Nikon Full Frame Mirrorless to Have New Z Mount

Tugela

EOS R
Feb 12, 2014
873
23
There are other, practical, reasons for moving to a new mount:

1) It allows for greater flexibility in lens design.
2) It allows for the implementation of a mount that is protected by IP, in other words you get to decide what lens goes on the camera, not some third party manufacturer that is competing directly with you and taking revenue from you.
3) A new mount allows for greater computational integration between the lens and camera (similar to how Samsung used lenses with the NX cameras). As cameras become more computer like in the future this will increasingly allow more creative design options.

Basically starting a new mount (which can be made backwardly compatible with older lenses using adapters) is a sensible approach that looks to the future and not the past. Doing this in conjunction with the development of new MILC lines is an obvious time to do it. It is much more difficult to this sort of thing in the middle of a camera line since it is very disruptive to the eco system.
 

Tugela

EOS R
Feb 12, 2014
873
23
neuroanatomist said:
ahsanford said:
But I just can't see them signing up to FD --> EF 2.0. New lenses for mirrorless would happen with a thin mount (of course), but not a rebuild of EF for mirrorless -- there's no chance of that until all the mirrorslappers retire their mirrors.

+1

With dSLRs accounting for 65% of the ILC market, the demise of the reflex mirror is still a long way off...and by the time it happens, it may not be the current version of MILCs, but an industry paradigm shift that supplants today's ILCs (think: light field cameras, multi-lens 'bug-eye' cameras, holography, etc.).

MILCs will be the dominant ILC type by the end of 2019 if current sales trends continue. That may even happen in Asia this year. The end of the DSLR era is a lot closer than you think.
 

ahsanford

Particular Member
Aug 16, 2012
8,617
1,642
Tugela said:
MILCs will be the dominant ILC type by the end of 2019 if current sales trends continue. That may even happen in Asia this year. The end of the DSLR era is a lot closer than you think.

And Canon -- hardly committed in this market -- is #2 in mirrorless.

So what's your point? Either:

  • Canon's too late to the (very small unit) FF mirrorless market and will never catch up to the competition because of it? No. EOS M showed Canon can show up late (and underspec'd) and still sell like gangbusters. They've gone from nothing to 2nd place in span of 2-3 years without trying all that hard.


  • Canon will get stuck with a bunch of SLRs no one wants? No. They are purring at about a 50% ILC share right now. They know how to move units and will wisely rationalize/obsolete/not update SLR lines and replace them with mirrorless ones when they need to.

  • Canon isn't symbolically stating mirrorless is the future and aggressively and abruptly migrating its existing lines to mirrorless? No. That's madness given their current market share and global userbase. That's what AvTvM or some other internet expert would do, and it would set the business on fire. It makes a ton more sense to slowly work from the bottom of the Rebel line to the top of it -- line by line -- and offering mirrorless in that segment. Which is likely what Canon will do (if not sell both side by side for a time).

This notion that 'time is running out on the mirror' and Canon isn't getting the message is off target. Time is running out on the mirror, but (a) it isn't running out imminently, (b) mirrorless can be slowly phased in gradually on a market by market basis over time, and (c) when mirrorless does arrive, EOS M is proof positive that they will succeed in moving units.

The sky isn't falling. Why? Because Canon's plan doesn't have that on the Gantt chart. ;)

- A
 

Attachments

  • FlavTvM small.jpg
    FlavTvM small.jpg
    42.8 KB · Views: 448

Tugela

EOS R
Feb 12, 2014
873
23
ahsanford said:
Tugela said:
MILCs will be the dominant ILC type by the end of 2019 if current sales trends continue. That may even happen in Asia this year. The end of the DSLR era is a lot closer than you think.

And Canon -- hardly committed in this market -- is #2 in mirrorless.

So what's your point? Either:

  • Canon's too late to the (very small unit) FF mirrorless market and will never catch up to the competition because of it? No. EOS M showed Canon can show up late (and underspec'd) and still sell like gangbusters. They've gone from nothing to 2nd place in span of 2-3 years without trying all that hard.


  • Canon will get stuck with a bunch of SLRs no one wants? No. They are purring at about a 50% ILC share right now. They know how to move units and will wisely rationalize/obsolete/not update SLR lines and replace them with mirrorless ones when they need to.

  • Canon isn't symbolically stating mirrorless is the future and aggressively and abruptly migrating its existing lines to mirrorless? No. That's madness given their current market share and global userbase. That's what AvTvM or some other internet expert would do, and it would set the business on fire. It makes a ton more sense to slowly work from the bottom of the Rebel line to the top of it -- line by line -- and offering mirrorless in that segment. Which is likely what Canon will do (if not sell both side by side for a time).

This notion that 'time is running out on the mirror' and Canon isn't getting the message is off target. Time is running out on the mirror, but (a) it isn't running out imminently, (b) mirrorless can be slowly phased in gradually on a market by market basis over time, and (c) when mirrorless does arrive, EOS M is proof positive that they will succeed in moving units.

The sky isn't falling. Why? Because Canon's plan doesn't have that on the Gantt chart. ;)

- A

No they are not. They are #2 in half of the Japanese market, not #2 everywhere else. And a good part of that is due to lower end Canon video ILCs being included in that number.

The trends in the 2017 shipment numbers are consistent with previous years, so there is no reason to think that will not continue. MILCs are already almost half the market in Asia, and it will not be long before that happens in the NA market as well. 2019 will be the inflection point in market share, after that DSLRs will rapidly decline in market share and be limited to a few niche markets.

DSLRs are dinosaurs, and the meteorite is about to hit. The writing is on the wall. You will be surprised at how fast they disappear once we pass the inflection point.
 

neuroanatomist

I post too Much on Here!!
CR Pro
Jul 21, 2010
25,599
3,940
Tugela said:
No they are not. They are #2 in half of the Japanese market, not #2 everywhere else.

So, you believe that the BCN rankings are the only source of data? Hint: No they are not.
 

ahsanford

Particular Member
Aug 16, 2012
8,617
1,642
Tugela said:
DSLRs are dinosaurs, and the meteorite is about to hit. The writing is on the wall. You will be surprised at how fast they disappear once we pass the inflection point.

Ah, so it's not about a prediction of doom for Canon so much as a big change is coming once the market sees mirrorless take over. Sure, I suppose that's plausible, but we've been hearing predictions of momentous shifts away from mirrors for years now. It still hasn't happened.

I would argue that the great mirrorless exodus cannot occur without Canon and Nikon deprioritizing their Rebel/D5X00 lines by (a) not updating them any longer or (b) selling identically spec'd mirrorless rigs for the same price alongside the SLRs. Seeing as SLRs kind of keep the lights on for both of those companies (which might halt energy to tackle (a) above) and that mirrorless enjoys a lovely little upcharge over SLRs today (nixing (b) above), it might be a while.

Don't get me wrong, I agree it will eventually happen, but it won't happen in earnest until the two largest SLR manufacturers put their consumer SLR lines out to pasture.

- A
 

neuroanatomist

I post too Much on Here!!
CR Pro
Jul 21, 2010
25,599
3,940
Tugela said:
The trends in the 2017 shipment numbers are consistent with previous years, so there is no reason to think that will not continue.

Once again, your 'facts' are contradicted by reality.

index.php


You really should try to live in the real world with the rest of us, instead of inventing your own private reality where you know stuff.
 

Hflm

Gear: 5div, A7riii, A9 ...
Jan 10, 2017
88
0
neuroanatomist said:
Tugela said:
The trends in the 2017 shipment numbers are consistent with previous years, so there is no reason to think that will not continue.

Once again, your 'facts' are contradicted by reality.

index.php


You really should try to live in the real world with the rest of us, instead of inventing your own private reality where you know stuff.

http://www.sansmirror.com/newsviews/when-does-mirrorless-suppla.html
showed two scenarios based on unit volume which are very possible (based on 10% decrease in dslrs and 10% increase in mirrorless, for example).
bythom_ilc_trendline_med.jpeg


Change the growth rate to account for new MILC models introduced by Canon and Nikon and thing can change faster:
bythom_ilc_trendline2_med.jpeg


So 2019 or 2020 are easily possible in my opinion.
 

AvTvM

EOS R6
Nov 4, 2011
3,165
0
Neuro seems to have "forgotten" adding rapidly shrinking mirrorslapper shipments ::) ... real picture looks like this ... with some rather conservative projections for 2018-2020 ... given Nikon will come with mirrorless system(s) ... APS-C and/or FF ... and Canon will [have to] add FF MILC system as well ..

bythom_ilc_trendline_med.jpeg


http://www.sansmirror.com/newsviews/when-does-mirrorless-suppla.html

end of mirrorslapping is in sight. Transition will happen very quickly now
 

neuroanatomist

I post too Much on Here!!
CR Pro
Jul 21, 2010
25,599
3,940
Hflm said:
http://www.sansmirror.com/newsviews/when-does-mirrorless-suppla.html
showed two scenarios based on unit volume which are very possible (based on 10% decrease in dslrs and 10% increase in mirrorless, for example).

So 2019 or 2020 are easily possible in my opinion.

AvTvM said:
... real picture looks like this ...

Anything is possible. What is true is that Thom would have gotten a very different trendline for MILCs if he'd included all of the available data (CIPA started separately tracking MILCs in 2012). Many people like to base conclusions on incomplete or 'carefully selected' data. In my field, I call those people poor scientists.
 

dak723

EOS R
Oct 26, 2013
1,141
435
Here's a serious question. Why do you all care so much about if and when mirrorless cameras outsell DSLRs? They do not compete against one another. So who cares?

Mirrorless will replace DSLRs when the EVF is indistinguishable from an OVF. And when that happens, no one will care if the camera is mirrorless or has a mirror. Because - I realize forum dwellers won't understand this at all - most people don't care what is inside the camera. When I had a DSLR I spent zero moments thinking about the mirrror. Now that I have mirrorless, I spend zero time thinking about, well, having no mirror. Most folks owning DSLRs probably aren't even aware that there is a mirror in there.

In other words, no one cares and since they don't compete against one another - no one should care. What an unbelievable waste of time and hot air that this topic generates.

Just my opinion, of course.
 

3kramd5

EOS R6
Mar 2, 2012
3,084
405
dak723 said:
Here's a serious question. Why do you all care so much about if and when mirrorless cameras outsell DSLRs? They do not compete against one another.

Of course they do [compete], but your question stands. Then again, I don’t get team sports either.
 

privatebydesign

I post too Much on Here!!
CR Pro
Jan 29, 2011
10,441
5,658
3kramd5 said:
dak723 said:
Here's a serious question. Why do you all care so much about if and when mirrorless cameras outsell DSLRs? They do not compete against one another.

Of course they do [compete], but your question stands. Then again, I don’t get team sports either.

Just to throw my hat in the ring, I don't care when one outsells the other, just so long as there is good R&D and improvements to all models in both ranges I'll be happy.

As a 1DX MkII owner I can already think of meaningful improvements that are not out of the box on my DSLR, as an EOS-M owner I can think of improvements I'd like there too. I'd happily buy a FF mirrorless camera with or without an EF mount if it had features I found compelling.
 

3kramd5

EOS R6
Mar 2, 2012
3,084
405
^^ yes. That, precisely.

I sold my A7Rii when I got a 1Dx. They don’t really compare, but I just didn’t find myself using the former any longer. There are some noteworthy aspects to the Sony A9 which I would love to see in a canon future body (especially zero blackout in live view). Likewise there were things in my A7Rii that were tedious and frustrating, but work seamlessly with the 1Dx (low light autofocus, and autofocus in portrait orientation, for example).

If someone makes a best of all worlds, sure I’ve got money.
 

Hflm

Gear: 5div, A7riii, A9 ...
Jan 10, 2017
88
0
neuroanatomist said:
Hflm said:
http://www.sansmirror.com/newsviews/when-does-mirrorless-suppla.html
showed two scenarios based on unit volume which are very possible (based on 10% decrease in dslrs and 10% increase in mirrorless, for example).

So 2019 or 2020 are easily possible in my opinion.

AvTvM said:
... real picture looks like this ...

Anything is possible. What is true is that Thom would have gotten a very different trendline for MILCs if he'd included all of the available data (CIPA started separately tracking MILCs in 2012). Many people like to base conclusions on incomplete or 'carefully selected' data. In my field, I call those people poor scientists.
True?
I think Thom Hogan is well aware of the data and is not selecting only a small part suiting himself, being a DSLR user himself. He reports a likely scenario and isn't reporting it as the truth, his estimate and I think he could be right, is 2020. But, please provide your own data and prove he is wrong, explain what he leaves out in detail, that he may do so purposedly. So please substantiate your claim. So far, his data proved to be very accurate in hindsight over the years and I believe him to be far more knowledgeable in this field than you.

I am a scientist, too (full university prof), as certainly are others here. Only because I am, I am not calling others poor scientists so fast, without knowing a bit more details.
Calling him a poor scientist is a cheap shot which is not backed up by you. But getting personal against others is something I often see in your contributions, here. Nothing new.
 

Talys

Canon R5
CR Pro
Feb 16, 2017
2,098
385
Vancouver, BC
dak723 said:
Mirrorless will replace DSLRs when the EVF is indistinguishable from an OVF. And when that happens, no one will care if the camera is mirrorless or has a mirror.

As long as "indistinguishable" includes battery life, I'm all on board.
 

3kramd5

EOS R6
Mar 2, 2012
3,084
405
Talys said:
dak723 said:
Mirrorless will replace DSLRs when the EVF is indistinguishable from an OVF. And when that happens, no one will care if the camera is mirrorless or has a mirror.

As long as "indistinguishable" includes battery life, I'm all on board.

So never? That’s one thing which can not happen.
 

Talys

Canon R5
CR Pro
Feb 16, 2017
2,098
385
Vancouver, BC
3kramd5 said:
Talys said:
dak723 said:
Mirrorless will replace DSLRs when the EVF is indistinguishable from an OVF. And when that happens, no one will care if the camera is mirrorless or has a mirror.

As long as "indistinguishable" includes battery life, I'm all on board.

So never? That’s one thing which can not happen.

I wouldn't say never. It just has to be way, way better than it is now.

Currently, with an OVF you can sit there and watch a bird for 20 minutes, then take a series of 10 shots when it does somethign interesting, and effectively zero battery is used. Then you can sit and watch for another 20 minutes. I can spend hours observing one animal.

With an EVF, that only works if I take a bagful of batteries with me, which is just not acceptable. I mean, I should not have to feel like I can't look through the viewfinder if I want to conserve battery.

So, they would be equivalent, for example, if 1 battery plus spare would give me a day's worth of viewfinder time (and the ability to take sporadic, though not continuous, photos in there, of course). They would probably be acceptable for me, if 1 battery plus spare could power the viewfinder (and allow sporadic photos) for about 10-12 hours.

It's still a very far cry from an LPE6 on an OVF, where a battery is literally good for days and days if wait-and-shoot is the type of photography you do. But that would be good enough, for me, at least.
 

neuroanatomist

I post too Much on Here!!
CR Pro
Jul 21, 2010
25,599
3,940
Hflm said:
neuroanatomist said:
What is true is that Thom would have gotten a very different trendline for MILCs if he'd included all of the available data (CIPA started separately tracking MILCs in 2012).

True?

Yes, what I stated is true. As a scientist and full professor, I would think you'd have looked at copious amounts of data over the years. Maybe you just haven't seen or analyzed much data, or you lack the ability to visualize. Personally, I have no trouble looking at a column or scatter plot and mentally visualizing the trendline. Looking at the data I posted:

index.php


...I can easily visualize that the trendline is going to be essentially flat. The trendline will only be ascending if you exclude the 2012 data point. What would be the justification for doing so? (Aside from the obvious one – selecting only those data that support your pre-determined conclusion, and ignoring the data that don't fit your hypothesis.) Personally, I don't ignore data...much less intentionally omit them (Grubbs' test notwithstanding).

In the case of the trendline, I am reminded of a remark made by a colleague (who was, admittedly, a bit cynical) after he sat in on one of my medical school lectures. After hearing their questions, he stated, "These kids don't want to just be spoon fed, they want to be fork-and-knife fed, too." But, I had a little time, so I decided to humor you. Below is the same graph as above, with the trendline for the full dataset shown in green, and the trendline for the dataset excluding 2012 shipments shown in purple. Hey - maybe I could omit the 2017 shipments, and then I could say that the MILC market is declining! No, I don't think I'll do that. ;)

Incidentally, Hogan's conclusions may be correct. The major driver for the intersection of the two trendlines is the decreasing shipments of dSLRs, not the MILC shipments, which are essentially flat (or mildly trending upward, if you ignore 2012, or more strongly trending upward, if you make some assumptions which the existing data do not support). So, if the ILC market continues to contract and dSLRs continue to drop, 2019-2020 may be correct. But it's also worth noting that, looking at 2016-2017, the formerly plummeting compact camera market appears to be bottoming out (and by unit numbers, compact cameras still outsell ILCs). What if dSLRs show a similar trend, and shipments of them start leveling off?

Hflm said:
Calling him a poor scientist is a cheap shot which is not backed up by you. But getting personal against others is something I often see in your contributions, here. Nothing new.

I didn't call him a poor scientist, please go back and read what I wrote before you put words in my mouth. He's not a scientist at all, actually (his academic background is in telecommunications, BA, MA and started but did not complete his doctorate, all in that field). As such, I would not necessarily expect him to be an expert on data analysis.

As for 'getting personal', well, the Internet is a dangerous place. If it bothers you, try picking up a good book or journal to read. They don't talk back.
 

Attachments

  • Trendlines.png
    Trendlines.png
    63.3 KB · Views: 368

3kramd5

EOS R6
Mar 2, 2012
3,084
405
Talys said:
3kramd5 said:
Talys said:
dak723 said:
Mirrorless will replace DSLRs when the EVF is indistinguishable from an OVF. And when that happens, no one will care if the camera is mirrorless or has a mirror.

As long as "indistinguishable" includes battery life, I'm all on board.

So never? That’s one thing which can not happen.

I wouldn't say never. It just has to be way, way better than it is now.

Currently, with an OVF you can sit there and watch a bird for 20 minutes, then take a series of 10 shots when it does somethign interesting, and effectively zero battery is used. Then you can sit and watch for another 20 minutes. I can spend hours observing one animal.

With an EVF, that only works if I take a bagful of batteries with me, which is just not acceptable. I mean, I should not have to feel like I can't look through the viewfinder if I want to conserve battery.

So, they would be equivalent, for example, if 1 battery plus spare would give me a day's worth of viewfinder time (and the ability to take sporadic, though not continuous, photos in there, of course). They would probably be acceptable for me, if 1 battery plus spare could power the viewfinder (and allow sporadic photos) for about 10-12 hours.

It's still a very far cry from an LPE6 on an OVF, where a battery is literally good for days and days if wait-and-shoot is the type of photography you do. But that would be good enough, for me, at least.

But way way better means* better battery capacity/technology, which will also benefit SLR. The only way they’ll become indistinguishable is if they start dumping more power into SLR OVF overlays, effectively making them worse (from that perspective) rather than making EVF better. I think technique will ultimately make the biggest difference. When I used an A7Rii frequently I had a button mapped to turn off the rear display, and the EVF only powered when my eye was in place (prox sensor). That mitigates power draw in extended intervals between shots. However while shooting, the display which requires 0W will always hold a power advantage over one which requires even very little wattage.

*It’s possible they could begin converging with lower power displays, but I won’t hold my breath for parity any time soon. I expect that rather EVF will become more power hungry in pursuit of responsiveness.