The thing I see here is added hot shoe, better ergonomics, faster frame rate, and more pixels.

Judging by my Rx100, with even higher pixel density, I don't think the IQ will be much of an issue. Nikon are doing quite well lately with their sensors.

The thing I don't get is why someone would invest in this, given the size is too big for your pocket and not big enough to provide adequate (for most serious users) DOF control. I have to assume they target a market that just wants the latest/greatest innovations. ?

I carry my V1 in my pocket all the time - just not a shirt pocket. I was hoping for the RX100 sensor. Like the new controls though.

Looks like a nice development. It's actually slightly smaller than the V1 and much smaller than any m4/3 with a VF. I wouldn't mind having one, but I'm using m4/3 already.

FlyPenFly wrote:
Because it says Nikon.

Do people care about brand name so much?...or do people do on-line reviews....??

This is the chance I was waiting for. Got a V1 with 10mm for less than $500. Thats the little camera I wanted.

anthonygh wrote:
FlyPenFly wrote:
Because it says Nikon.

Do people care about brand name so much?...or do people do on-line reviews....??


In general, yes. On one specific purchase, it depends on how invested they are in the purchase and their budget. For example, it will raise the hair on the back of a foodie's neck if you suggested replacing their Hagen Das Chocolate ice cream with a generic store brand, regardless of how similar the taste is to you, but that same person will have no problem wearing store-brand jeans over Levis because they're not as invested in purchasing clothes.

Brands also hold a big sway over consumers when they're out of their comfort zone, particularly when they're going into debt to make the purchase, like with high-end electronics or automobiles, and usually without entering into their conscious decision-making process. Even a well-informed consumer can be swayed by brand identification. Advertising has become less about selling a product, and much more about selling the brand through an identification with a lifestyle or ethos (technological or otherwise) tailored to be attractive to likely buyers. And since you're reading this on the web, most likely that advertising is reaching you. If you live in an industrialized nation, it's inescapable. Sneer at it if you like, but think very hard about what might have influenced any recent purchase in which you were presented with two like products of different brands.

dmbphotography wrote:
This is the chance I was waiting for. Got a V1 with 10mm for less than $500. Thats the little camera I wanted.

Review/impressions coming?

I enjoyed the V1, and only gave up for swlowness in releasing new lenses
If lenses as the announced 85/1,2 were available, the system would be great
Not everyone need such thin DOF, I guess that a long time ago someone even founded something like f:64 club...

For different reasons though! That was a reactionary move, as the modernists ganged up against the pictorialists. Now we have lenses which are sharp wide open, and don't need such extremism.

carstenw wrote:
For different reasons though! That was a reactionary move, as the modernists ganged up against the pictorialists. Now we have lenses which are sharp wide open, and don't need such extremism.


I agree, of course, but any tool allows a different key; if you wish have an entirely in focus picture (wich is what most photographers wanted some years ago) you'd have hard time with a full frame camera. I wouldn't say better or worse, just different.

Hmm, I think f/64 on an 8x10" camera doesn't necessarily give you an image which is sharp from front to back. Maybe if you focus at infinity and don't include close object, like much of Ansel Adams' work...

I played around with the J1, V1, J2 and V2 today in the store, a large electronics super market, and although the cameras are great fun and really nice to operate, and the results look superficially good, I must admit to being quite disappointed at the acuity at ISO 800. The noise AND smudginess were just quite strong. I didn't see any major improvement in the 2nd generation cameras. This was all around ISO 800 with the 10-30 zoom.

On the other hand, I played with E-PL3 (which I own and know well), E-PL5 and E-M5 as well, and I was very pleased with the E-PL5, and will upgrade soonish. The E-M5 is a really nice camera, but I have to admit that I hate the mushiness of the buttons. The E-PL5 is so much better in that regard.

The E-PL5 is a very good reason not to buy any of the Nikons. It's cheaper than the V2, has a better sensor, articulated screen, IBIS and access to a great range of lenses. It will be a perfect street cam with the new 17mm f/1.8. It doesn't have a viewfinder as standard, but when trying it out yesterday, I was surpised how sturdy the add-on VF felt. Yes, I'm buying one as a Christmas gift for myself

I wish they'd enable metering/focus zoom with a manual lens. These would be an absolutely fine b cam with a BMCC.

This V2 looks pretty cool!

The 60FPS at full 14mpx are of interest to me. The in-camera uses they put that high speed capture up to are also interesting to me. Tho more than 2 frames for HDR would have been nice.

Also I noticed here http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MCZlvybCYrE&feature=player_detailpage#t=120s that he says the lenses are designed to cover a CX sized sensor. Isn't CX Nikon lingo for APS-C? If so that means that Nikon could release an APS-C version of the N1 cameras at any time and not suffer lens incompatibilities! If they do this or even get up around the 4/3rds size mark, I'm jumping on board!

Again... 60FPS in 14mpx... CoooOOOoool!

At the end of the video they mention 1200FPS video slomo... that's pretty awesome if it's not size reduced!



EDIT:
Oh wait... No
FX = FF,
DX = APS-C, and
CX = ?? This new mirrorless size?
Damn!

The 1200fps video is 320x120....
Damn Damn!

On another uptick it has a 1/16,000 shutter speed using it's electronic shutter! I guess that can be turned on for regular still shooting, no?

FX = FF
DX = 1.5x crop
CX = Nikon 1 = 2.7x crop

I keep playing with the idea of getting a cheaper one of these, maybe V1, to get a good long lens system for the zoo in the daytime/ Just for fun, nothing else.

carstenw wrote:
FX = FF
DX = 1.5x crop
CX = Nikon 1 = 2.7x crop

I keep playing with the idea of getting a cheaper one of these, maybe V1, to get a good long lens system for the zoo in the daytime/ Just for fun, nothing else.

So do I.

OTOH, using only the center 10mp (that the V1 delivers) from a 24mp DX sensor effectively turns that DX sensor into about 2.3x crop. With better image quality and much better AF capabilities. Decisions, decisions...

Hm, time to get out the calculator. I have a D800


... ~5MP. Not enough for much of my work, but maybe for the zoo.

I think tight zoo shots are best had from 400 to 600 equiv. unless it's a huge zoo with expansive open planes - more like a wildlife preserve or something. I took a FD 300/2.8L on the GH2 (600 equiv) to the zoo recently and thought it was too narrow for most shots.

You've all seen a few of them already:

Very cool shots, having only a tight prime does yield a certain style Have you thought about a Pana 100-300 or an Oly 70-300?