Canon or Nikon mirrorless camera?

herb

Subscriber
Joined
Jan 22, 2005
Messages
405
Format
Medium Format
I realize Nikon has come up with one mirrorless camera, with a small sensor.

It would seem that with all the lenses the two have in the world, they would really get some sales if they had a full frame mirrorless camera that used the earlier lenses designed for reflex cameras. Is this technically possible? The reflex use lenses are a lot bigger than would be needed, but a buyer of the body would not need to buy more glass.
Of course it might be that some marketing genius would object to not selling more lenses, but I dare say that the volume would be huge if no new lenses were needed, at least in the beginning
 

bdial

Subscriber
Joined
Jan 2, 2005
Messages
7,466
Location
North East U.S.
Format
Multi Format
They have an adaptor for their regular mount lenses, at least one is shown in the brochures I've seen. Not too likely, however, that these cameras would play well with manual focus lenses. I think that for the market Nikon is targeting, lens choice or the ability to use "legacy" glass isn't too important.

I like the idea of these mirrorless cameras, but everybody else who is making one is using a larger sensor than Nikon. Supposedly, Nikon's sensors in these cams are better than the competition. I'm not in a hurry to buy one, so I'm willing to wait and see how things shake out, though someday, I'd like a digi that can do Raw, with a decent sized sensor.

But my local shop has them, and one of their guys seems to like it a lot (and bought one for himself). When he still did film, he used Leicas.
 

Danielle

Member
Joined
Jun 19, 2011
Messages
80
Location
Melbourne, A
Format
Multi Format
I know you can put sony minolta lenses on the NEX series, for I know someone who owns one. However if you did do this kind of thing, it would look retarded for those lenses are massive and the little nex body is tiny. I think the little compact camera's like those (or the nikon V1 etc) are something you'd want to keep small, and for those of us who use SLR's (and only SLR's), our only use would be travelling or taking into somewhere where our huge camera's is just a no no. Thats the only use for one which I'd have. And I'd only travel with something like that if I really had no choice and HAD to leave other things at home, so I'd only be interested for the second reason I suggested.

Im sure as chuck (above) suggested, they are great for their targeted market.
 

chuck94022

Member
Joined
Jan 11, 2005
Messages
869
Location
Los Altos, C
Format
Multi Format
Regarding the original question, versus the title of the post, I don't think there would me huge interest in a full frame sensor mirrorless system. The body would be similar in size to a regular DSLR, and use the same big glass. So it would be heavier than the micro 4/3 cameras, and bulkier. Those that buy this sort of camera aren't pixel peeping their way to a high rez nirvana. They are debating why they should have anything more than their phone camera.

The target market for full size sensors sees value in an optical, through the lens finder, and full control.

The compact system cameras like the Nikon 1 are a response to phone camera cannibalization of the compact camera market, in my opinion. That said, the are sweet little cameras for casual snaps.


---
I am here: http://maps.google.com/maps?ll=39.948080,116.433614
 
OP
OP

herb

Subscriber
Joined
Jan 22, 2005
Messages
405
Format
Medium Format
don't think the little camera is too small for serious work. I have one converted to IR and it has produced some pretty good shots that show no loss of detail at 11x14 print size.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Menu
Log in
Register
Cookies are required to use this site. You must accept them to continue using the site. Learn more…