Picture of Nikon’s mirrorless camera mount

Picture of the mount and sensor of upcoming Nikon mirrorless camera named "X810" leaked on the Chineses forum Xitek:

Brief translation (thanks B.): the new mirrorless demo machine is here, temperatly named X810. The user is not going to post pictures of the whole camera due to trade secret and he do not want to lost his job. but he did post a picture of the mount as requested by other users. As we can see it is not a F-mount and the senser size seems to be 1/2.3 or 2.5. many users seems to be disappointed with the small sensor it has.

The mount on the picture is similar to various, previously filed patents from Nikon for a mirrorless camera:

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


    • Frosti7


  • where is it??

  • Vladi

    Disappointed by sensor size. M4/3 seems to be the way forward. Will keep my E-P1 for couple of years.

    • Frosti7

      Why? i think APS-C is the way.

      If you want a slim and small lens, you want a pancake, and m43 and aps-c pancakes are the same size!

      If you want zoom lens, then perhaps sony 18-55 is abit bigger then panasonic 14-45, but does it really matter? they need the same size of bag!

      I do not see an advantage of 4/3 sensor size, but would like t hear your opinion

      • no

        APSC is a waste of time. look at the sony nex. huge lens mount, huge expensive lenses, clumsy, tired and boring. APS-C is dead. ongoing the future is 4/3’s period. that’s the only format that will be small and cheap enough to appeal to the masses. the world of tomorrow will be split with pros having full frame sensors and the rest of people with 4/3’s. with a few lonely souls still stuck in the aps-c.

        nikon is making a HUGE mistake not matching the sensor size. ….or are they? the mount may be large enough for bigger than 4/3’s sensors. we’ll see.

        • camerageek

          Spoken like a true member of the common peasantry that worships micro four turds every day! Yeah look at that amazing performance seen from any micro four turds unit compared to say the APS-C X100 or the FF Leica M9, or to even things out an Epson R-D1!

          Ahh yes continue on dear commoner whilst we the Elite contemplate real cameras and you play in the litter box with the turds (micro four that is).

          • MK

            HAHA you sound like an epic snob so I have to assume your post was a joke. Only a fool would compare FF performance to m43 sensor. The only camera in the same price-range as X100 is GH2. I’d take a GH2 for the features over X100 any day.

            • camerageek

              Go ahead peasant. It was made for your low standards bwahahahahaha

          • scurvy hesh

            COOL STORY BRO!

      • broxibear

        Hi Frosti7,
        The advantage of micro four thirds isn’t so much the sensor, sensors get better, just look at the reviews of the Olympus EP3. The advantage is that the system is already out there, people who have one or two lenses and a EP1 or GF1 could change to a Nikon m4/3 body without having to start from scratch. They could use a fantastic lens from one company like the Panasonic 20mm f1.7 on a Nikon, or if Nikkor made a great 50mm f1.4 they might want that for their EP3?
        It would also mean better products and better pricing because the comparison is direct.
        For me this isn’t about replacing my dslr, it’s a camera that’s an addition to my dslr and you can get great quality from m 4/3 as is shown here http://blog.karimsahai.com/2011/03/the-photography-of-amos-chapple/

        • iamlucky13

          On the other hand, if Nikon went with a DX sensor (I don’t even dare hope for an FX), then those of us with existing Nikon lenses can use them effectively with an adapter, and pick up a mirrorless dedicated lens or two for compact travel.

          The thing is, people who own an M4/3 system have little reason to switch to a Nikon mirrorless.

          People who have a Nikon SLR, however, have an investment in Nikon lenses. If they want a mirrorless companion camera, and their lenses aren’t effective with the mirrorless, they have no reason to stay with Nikon.

          When I say useful, I don’t mean merely that you can get an adapter for them. I mean they actually make sense to pair with the camera.

          I’d be very interested in getting a mirrorless camera and zoom to have something compact but with excellent sharpness and dynamic range for hiking and travel. But it would be nice to be able to use my existing telephoto, fast prime, and wide angle lenses on it, too. On DX, all of these would work fine with an adapter.

          On ~2.5X:

          – The pixel density would be extremely high – well beyond the resolving power of probably any F-mount lens (the smaller 2.5x lenses can be cost effectively built to higher tolerances)

          – The viewing angle of my telephoto would be extremely small. While it would be cool to have such an ultra-telephoto effect, the sharpness would not be appealing, there’d be more motion blur, and I’d have a viewing angle gap.

          – The wide angle lens simply wouldn’t be.

          – Primes would not achieve comparable DOF, in addition to the substantially-changed crop factor. A 35mm is a useful normal lens on DX, but would be a short telephoto on 2.5x

      • phb

        Nah. This is not highlander. There can be more than one format

        I would like to see a compactsensor first and fx layer when the bugs are worked out.

        Dx has advantages of neither. It’s big but not big enough

    • twoomy

      I think M43 and NEX will both have their own markets, but if you like a wide array of lenses and the significant size advantage, M43 is the winner at this point. And note that this is coming from a DX (D2x/D300) lover for many years, but my Panasonic GH2 is much more fun to take around with several lenses and its image quality pretty much patches my D300 for my purposes. (Sure you can come up with shortcomings, but I’m very happy.)

      To everybody who’s claiming that sensor size is a big issue, look at a chart that compares M43 to DX to FX. M43 is over four-times the area of P&S’s and is only slightly smaller than DX. If you want to talk about differences in DoF and ISO performance, there is a much more drastic difference between FX and DX. I find the difference to be insignificant.

      • Ren Kockwell

        And I find the weight/size benefits of M4/3 to be insignificant. I was initially very excited about M4/3, but after holding and using several systems, I decided the minor trade-off in weight and size were not worth the compromises (lag, contrast detection, AF speed & quality, MF ease, dynamic range, small choice of lenses). DX is better. In your mind, perhaps only incrementally so, but not in mine. Once I have to sling it over my shoulder, a mm here or a gram there is of no consequence to me. Once I’m doing that, I want quality over all else.

        But when convenience is paramount, smaller is better. To have an impact on the way I shoot, I want the camera to either have a unique quality (i.e. the DP2 w/ its Foveon sensor), and/or be eminently pocketable with lots of super fast primes. So while I don’t love how small the Nikon sensor is, if Nikon can make the cameras and lenses super small to properly challenge compacts (not M4/3), while providing significant improvements in DR, low light, AF quality over compacts, then I am interested.

        Biggest concern? Nikon has made about 2 pancake lenses ever. Not a core competency.

        • Oilymouse

          You seem misinformed, especially about recent technological advances (it’s true that Nikon hasn’t been delivering int that area recently, but still). Your arguments:

          1. lag, contrast detection, AF speed & quality: seems like on thing, please see the focus speed on the latest Olympus and Pananonic bodiess en lenses. M43 seems to win big time here, and they’ve only started.

          2. MF ease: the magnification (especially in the EVF) is quite wonderful. I actually prefer it over a FF or 35mm w/ focusing screen.

          3. dynamic range: have to agree I wish it was better (but that also goes for APS-C, to be honest).

          4. small choice of lenses: you must be joking. Given the age of the M43 system alone the lineup is already impressive. With dedicated companies like Schneider & Zeiss joing Leica & Voigtländer it will be outstanding. For me, the availability of OM and “legacy” 4/3 lenses, as well as adapters for Leica, Pentax and M42 is one of the best reasons to use M43.

          I’d say an E-PM1 with a few primes (pancake or not) would suit you just fine, likely much better than any small-sensored Nikon would.

  • Bruce

    Oh dear. This does not look encouraging at all.

  • Marc W.

    Ok, everyone… insert your complaint here…

    • Martin

      thanks, marc 🙂

      obvious complaint: sensor size.

      if restriction of d-o-f is not possible, the camera is uninteresting for me. i would want at least DX, rather FX.

      • mike

        But we’ve known the sensor size for years now. If you wanted APSC, you should have just gotten a Sony Nex.

        • z

          Though I love sony, most of NR readers are..well, nikon lovers..

          • mike

            Just because you shoot Nikon SLRs doesn’t mean you have to use their mirrorless cameras too. Nikon’s P&Ss are awful; do you also use those? There’s no advantage to sticking with Nikon in this case, because we’ll have to buy into a new mount regardless.

            • Oilymouse

              Not sticking with Nikon?! That’s just insane. You might as well buy a PEN or Pany GF (maybe with a nice Nikon F-mount converter for your ungelded lenses) and get this over with 😉

              Unless, of course, you’re a typical DX shooter (the true Nikon fanboys often are): in that case, you are simply stuck with shooting DSLR using your gelded Nikon lenses. You should be happy Nikon still makes decent DLSRs, although I wouldn’t expect dramatic innovations in the DX range during the coming years: Nikon needs to work on FF and mirrorless first.

      • no

        you’re out of your mind. an FX camera would be so expensive no consumer would buy it. it would require gargantuan glass and the lens mount so big, it would defeat the compact format. DX is already too big. 4/3’s is the perfect balance between size and portability.

        • camerageek

          bwahahahahahahaha!!!! Your ignorance makes me laugh common peasant! The Leica M9 sells quite well, has lenses that are quite often smaller than those of Micro Four Turds, and the camera itself is not that much bigger than an X100 or GH3!

          Micro Four Turds is a perfect balance, between that of fools and their wallets being separated from them! bwahahahahahaha! Ahh do continue though enjoying playing with your Turd (Micro Four that is) and leave the contemplation of cameras for the Elite to the Elite!

          • camerageek

            I am assuming your were one of the many fools, oh I mean peasants, that had said wallet separated from them? bwahahahahahaha!!! Let me taste your tears!

            • MK

              wow. how many times have you posted so far on this story? what a sad sad little man. trying to boost your ego on the internet by calling people peasants over and over and over again like a monkey with the miniature cymbals. get a life. laughing at your own jokes doesn’t make you funny, just desperate.

            • Ronan

              Who are you talking too troll? Me?…

            • Oilymouse

              Damn that was low on content

          • BornOptimist

            Leica sells quite well?!? In Nikon terms, Leica sales volume are shit, so if they can’t sell more than that, they will never release that camera. Even D3X outsell M9 by a huge margin.

            • PHB

              Nikon would have a major problem selling an FX sized EVIL camera. They would have to invest a lot of $$$ in producing a full range of wide angle lenses for it to be any use and it would be inferior to the DSLR body above 50mm.

              Take a look at your telephoto lenses, take a look at how far the rear element is from the mount. It is pretty clear that the mirror sweep is not an issue in the design at all. So an EVIL body is not going to be like having a DSLR stuck in live view mode permanently.

              EVIL has two potential advantages. The first is much better and cheaper wide angle lenses. A 24mm f/1.4 for a DSLR has to be a retrofocus design. A 24 f/1.4 can be a short focus design, the front element can be much smaller and hence cheaper.

              The other potential benefit is to scale down the whole system in size. The 2.7x crop factor means that the EVIL system is only likely to deliver the low light noise performance of the D300. I really could not care less. I want a new camera to do something better than the existing system and no EVIL camera is going to be beating the D4 on that basis.

              There is no other parameter of the system that is improved by making it larger. Optical performance is scale invariant – unless you have to cope with a mirror sweep for the 35 mm format which is what hurts DX lens performance. DX wides have to be even more asymmetric than FX wides.

              On the plus side, smaller sensor size means less heat. And that is important for video where long shoots become a heat issue.

  • broxibear

    I think this a stupid idea…should have gone micro four thirds Nikon.

    • lolly

      I’ll agreed with that if m4/3 sensor has better quality image but if Nikon’s mirrorless sensor is just as good as m4/3 then Nikon’s timing is good. If it’s more expensive than m4/3 then m4/3 is more appealing to me because there’s greater variety to choose from and regardless of size, image sensors get better as time goes by. For me price is the determining factor.

      • broxibear

        Hi lolly,
        For me it makes more sense to take advantage of the very good m4/3 lenses already available from Panasonic and Olympus, then add to it with high quality Nikkor m4/3 lenses.
        Nikon has to make a choice about which consumer it’s going after…
        It’s a very crowded market already with Sony, Olympus, Panasonic and apparently Fuji are going to join later in the year…not to mention Canon.
        If it hasn’t got something special it’ll go the way of the P7000, it all depends on how serious Nikon are about it all ?

  • yoyo

    bye Nikon

    • vinman

      bye yoyo.

      • Can Wishingwell

        we know Yoyo will always go back & forth…like a yoyo ;-0

    • gt

      the picture of the new mirrorless mount was the final straw for yoyo. He couldn’t believe nikon let him down this way.

      He looked up into the sky, cursed the gods, and then sold all of his gear and switched to canon.

      Alas, his photography never did improve.

      • Oilymouse

        I agree, my photography also sucks regardless of the system I use, fanboy. That’s why I own more cameras and lenses from more than one system, just to be sure.

        But this topic isn’t about camera vs. photographic qualities now, is it? (Be careful or I’ll quote KR on this one 🙂

        Yoyo had a point: news like this very probably signifies the end of the Canikon hegemony. I can imagine some people think this change is good and will bring innovation. Some even consider it wise that Nikon is not leaving behind its DX user base, but chose to use mirrorless technology in another way instead (a new segment, somebody called it, I think).

  • Jason Brown

    Minimum of DX sensor or don’t bother, Nikon…

  • fake

  • Stranger

    Seams wierd,
    You should remmember that this might not be the actual thing.
    The plastic doesn’t look nikony at all, maybe its because its a prototype, and maybe because its fake!

    • Anthony

      There’s no context for inferring the size of the sensor.

      • chuck

        If they use the same screws on the mounts then yes, and how big would the mount have to be in order for that puny sensor to be aps-c?

  • You know, Nikon, a DX sensor with an f-mount would have been the way to go here. I was so looking forward to picking up a Nikon interchangeable lens point and shoot… but now, looks like I’ll be moving to the Fuji X100.

    • Cold Hands Luke

      It’s been said here a million times already, you can’t make a slim mirrorless camera with an F-mount, because the mount needs to be some distance from the sensor, which means the camera needs to be at least that thick. I’ve no doubt there’ll be an F-mount adapter for the Nikon mirrorless in due course, but if you must have it built into the camera, there’s already the D3100, D5100, etc.

      I understand and sympathise with those who want the sensor to be DX-sized or larger, but we should look at the NEX, a lovely small APS-C mirrorless range…with relatively enormous lenses which dwarf the camera and nullify its size advantage, and must surely degrade handling as well. I’m sure a lot of thought went into the sensor size decision, and the payoff will be small lenses which don’t render the whole mirrorless idea pointless.

      Oh, and you know the X100 doesn’t have interchangeable lenses, right?

      • Michael Barkowski

        At least with NEX and NX – it’s possible to have those cameras be small sometimes (with wide-angle to normal primes). The difference from any DSLR is striking IMHO.

        It’s not possible to match APS-C shallow focus abilities with a 2.7x crop sensor. I always thought 2.7x crop was a nice compromise to get smaller zoom lenses. If Nikon indeed has made a 5.6x crop or 1/2.3″ sensor mount that is different from Pentax’s, then Pentax is getting some serious competition in their niche.

      • paf

        you know you could put a spacer in between to position the sensor away from the lens at a proper distance….

        • Oilymouse

          Very true. The body can be very small, and depending on the lens mount you would have a different mounting adapter. This is how it works on M43.

          However, only the more recent native M43 lenses give you both small size and weight and fast CDAF. Those qualities should no be expected from your existing lenses.

  • Steve France

    Been with Nikon 40 years. I hope they have adaptors to use other lenses like the 4/3 and M4/3 systems. Experimentation with older lenses has become the craze. If this mount is exclusive it will probably go the way of APS, Kodak, Polariod and the rip off Fotron nightmare of the ’60s………….

  • The certain thing, that cause that I buy it is APS-C sensor with possibility to use F-Mount lenses via adapter. Otherwise I will not buy it.

  • Greg Webb

    Ow. Looks as good an idea as Pentax Q – I really don’t see the point in such a small sensor in an interchangeable lens camera, the IQ just won’t be there. And with the likely pixel density and exposed sensor when doing lens changes, I really don’t want to think about sensor dust…!

  • ttox

    Stupid or not, Time and coustomers will show wat it realy is. I’m going to get a X100.

    • No you’re not, cause you can’t change lenses and you will return it in a couple of weeks. If Nikon would have placed a ASPC sensor, then they would have shot them selfs in the foot and canibalized the entry level sales, which have been the strong point in the last years. Now pentax’s decision also makes sense. On the other hand, fuji, olympus and panasonic do not have a higher range to canibalize, so they went all the way with sensor size.

      Bottom line is that this mirrorless is for people who want a small camera and are oblivious to such notions as depth of field, aperture. This puts less strain on the AF sistem, and to be fair, the latest generations of compact size sensors are capable of very decent ISO1600-3200, there’s really no need for a large sensor which would have made the camera larger yet more expensive.

      • lolly

        Price is the determining factor. The people who’d buy Nikon’s mirrorless camera would most likely be the P&S people who are budget conscious. It’s still going to ‘cannibalize’ the entry level Dslrs.

        • lolly

          … and if it’s more expensive then who’s going to buy ?

        • Oilymouse

          inginerul makes a good point, but I have to agree with lolly: Sony, Pany and Oly are also gobbling up entry-level DSLR market share fast with mirrorless systems. Basically, we’re talking about the bottom end of one big interchangeable lens market.

          And just like with Olympus, the question is: what will happen with the current users who have invested in a system? Answer: still not sure, but this news is not comforting at all.

  • Anonymous

    The bitching has started.

    • chuck

      the crappy rushed looking image of a supposed nikon product has been released. What do you expect?

  • Wongy

    Strange that Pentax and Nikon have gone in the same direction.
    Unless they sell this product at the price no greater than P7000 then I can’t see the way Nikon is making any profit out of it

  • JY

    Hang on everyone! For all we kow, the mount could be 8 inches in diameter, and that really is the Fx sensor!!!!

    • Joel


    • lolly

      keep dreaming … good hint for Nikon though 😉

    • paf

      lol.. with really large A** screws.

      +1 (love your optimism!!)

  • RMT

    I don’t get it…….
    What would the advantage be of this type of interchangable lens on a small sensor camera compared to the fixed super zooms (30x) on the existing P&S?
    Where is Nikon going with this?
    And what happened to the automatic “iris” dust shutter system for the sensor?

  • Piece of crap , sorry!

    If i would buy something in this class, will be x100, Nikon lost the way with this crap sensor. Still waiting for the FF body.


  • Joel

    APS-C sensor or bust. They just lost the race to Sony before it even began..

  • Bullsnot

    I doubt the folks on this board are the ones Nikon is targeting with this new camera.

    Having said that, a smaller sensor certainly will not allow this system to offer any advantages over others with larger sensors. I would think most people who would be interested in a camera like this will be smart enough to do their research.

  • While I personally share the disappointment about the apparently small sensor, it may make sense from Nikon’s perspective. After all, sensors get better each year while a new lens mount will be around for a long time. So I am sure the Nikon Engineers have been predicting where sensor performance will level off, and then selecting a sensor size that they think will satisfy 95% of users when that level of sensor performance is achieved. If they get it right they will end up with cameras that satisfy almst everyone but are significantly smaller (due to lens size) than Sony and micro 4:3.

    • Joel

      And yet they wont sell a single bloody camera because Sony will likely be offering an APS-C based solution for a similar price!

    • Oilymouse

      M43 users have been hoping the same thing. So far, it has proven hard to match APS-C (gotta love those Sony sensors – we know Nikon does).

  • Phil

    I wouldn’t complain too much yet. Maybe it is small, but I bet it can compete with Hubble for its light gathering abilities.

    …perhaps not

  • Sarge

    Should have kept the APS-C sensor and compatibility with DX lenses. I’ll keep my NEX-5, unless Nikon releases a set of F0.95 lenses for this tiny sensor. The loss of shallow depth of field is a deal-killer, no matter how ‘great’ they’ve managed to make that tiny sensor… and I kind of doubt it’s that great.

  • The invisible man.

    I don’t want a mirror less camera.
    What next ?
    Shutter button less, tripod socket less, viewfinder less, camera less, photographer less ?

    • kaze kaze

      that next is now (sadly) when was it you last time seen average joe point his smart phone (i-fone) and do snapping?

      • Mark H

        You even see kids using a Nintendo DS (usually the DS XL) snapping photos.

        It makes me think that there must be some way to use that as a gateway drug to better cameras- make an app or add-on that allows the person to improve the image or something.

    • Ren Kockwell

      Photographer-less has already happened. When did you last pick up a compact camera?

      • lolly

        how about pointless 😉

  • I don’t think it’s real.

  • Your Mom

    I but it doesn’t even work! I wont buy anything unless it has more than 20 megapixels.

    • ZinhaEq

      If it will really be 20MP+ sensor, then I wish you good luck using it. 😛

  • C

    Totally disappointed

  • dgm

    patents shows 8 electrical contacts .. this thing has 12
    other patents were showing an automatic anti dust iris system .. where is it ?

    We don’t even know that this is a Nikon :
    “The user is not going to post pictures of the whole camera due to trade secret and he do not want to lost his job”

    hahaha and the mount is not a ‘trade secret’ or does he not want to lose his credibility.

  • Rory

    It really is a shame Nikon don’t just swallow their pride and make a micro four thirds camera. Or heck just make a nice series of pancake primes and a smaller DSLR body.

    • broxibear

      Hi Rory,
      I’ve been saying this for a long time…m4/3 is the way to go but Nikon for whatever reason don’t think so.
      If Canon bring out a m4/3 mirrorless, and Fuji make their interchangable lens version of the X100 m4/3, Nikon are well and truely screwed.
      Nikon are not very good outside the dslr market…the P7000 was a failure, the P300 sounded good until people realised there was no RAW.
      They’ve left it so late to enter this market that it has to be very special to succeed…I just don’t see it ?

      • Oilymouse

        Nikon is not joining M43 because of the fanboys out there, most of them couldn’t handle that 🙂

        Besides: it wouldn’t matter: the F-mount lenses would not autofocus on M43, just as they will very likely not autofocus on any Nikon mirrorless system, especially this one.

        New mount, new lenses problem solved. Would be great to see Nikon make small lenses, btw.

  • kaze kaze

    12 contact pins… better be something good. and if my memory is correct there was a recent patent to keep the sensor “shut” when the lens is un-mounted?

  • Dweeb

    Wow sure that’s not a new iPhone?

    • Ben Hipple

      iPhone 5

  • nacho

    i don know… to me it just looks photoshoped all over!
    FAAAAKE!!!, i say!

  • photonut

    Damn, my cell phone sensor looks bigger than that…

    But hey, als long as they get D700 noise levels with that sensor I won’t complain …

  • Jabs

    Is that a screw drive ‘tag’ or a lens mount lock – right @ 3 o’clock position?

    Finally a small camera NOT trying to be a big camera or a small body with gigantic lenses stuck on it.

    Seems like a digital rangefinder or even a digital version of a compact Nikon film camera, or even like a Minolta CLE type camera.

  • Not for me, but I never expected a mirrorless to be professional in quality. Hopefully this will fit the needs of some consumers and be profitable for Nikon.

  • comicalalien

    Hey Nikon!
    What the hell do you think you are doing?

    You are behind the eight ball by a long way!
    Do a reality check and for F*** sake, WAKE UP to the demands of real world users!

    • BornOptimist

      I’m a real world user, and this is exactly what I want. So I’m welcomming this sensor size (2.5x-ish) with open arms. Now don’t f**k it up with Sony-style lenses (read big and slow).

  • Jabs

    Actually, it looks like a Nikon F-mount from the film days BUT with the sensor closer to the lens, eliminating the mirror box and with the sensor closer, it looks weird.
    New adapter to use regular F-mount lenses, perhaps – like adding a TC on this mount, then your regular lenses.

    Remember the TC-16AF, it autofocused certain Nikon lenses with the older F3AF.

    Extra contacts to make the TC work and you could only use G lenses plus lenses with built-in motors to AF.

    Could this be the DX-4 and it was NOT a typo?

    Hmmm – curious!

  • EC 2

    Bisogna essere dei pazzi a livello interplanetario per proporre qualcosa del genere quando Pentax ha fatto un buco nell’acqua presentando la Q che ancora non ho capito (ma nessuno lo ha capito) a che serve. E Nikon mi verrebbe fuori con questa roba? Quando il m43 è un formato aperto le cui ottiche sono sfruttabili cross-brand? Quando c’è in giro macchine mirrorless giunte alla terza generazione con un’architettura stra-collaudata? Olympus è alla E-P3, cioè alla terza generazione e sempre con un sensore da 12Mpixel e per ovvi motivi visto che i miglioramenti rispetto ai modelli precedenti, sotto il profilo dell’imager, sono minimi. Io non ci credo che Nikon possa fare una smarronata colossale come questa: sono già in ritardo cronico sul fronteEVIL e su quello reflex FF con sensore in alta risoluzione a prezzi UMANI. Il proprietario di questo sito si chiede come mai molti utenti sembrino essere scontenti di vedere un sensore così piccolo… e vorrei anche vedere visto che gli unici miglioramenti decenti sul fronte IQ si registrano per i sensori APS-C (vedi l’ultima iterazione del 16MPixel sulla NEX-C3) e chiaramente sul “pieno” 36x24mm. Il m43 ha già evidenziato i propri limiti (all’attuale stato dell’arte) e Nikon metterebbe addirittura un mini-sensore da 1/2,33″ dentro una macchina ad ottiche intercambiabili? Che magari costerà -solo corpo- 4/500Euro? Ma per piacere!!!

    • nobody

      Das ist doch Blödsinn!

    • Хорошо интурист говорит!

    • paf

      Tłumacząc — Nikon zjebał sprawe.

  • David Royo

    Sorry to disagree… but I see Nikon and Pentax movement as quite clever.

    What Nikon tries to do here is to create a range of compact cameras with interchangeable lenses, not a “mini dslr” as sony or M43 tried to.

    This sensor size allows for truly small and cheap lenses, while picture quality can remain very high at small ISOs. M43 is kind of a mixed bag, it’s smaller than the DX cameras, but it’s not THAT smaller, and the lenses are still quite expensive for such a limited format.

    Nikon doesn’t want to create a DX sized compact camera, because obviously, it would take away a lot of DSLR sales!

    What Nikon tries to do here is to take sales from the High end compact camera market, for those who want a more versatile camera, and from the M43 market (People may want even smaller cameras)

    I seriously think that smaller sensors from nikon and pentax are a HUGE threat for M43 cameras. Does the average Joe give a damn about high iso performance? “Hey, it’s Nikon, it’s cheaper and it’s smaller!” (Meanwhile those who want a DSLR don’t face the choice between both systems because they are way apart)

    • Trevor


    • gt

      I feel like a small sensor and interchangeable lenses = all the negatives of photography with none of the benefits.

      What you get:
      expensive lenses, worry about sensor dust, more to carry

      What you don’t get:
      no high iso capability, no control over depth of field, no significant dynamic range

    • camerageek

      Agree completely! Nikon and Pentax are making systems for the uniformed, unclean peasantry that already accepts the abysmal quality of Micro Four Turds. If they can do it cheaper with their obvious marketing muscle and name recognition, then they crush out the likes of Olympus and Panasonic and conquer the whole “Foolish Peasant” market.

      • Oilymouse

        I’m convinced, Brilliant Strategy! I’ll be thinking of (the likes of ) you when the story unfolds.

        The average joes will surely save Nikon from Panasonic and Olympus by buying into a compact-camera system with interchangeable lenses, so that the DSLR elite can sleep safe and sound.

        Of course, you would need FX to be really called “DLSR elite”, in which case you couldn’t care less about this.

  • no

    they should have just matched the 4/3’s sensor. although I don’t think the mount is what is determining the maximum sensor size in this case. there seems to be plenty of room for a larget sensor so maybe there will be different types of cameras using this mount where some have larger sensors than the rest and mayb even lens families like DX and FX.

  • Jabs

    Look at this web site and the F-mount from the film days


    Digital F? series then, maybe

  • Derek

    Well, I wanted to see what Nikon will bring us in the mirrorless market, now I know so I can go for the X100, thanks Nikon…

    • binary_eye

      Have fun shooting everything at 35mm equivalent.

      • Derek

        Don’t worry, I will.

  • Jabs

    Maybe that previous post about the huge lens and adapter (Canon/Nikon) for the iPhone was just a joke or a dig at micro 4/3rds-Sony or even an analogy or what they are attempting to do – LOL. Fit a big lens on a tiny body!!!

    Nikon is probably NOW telling us – here is HOW you do it – bozo!

    Come into my lair and be veerrrry stilll .

    Competing Engineers or a geek fest!

    Hence the Rube Goldberg thingie too – yeah

    Laughing at who though?

  • Cold Hands Luke

    I’m a bit disappointed not to see any sign of that patented lens mount cover, but my real concern is that Nikon don’t try to cram too many pixels on to that tiny sensor. With that sensor size there’s no way this is going to be a “pro” mirrorless like we’ve been led to believe before, which means the photos it takes are almost exclusively going to end up on Facebook or Twitter or in emails, perhaps Flickr or viewed on an HDTV.

    Five or six megapixels would be PLENTY for those applications (how often do people crop their pictures on Facebook?) , and would allow for excellent dynamic range and noise performance. To the target audience, the pictures would just “look better” than those from a phone or some 14MP compact, or even maybe a NEX or m4/3. And the lenses wouldn’t need much resolution, so they could contain fewer elements and be smaller and lighter. Win-win.

    I know, not going to happen. I fully expect this thing to be announced with 12 megapixels, absolute minimum. :'(

    • portence flatulencia

      exactly. if this sensor were only 5MPs, its output might actually be quite good. give it connectability (or at least make it eye-fi card friendly) and gear it towards those who print small (when they do print) and primarily share to the web, and you’ve got a fine performer that’s geared for the times.

      as it is though, with such a tiny sensor and the likely 10-12+ megapixels that nikon will crowbar into it, expect the bad dynamic range, noisy IQ and little DOF control that come with compact-sensors jam packed with pixels.

      don’t expect this to be an inexpensive camera either.

      i hope i’m proven disastrously wrong, though i don’t expect that either.

  • kevrev123

    Why is the white dot at the top?

    Also, sorry looks more like a Canon mount to me.

  • vinman

    I don’t understand the whining about the smaller sensor size, personally. It’s almost a certainty that Nikon will produce an F mount adapter for this if it turns out to be the real deal. Who knows – maybe even one that can properly control G lenses.

    A great many photogs using a body like this want one slim, fast pancake for pocket (ish) size and stealth and then the ability to mount a larger zoom. This seems to be a Nikon produced solution. It is not meant to be a DSLR replacement and won’t be one.

  • Trevor

    Admin, can you clarify if it’s they’re talking about a 1/2.5 or a 2.5x crop factor? I thought we last read a 2.5 crop, which would be way bigger than a 1/2.5.

    For those asking for m43, you’re asking for the worst of both worlds. M43 sacrifices DR and DoF, but it’s *barely* smaller than DX (definitely won’t fit in your pocket). The new panny 50equiv 1.4 is just about as big as the Nikon 35 f/1.8, and the Nikon will produce shallower DoF wide open. If I want to drop a camera in my pocket I want it P&S small, not D3100 small. You won’t get that with m43.

    If Nikon produces a compact system, I think 2.5 crop or smaller is the way to go. You get economy or performance, but you don’t get both.

    • DrSmouse

      It’s talking about 1/1.25″ and 1/2.5″. Not crop factor. This is a compact point and shoot camera sensor we’re looking at.

      • BornOptimist

        No it’s not! This is a 2.7-2.8x crop sensor. Just measure the screews and sensor. Compare with pitcures of the Q-mount on DP Review and you will see this sensor is far larger than the sensor in the Pentax camera.
        I have done it, and by comparing the screews on my cameras (D700 and GF2) and also with E mount and Q mount, all of them have screews that are ca 3mm dia. Assuming this has approx the same dia, this is a 2.7-2.8x sensor.

    • Oilymouse

      Yes, you do, since M43 has multiple pancake lenses. These are the lenses designed be “pocketable”. Nikon has no pancakes, so there is no contest. And the smaller PEN bodies are definitely considerably smaller than any DSLR (of course).

      The current M43 sensors are not class-leading in DR, but they are more than good enough for most actual owners and serious camera reviewers out there, as you know.

      Also, I don’t need to tell you lenses that are identical on paper (or, in your case, comparable) can have a different actual DoF for a given aperture, so it would be nice to see the source(s) that allow comparing the two. Regardless, it’s trivial, because they’re comparable as you say.

      Btw, you should consider full frame for shallow DoF, DX and M43 are very similar in that respect (also). DX really isn’t that special compared to M43, you know. Sorry.

      Because in the end: when you choose, you loose. Hahaha. Fanboy.

    • I will write another post on the sensor size of the Nikon mirrorless next week.

  • goose

    its a medium format sensor.

    … with special screws and special mount and special… i push to bereeve

  • Back to top