The Nikon 1 V3 mirrorless camera is now discontinued

The Nikon 1 V3 mirrorless camera is now listed discontinued at B&H and it's on backorder at Adorama and Amazon. The camera is also listed as discontinued on the official Nikon website:


We are definitely getting close to the announcement of the new Nikon mirrorless camera.


Like: Nikon Mirrorless Camera Facebook Page | Join: Nikon Mirrorless Camera Facebook Group

This entry was posted in Nikon 1 and tagged , . Bookmark the permalink. Trackbacks are closed, but you can post a comment.
  • Michele Perillo

    Now is the time to show us something really good Nikon! At least as good as D850, I mean

    • I wonder why there was no fire sale.

      • Proto

        Probably not much left for clearance sale….

        • So they did a good job selling the last piece at full price 🙂

          • Thom Hogan

            No, they did a good job of not building any until they had orders. Basically it’s been build on demand since the beginning.

            • Shutterbug

              I think you are right. They probably learned from the huge fire sales of previous N1-cameras.

            • That sounds highly inefficient but what would I know.
              Assuming it’s nothing like Aero/Auto industry and you can’t just shuffle tooling around.

            • Thom Hogan

              Nikon’s Thailand and China plants were built to be reconfigured to production needs on the fly. They are built to shuffle production between models as demand changes.

            • Is this part of the reason those Nikon 1 cameras were so expensive?

            • Leonore Franckenstein

              It may have been because of the low Yen or that Nikon thought that some people think the higer priced a camera is the more people will think it is better,

              Also, most people have no idea as to how small a 1″ sensor is. Not even half of a MFT. I will always go with an APS-C Nikon like the D-5300/5400 or even the D-3400.. Look at the prices. $500 less than these BABY SIZE cameras. Money for a better lens. Maybe Nikon wanst to make camera that won’t take the Sigma or Zeiss lenses, like they do buy changing the battreries every few years.

            • Nakayamahanzaemon

              I disagree. The production volume of Nikon 1 was more than 600k a few years ago. It would be crazy if all 600k were built to order. Even in 2016, Canon, the second biggest mirrorless maker at the time, produced around 700k, not much different from 600k. Nobody would say that Canon produced only on a build-to-order system.

            • Thom Hogan

              I’m speaking specifically of the V3.

            • Claude Mayonnaise

              Does anyone else think it’s jive for Nikon to be selling this thing recently if they know it will be axed? I’d be p’d if I bought some of those expensive lenses and a V3 at asking price.
              I guess that’s the way the cookie crumbles, but they really should be more direct with some of this stuff.

      • the_leopard

        There was… I ordered a N1 V3 with 10-30mm and 10-100mm PD from Nikon Europe on black friday. The price was a little more than 500€. That’s about 1/3 of the normal price.

        • We never got a sale here in the US.

        • Gerard Roulssen

          I bought a V3+10-30 PD-Zoom for 399,00€ in November 2016!

          • Leonore Franckenstein

            Where did you get it? In USA?

      • Spy Black

        I’m not sure if Nikon will ever officially discontinue the N1 line and just let it slowly disappear and hope that nobody ever takes notice. Japanese pride maybe?

        Or is N1 really dead? As I’ve mentioned elsewhere, I still don’t understand why they recently filed a patent for a CX zoom. So while the V3 may be discontinued, you wonder if a V4 will emerge.

        I guess we’re just going to have to wait and see what happens.

        • Once they officially list the J5 on this website, its all over – they have no other current Nikon 1 cameras:
          http://www.nikon-image.com/products/acil/discontinue_lineup/

          • Been wondering, with advances in tech wouldn’t a new stab at a V4 enhanced with 2017/18 level software and hardware be a worthwhile endeavor? I would think serious inroads could be made as quite some time has passed between V3 and a potential V4, it could look quite different from what we expect if it does exist. I would hope Nikon has been following the tech advances in the mobile phone world keenly enough so that we can get tech translation, eg OLEDs, better microphones, more compact design etc.

            • PhilK

              I don’t think OLEDs are an advance.

              They have nice black levels but photographic accuracy is lacking and they have a nasty problem with burn-in.

        • PhilK

          Perhaps their strategy is to call their completely new MILC line “Nikon 1.1” or something, to save face. 😀

          Also, I seems likely to me that a lot of patents are filed to throw competitors off the track of their strategic gameplan.

        • Espen4u

          If the new N2 line (or whatever) gets traction, perhaps some of that can realive the N1 in a future?

      • ZoetMB

        Strangely and illogically, Nikon tends to raise the price when a product is at end of life, sometimes bringing the product back to the original list. The Nikon 1 J5 10-30mm kit is still the same $500 as when released. The 10-30 + 30-110 kit went to a street price of $647 for a time, but is now back to its original street price of $747 and has been since at least October of 2015. Same for the 10-100mm kit: It listed at release for $1050, dropped at some point to a street price of $897 and has been back to $1047 since at least October of 2015.

        • ZoetMB

          And the only lenses that are left are the 10mm, 32mm, 6.7-13mm and the 70-300mm. All the others are either no longer listed at all or labeled as discontinued at B&H. So it doesn’t look like Nikon is interested in supporting existing users of the Nikon 1 cameras.

          • Spy Black

            Yeah, it looks like the end of the road for the most part.

        • Andrew

          Nikon’s strategy is a way of keeping the value of an investment in their camera systems high. They did that with the Df which sold at its launch price of $2,750 for years until it was discontinued. The Nikon D810 saw very little price reduction. And so I am not surprised that the Nikon 1 has followed the same high value pricing trend. Nikon’s logic is quite logical if it wants to maintain its image as a premium brand.

          In order to make a high value pricing strategy work in a mass market context, Nikon has to price its products right and on the whole it has. One cannot argue against the value proposition of Nikon cameras. Even the Nikon D850 was expected to cost significantly more than its launch price of $3,299. We will not be returning to the days of the Nikon D2x, that wonderful 24 MP camera that was launched at $8,000 😉

          • ZoetMB

            The Nikon Df is not discontinued

      • C-M

        There where a fire sale on the v3 from Nikon Nordic this Christmas

    • Leonore Franckenstein

      I agree, but I am looking/waiting for the next D-750. I like the 6µm pixels which is better in low light. I may buy the D-850, after I test and compare with my Zeiss 21mm 2.8 Distagon. If there is a D-760 it would be over $1,000 less than the 850.

      Why should Nikon do more than a D-850… It is just out. What are you talking about? Maybe you meant that Sony should show us something better than a D-850? Or?

  • TheMexican

    Loved this V3 camera, but these are GREAT news!
    I’m getting really anxious

  • Adam Brown

    No surprise….. and the J5 will be discontinued as inventory runs out. (which could take a long time when selling only 2 cameras per year..)

    But it’s another possible indication that a mirrorless announcement may be VERY close. Within 30 days.

  • bobgrant

    Finally. Out of its misery.

    • This is probably what Nikon were waiting for – to clear their Nikon 1 inventory.

      • PhilK

        Well I don’t think it would have helped launch the D850, either. 😉

        That is, unless it is going to be a much lower-end product at launch.

  • Davidvictormeldrew Idontbeliev

    Shame about the News about Nikon 1 system and Nikon’s failure with their strategy on past Mirrorless, Coolpix, Powershot G equivalent, Keymission, pro video cameras, etc. A question I have as Nikon is a camera club why they don’t / never have done camcorders,

    • PhilK

      Because the company has never been interested in film/video much. I think you can see this easily.

      Canon made a bunch of 8mm moviefilm cameras for example (some fairly fancy ones), Nikon maybe produced one low-end half-hearted thing that never sold.

      They really don’t seem much interested in moving images. (Although they are making a half-hearted effort these days since that’s expected from most still cameras now)

  • vwking

    There have been many occasions where I was unable to, due to size and weight, bring my D500 with tele-zoom, it was the N1V3 + 70-300mm that had the reach I needed AND was small and light enough for the trip. Its auto-focus was far superior to anything near that size at the time. IQ wise, the N1V3 is quite limited, even compared to some of the MFT cameras of the same time. The grip which was the only way I could use the camera wearing gloves, kept loosening itself. Plus I had to go to great lengths to protect it from the weather I had to shoot in. But it was the choice of whether I came back with a few photos (usually acceptable, shot with the understanding of the clear limitations) or no picture at all. When they announced the AW1, I was wishfully thinking Nikon would offer a line of serious compact cameras that would become the digital successor of the Nikonos. Alas, they decided that wasn’t the path they want to go 🙁

    • Davidvictormeldrew Idontbeliev

      They did produce the promising Nikon A but didn’t update this or expand the line out akin to the DL which should have developed much earlier, e.g., Nikon 1 release and spin up serious by no of marks / releases.. With their technical delays still would have paid for the DL even if they jacked up the price a few more hundred ££/$$ and could have proved some good competition to the Sony RXnn/nnn and Canon G Powershot line. Would have resulted in more market share for Nikon in the serious compact market and they could scale back development / models if / when the market collapsed.

    • I’ve exposed my J4 to obscene amounts of snow, cold, heat, and humidity, used it as a 2nd/3rd camera filming productions and ultra lightweight camera for more hardcore skiing. It was more than good enough for a Fortune 500 company and news agencies, some days with all the avalanche gear required by HR/Health and Safety it was all that would fit in the bag.

    • PhilK

      I have never quite understood why they didn’t pursue a “Digital Nikonos”, unless there are some powerful competitors in that segment.

      Seemed to me that most of the people doing higher-end underwater photography are using expensive housings these days, but that’s just a guess because I don’t follow it much.

      Maybe the potential sales volume is too low to support all the unique work that would be required to make a dedicated underwater camera, and a lot of the potential market is siphoned-off by the low-end GoPros and so on.

      • Miguel Aleixo

        Higher end uw photography is done using dslrs in a housing which is more expensive than the camera. Most people use Nikon (due to the Nikonos heritage, I guess) and some use Canon. The big volume is in the lower end of the market for which the Canon G series, the Olympus TG line and the Sony RX100 line seem to be the main choices, apart from the ubiquitous GoPro.

        • Davidvictormeldrew Idontbeliev

          another Missed opportunity for not having the DL’s around.

          • Davo

            Too right. I’d be all over a ‘tough’ DL 18-50.

        • PhilK

          I had no idea Nikon had the #1 market position in cameras used underwater these days, interesting.

          I’d think that a mirrorless camera would be ideal underwater because an optical viewfinder is probably nearly impossible to use underwater. I think with the Nikonos you just aimed it in the general direction you wanted to shoot with the aid of this big bullseye-like framing thing stuck on the top. 😀

          • Leonore Franckenstein

            Please read my mail above.

      • They kind of did with the Nikon 1 AW1 – I thought this was a great idea.

        • PhilK

          That whole series wasn’t really on my personal radar but after looking into the deets on the AW-1 it does seem pretty nice.

          Tho the Nikonos wasn’t fundamentally compromising on image quality to go underwater (it was a 35mm camera just like Nikon’s traditional terrestrial cameras), whereas the AW1 can never fully measure-up to the image quality of an APS-C or FF camera.

      • vwking

        The GoPro is pretty much the “digital Nikonos” of our times. But I think it would be really interesting if Nikon developed the N1AW1 further. Back then, the Nikonos was taken to the Amazon jungles, the Himalayas, the coral reefs, and everywhere in between. It was THE rugged camera for expeditions of all kinds. I checked out the AW1 when it first came out, I liked the larger sensor, and the interchangeable lenses, but I thought it wasn’t quite there yet. Was hoping for the next, “improved” version. AW2?? The GoPro is built for adventurists who needed a camera. I was looking for a camera built for photographers who shoot adventures.

        • PhilK

          I think my main issue with the AW1 (if I were in the market for a camera like that) would be the inferior sensor. The Nikonos series always used the same film format as Nikon’s terrestrial cameras, so under the right conditions the image quality should be equivalent. Whereas with CX, no matter what you won’t get the same level of image performance as a larger sensor camera.

          I hope they make an underwater variant of their new mirrorless camera series. That would be an excellent application for mirrorless, as most of the DSLR benefits probably wouldn’t mean much underwater or whenever you can’t easily press your eye against a little viewfinder opening.

      • Leonore Franckenstein

        I think the “Tough” cameras took the field. Take a look at the Olympus 850, with RAW. Or the older 450, also with RAW. They are the only ones that look like regular cameras. Ask people who liked the old Olympus mµ.
        Great little film cameras.

    • Leonore Franckenstein

      I only agree with one point: The 300mm, on a 70-300, on a 1″ is over 700mm. and at a great price, but zooms are sharper at the wide setting.

  • Tieu Ngao

    Imagine how much time and resources Nikon had wasted on these failed products. A wrong decision from executives could cause havoc on the company’s bottom line. I hope Nikon won’t make similar mistakes again and continue to bring in great products like D850, D5 and D500 in mirrorless.

  • Bohemian Rhapsody

    Nikon 1 v3 with zoom lens costs 1200 $ .. I really want to know how they will price their FF mirrorless … 2500 $ ?
    The upcoming A7iii will cost less than 2000$ ..
    Nikon needs a good sensor , Superior EVF than any Sony ML , good AF , spectacular battery system , and of course a fuji-like design …
    … There still some gaps Sony didn’t fill in mirrorlees … But with every release they fix/add features ..
    For example Sony ML had an awful battery life , very slow AF , poor Lens selection , awful user interface
    These are no more problems in A9/A7R3 …

    • Davidvictormeldrew Idontbeliev

      Unfortunately think the A7iii will be in line with R version at around $3000.00 or more – agree with you on Fuji the X-t2 is a beautiful styling and having a FF like a D850 styled body would be good replacement to the D5xx and D8xx line when it goes mirrorless

      • Bohemian Rhapsody

        The A7ii now costs 1600$
        I expect the A7iii to be priced 1999$

    • Sebako

      We can probably take the current Sony prices, or Canon’s prices for the M line as a lower bound for the prices to expect from Nikon. They’ve always been the company that’s a little more expensive than the others, but not so much it really hurts or excludes potential buyers (like Leica).

  • Chimphappyhour

    Love my V3 with the 18mm on it. I could put it in my everyday carry bag. Which means my full frame Nikon ended up gathering dust as it was such a hassle to carry every day. To that end, I made the decision at the end of 2017 to sell off my full frame gear and pick up a Fuji X-T20. It’s a bit bigger than the V3 but it still fits in a pocket on any of my winter jackets. Can’t say I’ll miss the large camera gear as I haven’t for the last two years. Also won’t miss the toxic culture that Nikon forums seem to have become as evidenced in the comments section here any time the subject of Nikon 1 comes up. (Oddly, you bring up Nikon 1 in other camera brand forums and people seem to be delighted as they probably had one and enjoyed it.)

    • Davidvictormeldrew Idontbeliev

      That model would be good in a Df sort of camera update but in a mirrorless format

    • Paul Willy Brown

      Love my J5, it gets more use than my other 3 Nikon DSLR’s.

    • Will McH

      Love my J5! After I got my J5, I never touch my RX100mk4. Nikon 1 is a great companion everyday camera for Nikon DSLR owner. In my usage, J5 directly competes and out performs RX100 in actual uses.

    • RC Jenkins

      I like(d?) my Nikon 1 at the time. I never use it now though.

      For me, my Nikon 1 was succeeded by a micro-four-thirds Panasonic GM, which offered 1-stop advantage (like FX vs. DX) and ‘better’ lenses in a smaller & cheaper package (but worse autofocus):
      https://uploads.disquscdn.com/images/9678cb585bf2a2ab4cde816a4c7f910a1102d05c8758154ad86b7eac4909b6a8.png
      https://uploads.disquscdn.com/images/d9e05236a889e74384691aeff42bef10ad85726fc319f05e767ac77c9a5860b9.png
      (both shown with normal F/1.8 or F/1.7 lenses)

      This GM was going to be succeeded by a Nikon DL, which was going to be even more compact due to telescopic lenses that recessed into the body. But nope.

      Now, I find phones adequate for a majority of shots, except in extreme low light conditions or for pocketable portraits (they make a 85mm-equivalent F/1.7 lens similar in size to the Nikon 1 18.5mm). I’ll still occasionally throw the GM in a pocket but not as much.

      I’m interested to see what variety of cameras Nikon produces on the new mount. They could conceivably make something just as thin as these cameras.

      • PhilK

        Interesting comparison. So is that (20mm?) Lumix lens more of a wide-angle on M4/3 than the 18.5mm Nikkor?

        • Thom Hogan

          m4/3 20mm = 40mm full frame
          CX 18.5mm = 50mm full frame

        • RC Jenkins

          Yes, slightly.

          Those are equivalents of 50mm F/4.9 for the Nikon 1 vs. 40mm F/3.4 for the M4/3.

          Here’s another comparison, this time with portrait lenses:
          https://uploads.disquscdn.com/images/115bded6094db3627b73801d0482359a4e5490ddca8a8731e765171447b6d8f3.png

          On the left is an equivalent 86.4mm F/3.24 (Nikon 1) vs. 85mm F/3.4 (M4/3). The Nikon lens retails for $900 (no VR), while the M4/3 lens retails for $400 and includes VR.

          • PhilK

            Thanks for that.

            Examples like this are why I think Nikon often comes out on the losing end of comparisons to competitors in mass-market ILC categories when the primary criteria are price and size.

            Companies like Sony and Panasonic (former Matsushita) are very tough competitors when it comes to electronics miniaturization.

  • jonebize

    I’m going to make one of those countdown calendars where I rip off the date until they announce the new mirrorless. It’s what I’ve been going to this site daily for years to see.

  • Bohemian Rhapsody

    How will Nikon users deal with the EVF ?

    • TheMexican

      Like a breeze.
      If it’s a good high res, high fps EVF its rather easy

      • jonebize

        I wonder if we will see a class-leading EVF!

    • TurtleCat

      The fast 100fps refresh rate on the Fuji EVF is very good. I think many will be happy.

    • Mehdi R

      For non-FF cameras I prefer EVF, especially on enthusiast and below models.

  • TurtleCat

    Heck, if they fire sale it with the adapter and evf for $299 I think I’ll buy one.

    • Mehdi R

      And camera pouch?

      • TurtleCat

        Nah, I wouldn’t use one.

        • Mehdi R

          Lol

  • TurtleCat

    Actually, you’re spot on with fanboy reactions on both sides.

    • Sawyerspadre

      And just like politics, both camps will believe that they are 100% right!

      • PhilK

        Seems to be a popular affliction nowadays..

  • Sawyerspadre

    I guess we knew Nikon 1 was doomed when they didn’t release a camera with Snapbridge!

    • Paul Willy Brown

      Hmmm
      my J5 talks to my android phone just fine

    • PhilK

      Ironically and with the reception Snapbridge has gotten, that may be a point in it’s favor. 😀

  • the_leopard

    They should have released a limited edition Nikon 1 to be used on Air Force One.

  • Claude Mayonnaise

    Or, Nikon release a Canon EOS M competitor, the camera they may actually put out first because it’s what likely will make them the most money in the long run. This next release is going to make tons of people happy and pissed all in one swoop. Ha Ha.

  • Scott M.

    If this new mirrorless won’t use f-mount I have very little interest in buying one. Why would I?

    • Bohemian Rhapsody

      Nikon ff mirrorless is for new amateur buyers

      • Mehdi R

        Nope

      • Scott M.

        Then it must be better and cheaper than iPhone camera

    • Same here, but the best part is that we don’t have to buy it. Apertently mirrorless is the future and some people are interested in buying one.

      • Scott M.

        I keep hearing how important it is but Nikon has made three outstanding ‘old fashioned’ digital cameras that are simply amazing. Not sure how a smaller one can compete without the legacy lenses being a factor.

        • I am not sure either and I don’t feel like buying a new set of lenses and selling my current set. I don’t care about face tracking AF and 100% silent shooting. The video in the D850 is good enough for me. I don’t think I can live with overheating, crappy EVF, poor battery life, star eating, lack of lenses, etc (I hope Nikon addresses those issues). The gain in weight and size is not even that big (if any). It will be funny if Nikon releases a killer mirrorless camera and nobody buys it… Maybe the best reason to have a Nikon mirrorless camera is to shut up all Sony fanboys:)

          • Allan

            Are there any Sony fanboys who are polite and diplomatic?

            • Have not seen any 🙂

            • Mr_Miyagi

              Depends on what your definition of fanboy is. I shoot Nikon DSLR and Sony mirrorless, as well as Panasonic MFT, and enjoy each of those systems. Each of my cameras has its good points, as well as its limitations, and the camera I choose on any occasion depends on what I think will serve me best. All three companies produce good to excellent lenses, and all three of them produce mediocre lenses as well. I love the Nikon “look,” but ultimately the AF system of DSLRs is an engineering kludge that has had its day and must inevitably yield to mirrorless. I now have Sony camera + lens combinations that are every bit as good as equivalent ones I can assemble from my Nikon gear…but the Sony image look is not the Nikon image look that I like. The Panasonic MFT user interface is tremendously convenient and powerful, but current MFT sensors cannot compete in all around shooting against FF sensors, especially the ones Nikon has from experience learned to tune for superior imaging performance.

          • br0xibear

            “It will be funny if Nikon releases a killer mirrorless camera and nobody buys it”.
            I think that’s exactly what’s going to happen.
            A lot of people seem to have lost their minds concerning mirrorless, they’ve forgotten the simple facts…Canon, Nikon and Sony are the main players in an ever decreasing camera market…the majority of people, (including those who in the past bought DSLRs) couldn’t care less about any camera that isn’t inside their mobile phone…no amount of marketing, mirror or no mirror, lenses or no lenses will bring them back.
            Choose a camera that you can afford and works best for they way you take images…the rest is just BS.

            • Yes, I will not be surprised.

            • you need to hang out on a few video-centric sites for a while. The thing that will make the nikon mirrorless sell is it’s video capabilities. DLRs a re just not right for “hybrid” shooters, and like it or not more and more photographers are shooting video as well as stills. I’m one of them. I kept my d800 because for what I do, theres nothing like it (from a competing company). But I also need to use a gimbal: I’ve been through Gh2, a6000, d5300, d5500, gx85 and gh5. And I always come back to the nikon image for video. It is very quick to work with, and it has something about it. I’ve had the GH5 for a few months now and all the video bells and whistles cant make up for the fact I still prefer the nikon look. If nikon make a d850 in a mirrorless form, give it a bit more video chops (like 10-bit), it will sell very IMHO. Plenty of nikon shooters might be thinking about the A7R3 as a way to go: but a nikon system, with nikon adaptor, will mean all their lenses keep autofocus, iris, VR.

            • br0xibear

              “If nikon make a d850 in a mirrorless form, give it a bit more video chops (like 10-bit), it will sell very IMHO”
              I think we’ll just have to agree to disagree on this Gethin.

            • fanboy fagz

              I agree. many have moved to the sony as7II and gh5 cameras from canon and nikon

            • geofflivingston

              I’ll buy it if it is decent. I held back on the D850 for this.

            • PhilK

              Well if it’s true as has been stated here a number of times that when Canon entered the MILC market they almost immediately took a large share away from the existing players, why wouldn’t a company like Nikon want a piece of that, especially when sales on their existing product-lines are continuously declining?

              Lots of religious-type arguments being made that don’t take into consideration the clear market trends. Hoping for Nikon to hunker down and turn into a small niche manufacturer is an even worse strategy, because the time will come that the sales they get from that will not generate the revenue necessary to continue to engineer and produce top-flight products.

            • Thom Hogan

              That time is now. Nikon is down to 2.6m DSLR units a year. Mirrorless alone is at 4m+ and growing. Canon’s ILC market share has remained strong at about 48%, Nikon’s has slid in recent years from 33% to I think it’s going to be 21% in the year end report in April/May. Sony is somewhere around 14%, so Nikon can’t sustain more drop without losing pricing advantages.

            • Thom Hogan

              I think you’re wrong. I can’t say what yet due to sources, but I’m pretty sure Nikon still has some tricks up their sleeve.

              Nikon’s real problem with mirrorless, no matter how good or bad the camera is, still remains lenses. No matter what they do, they’ll be coming in with a perceived lens deficit. It’s ironic that a company that was founded on optics and believes its core strength is optics took so long to come around to that same conclusion.

            • br0xibear

              Who is going to buy mirrorless cameras beyond a some enthusiasts and professionals ?…those numbers are tiny.
              The camera market as a whole is decreasing, fewer and fewer people are buying cameras and this won’t stop because of mirrorless, mirror or magic mirror on the wall. The idea that smartphone users are somehow going to want mirrorless or DSLRs because they want better quality, features etc is just not reality…they want the cameras inside their phones to be better.
              Too many people inside the bubble and echo chamber of enthusiats, professionals and forums don’t see or understand what’s going on in the real world.
              Nikon’s future is to concentrate on what they do well, make a few very good products like D500, D850 and D5, bring that quality to a mirrorless product and not be a jack of all trades. They can’t afford to do what Sony do because Sony are massive compared to them, Canon are also bigger and have many other revenue streams that Nikon don’t…Nikon survive and hopefully do well by becoming smaller, which they already are, and doing what they know at the high standards they can.
              If what you’re reporting is correct, and Nikon will have both DX and FX mirrorless products, I think they’ve already failed.

            • Thom Hogan

              Mirrorless camera sales are the only segment that’s going up. Now at 4m+ units a year. Nikon’s ILC units are at 2.6m units a year, if they make their numbers. And those numbers for Nikon have been declining as they lose all but the highest end customers.

              So quite obviously, more people are buying mirrorless cameras than are buying Nikon DSLRs.

              I can tell you that if they get to only 1.5m units, Nikon fails. Their financials at that point would clearly be unsustainable and trigger write downs making them look even worse. (Actually, the fail number is probably higher, but I haven’t had time to do a detailed analysis yet.)

              You actually have things backwards. Who’s going to buy high-end, high-capability DSLRs such as the D850? The total number Nikon will sell of those in their current fiscal year is probably around 100k units. D5 would be worse. D500 would be better.

              Nikon spent a lot of capital and brand reputation to do Coolpix Android, Nikon 1, DL, KeyMission, and a host of other things that never really paid back ROI or established a clear sales stream. They’re now paying the price for that.

              1. They need a competitor to the Canon EOS M.
              2. They need a competitor to the Sony A7 (not R/S) and upcoming Canon EOS MF.
              3. They need lenses to support the above.
              4. They need to maintain their high-end DSLRs and lenses until they can make an A9-like switchover.

              It won’t be pretty, no matter what Nikon does. Being last gives them the advantage of seeing everyone else’s hand, but it also means that they need a darned good hand to win. And it also means that they come with a lens disadvantage out of the gate if they try to go it alone again.

            • br0xibear

              I think numbers can be shown to in various ways to back up a particular view.
              A recent article on PetaPixel about camera sales said “98.4% of the consumer cameras sold in 2016 were built into smartphones – only 0.8% were compacts, 0.5% DSLRs, and 0.2% mirrorless.”
              The problem with the 1 – 4 list you made is this, Nikon don’t have the money to compete at every level with Sony or Canon.
              And I stand by that people inside the bubble and echo chamber of enthusiasts, professionals
              and forums don’t see or understand what’s going on in the real world.

            • I have been saying this all along, if you think Nikon is the only camera in trouble, you are wrong. Just wait and see.

            • br0xibear

              As have I…but nobody ever listens, lol.

            • Of course this doesn’t mean that Nikon is not at fault here – they did a lot of stupid moves that costs them a lot of money probably (KeyMission, DL…). Nobody talks about KeyMission anymore, at least the Nikon ambassadors should… another dead product.

            • RC Jenkins

              Good to hear from you @thomhogan:disqus .

              I agree about the ‘perceived’ part. In my experience, the best reaction to ‘perceived’ is marketing.

              Nikon should be marketing the hell out of adapters, and thinking about an investment in minimizing cost of these adapters for early adopters. They need to do everything they can to remove sales friction and establish a base market share fast.

              For consumers, it’s risky to buy a bunch of new-mount lenses. Not as risky: buying only a camera, adapter, and maybe 1-2 lenses. This way, even if the system fails, it will always work with DSLR lenses. If the system succeeds, Nikon has future lens sales.

              If I were Nikon, I’d have adapters with all of those options I mentioned (tilt-shift, focal-length-reduction, rear filters & more); and I’d use them to market the mirrorless system as being “better” with F-lenses than a DSLR. Bonus points for ensuring a Canon EF adapter gets released.

              So I’m coming around to your previously mentioned idea that Nikon should start with an APS-C mirrorless–but only if they make it clear that the FF mirrorless is absolutely coming soon after. Perhaps even announced at the same time, released later.

            • TurtleCat

              I wonder what the odds are that Nikon will take a page from Sony’s playbook and license a potential new mount? Even if they charged a license fee I believe they would have takers.

            • Eric Calabros

              You know better than us, glass is a slow business. You can’t simply release 20 lenses in a year, even if you had carefully planned all of them two years before. Just look at the time distance between Leica SL mount lenses, or even EF lenses release date. And there is a huge difference that Nikon has to give us ALSO F mount 300mm f/2.8E, 200mm f/4E, 12-24mm or 14-28mm f/2.8E, 16-35mm or 17-35 f/2.8E, 50mm f/1.4E, 135mm f/2E, just to keep the lineup current. You expect Nikon to do better than all lens makers combined! But I expect them to do something more realistic and attainable: show me that 70-200E on new mirrorless works flawlessly so I don’t have to wait for you to made a native one!

            • Thom Hogan

              Where did I write that I expect Nikon to do better than all lens makers combined? Just the opposite.

              The “tricks” I alluded to are on the camera.

            • Thom, by “took so long to come around”, do you mean you believe that Nikon (management) finally understood your long-standing gripe with their lens strategy?

              I would be somewhere between pleasantly surprised and quite shocked to hear that 🙂

            • Thom Hogan

              There’s certainly someone at a high level arguing what I’ve been arguing within Nikon now, let’s put it that way.

            • Glad to hear that, and curious to see if it will take hold and lead to strategy changes. Thanks!

          • Scott M.

            You said everything I was thinking and then some.

            • The point is that Nikon should give it a try and see what will happen.

            • PhilK

              They would be silly to bury their heads in the sand and ignore obvious market trends. They’ve already let the market run off without them for several years now.

              If they can apply their expertise to address some of the classic complaints about mirrorless, then they can in some ways have their cake and eat it too.

            • Yes, they should take advantage of their late entry to the market and get it right without repeating the mistakes other companies did over the years.

            • Thom Hogan

              And what mistakes would those have been?

            • Davo

              I won’t speak for Peter but for me, off the top of my head some might include poor ergonomics for the sake of size, ignoring APS-C (for Sony, done right by Fuji), poor battery life (that are better addressed now with larger batteries and/or better power management), poor EVF experience (probably more to do with tech catching up), proprietary and incompatible accessories (Nikon’s own mistake with Nikon 1 speedlights incompatible with CLS) etc.
              These all lead to poor user experience that were a constant complaint on earlier mirrorless models but have largely being rectified on current and new ones.

            • Thom Hogan

              And now: what of those things you report as mistakes by others are strengths that Nikon has shown?

              Please don’t cite the DSLRs, which have long established ergonomics designed by an Italian. Look at the products Nikon made that weren’t DSLRs and tell me where they got any of that right.

            • Davo

              They haven’t but isn’t that the point. Now that they are last, they’ll hopefully have learnt something and get it right. Maybe too optimistic?
              Btw, I was going to also include a list of things that I feel other manufacturers got right that Nikon should try to incorporate. But one of the ‘right’ things, though not mirrorless is their own DSLR UI. They should emulate that so one can shoot seamlessly between their DSLR and future mirrorless body.
              The Nikon UI is a reason the Panasonic G9 piqued my interest. It’ll be sad if the G9 is more Nikon than Nikon’s own mirrorless.

            • Adam Brown

              Sony’s E-mount wasn’t really optimized for full frame… fortunately for them, the diaphragm was just big enough to accustom full frame when they decided to give it a try. But some have suggested this has hampered lens design.

            • To the list above I will add overheating, ergonomics, star eating, lens selection, I am sure I am missing some.

            • TurtleCat

              Star eating is not specific to mirrorless. Nikon had a very bad reputation for it until a couple of years ago.

            • But they fixed it since, Sony still hasn’t, which is my point that Nikon can use their experience and late entry to the market and fix many of the mirrorless issues reported over the years.

          • Having put multiple versions of Nikon 1 through complete and utter heat HELL as well as D500 in 115 degree heat in sunlight for extended times rolling 4k video, I really think this is a Sony problem.

            • Could be, I just hope Nikon gets it right and sell a lot of mirrorless cameras. Like I already said I will not be buying one. Maybe it’s time to make a poll?

            • CX mount with updated tech instant sale here, would think many others also buy in a heartbeat too.
              Not just due to “ooh shiny new thing” but because the trend with the airlines is soon all we can bring aboard is a single tic tac and pocket lint. If you do go a ‘pollin make sure you frame this the right way – A slim Nikon V4 done right and not marketed/designed as a toy is and should be the only option here.

            • Scott M.

              Poll without specs will get a lot of maybe answers.

      • mohammad mehrzad

        Peter, Actually, some of us Nikon fans are rooting for the future Nikon mirrorless, because we hope that it might boost their financials and would ensure the future of our DSLRs!

    • RC Jenkins

      I can’t tell you why you would or wouldn’t buy one because I don’t know your specifics. But here’s why I would:

      ::EVF, for a bright, amplified live image preview. With focus peaking, histograms, magnification, etc. Very useful for shooting in dark scenes and with manual-focus lenses.

      ::Settings based on the imaging sensor, as opposed to separate sensors for everything that have to be calibrated (Focus, metering, etc.)

      ::An adapter that will allow you to do things with DSLR lenses that you can’t do with an F-mount camera. Tilt-shift in the adapter. Drop-in rear filters in the adapter. Focal length reduction or extension in the adapter (perhaps as drop-in components). etc.

      ::Ability to use more than just F-mount lenses for people who have more than one set of lenses.

      ::New lenses with improved size, speed, or image quality, particularly at the corners

      ::Thinner body, for better portability.

      The first two are a difference between mirrorless and DSLR. The others are only possible with a mirrorless that has a new mount.

      You may not have interest in any of these. I do.

      • I have interest in all that.

      • Roger S

        Yes, an appealing list. Especially #1 the EVF with focus peaking, histogram, etc. and #3 the flexible adapter. Tilt-shift capabilities built into an adapter would be so cool! I still don’t see myself as an early adopter — I’m very happy working with and developing the gear I currently have — but that could change.

        • AYWY

          There are some reasons i can think of.

          – No mirror slap always helps. Silent shutter means you are the only person allowed to shoot when a golfer takes a shot in a golf tournament. You can also shoot silent during recitals, plays/performances, wedding solemnizations, events where quietness is preferred. Working photogs are starting to realize this with the A9. This aspect is quite a big deal. As more clients become aware of it, it could become a work requirement in the future.

          – No worries about AF finetune. You can work with a partner at an event and share lenses without worrying about it.

          – For FF bodies, having greater AF coverage instead of only the center patch is very welcome.

          Yeah, this is all about business.

          – For bokeh fans, the mirrorbox clips bokeh balls.

          • peter w

            Since about a week I use a D850 to cover most of your points. Life view is really silent and it works. I understand the Sony’s are dedicated to working silently, so work better in that mode. But for me having both an OVF and a real silent mode in one camera is extremely nice.

            • RC Jenkins

              Yes: most of what can be done in an EVF can be done in an SLR in “live view mode.” Obviously, there are different implementation & qualities in rear LCD vs EVF (use in direct sunlight, battery life, AF today, etc); but it’s the same concept, and most (if not all) features are interchangeable between rear LCD & EVF.

              But a real fundamental differentiator is in the ability to use a reduced flange distance (aside from the concept of using the imaging sensor for all measurements). And this is one reason Nikon should use a new mount for the mirrorless camera.

              In a mirrorless F-mount, Nikon will have all of this unused empty space in the cavity behind the mount. This will constrain lens designers optically, it will move the camera’s center of gravity forward for worse balance, it will prevent adaptation and manipulation of lenses in this space, etc. Longer-term, a new mount is the only way to fly in a mirrorless world.

            • manattan

              Silent shooting of performances, street, etc. is one that cannot be done in live view. You also need a sensor optimized for fast read out to avoid rolling shutter artifacts. The A9 is almost there…hopefully we will see improved IQ and handling, along with a decreased price in the mark 2 version. That is the formula Nikon should best if they want to produce a mirrorless DSLR killer.

            • RC Jenkins

              That would be why I said “obviously, there are different implementations…” 🙂

              This is not a fundamental difference. This is an implementation difference. In other words, there’s no reason Nikon couldn’t produce a DSLR with an A9 sensor.

              Today, all cameras that do silent shooting use electronic shutter for this and have the same issue, but to different degrees.

            • peter w

              I understand that sensors still behave different from film, and that for a sensor the angle of incidence of the light would yet be an issue not quite in favour of a short distance to the rear lens element. Hence curved sensor investigation. Which in my simple mind would be difficult to develop for an exchangeable lens system.
              I do think it would be madness to go FX or DX with only an F-mount. But it would be madness too if the camera doesn’t work properly with the F-mount telephoto lenses and the micro and tilt and shift lenses. Thus an adapter, or an interchangeable lensmount.
              Well, lets see.

          • PhilK

            Re: silent shutter, also great for street photography and wildlife, I’d think.

            Also good points about the bokeh clipping and AF coverage. I always hated the fact that FF DSLRs had little patches of AF points in the middle of the frame only.

      • Scott M.

        When I wrote ‘why would I?’ I was hoping for a reply like yours. I have never owned a mirrorless camera except for an iPhone. Your first reasons are interesting, EVF, focus in the dark, etc. The ‘adapter’ is your speculation or do other companies make this versatile thing that can tilt shift and use drop in filters? I really am curious. New lenses will take some time but might be worth the wait. Guess we are all left with speculation until we see what the engineers at Nikon have developed. They have been amazing so far.
        My needs are primarily fast wildlife but I did a three night shoot last summer backstage in a dark theatre. So I am open minded about any advantages. Thanks for your reply.

        • RC Jenkins

          I am speaking from experience with actual devices that exist today. 🙂 Along with Nikon DSLRs, I shoot with mirrorless systems.

          Here’s an example:
          https://a4.pbase.com/o9/93/433593/1/150387769.puF3nYdi._DSF3919w.jpg

          That’s a Nikon F mount lens, tilting & shifting…on a Fuji mirrorless camera. It’s strange, but the adapter can make the lenses more versatile on mirrorless systems than their own native system. 🙂

          The focal length reducers also bridge the gap between DX & FX–just like teleconverters lose a stop and enlarge defects, these reducers gain a stop and shrink defects.

          Adapters bring a lot of flexibility to the table because you have all this space between the camera mount and lens to play around with.

          I was reluctant to try mirrorless cameras at first–especially with the thought of an EVF. I thought it would be like shooting older camcorders. I was absolutely wrong.

          One of my earlier EVF experiences was at a pub, when a friend of mine brought in an A7 variant he had borrowed, and he asked how to use it. We were outside at night. I put it up to my eye and I was stunned. It was clear, realistic, smooth, and bright–brighter than what I was seeing with my own eyes. Hard to describe–it didn’t look like a tv or phone screen. And the fact that it previewed off a large aperture enhanced the depth of field–it’s like taking a big eye and concentrating its image.
          It’s a surreal experience you must experience firsthand to appreciate. BTW, I hated the camera, but I loved the EVF.

          Since then, I’ve purchased some mirrorless cameras that I use in conjunction with my DSLRs. I no longer use manual lenses on my Nikon DSLRs because they’re so much easier to use on my mirrorless. Each has strengths & weaknesses.

          So I want a Nikon mirrorless that I can use alongside my DSLRs without buying a bunch of new lenses–not one to replace my DSLRs. But I want this to come with a new mount so I can actually have multiple reasons to buy a mirrorless!

          • RC Jenkins

            Here’s a comparison: Think night time in suburbia.

            I took a camera and looked in each viewfinder. The camera taking the pictures has the exact same settings: 1/8 seconds, ISO 800, F/1.9.

            Here’s what I see through the OVF on a DSLR:
            https://uploads.disquscdn.com/images/b8df870c7c6dfdda8ea6d05ddea18c03abe54882279149f554009d98a96c92ae.png

            And here’s the same view, through the EVF on a mirrorless (aps-c Fuji), using the same lens with an adapter:
            https://uploads.disquscdn.com/images/28c85547b41ddc3a2fab3b24a51ccedad04543aac613c60e1607ebfe1cafbd47.png

            I can also vary the EVF’s brightness, white balance, contrast, saturation, features, etc.

            Or even the magnification…here’s a magnified view, with focus peaking:
            https://uploads.disquscdn.com/images/f921516d53e203b65939290009cf2c6490af9ea0bb15e8629bb23a37c232b51e.png

            Both of these obviously look much better in person, but I hope this gets the point across.

            You can pretty much try something similar: try using your rear LCD vs. OVF. You should be able to see more through your LCD in the dark.

            I apologize in advance, but I must use this opportunity to say: That’s a pretty “night & day” difference…. XD

            Sometimes I prefer OVFs; but in the dark, the EVF is so much more useful. And that’s just the EVF part of the differences…

            • peter w

              You seem to have enough material for an article on this. Thanks for sharing.

            • RC Jenkins

              Maybe once it comes out, I’ll see if Peter will let me write a review or something. 🙂

            • peter w

              BTW, somebody over here keeps refering me to a eyepiece to put on the screen of the DSLR, an LCD viewfinder. Using Lifeview you should get a fine and detailed OVF. And a nice and bulky camera starting to look like a PhaseOne.

            • RC Jenkins

              Yes, that could be done as well (or on the hotshoe mount). I have no experience with them.

              One problem in doing that with current Nikon DSLRs is that you lose PDAF if you want to autofocus. May not be a problem at night, since my experience with mirrorless AF so far has been that it sucks at night, so you have to manually focus anyway. 😛

              So far, my Nikon DSLRs are generally better at autofocusing (MUCH better autofocusing in low light), and my mirrorless cameras are MUCH better at manually focusing.

              Another is that your DSLR must support focus peaking, magnification, etc. for this to show up in the EVF.

              Then you have to worry about where to put it & the wiring, worry about battery life, etc. Things like that.

              But all else equal, a “clip-on” EVF on a DSLR should be just as effective as one built into the camera, provided the DSLR supports this sort of output.

            • PhilK

              Re: manual focusing – it doesn’t help that focusing screens in modern DSLRs have become very problematic for manual focusing because they are
              now optimized for maximum light-transmission (eg light collimation), rather than manual
              focusing. (eg, groundglass)

            • RC Jenkins

              This is correct.

              The metering sensor on most modern DSLRs is also based on the image on the focusing screen. This can lead to a level of inaccuracy in metering.

            • TurtleCat

              My biggest issue with using the Nikon live view at night is the terrible refresh rate plus not being able to uncouple the exposure. That was one thing I liked with the Fuji. You could keep it at 100fps and max gain to more easily see and focus.

            • RC Jenkins

              Yes. I believe many people who think of EVF immediately base their conclusions on experiences on Nikon’s Live view in rear LCD. But this is not the case with modern EVFs released the past few years. EVFs in mirrorless cameras are purpose-built for this type of shooting.

            • peter w

              I would like to see a hot shoe mount EVF for D850, if this yields improved battery life. Google doesn’t give any results yet.

            • Sure, guest posts are always welcome.

            • Davo

              Someone (possibly Ming Thein but I can’t recall) mentioned something along the lines of:
              EVFs are a help to focusing in the dark only to a certain extent. If the boosted electronic image is overwhelmed by noise or lacks adequate contrast then EVFs become useless for focusing.
              However if the eye is allowed to properly adapt to the dark environment, then MF through OVF is still possible. I think the reference was to subjects such as astrophotography, focusing on stars.
              Can you comment?

            • PhilK

              I can tell you just from LiveView usage on a DSLR that even after your eyes acclimatize to the darkness a good EVF still has a substantial advantage over the naked eye or the naked eye through an OVF when it comes to “seeing in the dark”.

              But as we should all know by now each system has its strengths and weaknesses.

            • Davo

              I’ll have to find the link but IIRC it was referencing focusing on stars.
              So for that specific case scenario I can imagine it might be impossible to distinguish between a noise and small light points.

            • PhilK

              Perhaps, but I’d think star photography focusing is pretty easy since once you focus on one bright thing, all the rest (bright and dark) are in focus since they’re all at infinity. 😉

              Just try going out into some really dark place where you can’t see the subject well enough to focus, then turn on LiveView. I think that’s one of the best things about an EVF for sure. (Especially since the older I get, the weaker my eyes light-gathering power seems to get.. )

            • Davo

              I’m still using a D700 and though it has LV, I never touch it 🙂

            • peter w

              Well… I must say, for macro photography D850, D500 and D750 are quite a few steps ahead. Put your camera on the ground, on a bean bag, or even on your hand, tilt the screen, check the focus and shoot one photo or a sequence for focus stacking. No shutter and mirror shake (didn’t test focus stacking in life view yet, hopefully it is there too).

            • PhilK

              It’s very handy for fine focusing while on a tripod.

              Go ahead and try it at night and see if you can see what I mean about how cool it is to be able to “see in the dark” with an EVF. 🙂

            • Davo

              Though i’m without a mirrorless body currently, I had been a user for years so I’m pretty aware of EVF capabilities.
              Basically I’m seeing very limited situations where I’d prefer EVF over OVF from a practical standpoint.
              If I can still see the subject through the OVF, I prefer OVF because EVF start to operate sub optimally when light level drops (although EVF can give a brighter image). If I can’t see the subject then I’m likely to be on a tripod in which case LV (on newer camera bodies than my ancient D700) can take over.
              So i’m left with a small number of situations where I can’t see through the OVF but still want to shoot handheld on the fly where EVF would be more advantageous. I guess my type of photography just doesn’t exploit the EVF advantage in low light.

            • TurtleCat

              It kind of depends. While you would think it’s within the DOF to focus on the moon, it often doesn’t work out quite that perfectly. Of course there are other problems like a flat field, coma, and the like to be considered. For things other than starscapes, dedicated astrophotographers will often use an automated focus system since the environment effects tend to also change focal position as well as gravity. While minute, there are noticeable focus differences between most interesting objects in the night sky.

            • PhilK

              Very interesting.

              Seems counter-intuitive to me but I don’t do enough shooting of astronomical objects to be any sort of authority on such things..

            • RC Jenkins

              Your eyes will always lack enough light to manual focus before your EVF does. Remember that the EVF has a larger “aperture/iris”, larger “sensor / retina”, and longer refresh rate than your eyes do. That image I took shows that the viewfinder was very noisy (and it was very dark)–but it was still far better than manual focusing with the naked eye.

              For night or astrophotography, I also use the dimmest setting (or auto) for both the EVF & LCD brightness so that my eyes don’t lose too much adjustment to the environment. But remember that even a DSLRs information display within the OVF (text along the bottom) can cause your eyes to readjust in these scenarios.

              In astrophotography, neither system “wins,” because a tilting LCD does (awkward position of the camera pointing upward). I also use magnified view for focusing in this scenario because focusing on stars through an OVF + wide-angle lens in pitch black darkness is impossible. Often, even just seeing any stars is impossible. 🙂

            • Davo

              Thanks for that. I can’t seem to find the reference so I might have remembered incorrectly.
              However I’m still not that convinced of the EVF advantage. And I’ve owned and used a number of mirrorless cameras as well as tried out pretty much every EVF ypbto the A9.
              In practice, if I’m photographing in low light I can still make out my subject in the OVF. In this scenario I’m trusting the AF system can see better than I can either through actually autofocusing or MF with dot confirmation.
              But if I can’t even see the subject, then I agree a boosted image offers an advantage compositionally. But in this scenario, it’d be so dark that I’m on a tripod anyways so there’s no difference with using Liveview.
              So in practice I haven’t really found a situation where EVF offered me an advantage in low light especially given the fact that most EVF refresh rates drop in low light giving a poorer user experience.
              I guess if you manual focus a lot then peaking beats dot confirmation.
              And I agree EVF exposure approximation is also more intuitive than looking at the metering bar indicator.

          • PhilK

            I agree it’s cool to have a way to view the scene that shows you more low-light detail than you can see with your naked eye. I’m just not a fan of the swimming and pulsing and low-res that many EVFs exhibit.

            Re: that tilt/shift adapter – technically you could do the same thing on a DSLR, though only at closer-than-infinity distances. And no aperture coupling from an old Nikkor is going to actuate through that adapter on a MILC, either.

            Also, those things are really only practical when the sensor is 1/2 the size of the format the lens was originally designed to cover, or else the image quality will not be very good except perhaps dead center. (Especially with extreme movements such as that depicted in the pic)

            • RC Jenkins

              You should read my other recent comments in reference to this. Already mentioned the considerations about the tilt-shift adapter.

              Which specific EVFs are you referencing with the swimming and pulsing? Mine wasn’t swimming & pulsing in this scene.

  • Claude Mayonnaise

    What are the chances Nikon ever makes a solid mirrorless camera under $1500?

  • sexyjon

    On the Nikon website the Nikon 1V3, Nikon 1 J5 and Nikon 1 AW1 are not listed as discontinued. So officially Nikon is still offering 3 cameras in the 1 lineup. Whatever that means.

    • The v3 is listed as discontinued at Nikon Japan (see link in post) – this is the only websites that lists discontinued products, not sure which website you are looking at.

    • Leonore Franckenstein

      It means that they learned that if they discontinued a camera the prices would fall… they usually keep a camera on their list for a couple years after the newer model comes out.

      • sexyjon

        Maybe that is what they are doing. I would have preferred that they continued with the system, making some long primes etc. I have just finished adapting a Sigma 70-200 f/2.8 lens to my J5. It works fine with focus magnifying and focus confirmation and metering. Of course no stabilizing and manual focus only so mostly to use on a tripod. Just imagine how good this system would be with a compact 70-200 f/2.8 lens made for the 1 system. Would give you 540 mm field of view and f/2.8. I think the problem at Nikon is that they are afraid of their own system versus other alternatives. But nowadays when airlines are allowing less cabin baggage it is of great benefit for the travelling photographer to have a light weight and compact system and the Nikon 1 system is the most compact and lightweight system so far. It is a mistake to dump this camera system.

  • Mehdi R

    Guys, is there any website to compare mirrorless cameras vs DSLR with lenses on except camerasize.com in terms of size?

    • AYWY

      I think it is best to walk in a store and observe the display yourself…

  • fanboy fagz

    I hope youre right but im worried they might half ass it like the DF.
    I hope the D850 was the start of the new nikon knowing that when you try to remove demanded features (like the 6d II) it will turn people away

    • PhilK

      Re: “removing demanded features” – you mean like the D7500? 😉

      Thing about the Df was that they didn’t really engineer any unique technology for that camera, just took the sensor from the D4, AF and most stuff from the D600, and put it in a body that looked like an FE. And charged a stupid price for it.

      Re: battery capacity, apparently the main enabler for drastically improving the battery life on the A7RIII was much better miniaturization of the electronics on that model vs its predecessor.

      Given that Sony has long been one of the best in the world in regards to electronics miniaturization, it may be an uphill battle to compete head-to-head with them on that front for Nikon.

      • fanboy fagz

        they half assed the DF. slow af module that cant focus in low light for a sensor thats cable of. no video. we can argue about the video but they could have shoved it in. especially for the price.

        lets see if nikon can deliver. the enel15 is a great battery that delivers many pics per charge

        • PhilK

          I understand the lack of video for a camera focused on a “retro” experience.

          Interestingly enough, I could have even been in the target demographic for such a camera, as I like dedicated analog controls and have zero interest in video.

          But I never liked the functionality, ergonomic and aesthetic choices on that model, nor the price. (I owned both the FM-2 and FE-2 but never particularly liked their ergonomics or aesthetic design. The first “mid-range” Nikon I really liked was the F-100.)

    • Ian Lee

      if they make a full frame D850 mirrorless (or maybe D5) with command dials as a fuji x-t2, they will have a mega winner. If they do as you said a ”half” job like the DF they will fail.

      • fanboy fagz

        dude, a d850 body mirrorless. wow. that would be the shit right there

  • When somebody finally comes out with a high performance mirrorless it will have the potential to be a hit. Look at how much smaller and lighter a Sony A7 is than any DSLR. That’s appealing. Look at a Fuji x100F, X-Pro2 and some of their other models where the viewfinder is on the upper left corner of the back of the camera. That provides a real advantage in some kinds of shooting. Think about the additional degrees of freedom Nikon optical engineers will have with a shorter flange to sensor distance when designing wide angle lenses. That can be a game changer in terms of image quality. The current state of the art of EVFs isn’t very good IMHO, but somebody is going to solve that. As for mirrorless cameras doing some things that DSLRs don’t, like face recognition, well turn it off. I’ve had video on several DSLRs and NEVER used it; not even once to just “see what it’s like”. No biggie. I’m traveling to Europe this year and really don’t want to drag around my Df and even just one lens. After borrowing and/or renting a handful of small cameras, I’ve decided on a Fuji X100F. I know it’s not an ILC, but the form factor is exactly what I want. The viewfinder gets around the latency problems associated with EVFs and I can always check a histogram or focus if I feel the need. I looked at Nikon 1 but the color depth and DR just didn’t thrill me and I passed.

    If Nikon starts from scratch and makes an optimal camera from the design basics given by mirrorless, and then offers an adapter that allows the use of legacy glass they’ll have something pretty cool. Will they sell a bunch of them? Shit, who knows.

    • Markus

      But I think the A7 has major shortcomings in terms of handling due to its size. It is just a unbalanced camera with heavier lenses. An issue most DSLRs never had, especially not the ones in the price range of the A7. It may not be a major problem on a tripod but handheld it is, at least for me.

      • Bohemian Rhapsody

        There is always compromises … I will sacriface handling for small size camera ….

      • That’s why I pointed out the advantages of designing superior wide angle lenses with the mirrorless format. No one camera can do everything. I see mirrorless as the perfect walk-around, travel camera that’s capable of professional-quality images.

    • PhilK

      Re: someone “solving the problem” of EVFs, it just occurred to me…

      One of the products that Nikon makes are very expensive photolithography machines used by microchip manufacturers to create the microscopic patterns used to produce the circuitry inside microchips.

      And while their very very top super-expensive models have recently become eclipsed by a giant European consortium, they still make lots of the lower-end devices that are used to produce flat-panel displays. (And make significant profit from, as they are in high demand)

      One of the challenges with EVF technology is increasing the resolution of the display. The imaging part of the EVF is very small – generally around 1/2 inch, but in that small area needs to be enough pixels to show a good resolution image after it is magnified within the viewfinder.

      Theoretically, Nikon could use its deep and class-leading expertise in super-high-resolution silicon microlithography and produce a flat-panel patterning device capable of producing a 1/2 inch panel (such as used in EVFs) with the highest-resolution ever – and make themselves the first, priority customer of its production.

      Now THAT would turn some heads amongst the mirrorless fanboys, that Nikon leapfrogged all of their favorite brands with a dramatically higher-resolution EVF than has ever been produced before. 😀

      https://www.neocamera.com/article/evf_sizes?sort=resolution

  • The risk of having a stream of new lens mounts from various manufacturers is that they will be discontinued, and instead of having a 50 year old lens that still works on a modern camera, you will have a paperweight.

    Personally, I feel it would bring more value to a camera body if it used existing lenses natively. People who put their trust in Nikon now know what its like to have purchased Sony gear over the years.

  • MyrddinWilt

    Any new mirrorless camera is going to consist of a processing package and a sensor package. And the processing package is where most of the work goes for Nikon. They can buy the sensors off the shelf for the Nikon 1 series. So it is possible that there is a refresh of the CX mount bodies at the same time, just not very likely 🙁

    What was bizarre about the Nikon 1 line is that there are really only two good reasons to go mirrorless. One is to make killer wide angle lenses. The other is to do pro video. Nikon never fulfilled the potential on either score.

    It will be interesting to see what they do with the new line but it will lack one key feature for me, providing a teleconverter substitute. Stick an 80-400 zoom on a Nikon 1 and you have a 1000 mm lens.

    • Markus

      The 6,7-13 mm lens is quite good.

      • Bijan Choudhury

        I wish Nikon would keep the Nikon 1 line and introduce the Full frame mirrorless … but it appears unlikely at this point in time …

      • MyrddinWilt

        Its only a 100 degree angle of view. A 14mm full frame is 114.

  • Nikuza

    A Phoenix reborn… with an F-mount…

    • Markus

      A V3 with the optional grip as a FX camera, the viewfinder built in and the standard flash hotshoe would be a very tempting package to me.

      I love my V3 and it will be a keeper until it breaks.

  • PhotoJoe55

    This crap looks very familiar…

  • Davo

    Maybe they can do an adapter for Z-mount 😛 Long live the Nikon 1!!!
    Now I just need a 145MP FF sensor to equal the current Nikon 1 pixel density.
    I wonder if they can vary the pixel density of a sensor?

    • By my math J5 pixel density scaled up to FF would only be 54mp. Where are you getting 145?

      • RC Jenkins

        Where are you getting 54MP? Are you just multiplying 20MP by the crop factor? (That’s wrong).

        You need to multiply by the square of the crop factor, since the crop factor is linear, while sensors have 2 dimensions. The height & width are each 2.7x smaller.

        In other words, FF has a sensor area that’s roughly 7.3x larger than Nikon 1.

        7.3 x 20.8 = roughly 150MP.

      • Davo

        20*2.7^2
        D500’s pixel density scaled to FF is already 45MP (D850’s resolution), the maths being 20*1.5^2.
        A 20MP m43 scaled to FF would be ~80MP (20*2^2).
        J5 has a 1” sensor (2.7X crop factor).

  • Leonore Franckenstein

    No wonder itis discontinued. Why should anyone buy a camera with such a small sensor. Smaller than a MFT camera, at over $1,100. I could buy a Nikon D5400 or D5500 pr a Canon D750/760 or the cheaper Nikons/Canons for less with kit lens and they have an APS-C sensor, 4xtimes or more in size. Look at the new Fujis w/24Mps or the older models w/16Mps at a lower price, they are smaller than a DSLR at
    a fair price.

    • BVS

      Sony RX100 V is $1,000, and RX10 IV is $1,700, so I guess somebody is buying them.

      • Leonore Franckenstein

        Dear BVS, why don’t you see the difference between a small sensor camera without the chance to use other lenses, like a Zeiss Distagon 21mm 2.8, for exapmle. For the $500 you can save on a BETTER body like the Nikon 5400/3400. No Deep pass filter, 2SDs, Expeed 4, Think about all of the people in Asia who only buy Sonys and how mayn people in the world who get it wrong.

      • Leonore Franckenstein

        The price has nothing to do with how many people
        buy something.

  • vau

    Will be missed. Not.

    • %(numUsers)

      Ayuh. Nikon completely screwed the pooch (so to speak…) with the CX line. (In the singular – the S and J models were a complete joke to begin with.)

      The V2 was kinda-sorta-almost viable upon introduction… but their answer to Sony’s 1″ killers and the explosion of MFTs at comparable price points (and with far better lens lineup) left Nikon dead in the water. Their answer…? Make the V3 have worse ergonomics and make the EVF an optional extra.

      Slow clap.

      • The lenses were great and the patents and designs for ones that didn’t come out were too, every body was a let down in some way though, at the end I just wanted a Sony RX with a CX mount 🙁
        Nikon how can Sony beat you so handily? They are a lumbering 800lb Gorilla spread thin, this shouldn’t be the case.

  • mikew

    I will be sorry if its the demise of the 1 series,i only ever post online dont ever hope to sell images.
    My V2 with the Sigma 150-600 is a handy birding tool, already i had made the decision that it would not get developed enough so i bought into m4/3 for a small light system.
    Sold all my DX/FX gear and its too late for me to comeback to Nikon no matter what they do,this is after nearly 50 years.

  • Pancanikonpus

    Nikon wasted so much time not to cannibalize own DSLR sales and introduced this N1. and now go back to the square, extremely inexperienced management lead team made all this in earliest day.

    • Markus

      Imho they cared too much on their volumes models 3xxx and 5xxx. I think the buyers of the lines above would have bought a N Series as an additonal system.

      Nikon should have seen the N1 lines as a possible replacement for their entry level DSLRs. And they should have reduced it to a single model the 5xxx series.

  • whisky

    bring on the Cx/Dx/Fx mirrorless hybrid.

  • The Nikon 1 AW1 camera is also listed as discontinued at B&H: https://bhpho.to/2DcMW2L

  • Man, Nikon screwed up so royally. If only they held the V3 release to get the sensor that went in the J5- but of course, they had no idea what they were doing apparently. I would have upgraded my V2 to the V3 full price but instead waited until the J5 went on clearance recently to pick one up for under $300. A V3 released just a year later would have had the sensor it deserved. I do not expect a V4. And I’m sick and tired of Nikon not being forthcoming about their product direction, it just reeks of mismanagement and incoherent strategy.

  • Neopulse

    Just wish the camera actually dropped in price. Was too expensive off the bat and made other cameras like the Olympus MFT system more enticing in comparison.

  • Back to top