Discussion in 'News - Discussion' started by CSBC, Sep 22, 2016.
They also said they had no plans for full frame DSLRs either...
Well when it was launched I was pleased to see a 1" sensor because I believe that size of sensor is a sweet spot for small lightweight all round cameras.
But Canon, Sony, Panasonic etc have the right use of such a sensor in high end bridge cameras.
Nikon bridge camera don't seem to cut the mustard against other makers. So they should have used that sensor for a bridge instead of the 1 system.
If Nikon do abandon the 1 system they should do the fair thing and release the lens mount from royalties/license so other lens makers can support the existing 1 bodies out there.
The other option is to give the system a all round lens say 8mm - 200mm similar to the bridge cameras.
Nothing stopping Nikon doing this as far as I can see.
There have been hints that Sigma might support the 1 system. In which case they might engineer a "travel" lens as they are sometimes called.
What's more likely to happen is Nikon produce a full frame mirrorless similar to Sony A7 with a new mount that can run a adapter for the Nikkor used on cameras like the D800.
I know there are die hard lovers of the the dSLR but as I have said for awhile it is going to become niche or die out. We are now seeing nearly 4million dot EVFs. Next generation EVFs will hit 6 and 8millions dots have very fast refresh rates and of course be OLED.
To achieve the new functionality in cameras the mirror has to go.
Make sense to see what the sensor sees not your own eyes so that you can know what the result will be from pushing the button.
SLR was a great technology for its day as was previous improvements but like all technology it going to be pushed out down the line.
Can you imagine in a couple of years the press taking shots of a president, PM or red carpet and silences no clattering of mirrors just flashguns ( if that ) LOL
I have never seen anybody using one of these. I have seen them secondhand in CEX though!
Me neither but to be fair (difficult I know) they are probably sufficiently small and inconspicuous to get under my radar
I think there was a simple reason for the Nikon 1's failure...
Nikon 1 sensor size: 13.2mm x 8.8mm (116.16 sqmm)
Panasonic GM5 sensor size: 17.3mm x 13mm (224.9 sqmm)
Nikon 1 dimensions: 106mm x 61mm x 30mm (193,980 cbmm)
Panasonic GM5 dimensions: 98.5mm x 49.5mm x 36.1mm (176,014.58 cbmm)
In other words, nearly twice the sensor area in a 10% smaller casing.
Well according to DxOMark there not much in it having a MFT sensor.
But it does make a difference if you want extra reach this is why the latest bridge cameras are using a 1" sensor.
Also less power is used by a smaller sensor.
Well when the Nikon 1 was announced I downloaded the brochure and the publicity photos in it had very serious artifacts, far worse any I have seen on any of my 4/3 cameras so I decided that if Nikon could not get it right in controlled conditions the system was not for me
Edit: Your gloss "Not much in it" conceals the fact that the Panasonic was ahead.
Some people don't seem to think Dxomark tests are that useful: http://www.dslrbodies.com/newsviews/do-you-believe-in-dxomark.html or https://northrup.photo/canon-5ds-r-dxomark-scores-why-you-shouldnt-care/ - I merely mention this because their results appear to be at odds with received wisdom on sensor size. Then again, I started with film and bigger was certainly better then but in electronics smaller is generally better, so perhaps it's time for me to recalibrate my prejudices.
I always felt the problem with the 1 series was the initial pricing - they were somewhat expensive for what they offered and the lens range was limited and equally expensive. Overall the basic 1 cameras are are more competitively priced and there's a reasonable range of lenses though not a comprehensive one - nor do there appear to be any 3rd party alternatives which there are for MFT and APS CSCs.
While they don't appear to have been an overwheliming success here remember that other markets may have another view - Japan for instance has often shown itself more amenable to small and miniature cameras than the UK and the NiKon 1 may well be a big seller in it's home market just on it's size.
I have a 1 J5.
The images have rarely been as I would expect, at least in the JPEgs.
A couple of days ago I was clearing out some images from Lightroom, and came across some that were terrible, but right beside them were good shots.
The difference? JPEGS and raw files. The raw files were fine, but the in-camera processing to JPEG is terrible.
Needless to say, I need to use raw, but that is not an issue, as it is my preferred method.
The only reason for getting 1 series above others is the Next mon lenses I already have, for which I will soon buy an adaptor.
On another note, Nikons delayed advanced compacts are officially dead in the water.
Errr... That was supposed to read "the only reason for getting 1 series is the Nikon lenses I already have."
Damn auto correct
I guessed that...
But actually, I think that was another area the system fell down - the crop factor makes a lot of lenses less than useful. My EOS M and M3 cameras might not be cutting edge, but they integrate well into my EOS system, which makes them very useful to me. If I were a Nikon user, the 1 series would not have been anything like so useful.
... and now Nikon appear to have cancelled their high end DL compact range, with many job losses mentioned.
I have always considered the Nikon 1 system to be rather pointless and an ill-judged introduction, if ever there was an award for the wrong product at the wrong time I would nominate this.
I think that's fair comment; it always seemed to me to be a product without any real target market, having too many compromises to suit any one group that well. Not a bad range of cameras, but the wrong range of cameras.
Well given that Sony themselves have products using a 1" sensor there clearly is production to support that size sensor.
Therefore Nikon have access to newer sensors down the line.
Its only a matter of time to see 24MP in a 1" sensor with improve noise ceiling.
You're right - the technology moves on and today's marvel becomes yesterday's oddity. Also, it does seem you can make better lenses for smaller formats.
I don't know about better but the cost of making a good lens increases rapidly with physical size so it is cheaper in materials to make good lenses for small formats. You need good lenses. The smaller the format the greater the enlargement needed when viewing the end result so imperfections show.
Separate names with a comma.