Thread Rating:
  • 0 Vote(s) - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
Is Nikons ILC right around the corner?
#11
[quote name='PuxaVida' timestamp='1310047337' post='9797']

Maybe not only the price... Surely the back-illuminated CMOS has it's strengths, but the sensor could be a bit bigger for a better IQ I think. OK the camera is tiny, bu who needs that much small camera, as long as one cannot put it in his/her pocket (because of an interchangable lens mount).

[/quote]

I don't see pocketability as an all or nothing affair. It is more like a statistical distribution. I carry the E-P1 with pancake on it in coat pocket for example, but I'd want something smaller if I didn't have the coat.



The sensor I think can deliver more than you think. My recent usage of the Sony HX9V which I believe has near enough the same size sensor has surprised me in what it can put out. If the Q has RAW output I think the advanced photographer can do very well out of it, coupled with suitably fast lenses of course.



To me, the biggest barrier for the Q has to be the price. Right now, you'd have to really want one to get one, and I'm not sure anyone does. In my opinion, it needs a street price on the lower end of existing mirrorless system cameras. I don't think in this case the physical size is enough of a selling point to demand a significant premium.



[quote name='Vieux loup' timestamp='1310048720' post='9799']

I think the X100 takes market share from the mirrorless market, but who knows exactly. With respect to the Q price, I believe it will be somewhat like the D7000, that started out at the level of a D300s and know is 25% less expensive! We shall see!

[/quote]

Are some people buying the X100 instead of current mirrorless system cameras? Probably. But I don't see the X100 in itself as sustained competition. It is a one-off, and Fuji can't sit on it.



As for price drops, they are almost inevitable. But if you start too high like the Q or SD1, I don't think it could drop enough to gain traction.
<a class="bbc_url" href="http://snowporing.deviantart.com/">dA</a> Canon 7D2, 7D, 5D2, 600D, 450D, 300D IR modified, 1D, EF-S 10-18, 15-85, EF 35/2, 85/1.8, 135/2, 70-300L, 100-400L, MP-E65, Zeiss 2/50, Sigma 150 macro, 120-300/2.8, Samyang 8mm fisheye, Olympus E-P1, Panasonic 20/1.7, Sony HX9V, Fuji X100.
#12
My expectations from Nikon in EVIL direction are that they will make similar step as they did with P7000 - poor imitation of G12. Given that they are using Sony sensor it will be something similar to the Q and cute enough to attract the P&S shooter to spend more money. I am not expecting anything attractive for DSLR user.
#13
[quote name='borisbg' timestamp='1310059362' post='9805']

My expectations from Nikon in EVIL direction are that they will make similar step as they did with P7000 - poor imitation of G12. Given that they are using Sony sensor it will be something similar to the Q and cute enough to attract the P&S shooter to spend more money. I am not expecting anything attractive for DSLR user.

[/quote]



Precisely.



Look, I´m a dedicated Nikon user but it seems to me that Nikon must be actually two, separate companies (which is kept in secrecy before the public): One makes DSLRs and the other compact cameras. The first one is quite successful, more or less perfectly matches customers´ demands and has great portfolio overall. The second one is always slightly lagging behind competition, does bad and wrong implementation of most things and shows crass, contrived effort just to imitate Canon´s compact cams (which are great, btw). Still, the performance of Nikon compacts has never lead the market and their IQ was sup-par. (and I wouldn´t buy Nikon compact cam for sure at least).



Now if Nikon enters the mirorless sphere, it depends if the MLS concept will be given to the "first" or the "second" Nikon company... but anyway, I´m afraid they will not have it done right. I remember reading one of the Nikon reps talked about necessity to have Nikon MLS solution "definitely small, smaller then APS-C" etc. etc. which is all wrong, IMHO.
#14
[quote name='popo' timestamp='1310058698' post='9804']

I don't see pocketability as an all or nothing affair. It is more like a statistical distribution. I carry the E-P1 with pancake on it in coat pocket for example, but I'd want something smaller if I didn't have the coat.

[/quote]



That's right, I agree with you: size of the pocket matters <img src='http://forum.photozone.de/public/style_emoticons/<#EMO_DIR#>/smile.gif' class='bbc_emoticon' alt='Smile' />.... OTOH, I think the Pentax Q is unneccessarily [url="http://www.dpreview.com/previews/pentaxQ/page3.asp"]too small[/url]. It is like you can put it in your shirt pocket, but only without the lens. Don't get me wrong, I'm not a shirt pocket camera fan, but too much small means to me less user friendly controlls for users who don't have tiny hands. And I don't think a camera body with an interchangable lens mount should be in shirt pocket size.



Quote:The sensor I think can deliver more than you think. My recent usage of the Sony HX9V which I believe has near enough the same size sensor has surprised me in what it can put out. If the Q has RAW output I think the advanced photographer can do very well out of it, coupled with suitably fast lenses of course.



Well, that is good then... Because with that price tag a decent IQ should be expected. But as you know, the IQ would be definitely better if the size of the sensor was bigger... not as big as an APS-C, but a bigger back-illuminated sensor than the used one maybe. And this would probably make the camera body bigger, which is my point of complaint <img src='http://forum.photozone.de/public/style_emoticons/<#EMO_DIR#>/wink.gif' class='bbc_emoticon' alt='Wink' />...



Serkan
  


Forum Jump:


Users browsing this thread:
1 Guest(s)