Rumor: Nikon mirrorless camera will come with three lenses and 2.6x crop factor

Information about the Nikon mirrorless camera is so scattered, that when I receive anything from a reliable source, it is a big deal. The latest tip indicates that the sensor in the upcoming EVIL camera will have a 2.6x crop factor. Most of the previously filed patents also suggested a sensor with image diameter of 17 mm (diagonal) and a 2.5x crop factor - the difference between 2.5x and 2.6x is probably because of different rounding. If this turns out to be true, the Nikon mirrorless sensor will be smaller than the current m4/3rd format (diagonal: 21.6mm, 2x crop factor). On this diagram I added in yellow the approximate size of a 2.6x crop sensor:

According to the rumor, three new lenses will be introduced at the time of the mirrorless camera announcement: one wide pancake and two zooms. For reference, several mirrorless lens patents for different focal lengths were filed in the past. Note that Nikon may be obfuscating the designs and exact numbers in some of their patent applications.

There has been contradicting reports on whether the new Nikon mirrorless system will be targeted at professionals or not.

[NR] probability rating: 60%

This entry was posted in Nikon 1. Bookmark the permalink. Trackbacks are closed, but you can post a comment.
  • John Connor

    Pure caca.

  • Wild Thing

    This new model could be the hottest camera that Nikon has ever made — especially if it is made near the Fukushima nuclear power plant. 🙂

    • brian

      wow. not even close to funny. try again.

      • chris

        dont encourage him.

  • Bummer, I was hoping for a full frame mirror less Nikon. Oh well, maybe in a couple years.

    • Nathan

      I too was hoping for a full frame mirrorless camera.

      • Tsen

        It’s doubtful they’d ever launch one though. The final product would be well into the $1k range, if not the $2k range, but it would lack several useful features by necessity. Yeah, it’d be cool, but it’d be rather like a million dollar supercar: Lamborghini almost went out of business in the 70’s because they operate a high-margin, low-sale business, so when gas got scarce buyers were frightened away and nearly brought down the company.

  • Sarge

    If that’s true about the sensor size I’ll be keeping my NEX 5 for ‘walk-around’ and vacation use… with a child to chase around, small size is key, but there’s no reason to use a 2.6x crop sensor (lacking shallow depth of field) when APS-C is available. 2.6x would be a big mistake in my view…

    • na


      • ivan


        • Enrico


          • Yhannoby


            • Jan


  • Will reserve judgement until it’s out there being used for real.

  • Eric Pepin

    Nikon coolpixes are already crappy compared to canon and lumix, comon nikon, make something atleast AS good as the oly and panasonic options.

  • explorer76

    With that sensor size, the starting lenses better be pretty fast. Otherwise it wont offer much over premium compacts like XZ-1, LX5, TL500 etc. The sensor in these compacts is around 10mm versus the rumored 17mm for the Nikon but they have fast lenses (f1.8-2.5 for XZ-1 and so on), which will make up for the sensor size difference.

  • John Bowen


    C’mon, Nikon, stop selling this crap and make a real camera, for crying out loud.

  • Richard

    Not that I find this particularly interesting, but it just might be a sound marketing decision. The overwhelming majority of people taking pictures have never made prints larger than 5×7 whether using film or digital capture and in the digital lifestyle world many people are posting their images to Facebook/Flickr/whatever where the technical demands (and expectations) are simply not that great. The reason I believe this could be a sound business decision is that it should sell a lot because it will be compact (an imperative for most people) enough to take with them almost everywhere. I just hope that they have designed it to facilitate uploading the images to the various web pages so that it will stand a chance of competing with the onslaught of wireless phone cameras which can take a picture and upload it almost instantly.

    This may not be the camera that most of us want, but it just could be an important camera to us by keeping Nikon a profitable company able to continue designing and producing things we are actually interested in buying.

    • Trevor


      • Global


        Exactly — this will be a truly entry-level “DSLR”. (I don’t know what we call these things.) Very, very small interchangeable lenses.

        The Sony’s and others have just huge lenses. It doesn’t make sense just to lose a mirror. You need to lose lens size and significant weight of the glass.

        .. It may also be the best-priced interchangeable lens product out if released. Squarely targeted at the entry-level crowd. Where do they jump to? D3100, D5100, D7000.

        • Dan

          I agree that this looks promising. I might be interested in a smaller camera and this sensor sice might be it. Sony and samsung have to large sensors meaning to large lenses. If I wanted that I might just as well carry around an dSLR. The rumored pentax are either to large or tiny. so m43 or this might be a good compromise. I just fear that it will be to focused on the entrylevel crowd.
          Good controls, small size and a good compromise on image quality and I’ll buy one.

          • steve

            Is there such a thing as a ‘good compromise on image quality’ when all the thing does is produce images ?

            It’d have to be low MP to have a decent pixel density and image quality. But I think we all know that high MP sells so I suspect we’ll get image quality between an E-PL2 and a XZ-1. Not my idea of a good compromise, but wait and see…

            And I’d bet they plan to release slow lenses too. Coolpix Pro ?

            I hope this is a success but I fear a major flop.

            Wait and see….

            • The Lurker

              If you never compromised, you would be lugging a medium format digital back and camera around all the time.

    • I can’t beleive that Nikon would make it with such a small sensor…
      This is absolutely not what we are expected!
      Posting on FkickR and printing 5×7 are way too bad reasons compare to high ISO quality and descent deep of field for examples

      • spam

        Nikon make lots of P&Ss using much smaller sensors, why shouldn’t they make a system camera with medium sized sensors?

        • Khufu

          Because this should at least try and compete with what’s already out there (NEX for example) not just be another P&S.

          Don’t be a blind Nikon apologist.

          • spam

            Nikon apologist? I’m not interested in another NEX or NX-sized system. I wan’t something smaller, if Nikon really settle for 2.6x crop then that’s great. If you want APS-C then you’ve already got two mirrorless brands to choose from.

    • jim

      People that constantly upload their pics to fb/twtr… are using their iPhones. They dont much care about the quality of their images- immediacy of publication is king here. The image quality of this system needs to be approaching that of the entry-level dslr for it to sell. I just don’t see the p&s surviving more than a few more years unless something drastically changes.

      • Mock Kenwell

        Poor logic. If they don’t care, what makes you think they’ll drop the tremendous convenience of their iPhone for this?

      • Ronan

        jim you make no sense…. LOL

      • mike

        i understand your point perfectly jim, and i agree

        the point is, that it looks cool, and its the latest thing.

        “ooooh its one of those new mirror-less ones” for people to buy and take on holiday with them.

        these are just point and shoots really, and this IS the drastic change you talk of. imo.

        • Khufu

          IPhone has more than enough cool factor for these people.

    • Zograf


    • flyme2themoon


    • Worminator

      The sensor size exactly splits the difference between “advanced compacts” with 1/1.7″ sensors and APS-C. Think of it as a P7000 with a 3x larger sensor and interchangeable lenses and it starts to look pretty attractive I think.

      It will end up costing as much as a m3/4 system, however, and that’s a problem: It will have to offset the disadvantages of the smaller sensor with something, presumably lenses and camera with significantly smaller size.

  • B

    At first I had the same reaction as everyone else — disappointed. However, when I look at the current mirrorless cameras I think they’re too big. If it’s still too big to fit in my pocket, I might as well carry my DSLR. If this smaller sensor allows the camera to fit in my pocket, and provides significantly better IQ than a true compact, then it’s alright by me.

    • ZoetMB

      Disagree: There’s a big difference between carrying a D7000 and 2.8 lens and something like a Sony NEX. A BIG difference. You say, “if it’s still too big to fit in my pocket, I might as well carry my DSLR.” By the same logic, if the quality is too poor because of the small sensor size, I might as well carry my even smaller P&S or simply use my iPhone.

      What it comes down to is, ‘Is there a market for a system camera that presumably will have poorer quality than most or all of the micro 4/3 that are already out there?’ My bet is no.

      • Ronan

        Or see it this way:

        Smaller than 4/3, fits in pocket, better IQ than P&S.

        That will sell.

        • Khufu

          Canon s95 does that already IMHO

          • Steve

            At base ISO, the IQ from my G11 is almost indistinguishable fom that of my D5000, even wide open at f/2.8. However, climb just a bit higher on that ISO ladder and the differences start to become obvious, which is simply the bane of all compacts including the S95.

            • Giorgio

              Steve, sell your D5000 and keep your G11. I think even a Canon fanboy can see differences between G11 and D5000+base-kit.

    • Darkness

      You need bigger pockets..:)

  • hiplnsdrftr

    Here’s what makes it a success…

    1. nice design

    2. good build quality

    3. truly compact

    4. reasonable price

    5. says “nikon” somewhere on the body

    • KoneyDong

      How about a X100-look-alike at a body size slightly thicker than a S95?
      Used with a small collection of pocketable pancake lenses?
      Just imagine how cute a S95 size X100 would be…

      I tell you, the rate in which undereducated scene kids are picking up 550D’s to attract who knows who will have one and only decision to make when buying cameras! Good marketing strategy!

      I find it hard to see why a camera like this doesn’t already exist though – lomography have made a small fortune selling their plastic crap, the lesson is not to make ‘crap’ but to understand that to make something trendy sells almost anything like wildfire.

      Trendy products are the epitome of successful business and marketing decisions.. if Nikon chooses a sensor size, whatever the size, the final design just needs to be exactly what hiplnsdrftr mentioned.. 1. 2. 3. 4. & 5. + Trendy/Cool/Cute/Sexy on women.

  • Dweeb

    What is this, a cell phone?

  • Jeff

    If our existing FF lenses will adapt, this would be great for bird photography in good light. Talk about reach!

    • Global

      Why don’t you just crop off your your current sensor??

      The quality’d be a lot better.

      • nobody

        No, it would not.

        If you crop e.g. a D700 file to get the same field of view, you’re left with less than 2 megapixels. The Nikon mirrorless camera will surely have 12 megapixels at least.

        So this could indeed be a first class solution to get as many pixels per duck as possible for those who don’t want to spend big money on super tele lenses.

        Of course, you would need a very good lens with enough resolution for those small pixels. A consumer tele zoom will not do, but the 300mm f4 could turn into a poor man’s 800mm equivalent with very usable image quality.

        • Edw

          pixels per duck, that’s an interesting way to put it.

          • Nikko


  • Nikon might do it, but it would put this out of the potential buy range for me. APS-C is my guess, though (lusting after an M9 aside) I’d love to see a more compact full frame camera, even if it is EVIL.

  • Rob

    Well what’s it going to look like? How will it function? Two dials? Will it have good video? Price?

    These are the only important things to consider in late model, glorified p &s, Nikon camera. Consumers will not look at megapixels and will definitely not look at sensor size (they’re measured in fractions for goodness sake, nobody understands fractions). Yes they might get told that the competitors sensors size is bigger but the Nikon will be easier to pocket.

    • WoutK89

      17mm or 2.7x crop are no fractions to me

      • WoutK89

        2.6x crop *

  • na

    another way nikon try to kill itself
    recent attempted suicide:
    24-120 f4
    really!! 2.6 crop, why border, I will get a p and s
    please listen, we want aps-c, not a sensor that smaller than mirco four third
    if all the people want to buy a mirrorless with tiny sensor, sony and samsung will join the mirco four third long time ago.

    • spam

      “we want aps-c, not a sensor that smaller than mirco four third” – Maybe you mean you? I’d certainly like something smaller than MFT.

    • Peter Goodman

      Why are the 28-300 and 24-120 F4 attempts by Nikon to commit suicide? These are both very popular lenses. I love my 28-300. Great quality and convenient when I can’t be bothered to keep switching lenses.

  • Stanley77

    Obfuscation may be used for many purposes. Doctors have been accused of using jargon to conceal unpleasant facts from a patient; American author Michael Crichton claimed that medical writing is a “highly skilled, calculated attempt to confuse the reader”.[1] B. F. Skinner, noted psychologist, commented on medical notation as a form of multiple audience control, which allows the doctor to communicate to the pharmacist things which might be opposed by the patient if they could understand it

  • Anybody ever think of the possibility that this is just Nikon trying to throw their competitors off by filing patents they have zero plans in using? You guys never know, Nikon could be really planning on using a APS-C sensor, similar to the proven Sony D7K sensor or even the D90/D300s(s)/D5000 12.3MP sensor or the D3100 sensor. Nikon is NOT stupid, they do make the best DSLRs in the biz currently(for IQ, DR and high-ISO performance), even if the best APS-C sensor in the world is actually made by Sony(D7K). I doubt Nikon would spend tons of R&D on a system that wouldn’t perform well. They have a reputation to uphold.

    Also, even if they ARE planning a 2.6 crop factor sensor, who’s to say they aren’t going to use ultra fast primes (wider than F/1.4) to combat DOF issues with this crop factor? They could have developed a x2.6 sensor that has amazing light gathering characteristics, low signal/noise ratio, while being small and light. Let’s not forget, this is Nikon we’re talking about. They are fully capable of innovation.

    • 3rrolsk13

      +1 just business startegy….. whatever…

    • ZoetMB

      Sometimes….but look at their P&S line. This could be like that…a great big bore. And regardless, no matter how much engineering they put into that small sensor, the same engineering in a larger sensor would have resulted in better PQ. Going smaller than m4/3 will be a disaster, IMO. Even m4/3 would have been “iffy”. It should have been DX.

      My bet is that this design (assuming it’s real) was the result of an internal fight at Nikon. They wanted a camera that wouldn’t erode sales at the bottom of the DSLR line. They didn’t want to join the m4/3 consortium. So they came up with this – which is basically a P&S with removable lenses and it will probably be expensive, considering how they price the high end of the P&S line.

  • goose

    DOF inexistent at f5.6…?

  • Adde

    16mm sensor makes perfect sense, they could be slightly cheaper than m 4/3.

  • Wouldn’t this sacrifice ISO performance to quite a large extent? 😮

    • spam

      Yes, at least tos oem extent. But that’s what you have to sacrifice to get smaller lenses.

  • Peter

    If this will be usable @ ISO 800 it will be quite good. I base this on opinion that LX5 which has a quarter sensor size is ok @ ISO 400.

    D80 quality in a very small camera with a bit smaller pancake lens than what we have seen in m4/3 cameras. I like.

    Only bad thing being that it still is an SLR, so you cannot take it to any place which forbids use of SLRs. (Most conserts, festivals and pub gigs)

    • nobody

      A 2.6 crop sensor would have about 15% the sensor size of a D3s sensor, so it should have similar noise levels at 15% of the D3s ISO values.

      IMO, the D3s is very good at 6.400 ISO and easily usable at 12.800 ISO. So a 12mpix 2.6 crop sensor based on D3s sensor technology should be very good at 1.000 ISO and usable at 2.000 ISO.

  • simpleguy

    sorry to say this , but WHY ? , who needs this anyhow mirrorless compact cameras
    im waiting for updates on d4 or d800

    • WoutK89

      Why, because you are not alone in this world 😉

  • BB

    Slightly disappointed too, but IMHO a clever business decision.

    As DSLR user, I’m not the main targeted consumer anyway. Why to change for APS EVIL when I have already an APS DSLR & lenses and satisfied with it – Just for small benefit in seize and weight? No!
    On the other side, for most consumers, cameras in phones are sufficient in quality, i.e. phones will replace P&S in the future.

    The new EVIL needs to open a new market for Nikon.
    When P&S are not the future and DSLR are for “higher end” users, why not to open a new niche just above P&S with this new concept as an entry for DSLR?

  • Geoff

    Is the next Nikon a cell phone camera ? ;- >

    • bjrichus

      Give it some time, and if they don’t they’ll have missed out an entire generation of users/buyer…

  • nonbeliever

    something nobody needs – crap
    they have good DX sensors – why don´t use one.
    even if nikon has the chance to produce something good, they mess up.

  • John

    Hmmm . . . So if Nikon uses the sensor technology in the D7K (a 16.2MP 1.5 crop sensor) for this 2.6 crop sensor lets do some rough math. The new 2.6 crop sensor is approximately 0.58x the area of APS-C, so if you just cropped out the D7K 16MP sensor you’d get a 9.4MP sensor (or thereabouts). Now assuming Nikon has an even more advanced sensor design than the D7K has, then it seems to me that a 10 or 12MP 2.6crop sensor could have very very good DR/noise characteristics as long as they keep the MP count reasonable (like 12MP or less).

    I could work with that kind of sensor for sure.

    Now all Nikon has to do is make some stellar lenses to go along with it plus a decent body (excellent EVF, built-in flash, etc.) and I’d be willing to fork over some $$ for a compact, interchangeable lens system that has very good final IQ.

    • sirin

      keep in mind that heating up the sensor all the time because of the electronic VF will increase the noise quite a bit. unless they come up with a VF that will not depend on the main sensor.

      • John

        Or they have a way to keep the sensor reasonably cool.
        I assume Nikon has been waiting for sensor and EVF technology to get to the point that a 2.6 crop sensor is feasible enough to satisfy the DSLR crowd as far as noise and EVF quality.

        Hopefully this is the case.

        • Alex


          2.6x crop also emits much less heat compared to m4/3 and bigger sensors.

          If the zooms are collapsible like compacts and reasonably fast, the system will sell like hotcakes.

    • Paul

      You’re math is wrong. It’s 34.35% of the area or about 5.5 megapixels if you keep the same pixel pitch.

      23.6×15.7 mm^2


      13.85×9.19 mm^2

      • John

        I stand corrected, though where did the 13.85 and 9.19 come from? That gives about a 16.62 diagonal – I thought it was supposed to be 17mm?

        • Paul

          I used the 2.6 crop factor from a 35mm frame. So 36mm long / 2.6 = 13.85mm. 23.9mm tall (D3) / 2.6 = 9.19mm.

          If you use 2.5 crop, you get 17.31mm diagonal. If you use 2.6 crop, you get 16.62mm diagonal. Both round to 17mm.

  • Dave

    It’s already crap?

    Admin, next rumor please.

  • sirin

    very clever business decision. possibly the first EVIL camera on the market that actually would be a size of a P&S and cost less than $600.
    not that i need one, i’ll be waiting for that D800. but a lot of people would.

  • Phill

    2,6 crop factor?!!!!!?
    So i guess Nikon is trying to push us on buying an Olympus or a Fuji. I really cant unstderstand the meaning of this kind of move on behalf of Nikon.

  • Sounds reasonable. Sony NEX with lens longer than 50mm looks just funny. Small camera gives nothing if lens are big. If I could get something of Olympus XZ-1 size with more depth of field control and small bright lens, it would be a winner. f/1.4 is nice, but kinda useless in many situations on DSLR because of too shallow dof.

  • Let me offer an alternative possibility and see if it changes any minds. ;~)

    What if this camera could communicate to an iOS/Android device via WiFi? And what if it could tell those devices what to do with the image? Suddenly the 2.6x crop factor looks huge compared to the camera in the iOS/Android device. In other words, it becomes the quality cell phone camera upgrade of choice.

    Design is about targeting a user and satisfying them. It seems clear to me that a 2.6x crop wouldn’t satisfy me or anyone who reads my site (and most who read this one). But that doesn’t mean it can’t satisfy a different user. Thing is, Apple alone will probably sell more cameras than Nikon, Canon, Olympus, and Pentax combined this year. That’s an awful large audience not to target. Moreover, you want to target them in some way that gets them into your notion of “system” (e.g. DSLRs), not to an individual product (compact cameras). In that context it would make sense.

    That said, I did not get the sense 14 months ago that this was Nikon’s direction with their mirrorless product. I’m sure it’s evolved since then, but I’d be somewhat surprised if Nikon were trying to do what I outline above. Pity that. Someone should.

    • Khufu

      So now we need to carry two devices about at all times?

      Sounds like fail.

      • Possibly Fail. But not necessarily Fail.

        Convergence tends to happen only at the low end. A converged device, by definition, is a jack of all trades, master of none. As a user becomes aware of the deficiencies of the converged device, they seek better choices, and those choices tend to be task specific. For example, as you become aware that the speakers in your TV suck, you seek out, oh, a surround sound system that works well in conjunction with it.

        The problem for the camera companies is this: if they don’t get to that space just above phones with the right equipment fast, the phone producers will. The battle is on, today, for who’s going to be the primary names in image gathering in the future. There’s a strong chance it will not be Nikon, Canon, Olympus, or Pentax. Sony, Panasonic, and Samsung can find merge strategies amongst their various divisions to keep their name in imaging.

        Bottom line: if you’re not acting now to stop the erosion, you’re going to fail anyway.

    • John

      Well, you said it, this would not be for me ’cause I read your site. Though I have a smart phone the last thing I want to do is have it talk to it in some way unless I really needed to get my images to someone ASAP (maybe that’s ticket for some folks), though I’d need 4G for that and I don’t have it yet. I’d rather have it be a top notch photographic tool first and foremost.

      I could do the 2.6 crop factor if the IQ was good enough. Heck, my LX-3 is good enough in some situations because it has that awesome 24mm wide end to it’s lens and it’s so small & light (and the video is handy). I use it when weight and size are a premium (like when I’m climbing).
      The 2.6 crop system better have IQ far better than the LX-3 and near enough to current APS-C while having an overall size and weight far enough from my DX cameras for it to make sense.

      If it has interchangeable lenses that will scare off a fair number of the iPhone crowd.

      Nikon could make two version of this 2.6x sensor:
      one with interchangeable lenses and a very very good EVF for the upper end crowd (that’s me)
      one with a collapsable fixed zoom lens (24 to 100-ish/2.0-4.0 ff equiv. please) for the LX-5 or XZ-1 crowd (that’s me too)

      This could work if it’s done right.

      • > Though I have a smart phone the last thing I want to do is have it talk to it in some way unless I really needed to get my images to someone ASAP.

        That directly describes most PJ, event, and sports photography. It directly describes most of the youth-driven Facebook, Twitter, and other social photography. That it does not describe the serious amateur/prosumer isn’t a good enough reason to avoid it.

        > I could do the 2.6 crop factor if the IQ was good enough.

        Agreed. I have problems with people judging something prior to its actually showing up and being evaluated. All the “no 2.6x” statements mean at this point is that there is a prejudgment barrier that both the product and marketing will have to break through.

        > If it has interchangeable lenses that will scare off a fair number of the iPhone crowd.

        Disagree. We have iPhone users trying to ADD things to their phone and enough of them that it’s spawning side businesses to appear. You have to remember that we’re talking about 16 million iPhones sold in a quarter compared to maybe 35m cameras total from all camera makers of all sizes. Take all those “I want an XX lens or YY feature” comments you see here and elsewhere and you’ve got what’s happening in the phone market right now (and mostly being ignored by the phone makers ;~).

    • Richard


      That is exactly what I was alluding to. The ability to upload and post the images is the very heart of the social media experience. It used to be that people were satisfied to pop an SD card into their laptop and upload from a Wi-Fi hotspot while they had their coffee or whatever. Now they expect to do it via their cell phone right away.

      Integration with the iOS or Android device is absolutely essential to this concept. The potential market is huge. At least one financial analyst has recently estimated that Apple could sell 100 million iPhone 5s (presumably world-wide) when they make their debut (expected this Fall). That is a lot of potential customers.

      The camera must have some in camera ability to adjust and crop the image. Nothing terribly sophisticated, but it must be able to do these sorts of things to compete with the in-the-phone apps and such to which the potential customers have become accustomed.

      Half the trick will be figuring out how to make the phone accept the images as Nikon can expect rather little cooperation from Apple. Perhaps it could be via an App that would utilize the existing Wi-Fi capability of the phones. Who knows? That’s what engineers are for.

      If the camera lacks this capability, I suspect it will be yet another footnote in the Nikon annual report of a product that did not work out…. Perhaps there will be a day of reckoning when the share holders recognize that the company is not prospering as it should be.

      • Nikon is once again venturing into unexplored ground. In the past they’ve tended towards on of two eventual scenarios:

        1. The Coolpix 900 scenario. State-of-the-art control and quality with a design that was not just unique but opened up new capabilities.
        2. The Coolpix S1000pj. Crappy camera saddled with a feature it turned out no one really was asking for (projector).

        Whatever is coming needs to be #1, not #2. I haven’t heard specifics on this product for about a year now, but when I last did here some specific details, I’d bet on #2. That there’s been a delay means Nikon themselves might have realized that it was headed towards #2 and they decided to make changes. Let’s hope so.

        > Perhaps there will be a day of reckoning when the share holders recognize that the company is not prospering as it should be.

        Given the makeup of the largest shareholders, not likely. Personally, I’m of the opinion that Nikon should be skyrocketing past competitors like Apple is. They have the technical expertise and a strong brand name. The fact that they aren’t shows that they’re still mired in their legacy structure and thinking. The fact that cameras and lenses have recently represented two-thirds of the company’s sales and most of their profits has ironically made it even harder for them to bet the company on the future of imaging. They worry too much about killing the bronze goose to try and find the golden goose.

        • Richard

          Sadly, you are probably right about the current ownership.

          Strangely, the changes that are being forced upon Nikon as a consequence of the earthquake and ensuing events may actually cause some positive changes once the company relocates a number of its operations.

          In the meantime, Canon, in my view, are attempting to “freeze” the market by a series of controlled “leaks” about their upcoming products. Spreading FUD (fear, uncertainty and doubt) about their competitors’ ability to match the leaked products’ capability is intended to either keep people from making purchases of the competitions’ products and wait for the release of the rumored product. Nikon really does need a smash hit in the consumer product line. Here’s hoping they can do it.

  • Sam

    The rumours of Nikon’s EVIL being aimed at pros seems out the window. I was hoping for an APS-C sized sensor (the one in the D7000) like the Sony NEX, with Nikon’s DSLR controls. I guess the Nikon heads decided that it would eat into their DSLR sales and protected their…

    I guess I will stick with my NEX-3, I can already use my fantastic Contarex Zeiss and Schneider lenses on it and there even better lenses coming. Congratulations to Sony for being the only company with the balls to use a large sensor.

  • Ronald

    I rather have a Nikon Nef Codec for Windows 7 64-bit……when will that one be released 🙁

  • this product will be DOA if it gets a 2.6x crop factor. the iPhone and its kind are devouring the small-sensored business, and i can’t imagine that nikon would think that 2.6x sensors would be a good bet for a system camera.

  • John

    Oh yes, I think it should be called the “ProPix” in stead of the CoolPix.

  • John

    Now Nikon has 3 lens lines to make $$ off of (if they can produce enough of them that is):
    MX – 2.6x Crop
    DX – 1.5x Crop
    FX – “Full Frame”

  • photoSmart42

    I’ll reserve judgement until sample photos come out and until it becomes clear what the system capabilities and compatibilities will be, but off hand I’d say I won’t buy it if it’s anything smaller than APS-C. I’ll stick to my GH1 mirrorless if that happens. I’m hoping for an APS-C mirrorless that can use existing Nikon system lenses in AF mode. I have my S95 or my iPhone if I needed a compact carry take-anywhere camera.

  • spamdie

    Its complete rumor. Think about it. If you have 3 New lenses to go with this new mirrorless camera. There would be no “crop factor”. The only reason why “crop” exists is because we took Old 35MM lenses and put it on a different focal distance. And rather than reinvent the numbering wheel with DX lenses. They just kept everything the same so people could multiply it out etc.

  • photonut

    Nikon should have joined m4/3. The perfect balance between size and pic quality.

    • broxibear

      Hi photonut,
      I think you’re dead right.

  • The only thing I wish to see is a Nikon rangefinder. Heck yes, rangefinder is mirrorless. Look at the X100, even if this is not a true rangefinder, it is selling like a hot cakes. What if the next Fuji model (X200? X300?) will be real rangefinder with FF-sensor and will have wide range lens line? This shotgun fire will kill Leica boutique market and lots of potential mid-priced DSLR consumers will take their look on this gem. Nikon will lose potential $’s too.

    If Nikon mirrorless solution will be like that (I mean, 2.6 crop, tiny size for children’s hands), it must have something unique, maybe f0.95 50mm-equivalent lens to justify developing costs and consumer’s attention. Otherwise, this will be nonsense and failure.

  • Dave

    I’ve voted with my wallet & bought the Fuji X100. No, it doesn’t fit in my shirt pocket, but nor does the GF1/NEx5 etc. The expected Nikon pancake lens + Nikon EVIL body probably won’t fit either.

    I don’t see what the Nikon EVIL + pancake option will offer over the X100

    • broxibear

      Hi Dave,
      I did almost the same thing…I bought a GF1 + 20mm f1.7 a few months ago, tried the GF2 but hated the touchscreen.
      I needed a small quality cameras that I could carry with me all the time, yes the GF1 doesn’t fit in my Levis backpocket but its not an issue.
      I considered a X100 but the price difference is huge. For me there wasn’t enough of a difference to pay over double, the GF1 inc lens cost me £450 and the X100 is £1000 ?…I’d rather put the money I saved into other equipment.
      As photonut says above Nikon should have entered the micro four thirds sector years ago.

  • One other thing that people are missing: costs.

    In theory (though 4/3 proves that it doesn’t always work in practice) smaller sensors mean lower costs on the most expensive component in a camera (at least until you get down to the very small sensor compacts, but even then it’s still one of the more expensive components). It’s a highly sliding scale. A small sensor might cost $5, an APS-C $50, and an FX $500. In theory, the Olympus E-PL2 should have a higher gross product margin than the NEX-5 (I don’t think it does, but that’s another story for another day). In theory a 2.6x crop ILC should have a higher gross product margin or a lower selling price than m4/3, which should be better than APS-C.

    The problem is that this is a marketing issue, not engineering one. Why? Because 2.6x should produce slightly lower image quality than m4/3 which in turn should produce lower image quality than APS-C. It’s sort of like the issue of engine size in cars: inline-4 versus V6 versus V8. Unlike with cars, there’s not an obvious marketing message (cylinders = power, lack of cylinders = gas mileage) the camera makers have found to hook marketing messages onto. This is clearly evident in 4/3 and m4/3 and has been from the beginning. (They tried size, but the tape measure proved that message false from Day 1.)

    Given that none of these companies could market their way out of a open field, you have to wonder just what Nikon’s message is going to be. This argues that there is something to the camera other than just small sensor ILC. Otherwise it’s dead on launch, as many of you have suggested.

    • broxibear

      Hi Thom,
      “This argues that there is something to the camera other than just small sensor ILC.”…there are only three things left…design, price and features.
      Design…I guess it could be a design classic based on the SP rangefinder ?
      Price…If it’s going to compete against Sony it has to be the same price as a NEX5 at £400 inc lens.
      Features…I don’t know? what feature could it have that no other manufacturer has thought of ?. A swapable sensor, so instead of upgrading the camera you just upgrade the sensor, and it’s as easy as changing memory cards ?

      • photonut

        must be some secret mojo to produce D700 image quality in a 12 MP 2.6x sensor. Otherwise… as Thom said: DOA

  • JR

    This sensor size is roughly the same size as 16mm film. For all those doubting IQ, remember that The Hurt Locker was filmed on 16mm. It won Best Picture at the Academy Awards. Its a tool people. The only limit to what you could produce with this camera is your creativity.

  • NoFunBen

    If it was not going to be small then nikon would just use the F-mount.
    Mirrorless for the F-mount is coming too. but that will take another year.
    This is aimed to under cut m4/3 in size and price.

  • carlgo

    I’m done with giant DSLRs and lenses, but I want the megapixels. Yes, I like the little suckers and intend to own more of them some day.

    A very capable EVIL system, other than the silly-expensive Leica, will appear in a year or two I’m sure.

  • Filippos

    Nikon….just make an FM2 like prestige body with the D700 sensor and external dials with an F mount ( i dont think that this is so dificult…), price it at 1500 dollars and … sell it like hot cake.

  • David Castro

    Canon G12 – CCD tipo 1/1,7

  • David Castro

    TIPA AWARDS 2010 – G11

  • I want my D7000 in a mirror less configuration… as as small as possible… pair it with the fastest Pancake prime len possible in the 28mm to 50mm range and I’ll buy it for $1500

  • Back to top