Will you buy Nikon's upcoming EVIL camera?

[antiquark]

Mostly rumors at this point:
http://nikonrumors.com/2010/07/12/ni...era-again.aspx

A few "facts" about the camera:

- Will probably be released this year.
- The image circle will be 17mm, which is smaller than u4/3.
- Will have removable lenses.
- Not sure if there will be an electronic viewfinder.
- Might have a 50/1.4 equivalent lens to go with it.

[Alpacaman]

That small image circle sounds nasty, I won't ever be buying one (although this is probably more to do with having no money than anything else )

[antiquark]

Originally Posted by Alpacaman

That small image circle sounds nasty, I won't ever be buying one (although this is probably more to do with having no money than anything else )

I'm worried that the cost will be wayyyy out of proportion to it's capabilities. Like, in the $1000 range, for a camera that will basically be a glorified point-and-shoot. (Like the Olympus EP1 )

[Nikon Bob]

Not unless it is FF (D700 or better sensor) and not much bigger than an FM2n. Sort of a modernized rangefinder. I guess the answer is no for now.

Bob

[Juan Valdenebro]

For a moment I thought they were about to make a new film camera... A very small one...

It was good while it lasted...

Cheers,

Juan

[amateriat]

Hardly interesting, based on what clearly is scuttlebutt. Time for me to buy another brick of Portra.

[pvdhaar]

With a 17mm image circle, that EVIL camera had better be really, and I mean really really, compact. If not, it wouldn't stand much of a chance against the Sony-NEX, which is quite small for what it does already.

The other thing that Nikon needs to do something about, is the auto-focus performance. So far, the Coolpixes that I've used and the Live-view-AF on the Nikon DSLRs are not best in class.. to say the least. This rumored camera has to be much much better than that.

If both of the above, compactness and focus speed, are there, then maybe I'll be interested..

[jarski]

Sony probably has better (best?) package, especially after more prosumer oriented NEX models has arrived. sensor size and adapter friendliness does it for me. too early to vote though, since all we have are rumors.

[Matus]

Most probably not. 17 mm image circle allows you to cover cca 13 x 10 mm chip (if it would be around 4:3) - that gives you lens conversion factor relative to 35 mm film about 2.8 (!). This in return increases the DOF for the same focal length by about 3 stops.

This may be fine as improved P&S but will limit any selective focus work unless Nikon comes up with lenses faster than Noctilux ($$$). On top of that Nikon P&S cameras never persuaded me to buy one or to recommend it to somebody (based on reviews).

I am in the camp waiting for FX based RF a'la M9 for a more reasonable price (or at least reasonably sized FX DSLR). But I am not too optimistic that any camera producer would dare to approach the design/layout of a classical rangefinder - too practical and too little fancy I fear.

I remain with film for the time being - and I actually enjoy it

[igi]

17mm image circle is a disappointment for me

nope

[rxmd]

Originally Posted by Matus

On top of that Nikon P&S cameras never persuaded me to buy one or to recommend it to somebody (based on reviews).

Well, for example the Nikon 900 series was pretty brilliant line of digital compacts back in the day, exactly because they got rid of a lot of classical ideas what a camera should look like, instead emphasizing functionality and ergonomics.

Same here. We can already witness the rangefinder crowd howling because their Summicrons are now teles, but I guess that anyone who designs a camera with a sensor such as this does not have the adapter crowd as their target user base - which is after all a pretty small group of people, however vocal, and not very interesting commercially because they tend to buy less lenses. I guess the success of this will depend on two things: whether they can present a lens lineup that makes sense, and whether they can depart ergonomically from cameras that are either SLR mockups or optimized for chimping. If they want to position this as a video camera replacement, I guess they've at least given the ergonomics some thought.

But since there is next to no data available and all we have is some rumours, I guess this whole discussion won't lead very far.

But I am not too optimistic that any camera producer would dare to approach the design/layout of a classical rangefinder - too practical and too little fancy I fear.

From a camera manufacturer's point of view, it's rather the opposite: digital rangefinders are fancy cameras that cater to a boutique crowd, while people who want practical things like zooms and autofocus prefer DSLRs and EVILs.

I remain with film for the time being - and I actually enjoy it

In 2010 that makes you pretty fancy, I guess, and also puts you firmly out of the market for any digital compact.

[Juan Valdenebro]

Originally Posted by jarski

Sony probably has better (best?) package, especially after more prosumer oriented NEX models has arrived. sensor size and adapter friendliness does it for me. too early to vote though, since all we have are rumors.

But about buying it, some people voted "Absolutely without a doubt!"

I thought such blind faith was exclusively Leica faith...

Cheers,

Juan

[Matus]

Originally Posted by rxmd

In 2010 that makes you pretty fancy, I guess, and also puts you firmly out of the market for any digital compact.

Fancy or not - I am not in the market for a compact digital camera (I mean here the 1/1.8" and smaller sensors).

I prefer to shoot film for my personal work. And for the occasional sessions renting the equipment can be done. I try to avid replacing my old DSLR (Minolta 7D) which I use mostly to "make pictures of something" rather than "photography" (if that can be understood) - apart from occasional "long lens" photography. Actually the only reason for me to buy a DSLR would be to have a chance to make some money with it - it would have to pay for itself.

Should a rangefinder/compact camera with large sensor appear that appeals to it could replace 35mm rangefinder I use now. I am hoping for the Foveon technology to be developed further (FX with true 12 Mpix) and get implemented in a decent body (e.g. Leica M10 ). But I am not in a hurry.

Digital rangefinder designed for "boutique crowd" will most probably not have the layout most of the RFF members would hope for - kook at the Sony NEX3 & 5 ...

[sfaust]

I don't need two small compact setups, so it would be a replacement. And with that in mind it doesn't sound appealing to me, or any better in order for me to give up the E-P2. While I won't vote never, I would vote Most likely not. I'm very happy with the E-P2 for the time being as a companion to my DSLRs.

[parsec1]

I heard it might even have an M compatible mount.
That would put the shark amongst the swimming herd of unholy cows.

[rbsinto]

In answer to the original question, no I will not be buying it.
I've got three Nikon rangefinders, six Nikon SLR bodies and numerous lenses in both systems from 17 to 300 mm that take care of all my photographic needs, and a ton of very nice slide film that I love to shoot.
So, if it ain't broke...........

[DanP]

I have a canon DSLR and a GF1, and there is definitely a difference in the quality of pics from them. If the nikon sensor is even smaller than that of GF1..no way. And, I enjoy shooting with my newly acquired film RF..yashica GSN .

[johannielscom]

Originally Posted by igi

17mm image circle is a disappointment for me

nope

+1 on that one. Not worth the trouble. I'll happily hold out for that FF EVIL camera that takes LTM lenses.

[CK Dexter Haven]

No sense in a camera with interchangeable lenses and a small sensor. I already have a Canon S90 that i don't use because it can only make 'small sensor' pictures. I'm far more interested in the Samsung NX10 (or what comes next) and the Sony NEX, although Sony has a way to go before they understand interface design.

[NickTrop]

No sale. EVILS - I've concluded, are for suckers regardless of manufacturer. - And I almost bought one. DSLRs are mature. They are as good as they're gonna get with around 10 years of development behind them and the most tech-generations. They also represent - due to intense competition , the best cost/performance ratio and competition has driven down the margins just like PCs. EVILS were invented for the manufacturer to remedy the issue of shrinking margins for camera manufacturers. They were not invented for the photographer. Let's take off the viewfinder, that can be an "accessory" and another revenue stream! We can cut the manufacturing cost of the pricey mirrors, and charge the same - or more, for the body! Hey - and a new lens mount = more $$$! - another revenue stream! And we can cut the cost of the sensor by making them smaller. Of course, we can add all kinds of (cough... useless) "features" that are lines of code in the firmware that cost nothing to manufacture... Additional revenue streams, higher margins on the camera body... Any benefits? None that I can see... They're probably as good as compact DSLRs from 2 generations ago. They're a bit smaller than compact DSLRS. Big deal. They are sexy lookin' though.

[Benjamin Marks]

No, unless the sensor is larger than m-4/3. I disagree with Nick on this one. I have really been enjoying a slew of odd glass on an OLy E-P2 -- and you know what? The image quality doesn't touch the M8 (at low ISOs) or the D3 (at high ISOs), but it is fun to use. And, while I think I answered someone's poll that I wasn't interested in movie-mode -- Y It's a hoot. I've got so many lenses that will work on this thing (Konica AR, Nikon-F, Nikon-S, Contax, Leica-R, Leica-M, C/V LTM and M), it is as close to a universal platform as I could wish for. . . EXCEPT miss that full frame thing. SO. If Nikon wants my money for a new concept camera, they'd have to split the difference between the EP-2 and the D3 on image quality and give me something that will make my wides wide. I'd go weak in the knees for something the size of a Nikon S2 with the D3's chip. Aooooah.



Ben Marks

[mackigator]

No sale unless they have some miracle of small sensor design up their sleeves - literally all available evidence points to that size sensor not being able to measure up to what many of us want: low noise. That is in addition to the obvious: small camera, viewfinder, good controls, removable lenses.

So the unicorn of camera design remains a myth.

[sfaust]

If you compare the m4/3 against a DSLR and start taking off points for its disadvantages, it will obviously come up short. No question! But I don't believe that is the market the manufactures are targeting, it's not mean to replace a DSLR.

But if you are looking for something better than a P&S for times you want higher IQ, but can't, or are not willing, to lug a DSLR around every day. If you compare its advantages against a P&S, it really shines. Better IQ, higher usable ISO, decent image size, manual capabilities, ability to use HQ fast interchangeable lenses, removable EVF to keep it compact yet have the ability when needed, ext flash capable, long battery life, compact package, etc.

We as photographers have been asking for years for compact cameras that we can carry every day, and still get decent results from. The m4/3 cameras seem to actually get close, and are head and shoulders better than 98% of all P&S alternatives out there.

To me, the m4/3 is a P&S on steroids. Not a replacement for the DSLR, but his little brother he sends when he can't be there himself. Not equivalent to a DSLR, but better than the best offerings from the P&S crowd.

I'll allow the m4/3 to ride along with me daily for everyday stuff, ditch the P&S altogether, and call on its big brother when he is really needed.

With that said, this offering from Sony seems like a step backwards from that goal IMO.

[douglasf13]

Originally Posted by CK Dexter Haven

No sense in a camera with interchangeable lenses and a small sensor. I already have a Canon S90 that i don't use because it can only make 'small sensor' pictures. I'm far more interested in the Samsung NX10 (or what comes next) and the Sony NEX, although Sony has a way to go before they understand interface design.

Sony knows quite a bit about interface design. The A700/850/900 are about as good as it gets in this regard. Sony purposefully made the NEX interface more cell phone like in order to make it extremely easy to pick up and use. In fact, it was designed by Sony Ericsson. Although improvements could certainly be made, every advanced owner that I've talked to says the NEX interface is still quite usable.

[PKR]

How do you know about the sensor size? I haven't found a statement about the size in my reading. Can you point me to the source? Thanks.