It’s look like Nikon is serious about their APS-C format Mirrorless camera. Just, take a look what Nikon representatives said to dpreview staff
Do you think the Z mount will eventually be an APS-C platform, as well as full-frame?
I cannot disclose our plans but for today I can say that since we launched the Z series, our DX format DSLR users have been asking us to apply mirrorless technology to the DX format as well. If we employ APS-C sensors [in mirrorless] maybe the system can be made even smaller. So as we go along, we’ll listen to the voices of our customers.
So, its a clear that Nikon is working on the DX format APS-C Mirrorless system but they don’t want to disclose their plans right now.
If you can read they have clearly said – users have been asking us to apply mirrorless technology to the DX format as well and we’ll listen to the voices of our customers.
Nikon Z-Mount APS-C Mirrorless Coming
In my view, I don’t think Nikon will do same mistake as Canon did with their EOS M system, they are smart enough to use same Z-mount for their APS-C Mirrorless system to make the entire Mirrorless range More versatile and user friendly, just like their DX and FX DSLR line-up.
TNC Exclusive – Nikon New Pro-Compacts Coming
Check out Ongoing Featured and Lightning Deals at Amazon.com | Amazon.UK | B&H Store
Follow us on our social pages FACEBOOK | TWITTER | INSTAGRAM to get live news + rumors 24X7
Featured Comment
From what I recall, Canon made nearly the same statement that Nikon did here, only they were talking about creating an APS-C option using the RF mount…alluding to the fact that EF-M will continue on as the “fun, micro compact” mirrorless option, living alone and probably rarely visited in its own unique active retirement center. This can be interpreted in a more cynical way too, but, as things tend to happen over time and not instantaneously, current EF-M user may migrate to the RF platform on their own anyway, forgoing any sort of standoff.
The low, low price on the RP might have been designed as an additional incentive to EF-M owners as encouragement to simply get them off their unlucky mount.
The RP is a potluck dinner, bits and pieces from several different kitchens. Some ingredients maybe starting to turn, but enough spices and a couple tablespoons of klonopin to make sure it goes down with a dumb smile. Nothing special, just get everyone eating at the same table, maybe in the hope of consolidating their 3 1/2 mounts to just 1.
It’s too bad Canon didn’t actually try with the EF-M range. Like, really try to make it good instead of the rock soup they always insist on serving their customers by cutting corners and options until what’s left is a child’s arts and crafts snowflake that unfolds in a very disappointing—but sturdy— smdesign. Not inexpensive Swiss cheese served on thin napkins, using two sporks songoinrd with a rubber band to prevent excited guest from spreading too much contagious enthusiasm.
Just imagine Canon really trying—to the point that they even admit they tried. Like, throw the kitchen sink at a camera and unchain some engineers from their focus group chaperones, and really let them do what they want. To an extent, the way Sony operates with their albeit, uneven crop ILCs… Sony ain’t scared of a cobra. They’re a badasss Honey Badger. In no way do they care about adding cool new tech that might upset the delicate (artificial) hierarchy of customer expectations, price points and materials’ costs. If Canon were a person, I think they would’ve been peeing the bed well into their adolescence. Brilliant, but scared of their own shadow. Especially since it appears now that EF-M might’ve been, 100%, a large scale feasibility study, much like what the Saturn Relay snd Pontiac Montana were to the yet untested, potentially, uhh, brilliant idea of merging a minivan with SUV “looks.”
Come in Canon, with a slim to zero chance of a future with EF-M no matter what, they really should’ve dropped some tech in there and freaked out done it thrur retired engineers cum photographers. Canon’s RF spec certainly goes back quite a way, even it began as nothing more than a contingency plan—so the EF-M scheme would’ve been pretty safe to let loose on, Canon. Or, if you’re not careful, you might gmsonehoe acquire the nickname Cannot. ??♀️ Good nigh, sleep tight.
I am leaving Fujifilm for Sony new A6xxx camera, as I want IBIS in small and light body, that Fujifilm hasn’t.
However, should Nikon Mirrorless APS-C come first, or I dislike new Sony, I may be interested.
I have about 8 quality Nikkor F lenses from the past and if I can use them, specifically if I can FULLY use Nikkor DX G-ED lenses, I am sold.New
Mirrorless Nikon DX must be compact and light though; that’s why left them for Fiji 6 years ago.
Both D80 and D7000 are far too big and heavy.
Maybe Nikon should go to APS-H sensors with Z-mount?
From what I recall, Canon made nearly the same statement that Nikon did here, only they were talking about creating an APS-C option using the RF mount…alluding to the fact that EF-M will continue on as the “fun, micro compact” mirrorless option, living alone and probably rarely visited in its own unique active retirement center. This can be interpreted in a more cynical way too, but, as things tend to happen over time and not instantaneously, current EF-M user may migrate to the RF platform on their own anyway, forgoing any sort of standoff.
The low, low price on the RP might have been designed as an additional incentive to EF-M owners as encouragement to simply get them off their unlucky mount.
The RP is a potluck dinner, bits and pieces from several different kitchens. Some ingredients maybe starting to turn, but enough spices and a couple tablespoons of klonopin to make sure it goes down with a dumb smile. Nothing special, just get everyone eating at the same table, maybe in the hope of consolidating their 3 1/2 mounts to just 1.
It’s too bad Canon didn’t actually try with the EF-M range. Like, really try to make it good instead of the rock soup they always insist on serving their customers by cutting corners and options until what’s left is a child’s arts and crafts snowflake that unfolds in a very disappointing—but sturdy— smdesign. Not inexpensive Swiss cheese served on thin napkins, using two sporks songoinrd with a rubber band to prevent excited guest from spreading too much contagious enthusiasm.
Just imagine Canon really trying—to the point that they even admit they tried. Like, throw the kitchen sink at a camera and unchain some engineers from their focus group chaperones, and really let them do what they want. To an extent, the way Sony operates with their albeit, uneven crop ILCs… Sony ain’t scared of a cobra. They’re a badasss Honey Badger. In no way do they care about adding cool new tech that might upset the delicate (artificial) hierarchy of customer expectations, price points and materials’ costs. If Canon were a person, I think they would’ve been peeing the bed well into their adolescence. Brilliant, but scared of their own shadow. Especially since it appears now that EF-M might’ve been, 100%, a large scale feasibility study, much like what the Saturn Relay snd Pontiac Montana were to the yet untested, potentially, uhh, brilliant idea of merging a minivan with SUV “looks.”
Come in Canon, with a slim to zero chance of a future with EF-M no matter what, they really should’ve dropped some tech in there and freaked out done it thrur retired engineers cum photographers. Canon’s RF spec certainly goes back quite a way, even it began as nothing more than a contingency plan—so the EF-M scheme would’ve been pretty safe to let loose on, Canon. Or, if you’re not careful, you might gmsonehoe acquire the nickname Cannot. ??♀️ Good nigh, sleep tight.
Even if Nikon comes up with a Nikon ML APS-C body, i would have to use all my DX lenses with a mount adapter, meaning that this kind of combo would be as much large and heavy…I simply don’t want to be on the market for new park of ML lenses to use with this new body. My decision is made, i keep my D7100 for serious shoot and i am going with an excellent bridge camera for daily use: Sony RX 10 Mark 4
The Nikon Z mount is too big to design a compact APSc (DX) mirrorless body and lenses; (like SONY did with the E mount). But a new DX mount and lenses line leaves too many fronts open in Nikon. Although they have the option of using the old F mount, but blocking the old DSLR lenses!
Nikon (or anyone else) should never put that curvy hump on the top of their new design. Or any design, for
that matter. The closer designs get to the classic Leica, Contax, or Nikon S series body design, the better.
It’s what made the Sony RS1 so successful.