Nikon’s new mirrorless system, coming in ... late September 2018

[32BT]

I thought it was common knowledge that Nikon were launching their mirrorless camera with an adapter to allow current Nikon users to use their existing lens range on the new mirrorless mount. If that is true then the new mirrorless sensor must be no bigger than 24 by 36 or the lenses will not cover it.

It could still be square 36x36, and at 45mpx you don't exactly need to expose the entire image plane to support a legacy format. Sony also has autoswitch for aps-c lens support on their ff offering.

[Martin Kristiansen]

It could still be square 36x36, and at 45mpx you don't exactly need to expose the entire image plane to support a legacy format. Sony also has autoswitch for aps-c lens support on their ff offering.

Well let’s see. Nikon did say FF. I would think that means FF. Square you think? I would not put serious money on that.

[32BT]

Well let’s see. Nikon did say FF. I would think that means FF. Square you think? I would not put serious money on that.

No, i don't think square, in fact i think a different format doesn't make economical sense, but a lens should be able to expose a square. Either way, legacy lens support doesn't dictate the format, but i fully agree: Nikon specifically mentions FX format.

[BernardLanguillier]

I thought it was common knowledge that Nikon were launching their mirrorless camera with an adapter to allow current Nikon users to use their existing lens range on the new mirrorless mount. If that is true then the new mirrorless sensor must be no bigger than 24 by 36 or the lenses will not cover it.

That's in fact not an argument against a larger sensor, because Nikon has never prevented the usage of APS-C lenses on FF bodies.

But I don't think the sensor will be larger than 24x36.

Cheers,
Bernard

[scooby70]

Besides, although Sony has delivered solid cameras with the a7/a9 and have demonstrated great innovation drive, they are far from perfect. They are great compared to the very flawed first iterations, but still half baked compared to what most photographers would like them to be (ergonomics, EVF, ruggedness, battery life,...).

Cheers,
Bernard

I do wonder how much of this is true and how much is... well... smelly bovine stuff in a field.

I was an early A7 adopter and I still have my flawed half baked A7. It's been used in all conditions and in all seasons and weathers in streets, forests, hills and beaches in the UK and the far east. I've used it in conditions I could hardly stand up in (once in wind so strong my screen protector blew off) and I've changed lenses multiple times in any and every environment (forests, beaches, hills...) and yet it's hardly missed a beat... I say hardly as it has one issue as there's a black speck in the EVF which looks like a fleck of paint or something, this annoys me but as I grew up with Nikon SLR's which I had for decades and then had Canon DSLR's for over 10 years I'm used to having stuff in the VF.

Reading posts on internet forums I'm amazed that my half baked A7 doesn't slip from my hands and disintegrate, I'm amazed I can use it to take pictures at all.

I'm currently enjoying my A7 and Voigtlander 35mm f1.4 combination.

I wish Nikon well but lets not pretend that anything that doesn't say Nikon on the front is an unusable piece of junk and that the makers should stick to making playstations.

[BernardLanguillier]

Never said that, you are over-reacting.

Most Sony a7rIII owners I know describe it as being much much better than the v2 and they described the v2 as being much much better than v1.

The rugdness comment comes from a well know test. It never meant that every a7 would fail at the first drop of rain, just that it can and is behind its DSLR competition.

Not sure why you seem to be taking these as personnal offenses.

You took the decision to be an early adopter of the first version of a new line in a new market segment. It shouldn’t come as a surprise that it isn’t pefect.

Cheers,
Bernard

[mcbroomf]

I don't think either of these observations are contradictory.  IMO it's clear that the Sony still has a way to go design wise to meet what I'd consider ergo and robustness thresholds, while at the same time they can keep on plugging away.  I'm also very wary of individual data points.  For example I could mention that I've been using Sony bodies since the Nex 5N days, having owned most bodies, when switching to FF have owned a pair of each of the R bodies (rather than S or regular 7 series).  I've had to replace a bent body flange on one body (A7R I think), and both of my A7R3 bodies failed for 2 different reasons within a week of each other recently (each took a week for repair under Pro support).  I could also mention the times my older 1Ds type bodies had to go in for repair.  What does that prove or show?  Nothing ....

[Guillermo Luijk]

The actual market share of Sony is probably less than 1% of all full frame users out there. Tiny in the grand scheme of things.

Bernard, A7's have already been seeling for 5 years, and selling well. Do you really think in a market where average camera lifetime must be over 3-4 years, i.e. most users bought a new body with the A7's on the market, only 1 out of every 100 FF users has a Sony? I think you are being far too pesimistic here. Or you missed a 0 perhaps?.

Regards

[BernardLanguillier]

Bernard, A7's have already been seeling for 5 years, and selling well. Do you really think in a market where average camera lifetime must be over 3-4 years, i.e. most users bought a new body with the A7's on the market, only 1 out of every 100 FF users has a Sony? I think you are being far too pesimistic here. Or you missed a 0 perhaps?.

No, it seems about right.

FF cameras have been out for many many years. And even after Sony released the a7, it has been consistently outsold by Canon and Nikon FF DSLRs.

It could be 2% or 0.5%, but it is this order of magnitude.

You can build a quick Excel and do the math for yourself.

Cheers,
Bernard

[Kiwi Paul]

Exciting times ahead, a lot of speculation at the moment, I'm not that invested in any system at the moment either, at least in full frame terms, I have an A72 and 2 primes and 2 zooms so it wouldn't be that bigger deal for me to jump ship if it suited me, I love the Sony gear but I'm not a fan boy of any system in that respect.

[Guillermo Luijk]

No, it seems about right.

FF cameras have been out for many many years. And even after Sony released the a7, it has been consistently outsold by Canon and Nikon FF DSLRs.

It could be 2% or 0.5%, but it is this order of magnitude.

You can build a quick Excel and do the math for yourself.

I'm sorry Bernard but I don't swallow that by far. I don't have the needed figures to make a calculation (if you do I'd be delighetd to see them), but an order of magnitude of 1% is basically irrelevant. Are you telling me Sigma, Laowa, Tamron and other little brands have launched specific E-mount FF lenses just for 1% of the market share?.

I insist, if the camera lifecycle is about 3-4 years, almost every FF user had to renew its FF body with A7 options already in the market (you did and chose the D850, I did and chose the A7 II). Even if Sony were outsold by Canon and Nikon, do you mean Sony's sales market share is so negligible as to just achieve 1 out of every 100 users in half a decade?.

This was 2014 sales market share, and today the A7 III is globally outselling Canikon FF models.




Moreover in terms of customer "churn" having a smaller customer base means Sony is in its lifecycle period where it can easily get positive "net adds" (i.e. increase its customer base), while surely Canon and Nikon have entered negative "net adds" because of their much larger customer base moving to the competition. 1% would simply mean this process isn't occurring which is plain wrong. Everytime I travel I see more and more A7's. Even if there are more DSLR's I don't see just one A7 for every 99 Canikon FF's, do you? for every friend with a Sony, do you have 99 friends with a Canikon?. I doubt it.

Regards

[32BT]

I insist, if the camera lifecycle is about 3-4 years, almost every FF user had to renew its FF body with A7 options already in the market (you did and chose the D850, I did and chose the A7 II). Even if Sony were outsold by Canon and Nikon, do you mean Sony's sales market share is so negligible as to just achieve 1 out of every 100 users in half a decade?.

If your replenishconjectue were true (which i highly doubt), then you could calculate the marketshare as follows:
If Sony replenished 0% of the market at the launch of the A7 and subsequently grew to 13%, then the total marketshare is the average replenishrate = 13% divided by nr of years.

Means Sony can have at most 3% marketshare.

[Guillermo Luijk]

If Sony replenished 0% of the market at the launch of the A7 and subsequently grew to 13%, then the total marketshare is the average replenishrate = 13% divided by nr of years.

Means Sony can have at most 3% marketshare.

That 13% was 2014 sales Sony's marketshare, not today's. Today Sony is selling more FF than Canon and Nikon thanks to the A7 III; it will not last long though.

Information is insufficient but I have made an Excel which in spite of its numerous assumptions (only 50% of FF users bought a new FF body from 2014-2018 and those who did only bought one, users are only Canikon or Sony never mixed, total market is stable, yearly body sales remain constant,...) is unable to reach figures like the 1% suggested by Bernard:




Here is the Excel to play with. Green cells can be adjusted.

http://www.guillermoluijk.com/misc/mirrorless.xlsx


I don't like to calculate customer base shares without knowing the precise customer base figures, but this is the best I can figure out from available data.

Regards
 

[BJL]

@shadowblade, the Nikon press release specifically says “FX”, so it is 36x24mm.

If the claims of throat diameters like 65mm were true, that would be more than makes sense for 36x24, but the measurements suggesting 51-54 are too small for 44x33; modern fast lenses with exit pupil far higher than the depth of this mount need a throat wider than the image circle. (Leica M does not have the fast telephoto lenses  like 200/2 and 400/2.8 that need a wide throat most.)

[shadowblade]

@shadowblade, the Nikon press release specifically says “FX”, so it is 36x24mm.

For this camera, yes. But it says nothing about future cameras using the same mount and lenses. And a larger lens mount can offer more forward compatibility with future, larger sensors.

After all, Canon APS-H and APS-F cameras use the same mount, as do Phase One and Mamiya bodies with different sensor sizes.

If the claims of throat diameters like 65mm were true, that would be more than makes sense for 36x24, but the measurements suggesting 51-54 are too small for 44x33; modern fast lenses with exit pupil far higher than the depth of this mount need a throat wider than the image circle. (Leica M does not have the fast telephoto lenses  like 200/2 and 400/2.8 that need a wide throat most.)

Yet Sony has a 400/2.8 for the E-mount, while Nikon has 200/2 and 400/2.8 (and other fast telephotos) for the even smaller and deeper F-mount. Not to mention the PC-E 19mm, which manages to put a wide-angle tilt-shift lens through a narrow throat and deep mount. And you can use any of Canon's long telephotos on E-mount cameras without any optical issues. So, clearly, outside of some extreme lenses, with a likely very small customer base, 46-47mm is a wide enough throat for 24x36mm sensors, with larger mounts adding size without necessarily adding capability.

Of course, it all depends how big this lens mount actually is. F-mount puts a sensor with a 43mm diagonal behind a 44mm mount. 33x44mm sensors have a 55mm diameter - if the mount is 51-54mm in diameter, it would not be able to accommodate this, but a 58mm diameter mount could accommodate it quite comfortably.

[BernardLanguillier]

We don’t have the data, but one input is that there is still a huge number of 5D2/6D and D700/D600 out there it seems.

I believe that your assumption that the average renewal period of FF cameras is 3-4 years is not representative of the reality of the market. It is probably true for the rich hobbyist roaming LL, but most people, starting with many second league pros never upgrade.

We could look at Flickr, but even that would ignore the huge mass of dormant shooters.

But ok, even if Sony has 5 or even 10% of FF cameras (which seems very unlikely) the story remains the same. Canon and Nikon are still by far in a dominant position to convert the remaining 90% of the market to their own mirrorless platform.

I don’t particularly like this situation, but it is the reality resulting from these 2 companies having sold in excess of 100 million lenses.


Cheers,
Bernard

[chez]

We don’t have the data, but one input is that there is still a huge number of 5D2/6D and D700/D600 out there it seems.

I believe that your assumption that the average renewal period of FF cameras is 3-4 years is not representative of the reality of the market. It is probably true for the rich hobbyist roaming LL, but most people, starting with many second league pros never upgrade.

We could look at Flickr, but even that would ignore the huge mass of dormant shooters.

But ok, even if Sony has 5 or even 10% of FF cameras (which seems very unlikely) the story remains the same. Canon and Nikon are still by far in a dominant position to convert the remaining 90% of the market to their own mirrorless platform.

I don’t particularly like this situation, but it is the reality resulting from these 2 companies having sold in excess of 100 million lenses.


Cheers,
Bernard

Nikons market share has been dropping steadily over the last 5 years...this is right out of their financial statements. It is now less than 25% of ICL cameras sold in 2017. Canon has held steady. Mirror less cameras have been eating away at Nikon's share.

[BernardLanguillier]

Nikons market share has been dropping steadily over the last 5 years...this is right out of their financial statements. It is now less than 25% of ICL cameras sold in 2017. Canon has held steady. Mirror less cameras have been eating away at Nikon's share.

I don't believe that this is the case speaking of FF.

Nikon has been loosing to Canon in APS-C body kit sales but increasing its relative marketshare in the high end FF segment. The continued success of the D750/D800/D810/D850 over their Canon equivalent should be ample proof of this. I believe that Sony has been gaining very clearly marketshare over Canon in this segment, I am not too sure about Sony vs Nikon. They may have also, not too sure.

Future will tell, but I believe that this is the segment that matters when assessing the future potential of camera companies.

As I wrote elsewhere, to my eyes low end APS-C DSLR kits are deadman walking. They will be swept away by mobile phones within a couple of years.

Cheers,
Bernard

[BJL]

@shadowblade, yes 58mm might be barely enough, the Hasselblad’s new X Mount is 61mm and Fujifilm’s G mount is about 63 or 65. Sony’s E mount is about 46, so about 3mm wider than the 36x24 image circle.

Your examples of using the same mount for different formats involve starting with the larger format with film and then reusing the mount with a smaller format for the sake of using exiting lenses: going small to large is harder, as optimal lens designs for the smaller format risk vignetting with the larger.

[chez]

I don't believe that this is the case speaking of FF.

Cheers,
Bernard

What data do you have to make you not believe this?