New Sony announcements - what does it mean for Nikon shooters?

Nikon Rumors Forum » Weird & Fun

New Sony announcements - what does it mean for Nikon shooters?

(43 posts) (14 voices)

Tags:

« Previous 12

TaoTeJared

preferred member
Joined: Apr '10
Posts: 2,422
offline

I think what Sony has shown, they are the only one who is working towards a FX mirror-less camera. I think Panasonic and Oly would be poised for a FX version but they don't have the capital to dump into developing a completely new system. They seem to be content with the m4/3 and for good reason - they are eating the low Dslr market like a kid in a candy store. Nikon and Canon could be working on something, and I think MSmoto is right, the mirror must go at some point, but for now the best AF and Metering utilizes the mirror. I think Nikon's J1/V1 shows that they know this as well, that AF is fast - but still not pro DSLR fast.

I think the better question for a mirrorless is not who will produce a FF one, but when the quality of the smaller sensors will match the quality desired, and when will f1.0 glass be or the technology be available to achieve the bokeh as well.

Posted 8 months ago #
iris chrome

preferred member
Joined: Feb '11
Posts: 394
offline

TaoTeJared said:
debunked
http://photorumors.com/2012/09/21/fuji-now-claims-their-xf-lenses-cannot-cover-a-35mm-sensor-sony-and-panasonic-full-frame-cameras-are-possible/

Tao, what's been debunked, as you say, is Kawahara's (Fuji's rep) statements regarding compatibility between current XF lenses and a possible FF X-series camera.

"It would not work - XF lenses could not be used with a full-frame sensor"

Fuji seems to still be interested in FF or at least exploring the idea otherwise why would Kawahara debunk this part of his statements without debunking the rest of the original article from Amateur Photographer?

As for the image showing the overlapping FF sensor with the X-E1 mount, there are a couple of reasons I could think of why it's inaccurate and misleading. I'd take that with a grain of salt if I were you.

It's not clear from his statements if the current mount itself is not compatible or if just the image circle cast by current lenses wouldn't cover a FF sensor. In either case that by itself does not preclude a FF Fuji. The idea of having different mounts within the same system is not new. Take canon's EF-S and EF mount lenses for example. EF-S can mount both type of lenses but EF will only mount EF lenses. Of course, if it's just a matter of image circle not covering FF sensor then it's the same case as Nikon's FX vs. DX mounts.

You mentioned that the future of mirrorless is not FF but smaller size sensor stepping up to better quality and I agree with that statement. However, X-series, RX1 and Leicas are the niche of mirrorless and not the future.

Posted 8 months ago #
TaoTeJared

preferred member
Joined: Apr '10
Posts: 2,422
offline

The reference of amateur photographer's article was that because current lenses could cover a FF sensor, then they are working on one and it is closer than previously thought. That was the apparent message they were sending.

When DPreview asked a much different answer was given that it is not possible for a FF sensor to work with the current system.

debunk:
verb (used with object)
to expose or excoriate (a claim, assertion, sentiment, etc.) as being pretentious, false, or exaggerated: to debunk advertising slogans.

It clearly appears Amateur Photographer wanted the "drop" on some news and read too much a comment. Debunked is the proper term to describe it. My comment has nothing to do weather or not Fuji is looking into it or not.

Salt isn't needed with math - if you do the math you can see it wouldn't work. My 35mm 1.8 covers my D800 sensor with heavy vignetting. I would say it covers it but that doesn't mean it is truly compatible.

There is much room and future for the "niche" systems. They have always existed and they will continue.

Posted 8 months ago #
iris chrome

preferred member
Joined: Feb '11
Posts: 394
offline

Thom confirms Fuji's FF comments although he seems to be against such implementation:

"The Sony RX-1 was getting good attention, but not the crazy attention it's gotten in the press since announcement. Ditto with a full frame Fujifilm. Fujifilm's comments about such a possibility at the X-E1 launch set off a wave of press speculation that's snowballed [...]"

http://bythom.com/photokina2012trends.htm

Tao, thank you for your vocabulary lesson... it was not needed :/

As long as you're giving lessons though maybe you should reread what I wrote:

iris chrome said:
As for the image showing the overlapping FF sensor with the X-E1 mount, there are a couple of reasons I could think of why it's inaccurate and misleading. I'd take that with a grain of salt if I were you.

This referred to FF sensors fitting into XF mount. Nothing to do with lenses.

Posted 8 months ago #
msmoto

big gun cougar
Joined: Mar '10
Posts: 2,736
offline

@ Jonnyapple... I think I like the Fuji XE-1 more so than the Sony Alpha Nex-6. But, i am waiting awhile until more falls out. Maybe the D400 will show up, maybe Nikon will drop something before Christmas, who knows. But, at the present time, I am OK with the wait.

It would seem to me, an awful lot of the articles we see in various magazines are written primarily from rumor and supposition. When a manufacturer's rep makes a statement and the next day it is contradicted by another rep, this suggests even within the suppliers there is a clear competition to be "first" with the information. And of course some of us here on NRF will hear supposedly reliable information, later to find it is not accurate.

But, this is a discussion forum and everything goes, as long as we are nice to each other and keep our mouths clean. (This is in reference to what I would like to say to Nikon regarding the lack of a D400).

Posted 8 months ago #
adamz

The Predator
Joined: Mar '09
Posts: 3,461
offline

sony just posted a gallery with rx-1 photos, don't know like You but I would love to see such a camera in Nikon lineup:
http://www.sony.jp/cyber-shot/1hand-fullsize/gallery_shitamachi.html

Posted 7 months ago #
msmoto

big gun cougar
Joined: Mar '10
Posts: 2,736
offline

Yes, I would like a Nikon product like this....which would accept all the lenses. But, what is so nice about the link, Adam, are the wonderful photographs of the people.....love it! Thanks!

Posted 7 months ago #
TriShooter

senior member
Joined: Dec '11
Posts: 53
offline

I seriously thought about getting the Nikon 1 V1 when some of the stores were dumping them, but could not justify it because of already having the NEX C3, and NEX 5N. I like the larger Sony Alpha bodies and use them on my older Nikon lenses like the 50cm F5 mirror lens that I operate manually. But for birds in flight Nikon's AF-s and subject tracking is still the best.

I originally wanted a V1 for the extra reach of the CX Format when shooting small birds but do not like the low ISO limitation of the V1 with my older and slower lenses. Both Nikon and Sony's electronic viewfinders make shooting manually completely painless on still images. I like live view shooting on both systems, but neither works for me when shooting flying ducks that can appear and disappear on the horizon in seconds.

I will probably buy an FX compact to use whenever I want a shallower depth of field and really love the idea of one in a compact camera body. I prefer to buy Nikon because that is my primary system, but buying a few 300mm to wide angle lenses in not a deal breaker anymore for me. Traveling with the NEX Series has spoiled me.

Posted 7 months ago #
TriShooter

senior member
Joined: Dec '11
Posts: 53
offline

I meant to say that the Sony NEX lenses are just adequate, but not comparable to the quality of the Nikon lenses. I have not tried their latest lenses. This is one of the pitfalls of not waiting for Nikon. The NEX series works well with an adapter but you have to be comfortable using manual focusing and exposure to use them on the NEX Series.

Posted 7 months ago #
SkintBrit

preferred member
Joined: Jul '10
Posts: 1,149
offline

Funduro said:
Many people with large amounts of disposable income will buy the RX1, whether they shoot Canon, Nikon, Pentax, Sigma, Samsun, Sony or Olympus. They'll buy it to have it, to brag they have it, to make other jealous, to shoot their cats. I hope they have fun with it and I'll hope to hit the lottery this Saturday. ;-)

I don't have large amounts of disposable income, or intend to brag I have one, but am seriously thinking about putting my order in for an RX1.......Am I mad? The reviews make it sound fantastic, and if I get my folks to bring it over from the states next time they visit, it'll cost me £1800 instead of the £2600 Sony want for it here. As photojournalism/candids is my thing, and I'm getting too old to carry my D3s with a 24 1.4 all day long, do you guys think it would be a good idea? My heart says RX1, my head says Fuji X100 at 1/3 of the price.

Posted 6 months ago #
SkintBrit

preferred member
Joined: Jul '10
Posts: 1,149
offline

Thinking about it over the last couple of days, in spite of the universally excellent reviews the RX1 has received, the main cause of concern for me in purchasing one, is the amateurish looks one would receive, if I tried to use it for paid portrait or wedding work....... I don't think most paying clients would take kindly to having their photographer taking shots at arms length with a P&S? I suppose I could use it in conjunction with the optional OVF/EVF, but still it's looks I think would send out the wrong signal, anyone had any experience of clients reactions when using a P&S professionally?

Posted 6 months ago #
Ade Barkah

preferred member
Joined: Apr '11
Posts: 108
offline

I think you have to honestly ask yourself if any camera with a fixed 35mm lens is the right tool for performing professional weddings and portrait photography? As a second camera, maybe; but I can think of any number of common scenarios in weddings and portraiture where a fixed 35mm lens will be severely limiting.

Posted 6 months ago #
SkintBrit

preferred member
Joined: Jul '10
Posts: 1,149
offline

Yes sorry Ade Barkah, I should have made myself clear, it would be a second (or third) camera to my Nikon DSLR's.

Posted 6 months ago #
TaoTeJared

preferred member
Joined: Apr '10
Posts: 2,422
offline

I have had the same thoughts - as a second camera with a 35mm lens. If you use a 35mm range on a second body and you think about it, even a D600 ($2,000) and a 35mm f2 AFD lens puts you at the same price but more weight - and for what?

I actually use my fuji X100 a ton (35mm equiv) as a second camera for the "documentary" feel or when I need something wider. It is small so it really doesn't get in the way at all. If I have a 70-200 or anything like a 50mm,85mm,105vr + it works great so I don't have to swap lenses.

I like the idea of the High ISO is better since generally I just set it on manual focus, aperture at f8 and zone focus at 6ft. That gives me everything from 4'-12' in focus. Many times it will be at iso6400 which works for B&W most of the time, but there are times where I could use a better output in color and cleaner B&W photos.

There is one thing I keep my Fuji X100 for and that is the super high speed sync with the focal shutter. I can get 1/2000 sec shutter with flash. In day light, f2 and wanting to really darken the background, it is great. If they update the x100, that would keep me on the DX for sure. I don't use it much, but it sure is nice when I can.

Posted 6 months ago #
sevencrossing

preferred member
Joined: Sep '10
Posts: 1,265
offline

Now if the Rx 1 had a 24mm f 1.4 then yes, I would be tempted

Posted 6 months ago #
msmoto

big gun cougar
Joined: Mar '10
Posts: 2,736
offline

The interesting thing about all these new cameras is the limiting factor of the glass. It appears all the new f/1.4 or f/1.8 lenses which are for either a crop sensor or full frame are so large they are the limiting factor for the size. My little Olympus E-PL2 with its very small 14-42mm f/3.5-5.6 zoom is actually OK for a large purse, but not a pocket camera. And if I were to place an adapter with the 24mm f/1.4 on it...mmmm

I suspect i may look for the 17mm f/2.8 as this is the only small lens I can see which fits the micro 4/3rds mount. And, the nice part is I have only $200 in the camera as I purchased it from Ritz on the last day they were open.

But, I am still waiting for Nikon's real answer to the DX mirrorless.... with "F" mount less or an adapter.

Posted 6 months ago #
SkintBrit

preferred member
Joined: Jul '10
Posts: 1,149
offline

sevencrossing said:
Now if the Rx 1 had a 24mm f 1.4 then yes, I would be tempted

I think I would prefer 24mm too, and as for f1.4, msmoto is correct, it would be lovely to have, but would hardly make for a pocketable camera. I think they have done a pretty good job giving such a small camera a FF sensor and an f2!

Posted 6 months ago #
Ade Barkah

preferred member
Joined: Apr '11
Posts: 108
offline

TaoTeJared said:
I have had the same thoughts - as a second camera with a 35mm lens. If you use a 35mm range on a second body and you think about it, even a D600 ($2,000) and a 35mm f2 AFD lens puts you at the same price but more weight - and for what?

For backup in case your main camera fails, you can still use the same lenses, accessories, etc.

For weddings most likely you wont need/want to manage two cameras hanging off your neck with two different lenses / settings / ergonomics (especially if you have a 2nd shooter already taking pictures). You're probably better off with one solid main camera, a few lenses to swap, and a backup body tucked away, just in case. And that backup body doesn't need to be a brand new D600 either.

That RX1 might be an excellent camera for the 2nd shooter, however. (Though again it might be preferable if the 2nd shooter uses the same gear system as the main photographer -- just in case.)

Posted 6 months ago #