We can lock in a DSLR D6. That should be announced at the end of the year, or first thing next year (though I think that's a bit late) , that leaves precious little time for the Pro's to familiarize themselves and mentally tick off the confidence box ready for the Olympics.
I think those total numbers figures per model in my couple above post are quite revealing. There must be a lot of Pro's still happily earning a living from their D4 that didn't feel the need (or could justify the cost benefit analysis) for a D5 upgrade. Will the D6 capture these folks? Maybe. I still think there are possible goodies that the D6 'could have' that it won't get at the initial release. I'm expecting evolution rather than revolution. They may save those goodies for ~3 odd years down the track for a mid-life and last hurrah D6S upgrade.
I suppose we will soon (in the next year or so) see whether the 'little brother' DSLR D500S (or whatever they call it) also follows on from the D6, just like the D5/D500 duo did. It will be interesting :cat:
I think this buys Nikon quite a bit of time to carefully and successfully design the Pro Mirrorless FF and DX offerings. Remember - no-one as of yet has come out with a Pro Mirrorless form factor ergonomics and size wise (Panasonic may argue that they jumped straight to it with their S1/S1R). Getting this and the UI right is going to be critical - look at all the flak the Sony a9 cops and the non-pro Canon R did too for its weird operating departure.
Also, Nikon needs the next generation lightweight long super telephotos in native Z mount - otherwise really what's the point? Adapted lens seem to work well for Nikon but they don't take full advantage of all of the benefits the Z mount offers in terms of better AF motor control and accuracy.
Also what's becoming another bit of a peeve for me, is that we are seeing some nice lens design advances and innovations and performance pickups at the Mirrorless wide end, but ..... Everything from say the 70-200 (Canon excepted) and longer seems to be merely just sticking a tube and built-in Mirrorless mount onto the end of existing lens designs. There are no inherent length or weight reduction benefits being offered. This is budget stuff - even for the supposedly 'Pro' glass. This is not really going to convert the Smartphone hordes to the field of dreams (excellent PF and DO lenses notwithstanding - assuming they also get some nice native Mirrorless mount versions).
I do wonder what Nikon will do for a DX mirrorless lens. Will it still be a Z mount? I assume so. But will they make DX Z while trying to catch up on full frame. Or will they do a DX mirrorless with F mount for the existing DX lens lineup?
Marc
Well DX Mirrorless for Nikon (and to a lesser extent Canon) is the biggie isn't it ! :cat: What to do, what to do, what to do ...... ??
People go DX for 2, possibly 3 reasons:-
1. Reach.
No substitute, Nikon will need the Z mount to offer native compatibility with the long FF super telephotos. Any such future 'Mirrorless D500' would need to be Z mount.
A very nice system could be made with some nicely purpose designed DX Mirrorless Z lenses, such as a version of the excellent 16-80 f2.8-f4, and offering some 'S line' DX very fast (I'm thinking f1.4) wide primes - say a 16mm and a 24mm. Longer than that just use the excellent FF Z glass. There's the FF f4 14-30mm which would give eq 21-45mm, and they would only need a DX dedicated fast ultra wide zoom of say f2.8 (f2?) 8-20, or 8-24, or even 8-28, giving from eq 12mm up.
2. Light weight /smaller size.
This is where the Canon EOS-M is winning. It allows the design of compact, lightweight, well performing systems. Even though there is no real compatibility with the full frame R, I still think it is not the drawback many make it out to be at the entry-consumer level.
Sony trumpets their single mount solution - but is it just an all round compromise ? Sales of EOS-M say Canon has got it right.
The big question is does Nikon follow suit ?? or forge it's own unique path?
* Does it merely make the entry/consumer level DX Mirror less with a built-in F mount allowing instantaneous kits up and running? but without fully capitalizing on the size reduction (mirror box elimination) benefits .....?
** Does it use the large Z mount and cop a slight size and weight penalty, but offering excellent wide angle design possibilities, and complete compatibility and migration between DX and FF. There's a pretty good case for this I think.
*** Or does Nikon do something completely out of the box with a completely new DX Mirrorless mount - though a very very clever one (ie slightly smaller throat diameter AND slightly shorter FFL [if this is possible] - this would allow Z mount FF lenses to be adapted via an ultrathin fully functional adapter plate - Techart style).
I actually think this strategy has some legs that could offer the best of all possible worlds and cover entry/consumer/prosumer levels. It could be a real winner. DX customers using fully functional FF Z glass via full benefit Mirrorless adapter, could use that glass natively on any future FF Z body. Nikon could do a lot of busine$$$$$$.
The only real drawback would be the amount of time to fully flesh out the lens range, though Nikon could get up and running immediately with a range of no drawback adapters (as the FTZ seems to be - mostly positive press there). Bundling these essential adapters free or via promotion would also be critical.
If I'm Nikon CEO this is the sort of move I think I would make. It would allow third party lens designers to natively supply with very minor modification to existing designs. It could also offer unmatched competitive advantages. Will they do it - who knows?
3. Cost.
The third reason people go DX is cost. Pure and simple. It's why the D3xxx and D5xxx have been such winners. Such Cost advantages could be retained no matter which DX design option Nikon goes with. Profitability should increase too given the lower Mirrorless Bill of Materials cost base.
The question ultimately becomes - which field of dreams does Nikon build so that the most paying fans come? I hope they go the 'clever' solution ...... that would shake the industry a bit - all the advantages of Canon's EOS-M yet at the same time all the 'effective' compatibility and format mobility of the Sony FE. Win-win. :t:
Interesting times ! :cat:
Chosun :gh: