Nikon mirrorless definitely on the way

[HoppyUK]

Err... It's not like I didn't use my A7 which IMO was the right size and weight.

I wouldn't call the A7 small, there are plenty of way smaller mirrorless cameras.

Edit: When size is pushed too far, it limits the size of the rear LCD and space available for buttons/controls. You get a smaller battery, lose dual card slots, maybe lose a top control dial and top LCD, the heat-sink for the sensor gets overloaded etc.

The average guy finds them fiddly and they chip my nail polish.

 

[twist]

That looks like one hell of a big hole in the front of it!

Yup, its supposed to be for their new F0.95 lenses. I have a theory that it may also help with adapted, better light transmission could mean better AF in darker conditions.

 

[nandbytes]

I wouldn't call the A7 small, there are plenty of way smaller mirrorless cameras.

Not sure they'd fit a FF sensor and not overheat.
I was kinda happy using the A6000 also but lack of front dial annoyed the hell out of me. I used A7 with 70-400mm no problem wouldn't put the same on A6000 I suppose.
In the end depends on the use case. Horses for courses and all that

 

[Brazo]

But surely Nikon will try to leverage their big advantage over Sony, which is all the big (and heavy) lenses. There have been reports that the new camera will be launched with an adapter that will provide close to 100% functionality and perforrmance with F-mount lenses; so the camera mount has to be strong enough from the outset.

Yeah I take your point but as it stands Sony has a huge advantage over Nikon with native long lenses.

As for F mount being ‘close’ to 100% firstly that’s to be seen and even if it lives up to the rumour who wants ‘close’. Who wants ‘nearly’, who wants not quite as good as the dslr counterpart?

We choose lenses and cams on tiny fractions of performance I for one am not about to dumb that down with an adaptor. Plus a tiny camera with a huge lens plus adapter isn’t ergonomic.

 

[gad-westy]

Doesn't look any more or less ugly than other cameras to me but where's the glowy ring gone?

I wasn't quite sure on the purpose of that. Illuminated buttons are great and should be universal as far as I'm concerned. Fast wide angles lenses that might serve as astro lenses would benefit from illuminated controls too but I've never really wanted for an illuminated mount. Seems a strange innovation.

 

[gad-westy]

Yup, its supposed to be for their new F0.95 lenses. I have a theory that it may also help with adapted, better light transmission could mean better AF in darker conditions.

I guess it might help with IBIS too.

 

[HoppyUK]

Yeah I take your point but as it stands Sony has a huge advantage over Nikon with native long lenses.

As for F mount being ‘close’ to 100% firstly that’s to be seen and even if it lives up to the rumour who wants ‘close’. Who wants ‘nearly’, who wants not quite as good as the dslr counterpart?

We choose lenses and cams on tiny fractions of performance I for one am not about to dumb that down with an adaptor. Plus a tiny camera with a huge lens plus adapter isn’t ergonomic.

Nikon's main target is current Nikon users with a bag of lenses - millions of them. That is the big market opportunity and that is where the new camera will stand or fall (ditto Canon). For those users, even if Sony was the preferred choice the cost of a entire replacement system is simply out of the question.

I'm sure Nikon would love to tempt people away from Sony and others, and no doubt they will to some extent, but they're not the primary target.

 

[woof woof]

We choose lenses and cams on tiny fractions of performance I for one am not about to dumb that down with an adaptor. Plus a tiny camera with a huge lens plus adapter isn’t ergonomic.

A tiny camera and a huge lens / adapter may be a problem but I do think that this can be over hyped sometimes as I tend to have my right hand on the camera grip with my finger over the shutter while my left hand is on the lens somewhere near the zoom and or focus rings which even with a larger lens sually equates to somewhere near the point of balance and usually this means that even a bigger lens balances perfectly well on a smaller camera.

The big lens on a small camera issue may be a genuin issue with some camera and lens combinations but I do think that much of the time it's overplayed if you hold the kit anywhere near how I do.

 

[woof woof]

Nikon's main target is current Nikon users with a bag of lenses. That is where the new camera will stand or fall (ditto Canon). For those users, even if Sony was the preferred choice the cost of a entire replacement system is out of the question.

I'm sure Nikon would love to tempt people away from Sony and others, and no doubt they will to some extent, but they're not the primary target.

Surely people with multiple lenses will still possibly be a minority of buyers. Isn't it true that most people (out in the real world rather than posting on forums) buy the camera and just one or two lenses? If we did see a majortity of buyers being multiple lens owners I think that might be a problem for Nikon. I think they'll be aiming wider than that.

 

[woof woof]

And a PS.

I know times have moved on and there are multiple things in play such as the prices when you buy and sell and early adopter costs etc but when I switched from DSLR's to mirrorless it didn't cost me an arm and a leg. I largely got good prices for my Canon kit and in fact I sold a couple of lenses used for more than I paid new. I think it's always worth doing the sums and seeing what the real world cost is.

 

[HoppyUK]

Surely people with multiple lenses will still possibly be a minority of buyers. Isn't it true that most people (out in the real world rather than posting on forums) buy the camera and just one or two lenses? If we did see a majortity of buyers being multiple lens owners I think that might be a problem for Nikon. I think they'll be aiming wider than that.

Of course they will be aiming as wide as they can, but they'll not allow that to compromise the appeal to existing Nikon users. There are over 100m F-mount lenses out there.

Edit: The general non-Nikon market will be as interested in the new series of native-mirrorless lenses as the camera itself. That will be necessarily a limited range at first (another reason to target existing Nikon users) but all buyers will want to transition to them over time. It's quite an appealing outlook for Nikon

 

[Peter123]

Hope I can use my ai-s lenses with ibis engaged.

 

[gad-westy]

Hope I can use my ai-s lenses with ibis engaged.

Can't see why not. Though I guess when you're talking fully manual lenses, it probably doesn't matter very much whether you're using a Sony or Nikon or anything else. It is one of the really appealing things about IBIS especially because the stabalistation can really help with accurate focusing in the view finder too as well as the other neat aids mirror less brings in that department.

 

[woof woof]

Of course they will be aiming as wide as they can, but they'll not allow that to compromise the appeal to existing Nikon users. There are over 100m F-mount lenses out there.

Yes but I'm not too sure how much of the following is actually crucially true...

Nikon's main target is current Nikon users with a bag of lenses - millions of them. That is the big market opportunity and that is where the new camera will stand or fall (ditto Canon). For those users, even if Sony was the preferred choice the cost of a entire replacement system is simply out of the question.

I'm sure Nikon would love to tempt people away from Sony and others, and no doubt they will to some extent, but they're not the primary target.

I just think there's a chance that we on internet forums get a bit carried away and think everyone is like us and has three camera bodies and 6-12 lenses, they don't. Which market is crucial to the success of this camera I don't know but I do think that altrhough "we" may well be important we may still be overplaying the importance of people like us.

On example... the success of Canon CSC's which many people of forums would possibly see as relatively weak products with few lenses, but they are aparently selling quite well in some markets.

 

[HoppyUK]

Yes but I'm not too sure how much of the following is actually crucially true...



I just think there's a chance that we on internet forums get a bit carried away and think everyone is like us and has three camera bodies and 6-12 lenses, they don't. Which market is crucial to the success of this camera I don't know but I do think that altrhough "we" may well be important we may still be overplaying the importance of people like us.

On example... the success of Canon CSC's which many people of forums would possibly see as relatively weak products with few lenses, but they are aparently selling quite well in some markets.

Canon's current mirrorless cameras are entry-level - a few hundred pounds, not £2-3k. Not the same scenario.

I added a late edit to my post above, but don't take my word for it, here's a quote from Thom Hogan (my bold):

1. Compatibility with existing lens set (F-mount). Nikon’s strength has always been their attention to legacy owners, so anything that detracts from that would be walking away from a key strength. Compatibility could have come in many forms, including just using the existing F-mount, but the key issue here isn’t so much the physical form as the performance. 100m Nikkors live in the wild. Abandoning any significant number of them would be a disaster. A disaster so big that it creates the top goal all by itself.

https://www.sansmirror.com/newsviews/design-priorities-for-nikon.html

 

[woof woof]

Yes, but I just don't like the idea of getting carried away and thinking that the camera will succeed or fail depending upon how "we" or Thom Hogan feel. He's still one of us I think it's always worthwhile trying to keep a bit of perspective and I'm sure that Nikon will have done the odd focus group or two so lets not run around like headless chickens if a box or two of ours isn't ticked with a tick of exactly the right angle and length. The four screws isn't enough scenario is a possibly a good example here.

PS.
On the disaster scenario.... FD to eos? Pain yes but No1 or there abouts for how long?

 

[gad-westy]

On example... the success of Canon CSC's which many people of forums would possibly see as relatively weak products with few lenses, but they are aparently selling quite well in some markets.

Had an interesting chat with my father a while back. He's always shot Canon in the digital era. Has a couple of full frame bodies and lenses. When he was looking for a new small camera to replace his aging S90, he asked me about a few options. We talked about Sony RX cameras, m4/3, Fuji stuff, all sorts but ultimately I don't think he even looked at any other manufacturer other than Canon. He opted for a G5x but did consider M cameras too (I don't know their names). He'd be starting afresh whatever he chose but brand loyalty and familiarity with controls, dependability and whatever other subjective factors meant he simply didn't look at anyone other than Canon. I suspect when Canon bring out a full frame mirrorless camera he'll buy one but Sony and Nikon's offering won't be on his radar at all. I wonder how many other users are like him? I realise it's all a bit anecdotal but I do know a few people like this. Another has exclusively shot Olympus for 30 years. In effect he's changed system several times but always with the same manufacturer. If Olympus brought a full frame camera out tomorrow, he'd buy one I'm sure.

 

[JJ!]

Had an interesting chat with my father a while back. He's always shot Canon in the digital era. Has a couple of full frame bodies and lenses. When he was looking for a new small camera to replace his aging S90, he asked me about a few options. We talked about Sony RX cameras, m4/3, Fuji stuff, all sorts but ultimately I don't think he even looked at any other manufacturer other than Canon. He opted for a G5x but did consider M cameras too (I don't know their names). He'd be starting afresh whatever he chose but brand loyalty and familiarity with controls, dependability and whatever other subjective factors meant he simply didn't look at anyone other than Canon. I suspect when Canon bring out a full frame mirrorless camera he'll buy one but Sony and Nikon's offering won't be on his radar at all. I wonder how many other users are like him? I realise it's all a bit anecdotal but I do know a few people like this. Another has exclusively shot Olympus for 30 years. In effect he's changed system several times but always with the same manufacturer. If Olympus brought a full frame camera out tomorrow, he'd buy one I'm sure.

Quite a few I reckon! I know people exactly the same. My Sister in Law just will not buy any TV apart from a Sony TV!

I tried the Sony A7Riii and just didn't enjoy it enough to change, but if this Nikon does not deliver I may revisit Sony.

 

[woof woof]

Yup.

I'm petty sure that if Nikon and Canon make a half decent stab at FF mirrorless it wont matter how they compare to a Sony A7III or whatever may be objectively "best," they'll sell by the boat load. Maybe not so much to people on forums but to normal people

 

[gad-westy]

Yup.

I'm petty sure that if Nikon and Canon make a half decent stab at FF mirrorless it wont matter how they compare to a Sony A7III or whatever may be objectively "best," they'll sell by the boat load. Maybe not so much to people on forums but to normal people

Yep, I think this sub-forum in particular is a bit of a self fulfilling prophecy when it comes to gear. I'm guessing most people in here are a bit more brand/camera fluid than most or if they weren't to start with, reading enough about other products or seeing enough pretty pictures will do the job!

I've used a few systems but do feel a pull to Nikon. It's what I started with in DSLR's and I feel entirely at home using them. It's funny that the still born DL got a mention in this thread as in all honesty, that's one that I really wanted to come to fruition. I'd have bought one if it worked like a bigger Nikon, same with the Coolpix A if it had had a viewfinder. There's plenty of others out there that might be better but sometimes a bit of loyalty counts for a lot (misplaced or otherwise!)

 

[HoppyUK]

Had an interesting chat with my father a while back. He's always shot Canon in the digital era. Has a couple of full frame bodies and lenses. When he was looking for a new small camera to replace his aging S90, he asked me about a few options. We talked about Sony RX cameras, m4/3, Fuji stuff, all sorts but ultimately I don't think he even looked at any other manufacturer other than Canon. He opted for a G5x but did consider M cameras too (I don't know their names). He'd be starting afresh whatever he chose but brand loyalty and familiarity with controls, dependability and whatever other subjective factors meant he simply didn't look at anyone other than Canon. I suspect when Canon bring out a full frame mirrorless camera he'll buy one but Sony and Nikon's offering won't be on his radar at all. I wonder how many other users are like him? I realise it's all a bit anecdotal but I do know a few people like this. Another has exclusively shot Olympus for 30 years. In effect he's changed system several times but always with the same manufacturer. If Olympus brought a full frame camera out tomorrow, he'd buy one I'm sure.

Yes, and I don't think your dad is at all untypical.

I get to use a lot of different cameras through my work and regardless of objective merits, any non-Canon feels a bit alien at first. Then I get into the menus and it's always a game of hide and seek. With any Canon, I feel at home, comfortable and confident. It's only a familiarity thing, but counts for a lot and the more you use a particular brand, the more uncomfortable it is to change. This new camera must feel like a Nikon and work like a Nikon or it may stumble at the first hurdle. Nikon will have surely worked hard on this.

 

[woof woof]

Yes, and I don't think your dad is at all untypical.

I get to use a lot of different cameras through my work and regardless of objective merits, any non-Canon feels a bit alien at first. Then I get into the menus and it's always a game of hide and seek. With any Canon, I feel at home, comfortable and confident. It's only a familiarity thing, but counts for a lot and the more you use a particular brand, the more uncomfortable it is to change. This new camera must feel like a Nikon and work like a Nikon.

But on the other hand... DSLR/top end CSC type camera users are an aging bunch in a slow to stagnant market and maybe the manufacturers should be looking more towards upcoming generations. I doubt this new Nikon will do that to any greater extent than any Sony or Fuji to date but at some point maybe it will have to happen and maybe it'll be as big a change as from DSLR to mirrorless seems at the moment.

 

[HoppyUK]

But on the other hand... DSLR/top end CSC type camera users are an aging bunch in a slow to stagnant market and maybe the manufacturers should be looking more towards upcoming generations. I doubt this new Nikon will do that to any greater extent than any Sony or Fuji to date but at some point maybe it will have to happen and maybe it'll be as big a change as from DSLR to mirrorless seems at the moment.

A touch-screen then. When well implemented they're an excellent addition to any camera IMHO - easy, intuitive and don't detract. Seamlessly integrated wireless connectivity is another essential for any properly modern camera

 

[simonbarker]

DSLR/top end CSC type camera users are an aging bunch

That'd be the bunch with money right?

upcoming generations

That'd be the bunch without money right?

Joking aside, I see your point but besides putting out good products what exactly else should they be doing?

 

[snerkler]

Yeah I take your point but as it stands Sony has a huge advantage over Nikon with native long lenses.

As for F mount being ‘close’ to 100% firstly that’s to be seen and even if it lives up to the rumour who wants ‘close’. Who wants ‘nearly’, who wants not quite as good as the dslr counterpart?

We choose lenses and cams on tiny fractions of performance I for one am not about to dumb that down with an adaptor. Plus a tiny camera with a huge lens plus adapter isn’t ergonomic.

I depends it will be how close. I used a 1.4x TC which apparently reduces AF performance a bit, but I couldn't perceive it.

 

[woof woof]

That'd be the bunch with money right?



That'd be the bunch without money right?

Joking aside, I see your point but besides putting out good products what exactly else should they be doing?

Dunno. I'm in my 50's and I couldn't give a flying about smartphone tech, Friendface, geo tagging or any of the other stuff. Ask a 22 year old on £1k a day and see what they think of DSLR's, I suspect they'd think they were something from the 1950's and yes there are plenty of younger people on good money.

PS. The £1K a day ref is because I was talking to some who are on that last week. When that job ended they moved to another, £1.5k a day I got nowhere near that Anyway, none of them had a dedicated top end interchangeable lens camera but all take pictures and vids with their phones. I just can't see that generation or the next being happy with DSLR or even current CSC tech. Just my little worry.

 

[Gaz J]

What would make people switch to ff mirrorless within the brand that they already use? Assuming that you’ve bought a camera that suits your needs for your type of photography already. Surely an ev and no mirror wouldn’t be enough to tempt people.

If you have a D850 then it would be some achievement on Nikon’s part to get someone to say ‘you know, this just doesn’t cut it anymore’.

Image quality is pretty much a given these days. Sensor performance is better than its ever been.

Is weight really that important given that for a lot of people they would be hoping to use their existing lenses, maybe with an adaptor, and if you’re a long tele lens user then the weight saving is insignificant.

For me to consider a change within Canon from what I have it would be down to AF that is a step above anything that they have produced up until now. If they can’t do that I’m not interested because I don’t see anything else that would make me want to change otherwise.

 

[woof woof]

Is weight really that important given that for a lot of people they would be hoping to use their existing lenses, maybe with an adaptor, and if you’re a long tele lens user then the weight saving is insignificant.

Any weight saving with the body alone is always there, it just becomes less of a percentage of the total when you fit the big fat lens. How many people use the largest lenses that make the body weight insignificant? I don't know but at least a compact CSC gives you the option of using a small light prime to keep the bulk and weight down on those days you don't need the big fat lens.

PS.
I originally started to look at CSC's for the bulk and weight saving but later I came to like what I saw as the advantages of mirrorless and to be honest even if there was no bulk or weight saving at all if I'd know about these advantages I'd have changed anyway

 

[snerkler]

What would make people switch to ff mirrorless within the brand that they already use? Assuming that you’ve bought a camera that suits your needs for your type of photography already. Surely an ev and no mirror wouldn’t be enough to tempt people.

If you have a D850 then it would be some achievement on Nikon’s part to get someone to say ‘you know, this just doesn’t cut it anymore’.

Image quality is pretty much a given these days. Sensor performance is better than its ever been.

Is weight really that important given that for a lot of people they would be hoping to use their existing lenses, maybe with an adaptor, and if you’re a long tele lens user then the weight saving is insignificant.

For me to consider a change within Canon from what I have it would be down to AF that is a step above anything that they have produced up until now. If they can’t do that I’m not interested because I don’t see anything else that would make me want to change otherwise.

For me it would be so that I could just have one system rather than two. Smaller setup for travel, and full performance when using the big gear. I love my Olympus, but in an ideal world I'd have FF for travel too. The D850 and 24-70mm f2.8 or 24-120mm f4 is just too bulky and heavy for sightseeing (for me).

 

[Faldrax]

What would make people switch to ff mirrorless within the brand that they already use? Assuming that you’ve bought a camera that suits your needs for your type of photography already. Surely an ev and no mirror wouldn’t be enough to tempt people.

There are a number of potential advantages;

1) AF points covering a much larger proportion of the frame
2) 'Zero blackout' from raising / lowering the mirror (this does require a very fast sensor readout, currently only the A9 does this)
3) Higher FPS rates as no moving parts to worry about.
4) Totally silent shooting - which can be a benefit in some situations (actually, any situation in which extraneous noise is a disadvantage)

additionally an EVF has advantages (but you could fit an EVF to a DSLR if you rally wanted to)

1) EVF allows you to see changes to settings directly
2) EVF allows you to review images - avoiding 'bright light on rear display' issues, and also meaning you can shoot, review, shoot without moving the camera from your eye
3) Additional information overlay - you already have some overlay within OVF, but EVF allows more flexibility to add things like live histogram, virtual levels, etc.

 

[Ed Sutton]

There are a number of potential advantages;

1) AF points covering a much larger proportion of the frame
2) 'Zero blackout' from raising / lowering the mirror (this does require a very fast sensor readout, currently only the A9 does this)
3) Higher FPS rates as no moving parts to worry about.
4) Totally silent shooting - which can be a benefit in some situations (actually, any situation in which extraneous noise is a disadvantage)

additionally an EVF has advantages (but you could fit an EVF to a DSLR if you rally wanted to)

1) EVF allows you to see changes to settings directly
2) EVF allows you to review images - avoiding 'bright light on rear display' issues, and also meaning you can shoot, review, shoot without moving the camera from your eye
3) Additional information overlay - you already have some overlay within OVF, but EVF allows more flexibility to add things like live histogram, virtual levels, etc.

I have nothing against mirrorless cameras, but I do think their 'advantages' are overplayed. Of those listed above silent shooting is the only one that interests me. And that not sufficiently to make me want to shell out a load of cash.

Who will buy the Nikon's mirrorless cameras? Gearheads who obsess over features they mostly never use.

 

[Riz_Guru]

I have nothing against mirrorless cameras, but I do think their 'advantages' are overplayed.

It was probably this line of thinking Nikon had years ago when mirrorless first hit the scene....
Mirrorless is where the market is heading, shame it has taken Nikon this long to realize, Canon will follow soon.

 

[Gaz J]

There are a number of potential advantages;

1) AF points covering a much larger proportion of the frame. Yes
2) 'Zero blackout' from raising / lowering the mirror (this does require a very fast sensor readout, currently only the A9 does this) Not enough of an advantage for me.
3) Higher FPS rates as no moving parts to worry about. Yes but will it only be with native lenses. Sony A9 with a meta bones adaptor halves the frame rate.
4) Totally silent shooting - which can be a benefit in some situations (actually, any situation in which extraneous noise is a disadvantage) Never found it a problem but wouldn’t knock it.

additionally an EVF has advantages (but you could fit an EVF to a DSLR if you rally wanted to)

1) EVF allows you to see changes to settings directly. Not sure that’s an advantage.
2) EVF allows you to review images - avoiding 'bright light on rear display' issues, and also meaning you can shoot, review, shoot without moving the camera from your eye I review images only for critical focus so don’t see that as an advantage.
3) Additional information overlay - you already have some overlay within OVF, but EVF allows more flexibility to add things like live histogram, virtual levels, etc.

there’s a limit surely to how much info you can process visually in one area. Never found the info available now insufficient.

 

[gad-westy]

For me it would be so that I could just have one system rather than two. Smaller setup for travel, and full performance when using the big gear. I love my Olympus, but in an ideal world I'd have FF for travel too. The D850 and 24-70mm f2.8 or 24-120mm f4 is just too bulky and heavy for sightseeing (for me).

That's one really nice thing about Sony that hopefully Nikon can replicate. An A7 with a 24-70 attached to it offers only marginal benefit in bulk over a DSLR, but stick a 35mm 2.8 on it and it becomes very portable and discreet. It's a bit of a balancing act though because there is a limit to how small a camera can get before it becomes more awkward to hold and use.

 

[gad-westy]

There are a number of potential advantages;

1) AF points covering a much larger proportion of the frame
2) 'Zero blackout' from raising / lowering the mirror (this does require a very fast sensor readout, currently only the A9 does this)
3) Higher FPS rates as no moving parts to worry about.
4) Totally silent shooting - which can be a benefit in some situations (actually, any situation in which extraneous noise is a disadvantage)

additionally an EVF has advantages (but you could fit an EVF to a DSLR if you rally wanted to)

1) EVF allows you to see changes to settings directly
2) EVF allows you to review images - avoiding 'bright light on rear display' issues, and also meaning you can shoot, review, shoot without moving the camera from your eye
3) Additional information overlay - you already have some overlay within OVF, but EVF allows more flexibility to add things like live histogram, virtual levels, etc.

I know it's not limited to mirrorless but IBIS will be a big selling point for many too.

 

[Ed Sutton]

It was probably this line of thinking Nikon had years ago when mirrorless first hit the scene....
Mirrorless is where the market is heading, shame it has taken Nikon this long to realize, Canon will follow soon.

I reckon they have both been waiting until the market was big enough to make it worth their while being a part of it. let the other brands develop a demand, all the while quietly working away developing something that will blow the competition out of the water. Maybe!

Kirk Tuck has had some interesting thoughts on it all (and he's been a big fan of mirrorless currently revelling in using 'old' Nikon FX DSLRs). The Visual Science Lab / Kirk Tuck

 

[Brazo]

A touch-screen then. When well implemented they're an excellent addition to any camera IMHO - easy, intuitive and don't detract. Seamlessly integrated wireless connectivity is another essential for any properly modern camera

I hate a touchscreen as my nose seems to ‘control’ the camera! They got covered in smears and fingerprints!

Does go to show we all have different needs!

 

[snerkler]

That's one really nice thing about Sony that hopefully Nikon can replicate. An A7 with a 24-70 attached to it offers only marginal benefit in bulk over a DSLR, but stick a 35mm 2.8 on it and it becomes very portable and discreet. It's a bit of a balancing act though because there is a limit to how small a camera can get before it becomes more awkward to hold and use.

Depends which 24-70mm. When I was looking at the Sony the A7Riii with 24-70mm f4 was significantly smaller and lighter than the D850 with 24-70mm f2.8 or 24-120mm f4. Obviously you're not comparing like for like, but Nikon don't do a 24-70mm f4 for f-mount. Rumours are they will with the new camera though, and so hoping for a similar size weight saving as the A7 and 24-70mm f4.

 

[gad-westy]

Depends which 24-70mm. When I was looking at the Sony the A7Riii with 24-70mm f4 was significantly smaller and lighter than the D850 with 24-70mm f2.8 or 24-120mm f4. Obviously you're not comparing like for like, but Nikon don't do a 24-70mm f4 for f-mount. Rumours are they will with the new camera though, and so hoping for a similar size weight saving as the A7 and 24-70mm f4.

Yep, always seems a bit of an omission from the current range.

 

[HoppyUK]

I hate a touchscreen as my nose seems to ‘control’ the camera! They got covered in smears and fingerprints!

Does go to show we all have different needs!

Note the position of the new Nikon's off-set viewfinder, should eliminate the nose problem (at last ) at least for right-eyed users.