New Yahoo Japan article about Nikon


Yesterday Yahoo Japan published an article about Nikon. The Google translation is hard to understand, but here are the main points:

  • The Nikon D850 was described to have "high-speed continuous shooting"
  • Nikon is still second in the camera industry
  • "Action cameras shooting 360 degrees have poor reputation for connectivity with smartphones and have not reached half of the plan."
  • Camera and other imaging businesses accounted for more than half of Nikon's sales
  • Senior Managing Executive Officer Mr. Yoshihiro Kiyoshi said: "Strengthen middle / high-end single lens reflex, replacement lens and a mirrorless camera that can make use of brand power."
  • The article also mentions the previous quote from Nikon's President Kazuo Ushida on the upcoming mirrorless camera: "Generate mirrorless camera that differs from other companies in terms of performance in generations grew up on smart phones. I would like to overwhelm the performance of the lens by making use of industrial lens technology, while also requiring playfulness"
This entry was posted in Nikon D850, Nikon KeyMission and tagged , . Bookmark the permalink. Trackbacks are closed, but you can post a comment.
  • Mehdi R

    high-speed continuous shooting 🙂

    • Yes, I did see this translation clearly 🙂

    • Andrew

      I am in agreement on this one about a dual processor design. The reason is simple, the Nikon D5 is full frame and has a 20.8 MP image sensor at 12 fps. The D850 has a 46 MP full frame sensor and a rumored frame rate of 10 fps.

      The D5 introduced a new EXPEED 5 image processor that is 30% faster than the previous generation. It is unlikely that a new EXPEED 6 processor will be released this soon with a major performance boost. So a dual processor design is quite likely.

      • NikonFanboy

        Expeed 6 is already released. DL cameras which was made redundant had been designed with it. Anything could be possible.

      • 20.8MP x 12 fps = 249.6 MP/s (250)
        46.0MP x 10 fps = 460 MP/s.

        That’s 84% more. Essentially double. So the only option is an Expeed 7 (?) with double the performance of Expeed 5 or dual processors on an architecture / bus that is nearly 100% efficient.

        • ITN

          A99 II does 42MP at 12fps so 46MP at 10fps should have similar requirements on the processing. I.e. par for the course.

          • I did not know that. So, par for the course, then.

          • Further to that, the Expeed 6A which was slated for the DL was capable of 20fps at 20.8MP.

            In any event, processing photographs is highly parallelizable so they can just make a chip with more cores on it.

            • Thom Hogan

              Bingo.

        • Thom Hogan

          You’re making an assumption that Expeed was already maxed out with the D5.

          • True

          • waterengineer

            right – you beat me to the point you made.

      • koenshaku

        While the processor is helpful in crunching math and communicating into to all other components of the camera live view, button responses etc at high speeds etc. I think the EXPEED 5 is fast enough to processor 20fps personally, but we may see an EXSPEED 5+ that may be needed to allow for throughput to faster member if necessary. The bottlenecks come from in with how fast you can flip your mirror reliably and how fast and large your cache memory is for holding all that information while it is being stored to your cards.

        There are plenty of mirrorless cameras with lesser processors that can hit much higher framerates for this reason alone, only to be met with buffer overflows and slow FPS after a couple burst from the cache speed and size. Even Samsung NX shot 15fps at 24mp which was good for a burst or two before crapping out.

    • Davo

      Is EXPEED even the bottleneck? I’m not so sure this is the limiting factor to go 10+ FPS @46MP.

      • David Uglava

        Maybe they could fit in Dual Chip…That would be amazing.

      • Thom Hogan

        The two bottlenecks are at the two ends: getting data off the sensor itself, and getting data out of DRAM onto cards. I don’t think that still image processing is a bottleneck. Moreover, you could solve that with more ARM cores in Expeed.

        • Proto

          real bottleneck is BRAIN that cannot compose a good photo or feel the moment

    • Thom Hogan

      One.

  • Coffee

    Isn’t Fiju second based on sales now, or did Nikon really recover enough from last year?

    • Sandy Bartlett

      Not even close. Fourth at best.

    • Fuji was never 2nd, they are not even 3rd – Sony is.

    • Richard Haw

      while Fuji is doing great as what the impression goes, it is lower in the totem pole.

    • TwoMetreBill

      As a Fuji shooter and fan, one could wish but at best they are in 6th place behind: Canon, Nikon, Sony, Panasonic, Olympus and then maybe Fuji. There is a good chance that Nikon and Sony will switch places this year. This assumes that one is prejudiced against smartphones as cameras which would push all the above into insignificance.

      • Sony and Nikon will not switch places this year – in 2-3 years maybe if Nikon continues to sleep. I agree that Fuji should be at the #3 spot instead of Sony.

        • Richard Haw

          i know that i am going to get a lot of flak for this. at least here, Fuji is selling well when a new camera is launched but most shops do not make repeat orders after that. this is of course not true in certain territories but this is whats going on here in Japan. Fuji is not really prominent here. Canon and Sony are.

        • EcoR1

          You might want to read the new interview in Image Resource.

          “ I’m comfortable saying that Sony is now the #2 company in the interchangeable-lens camera business, based on the overall dollar (or Yen?) value of their sales.”

          • I already did:
            https://photorumors.com/2017/08/10/sony-self-claims-world-wide-2-spot-for-interchangeable-lens-cameras-still-committed-to-aps-c/
            This data is coming from Sony, not from a third party. I don’t believe or trust Sony. You opinion may vary, so take it easy.

          • m35g35

            If Sony is no. 2 I would see a lot more of them when out shooting with other photogs. I see a lot of Canon and Nikon. Third (far behind) a few Sony’s and a few Fuji’s. Sometimes Panasonic and Olympus. Of course this is not a scientific study, just observation.

          • lol:

            Correction, 5:36PM: The note above originally claimed Sony was #2 in overall ILC sales, when in fact they are only planning to claim they are #2 in full-frame cameras YTD. Sony clarified the statement on their position in the market and the article has been updated as such.

    • Fly Moon

      @disqus_XOFypRVmeD:disqus
      You need more coffee 😉

    • Thom Hogan

      Sales of what? ILC cameras? Not even close. Canon #1, Nikon #2, Sony #3, and probably Olympus #4. Fujifilm would be #5 or #6.

  • Claude Mayonnaise

    The word playfulness sure sounds like a bad adjective for a highly anticipated Nikon mirrorless.

    • Well, I did not include the last sentence where they talk about girls using cameras…

      • Thom Hogan

        Yeah. The whole quote reminded me of what Nikon was saying when the introduced the Nikon 1. That’s disturbing.

      • Claude Mayonnaise

        Yikes….

    • Julian

      That was the one part of the article the really unnerved me, can anyone remind me of the last successful playful Nikon product?

      • silmasan

        Not a product, but their recent “Oz” video should scare you a little bit. :-p

        • XXTwnz

          That video didn’t scare me….. it terrified me that this company thought that should be shown to anyone outside Nikon’s employee cafeteria.

    • PhilK

      I view it more as an uncomfy way of saying the camera is “fun to use”.

      Nikon may not be the most ‘playful’ camera maker around, but it wouldn’t be that difficult to figure out how to change that – eg by bringing in some new/young people/ideas instead of just asking the usual old decrepit management guys what they think is ‘fun’. (Which at Nikon seems to translate to “cute, brightly colored stuff that the wimminz seem to like”)

      • Thom Hogan

        Still, the same question applies: what was the last Nikon camera that was “fun to use”?

        • We find our Nikon Dslrs fun to use. All of them.

        • pami

          The FM2 😉

        • mikeswitz

          Coolpix A

          • CaMeRa QuEsT

            I think the Ricoh GR beat it in all accounts, but if Nikon had made a Coolpix B addressing all of the A’s shortcomings while keeping their sales volume expectations more realistic (it was, after all, a niche product, but they tried to move mass consumer volumes of it) it would have given Nikon a good halo product to attack the same market they had with the Ti twins, which was their original intention after all, but the engineering effort they put in it was way short of what they did with the Ti twins. Maybe it was doomed from the moment they decided to slap the Coolpix moniker on it.

            • mikeswitz

              All of that may or may not be true. But I was answering Thom Hogans question; what was the last Nikon camera that was “fun to use”?. Especially since I only paid $350 for a new, in the box, untouched, Coolpix A. It is indeed fun to use.

            • CaMeRa QuEsT

              Nikon originally wanted for you to pay $1100 for it, plus $450 if you wanted the OVF. Guess there were not many people out there who felt it was a fun camera at those lofty original MSRPs. But Nikon did sell a lot of Tis for even higher prices (corrected for inflation) for much longer, and they’re still sought after almost 3 decades on. Nikon did sweat out the details on the Ti twins, they didn’t with the Coolpix A, thus they got very different faiths in basically the same market. I for one didn’t feel it was worth paying more than a Canon M coupled with a 22mm, which was also on fire sale at the same time as the Coopix A ($275 vs. $300). Both cameras caused lots of tears to both their companies, but Canon persisted with their M line and now they’re top sellers, while Nikon just bailed and now they have to start all over again to try to catch not only Canon but basically all of the other mirrorless players.

        • CaMeRa QuEsT

          The Ti twins. Yes, that was a very long time ago and I still can’t afford one now.

    • ITN

      I believe this refers to the lenses, that lenses should not just be like industrial lenses that copy the subject’s features, but to add something special, a playful rendering of the subject.

      • Thom Hogan

        Yes, that could be what they mean. They used a line like that on me when I was there in 2010. They also provided an example of an upcoming model that would do that. That model bombed, as I predicted it would.

        Nikon seems a bit hung up on the original Instagram thing, where you took images and then modified them with filters. The problem with that is you’re trying to develop into something that is very faddish. By the time you have your equivalent, the fad has moved on. And I don’t think Nikon has any history of being the one to start fads.

        • ITN

          I’m not talking about toys or fads. I believe Nikon always consider aesthetics of the image rather than looking at reproduction of detail as an objective in itself. The idea is to make lenses which go beyond reproduction and make a photograph which has a beauty of its own apart from the subject’s beauty. Canon also have stated that they try to tweak lenses into that direction. I think this is what is meant by playfulness, i.e. play with the light, to create a play of light which is artistic in its own right. It can be a subtle thing that many people don’t realize exists at all. I don’t think it’s a fad at all.

    • Eric

      Interesting use of words, as the word “playfulness” and reference to generations growing up in the smartphone era certainly speak against Nikon producing a heavy brick. So what to make of all this? My take #1: Nikon will continue to generate the D5/D850 line, but may introduce a parallel line of mirrorless cameras distinct and separate from these. My take #2: that the D750 replacement is the best placed in terms of size and function to become the new Nikon mirrorless line while still using the existing line of Nikon lenses. Whatever Nikon does, there will surely be a “transition era” for the company so they can manage the transition to mirrorless in total or in just a few of their products.

  • TwoStrayCats

    I’m very playful. Lay it on me.

  • Adam Brown

    I don’t like all the quotes about mirrorless being “playful.”
    It suggests to me, they don’t intend on a serious mirrorless for pros.
    To me, it should be “playful” like the d850 is playful! A beast of IQ and performance.
    I fear they want to relegate mirrorless just to the smart phone crowd.

    • Well they said it will be different from what other companies are doing, whatever that means.

      • Eric Calabros

        It should “sell” differently. we talk about mirrorless replacing DSLR, but look at Fuji-Oly-Pany sales combined.. it’s almost stalled. Despite that these three brands make the coolest ILCs in the market in terms of tech features and user friendliness, with complete lens system.

        • Thom Hogan

          And then look at the Canon mirrorless sales: wicked growth, not stalled at all, and it’s replacing some of Canon’s low-end DSLR sales and keeping the low-end ILC sales for Canon from collapsing, as Nikon’s are.

      • Jacques Conradie

        Yes, other mirrorless companies are not targeting the smartphone crowd – they are obviously more serious about mirrorless than Nikon

      • Max

        And to overwhelm the lens lol.

        • Semaphore

          That should’ve been, “Utilise industrial lens technology to overwhelm competitors (in terms of lens performance).”

          • PhilK

            Thing is, I doubt that lens performance is something that either will truly set apart a new Nikon MILC camera from the competition, nor something that Nikon usually has a problem with.

            The real issue, seems to me, is how out of touch Nikon tends to be on pop culture and technology trends, including software, mobile device integration, internet integration, social media integration, interface/IO standards, video/electronic media trends and standards, etc etc.

            • Semaphore

              They’re not really out of touch about it – for example they’ve been pushing mobile integration for years. They’re just really incompetent at it.

            • PhilK

              I don’t know about this “push for mobile integration”, since they seem to be behind almost the whole industry in that regard.

            • Thom Hogan

              No. They were first with Eye-Fi support, early with Wi-Fi support, first with Ethernet on the big camera. At least compared to other camera companies. But they still don’t get that it isn’t just the hardware that’s the issue. They, like everyone, are woeful at software integration.

            • PhilK

              Re: “ethernet on a big camera”, Canon EOS 1D X had that first and did it right (gigabit ethernet), whereas the D4 has a stupid 100Mbps interface which has a maximum data transfer rate less than 1/3 the speed of USB 2.0.

              I don’t call that very useful, outside of perhaps some tethered applications where you don’t care how long it takes to transfer data. It took them 2 years to fix that in the D4s.

              I view EyeFi as a hack from a single vendor for products that should have had the feature built into their own hardware.

              Of course we agree about Nikon’s software problems. But it goes beyond just software per-se. Nikon most of the time acts like they are in a cave when it comes to staying current with technology trends in general, outside of things necessary inside a camera body to create image files on a storage card.

            • Thom Hogan

              Agreed. As good as Nikkor lenses are, we’re in a world of excellent lenses these days.

              I do wonder if things like PF are what they mean. A DX mirrorless with PF in the big lenses could be wickedly small in comparison to others. It’s where the Fujifilm and Sony advantages start to go away compared to DSLRs (f/2.8 zooms, telephoto zooms, long telephoto).

            • Ivanku

              I’ve read no rumors of upcoming PF lenses, and Canon seems to have only one DO lens in their lineup (though they’ve had the technology for well over a decade) and only one additional DO in the pipeline. Do you think that Nikon is going to double down on PF tech, or was the 300mm a one-off?

            • Thom Hogan

              Wish I knew. There’s absolutely room for more PF lenses, and especially if we’re going to start yet another lens line.

            • Maybe PF lenses have limited application because their bad reproduction of point sources?

            • Ivanku

              I don’t think it’s a problem that’s encountered that frequently in everyday shooting. Canon’s current, second generation DO lens seems to have almost entirely resolved that issue as well

      • Adam Brown

        That’s a bit scary. If Sony, Fuji and Canon are basically doing it the “right” way… doing it “different” would be the “wrong” way.

        Their concern should be making it “good,” not making it “different.”

        It doesn’t need to be different. If they simply built a Sony a7rii or a Canon m5 that was fully compatible with F-mount lenses, it would sell massively to Nikon lens owners.

        • ITN

          Copying existing products by others won’t lead to a profitable business. If there are two identical products on the market, the cheaper one wins the sale so there will be a price war and no money is possible to make after the price war because the price has been cut so low. What Nikon needs to do to succeed in mirrorless is make unique products which are different from what is already available on the market. That way they can carve their own niche and charge a reasonable profit.

          • Adam Brown

            Nonsense— they copy each other and try to one up each other, constantly.
            They all try to give the best image quality, performance, autofocus.
            Does any successful camera maker say, “we will let the others concentrate on auto focus systems… we want to be different”

            When Nikon first introduced dSLR video, did the rivals copy it or go different? When Minolta went autofocus, did Canon and Nikon stick to manual focus in order to be different? When Nikon went to 36mp with the d800, did the rivals decide to ignore high resolution to be different?
            Is there a successful ILC camera that doesn’t have PASM modes?

            While each brand may have a few unique fine tuned differences, they are all more alike than different.
            I can pick up a Fuji, Sony, Canon or Nikon — within a few seconds, I’d figure out the basic operation and I’d be able to capture nearly identical images.

            They are alike — because it’s a question of what Works.
            Just like all cars have 4 wheels.

            As they figure out what works, the products actually converge.

            The Sony NEX line was quite different– and it has converged into being very dSLR like.
            The Canon mirrorless has become more successful as it has evolved into something more similar to the competition.
            Look at a Canon Rebel and a Nikon d5500… they are 95% similar.

            • ITN

              Nikon’s and Canon’s approach to autofocus was very different. Canon went with in-lens motors (which was also Nikon’s original solution in previous prototypes and products) but Nikon chose to implement in-camera motors and use the camera’s motor for the majority of lenses in the beginning (as did Pentax and Minolta). In-lens motors gave better performance while in-camera motors allowed the lenses to be smaller. Canon won out in this competition even though they abandoned support of older lenses but Nikon maintained some market share nevertheless. With DSLRs, both brands chose to support existing lenses. They had existing customers so the solutions initially didn’t have to be all that different (since each brand had existing users who could just plug in the digital camera in place of a film camera). Also the market was rapidly growing with digital so there was plenty of customers for both brands. However, mirrorless is different because you need new lenses for it, in practice, to get competitive AF, so the existing product line is a liability, not an asset. This is why those manufacturers who failed in the DSLR market were the ones to bring out mirrorless: they couldn’t compete successfully with Nikon and Canon in DSLRs so they had to make a different type of camera: the mirrorless ILC, and in this field for many years they couldn’t make a profit (because too many had a similar product: Olympus, Panasonic, Fuji, Sony etc.). The mirrorless field is far too crowded even without Nikon and so in order to make it successfully in that market they have to come up with a different kind of a product. Otherwise customers will just choose the established players instead of the newcomer. The fact that the camera market is overall shrinking and most mirrorless cameras are made at a loss mean that it is even harder for a newcomer to step in.

            • Adam Brown

              “Nikon’s and Canon’s approach to autofocus was very different. Canon went with in-lens motors (which was also Nikon’s original solution in previous prototypes and products) but Nikon chose to implement in-camera motors and use the camera’s motor for the majority of lenses in the beginning (as did Pentax and Minolta).”

              IN THE BEGINNING being the key — And yet, Nikon eventually transitioned to in-lens motors. The technologies converged, as they figured out what was actually best. Being best turned out to be far more important than being different.

              “However, mirrorless is different because you need new lenses for it, in practice, to get competitive AF, so the existing product line is a liability, not an asset. ”

              You don’t “need” new lenses for it. Canon’s mirrorless solution works equally well with their existing lenses. Certainly, the Sony approach 5 years ago… didn’t work with their existing lenses, so they launched a whole new lens line. But as the technology evolved — Go adapt one of their A-mount SSM lenses to the A9, and it works wonderfully.

              Their existing customer base is their BIG ASSET. If they don’t continue to make competitive products for that existing base, then they will be out of business.
              Sony had no big base — They were in a position where it didn’t hurt them to practically start over from scratch. (Especially since the camera division is a small share of their business).
              Nikon cannot afford to start from scratch — especially this late in the game.
              Starting from scratch, with a product that is simply a little “different”.. is a surefire path to bankruptcy.

              “The mirrorless field is far too crowded even without Nikon and so in order to make it successfully in that market they have to come up with a different kind of a product”

              As you said, it is crowded. There is really nothing that can be done that would be so “different” as to make a massive entry into the market.
              But Nikon does have one huge asset if they enter the market with a SERIOUS F-mount camera — The huge asset being a hundred million lenses already out there. Millions of potential customers, who are predisposed to your “best” camera, as opposed to Sony or Canon’s best camera.

            • Luis Augusto Fretes Cuevas

              You’re wrong and Nikon is right. Fuji isn’t really copying everyone else, nor did Panasonic.

              Nikon had an interesting concept (Nikon 1) but butchered it by not targeting it correctly and by lack of ambition.

              If Nikon wants to succeed long term it can’t depend solely on making “yet another ILC”, because the camera market is not as big as it used to be, they need to compete on more than just price and “I’m a Nikon, don’t leave me because selling your lenses is a hassle”.

            • Adam Brown

              Fuji isn’t trying to put out serious cameras with great image quality, autofocus, ergonomics and performance?
              Same with Panasonic??

              Has either of them said, “we don’t care about image quality.. instead we want to be different and concentrate on making the camera bodies really colorful!”
              Has either of them said, “we don’t care about the camera performance.. we want to be different so we are including a music player in our camera!”

              Autofocus, IQ, ergonomics, performance — those are the basic factors on which every camera is judged. No camera maker is being “different” and ignoring those things.

        • BVS

          If the camera market is still shrinking then they may not be doing it the right way either.

          • Adam Brown

            The market is returning to it’s normal size for serious users….. There was an explosion as digital cameras became a fad.
            But within the market, it is Nikon that is most prevalently losing market share. Sony and Canon have been gaining market share.

      • Thom Hogan

        Yes, and the Nikon 1 was different from what the other companies were doing, and marketed as “playful.”

        • Adam Brown

          Sony was the Sony NEX at first.
          But Sony learned a lesson…. they realized that it has potential as a “serious” camera — They re-branded it from NEX to Alpha… they got rid of the over-simplified menus… they started to develop serious lenses, they moved it to full frame…
          They no longer market it as different and playful — They market it as a powerful ‘dSLR-like’ camera.

          From many statements I’ve seen from Nikon…. they still seem to view mirrorless as a non-serious product, just for people who want different and playful.

          • EcoR1

            And still the NEX-cameras were designed for E-mount. The same mount all the Sony Alpha FF-cameras use today. Nikon’s huge mistake was a Nikon 1-mount. It was too small from the start. If they had any intelligence, they choose a bigger mount, even if they started with 1-inch sensors inside. What a waste…

            • Adam Brown

              Actually….. No, not all Sony FF cameras use the E-mount. The Sony A99ii is A-mount… though there are very few customers left.

              The small mount system….. it could have been successful. The small size could have worked for a successful product, if they hadn’t made other mistakes.
              But it would not have replaced the eventual need for large-size mirrorless.

              It often feels they intentionally handicapped the “1” because they didn’t want it to compete with their own dSLR lineup.

              But the “1” could have been a major competitor to the Canon GX and Sony RX lineups.

        • Ric of The LBC

          After all, they came in pink.

    • Andrew

      Think of mirrorless not as a single monolithic product but as a range of products. Nikon’s mirrorless cameras will range from 1-inch image sensors to larger crop sensors (DX) and full frame (FX) sensors. So there is room for playfulness at the low-end and seriousness on the high-end 😉

    • Semaphore

      He’s not saying they want a playful mirror less. What he actually said is, “At the same time (i.e. in addition to ll the mirrorless stuff he was talking about), it’s necessary to maintain a playful heart. For example projects like a DSLR that’s easy for women to use would be good too.”

      • Eamon Hickey

        Thanks for providing a sensible voice here, on this topic. What you’re saying should be obvious to readers, especially with a machine translation, but evidently it isn’t.

      • Thom Hogan

        That kind of thinking will get them no where. Apple didn’t think “we’ll make a phone that’s easy for women.” They thought more generically (“more easy for everyone”).

        • Semaphore

          Yeah probably. But I would think that by “easy for women”, he meant smaller size and weight.

          It seems pretty common for mirrorless to be recommended to women (in Japan) for those reasons, and he specifically says a “SLR” for women. I’d be interested to see how much weight they can shave from full frame.

        • Verco

          It’s also an incredibly sexist and chauvinistic way of thinking. I can just imagine rooms full of men in Japan coming up with “playful” ideas on what women want cameras to do.

      • mhammon

        I tend to think “fun” may have meant “fun to use”–>”easy to use”–>”user friendly”, which echoes Thom’s comment below. By making ILC or MILC camera owners’ experience more user friendly, manufacturers are more likely to appeal to broader customer segments and generate greater user reviews.

        I agree that the “fun” comment startled me, too. I immediately thought of the colored Coolpix and DX bodies and thought of the worst case Nikon marketing proposal– “OMG, please, not a Hello Kitty D850!”

    • Max

      A playful beast.

    • JXVo

      Considering the complex issue of interpreting Japanese characters to English the literal translation ‘playful’ is probably intended to mean ‘fun to use’. The statements make more sense to me when viewed in this context.

      • Adam Brown

        But are they then implying their current dslrs are not “fun” and the new mirrorless will be more focused on “fun”?
        They also say “for the generations that grew up on smart phones”

        It sounds to me like they still just don’t get it. The “1” was supposed to be playful.
        Sounds to me like they think they can win back smart phone photographers with a “playful” mirrorless.
        But here are the key points they don’t seem to appreciate:
        1– smart phone photographers are NEVER coming back. They like their smart phones because they are simple and good enough. No matter how “playful” a mirrorless camera may be, carrying an extra device will never be as simple as just carrying the phone.
        2– Only “serious” photographers will be willing to spend money on “real” cameras. Serious photographers can enjoy some “playfulness” in a camera, but the seriousness outweighs the playfulness. Look at Sony — ~7 years ago, their mirrorless cameras were “playful” and simple, their dslrs were the serious cameras. In following the market demand, their mirrorless evolved into serious cameras. Not simple playful NEX cameras anymore.
        3–the future of serious and professional photography is mirrorless. Even if you don’t think the a9 is quite there, it represents the future. A future where video and still photography basically becomes one. To capture a photograph, you will just take a 1-2 video… which will generate 30 24mp frames per second, and then you will just select the perfect frame as the final photograph. A future where autofocus covers 90%+ of the frame. Where shutters are noiseless.
        And in the end, these cameras will be cheaper to make than a dSLR.

        • Semaphore

          > But are they then implying their current dslrs are not “fun” and the new mirrorless will be more focused on “fun”?

          Except He wasn’t implying anything like that. He literally gave a DSLR project as an example of “playful”. And no, it doesn’t translate to “fun to use”.

          • Adam Brown

            Can be interpreted a couple different ways. But hopefully they see the need in mirrorless to make a serious camera that appeals to pros.

            • Semaphore

              No, it really can’t be, if you read the original Japanese.

            • Adam Brown

              ok, I’ll re-read it after I learn Japanese!

            • Semaphore

              It’s pretty dumb to try argue over how something “can be interpreted” if you can’t even read the language.

        • Thom Hogan

          1. Don’t agree with you. Smartphones are limited in what they can do in the form factor. Will dedicated cameras sell as well as smartphones? No. But a bigger audience shooting photographs should mean a bigger audience for higher capability gear. It has in virtually every other technology in history.
          2. That’s part of #1: as you outgrow the limits of the lowest common denominator device, you get more serious, not more playful. You have specific demands that need to be met.
          3. Absolutely, but not because mirrorless is anything useful to users. As Sony themselves have proven, there’s really nothing you can do with a mirrorless-type design that you can’t do with a DSLR-type design. The real impetus behind mirrorless is reduction of physical costs, and to a smaller degree, easier reduction of size and weight for the user.

          • Adam Brown

            1 — There will always be people who start with something simple, who then want to move to something serious. I started with a polaroid instant camera.But those people who have rejected a dSLR/P&S/Mirrorless in favor of a smart phone — Those people who have already rejected “higher capability”…. aren’t going to come back by making a camera that is a bit more “playful” or simple. Yes, there will be young people who start with a smart phone, who then want something more advanced. But for people who don’t care about “high capability” — they are not coming back.
            2 — That’s exactly the point I’m making. You can’t beat smart phones at the “playful” and “simple” game. Sure, you should try to integrate some things you learn from smart phones (like easy photo sharing). But in the end, you aren’t going to beat smart phones at their own game — You have to stick to your game. A baseball team isn’t going to beat a basketball team at basketball. You have to stick to your own game.
            3– Mirrorless “type”.. dSLR “type”… there isn’t a magical difference. But in the end, getting the mirror out of the way allows or simplifies some advancements. For many features, the dSLR “type” camera has to at least become a mirrorless camera. —
            a- ultimately, it is cheaper
            b- You can’t shoot video with the mirror in the way. Every dSLR already becomes a mirrorless camera in order to shoot video.
            c- On sensor focus systems allow for full frame, frame-wide autofocus coverage… you can’t do that with a mirror and full frame cameras.
            d- Ultimately, removal of the mirror makes it much simpler to shoot at high burst rates.
            e- On sensor focus systems can be inherently more accurate.
            f- Mirror-free operation is quieter, reduces vibration, and can allow black-out free shooting.

            Really… when you talk “mirrorless type” and “dSLR-type” — Canon dSLRs already are fitting in to both types. Take any of the newest Canon cameras — They are effectively decent mirrorless-type cameras when the mirror is up. And they are dSLR-type when the mirror is down. Without becoming mirrorless-“type”– dSLRs wouldn’t be able to shoot video at all.
            We are getting to the point where the mirror itself is simply an anachronism — It was a solution to a problem that no longer exists. (TTL viewfinders) .

        • It looks like they are looking at iphone like interface…

    • ITN

      I believe the comment about playfulness refers to new lenses using industrial lens technology, which will include both mirrorless and DSLR lenses.

      • Semaphore

        It doesn’t. He’s saying, “On the other hand, a playful heart is also necessary.”

    • Nikonland

      I fully agree with you.
      They simply do as usual, a great Nikon camera like Nikon F, Nikon F5, Nikon D3 o Nikon D5. Don’t care if there is a mirror or not inside it !
      A Nikon is the best camera for every Nikon user.
      A camera like Sony, Fujifilm, Canon, Leica or Olympus simply never cannot make.

  • CaMeRa QuEsT

    Google Translate: “You must cut off the negative chain betraying expectations quickly.” Nice. Correct translation: Cut the crap out fast! Keymission: out! SlapBitch: out!

    • My understanding is Nikon could not even reach half of their Keymission expectations. I say cut it out just like the DLs.

      • CaMeRa QuEsT

        This goes on top of that: Google Translate: “The
        challenge is to eliminate resource allocation mistakes that lead to
        development delays caused by DL and action cameras and to eliminate
        deviations from user requirements. “We will fundamentally review the commercialization process, there is no shortcut” Even nicer. Correct translation: We screwed up the D600/D750, took too long to bring a D300s replacement and couldn’t make the DLs to work without melting down because we ran the engineering department thin to develop those crappy Keymission nothingburgers, it’s not going to happen ever again, we won’t let our Nikon fans down anymore!

        • ZoetMB

          That’s not necessarily a good thing. Nikon might have made a lot of serious strategic and product errors in the past year, but they’ve also been criticized for not addressing new markets. So you can’t have it both ways. There was nothing inherently wrong with trying to address the action market, but Nikon got in several years too late.

          And a lot of people seemed to like what the DL cameras were supposed to be. The fact is that to this day, we still don’t really know why Nikon killed them off. Did the manufacturing cost go up so it would have been unprofitable? Did they have a tech issue that they felt they couldn’t resolve? Did they think they weren’t going to sell? Was there a parts supply problem?

          • PhilK

            Yes, Nikon entered the actioncam market too late, but the product quality was apparently not adequate either – something I was afraid of the first time I heard about Keymission.

            Specifically: Nikon has always been clueless on software, and they have to fix that. NOW.

      • Andrew

        Nikon is going through a methodical process of designing, developing, testing, and refining their technologies for the next generation of products. They did that with the Nikon 1 mirrorless cameras in order to develop their mirrorless technologies for their professional series of mirrorless cameras soon to be released and should do the same with the KeyMission cameras/video cam. GoPro proved that there is a market for such products.

        A product like KeyMission must be a critical part of Nikon’s long-term strategy. I see the KeyMission 80 as a potentially fun product that is a small, light, portable, durable, and waterproof camera with 1080p video. Sales expectations notwithstanding, Nikon needs these types of products for the young and old alike. It will be a winning strategy for the future.

        • Eamon Hickey

          I don’t think KeyMission is critical to Nikon’s future success. But I agree that action cameras are a worthwhile market, and simply leaving it because your first set of products did not sell as well as you hoped is not necessarily wise. The camera industry is filled with examples of product lines that were not big hits in their first iteration, but became successful with continued development.

          • Thom Hogan

            The real question for Nikon is this: who is their customer?

            If their customer is someone who shot with a sophisticated film camera and just wants the latest and greatest of that, that has turned out to be a market that is contracting back to it size in the analog world. Contraction is not growth.

            If their customer is someone who grew up with a smartphone and now wants to go beyond the limitations of that device in imaging (still or video), then you need to make the step forward easy for them. SnapBridge was supposed to be that, and it simply isn’t. Not reliable, not complete, not particularly useful, and it doesn’t solve the workflow situation. Even GoPro has started to figure this out, though their solution isn’t much better.

            • Eamon Hickey

              I agree with everything you said (and have said in the past) about the need for Nikon and everyone else to figure out a good solution to what I’ll call camera connectivity (i.e. Snapbridge et. al.)

              I’ll just say that it’s not only Nikon who has failed badly here. I have not yet seen a good, seamless connectivity solution or idea or concept from any camera manufacturer.

            • Thom Hogan

              Oh, absolutely. That’s one reason why Nikon isn’t yet “out of the game”. I’ve argued since 2008 that none of the camera makers are even in the modern image game, they’re still thinking workflow is like it was in the film processing era.

              But the answer isn’t hardware. The answer is software. And that’s where all the camera makers keep failing. They all live under the old “proprietary school” of thinking, but the numbers are against them. That ship left a long time ago. The only ship left is one of an open, supported, evangelized ecosystem that plays nicely with the other ecosystems they need to connect to.

              But even good software companies are having troubles with this. Adobe was certainly best positioned, but is still struggling to get all the pieces in place. And they, too, have that proprietary bug that gets in the way (though technically Lightroom supports plug-ins, and that’s the way some of the best solutions have been done to date).

            • BVS

              Why is that though? Surely it must be easier to find good app developers than engineers for their cameras, no? Plus, it’s not that complex of an app, so I’d be surprised if you need more than a couple of developers to do it.

              Or, is it simply a case of trying to do something that the technology (communication protocols, etc.) weren’t designed to do?

            • Thom Hogan

              No, it’s not that easy in finding really good app developers. But that’s not the whole problem, not even close.

              Making some fundamentals work, e.g. camera talks to app on phone, computer, router, wherever is just automating the “sneaker net” part. It hasn’t really made workflow simpler or more direct. You really need some sort of an API that other developers can use to build the rest of the piping system.

            • Claude Mayonnaise

              Who is their customer?
              That is a very good question in a world where camera customers are decreasing. It may just be that there will never be a customer base as there once was in the past. This could change though. Anything is possible. I don’t think Nikon has ever dealt with a technology so devastating as a smart phone. Throughout history there has always been a huge customer base for taking daily snaps. They now rest outside of their strengths and watch software taking over the world. The markets are decreasing and separate niches are developing before our eyes. Retro seems to be doing well but there is yet to be a software based platform that truly comes close to what the average person is carrying in their back pockets.Samsung comes to mind. There are so many decisions to be made that it must be making their heads spin right now. Everyone is coming down hard on Nikon but sometimes companies just can’t find the answer in the end.

            • Allan

              To me it’s a failure of 1) not having enough young people working for you in the right postions, and 2) not hiring and listening to the right consultants.

            • James Michael

              I don’t see it that way. Camera sales are at an all time high, and have reached astronomical levels. Billions of people have cameras now, and it is likely that more photos were taken just last year than in all of human history combined. People are buying cameras at a record rate, and modern cameras can even make phone calls now. Amazing!

              For many people the camera is the most important feature on their phone, and it is how they choose which phone to buy. If you subtract the cheapo point and shoot market, how are sales really? It seems to me that if you factor out the phones that have cannibalized the point and shoots, then dedicated camera sales are actually up. If DSLRs could directly post to Instagram/Snapchat sales would probably skyrocket.

        • Allen_Wentz

          The problem is that Nikon lacks an honest two-way marketing loop between consumers and Nikon corporate. Too much arrogance at the interfaces.

          So although “Nikon is going through a methodical process of designing, developing, testing, and refining…” sounds good, it is almost guaranteed to be sub-optimal without info from an honest two-way marketing loop.

          This has been really basic MBA stuff for many decades but unfortunately Nikon as recently as 2016 had not started implementation of such an absolutely critical structural part of a consumer products business.

          • Andrew

            Allen, I absolutely agree with you. My love relationship with Nikon is thick and thin. Thick because obviously, I want Nikon to succeed though not to the extent of not acknowledging what Nikon is doing wrong and definitely not to the extent to which I stop viewing myself as a customer whose money should be well spent. And so this is Nikon’s Achilles heel, satisfying the needs of their loyal customers and making certain that they do not feel ignored.

            When Nikon does not meet my expectations in terms of product features, I skip my camera purchase and make do with what I have. And I believe most people are that way.

            But my bone of contention is exactly what you have elucidated. I really do not think that at its core Nikon views itself as a consumer products company. Their heart is towards the professional photographic market and industrial semiconductor lithographic systems. And even at the professional (products) level, the sense is that Nikon is quite insular in its decision-making process.

            So what gives? It is that Nikon historically has seemed to view their consumer products line as a distraction. Or at least as a command and control proposition. And there is nothing that I can observe that tells me that Nikon’s culture has changed in this regard with the times. Not even in the current days of social media.

            But I must say that Nikon has indeed grudgingly become a more consumer friendly company in that their product support is quite exceptional.

            And finally, the D7500 is an example of a product that Nikon could have shown more flexibility in its release. It should have come with multiple versions of which there should have been a higher-end model incorporating all possible D500 features that can be fitted into the smaller size body. Automobiles are sold that way with different upgrade options to choose from. But the one size fits all model is not a friendly strategy.

      • Nakayamahanzaemon

        You’re correct for Keymission’s part.

      • Thom Hogan

        That is indeed true. The 360 seems to have done best, but it sold at about 50% of Nikon’s own expectations. In the US, Nikon quietly bought back dealer inventory of KeyMissions. Not sure what happened to all that.

        • CaMeRa QuEsT

          Re-brand them as Xiao Mi and take a big hair cut?

        • They will sell it to the gray market probably or push it as refurbished – must check the eBay prices soon.

          • CaMeRa QuEsT

            Or, they’re already looking at landfills in New Mexico, maybe right next to Atari’s…

        • CaMeRa QuEsT

          That’s very pathetic, for Nikon, an optical and imaging centenarian juggernaut, to be beaten by Garmin, a barely 3 decades old little GPS gadget manufacturer. I really, really hope the Nikon suits realize how low they have fallen.

  • Roger S

    I like Ushida’s desire “to overwhelm the performance of the [mirrorless camera’s] lens by making use of industrial lens technology.” That sounds like a serious and worthy objective. A basic project for the newly reorganized optical technology division? If, at the same time, Ushida wants the new camera to be fun to play with, I have no objection — I like playing with cameras. I’m not worried, though, that this camera will be relegated to the smartphone crowd (as horrible as such an outcome would be).

    • Eamon Hickey

      I’m skeptical of the “overwhelm performance” idea. Yes, the stepper optics are the world’s highest precision optics, by far, and Nikon’s experience building them, going all the way back to the Ultra Micro Nikkors of the 1960s, is a great and almost unique technological legacy (only Zeiss and Canon have similar legacies).

      But I’m not sure how much of that legacy really translates to an advantage in making lenses for consumer photography. So I think his statement is best understood as an attempt to justify, to the investment community, the billions that Nikon lost, over many years, trying to rescue the chip stepper business. Ushida is a stepper guy, if I’m not mistaken, and he and his management cohorts (and predecessors) are responsible for those losing investments, which Nikon finally brought to an end this year.

      The practical dismantling of the chip stepper business is a hugely shameful episode for Nikon, and I read that statement as an attempt to mitigate the shame by saying, “Look, our investment in that business wasn’t wasted after all; we’ll use the expertise we developed to kick ass in the camera market.”

      One simple objection to that idea is: If that is possible, why weren’t you already doing it? You’ve been making stepper optics for more than 40 years.

      • Thom Hogan

        Dead on, Eamon. It’s the way I read parts of the statement, as well. And your last paragraph is indeed the shameful part.

    • Maybe curved sensors and new lens line which is quite compact as a result. Exclusively for mirrorless, which they can afford to do maybe.

  • Richard Haw

    Peter, you forgot to mention that Nikon plans to introduce the mirrorless camera in 2-3yr’s time

    • After I read the translation, I understood that their new manufacturing technology will be applied to mirrorless cameras and lenses in 2-3 years. I don’t think they were talking about their mirrorless coming out in 2-3 years. Am I wrong?

      • optima forever

        no, you’re right.
        and it’s “on the other hand, we can’t forget playfulness”. and he continues by talking about “why not imagining a reflex that even ladies could have fun to use”. so I guess we’re not talking about mirrorless anymore 😉

      • Richard Haw

        Hello, Peter.

        “2―3年内をめどに、ミラーレスカメラなどへ搭載を目指す。” <- this statement didn't say much. but to me, it literally read "within 2-3yrs' time, we will implement these on the mirrorless camera and related devices".

        But the most important part of the paragraph is the statement right before that saying something like they will consolidate their technology from the various departments to cut cost to make it viable for consumer camera use.

        This is a very vague statement and it can mean anything.

      • ITN

        I think it refers to the new generation of lenses (using industrial lens technology), for DSLR and mirrorless. The timing of the launch of the new mirrorless cameras could be the same, or not.

        • Thom Hogan

          To my knowledge, the mirrorless projects at Nikon are coming to market in 2018. Ushida-san’s statements were about optical aspects that will come later, I think.

      • SHF

        Here’s the summary of the relevant section: Nikon used to have separate divisions for optical design for consumer products and industrial uses (I guess they are talking about lens technologies for military equipment, for example), but in April, those divisions were consolidated into one, so that technology and expertise developed for industrial uses can be applied to consumer cameras. But these technologies are very expensive (manufacturing cost for those lenses is $200-300K), so it’s not easy. They expect this (i.e., developing mirrorless cameras that incorporate some of those technologies) to take 2-3 years.

        • Thom Hogan

          Yes, that’s about correct. See Eamon’s comments above, too.

        • sickheadache

          2-3 years from…2-3 years ago? Or 6 months ago?…One would think even Nikon already got a bad ass Mirrorless ready to go!

          • exactly, even if true this is based on data where there is no Nikon mirrorless, this will change soon

  • Photoman

    there’s some serious engrish here

  • DrNo666

    Considering that the D5s should be out in January (if Nikon continues with its usual update cycle) I would guess that it is possible to increase the fps without undermining their top camera.

    • Allen_Wentz

      Single-digit Nikons are about more than just specs anyway.

      That said, I am curious to see what D5s turns out to be, and if a D5x is also brought out.

  • sickheadache

    This is what Matt Granger said…IF Sony can process a 42mp sensor and it can snap 12 frames per second..then the new Nikon D850 should be able to do the same.

    • brian valente

      if matt granger said it, it must be true 😉

      but sony can shoot 12fps in part because they don’t have to worry about a mirror. Nikon not in that same boat

      • silmasan

        Well, let’s take the two separately

        1) data throughput + processing power: 42mp @12fps > 46mp @10fps so the precedence has been set.

        2) mirror (i.e. mechanical): Nikon has also produced a DSLR capable of 12fps in the D5.

        …so combining the two they should be able to make a camera that does 46mp 10fps now.

        • Proto

          and deliver this combo at $3K please. Thanks!

          • silmasan

            Ask and it shall be granted unto you

            (…in 2 or 3 years :p)

      • Vocko

        Mirror doesn’t know what sensor goes behind it, the processor does. So if the Expeed(s) can handle the data transfer, mirror is not a problem. They can recycle the one used in D3s to have 9fps in FX and 11 in DX mode, or the one in D4(s) for 11fps in FX mode. That technology is available for quite some time as the sensor size doesn’t change with pixel density. And also by using that “old tech” they wouldn’t touch D5(s) territory.

  • Davo

    Do we have any idea what unusual industrial lens technology Nikon has, either in patent form or industrial product form?

    • No, but they continue to talk about it in interviews.

      • ckuklbac

        Curved sensor?

        • Those rumors were based on a patent.

    • PhilK

      Apochromatic lenses are common in industrial/scientific markets, that’s one possibility.

      I believe nano-crystal lens coating was based on their work in the semiconductor lithographic field.

    • PhilK
    • Eamon Hickey

      Nikon has been among the two or three highest precision industrial lens manufacturers in the world since the 1950s. They’ve made lenses for everything from chip manufacturing to aerial mapping to microscopic parts inspection to recording the readings on scientific instruments like oscilloscopes (years ago), and hundreds of other tasks. Optics is a huge field beyond consumer cameras.

      Specifically, Ushida is probably talking about the chip stepper lenses. They are far and away the highest precision production optics ever made. Speaking loosely, a stepper lens can resolve upwards of 5,000 line pairs per millimeter — i.e. 50x to 100x higher resolution than a good camera lens. They latest ones weigh several tons each and cost $10 million or more.

      • John Alexander

        if it comes in 800mm 2.8 sounds like a great lens for Barry

        • Eamon Hickey

          Well, they only focus 193-nanometer ultraviolet laser light (i.e. far outside the visible light spectrum) and work at only one focus distance. I don’t know their focal length, and they specify their aperture using numerical aperture, not f-stop, but some of the latest open to the rough equivalent of f/0.2. But you can’t stop down if you need more depth of field than f/0.2 provides, which is likely around 1/10,000th of a millimeter (rough guess). But maybe Barry can make some great pictures with one, I dunno. (Don’t even know who Barry is!)

          Kidding aside, these are some of the reasons why I’m skeptical that Nikon’s expertise in stepper lenses can be translated into a big advantage in consumer camera optics. Optics is optics, so some cross-pollination is undoubtedly possible (nano-crystal coating comes from the stepper division), but all the research and development on stepper optics is aimed at one very specific and narrow use case, which is totally unlike regular photography.

          As an aside that few people know, for several decades Nikon has employed a large number of optical physicists in the U.S. (in Belmont, CA and Austin, TX) in their stepper optics R&D division.

          • Allan

            “Don’t even know who Barry is!”

            Animalsbybarry is a Nikon Rumors reader.

            (Eamon, thanks for all the information regarding Nikon optics.)

          • nwcs

            Maybe the “gain” isn’t going to be technology exactly but rather just the good things that can happen when two different groups with different backgrounds come together. If it works it usually opens minds up to possibilities that weren’t considered before for whatever reason.

            • Eamon Hickey

              Well, maybe consolidating all optical research in one department will facilitate that.

              But Nikon had a core technology R&D center before this recent reorganization. And again, I don’t see why they couldn’t have been facilitating collaboration between the different divisions before, with meetings, weekly coffee klatches, symposiums, cross-visitations, temporary and permanent personnel reassignments etc. In fact, I’m sure they were doing all those things and more.

              So maybe the re-org will do some good, but to me the jury is out. Companies do re-orgs all the time in response to some business challenge or other. Sometimes, it’s just management’s way of showing investors, lenders, and critics that they a) have a plan, any plan and b) are doing something. They don’t always produce benefits. Sometimes they do the opposite.

              In a basketball game years ago, I stood still while a guy drove by me and dunked. A teammate looked at me and said, “Bite your tongue.”

              I said, “What?”

              He said, “At least do something.”

              Sometimes, that’s what a re-org is—biting your tongue to at least do something.

          • Allen_Wentz

            Cool info. Thanks for that.

  • tom

    Alota words but no useful info nor specifics

  • Eric Calabros

    “easy for women to use” camera is a camera with a big screen that you can control with simple touch gestures. Women don’t like confusing buttons, knobs and dials.

    Hope Google doesn’t send me to concentration camp.

    • sickheadache

      Like a Iphone swipe.

      • Eric Calabros

        Swipe up-down > Shutter speed
        Swipe left-right > Aperture
        Double finger Swipe up-down > ISO
        Double finger Swipe left-right > EV

      • Allen_Wentz

        I buy state-of-the-art Apple devices, and IMO the swipe process is still iffy. And that is from Apple, arguably best in the world.

        No way Nikon should be dragging [pun intended] high end image capture into the world of display swipes, given Nikon’s displayed [another intended pun] lack of competence in the modern consumer UI area.

        Maybe some experimentation at the low end, but low end is not IMO where Nikon should start its 2018 mirrorless journey.

    • j cortes

      Good one !

    • Semaphore

      Given the context I think he’s talking about weight and size. In Japan, the standard response to “recommend a camera for women” has apparently been “mirrorless”.

    • Spy Black

      The comment I think reflects ahow sexism is openly practiced in Japnese culture. Such comments would be lambasted in the ‘States, inasmuch as most guys here still maintain the same sexist mindset. There used to be an old ad in the 50s or 60s that stated something like “so easy, even a woman can use/do it”. This is essentially what’s going down there.

      • Eamon Hickey

        Yep, across the culture in Japan, and especially in industry, but Nikon is, in my opinion, especially old-fashioned in these ways. When I was a sales rep for Nikon USA in the 1990s, we used to get Christmas cards from the overseas sales department at Nikon Japan, with a picture of the department staff. I still remember cringing at the self-important male managers in their business suits surrounded by female secretaries dressed in a company uniform, like stewardesses from the 1960s.

        • Ric of The LBC

          and the problem is?

          • Allan

            Uh oh.

      • johnnykangaroo

        OP’s comment shows open sexism is not unique to Japan.

    • Ric of The LBC

      Men like lots of buttons
      Women like lots of words

      • Allan

        I don’t know about that.

        I’ve had some older (60’s, 70’s) female secretaries who loved pushing buttons on their gadgets.

        There’s quite a lot of talky males on this site (not me).
        🙂

        • Ric of The LBC

          Secretaries! So sexist.
          Don’t you mean Administrative Assistants?

          • Allan

            Yes. You’re right. Sorry.
            (They called themselves secretaries.)

          • Allan

            “secretary = a person employed by an individual or in an office to assist with correspondence, keep records, make appointments, and carry out similar tasks.”

          • Allan

            For the record, I’ve also had a male secretary … I mean, male administrative assistant.

            (Any females on your hockey team?)

            • Ric of The LBC

              Yes. On the league team I was on last year.

            • Allan

              This conversation reminds me of the tennis match in 1973 between Billie Jean King and Bobby Riggs.

            • Ric of The LBC

              I don’t see a comparison.

            • Allan

              Sorry, just my free flow of thoughts.
              (I think the younger person won the match.)

            • “There’s quite a lot of talky males on this site (not me)”…
              Sorry, can’t help. Nothing about D850 so reading comments only for time paas. Once done, will check for new post again.

            • Allan

              Sorry to hear about your injury.

              You’re probably less likely to get injured if you don’t chase after the puck in the corners with Gordie Howe or John Ferguson. 🙂

  • sickheadache

    I sent the President of Nikon a email the other day…I will translate this to you all. Mirrorless, 72mp, Excellent Dynamic Lenses, No Crapbridge. Thanks Sick Headache.

    • Thom Hogan

      For some reason he carbon copied me on his response: no.

      • sickheadache

        Thom….You are the Killer of my Dreams. Thank You.

      • Allan

        lol

    • What are dynamic lenses? sounds impressive!

      • sickheadache

        Them new lenses are being design and tested with the new Mirrorless cameras from Nikon…Tons of Dynamics…

  • jagigen

    Nikon really need to get their software together.
    They can’t keep on messing their offer otherwise very potential hardware up by adding piss poor software to it.

  • Peter

    Where are the natives that are able to provide a better/proper translation? 🙂

  • Dr.S

    Now the fanboys can calm down a bit…
    But seriously, I’m very curious how serious will be the Nikon mirorless path. Consumer, like Olympus and Fuji or real proffesional, equivalent to D500 & D5?

    • Allen_Wentz

      Yes, we are all curious. Nikon has been doing an excellent job of hiding info from us. :~)

    • Considering how Nikon *charged* onto the full-frame market with the D3 and D700, and it was game over for Canon’s full-frame competitive advantage ever since then, …I’d say Nikon has a decent chance of doing mirrorless very, very “right the first time”…

      Seriously. The D3 and D700 made a laughing stock of the 1Ds2, 1D3, and 5D. Then that Nikon one-two punch even held its own against the 1Ds3, 1D4, and 5D2 in every way except megapixels, and the D3X, D800, and D600 put an end to that, and also began the era of complete shame for Canon in terms of base ISO dynamic range, which Canon has still not caught up with.

      (BTW, WRT Sony sensors, Nikon *always* seems to do a better job with the same sensor. That’s why Sony (the camera company, not the sensor company) withheld their 42 MP and 12 MP chips. They knew that if Nikon got their hands on them, they’d put Sony to shame all over again. Even then, the D810 sensor holds its own against the A7R2 sensor, and the D750 sensor beats the A72 sensor.)

      I don’t know why folks are losing faith in Nikon’s tradition of “slow and steady wins the race”. Unless you actively need the 2-3 features that Sony mirrorless offers, and are willing to put up with 2-3X that many drawbacks in order to get those features, …Nikon is still the champ.

      They’re definitely running out of time, though. If an A7R3 *and* an A92 / A9R arrive before Nikon delivers FX mirrorless, it will definitley put Nikon on shaky ground. Sony fixed a whole lot of problems with the A9, from battery life to the lack of dual card slots… Now all Sony needs to do is offer those types of features in a body that competes with the price of the D750, and it’s *truly* panic time at Nikon.

      But somehow I doubt Sony is going to put flagship AF, dual SD slots, and their big fat new battery in a $1500-$2000 body, so Nikon is still totally safe for at least another 1-2 Sony product cycles.

  • Nakayamahanzaemon

    As I wrote before, I find few new information in this article. I guess only Keymission’s part is new. By the way, Senior Vice President’s name is Nobuyoshi Gokyu, the same guy who suggested the D850 just before the development announcement. He is also the head of Nikon’s camera division.

    This looks like a summary of several articles which Nikkan Kogyo Shimbun has written so far. Nikkan Kogyo Shimbun is a newspaper which interviewed Nikon’s president in July. We are now reading this article on Yahoo Japan, but it’s originally from Nikkan Kogyo Shimbun’s website called “Newswitch”.

    • silmasan

      Wait, is that supposed to mean “news witch” or “new switch”?

      • Nakayamahanzaemon

        It looks like “new switch”.

  • Me

    I find this in the article : “Nikon, […] is challenging with an attitude towards recovery. Following the reduction of more than 1,000 people, we abandoned the launch of a high-end compact camera that users had high expectations.
    Is that the Nikon 1? It will be very sad.

    • Fly Moon

      DL

    • Nakayamahanzaemon

      According to the article, an executive of a big camera company (I guess it’s Canon) describes Nikon’s cancellation of the DL series as “smart decision”. Canon might want to get out of the 1-inch sensor camera market.

    • Which is a huge shame, since I consider the Sony RX100 and RX10 series to be absolutely fantastic B-roll / 2nd / walk-around cameras for even the most serious DSLR shooter’s standards. If Sony’s next RX100 series offers a zoom that starts wider than 24mm and still hit’s f/1.8, I’ll definitely be picking it up as the ultimate vlogging / b-roll / timelapse camera.

      The 18-50 DL really could have been a big hit IMO, even if the others weren’t.

      • local_haole_boy

        Yep. My kit is a D810 and an RX100 mk 2. I’d like to have a later RX100 but the mk 2 works well for me.

  • Nikita

    Nikon: not innovators; always a sluggish response to existing markets.
    Also, Nikon thinks too much of its name, thinks it makes up for late to market product and high prices.

    Nikon: wake up, catch up fast and innovate, or die a sad death.

    • Kyle

      Just like Apple, always last/late but generally once they release, it’s solid.
      Hopefully even though Nikon appears late to the mirrorless game and what not – whatever they come out with will be awesome.

      • Nikita

        really? they already tried one mirrorless product, which now has apparently been discontinued. And Key Mission? Solid? Beyond DSLRs they don’t really know what they’re doing.

      • tom

        that’s like comparing apple and lemon

    • Thom Hogan

      Right. That explains the Nikon D1 ;~).

      • RC Jenkins

        With all due respect, that was almost 20 years ago!

        I wouldn’t go as extreme as Nikita, but Nikon’s conservative culture has certainly not help its case.

        Eg. Nikon was late to the game with fully electronic lens-body communication–which hurt its live view performance (and now legacy lens selection for modern cases). While 20 years ago, Nikon had a superior legacy lens selection, I think that practical balance has now shifted in Canon’s favor today.

        Nikon was also late to the game and conservative with Nikon 1. m43 was designing for enthusiasts & pricing for market share, while Nikon 1 was designing for amateurs & pricing for immediate return…& late. And that’s why a N1 32mm F/1.2 costs $900, while a stabilized Panasonic 42.5mm F/1.7 with similar performance costs $350. While phones were drastically improving as well…F/3.5 on a 1″ sensor no longer cuts it! 🙂

        Late with Keymission…and late & M.I.A. with DLs.

        Nikon’s late with a larger sensor mirrorless too, but I think this could be advantageous…as long as they ditch their conservative approach, learn from competitors, and push for new ideas or combinations of features.

        I think Nikon needs a new mirrorless mount, an investment in offering a free or cheap F-mount adapter (as well as offerings for more expensive adapters), competitive pricing (even at a short-term loss), and an overall well-balanced full-frame mirrorless camera, soon. Ideally, earlier than Canon.

        To me, this ‘outside of the established market’ & ‘fast deployment’ is not exactly in Nikon’s comfort zone…and Nikon needs to adapt and transition to living outside of its comfort zone soon!

  • animalsbybarry

    Nikon has always been very secretive about thier new products
    The fact that they have anounced they are working on a FF mirrorless probably meant it is not too far offf

    I am hoping for the highest available resolution with all the latest greatest features and that it is available by early 2018 in time for spring photography season

  • BeakerCasual

    Nikon’s “birthday” is a fail..

    • ToastyFlake

      Did you not get invited to the party?

    • Mike A

      Maybe the belated D850 will be “good”. Otherwise, 2017 is another Nikon Senior Management fail – while Sony and Canon are showing decent to good news.

      • disqus_ErOzKSxw9P

        Did I miss the canon good news? Cause I’d much rather a D850 than a pathetic 5D mk4 or 6D mk2

        • Mike A

          I couldn’t agree more. The F*ng 5D MkIV made me jump ship to Sony (A99II & A9).

          I used to be a huge Nikon fan (had D700). I hope the D850 is a winner and I think it will be. My guess is it will be a step above the A99II (better card tech, better flippy screen, better AF and a bit more refined usability)

          But, I think the A7RIII will be released near the end of this year and it will probably take the A9 goodness to the next level and go a step or even two to three beyond the D850. Sony’s on a roll…

        • Nakayamahanzaemon

          It’s Canon’s magic. I heard the 5D mark IV is popular in China, which is one of the reasons why Canon’s first quarter performance was good. The Chinese tend to appreciate big, bulky DSLRs.

      • Allen_Wentz

        C’mon, just because we want it sooner does not make it “belated.”

    • Antonio

      Why, weren’t they able to turn the 100 years count and are they still at 99?!! 🙂

  • Isaiah Harris

    This is what Matt Granger said…IF Sony can process a 42mp sensor and it can snap 12 frames per second..then the new Nikon D850 should be able to do the same.

    • Fly Moon

      Who’s Matt Granger?

      • Dr.S

        don Trump of photography

        • Fly Moon

          What does that mean?

          • Bob Thane

            He’s the president of photography I guess.

        • Allen_Wentz

          I do not know Matt Granger but that is about the rudest thing one could say about anyone.

        • sickheadache

          Of all the testers and reviewers.Matt Granger is pretty good..Matt actually handles the camera and lenses..And Test them..Where as..Film Flopwell and the fly by nights who Dont handle the product..But yet can produce a review…Star Wars The Last Jedi is excellent..I have not seen it..See..How that works..Fail.

      • Andreas Vesper

        Some Australian photographer, who sometimes gets equipment from Nikon and Tamron….

      • Kyle

        “That Nikon Guy” was his YouTube channel for a long time. I used a lot of his reviews and tests early on when starting out in photography.

    • Mike A

      I have the A99II & A9. The D850 will more than likely fit in between the a99II and the A9 due XQD. The A99II shoots fast, but the buffer gets jammed in a hurry and takes a while to clear…

      • Allen_Wentz

        And the SD in the A9 is only UHS-I. Go figure.

    • Allen_Wentz

      Sony blows it on the critical bus/buffer/card implementation. So I agree Nikon can do it well (IMO better) if they aggressively went after the bus/buffer/card implementation. D500 is already excellent when the lame SD card is out of the camera, so I fully expect Nikon also dialed in bus/buffer/XQDcard implementation in the D850.

      An interesting question will be how badly usage of the SD card second slot slows camera performance.

  • Zak Zoezie

    I would be really interested if Nikon made a compact interchangeable lens APSC mirrorless camera with their own camera SW, and have in the same body a separate upgradable android platform with WIFI/4G that runs social networks SW like FB, etc, acting as a small tablet. Both pieces of SW having access to the same memory card and back LCD would allow you to take photos using Nikon’s SW and seconds later switch to the android platform to upload & share whatever pictures you like … I mean, the android platform would not even need a heavy “Nikon shell” with dedicated “Nikon SW”, just stock android (like a Nexus or Pixel) to support social media SW downloadable from the app store. The tablet part does not need fast & heavy HW specs, just enough to be able to share photos. SW keyboard would be enough, no HW keyboard needed. It would be the first camera able to share high quality photos directly on social media, running upgradable & “future-safe” stock android. When successful, they can copy the concept later to future FF mirrorless. Integrating a small, low profile android tablet into a camera should not be that difficult, and photo enthusiasts would be happy to pay an extra 100-200$ to allow fast sharing. Just my 2 cents …

    • Thom Hogan

      I don’t like that Frankencamera approach. It’s also the way Sony PlayMemories apps work, by the way.

      The problems are simple, yet complex.

      At the simple level: (a) you need hardware to communicate, whether that be BT, Wi-Fi, or cellular connections; (b) you need software to do the heavy lifting of taking camera images and putting them where you need them, whether that be Facebook, Apple/Google Photos, et.al.

      (a) is a relatively straightforward engineering project. Why it seems to be so difficult for the camera companies I don’t know. I bought a US$10 device the other day that handles pairing and connection better than any camera I’ve got.

      (b) is a problem because the companies that control the APIs couldn’t care much about what to them would look like low volume use patterns. Moreover, the APIs and image requirements (e.g. sizes, etc.) are constantly changing. Moreover, the APIs and requirements are mostly being defined in Silicon Valley and its extensions.

      I’ve long argued that you need to do (a) brilliantly and completely (no short cuts or cost cutting) and that you have to have your own API/evangelism/support to solve (b).

      • Zak Zoezie

        I think people see it way too complex business wise: the tablet HW running Android SW can be completely separated from the camera HW + SW, except for the LCD & memory card access. This means Nikon can just partner with any tablet vendor out there, without the need for Nikon to design or test a single bit of Android SW ! Looking at the cheap prices of the android tablets today, the extra HW cost would be minimal because camera case + screen is already available, The other HW in todays tablets can even be made dirt cheap ! Of course HW specs could differ and increase cost when concept would become successful in pro market, but SW wise it can be 100% done by any partner out there that makes android tablets today. So no, Nikon would not need their own Android support team or API’s, just a web link to their partner, in case their camera customers need support for the Android SW part.

        • Thom Hogan

          Well, if you have a separate device (phone, tablet, computer, it actually doesn’t make any difference here) from the camera, you still have the SnapBridge problem. You need an automated way to get images from the camera to the device, preferably doing more than just moving the image data across. This is the approach Nikon currently takes, by the way, and it sucks as implemented.

          Moreover, you have the problem that the other device could be overwhelmed easily. Some of us shoot with 64GB cards in our camera, but a cheap tablet as you suggest probably doesn’t have that much memory total.

          • Zak Zoezie

            As I indicated before, the tablet part would have direct access to the SD card … no need for much tablet memory ! You get it ? Both touch back LCD and SD card would be shared by Nikon SW and Android SW …

    • RC Jenkins

      Why not just use your phone…?

      • Zak Zoezie

        I use my tablet + external SD card reader today, since it is the only way to transfer larger JPG files at acceptable speed. A phone is not even an option for me since 1) it does not support external SD card reader 2) transfer over BT is way too slow 3) transfer over Wifi is cumbersome to setup and takes me too much time to constantly switch phone Wifi settings from “public to camera to public” over and over again. So no, phone is not a decent option for me …

        • RC Jenkins

          But how would your proposed android device communicate with the camera…?

          Whatever it can do, the phone can do as well. It sounds like the issue is one of performance and connectivity workflow–and I don’t see how an additional device improves this at all.

          The simplest / cheapest solution would be for them to improve connectivity with phones.

          • Zak Zoezie

            My point is exactly that there is no communication needed between Nikon SW and Andoid SW ! Nikon SW writes on SD card, user switches from Nikon SW to Android SW, Android SW reads photo directly from SD card and uploads to whatever social media through Wifi or 4G. Got it ?

    • Fly Moon

      I wouldn’t bet on Nikon’s Software capabilities!!

    • Allen_Wentz

      What Thom said below.

      Plus the word “Android’ means Nikon should run not walk away from any such idea. Android is free and unsupported, given away in many different flavors to entice folks into Google’s ecosystem that has as it primary business model collecting users’ data. Nikon would need to be creating its own extensive support ecosystem.

      And like Thom said, Nikon would be a bit player in a very competitive tech space where the other guys would _not_ be playing to optimize for Nikon’s needs. The amount of support Nikon would need to provide would clearly be beyond Nikon’s capabilities.

      • Hans J

        This I agree with!! You make a great point about it being unsupported.

      • Zak Zoezie

        See my answer on Thom below 😉

  • sameer chawda

    Besides tech specs on the D850, I suspect a Nikon Mobile Phone primarily focusing on Photos & Videos. A high end Twin lens camera

    • thundrrd

      Now that would sell about 50% of Nikon’s own projections.

    • Allen_Wentz

      Yeah, because Nikon does consumer image communications software so well, well enough to out-compete folks like Apple…
      /s

  • fanboy fagz

    8fps for a 45mp camera is enough. The cards are the thing that will slow it down. It may be 10fps but maybe when writing the info split between the two card xqd/sd

    • Allen_Wentz

      Bus and buffer are most important, and we will have to see how aggressively Nikon engineers those for real-world performance in the D850. Bus/buffers/slot performance is something we do need field tests on because implementation is everything.

      Certainly the one rumored by-definition-lame SD card slot will cripple D850 speed after the buffer is filled. But the option exists to pull the SD card and use only XQD like we do with the D500.

      Nikon could even implement an XQD-only choice as programmable to a button (wow I wish for that…) so photogs could maximize speed on the fly. That would be way cool and makes total sense on a high frame rate body that includes a limiting SD card but also has fast XQD available.

      Today’s XQD at ~400+ MB/s is ~50% faster than the fastest available SD, and the XQD 2.0 spec released in 2012 goes to 1,000 MB/s. So we will likely see faster XQD cards available during the life of a D850, but we need to see what Nikon implements the D850 bus to support. XQD is only in Nikons and high-end Sony video right now, but XQD is clearly superior for pro usage as well as cheaper in pro sizes.

      SD just released a new UHS-III spec that will ultimately double SD card speeds to 600 MB/s, but that spec was just released (2017) so it will be years before we see SD UHS-III cards and card slots; certainly not in a D850 slot.

      Probably SD UHS-III will first show up in products where very small size and weight savings are critical, like in drone video cameras. SD even at the UHS-II available today costs much more than XQD in the larger sizes needed for pro DSLR and video and seems less robust as well.

      • Hans J

        fake news

        • Allen_Wentz

          :~)

      • fanboy fagz

        You think im gonna read all this? You crazy.

      • Chris

        The latest Sandisk 64GB Extreme PRO UHS II SXHC is 300MB/S and in my book that’s 25% less.
        The D500 has a 200 shot RAW buffer and perhaps with that SD-card it will be like 150. With the D810 I already have problems filling the buffer. I don’t understand what you’re nagging about. Almost every computer has a SD-slot, so no card reader necessary. For me the SD-card is a plus. I agree with you 2 XQD slots would be better, but it’s not a difference I will go crazy about.

        • Allen_Wentz

          As long as there is at least one XQD + SD I also will not go crazy about not having dual XQD.

          Yes, spec-wise fast XQD are about a third faster than the fastest SD cards, but most folks find a bigger difference in real-world practice.

          I am a database guy, and my experience has uniformly been that faster transfers seem to add stability. Like the extra time gives more opportunity for file corruption or something.

          So I am much happier with XQD through a fast Lexar XQD card reader. I just leave the slower SD card in slot #2 for backup and never take it out of the D500.

  • Maybe Nikon’s new mirrorless is a view camera.

    • Bob Thane

      I would kill for digital large format.

      I mean, I’d probably have to in order to afford it, but still.

      • Allen_Wentz

        Yup. A view camera without the chemicals or weight. WooHoo!

      • Eamon Hickey

        Would be very cool to see an area-array large format digital camera. Not sure how that will ever be done.

        As I’m sure you know, there is a 4×5 digital back from BetterLight, but it’s a scanning back, so suitable only for product photography and some kinds of architectural shots. Maybe some non-windy landscapes. For anyone who doesn’t know:

        http://www.betterlight.com/index.html

        • Allen_Wentz

          Interesting. Thanks for that link.

        • Vince Vinnyp

          I have heard about this and I know this is off topic but with the pace of a field camera you can shoot stitched images of as much resolution as you want, A gigapan is not a silly amount of money in the scheme of things and can produce arguably something equal to this with existing kit and probably not weigh much more.

      • You never know, you might be able to stand on 5th Ave and shoot somebody and get away with it. Then walk over to B&H or Adorama and get your camera.

        • Putin will supply a D850 free, as a gift, with an integrated 4g modem and unlimited LTE data. No those aren’t extra microphones, ignore that.
          It won’t turn off? That’s a design feature!

          • Includes extra weatherproofing in case you get to close to a golden shower.

            • Ric of The LBC

              yikes

            • …just sayin’. 🙂

          • Coffee

            Design feature, you mean safety feature. Also, remember that needs to be charged in it’s electric spa every day and to alternate the batteries daily.

  • Fly Moon

    What are you talking about?
    A7RII and A9 is already in the market!!

    • animalsbybarry

      Fixed it

      • Fly Moon

        That’s better 😉

  • Bukakke Comet

    Here is the problem with the 360 cameras. The 360° resolution is horrible. If they couldn’t get the resolution to a least 1080 they shouldn’t have even bothered. Then they market it as 4k. When its only 4k when its a flat image, not a 360°. There are numerous Quality of life features that if the engineer actually used the camera they would have implemented. But they didn’t and it shows.

    I wanted to add 360° videos as a serious feature in my photography experience and they didn’t have a serious place, where customers would respect the quality.

  • Keith Walls

    Regardless of what other features a mirrorless full-frame Nikon camera will have, it must be directly compatible with recent F-Mount lenses, or be usable with an adapter. Otherwise, it will go the way of the dinosaur and the N1 Series.

    • RC Jenkins

      Agreed it needs to be compatible with F-mount, but I think a new mount + adapter is the only option that will give Nikon an opportunity to differentiate & gain market share.

  • Aldo

    How do you say ‘ I AM : Marketing Failure ‘ in Japanese?

    • Antonio

      If you’re facing that situation with your operations in japan if you don’t mind I’d like to give you two humble pieces of advice:

      1. – Contact Nikon and get their agreement to use a slogan in advance to avoid future legal problems (remind their cases angst Zeiss);

      2. – Think several times before making it public because this confession may be seen as a loss of honor and some people may expect your only solution as being seppuku.

    • Coffee

      Babelfish said: 私: マーケティングの失敗

      That been said, I do not agree with this statement.

  • why are people so hung up on speed, if FPS the new MP……….

    I shoot both D5 and D4s along with D810’s and for 99% of my sports work I rarely shoot anything other than single shot. Ok one could argue that 30fps is nice to have but again I know many sports photographers who are happy shooting showjumping, power boats, diving and like me cars and either shoot single frame or on occasion 5fps or less, why, because no sports photographer in the main, I didn’t say NONE………… do not want to come away from a weekends shoot with 10,000 images.

    • Aldo

      Same here… for wedding work I rarely burst because I don’t want to kill myself later in LR. That said, I would think for sports you could benefit from more burst shooting but with good timing, not with just spray and pray.

    • nwcs

      In wildlife photography a well timed burst with multiple fps ensures you’re more likely to get the right shot. Yes, fps isn’t for everyone or every type of endeavor but there are some that need it. It’s not a spray and pray situation. It’s a capture decisive peak action of wildlife situation.

    • Allen_Wentz

      Sure we can do it the old way, and did so for years. I always kept my D3 set to 3 fps when not in single shot.

      However the extra competence of modern tools like your D5 or my D500 allow additional opportunity. One can shoot a single pic of your diver example, for instance, and with skill get a keeper image. Or one can shoot a dozen images and choose among many keepers, which is more PP work but improves the likelihood of a hero image. And, new tools and techniques allow new captures.

      Just my 0.002.

  • Semaphore

    I don’t know why you insist on using the machine translation when that article provides a human translation right afterwards.

    As I noted earlier, he actually said he wants to overwhelm competitors in terms of lens performance. The google translation is frankly garbage.

  • Kári Jensson

    “Camera and other imaging businesses accounted for more than half of Nikon’s sales”

    Well no S*** It’s the ONLY business they have.

    • Max

      They make semiconductor lithography and medical equipment too

    • Eamon Hickey

      Nikon is in dozens of optical businesses and always has been. Lithography, metrology, inspection, scientific, surveying, medical, sport optics, and much more.

  • Oh, Nikon, I *always* require playfulness. You know what I like…

  • OK, in all seriousness,

    I wish Nikon could come up with a good quality mRAW format that can deliver ~16 MP at 10 FPS, but that’s just not gonna happen due to numerous limitations of technology at the moment.

    Therefore, I’ll settle for Nikon doubling down on what they *DO* get right, and that is offering different NEF compressions and bit-rates. Being able to shoot 12-bit compressed NEF is way, way better than Canon’s mRAW; it saves more file size and yet forfeits less actual image quality. If you don’t believe me, I’ve done plenty of tests to both Canon and Nikon raw files that I can share.

    Nikon could double down by going nuts and both upping and dropping the two bit rates they offer, say 8-bit and 16-bit. That, plus offering the same lossless / uncompressed formats plus a *slightly* more compressed “lossy” format, and boom, you can shoot 45 megapixels at 10 FPS no problem, and still wind up with far better image quality than either Canon or Sony can. (Compared to Sony’s compressed raw woes, Nikon’s current “lossy” compression option isn’t lossy at all, it’s practically identical to the lossless option.)

    But, that’s probably too wacky of an idea for most folks to get on board with, so I doubt it’ll happen. We’ll probably just get stuck with regular, *huge* 45 MP files that completely clog a buffer in just a few seconds at 6-8 FPS. Oh well. That’s what a D500+D850 combo is for I guess.

    • RC Jenkins

      16-bit isn’t going to do much, when the cameras’ DR doesn’t quite reach there… 🙂

      Nor is 8-bit, as that’s JPEG depth.

      but 10-bit could…if everything else is in place to improve buffer.

      But even this would probably improve buffer depth more than framerate.

      Personally, I’m fine with 12-bit compressed as being the smallest ‘raw’ size Nikon allows.

      • You’re probably right- to increase frame rate, historically, Nikon has *only* done so by adding voltage directly to the shutter, and I think *once* by forcing 12-bit instead of 14-bit. I forget if it was the original D300 or the D700, but one of those cameras was gimped to a much slower framerate if you wanted to shoot 14-bit.

        Still, a smaller file is a smaller file, and at 45 MP and ~10 FPS, I’ll gladly take a smaller file any way I can.

        BTW, for the record, a 12-bit lossy compressed NEF is *already* almost the same file size as a JPG at the highest quality. In fact back when I shot JPG and RAW, I had thousands of low-ISO 12-bit compressed NEF files that were ~10% smaller than a noisy high-ISO JPG file.

        TLDR; I’d welcome 10-bit and 14-bit options, and/or slightly more lossy compression, if it meant a significant file size savings.

        • nwcs

          The D300 had the gimped 14 bit.

        • BVS

          D7100 and D7200 have to drop to 12-bit to get the advertised 6fps. 14-bit only does 5fps.

  • I’m really not reassured by the language consistently used when alluding to the forthcoming mirrorless: they want to leverage the brand by producing something “playful” for the smartphone generation that gives better performance than their ‘phones. Well whoop-de-whoop.

    I think we’re going to be waiting a while for a D7500-level APS-C, or D750-level FF mirrorless bodies, and longer still for anything that exceeds that.

  • Back to top