p.1 #1 · There goes the hope for a mirrorless FF...
from Canon. Who is going to step up to the plate next? Nikon round #2? Pentax round #2 (remember the FA limited?) Ricoh?
I still believe that the first sub $2000 FF mirrorless body with a nice set of prime (no huge zoom please) will take the market. But the big players seem to be more concerned about not competing against their own line (Nikon 1, now EF-M) than to win the market. Maybe there will never be a mirrorless FF.
p.1 #3 · There goes the hope for a mirrorless FF...
I'm curious, doesn't the launch of the Canon M mean that Nikon will have to rethink their mirrorless offerings? Won't Nikon be left far behind all competition as it currently stands?
p.1 #6 · There goes the hope for a mirrorless FF...
i don't have much hope for any of them bringing out a mirrorless FF for at least 2-3 years, except like edward mentioned, the a99, which will have almost none of the advantages of a real mirrorless camera.
p.1 #8 · There goes the hope for a mirrorless FF...
aleksanderpolo wrote:
from Canon. Who is going to step up to the plate next? Nikon round #2? Pentax round #2 (remember the FA limited?) Ricoh?
I still believe that the first sub $2000 FF mirrorless body with a nice set of prime (no huge zoom please) will take the market. But the big players seem to be more concerned about not competing against their own line (Nikon 1, now EF-M) than to win the market. Maybe there will never be a mirrorless FF.
Maybe it's time for a used M9. (bye bye $$$ )
I'm worried that there may not be much motivation for the camera makers to put expensive, 35mm sensors in mirrorless cameras, since mirrorless systems designed from the ground up aren't constrained to a particular sensor/film size. With Canon's new offering, we now have 5 (!!) different sensor sizes amongst various ILC cameras (7 if you count Leica M,) and the G1X has a 6th different sensor size. It seems that each manufacturer is choosing what they believe to be the right combination of size, performance and price without taking traditional film sizes into account.
p.s. I think Edward's probably right about the A99. It'll at least allow easy manual focusing with the EVF, but the size won't be an advantage.
p.1 #9 · There goes the hope for a mirrorless FF...
Douglas, you really make an excellent point. I too suspect that traditional film sizes are a thing of the past, at least in what concerns new systems built from scratch. Manufacturers want to differentiate themselves from others, and in the same time discourage buyers from using alternative lenses.
p.1 #10 · There goes the hope for a mirrorless FF...
35mm is still a valid size for a mirrorless sensor, as all current FF lenses are made to cover that exact area. Nikon could very well counter Canon with a mirrorless FF camera, compatible with its current FX lens lineup. The Nikon 1 concept is dead now imho. Nikon needs a mirrorless that can use its line of lenses as the Canon M does.
p.1 #11 · There goes the hope for a mirrorless FF...
I'm thinking that 35mm digital is starting to become the equivalent to medium format film of the past, in that the systems will be larger and more expensive than the various mirrorless cameras out there. Granted, the M9 is the exception, but it is very expensive and still considerably larger than something like a NEX-5N.
M9s are starting to pop up used in the $4-5K range these days, so I'm hoping an M10 comes this fall, and then I'll consider an M9, if the prices drop some more.
p.1 #12 · There goes the hope for a mirrorless FF...
briantho wrote:
35mm is still a valid dimension, as all current FF lenses are made to cover that exact area. Nikon could very well counter Canon with a mirrorless FF camera, compatible with its current FX lens lineup. The Nikon 1 concept is dead imho.
Yeah, but who want's to put large lenses on a small, mirrorless body with large adapters? You may as well use a small, 35mm DSLR with great AF, which is rumored to be coming from Nikon. Or, maybe a smaller 35mm SLT for old manual focus lenses.
p.1 #13 · There goes the hope for a mirrorless FF...
I never understood why large lenses are condidered a problem on small mirrorless bodies. It's about choice. You CAN use the larger lenses if you want to, but if you're packing light, you can use a native pancake. Why does large lenses necesserely need to be used on a large body?
p.1 #15 · There goes the hope for a mirrorless FF...
I never bet on Canon. I think first will be either Sony or some smaller one. Ricoh/Pentax or Fuji.
Tho if M10 will have additional EVF, it will be mirrorless.. Unfortunately not affordable, so I guess we all want something like NEX on steroids, FF+mirrorless and reasonable priced.
p.1 #16 · There goes the hope for a mirrorless FF...
briantho wrote:
I never understood why large lenses are condidered a problem on small mirrorless bodies. It's about choice. You CAN use the larger lenses if you want to, but if you're packing light, you can use a native pancake. Why does large lenses necesserely need to be used on a large body?
Sure, you can use larger lenses on a smaller body, but is the motivation large enough for the camera companies to put a 35mm sensor in a mirrorless camera, which would also require it's own 35mm lens line? It seems that they've decided that aps-c (and smaller) is good enough to use with both mirrorless and DSLR lenses.
p.1 #17 · There goes the hope for a mirrorless FF...
As far as I'm concerned, if the M10 has live view, fast processor and a nice screen, it would be my ideal mirrorless FF camera. It would use all of my ZM lenses, wouldn't need an external VF for my 18 and 25 lenses, would be able to actually focus down to 50 cm with those 2, would be able to use close up filters, and even adapt SLR lenses, all this while keeping the RF experience that I have gotten very fond of.
p.1 #18 · There goes the hope for a mirrorless FF...
edwardkaraa wrote:
As far as I'm concerned, if the M10 has live view, fast processor and a nice screen, it would be my ideal mirrorless FF camera. It would use all of my ZM lenses, wouldn't need an external VF for my 18 and 25 lenses, would be able to actually focus down to 50 cm with those 2, would be able to use close up filters, and even adapt SLR lenses, all this while keeping the RF experience that I have gotten very fond of.
Since I'm not a wide shooter, I'd basically just like to see a more contemporary sensor in the M10, and I'd be fine with it. That being the case, I think I'd be fine with a used M9, and, if they come down under $3K, I'll likely bite.
p.1 #19 · There goes the hope for a mirrorless FF...
edwardkaraa wrote:
As far as I'm concerned, if the M10 has live view, fast processor and a nice screen, it would be my ideal mirrorless FF camera. It would use all of my ZM lenses, wouldn't need an external VF for my 18 and 25 lenses, would be able to actually focus down to 50 cm with those 2, would be able to use close up filters, and even adapt SLR lenses, all this while keeping the RF experience that I have gotten very fond of.
+.9
I agree with all of this, but subtracted a bit since it will probably be so expensive that it'll take several years of depreciation before I can afford it.
p.1 #20 · There goes the hope for a mirrorless FF...
CVickery wrote:
+.9
I agree with all of this, but subtracted a bit since it will probably be so expensive that it'll take several years of depreciation before I can afford it.
The nice thing about Leica is that they're a good investment. They may be (very) expensive but you can get most of your money back, and in some cases, even make a profit
Even the M8 dinosaure is still fetching prices in the 2500$.
