gather more light than a medium format sensor with an f/4 lens?

        • AM I Am

          Well, yes, a f/1 lens will gather more ligth than a f/4 lens regardless of the sensor size if both are shot at their maximum aperture.

          • george

            NO, of course not. A faster lens will produce a beam of light of higher intensity (or number of photons per area unit of the sensor).
            But a lens with a larger physical size will “gather” more photons in total, no matter what it’s aperture is. And the number of photons is what’s actually important for things such as dynamic range, noise etc.

            To make it clear, suppose you have a 1/2.3″ sensor, a very fast lens coupled with that would “throw” say 1000 photons per second on the sensor. Now consider a sensor whose physical area is 30 times that (full frame for instance). Now, a lens of the same aperture would lead to 30000 photons hitting the sensor in total, greatly increasing the sensor’s dynamic range and noise characteristics.
            The “equivalent” lens would be a lens whose physical aperture would be 30 times the area of the large sensor lens, which is more than 8 stops difference…

        • MyrddinWilt

          f/1.4 is not an aperture, it is a focal ratio, the focal length divided by the aperture. So a 50mm lens has a 35mm aperture.

          The aperture determines how much light there is to fall on the sensor, the angle of view decides how much of it is thrown away. The narrower the angle of view, the more light is being thrown away.

          A phone camera typically has a f/2.8 lens but even if it was f/1 it would only be a 5mm aperture or so.

          Diffraction is an issue, but again it just means you need a bigger lens. Those camera phone sensors aren’t just a little bit smaller than your FX or DX sensor, they are minute.

  • http://www.metconphotos.com/ Christopher Nolan

    they already did release a MF camera, ….. with an FX sized sensor and DSLR camera body, . . . . LOL

    • nwcs

      As much as I like the D800/810 (had one for 14 months) it’s really not a competitor to medium format, especially the film sizes.

      • http://www.metconphotos.com/ Christopher Nolan

        Ya, owned a D800 the day it came out, until a month before the D810 came, now have the D810, . . . haven’t really shot with it yet, at least not in the studio, but looking forward to it. It is not a MX, true, but I am pretty that I have read that it has cut into lower end MX sales.

    • http://www.flickr.com/nathantw/ watsdamattau

      Actually you’re closer than you think. The new 50mp CMOS sensor isn’t that much bigger than a FX sensor.

      • nwcs

        Only if you’re thinking of megapixels alone in isolation. The larger sensor area is where medium format is significantly different from FX. Megapixels never tells the whole story.

        • http://www.flickr.com/nathantw/ watsdamattau

          You’re right that MP don’t tell the entire story. Have you seen the output from the Pentax 645z? They actually don’t look much different than the D800/D800E. Sure there are minor differences, but nothing like what we would expect. It’s definitely not a difference of, say, going from 35mm film to 6×6 or 6×7 film and enlarging the photo on an optical enlarger. There was a huge difference. Even CCD looked different.

          The whole idea of shooting a larger format is to get something that no other format can offer you, especially in the way the final product looks. When the large 645 CMOS sensors came finally came out the output was like looking at an image that was taken with a slightly larger full-frame 36MP sensor.

        • MyrddinWilt

          Yeah, the lenses cost $5000 for the equivalent of a 50mm f/1.4 prime and you can’t get anything like a super-tele.

          You can buy the most amazing F-mount kit imaginable for much less than the cheapest PhaseOne setup.

          Sure there are some jobs that might need that sort of kit. But not very many.

          • Thylmuc

            Actually, an 75 mm Standard lens for the Pentax 645 is 499 Euro.

        • El Aura

          Sensor size increase going from DX to FX: 2.25x
          Sensor size increase going from FX to current 50 MP CMOS MF: 1.68x

          • nwcs

            Yes, but it’s still a larger area.

            • waterengineer

              Yep, and it is about more than most will admit here. The shadow roll off and the bokeh are much better and smoother in MF no matter what the D800/800e/810 fanboys say.

  • groucher

    A DFm, DFe or FF rangefinder please Nikon.

    • Fm2

      Yes!

  • nwcs

    I always wondered if the MX was a code name for the D800.

  • nsp

    In case anyone is wondering, the Japanese text in the pictures translates to the word “big”.

    • andi

      Good Guy Greg!

  • Imperious Images

    After seeing the rumors on other pages I was wondering if you would address it. But since you had reported on it I knew it wasn’t true. You’ve got a pretty good record. Thanks for all you work.

  • watsdamattau

    “Nikon Medium Format – I AM NOT COMING”

    That’s okay. Nikon was in the Guinness Book of World Records a long time ago as having the most expensive camera system in the world. That meant it was expensive. We don’t need another very low volume, very expensive medium format system on the market.

  • http://www.flickr.com/nathantw/ watsdamattau

    With a silent electronic shutter? I’d be all over that.

  • MonkeySpanner

    I hope we see a mirrorless version of the Nikon Df – but in DX sensor format before any of that. Or even just a DX version of the Df – that would be cool too.

    • PGi

      We need d810 without the mirror and ancient pdaf

    • waterengineer

      Not really. The whole point is that the Df is full frame.

  • MonkeySpanner

    I can’t see medium format as a good strategy for Nikon. Those systems are extremely low volume. The only thing that I think would be even a REMOTE possibility would be a fixed lens MF camera. Something like the Ricoh GR – except MF. And I only say this because now Sony is making the new MF sensor – and we all know that Nikon has a history with doing good things with Sony sensors.

    • Eric Calabros

      Yes, we need a pocketable MF to take 50mp snaps. D810 and Otus combo is too big for my Instagram shooting

      • MonkeySpanner

        I never said it would make sense to Eric Calabros. It doesn’t make sense for me either. I am just saying it has been done in the past by other companies (fuji, mamiya) so it would not be an impossible thought for Nikon to do the same. Still – I think it is an extremely long shot.

  • Guy With-camera

    No? DAMN IT

  • Ndawg

    You probably should post more rumors. This site gets pretty boring. Even the fourm… Interesting threads get locked. I’d like to see nikon try to do something. They are failing pretty hard right now.

    • LarryC

      I pretty much agree with you about the rumors. I check this site at least twice a day, and I appreciate Peter’s reluctance to post wildly non-credible rumors, but the site has petty much become “Nikon Announcements”. One of the “other” camera rumor sites is able to grade rumors based on credibility, and it’s those no-quite-verifiable rumors that generate the most interesting and engaging discussions. I shoot Nikon, but I find I spend more time on that site because of the discussions.

      • MonkeySpanner

        Yup, I used to visit that site too – a long time ago when I was into that brand. The grading system did work out pretty well. It ensured that there was lots of activity on the WS, but made sure you understood when a rumor was just a wild guess and when a rumor was almost a sure thing.
        EDIT – BTW, I mean no offense to the admin of this WS – I know it is a tough, thankless job to do. Kudos to you.

        • http://nikonrumors.com/ Nikon Rumors

          There cannot be rumors if there are no announcements. With one or two small exceptions, I have been successfully predicting every single Nikon announcement in the past 6+ years. For example, I reported about the D810 on March 5 (http://nikonrumors.com/2014/03/05/rumors-nikon-d800-refresh-instead-of-d4x.aspx/) – four months before the official announcement. I am not sure what else do you guys want. I will report what is coming for Photokina when I feel comfortable with the information I have. I will not report BS here, because I do not want to feel like an idiot when they do not materialize.

          • ego

            This site is about Nikon not you Peter.

            • http://nikonrumors.com/ Nikon Rumors

              Correct, who said the site is about me? Don’t you think that if it was about me, you would know my full name and I would be selling you workshops?

            • http://nikonrumors.com/ Nikon Rumors

              Nevermind, this dude is gone forever from the forum. I should have done this earlier.

            • Neopulse

              Unfortunately the warning wasn’t enough for this person to relax and lighten up. And also the comment about selling us workshops, I think you’re already swamped as it is in my opinion with the maintenance of the websites. Plus you seem like a family man, so that too would make it even more difficult to do such a thing.

            • WDF??

              Thats just sensorship (sic) :)

            • http://nikonrumors.com/ Nikon Rumors

              no, that’s getting rid of trolls

            • m

              and doing “webinars” :P

            • Asange

              This is exactly what happened with Wikileaks. It all became about Julian.

            • http://nikonrumors.com/ Nikon Rumors

              Ok, using different names to prove a point is typical for trolls and you are obviously one of them – next time you do this, remember to change your IP address, otherwise you will look really silly again (just like now).

          • MonkeySpanner

            Yes – that is fine. This is the way you choose to run this site. And I am here – so I benefit. I was just expressing the experience I had on another site and how it was set up. Not better, not worse, just different. You are obviously aware of that WS and you choose not to use the grading system they use. That is fine too. I thank you for the hard work you do to produce the content here.

          • Sports

            I’m sure the critisism is caused partly by the frustration when one or another dream product “never” appears. You should not take it personally, Peter. You’re doing an excellent job.
            Having said this, I cannot help adding that you chose the name “Nikon RUMORS”, and you don’t look like an idiot if some post turns out to be wrong. We really appreciate the processed rumors. Maybe the current MF rumor is what people want. More “visible” rumors but still processed properly, based on your other sources and experience.

            • http://nikonrumors.com/ Nikon Rumors

              Thanks!

          • robertkrasser

            Peter, thanks for your job I like “your” website as well and I am checking it also at least once a day. Much more often then the original Nikon website. On the other hand I have also the feeling you might be a little to strict not to post “real” rumors. Of course you schould not post BS but a “rumors” website with no failure predictions is a “early announcement website” So for me the uncertainty is the “spice” of the website. Concerning the Nikon medium format: I feel it at least legitim to talk about this “rumor” and I am wondering WHY Nikon is developing and building prototypes and register patents if there is absolutely no intention to bring it to the market?

            This reminds me to the discussion: Altkanzler Kohl: „Das Problem mit uns Deutschen ist, dass wir immer erst wissen müssen, wie der Traum endet, bevor wir anfangen zu träumen.“

          • david

            you know what i want. a d4x/d900 54mp

    • http://nikonrumors.com/ Nikon Rumors

      I will not post any rumors just to make the site more interesting – there are plenty of websites that do that already.

      • Ndawg

        Yep. No interesting discussion will be held here. This site is failing right along with nikon.

        • http://nikonrumors.com/ Nikon Rumors

          Oh, that’s nothing new – people have been saying this for 6 years and the site’s traffic pretty much doubles every year. Do not worry about Nikon or NikonRumors – both will be just fine.

      • John

        I agree. I browse quite a few other rumor sites, and this one clearly is exceptional. The rumors are basically always true – and truth is a good thing.

      • d810_shooter

        To quote Thom Hogan, “NR pretty much pre-announced the D800″ [in Oct 2011]

        In a way though, this site has became a Nikon pre-announcement site!

  • Guest

    Never say never …

  • Espen4u

    First they told us that DX is the thing, then they told us that -Nah forget DX, FX is what you should’ve gotten all along. And now MX. And will every Nikonian who does’nt embrace MX be punished with bad lens choises in FX from now on? Worry not, I bet Peter is right on this one.

    • Sports

      “First they told us …”
      And they try to force people to “upgrade” to FX even though DX is so much better now than it was ten years ago … when they told us it was “pro”. I know, there’s nothing wrong with grabbing for the money when you’re a commercial company.
      … Which is exactly why they ought to stay away from medium format. The market is not big enough for more than a few small companies. It’s not even certain that Nikon would be able to get much of it. They don’t usually excel in understanding customer real-world workflow and requirements.

  • Rick

    There were also rumors, none substantiated, that Fuji was coming out with a medium format camera this fall. Nikon would be foolish to do this, and I believe Fuji would also be foolish to bring one to market now.

    • http://molnarcs.500px.com Csaba

      I agree, though at least Fuji already makes MF lenses.

    • Neopulse

      Well technically Fuji has been making medium formats for a long time now. Just rebranded as Hasselblad.

  • ShaoLynx

    Hey guys, what is this? Peter-bashing day, or something?
    Chill out and go do some shooting – get your gear out, some people would say…

    • http://nikonrumors.com/ Nikon Rumors

      No, it’s the same person posting under different names, maybe I should just ban him.

      • Neopulse

        Guess a stern warning couldn’t hurt and of course saving the IP in case it happens again :-)

  • https://www.facebook.com/barty.lobethal/photos_albums Barty Lobethal

    So…I heard Nikon were coming out with a medium format camera. Anybody got any info on this? :)

  • https://www.facebook.com/barty.lobethal/photos_albums Barty Lobethal

    So…I heard Nikon were coming out with a medium format camera. Anybody got any info on this? :)

  • PGi

    Well I think they will because it is the only way for them to be taken more seriously than the Sony,remember, the d810 did not do well and most chose the Sony a7r over it.

    • Hawk75

      Huh? The D810 was just released and seems to be selling very well.

      D810 is more suitable for professional work due to faster AF and drive speed and much more silent operatoin. The shutter lag is also much shorter when using OVF. ISO 64 provides cleaner images with more DR.

      The A7R is usable in some situations and can adapt to much wider selection of other manufacturer’s lenses.

      • mikeswitz

        Don’t feed the troll!

  • PGi

    Or we see they go bankrupt before that?

  • Neopulse

    Would be a dumb thought by anyone to actually believe that it is feasible. It would NOT make sense whatsoever.

    1) What sensor would they incorporate in their MX? A 50.1 MP from makers of Sony? Nope, already quite a few people who are using it. So that is crossed out.

    2) Any MF lenses for them to use? No… so that is also unlikely

    3) Have they announced the idea of an MF system throughout the years? It would have been all over Peter’s NR in several posts rather than from a past source that didn’t have concrete evidence.

    4) Using CCD tech or CMOS? Not likely since Kodak CCD was already sold off to another company and CMOS is the “latest thing.”

    5) Would make their Pro-line cameras like the D4s or D810 look like the next “DX format” by making it look like something cheap in comparison (although I don’t think that, but uneducated people might and those are plentiful in the world). Selling many current bodies, lenses, accessories, etc are what the company needs in order to stay afloat.

    • MonkeySpanner

      As I said in another post – a new MX system, complete with new mount and lenses – that makes 0 sense at all. A camera with fixed lens and MX sensor (like Fuji 645 fixed lens cameras, only digital) – well maybe – still super unlikely but much more likely than a new MX system.

    • Adrian Gopal

      Actually.. Nikon F-mount lenses have been used for medium format digital, one example was the Horseman Digiwide, I have seen the Digiwide used with a AF-S 17-35mm. Also I know someone that built a custom 6×17 camera and was using Nikon lenses that had an image circle large enough to cover the frame. Amongst those lenses were the 17-35mm as well. So there are lenses that can be used from the F-mount range. Also the Sinar M system could use Nikon F-mount lenses. So there are lenses in the current range that can already be used without bringing out new lenses.

      But whether it will be financially viable to go into another new format like the MX?.. I seriously doubt it.

      • Neopulse

        Saw the digiwide one. It only gave a view of a 24×36 frame which is that of a 35mm camera. It was using a mega-DX mode of the Digitalback sensor.

        The lenses are not made for such large sensors. It will crop it to the proper image format of the lens. You can’t make a 35mm into a larger format without the use of adapters and such or else it’ll look like you’re looking through a pinhole camera.

  • Peter

    Fuck you peter. You suck and your shitty webpage sucks. Asswipe.

  • Belicosos

    Build it and they will come. I’ve always wondered what Nikon could do. Mirrorless and smaller is the current direction. Why not carve a niche for yourself and go bigger? I have both a walk-around Fuji and a D800 for purpose shooting… I would ditch my SLR for an affordable MF. Just a thought.

    • jvossphoto

      It depends what you mean by affordable. The Pentax 645z is certainly considered affordable by medium format standards at $8,500 but the lenses are another story they may be cheaper than Hasselblad’s but two of the new line 645 D FA’s are $5,000 and one at $4,500 the fourth being $1,200. Keep in mind these are wide angle to standard focal lengths. When they do come out with newer telephoto lenses they will be very expensive. I can’t imagine Nikon would be any cheaper and would probably be more expensive.

      • Belicosos

        I would hazard a guess and say most Digital FX shooters have invested between $4-7K and could sell all their FX equipment for $2-4K. A single lens and MF body for $6K would be feasible for most. I don’t know if it is for Nikon though hahahaha

  • Cyrille Berger

    “I also do not see how Nikon can support another system in those difficult times.”

    It is exactly because it is difficult time that Nikon can be tempted to create a new market and start another system to expand their sales. However, I would agree that it is unlikely to be “medium” format, the market for it is too small. And what Nikon needs now is a replacement for the P&S sales, so something that sales a lot, so I would expect them to be working on cameraphones, and they almost have the device for it, with the S800c.

    • http://www.amateurnikon.com/ AmateurNikon.com

      IMHO, Nikon is first and foremost a lens company. To put it an other way, it boggles the mind why they don’t produce more lenses that *count*. They seem to be following a carpet bombing technique (just count how many 18-xx zooms there are), while they should be focusing on producing more unique designs. I wonder, isn’t there one person in Nikon who thinks “hey, that AF-S DX 35mm f/1.8 we produced is very cheap/easy to make and it sells like hot cake. Maybe we should make something like that?”. I’m not a financial analyst, nor a marketing expert, but I think the lens market is still (and probably will continue to be) a great market. The camera market is rapidly becoming saturated

      • WDF??

        you are right, you are not a marketing expert…

  • http://www.gradyphoto.com/ Pete Grady

    Nikon used to supply medium format lenses to Bronica, so it’s not like they’ve never dabbled in it. They certainly had the opportunity back then and passed on it. The market for medium format is even thinner now than it was then, so it makes zero sense. I wonder if they still hold the patents to those old designs? Some of those lenses were pretty fine.

    • Smaczny Konsek

      Why is it that the market for MF is too small – is it because of price?
      I don’t have any opinion on whether Nikon will introduce MF but I have this wild speculation. Considering that digital cameras are not that old and the progress in development is relatively fast – in the beginning DSLRs were DX, then FX format became possible in digital and recently we can buy a full frame camera (e.g. D600) for price similar to DX bodies. Plust we have D8XX cameras which produce pictures similar to low end digital MF cameras quiality-wise.. So we never know what future can bring to us, if Nikon manages to build a larger sensor around F mount (and someone here said it could be possible) with reasonable price then we would have not a bad system.
      I can see how a camera with sensor larger than FF would work. It would surely have slower FPS but then you could get FX, DX etc crop modes and get a faster rates with those, and have ability to use any F mount lens.
      Then they could make few MF specific lenses for the sensor as they have some past experience with that already..
      As I said, just a wild speculation :)

      • http://www.gradyphoto.com/ Pete Grady

        Nonetheless, the price of the lenses will always be extreme…the laws of physics dictate that. Big sensor, big glass. So, I’m not sure that medium format cameras will ever be even as large a segment of the market as they used to be, regardless who makes them.

    • saywhatuwill

      Nikon also made large format lenses, so the know-how is there. It’s whether it would be worth doing it.

      • http://www.gradyphoto.com/ Pete Grady

        Yes, some very fine large format, copy and process lenses. They had stuff for the graphic arts industry, industrial imaging and of course studio and landscape folks with view/technical cameras. Fuji had a similar line. Rodenstock and Schneider seem to still be hanging on in that market, for whatever it’s worth.

  • Who says….

    Who says that MX needs to stand for Medium Format.
    Could also stand for Mirrorless system, next to the V-series.

  • j

    Medium format in the analogue days makes sense to me.. You could rather easily have the best IQ in that area (film and lens quality). If you wanted more resolution then you could simply move to large format. In the digital world it doesn’t make as much sense to me. I sure hope we don’t move in the direction of med, large format digital camera as a way to quantify/achieve the best IQ. Unless, it is due to the current limitations of our technology (which is always changing) and not some gimmick. If the sensors of the future become the size of a pin head and produce the most stunning “large format” images then that would be awesome.

  • Ken Elliott

    I’m not so sure. Given the close relationship between Nikon and Sony, I’m sure someone at Nikon has considered doing it. Likely, more a question to “when” than “if”.

    1 – Mirrorless shares parts across all sensor sizes. This makes it possible to offer a medium format camera at a much lower price point. Consumer cameras drive down the costs of viewfinders, processors, etc.

    2 – The move to mirrorless is driven by the lower manufacturing cost (much lower parts count, plus fewer custom parts). The mechanical design of the current F mount may be at a disadvantage here, causing Nikon to consider a new electronic mount.

    3 – Once you have a mirrorless FX camera, you have a small jump to turn it into a medium format camera. Seeking higher margins, Nikon may offer such a camera as a way to create a new market for their lenses. Remember – Nikon makes their own glass. A new format would be perfect, as we begin to hit the limits of what FX can resolve.

    So you have an opportunity that will present itself, for Nikon to make a camera with a small development budget that will create a market for expensive lenses, while boosting the image of Nikon as a leader in photography, and leapfrogging Canon. What’s wrong with that?

    • http://www.gradyphoto.com/ Pete Grady

      Interesting, but that’s a lot of ifs. And, the development, tooling, and production of a set of lenses would be very costly. With the kind of results you can get with a D810, it’s doubtful enough photographers would opt to spend the extra money to go MF. Some would, but not enough.

      • Ken Elliott

        I’d say there are very few “ifs”. In fact, that’s my point. A mirrorless FX camera would contain almost all the components used by a medium format camera, except for a sensor and lens mount. It has never been easier. It is odd that Pentax has not attempted this yet.

        In other words – IF Nikon ever chooses to produce a medium format camera, it will come shortly after they launch a mirrorless FX camera.

        • EnPassant

          The big IF are those last words.
          When will Nikon launch a mirrorfree FX camera out of the blue when they haven’t yet released a mirrorfree DX camera system that can be the base for a mirrorfree FX camera, just as Sony done with their E-mount?
          Sure Nikon can at any time launch a FX DSLR type of camera with EVF like Sony’s SLTs. But it will still look like a DSLR, not like a small mirrorfree camera without the mirrorbox.
          I hope Nikon instead of just exchanging the optical view for an EVF make use of their patent for a hybrid optical and EVF solution. With the EVF view being used when the mirror is up.

        • http://www.gradyphoto.com/ Pete Grady

          If it was all as easy as you describe, there would be more companies building cameras. Having worked for a camera design and manufacture company, I can tell you that developing a new camera is an enormous undertaking. The stuff you talk about above as if you’d just put it on a 3-D printer and hit the 1.5X button doesn’t work that way. Just like when you put a V8 in that Hyundai Accent Coupe, you need bigger brakes, a beefier trans, shocks, etc. Some company WILL do what you describe here, but it won’t be Nikon.

          • Ken Elliott

            Oh, I agree that I’m greatly over-simplifying the issues. I’ve been employed for R&D, and developed many products myself. It is not easy to develop such a camera, but it is all within Nikon’s capabilities. And that’s my point – all the difficult parts exist, and now it is mostly development and packaging. This is something Nikon can certainly do – all the major components now exist. This wasn’t the case a year ago.

            • http://www.gradyphoto.com/ Pete Grady

              Yes, Nikon has the capability to do any camera they would want to. After the stint in camera, lens and darkroom design/manufacture, I got involved in the semiconductor industry. Nikon was a major player and innovator. They had a revolutionary linear measurement system that redefined aspects of chip manufacturing. They had a very successful line of steppers that they made A LOT of money on. But, that’s a very rapidly changing industry that demands constant innovation and they have since lost much of their prominence there. But from a technology point of view, those guys could do whatever they want. They are under a lot of investor pressure and frankly, that’s part of the problem. They have to do things that make money and, now that they’re losing so much in the consumer point and shoot market, it’s a gamble as to what will bring in those missing dollars. I don’t think it’s going to be MF. Thanks for the discussion…

  • zoetmb

    There is no way Nikon is doing a medium format camera. Nikon is after as much of a mass market as they can get. Medium format is a niche market – considering that you can create poster-sized prints from a D800, very few photographers need MF (probably just studio fashion and product photographers) and even fewer would be willing to pay the price, which I suspect would be a $12,000 body. Also, Nikon can’t keep their current high end lenses in stock – how can they create yet another new line?
    If anything, with the emphasis on mirrorless, the market is moving in the opposite direction: people want fully featured, but smaller and lighter cameras and lenses. I could see Nikon doing their version of an A7 before they would ever do a MF.

  • WDF??

    “I have not received any information about a medium format Nikon camera and I doubt somebody got it before me”.
    am guessing you have an inside source in Nikon Japan :)

  • broxibear

    Maybe there is something to these rumours, Canon seem to be testing the waters…

    “It seems that Canon have been enquiring of more people whether they
    would have any interest in a Canon medium format system, this coming
    from reports of a recent questionnaire circulated to some of their ‘key
    users’.We’re told (thanks) that Canon’s questions concentrated on image quality, usage scenarios and lens requirements.
    It’s worth noting that there was much more about DSLRs and Video, but that the “MF stuff was new””

    http://www.northlight-images.co.uk/canon_medium_format_2ff.html

  • jtan163

    An affordable (above D4s cost but not too far) medium format might be enough to prompt pro shooters to buy a whole new set of lenses.

    And of course you could probably have a crop (FX) mode so you can use your existing lenses (with an adapter) while you re-mortage your house for all that new glass. You know the old pusher business model.

    And if it had decent video support then it may well appeal to a lot of video shooters.

    And there is no real reason it should not be mirrorless.

  • Back to top