Why not stick with Nikon? Nikon has better know-how and manufacturing capabilities to mass produce more types of lenses over Sony. I have no doubt Nikon will catch up quickly. Also third party manufacturers can most likely port their lenses to the new mount similar to how they've done native lenses for Sony.Sony, Here I come!!
Was just stirring the pot but then, there a grain of truth is there.Why not stick with Nikon?
Honestly, though....I speak a lot about diminishing returns on the size of camera bodies. There is a lot of speak about smaller sizes...but depending on your physical make up, a camera the size of the Pentax Q is out of the question for many. I find for me, personally, that the Olympus EM5 size body is about as small as I want to go with a smaller body, especially if you have a lens of any substance to it.I think Nikon had a difficult choice in the lens mount decision for its new mirrorless bodies. I cannot imagine that they would not permit the use of existing F-Mount lenses, but putting an F-Mount in the new mirrorless body creates two problems.
If the camera register distance is suitable for F-Mount lenses the mirrorless body will be as big as a DSLR. That eliminates customers who are looking for a smaller body to complement their current DSLR.
If the register distance is shorter, F-Mount lenses will mount but be unable to create an in-focus image on the sensor. I can imagine the internet reports by purchasers who complain that their lenses all work fine on their other bodies, but only produce blurry images on Nikon's new mirrorless body.
So a new mount is necessary if Nikon is to produce a competitive product. I expect the F-Mount adapter for it will be more capable than the one for the Nikon 1 series cameras, which supported autofocus and VR on AF-S F-Mount lenses. It remains to be seen if it will support autofocus with AF-D (screwdriver) lenses, but that is certainly feasible since some teleconverters have that capability.
So I expect to see a new Nikon mirrorless body that works as well with my F-Mount AF-S lenses as my current DSLRs. This gives me an EVF body for those situations where an EVF is the better choice without having to buy into a different system.
I think that analogy does not fit. I cannot think of an instance where I would want the performance of a carburetor rather than that of fuel injection. I can think of instances where I would prefer an optical viewfinder over an electronic one.So could one make an analogy between a mirrorless camera vs a DSLR and a computer controlled fuel injection system vs a carburetor?