Is that the first image of the Nikon mirrorless camera mount and sensor?


An unknown source from the chinese forum XITEK (Click here) posted the first image of the X810 Nikon mirrorless camera. As previously rumored the sensor is relatively small (1/2.33 inch?). A wonder if it really uses the same Pentax Q sensor!

  • Frosti7


  • Chlau

    Nikon tapping the kawaii market too?

  • nobody

    As discussed on NikonRumors, this will likely have a ~2.6 crop sensor. That is about 4 times as large as the Pentax Q sensor.

    • agent00soul

      It looks a bit small for that, unless the mount is huge (but why?).

      • BornOptimist

        The mount has the same size as m43. It also looks a lot like m43 mount, but the contacts are positioned slightly different.
        And the sensor is a 2.7-2.8x, not a 1/2.33″ sensor

      • MJr

        It’s not small, just not big. This is definitely something like 2.5x crop.

        Look how the Pentax Q sensor looks between its mount, and see what really is ‘small’.

  • lda

    Looks like it shares the same mount with Pentax Q, but Nikon’s sensor is obviously larger.

  • JesperMP

    I agree that it is not a 1/2.3″ sensor but more likely somewhere between 1/1.7″ and m43.

    I think that is a sweet spot to be in.
    It is perfect for video, and still “good enough” for still photography.
    And there are nobody else of the big players with this sensor size, so Nikon has it for themselves.
    The big mount, maybe so that huge tele lenses can be mounted ?
    Maybe the picture is a video camera ?

  • wish

    Nikon can’t make a decent camera, even if it hits them in the face. Canon all the way.

    • Narretz

      Are you the Pablo of this website?

  • Bobby

    I think a sensor of the mooted size would fill a gap, and that in the years to come such a sensor size could be capable of some really impressive results, but the mount seems huge compared to the sensor- how small would the lenses be capable of being? Some m43 and NEX bodies are plenty small enough as they are, and if the lenses aren’t hugely smaller then what’s the point of the new system?

    I’d also be worried that Nikon would expend less resources on this system than it could in order to protect its entry-level DSLR market.

  • Nathan

    2.5 crop factor is still very useful. Think about all of the C-mount lenses people can fool around with on this without vignetting- and video from this sensor and a fast video lens will look cool. If this little camera can do 1080p/60 and 1080p/24 with no rolling shutter, they’ll sell a billion of them.

    give me a 17mm f1.2 on this and I’ll be happy.

    Sure, people can cry about the small sensor, but I’ve been shooting on smaller than APS-C for years, and getting good results with fast lenses.

    • Maley

      Seeing how “fast” the Q-lenses are I doubt they release a 17mm f1.2.

  • slaven

    Supposing sensor size Compared to the PentaxQ:

  • Jojo

    Nikon have been condemned for this by many on various sites, but I am going to suggest this could become a market leading design. (Pause for effect, even mocking laughter….)

    Many are disappointed after expecting Nikon to take on existing mirrorless systems, but they are obviously thinking in a different direction. I too am a little disappointed; I would love a NEX sized compact (with EVF fixed, add on, or fold up) that would focus AF-S lenses via an adapter, but Nikon are clearly going elsewhere.

    Many market analyses have predicted the demise of the current P&S market as mobile phone cameras continue to eat away at it. Obviously Nikon will lose out if/when that happens, they must have thought seriously about this problem. Perhaps they are looking to create somewhere for those P&S shooters to go (at least that portion interested in photography) by developing what we could call a High End P&S market – “Super P.Sh”. Essentially appealing to those who would use a compact, but providing the extra USP of interchangeable lenses and a small “system”. Olympus and Panasonic seem to be aiming at a similar target market, but m43 will only work here with their pancake lenses. A G3 with standard kit zoom may shave something off the D3100 equivalent, but is still a strap over the shoulder or put it in a bag type of camera – it’s very slightly smaller, lighter but the difference is not really significant. Even the GF3/EPM1 are no longer particularly small once you fit the standard zoom.

    Years ago the Olympus 43 system was hampered by not providing a significant reduction in size despite the smaller sensor. Today Sony, Olympus and Panasonic are demonstrating cameras can be as compact as you like, but APS-C and even m43 do not really allow for correspondingly smaller lenses. Perhaps Nikon’s CSC will provide a better mix of balanced compactness with good enough quality, which the Pentax Q will not. The history of photography/equipment is full of “smaller but good enough”. Most of the target market will never want to print bigger than A4, many will never actually print a picture. I have read posts on NR saying 12MP is enough, my D300 produces 1st class 40 inch prints, etc. A 12/14MP 2.7 crop camera will likely produce A4 prints of a higher standard! Many enthusiasts use so called high end compacts when they want a small camera (LX5,ZX1,S95,etc), this new Nikon will provide better quality. It will be bought by some P.Sh upgraders, some enthusiasts. I believe it could create a new market niche in coming years and help Nikon to hold on to some of the “disappearing” P and Sh market.

    Obviously, it’s not an F mount, will there be an F mount adapter? Yes, hopefully providing AF with FA-S lenses. Although most F mount lenses will not be very useful on the format, think of the marketing potential/cachet of tapping into the world’s best known “Professional” camera name and system. The 35/50mm AF-S 1.8 lenses would be good shorter telephotos, but forget wideangles for obvious reasons. Will it be a professional camera? No, but some pros will use it. Some for its compactness. I would imagine every user of the 200mm f2 lens will buy one, if only for the experience of trying a 500mm f2! An 800mm f2.8 would have its uses also.

    So while some of you may agree with the Glaswegian who says “this is pish”, perhaps we should think more in terms of “Super P*sh”…..

  • Kostas

    What do you think is a 2.5-2.7x, or a 1/2.33″ sensor?

    I would like 2,7 . I think is the best compromise between (lens) size and image quality

    Sorry for my English

By continuing to use the site, you agree to the use of cookies. more information

The cookie settings on this website are set to "allow cookies" to give you the best browsing experience possible. If you continue to use this website without changing your cookie settings or you click "Accept" below then you are consenting to this.

What are Cookies?
A cookie is a small file of letters and numbers that is stored in a temporary location on your computer to allow our website to distinguish you from other users of the website. If you don't want to accept cookies, you'll still be able to browse the site and use it for research purposes. Most web browsers have cookies enabled, but at the bottom of this page you can see how to disable cookies. Please note that cookies can't harm your computer. We don't store personally identifiable information in the cookies, but we do use encrypted information gathered from them to help provide you with a good experience when you browse our website and also allow us to improve our site. You can watch a simple video from Google to find more information about cookies.

Cookies used by our Website
The Mirrorlessrumors website,, uses the following cookies for the collection of website usage statistics and to ensure that we can . These are anonymous and temporary. By using our website, you agree that we may place these types of cookies on your device.
Read how Google uses data when you use our partners' sites or apps:
Google Analytics Cookie Usage on Websites: Addthis cookies:
Disqus cookies:
Vimeo cookies:
Youtube cookies:

Disabling/Enabling Cookies
You have the ability to accept or decline cookies by modifying the settings in your browser. Please note however that by deleting our cookies or disabling future cookies you may not be able to access certain areas or features of our site. For information about how to disable cookies in your browser please visit the About Cookies website.