43 Rumors

How will Nikon fanboys explain away the even less shallow DOF of this camera compared to FF, and even compared to m4/3 and 4/3, and probably worse high ISO noice, than m4/3 and 4/3 has?

Should be interesting to here why such a small sensor will superior to anything else mirrorless.

If the crop will be 2.7 the sensor area in mm2 will be 118.
the micro43 is 225mm2.It’s 2 time bigger.
It’s quite impossible to have the same image quality keeping, for example, a 12mp sensor.

I wonder what the register distance will be. Probably even shorter than that of the M4/3 format. That means that you can make adapters for using M4/3 lenses on the new Nikon system, although I doubt the aperture and focus control will work. Making an adapter which translates the electronic control signals is probably not easy.

The various register distances:

http://m43photo.blogspot.com/2010/04/register-distance.html

This looks like another disappointing dud from the makers of Coolpix, a product line that in general has absolutely nothing going for it. The only reason Coolpixies sell is that they’ve got distribution; I don’t think the Nikon brand name means anything to anyone who isn’t already involved in photography.

Clearly Nikon only cares about DSLRs — they do a good job of those — and the result is this lame phoned-in design. It’s as if someone said, “Okay, we need to be in the mirrorless market… what’s the LEAST we can do to get in it?”

It looks like Nikon have designed a system that avoids any overlap with their DSLR range. They see customers upgrading from P&S cameras to it, rather than DLSR users switching to something smaller and lighter, but with equivalent image quality, like the NEX. Nikon are trying to protect the market for the lenses they’ve spent decades developing, but unfortunately for Nikon, I don’t think it will work in the long run and they will have to release a better system than this small sensor effort. IMO M43 is the minimum sensor size for a mirrorless camera to be taken seriously, and the GF3 with a pancake or X-lens is already as small as many P&S cameras.

They are “jumping the shark”. Nikon is gona die, if they dont do something reasonable really quick..

It so fkin easy to get it right, why nobody does?

Whether or not this eats NEX, NX, and µ4/3′s lunch kind of depends on just how small it is, and just how competitive they can keep IQ. I’ve always felt that the µ4/3 size sensor is the right compromise of IQ and size; Nikon’s decision to have an even smaller sensor I think validates the notion that “bigger sensor isn’t always better” in such cameras.

The initial price point listed here (if correct) is too high, of course, and I’m sure that the lens lineup will start off too small. But remember, this is Nikon, and they can fix both of those problems very quickly.

It will be very strong, because their sensor will be better. M43 sensors suck (and I say so as a M43 owner and lover, but the sensor is really their weak point, they should use a APS-C and ignore the area outside the 2x crop – a few pixels wasted, but quite a better quality)

PS: admin, I can’t vote because of this annoying IP-based poll: somebody already voted from the IP my ISP gave me.

I think Nikon realizes the success of 4/3′s and is introducing this to capture market share from M4/3. Now the M4/3 boys need to ensure their marketing strategies are strong even though they were first to the game Nikon has the dominant name in photography over Oly/Pan, but not so in mirrorless and that’s what should be exploited.

Nikon going so small will only strenghten m4/3 position as the optimum size. Regarding IQ there has not happened any revolution in physical reality. Therefore this sensor has the same RAW abilities as similar size P&S sensors plus/minus a few percent. Nikon has better introduce razor sharp f/2 and faster lenses and a phenomenal JPEG engine to rise above LX5/S95/XZ-1 crowd. Nikon is a brand or the brand among photographers but this camera should sell like the proverbial hot cakes among people never heard of Nikon.
-p-

In the US there is one aspect where Nikon has a huge advantage. Nikon products are everywhere. You can go into just about any major retailer and see and hold Nikon cameras. Not so with Panasonic and Olympus. I’ve never seen a Panasonic m43 camera at a major retailer. None of the specialty shops in my area have them. Olympus is almost the same way, but they can be found now and again.

This will be a huge factor. Panny & Oly need to get their stuff out to the forefront in North America or they’ll never gain a foothold like they have in Japan. So, in North America Nikon will be a strong competitor.

There will be a market for the 2.7x crop factor MILC, provided it has EVF. Superzoom shooters will see an interesting IQ upgrade path plus other benefits of an EVF-based MILC system. Most superzooms use sensors with a crop factor of about 5 or 6. Price will be the determining factor. An entry-level kit price of more than $600 will just not fly.

“In theory m43 sensors will still have a higher image quality but the smaller Nikon sensor will allow a more compact body and lens design.”

The Nikon sensor is rumored to be 10 MP. With a low pixel count, and Nikon’s skill with image processors, I wouldn’t bet the house on that statement above. A little common sense please – Nikon knows they’d get blasted in the press if they waited two years to enter the mirrorless market, and then delivered a product that didn’t at least match the best of what was already out there. I expect image quality to be quite good, and visibly better than m4/3 at high ISO. Also, with all do respect, your constant cheer-leading for m4/3, and bashing of other manufacturers makes your site seem rather unprofessional, and makes you look like a run-of-the-mill fanboy.