[Rondec]

Nikon has almost no advantages when it comes to mirrorless. Their biggest advantage in general has been their lens catalog, but it remains to be seen if that makes any kind of a difference in a situation where people will expect newly designed, hopefully smallish lenses to go with the new mount.

Certainly when it comes to specs, it is hard to imagine Nikon going over Sony except with regard to build, as the A9 seems to be top notch except with regard to build.

Feels like they are behind and will still focus on top end SLRs and try to gradually work their way in to mirrorless while keeping a foot firmly planted on the SLRs as their money makers.

[beholder3]

I have yet to see any convincing reason why anyone would want to buy a Nikon mirrorless. Nikon is and would be behind the competition in absolutely every area you can think of. They simply bring nothing to the table.

And again: Justifying cannibalism with "users would buy elsewhere" is not a sustainable business plan.

They need to find new users.

So far the last two years manufacturers have just increased profits by selling more expensive toys. I have not read any convincing arguments how that can be a sustainable approach. A more and more limited user group will not infinitely continue to buy more and more expensive gear in short cycles.
So no, I do not believe the situation has hit bottom yet. It might be an interim base.

[talgarik]

I have yet to see any convincing reason why anyone would want to buy a Nikon mirrorless.

mirrorless is trendy
Nikon for sure has lost customers to Fujifilm et cetera
a Nikon mirrorless could stop the hemorrhage and even win back some customers

There is profit in the ILC camera market, if Sony is continuing to aggressively invest even in a shrinking market ...
Pentax itself demonstrates why there is money and profit in the ILC: have you ever wondered why Pentax offers WR, 100% viewfinder and tons of pro features in every camera? because they cost nothing in terms of production costs: pro cameras are HUGELY over-priced.

[Jeff Lopez]

"Pentax itself demonstrates why there is money and profit in the ILC: have you ever wondered why Pentax offers WR, 100% viewfinder and tons of pro features in every camera? because they cost nothing in terms of production costs: pro cameras are HUGELY over-priced."

good point..

[surfar]

what they want is all the convenience of a smartphone (drop-dead simple shooting, automatic post-processing & fun filters, and upload to cloud/social media) with better photographic quality (bigger sensor and higher-spec lens) all in a compact body. No one has cracked that market which seems potentially much more lucrative than making a me-too mirrorless ilc.

yi....xaomi

[twilhelm]

Personally I think the low end market (in the US) is dying off and will continue to do so. Everyone has a smartphone these days, and the majority of them take good pictures which can instantly be uploaded to social media. If you have an iPhone 7, what real reason is there to spend a few hundred dollars on a camera that you will never see any difference in quality of photos because they are only viewed on a small screen?

The upper camera market is where the money is at. Selling new products to people that have "expendable" cash.

Or those of us who like to believe we do.

[Zygonyx]

Don't underestimate Leica's mirrorless FF products...
There IS obviously already big competition in high-end ML products....

[mee]

I just hope this theoretical Nikon mirrorless body doesn't become an actual Nikon D750 replacement. That'd be a bummer.

[pinholecam]

The people buying 'serious cameras' have shrunk over the past 3-4yrs.
Most laymen have moved to phones being good enough, this market will not move back to cameras.
So at this point, I don't think another mirrorless is enough to save Nikon (nor Pentax for that matter).


Its like telling people to eat quinoa instead of pasta (or earthworms over beef) and telling them this and that 'tech benefits' when all that folks can see is the short term (and taste a good meal )

[Digitalis]

The reference to "smartphone" users and in juxtaposition to references to mid- and high-end would seem to suggest this is meant to resurrect the low-end of the camera market.

Nikon are playing the role of undertakers. Good luck to them.

[mee]

There will always be a 'low end' market. The definition will simply change to what is considered 'low end.' And I think the translation was scrambled in the Nikon rumor anyways.. This could be a 'low end' item very possibly or it could be something else.

[surfar]

The "rumor" is strengthening...whether it becomes reality is a matter of time.

[Zygonyx]

Mirrorless are energy overconsuming systems, with no benefit on output : good luck to them.

[mee]

Mirrorless are energy overconsuming systems, with no benefit on output : good luck to them.

There is a fine benefit for Nikon: money!

Mirrorless ILCs are the rage right now.. difficult to hype a hype any hyper than mirrorless has been hyped. And thus there is such a demand that it would be almost crazy not to launch something to grab all the money waving in the air.

I don't expect this to be a big serious camera though along the lines of a D750/810/D5. I'm guessing more along the lines of Canon M6.. maybe with an EVF. More or less a testbed for sale. If it works out then great, all aboard. If not then easier to jettison the project and stick with known profitable ventures.

[surfar]

to hype a hype any hyper than mirrorless has been hyped

You forgot the Hyp(h)en!