What to expect from Nikon early next year (2016)

[wornish]

Good point ... one of the big advantages of mirrorless is the reduced size/weight, so having a smaller sensor size means being able to have smaller everything else ... frame, glass, etc.

That's where I get confused on the "full frame mirrorless" market like what Sony has ... if the sensor is full frame and a set size, don't the rest of the optics then dictate to an extent lens and camera size? Understand that some features like VC can be implemented in the body rather than the lens, like current DSLRs do, but it still seems to me that the overall package size wouldn't decrease significantly. Maybe the camera frame would, but glass too?

You are correct. Its physics the lenses for an FF sensor are the same size. The weight benefit of Full Frame mirrorless is lost once you attach glass. Many of the Sony lenses released for mirrorless are equal or in some cases heavier than the equivalent Nikon. The other thing in having too light a body is the camera system feels unbalanced when you have a tele lens attached.

The weight argument only works if you use smaller sensor and smaller glass. There are however other benefits that mirrorless brings like you said IBIS and focus peaking, silent shutter.

 

[Eduard]

As mirrorless IQ evolves and improves, the size/weight factor becomes more of a consideration IMHO. I am constantly "wowed" by my D800E. I am equally happy, in the right circumstance (and usually with the 70-300 CX) by what the V2 can do. I have a trip planned next spring where I can not bring the D800E which will include spectacular locations in probably a once-in-a-lifetime visit hence the X-T1 because of size and weight.

Here are the bodies and my most used lenses: X-T1 and 18-55mm (27-84mm FX equiv), D800E and Tamron 24-70mm, V2 and 10-100mm (27-270mm FX equiv).



Not all that different from this angle, but carrying them is a different matter. Now compare these screen snips from CameraSize.com and the difference is telling.



(The site only had the Nikon not Tamron 24-70mm and the Nikon 10-30mm instead of the 10-100mm non-PD for comparison so it isn't equal to the image of my actual cameras. The 10-30mm on the V2 is equivalent to 27-81mm on FX - nearly the same as the Fuji 18-55mm.)



Nikon has some hard decisions regarding mirrorless and lens mounts - especially if they go down the FX mirrorless road.

 

[RocketCowboy]

The weight argument only works if you use smaller sensor and smaller glass. There are however other benefits that mirrorless brings like you said IBIS and focus peaking, silent shutter.

Thanks for validating that I'm not completely crazy. I know there are other benefits to mirrorless than just the weight, so those benefits may make the difference to some that are on the fence.