Nikon Announces Development of Full Frame Mirrorless Camera (petapixel.com)

An anonymous reader quotes a report from PetaPixel: Nikon has just officially announced the development of its upcoming full frame mirrorless camera, finally confirming months of rumors and leaks. The new full frame mirrorless system will be built around a brand new lens mount that "explores a new level of optical performance," but existing Nikon DSLR lenses will also be compatible with the camera using a specially designed F-mount adapter. "The new mirrorless camera and NIKKOR lenses that are in development will enable a new dimension in optical performance with the adoption of a new mount," Nikon says. "The system is the result of Nikon's unsurpassed optical and manufacturing capabilities gained through more than a century of imaging expertise. Proven reliability and trusted performance are core traits of Nikon Digital-SLRs, and decades of feedback from professional creators around the world has further contributed to the development of this system." Nikon says that by finally jumping into the full frame mirrorless market, the company "reaffirms [its] commitment to providing photographers with the ability to capture images that are richer and more vivid than ever before." Features, specs, and pricing will be available at a later date. Nikon did however release a video yesterday teasing the new camera.

Comments

Re:Other companies have had this for years.

[cayenne8]

I know that both Nikon and Canon are working on their versions of a FF mirrorless camera.

I have 2 main concerns....

1. What's the form factor of the camera?

2. Current lenses to work with new camera

The first one, is that coming out with a FF mirrorless camera that is tiny as an iPhone is not going to do well for me.

I have a Canon 5D3, and the form factor and ergonomics of this size and form of camera works when shooting most events I shoot. A concert for example, using larger lenses, you need this to get a good grip on it, and also to be able to hit the manual controls as needed quickly during a shoot like that where you may have to quickly change ISO/Shutter Speed/Aperture.

Having a tiny body on a camera with tiny controls or basic things buried in menus just won't work in the heat of battle.

And for lenses....well, I guess an adaptor would work, but not the optimum choice.

I've read discussions about flange distances, sensor/lens distances, etc.

But my main thing is, aside from substantial investment in good L glass....is that IMHO, for the most part, you're not going to change the laws of physics any time soon...and not reduce the size significantly for the lens types out there, so, why come up with a new mount?

Why not make a mount that accepts your current lenses natively (in my case, EF), but if you have new features, have maybe new connect pads that the new lenses will use, but would be ignored by the current lenses, etc.

I'm looking forward to seeing what FF mirrorless offers, but I hope they do it right for the pro level or prosumer level needs.

Now that smartphones have become ...

[Qbertino]

... the de-facto standard for taking pictures, we're finally leaving the steam-age of photography.

Well done, Nikon! Bravo!

Re:Now that smartphones have become ...

[E-Lad]

Camera bodies, and whether they're digital or film come and go. Honestly, I have no idea why people get so mesmerized by them. The real magic is in the lenses, and the photographer's ability to frame a scene. A "clear and nice" image doesn't come from the sensor; it comes from the glass you put in front of it and the ability of the photographer to regulate the light going through those lenses. Sensor performance is really neither here nor there in the vast majority of situations.

Re:Other companies have had this for years.

[hcs_$reboot]

Sony does this pretty nicely. But when Nikon does something, it's always a professional build, plus the current optics etc... I think it's worth the wait.

Re:Better late than never

[werepants]

I very much like having a viewfinder, thank you. It's much easier and faster to see it the focus is correct than on a back screen (big pixels) or, god forbid, the horrible digital viewfinders that some cameras have.

It has a viewfinder, but if it follows a similar design to existing mirrorless cameras, it will be electronic. Like you, I can't stand those things - in every camera I've tried with one, there's a latency in the display, so what you are seeing lags behind what is actually happening, and the resolution is limited since it's really just a minuscule LCD they are cramming into the body in front of the eyepiece. Optical viewfinders are the only way to go for me.