New DRF's via rumour mill

Nikon I was out in September 1948... so Photokina makes it 60th year since first Nikon camera was out...
Oh and like Kiu said.. is around the corner...

Just small note, the D3/D700 sensor is an evolution from Nikon D2H/Hs LBCAST sensor. Developed and produce by Nikon itself.
D3X 24 Mp sensor, yes, it is a sensor developed by Sony (Like the D2X/D2Xs/D200/etc) sensors) but (and that's the catch) Sony manufactures all their APC/FF sensors on Nikon-made industrial machines, hence the close relations/integration/technologies.

Start counting pennies!
 
On this topic - I would LOVE it if Nikon came out with a DRF that somehow was M compatible. I have an S3 2000 which is about the most beautiful camera I own and if their DRF looked anything like it the eye candy appeal would be hard to resist.

On the serious side, competition brings about innovation. If Nikon makes this move I believe it will cause Leica to continue to sharpen their pencils, focus on their key demographics (no jokes about retirement home residents) and also build products that are even more compelling.

The competition could also bring awareness to the entire rangefinder way of shooting, something that could "grow the pie" and eventually help Leica in the lgno run. We shall see 🙂

Kent
 
The problem with the M-mount lens mated with FF sensors is that the lens flange to focal plane distance with the M-mount is much shorter than with the retro-focus design of SLR lenses, like Nikon's current lineup; it is this factor that causes the off-axis light falloff.

And the problem with '4/3rds' systems is that, although new lenses may have the same angle of view as longer focal length M-mount lenses, the depth of focus doesn't scale with the angle of view, but with the absolute focal distance and aperture. So the two aren't going to perform the same, photographically.

~Joe
 
NIKON KIU said:
what I wanna know is----> Does this mean we're going to have a Nikon topic in the digital rangefinder forum?
http://rangefinderforum.com/forums/forumdisplay.php?f=69

Kiu
Click to expand...

As I have written previously, Nikon has a place in rangefinder history...and well earned.

One of the arguments or beliefs found throughout this forum is that no camera manufacturer will bring out a digital camera line to kill off or compete against its own film-based product...

Nikon will not have this problem as its F6 has already been said to be the last of the line.

More to the point, crossing over to digital is like going beyond the point of no return. Imagine if the Leica M8 was a total flop and the M7 had to be reincarnated...similar to the M5-to-M4 back to the future fiasco of old.

Nikon didn't have this problem either, it has already successfully crossed over to the D side.

Within Nikon's bloodline and long history, every element in putting together a digital rangefinder is already in hand. Hardly more R&D is needed. The only remaining question is why bother? Aren't the FX D3, D3X; or the D700, 800, 900, 1000 just fine?

For me, the pro-and-con considerations are akin to a successful sedan manufacturer contemplating building a sports car or going racing...like Honda building the NSX or BMW entering F1. It is good for the soul, not to mention marketing and staking a claim in unconquered territory...in Nikon's case, retaking its original territory.

The new Nikon Board was said to be far more aggressive, may be it is now time:

Many of us actually prefer basic tools, relying on our knowledge and experience...and dare I say skills, rather than do-anything automation.

Don't argue...you know who you are.

I for one couldn't care less whether the meter is a 52 point RGB matrix or only 12. Just help me with a starting point...if I even need it, and let me bracket. Standard AE with convenient EV adjustments or exposure lock works just fine.

There are no film/processing costs any more...and memory cards [of equivalent capacity] are cheaper than a roll of film AND reusable.

I don't care if the focusing is automatic or not...I understand depth-of-field and actually prefer to select my own focal point.

No software can yet read mind...at least my mind.

I don't need a 960,000 dots 3" LCD to tell me whether the last shot was good, or recheck histograms... Even if it confirms the shot was a poor composition or bad exposure, the moment was long gone anyway. I want to glue my eye to the view finder and keep shooting.

Good shots are often captured that way, minor exposure imperfection or not.

The D3 chip seems to be nice and even, of high speed and well processed via the EXCEED firmware. Hell, does anyone remember anti-vignetting filters? We don't need to view through a rangefinder camera's taking lens, remember?
 
Last edited:
The problem is that the numbers of us interested in such a camera likely number only in the thousands. Nikon is unlikely to do the R&D necessary to produce a totally new dRF camera for thousands. Leica did it because they had no choice. Nikon has a choice.
 
Ray Nalley said:
The problem is that the numbers of us interested in such a camera likely number only in the thousands. Nikon is unlikely to do the R&D necessary to produce a totally new dRF camera for thousands. Leica did it because they had no choice. Nikon has a choice.
Click to expand...

Indeed Nikon has a choice [to stay only in the DSLR world]...but also the additional choice to retake its original rangefinder territory via DRF as well.

The two choices are not mutually exclusive. A simpler camera based on parts-bin engineering and requiring lower capital is a way.

I know real photographers have always been a minority...just count the active membership in RFF.

Sometimes business decisions are not made only based on volume...an aggressive Board might just play a hunch.
 
Especially if Kevin uses a 32x ND filter.
Click to expand...

I was just thinking the 8x ND filter I use for shooting 400 speed film in daylight probably wouldn't cut it. 😀

The problem is that the numbers of us interested in such a camera likely number only in the thousands.
Click to expand...

Hey, do I recognize this relentless negativity? I do, but I'll address the statement, anyway.

Baloney. There's a big, untapped market out there for a small, fast-handling digital camera with good IQ. Maybe it'll be a rangefinder, maybe not. But there's no reason to expect SLR's to be any more than an interim step in the digital age.
 
Frankie said:
Indeed Nikon has a choice [to stay only in the DSLR world]...but also the additional choice to retake its original rangefinder territory via DRF as well.
Click to expand...
Dear Frankie,

And get a share of a market that the anti-M8 brigade maintain is too small to support ONE manufacturer?

Besides, look at the price of Nikon's high-end cameras -- and this would have to be a high-end camera. How much cheaper could it be than an M8?

A sub-$2000 Nikon DRF body has to be idle fantasy. In fact, sub-$4000 is probably pushing it.

Cheers,

R.
 
As mentioned in this thread already - this is Nikon 60th anniversery and they do want to make a splash!
My hope is that Nikon recognizes what they did in the 40 and early 50's - produced a series of cameras and lenses that were the top of the line. Leica spent most of the 50's playing catch up. Nikons lens line forced in many ways Leica to respond with high speed lenses, multi frame finders, motor drives etc. With the Nikon F they also established themselves as the "photographers" camera manufacturer!
If they can produce a Drf with the capacity and quality of the D3/D700 and not overload it with gimmicks - they can sell a substantial amount (in RF numbers). Nikon also has a pretty good track record for putting out a finished product, not making the customers into "test" benches with frequent visits to services when things dont work as they should.
My only fear is that it will come with a 400 page manual - and I hate reading camera manuals - even the 12 pages of a M manual bores me!
It is obvious that if they can produce a full frame D3 quality sensor in a Drf with an M-mount - they will have a market for at least 12-18 month before anyone else (not necessarily Leica even) takes up the gauntlet. It is also obvious that it will not be cheap - and why should it be. They have to make some of their money back in that 12-18 month window of opportunity.
Cant wait for Photokina this year. No interest in 50f0.9 lenses or ultra fast wides, but a Drf that my 35 stays a 35 on is tempting. It would not replace film in my shooting but be an additional "image" maker.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom