I agree that the initial pricing of the 1 series was a mistake. However, at the moment on Amazon UK you can get the V1 twin lens kit for only £70 more than RX100 (discounted). I think that once they bring out an UWA lens for the 1 series to go with their mid range and telephoto lenses they'll have a great, compact travel camera system.
I think EOS M will sell well, just bacause EOS has very strong user base. Many will get one, many will hope to make better use of their (1.6x corp) kit lens and then realised that using those DSLR kit lens doesn't make much sense..
If I use EOS, I will get one too. It would be great for backup/2nd cam when travel. Not everyone need super fast AF all the time. too bad I am not an EOS user and EOS-M isn't full frame.
Nikon 1 is not that bad, but it doesn't really has size advantage over M43 with a pancake zoom.
soupcxan wrote: The Sony RX100 is the nail in the coffin for Nikon's 1-series. Why just the Nikon 1? How about all the other MILC's?
I think that is because Nikon 1 is among the lowest end MILC out there (IQ alone). But maybe RX100 is more a nail for Pentax Q than V1.
No size advantage, no faster lens advantage, no IQ advantage, the only thing that makes Nikon 1 stands out is AF speed.
I do think RX100 makes Nikon 1 's position more difficult. Many mirrorless buyer (move from P&S) just use kit lens. For them, RX100 is probably a better choice.
If you look into the mount of the Nikon 1 camera (V1 or J1), you see the mount is way bigger than the sensor. I think Nikon planned for a future version with DX sensor, using the same mount, much as the F mount works for DX and FX.
Image quality has become quite cheap. Nikon D3200 is a good example. And by extension sensor size.
What photographers demand today is performance and functionality, all in a small discreet package. This demand started the whole m4/3 market and Nikon V1 is a direct competitor to M4/3 cameras. It beats M4/3 cameras in every department except some of the top M4/3 might just do better in higher ISO according to reviews. But the Nikon 1 has a more pleasing look to its images according to some reviewers.
When the rumored D600 is announced, which will be around ~$1500, the high-end market will simply split into FF DSLRs and performance mirrorless compacts. In other words all you need is a D800/D600 and a Nikon V1 or some other mirrorless - but maybe the Nikon owners will go with Nikon 1 and Canon owners with the new canon mirrorless - that's the logical thing with adopters.
For example any AF-S zoom lens becomes a super zoom with Nikon 1, which means instead of carrying the heavy 70-200mm on a huge DSLR, its possible to use a smaller zoom of high quality and with the Ft1 adopter and Nikon 1 you have the same reach in a fraction of weight and cost.
With Nikon V1, FT1 adopter and 70-300mm VR, one has a 189-810mm zoom range with functional AF and VR!
VinnieJ wrote:
Why just the Nikon 1? How about all the other MILC's?
I said the Nikon 1 because it has the smallest sensor size, weakest lineup of native lenses, and is the newest introduction so the smallest established user base. It is a joke of a product line, but it will take Nikon several years to admit it.
The RX100 may hurt MILC sales overall, but if you want interchangeable lenses the RX won't work for you, so there is still a market for M43, NEX, EOS-M, etc.
Thorsten wrote:
If you look into the mount of the Nikon 1 camera (V1 or J1), you see the mount is way bigger than the sensor. I think Nikon planned for a future version with DX sensor, using the same mount, much as the F mount works for DX and FX.
If Nikon did that.. that would be GENIUS. GENIUS I tell you...
Thorsten wrote:
If you look into the mount of the Nikon 1 camera (V1 or J1), you see the mount is way bigger than the sensor. I think Nikon planned for a future version with DX sensor, using the same mount, much as the F mount works for DX and FX.
I received my Nikon V1 today and after looking at the mount your theory is not that far fetched.
p.2 #12 · Will the Canon EOS M force Nikon's hand?
soupcxan wrote:
I said the Nikon 1 because it has the smallest sensor size, weakest lineup of native lenses, and is the newest introduction so the smallest established user base. It is a joke of a product line, but it will take Nikon several years to admit it.
The RX100 may hurt MILC sales overall, but if you want interchangeable lenses the RX won't work for you, so there is still a market for M43, NEX, EOS-M, etc.
The Pentax has the smallest sensor size so you probably should get that right at least. Haha, nail in the coffin.
Genius.
p.2 #14 · Will the Canon EOS M force Nikon's hand?
Unless sales completely disappear, Nikon is committed to the V1. Each size sensor has its pluses and minuses. The lack of controls makes the V1 not appealing to me, but I held one
and it is a nice camera. Canon M lack of a view finder makes it a no go camera for me.
I do think the future is the "DSLR" with no mirror and an excellent Electronic View Finder:
smaller body, faster and more accurate AF, higher frame rates, real time exposure curve.
p.2 #15 · Will the Canon EOS M force Nikon's hand?
Download sample RAW files of V1 and then make a judgment on its image quality. Dismissing it simply because it has a smaller senor does not make sense. Similarly handle one in a store and you will see that the pictures and even video really does not convey the real thing.
Nikon V1 is the dark horse of this mirrorless game.
I have been waiting for a camera like Nikon V1 since 2007 when I begun to dabble in street photography, and the moment I picked up a V1, I knew this is what I was looking for all this time (of course I'm talking about a black V1 because of its discreet look).
