The Nikon 32mm f/1.2 Lens is a Bargain! By Joe Marquez

titlev132

The Nikon 32mm f/1.2 Lens is a Bargain*

*in the 1 system world!

By Joe Marquez  – His website is HERE

The Nikon 32 1.2 is available at Amazon HERE or B&H Photo HERE.  *Amazon & B&H have the Silver version in stock now. 

974409

For the past couple of weeks I’ve been shooting with Nikon’s 32mm f/1.2 prime lens for the 1 system. This is Nikon’s new diminutive portrait lens and on the CX one-inch sensor the lens produces a field of view equivalent to an 85mm focal length on a full frame DSLR.

So why is this a bargain? Well let’s compare pricing of the fastest 85mm prime lenses available for Nikon and Canon.

Nikon 32/1.2 – $899

Nikon 85/1.4g – $1649

Canon 85/1.2L – $1999

In comparison to the Nikon 85/1.4g you save $750 and get the bonus of one half stop of light gathering capability. In comparison to the Canon 85/1.2L lens you save $1100. And the savings don’t factor in the cost of a camera body. Purchase a Nikon V2 or bargain basement V1 body ($200)  instead of a Nikon or Canon full frame body ($3000) and now we’re talking about some serious dollar savings.

9150887360_ddf7400d3b_h

And there’s the weight savings to consider.

Nikon 32/1.2 – 235g (8.29oz)

Nikon 85/1.4g – 660g (1.45lbs)

Canon 85/1.2L – 1030g (2.26lbs)

Nikon V1 or V2 body including battery – 383g/337g (13.5oz/11.9oz)

To my surprise, the 32/1.2 attached to a V1 or V2 body with a battery weighs less than the 85/1.4g alone.

Well, of course everyone wants a bargain, but what are the limitations of the 32/1.2 compared to these other 85mm portrait lenses?  I’ve listed a few below, however, based on my shooting experience with the 32/1.2, none are a deal breaker for me.

Depth of field not as shallow.

Noisier, particularly in low light.

Fast focusing slows in low light.

Not as many megapixels.

9285188603_da00ea486f_h

These are more a consequence of the smaller CX one-inch sensor than the lens itself and as sensor technology improves, these limitations will become less so (except of course the fixed DOF).

So what do the images look like? Not bad and I’ve included a few below. These were taken on a V1 body which I purchased a month ago. The images include street shots in Waikiki and Chinatown, contestants at a Dracula event in Honolulu and performers at the Korean Festival near Diamond Head.

In summary, what would you say if someone offered an 85mm equivalent portrait lens capable of shooting at f/1.2 that costs approximately half a Nikon or Canon equivalent and along with a camera body weights less than a Nikon 85/1.4g lens alone?

Don’t know about you, but I would say, “what a bargain!”

9155827439_49926cc8e1_h

9148658773_eeed088389_h

9223169756_521ae3ce4f_h

9223170324_45ab274c2d_h

9229070158_f74da98ff4_h

9248181163_ceed5fa3bf_h

9237606848_ad1d1508e0_h

9285188015_22dcd5cab9_h

Related Post

96 Comments

  1. I love how everyone is arguing about value. The fact is if YOU BUY A NIKON 1 SYSTEM CAMERA then this lens will give you that 85mm equivalent with biting sharpness and nice bokeh with a 1.2 aperture for low light use. If you want to buy some big DSLR, sure you can buy a Nikon 85 1.8 or Canon 85 1.8 but then you are still paying more, have a much larger kit, much heavier kit and really are only gaining some shallow DOF and resolution advantages over this lens on a V1 or V2. If those are important to you, as in high megapixels and silky smooth large files then the 1 System will NOT work for you.

    What this article states is that for not much money you can get a Nikon 1 body (say the V1 at $200) and this lens for about $1100 total and have a nice SMALL and light but capable portrait setup. You can step up to an OM-D or E-P5 and 45 1.8 for $1400 and have a whole different camera system. For those who own a Nikon 1 camera or plan on getting a Nikon 1 camera (and they are really fantastic no matter what the haters of the 1 system say), if you want an 85 equivalent and a fast one at that, this is your choice, and it is much smaller and lighter without giving up any sharpness. Is it expensive? Sure it is but for those that want it, this is it.

    The V1/V2 give a filmic look to the images, I noticed this on day one of shooting the V1. You do not get the major resolution, creamy files or insane shallow DOF but you do get a fast, small, reliable and problem free camera that delivers sharp film like images with great color and a built in VF to boot if you go V1 or V2. Some like this, some do not.

    There are TONS of choices in the camera world for a body and 85mm or equivalent lens. What one chooses is up to each individual..what works for them. Not sure why everyone has to argue about it all of the time. It’s silly. Just enjoy your own thing and know that all websites that talk about camera gear are based on the writers OPINION after using said gear. Take it or leave it but no need to bitch about it. This article states the downfalls of the 1 system clearly in a simple list and what you lose by using this lens on a 1 body over an APS-C or full frame.

  2. First of all thanks Steve for including my thoughts and images on your wonderful site. Secondly, thanks everyone for the feedback (both positive and negative). Perhaps I should have better clarified my perspective to call this lens a bargain.

    I normally shoot with an H4d-40, D800, D3s and Sony Rx1 and I’ve owned and used the Sony Rx100, Fuji x100 and Fuji X-Pro 1.

    Once I began using the 32/1.2 I realized this is a very special lens and is perfectly matched with the V1 or V2. No doubt it is expensive, but compared to what I would normally use under similar conditions (my 85/1.4g) the 32 is a bargain. Compared to the only fast 1.2 portrait lens I am familiar with, the 85/1.2L, it remains a bargain.

    I did not consider or compare other options (e.g. 45/1.8) but I am now aware of alternatives and that is a good thing. The lesser DOF of this lens cuts both ways and for group shots it is nice to have f/3.2 equivalent DOF with f/1.2 light gathering ability. It also helps smooth over minor focusing errors.

    And finally I apologize for my 1.4 – 1.2 full stop mistake, but I’ve never shot at 1.2 before and never had to make this calculation. My bad.

  3. That’s it! Thank you Steve!

    I was not quite able to put my finger on it: its rendering is film like!

    Thx again Steve!

  4. Funny…One Nikon 1 V1 (with few lenses) + Sigma DP2 Merrill = my “setup” since the end ot the last year. Unfortunately not enough “gut” to sell the D600, Sigma 50-500 and the rest of the bunch even if they are “gathering dust” in the closet…
    Great pictures Joe ! Inspirational site Steve!

  5. Hey, OP. Great pics! I love it when someone posts a good article which clearly shows them having some fun with their gear. But then the equivalent police gatecrash the party….what fools.

    • Not sure who you call fools here but it seems that that the fool is the one who can not grasp what many here are trying to say. First of all this is comments area which is a place for comments and people can leave comments hopefully without having to be called fools or other derragotory names.

      Second, if OP just wrote an article about how he enjoys using his 32mm Nikon lens, I am sure this discussion would not even be here. However, the OP himself engaged a number of people by entitling his article “IT’S A BARGAIN.” So framing his article in this way, he welcomed several people who had attempted to explain that in terms of “the bargain,” the 32 just isn’t it, there are several better or equally as good and cheaper alternatives elsewhere. That’s all. And I am sure pretty much everyone commented on excellent photos OP posted.

      • If you shoot a Nikon 1 camera the other options are NOT options. For the 1 System, he feels this lens IS a bargain. Why would you buy an Olympus 45 when you shoot with a Nikon 1? You would not. Yes, he did compare the cost to other 85 Lenses, and did miss the Oly 45 1.8 which is less than half the price but it is also a 1.8 lens and a 45mm lens. A 32mm lens is more expensive to produce and the Nikkor is a 32mm 1.2 lens. If you shoot a Nikon V1, and only a Nikon V1 there is no other choice except to use an adapter and lose all automation by mounting a Voigtlander 35 1.2 that costs $1300. Then you would lose the AF, the automation and sharpness.

        If you own an E-P5 or E-M5 the 45 1.8 is fantastic just as if you own a Nikon D800 the 85 1.4 is fantastic but also VERY expensive. Do buyers of the NIkon 85 1.4 think “Damn, I could but an Olympus 45 1.8 for $399”? No.

        • Steve, I hope you did not miss comments on Canon 85/1.8 which is less than half the price, and Nikon 85/1.8 which was on sale for $399 for the longest time. But yes, these are not for Nikon 1 series, true.

        • Steve, what so called “equivalence police” is trying to bring up here is a bit more rationality. Understanding that 32/1.2 on Nikon 1 is about the same as 86/3.2 on Nikon D800 (and also the same as 43/1.6 on m4/3 or 54/2 on APS-C) does help your readers make better gear choice, especially if they are considering buying a new camera system. Knowing that you get similar photographs with e.g. Canon SL1 + 50/1.8 lens or Olympus EM5 + 45/1.8 lens or that you get significantly more depth control and much better low light performance using a (cheaper) 85/1.8 on a full-frame camera does help you make better purchasing decisions. Let’s help your readers make well-informed decisions.

          • p.s. By the way, I do like the photos taken with this 32/1.2 a lot. Bokeh looks great. So it indeed may be a very good 86/3.2 equivalent lens.

          • But if a reader ONLY has the Nikon 1 System camera those lens choices mean NOTHING. This is an article about a Nikon 1 System lens for those who shoot the 1 system. A Canon 85 1.8 will do nothing for those users. This site has always been about information, and always will be. But suggesting a Canon 85 1.8 for a Nikon 1 user is very odd indeed. 🙂

          • Hmm.. I haven’t seen the article saying “this information is for Nikon 1 users only” :). For example I am considering a smaller sensor system to purchase to complement my full-frame system. I’m sure there are a lot of readers in a similar here.

            Had I not understood the physics of smaller sensor cameras I may have well thought that 32/1.2 with Nikon 1 will give me the same DoF control and/or low light performance than say 85/1.2 on Canon 5Dmk3, while being cheaper and smaller. In reality of course 32/1.2 on Nikon 1 is almost 3 stops “slower” in terms of DoF and low light performance than 85/1.2 + full-frame, hence the difference in price and weight. Knowing the difference may well help your readers choose the right system for themselves (or decide to not buy a new system at all since it’s not going to give them what they may erroneously expect).

        • WRONG Steve, he does not qualify his statement that this lens is a bargain by saying “It is a bargain … compared to anything else available for the Nikon 1 system”. He actually makes a POINT of stating this lens is a bargain compared to Nikon and Canon full-frame cameras/lenses – how could you miss – or misunderstand – this simple fact ??

          “In comparison to the Nikon 85/1.4g you save $750 and get the bonus of one extra full stop of light gathering capability. In comparison to the Canon 85/1.2L lens you save $1100. And the savings don’t factor in the cost of a camera body. Purchase a Nikon V2 or bargain basement V1 body instead of a Nikon or Canon full frame body and now we’re talking about some serious dollar savings.”

        • “Do buyers of the NIkon 85 1.4 think “Damn, I could but an Olympus 45 1.8 for $399″? No.” People who are looking to buy an 85/90mm equivalent lens who are not inextricably locked into any system do, in fact, think EXACTLY this type of thing … and so they should – that’s their prerogative, and why SHOULD they spend more when they could spend less ? That wouldn’t be smart, right ? So why do you think this is an invalid consideration for them … or are you saying “this article is only designed for people who are already locked into the Nikon 1 system” ? Well if that is the intent of the article – that it only be valid for current Nikon 1 owners, and therefore nobody else’s suggestions in these comments are valid, then perhaps a little disclaimer within the article – limiting its parameters – might be warranted !!

  6. The lens does perform well (judging from the photos).

    Now to make the table in the article more informative and to better compare the Nikkor to its rivals let’s convert the table to more relevant equivalent numbers (in terms of angle of view, DoF and light gathering capacity) :

    Nikon 32/1.2 (86 / 3.2 full-frame equiv.) – $899

    Nikon 85/1.4g – $1649

    Canon 85/1.2L – $1999

    And continue with:

    Olympus 45 / 1.8 (90 / 3.6 full-frame equiv.) – $400

    Canon 50 / 1.8 on APS-C (80 / 2.9 full-frame equiv. ) – $100

  7. I have both the Nikon 1 and a Nikon D7000. Both meet my needs, both produce great pictures. The FT-1 adapter makes the N1 even stronger, in my opinion. And they both use the same batteries. I am looking forward to getting the 32mm f1.2.

    The compactness of the N1 system meets a need to travel light, and having the ability to change lenses. The D7000 allows for a different element in photography, one with more manual control than the N1. I don’t like lugging around a lot of stuff when I am out to do photography, so both systems meet my needs. And both produce great pictures.

    The pictures in this article are great – they show what both the lens can do, and what the N1 system can do. And they show what the author / photographer can do as well.

    As far as I am concerned, the sensor size is irrelevant. What is important is understanding the tools one has, and how to use them well. Every camera has its limitations, every lens has its limitations, and every photographer has his or her own limitations as well. Equipment is only a part of the puzzle – the creative element and vision behind a photograph is as important – more important – but knowledge of the tools of the trade makes the job – any job – much easier to accomplish.

  8. Why is it that folks talk about the equivalent focal-length/field-of-view but the equivalent depth-of-field gets lost.

    Isn’t the equivalent lens — a lens that will produce a similar image (framing and DOF) — something like a 85/3.5?

    • Yes, roughly, probably, but …. To save Steve pointing it out a third or fourth time, with the light gathering properties of an f1.2….so able to get a shot with faster shutter speed and lower ISO than a 3.3. The pictures look great, depth of field just fine for a light walk around that is enjoyable to use. Whether it’s worth the $ or not is entirely a personal thing, clearly it is for the author.

    • I’m really glad you are open to criticism! It’s not a big mistake, but double-check your facts next time 😉

      Most importantly of all: nice photos!!!

  9. Thanks for the feedback everyone. As I previously mentioned, when I first saw this lens I realized it could be quite useful in certain conditions (e.g. ballet). Normally I use a D3s and D800 from the back of the venue, but I need something discrete when the audience or performers can be distracted. I tried a Fuji x100, X-Pro 1 and Sony Rx1, but they are just too slow to focus. Picked up a V1 a month ago and the 32 a couple of weeks ago and have been shooting under a variety of conditions. Super fast autofocusing, great light gathering ability and quiet shutter is a killer combo whether at a performance, on the street or even in broad daylight (1/6,000 sec shutter speed helps). Image quality is much better than I expected and as someone pointed out the raw files beg to be converted to b&w. Still learning the camera but can’t wait to shoot some ballet performances next month.

  10. It’s tempting to say that there’s a lot of BS in this article, but that would be really impolite (instead I’d just like to ask you not to write incorrect things (e.g. f1.2 is only HALF a stop brighter than f1.4) and make silly comparisons).

    I am impressed by your images, you used your gear very well, but the 32 is not a bargain in my opinion. It costs exactly as much as it should, maybe even $100 too much.

    If you want a real bargain, you can get pretty much the exact same look (with better resolution) for $500, body included: Oly E-PM1 + 45mm f1.8.

    Have a nice day

    • I agree with Thomas. The pictures are nice but the title of this article is “It’s a bargain” and it just not. In addition to Olympus 45/1.8, Canon 85/1.8 is $300, and Nikon 85G/1.8 was $399 on sale for a while. These are sharp wide open

      • Good point, David! Especially the Canon 85/1.8 is a stellar performer and can cover FULL FRAME! One of the few reasons I would ever consider shooting a Canon DSLR 😀

  11. don’t agree there, it doesn’t mean that you know how all painters that end up purchasing their tool while at the market, therefore judment become not constructive,
    you probably “never heard”… if any artist want “result” then, as any artist would do, he choose his tool to achieve his art. don’t you choose you paint or bruch while purchasing? you look at what is available and break the choice! what ever any one purchase is “up to him”, i usually say myself “up to me” and my choice is mine and i’m happy or not with it. to come back to camera: most of them are good enough to achieve “result”, i still own a 2 mega pixel nikon camera and sometime take it our for a ride, i come back home and sometime get out a nice picturefrom it.. you know why? because i shot what had to be shot that day, i forget about the “pixel”, the “lens quality” or the 10000 euro combo , i’m only proud and happy about my picture, that’s the “one” i wanted that day..; guys be happy with what you have and do not compare materialistics objects … feel happy with what you already have, you already own more than two third of humans living on that planet.

  12. One other thing to consider is that this 32mm at F1.2 will blow away any full frame lens as far as sharpness goes. The FF lenses will be soft and show a lot of chromatic aberration or color fringing.

    This 32mm at F1.2 is super sharp and corrected and this adds to its 3D pop, as the subject that is in focus is really sharp compared to the blurred background.

    Also the shallow depth of field that this lens creates is about right.

    Going more shallow is fine for some but really it starts to get silly and just become a special effect that gets old fast.

    This lens and camera allow “real pictures” to be taken, the kind of photojournalist type pics that win awards or build a career. Think Salgado, Bresson, Ritts.

    None of these masters did the Bokeh thing or even cared.

    • Stvennorquist, are you serious? will blow away any full frame lens on sharpness? What are you smoking? Have you tried any of the recent full frame primes? Do you own or have you shot with, or have you read any reviews on Sigma 35 1.4 lens?

    • A lot of “judgement” is being thrown about here. I prefer to leave that up to each photographer. With this lens… one cannot go shallow.

  13. Think the proof is in the pudding on this one. Beautiful pictures! I love my OM-D with 25 1.4 and 45 1.8, but wouldn’t say I could do any better than these with my setup. Congrats!

  14. You financial analysis is a joke! You’re comparing it to full frame lenses which can work on 3 different sensors FX DX nad even m4/3 via an adapter, Also a 50mm 1.4 lens mounted on a 24mp Sony NEX will give you the same FOV and DoF for $400. You like the lens that’s fine, you take great photo that’s fine, but as a financial advisor…..you’re fired!

  15. I like the results in your hands. When the price drops I’ll get one but not before.
    (By the way, f1.2 is only a half stop faster than f1.4)

  16. I have an OMD and have used it for over a year.
    Then I got a V1 based on Steve’s review and started to see what all the magic is with this little CX sensor.
    I then added the 6.7-13mm lens and was blown away by the creative capabilities.
    Here is a sample of what the V1 with the 6.7-13mm can do:
    http://www.flickr.com/photos/[email protected]/9240377542/in/set-72157633029810049

    Just the other day I added the 18.5mm lens and found it to also have a unique magic all its own.

    Seeing the pics Joe took with the new 32mm tells me that Nikon knows what it is doing with the Nikon 1 series of cameras.

    What I like about this camera compared to the OMD and other cameras I have used is that the raw files it creates are “film like” in character.
    These pics that Joe posted are much nicer in my opinion than most of the Leica, Fuji and Nex pics we see on this forum.
    These pics of Joe’s have character, pop, texture, impact and most importantly, are devoid of that “too perfect” digital look you get with the higher mega pixel sensors.
    I can see vignetting in most of these shots and I assume this is the lens rather than a post processing effect.
    These pics have a roughness and old school charm that you get with film cameras.
    The B&W pics are especially nice and I find the V1 CX sensor excels in creating raw files that just beg for B&W conversion.

    Thank you for this review Joe, i will now start saving my pennies for the 32mm F1.2!

  17. great option , pricey though , especially since a lot of nikon 1 users got their camera because they became so cheap. this price is more in line with initial V1 kit prices than latest bargain sales..;

    it will not sell Iin large volumes at this price but it is great to have it in the system.

  18. “Nikon 32/1.2 – $899
    Nikon 85/1.4g – $1649
    Canon 85/1.2L – $1999”

    Olympus 45/1.8 – $399
    Canon 50/1.4 (on any APS-C EOS) – $399
    Canon 50/1.8 (on any APS-C EOS) – $75
    Nikkor 50/1.4 (on any APS-C Nikon) – $469
    Nikkor 50/1.8 (on any APS-C Nikon) – $219
    Sony SEL 50/1.8 – 298$

  19. Joe,

    Thanks for the write-up. Nice photos too, some of the first I have seen from this lens, as a matter of fact.

    And Steve: don your lab coat, grab you clipboard and test this thing out, for goodness sake. This thing looks grrrreat.

    Jan

  20. Joe, you take great pics. I disagree that the lens is a great deal though. Nikon needs to produce a portrait lens that is a bit more affordable to compete with M43 and NEX, who carry the day in this regard (especially the 45mm 1.8 which is a fine lens). I own a V1 and just can’t see dropping this kind of cash on this lens with a system with very good but not great IQ. For now I will shoot with the 18.5.

    • Thanks Austin. The 45/1.8 sounds great but I need all the speed I can get when I shoot ballet performances in low light. The fast autofocusing of the V1 combined with a quiet shutter and f/1.2 lens was too irresistible to ignore. I will shoot several performances next month, but my preliminary testing suggests this setup should work well. I hear nothing but good things about the 45/1.8 and if my 32/1.2 doesn’t work it might be worth a try.

  21. Olympus 45/1.8 lens which weighs 80 grams, costs $329 (on sale) and is 90mm/1.8 equivalent with pretty much the same or better depth of field as the Nikon 32/1.2, and m43 system’s high ISO is much better then Nikon 1 series. Did I mention the worlds fastest AF on latest Olympus/Panasonic cameras?

    • The Nikon 32mm has actually a slightly shallower dof, though he difference is marginal. The mft sensor wins on high iso performance, but f1.2 versus f1,8 gathers more light. The mft AF is really fast, but gets bettered by the Nikon N1, in good or decent light at least. No matter how one tweaks it, these small sensor Nikons have a few things going for them, one of which being fun.

    • “world’s fastest AF” ha ha it’s not even faster than the camera you’re comparing it to.

  22. Great photos and the lens looks like a must have for serious N1 shooters. I picked up a huge bargain demo V1 with the 10-10mm for 199 including 3 years warranty from a dealer on Saturday as they were clearing their shelfs. This 32mm and the wide 6.7-13mm zoom are now on my wish list. And travelling with one of the top IQ compacts (RX1 or Sigma DP2m) and the V1 with the wide zoom and this ultrafast 32mm my plan.

  23. A key advantage to the V1 at f/1.2 is that you can shoot at 1/16000. None of my DSLRs can do that. It makes shooting wide open in broad daylight possible. Which is pretty cool.

  24. Why spend a grand for a dinky sensor. Go Nikon SLR and the 85/1.4D. Why use too little?

    • It is called size and weight and cost and performance. The V1, new can be bought today with a 10mm 2.8 for $269 with free fed ex ship. Add on this 32 1,2 and you will be at $1100 to have a 28 and 85 equiv, two fantastic lenses. The V1 is super fast to AF, meters well, has superb color, takes great video, is built very nice, has long battery life and is MUCH smaller than any DSLR setup while saving lots of cash. This dinky sensor can give fantastic almost film like results.

        • Hi. Yeah, even though I know better I’m still finding it hard to come to terms with the idea of using such a small sensor. But, more and more, I’m finding myself wanting greater DOF for my burgeoning interest in street photography. This camera is looking good, particularly at current prices.

          BTW this is my first post here and I want to say what a great site it is. Keep up the good work Steve!

        • “I’m amazed that people still get hung up on sensor size.”

          Sure they do. Small sensors eliminate your creative option of utilizing depth of field. This is the same reason artists “get hung up on” brush size or type of paint.

          • Yes, it’s hard to get shallow DOF with a smaller sensor, but at the same time, it’s harder to get *more* DOF with a larger sensor. I shoot medium format most of the time, and DOF at f/2.8 on a 75mm lens is *very* shallow. Sometimes I’d love it if I could have more DOF without stopping down too much (as I want the light gathering ability of a fast aperture, but not the shallow DOF).

            Smaller sensors and film sizes have advantages, as well as disadvantages. I don’t use digital at all these days, but the V1 with lens for $269 is a stunning deal.

          • Garry, you can’t have both good light gathering capacity and wide DoF unless you can change the exposure time. So roughly speaking f/5 MF lens will give you the same DoF and will gather the same amount of light as Nikon 1 with f/1.2 lens that has the same angle of view (easy to see why — physical diameters of those lenses are the same in this case). The images will be essentially the same if you use the sensor with the same efficiency in both cameras (unfortunately MF sensors or film these days do lag behind small sensors so you’ll see worse quality from the MF camera at the equivalent settings).

          • Then you mix with a very odd bunch of painters – ‘paint type’ is one of the very few things artists will really get hung up on.

          • Agree… sensor size does matter, you cannot go wide open with f1.2 in plan day light so at the end you will end up shooting a 32mm lens, with a narrow point of view @ f4.5 – 5.6. Oh yes, but it is small.

          • There are of course some advanced techniques that can be used to circumvent this problem. One way to delve into these dark arts is to use so called ND filter.

          • At f/1.2 and 1/16,000 sec you’re about equivalent to f/16 at 1/100sec so should be fine on a normal sunny day at ISO 100. If brighter use a ND filter

      • What a joy walking around with 85/1.2 and 28/2.8 equivalent lenses on a small body that focuses as fast as a full size DSLR all weighing the same as one Nikon 85/1.4g lens. Thanks Nikon for this dinky sensor.

        • lets see…. up until recently, a terrific, small and powerful 16MP with lightning, with touch screen Af among other things, and a nice little flash that could be bounced, fast AF Panasonic GX1 was for sale everywhere for $199, including B&H and Adorama. I think the price went up to $249 but if you look hard enough, the $199 deal is still out there. That is $199. Lets add a terrific super sharp and extremely fast AF Panasonic 14/2.5 lens which can be had used for $150, ok if you want to buy brand new $250. Add the above mentioned super sharp wide open 45/1.8 for about $329 on sale and you have a small and powerful setup for under $800. Oh and you have over 30 lenses to choose from TODAY in m43 camp including incredible 75/1.8, amazing Panasonic 7-14, super sharp and weather sealed macro in 60mm F/2.8. Now lets look at Nikon’s 1 lens setup……. ok lets not, it is not even fair to compare

          • The GX1 will give you about the same IQ (look at DXO), without a viewfinder, and with AF that is not as good. The GX1 a fine camera in a better developed system, but at least try to be objective and see the other side.

        • I have both OMD and V1. Both terrific cameras. What I like about the Nikon V1 is that the menu system is so simple to use while you have to be an intergalactic navigator to fly the OMD by menu which is why I only use a few of it’s functions, tending to leave it set up in one mode as I like. The other thing is just the really nice solid feel of the V1 and it’s astonishingly good images for the price.
          OMD for creative photography and bigger images. (Prints?)
          Nikon V1 for snapshot photography and simplicity of operation. Both excel.
          By the way i have got some shots with good defocusing of background even with the Nikon standard kit zoom believe it or not.
          In my experience the whole Nikon V system is a bargain not just the 32 1.2.
          I love it. Like my old friend the Nikon EM it might be simple and have it’s limitations ( not always a bad thing) but the image quality is right up there. Unless of course, you are an obsessive pixel peeper, or sensor fetishist, in which case, nobody can help you, because you’ll never be satisfied and will need to buy the newest camera every month or die!

      • Besides the size/weight difference, the smaller sensor’s 2.7x crop factor can also be an advantage in certain situations where ‘extra reach’ is required (candid street photography, wildlife photography, etc.)

        • If you like “extra reach” just crop a bigger sensored camera photo. Not much better than digital zoom if you look at it like that.

          • But you shed MP’s like crazy when you start cropping in post.

            Also, as I understand, using native lenses on a crop-sensor camera is more similar to ‘optical zoom’ then it is a ‘digital crop’ (despite the term ‘crop sensor’) and generally better IQ. Is that correct?

    • I’m with you. The way-too-small sensor and the lack of DOF options makes this a non-starter. More than size/weight, this is a result of Nikon simply (and wisely) wanting to protect their DSLR market.

  25. Great photos! Really tempted to sell my bulky Nikon DSLR and go with something extremely portable….
    Right now where’s the best place to get a V1 at bargain prices?
    Jet

Comments are closed.