Nikon full frame mirrorless camera specs

[BTM_Pix]

10 minutes ago, mercer said:

@BTM_Pix since you can record right to DNG, can you natively open those stills in Resolve?

I haven't but let me go outside and take a picture of something and let you know 

Hang on....

[BTM_Pix]

1 hour ago, mercer said:

@BTM_Pix since you can record right to DNG, can you natively open those stills in Resolve?

Well that was a rabbit hole...

I went out and took a few frames (of flowers obviously as I don't have a cat) and importing them crashed Resolve.

I thought it was because I had an older version so I downloaded and installed the latest one.

Still crashes it.

So that would be a no !

Lightroom, Afinity Photo, Aperture  etc opened it without issue.

 

[mercer]

7 minutes ago, BTM_Pix said:

Well that was a rabbit hole...

I went out and took a few frames (of flowers obviously as I don't have a cat) and importing them crashed Resolve.

I thought it was because I had an older version so I downloaded and installed the latest one.

Still crashes it.

So that would be a no !

Lightroom, Afinity Photo, Aperture  etc opened it without issue.

 

Good to know thanks. I don’t shoot many stills, but I would like to start and I am weird in that I’d rather have 2 cameras... one for stills and one for video. I’ve been following Mattias on IG for a while now and his B&W Sigma shots are freaking amazing... so I thought if Resolve opened the Sigma DNG, then I could shoot and process stills while practicing with Resolve... anyway, worth a try. Thanks.  

[noone]

They really do need to get a wriggle on with FF mirrorless (Canon too).

 

Around here (middle of nowhere Australia), Canon and Nikon reign supreme with the pros and have done for years.      That said, in the last few years there have been a few pros switching to Sony and a growing few more adding some Sony gear .

Just yesterday, one of the better semi-pros with a decent local following started posting with an A7Riii and one of the leading local pros stated Sony is sending him an A9 and A7Riii to try out.      Every passing day means a growing number of defections.

[TwoScoops]

1 hour ago, BTM_Pix said:

Well that was a rabbit hole...

I went out and took a few frames (of flowers obviously as I don't have a cat) and importing them crashed Resolve.

I thought it was because I had an older version so I downloaded and installed the latest one.

Still crashes it.

So that would be a no !

Lightroom, Afinity Photo, Aperture  etc opened it without issue.

 

 

How about bringing into LR, exporting as a DNG, then opening the LR DNG in Resolve?

[Mark Romero 2]

Best to use resolve 14 or 12.5 while 15 is still in Beta.

[webrunner5]

1 hour ago, BTM_Pix said:

That looks like Alice Springs territory?

[Mark Romero 2]

@BTM_Pix

Would you mind terribly uploading your DNG file to drop box and making it shareable? I have always wanted to try editing a DNG file in resolve.

[BTM_Pix]

57 minutes ago, TwoScoops said:

 

How about bringing into LR, exporting as a DNG, then opening the LR DNG in Resolve?

Yeah, I tried that a bit later and it just does the media offline thing.

It didn't crash though so there is that

46 minutes ago, Mark Romero 2 said:

Best to use resolve 14 or 12.5 while 15 is still in Beta.

12.5 was suffering from my 'upgrade' to High Sierra.

36 minutes ago, webrunner5 said:

That looks like Alice Springs territory?

I swear I was only walking for about 90 seconds from my house so I'm pretty sure I was still in Spain but you know how time becomes elastic with advancing years 

22 minutes ago, Mark Romero 2 said:

@BTM_Pix

Would you mind terribly uploading your DNG file to drop box and making it shareable? I have always wanted to try editing a DNG file in resolve.

No problem, it'll have to be tomorrow though as I'm out, erm, 'refuelling' at the moment.

[webrunner5]

4 hours ago, BTM_Pix said:

I swear I was only walking for about 90 seconds from my house so I'm pretty sure I was still in Spain but you know how time becomes elastic with advancing years 

 

Ah Spain , Australia, they all look alike. Seen one you have seen them all as they say. I could have sworn you were one of those Crocodile Wrestlers from down under.

Now being a Conquistador invading Mexico, I, I can't envision that. But being at the advanced age I am, some things do seen to escape me. My Bad.

My Sincere apologizes for calling you a Bloke. eh, tail between my legs. ☹️ 

Still looks like Alice Springs. Maybe it is Alicia Muelles?

[Robert Collins]

8 hours ago, noone said:

They really do need to get a wriggle on with FF mirrorless (Canon too).

 

Around here (middle of nowhere Australia), Canon and Nikon reign supreme with the pros and have done for years.      That said, in the last few years there have been a few pros switching to Sony and a growing few more adding some Sony gear .

Just yesterday, one of the better semi-pros with a decent local following started posting with an A7Riii and one of the leading local pros stated Sony is sending him an A9 and A7Riii to try out.      Every passing day means a growing number of defections.

BUT it will be difficult for both Canon and Nikon. A lot of their long time, most loyal customers are DSLR diehards. Not only do they have no interest in moving to mirrorless but they are inherently hostile towards it. If you think about - the greatest fear that a die hard Nikon DSLR user has - is that Nikon's mirrorless will be a success!! Because then they can see the writing is on the wall for the development (and probably value) of their equipment.

I imagine that sort of dynamic will be difficult to manage (both externally and internally.)

[noone]

Maybe, but many of those that have been switching lately I would have called DSLR diehards too.     There will be some who get dragged kicking and screaming (maybe due to the cost of the "last" DSLRs VS mirrorless by then) but I think many may say they are but will come around.

Some of course are just plain Sony haters and will say how wonderful FF mirrorless is once it is made by Canon and Nikon (even if it is identical to something Sony).

Still, all just speculation and I do hope they arrive soon and are good.

 

[IronFilm]

17 hours ago, kye said:

• Nikon is unlikely to get into the smartphone game

If I was them, I'd have partnered with a smartphone brand, such as Zeiss has done. 

 

[IronFilm]

17 hours ago, mercer said:

Hopefully Canon is smart enough to release an EF Mount FF mirrorless, shaped like a DSLR. And with the extra room they can add a great IBIS system and possibly some internal NDs.

I'm not keen on the idea of EF Mount FF mirrorless.
As say the FS5 etc (to name but one of many) have shown it is perfectly possible to have a mirrorless mount and internal NDs. 

[Grimor]

14 hours ago, BTM_Pix said:

 

Adelfas!! (Nerium Oleander)

One of the most toxic plants in the Mediterranean

[IronFilm]

17 hours ago, webrunner5 said:

Yeah I have had a Ton of analog, digital synthesizers from the start much to my first wife's chagrin.. I always laugh when I see someone with an old Moog using it to sound mostly like a Piano! ?

You know in this day and age I don't really see any need, other than Maybe slightly smaller lenses for them , for a APSC camera at all!

I think even Fuji is stupid still pushing them. With Mirrorless FF cameras so small there is no need in hell for them now. I bet the Sony A7 mk III has a smaller body than the Fuji XT2. And it is. Now how stupid is that!! And another dumb ass thing when I looked up that size comparison, is that Fuji must have 20 different models of APSC cameras. Even dumber...

https://camerasize.com/compare/#777,679

https://camerasize.com/compare/#704,312

With medium format set to get smaller and smaller, maybe it is silly to make FF cameras? ?

It is a compromise step at every position along the way as you go up or down in sensor size. 

APS-C has price and size benefits (look at how big the FE lenses are! Vs APS-C)

Oh and I think Fuji doesn't have 20 APS-C mirrorless cameras, rather there are a lot of their P&S models included in that size comparison chart. 

17 hours ago, Robert Collins said:

I get your point but I mostly disagree on a conceptual level. I am somewhat positive on the digital camera you are negative (as are most people.) No problem - time will tell.

But where I have a problem is this. Imagine you invested in a 'tech mutual fund'. Why would you do this? Well because you thought that tech stocks are going to rise. Right? So imagine if your tech fund manager decided that tech stock prices were too high and instead of investing your money actually sold the stocks and put it on deposit. What would happen? Well if stock prices rose you would be royally pissed off because you would see no gain and you invested solely on the basis that you would see a gain if stock prices rose. And if tech stock prices fell? Well you would be better off but only in the sense that you didnt expect to be - on the basis that the fund manager had done the exact opposite of what you wanted.

And this is what Thom Hogan means by the fact that Nikon is being run by 'bankers'. Who really have little interest in what the company invests in apart from whether they get their dividend at the end of the day.

Sony have been very aggressive in the ILC market - whether it will prove right or wrong only time will tell. But to me the management of the Nikon brand taking the view that the brand and its products are going nowhere is not in the interests of shareholders - because if shareholders believed that they wouldnt be shareholders in the first place.

Nicely put!

 

[kye]

3 hours ago, IronFilm said:

If I was them, I'd have partnered with a smartphone brand, such as Zeiss has done. 

Yeah that thought crossed my mind too, it's a pretty obvious move.  I don't really know how the camera industry works in terms of which people are primary producers and which only assemble things and who specialises in what..  I guess if Nikon hasn't got much experience of tech at that physical scale, and doesn't make any, then it might be a hard transition to become a preferred supplier for a major smartphone brand.

16 hours ago, noone said:

Just yesterday, one of the better semi-pros with a decent local following started posting with an A7Riii and one of the leading local pros stated Sony is sending him an A9 and A7Riii to try out.      Every passing day means a growing number of defections.

I watched a review of the new Sony 400mm(?) lens and the reviewers took the A9(?) to a sports game and their conclusion was that the lens was slightly more expensive than Canon or Nikon, slightly lighter than Canon or Nikon, and performed similarly (ie, great) but that when following a subject in AF-C the combination got 20fps instead of the 10-11 that Canon and Nikon got.

If you're a sports shooter then that's going to be a set of features that will be really hard to ignore.

10 hours ago, webrunner5 said:

My Sincere apologizes for calling you a Bloke. eh, tail between my legs. ☹️ 

Hey - be careful being critical of Aussies!!  I do it all the time, but it's like many things - only we're allowed to do it!!!!  ????

[IronFilm]

17 minutes ago, kye said:

Yeah that thought crossed my mind too, it's a pretty obvious move.  I don't really know how the camera industry works in terms of which people are primary producers and which only assemble things and who specialises in what..  I guess if Nikon hasn't got much experience of tech at that physical scale, and doesn't make any, then it might be a hard transition to become a preferred supplier for a major smartphone brand.

If being a supplier falls under the "two hard basket" (I doubt it... plus all that manufacturing equipment which used to make point and shoots might at least be partially used for smartphone sensors and optics instead) then they could just license their name and tech knowledge instead. (also like Zeiss & Leica are doing with smartphones)

 

21 minutes ago, kye said:

I watched a review of the new Sony 400mm(?) lens and the reviewers took the A9(?) to a sports game and their conclusion was that the lens was slightly more expensive than Canon or Nikon, slightly lighter than Canon or Nikon, and performed similarly (ie, great) but that when following a subject in AF-C the combination got 20fps instead of the 10-11 that Canon and Nikon got.

If you're a sports shooter then that's going to be a set of features that will be really hard to ignore.

Yes with the new 400mm lens then Sony is going deep into Nikon/Canon territory and attacking them. 

Still feel that Nikon doesn't need to make a mirrorless D5/D500 just yet, and should concentrate instead on bringing out the core mirrorless models first (something like a D850/D750/D7500 equivalent). However Nikon needs to get these first mirrorless models out soon as there will be a time not far away (I suspect within 5yrs) when that need to have a response to Sony's mirrorless attack on their sports/birding/wildlife market will mean that Nikon must put out a mirrorless response rather than keep on relying upon their D5/D6 top tier DSLRs. 

[BTM_Pix]

The Sony 400mm f2.8 is a shot across the bows rather than a direct hit below the waterline for Nikon and Canon.

It takes away the single non-negotiable denial of entry point for Sony into professional sports but the A9 itself will still hold them up for now. The fps thing is a bit of a red herring by the way because it can only hit that using the electronic shutter (which has known issues with LED ad boards at stadiums) and can actually only do 5fps with the mechanical shutter. There are a number of other factors like infrastructure and other mundane stuff that all add to the difference between it being something with a fantastic spec and something which is actually then used and adopted in real professional environments. 

The next version of the A9 though might well be the one if Nikon and Canon don't pull their fingers out.

 

[noone]

6 hours ago, kye said:

 

I watched a review of the new Sony 400mm(?) lens and the reviewers took the A9(?) to a sports game and their conclusion was that the lens was slightly more expensive than Canon or Nikon, slightly lighter than Canon or Nikon, and performed similarly (ie, great) but that when following a subject in AF-C the combination got 20fps instead of the 10-11 that Canon and Nikon got.

If you're a sports shooter then that's going to be a set of features that will be really hard to ignore.

 

Agreed, though what is heavy and isn't is subjective.      That new 400 2.8 Sony actually weighs 5 grams LESS than Nikons CURRENT 300 2.8! (that has to have been deliberate I would think).

Many people will hand hold a 300 2.8 for quite long periods but a lot less so a "normally" heavier 400 2.8.

I know I can hand hold my old manual focus 300 2.8 for the duration of a football game or several sessions at a cricket match - putting it down from time to time to the point I don't even take a tripod or monopod now or I put it in a backpack and go for a walk.       Not going to do that with a 400 2.8 except maybe this one (if I win the lottery).       I should say my old Tamron is probably the lightest 300 2.8 made though and I use it with an A7s (previously several DSLRs ).