Nikon FF Mirrorless

[hansel]

Amen to that Andrew. Surely Nikon needs to wake up and get going. But the last full frame Nikon  dslr's have been awesome and still are for a hybrid shooter...translating that over to a mirrorless is nothing to be ashamed off and definitely good enough for me. 

[IronFilm]

20 minutes ago, hansel said:

But the last full frame Nikon  dslr's have been awesome

Even Nikon's DX DSLRs have been great DSLRs for their price. 
I've had my Nikon D5200 for years now, very happy with it! And is thanks to Andrew Reid reviewing and recommending it. 

[Andrew Reid]

Yeah it started with the D5200. What a total bargain that was. An A7S-like image for really cheap. It was a more cinematic camera than the GH3 at the time and better in low light. D5300 fixed the banding. So light and great big LCDs.

Also I have always been impressed by Nikon's codec.

The creamy blacks.

Great colour.

Sony could learn a lot.

[Danyyyel]

On 8/8/2018 at 6:34 PM, webrunner5 said:

I do! Video is the future. There will be No photo cameras down the road. They will all be video cameras with a photo mode, a frame grab. It's as simple as that.

Sorry unless you want all your photo to have motion blur it is far from that easy. What about flash, are you going to carry something like a 300-1000 watt led light with batteries etc when you can have just a speed-light or two. Another misconception about photography, when you have to edit for example a wedding, you have to watch every shot then decide if it is good or bad then cut it t remove unwanted part etc. This is already tedious, not doing it at 24,25 or 30 fps, but one frame at a time, good luck with that.

[Danyyyel]

On 8/9/2018 at 2:58 AM, webrunner5 said:

Plus Nikon has sort of painted themselves in a corner with the focus motor in body. I have no clue what they will do yet, but I would not be surprised to see this new body with No motor in it at all. I would think an adapter with a motor in it is possible, but I think moving forward they have to change their lens concept.

Its been at least two decade they have not done screw driver motor lens, their lens have been stellar in optics and focus speed that is why it is used by most pros with Canon. The thing is most Nikon lens in photography are good enough for 4k which is only 8 megapixel. Today's discussion is not if they are good enough for 4k but 45 megapixel monsters like the D850, so we are long gone pass a measly 8 megapixel in Nikon world. 

[Danyyyel]

On 8/9/2018 at 4:52 AM, webrunner5 said:

Sony is ground breaking and Nikon will Have to be to stay with the Sony A9. You think those old screw lenses are going to focus at 20fps like the A9 can? With electronic shutters there is really no end to how fast they can do FPS. Sony is so damn far ahead of these guys it is not funny. Hey I am a big Nikon fan, but both Nikon, Canon have let themselves get so far behind, I have no clue what they were thinking.

Sure they will be nice, but they are not going to be great! it is their first real try. And Sony will just top them at every move ,and lower the price, and lower it till the cows come home. They are not ever going to catch up. So instead of being the leader like they were at one time, they are sucking hind tit all the time. What a dumb ass position to let yourself get into. And Sony has them all by the ass on Sensors to boot.

And if I wanted a body as big as the Nikon one looks like I would have stayed with a DSLR.  With the bigger mount that means the lenses will be bigger, I think it is a stupid move. Mirrorless cameras were Never meant to have a 600mm lens hanging off of them. Why do you think Sony, Fuji doesn't have them.

I am sure they will sell, but they have such a uphill road to go I doubt they have the capital to keep it moving ahead. Canon, Sony, Panasonic has so much more video experience to pull from, and Nikon has No upward path at all Semi Pro, or Pro gear. They have let themselves become somewhat irrelevant in the video world, and it will bit them in the ass in the short and long run. Canon and Sony will hand Nikon's ass to them even if it is a pretty good product. It is too little too late. Look at the D750 how they have shit around without updating it. Jesus.

WOW, I am speechless. So you are still sticking about those old screw lens when 95+ percent of Nikon lens have very fast in body motor. They even have introduce stm lens in there latest DX and one FX that already focus a bit faster in video than there current one. If you think Nikon D5 -D850 autofocus is not very very good, then objectivity is not your strong point, you should replace all these pro sport photographers. That mount will give them two very important advantage compared to the Sony lens mount. For one the sensor will be able to move much more than in the Sony ones that will give much better IBIS. Secondly it will give them the ability to produce much faster lens as the NOCT .95 strongly rummored prime and also the coverage of the sensor will be much more easy to have better edge to edge sharpness, vignetting etc. There will undoubtedly a big fight for the ML cameras, but now Sony won't have a monopoly at all and its market share will stagnate or from what I believe decrease. 

[IronFilm]

3 hours ago, Andrew Reid said:

Yeah it started with the D5200. What a total bargain that was. An A7S-like image for really cheap. It was a more cinematic camera than the GH3 at the time and better in low light. D5300 fixed the banding. So light and great big LCDs.

Also I have always been impressed by Nikon's codec.

The creamy blacks.

Great colour.

Sony could learn a lot.

I'm waiting for a "full frame" (in the traditional meaning, not meaning sensor size) 4K Nikon DX DSLR and then I'll probably upgrade my D5200. 

D7500/D500 both crop their sensor for 4K, plus I'd hope to see 4K in a cheaper D5x00 body.

[webrunner5]

1 hour ago, Danyyyel said:

WOW, I am speechless. So you are still sticking about those old screw lens when 95+ percent of Nikon lens have very fast in body motor. They even have introduce stm lens in there latest DX and one FX that already focus a bit faster in video than there current one. If you think Nikon D5 -D850 autofocus is not very very good, then objectivity is not your strong point, you should replace all these pro sport photographers. That mount will give them two very important advantage compared to the Sony lens mount. For one the sensor will be able to move much more than in the Sony ones that will give much better IBIS. Secondly it will give them the ability to produce much faster lens as the NOCT .95 strongly rummored prime and also the coverage of the sensor will be much more easy to have better edge to edge sharpness, vignetting etc. There will undoubtedly a big fight for the ML cameras, but now Sony won't have a monopoly at all and its market share will stagnate or from what I believe decrease. 

You are a Perfect customer for a Way behind Nikon effort. I hope you have a nice day. Give them all the money you have. You are Just what they are looking for!

[kye]

21 hours ago, webrunner5 said:

Speaking of 4K. This is one funny, interesting video.  It is long but worth it. About a little over a year old.

I watched that too..  

He makes a point, BUT he's assuming that we shoot, process, and display in the same resolution, and that we display that resolution in a 16:9 rectangle with a viewing angle aligned with the THX or SMPTE specifications.

This is old thinking.

We need to shoot higher than 4K if we want visually-acceptable results with reasonable cropping, VR, or any kind of immersive projection.

13 hours ago, jonpais said:

You're killing me.  I guess @kye will take the a7 III off my hands.

Not if Canikon gives us an early xmas!!

2 hours ago, Danyyyel said:

Sorry unless you want all your photo to have motion blur it is far from that easy. What about flash, are you going to carry something like a 300-1000 watt led light with batteries etc when you can have just a speed-light or two. Another misconception about photography, when you have to edit for example a wedding, you have to watch every shot then decide if it is good or bad then cut it t remove unwanted part etc. This is already tedious, not doing it at 24,25 or 30 fps, but one frame at a time, good luck with that.

I've gone a little ways down this path, and there are a few adjustments.

With a shutter speed you can either shoot for video (180 degree rule), for images (very short exposures), or a compromise.  I shoot a compromise because I think that the motion blur you get from something like 1/100 or 1/150 is appropriate because if it's significantly blurred then it was an action shot and I like that in the photo, but this is personal taste.

In terms of formal posed moments, video modes aren't currently well suited to this, so you're better off just shooting images.  However, cameras could evolve in this aspect (and would need to) by perhaps having something like a 'burst video mode' where it shot RAW for a burst, perhaps 0.5s before and after the shutter button was pushed.  This combined with high ISO performance could give sufficient image quality to work fine with continuous light, or you could get continuous lighting with a burst mode, or 24/25/30fps sync for that burst.  These technologies are either already with us, or are pretty close, so it's more a case of them being combined and the market working out what photogs would use and find practical.

In terms of picking shots, I think it's actually a bit easier to choose shots than with photos, but it requires a different mind-set.
When you're taking photographs you're trying to notice everything and then hit the shutter at exactly the right moment to capture it.  You then take those moments into post and have to choose between the shot with the nicest groom smile but slightly forced bride smile, and the better bride smile but less groom smile, or to spend the time photoshopping the two together.
With video, you're capturing every moment and now you get to choose any moment to retrospectively 'hit the shutter button'.  In this sense, you should view it as a continuous capture, not individual images.  During a moment, there are lots of micro-moments happening: the bride smiles, the groom smiles, the trees flutter, the distracting noise happens in the background, the couple hear it, the couple look puzzled while they process it, then they laugh at slightly different times.  You will have captured all of those moments and all of the moments in-between, so the task is to scrub the play-head back and forwards to find the moments of 'peak smile'.  This is kind of how sports photographers choose images from bursts - they don't think "crap, I've got to choose between 3000 images" they know that in each burst there is the best moment and they just scroll through them to pick that best moment.  The difference will be that even if you're shooting in the fastest bursts of Canikon (around 10-12 fps) the magic moment in sports is often between frames.  There's a reason that flagship bodies are pushing for higher burst rates - pro shooters aren't saying "oh shit, higher burst rates make my life worse by making me choose between more images".  In the future the burst video mode for flagship bodies will be much faster than video - it will be 50, then 100, then higher frame rates.  
If you look at the iPhone burst functionality, it captures a burst and then shows you the whole burst as one image, which if you click on it to edit it you can choose which ones are kept and there's a button to discard all the rest.  Apple has worked out that a burst is different to a whole string of individual images, this is more aligned with the new way of looking at this type of capability.

[webrunner5]

45 minutes ago, kye said:

I watched that too..  

He makes a point, BUT he's assuming that we shoot, process, and display in the same resolution, and that we display that resolution in a 16:9 rectangle with a viewing angle aligned with the THX or SMPTE specifications.

This is old thinking.

We need to shoot higher than 4K if we want visually-acceptable results with reasonable cropping, VR, or any kind of immersive projection.

Way beyond my knowledge on the stuff on a technical point, but I have had a Macular Hole, Detached Retina, both eyes operated on with cathartics, my granddaughter having brain surgery with only having half of each eye function, so yeah I know an unfortunate amount about eyes!  Sort of been there, done that.

I don't know about you but 16:9 is all is shoot at, and sort of what I relate to, and I Only have one eye! You must have 3 eyes to see different? There isn't anyone that can see in 4K! The average person over 20 is lucky to see HD. Hell of a lot of men are Color Blind.

"Red-green color blindness affects up to 8% of males and 0.5% of females of Northern European descent.[2] The ability to see color also decreases in old age" Wiki.

 

[IronFilm]

35 minutes ago, kye said:

In terms of formal posed moments, video modes aren't currently well suited to this, so you're better off just shooting images.  However, cameras could evolve in this aspect (and would need to) by perhaps having something like a 'burst video mode' where it shot RAW for a burst, perhaps 0.5s before and after the shutter button was pushed.  This combined with high ISO performance could give sufficient image quality to work fine with continuous light, or you could get continuous lighting with a burst mode, or 24/25/30fps sync for that burst.  These technologies are either already with us, or are pretty close, so it's more a case of them being combined and the market working out what photogs would use and find practical.

I think you missed his point completely. 

For example:

Flash lighting (along with high speed shutter) can be used to massively change the ratio of ambient to artificial light, to get a look you could never achieve with constant lighting. 

[kye]

31 minutes ago, webrunner5 said:

Way beyond my knowledge on the stuff. Makes more sense that the crazy stuff on here. I don't know about you but 16:9 is all is shoot at, and sort of what I relate to, and I Only have one eye! Isn't anyone that can see in 4K! The average person over 20 is lucky to see HD. Hell of a lot of men are Color Blind.

"Red-green color blindness affects up to 8% of males and 0.5% of females of Northern European descent.[2] The ability to see color also decreases in old age" Wiki.

A really simple example might be the home videos from Minority Report:

Ignoring the 3D aspect of it, right now we have the ability to shoot really wide angle and then project really wide angle. All you need is a GoPro and one of those projectors designed to be close to the screen - existing tech right now.

If you shoot 4K but project it 8 foot tall and 14 foot wide then most people sure as hell will be able to see it - especially if you've shot H265 at 35Mbps!!

Projecting people life-sized is a pretty attractive viewing experience, so we're not talking some kind of abstract niche kind of thing - we're talking something that a percentage of the worlds population would see in the big-box store and say "I want that"

17 minutes ago, IronFilm said:

I think you missed his point completely. 

For example:

Flash lighting (along with high speed shutter) can be used to massively change the ratio of ambient to artificial light, to get a look you could never achieve with constant lighting. 

I understand that.

If you read my post carefully you will notice I mentioned that they might have a 24/25/30fps sync - this is different to continuous lighting.  While this isn't currently available at full power, there are strobes that can recycle fast enough (eg, Profoto D2 - link can recycle in 0.03s and can already sync to 20fps bursts).  All that is missing is having a big enough buffer (capacitor bank) to do full power that fast.

[webrunner5]

14 minutes ago, kye said:

A really simple example might be the home videos from Minority Report:

Ignoring the 3D aspect of it, right now we have the ability to shoot really wide angle and then project really wide angle. All you need is a GoPro and one of those projectors designed to be close to the screen - existing tech right now.

If you shoot 4K but project it 8 foot tall and 14 foot wide then most people sure as hell will be able to see it - especially if you've shot H265 at 35Mbps!!

Projecting people life-sized is a pretty attractive viewing experience, so we're not talking some kind of abstract niche kind of thing - we're talking something that a percentage of the worlds population would see in the big-box store and say "I want that"

I understand that.

If you read my post carefully you will notice I mentioned that they might have a 24/25/30fps sync - this is different to continuous lighting.  While this isn't currently available at full power, there are strobes that can recycle fast enough (eg, Profoto D2 - link can recycle in 0.03s and can already sync to 20fps bursts).  All that is missing is having a big enough buffer (capacitor bank) to do full power that fast.

I think  you are sort of are trying to talk me into that the Matrix movies were reality! I "see" where you are trying to go here. ?

[kye]

6 minutes ago, webrunner5 said:

I think  you are sort of are trying to talk me into that the Matrix movies were reality! I "see" where you are trying to go here. ?

Whenever I see things like "we can't see in 4K" or "no-one will ever need 8K" I just hear "640k should be enough for anybody" ???

[jonpais]

Okay, now for a few quibbles with the a7 III for those who are on the same page when it comes to Sony’s state-of-the-art FF mirrorless (that is, not some pie-in-the-sky $2,000 Canon mirrorless in 2020 with no crop, functioning DPAF in 4K, no crippled HDMI out, blah, blah) being the one to beat in 2019. 

Screen and EVF resolution - Sony had to cut corners somewhere to keep costs down. Can Nikon give us a 3 million dot LCD in their 24/5 mpx camera? And will zebras, histogram and PDAF all work properly in 4K as they do in 1080p?

File structure - Sony’s file structure is nuts, as is the numbering system. I’d expect Nikon’s to be saner.

IBIS - Sony’s stabilization is mediocre. Fuji managed to mess this one up on their smaller APS-C sensor cameras. Will Nikon be able to do any better? I know everyone here will say ‘of course they will!’, but like everything else, we’ll just have to wait and see.

Dual card slots - Sony’s implementation is wonky. Will Nikon’s be better?

Timelapse.

Touch screen - I for one don’t use the touch screen, but can Nikon please give us a fully functioning touchscreen that allows skimming through menu items? Can they make one that’s not laggy and time-consuming like the X-H1?

Codecs, etc. - I must be the only person in the entire world to actually like Sony’s colors. But just try lifting a midtone here or a highlight there, and the image falls completely apart - something I never experienced with the GH5. Everyone expects Nikon’s colors to trounce Sony’s (myself included), but will their files hold up any better to grading? And will they offer Log profiles? HDR? After all, Nikon boasts that their camera is for the next century. Another opportunity for Nikon would be to enable 10-bit with an external recorder, something not currently possible with the a7 III.

disclaimer - I haven’t shot Log on the Sony yet!

HFR - many are clamoring for 4K 60p. Can Nikon offer it in a $2,000 FF mirrorless?

Remote app?

Doubts - I’m not confident Nikon can offer anything as brilliant as Sony’s eye detect AF in stills mode. Will video AF-C transition (relatively) smoothly as it does with Sony, or will it be jarring, like it was on my X-T2? Will Nikon’s sensor perform as well in low light as Sony’s?

My last and final comment about lenses ?: It’s anticipated that Nikon will announce a couple of universal zooms and a prime on the 23rd. And let’s imagine that third party manufacturers cooperate and gift us with two dozen zooms and primes, AF and manual - within months! I would still be shelling out a small fortune, because I would most likely be trading up to Nikon’s own fast native primes (16, 35, 50, 85mm f/1.4) when they’re available down the road. And for sure selling off all my third party Rokinon et al manual lenses once Voigtlander designs their own vastly superior Z mount lenses.

My guess is, there will be no clear-cut winner as so many here think, and that the decision will still be as difficult as @Oliver Daniel ‘s choosing between several cinema cameras + B camera. Which begs another question - but I’ll leave that to you guys to figure out. 

[kye]

Nice post @jonpais.  There are so many different aspects to consider, and for many of us, a camera that really stuffs-up a single feature is worse than one that is passable at everything but doesn't wow.

I think that's the difference between different types of filming - some situations call for a camera to be great at some things and don't need other things, whereas other styles need everything to operate above a certain minimum level of performance, even if that minimum level is quite modest.

A great example is the GH5 vs A7III - 10-bit or 4K60 doesn't matter to me if the AF has failed, yet there are many cinema cameras that don't even have AF.  People have told me flat out that I'm expecting too much but unlike perhaps the vast majority of people on here, I started making films with what I had (a Samsung Galaxy S2 and a ~$300 Panasonic GF3 m43) and only upgraded when I went on a trip, filmed real things, messed up shots all over the place, and then looked for ways to improve.

[jonpais]

On 8/7/2018 at 9:16 PM, IronFilm said:

It is due to high demand (but low supply). 
Which was my point. 

(That was in response to my post about a seller asking over $12,000 for a Noct-Nikkor.)

And for the very same reason, a Virgin Mary Grilled Cheese sold for $28,000 on ebay, right? And I’m sure others here can recall dozens of other such ridiculous offers. 

Someone can list old toenail clippings on ebay for a million dollars, it doesn’t mean a thing.

[Oliver Daniel]

7 hours ago, jonpais said:

My guess is, there will be no clear-cut winner as so many here think, and that the decision will still be as difficult as @Oliver Daniel ‘s choosing between several cinema cameras + B camera. Which begs another question - but I’ll leave that to you guys to figure out. 

Haha yeah, I've always said that these camera choice dilemmas do get in the way of the real purpose we're all imaging nuts, however when the images you produce are part of a business model which feeds your family and pays your rent, you do have to make the right choice (I haven't before and my product quality dived!). 

If I was shooting stuff for pleasure and fun, I'd just stick with a Sony A7 III, some mid-range lenses and a Zhiyun Crane for everything. Actually, I'm off to Greece at the end of the month for a holiday, and I'm perfectly happy taking the A6500 and the shitty kit lens. It's a fine setup for what I need it for. 

[nigelbb]

12 hours ago, Danyyyel said:

Sorry unless you want all your photo to have motion blur it is far from that easy. 

You are stuck in today's video vs. photo paradigm. The technology already exists for dual ISO so why not dual shutter speed? or a still image taken at 1/250 or 1/500 or whatever taken in between each video frame or every 10th video frame & stored separately? There are so many different ways this could be accomplished. The 8 Megapixel stills that you can grab off a 4K timeline are sensational & can be used for any commercial purpose from wedding albums to magazine covers to billboards. 

[Sage]

6 minutes ago, nigelbb said:

You are stuck in today's video vs. photo paradigm. The technology already exists for dual ISO so why not dual shutter speed? or a still image taken at 1/250 or 1/500 or whatever taken in between each video frame or every 10th video frame & stored separately? There are so many different ways this could be accomplished. The 8 Megapixel stills that you can grab off a 4K timeline are sensational & can be used for any commercial purpose from wedding albums to magazine covers to billboards. 

That's a great idea.

At the moment, there's Reel Smart Motion Blur (computer intensive though)

Stills with 180d blur are cinematic, as long as you can get one resolved enough..