Nikon enters the game with the new Mirrorless J1 and V1 cameras!

120 Comments

1. Looking at the images samples floating around the web almost nobody believed the Nikon J1 and V1 sensor could be as good as the bigger Micro Four Thirds sensors.

   And here comes the latest DxOmark test and tells you exactly the opposite story.

   According to their tests the sensor of the J1 is exactly as good as the latest 16 Megapixel sensor of the Panasonic G3 and better than the rest of the Micro Four Thirds cameras. Color depth and landscape is slightly better than the G3 and only at High-ISO Micro Four Thirds has a visible advantage.

   Anyway, Sony still has by far the best sensor of all Mirrorless cameras. The NEX-C3 has 17 more points than the J1 and I bet the new Sony NEX-5n is even better!

2. I love the design and size, but having to pay for the one lens I DON’T want is asinine when the price of this system is already so high. The pancake lens and body will fit a small jacket pocket when going places in the evening, and the 30 to 110 will be perfect for photo walks. But that extra lens and price is a deal-breaker.

3. I have read these comments with a bit of amusement and frustration. I am a 25 year vet of the newspaper biz, still working,and still changing with the new tech.What I am painfully aware of, and most here don’t think about…the days of needing large pristine file sizes are gone. Unless you are shooting billboard ads, print work needs no more than a 300dpi photo at whatever web size the publication runs at. And as more print publications cut back, the web doesn’t even need a third of that size. I am glad people still argue about the relative merits of megapixels, but I can assure you in a few years it will be a non issue for everyone but a few niche publications.

   • Amen. I must admit, my first reaction was entirely negative as well. Apart from the price (which I still question the wisdom of their marketing department on), the camera does represent a number of significant leaps.

     First, the image quality is good enough (for most people–not the ones that spend their free time on stevehuff, dpreview, nikonrumors or google translations of foreign sites). Second, I cannot tell you how many times when I was working in a professional camera store that wealthy soccer moms came in and wanted something with fast autofocus (because nothing else could cut it), they had to purchase an SLR, which was far larger than what they wanted. For photographers, this might be a frustrating debacle (not being able to find ISO or lacking a PASM wheel), but I can tell you there are people (like my wife) that have a decent eye, but could care less about screwing with that stuff.

     This camera will surpass a D70s, and probably a D200 in everything except subject isolation. It has an insane amount of processing power and arguably the most significant autofocus development in years. Face it, very few people are printing (in the volume they used to) anymore, yet they are taking more photos on phones and posting them to flickr/facebook/etc. They’re certainly not printing large every time. These look ok displayed on my 24in monitor. This generation of cameras could hold some promise.

     Nevertheless, I certainly won’t be buying one. Not at that price anyway. They’re going to need some extraordinarily fast normal lenses for me to take interest. Going from medium format to DX was bad enough. I’m not obsessed with bokeh, but I at least like the option. So, I’m still looking for the ideal travel companion (I can’t afford an M9, nor would I feel comfortable carrying $9000 on my shoulder). The GXR was my favorite thus far… but the AF sucked. Hopefully their acquisition of Pentax can yield something interesting.

   • You’re right. Until we get to the price of the Nikon offerings, that is. Then it makes no sense whatsoever. $800 for a web camera? Wot? Why not just use the iPhone, then, the real camera that you will always have with you?

4. So I guess Canon is the only odd man out now….
   Also while I’m ranting why can’t panasonic make a GF1 type body with a built in HighRes EVF?
   That’s all : )
   am

5. If you think of the 1 as a still camera, you will probably be disappointed. Even if you think of it as a camera for classical action photography, you miss the point. I think the 1 has got the potential to revolutionize the approach to snap-shot and street photography, as it introduces a new, very accessible way of taking “photos with motion”. In this regard, the 1 is a dam’good thing! And don’t forget: the 1 is cutting edge technology that is worlds ahead of its competitors – it has got a blazingly fast image processor, and, an absolute Schmankerl, it has got phase-detection AF on the sensor.

   • The IQ looks great. Take a look at the gallery at dpreview. High ISO output is a lot cleaner than anything from the PEN-series. Image IQ is on par if not better than 4/3 PEN.
     Think it is amazing with that quite small sensor.

   • I just want to add, that the phase detection AF on the sensor will make such oddball constructions like the one of Sony with its static mirror (which, by the way brings in more reflections and refractive surfaces in the way of the light to the sensor than any other construction!) a thing of yesterday. Sony’s concept was ill-bred from the beginning, and it’s already dead now.

6. Like TOP said, Nikon isn’t taking mirrorless seriously ….. protecting their DSLR market .. but mirrors (and large heavy cameras and large heavy lenses) have to go, it’s digital now, evf’s and screens.
   Large companies like Panasonic and Sony and Samsung will eat the Conikon market, sooner or later ..
   This camera is for soccermoms ..

   • Perhaps the right thougt. In view of their inventory of existing lens designs (and physical stock), Nikon did not want a DSLR killer at this time. But due to its small sensor, the competitors rather than the Nikon 1 will kill the Nikon DSLR.

     Further progress in AF speed and electronic viewfinders will do away with DSLRs very soon. Production cost of electronic components will drop faster than cost of mechanical/optical components. In fact Nikon already claims the Nikon 1’s AF is faster than D3’s.

     Even during film era, I disliked “pro” SLRs and lenses. Which sane “enthusiast” enjoys to walk around with a 2.8/80-200 zoom on an EOS1, with the appearance and the noise of a machine gone, unless the “enthusiast” earns his joy by posing as a “pro”. Do the “subjects” like to be “shot at” by this kind of gear, unless they are celebrities who make a living from it?

   • There is the problem. Not taking seriouly a market growing very fast. Perhaps Nikon don’t want to risk its DSLR market, but other brands are risking Nikon’s market. I think Nikon is testing the waters, I’d bet they will come with a much better camera soon.

7. Nothing serious about it. It’s just stupid how people bash gear they haven’t tried. Only time will tell if it’s an epic fail or not. If every manufacturer brought the same thing to the table, what’s the point of making anything. I shoot with a D300 to make my income and I use a GF-1 for my everyday camera. When I first heard of the concept I thought it was strange but interesting. I didn’t jump on every forum I could find to bash something I didn’t get to use. I actually went to a store and looked at it, tried it out and actually got to see what it did for my own eyes. I so surprised I actually bought it and loved it. (Even though it was stupidly expensive at the time.) I still don’t believe it’s the prettiest camera out there but it works. If I listened to some DSLR users out there on forums at the time it came out, I never would have even looked at it.

   The epic fail may not be the camera.

8. Does Nikon not have a single Industrial Stylist on staff? These cameras are beyond ugly. It doesn’t matter how good your specs are, if your target customer (whoever that might be) wouldn’t be caught dead holding your new model cameras.

   • I think the design is nice 🙂

   • What has camera design got to do with nice photos? It’s handling that is most important and as long as the guts pass muster at resembling anything photographic from the past 50 years – the photos (with the right shooter) will be good.

     Steve – enough gear talk on this site. Back to the actual shooting and the fun of making images please! Don’t turn this blog into some insane geek fest like dpreview which is painful to read now.

     • Direct request Richard with no frills, but one I wholeheartedly agree with.

       Some of the “Stockholm Syndrome” gear lust posts are too sickly to stomach. We all like nice gear but photography is and ALWAYS has been pretty much in the head – YOUR head. Back to technique talk & method request from me also….but I will add a “please”. 🙂

       • An I add a “skip the page” to both of you guys. You are not obligated nor to read or comment here.
         Richard does not like this topic but he is one of the most active posters here. Just let everybody express! If AH likes the design, what’s the problem? Just relax!

9. Oh, good! Another small camera with proprietary lenses, questionable sensor and high price. Seems
   like the 3100 and 5100 are better alternatives for photographers, the F1 and V1 will apply as “purse
   candy” for soccer moms. Don’t know if these lenses are any good – Nikon can certainly build one if
   they chose to but this looks like the engineers and the marketing people aren’t talking. So much for
   hopes of a M9 alternative.
   If I needed to start a new “systems” approach for portability this one – sight unseen and un-reviewed –
   takes a poor fourth place in the consideration list. In the meantime, I’ll hope Canon has a better
   understanding of the market or wait until Leica unveils at photokina. This toy didn’t do it.

10. They should make something that looks like a digital version of the Nikon SP, SPX rangefinder camera, that would get everyone’s attention.

    • Thats what im saying, a digital SP rangefinder with an FX sensor and an M mount, and hybrid viewfinder, nikon can make their own M mount lenses with an AF system and give us the option to use classic Leica glass as well.

11. Sorry for the typos…it’s late here in Oz!

12. I don’t get excited by these new Nikon offerings, but then again, I’m pretty sure that I’m not part of the segment of customers for whom these new Nikons were aimed at. Nikon’s executive, while holding a new V1, said that the enthusiast camera segment is quite small (read: unprofitable), which makes it quite obvious that they are targeting a kind of market that, frankly, probably does not spend much time in camera forums…

    As a better-than-point & shoot camera, it works in terms of features and performance – except for the price point. I think this is where Nikon got it wrong: if the new mirrorless Nikons are aimed at the non-enthusiast market, then these people won’t spend the kind of money Nikon is asking. That kind of money is spent mostly by enthusiasts, I think, and they wanted something else: a D7000 in a Fuji X100 body. This is definitely what I would’ve liked…

    However, as a business decision, the new Nikons make sense (if you’re an accountant), given the larger segment of people at which these cameras are “focused” (sorry…). The question is whether a company like Nikon is best driven by business decisions based on market-share (witness the new Nikons), or whether they should be lead by business decisions that answer a more sophisticated/demanding market. I guess it’s both in my opinion. But given the high expectations of Nikon upon them entering this emerging mirrorless market, I think they got it wrong and should have gone higher-end, as the negative impact on their image and reputation might be greater than the high volume sales they might never generate with this models.

13. We “educated enthusiasts” are begging for fast, compact primes of good optical quality, for large sensors with high ISO and shallow DOV, but industry delivers late, if at all. Instead we observe weird offerings like Ricoh GXR, Pentax Q and now Nikon 1. In the lens department, After 5 years of EF-S lenses, Canon still denies us prime lenses in the 20 to 30mm range. Nikon and Sony give us slow 30 and 40mm macro lenses. Are product managers and boards of directors ignorant against textbook wisdom on photography, are they grossly incompetent? Or is it “us” who misjudge “the market” at large? The masses are buying P&S, for travelling with 10x zoom lenses. At night, even in a football stadium, they just turn on flash rather than buy fast film or crank up digital ISO. DOV is a hassle that partially blurrs images.

14. I think the censor is a joke. A crop factor of 2.7?? Seriously? I thought Nikon would come up with something really great like a nice APS-C (DX) Camera.

    So I’m still looking for basically an M9 for a students’ budget. I would like to see something like an M9, maybe with EVF instead of Rangefinder (would prefer the last one), Maybe not Full frame and lower resolution, but equal in size and with such a great Manual mode. That for under 900€ including a 35mm F:2 and I would be in in a heard beat.

    So until I can effort a Leica the favorite camera I have is still the 1982 Minolta XG-1 with my 50mm F:2 and a great roll of film.

    • Sounds almost like the X100.

      • Just that I want interchangeable lenses, that I wanted a 35mm equivalent of 50mm Focal Length (35 for APS-C) and for my taste, the X100’s body is to small, but otherwise, you’re right the Fuji X100 is pretty damn close.

        • Price is the main issue for you. The Nex-7 and a nokton 35/1.4 would do the trick. Or a Samsung NX with the 30mm pancake might work.

      • I don’t think so. The X100 has a aps-c sensor.
        Maybe you are referring to the X10, which has a ⅔ sensor, about half the size of the one Nikon uses.

    • Get the Ricoh GXR with M mount module. Or the GF1, G1 or EP1 secondhand with M mount adapter. Or Nex 3 with M mount adapter. You have way more choices than you realise. No need to wait for Nikon or Canon. Mind you, if Fuji comes out with their announced removable lens X camera, and it can take M mount lenses, that would be a tasty replacement for my GF1 indeed.

15. I think that people who want interchangeable lenses want high image quality as well. In the end it comes down to the lens/sensor combination. Sony has a big advantage of using the larger sensor, plus you can buy beautiful Zeiss and Voigtlaender lenses and use them without too much crop. The Nikon system may be appealing to basic users by why would they care about interchangeable lenses if they could get a camera with similar sensor and built in zoom. It feels like a niche camera. Who knows, maybe that niche is bigger than we think. Actually I like the design of that camera. I just wish I could mount a nice 50mm 1,4 Nikon lens on it and shoot some great images.

    • Why do you think you cannot shoot great images with it as is, when you can shoot great images with a tiny S95.

      • No kidding.

        • He..he..No kidding. If you can’t take great fotos with an s95, you can’t take great photos with any camera IMHO.

      • Sure you can, but what’s the point of the Nikon 1 system, then? Why not just stick that 1″ sensor into a Nikon Coolpix superzoom or family of prime lensed Coolpixes. Now that would be really something to talk about. Instead, Nikon bequathes the world with something that is the same size as other cameras that are already there, but with a tinier sensor, crappier lenses that are also too large, AND far more expensive than reasonable.

        The way I see it, based on the overall design, Nikon is trying to do an Apple – fleece consumers who have more money than sense.

16. The NEX-7 is going to monster this thing, I was expecting better from Nikon after all this time… no wonder their (and canon’s) stocks are plummeting.

17. Nikon have got it wrong yet again, they’ve missed the entire plot unless they have yet another system planned for launch shortly with a 1.5 crop. What a pig ugly camera too.

18. Hello everyone,

    To me, Nikon had many options.

    First, they could have integrated a large sensor in a compact body (Sony did it with it’s Nex7).
    This would mean better high ISO performances without many tweaks and/or better resolution.

    Second, they could have create a M4/3 body so that they can take benefits of all the existing Olympus/Panasonic/Voigtländer/Sigma,…. etc, lenses in the market, and also reuse many different adapters (for M mount for instance). They also could have provided an M4/3-to-Nikon F mound adapter, very useful for their camera AND for all others M4/3 bodies (Pana GF/GH & Oly PEN). They could have sold many many more Nikon F lenses for all M4/3 existing users.

    Third, they could have used a vintage design for these new gears, based on a Nikon FM camera for example with vintage logo and so on. Fujifilm did it with it’s exciting Fuji X100.

    Fourth, they could have build a “native” compact mirror less camera F-mount. No adaptor. Full reuse of all Nikon/Nikkor high end lenses. It would have been REALLY interesting for professional who want a small high quality compact camera system for everyday use, in complement of a DSLR.

    And IMHO, they’ve chosen any of these scenarios, and maybe the worst one : no new concept, new mount (need to re buy everything), small sensor, poor design, kind of ridiculous accessories.

    I’m waiting for the reviews to see if it’s not “as bad as it seems”…

    Regards,
    Antonio

    • They could not do a native F mount compact. The lens registration would have to make the camera as thick as a standard DSLR so you could focus to infinity. No really compact.

19. The next Fuji X100, maybe X1000 or X200, who care’s about a name, will have APS-C (crop 1,3) with
    changeble lenses…hopefully with M bajonet

    That will finish of these rubbish cameras as the V1…no one asked for that, no one want one

    Nikon is a great brand…. but it’s not the 30-40s of the last century any more …so again a different sensor size and now we wait for a similar announcement of Canon with crop 2,35 ..

    Sure they will sell some of these…but who will seriously invest in these NIKON ONLY lenses?
    Nikon should have made this a 4/3, 2x crop and THAN add there wonderful lenses to the 4/3 family, that’s enough.

    Eevry other serious amateur photographer with some money, will go for a X200 like system or
    maybe a X2 system later from Leica.

    I recap NOBODY is waiting for this Nikon V1….

20. The one thing that really caught my attention with the Nikon 1s is the Hybrid autofocus system (Phase Detection + Contrast-detect), which supposedly improves the tracking performance compared to just contrast-detect of other mireless systems. I wonder how it performs in real life…

21. Another whine-fest of people that would rather complain about a camera they’ve never used, while hoping for the next big thing to make their photography better. Chances are, if you haven’t found that camera to do that for you yet, take up knitting. It doesn’t exist. You need skill.

    • LOL….relax dude….it’s just a camera, don’t take it so seriously. Actually IMHO I have all the skill in the world, but this new Nikon is still ugly, with a small sensor, and big lenses. Like I said, epic fail.

      Another thing…I HAVE found the camera that works for me…actually a few of them…5D2, M8, 7D. We’re all entitled to our opinions and I predict that this will be a major failure for Nikon. Hopefully they redeem themselves with a nice successor to the D700.

    • Absolutely right Mike.

22. I don’t admire Pentax-Q system. I think GF3’s design was a mistake.

    Lo & behold, the rise of the champion of idiotic mirrorless Nikon 1 system.

23. Hmm….tiny sensor, big lenses, body looks like a cheap mock up….
    Epic Fail.

24. First word.. DISAPPOINTING. I can’t see why someone would move from a compact to this. Considering the price point, I am more inclined to go from a compact to a m4/3.

    I’ll wait for some real world reviews and then judge.

    Unless Nikon has hit one out of the park…. Second word….. DISAPPOINTING.

25. There are a slew of new retro mirror-less cameras. The only really revolutionary one is fuji’s x100. The nex7 is interesting also. With these stupid small sensors the rest are more for show/mass consumer-turned-hipster. And the interchangeable lense trend is laughable for tiny sensors (just get sn lx5 and be done with it…sans trendy retro looks, of course.) Notice how all the new cameras have alot of attention put on their “minimal” retro camera looks? (Lumix needs to get it’s act together and shit can the tired NASCAR logo look. Even the lx5 manages 4 logos/BS on it’s tiny front!) The attempted market niche dichotomy of lx5 vs. these new cameras is quite funny IMO.

26. The price seems high for what they are, unless Nikon can manage to pull some serious IQ rabbits out of their hat. Currently on Sony USA you can get a NEX 5N twin lens kit for $799 or a NEX C3 twin lens kit for $699 – I can’t imagine anyone would look at the Nikon 1 system for $900 even if they were unaware that the sensor in the Nikon was inferior. To those who do know, cheaper for APS-C is the obvious choice.

    I do like the coloured kits, and matching the lenses to the colour of the body.

27. More ignorant small sensor talk. Do people realise that megapixels are a logarithmic calculation? That a 10Mpixel sensor like this is the same as taking a 135 frame 18-24 megapixel sensor and cropping out the middle?

    Do photos taken with the larger sensor then cropped in a bit suddenly change quality?

    :-S

    • Wrong. The pixel pitch of these Nikon cams is nearly half that of a 135, 24mp sensor. Besides, most of us have an issue with small sensors because of equivalent depth of field.

      • Sensor has othing to do with depth of field. Bye bye internet digital photog nerd.

        • Depending on how you look at it. Most of the people most of the time assumes a comparisson with 35mm format. So, for the same equivalent angle of view you need a shorter focal length, which increases the apparent depth of field. You are right, technically, even for different focal lengths the depth of field is the same, but practically not. In a print, a wide angle shot appears to have more DoF. So DF is right, to us, people who actually take pictures, a smaller sensor means higher DoF. In fact, a photog nerd is someone who only cares about numbers and not the real world implications. I bet you wouldn’t choose the same focal lengths for this camera as for a 35mm. In fact, the focal length is only a number to have an idea of the angle of view, because we always relate it to a 35mm format. I don’t care of the number as long as I got the field of view I want.

    • Talk about being ignorant where you yourself have no idea what you’re talking about.

      • Actually same as the 24 mpix Sony APS. No one mentioned it though… just the usual small is bad commentary from people that have never sold a photo or won a comp or had an exhibition of their work. IE – the same tech troll crap that is killing this hobby and serious avenue of study in Art for some of us.

        Ignorant and photography is not something that I have had my name associated with in a while. Funny. Must remember that at my next show…..

        Internet nerd troll.

        • Richard you are confusing two important topics – art and image quality

          There is minimal relation between the two. This is mainly a conversation about image quality. I have no doubt that the 1 series will make excellent photographs in the right hands and the photographer can do great things within the limits of the system.

          Yet – that is not what we are talking about. We are talking about image quality. I understand perfectly the difference between a crop and full frame. When it comes to image quality size matters. Why do studio photographers spend so much money on a phase system (enought to buy a nice luxury care)? Because the images are better. 4×5 is better than MF, 8×10 is better than 4×5. This is due to the decreased amount of enlargement required for viewing.

          Also – to have equivalent field of view, you must have a shorter focal length. This means that for MF = 75, FF = 50, DX = 32, CX=14. If you have ever used a 14 mm lens, you realize that the DOF is huge and it is very difficulty to get subject isolation.

          In summation – no reasonable person believes the 1 series will have IQ on the level of ANY dx camera. However, that being said, a good photographer could still use this camera to make astounding art.

          • Jonathan,

            There are always a guy like him, who pretend to know everything. He wont understand.

        • Haha, you are very funny. This remembers me when I was 10 years old, all the little boys liked to showoff. Nobody ask you for your achievements, and centainly you don’t know about the other people achievements.

        • Also, this is some seriously pretentious shit right here.

28. Well what can I say except ….. ZzzzzZzz..yawn. Come on Nikon get your act together, why throw another cut- down digital camera our way ? it’s just another cut down P&S in an over-saturated Market.

    What does everybody wish for more than anything? I can say this with a bit of certainty, FULL FRAME NOT ANOTHER SMALL SENSOR CAMERA (Ricoh exempt from this statement).

    The problem for me is I love magic, and Nikon it seems has nothing in their hat or up their sleeve. They are a powerful creative company whose sole responsibility and market is ?cameras. That’s it, not washing machines or television or video cameras, just cameras. Have some balls Nikon, give us a full framed Rangefinder (Contax G2) and I may just kiss those balls.

    There is no other contender more worthy of a M9 competitor than Nikon. He’ll they even brought out a LTD Edition once discontinued Nikon S rangefinder Film camera complete with lenses back in 2002. So the ability is there, the technology is there, They
    have the sensor, lens and $$$$ to make it happen. How long do we have to scream and shout for them to give us what the market really needs. Leica must be laughing there asses off as they rejoice in the one man band market of Digital Rangefinder Heaven.

    Ok I do apologise for my rant, but not the gist of the words I am screaming for. So Nikon here it is my request loud and clear

    Full Frame Rangefinder
    Interchangeable AF/Manual lenses
    Hybrid viewfinder
    $3500-4000 price point
    & all the bells and whistles we have come to expect from your pro range of cameras.

    I guarantee people will buy it, And if you do pull a Rabbit out of your hat, it will be MAGIC.

    • lol. Nikon won’t make another rangefinder.

      • …unless they really want Simon to kiss their balls

29. the number of people who do not know the meaning of APSC sensor, 4/3, mp, iso, aperture, 2.7 crop etc is much much bigger than the number of people who do know, and they are a big market. IMO It’s never about performance, it all about making profit. If we want performance, they have huge number of DSLR range. Company as big as Nikon must have something in their mind before realeasing this. Just a thought.

30. I think most of you are looking at this the wrong way. Nikon would not have introduced this system unless they felt there was a real market for it. Though to be honest I feel Pentax got it far more right than Nikon. After using the Q for nine days at New York Fashion Week, I can assure you that it is a little tank of a camera, not a toy. After handling the J1 today I came away feeling like I had just played with a Holga or a Fisher Price camera to be honest. While I think from the tech standpoint Nikon has it’s target well pegged, price wise they are definitely wrong. The Q at 800 while with a smaller sensor, by virtue of feature and build is worth it. It is literally the Swiss Army knife of cameras complete with a fully manual video mode. With the J1 after nearly an hour of use I knew it wasn’t meant for me, hell I couldn’t even figure out how to change ISO on the thing.

    • Many people complain of the Q based on the small sensor, but I think it will be a good seller due to the small size, portability, buid quality and controls. I’m liking it! I think that if you take care of the ISO you can get very good results form this ultra-portable image machine. Imagine, it is the ideal camera to have with you at all times. Just don’t expect full frame IQ.

      • I shot the Q up to ISO 6400 and got very acceptable results. During Fashion Week while testing it it lived at ISO 640 and did fantastic.

        • That sounds good, technology is advancing so fast!
          Then the very only “consecuence” of the small sensor is the high depth of field, but for many aplications, including some styles of street photography that’s very good

        • That’s the one thing I want to see. I have the LX5- a fantastic camera. But if the Q buys me a stop in low light I would consider it.

          • Here ya go, one Pentax Q shot at 6400

            [img]http://www.adorama.com/alc/files/b0e490d94f1e017d0935db059efef7c6.jpg[/img]

          • @ Sandy – Sandy I had seen that shot before, but almost any camera looks decent at that kind of size. I think the Q holds the color better, but I would have to see something closer to a 100% crop to get an idea how much better over the LX5 it is.

            Thanks for the reply though.

31. Clearly Nikon hasn’t stepped up in the portable camera business as this is looking like it will be as successful as their Coolpix (fail). I wonder if their designers even know that the trend is back to classic is in again in recent years (See Fuji and Olympus).

32. My take on this is that i don’t know who they are targeting this system to?
    from the lack lustre reception here and other places, it’s obviously not the high end market, but I fail to see how the consumer who is looking at a coolpix is going to spend $900 on the kitted body and then maybe just for fun pick up a $700 zoom lens.
    People who buy point and shoots typically don’t ever spend more than $500.
    If the V1 with lens was $500, then It would be very clear to me who they are aiming at.
    (heck I’d probably buy one for my little cousin for xmas)
    am

33. Size of the CX sensor = 13.2mm×8.8mm.
    In comparison the DX sensor = 23.6mm×15.8mm.

    • so for area cx = 116 mm2
      and dx = 372 mm2

      You have almost 3 times the area on DX than the CX
      So for all you who feel that 24mp is too much, the pixels on the sony NEX-7 will actually
      be bigger than the pixels on the 1 series 🙂

34. Yuck! I mean wtf nikon? Why didn’t you slap a APS-C sensor in there just to spice up the competition! Oh well, it still makes me happy looking at my X100 knowing there is nothing out there i would rather have!

    Cheers
    Vlad

35. I was holding my breath for a digital FM2n (FM2d?) quite dissapointed 🙁

    • For the life of me I can’t figure out why Nikon (and other manufacturers) don’t continue their legendary lines of cameras into the digital age, ie. the FM series.

      For me, a digital FM2n would be the perfect camera. Instead we seem to get countless point and shoots year after year. I guess that crap sells for some reason.

36. Thanks for the post Steve. It is actually very interesting to notice how both curved sides of the nikon 1 look very Leica inspired. My guess is they’re trying, at least design wise, to bring the rangefinder aesthetic back into the mainstream market, and it does seem to be working.

    As for the v1, i think it is very consumer and large market oriented, and i don’t see how any of these specs would please the serious creative photographer crowd. Again, sacrificing image quality for size is having its limits. I mean, this is basically a “no DOF” camera …

    On a side note i just wanted to thank you for you continuous dedication and passion in smaller system. I went from the 5dmkII to the leica x1 last year. second step being the m9 i bought last week. My switch to Leica is now complete. And i’m having a blast.

    S

    • I think its just poor R&D by Nikon for not putting a larger sensor in there while Sony did it in a probably smaller body than this.

37. Did Netflix buy Nikon? Nikon’s decision to create these cameras is mind boggling. Who is their target consumer? An uninformed hobbyist? Same with the Pentax Q. What’s the point if there is already m4/3 and NEX.

    • Yes, that is exactly the market Nikon stated this is geared towards.

      Of course no one on a enthusiast website like Steve Huff.com is going to be interested. There weren’t designed to rival NEX or LEica’s or even m4/3

      They are going after the compact market upgraders and give the color choices such as pink, most likely expect sales in the Asian markets.

      I swear,, why does everyone who doens’t like a new product because it doesn’t appeal to them think it was ever supposed to ?

      I mean really, how can anyone think that Nikon thought they’d cut into the NEX7 market with a camera like this ? It was never the plan to

      • I’m confused. Why would an enthusiast not be interested in this better specced Nikon, but be interested in the Pentax Q?

        Also, Why would anyone decide something is a great camera or a piece of crap without ever trying it or reading good or bad reviews about it first ?

        There are several cameras including this new Nikon 1 (v1) that i am interested in. But I will not decide to like or dislike any of them until it has been reviewed and recommended or not by the people like Steve Huff whose opinion we can trust.

        Steve will even recommend a camera that really isn’t for him but is good enough quality that he thinks others might like it.

        But in fairness to all readers it would be great if people did not form a solid opinion on a product nobody has ever touched or had enough time with it to form an honest opinion.

        These may just well be the camera we are all looking for !![img]http://www.nikonusa.com/Nikon-Products/Product/Nikon1/27504/Nikon-1-V1.html[/img]

        • Well, certainly you are right. There is no conclusion until anyone review all these cameras that suddenly appeared, but, by judging the specs we do have now, we can speculate with enough precision, unless this little camera has an ace under the sleeve. Simply put, the small sensor will not attract any enthusiast looking for a main camera. I think it is even too expensive to be a second body. For that money a NEX 5N looks better (again, just in the paper, lets see the IQ of this little Nikon).

    • Having used the Q I can tell you right now it is a serious photographic tool. It is built like a tank and from what I experienced today with the J1 light years ahead of it even with it’s smaller sensor.

38. I hope this won’t go down the same road as the Pronea series of bodies back in the film days… but just looking at the spec, I can’t see many serious armatures who will be dishing out the cash for it… 900 bucks for the entire kit… hmmmmmm… comparing that price with EP3 and it’s lens collection… which one would you buy??

39. When can I get adaptors so I can use my Russian m42 lenses?

    I hope they didn’t blow it, but then you can never predict what will catch on.

    Good luck Nikon.

40. I think I would take the Q over the Nikon. I received the Q for review and MAN it is tiny but feels REALLY nice and well made. Review soon!

    [img]http://www.stevehuffphoto.com/wp-content/uploads/2011/09/L1010102.jpg[/img]
    [img]http://www.stevehuffphoto.com/wp-content/uploads/2011/09/L1010099.jpg[/img]

    • I handled the J1 today, and did a review for Adorama of the Q. To be honest Steve, the Q is light years ahead in usability, and feels as solid as a brick thanks to it’s construction. The J1 felt literally like a plastic toy in my hand and gave me zero confidence in handling it.

      • Just started messing with the Q today and agree, its build, handling, control…is really really good. So tiny but it feels like a camera 🙂 Also have the VF so will be doing a full thorough review…

        • Pentax didn’t ship me the finder, though it looks like it was made by Voigtlander lol! I honestly found the rear screen sufficient when I did my review. It is a little tank, all the buttons and dials out of metal. Sort of what I would have expected from Leica not Pentax. That is saying alot. Also I have really big hands and never really had an issue handling it. Handling the J1 today was a bit different. It was sort of slippery in my hands.

        • One other thing. I had every control deciphered on the Q in under 30 minutes. It is a very intuitive camera. I handled the J1 for about an hour and could not for the life of me figure out how to change the ISO.

      • The Nikon looks underwhelming. But its AF seems to be from a different planet, the fastest ever seen in any camera, by quite a margin, can you confirm this from first experience?

        • I must admit the AF did seem very snappy nearly instant. While the Q was close in my experience to the EP-3 and handled tracking fashion models walking the runway quite well, the J1 just seemed to focus instantly, however the very slow lens meant I was still shooting at under 1/30th of a second for most shots, and since there is no IBIS I had a lot of blurry shots.

    • Steve, I would really love to hear your thoughts on the Q vs the Panasonic LX5/Olympus XZ-1. I am talking in particular sensor performance. The reason is that I already own the LX5 and unless the Q buys me higher ISO low light shooting, I don’t see the point in upgrading. I would really appreciate that.

      Oh and if the Q does fit in a jeans pocket with the 1 prime lens. That to me is another requirement.

      Thanks again!

      – Ricardo

41. I got a chance to handle the J1….felt like a Holga….could not for the life of me figure out how to set the ISO….hmmmmmm

    • That’s what I think is missing – those external controls for the few things you might want to adjust more than just occasionally. Maybe the menus are done with that in mind…

42. Let’s see..

    Tiny Sensor(Smaller than m4/3, much much smaller than NEX)? = Check
    6400 Max ISO (usable will probably under 3200) ?= Check
    No standard hotshoe? = Check
    Overpriced ?= Check
    10MP*? = Check
    Very limited controls/buttons? = Check
    Non-swivel LCD*? = Check
    Very generic design*? = Check
    Very Slow lens lineup? = Check
    Comes in Color Pink*? = Check
    No info yet for F-Mount AF Adaptor? = Check

    Bound to Fail hard? = You decide lol.

    • Actually they announced an F-Mount adaptor. And they said that it fully supports AF. But I want to know about great MF support like peaking 😀

      • Probably none since this is Nikon after all.

43. Worst looking Nikon ever. Holga design?

44. These Nikons suck big time. They are like toys, and expensive to boot. VERY disappointed that one of the biggest camera makers in the world couldn’t produce anything anywhere close to what Sony is doing.

    • Have you used both cameras and compared them side by side ?

      I didn’t think so !

      The Nikon 1 system is starting off with more lenses than Sony has to date, and they appear to be better quality.[img]http://www.dslrphoto.com/wp-content/plugins/feedlist/1_nikkor_lenses.jpg[/img]

      • “and they appear to be better quality.”

        “it was just announced today and it has never been reviewed ?”

      • Sony started with 3 lenses (18-55, 18-200, and 16mm) .. and Nikon is starting with exactly three lenses too

        • There are already ISO comparisons published against the Oly, Pano, and Sony. The Nikon falls way short. I found one review that claimed the Nikon was superior to the Sony – Can’t figure it out. In my opinion, this is like entering the modern car industry with the equivalent of a Model-T. I own two Nikons, Sony, OLY, Panasonic, and others; I am not a Nikon basher, this is obviously a too little too late.

          Also, I am curious, well not really, about the user interface… 😉

          As far as the Sony Lenses… A little late in the game to start talking about lack of choice.

          • @Joe. There is a lot less noise at high ISO on the J1 images at dpreview than in the Olympus PEN which is noisy already at ISO 200 in high contrast scenes. Pretty amazing with the smaller sensor.

    • Sounds like you don’t know what you are talking about. Take a look at the images at dpreview and read the specs. Seems pretty good to me.

    • Was in BestBuy just today, hands on with both the NEX-5N and the J1. You are absolutely correct. I couldn’t believe how toy like the J1 felt. Obviously couldn’t compare IQ myself, but based on reviews so far can’t imagine the J1 will seriously compete with the 5N on that score. Big +1 for Sony.

45. It is another option, but I rather spend my money on the great NEX7

    • Julio, do you really think that anyone who is thinking of buying a NEX7 was an intended customer for a very low level system designed to be a step up from an advanced point and shoot in the first place ??

      • Well, I’m talking about my personal preference: “…I rather spend my money…”. Did I say something wrong? it is another option, isn’t it? even for you.

        And no, a customer for the NEX7 will never see this one as an option, but a customer of this little Nikon could take a look at the NEX7. It is the opposite way. That is what I said. Someone taking a look at this Nikon should save a little more money and invest on a NEX7. Anyway, sometimes people is very strict when talking about market segments and don’t realize that all products in the market compete with each other, regardless the scope of the manufacturer. Any money you spent on this Nikon is money you cannot use for a better camera.

        Sometimes it is funny, but there are many reasons people buy things. Just enjoy what you like, I don’t care if the intended market was not me.

        • Julio,
          Could not agree with you more. I started my search for an improved P&S over a year ago. Used a G10 from a friend a few times and thought that was the way I was going to go…Leica branded panasonics were tried to low satisfaction…started looking more and m4/3 was close to getting my dollars (waited for GH2)…then Sony NEX 7 announced and wham I preorder right away…wrongly or rightly the feature set, look, size just seemed to really fit me. We’ll see when it ships. Granted it is a camera way above my current ability, but it is definitely one that I can grow into. And one that I consider more of an “investment”.

      • Considering that the price for the V1 with kit lens is $900, it isn’t too far off.

46. Those cameras overall are pretty underwhelming considering the mirrorless available in the market today.

    And I thought when the sensor is small, they can make a small lenses too, but Nikon made a huge lens anyway. And not only as big as m4/3 and NEX, but much slower too.

    Oh and the price is pretty high for that “average” specs.

    NEX5n completely obliterates this in every way.

    Sucks that Nikon is so good at their DSLR and Lenses but completely suck at smaller cameras(This and Coolpix).

    :/

    • You simply do not know what you are talking about !

      these lenses are about the same size and weight as the Olympus lenses, but a lot smaller and litter than the Nex lenses.

      Keep in mind the Nikon lenses have a metal mount !

      1 NIKKOR
VR 10-30mm f/3.5-5.6 $249.95*SRP
      SRP (Suggested Retail Price)
      (picture angle equivalent of a 27-81mm in 35mm format)
      Dimensions 
(Approx.) 2.3 x 1.7 in. (Diameter x Length)
      57.5 x 42 mm (Diameter x Length)
 
      Weight 
(Approx.) 4.1 oz. (115g)

      Olympus
      14-42mm II R Specifications $299.95*SRP
      SRP (Suggested Retail Price)
      Maximum Aperture
      f3.5 ( 14mm ); f5.6 ( 42mm )
      
      Minimum Aperture
      f 22
      
      Filter diameter
      37 mm
      
      Dimension
      2.2 inches (56.5 mm) Ø x 1.9 inches (50 mm) long
      
      Weight
      4.0 ounces (113 g)

      Sony Nex 18-55mm f/3.5-5.6 Zoom Lens
      Focal Length (35mm equivalent) : 27mm-82.5mm $299.99*SRP
      Dimensions (Max. Diameter x Length) : 2-7/16 x 2-3/8″ (62x60mm)
      Lens Weight : 6.9 oz (194g)

      1 NIKKOR 10mm f/2.8 $249.95*SRP
      SRP (Suggested Retail Price)(27mm equivalent in 35mm format)

      Dimensions 
(Approx.) 2.2×0.9 in. (Diameter x Length)
      55.5×22 mm (Diameter x Length)
 
      Weight 
(Approx.) 2.8 oz. (77g)

      M.ZUIKO DIGITAL 17mm f2.8 $299.95*SRP
      (equivalent to 34mm on a 35mm camera)

      Dimension
      Diameter 57 x 22mm
      Weight
      71g

      16mm f/2.8 Wide-Angle Lens
      Focal Length (35mm equivalent) : 24mm $249.99*SRP
      • Dimensions (Max. Diameter x Length) : 2-7/16 x 7/8″ (62×22.5mm)
      Lens Weight : 2.5 oz (70g)

      So if you factor in the metal mount the Nikkor lenses are the lightest. Also all the lenses are the same speed.
      But if you factor in Nikons new dual auto focus system the nikon should be a lot faster.

      I had a nex -5n for 2 days and just had to return it because of clicking issue and poor jpeg quality.

      And where do you get off saying this camera sucks knowing it was just announced today and it has never been reviewed ?

      It seems to me people should base there opinions on fact and not ignorance !

      • token defend underwhelming/overpriced Nikon camera because of reasons that invalidate EVIL camera existence and ‘of course’ owned a Nex and had issues comment. No offense but people like you are no better, this camera appeals on no levels beyond a marketers. Also trying to write off others as ignorant based off of observations of the actual specifications is no better. Nikon is not even trying with this one and no one is contractually obliged to dance around the substandard showing Nikon is shoving in our face.

      • +1.

      • The panasonic X 14-42 lens is actually much smaller then the nikons

        • It is not my intention to buy one of these cameras, but I think we should not criticize the CX format based on our expectations and interests, as well as not recognizing that it targets a specific consumer segment that it is not the one most of the people around here will be shopping in the future.
          Nikon certainly made their market surveys and studies to find where the money to be made is, not the “small” revenue segments of pros and prosumers, may we like it or not.
          Nevertheless there are strong arguments we may be overlooking and that can open important “new doors” if translated to the kind of equipment we would like to buy. And these are the points we should rather be discussing now.
          Will it be a mirrorless with a larger sensor or a reflex camera? We’ve to wait and see, but the new techs are already there.

47. Ouch. I predict the Nikon 1 system will go down in flames and it will not be pretty. I don’t see anything in the camera body design or the lenses that will appeal to serious shooters.

Comments are closed.