Robert Collins

I dont think the opening will be anything like as large - 62mm - that people have guessed from some grainy photos. My guess is that it will be between the E mount 46mm and Canon EF 54mm.
By far the largest number of sales for the Z mount over time will be APS-C cameras. And it is terribly inefficient making a 62mm diameter mouth opening to accommodate a sensor with a 27mm diagonal. 

I am not sure the concept of crippling the video of a 'MILC' to protect your high end video gear actually makes any economic sense in the current market. It seems to me that MILCs are something of a sweet spot for video because they are video cameras largely paid for by still photographers in large numbers. And if you consider say a Sony A9 can shoot 20fps, FF, 24mp in 12 bit 'real' raw for US$4k - you can imagine what the possibilities are for video going forward.
Seems to me that crippling a MILC to protect your cinema cameras is rather akin to crippling a mobile phone camera to protect your compact cameras.

Actually,, I have a different reason for thinking that it 'wont' take Nikon years to catch up 'Sony' with lenses.
The key point with mirrorless lenses is that they need different af motors to pure 'pdaf' lenses (of DSLRs) to take advantage of the 'pdaf' plus 'cdaf' fine tuning of mirrorless lenses. 
The Nikon 1 had excellent on sensor pdaf because the sensors were built by Aptina which had on sensor pdaf tech. Aptina agreed a cross licensing patent deal with Sony (and was subsequently taken over by On Semi who no longer makes image sensors for dedicated ILCs). Sony took that tech and used it in their second generation A7x series. Nikon will presumably license the same tech from Aptina/Sony for their mirrorless. This is a long winded way of saying that Nikon's mirrorless af will likely be very similar to Sony's.
So I dont really see any particular reason why 3rd party manufacturers of Sony FE mount lenses shouldnt be able to fairly quickly come up with Nikon Z mount versions. So Sigma (well sort of), Tamron, Samyang and Zeiss Batis (?). Now that is 20 lenses that could be introduced in less than a year.

Actually,, I have a different reason for thinking that it 'wont' take Nikon years to catch up 'Sony' with lenses.
The key point with mirrorless lenses is that they need different af motors to pure 'pdaf' lenses (of DSLRs) to take advantage of the 'pdaf' plus 'cdaf' fine tuning of mirrorless lenses. 
The Nikon 1 had excellent on sensor pdaf because the sensors were built by Aptina which had on sensor pdaf tech. Aptina agreed a cross licensing patent deal with Sony (and was subsequently taken over by On Semi who no longer makes image sensors for dedicated ILCs). Sony took that tech and used it in their second generation A7x series. Nikon will presumably license the same tech from Aptina/Sony for their mirrorless. This is a long winded way of saying that Nikon's mirrorless af will likely be very similar to Sony's.
So I dont really see any particular reason why 3rd party manufacturers of Sony FE mount lenses shouldnt be able to fairly quickly come up with Nikon Z mount versions. So Sigma (well sort of), Tamron, Samyang and Zeiss Batis (?). Now that is 20 lenses that could be introduced in less than a year.

I think the current general narrative - Nikon v Sony - FF mirrorless isnt that productive. Sony has set the bar in terms of 'features' and 'value' incredibly high to think that Nikon will beat it with their first mirrorless offering. 
From Nikon's perspective the most important thing is that they get their installed customer base on board for their mirrorless product and dont continue to leak elsewhere.
From that perspective, it is incredibly important that their adapter works incredibly well (or certainly much better than a Nikon lens on a Sony - which certainly isnt asking a lot
 

Actually,, I have a different reason for thinking that it 'wont' take Nikon years to catch up 'Sony' with lenses.
The key point with mirrorless lenses is that they need different af motors to pure 'pdaf' lenses (of DSLRs) to take advantage of the 'pdaf' plus 'cdaf' fine tuning of mirrorless lenses. 
The Nikon 1 had excellent on sensor pdaf because the sensors were built by Aptina which had on sensor pdaf tech. Aptina agreed a cross licensing patent deal with Sony (and was subsequently taken over by On Semi who no longer makes image sensors for dedicated ILCs). Sony took that tech and used it in their second generation A7x series. Nikon will presumably license the same tech from Aptina/Sony for their mirrorless. This is a long winded way of saying that Nikon's mirrorless af will likely be very similar to Sony's.
So I dont really see any particular reason why 3rd party manufacturers of Sony FE mount lenses shouldnt be able to fairly quickly come up with Nikon Z mount versions. So Sigma (well sort of), Tamron, Samyang and Zeiss Batis (?). Now that is 20 lenses that could be introduced in less than a year.

Well its all good speculation. I certainly dont think Nikon would introduce a poor camera for their first serious mirrorless but I think it will be a 'solid' entry rather than anything too groundbreaking. Two reasons...
1) Timing. I think if Nikon had a mirrorless up their sleeve that would 'blow away' Sony they would have already released it much earlier. The timing looks entirely 'defensive' to me. Nikon  'needs' FF mirrorless 'now' in response to the success of Sony's A7x3 cameras or risk eroding their client base..
2) Marketing 'lite'...
Look at this photo taken at a marketing shoot....

This is marketing 'lite' - it is far more Nikon 1 than D850. This girl is young, female and appreciates that the mirrorless is lighter. She doesnt go out in the sun (or the rain) or go parkour jumping.....

I think the current general narrative - Nikon v Sony - FF mirrorless isnt that productive. Sony has set the bar in terms of 'features' and 'value' incredibly high to think that Nikon will beat it with their first mirrorless offering. 
From Nikon's perspective the most important thing is that they get their installed customer base on board for their mirrorless product and dont continue to leak elsewhere.
From that perspective, it is incredibly important that their adapter works incredibly well (or certainly much better than a Nikon lens on a Sony - which certainly isnt asking a lot
 

I think the current general narrative - Nikon v Sony - FF mirrorless isnt that productive. Sony has set the bar in terms of 'features' and 'value' incredibly high to think that Nikon will beat it with their first mirrorless offering. 
From Nikon's perspective the most important thing is that they get their installed customer base on board for their mirrorless product and dont continue to leak elsewhere.
From that perspective, it is incredibly important that their adapter works incredibly well (or certainly much better than a Nikon lens on a Sony - which certainly isnt asking a lot
 

He was referring to cmos image sensors in general which are used in a wide variety of industries - automotive, mobile phone, pc web cams. security devices...

Honestly, I have quite a lot of qualms with the whole concept of reinstating him.
This has nothing to do with the rights and wrongs in this case - he shouldnt have been sacked in the first place (from what I can see.)
It is more to do with whether 'everything should be judged by who can shout loudest in the internet court of public opinion'
It just seems an incredibly crappy way about going about things....

The release button being on the left on Nikon cameras is to do with the traditional functions of the controls on the right on the film cameras, which were for self timer and depth of field preview.
The latter physically engages with the aperture control lever in the lens to stop the lens down to enable the preview so you can retain the viewfinder brightness of having the lens wide open when you are focusing and composing but still be able to check the depth of field before you press the shutter.
This functionality is carried on through all their DSLRs today (along with the additional programmable buttons) which means if you are an old git like me then the muscle memory you've built up from starting with an F2 back in the stone age is still valid on a D5 but crucially the lenses that you had attached to it will still work too.
It might seem archaic in the age of constant preview for mirrorless (and it is for electronically controlled Nikkors) but its still relevant for Nikon as they have that big back catalogue of lenses that don't have electronic control and have to be engaged physically.
I've no idea why they decided originally to put it on that side - though I personally think it makes more sense to keep the lens release away from your 'busy' hand - but once they'd done it they had and have to even now stick to it in order to support all their lenses.
The problem for me comes when I'm swapping between my Nikon/Canon/Panasonic cameras to my Sony/Fuji/Leica/Sigma ones and thinking "where the f*** is the lens release"  
And, like when you get in a different car and try and find the windscreen wipers and indictors, you can guarantee that its on the opposite side to the one you've most recently been using !
The biggest issue is if I use a Leica R lens on my A6500 with the TechArt adapter as I also have to have a Canon adapter in the middle of it and each step has a lens release on the different side so its like doing a Rubik's cube to deconstruct it.

Huh? Cameras are designed to be held one handed on the right hand side - that is why they have a grip there (and the lens release should be there.)
Holding a camera on the short left hand side is uncomfortable because the left hand generally holds the lens 'which is convenient for taking the lens off and putting it on'
I know because I used to have an Olympus that had the lens release on the wrong side which was very stressful. In fact, I would often have to spend a day in bed after changing lenses, simply to recover.

I am sure that hybrid mirrorless sales are largely driven by still shooters though. In fact, from a video/film centric view, I think the whole concept of mirrorless hybrid is driven by the fact that you get a very capable video camera that is heavily 'subsidized' by still shooters.

DPreview did a poll of what people want to see in Canon and Nikon FF mirrorles (they got nearly 4,000 replies.)

Not surprisingly 'full compatibility with existing lenses' came out on top - so these systems will live or die through the quality of their adaptors. (I really hope that Nikon doesnt go with a translucent mirror design.)
IBIS also scores highly (not surprisingly.)
Also note that 'compact size', small affordable primes and lightweight scores high. (Fast primes, substantial grip - not so much.) So I wonder if the Nikon bigger mirrorless is going to be that successful.

Shot this video for a Bible camp I was at last week entirely with Pro Color V4 HDR: 
 

They definitely limited to slower speeds of say 1/2000th.
But I dont see that as a problem for 'stills' with a 'drone'. The shutter limitation of 1/2000th of a second for stills only really occurs when you are trying to use a very fast lens - say 85 1.4 - 'wide open' in 'bright sunlight'. If you stop down to f5.6 you wont have a problem. You are not trying to get shallow dof with a drone. And I assuming the Mavic Pro has variable aperture.

Just a guess. But as it is a 'Hasselblad' camera there is a fair chance it will come with a 'leaf shutter'

Or possibly not....
https://petapixel.com/2017/03/22/sony-keeps-best-sensors-cameras/

Yes, I saw that but dont forget that DJI is now the majority of owner of Hasselblad, so some tie up was inevitable.

I think Panasonic and Olympus have far more fundamental problems. Video af is pretty much unacceptable - they need pdaf. And their pricing (for both bodies and high end lenses) is simply too high when you have FF at US$2k with the Sony A7iii and Canon and Nikon are likely to be aggressive in the budget end of mirrorless APSC.

I think the 'zoom camera' will have some 'auto modes' that will be pretty fancy and appeal to people who dont want to do a lot of editing. For instance, they mention 'dolly zoom' in the specs which is pretty fancy on the basis that you have to move the drone while zooming.
Still I would think the 1 inch is the one to go for. Based on the shape of the lens, I am guessing that the 'zoom' doesnt have aperture control while the 'pro' does.

It's not RAW the way photo cameras use the term: lossless linear camera data. It's the same story with Redcode Raw, Canon RawLite, and Blackmagic's compressed Raw. They realized that compressing before debayering allows them to pack more meaningful data in smaller files, with the caveat that the user is required to debayer the files later. And, naturally, they call it raw because they want people to confuse it with actual RAW camera data.