POLL - micro cameras for Nikon and Canon

[Benchista]

Well it's rapidly running out of time in my case...
But I think you're taking this whole "grumpy old man" act waaaaay too far. Are you seriously arguing that all kit has to be designed for everyone? Should all cameras come with a built-in zimmer frame? Should we take your unique brand of political correctness further and ban cameras altogether as they're of little use to blind people? Absurd arguments of course, but where do we draw the line? No, it's just another choice, and a niche one at that. If it's not for you, fine - Nikon and Canon (and Barney and I) certainly won't abandon cameras with viewfinders, but there's another choice for those that want it. Certainly there seem to be people a lot older than you perfectly happy with existing viewfinderless MFT options, and I doubt if they're all waving their cameras about at arm's length.
On the subject of control by menus, though, I'm entirely with you. That's why I've not bought an MFT camera, and opted for the compact I did - it has a much more sensible physical control layout, and it's one area where I would expect Canon and probably Nikon to shine in this niche.

[daft_biker]

Yeah, I wonder where Nikon would put the ISO button on a MFT camera. Then again how far away from your fingers could it be on a compact

[RogerMac]

The poll said "Should introduce" so I voted don't know. If it had said "Will introduce" I would have voted yes as this has to be a certainty, given the market share that mFT has already taken.

Roger

[huwevans]

Hey, you asked the question - remember? I just answered it.

Why at arm's length? I just don't get that. Etc.

I think you're taking this whole "grumpy old man" act waaaaay too far

Well, get used to it - it's only going to get worse from here on in. I've got a couple more years before I hit 50, and I'm not happy about it!

[TimF]

I think you're taking this whole "grumpy old man" act waaaaay too far

Well, get used to it - it's only going to get worse from here on in. I've got a couple more years before I hit 50, and I'm not happy about it!






[/QUOTE]
Time to get yourself a Leica and an old Landrover, and start wearing a smock and a monocle I reckon!

[huwevans]

Not a bad idea - so if anyone out there would like to contribute to the newly instituted 'Buy Huw a Leica Fund'...

[El_Sid]

I've got a couple more years before I hit 50...

You young whippersnapper...

[huwevans]

I've got a couple more years before I hit 50...

You young whippersnapper...

Well, inside I'm still in my 20s, of course. It's just externally that things are showing a few signs of disrepair. If I were a camera body I'd definitely be 'brassing', and my shutter would be a good half a stop slow.

[Learning]

nor do I like holding a camera at arm's length so I would want some other option for composing.

Why would you do that? Why? There's no reason to whatsoever.

Have you been drinking Barney, If it doesn't have a mirror or an EVF you use the screen on the back, at arm's length, to compose the picture. Like some one I know does with a D90!!

Why at arm's length? I just don't get that. Take my little S90 - the controls are just in the wrong place to use at arm's length, but get it a lot closer to your face, and they're absolutely perfect - it's clearly not designed for arm's length use, and nor should it be.

I am appallingly myopic; think bicep curl rather than front raise when using a compact screen

[Still_Togging_Along]

I'd guess Canon and Nikon probably will, but I suspect there are people within these companies who ....

A. Dislike the idea of a product that uses 'someone elses' standardised design format,

B. Using the M4/3rds bayonet mount, which is now 'universal' for this format.

C. The distinct possability that this will mean paying Olypmus or 'New kids on the block' a fee for using their mount and electronic coupling designs.

Personally I feel that all of the above features, mean users are no longer 'locked into' a particular manufacturer's products and there is at long last a 'Universal' bayonet mount, as was the case with the Pentax screw mount.

For some Canon and Nikon die-hards/'Fundamentalists', the use of such a mount, may well be viewed with utter horror.

[Benchista]

I'd guess Canon and Nikon probably will, but I suspect there are people within these companies who ....

A. Dislike the idea of a product that uses 'someone elses' standardised design format,

B. Using the M4/3rds bayonet mount, which is now 'universal' for this format.

C. The distinct possability that this will mean paying Olypmus or 'New kids on the block' a fee for using their mount and electronic coupling designs.

Personally I feel that all of the above features, mean users are no longer 'locked into' a particular manufacturer's products and there is at long last a 'Universal' bayonet mount, as was the case with the Pentax screw mount.

For some Canon and Nikon die-hards/'Fundamentalists', the use of such a mount, may well be viewed with utter horror.

Sorry, your main assumption is just plain wrong. MFT is NOT "universal for this format"; Samsung have already released a camera with an alternative mount and sensor size, and Sony have shown a camera of this type with yet another mount. I think there is absolutely zero chance of Canon or Nikon using MFT; personally, I rather suspect Canon will produce a mount that is somehow compatible with EF-S, but whatever, I would be absolutely astonished if they went down the MFT route - and I think it would be madness for them to do it, too.

Oh, and M42 wasn't the "Pentax" screw mount, it was the Pentacon/Praktica screw mount - Pentax came to it much later. But there was an absolute plethora of competing mounts back then, there never really was a universal mount.

[daft_biker]

Aye, I can't see Canon using Oly lenses when they have the biggest lens range out there. A short extension tube to make a new mount EF and EF-S compatible would seem to be the logical way to go to me if Canon do decide they're losing too many sales to MFT. From what I can gather folk are buying MFT and DSLRs so I don't see a pressing need for Canon or Nikon to worry.

When folk lose interest in their new DSLRs they might worry but MFT seems like an awfy small market for the big guns to rethink their plans for. At least until somebody does a properly good MFT I doubt they'll take much notice.

[GeoffR]

Some on here have entirely missed the point, deliberately?

When I said I didn't like taking pictures at "arm's length" I was alluding to the fact that I don't like using the monitor on the back of a camera as a view finder, at any distance. I don't like EVFs either but no one commented on that!

I want the, preferably Nikon, mirror-less camera but I want some other form of viewfinder OK?

[Benchista]

Sorry, I thought you actually meant what you had said, my bad.

[daft_biker]

Some on here have entirely missed the point, deliberately?

Not deliberatly in my case - parallax error would be a bigger problem for me than a pixellated view. At least I'd get the subject in the picture even if the focus was iffy

[dangie]

Canon and Nikon will already have mirrorless micro-system cameras developed. Just waiting for what they think is the right time to introduce them. Whichever one does it first, the other will announce theirs the next day..!! Of course each will have their own lens mount. B**ger the consumer.

As I've said before, audio-visual products eg Televisions, HiFi's, DVD's etc, of whatever make, work together. WHY CAN'T CAMERAS..!!

[Barney]

As I've said before, audio-visual products eg Televisions, HiFi's, DVD's etc, of whatever make, work together. WHY CAN'T CAMERAS..!!

But they do, in just the same way. You buy an SD or CF card and it will work in any brand of camera just as a CD will work in any HiFi. Look at DVDs though and it will only play in certain regions.

I'm sure if you looked into it, certain manufacturers of brown goods have protocols which will only integrate with their own range.

Having said that, it would be nice for one of the big two to join the MFT mount brigade.

[sey]

............Having said that, it would be nice for one of the big two to join the MFT mount brigade.

it would have to be the little people and not the big two to mount MFT, Barney.
don't think you could have 'em [img]/forums/images/graemlins/tongue.gif[/img]

[Benchista]

Canon and Nikon will already have mirrorless micro-system cameras developed. Just waiting for what they think is the right time to introduce them. Whichever one does it first, the other will announce theirs the next day..!! Of course each will have their own lens mount. B**ger the consumer.

As I've said before, audio-visual products eg Televisions, HiFi's, DVD's etc, of whatever make, work together. WHY CAN'T CAMERAS..!!

Not entirely true - yes, my TV and Blu-ray player work together, but they've got entirely different protocols with regard to remote controls, synchonised start-up and so on. But as regards cameras, it would bugger me up if Canon used MFT and not a mount more compatible with the lenses I own, and I'm not alone there. I'm simply not interested in a standardised mount, it would be a catastrophic move IMHO for everyone who owns a few lenses.

[RogerMac]

it would bugger me up if Canon used MFT and not a mount more compatible with the lenses I own, and I'm not alone there. I'm simply not interested in a standardised mount, it would be a catastrophic move IMHO for everyone who owns a few lenses.

Whatever mount Canon chose for the their micro offering (whenever that comes) they will have to produce an adaptor for EF etc. lenses to the new format. I can see no reason why they can't produce such an adaptor for mFT to EF allowing full functionality. In fact I would be surprised if the third party lens makers did not have such a development in hand at the moment.

One of the reasons I will one day buy a mFT camera is that the adaptors already exist for Canon FD lenses.

Roger