On the off chance someone at Nikon, (and not the geniuses who came up with the V1/2 line) are listening, what would you do if Nikon introduced a retro-design (a la Olympus, Fuji) compact, full-frame F-mount body the size of the FM2/3 with, say, 18-24MP, morrorless or rather prism with a hybrid VF, focus-peak assist, screen optimized for manual focus and ƒ/1.2, that can still AF with G-type lenses (but not screw-driven D's).
For those bitten by the bug of legacy manual focus lenses, use this link for the poll I started over on the Nikon thread to vote, comment:
j.liam wrote:
On the off chance someone at Nikon, (and not the geniuses who came up with the V1/2 line) are listening, what would you do if Nikon introduced a retro-design (a la Olympus, Fuji) compact, mirrorless, full-frame F-mount body the size of the FM2/3 with, say, 18-24MP, focus-peak assist with interchangeable screens, optimized for manual focus and ƒ/1.2, that can still AF with G-type lenses (but not screw-driven D's).
For those bitten by the bug of legacy manual focus lenses, use this link for the poll I started over on the Nikon thread to vote, comment:
I would put a prism and a mirror in a very compact body the size of the original FM's. Sounds like that's what you had in mind when you wrote it would have interchangeable screens?
Tariq Gibran wrote:
I would put a prism and a mirror in a very compact body the size of the original FM's. Sounds like that's what you had in mind when you wrote it would have interchangeable screens?
You are correct only because I'm not crazy about pure EVF's. Maybe then a hybrid VF with a prism. SECOND EDIT OF THE SPECS.
Tariq Gibran wrote:
I would put a prism and a mirror in a very compact body the size of the original FM's. Sounds like that's what you had in mind when you wrote it would have interchangeable screens?
+1
A minimal DSLR, small like in the old days. Ruggedly built, huge, brilliant prism with a mirror and focusing screen made for manual focus. 24MP.
p.1 #11 · Nikon FM3-D imagined..What would you do?
carstenw wrote:
A minimal DSLR, small like in the old days. Ruggedly built, huge, brilliant prism with a mirror and focusing screen made for manual focus. 24MP.
Key here is 'minimal' without the bloat; hardware and software. Perhaps a stellar built-in JPEG engine like Fuji created for the X-series cameras.
mawz wrote:
I'd cop to a high-end EVF instead of the prism, but what I really want is that FM2n-sized body and the ability to properly focus manually.
Exactly. My brief time with a D800 netted me a save rate on MF lenses, particularly the faster ones, of maybe 1/3. About the same as the D700 before Katz Eye. Not acceptable.
p.1 #12 · Nikon FM3-D imagined..What would you do?
redisburning wrote:
EVF & AF are a non-starter to me.
seriously AF is either for for pros/people with disabilities or the sort of chumps that drive automatic transmissions.
I just want a viewfinder that lets me see (optically) ... bright and clear, with an screen that's easy to focus. Is that too much to ask for?
I never really understood we can't just have a 100% mirror / interchangeable focusing screens / optical viewfinder like film. Push the button, mirror moves out of the way, shutter opens, light hits sensor, shutter closes, mirror comes back down. How hard is that?
p.1 #15 · Nikon FM3-D imagined..What would you do?
RustyBug wrote:
I just want a viewfinder that lets me see (optically) ... bright and clear, with an screen that's easy to focus. Is that too much to ask for?
I never really understood we can't just have a 100% mirror / interchangeable focusing screens / optical viewfinder like film. Push the button, mirror moves out of the way, shutter opens, light hits sensor, shutter closes, mirror comes back down. How hard is that?
+1 give me a barebone DSLR like film, I'd more than like to spend more for 'less'. There is market for this section which all big player ignore right now
p.1 #16 · Nikon FM3-D imagined..What would you do?
RustyBug wrote:
I just want a viewfinder that lets me see (optically) ... bright and clear, with an screen that's easy to focus. Is that too much to ask for?
I never really understood we can't just have a 100% mirror / interchangeable focusing screens / optical viewfinder like film. Push the button, mirror moves out of the way, shutter opens, light hits sensor, shutter closes, mirror comes back down. How hard is that?
Unfortunately, it's probably more a case of "we can build it much cheaper with an EVF" than it is a matter of anything else.
p.1 #17 · Nikon FM3-D imagined..What would you do?
j.liam wrote:
On the off chance someone at Nikon, (and not the geniuses who came up with the V1/2 line) are listening, what would you do if Nikon introduced a retro-design (a la Olympus, Fuji) compact, full-frame F-mount body the size of the FM2/3 with, say, 18-24MP, morrorless or rather prism with a hybrid VF, focus-peak assist, screen optimized for manual focus and ƒ/1.2, that can still AF with G-type lenses (but not screw-driven D's).
For those bitten by the bug of legacy manual focus lenses, use this link for the poll I started over on the Nikon thread to vote, comment:
The geniuses (as you correctly label them) that came up with the compact J/V 1/2 series actually saved Nikon's butt last year. Those series most probably (from looking at their official economical statements) made more money than all of the FX and DX bodies combined in 2012 - which kind of was a saving grace for the R&D department and Dev. department at Nikon imaging, keeping them in a positive cashflow, allowing them to continue looking forward in stead of stagnating from running on fumes financially.
What you specify is AI-S spec and AF-S (G) spec full body, but in FM2 sizes - which isn't physically possible unless you accept that the body WILL be about 15mm thicker front to back than the FM2. This would make the camera quite bulky.
The film plane and film guide plus about 1mm of steel plate backing is adding 1.5mm from the focal plane backwards in a film camera. That's all you need, there's nothing more there to do. 1.5mm, plus some strengthening beams in the back plate. If you want a digital sensor in stead of film, it's not so simple.
In digital you have a sensor with sensor plate backing (3mm) plus al/cu heatplate (1mm) plus insulationplate (1mm), before arriving at the mainboard (1.5-2.5mm) that sits just in front of the camera body back plate (1mm). Behind that you'd need an LCD assembly for the screen, the and the thinnest SCP 3" LCD assembly I know of is about 6mm thick.
Adding to that - you specified AF-S auto focus. One of the reasons that the FM is compact in height is that it DOESN'T have AF. The AF module sits under the mirrorbox, and adds about 15mm under the sensor that wasn't there on the FM series.
Then after that, you'd probably want a real grip hump - I've used the FM quite a lot, and it's a very uncomfortable camera. It's slippery, it's thin, you have nothing to hold on to, and where you WANT to hold on to it to - it's all sharp edges. You can get more compact - but then you have to drop the F-mount, and with that - all F-mount lenses. And phase detection AF would have to go too. Anything else is just a pipe dream.
F-mount flange distance: 46.5mm. Plus a minimum of 15mm body and electronics - 62mm. This is the minimum thickness of the camera body if you want F-mount, digital sensor and a back LCD.
p.1 #18 · Nikon FM3-D imagined..What would you do?
If it can't mount lenses with shorter than F mount registration(FD, LTM, M...) I'm not all that interested unless its it handles and performs very well and has a large viewfinder.
p.1 #19 · Nikon FM3-D imagined..What would you do?
theSuede wrote:
The film plane and film guide plus about 1mm of steel plate backing is adding 1.5mm from the focal plane backwards in a film camera. That's all you need, there's nothing more there to do. 1.5mm, plus some strengthening beams in the back plate. If you want a digital sensor in stead of film, it's not so simple.
In digital you have a sensor with sensor plate backing (3mm) plus al/cu heatplate (1mm) plus insulationplate (1mm), before arriving at the mainboard (1.5-2.5mm) that sits just in front of the camera body back plate (1mm). Behind that you'd need an LCD assembly for the screen, the and the thinnest SCP 3" LCD assembly I know of is about 6mm thick. ...Show more →
With the RX1, I measure about 8mm from the designated film plane (marked on top) to the rear of the LCD screen. Granted, that's Sony. One only has to look at what Leica has done to the thickness of the digital M's (vs film M's) to see how thick things get when you're not Sony...and that's not even an SLR!
p.1 #20 · Nikon FM3-D imagined..What would you do?
Tariq Gibran wrote:
One only has to look at what Leica has done to the thickness of the digital M's (vs film M's) to see how thick things get when you're not Sony...and that's not even an SLR!
As Tariq points out, some gradual 'enhancement' in size is inevitable. And notwithstanding our Swedish friend's most thorough assessment, I am not an engineer and what I imagined may not be practicable as outlined. But those specifications aren't invariable. Perhaps a MF-only camera, and AF only with an add-on grip? Also as Tariq points out, Sony seems to have overcome some of the engineering obstacles.
theSuede wrote:
... the compact J/V 1/2 series actually saved Nikon's butt last year.
As far as the V-series being the monetary 'saving grace', do you have the data to back up the claim? I was under the impression that Nikon is secretive as to specifics.
