Dear Nikon...

[theSUBVERSIVE]

I kind of agree with most of the things but I not with the overall wrap up, it feels unbalanced for me, it feels like something out of frustration than a more reasonable thing.

 

I also made a post about the Nikon Df - on my brand new blog that was made for anti-procrastination purposes.

 

I do think that this is a stepback but I also understand that it seems to exist a demand for this type of camera, there are a lot of people screaming with joy for this purist thing. My personal take is that this is so stupid and empty, if you don't want to shoot video, just don't do it, what's the point of not having that at all? You are simply pissing on the face of those that would make a use of the video? Why?

 

At the same time, I don't think that this is something against the videographers, for me, it feels more like something to please the purists crowd than making a statement against video - although for most people it will just sound like that. Nikon wanted to please the "pure photographers", they saw a business opportunity and they took it, the part that they slash the videographers is like a side effect that they decided to deal with it - maybe because they felt that not so many video guys think too high of Nikon anyway. It didn't feel like it was their way of saying "we don't care about video, f*** you!", they may even launch a camera with more video feats, who knows?

 

So, in the end, I don't agree with Nikon but I kind of get it. But yeah, if I was Nikon, I would have taken the opportunity of this new market and launch a new FF Mirrorless system but Nikon lacks balls.

 

About Fuji and Olympus. From my perspective it feels like Olympus is the one doing just for the marketing but since they implemented 5-axis IBIS for video in the E-M5 via firmware, they are getting some serious demand for video and they are a bit lost about it, maybe they didn't expected it. Since everybody looks at Oly for photo and Panny for video - why can't we have both?? But Panasonic is catching up in the photo department faster than Olympus in the video.

 

I don't think it's completely fair to say that Fuji is doing this just as a badge on the box. It should be taken into account that the Fuji X system doesn't even have 2 years old and Fuji is still trying to stablish themselves and putting their effort in proving more cameras to their Fuji x line up. Video was never a priority but nonetheless it wasn't completely forgotten. With the X100s they added 1080p60 and now a bit more control in video mode, the ability to use filters, etc. I know, it's not much and they could have done a better but it's not a complete lack of interest in it, if feels more like a matter of priority. For now they are stablishing themselves, developing more cameras and their focus is on photography, but having now cameras with dedicated record button and some new feats, it's their way of saying "it's not our focus and these are baby steps but bear with us, we are not ignoring it". Further more, video it's not Fuji's expertise, for them to develop the know-how and the better quality, it will take longer, the X-E2 is just the first camera from the 2nd generation of Fuji X cameras.

 

These are baby steps but they've done more in 1 year than Olympus have done, Olympus already have a stablished system and even so they couldn't even put more framerate options on their long waited flagship camera.

 

I feel more disappointed at Canon than the other brands that never had video as a priority. Sure, we know that video can be a lot better - A LOT BETTER - if they put a bit of effort. But that's when there is an opportunity for a company lilke Black Magic to come out of nothing with a mind blowing product and price tag - even though the execution had its hiccups. The stagnancy of the camera brands made this possible, to have RAW for under $1000 - when the upgrade for the Pocket Camera arrives - to have up to 13 stops of DR in video and so on. One could argue that all of that should be there in the first place but things don't work like that, as much as I'd like to, no one has obligation to make video a priority. Which is different when you allure consumers for your video and then you show then the middle finger and say "go get more money and buy our PRO stuff".

 

My overall vision is that I have more hope of Panasonic implementing a 5-axis-like tech than Olympus really doing it right with the framerates, codecs, etc. - Panasonic should give the people what they want, to make the GX7 IBIS work in video! And the rumor about a true micro4/3 for video is very interesting and only Panasonic is able to pull that off - this is Black Magic putting preassure on Panasonic, for sure.

 

Sony always talk about a true hybrid, they even have all the accessories for that but nonetheless they fail to step up and deliver a better video quality. Fuji will keep their baby step and I have hopes for Kaizen but I'm disappointed that although they gave us more control over video, it's still not full control! WTH. Can Fuji keep evolving? I think so because I didn't expect 1080p60 with the X100s, it's not good video, I know, I hope they finally put full manual control and more framerates.

 

Canon will continue to do Canon things I guess, they don't care, they are not bothered, most people still think Canon has the best video. I feel like Nikon's video is going to get better but it's never gonna be as important of a feat as it's for Panasonic or even Canon.

 

I hope that Black Magic give a bit more attention to polishing their cameras, it was great to see them correcting the black hole spot, but they still didn't get some little things right. And their delivering isn't still smooth as they said it would be. I'd like to see a real micro4/3 Black Magic camera, one that has a micro4/3-sized sensor to be able to make fully use of the micro4/3 system. I like how bold Black Magic is and that's why, although it may not sound like this kind of product is on the way, I get that feeling that it might happen, who knows? It's refreshing.

[Germy1979]

I have been waiting for several years to buy the right camera. No one is making it yet. In the meantime, I rent.
 
I have talked to manufacturers. They have tunnel vision. 
 
If one of them gets brave enough to do it, they could make the camera most of us have been waiting for, and find a "whole new market" (one we have been telling them about for some now): and sell a lot of cameras.
 
I do not think Canon, Nikon, Fuji, will be the brave one to do it, nor do I think they care at all about articles like Andrew's. I appreciate the effort, Andrew. Write one to the companies who might actually care!

Amen?

A big question I've wondered off & on lately is the difference in performance between say, an 18mp sensor with full readout, vs a lower mp sensor
optimized for video? How would that compare in latitude, lowlight noise, iso performance? I know a higher mp sensor bites you when it has to pull just 2 mp out for 1080 video. This whole full sensor readout thing is new to me though.

So now we need a Hasselblad with a built in Alexa.

[Giovanni Bertani]

Oh yes... Nikon entering the fashion business. There is no reason at all this can be taken seriously over a D800E. A tool is a tool and this is obviously not marketed to photographers.

 

My perfect set in the bag now is a nice set of lenses mounted over:

A7R for greatly detailed photography in a compact body good for gallery size large prints Blackmagic Pocket Cinema Camera with speed booster to use the same lenses on Raw video

 

Looks like to me that in a modular world having two optimized sensors/bodies with a great shared lens set will be a wiser choice than a limited hybrid.

 

And this will be the direction I will take. 

[cantsin]

Looks like to me that in a modular world having two optimized sensors/bodies will be a wiser choice than a limited hybrid.

 

Couldn't agree more.

[austinmcconnell]

I'm gonna go out on a limb here and suggest that Nikon's main focus is not, nor has it ever been, nor do they want it in the future to be video shooters. I don't really get this article, I guess. To me this camera makes perfect sense for their market.  Nikon is a stills company. Always has been. Why complain to them about a lack of 'acceptable' video standards when that is not a service they want to provide? If you want to shoot video, then use one of the many video options offered by other companies. 

 

Nikon likely sees little to no revenue (and thus, incentive) to seriously tackle video. No reason to write them a hateful letter about it.  :)

[Rob Bannister]

Yes Im sure that they never wanted to get into video thats why the main focus of the D4 and D800 launch was all about uncompressed video out through HDMI lol its a tool, there are tons of stills cameras out there if you didnt want video on it. Im also guessing that them adding a video switch to live view and a dedicated record button also solidifies that they never intended to get into video....come on get real people maybe our market is small but I can tell you all Ive heard from everyone around here anyways is that the sony a7r is the better choice over this because its more of a Swiss army knife camera. I want to make sure I bring the right tool for the job and this one is not it. My job is not about looking like a hipster and complaining about having too many features in the tools I use

[austinmcconnell]

Yes Im sure that they never wanted to get into video thats why the main focus of the D4 and D800 launch was all about uncompressed video out through HDMI lol 

There you go. Nikon attempted a hybrid camera, with many of the features us video folks usually ask for. And guess what? Sales weren't there. Classic example of condemned if you do, condemned if you don't. When they make a camera with video featured, video shooters tore it a new one for not being good enough. When they say, alright, let's just make a camera doing what we know (still photos), we complain that they no longer have video, and we tear them a new one all the same.

 

 

 I can tell you all Ive heard from everyone around here anyways is that the sony a7r is the better choice over this because its more of a Swiss army knife camera. I want to make sure I bring the right tool for the job and this one is not it. 

I'm with you there. This camera is clearly not suited for what you need. But it is suited for their core customer base, and they might very well gobble it up. My girlfriend, for example, is actually very excited for this particular camera, because it has all the features she wants. I'm not excited for it because I would never use it. And guess what? Neither of us are wrong. We're just different folks with different strokes. 

[richg101]

the main reason pompus Nikon users ask for no video mode is because they simply don't understand how to get good things from video. wedding photographers who can diversify and offer (good) movies of a wedding are stealing jobs from the guys who can't deal with pulling focus, working with limited DR, editing, sound etc.  People want more than just a bloke with a boring 28-120mm zoom and a marks and spencers suit.  If I were to be married I'd toss a coin between a guy shooting with a large format view camera or a photographer using a LOMO 75mm square front for stills.  

 

Enough about lack of video mode...  I wouldn't look at a Nikon until they bin their horrifically limited lens mount.  Why havn't they binned this horrible FFD and gone with a new mount and sturdy adaptor as sony have done with their e-mount to a -mount adaptors.  

 

This camera will only be bought by boring photography club members who only buy camera gear to take to their meetings and talk about it, rather than taking photos anyway.

 

on a positive note...  Damn I love the styling.  But the A7R is about a million times more sophisticated.  And a biliion times more usable in this day and age

[richg101]

Let me guess...  Nikon forget to include a split screen focus system on this...  

[austinmcconnell]

the main reason pompus Nikon users ask for no video mode is because they simply don't understand how to get good things from video. wedding photographers who can diversify and offer (good) movies of a wedding are stealing jobs from the guys who can't deal with pulling focus, working with limited DR, editing, sound etc.  People want more than just a bloke with a boring 28-120mm zoom and a marks and spencers suit.  If I were to be married I'd toss a coin between a guy shooting with a large format view camera or a photographer using a LOMO 75mm square front for stills.  

 

Enough about lack of video mode...  I wouldn't look at a Nikon until they bin their horrifically limited lens mount.  Why havn't they binned this horrible FFD and gone with a new mount and sturdy adaptor as sony have done with their e-mount to a -mount adaptors.  

 

This camera will only be bought by boring photography club members who only buy camera gear to take to their meetings and talk about it, rather than taking photos anyway.

 

on a positive note...  Damn I love the styling.  But the A7R is about a million times more sophisticated.  And a biliion times more usable in this day and age

 

Aww... photographers have feelings, too! Don't be mean.  ^_^

[Germy1979]

There you go. Nikon attempted a hybrid camera, with many of the features us video folks usually ask for. And guess what? Sales weren't there. Classic example of condemned if you do, condemned if you don't. quote]

The D800 aliased really bad. Really bad...It had a run on Dexter, has better DR and detail than the stock Mark 3, and I've seen some nice video from it, but the aliasing did it in I'd assume. It sucks, but despite it's strengths over the Mark 3 and even having clean hdmi first.. It wasn't enough for the consumer to overlook that the Mark 3 had no aliasing or moire. (Just a muddy ass image.). I agree with you Nikon has focused their market to stills and there are other options, but people are complaining because there's a need yet to be met still, and Nikon don't have a dedicated video department... Which means they could make a camera from hell if they wanted. So until they flat out say, "hey look. We're not going to be your messiah for video." - I think people will hold expectations.

[Germy1979]

I also don't understand the still photographer hate for a video feature, lol. It's a button... Don't push it. I almost picture a still shooter looking at the function dial and seeing the little movie camera icon:

"Son-of-a BIIIIiIIIIIIIIIiIIIIITCH!!!!!!!!"

Throws camera, flips table over.

Seriously. What's the problem?

[Rob Bannister]

yes half ass attempts dont get sales. I would even bet this DF camera doesnt get the sales they expect either.

[Nikkor]

Nikon is targeting it's classic FF market,one of the few markets they have left but also one of the best they got: old retired white men with cash and nothing to do. Men who don't want video and who don't know that putting video into a camera doesn't take extra place or makes other things worse. (this is the only way to explain dpreview comments of the last 5 years)

The price point is perfect, they get a lot of cash out of a cheap camera and people will still buy it, I guess the D4 sales are low (the other retirement camera), and this one will take all those old men who can't carry a D4, don't have cash, still have a D3, or have a D4 and want to use their very old lenses or just want the classic dials.

This is a bread and butter camera, for the good old segment. Nikon could be making 4K raw video monsters and they still would make this one because retired white male are the majority of the society with spare cash. The article looses the point completle.

[zephyrnoid]

Well. I see you don't get it. My cynicism will win you over. First, some waxing of nostalgia of my own.
I actually giggled when I spotting this 'Df' on a facebook thread this morning. It immediately reminded me of my bread n butter Nikon FM2's of which I owned three. So Kudos to Nikon for picking the 1980's for a so-called 'retro' throwback. 1980's! Not the F or F photomic of the 70's. What can I say? I feel old.
Now to this>>>>>>>>>>>> "But there’s really no such thing as a retro camera market."
Wrong! I've studdied the Millenials like a hawk and have written some pieces related to how the retro market was shoe-horned into the Hipster Generation. I will not share my opinion of why this has happened but it definitely happened.EVERYTHING has to be retro to sell properly to Generation 'Zero'.  You see, the reason that stills cameras have been the big ticket bread and butter items versus say an affordable Digital Bolex type rollout is that Millennials ( the target demographic ) do not have the attention span to edit anything longer than 15 seconds so they can't actually STAND video . That is why the retro stills cameras will be a huge hit. Quick, Easy and looks perfect around the neck while globtrotting on Grandma's Trustfund cash ;)
Instructions:
1) Turn camera on
2) pose as a Spoiled Rotten 'Vintage Ivy League Scholar'  with matching period retro styled digicam while wearing $1,500 worth of retro threads* from Brook Brothers while shooting 'made for Instagram' snaps of your friends making silly faces.
3) Functionality? Get the shot onto your Facebook wall ASAP.
4) This is a camera that you'll want to pass on to your kids as a family heirloom ;)
:D
 

[austinmcconnell]

Nikon is targeting it's classic FF market,one of the few markets they have left but also one of the best they got: old retired white men with cash and nothing to do.

Blugh. Your racial stereotyping really bothers me. If you think labeling photo shooters like that is appropriate, I pity you. 

[Germy1979]

Blugh. Your racial stereotyping really bothers me. If you think labeling photo shooters like that is appropriate, I pity you.

I don't believe he was being "racist" man. Sheesh. Lol. He's actually pretty spot on. Just picture the bad guy from Sleeping with the Enemy.

[Andrew Benton]

Yeah, right when Sony comes out with (finally) a mirrorless FF camera instead of just Leica... is this Nikon's "response"?
Though I would have been all into this camera maybe 2 years ago, it's still too fat, with too much grip and way too many
buttons for a retro camera design, and no video + insane price = haha you're joking right?

I thought as technology improved aren't costs supposed to drop? Affordable FF cameras such as the 6D and D600 showed up and well, they're not the greatest but manufacturers are trying hard to not allow that price to drop to the point where everyone can afford FF it seems...

Otherwise, those saying "who cares about video on a stills camera" get over yourself, ever since the D90 and 5DII that argument holds no ground what-so-evah! Today, it's natural to expect a camera to take video as well, why not, if I'm out and about for photos and there's something I really want to get some footage of, something that stills just won't do justice to, then do I whip out my phone to do it??
Majority of users prefer their smartphone because they can instantly share the footage to everyone, no one wants to bother with the ever so complicated post editing and encoding.... but of course, that's where the art is, in taking time and effort to making something, and if that's in practice then a smartphone won't do any justice. Today, a camera is a multi-functional tool, there is no such term as a "stills camera", maybe "stills oriented camera" for the overall purpose and design, and there will always be a differentiation between tools with purpose for video or photography, but it doesn't make sense anymore to be able to just take still photographs with a digital camera.

Let's put it this way, if there was some way, however it may have been, for film cameras such as an FM2 to shoot motion pictures as well, would engineers back then have foregone that opportunity? Considering, if it worked of course, but really, isn't it amazing to be able to both now? Getting rid of video will do nothing to improve photos, if you don't mind getting rid of live view by changing the sensor design to something that will improve IQ, well, that isn't happening either, it'd be a pain to not have the ability now that we are all so used to it being available when, and maybe if we need it. 
Heck, even the new Leica M has video!! Doesn't that go against Leica tradition? Well, even they have a sensible side that understands what is desired in today's cameras
 

[Tone13]

This camera is purely for posers with money to burn. Unfortunately, in this world there are plenty of rich posers.

I don't understand the mentality of stills guys who want a stills only camera. You do not sacrifice any quality in stills by having a video mode. Considering live view uses a video stream, it's a natural progression to include a video mode. I personally will never buy a stills only camera again. There is just no point.

Personally, I'm desperate for a phone that doesn't have a music playing feature. I just can't handle my phone being able to play music!!!!

Stupid stills guys

[ScreensPro]

Interesting that a post titled "Dear Nikon" contains far, far more bile towards Canon.

 

As always, Andrew, you are looking at a product and thinking "Is this right for me?".... Fair enough, we all ask ourselves that question.... We don't, however, go on to write a blog about the fact that it doesn't check the boxes we desire.

 

Nikon make 99% (probably more) of their money catering to the needs of still shooters, it's not that hard to understand.