M Mount Nikon Digital rangefinder?

[jsrockit]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

I can't see why Nikon would use an M mount. This just doesn't sound right ot me. However, Nikon will no doubt bring out a camera that fits in-between their DSLRs and P&S models.

[Jeff S]

That's the short answer:D

 

Thanks, Noah.

 

I'm surprised about the service from NJ. My experience with NJ has been very positive, but that was early last Summer before the new products were introduced and things probably got crazy. Plus, my issues were minor adjustments on an M8.2 and some lenses.

 

As a pro and multiple camera purchaser, I'm even more surprised you haven't received top flight service. Very disappointing. The S2 would seem to be doomed if the pro experience is similar.

 

Jeff

[AlanJW]

I doubt the rumor is true. However, it may be time to stop thinking in terms of "SLR" and "RF" as there are cameras out there already that are hybrid in the sense that they are not classic pentaprism SLRs and they do not have rangefinders either. Since Nikon uses CMOS sensors it is more likely that anything Nikon brings out -- if they bring out anything -- would be a live view focusing screen camera, with or without a viewfinder (or rangefinder), and I seriously doubt Nikon would build a camera in Leica M mount unless they were planning to produce their own lenses in M-mount. Nikon likes to sell systems not just camera bodies. Why would they want to produce M9 backup bodies?

 

As for the attractiveness of a compact Nikon with small interchangeable lenses, even if not M, I'd have to await seeing something real rather than something imagined.

 

Finally on the Leica service point, I had an M8 repaired recently -- the metering was totally kerflooey esp in low light and it took 2 months for repair. I am not a pro so perhaps my gear goes to the back of the line. Not so with Canon. I had a 5D that had a terrible overexposure problem and Canon had it back to me in less than a week. Don't misunderstand, I love Leica, but owning Leica sometimes means putting up with frustration, and competition is always a good thing.

[adan]

Let's keep our terms straight - a "rangefinder" is not the same thing as "any camera that is not an SLR." As Alan says.

 

Rangefinder cameras focus by measuring distance to the subject, as in the Leica M, Cosina Bessa R models, or the Contax G (or, once upon a time, the Nikon series (SP/S3 etc) and Canon RFs)

 

A focus confirmation light in an SLR is NOT a "rangefinder" - it is just using the SLR's AF system to turn on a light rather than move the lens. It still depends on SLR mirrors and AF sensors to work.

 

The various micro 4/3rds cameras that take interchangeable lenses are likewise not "rangefinders" (although they could be, if they had an RF mechanism in addition to live-view). Even if you put a viewfinder on top (direct-view, or EVF) that is still not a rangefinder.

 

The original Cosina Bessa L that came out with the 15 and 25 lenses a decade ago was a viewfinder camera - worked fine with lenses if they were wide enough to have great DoF and could be scale-focused. For longer lenses, Cosina added a real rangefinder in the Bessa-Rs ("R" for - you guessed it - "rangefinder").

 

I doubt Nikon is going to produce a true rangefinder camera, M-mount or otherwise. They gave up on the hassle of making RFs back in the 60's. I could be wrong.

 

But they may well be working on a "rangefinder-like" viewfinder body for their AF SLR lenses.

 

I proposed this to them 20-odd years ago when they first adopted AF - which they ignored at the time and ever since, but maybe they finally saw the light! .

 

Make a box the size of a Leica M or Nikon SP, with a window viewfinder and some way to vary the framing (bright lines, or zooming) for the range of, say, 24mm to 105mm. Install some way to use the lens's projected image for AF - since Nikkors don't have a focus cam. At the time I proposed a small mirror on a swinging arm to redirect the image to an AF sensor in the camera bottom - basically just like the AF SLRs except without the main mirror.

 

(Today one could use the image sensor itself if one is willing to put up with the extra shutter delay of closing the shutter before beginning the exposure.)

 

Put an F mount on the front, with the drive cam to focus standard AF-Nikkors.

 

Not a "rangefinder" camera, since it still "views" the projected lens image to focus, just like an SLR. It doesn't know from subject distance, it just knows from "sharp" or "fuzzy".

 

The Contax G cameras came very close to that concept, except for using a real rangefinder (electronic, not mechanical) for focusing.

 

Today, Nikon (or anybody, including Leica) could build what amounts to an interchangeable-lens X1, with one of several viewfinder approaches (built-in or add-on): something like the Leica Frankenfinder or Epson R-D1 finder, with manually set brightlines - a zooming finder (like Contax G cameras or the Leica 21/24/28 zoom finder) - or separate finders for individual focal lengths.

 

It still won't be a rangefinder - but it would include many rangefinder-like properties.

[AlanJW]

Andy's reference to Contax G triggered some thoughts. Some years ago, I had a G2. While it did have a "rangefinder", one could never tell precisely where it was focusing. It is this very "feature" that led me to Leica in the first place. I wanted to select the point of focus, not ave it selected for me, and anything that does not permit the user to select the focus point to me is not a "rangefinder" --- that may be just my idiosyncracy but it is the way I feel. In fact even with a sophisticated SLR like a Canon 5DmkII, I turn off all but the center autofocus point and use it like I would use a rangefinder -- compose, focus on selected point, recompose.

 

I seriously doubt that Nikon would invest in building a true rangefinder though they may build something else that is a serious non SLR camera. Whatever they do, they will not make a major investment to help Leica sell M lenses. So I would not hold my breath waiting for a Nikon substitute for an M9.

[brianv]

I seriously doubt that Nikon will come out with a real Digital RF, would love it if they did. A Digital-SP would be nice. Not going to happen.

 

The closest thing to a Digital Nikon RF is going to be an M8 or M9 with an S-Mount to M-Mount adapter.

 

Like my setup.

 

As for RF's with "Nikon" on them, I'll just have to settle for my 15 that use film.

[rsh]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

So what. I am and have always been a Leica User.

[zeitz]

Nikon didn't "gave up on the hassle of making RFs back in the 60's." Nikon stopped making SPs because they had problems making enough Nikon F cameras. There must have been a sales dip too. But they didn't give up because of the hassle of making them.

[wilfredo]

Seriously, or in jest? If the former, what would be the enticement?

 

Jeff

 

I suspect the enticement would be the price. If indeed Nikon creates an M mount rangefinder, FF, it will have a great reception, even if at the very least it was used as a back-up to the M9. In my case I would use it as a companion to the M8. Nikon clearly has the capability. I would like to see them go forward and produce something affordable.

[chanyr]

I'm doubtful that it'll happen. The Japanese people in general are camera aficionados and so are the senior decision makers at Nikon. They would not want to kill an icon like the Leica M by making a full-frame M mount digital. A mirrorless interchangeble camera yes, but not a M-mount full-frame digital.

[jlindstrom]

I also seriously doubt we'll see a Nikon rangefinder with Leica M-mount. But I will be positively suprised if this happens.

 

Reasons why this would be good:

 

1) competition equals price drops

2) competition equals more technical development

3) we'd also get Nikon lenses for M-mount which would be great addition to Zeiss/CV category of things.

4) Nikon would also bring different aspects to ergonomics - that's not to say Leica is bad, just different. In dslr-world I wouldn't touch anything other than Nikon purely for this reason..

5) more M-mount users would surely also get Leica more sales!

6) it could finally mean manufacturers take Leica approach to development meaning more quality, less gimmick! more of the smallish, good quality stuff without too many confusing and useless options. Back to basics!

 

The down side is that if for some reason the Nikon would be cheaper than Leica, technically superior and use M-mounts.. well, it could put Leica out of business. Which again would suck donkey bollocks..

 

Here's to hoping rumor is true and that it would bring out the best of things to both manufacturers!

 

//Juha

[integrale]

Could it be an X1 clone/remake with an F-mount?

 

According to some rumours, the X1 was developed with Nikon (apparently, this had something to do with the SONY sensor used being similar to the Nikon D300...).

 

If Nikon is contemplating a semi-compact APS-C based camera with an F-mount (and perhaps even EVF/EVIL), I'll be seriously tempted. Mounted with a Voigtländer 40mm or even my Elmarit 35 or Summicron 50, it would be a nice companion.

 

It would need to be COMPACT, though (i.e. D2 size).

[jsrockit]

I can't see Leica and Nikon working together... it just doesn't make sense for Nikon.

[brianv]

I can't see Leica and Nikon working together... it just doesn't make sense for Nikon.

 

Maybe the Nicca name will be resurrected for such a venture...

 

At least I can use my Nikkor lenses that came with the Nicca III on my Leica M8. I suspect that will be the closest that I get to a Digital RF Nikon.

[markowich]

Hi Peter

The idea that Nikon will join the m4/3 consortium (i.e. Olympus, Panasonic and possibly Fuji) seems entirely incredible to me - certainly a hat eating scenario.

 

I'd expect them to jump on the mirrorless interchangeable camera scenario with either an APS/c sized sensor - or possibly something smaller than m4/3.

 

There is such a big gap between the pixel density of the cropped dSLR cameras and the best of the compacts:

 

2.1 Mp/cm2 = M9

3.3 Mp/cm2 = X1 / Nikon D300

5.1 Mp/cm2 = M4/3 cameras (EP and Panasonic G)

23 Mp/cm2 = G11

 

I think there is a real market for something inbetween which could be genuinely small with excellent image quality.

 

P.S. - do you have an M9 to trade? and if you do, why?

 

jono,

i must have overlooked your message. no, i do not have an M9 to trade. will still keep mine.

peter

[andybarton]

I can't see why Nikon would use an M mount. This just doesn't sound right ot me.

 

Because there are already hundreds of thousands of lenses out there already? And the M mount is out of copyright years ago.?

 

I'd be interested. The chip in my D700 (while probably not the same) is a nice chip. How they deal with vignetting is the real $64,000 question

[NB23]

Because there are already hundreds of thousands of lenses out there already? And the M mount is out of copyright years ago.?

 

I'd be interested. The chip in my D700 (while probably not the same) is a nice chip. How they deal with vignetting is the real $64,000 question

 

I think a 1.5x Crop is enough and the easy way to deal with the vigneting.

[brianv]

As the D700 is a full-frame 24x36 chip, I suspect the assumption that there would not be a crop factor in the supposed camera if they used the same chip. A new microlens layer would be required, or a non-uniformity correction needs to be applied. If the dynamic range of the sensor had the spare bits of resolution, that could work. A 20-bit pixel offers 4 F-Stops of correction for vignetting and would produce a 16-bit raw pixel. Pentax uses a 22-bit A/D.

 

If they used a D300 chip, then the 1.5x crop factor applies.

[NB23]

The OP talks about DX lenses, which implies a 1.5 crop sensor... I wouldn't mind!

[Advertisement]

Hallo,

Look here: Interesting Leica gear

[jsrockit]

Because there are already hundreds of thousands of lenses out there already? And the M mount is out of copyright years ago.?

 

I'd be interested. The chip in my D700 (while probably not the same) is a nice chip. How they deal with vignetting is the real $64,000 question

 

And there aren't even more Nikon F mount lenses?