I try to avoid making too many judgments about what people say they want (though it can be hard not to comment on magical thinking about lens size, aperture, backwards compatibility, etc.). I especially try to fight the urge to call those tastes illegitimate or ill-informed.
I've been shooting film for decades, and I've always loved the feel of a rangefinder -- I've always found them more comfortable and intuitive to handle. And yes, they look great. I would welcome more compact native mount primes, but I can get most of what I want with a mix of Z and adapted older lenses. The 40/2 and 85/1.8 primes are reasonably compact (especially with a smaller hood on the 85), and get me back to a lot of what I loved about the old Leica/Minolta CL/CLE as a travel kit -- and I can also shoot those focal lengths in adapted MF lenses on the current Nikon bodies pretty effortlessly.
If the only thing you're looking for is a solid platform to shoot adapted M glass, any of the existing Z bodies can perform admirably, though some manage manual focusing better than others. I wouldn't need or want a different mount, new lenses, or a hybrid viewfinder on a Z/SP.
dennishy wrote:
I'd love nothing more than Nikon's version of an A7CR. I love my ZF but wish it could be even smaller like the Z30. And as I'm wishing into the void add a tilt screen for waist level shots. Please Nikon, I'll be saving my nickels until you do.
I will be looking into the new Sony FX2 camera when it arrives. Although it's main attractions are meant for video shooters, it supports stills use with a 33MP, a small body, tilting rear screen, tilting EVF (something I've wanted since time immemorial)) and I've still got a full range of F-mount lenses to put on it.
I do think the idea is that the Z/SP has a Z mount, not a new S mount. Agree it makes no sense to make an all new mount. In theory they could have a new smart adapter.
Smiert Spionam wrote:
I try to avoid making too many judgments about what people say they want (though it can be hard not to comment on magical thinking about lens size, aperture, backwards compatibility, etc.). I especially try to fight the urge to call those tastes illegitimate or ill-informed.
I've been shooting film for decades, and I've always loved the feel of a rangefinder -- I've always found them more comfortable and intuitive to handle. And yes, they look great. I would welcome more compact native mount primes, but I can get most of what I want with a mix of Z and adapted older lenses. The 40/2 and 85/1.8 primes are reasonably compact (especially with a smaller hood on the 85), and get me back to a lot of what I loved about the old Leica/Minolta CL/CLE as a travel kit -- and I can also shoot those focal lengths in adapted MF lenses on the current Nikon bodies pretty effortlessly.
If the only thing you're looking for is a solid platform to shoot adapted M glass, any of the existing Z bodies can perform admirably, though some manage manual focusing better than others. I wouldn't need or want a different mount, new lenses, or a hybrid viewfinder on a Z/SP....Show more →
I'm probably in the minority, but I think the original S is a tremendously ugly camera. The year 2000/S3 is much more appealing to me, which is what this render seems to be aping.
It's definitely a cool idea. For me, it would probably come down to what sensor they put in it, and possibly does it have IBIS. I have been itching for Nikon to give us an updated camera with a 45mp + sensor in a smaller body than the Z8. As long as the price is reasonable, I would probably even take a Z5II with a Z7II sensor.
The Z30 is already very close to range finder style camera.
