Re: Dpreview comparos of Nikon V1 looks...not good

Discussion in 'Digital Photography' started by Bruce, Oct 15, 2011.

  1. Bruce

    Bruce Guest

    Rich <> wrote:
    >Compared to any of the other mirror-less cameras (apart from the diminutive
    >Pentax which has produced some very erratic quality in sample images) the
    >Nikon comes up somewhat short. However, if people like a solid product, I
    >handled the V1 and found it to be as solid as the old Panasonic GF1. The
    >freakish thing was seeing small, pricey PINK lenses that are available for
    >the cheaper model Nikon.



    But the pink lenses will fit either the J1 or the V1, as they have the
    same mount. ;-)

    You say you like the solid build of the V1, I say it looks ineptly
    designed (who on earth signed off that EVF "bulge"?) and the finish is
    cheap. I was particularly disappointed by the poor quality of the
    Nikon branding, "1" and "V1" on the front of the camera, the engraving
    on the lens and the flimsy four way control pad.

    However, the one I handled was a pre-production sample, so it might be
    that the final version could be better, except for the EVF bulge. ;-)
    Bruce, Oct 15, 2011
    #1
    1. Advertising

  2. Bruce

    RichA Guest

    On Oct 15, 5:49 am, Bruce <> wrote:
    > Rich <> wrote:
    > >Compared to any of the other mirror-less cameras (apart from the diminutive
    > >Pentax which has produced some very erratic quality in sample images) the
    > >Nikon comes up somewhat short.  However, if people like a solid product, I
    > >handled the V1 and found it to be as solid as the old Panasonic GF1.  The
    > >freakish thing was seeing small, pricey PINK lenses that are available for
    > >the cheaper model Nikon.

    >
    > But the pink lenses will fit either the J1 or the V1, as they have the
    > same mount.  ;-)
    >
    > You say you like the solid build of the V1, I say it looks ineptly
    > designed (who on earth signed off that EVF "bulge"?) and the finish is
    > cheap.  I was particularly disappointed by the poor quality of the
    > Nikon branding, "1" and "V1" on the front of the camera, the engraving
    > on the lens and the flimsy four way control pad.
    >
    > However, the one I handled was a pre-production sample, so it might be
    > that the final version could be better, except for the EVF bulge.  ;-)


    The word, "minimalist" is going to appear in regard to the Nikon. One
    of the Nikon reps was very incensed that people out there have already
    consigned it to the waste bin, saying it will fit two markets very
    well, those with DSLR's needing a high-quality back-up and those
    migrating from P&S's who don't want DSLR's. We'll see...
    RichA, Oct 15, 2011
    #2
    1. Advertising

  3. Bruce

    Bruce Guest

    RichA <> wrote:
    >On Oct 15, 5:49 am, Bruce <> wrote:
    >> Rich <> wrote:
    >> >Compared to any of the other mirror-less cameras (apart from the diminutive
    >> >Pentax which has produced some very erratic quality in sample images) the
    >> >Nikon comes up somewhat short.  However, if people like a solid product, I
    >> >handled the V1 and found it to be as solid as the old Panasonic GF1.  The
    >> >freakish thing was seeing small, pricey PINK lenses that are available for
    >> >the cheaper model Nikon.

    >>
    >> But the pink lenses will fit either the J1 or the V1, as they have the
    >> same mount.  ;-)
    >>
    >> You say you like the solid build of the V1, I say it looks ineptly
    >> designed (who on earth signed off that EVF "bulge"?) and the finish is
    >> cheap.  I was particularly disappointed by the poor quality of the
    >> Nikon branding, "1" and "V1" on the front of the camera, the engraving
    >> on the lens and the flimsy four way control pad.
    >>
    >> However, the one I handled was a pre-production sample, so it might be
    >> that the final version could be better, except for the EVF bulge.  ;-)

    >
    >The word, "minimalist" is going to appear in regard to the Nikon. One
    >of the Nikon reps was very incensed that people out there have already
    >consigned it to the waste bin, saying it will fit two markets very
    >well, those with DSLR's needing a high-quality back-up and those
    >migrating from P&S's who don't want DSLR's. We'll see...



    An incensed Nikon rep? We've had exactly the same reaction here.
    Dealers are very critical of the product because of its small sensor
    and low pixel count (combining to give disappointing performance) and
    the ridiculously high price.

    The Nikon reps are *very* defensive. They have been well briefed and
    all chant the same mantra: "It isn't about the sensor size, and it
    isn't about the pixel count. It's about the performance."

    Yes, the camera has stunning AF performance. Yes, it can shoot 60
    frames per second. Yes, the lenses have very effective VR. But while
    these features are welcome, the problem is the market positioning.

    Nikon thinks the 1 System is a masterstroke because it opens up a new
    market between p+s/superzoom at one end and DSLR at the other, without
    overlapping with either. They are really, really pleased with
    themselves. Dealers, on the other hand, are scratching their heads
    wondering how to market a system that, in terms of image quality,
    seems to fall short of Four Thirds and definitely well short of NEX.

    But who knows? Nikon may be right and the dealers wrong. The dealers
    are very keen to sell them, they just aren't sure who to, and how.
    Bruce, Oct 15, 2011
    #3
  4. Bruce

    Robert Coe Guest

    On Sat, 15 Oct 2011 09:53:29 -0700 (PDT), RichA <> wrote:
    : On Oct 15, 5:49 am, Bruce <> wrote:
    : > Rich <> wrote:
    : > >Compared to any of the other mirror-less cameras (apart from the diminutive
    : > >Pentax which has produced some very erratic quality in sample images) the
    : > >Nikon comes up somewhat short.  However, if people like a solid product, I
    : > >handled the V1 and found it to be as solid as the old Panasonic GF1.  The
    : > >freakish thing was seeing small, pricey PINK lenses that are available for
    : > >the cheaper model Nikon.
    : >
    : > But the pink lenses will fit either the J1 or the V1, as they have the
    : > same mount.  ;-)
    : >
    : > You say you like the solid build of the V1, I say it looks ineptly
    : > designed (who on earth signed off that EVF "bulge"?) and the finish is
    : > cheap.  I was particularly disappointed by the poor quality of the
    : > Nikon branding, "1" and "V1" on the front of the camera, the engraving
    : > on the lens and the flimsy four way control pad.
    : >
    : > However, the one I handled was a pre-production sample, so it might be
    : > that the final version could be better, except for the EVF bulge.  ;-)
    :
    : The word, "minimalist" is going to appear in regard to the Nikon. One
    : of the Nikon reps was very incensed that people out there have already
    : consigned it to the waste bin, saying it will fit two markets very
    : well, those with DSLR's needing a high-quality back-up and those
    : migrating from P&S's who don't want DSLR's. We'll see...

    What DSLR user wants a backup camera that won't take the same lenses as his
    primary camera? For that matter, who's going to actually buy a new backup
    camera? Doesn't everyone use one of his old cameras as a backup?

    Bob
    Robert Coe, Oct 15, 2011
    #4
  5. Bruce

    Bruce Guest

    Robert Coe <> wrote:

    >What DSLR user wants a backup camera that won't take the same lenses as his
    >primary camera?



    My backup camera won't take any of my Nikon lenses. It is a Canon
    Powershot G9.

    The Powershot G Series sells in very large numbers to DSLR users who
    want a backup camera.
    Bruce, Oct 15, 2011
    #5
  6. Bruce

    Robert Coe Guest

    On Sat, 15 Oct 2011 15:51:25 -0700, Savageduck
    <savageduck1@{REMOVESPAM}me.com> wrote:
    : On 2011-10-15 14:11:29 -0700, Bruce <> said:
    :
    : > Robert Coe <> wrote:
    : >
    : >> What DSLR user wants a backup camera that won't take the same lenses
    : >> as his primary camera?
    : >
    : >
    : > My backup camera won't take any of my Nikon lenses. It is a Canon
    : > Powershot G9.
    : >
    : > The Powershot G Series sells in very large numbers to DSLR users who
    : > want a backup camera.
    :
    : My digital bag looks something like this; Nikon D300s "workhorse DSLR",
    : Canon G11 "something compact when I need it", Nikon D70, "lifeboat
    : DSLR". ...

    The disconnect between Bruce's opinion and mine may be a matter of
    terminology. To me, the D70 is your backup camera, since it backs up your
    D300s. Your G11 serves a different purpose, which I wouldn't call "backup". If
    the G9 really is, by my definition, Bruce's backup camera, I suspect it's
    because he's eyeing a camera that doesn't exist yet, such as the putative
    D800. Most serious photographers (and the evidence suggests that Bruce is one)
    wouldn't dream of being without a second camera that accepts their preferred
    lenses.

    : I had seriously considered getting a D700, but the funds have been
    : spent on other stuff.
    : :-(
    : Now I am still weighing my pro & con points for moving to FF. and I am
    : finding fewer and fewer personal pros at this stage. The D300s does
    : fine for 19x13 prints (even the D70 let me print some decent 19x13's),
    : and I don't do that much low light shooting. Well, not another $2K
    : worth of low light shooting.
    :
    : Sigh! Maybe next year.

    My thinking pretty much mirrors yours. I maintain a FF wish list at B&H, but
    it's almost entirely hypothetical. It would cost me more than $8000 to
    implement it, and every rationale I've come up with to spend that kind of
    money is unconvincing.

    We recently made up a large print of one of Martha's pictures to give as a
    wedding present, and it came out great. After it was done, I was surprised to
    notice that the picture had been taken not with her 18MP T2i, but with her old
    10MP XTi. The experience did nothing to persuade me that my own 15 and 18MP
    cameras are insufficiently large.

    As you say, maybe next year (or the year after). :^)

    Bob
    Robert Coe, Oct 16, 2011
    #6
  7. Bruce

    Trevor Guest

    "RichA" <> wrote in message
    news:...
    >One of the Nikon reps was very incensed that people out there
    >have already consigned it to the waste bin, saying it will fit two
    > markets very well, those with DSLR's needing a high-quality
    >back-up and those migrating from P&S's who don't want DSLR's.


    Or more likely NOT fit either very well at all!

    Trevor.
    Trevor, Oct 16, 2011
    #7
  8. Bruce

    Bruce Guest

    "Dudley Hanks" <> wrote:
    >"Bruce" <> wrote in message
    >news:...
    >> Robert Coe <> wrote:
    >>
    >>>What DSLR user wants a backup camera that won't take the same lenses as
    >>>his
    >>>primary camera?

    >>
    >>
    >> My backup camera won't take any of my Nikon lenses. It is a Canon
    >> Powershot G9.
    >>
    >> The Powershot G Series sells in very large numbers to DSLR users who
    >> want a backup camera.
    >>

    >
    >Usually, a backup cam would be something that resembles somewhat one's
    >primary cam, both in image quality and performance, something like a 7D
    >backing-up a 5D2, or something similar.



    That's a matter of personal choice, Dudley. Tastes differ.

    I own four DSLR bodies, a Nikon D3, a Nikon D7000, a Kodak DCS Pro 14n
    and a Hasselblad H3D-39. I use them all for different purposes. The
    D3 is great for high ISOs, the Kodak is incomparably good in the
    studio and at low ISOs, the D7000 gives my telephoto lenses extra
    reach when needed and the Hasselblad fulfils the requirements of a
    3-year contract with a real estate agent.

    To some extent, they all back up each other but at the same time, they
    have a near equal part to play. The backup to all of these is the
    Canon Powershot G9. I don't leave home without it.

    It is soon to be replaced with a very similar Nikon Coolpix P7100
    because of its significantly lower noise at medium ISOs and a 28-200mm
    (equivalent) lens rather than the G9's 35-200mm.


    >To me, the G-series cams would be more like the tool of last resort if the
    >DSLRs were left behind, stolen or killed by some sort of unholy disaster...
    >:)
    >
    >That's the part my SX120IS plays...



    My G9 is a long way from being a tool of last resort. I sell news
    images to local, regional and sometimes national newspapers, and the
    majority of these are taken with the G9. So it isn't just a backup,
    it is the camera that I would never want to be without.

    Or, to be more precise, its D7100 replacement will be the camera that
    I will never want to be without. ;-)
    Bruce, Oct 16, 2011
    #8
  9. Bruce

    Bruce Guest

    Savageduck <savageduck1@{REMOVESPAM}me.com> wrote:
    >
    >My digital bag looks something like this; Nikon D300s "workhorse DSLR",
    >Canon G11 "something compact when I need it", Nikon D70, "lifeboat
    >DSLR".
    >...and I also have a FujiFilm E900, which does as good a job with IQ as
    >the G11, but has a pretty kludgy PIA menu system.
    >
    >I had seriously considered getting a D700, but the funds have been
    >spent on other stuff.
    >:-(
    >Now I am still weighing my pro & con points for moving to FF. and I am
    >finding fewer and fewer personal pros at this stage. The D300s does
    >fine for 19x13 prints (even the D70 let me print some decent 19x13's),
    >and I don't do that much low light shooting. Well, not another $2K
    >worth of low light shooting.
    >
    >Sigh! Maybe next year.



    When the new Nikon DSLRs arrive, and at least one is imminent, you
    will see a rush to the new models and there will be a lot of used D700
    bodies available. Used prices will drop significantly.

    But if you don't need one, you don't need one. ;-)
    Bruce, Oct 16, 2011
    #9
  10. Bruce

    Bruce Guest

    Robert Coe <> wrote:
    >The disconnect between Bruce's opinion and mine may be a matter of
    >terminology. To me, the D70 is your backup camera, since it backs up your
    >D300s. Your G11 serves a different purpose, which I wouldn't call "backup". If
    >the G9 really is, by my definition, Bruce's backup camera, I suspect it's
    >because he's eyeing a camera that doesn't exist yet, such as the putative
    >D800. Most serious photographers (and the evidence suggests that Bruce is one)
    >wouldn't dream of being without a second camera that accepts their preferred
    >lenses.



    My reply to Dudley explains all. Please read. ;-)
    Bruce, Oct 16, 2011
    #10
  11. Bruce

    Bruce Guest

    Rich <> wrote:

    >Bruce <> wrote in
    >news::
    >
    >> Robert Coe <> wrote:
    >>
    >>>What DSLR user wants a backup camera that won't take the same lenses
    >>>as his primary camera?

    >>
    >>
    >> My backup camera won't take any of my Nikon lenses. It is a Canon
    >> Powershot G9.
    >>
    >> The Powershot G Series sells in very large numbers to DSLR users who
    >> want a backup camera.
    >>
    >>

    >
    >Two people I met yesterday are replacing a G11 and an LX5 with the X10
    >Fuji.



    Why? Because it's new?

    They cannot have the faintest idea about how it will perform. It is
    quite a risk buying something that is new, untried, untested and, as
    far as I know, has not yet been reviewed - but do correct me if I'm
    wrong.
    Bruce, Oct 16, 2011
    #11
  12. Bruce

    Bruce Guest

    "Trevor" <> wrote:
    >"RichA" <> wrote in message
    >news:...
    >>One of the Nikon reps was very incensed that people out there
    >>have already consigned it to the waste bin, saying it will fit two
    >> markets very well, those with DSLR's needing a high-quality
    >>back-up and those migrating from P&S's who don't want DSLR's.

    >
    >Or more likely NOT fit either very well at all!



    That is the difficulty of creating a new market. No-one knows whether
    the camera will fit this market because, currently, the market does
    not exist.

    People are currently buying cameras that sit below this market
    (p+s/superzoom) and above (4/3 and APS-C mirrorless CSCs). Further
    above, there are DSLRs. Further below, there are smartphones. But
    Nikon believes that there is a gap in the middle, one that presents a
    new opportunity.

    Who am I to argue? I don't deny that there is a gap, but I do wonder
    whether there is really a market for a system with such a small sensor
    and only 10 MP. Time alone will tell, and I haven't the faintest idea
    whether Nikon's gamble will pay off. But that doesn't worry me
    because I can probably sell, to every customer who decides not to buy
    a Nikon J1 or V1, a camera that they will probably be a lot happier
    with.
    Bruce, Oct 16, 2011
    #12
  13. Bruce

    Bruce Guest

    "Neil Harrington" <> wrote:
    >Rich wrote:
    >> Two people I met yesterday are replacing a G11 and an LX5 with the X10
    >> Fuji.

    >
    >Now that X10 is a very appealing looking camera. And the return to a 2/3"
    >sensor is sort of interesting. Haven't seen that size sensor since the
    >Coolpix 8400, 8800, and the Minolta DiMAGE 7 family of cameras.



    Olympus also used that sensor size in their early E Series DSLRs. Not
    the E-1, which was of course Four Thirds, but the E-10 and E-20 DSLRs
    with non-interchangeable zoom lenses. They seem almost quaint now.
    Bruce, Oct 16, 2011
    #13
  14. Bruce

    Bruce Guest

    "Neil Harrington" <> wrote:
    >Bruce wrote:
    >> Nikon thinks the 1 System is a masterstroke because it opens up a new
    >> market between p+s/superzoom at one end and DSLR at the other, without
    >> overlapping with either.

    >
    >That it does, but why they believe prospective customers will be interested
    >in such a new market opening up is sure a mystery to me. It seems sort of
    >like marketing a new eating implement, between a teaspoon and a tablespoon.
    >You'd have to believe a lot of people would be thrilled at the idea of
    >having such an intermediate spoon.



    I'm glad I wasn't drinking coffee when I read that! I would have
    needed yet another new keyboard ...

    But you are exactly right.


    >> They are really, really pleased with
    >> themselves. Dealers, on the other hand, are scratching their heads
    >> wondering how to market a system that, in terms of image quality,
    >> seems to fall short of Four Thirds and definitely well short of NEX.

    >
    >I think the dealers are right on this one.
    >
    >>
    >> But who knows? Nikon may be right and the dealers wrong. The dealers
    >> are very keen to sell them, they just aren't sure who to, and how.

    >
    >It will be interesting to see how this all works out, but my guess is the
    >Nikon 1 will turn out to be the Nikon Pronea, 2011 version. (At least there
    >was an existing market for that one, nonsensical and short-lived though it
    >was.)
    >
    >And to think I waited all these months with such intense interest to see
    >what Nikon's ILC would be like. Bah.



    You are in good company. Every weekend (and some weekdays) since
    Nikon announced the 1 System cameras and lenses, we have had Nikon
    users coming in to the stores asking:

    1. Are they a joke?
    2. Do we think anyone will buy them?
    3. When will Nikon bring out a "real" mirrorless CSC with DX sensor?

    Having said that, we do have some advance orders. ;-)
    Bruce, Oct 16, 2011
    #14
  15. Re: was considering new Nikon but ....

    I was in the market for a camera to replace my Sony A300 DSLR. In my
    case I wanted something smaller and lighter than the 'standard' 35mm
    sized DSLR, something that would be more likely not to be left behind.
    You know the old adage that "the best camera is one you're likely to
    use". I had bought the Sony as a trade in for my old Nikon FE/FA
    cameras and lenses after discovering digital in the form of an Olympus
    C5050. But although the Sony isn't the largest and heaviest thing in
    the world (it's more portable with the two lenses and flash, 18-70 and
    75-300 than my bag full of Nikon and single FL lenses were) the LP
    Rizo-180 bag to fit it all was still a handful.

    So to make a long story short I wanted to get some sort of 'EVIL'
    compact. Most likely a 4/3's, and I had narrowed the short list down to
    a Panny G3 or GH2, or an Oly P-E3. Then I saw the Nikon announcement
    and really wanted to wait and see what the reviews had to say about it.
    Since I didn't think I could live without the EVF (which meant
    factoring in the price of the EV2 for the P-E3) it was obvious that the
    Nikon V1 and the P-E3 were in the same price class. Given Nikon's
    better software in their other cameras, it's possible that the two of
    these will end up with similar IQ (maybe not if the latest sample pix
    are valid).

    I've just pulled the switch and purchased a Panny G3. It does what I
    want, it's got decent IQ (for me anyway), shoots HD video, and is
    small/light enough to not be left behind. I wish the battery life were
    longer (so factor in another $60 for a second battery) and it's still
    not a 'pocket' camera (but NO ILC is, not even the Nikon). With the
    money I saved I can afford a matching flash and a tele-zoom. I know
    I'll have the occasional regrets about the 'better' GH2 or the Nikon,
    but u4/3 has proved itself while the Nikon 1 system may end up being an
    Edsel (here today gone tomorrow), and I wanted to get SOMETHING this year.

    On 10/15/2011 05:49 AM, Bruce wrote:
    > Rich<> wrote:
    >> Compared to any of the other mirror-less cameras (apart from the diminutive
    >> Pentax which has produced some very erratic quality in sample images) the
    >> Nikon comes up somewhat short. However, if people like a solid product, I
    >> handled the V1 and found it to be as solid as the old Panasonic GF1. The
    >> freakish thing was seeing small, pricey PINK lenses that are available for
    >> the cheaper model Nikon.

    >
    >
    > But the pink lenses will fit either the J1 or the V1, as they have the
    > same mount. ;-)
    >
    > You say you like the solid build of the V1, I say it looks ineptly
    > designed (who on earth signed off that EVF "bulge"?) and the finish is
    > cheap. I was particularly disappointed by the poor quality of the
    > Nikon branding, "1" and "V1" on the front of the camera, the engraving
    > on the lens and the flimsy four way control pad.
    >
    > However, the one I handled was a pre-production sample, so it might be
    > that the final version could be better, except for the EVF bulge. ;-)
    Kenneth Scharf, Oct 17, 2011
    #15
  16. Bruce

    Trevor Guest

    "Bruce" <> wrote in message
    news:...
    > That is the difficulty of creating a new market. No-one knows whether
    > the camera will fit this market because, currently, the market does
    > not exist.
    > People are currently buying cameras that sit below this market
    > (p+s/superzoom) and above (4/3 and APS-C mirrorless CSCs). Further
    > above, there are DSLRs. Further below, there are smartphones. But
    > Nikon believes that there is a gap in the middle, one that presents a
    > new opportunity.
    >
    > Who am I to argue? I don't deny that there is a gap, but I do wonder
    > whether there is really a market for a system with such a small sensor
    > and only 10 MP. Time alone will tell, and I haven't the faintest idea
    > whether Nikon's gamble will pay off. But that doesn't worry me
    > because I can probably sell, to every customer who decides not to buy
    > a Nikon J1 or V1, a camera that they will probably be a lot happier
    > with.



    There is no question a market could be created for the camera, the
    disagreement I and many others have is that Nikon can sell enough to satisfy
    Nikon, at the price suggested. And I agree that it will be easier to sell
    other camera's that people will be happier with, and most of them cost less.

    Trevor.
    Trevor, Oct 17, 2011
    #16
  17. Bruce

    MG Guest

    Re: was considering new Nikon but ....

    "Kenneth Scharf" <> wrote in message
    news:j7fpb1$t5l$...
    >I was in the market for a camera to replace my Sony A300 DSLR. In my case
    >I wanted something smaller and lighter than the 'standard' 35mm sized DSLR,
    >something that would be more likely not to be left behind.


    I was thinking of buying a superzoom. Canon SX30, Nikon P500, Panasonic
    FZ47/48. I thought I would wait to see what the Nikon mirrorless had to
    offer. Maybe I could get a "superzoom" with a much larger sensor than the
    real superzooms.

    But the flash and viewfinder is an either or choice. I can't have both. And
    the price is far too high. $350 for the superzoom, $1150 for the V1 and 2
    lenses.

    So I am back to considering a superzoom.

    MG
    MG, Oct 17, 2011
    #17
  18. Bruce

    Bruce Guest

    "Neil Harrington" <> wrote:
    >Bruce wrote:
    >> You are in good company. Every weekend (and some weekdays) since
    >> Nikon announced the 1 System cameras and lenses, we have had Nikon
    >> users coming in to the stores asking:
    >>
    >> 1. Are they a joke?
    >> 2. Do we think anyone will buy them?
    >> 3. When will Nikon bring out a "real" mirrorless CSC with DX sensor?
    >>
    >> Having said that, we do have some advance orders. ;-)

    >
    >I'd be interested to hear how your customers like 'em when they've got 'em.



    I will let you know. ;-)

    I had some product training on the V1/J1 today. It was interesting,
    but not particularly informative. Nikon is sticking to its story
    about the sensor size and pixel count not being important, and that
    the frames/per second and fastest-ever AF are what matters. Huh.

    An online photo magazine has reported the claim of a marketing manager
    with Nikon UK that the 'megapixel race' ended "years ago" with the
    introduction of the Nikon D3s. Note that he is not talking about the
    24 MP D3X, but the 12 MP D3s:

    http://preview.tinyurl.com/65z26xa
    or:
    http://www.ephotozine.com/article/nikon-uk-say-the-megapixel-race-ended-years-ago-17608

    Back in April 2011, Nikon UK was claiming that the company didn't need
    a mirrorless CSC in its range. Then along came the 1 System. What a
    surprise that must have been!

    http://preview.tinyurl.com/3jhxuef
    or:
    http://www.amateurphotographer.co.u..._about_compact_system_camera_news_306661.html

    A few weeks from now, someone from Nikon UK will no doubt express his
    personal opinion about the new Nikon 36 MP DSLR. I'm sure his words
    will carry about as much value as his colleagues' have previously. In
    other words, not a lot. ;-)
    Bruce, Oct 17, 2011
    #18
  19. Bruce

    Bruce Guest

    "Trevor" <> wrote:
    >"Bruce" <> wrote in message
    >news:...
    >> That is the difficulty of creating a new market. No-one knows whether
    >> the camera will fit this market because, currently, the market does
    >> not exist.
    >> People are currently buying cameras that sit below this market
    >> (p+s/superzoom) and above (4/3 and APS-C mirrorless CSCs). Further
    >> above, there are DSLRs. Further below, there are smartphones. But
    >> Nikon believes that there is a gap in the middle, one that presents a
    >> new opportunity.
    >>
    >> Who am I to argue? I don't deny that there is a gap, but I do wonder
    >> whether there is really a market for a system with such a small sensor
    >> and only 10 MP. Time alone will tell, and I haven't the faintest idea
    >> whether Nikon's gamble will pay off. But that doesn't worry me
    >> because I can probably sell, to every customer who decides not to buy
    >> a Nikon J1 or V1, a camera that they will probably be a lot happier
    >> with.

    >
    >
    >There is no question a market could be created for the camera, the
    >disagreement I and many others have is that Nikon can sell enough to satisfy
    >Nikon, at the price suggested. And I agree that it will be easier to sell
    >other camera's that people will be happier with, and most of them cost less.



    Thanks, Trevor. That is exactly what I was trying to say, but I tied
    myself up in knots instead. ;-)
    Bruce, Oct 17, 2011
    #19
  20. Bruce

    Bruce Guest

    Re: was considering new Nikon but ....

    Kenneth Scharf <> wrote:
    >On 10/15/2011 05:49 AM, Bruce wrote:
    >> Rich<> wrote:
    >>> Compared to any of the other mirror-less cameras (apart from the diminutive
    >>> Pentax which has produced some very erratic quality in sample images) the
    >>> Nikon comes up somewhat short. However, if people like a solid product, I
    >>> handled the V1 and found it to be as solid as the old Panasonic GF1. The
    >>> freakish thing was seeing small, pricey PINK lenses that are available for
    >>> the cheaper model Nikon.

    >>
    >> But the pink lenses will fit either the J1 or the V1, as they have the
    >> same mount. ;-)
    >> You say you like the solid build of the V1, I say it looks ineptly
    >> designed (who on earth signed off that EVF "bulge"?) and the finish is
    >> cheap. I was particularly disappointed by the poor quality of the
    >> Nikon branding, "1" and "V1" on the front of the camera, the engraving
    >> on the lens and the flimsy four way control pad.
    >> However, the one I handled was a pre-production sample, so it might be
    >> that the final version could be better, except for the EVF bulge. ;-)


    >I was in the market for a camera to replace my Sony A300 DSLR. In my
    >case I wanted something smaller and lighter than the 'standard' 35mm
    >sized DSLR, something that would be more likely not to be left behind.
    >You know the old adage that "the best camera is one you're likely to
    >use". I had bought the Sony as a trade in for my old Nikon FE/FA
    >cameras and lenses after discovering digital in the form of an Olympus
    >C5050. But although the Sony isn't the largest and heaviest thing in
    >the world (it's more portable with the two lenses and flash, 18-70 and
    >75-300 than my bag full of Nikon and single FL lenses were) the LP
    >Rizo-180 bag to fit it all was still a handful.
    >
    >So to make a long story short I wanted to get some sort of 'EVIL'
    >compact. Most likely a 4/3's, and I had narrowed the short list down to
    >a Panny G3 or GH2, or an Oly P-E3. Then I saw the Nikon announcement
    >and really wanted to wait and see what the reviews had to say about it.
    > Since I didn't think I could live without the EVF (which meant
    >factoring in the price of the EV2 for the P-E3) it was obvious that the
    >Nikon V1 and the P-E3 were in the same price class. Given Nikon's
    >better software in their other cameras, it's possible that the two of
    >these will end up with similar IQ (maybe not if the latest sample pix
    >are valid).
    >
    >I've just pulled the switch and purchased a Panny G3. It does what I
    >want, it's got decent IQ (for me anyway), shoots HD video, and is
    >small/light enough to not be left behind. I wish the battery life were
    >longer (so factor in another $60 for a second battery) and it's still
    >not a 'pocket' camera (but NO ILC is, not even the Nikon). With the
    >money I saved I can afford a matching flash and a tele-zoom. I know
    >I'll have the occasional regrets about the 'better' GH2 or the Nikon,
    >but u4/3 has proved itself while the Nikon 1 system may end up being an
    >Edsel (here today gone tomorrow), and I wanted to get SOMETHING this year.



    I think you made a good choice. The G3 is the state of the art in
    Micro Four Thirds. Yes, the GH2 has slightly more pixels but it is
    more ideally suited to video use. The G3 is tiny yet it packs a real
    punch - it is a serious camera in a small package.

    However, what interests me more is why you didn't consider other
    brands, including Sony. Weren't you attracted by the Sony Alpha 35 or
    55? What about the NEX range?

    We have great difficulty selling the Alpha range, but the NEX range
    just flies off the shelves. We have a few disgruntled former Sony and
    Minolta customers who have changed to NEX and many who have changed
    brands altogether. I just wondered what went through your mind before
    you chose to switch brands.


    [P.S. I changed the format of the quoted text to follow the Usenet
    newsgroups convention, where you add your new message at the bottom of
    the quoted ones.]
    Bruce, Oct 17, 2011
    #20
    1. Advertising

Want to reply to this thread or ask your own question?

It takes just 2 minutes to sign up (and it's free!). Just click the sign up button to choose a username and then you can ask your own questions on the forum.
Similar Threads
  1. Annette Kurten

    Gmail, this looks good (NOT SPAM)

    Annette Kurten, Apr 3, 2004, in forum: Computer Support
    Replies:
    4
    Views:
    414
    Blinky the Shark
    Apr 3, 2004
  2. Unk

    The good Lord looks out for me...

    Unk, Oct 1, 2004, in forum: Computer Support
    Replies:
    0
    Views:
    416
  3. Replies:
    4
    Views:
    827
    gunner
    Feb 11, 2007
  4. Leica
    Replies:
    8
    Views:
    330
  5. Collector»NZ

    Now this looks good

    Collector»NZ, Apr 25, 2005, in forum: NZ Computing
    Replies:
    1
    Views:
    329
    Gordon
    Apr 26, 2005
Loading...

Share This Page