Nikon DL cameras delayed because of serious issues with the integrated circuit for image processing

The Nikon DL cameras were delayed because of the Kumamoto earthquakes and serious issues with the integrated circuit for image processing - this is according to Nikon tech support's answer to reader:

Thank you for contacting Nikon regarding the premium compact cameras, Nikon DL18-50 f/1.8-2.8, DL24-85 f/1.8-2.8, and DL24-500 f/2.8-5.6. As indicated in our press release on April 20, the DL series will be delayed due to the effects of the 2016 Kumamoto earthquakes and serious issues with the integrated circuit for image processing built into the three new premium compact cameras. These cameras were originally scheduled for a June 2016 release.

The new release date has yet to be determined and we will announce the information as soon as it is decided.


This entry was posted in Nikon DL. Bookmark the permalink. Trackbacks are closed, but you can post a comment.
  • HD10

    Looks like Thom Hogan was right.

    • Mike

      Agreed. Especially with the rumoured Fuji MF announcement. I’d love to stay in the Nikon ecosystem and a compelling announcement from Nikon might sway me from temptation with a compelling Fuji MF solution.

      • HD10

        The Fuji MF is one of the one tempting possibility that I had in mind given Fuji’s good lens track record . =)

        • nwcs

          I’m personally not interested in MF but Fuji has a long history with MF. If they do that camera I’m sure it’ll be done well. I’ve got a X-T2 and it really is a big step forward from the previous generation. If Nikon had any kind of vision/plan that was out there I would probably have waited for an eventual Nikon mirrorless contender.

          • HD10

            Indeed. A good number of people initially surmised that the soon-to-ship Hasselblad’s X1D was from Fuji given Hasselblad long years of working with Fuji on MF. But it looks like Fuji will now be stepping forward on its own name. Given’s Fuji’s innovation and lens releases, I can only say “Way to go Fuji!”

            For the compact cameras, I have the Olympus E-M1 Mk2 and the Panasonic GH5 in mind as the other tempting possibilities though these two will not likely be available till early 2017.

          • Ineedmy Bobo

            I hate to talk pro-Fuji too much on a Nikon site, but I’m using my Fuji gear more and more for size, fun, and quality of lenses. If Fuji MF comes out and the body is smaller and lighter than my D810, I think it may be time for me to jettison the remainder of my Nikon rig.

            • HD10

              I will likely add a Fuji MF while keeping the Nikon as there are still many things I can do with Nikon that I cannot with anything that Fuji is likely to come up, e.g., PC-E, 200mm f2.0, etc.
              I do wonder if a successful Fuji MF launch may cauise some people to start calling the Nikon FX as crop cameras? =)

            • ITN

              Nikon FX sensor covers the image circle of their lenses so it is full frame. Fuji X series sensor covers the image circle of their lenses too so that is full frame too. Hasselblad and Pentax DSLRs which use 44mm x 33mm sensor are crop cameras since most of their lenses cover a much larger area (6cm x 4,5cm film). The “crop” to smaller sensors than the lenses were designed for, making it difficult to find decent wide angles. However the term full frame is used incorrectly and de facto it refers to the size of 35mm film frame (24mm x 36mm).

              FX will never be “crop” unless you put an FX sensor in a medium format body and use medium format lenses, which is of very limited interest.

            • HD10

              I understand all that you say and this is why I ended my post with a =). I would extend the post further to point out that DX, m43 and Nikon 1 are all full frame cameras.

            • Krishna808

              “I would extend the post further to point out that DX, m43 and Nikon 1 are all full frame cameras.”

              Well,not really because Full Frame means the size of 35mm film.

            • HD10

              Do read up a bit to understand this better.

            • Krishna808

              Oooh, la-di-da! Why not just tell us what it is you know that the rest of the photographic world doesn’t.

            • HD10

              It’s already explained by ITN above. Nothing more to add.

            • Krishna808

              What, in the bit where he says ” de facto it refers to the size of 35mm film frame”? It seems we agree!

            • HD10

              Sigh. “However the term full frame is used INCORRECTLY …”

              But if you insist on misreading that, you can to that too.

            • Krishna808

              Used incorrectly by you, ITN and nobody else I’ve ever come across.

            • HD10

              You have been educated on the correct meaning on what the term “full frame” means. But you have chosen to remain ill-informed and mis-educated on what this terms means. That’s too bad but that is your choice. This is my last post on this matter.

            • It also means that you’re paying and carrying more lens than you otherwise would.

            • Fuji is probably the mirrorless camera I will buy today if I have to. I owned the X-Pro1 and the X100 when they came out but was not impressed and sold them. They improved since, but I still prefer the Leica Q as a small travel camera. If you are a Fuji fan, you should check our sister site .

            • Eric Calabros

              No matter how many of you guys buy a $1500+ mirrorless body, the situation for Canikon won’t change much. They need something strong in $800 range.

            • nwcs

              I think Canon now has that exact body coming out in the next week. Nikon? *crickets*

            • HF

              I don’t like the Fuji controls and tiny buttons.

            • I agree, but they are still better than the Sony a7 controls – have you tried to hold one? There are buttons everywhere.

            • br0xibear

              “they are still better than the Sony a7 controls”
              Are you some sort of troll who hates Sony and all mirrroless cameras ??? lol

            • HD10

              I concur with Admin in preferring Fuji’s control’s (specially those in the X-T2) to those found in the Sony A7 series cameras. That does not make me (or the Admin for that matter) a troll.

            • Toecutter

              Sense of humour bypass?

            • HD10

              I hope not. But I do blame my erratic connection due to all the ongoing postings which is messing up my posts.

            • br0xibear

              Hi HD10
              I’ve known Peter (admin) for a long time through nikonrumors, posted here for many years…
              It’s just a little bit of fun connected with a previous article about mirrorless.
              It’s cool.

            • HD10

              Fully appreciate the situation Broxibear. I am having difficulty posting and somehow messed up not concluding it with a =) at the end of that post. I edited that post with the needed correction.

            • br0xibear

              No problem

            • Broxi is just joking based on another related discussion on PhotoRumors where I was eaten alive by the Sony trolls. But yes, we all have opinions and needs and as long as we have an intelligent discussion, I am ok with it.

            • Actually I am 🙂 I am all for having choices, the Sony a7 is just not for me. I loved the RX1, I wouldn’t have sold it if Sony cared and improved the AF with a firmware update. The RX100 is also an interesting camera for me… so it’s not that I hate Sony, I just think their products are more hype than anything, but then again just imho.

            • Ennan Hamill

              I love my A7s – it’s perfect for the work I do. But it’s so subjective. I use Nikon SLR’s and love them but I hate how Canons control. I also hate Sony DSLR’s. I own so many different cameras and some you take to and some you don’t. There is no right or wrong – if it’s letting you do what you want to do then it’s a good camera.

            • Exactly, I agree 100%. Not sure why some people waste their entire day to convince others that their camera is better.

            • animalsbybarry

              I use Sony
              Thier user interface sucks …!!!!!

            • That too 🙂

            • Ennan Hamill

              I like the physical controls of my A7s but I agree – the menus are terrible. Navigating them is fine – it’s working out where they’ve put stuff that’s the problem. Give me a Nikon menu any day.

            • TheMexican

              The Sony controls are terrible. As a A7r II owner and a previous D800 one, I can definitely say that.

              Don’t get me wrong, I’ve used and owned various Sony systems over the years and can say that besides being a very good camera for quality and features, it lacks the proper pro menus and control dials (architectural wise).

              I recently took a trip with the Fuji X-T1 and enjoyed using that camera much more than the A7. Although, it is not as good in image quality.

              More so, both aren’t as well designed as my beloved D800.

            • HF

              We use A7rii and Nikon D750/D810 professionally for weddings, for example. Before I went with the A7rii I used Fuji (XT1) but didn’t like it so much. The A7rii with grip is very nice to handle (only a joystick is missing, imo). But I still like all the Nikon stuff and don’t see a reason dumping it completely. A d750 successor is very high on my list for a next camera.

            • Jorge

              Try an XT1 or 2. Truly AMAZING…

            • I know the Leica SL is probably too disastrously expensive for you, but if the new T is anything like an interchangeable lens Q, I think it might be a worthy competitor to Fuji.

            • TwoStrayCats

              I’m actually considering an ante-up for the SL… starting out with the 24-90 until my pocketbook fire goes out. And then making the big reach for the 90-280. From what I’ve seen, the SL is very impressive.

            • The Leica Q is incredible, but hardly comparable to a Fuji X-anything. At $4,200 it sought to include an assistant to go get your lunch for you.

            • I know, I agree – I was just talking about my personal choice/preference.

            • Jorge

              Hear! Hear! I have been Fuji since early 2013. The only Nikon gear I have left is my D800e and a 50 1.8G plus my Nikon Flash(es). I pretty much use Fuji no FT. Sorry to say… Cause that D800e generates some gorgeous files.

            • Riley Escobar

              I’m with you. I started with an X-E1 to test the waters. Sensor IQ is good, and I am loving the smaller kit size. I haven’t taken my D3 out in over a year now, and have considered selling my FX kit. Well, maybe not my 28-70 AF-S or 105DC.

            • fotoMatt

              I’m in pretty much the same boat. I’ve used Nikon gear since 1982 and am hardly using it any longer. They should have done something like the X100 with interchangeable lenses (someone Photoshopped a fake one called a Nikon S3 and I was so excited for about 30 seconds before I realized it was a fake). I am hanging on due to my investment in Nikon lenses and flash gear but hardly use any of it any longer. Seeing Nikon blunder down this path is very sad.

      • outkasted

        that and the iphone 7 🙂

    • nwcs

      He sure did and people still question his information and astute guesses. He’s not perfect and gets some things wrong on occasion but he’s been right far more than not.

    • Wesley

      I’m going to have to disagree with that. I don’t think people are going to hold on to their cash and wait for the Nikon when Nikon has shown they can’t meet announced shipping dates. Or release a FF camera without having to recall it. I suspect a number of people planning to buy a DL are going to look elsewhere now that it’s clear the DLs won’t be available anytime soon. Waiting on an announcement when a shipping date is close to definite is better than announcing a camera and then not shipping it for a year. One more rollout Nikon screwed up. Having said that, Nikon has also shown they can’t make good decisions so they probably will announce the new camera and have to delay the release or recall it when an issue is found. Quite disappointing to a long-time Nikon user such as myself.

      • HD10

        I understand the sentiment. But let me be a bit more specific.


        For the DL, the die has been cast. I think those who want a DL 18-50 will wait until this is available unless someone else announces and releases an equivalent before the DL 18-50 becomes available.

        As for the other DL models, there are many other alternatives so it’s unlikely that those who need their cameras soon will wait. I have made mention in previous posting that with judicious choosing, one can assemble an m43 kit for the same budget as the DL with the buyer getting a camera with better image quality but also with better camera controls combined with a plethora of interchangeable lenses as an option.


        This is where Nikon can make a difference. Let me cite some scenarios.

        One scenario: Nikon announces an F-mount mirrorless high-resolution FX using the same 42mp Sony Sensor with OSPDAF sensors … so fast AF and good AF coverage. Combine this with IBIS, electronic first curtain, AF joystick (like the D500 and D5), an articulating touchscreen, 4K video, GPS, “split-screen” options for its EVF when using MF (like the old manual focus SLR cameras). Would you be interested? Speaking for myself, I will definitely wait for such a camera!
        Another scenario: A new F-mount mirrorless equivalent of the D5500 but with IBIS, 4K, BT, along with several new primes, e.g., 11mm f/1.8, 16mm f/1.8, 24mm f/1.8, Would this hold your interest?

        • I don’t think I’d want an F-mount mirrorless offering. You would have to build the F-mount flange distance required for F-mount lenses into the body and then you end up with basically a Sigma SD Quattro that takes Nikon lenses. I’d much rather they went with a new all electronic mount and a credible and fully functional F-mount adapter to bridge the gap in lens offerings until enough native lenses can be brought to market.

          • HD10

            I thought about this and here is my take on this.

            Nikon can still make a new mirrorless camera with a different mount with F-mount adapter the way Canon has approached it with the EF-M.

            But Nikon would be better off doing that AFTER it has successfully launch a mirrorless F-mount camera. There are many advantages to doing this, but let me cite a few.
            No resources needed to design and make new lenses simultaneous with the mirrorless camera launch.
            Market potential of Nikon mirrorless is determined without undue risk of alienating and scaring photographers with many Nikon F-mount lenses.

            • Your logic makes sense, just wondering if they would have that much market in a system that offers very little size advantage to the current DSLR system if you go with a body for F-mount lenses.

            • nwcs

              It could be a different mount and Nikon could just change the housing on existing lenses to basically incorporate the adapter. That’s basically the Samyang/Rokinon approach in providing lenses for m43, Fuji, etc.

            • Agreed but then you are having to incorporate the flange distance difference resulting in longer lenses than necessary. Whether you add the distance in the camera body or in the lens barrel, it needs to be accounted for if you are going to sue F-mount lens designs. Take a look at the Loxia 21mm f/2.8 vs the Milvus 21mm f/2.8 for a direct comparison by the same lens manufacturer of a lens designed for mirrorless vs a DSLR lens and then you still need to add the adapter to the Milvus lens.

            • nwcs

              Oh, I know the impact. It’s just a quick way for them to provide lenses for a new mount and skip the adapter. The short flange really only benefits wide to normal lenses mostly, though. You won’t see any savings with a 300 f4, for example.

              It may not be a perfect solution but I think it could be a successful one for Nikon once you take a step back. Assuming one isn’t looking for the smallest volume camera setup.

            • True dat! As the apertures get larger and/or the focal length starts to really dominate the flange distance, the sizes become more normalized.

            • EcoR1

              It’s not as simple as that. Even if optical design remains the same, everything else would need a redesign. For example AF-motors inside old Nikon lenses would need an update – they were never designed for autofocusing scheme used in mirrorless cameras. Samyang can do what they are doing, because they don’t include AF in their lenses.

            • HD10

              If one is to push the size (and weight) advantage a bit further, the size (and weight) advantages that makes sense to me is best realized by pursuing this in the lenses rather than in the camera body. The camera manufacturers can make different camera sizes but we cannot resize our hands we were born with.

              To reduce the lens size and weight, the best way to unfailingly achieve this is to reduce the image area that it has to cover .. and thus the sensor size also needs to be correspondingly reduced.

              It will be very difficult to pursue size (and weight) advantage when working with a high-resolution 36mm x 24mm sensor because the lens image area must cover that – and this is true whether working with the longer flange distance of an F-mount or the shorter flange distance of the Sony FE. Observe how the recent FE lenses have grown in size and weight to near dSLR equivalent, specially in the longer focal end.
              So how did I achieve the smaller size and weight that I need for some occasions? Rather than pursue image quality and the size/weight advantages in one camera system with its sometimes conflicting directions, I have accepted that while the Nikon FX will be my primary system, I will need to another system with a much smaller and lighter lens. That is how I came to adopt the m43 compact system.
              I should declare that I do use the Sony E-mount cameras. But for that, I limit myself strictly to prime lenses. Without a camera that has the proper body size and controls that will work with my hands, I will steadfastly refuse to use a constant f/2.8 Sony FE zoom with any of my E-mount bodies.

            • Thom Hogan

              Nope. If Nikon were to be able to “successfully launch a mirrorless F-mount camera” it means the end of F-mount DSLRs. Trying to then launch another mirrorless camera line that gets rid of the F-mount for a new mount then means that 110m existing lenses no longer look so interesting or lock in the customer. After all, those same 110m lenses work on a Sony A7 with an adapter, too ;~).

              I went through the logic of this a long time ago. Nikon’s choices for mirrorless are “new mount” or “existing mount,” not both. The longer they wait, the more boxed into a corner they are, actually. Fujifilm, m4/3, and Sony are all building out their lens sets nicely, so the advantage of the current lens set slowly gets lower, and at a certain point there’s no way Nikon builds out a new lens set fast enough to remain competitive.

            • br0xibear

              Which is why they should make a micro for thirds camera.
              You don’t need to make as many lenses straight away, and so many more potential customers for Nikon m43 lenses and bodies.

            • br0xibear

            • br0xibear

              Mock up…

            • nwcs

              I’ve advocated that for about a year though it seems that only lately people are agreeing with me. It’s not the ideal scenario for Nikon but it could be a good option.

            • br0xibear

              I too have been saying it for a long time and I think it’s the perfect solution for Nikon.
              Make it a desirable design (like the X100 was) , and release it with 3 fast primes… 12mm, 20mm and 45mm f/1.8
              Don’t market it to DSLR users as a replacement, but as an addition to their DSLRs. That way enthusiasts/pros using D500, D750 etc will buy this as their carry with them/travel type of camera. Those thinking the D3400 is a bit too big might buy this mirrorless instead of a rivals…IF it’s priced correctly.
              And those already invested in micro 4/3 have another option from Nikon when thinking of bodies and lenses.
              Looking at the images coming from cameras like the Olympus OM-D E-M5 Mark II image quality isn’t going to be an issue.
              I just hope they don’t bring out another “Blah” camera that nobody really cares about or wants…they may as well do nothing if that’s the case and just concentrate on DSLRs.

            • HD10

              A Nikon m43 camera that can compete with Olympus and Panasonic … but with an extra premium that it can be used with a Nikon-made adapter and thus can use all F-mount lenses with full AF-C functionality on all the AF points of the m43 camera … wow! Where can I pre-order this? =)

            • So then their only option is the Nikon 1 mount?

            • Thom Hogan

              It’s their “best” option if they had this planned from the beginning and were developing another FX/DX like approach (DX first, FX second). Remains to be seen if that’s what they were doing.

              But let me put it this way:
              A. They introduce a full frame mirrorless: they’ll mostly just transfer sales and updaters to the mirrorless system. Sure, D810 and D5 users might still continue to go for DSLR, but the D610 and D750 user will mostly transition. Result? No gain in market share. And either another new lens mount or an awkward body design. Essentially the Sony A7 solution, but not likely to be done as well by Nikon. Didn’t gain share for Sony (did increase their average sale price per unit, though).
              B. They introduce a DX mirrorless: this is even worse in that it replaces DSLR sales with mirrorless right in the heart of Nikon’s biggest unit volume. We still have the same new lens mount or awkward body design problem. Worse, it goes right against Canon, Fujifilm, and Sony, all of which have same-sized sensor cameras and, except for Canon, good lens choice already.
              C. They upscale CX. This only destroys Nikon 1 sales, which they already destroyed in previous moves ;~).

              Which would you do?

            • I will go for C and try to stick a bigger sensor inside. Killing the entire Nikon 1 line does not look good for Nikon.

            • Thom Hogan

              I agree. C is the best approach if done right.

              A is definitely a huge risk if all it does is transfer sales out of D610/D750, and particularly if its a new lens mount, as Nikon just isn’t going to win the new lens game at this point.

            • Why did’t they think about that when they designed the CX mount. Leica did with their TL mount and now they use it in the SL. Or maybe they did? I remember seeing calculations online, but are we 100% sure that an APS-C sensor cannot fit inside the CX mount?

            • Thom Hogan

              Mount image circles get a little tricky to figure. Certainly CX would support 1.8x, and I think 1.7x is well within doing. Not sure about 1.6x (APS-C) or 1.5x (DX). Some lens designs start to be problematic pushed into that smaller mount.

            • MB

              Upscale CX mount how exactly?
              It seems that they can hardly squeeze µ4/3 sensor in, but they would have to rearrange electronic contacts to make it fit so it would not be CX mount any more. And there is no way Nikon would go for standard µ4/3 mount because they are too vain and too greedy and they want it all: cameras, lenses, flashes and everything and they are to narrow minded to realize the importance of third party ecosystem.
              Anything larger than µ4/3 seems impossible to me and I would really appreciate if you can share how exactly do you propose for Nikon to do this.
              But even if they do somehow apply some oriental magic and manage the impossible to put DX or slightly smaller sensor in this new mount and call it CXplus, DX minus or even just CX even if it is totally incompatible with current CX mount, what would be the difference with your option B? In this case they will enter saturated APS-C digital systems market and will compete with all other more mature systems and will not achieve anything, they will not slow down consumer leakage and will not increase current Nikon market share.
              The end of DSLRs is inevitable. Current advancements in technology such as electronic viewfinders and global shutter sensor makes it so, and Nikon can either embrace this fact in time or vanish. And currently IMHO the FX mirrorless is the only way to go if they want to stay relevant.
              By the way maybe the DL line was an early probe for Nikon with new global shutter technology and the image integrated circuit for image processing are DRAM chips attached directly to the back of the sensor chip that are currently causing problems because they are overheating the entire sensor.

            • El Aura

              And what is fricking difference between putting a bigger sensor into a body with a CX mount and releasing a new mirrorless system with a new mount and a bigger sensor? That people can use their existing CX lenses on this bigger sensored body? Not going to happen, how many people use DX lenses on their FX bodies? Almost nobody. Or that people could use Nikon 4/3 or APS-C lenses on their Nikon 1 bodies? Outside of the current target group of the FT1 adaptor almost nobody will do so. Or that people will have a mixed system of 1″ and 4/3 or APS-C bodies and lenses? Highly unlikely, the 1″ sensor size is all but dead in ILC systems.

            • Like Thom said – APS-C mirrorless market is saturated and it will take Nikon years to build up a lens selection for a new mount. Also, nobody will take the new mount seriously after the failure of the Nikon 1.

            • El Aura

              So, their only option is ride the 1″ mirrorless and DSLR product ranges into the sunset and switch off the light when the last person leaves the building?

              A CX-mount based 1.8x mirrorless camera system won’t do any better than a completely new APS-C, new-mount 1.5x mirrorless camera range. DX DSLR users upgrade to FX DSLR because they (a) already have some FX DSLR lenses or at least see the wide offering of FX DSLR lenses and (b) get a larger optical viewfinder. Both things don’t apply for people upgrading from 1″ CX to 1.8x CX. There are no existing 1.8x lenses nor will there be many if there is only one camera system with that sensor size (discounting Foveon as its sales are tiny). People buy DX DSLRs because (1) they DX appeals to them and (2) because there is a very wide upgrade path to FX DSLRs. People are rapidly decelerating their CX mirrorless purchases because CX has become less and less appealing (1″ compacts being smaller and better (faster zoom lenses) and m43 being better while not being much larger.

              A 1.8x CX system would suffer from very little synergy: having 1″ bodies and lenses adds little to the attractiveness due to the fast descending appeal of 1″ ILCs and having a sensor size that shares no synergy with other lens systems.

              Thom is lauding Sony for opening the E-mount to third-parties. Adding a sensor size that no other system shares isn’t exactly the best recipe to attract third-party lens makers.

            • Yes, they are in a pretty bad situation.

            • Balder the Brave

              OK…. but what about all the latest DX lens without VR (ex 70-300 AF-P F4,5-6,3 G ED, or or NIKKOR 18-55mm f/3.5-5.6G AF-P D ) with step motors, ? doesn’t it means a mirrorless DX with IBIS is about to come with an F mount ?…. instead of a CX ?

            • El Aura

              It could be an indication towards that. Or just to enable decent AF when used via an adaptor on a mirrorless body. Or just a desperate cost-cutting move.

            • Balder the Brave

              In a desperate cost cutting move, you don’t create 2 versions of a same lens cause you have to pay twice for the tooling

            • El Aura

              Maybe the two lenses are identical with just some parts missing from one of them.

            • El Aura

              I’d use the one which looses the least amount of market share in the medium term. Imagine what would have happened if Nikon had put all the energy they put into the Nikon 1 system into what Sony did? There is no option for Nikon that increases market share (unless they got their software act together, which I think we all agree is almost certainly not going to happen). If m43 is always going to be a niche below APS-C, then CX is always going to be an even smaller niche, even with f/1.2 primes and f/2.x zooms. Or is your idea of upscaling CX to put an 4/3 or even an APS-C sensor in it?

              Sony killed the A-mount partially by moving to SLT, Nikon can at least avoid that mistake. Nikon can follow Sony and Canon or it can follow Pentax which is perennially (too) late with almost anything.

            • Thom Hogan

              1.7x or even 1.8x sensor in the CX mount would solve most of Nikon’s short term problems IF: (1) these are Exmor-like sensors; (2) the autofocus system is on-par with the Nikon 1; (3) the camera controls/UI is at least as good as the DL series (e.g. more DSLR like than Nikon 1); (4) Nikon introduces the right new lenses to support it; and (5) current CX lenses are supported with appropriate crops (esp. if to their image circle, not the 2.7x size).

              Again, we’re going to see whether Nikon was thinking ahead (CX was built to support larger sensors in the first, and so were some of the lenses) or just winging it.

            • Eric Calabros

              Most of 1 system lenses are slow kits, why new mirrorless should support them? and whats the benefit for their owners? That 1.7x sensor is unlikely to go above 20mp resolution. Any crop of that is almost useless. Besides, if they gonna keep current pin configuration, I’m afraid they just limit themselves in designing fast lenses.

            • Thom Hogan

              The 18mm, 32mm, and 70-300mm lenses, in particular, would be useful with the larger sensor, and two of those may have enough image circle to cover 1.7x.

              But as someone else pointed out on dpreview, if Nikon did 4K video as a crop (almost necessary to meet bandwidth issues), all the older CX lenses would suddenly find great use. Exactly the same as DX lenses for the D5 4K video ;~).

            • Eric Calabros

              Crop 4k on a cropped DX? I set my expectations a bit higher. a 4:3 crop of that sensor can be used perfectly with m4/3 format anamorphic lenses 🙂

            • Mr_Miyagi

              “If Nikon were to be able to “successfully launch a mirrorless F-mount camera” it means the end of F-mount DSLRs.”

              In other words, many of Nikon’s loyal customers would abandon something they have no choice but to buy because that’s the only product Nikon is willing to offer, for something those customers would prefer to buy but Nikon refuses to make. If there was ever a reason why Nikon’s customers should look elsewhere while Nikon deserves to go out of business, that is it.

            • HD10

              Thom Hogan: “If Nikon were to be able to ‘successfully launch a mirrorless F-mount camera’ it means the end of F-mount DSLRs.”

              I disagree.

              A successful launch of a mirrorless F-mount does not mean the end of F-mount dSLRs. It is possible for both to succeed and exist side-by-side. Different task require different tools and cameras are no different. The fact that Nikon has different camera models ranging from the recent D3400 to the D5 attests to this. The recent release of the D500 for example did not in any way invalidate the other cameras and the D5 was in fact released with the D500. These different models continue to be produced and for some users, these different models successfully complement the other models.

              F-mount mirrorless cameras are no different. These are tools just like the other camera models. As many have learned for themselves, mirrorless cameras are better at certain tasks but do poorly in others. It’s the same with dSLRs. Eventually, the market will determine which camera type is better suited for what task, particularly for general purpose cameras (as contrasted from special-purpose cameras, e.g., D5/D500). Nikon should actively seek the product mix and balance between the two by producing dSLRs and mirrorless models that may even compete with each other and produce more of that which is more successful. Regardless of whether this will be dSLR or mirrorless, the matter of which lens to issue is a non-issue … it will always be the F-mount.

              As to Nikon releasing a mirrorless with a non-F mount, I consider this as an unlikely possibility due to the enormous expenditure required with no clarity as to what the returns will be. But if Nikon decides to try out the water here (that is the best that Nikon can do at this point as no one knows what the results will be), it would be best if it does this after releasing an F-mount mirrorless. If Nikon does take this risk, Nikon needs to clearly communicate that the lenses for such a new mount will be specially designed for small size and light weight, and will be produced primarily in the wide-angle to standard focal length. There are no size and weight advantages to be gained in the longer focal length from using such a new mount so Nikon will not make such lenses for this new mount. Nikon can release an adapter with such a new camera to allow the full use of F-mount lenses, including all the long lenses needed by adopters of such a new camera.

            • Thom Hogan

              The surveys say differently, unfortunately. Really only the D810 and D5 user base is clearly DSLR-oriented. Not likely that those shooters would adopt mirrorless. But essentially a competent full frame mirrorless camera kills the D610 and D750, which means that all Nikon does is what Sony did: move market share from DSLR to mirrorless. And if that’s using a different lens mount, it opens up those sales to competition from Sony. That’s not a solution to Nikon’s current problems, and it comes in the wrong place in Nikon’s lineup to keep #2 ILC market share intact, IMHO.

              Nikon’s problem at the moment is at the other end of the lineup. They’re not really having troubles selling D500, D750, D810, or D5 models in the quantities they expect (or better).

              Canon’s EOS M5 adds another problem to the D3400-D7200 lineup for Nikon, though, like the Sony A6300, the M5 is priced near the top of Nikon DX DSLRs. Still, the surveys show that the movement is now real: people are downsizing and paying more for it. Cutting costs out of the D3400 looks good from Nikon’s bean counter view of the world, but word of mouth was that too much was cut (even if that wasn’t really true in practice. Nikon has a marketing problem here. A big one. Anything they do in rebuilding mirrorless lines adds to that marketing problem for them, unfortunately.

            • El Aura

              I’d say moving market share from Nikon DSLR to Nikon mirrorless is better than moving market share from Nikon DSLR to Sony or Canon mirrorless.

            • Thom Hogan

              Sure, but the surveys show that’s really happening in DX, not FX ;~). The leakage Nikon is experiencing to companies like Fujifilm initially came due to the delayed D500. Now with Canon’s EOS M5, there’s chance for leakage all across the DX line.

              Nikon has done this before, several times: they make a great high end camera, then try to extend the lineup down into consumer, eventually screw that up, retreat, and start again. Nikon’s problems are simple: they’re not a consumer company. They’re not designed for that, period. And consumer products/tastes move far faster than Nikon is capable of, IMHO. Moreover, software is becoming more and more the differentiator of consumer tech products. Another Nikon weakness.

            • HD10

              “But essentially a competent full frame mirrorless camera kills the D610 and D750, which means that all Nikon does is what Sony did: move market share from DSLR to mirrorless. That’s not a solution to Nikon’s current problems, and it comes in the wrong place in Nikon’s lineup to keep #2 ILC market share intact, IMHO.”

              Sluggish or even a drop in ILC sales is a problem not just for Nikon but for every camera manufacturer. While moving market share from dSLR to mirrorless may not increase unit sales, it would at least be more profitable for Nikon to do so given the lower cost per unit of mirrorless cameras. To rely solely on dSLR when there is a clear maket preference for mirrorless camera from a significant number of Nikon users will make the problem worse.

              While producing mirrorless will not address the issue by increasing unit sales, it will at least help prevent the problem (of low unit sales) from getting worse. The solution to Nikon’s problem (as with all other camera manufacturers) of increasing unit sales lies not on whether to make mirrorless camera (Nikon needs to) but elsewhere.

              I am inclined to believe that over time, dSLR will become a speciliazed niche camera product and more users will generally be using mirrorless camera. This is not necessarily bad if this is where the evolutionary forces moves the development to. If you agree with me that this is indeed inveitable, then it is best that Nikon get a move on in making mirrorless cameras now rather than later.

            • Thom Hogan

              You’re not paying close attention. Go back and read what I wrote about Nikon’s own estimates with their Q1 results.

              Canon maintained unit volume in first half of 2016. Nikon lost it. Fujifilm gained it. Sony lost some and gained some, depends on the line, but overall lost less than Nikon.

              Nikon’s own estimates for the full year have them losing about 6% of ILC market share in a declining market. That means that they’re not only losing sales due to the market contraction, but to not having competitive products, as well.

              I see no scenario other than repurpose CX that could win them overall ILC market share back, and even that would be predicated on holding FX market share and fixing the DX decline. None.

            • HD10

              Thom Hogan: “I see no scenario other than repurpose CX that could win them overall ILC market share back, and even that would be predicated on holding FX market share and fixing the DX decline. None”

              I truly have difficulties in imagining how a repurpose CX can solve Nikon’s

              On the other hand, a mirrorless F–mount FX / DX with IBIS will present very real gains what Sony A7 series has to offer in terms of improved grip, camera controls and other ergonomics, much better menu, longer battery life. The AF joystick alone on a mirrorless FX/DX will run circles around any of the the A7 series and A6300 that Sony has. IBIS on a mirrorless F-mount Nikon DX is a supercard against Sony and Fuji.

            • Thom Hogan

              Let’s see:

              > a mirrorless F–mount FX / DX with IBIS

              Nikon hasn’t done IBIS. Meanwhile, companies like Olympus and Sony are on their second and third implementations. I’m not convinced Nikon is going to do IBIS. Doing so tends to invalidate their marketing claims for VR ;~).

              > will present very real gains what Sony A7 series has to
              offer in terms of improved grip, camera controls and other ergonomics,
              much better menu,

              Well, that’s if Nikon uses DSLR designs. Note that they didn’t do that with the Nikon 1 ;~). I’m not convinced that Nikon will make anything that competes directly with their DSLRs until absolutely forced to.

              > longer battery life.

              Unlikely. Mirrorless is a different story than DSLR.

              > The AF joystick alone on a
              mirrorless FX/DX will run circles around any of the the A7 series and
              A6300 that Sony has.

              Funny thing is, Sony could just “fix” the things that you’re complaining about ;~). It’s likely that they’re doing exactly that. You’re making a classic product management mistake of targeting the benefits of your as-yet-to-be-produced camera against the competitor’s now almost two-year-old product.

              > IBIS on a mirrorless F-mount Nikon DX is a
              supercard against Sony and Fuji.

              Yeah, that’s really sold a lot of Olympus cameras ;~).

            • HD10

              Re Nikon not ever doing IBIS, look at what Panasonic which used to rely on in-lens optical stabilization has done with its new releases (GX85, G80). Marketing cannot overcome technological improvements and market demands.

              Why won’t Nikon use its dSLR design for its mirrorless? Nikon’s follies and mistakes on the Nikon 1 V/J is clear for all to see. Do you mean to say that any new Nikon mirrorless repeats the V/J design fiascos?

              Longer battery life is predicated on the higher capacity of the Nikon batteries, all things being equal. So yes, a Nikon mirrorless will likely have a longer battery life if it uses the EN-EL15.

              It would be good to see Sony incorporate an AF joystick for its future models. But the A6300 is new and is without it. Ditto on the A7 MK II series. So a Nikon mirrorless with an AF-joystick will have an advantage even if it is momentary.

              Re IBIS on Olympus selling cameras, I own two units of the E-M1. I will likely get two of the E-M1 Mk2 when this comes out.
              There is no currently no APS-C mirrorless cameras in the market with IBIS … not from Sony, Fuji or Canon. If Nikon makes one, it has an advantage over anyone else who does not have one.

            • Verco

              I think Nikon need to do what you’ve said – cannibalize themselves.
              They need to start at the bottom (D3xxx) and work their way up with mirrorless.

              Then I think it’s up to Nikon whether they want to keep the F-mount, or start anew.
              I would highly recommend quality FM2 styling (ala fuji). But this picture illustrates how nikon failed with the DF

            • HD10

              “Nikon’s problem at the moment is at the other end of the lineup. They’re not really having troubles selling D500, D750, D810, or D5 models in the quantities they expect (or better).”

              “Sure, but the surveys show that’s really happening in DX, not FX ;~)”

              For the enthusiast, making compact and lighter weight DX lenses along with a mirrorless F-mount DX will pretty much address the issue. This will benefit the DX dSLR camera users as well.

              Fuji has a good lead on the lenses but Nikon can catch up if it put resources to this (a reason against making a new lens mount). Sony has effectively abandoned this front by neglecting to release a new APS-C E-mount in the last three years and focusing solely on FE. I think its not possible to match the m43 lens selection at the rate both Panasonic and Olympus are churning out new lenses.
              For casual camera buyers, the Nikon brand is still premium. At a time when most mirrorless camera manufacturers have resorted to selling high-priced camera models to make up for the low unit sales, Nikon has the opportunity to steal the thunder from any of them by producing a competent lower cost camera equal to or even lower than D3400/D3300 pricing.

            • Thom Hogan

              Nikon makes between six and eight new lenses a year on average, and it takes them about three years from concept to lens on shelf. They won’t catch up to ANYONE very fast, especially since a significant number of those new lenses are simply updates of older lenses, a simpler problem. Any new mount is going to need: two or three primes (we can argue on the focal lengths), a wide angle zoom, a mid-range zoom, and a telephoto zoom. Nikon’s propensity with “consumer” products is that they’ll also want to make a superzoom. And then we have the need to “fast” lenses on top of those basics, especially for smaller sensor bodies.

              As I’ve noted elsewhere, Sony is making the same mistake with E mount that Nikon did with DX mount. They’re paying for that by enabling competitors and not walling off Canon. Fujifilm is small but growing, and they’ve not made a mistake yet. m4/3 will benefit from sensor improvements and already has a pretty strong lens lineup.

              I’m afraid the window is closing on Nikon and mirrorless at DX or smaller sizes. Hasn’t closed yet, but there’s not much opening left, so given what I said about how long it takes Nikon to make lenses, they would have had to start on this some time ago to keep the window from shutting on them.

              Thing was, the Nikon 1 was genius on a few fronts. But not on usability or price, and Nikon’s lens choices now make it vulnerable to even Nikon’s own DLs, let alone all the other 1″ sensor cameras that are getting released.

              FWIW: playing with a D3400 now. Won’t pair with my Smartphone ;~).

            • I still think Nikon will do a full frame mirrorless with F mount, something like the Pentax K01 ( It won’t be pretty, but they have the lenses already and will keep the original mount.

            • Thom Hogan

              And we’d buy that over an FX Nikon DSLR why? Not going to be smaller, cheaper, or faster than a D610/D750. Not going to be as good as a D810 or D5. So what’s the buying proposition here?

            • Not sure 🙂 At least the pentaprism and mirror will be gone and this should make some people happy. Or maybe go the retro way – use the FM2 design with EVF, I would buy that 🙂 Anyway, I do agree that Nikon is in a bad situation.

            • Thom Hogan

              I’ve long noted that my surveys show that a modern digital FM3a/FM2n design would sell. Probably at least as well as the Df did. This also answers the lens question: it’s a bare bones, non-AF camera! Just make the EVF help with focus. Drop a couple of new primes for it.

            • dlub

              Yes please! I really want a lowish end mirrorless FX so I can easily achieve proper focus with my zeiss zf.2 21mm, 135mm, and Nikon 105 AI lenses.

            • enozama

              You’d achieve proper focus with any DSLR if you had the good idea to ask Nikon for a split image prism… sensor size is irrelevant.

            • Davo

              I still think a hybrid OVF/EVF finder is the best of both worlds for the F-mount.
              Mirror mode OVF for traditional DSLR shooting. Mirror-up EVF mode for slower precision shooting.

              A reboot of CX with a larger sensor appeals to me personally as the right compact mirrorless strategy.
              Existing CX lenses gain sensor real estate through freedom of aspect ratio cropping
              so it gives some breathing room for newer lenses that cover the full new sensor size to be released.

              If there’s gonna be another new mirrorless mount, may as well make it large enough for medium format and gain something on the Sony FE’s. But do an F-mount adapter. Again, existing F-mount lenses gain some additional sensor real estate through freedom of aspect ratio. Some F-mount lenses with extra large image circles become extra interesting. I wonder how big the image circles are on the Zeiss Otii?

            • HD10

              Thom Hogan: “And we’d buy that over an FX Nikon DSLR why? Not going to be smaller, cheaper, or faster than a D610/D750. Not going to be as good as a D810 or D5. So what’s the buying proposition here?”

              Using a Sony 42mp sensor, a NIkon F-mount mirrorless with IBIS can stabilized all the unstabilized lenses (specially the prime f/1.8 and f/1.4 lenses) which none of Nikon’s dSLR can do, it will have a wider AF coverage and possibly more accurate AF, for manual focus, it will support image-magnify and focus peaking (wishlist: split screen for MF just like the old manual focus SLRs of old), articulating touchscreen, 4K video, Blue Tooth, etc.

            • Thom Hogan

              Using the 42mp sensor automatically is going to make it as expensive as a D810. Sony themselves is having trouble getting the cost under control for the A7rII due to that sensor.

              But I’d still argue that it’s not going to focus as fast as the DSLRs, Nikon’s lenses are not optimized for contrast detect final step focus (the AF-P lenses are, but that’s another story for another day). Nikon has yet to do focus peaking on ANY camera, which means that they don’t prioritize it very well.

              What you’re talking about is a US$3000+ camera that’s not going to make Nikon any additional volume, and is going to make all the D810 users say “what the?” Why would anyone now buy the D810 if that did what you say?

              This is tricky. I personally believe that you have to cannibalize your own products before others do. But I don’t see a path where Nikon makes the proper product to satisfy their DSLR crowd and get them to ALL jump to mirrorless. Nikon has to be very careful to not send any wrong signals or mis-deliver here, or else they just accelerate their own unit volume crash.

            • HD10

              If 42mp is a price issue for a D610/D750 mirrorless equivalent, Nikon can use the Sony 24mp now used with the Sony A7 Mk II.

              A Nikon mirrorless will stop and even reverse the FX leakers to return from Sony. Nikon needs to determine the real score for Nikon dSLRs vs Nikon mirrorless. The only way it can do that if it makes a Nikon mirrorless.

            • HD10

              The difficulties you mentioned are precisely the reason why Nikon should not switch to a new mount for its mirrorless cameras.

              Re D3400, is the grip any better than the D3300?

            • El Aura

              It sometimes feels that Nikon will go down because it keeps dithering whether to create a new mirrorless mount or re-purpose the F-mount for a mirrorless system. The longer they wait, the less it will matter what solution they choose because it will be too late no matter what they do.

            • HF

              Why not doing a hybrid and modular concept? May allow for the best of both worlds, allows a slow transition.

            • EcoR1

              F-mount will see a sudden death if Nikon releses a compelling mirrorless full frame camera with a new mount. The question is, would the current Nikon owners still choose a new Nikon’s mirrorless camera or change the camp. But in the end I can’t belive that F-mount will survive anyway if we think 10-20 years ahead. Going with mirrorless F-mount would buy it some more time, but not much.

              For example, guess how small the mirrorless lenses from Sony, Fuji et al. will be when the new organic sensor technology hits the fan? Normal to wideangle lenses could be really small, because some limitations in lens design is removed with a sensor technology that allows incident light hit the sensor with high ray angle. But this only applies for mounts with a small flange distance. So no, I can’t see old DSLR-mounts to survive.

            • Thom Hogan

              > F-mount will see a sudden death if Nikon releses a compelling mirrorless full frame camera with a new mount.

              Sort of my point. Look at the sudden death of Alpha mount Sony’s with the E/FE launches. But the thing is, that didn’t change Sony’s market share one bit.

              > For example, guess how small the mirrorless lenses from Sony, Fuji et
              al. will be when the new organic sensor technology hits the fan?

              Same size as they are now ;~).

              What you seem to be arguing is that organic will allow smaller sensors to be competitive. Unfortunately, that applies to smartphones, too. The problem with going downscale with sensor size is exactly the problem that m4/3 and then Nikon 1 ran into: they’re still competing with larger sensor models.

            • EcoR1

              “What you seem to be arguing is that organic will allow smaller sensors to be competitive. Unfortunately, that applies to smartphones, too.” Nope, that’s not what I meant exactly.

              Coming sensor technology will allow smaller lens design with every short flange distance system regardless of the sensor size. One of the biggest gripes you can hear about fullframe mirrorless is “small body, big lenses” -mantra”. Well organic sensor technology will bring some remedy to that issue. Basically it will make FF mirrorless look even more compelling for people who want a smaller system with a best possible image quality.

            • EcoR1

              “Look at the sudden death of Alpha mount Sony’s with the E/FE launches. But the thing is, that didn’t change Sony’s market share one bit.”

              Why don’t we wait couple of more years and we shall see the true implications of FE-lenses 😉 .You know it’s only 3 years old lens-system and still pretty immature. There are still many gaps in the lineup and that alone can prevent people joining.

          • HF

            Then why no Sony directly? Now they have a big range of lenses, your old DSLR serves for wildlife and sports. Whatever adapter it is, I guess AF performance with the adapted lenses will be pretty bad (no linear motor in most of them). And even something like the LAEA4 Sony offers will probably not provide great performance (I used that for some time).

            • That’s actually what I am doing although I chucked adapted lenses for native ones a couple of years ago. I have my wildlife system which is Nikon, my light travel landscape system based on an a7R II and mostly Zeiss native primes, and then a medium format system. I’m just saying that you lose so much of the size advantage if you have to accomodate Nikon F-mount lenses natively. I do realize it is a much bigger investment for Nikon to do that…

            • Thom Hogan

              Right. And E.J. isn’t the only one that’s done that. To some degree I’ve done something similar, though no MF yet ;~).

            • XanderV

              I traded in my D7100 and and several f-mount lenses for the 1st gen A7 body when it was on sale for less than what I paid for the D7100 back in 2014. I did this because it was smaller (about the size of old SLR) and provided much better manual focus assists. I did not own an AF lens but used a hodgepodge of manual focus lenses older than I am. I enjoyed this very much, and I kept this up until my infant became a toddler and learned to walk and eventually run. A few months ago, I recently got my first native AF lenses to handle this. Has this been entirely ideal? Not at all, but I haven’t been happier. I’ve even improved as a photographer due to having to be more deliberate with the imposed manual focus restrictions and implications therein. Honestly, I haven’t missed a thing, yet if Nikon were to ever produce a body similar to an A7, I’d switch as soon as I could. Why? Simply because I think Nikon could do it better. But will they?

          • Max

            Can you imagine how expensive that would be for Nikon, though? Another new lens system to develop, new factory setups… While camera market is struggling…

            • Thom Hogan

              Profit = Income – Expenses.

              Let’s see, Nikon can choose Income going down 30% or Expenses going up 30%. Which do they pick? ;~)

              Like I’ve written previously, Nikon has put themselves in a hole of their own choosing. How they dig out of it has limited choices available. Indeed, even more limited because Nikon doesn’t understand how to use third parties to build an bigger and better ecosystem (and faster).

              Right now management has an edict out to squash all expenses, even as it compromises products and services. I don’t know any company that grows by doing that. It’s a panic decision, basically.

            • nwcs

              Yes, “Cost Cutting Your Way To Success” doesn’t ever seem to be on the best seller list anywhere. It’s always a losing strategy that winds up with the company either reinventing, being acquired, or exiting the market.

          • The Leica SL is appealing to me despite its staggering price because it’s a clean-sheet electronic machine designed by a company that knows and loves camera ergonomics.

            The problem with Nikon taking this route is that it appears to be poor at designing lenses with significant customer appeal. Compare Nikon DX lenses with Fuji’s much more elegant and attractive lenses to get the point.

        • Wesley

          A FF mirrorless from Nikon would definitely peak my interest. But only if it included a new set of smaller lenses whether that’s in the F-Mount or a new mount. I do not want to use my existing G series lenses going forward. Let’s say they do create a new mount and you want some of the new, smaller lenses. And let’s say Nikon does have to delay this new camera. Since you want new lenses anyway why not get the Sony or the new Fuji or whatever else is available? The only reason to wait for the Nikon would be to use your existing Nikon lenses on this new cam via Nikon’s new adapter if there is one. People will only wait so long.

          • Pardon me for keep reposting the same link:
            you cannot get smaller lenses for full frame mirrorless camera… that flange distance cannot be changed

            • Aside from clearly having an agenda, that guy’s argument is a bit pointless. There are plenty of small FE lenses if you want to keep the system small, and there are also big pro zooms if you want to do specific things that require those. I personally have a 35 f/2.8 and 55 f/1.8 and my kit packs a lot smaller than when I was shooting with a D800, despite the fact that I shot mostly with AI-S primes on the DSLR to save space.

            • MiK Images

              People don’t understand that (FF && small), because of lenses…

            • Carleton Foxx


            • Riley Escobar
            • ShaulB

              FF mirrorless would be pointless in terms of lens size, but would probably appeal to the video crowed (if done correctly) Problem with APS-C is that Nikon don’t do enough lenses and considering the Nikon 1’s lens selection, a DX mirrorless would suffer from the same shortage as the DSLR DX does right now.

            • EcoR1

              The link you are referring is a clickbate with massively flawed arguments. I suggest a dive into this:

          • HD10

            That’s from a buyer point of view. Let’s take a lot at this from Nikon’s side.

            At a time when the market is struggling, why put in so much resources, take so much risk, for something that is uncertain, unproven, with the competition having some years head-start. Why spent for so much and take so much risk in exchange for something that even if successful, will at best not yield a substantial return for many years?

            If Nikon already has a mirrorless F-mount that meets the needs of most F-mount users coupled with all the strength of its F-mount lens library, would the benefit of preventing a few leakers really justify spending so much and taking so much risk as to reverse the release sequence of releasing a mirrorless Nikon with a new mount before releasing a mirrorless F-mount Nikon? I think not.

            • Because that is the future. And one shouldn’t ignore future needs. That’s what R&D is for.

        • pjpo

          I could see a Df (Digital FM) replacement that is even more like a Nikon FM. (even better would be a squared rangefinder style like the Nikon SP that keeps your nose from hitting the rear screen) It could still use the F-mount just like the ugly Pentax K-01 used SLR lenses. We already see in the Sony A7 that AF lenses end up being no smaller than SLR lenses when mounted. Do this and I might be tempted to sell my A7rII. Just give it full sized batteries.

      • ITN

        There is no recall on D5, D4s, D4, D3s, D3X, D3, D700, D610, Df etc. all of them are full frame Nikons. There are plenty of recalled DX cameras e.g. D70, D2H which suffered catastrophic failures, so it has nothing to do with the sensor size whether a product has significant bugs. It just happens.

        • Thom Hogan

          Uh, what? The D600 was recalled, the D750 recalled more than once. The D800/D800E had autofocus sensor alignment issues. The D810 needed to go back to Nikon for reprogramming. You seem to have a very selective memory.

          • ITN

            I do not. I was responding to a post which claimed that all Nikon FX bodies have problems that cause a recall. I simply listed examples to the contrary.

            • Thom Hogan

              Sorry. I’m a little under the weather today and trying to catch up fast…I missed that.

      • TheMexican

        Sadly you are correct,
        I had huge plans on the DL18-55 to replace the RX100M2 I used to have (got stolen).

        But now I don’t know what to do. On one hand no compact 1″ camera offers that focal lengths, and on the other hand I don’t wanna go back to Sony as really, user interface sucks.

    • Glen

      100% agree, I have a few k set aside for a new body to replace my D600 and buy the rumored 19 PC-E but I do not want to purchase any of the current full frame bodies as they are all 2+ years old. If the A7R II had dual cards and better battery life I would have already bought one.

    • Early announcing may keep Nikon people in the fold in the short term, but it’s cutting into the company’s reputation and brand in the long term. Maybe Nikon’s situation is so desperate that it has started discounting the future…

      If the delay was (a) unexpected and (b) unavoidable, it is what it is — but as soon as they knew they should have come clean. Even in the shorter term, it will actually have the reverse effect. Should I wait for some indeterminate period for this thing Nikon just announced, or just buy this product XXX announced that’s already shipping?

      • HD10

        I concur that Nikon should come clean. Leaving one’s customer confused and in the dark has never helped any business.

        • Thom Hogan

          At this point I suspect that Nikon’s thinking is this: “2016’s a bust, so let’s make the 100th anniversary year look good.”

          • Stuart Crowther

            Exactly, I started to get the feeling a few months ago that photokina was going to be a fizzer, Nikon is not going to make the playoffs, regroup, rethink, get ready for next season.

      • Thom Hogan

        That’s my fear, that Nikon has gone back to it’s 1990’s thinking for awhile and will accept the camera group contraction. The difference this time is that there’s a viable competitor that will take their place (Sony). And I’m not seeing what thing Nikon is working on that will disrupt that market and change things like the D1 did.

        • Julian

          Sony still suffers from their range of lenses though, so I’m not sure if they are a direct threat.

          • Thom Hogan

            Not really. Look at my recent article on sansmirror. In the range of focal lengths that matter most, we’ve now got many dozens of choices.

            I will say that Sony is making the same mistake Nikon did with crop sensor: not a full lens set. I’m pretty sure the analysis is naive and goes like this: entry level buyers only buy zooms, especially superzooms. Unfortunately, that ignores competition that can wedge into your market by “being photo centric.” Fujifilm is probably the best example of enabling a crop sensor competitor so far, and they’re simply going to get stronger until the big boys start paying attention.

    • Good idea unless specs are very good. Otherwise the idea would backfire.

    • TwoStrayCats

      I wonder if its a design flaw in the IC or if its a subcontractor QC issue?

    • Wolf33d

      WHO CARES about the DLs? We want a FF mirrorless. What on earth Nikon is doing???? Tired of this. Sony is already on Mk2 and Mk3 coming. Canon just released an expert version of EOS M5 (APSC though but their FF coming this year). WHAT Nikon is doing?

  • Neopulse

    How could there be problems with integrated circuits? Isn’t the Nikon 1 technology been around for years now?

    • HD10

      The delay indicates that the DL is not based on old Nikon 1 tech. Ditto with the new “large sensor” mirrorless.

      • Thom Hogan

        Until we can disassemble a DL, we actually can’t say that. Now it could be that in order to control costs Nikon tried to do something like add a Bluetooth/Wi-Fi asset to the EXPEED chip and messed it up. That’s not what I hear, but I’m hearing about what happened through an intermediary.

    • nwcs

      And that’s why they would want to update the electronics in this one. Why use 5+ year old stuff?

      • Neopulse

        Nono I get, obviously not 5+ year old tech, what I’m getting at is that already there is an R&D section of the Nikon 1 system in existence. It’s not like they just started creating their first mirrorless with the 1″ sensor. They have past models that would help guide them to bettering rather than starting something completely fresh.

        • nwcs

          Maybe but they could have also stopped working on that when the V3 was designed. Or it was just something that snuck in late in the IC development cycle that was overlooked.

          • Neopulse

            Both valid points. The V3 warranted an update awhile back also which does add more sense. Just hope people get what they want. Although I hope Fuji releases soon their rumored MF system. Would wreck house at Photokina.

    • Merv S

      The problem could be at the manufacturing level. R&D may have created an excellent and working circuit for small numbers of cameras, but getting it scaled up for mass production is completely different.

      • Neopulse

        You also make a good point. It’s more problematic when being done for mass production. I feel like lately Nikon has been plagued by every new generation of camera, something that messes it up.

    • AYWY

      J4 only gives a laughable 4K/15. If they want 4K/30 minimum, they need a new chipset that can process 2x the amount of data. The need to include snapbridge also means some additional components that are theoretically “always on” and have to play well with everything else in a tiny package.

      • Neopulse

        I agree, 4k needs to be better and Snapbridge is a must I agree. It would make sense in such a small mirrorless. Would still blow away IQ on cellphones any day.

  • doge


  • It’s better they delay it and sort it out. I’m already disappointed with blowing up batteries from a phone I got excited for.

  • sickheadache

    Dear Nikon, Did anyone close to the President of Nikon, Akihiro Nikon, ask Sigma, how their Three Fixed Lens Fair’d in the sales department?

    I still don’t get it, with fixed lenses, you do truly limit the photographers abilities, and why not have just one excellent camera with a 18-80mm ..and save the time and money.

    • Those that I know that rave about them, including a couple of well known landscape pros, had all three and rather than changed lenses, they would just grab the appropriate camera for whatever they were shooting. But from a sales perspective, they did not do well which is why there is an interchangeable lens one now.

      • nwcs

        Well, to be fair, the Quattros and Merrills were in interchangeable DSLRs as well (at too high a price). So this is the first mirrorless interchangeable for them. The Qs and Ms definitely have a devoted, albeit small, following.

      • sickheadache

        Visible noise at the lowest speeds, ..and Sigma trying to be Sigma, it failed to catch on, being the oddball of oddball cameras. Poor Battery Life, strange design, hard to hold, and zero screen in back…to help the Photogrphers out.

    • Thom Hogan

      I’m not sure you can compare here. The Sigma’s had terrible battery life, were useful almost solely at or near base ISO, were slow operating cameras with slow autofocus systems, and more.

      There are plenty of ways to fail at entering a market. Sigma picked one, Nikon is picking another ;~).

  • MiK Images

    I’m guessing that the problem is caused by IC overheating. DLs will have “true” 4K @30 fps. But even N1 J5 with 4K@15 fps has suffered from this problem.

  • Carlo

    I do not understand all this noise around this delay. If you really need this kind of camera now just buy a competitor camera. If you leave Nikon because of this delay I bet you already changed brand before.

    • Ineedmy Bobo

      The noise is simply sadness about Nikon’s inability to bring stuff to market promptly. As for the DL18-50, this is a unique offering that many of us were excited for–the first ever wide-angle zoom on a one-piece point-and-shoot camera. There is no competitor camera. But after 9 months of announcement and delays, I’ve lost most of my excitement about it.

      • Exactly. Nobody has anything that competes with the DL18-50, and that would be an extremely useful range for most people. For me it would eliminate the need for a wide angle lens.

      • Shutterbug

        As long as there remains no competition, it should (hopefully) still be exciting when they do end up releasing it.

    • Mr_Miyagi

      So you’re saying that there’s nothing special about the Nikon brand and they should just cancel the entire line? Sorry, while I’m not exclusively a Nikon shooter, I give Nikon the props they are due when it comes to autofocus and color. I shoot Sony and Panasonic as well as Nikon, and like all three for different reasons, but when it comes to nailing the focus and reproducing the colors of the scene, I easily rank Nikon #1.

      • Carlo

        Don’t get me wrong … I love Nikon cameras
        and have been using them for the past 25 years. But when it’s related to business, if Nikon does not have the material I need… I do not mind picking
        other brands and getting the job done. When it is for me … I am not so impatient about getting new material.

    • Shutterbug

      There is nothing that comes close to the DL on the market at the moment, particularly in the AF and responsiveness department. It’s not as simple as just buying the same formula with another brand on it. Nor is there a competitor with an 18mm lens. Unfortunately the DL isn’t on the market either though haha.

  • Mato34

    Sorry, but I don’t see the point of this post, admin. As it says in that mail, that was “indicated in our press release on April 20”, and I remember those were the reasons I read and they gave us time ago.

    There is nothing new here.

  • br0xibear

    At least they caught the issue before any cameras went out, look at the recall chaos Samsung are in the middle of with their Note 7.
    Things could have been worse, it’s only a camera.


    Being a skeptic, I have to question whether the person at Nikon tech support (I assume in the USA) who wrote this response necessarily knows what is happening at Nikon head office and their R&D programs.

    • nwcs

      If that is the case I’m sure they would be disciplined for doing it. It puts Nikon in a bad light and they wouldn’t want a tech going off-script like that. I’m sure the tech knows that, though.

      • Boris Cheung

        We should check out whether the production lines in thai get mistakes again.

    • It seems so far off of a typical Nikon script (or any Japanese company actually) that it rings true – “truth is stranger than fiction because fiction has to make sense” 🙂

  • Would that be problems rather than “issues”? Issues are for debating, problems for fixing.

  • Aldo

    Okay… guess they are trying to avoid sony’s mistakes (overheat, shutoff).

    • I once made my J4 overheat, two weeks ago. This was after shooting about 40 video clips, 300-400 jpg+raw and in a dive case in 100 degree weather and 94 degree water. All in a very short period of time. It said overheat and then came right back after turning it off for just a half a minute.
      I trust Nikon is doing their best to deliver consistent performance to us – my DXXX bodies don’t skip a beat in strong sunlight and heat.

      Sony on the other hand seems to offer equipment that wildly varies in performance – I wouldn’t expect one of their $10k+ cine cameras and broadcast cameras to do this, but I wouldn’t be at all surprised to see a Sony full or aps-c camera do that. It seems the a6300 suffers from this – an effect of making such a compact body full of so many features?

      The D500 is proving adept at handling lots of 4k filming in direct sunlight and 106 degree weather, no overheats (yet)despite 30-60 minute back to back sessions.
      Anyone else get overheats with DXXX bodies?

      • Carleton Foxx

        For the past two summers, I’ve managed to overheat my D810 to the point it wouldn’t shoot video. It shot stills fine, but no video. The first time it was down for about an hour. The second time it was down for more than 24. Both times it was my fault, I left the camera in a hot car overnight in my garage at home. it was also humid.

      • Boris Cheung

        No, my d810 havs never overheated, it works perfectly at all seasons.

    • Boris Cheung

      Plus short life

  • Ok, I guess I am blind – I specifically checked that post before publishing and for some reason did not see it. You are correct, sorry about that.

    • Mato34

      Nothing to worry about admin 🙂

      Sorry for my 3 same posts in disqus…

  • geozec

    So what they are saying is that they weren’t lying in their statement a few months back and that it’s still valid.
    I don’t get why this is news.
    FWIW an earthquake can delay a product for many months, I can see that, but the fact that they are still having problems with the circuitry of a camera that they handed out to testimonials 9-10 months back is beyond embarassing.

  • Captain Megaton

    This is what Nikon publicly said in April. Did everyone collectively just forget?

  • tonkotsu

    “As indicated in our press release on April 20”
    press release on April 20
    April 20

    • Boris Cheung

      Put that shit off the web

  • I just bought a gx85. Been shooting video with it, a sony rx100 and the d5500. Its hard to cut it all together, the D5500 footage is so mushy. I really am fed up with using a bunch of cameras when I know the A7r2 will do 95% of what I need the D800 to do in terms of stills and be better than my motley collection of video cheapies. I do not want an A7r2, I’m not a sony fan, but its increasingly looking like the sensible thing to do. I agree that nikon need to give us some teasers, like RED did and do of their mirrorless system, or I’ll have a sony by christmas (and then inevitably will start getting native glass).

    • Carleton Foxx

      OK, $64,000 question: why not just buy a large-sensor video camera like a C100 or an FS700? I’m asking because I’m in the same boat as you; I shoot video and was hoping that the DL18-50 would pull it out for us..

      • Kyle

        Interesting on mushy video from the D5500.

        I film weddings and use a D7200 and D750 as my mains.

        I also use a Panasonic gh4, Sony cx900, and Nikon v1. My other guys use a a7s and a6300. It’s a little challenging to match them all but you can get them close.

        You have to adjust WB and also tint settings. (Green or magenta). Then add some orange to the Sony to get them to match Nikon. Shoot neutral or flat makes a huge impact and easier to match in post.

        See below for one I just finished yesterday. This also uses dji Osmo and phantom 4 footage.

      • Would love to, but I shoot on a gimbal so whatever I shoot needs to be compact. I’d need a fs700 plus a smaller gimbal cam. Anyway reading up on a7r2 forgot it lacks a stop of dynamic range on the Nikon. Left me hoping the d900 will be small!

    • Buy a D500….been shooting a lot of 4k with it, definitely not mushy. Then when the D810 replacement that shoots 4k comes along, sell-n-swap. I will.

  • Boris Cheung


  • Boris Cheung

    Ok, all are clear now! DLs faulty circuitries reveal that nikon is facing technical bottlenecks.

    Before displaying prototypes in Spring 2016, nikon should resolve all technical discrepancies. And after that display, parametric adjustments of firmwares should be taken according to testers’ opinions.

    In facts, nikon does launch firmware updates for its newly issued cameras, see the D500. This implies that the design teams did not design and test their prototypes thoroughly and in a systemic and logical ways. Also, marketing teams are fallen asleep for years because they did not reflect competitors’ trends and counter-propose leading trends to nikon’s management.

    Nikon will surely be the follower of Motorola mobile phone and Olympus digital cameras, providing that nikon’s workteams are keeping asleep and nikon’s management is keeping unconscious.

  • Boris Cheung

    That’s a reason for such big and heavy cameras and lenses – elderly manager with old technology and mindset.

  • Zenettii

    Suprised Nikon didn’t just release it anyway, then deny all knowledge that a problem exists, this is their usual tactic!

    Nikon never learn from their mistakes.

    • On the contrary, they’re avoiding making the same mistake right now apparently.

  • luca

    RIP DL series! Welcome APS mirrorless! Welcome APS Nikkor F lenses for both mirrorless and reflex!

  • The pictures are not clickbait… They are real.

  • Carleton Foxx

    Beautiful. And very nice white balance consistency. That bride is lucky to have picked you.

  • Lcky

    I hope they never release these.

    FX Line / DX Line / Compacts.

    Add a high end and mid end mirror less option – FXm / DXm.


    FX / DX Lenses.


    + Nikon.

    • NO. Despite what you might think about sensor size, this is a perfect balance for “compact” camera buyers who are looking for something better than what a cell phone can offer, something nearly capable of professional results, and fully within the ergonomic experience of professional gear.

      If anything, what they ought to do is kill the ILC line that uses this sensor size, since these three DL cameras could singlehandedly obsolete the entire Nikon 1-series if done correctly.

      • Lcky

        I’ll agree that there is a place for this model type / form, what I mean is Nikon should ‘focus’ on great, forward moving products that we actually want. If Canikon can’t do it, someone else will.

        • Indeed, Nikon desperately needs to develop mirrorless systems for both FX and DX. But their current FX and DX DSLR lineups are still incredible, in a time when (believe it or not) DSLRs are still sold in greater volume by far.

          Also, even Sony which does have decent mirrorless systems for both APS-C and Full-Frame, also has a handful of killer compact cameras that use this same sensor format, (probably even the same sensor, at its foundation!) …and those lineups are extremely popular. Much more popular than, say, if Sony had tried to develop an ILC system around that (2.7X crop) sensor size LOL. 😉

  • Sounds like Nikon is doing the right thing, and trying *not* to release a seriously flawed camera.

    This is just how SLOW Nikon works when they’re trying to do things right the first time. We complained about Nikon’s speed 10-15 years ago, and whined until they gave us what we wanted, (products fast to market) …but now it turns out that’s not what we wanted. Meanwhile, Sony gets praise heaped upon them for rushing to market with similarly junky half-finished concepts, mk2 versions of cameras that really make their mk1 predecessors look like they should have never been made in the first place… Oh well… Glad I have no brand loyalty, just personal preference for ergonomics and interface…

  • sickheadache

    Just like Canon, who just released a over-priced, non 4K Old, Oldsmobile…are slow to the Mirrorless Camera Game. Talking about Full Frame, high MP beyond 50mp and 4-6-8K. Two XQD Card Slots. Now mind you all, Those Sony boys have had their products out, since 2014…so mind u all…Sony was probably working on all of this since 2012. As we see today, Canon still produced a lackluster of nothingness, and where is my Nikon?

    It seems the Asian Camera Guys…need to move they’re operations…to the US…desert southwest…away from twisters, floods, earthquakes, Mothra, and all other batshit crazy things in Japan.

  • Joey

    Thank goodness for the new Panasonic LX10.

    Nikon, back to the drawing board yet again.

  • Considering the point on the learning curve that most companies like Nikon are on, it’s surprising that they are having a year-long issue. You wonder who is making it for them.

  • Sean Parchem

    I waited as long as I could for the DL. I decided to purchase a “pocketable” travel camera for a family vacation so I didn’t have to take/lug my d800 across the pond. I ended up purchasing the Sony rx100 iii. Hate the menu, love the form factor, focusing, and the DR is not bad for a 1″ sensor. But man, I wish nikon would do an update of their coolpix A. With Better focusing to start. I let my daughter use the A on the same vacation and we took some of the same photos. Wow, the photos are just amazing even SOC (I realize the sensor sizes are quite different). I really wish Nikon could get their act together. I may be done with them all together

    • You can buy “like new” copies on eBay for $350.

    • Tieu Ngao

      I agree that the Coolpix A can be improved to become a great compact camera. The PQ is much better than any 1″ sensor cam.

      • I agree as well, but then again – this had to be done a while back.

  • Hendrik

    I have another idea: Nikon could bring a mirrorless xx-mount camera with the possibility of mounting cx-mount and f-mount with a adapter. This would make the system comptete.
    But with the cx lens in front of a much bigger sensor would be a heavy crop with not too many pixels left…

    • Ineedmy Bobo

      Eh…. no. Nobody wants to mount CX lenses on anything new. Nikon dropped the ball on making any really interesting lenses for the Nikon 1 system, hence its failure.

    • DLynch

      I say they stop the bleeding and stop all their low end camera production. The N series has been a bust. With phone cameras and a very competitive market it’s not worth the pennies.

      • MonkeySpanner

        The 1 system could have been fantastic, they just never knew who their customer was.

  • maxx

    Well, within just a week to Photokina and Nikon brings just a DL error… not to bad… :-((

    • tap0

      This reason for the delay was announced in April 20th of this year. Not sure why this is news now. I suspect that Nikon has either nothing to show or has plugged all leaks and this site needs some eyeballs. So this becomes hot news now.

      • DLynch

        Delay is five months and a very good reason to be news worthy in my opinion. The N1 V3 was a big flop and previous versions didn’t kill it either. So it looks like the DL series was suppose to be the N1’s replacements. We see how this is going. By the time (and if) they release these the technology is going to be a year or more older. No thanks.

  • Davidvictormeldrew Idontbeliev

    Probably means either the DL range is scrapped (Nikon losing Face) or morphed into something better – a DL range and a Mirrorless F Mount Camera or one modelled on the Canon EOS M series ( a good range in time)

    If nothing turns out from Nikon in Feb 2017 – may repurchase the Sony RX100 MK 4 to replace my broken ( my fault dropped it) RX 100 Mk 1

  • tomskyphoto

    I don’t really care for the DL24-500 or DL24-85, although the latter’s longer telephoto end is much nicer than the ubiquitious 70 equiv. of the competition; there are good 1″ sensor equipped alternatives available. But the non-appearance of the DL18-50 is disappointing.

    Quite often my compact, lightweight one body-one lens travel setup carries a 16-35 or 18-35 small wide angle zoom as its focal lengths cover everything from wide land- and cityscapes to street photography. Sometimes I additionally throw in a compact 50/1.8 for those low light shots and a bit more FL.

    The DL18-50 would have a brilliant complement with essentially the same capabilities including the 50 mm FL for those occasions where one would like to have an even more compact setup such as hiking or cycling. And there is simply nothing else available that is similar to the DL18-50. Maybe a Panasonic GM5 for my Oly 9-18 would be about as close as it can get when it comes to FL and size. But that 9-18 is relatively slow and not optically the greatest as it somewhat trades off performance for size reduction.

  • Fujimoto

    Sony will send more wine and cigars.

  • Elky Asno

    Welp, that settles it. Buying an LX100 instead.

  • Leslie Hoerwinkle

    I’ll stick with my D100.

  • Perq Elest

    DL18-50 is needed! I hope Nikon can add an built in flash to be used when the background is too bright and faces becomes dark/black. Like on the beach with beautiful views that must be correct and people in foreground 3m away

    Add on flash occupy the possibity for the viewfinder needed in sunny weather. I have to manage with my Canon G5X only.

  • Back to top