Got a tip for us?
Let us know
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
Nikon V1 thoughts
- Thread starter maflynn
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
Yes - this looks very interesting - especially that 35 f1.4!
I wasn't convinced by the viewfinder on the X100 though, and it'll be interesting to see how the optical/electronic mix works on an interchangeable lens camera.
Disappointingly it seems that Canon are still 6+ months off their mirror less entry.
I didn't like it when I tried it in the shop either. In particular the fact that the optical and digital did not show the same field of view. I've read that the system in the X1 auto-zooms to match the lens (like the frameline selection in a Leica M camera) but cannot cope with zooms (again like a Leica M). Hopefully they've fixed some of the issues with the X100.
Similar adaptors exist for other systems. The price has always been the issue...
This is the first I've seen with electronic aperture control for EF lenses.
And as a Canon lens owner...
You're right about the price. I guess it just caught my eye as someone thinking of trading a second Canon body in for a mirrorless - this would mean I still had some sort of back-up body.
I read the review and and a V1.
I'm very happy with the performance of the camera. Between the size and image quality I have no regrets. Dpreview mentioned those who own Nikon products are probably more apt to go with this over another camera and I think that's a fair statement, as I own a Nikon dslr.
I'm waiting for more lenses to be released at this moment
----------
He's generally critical of the V1, but I love his reviews and I agree. I'm more apt to take what he says over many of the other reviews on the net. I also like dpreview's in depth reviews as well
I'm very happy with the performance of the camera. Between the size and image quality I have no regrets. Dpreview mentioned those who own Nikon products are probably more apt to go with this over another camera and I think that's a fair statement, as I own a Nikon dslr.
I'm waiting for more lenses to be released at this moment
----------
He's generally critical of the V1, but I love his reviews and I agree. I'm more apt to take what he says over many of the other reviews on the net. I also like dpreview's in depth reviews as well
I think it's as good a camera as they could have made at that crop factor. It seems to have class leading autofocus, and low light performance is better than it has any right to be.
I really question the combination of swappable lenses (an 'enthusiast' feature) with a small sensor - and the creative limitations that carries. It'll be interesting to see how popular it becomes.
I really question the combination of swappable lenses (an 'enthusiast' feature) with a small sensor - and the creative limitations that carries. It'll be interesting to see how popular it becomes.
Apparently Sony are adding 6x more E mount lenses this year. Anyway this is probably an over simplification (as there are other pros/cons of all these compact camera systems), but here goes:
[1] If you want the best native lens selection, you get micro 4/3.
[2] If you want the best auto focus performance, you get Nikon 1.
[3] If you want best sensor/low light performance or have a lot of legacy lenses, you get a NEX α.
It will be interesting to see what Canon do as well.
[1] If you want the best native lens selection, you get micro 4/3.
[2] If you want the best auto focus performance, you get Nikon 1.
[3] If you want best sensor/low light performance or have a lot of legacy lenses, you get a NEX α.
It will be interesting to see what Canon do as well.
The only reason I can come up with, is the fact that if they used a bigger sensor they would have cannibalized their dslr sector. I mean given the size of the CX sensor can you imagine how much great the IQ could have been with a 4/3 sized sensor.
Given the size, its a perfect camera for me. Awesome pictures, quick AF, and its easier for me to lug around
I agree - that's exactly the reason they limited the sensor size.
And this sensor appears to perform extremely well - with very good low light performance.
I should clarify - when I said 'creative limitations' it's not the low light performance, sharpness, colour or anything like that I'm referring to. It's the ability to separate foreground from background in an image by using low depth of field. This is something that the 1 series is never going to be able to do well - and that's caused by the optical physics of having a small sensor.
Sounds good. They always say 'the best camera is the one you have with you'. A larger DSLR may have better creative capabilities, but if it always gets left at home you may as well not own it.
Last edited:
Yep. Even m43 is limited in this: people oohed and aahed a the Voigtlander 25mm f/0.95 when it came out but this gives the same depth of field and angle of view as a 50mm f/1.8 lens on a 35mm sensor (full frame obviously). Which is really nothing all that impressive.
I'm extremely pleased with the IQ. Sure it can produce some noisy images at ISO 3200 but depending on the situation, they're easily cleaned up with Denoise. Shooting in 1600 and 3200 while not idea gives me the option of not using the flash.
Agreed, and you have determine whether the negatives are show stoppers. I do miss the dynamic range and Depth of Field a larger sensor provides. For my needs right now, this is not a show stopper.
I may at some point upgrade my D70s to a newer model but right now, I find the V1's strengths is that I can carry it our in situations that the DSLR would be a bit unwieldy. The silent electronic flash also allows me to shoot without impacting or interrupting the subjects so it can capture the situation.
^ Coming from the D70s I can see your move to the V1 being completely logical. I have the D300 and my biggest issue became my unwillingness to lug my entire bag everywhere. I don't see myself giving up the DSLR but I am so far quite pleased with my Panasonic GF2. I know that is a MFT system and the V1 isn't, really, but what you're saying rings true. Can the V1 or any other MFT system replace the DSLR? I'm not incredibly sure but I would seriously consider taking the GF2 on a trip over the DSLR. I think this would be great when I go to Chicago or some other place where I spend most of my days walking and walking.
The V1 was in my opinion purposely designed so that would not be the case. I think as technology marches on ML type cameras could very well impact DSLR sales. Particularly the MFT type cameras because you're getting a large sensor. Putting it all together with some great lens selections and features will certainly give them a run for the money in the future.
My photographic needs are totally intertwined with my children's activities so a small camera that has a quick AF and takes great images are my must haves.
I remember taking my this beast with my to Disneyworld one year with my D70s. That got old really quick. The 28-70 f2.8 takes awesome pictures but its a tank of a lens. I nicknamed it the beast given the size and weight
Attachments
I can see it happening eventually, as electronic viewfinders get better.
I'd really like to replace my smaller DSLR with a mirrorless system this year sometime. I like travelling places, and I'd prefer not to be weighed down with a ton of camera stuff (been there, done that).
It would be nice if Canon came out with a system that I could use my existing EF lenses with, but failing that there are a few other good choices out there.
I'd prefer a slightly bigger sensor, but MFT has a lot of great options and it's clearly the market leader. Sony has some nice cameras, but they seem to have mis-designed their sensors so they work poorly with third party lenses (which is a shame, and kind of rules them out for me). I'm looking forward to seeing Fuji's new interchangeable lens camera, and that may be the one for me. Pentax look like they have something interesting coming up soon too...
I've been somewhat disappointed with the samples I've seen from the new Fuji and it's 35mm lens: somewhat soft in the corners with masses of CA.
Ugh. That's a shame... the 35 1.4 seemed like the perfect partner for the body.
I wonder if it's a problem with the lens or the funky new sensor? Fuji should be able to make a decent rangefinder - they co-designed the XPan with Hasselblad after all.
I used to own a Fuji rangefinder. It would be nice to have another!
Then you are looking at the wrong camera as the new one is not a rangefinder! I really wish people would stop calling any old common-or-garden mirrorless camera a rangefinder. Apart from Leica and the now defunct Epson there are no digital rangefinders
()Fuji samples I am talking about are here: http://vladdodan.ro/blog/fuji-x-pro-1-hands-on-preview/
Then you are looking at the wrong camera as the new one is not a rangefinder! I really wish people would stop calling any old common-or-garden mirrorless camera a rangefinder. Apart from Leica and the now defunct Epson there are no digital rangefinders
I'll make do with 'rangefinder-styled'. While it worked well enough, rangefinder focussing isn't something I particularly miss. I'd rather see peaking... but I don't think the Fuji has that.
I have been following this thread with interest. We have a couple of Oly Pens that get used a lot as they are great travel and carry in a tote, messenger bag cameras. I certainly can appreciate why maflynn made the choice that he did. Like many, I am looking forward to seeing the Fuji X1 Pro when it is released. Thanks to a fellow on MR's who brought it to my attention a while ago, there is another mirrorless viewfinder coming out in February and that is the Olympus OM-D. It is rumored to look like the vintage OM series but with a magnesium body, full sensor, etc. We are looking forward to seeing that camera as well. It is great to see this segment expand. Of course we are biased as we still have our original OM-1 w/ two primes and zoom which was lovingly serviced before being placed in storage when its time was over.
- David
- David