Nikon 1 is still alive, larger sensor mirrorless solution is being considered

Nikon mirrorless camera concept4 Nikon mirrorless camera concept3
Nikon mirrorless camera concept2 Nikon mirrorless camera concept1
In addition to what I already reported in my post yesterday, there are now two more interviews published online where Nikon clearly say that their Nikon 1 product line is still alive and a large sensor mirrorless solution is being considered:

Probably the most telling interview comes from Amateurphotographer, here are few quotes:

We announced the J5 about a year ago and that model is doing really well – especially in the Asian market, we have more than 10% [mirrorless] share... You can expect the J series especially to continue. This is really our mainstream model... However, we are considering taking the strengths of Nikon 1 – which is speed, portability, movie capabilities – to maybe refine the concept… to fit better to the market need... When you are talking about larger sensor mirrorless, this is definitely also a market we are officially monitoring in detail and we are really considering this segment.

And similar words from an interview with Camerajabber:

We are considering new concepts based on the Nikon 1 concept. The advantages of Nikon 1 is portability, speed, movie capabilities. We’re thinking about how we can use its strengths for new concepts that fit better with the demand from the market. I’m not saying we’re announcing a full-frame mirrorless camera, but it’s definitely something we’re analysing a lot, looking at the market very closely; it’s on our radar.

What I get out of those interviews is that Nikon is really trying to not cut corners and is taking their time before releasing a new "larger sensor" mirrorless solution.

Pictures of Nikon mirrorless camera concept created by NikonRumors reader Al.

This entry was posted in Nikon 1 and tagged , , , . Bookmark the permalink. Both comments and trackbacks are currently closed.
  • Michael Laing

    Well Nikon are certainly taking their time if they are only considering making a full frame mirrorless. Talk of a full fram mirrorless must have been going on for years, in the Nikon community. So if they are still only thinking about it, then it must be a couple of years away at least, or maybe they have got past the concept stage, it might be a little closer.

    • manattan

      The only positive light I got out of their “we’re looking at” comments is that they may reposition the Nikon 1 into a video line, which in some ways would not be terrible if done right (e.g. along the lines of Panasonic GH5).

    • Davo

      Hard to say. Weren’t they still only looking at a DX flagship only fairly recently then Bam! the D500 surprise.
      Nikon keeps their cards close to their chest, maybe sometimes to their own detriment.

    • Another thing if heard was that Nikon is (or was?) not satifsfied with the results the current implementation of bigger mirrorless technology has to offer. There are still problems with electronic view finders that have a time lag (latency) of what is currently happen in front of you because the sensor needs some time for read-out, EVF can lead to flickering lights or smearing of light sources, the battery lifetime is more than average and so on… because other manufacturers release mirrorless cameras doesn’t mean that they don’t have any quirks.

      • Michael Laing

        Well I have had a Fuji X-E1 for several years and maybe it was because i was used to EVF’s because I used to be a cameraman but I have never been unhappy with camera’s EVF, you get a little flicker but that camera is 4 years old and the technology have moved on hugely since then, with Fuji just releasing their medium frame mirrorless, which takes an external EVF (and does it well, unlike Nikons offerings).

        • I have no idea of how the implementation of current EVFs look like compared to a OVF. Medium format is not for sports/action/wildlife so if there would be still a lag to be 1/250 behind it wouldn’t matter. The idea of a detachable, adjustable viewfinder is brilliant, maybe because the camera is already big and very pricey for a enthusiast person.

          • Michael Laing

            Current EVF’s are exceptional and I think the lag time for the X-E2 was 0.005 sec and that is a 2 year old camera, The X-T2 has a great built in EVF.

            The problem with Nikon detachable view finders is that, they don’t have hotshoe, so you can’t use an external flash if you have the EVF mounted, also Nikon went with a different hotshoe, which meant that no normal flash will can be mount.

            When it comes to price and size look at the Fuji XT-10, now I personally am not a big fan of the camera but it is much better than the Nikon one series and costs a lot less.

  • Plug

    The J5 is horribly hampered by having no viewfinder, whilst its sensor is superior to the V3. That makes no sense to me.

    • manattan

      Its also funny that that they said they released the J5 a “about a year ago” as it was really announced about two years ago LOL and at least in the US has been available for purchase for a year and a half.

      • SteveHood

        And the last non-kit lens to be announced was the 70-300mm from 30 months ago. Nikon may eventually introduce new product but they certainly did put the brakes on developing the Nikon 1 system. I think it may be too late to recover now.

        • zzzxtreme

          I totally want that 3mm fisheye which they patented.

    • Nemmondom Meg

      To be honest I was expected after the jd a v4 with a wee bit more robust built, more buttons, and with a viewfinder (lets say like a v2 with more button and j5 sensor) For macro, and wide angle shoots i prefer lcd, but whenever i have nyl the j5 with myself i note how much i would use the viewfinder.

    • Luís Flôres

      Could somebody tell why the V3 doesn’t have ISO 320 (640, 1260…) unlocked? Is that possible with Firmware? I have Nikon 1 on my radar, but I’m not very happy with 200, 400…. in 1EV steps

      • steven8217

        My friend too this shot and somehow the EXIF data show ISO 180: (perhaps he set it at auto ISO) https://www.flickr.com/photos/birdsaspoetry/28847946174/in/dateposted/

        • Luís Flôres

          so, it’s impossible to manually set other ISO settings than traditional 100 multiples (except 160) in Nikon 1 system?

          • steven8217

            Hi Luis, If you want to have the exact Aperture and Shuttle speed setting in your mind, I would suggest you to use Manual mode to set the A and S then use Auto ISO. the V3 will pick the matching ISO value. You are correct that the camera would not let you manually set to ISO that is not within the incremental list. Normally you would with set A or S value as priority mode so I would not feel much missing on specific ISO else just use the auto ISO in Manual mode

            • Luís Flôres

              Hi, if I use auto ISO is not exactly M mode, is it? 😉

      • dave

        Luís, why aren’t you happy with with full stops? These are also your cameras native iso stops which in theory will produce less noise then non-native iso’s since those are “processed” further to create non-native values. For example… if you want 320 then shoot in 400 and it will have slightly less noise, while at first it doesn’t make sense but once you understand native iso’s it will. On my camera’s I will always set it to full stops when I can. I’m sure you can google this if you need a good explanation.

        • Luís Flôres

          I use ISO full stops in all my cameras… that’s not the point

          • dave

            i hear ya. I have no idea why but I guess it’s how you look at it. Personally, I wish they didn’t have the in-between values and only used native stops or why on my full frame nikon i can set it to just use native values but on my d7000 I can’t.

  • 1741

    Nikon and canon will have prototypes of bigger sensor cameras for development and they will release them when they are ready to and when they think the market is ready for them if at all, for a pro mirrorless I think the finder will have to be around the 5mpx to get it somewhere nr or better ! than an optical one, plus the af of these cameras still have a bit to go, maybe next yr they will be positive rumour’s and poss announcements for 2018 releases, also remember that the lighter the camera the more need for ibis or os so that needs more development to get it to a standard pro’s would be happy with, yes it’s quite good at mo but still not quite there, same for the cameras

    • Mike D

      Why worry first about a “pro mirrorless”. Put out a mirrorless that will appeal in larger volumes to owners of D610, D750, D7200.

      • 1741

        I never said there first one would be a pro model just the current finders are not quite there yet to truly compete with an optical one, wouldn’t you rather wait awhile an have a great camera rather than an ok one, if you’re happy with an ok camera that’s fine an they will prob release one or two that covers the ones you’ve mentioned

        • ZoetMB

          The biggest issue to me is that there’s relatively little point to a full frame mirrorless unless you can also do a new lens line that’s smaller and lighter. Otherwise, there’s little or no advantage to mirrorless and you don’t have effective competition with Sony other than having a large body of users with existing f-mount lenses.

          The Sony A7 series is great when you use a kit lens or one of the small primes. But once you start getting into the big zooms or other esoterics, the slightly smaller size of the camera body is completely irrelevant since the lenses are so large and heavy.

          And if Nikon does come out with a full frame mirrorless, it shouldn’t be part of the Nikon 1 line. It should named the Nikon M1 or DM1 to be consistent with the Nikon F and the Nikon D nomenclature.

      • ITN

        By doing that Nikon would lose all hope of sales of additional F mount lenses and get people waiting for lenses for a new mount that do not exist. No, I don’t think that would be fiscally responsible.

        • They can improve the Mirrorless after shipping like they already do with their constant iterations of DSLRs.

    • nwcs

      Hmm, amazing how many pros make money on the mirrorless that’s out there. There’s nothing wrong with the features you mentioned but what’s out there today makes money for a lot of people.

      • 1741

        That’s because those cameras suits their needs which is how pro’s and anyone choose’s their cameras and system (for those who do buy their own gear ) (any camera is capable of making money in the right hands), there are still a few steps to go before they can overtake conventional mirrored cameras they are almost there, personally they are all way too small an light an feel more like compacts

    • Leica SL owners seem quite happy with their 4MP viewfinders, so I suspect that would be good enough for Nikon. Even my Leica Q’s 3.7 MP viewfinder works very well.

      • 1741

        I’ve not had the chance to try either of those tho I’m sure they’ll be very good, i’ve tried the sony’s out and they are good but personally think they would be great if they doubled the mpx’s

        • There are Leica stores in major cities nowadays, where you can try them out. It’s really a pity the SL is so expensive; I think it deserves a wider audience than it can get at its staggeringly high price point.

  • slimysnot

    Looks like a fuji

    • ZoetMB

      That’s a concept designed by an AI reader, not by Nikon.

  • DLynch

    Until the IQ of the 1″ sensor can be improved considerably I’ll stay out of this arena. I do like the compactness of these systems but IQ suffers too much for me. Going with a larger sensor will impact the compactness so I’m not sure where they will go.

    • AKH

      Check Thomas Stirr he gets a lot out of his Nikon 1 cameras.

      • DLynch

        Everybody has their level of acceptance.

        • Nemmondom Meg

          I don’t know if on iso 100 you could tell the difference if it was pictured with j5, d300, or d750. Maybe not even on ISO 400. That means in 95% of the situations j5 is good. And another thing j5 can be with you all the time. A D750 despite it is small for full frame with 3 lenses, and next day you will go out taking only your phone camera with you.

          • AKH

            Actually there will be a little more noise in J5 images compared to d750 even at ISO 160 (base ISO on J5) if you pixel peep. But generally I agree.

            • Spy Black

              That’s not what I’ve seen. Its noisy, period. However it’s still a useful format if you can live with it. The big problem with the N1 system has been deliberate crippling. Get rid of that, introduce a fully capable and truly profesdional body, and the noise becomes far less important.

            • AKH

              In the right hands the N1 system can deliver very good results. Check Thomas Stirr. Just incredible what he gets out of his Nikon 1 cameras.

            • Spy Black

              I’m not arguing that, but even Thomas admits to the challenges of using the J5. Make a capable body and the system becomes eminently more useful.

            • AKH

              Agreed. Guess many of us are waiting for a V4.

        • AKH

          For me the acceptance criteria is how good the image is, not from which sensor or camera the image came.

          The J5 for instance can deliver images in good light that would be hard to distinguish from an APS-C or FF camera when using one of the best lenses like the 32 mm f/1.2.

          • DLynch

            We’re on the same street just different sides. Too hefty of an investment for me for getting that 1″ sensor to produce acceptable images with the light restrictions.

            • AKH

              I agree that the investment may be a little high, but for light travel or biking it is a nice system.

            • DLynch

              Agreed, I hike.

            • whisky

              when shooting in bad light, all things being the same a larger sensor delivers better IQ. but larger sensors have their own baggage — often including heavier bodies, glass, larger size, and cost for a similar reach.

              the N1 offers a better than “good enough” job in good light. similar to the way 110 film cameras were deemed good enough in place of 124 instamatics. JMO.

            • ZoetMB

              The problem with the “good enough” argument is that you can take it anywhere. One can make the case that the newest smartphone cameras are also good enough making almost any small sensor camera unnecessary. In spite of their small sensors, smartphone photos are getting uncannily good, largely due to brilliant software processing. Sometimes I actually get angry when I wind up with better results out of my smartphone than I do with my DSLR.

              I think it’s obvious that the smartphones have already won the point-and-shoot battle. Unless a manufacturer can incorporate some radical new functionality in a small sensor camera that a smartphone can’t effectively replicate, there’s no point releasing anything.

              And since smartphones are getting better all the time, even a DX or FX camera has to perform radically better to compete, since innovation on phones is happening at a much quicker pace than innovation on cameras.

            • El Aura

              The ‘good enough’ argument has to be seen as what is ‘good enough’ varying wildly between people. We had a wide variety of cameras (and camera systems) for a very long time. What is shifting is what proportion of the population considers a given camera type as good enough.

            • whisky

              except the N1 is also part of a system, with multiple lenses and the ability to adapt Fx or Dx glass.

              when out photographing with the D500 + 200~500mm, i like to have a N1 with 6.7~13mm for those wide shots a smartphone, or the long lens couldn’t capture. if i needed greater reach, and the light was “good enough”, i could throw the 200~500mm onto a N1. integration, versatility, and convenience are my reasons for buying into a system. JMO.

          • dredlew

            Nope, not my experience. I had both the 32/1.2 & 10/2.8 and it didn’t help. The IQ is just not what you would expect for that price. Even at the lowest ISO, the image was not clean and didn’t allow for much push. Also didn’t understand why they had to leave the AA filter in, which would have at least helped with sharpness.

            I’m still in love with the CoolPix A sensor, this thing was phenomenal. I’ve said this before and saying it again; had Nikon married the sensor of the CoolPix A with the system and speed of the 1-series, they would have had a winning combination.

            In that sense, I’m sorta and sorta not looking forward to the DL-series. It’s the same 1″ sensor as in the 1-series and if they’ve made no improvements to it, I’ll gladly pass.

            • russ

              Never tried the Coolpix A but ditto the first part. I still own a V1 with native and adapted lenses. The IQ to my eye doesn’t come close to DX or FX in most shooting situations. Even with low ISO in good light, which is rare for me, the images are noisy. That’s why I’m not quite sure in the back of which closet my V1 gear sits. Nikon needs a bigger sensor for the follow-up, which is what I think they’re saying in the interviews.

            • AKH

              The price is high, but not that high for the 32 mm f/1.2. If you compare to FF it is about half the price of a similar G lens – which by the way does not exist, as only f/1.4 is available.

              I also own the Coolpix A and it is a
              phenomenal camera with a great lens and sensor.

              There is no AA filter in the V3 and J5.

              Apparently you didn’t try the J5 with the 32mm f/1.2. It is a really good combination and the sensor is improved a lot. No problem to make good prints up to 90 x 60 cm.

              I still like the output from the V1, though. It reminds me a little about old-fashioned film.

    • Davo

      I think going up to 2X crop won’t significantly impact the lens size.
      m43 is only marginally bigger than Nikon 1 and personally I feel the IQ was never an issue on the m43 beginning with the E-M5 Mk1 generation of sensors.
      To the suggested theoretical 1.7X max crop factor for the CX mount, then I’m not sure.
      But 1.7X was considered APS-C by Sigma many years ago and APS-C lenses are definitely considerably larger but then again APS-C was used by a lot of manufacturers up to 1.5X crop so they needed the lens to cover at least to 1.5X and probably bigger to avoid too much vignetting.

  • nwcs

    Taking their time… Sometimes that’s a good strategy but often it means aiming for where the other manufacturers are today and not aiming for where things are going. I’m sure they’ll have something but where will it fit? Fuji may have APS locked up by the time they do it, Sony 35mm, m43 consortium. Canon, of course, will be on their 4th or 5th iteration and may be in several markets.

    I think the market shift, both in the overall shrinking of the market and in more interest in mirrorless, caught them flatfooted and they are still reacting/reeling instead of being strategic and methodical.

    • manattan

      Fuji will slow down in APS as they promote MF, and Canon still seems clueless why the m43rds and Sony mirrorless cameras are so popular. Nikon 1’s technology was superb, but their implementation was terrible. The J5 was what the J1 should have been from the start and they never really got the V-series right. However, Nikon probably does have some time to study/pontificate/screw-up etc., but not much. It’s clear from Nikon’s comments that they themselves are not sure where they are going and that is scary. Perhaps they should take a page out of their D500 playbook, and listen again to their customers to produce a great mirrorless camera 😉

      • nwcs

        We don’t know if they will slow down in APS or not. It’s way too premature. They seem to be doubling down on the market. Canon is not as clueless as they were. There is an appearance of a strategy behind the last to M mirrorless cameras and it might lead to better things.

        I had a V1 before the firesale (talk about overpaying!). I liked it. Nikon totally screwed up with it and could have really made a great camera and maybe fended off a lot of leaking to m43, Fuji, and maybe even Sony. They lost all their momentum trying to overcharge, underdeliver, and cripple their N1 system.

        I hope they do get their act together. I enjoyed Nikon for many years but the current system doesn’t do it for me anymore. My only Nikon now is a F100 with lenses. I haven’t had withdrawal yet. 🙂

      • harvey

        next will be the Fuji XE-3, 24mp, probably early next year. For Fuji, APS and MF are two very different markets. They are big enough to handle both. ps. got nailed with the V1, as well.

      • Bob Cozzi

        You said “Nikon 1’s technology was superb, but their implementation was terrible.” And I couldn’t agree more! Just drop the mic and walk out, you are spot on.

      • akkual

        I am sure this is well considered move from Nikon. Producing a yet-another-mirrorless that suffers the same problems as current mirrorless on a market that is still niche and hasn’t grown up in the phase expected.. every new product is a risk. Competing on oversaturated and overhyped market is dangerous. For a company, staying profitable is more important than playing on all fields at any cost. These all field players have always suffered at the end. Think about Samsung vs. Apple for instance.

  • Bo Dez

    Considering it? zzzzzzzzzz

  • NightPhotographer

    I think Nikon is “taking its time” a little too much. At this point, Canon dual pixel auto focus is more capable than on chip PDAF of many mirrorless systems. I think, the next iteration of this sensor could be ground breaking.

    • Shutterbug

      I am not sure if you’ve used both, but the DPAF is not as good as the 1-series or Sony PDAF, even on the 5DM4. Where the DPAF shines is with video.

  • Pippo

    No stress. CIPA says, sales of DSC are half dozen less than earlier years. No progress in “non-reflex” camera market. Yes, compact production 2-3 years and be closed.

    I’m worked on big summer event for my country. 85-90% of visitors used phone cameras. 90% from left 10% used DSLR, all other – compacts, for all day I see 2 mirrorless. YeP, my country not the richest, but …
    Nikon’s way still DSLR. From January 2017 we wait from Nikon 3 new pieces + 3 DL’s

    • nwcs

      CIPA data shows mirrorless hold steady, more or less, while DSLR declines. So as a percentage of overall market mirrorless is growing (or perhaps declining at a far lesser rate than DSLR).

      Even if you somehow accurately identified 10000 cameras (which isn’t likely) your observations are relevant only to your event.

      • Pippo

        Yea, but not significant growth. ILC not pocketable and cheap.

        If someone owns the A7, it is unlikely he would leave it at home 😉

        • nwcs

          Yes, not significant growth but DSLRs are declining very rapidly. You may not have noticed people with m43 or Fuji users or smaller Sony A6x00 types.

          • Pippo

            You think, be distinguished from the compacts or phones? Maybe 😉
            About DSLR – there are 2 competitors who share the market. (Sony & Pentax for entusiasts)
            MILC – more manufacturers, more researches, respectively it supposed to be more growth.

      • ITN

        CIPA data for Jan – July 2016 show 19% decline in SLR units shipped relative to Jan-July 2015. For mirrorless it shows a 17% decline. Both seem to be falling at a roughly similar rate. Time will tell but it seems MILC enthusiasm isn’t showing at the shops any more. Even smartphone sales are declining. Each product type has a period of growth and decline when consumers move on to the next thing of fancy. In the meanwhile, photographers keep making photos and sometimes updating equipment. However, they are really a small minority of camera owners.

      • ZoetMB

        No. Through July, CIPA shipment (not production) data shows mirrorless down 17%, SLR down 19%, point-and-shoot down 45%, lenses for smaller than 35mm down 22% and lenses for 35mm and larger down 1%.

        That’s on top of full year 2015 data that shows mirrorless up 2%, SLRs down 8%, p&s down 25%, small lenses down 6%, large sensor lenses down 3%. But in terms of units, mirrorless sold 34% of what DSLRs sold in 2015. It’s 35.3% so far in 2016.

        2012 was the peak year for DSLRs with about 16.2 million shipped. It was only 9.7 million in 2015. 2016 will probably come in under 8 million. Nikon thinks the industry combined number for DSLRs and Mirrorless for their fiscal 2017 (April 2016 to March 2017) will be just over 13 million with Nikon selling 3.35 million of that.

        • nwcs

          It was a gross generalization but mirrorless and DSLRs are not following identical patterns. that’s the key takeaway. Yes, in the short term recently they are but over the last several years no.

          The big question, though, is not what is happening in 2016 but what will it be like in 2018, 2019, or 2020. And Nikon, like the others, tends to overestimate the market size. Seems each quarter they revise their estimates downwards.

  • MB

    I am not sure if Nikon is taking time or a nap …
    They should wake up because others are cutting not only corners but some larger chunks out of Nikon market share.

    • I see that too. I see more brilliant moves at the competition. Nikons passion to me is obviously full frame cameras and lenses – they put the best engineering in there. But the rest? Could be better (for example the D500 is great but the DX lenses line-up not that dedicated as at FUJI). Maybe Nikons problem is that they try to cover everything.

  • BG

    Read: Nikon 1 is dead. The future is a new system with a larger sensor.

    • manattan

      To me it’s more hilarious that they are now back to talking about Nikon 1 and ignoring the never shipped DL cameras.

      • Shutterbug

        We already have all the information on the DL cameras’ delay, what more would you be looking for? Supplier issues due to the earthquake and issues with the mainboard – delayed indefinitely. Why would they want to bring additional attention to that for no reason?

        • manattan

          There is NO SHIP DATE. I am not sure why you think it is okay for someone to have already laid down money with no clear guidance as to when they will receive their cameras, only delays after delays. I would be pissed, but perhaps for you dropping a half grand or more is no big deal

          • ZoetMB

            Get your money back. I don’t know why anyone would put down money on a mass market product that doesn’t have a ship date. Did you order direct from Nikon or a dealer? If it’s a dealer, this is not Nikon’s fault. Any why would you order from a dealer who bills your credit card (presumably) before an item ships?

  • Shutterbug

    Nikon has always maintained the 1-series isn’t dead, this shouldn’t be a surprise. They may not be the most popular MILCs in North America but they do well in other parts of the world and are still unique when it comes to speed. Glad to see them looking at a larger sensor MILC as well.

    • Chris

      But will they (re)use the existing CX lenses?

      • Shutterbug

        Possibly – the CX lenses can actually handle a larger image circle than the 1″ sensors. I would hope they add some more choices though 🙂

        • Chris

          I’ve read somewhere they can handle 1.7x crop (Samsung??)

          • Nemmondom Meg

            Is it for real? I would be happy as 32mm, 70-300 are cool glasses.

          • Member

            According to Thom the cx mount is wide enough for 1.7x crop sensor but the image circle of the N1 lenses are not.

            • Maybe they can squeeze a DX sensor inside and call it Nikon 2.

            • Member

              If they re-arange the contact pins in the CX mount I’m sure there will be enough room for a DX sensor.
              However I don’t see any reason to go with CX mount for DX cameras. It makes more sense in keeping the FF and DX mount the same, either good old f-mount or new full electronic mount.
              Another reason for not choosing the CX mount as the lens mount for DX system is that a too tight fitment of the sensor wil rule out a proper implementation of IBIS.
              Btw so far I’m happy with the CX mount but Nikon should have done a better job in designing the CX mount.

            • Davo

              Yes, so new lens will be required on the same mount. Sort of like DX and FX lenses sharing the F-mount.
              However, there will be freedom of crop ratio on existing Nikon lenses up to their actual image circle, some of which exceeds the 1″ sensor area.

            • Member

              Don’t count too much on usability of the existing lenses. The image quality outside the 1″ sensor area might be crap.

            • Davo

              True. But at least you do get some additional sensor real estate with other aspect ratio crops but staying within the confirmed image circle.
              Eg. larger square crops

            • Member

              That’s indeed a sensible option. However a larger sensor wil dissipate more energy and therefore generating more heat.

            • Davo

              I must admit I don’t know the practical disadvantage that this might have. I would have thought the density of the electronics and speed of data offloads would have larger impacts on heat and dissipation leading to greater read noise.
              But on principle I’d agree that squeezing a larger sensor into the same/similar volume of space by retaining the same mount (and assuming they would still try to make the camera as small as possible) may pose a heat problem.

        • nwcs

          CX mount but not many of the actual lenses.

      • Balder the Brave

        What if ……Nikon finaly delivers us a modular system on the Cx mount capable of taking a 1″ or 1.7x sensor ?

        • Balder the Brave

          It would mean a cost killer system capable of taking current Cx lenses and future lens for the 1,7 x sensor.
          Just like FX mount can take FX or DX lenses

    • ZoetMB

      I’ll believe they’re doing well when Nikon breaks out the mirrorless numbers separately from the DSLRs, which they’re not doing.

  • Boris Cheung

    In other brands, larger formats are not considered but are manufactured.

  • animalsbybarry

    So it is likely the new 600mm 75x zoom is for Nikon one

    And I am hoping that Nikon makes thier own version of the new A9 that is rumored to have game changing specs.

    I would rather get a fully F mount compatable version of this camera ( Nikon mirrorless ) than the Sony version with no fully compatible good long lenses

    • Jelle Eisma

      The problem with the F mount is that you need a flange focal distance of 46.50mm or you can’t focus properly. This would make mirrorless camera’s as large as a dSLR or would require adapters for the lenses to work as you would like.

      • animalsbybarry

        So why is that a problem ???
        Bigger camera means smaller lens

        • Jelle Eisma

          One of the main arguments for mirrorless is that camera’s can be made more compact. But they cannot get more compact than entry level dSLRs if you want to have full F mount compatibility. In that sense it might be considered a problem.

          • animalsbybarry

            That argument is a faulty argument
            Optics are optics
            Except for extreme wide angle lenses ( retro focus ) a shorter flange distance will make the camera body shorter, but every lens will need to be longer
            What you save with a smaller camera you lose with every lens.

            • Jelle Eisma

              Might be faulty, but it has been used a lot to promote Sony cameras 😉

            • animalsbybarry

              And E mount lenses are all short/wide angle to portrait length….. There are absolutely no native E mount long lenses, and there are no long lenses that focus well on E mount cameras with adapters
              I expect that situation will change as technology improves, but that is how it is currently.

            • ZoetMB

              Which have lenses as large and heavy as Nikon lenses once you get beyond a few small primes and kit lenses.

            • Jelle Eisma

              It is, but I have heard it a lot from people promoting Sony gear 😉

            • DaveR43

              I used to think like that, until I bought the Nikon 1 70-300mm zoom. It can be collapsed into itself when not in use, and is then significantly smaller than any other 70-300 zoom on the market. And mounted on a Nikon 1 body the combination is extremely compact.

  • Merv S

    I have to say, I do notice Nikon 1 J series cameras being used by Asian tourists.

    I wouldn’t mind getting a Nikon 1 as the last point-and-shoot I bought in December 2005, instead of a new Nikon dSLR, I have a D40 and D5100 and both did very well for me in my last vacation, so I don’t need the most magnificent sensor or feature set in my cameras.

  • jimh

    Nice that they’re “considering” getting into mirroless after all. Maybe they’re also thinking about giving up their AOL account? Hey don’t rush into anything. Doesn’t matter to me, I went to Sony mirrorless over 2 years ago.

    • CaMeRa QuEsT

      If they do, how are they going to know when they’ve got an e-mail from me?

      • Mr_Miyagi

        Call them on the telephone to let them know, of course. Geeeesh.

  • CaMeRa QuEsT

    And may I ask how much market share Canon has in the mirrorless market?

  • Citizen Kang

    The “video capabilities” touted are laughable if he’s referring to the hobbled 15 fps 4K in the J5 (the current flagship for image quality). What a joke. As for the rest of the HD video capabilities, they’re very mainstream and EVERBODY has them. The significantly lower resolution high frames per second modes are, at best, a parlor trick that nobody uses beyond one or two times just for kicks. I’ve owned 5 or 6 Nikon 1 cameras and they have their place and I love them for certain types of photography, but lauding their pedestrian video capabilities is bragging about a non-event. Now, if their next Nikon 1 camera has 60 fps, full-readout with a variable AA-filter (like in certain Pentax models) and built-in variable ND 4K, then that would certainly get a lot of peoples’ attentions. I’d throw in a global shutter, but that would make this non-existent camera a unicorn.

    • whisky

      i suspect unhobbling the “15fps 4K in the J5” would have raised the price point back to something less reasonable.

      while you might not shoot a “pro” production entirely at 15fps, in some cases as a video supplement it’s better than nothing. i’m not going to fault them for that. JMO.

      • nwcs

        But why would someone choose that over a smartphone that does 24fps 4K? I think that’s the problem.

        • whisky

          if the J5 were a fixed lens camera i’d agree. however, the whole point behind the ILC’s are it’s ability to change lenses and shape the FOV. JMO.

          • nwcs

            I know but given the lenses available in Nikon 1…

            • whisky

              … they are pretty spectacular. especially the 6.7~13mm, the 32mm f1.2, and the 70~300mm. JMO.

            • nwcs

              And the various ~10-30, 10-100, 30-110, 10mm?

            • whisky

              i don’t use them. however the 10~100mm seems to be well regarded by others.

  • whisky

    who cares about what DPreview thought? i’ve always been more interested about what Nikon thought. if this is an “official” claim, then it gives me hope the Cx system will move forward.

    • DPreview? Are those clowns still doing a blog?

      • to be honest. their review of the d750 was great. very detailed and more helpful than those guys doing unpacking videos and blah blah about something they have never used in real life before.

        • Perhaps, but I didn’t see it. Those folks take themselves so seriously and consider their own words so authoritative that I wanted to throw up any time I read their responses on the forums. I stopped reading them and now have more time to look at great photography, painting, cinema, design and so on. Much more inspiring than reading about how the new Fujycon U812s is so much better than the Fujycon U812 because it has 73 more pixels.

          • I don’t mean the forum talk which is a lot about pixel peepers. I mean the entire review of the camera. For example i have learned how they implemented the new 3D tracking of the Nikon D5 and D500 – what it is capable to do which was very impressive. The review of the D750 was several pages long and comprehensive about the auto focus – you don’t find that often. Also the pro and cons about my D600 pretty sums up well.

  • zzzxtreme

    A larger sensor mirrorless with the capability to attach cx lens (2.7x crop factor) would be cool.

    • Let me know when you work out the physics of that one.

      • zzzxtreme

        Yeah lol.but it’s sort of like samsung nx500, in 4k video mode, it actually “becomes” cropped. It uses small part of the sensor. So maybe something similar, using somekind of adapter. So cx lens on larger sensor would vignette, but the camera will instead use 1″ part of the sensor.

    • Semaphore

      Well, they can fit a sensor as big as M43 in the CX mount.

      It would be pretty interesting if Nikon actually joins M43, but of course that wouldn’t happen.

  • Chris Tucker

    I’d prefer aps-c mirrorless. Let the 36x24mm format sensor die off. The 36x24mm format makes the camera too large and the lenses too large and makes access to super telephoto lenses difficult and expensive and heavy. Also, aps-c is similar to the Super 35 format that is used for Hollywood films so it’s more ideal for video work.

  • DLynch

    Can anyone account for their sources? Just curious.

  • Bo Dez

    it’s a bit late for considering.

    • IIRC, “considering” is what they said they were doing just moments before they announced the D3.

      In other words, all they’re doing is getting a little bit more liberal with their words because they know they’ve already got something impressive in the oven.

      • Eric Calabros

        No matter how technically good is that thing, many of their users will be disappointed, depended on ditching or not ditching the F mount.

        • I think it will be rather easy for Nikon to maintain full compatibility with the F mount, whether by actually continuing to use that mount and flange distance in a mirrorless body, (I wouldn’t mind that) …or by shortening the flange distance significantly, opening up the mount a bit, and then throwing in a simple converter with all of the first few thousand / million units sold.

  • If this is anything like the years / months leading up to the D3 announcement, “being considered” = “just a few months away from release”…

    Of course I said this about the D300s replacement when the D500 was still 1.5 years away from being announced and Nikon execs were being pestered about it, but we’ll see. If Nikon did wait another entire product cycle before making a DX or FX mirrorless system, they’d still “survive” the competition from Sony. As I’ve said elsewhere, they’re better off taking their time and doing it right the first time.

  • IainGFoulds

    … Why has the standard become “something you can just slip in your pocket”. Those are ugly cameras, and would be terrible to hold and use. Another dead end from Nikon.

  • Excuse me but i have a general question: why do camera manufacturers not provide a better marketing job in terms of how to differentiate their products better against smartphones? I mean a APS-C/Fullframe DSLR or APS-C/Fullframe mirrorless Body contains a lot more possibilities, is a lot more capable of how to capture an image or to make videos and can be used in a lot more creative ways than a smartphone – but i don’t see any manufacturer that makes interesting marketing campaigns to create interest. The industry says “oh, It is so bad that camera sales are going down” but my impression is that there are a lot of consumers that don’t know anything about dedicated (APS-C/Fullframe) cameras. It goes like “well my smartphone does already have a camera – why should i buy another camera?”. Also because they don’t know about the possibilities.

    • Max

      Do you realise how many people who’s “smartphones have great cameras” have a D40 or a D3100 or a Rebel or even a D90 lying in their closet getting dusty?
      It’s too much effort for them. They don’t share our passion.
      But marketing is powerful. I think the trick is to make dedicated cameras “cool” again.

      • jonebize

        Those APS-C SLR’s are bulky, have crappy lenses, and the images are not that great. Full-frame mirrorless would give people something more portable and powerful — something worth buying and carrying.

        Edit: COOL is the right word. And the current crop is far from it.

        • That’s the reason why the Sony Alpha 7 gets so much attention. It is full frame, mirrorless and small. But the FUJI X series shows that APS-C mirrorless can be awesome, too. Of course their lenses are expensive but everything they do looks very dedicated and well designed. I don’t like the Sony bodies – the controls look more like a compact camera and the user interface is more like a PC.

          • jonebize

            Yeah man! The Sony’s are ugly AF. I want a digital FM2, dammit!! The Fuji’s are great, but I could live with carrying something a little bigger (read: full frame mirrorless) 24/7. I’m the type of guy who carries a camera slung around his shoulder all day everyday. But you can’t do that with today’s DSLR’s. You -could- do it with old film bodies. I miss that!

            • Regarding weight and size it depends also from what glass you are using. If you like wildlife a 500mm lens is your friend and professionals carry them everywhere around, even up to the mountains. That needs some very strong dedication of what you are doing 🙂

        • Max

          You mean those old ones? Because I mentioned old models because that is the last time these people bought cameras.
          Modern aps-c cameras make good images, not a big difference from full frame.

          But I agree, apsc dslr’s are far from cool.
          This girl friend of mine recently sold her 6D and soon after started looking for something new that is “not big but takes better photos than her phone”.
          I showed her a picture of a X100T and she said it was sexy and bought one a month or so later.

          Just proves the point..

        • Arslaan

          I don’t think a Full Frame mirrorless with good FF glass will be much smaller / more portable than an APS-C SLR + DX glass.

          For example, look at Full-Frame 50mm 1.8’s–those lenses alone are much wider than most mirrorless cameras.

          Nikon’s F-Mount flange distance is about 1.8 inches–meaning that’s the thinnest the camera body (mirrorless or not) can be with standard Nikon lenses.

          DX cameras have smaller equivalent lenses (in this case, 35mm) because their sensors are smaller. Same Flange distance as full frame, but the lens is shorter and lighter.

          I have yet to see a focal plane indicator mark on my Nikons that is near the front–on my D750, it looks like it’s just a few millimeters in front of the back of the camera.

          The benefit of Nikon 1 was it was an all new mount with a much smaller flange distance. This allows smaller bodies–and the smaller sensor allows smaller lenses.

          Sony and others have a much smaller flange distance (similar to Nikon 1’s), making their mirrorless offerings thinner than Nikon can.

          If Nikon wanted to make a Full Frame mirrorless that would have significantly smaller bodies, it’d need an all new mount–meaning new lens offerings. And at that point, do you really care if it’s a Nikon or not since your lens library is suddenly incompatible with it’s full frame mirrorless offering?

          Smaller sensors = smaller glass.
          Smaller Flange Distance = smaller camera bodies.

          Both of these combined = more portability. Nikon did this with Nikon 1. Sony’s lenses are still huge and less portable than Nikon 1.

      • “I think the trick is to make dedicated cameras “cool” again.”

        That is the point. Especially for young people who start with smartphone photography. It is the digital Polaroid we had around the eighties for them. But especially smartphone people think that there are no further differences between a martphone camera and a dedicated FF/APS-C camera.

        “Do you realise how many people who’s “smartphones have great cameras” have a D40 or a D3100 or a Rebel or even a D90 lying in their closet getting dusty?”

        A D3100 or D5000 is not a good example for good entry-level cameras and i think that it is a reason why it makes less fun to use them. Their user interface is too crippled – a decision i don’t understand from a product marketing standpoint. For example look at a Pentax K-50 or K-30. They have at least two wheels, more features, a better user interface and view finder in the entry to mid-level class. Nikon could still differentiate those entry-level cameras using a less performant auto focus module, buffer, processor. I am a big fan of manufacturers that look about consistency in their products regarding the user interface.

        • Max

          Yes the Pentaxes are awesome, but my point is that they bought their last dedicated cameras nearly 10 years ago, and were quite amped to use them back then. For a while… Untill smartphones got better to a point where they felt “oh fuckit, it’s too much of a mission. carrying all of that around… having to download the photos onto a computer first and maybe edit them too…” My phone’s ok. I love my iphone. It makes my bum look great too when it sticks out like that.

          • I think the camera manufactuers should show the smartphone users what those cameras are good at and what the iPhone doesn’t cover really well or can’t cover at all. At least you will create interest at people that want to be creative. Bringing back the fun of using cameras. But i think this is maybe hard. We live in times where convenience is more important than the quality of the output.

            Of course, a camera with a bigger sensor than an iphone will always be bigger but if people start to complain here then they want only to snapshot and aren’t interested in a camera at all.

            “… having to download the photos onto a computer first and maybe edit them too…”

            Yes, thats a workflow issue camera manufacturers need to solve. But a Smart Device / Camera hybrid was already made once by Samsung i think running Android on it. There wasn’t much interest for that. So how can this be solved at all?

            • Eledeuh

              > We live in times where convenience is more important than the quality of the output.

              And also at a time when we document almost everything, and for that you don’t need more than a phone camera. Worse, you don’t need more than phone cameras as they were several years ago.

              See the iPhone7+ recently released and its dual optics, they’re already trying to bring over to phone users some parts of the “bigger camera experience”, all in the same familiar package.

              What do you gain with a bigger camera ? Quite a lot of things actually, but most are really just refinements, nothing essential.
              If people don’t consider the idea of “doing Photography” and owning cameras to be cool, they’ll probably never get over the hassle of carrying that extra weight again.

            • Great reply. You are right. So people are tired to get into more sophisticated photography because they think everything has been already documented? Or they don’t have any sense or taste about what good quality really is? The same problem is having those manufacturers of higher class Hi-Fi Stereo systems. Most people don’t care about really good sound systems at home. They have a iPhone boom box which outputs only a mono signal with low quality.

            • Great reply! You are right. So people are tired to get into more sophisticated photography because they think everything has been already documented? Or they don’t have any sense or taste about what good quality really is? The same problem is having those manufacturers of higher class Hi-Fi Stereo systems. Most people don’t care about really good sound systems at home. They have a iPhone boom box which outputs only a mono signal with low quality.

            • Eledeuh

              You should really think about the idea of “good enough” 😉

              People just choose their battles.

              Not everyone wants to maximize everything, nobody *can* maximize the quality of everything they do.

              When I said “we document almost everything” I meant that “we” like to share a lot of what we do in our lives. Whether it’s on Facebook, a blog, an instagram, you’ll find armies of people just sharing that they checked-in at that (not exactly interesting) place, or that they had that (totally forgettable) meal at some other place.

              Most of us live ordinary lives and we tend to like sharing what we do with our close relatives and sometimes with not-so-close relatives. Some don’t, most do.

              Nikon, Canon, and other camera makers *traditionally* appeal to a specific kind of people who want to *maximize* the quality of the image they produce via photography. The problem is, phone cameras are now at a pretty high level of IQ, and already won the battle of the ease of use (for simple use-cases that is).

              While there *is* some kind of overlap between your run-off-the-mill “I just took a picture of the beach I’m in front of” (type A) person and the “I want to create a specific image with this scene” (type B), since a “type A” result from a phone camera is very difficult to differentiate from a type A result from a DSLR, there is very little point for this “type A person” to stop using a phone camera.

              Now *if* that person were to consider pursuing photography in depth, a DSLR would still be completely relevant today. But as it stands, not everyone is interested in pursuing photography, and I’d say it’s totally fine that way.

              That’s why I think, and I suppose @TheRunningPlanet:disqus thinks, that the only way to make numbers going up again, is to find a way to make cameras and high(er) quality photography cool again, because if they battle on the same grounds as an iPhone, they’re probably going to lose.

            • “That’s why I think, and I suppose Max thinks, that the only way to make numbers going up again, is to find a way to make cameras and high(er) quality photography cool again,”

              And it is about to create art with it. Not only snapshots. But the problem is that ordinary people aren’t really interested to make visually appealing photos. The same as they aren’t interested to hear good music on a good stereo system. Our society is too focused about consuming things without really enjoying them.

              When it comes to cameras:

              Have you ever tried stroboscope flash lighting along with multiple exposures on your iPhone? Not possible. Have you ever done long exposures with low noise to capture stars, moon, milky way? Not possible. Have you ever tried close-ups of wildlife animals on your iPhone? Not possible. Have you tried creative landscape, architecture shots with fish eye lenses on your iPhone? Not possible.

              Because of that i wrote my initial post to put that in question. I think the marketing of camera manufacturers lack at this point to bring the creative potential of their cameras closer to an audience that is using only a smartphone. The problem is that a smartphone photographer thinks he can take as good images as somebody else using a DSLR. That shows the problem – look at those images on bigger screens (and not only on the iPhone or Tablet), print those images on large prints…

            • Eledeuh

              > The problem is that a smartphone photographer thinks he can take as good images as somebody else using a DSLR.

              I’m not sure about that, I’d say they genuinely don’t care. 🙂

            • Yeah and i couldn’t care less for all the snaphots from people that think they are a photographer holding their iPhones and posting their crappy pictures on instagram and facebook.

  • CX format sensor is a joke…

    mirrorless please use APS-C

    • I agree. If you want to step up from a smartphone you want to have a bigger sensor that is a lot more capable of what a smartphone can provide. CX is not really much bigger. It starts with APS-C.

      • Shutterbug

        A 1″ sensor is approximately 7 to 8 times larger than the sensor in an iPhone, that’s quite significant. The image quality is orders of magnitude apart. The image quality Sony gets out of the RX 100 series and Nikon in the J5 (same sensor) is better than it should be for 1″ and similar to M43. The problem with large sensors is big heavy glass unless you stick to pancake lenses – it’s a balancing act, and another reason why it’s nice to have so much choice as a consumer.

        • For my opinion a FUJI X T-1 or Olympus E-M1 is already tiny and their design look great. What i like at Nikon is their full frame line of models but everything else is not that sexy. Their new action cams look ugly compared to GoPro.

          • Shutterbug

            Agreed, Jorge – Fuji is making some of the nicest mirrorless cameras right now in my opinion as well. Olympus’ E-M1 MK II they announced the development of looks very impressive as well.

            • Yes, i wish that Nikon would make the same dedicated hardware. Their product range looks sophisticated. The thing is that Nikon is having a huge legacy of lenses for the F-mount and the product catalog much wider than what FUJI and Olympus are offering. So they have a lot more to cover and luggage to carry around.

    • Shutterbug

      It’s not a joke for the people looking for cheap action cameras, cheap underwater cameras, extremely light travel combos, or cheap wildlife/birding combos.

      • But Nikon is way too late for action cams. The market leader is GoPro here and they have already problems to survive for the future, that’s why they came out with this new drone.

        • Shutterbug

          I meant action cameras in the sense of shooting high frame rates with deep buffers and autofocus between frames. They are still unrivaled when it comes to that in the mirrorless world, and one reason they can do that is because of the sensor size. It’s all a trade off.

          You’re right that GoPro has the action video camera segment pretty well cornered.

          • Faster sensor read-out is one of the remaining problems at full frame / aps-c mirrorless cameras to get better at action. I don’t know if the electronic viewfinder is still having a lag (latency) for fast action at current EVF cameras – it is because the read-out from the sensor needs some time to display it’s image at the EVF.

      • Max

        Or street photographers (depending a bit on the style)

    • Member

      I do like Good jokes 🙂
      But maybe Nikon is not that good in telling jokes.
      I’m sure this joke would be more enjoyable to a wider audience if it were a little more juicier en spicier.

  • Bob Cozzi

    In mirrorless, I prefer fullframe but the DX (APS-C) size is good enough vs the “point and shoot” size sensors. So the Jx isn’t for me. I almost considered the DL but since they are not going to ship it until it is “old” I now have to consider other options.

    “Back when I was a kid” we could buy an F3 or a Kodak plastic thing (Instamatic? don’t recall the name) and they both shot on the same size “sensor” that is film. Why the “F-stop” does Nikon think a smaller camera needs a smaller sensor? I know market control, but come on–look what Apple did to Nokia and Motorola. Or what Tesla is going to do to GM and Ford. The old guard isn’t moving–just sucking profits out of existing product lines. Sure the D500 and D5 are great. But IBM knows its mainframes and AS/400 line up are great too–but problem is, nobody but IBM employees cares about how great those products are–well, not enough customers care. And to do a GoPro clone now, when GoPro said, I see you KeyMission170 and raise you the Hero5 for the same price and a 1 million times larger ecosystem, I think maybe Nikon is the next Kodak. I love Kodak and Nikon, but they’re “not eating, so it’s only a matter of time”

    • “Why the “F-stop” does Nikon think a smaller camera needs a smaller sensor?”

      That is the point. Other manufacturers like FUJI and Olympus got it right. They try bigger sensors in small cameras which create a lot more buzz these days – not only because they have a great lens line-up for them.

    • Arslaan

      For me, small sensors = small lenses. That’s one benefit I really like.

    • Davo

      Why the “F-stop” does Nikon think a smaller camera needs a smaller sensor?
      I agree but I have a different take.
      DSLRs need to go on a diet. The D750 is a good start. People have different sized hands so some may like a D810 sized camera, some even a D750 is too big.
      But if you’d like smaller lenses (and lens sizes are increasing to match increasing sensor resolution), then I’m afraid sensor size must also shrink.
      I personally think a happy compromise exists around APS-C to m43.
      Hey.. that 1.7X sensor sounds pretty good right now.

      • That is exactly the strategy of FUJI and Olympus trying to get those people who are interested in smaller sized (and less attention catching) bodies if they are mostly doing street photography for example.

        • Davo

          I tend to agree. But my opinion is its not because of more sophisticated control but that the 1+ stop penalty in sensor performance hasn’t been made up elsewhere in a meaningful way.
          Had the Nikon 1 approached some of the 1″ type compacts’ dimensions but still maintained interchangeable lenses capability then I think it would’ve satisfied another niche different to the m43 and Fuji X crowd.

    • Member

      Why the “F-stop” does Nikon think a smaller camera needs a smaller sensor?

      I’m not convinced that the goal was to design a small camera and therfore utilising a small sensor.
      I believe that the design goal was to create a system around that particular 1″ sensor which resulted in a smaller camera.
      Keep in mind that before 2011 there were no ILC with 1″ sensor. There Nikon recognised the gap in sensor size offerings. But due to this whole Nikon 1 project being poorly executed, it didn’t cut it for Nikon.
      In 2012 Sony released their rx100 with 1″ sensor and in 2014 Samsung their NX-mini.

  • Shutterbug

    ON a DSLR, yes, DPAF is the best liveview AF around, no contest. Compared to other mirrorless though cameras it is not as good as the Sony or Nikon 1 on sensor PDAF.

    At the moment there is no way to get even close to the accuracy of DSLR AF on mirrorless (for subject tracking), comparing it to something like the CAM20000 module in the D5/D500 for example.

    Everything isn’t in focus on a 1-series, especially if you use a 32/1.2 or 18/5/1.8. Also keep in mind that on the telephoto end, DOF is *extremely* thin, the 70-300 CX lens is an 810mm equivalent, and with the FT-1 adapter it’s easy to get well over 1000mm.

  • TheInfinityPoint
    • Lol, you don’t mind if I share this on social media, right?

      • TheInfinityPoint

        Of course no problem!

    • Mike Gordon

      Giorgio is great!

  • Arslaan

    2 things I’d love to see:
    1) Full Frame Mirrorless (for everyone who wants one, not me), and
    2) Small Sensor / Form Factor Mirrorless (continuation of “1” line maybe)?

    For #2, my phone just doesn’t cut it when I want different focal lengths–and its pixel size is probably too small for decent low-light performance.

    I’ve found that I could use a small (~GoPro-sized or slightly larger) interchangeable lens mirrorless camera, that has proportionally small lenses. Something I could throw in my pocket for a concert or travel or something along with 2-3 mini primes that would also be pocketable. Don’t need a lot of features here–give me full manual control, RAW Files, autofocus, built-in intervalometer, and I’m good. 12-ish Megapixels for decent low-light performance and Dynamic Range.

    Bonus points for taking F-mount lenses with an adapter. Then you could go home, throw on an f-mount telephoto and get a high res shot of the moon or wildlife.

    I would get a J5, but apparently it’s not compatible with my F-mount 500mm lens, even with the FT1 adapter. The other Nikon 1’s are compatible (like the V3), but they lack the dynamic range and sensor quality of the J5.

    My issue with Full Frame mirrorless is that my lenses usually outweigh the body–if I’m going anywhere with my full frame lenses, I really don’t care if the camera body is any smaller. A full frame DSLR body is just as annoying to carry as a mirrorless with large lenses. I also don’t care as much about video.

    Looks like there was the Pentax Q a few years ago, but sensor tech has come a long way since then…

    • I don’t care for body weight and size either to some extend because full frame lenses are bigger. For example i like the size of my D600 (also the D750). The D800 was too big for me but for other people it will fit well along with the new 105mm f/1.4E lens. The worst thing about mirrorless bodies for me is battery performance. I hate it to carry multiple batteries and replace them after only 300 shots. That is nothing compared to a DSLR camera. I am satisfied with DSLR systems and don’t need mirrorless or i don’t see a need in terms of that it outperforms a DSLR in any way.

  • steven8217

    Now that Nikon have the 1” DL product line for advance point and shoot market, I think Nikon should merge both Nikon 1 model J and model V into one single product line such as J6 with the optional EVF and a bulkier battery grip, and allocate the resource toward the APS-C mirrorless product line.

    I display both the Nikon 1 V3 body and the compact APS-C Coolpix A camera (with build in 18.5mm F2.8 lens) side by side in the attached photo https://uploads.disquscdn.com/images/cef8c4273daa5178c191370194e777afb6567909ed005ce16e6de7bc6d75f6f3.jpg , both are very similar in the dimension, Nikon can integrate what they have learnt on the excellent Coolpix A onto the coming APS-C mirrorless product line.
    Note that although both of the came seems very similar in the camera body dimension, the sensor image of circle make up a HUGE difference on the lens design, the 1” lens is significantly smaller than the lens design for APS-C sensor, I think the FX sensor mirrorless is out of question here on the initial large sensor mirrorless product launch.
    It is definitely an interesting milestone on Nikon 100 years birthday party.

    • Max

      How is the quality and size of that external viewfinder? Do you find you can manual focus with it? Compared to, say, a D7100 viewfinder?

      • steven8217

        Hi Max, I believe this is the very first EVF from Nikon and the build quality is very high (also the price) the dimensions is about 40x30mm with diopter adjustment and eye sensing feature. I have two of them for each of my V3.

      • steven8217

        Hi Max, the dimension is about 40x30mm at attached photo as I have two of them on both of my V3. I believe this is the first EVF from NIkon, the buikd quality is very high and it comes with the auto eye sensing switching and d https://uploads.disquscdn.com/images/3f1f648daac5592a8c913eef0bbd4135168cdd0c9183929afd98f7ad63b98185.jpg iopter adjustment.

        • Max

          Thanks for the info Steven, however I actually meant the size and magnication of the display in the viewfinder?

      • steven8217

        As of your 2nd question on MF/manual focus, an EVF is kind of similar to Live View focus but at a much FASTER AF speed due to hybrid AF sensor.
        There are two type of lenses you can use: 1). Nikon F-mount via the Nikon FT1 adapter, you can use any FX or DX lens (even old AI-S/AI lens but no pin that work on the fork or “rabbit ears”), lens with VR will works just fine BUT the focus point limit to the Center Point ONLY.
        2). Nikon CX mount, Nikon 1 lens with 171 contrast-detect and 105 phase-detect points, which is much more convenience and with the deep/wide DoF of 1” sensor resulting an overall high AF accuracy and I found myself just touching the location that I need to focus on the Touch LCD. You touch the location you want to focus on the touch LCD, V3 will focus and take the shot for you. (or just focus but wait for you to press the shuttle button.
        Nikon 1 did not implement focus peaking so you will need to check the final shot to view the desire DoF result.
        The no. 1 feature that I like on Nikon V3 is once you turn on Silent Photography, it is completely silence with zero noise with electronics shuttle, very handy in many situations compare to the annoying mirror-slap noise with every DSLR.
        Nikon 1 lens also have two lenses that are video friendly equipped with Power Zoom, one is the kit lens VR 10-30mm F/3.5-5.6 PD-Zoom, the other is the (Fat) VR 10-300mm F/4.5-5.6 PD-zoom.
        Note that only two Nikon 1 lens in the current lineup comes with manual focus ring: the Nikon 1 32mm F/1.2 and the VR 70-300 F/4.5-5.6 (crop factor is 2.7x to Full Frame)

  • Nikon is forced to reply to the Canon EOS M system. Nikon has always copied what Canon was doing, isn’t it that way? When does Nikon start to show it’s own innovation strengths?

  • Bengt Nyman

    The question is NOT what is the best size sensor. The question is what is the best size sensor for the number of details that you wish to capture. For a large distant landscape in dim light the best sensor is a medium format sensor, Hasselblad or Fuji. For architecture use MF or FF. For press and sports, FF is fine and even APS-C seems to do the job. For wildlife including birds, a small sensor is preferable because of the reach of the smaller and lighter lenses, for example an E-M1 with a 300mm lens or even a Nikon 1 with a 200mm lens.

    • TwoStrayCats

      You don’t think Ansel would’ve whipped out his Galaxy S7 to capture Moonrise Hernandez and have it on line in 10 seconds?

      • Bengt Nyman

        If Ansel had had a Galaxy S7 he would have called his wife and said: “Wait until I can show you this.”

    • The next question is how far are Smartphones replacing the traditional cameras? Apple just released the new beta software that allows to background blur the subjects and i am surprised i must say how good it works. Another step closer to the classical DSLR or mirrorless sensor system.

      • Bengt Nyman

        If you just want to please yourself, by all means, use your smartphone…

        • Me? Smartphone? You’re talking to the wrong person. If a picture has nothing to say i prefer not clicking the shutter button. 🙂

          • Bengt Nyman

            Excellent !
            I believe that 99% of all pictures taken are snapshots with zero after life and less than 1% is photography requiring a camera.

            • It is sad that people even accept a very noisy blurry, smeared picture in low light of themselves which wouldn’t make it into any photo album or weddings that are only done on a smartphone – it means a beautiful memory conserved into a photo doesn’t mean that much anymore.

            • Bengt Nyman

              I guess it is the cerebral recollection of a beautiful moment that reproduces the feeling, even if it leaves a third person viewer politely untouched.

          • Arslaan

            These are completely different markets. Are you suggesting that Nikon should target selling to the “90%” of users who don’t care about dedicated cameras? That sounds like an uphill battle. Smartphones are replacements for point-and-shoots.

            For the other “10%”, smartphones are pretty far away from replacing high quality cameras. Subject isolation is just one aspect of cameras, and software tricks like Apple’s have been around for years. They don’t have the same feel as true physical subject isolation due to the combo of distance, sensor size, & aperture. Also, see how the software works for fast moving objects or subjects at a distance.

            There’s also low-light, sharpness, variable focal length, lens quality, etc. to consider.

            • I mean that Nikon should speak to switchers which have an underlying interest but not knowing it. Do you remember the switcher campaign by Apple between Windows and Macs? I think it is the same with photography. Manufacturers should make more advertising that is showing what those systems are capable of and can do better what a smartphone can’t do very well or not at all. What i see now is that they only advertise their models itself. Make cameras a desired tool for smartphone users that have an interest to get more sophisticated pictures and getting creative with it. Show them how beautiful it looks to print a stunning photo in a big way – embrace a sense for quality. Show them why different lenses are a requirement for good pictures. You can advertise all that instead of thinking that people will find that out by themselves.

            • Arslaan

              Do you remember the switcher campaign by Microsoft between Windows and Macs? That was a lot more aggressive and had more resources thrown at it and highlighted more features…and it didn’t work. Comparing computers (a functional necessity in today’s world) and cameras (an art medium for most people) is nowhere near the same thing.

              How would you propose that Nikon finds and educates the “switchers which have an underlying interest but not knowing it?” How much budget & time would that campaign require and take away from the rest of the business in manufacturing and R&D? And most importantly, after the free education, how many conversions would you get out of it and what would net positive for you–and not your competitors? Do you have any experience running an entire technology product business? How’s your revenue looking compared to Nikon’s?

              Most people today who want to get into photography and who have the resources to do so are going to proactively read up on photography and reviews online. That’s what my friends have done. Most of my other friends (who are not into photography) know what a camera is and pretty much always think that a better camera means better pictures–they just don’t care enough to make an investment of money, time, and practicality of carrying a dedicated camera.

            • “Comparing computers (a functional necessity in today’s world) and cameras (an art medium for most people) is nowhere near the same thing.”

              Both are a tool work your work. The computer for the Lightroom and Photoshop part and the Camera for the Capture in the field, studio or anywhere else. There will be always a comparison between technical devices, regardless if they are cars, computers, phones or cameras. And a smartphones can do a lot more from the functional part due to it’s apps and software compared to a camera, so the manufacturers should watch closely what is happening on that market for consumers.

            • Arslaan

              What are you talking about? You’ve got the loopiest logic. You suddenly changed your analogy of computers to talking about them in the context of photography (which you explicitly didn’t use the first time).

              I never said there aren’t customers in the smartphone crowd. I might have to dumb this down a bit for you: Businesses have limited resources, and not everyone cares enough about photography to invest in buying and carrying a dedicated camera. For many people, their phone’s camera is good enough at the right price, and always with them. You are constantly suggesting that Nikon should educate the generic public in the differences between smartphone cameras and higher end cameras and that this will suddenly translate to conversions and everyone will suddenly develop enough of an interest in photography to spend hundreds of dollars because nobody knows the difference between a smartphone and a DSLR. Even though you also mention that there are thousands of magazines that consumers can read on the subject. Very loopy.

              “If you want a better camera for taking stills you wouldn’t really recommend a smartphone, or not?”

              I might. It sounds like you wouldn’t think about their requirements, constraints, or context. If the person looking wants a practical, relatively inexpensive camera integrated into a device they’ll always have on them to take great wide-angle shots with large depths of field during the daytime, a smartphone is a much better choice. I’ve taken some great shots with my smartphone in this scenario–much better than the shots I would have (not) taken when I’m not carrying my DSLR. I have a life and don’t carry my cameras & lenses constantly everywhere I go–nor do I recommend to my friends that they do either.

              If a person is looking to spend hundreds or thousands and is willing to carry several additional pounds of equipment when they want to take better pictures in tougher conditions, then I’d recommend a dedicated camera. These people are usually reasonably intelligent enough to ask and research. They don’t need to be told that a dedicated camera is different than a smartphone. …unless they’re loopy, maybe? I dunno…you can probably relate to them more than I can.

            • Oh my good are you cocky and bigheaded. Do you really think it needs an answer that implies some taunt? Why do i get the feeling that you are sore because someone writes about a brand?

  • peevee

    “We announced the J5 about a year ago”

    Actually, 1.5 years ago.

    And Samsung said NX is not dead either.

    Nothing for Photokina? They are definitely preparing something radical. Given that they had 3 generations of DSLRs with 24mpix APS-C, and 3 generations with 24mpix FF, they just don’t have new components to continue their usual route.

  • “This will come at the expense of image quality”

    If you decide for full frame you do it mainly because of the best possible image quality. That compromises that you have more weight and size. If you blame a full frame for that it was maybe the wrong camera decision. The same applies to MF cameras which are even bigger.

  • Zak Zoezie

    As a D750 user, I don’t own mirrorless (yet) but I’m closely watching it. According to me, Nikon’s 1 system has some great quality compact & light lenses, lenses that no other (APSC or m43) mirrorless system can match in terms of size & weight. Now just imagine Nikon improving the usability of the 1 bodies (which should be doable) and on top Sony delivering Nikon in the future a great 1″ sensor giving comparable noise & low light performance to today’s D750 FF sensor … I think it is just a matter of time (needed for the sensor tech evolution) before the Nikon 1 system can be used to its full potential. I agree that Nikon needs to work and improve the 1 system usability asap, but the sensor evolution … that will probably take much more time before its quality is somewhere close to today’s FF sensors. But the better these 1″ sensors get over time (and they will get better every year), the more the Nikon 1 series will benefit, and I’m talking consumer market here where people want a compact and light solution that delivers great quality images. So time should be on the side of Nikon concerning the success of their 1 system. But hey, that is just my personal view. Now next to the 1 system, Nikon will for sure need to develop a bigger sensor mirrorless for those (mainly semi-pro’s & pro’s) that desire the required DOF flexibility that no small sensor can deliver. These 2 mirrorless systems side by side would cover most of the market demands. I think it is just a matter of time before mirrorless technology is really fully ready.

    • Arslaan

      Totally agreed! Just hope Nikon keeps going with the 1. It would be awesome if they cut up the D750 sensor, removed the AA filter, and threw it on a really, really compact 1. Better if they developed more lenses and improved compatibility with their FX lenses (via adapter)! A few longer primes and faster zooms. I’m waiting with my wallet in hand. 🙂

      • Zak Zoezie

        Personally, I’m 100% convinced the 1 series will stay. But after the introduction of this system (typically when many people buy and step into a new system), where several body styles and iterations were released in a very short time frame, Nikon will most probably slow down and use a longer product cycle (= longer time frame) before releasing the next body upgrade as less new people will step into the system (this is normal market behaviour). So the Nikon 1 owners will need to be a little more patient in the future before they see new body upgrades and new lenses beeing released … So the increased waiting time people experience now (compared to the introduction period of the system) does not necessarily mean they will stop the system. They simply adapt their investments on the demand & sales of new body upgrades and new lenses. That is called “return on investment”.

  • El Aura

    Part of this fall-off in sales is saturation (‘every’ adult who is willing to get a separate camera got one and we are largely into replacement and new young people getting a camera) and maturity (replacement cycles are getting longer). The other part is smartphones. You don’t get such a steep fall-off just from saturation and maturity, those more gradual processes.

    If you were to look at the total number of images taken globally, that graph would continue to rise fairly steeply (number of photos taken by smartphones are still increasing healthily in rich countries and new ‘photographers’ are created in significant numbers in emerging economies).

    • MB

      You are right of course, most people that want a separate camera already has one, and also most of the camera sales boost at the beginning of digital era is from the people replacing their obsolete film cameras with digital ones … and you are right again that smartphone took away all the market share once owned by compact cameras and than some (and even much more than some) … and yes dedicated camera sales will eventually level off …
      But that does not solve the problem Nikon and others have and that is they grew up quite significantly during the golden digital era and the market they are facing now is just not able to support the cost of such a huge companies they become … for example I remember the rumor that Nikon acquired Fujitsu imaging software division with 800 people for developing firmware, the estimated costs for maintaining this single division is millions of dollars every month … they have to do something extraordinary to survive …

  • El Aura

    One problem of the Nikon 1 system is that isn’t that much smaller than m43. Or rather that m43 has a wide enough range of bodies and lenses such that it can be as small as Nikon 1 (eg, V3+32 mm f/1.2 vs GM5 + 45 mm f/1.8) but can also offer additional options if a larger body or a faster lens is desired (eg, 42.5 mm f/1.2). It’s only at the tele end where the smaller sensor still has a clear size advantage (Nikon 1 70-300 mm vs Panasonic 100-400 mm though the Panasonic is about half a stop faster in equiv. f-stops).

    • Arslaan

      Yeah…totally agree. Nikon 1 seems to be semi-competitive with M43, and I think theres’ a sweet spot in sensors somewhere in this range.

      Even though there’s much better low-light & subject isolation potential on the M43, for me, the benefit / cutoff would be “Can I put the camera body and 1-2 lenses (between 50mm & 150mm) in my pocket (separately)? I don’t need wider angles in this range because my phone covers that range. I also like the idea of a tiny higher-pixel density sensor that I can couple with a long F-mount lens for ultra reach (like the moon). In these scenarios, I think the Nikon 1 has the slight edge.

      But totally agree that different people will have different use cases. And Nikon 1 has a bit of an uphill battle to face the M43 incumbents, that you rightfully mentioned have a wider range of bodies and lenses today.

  • Really? Do you have a bad day or what is your problem? There are people out there who can’t afford to buy multiple camera systems and sensors of different types and all that lenses for that. Did you know that, too? Fine. To each their own. I don’t have time to piss off other people. Bye.

    • Arslaan

      Re-read this post. This was about what I’d like to see. I completely understand that different people have different budgets and requirements–you don’t seem to get that. You’re the one who keeps saying that Nikon needs to educate the smartphone crowd on why they need to spend hundreds to get full frame lenses and expensive dslr bodies.

      CX lenses & sensors are much cheaper than the APS-C that you were recommending, btw.

      • “You’re the one who keeps saying that Nikon needs to educate the smartphone crowd on why they need to spend hundreds to get full frame lenses and expensive dslr bodies.”

        Oh – my – god. Do you really read such bullshit out of my sentences? I mean advertising and marketing – that is not education! Please differentiate that. And i mean to bring back fun into cameras, whatever systems they are. It could be CX, APS-C or Full Frame. Is that so important? And Apple is the best example of marketing. People think they have invented the Smartphone – thats brilliant marketing… now they think iPhones are the first and best ones for portrait with dual-camera that can blur the background. Again, great marketing… do i see anything of that in the camera industry? No.

  • br0xibear

    There’s only one area where Nikon’s dslr sales are increasing, and that’s India.
    Here are Kazuo Ninomiya’s thoughts (MD, Nikon India)…
    “the phone is not our enemy”,
    “We are a luxury brand but we don’t want to take photography away from
    people. We want to be accessible. We have the DSLR but we also have the compact camera that is much more reasonably priced. But yet the picture quality will be ‘luxury’.”
    Full article here http://economictimes.indiatimes.com/magazines/panache/didnt-know-that-so-many-people-loved-photography-in-india-kazuo-ninomiya-md-nikon-india/articleshow/54423791.cms

    • Chaitanya

      Nikon might be growing in India at the cost of Sony, since Sony stopped making A mount cameras, most of the A mount users have shifted to Nikon or Canon. Most mirrorless cameras dont seem to be doing well in India.

  • Bjørn T Johansen

    Most people uses the smartphone for photos. Only entusiasts want a dedicated camera. I could buy the v3, but i think it is too expensive. So i rather go m43 when i buy a mini camera.

  • Mitych

    Nikon 1: “The reports of my death have been greatly exaggerated”. (c) Mark Twain 😉

  • IainGFoulds

    … No man wants a dainty camera, ergonomically manageable only by finger tips. There is a reason that pro-cameras are built large enough to be handled comfortably.
    … Mirrorless is a passing fad. Keep an eye out for flooded used markets.

    • nwcs

      Keep telling yourself that. Denial is the first step to acceptance.

    • Narretz

      Mirrorless is not a fad, it’s the tech of the future. Making cameras small as a distinguishing feature might be a fad.

  • Max

    Very nice:)

  • Chris Daigle

    Honestly, I would go for a DX size sensor camera with Nikon S rangefinder looks. Yes, I know I am dreaming.

  • Kai Schwab

    THAT’s what a Nikon Df should have been. Clean, sleek, simplified, reduced.
    I’d LOVE to get one of these into my hands!!! <3

  • stevieg

    Sorry if this seems obvious, but let’s assume that Nikon want to build on their heritage and have some backward comptibility, but also want to move forwards. Any mirrorless sensor camera will have to have either a DX or FX sized sensor. From what I can see from other manufacturers, the contacts between lens and camera body is electrical only. As far as Nikon goes, that means E-type lenses only. Currently that is the FX 24-70 and exotic telephoto’s. I am not aware of a single E-type DX lens. An adaptor to use even the E-type lenses would be needed due to short flange back distances as well, but I wouldn’t have thought that a mechanical lever to actuate the G-type (or D-type) lenses would be practical, let alone the screw-drive focussing of the D-type lenses. This would leave very little available lens-stock to carry over, use on a back up body, or continue current lens line-up sales! The manual lenses and D-type lenses could be manually focused with peaking and aperture set with the aperture ring. Maybe the reason we’ve not seen anything yet is because Nikon know that there would be virtually no lenses for current owners to put onto their new camera and they first need to update almost their entire lens line up (either DX and/or FX)!!!!
    That’s why, having been a Nikon user for (literally) decades, I am seriously considering a Fuji, especially having visited and used their products at Photokina this year and looking at my large D and G lens line up wondering what the future holds for them….

  • Back to top