Jump to content
Aussie Ash

Nikon FF Mirrorless

Recommended Posts

8 minutes ago, jonpais said:

Disappointing they don’t offer 8K. ?

Doesn't the Z7 have an 8K time-lapse feature?  Think of it as very low frame rate 8K! ????

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
EOSHD Pro Color for Sony cameras EOSHD Pro LOG for Sony CamerasEOSHD C-LOG and Film Profiles for All Canon DSLRs
28 minutes ago, kye said:

 It's common practice for market leaders to make 'closed' systems...

Sure but they arent even in the top 3 ILC lens manufacturers in the world and ILC lenses are a shrinking market... Horrible decision.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Nikon as well as Sony sell their newly released cameras at a loss. They then try to make up for it by selling lenses. It would be suicide to let third party in from the beginning.

Switching mounts is a huge deal if suceccfull. All those Nikon shooters sitting on backwards compatible lenses are no longer customers. They no longer bring profit.

A camera house is like a printer. Ink is the real business.

Same thing in camera stores.They hardly make anything on cameras. Their business is bags, insurance, payment plans, memory cards, etc.

Also, wasn't the A7 also released with just a few very expensive primes.. seems people forgotten that.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
16 minutes ago, Mattias Burling said:

Nikon as well as Sony sell their newly released cameras at a loss. They then try to make up for it by selling lenses. It would be suicide to let third party in from the beginning.

Switching mounts is a huge deal if suceccfull. All those Nikon shooters sitting on backwards compatible lenses are no longer customers. They no longer bring profit.

A camera house is like a printer. Ink is the real business.

Same thing in camera stores.They hardly make anything on cameras. Their business is bags, insurance, payment plans, memory cards, etc.

Also, wasn't the A7 also released with just a few very expensive primes.. seems people forgotten that.

Average lens sales per body is 1.5 now, some people are near two, and few at almost 3. This means usually a kit lens plus two primes. Pro shooters and enthusiasts want more and more, but for the rest of the market they did it right.. an all around nano coated weather sealed constant aperture zoom, and couple of sharp primes. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9 minutes ago, Mattias Burling said:

Nikon as well as Sony sell their newly released cameras at a loss. They then try to make up for it by selling lenses. It would be suicide to let third party in from the beginning.

Switching mounts is a huge deal if suceccfull. All those Nikon shooters sitting on backwards compatible lenses are no longer customers. They no longer bring profit.

A camera house is like a printer. Ink is the real business.

Same thing in camera stores.They hardly make anything on cameras. Their business is bags, insurance, payment plans, memory cards, etc.

Also, wasn't the A7 also released with just a few very expensive primes.. seems people forgotten that.

It is quite possible that a proprietary mount may work out well for Nikon mirrorless. It may also end up as an epitaph on their gravestone - 'the company that thought that a proprietary lens mount was a good idea in 2018!!'

Obviously it is not a great decision for consumers (but you could equally claim that why should Nikon care?) Of course Sony started with a few premium lenses not a problem. I happen to like the 'premium Batis line of lenses' others like the cheaper(er) Samyang E mount af lenses or the new Tamron 28-75 2.8. But a closed lens system for a new mount shouldnt be attractive to consumers. Of course, the Z mount could be easy to reverse engineer but in that case why not license it. If it isnt easy to reverse engineer why invest in the mount in the first place?

And seriously, it is total bollocks to camera manufacturers sell new cameras at a loss. Mirrorless cameras are pretty inexpensive to produce which is why Olympus has maintained a gross margin over 45% in the last 10 years and Sony can still sell a Sony A7 for US$799.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, Robert Collins said:

And seriously, it is total bollocks to camera manufacturers sell new cameras at a loss. Mirrorless cameras are pretty inexpensive to produce which is why Olympus has maintained a gross margin over 45% in the last 10 years and Sony can still sell a Sony A7 for US$799.

Truth.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, Eric Calabros said:

Average lens sales per body is 1.5 now, some people are near two, and few at almost 3. This means usually a kit lens plus two primes. Pro shooters and enthusiasts want more and more, but for the rest of the market they did it right.. an all around nano coated weather sealed constant aperture zoom, and couple of sharp primes. 

This figure when take in isolation is very misleading. FF cameras only make up between 15-20% of ILC sales (in volume) but full frame lenses make up over 50% of lens sales by value and around 30% by volume...

http://www.cipa.jp/stats/documents/e/s-201712_e.pdf

And actually if you look at the BCN numbers you will see that a 2 lens kit for the average consumer consist of of 2 x zooms (apsc) 16-55 and 55-150.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Robert Collins said:

And seriously, it is total bollocks to camera manufacturers sell new cameras at a loss. 

Sony and Panasonics financial reports dissagrees with you.

Plus, if you think about it for five minutes you will figure out that its comon sense. Or do you seriously think that the entire development of the Z-line cost $5 and will be covered by selling one camera? Of course not. You are not that stupid.

You know as well as I that they will need to sell alot of the Z bodys before it starts making them money.

And if its not making money its loosing money. But you knew that, only an idiot would think otherwise, and that is not you. The other guy however is more of a wild card at this point.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 8/24/2018 at 10:20 PM, Mokara said:

The bit that overheats is the processor. When it does, it throttles, and no longer can do the compression, hence you stop recording. Battery has nothing to do with it.

Batteries heat up. 
If you remove this heat source from a camera body then the whole body will be cooler, and thus it will be a longer time period until the processor overheats. 

So yes, the battery does have something to do with it!

This is Sony mirrorless user experiences as well.

 

21 hours ago, mercer said:

Right. I had a shooting day yesterday, so I haven’t been catching up, but is the 1080p a downscale from 4K? If so, 10bit 1080p ProRes to a Ninja Star sounds pretty okay to me.

Nope, the Ninja Star doesn't downscale from 4K

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, IronFilm said:

Batteries heat up. 
If you remove this heat source from a camera body then the whole body will be cooler, and thus it will be a longer time period until the processor overheats. 

So yes, the battery does have something to do with it!

This is Sony mirrorless user experiences as well.

 

Over one hour 4K no overheating. That works for me. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Robert Collins said:

This figure when take in isolation is very misleading. FF cameras only make up between 15-20% of ILC sales (in volume) but full frame lenses make up over 50% of lens sales by value and around 30% by volume...

http://www.cipa.jp/stats/documents/e/s-201712_e.pdf

And actually if you look at the BCN numbers you will see that a 2 lens kit for the average consumer consist of of 2 x zooms (apsc) 16-55 and 55-150.

Yeah in this day and age other than Pros I doubt many people buy primes anymore.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9 minutes ago, webrunner5 said:

And how long ago was those 5 years?

2. 

Most know-nothing DSLR soccer moms and the like got a short zoom, a long zoom, and a 50mm. Got tons of people who wanted to do their own portraits/headshots for fun or to save money. Prime lenses there. Travel photography, sold a wide fast prime to plenty of those. Same with astrophotographers. Even had one wild dude who was a serious birder and bought several brutally expensive primes, including a 500mm.

Do most consumers go for zooms first? Sure. But I would not say "no one except pros use primes." In fact, working photographers are the exact people who often benefit from zooms to get critical shots, while hobbyists can pick up a more fulfilling prime, take their time, and not worry about potentially missing a paycheck moment.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9 hours ago, jonpais said:

What about the two dozen third party Z mount lenses that were supposed to be released within months of launch? So disappointing!

The cameras haven't even shipped yet. Let alone it be months after. 

Patience! 

 

5 hours ago, BTM_Pix said:

With Nikon, it is difficult to 2nd guess their intentions for this camera and lenses to be considered for professional use, just as it is for its existing products.

In theory, you might inagine that if they consider it a professional camera then it will appear on the qualifying list for NPS.

https://www.nikonpro.com/ProductList.aspx

It doesn't yet of course but when it's actually available I have no doubt it will do as when you take a look at the cameras and lenses (especially the DX ones) that are on the list you will find many which you would at best consider prosumer ones. 

There are plenty of single card slot cameras on that list too by the way.

Admittedly because they use a points system you would need a fair amount of the lower end stuff to reach the 750 point threshold to qualify for membership but Nikon do acknowledge in this way that you don't have to have their most expensive equipment to be a professional photographer and receive the same benefits as those that do.

Which is good for the user (as professional photography is a broad church where not everyone needs the features or build of the higher priced equipment) but bad for trying to win internet arguments.

Crazy, even the Nikon D3100 is on that list!
 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
48 minutes ago, IronFilm said:

Nope, the Ninja Star doesn't downscale from 4K

Yeah, sorry... I meant does the Z7 downscale it’s 1080p from 4K in camera. If so, then the Ninja Star would still be a viable and small external recorder for anyone who only needs 1080p but wants the benefits of 10bit ProRes.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, Robert Collins said:

Sure but they arent even in the top 3 ILC lens manufacturers in the world and ILC lenses are a shrinking market... Horrible decision.

Wait... what? I thought Canon/Sony/Nikon are the top three in the world? 

8 minutes ago, mercer said:

Yeah, sorry... I meant does the Z7 downscale it’s 1080p from 4K in camera. If so, then the Ninja Star would still be a viable and small external recorder for anyone who only needs 1080p but wants the benefits of 10bit ProRes.

Depends on if Nikon offers that option. 

It is possible when you select 1080 monitoring that the output might drop down to 8bit again. 

Who knows. We'll have to wait and see. 

Seems a waste to buy a Z7/Z6 and to only use it for 1080!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
47 minutes ago, Mattias Burling said:

Sony and Panasonics financial reports dissagrees with you.

There is nothing in Panasonic and Sony financial reports to indicate that 'producing cameras' loses money while they 'make money' out of lenses because they are all lumped together...

Plus, if you think about it for five minutes you will figure out that its comon sense. Or do you seriously think that the entire development of the Z-line cost $5 and will be covered by selling one camera? Of course not. You are not that stupid.

I do get the point you are making. For instance, Olympus has a 45%+ gross margin in its imaging division but the imaging division loses money every year. So if you lump in SG&A, R&D and marketing you can 'claim' that selling cameras doesnt make them money.

But if you look at the BCN numbers for sales you will see that most of the top sellers are 'base model cameras + 2 x zoom lenses' (whereby either the lenses are sold cheap or the body or both.) And given that most of those buyers dont ever buy an additional lens (they are already at 2x body) it doesnt make sense to sell the body based on lens sales.

I would happily agree that low end bodies are sold on 'low margins' on the basis of a gateway drug approach but that is a different matter.

You know as well as I that they will need to sell alot of the Z bodys before it starts making them money.

Again I agree that they obviously need to sell a lot of Z bodies to 'make money' but that isnt quite the same as saying that selling a 'z body' loses money. I also suspect gross margins are higher for lenses than bodies (which would make sense).

I personally think that 'Sony' has a different 'business model' than Canon and Nikon. Sony is basically a 'sensor manufacturer' rather than a 'camera manufacturer'. So they are basically trying to get as much 'sensor' in a body as possible. As such it actually makes sense for them to sell 'larger sensor cameras' at a lower margin than 'smaller sensor cameras' because they are already making money on the sensor. Nikon and Canon and are camera manufacturers - so it makes sense for them to take the 'gateway drug' route of selling smaller sensor cameras at a lower margin on the basis that it is a 'gateway addiction' to their higher margin cameras and lenses.

So honestly I see every reason for Sony to pressurize Canon, Nikon, Panasonic, Olympus and Fuji to sell their 'cameras at a loss' because Sony sells (pretty much) all their sensors and then is effectively subsidizing their sensor.

I would readily admit though, that I am rather surprised at Nikon's pricing of mirrorless - which simply follows Sony's strategy of selling bodies at a discount (which works out well for Sony as they sell Nikon their image sensors) and lenses at a premium. I was expecting the opposite - cameras at a premium and lenses at a relative discount - which I am pretty sure will be Canon's strategy.

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
19 minutes ago, IronFilm said:

Wait... what? I thought Canon/Sony/Nikon are the top three in the world? 

Canon is always number 1, everywhere. Nikon was number 2 until very recently, and last year in Japan Nikon was no4, with Sigma being no2 from 3, and Tamron reached no3.

For sure Sigma has great dynamic these last couple of years, and Tamron has some very successful ones, e.g a lot of my Canon friends prefer their stabilized 24-70 than the L one, and it is significantly cheaper too. There is a second gen. also.

I am not sure that Sony was in the top 3 anywhere in the world in lens sales, ever. Until very recently, most people I know were adapting L lenses on Sony bodies, but I do not have statistics.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Restore formatting

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.


×
×
  • Create New...