New "mirrorless" Nikon

[uaiomex]

After reaching a population of 1.3 billion, I think they earned the name of the "People's Republic".
Eduardo

Hi there is another country in Asia, sometimes called PCR also known as China...

Best regards
Erik

[meyerweb]

Right now all we have on focus speed is Nikon's claims, which may or may not be born out in practice.  Tests at this site show the EPL-3 as faster at single shot AF except in dim light.

http://www.lesnumeriques.com/duels.php?ty=1&ma1=31&mo1=1521&p1=11887&ma2=32&mo2=1446&p2=11333&ph=21

I wonder if a good bit of the focus "speed" isn't simply because DOF is a mile deep.  Time will tell.

But I don't see who, in the US, is going to buy this. P&S upgraders aren't going to be satisfied with the tiny zoom range of the (relatively) small lenses, nor the size of the 10-100. With P&S bodies routinely offering 10X and even 20X zooms, the 10-30 is going to seem pretty limiting.

For the buyer who knows a bit more, and wants a bit more, m43 seems to offer a much better value. Smaller bodies and lenses, a wider range of lenses, and larger sensors. The only real advantages I see are (maybe) faster AF, a couple of somewhat clever features, and the promised ability to use F mount lenses  some day, which may be of value if you already own a bunch of Nikon glass.

Even there, though, I have to wonder about the price and bulk of said adapter, and the value of turning a 20mm lens into a 54mm lens, or mounting a V1 to something as huge as a 70-200 2.8.

[John Camp]

<snip>
So I'll ask you (or anyone else) again, with so much being similar (size, weight, price, rear LCD, color choices, new lens mount/lenses, no mirror, etc, etc), what do you think the most significant differences are with the Nikon, that would sway you from the Sony with it's obvious sensor/image IQ advantages?

All right, I'll answer that. I have both m4/3 and Nikon systems. I can carry a three-body, six lens, removable viewfinder, charger, extra batteries system in what amounts to a large briefcase. I can put it on the luggage shelf in the narrow-body regional jets (the ones with one seat on one side, and two seats on the other.) The same system, in the Nikon, would take a roller case and would have to be checked. The NEX bodies are smaller, but the rest of the system isn't. The NEX should be compared to the D7000 and the K5, etc, and those, frankly, are better cameras. The weight savings of the small body is insignificant if you have to tow around a roller-case full of lenses anyway.

I would assume that the Nikon 1 system will, when fully rolled out, fit into a case that will be no larger than an m4/3, with the capability of going smaller yet. Look at the very small X lenses recently released by Panasonic for the m4/3. Nikon is fully capable of reproducing those, and I think eventually will. The future of these systems in involves size, not resolution or marginal utility like super-high ISOs or extreme shadow detail. When Nikon produces its smallest collapsible zoom lenses, like the Panasonics, you will be able to put this system in a purse. The NEX system is constrained on lens size, and there's not much to be done about that. Their smallest lenses will aways be larger than the Nikon or m4/3 smallest lenses. Furthermore, the prints produced by these cameras at any commercial facility will be largely indistinguishable.

Nikon didn't try to insult anybody with this -- they just built it for a different market that isn't you. You don't mind hanging a camera around your neck while you're at a party, but a lot of people do mind. When the Nikons reach their optimum small size, they will be carried in purses, not in roller bags.

JC   

[BernardLanguillier]

Right now all we have on focus speed is Nikon's claims, which may or may not be born out in practice.  Tests at this site show the EPL-3 as faster at single shot AF except in dim light.

http://www.lesnumeriques.com/duels.php?ty=1&ma1=31&mo1=1521&p1=11887&ma2=32&mo2=1446&p2=11333&ph=21

Right... I am starting to doubt your willingness to look at this discussion fairly... your summary makes it look like the Pen is better at focusing... here are the figures in the sequence proposed by the tester:

Dark scenes (those were the compacts have been frustrating users):
- J1: 0.5 sec
- Pen E-P3: 1.6 sec

Bright scene:
- J1: 0.37 sec
- Pen E-P3: 0.25 sec

So what this means is that the Pen is basically unusable in dark places, even with static objects, while the J1 pretty much maintains its good day light performance. On the other hand the 2 cameras are only 0.12 second apart in easy scenes. I would think that most people would call this a home run in favor of the J1 but you seem to have a different view.

I would be interested in looking at test results for moving objects but my guess is that it would be even uglier.

Cheers,
Bernard

[Steve Weldon]

As mentioned before, this is the camera I would use when I don't intend to do "serious" photography, I use the D3x otherwise either by itself or with a robust pano kit when I need serious resolution.

In this context, here is the value I see with the Nikon 1 series:
- the zoom lenses are smaller (18mm shorter for basic lens kit, 47mm shorter for tele zoom) and the system has the potential be become even smaller in the future,
- the AF seems much faster indeed,
- I'll be able to use my existing set of Nikon lenses if the need arises.

Cheers,
Bernard

It will be interesting to see if the AF is significantly faster.  They're marketing it as much faster, but this is one of the areas where the proof is in the using.

I'm personally not interested in using my DSLR lenses with these cameras.. if I was using a full size DSLR lens, considering it's size, I don't see an advantage to using it with a smaller body.  Though, I am interested in "pocketable" lenses, those that are pancake in design or fold when not in use.  I think this is what I like so much about the x100 over the NEX-5.. the x100 is what it is, you can't hang other lenses on it.  So I use it in it's "pocketable" (true, large pockets) configuration.. and if I need more then I'll use a DSLR. 

The E mount lenses do offer size advantages, but so far not enough to sway.  If the Nikon 1 system's lenses are small enough, and I could carry several relatively small lenses in a situation where zoom makes more practical sense than a foot zoom.. then I see this as an advantage for the Nikon 1.  But then so would a Superzoom.  It will be interesting to see image quality trade-offs between the relatively inexpensive superzooms and the much more expensive Nikon 1.

The biggest question for me, is how much image quality I'm willing to give up and when, for the sake of small.  Currently the Fuji x100 is my minimum standard for image quality, in that I'll use it with the expectation I can make captures I'll want to sell, print large, or use on my website without qualification.   I've used 4/3's systems and I find they're on the other side of the line (if only just) for these purposes.   

I love PNS cameras, my wife adopted our NEX-5.. but these are family function/outing image quality cameras.  My wife is willing to carry the NEX-5 around for family functions, while I'm more happy with PNS style.. She says she likes the look of the Nikon 1 and would use it for family functions and light duty travel.  But then she's Asian and fits the demo it's being marketed to..   

You see, I think like many others here a modern high quality PNS is "good enough" for such functions.  I'd like more image quality, but not enough to carry more size/weight in such circumstances.  And for those special family functions such as graduations, weddings, etc.. I don't mind bringing along the DSLR.. in fact people count on it.

Will a 2.7x sensor camera's image quality make a difference to me?  Probably not at current standards.

Sorry for being verbose.. but this is only part of what goes in inside my mind when deciding to buy a new camera.

[Steve Weldon]

All right, I'll answer that. I have both m4/3 and Nikon systems. I can carry a three-body, six lens, removable viewfinder, charger, extra batteries system in what amounts to a large briefcase. I can put it on the luggage shelf in the narrow-body regional jets (the ones with one seat on one side, and two seats on the other.) The same system, in the Nikon, would take a roller case and would have to be checked. The NEX bodies are smaller, but the rest of the system isn't. The NEX should be compared to the D7000 and the K5, etc, and those, frankly, are better cameras. The weight savings of the small body is insignificant if you have to tow around a roller-case full of lenses anyway.

I would assume that the Nikon 1 system will, when fully rolled out, fit into a case that will be no larger than an m4/3, with the capability of going smaller yet. Look at the very small X lenses recently released by Panasonic for the m4/3. Nikon is fully capable of reproducing those, and I think eventually will. The future of these systems in involves size, not resolution or marginal utility like super-high ISOs or extreme shadow detail. When Nikon produces its smallest collapsible zoom lenses, like the Panasonics, you will be able to put this system in a purse. The NEX system is constrained on lens size, and there's not much to be done about that. Their smallest lenses will aways be larger than the Nikon or m4/3 smallest lenses. Furthermore, the prints produced by these cameras at any commercial facility will be largely indistinguishable.

Nikon didn't try to insult anybody with this -- they just built it for a different market that isn't you. You don't mind hanging a camera around your neck while you're at a party, but a lot of people do mind. When the Nikons reach their optimum small size, they will be carried in purses, not in roller bags.

JC   

1.  I've been carrying compact DSLR kit on flights forever.. I dare say I travel internationally and regionally more than the average guy, so I know what/how to pack to cover specific events.  I can do this with carry-on.  I don't think I'm alone, I know many who do this.  I don't need 3 bodies or six lenses for such work, and in the event I do.. nothing but the best image quality will do.. so I Fedex my gear ahead of me in military hard cases properly locked and insured.  Sure, I wish everything was smaller and lighter but I haven't been compromising my photography because they're not.

2.  My NEX lenses are significantly smaller than my DSLR lenses.. at least at comparable quality.  Yet, it's not a professional tool imo.. so my wife uses it.

3.  I don't carry a purse.. never thought about the need to fit my camera in one.

[BernardLanguillier]

I'm personally not interested in using my DSLR lenses with these cameras.. if I was using a full size DSLR lens, considering it's size, I don't see an advantage to using it with a smaller body.  Though, I am interested in "pocketable" lenses, those that are pancake in design or fold when not in use.  I think this is what I like so much about the x100 over the NEX-5.. the x100 is what it is, you can't hang other lenses on it.  So I use it in it's "pocketable" (true, large pockets) configuration.. and if I need more then I'll use a DSLR.  

Hi Steve,

I understand. Using DSLRs lenses on a J1 would not be my main usage either, but knowing you can do it is helpful. If the AF speed is preserved with AF lenses, it could also open up new doors for some applications where pixel density matters (birding,...) since it will turn a 300 f2.8 into a 800 f2.8 and the lack of mirror/shutter could help achieve sharp results.

It opens also the possibility to use a 1 series camera as a backup for important trips where bringing 2 bodies is not possible for logistical reasons (heli travel,...).

Regarding AF speed, the first independant tests show that it is 3 times faster than the newest Olyumpus on static subjects when the light is low. Another poster did provide an interesting link about this in the other Nikon 1 series thread.

Cheers,
Bernard

[Steve Weldon]

Hi Steve,

I understand. Using DSLRs lenses on a J1 would not be my main usage either, but knowing you can do it is helpful. If the AF speed is preserved with AF lenses, it could also open up new doors for some applications where pixel density matters (birding,...) since it will turn a 300 f2.8 into a 800 f2.8 and the lack of mirror/shutter could help achieve sharp results.

It opens also the possibility to use a 1 series camera as a backup for important trips where bringing 2 bodies is not possible for logistical reasons (heli travel,...).

Regarding AF speed, the first independant tests show that it is 3 times faster than the newest Olyumpus on static subjects when the light is low. Another poster did provide an interesting link about this in the other Nikon 1 series thread.

Cheers,
Bernard

1.  I think its interesting you could do this.. but probably not practical.  Yet, every time we get a new body we get the people who experiment and post fun stuff.. you can never tell.

2.  When I hear "1 series" I think fondly to the shelf holding my Canon's..   And to the future when/if they finally announce the 1ds4.

3.  AF sounds promising.  Nikon is hinting it's even faster at picking up moving subjects.. if so, I can't wait for that tech to transfer to the DSLR's.

All sound points, but nothing yet to prompt me to spend nearly $1000 for one.. knowing I'd also need to invest in the lenses.  But it's still early..

[BernardLanguillier]

3.  AF sounds promising.  Nikon is hinting it's even faster at picking up moving subjects.. if so, I can't wait for that tech to transfer to the DSLR's.

Thom Hogan just wrote a short article about this. He believes that this technology is likely to be embedded in the D4 to be announced in a few months.

This would give the options to the photographer to either use the mirror for those needed the best view of their scene, or with the mirror up for those needing the fastest AF and continous focus in video.

I like this idea, it does make a lot of sense. Now nobody knows if Nikon will go this route of course. It also has the potential to be able to focus very fast from anywhere in the frame which will provide tremendous new creative opportunities for sport shooters. Who isn't tired of all these images with fashion models or atheletes in the center of the frame because it is the only area where they can be accurately and reliably focused.

Anyway, back on the J1/V1, Nikon including this technology first in a consumer body shows that they have really understood something about the pains of everyday compact camera shooting. It reminds me of the Nike commercial "life is a sport". Oftentimes the accepted level of technological progress is still very far from answering the needs of people and it is good to see that some companies really focus their best effort on helping solve widespread issues like... out of focus images.

Cheers,
Bernard

[Bernard ODonovan]

@ New Mirrorless Camera’s, the ones that caught my eye recently…

First the Pentax Q. The new Sony BSI sensor and the small sensor size lead to very practical image taking for targeted users (where dept of field needed). The lens set is truly pocketable and for those who then add a converter and full sized SLR lenses this leads to spectacular supertele capability. Remember on full frame a supertele lens is very big, very heavy, very expensive and across a distance heat haze and dust will soften an image, so the full frame advantage is less obvious.

The feature and function set on the camera is not aimed at me and the standard prime appears to have barrel distortion so whilst I think Pentax are making a great contribution to photography and I love their brave approach to innovative products the Pentax Q is not my thang.

Second the Fuji X10. 2/3 Inch sensor, not back lit but does have Fuji’s other DR expansion features for low light. Looks like it will also appeal to those that bought the X100 for its retro feel. The optical zoom finder, whilst only 80% view is still very interesting as they claim the experience is large and bright to the user.

Like the Pentax Q, I love that Fuji have been brave to focus a product this way, a great contribution to photography but still not quite what I am after.

Last but not least the new Nikon 1. An even bigger sensor also not back lit but still small enough. If we were thinking in terms of TV sensor tubes and C mount lenses this would be classed a 1 Inch sensor, however it is not that large. With a diagonal just under 16mm it is slightly larger than the diagonal of super 16mm cine film which has a diagonal of 14.4 mm. Nikon appear to suggest ‘’1’’ is the future in place of the Nikon ‘’I’’ of the past.

The film world is very much following the still image world of digital change. Nikon do not bring out a new lens mount every week and the old F mount has survived the digital world of DSLR’s. I suspect they have chosen this new mount as a long term mount for compact still system camera, combo cams (as in the product being launched) and also a professional mount for motion picture camera’s that would shoot this new format the way 16mm film was shoot with C mount lenses. By using the new technologies the need for large heavy indexed lenses is also overcome and so the need for a robust PL type mount is now less import as lenses will be electronic and smaller and auto focus will become a reality for this use. So their CX mount may also replace the need for PL mounts in some applications should they make any professional digital cinema products.

The tech spec of the camera is very significant for all imaging systems. If focus, metering and image quality of both sensor and view finder continue to improve, I suspect we will see this approach on all popular formats. It seems Sony’s new view finder is a step up over optical APS-C viewfinders and almost as good as the average Full Frame viewfinder. The first nail is most certainly in the coffin of the DSLR. Once patent and production capability issues are overcome I suspect this new Nikon will be copied in the larger formats. It will be interesting if Nikon makes the switch on its so called professional model replacements.

I really like the concept of the Nikon 1. The functions it offers over the competition, the ‘’possible’’ future use of the mount and the convenience and price advantage of a smaller format. 10 Mega pixels (less than the Q’s even smaller sensor) obviously chosen to make the most of the faster processing engine for the new features. They really have done their home work… Well done Nikon…

I am quite happy with my ‘’Full Frame’’ 135 Film SLR for portrait work. If my SLR manufacturer brings out a Mirrorless body with a great EVF and Nikon 1 style hybrid auto focus, then I will drool and drool. However I do not NEED a DSLR or Mirrorless Full Frame. Full Frame is the goldilocks format for portrait work. Film more than meets my needs.

NEX 7 is interesting for wide angles (when the top lenses fill out, if they fill out). Not a NEED for me though. I will get way more fun from the Nikon 1 by the looks…

4/3, may as well not exist, just does not interest me (2:3 ratio formats only please), and I am not inspired by the makers in the 4/3 group either. If it suits you, good luck…

This is how I feel today… as the guys at ‘’RED’’ would say, expect change, with me change is guaranteed… LOL

[Lonnie Utah]

I was looking at some sample images from the J1.  I was surprised at how much noise there is in the J1 images even at ISO 200. 



Compared to the (now discontinued, NEX-5.  In my mind, that isn't quite fair.  To make it even, they should have used the 5n.  Oh, well.  It doesn't matter as the NEX-5 appears superior anyway...



These are un-edited crops 100% right from the images posted on digitalcamerainfo.com.

[BernardLanguillier]

I was looking at some sample images from the J1.  I was surprised at how much noise there is in the J1 images even at ISO 200.  

True, low ISO seems pretty noisy.

What is interesting though is that the noise level of the J1 seems to be pretty constant whatever the ISO, or to be more accurate the increase of noise with ISO seems to be less than with other cameras it was compared against.

It seems to have been optimized more for higher ISOs, which might make sense considering the moderate aperture you end up having with compact lenses.

All in all though, as was said several times, the 1 series is not trying to compete with the NEX.

Cheers,
Bernard

[Lonnie Utah]

All in all though, as was said several times, the 1 series is not trying to compete with the NEX.

Well like it or not, Nikon IS competing with the NEX, and losing badly.  The 1 series and the NEX are basically the same size (within a few millimeters of each other in all dimensions) and in the same price range (the nex-5n is CHEAPER than the V1 and has with better specs than the V1).  Like it or not, fair or unfair, they will compete with each other.  

If you look at Amazon's top 100 DSLR's, the NEX-7 (with the kit lens) is the top selling mirrorless right now trending upwards in the mid teens (17 when I posted this).  The NEX-7 body only is trending up in the low 20's, two versions of the NEX-5n are in the mid to high 20's.  The first 1 series offering is the V1 two lens kit in the mid to low 30's with the 1 lens kit is in the high 30's.  In just 6 short days since it was announced, the J1 has fallen out of the top 100.  There are 9 different NEX offerings in the top 100, compared to 4 Nikon 1 series offerings.  It looks like lots of people had waited to see what Nikon had up it's sleeve and have decided to pass in favor of the NEX or other systems.   Nikon 1 Series = too little, too late.

[fotometria gr]

Well like it or not, Nikon IS competing with the NEX, and losing badly.  The 1 series and the NEX are basically the same size (within a few millimeters of each other in all dimensions) and in the same price range (the nex-5n is CHEAPER than the V1 and has with better specs than the V1).  Like it or not, fair or unfair, they will compete with each other.  

If you look at Amazon's top 100 DSLR's, the NEX-7 (with the kit lens) is the top selling mirrorless right now trending upwards in the mid teens (17 when I posted this).  The NEX-7 body only is trending up in the low 20's, two versions of the NEX-5n are in the mid to high 20's.  The first 1 series offering is the V1 two lens kit in the mid to low 30's with the 1 lens kit is in the high 30's.  In just 6 short days since it was announced, the J1 has fallen out of the top 100.  There are 9 different NEX offerings in the top 100, compared to 4 Nikon 1 series offerings.  It looks like lots of people had waited to see what Nikon had up it's sleeve and have decided to pass in favor of the NEX or other systems.   Nikon 1 Series = too little, too late.

Just what they thought better target group..., nothing more nothing less...., you (and others) obviously think that NEX TG is ....photographers! Cheers, Theodoros. www.fotometria.gr

[BernardLanguillier]

Well like it or not, Nikon IS competing with the NEX, and losing badly.  The 1 series and the NEX are basically the same size (within a few millimeters of each other in all dimensions) and in the same price range (the nex-5n is CHEAPER than the V1 and has with better specs than the V1).  Like it or not, fair or unfair, they will compete with each other.  

Cannot agree on the size of the system once lenses are factored in. As mentioned before the standard zoom is 2cm shorter on the J1/V1 (that is 2/3 of the size), the tele zoom is 4.5 cm shorter.

But anyway, I am sure that some people will look at these 2 cameras the way you are looking at them. Now, how about the possibility that these people are not the targeted population for the Nikon 1 system?

How about the possibility that AF performance is the most important spec of a compact camera for some people (even if it is not written per se on the all important spec sheet)?

Final post from me on this.

Cheers,
Bernard

[RobSaecker]

Well like it or not, Nikon IS competing with the NEX, and losing badly.  The 1 series and the NEX are basically the same size (within a few millimeters of each other in all dimensions) and in the same price range (the nex-5n is CHEAPER than the V1 and has with better specs than the V1).  Like it or not, fair or unfair, they will compete with each other.  

If you look at Amazon's top 100 DSLR's, the NEX-7 (with the kit lens) is the top selling mirrorless right now trending upwards in the mid teens

Wait, you're comparing the pre-sale figures of two cameras that haven't even been released yet, and declaring one the winner based on that? You can't be serious. Six months from now Amazon's numbers might mean something, but not now.

[Lonnie Utah]

Wait, you're comparing the pre-sale figures of two cameras that haven't even been released yet, and declaring one the winner based on that? You can't be serious. Six months from now Amazon's numbers might mean something, but not now.

It's a metric.  It's up to the reader to evaluate the validity of the metric.  Given how the sales for the V1 have tanked on there in the past week, I'm not sure will have much to look at in 6 months...   

[BernardLanguillier]

It's a metric.  It's up to the reader to evaluate the validity of the metric.  Given how the sales for the V1 have tanked on there in the past week, I'm not sure will have much to look at in 6 months...  

Are you saying that:

1. some folks would be stupid enough to pre-order a camera from a new system nobody has even seen without actually trying to use them themselves?

2. You see the number of these folks as a meaningful metrics?

Even the hardcore Nikon fanboy I am would not even think of recommanding something similar! I would rather warmly recommend both the Sony NEX and 4/3 cameras as excellent choices for many usage patterns. 

Cheers,
Bernard

[RobSaecker]

It's a metric.  It's up to the reader to evaluate the validity of the metric.  Given how the sales for the V1 have tanked on there in the past week, I'm not sure will have much to look at in 6 months...   

It's an utterly worthless metric.

Are you saying that:

1. some folks would be stupid enough to pre-order a camera from a new system nobody has even seen without actually trying to use them themselves?

Exactly. Only those with more money than sense are going to pre-order the Nikon 1.

[AlfSollund]

My thoughts.

The question to ask; does the new product solve any problems. And yes, it might solve some:

1. Todays compacts and mirror-less cameras are incredibly slow in all aspects for taking photos of humans. Since family people often wants to wants to picture others in family this is a must-win  .

2. Todays compacts and mirror-less cameras have lousy batteries that only lasts for a few shots. Not all people want to carry 4 spare batteries to capture one birthday  .

3. Todays compacts and mirror-less cameras have to high picture quality. People want crappy solutions like Apple, low-quality music format, etc. With a tiny sensor  limited by diffraction from largest aperture (on "normal" consumer zoom) Nikon delivers  .