• Log in with Facebook Log in with Twitter
Photo

Nikon 1 discontinued?


  • Please log in to reply
26 replies to this topic

#21 Brightcolours

Brightcolours

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 4,542 posts
  • LocationThe Netherlands

Posted 19 August 2016 - 02:17 PM

A 40mm is arguably a more versatile FOV than 50mm as a walk-around lens.
However, if 50mm equiv is really required then there is the Oly 25mm f1.8. It provides better FOV control (f3.6 FF equiv) while the total package size remains in the same ballpark.
 
Fuji CFA pattern is not an issue anymore, even with LR.
If the photos (very nice ones) shown are an indication, AF is definitely not a limiting factor. Even something like a Pany GF2 would be sufficient.

MFT has that "undesirable" 3:4 old TV aspect ratio.
The Fuji CFA pattern has been an real issue for a long time, and this V1 was not bought yesterday. And it still can be an issue, depending on software choice.
And AF wise, any camera would do for these images, also my EOS M. But it was about why one would have chosen the V1, and it does not have to be linked to the images studor13 shared.

If the lens gives enough shallow DOF, no reason to look at the Oly 25mm f1.8. If it isn't, maybe the Oly won't do either and one would have to look at Sony E mount with speed booster, or FF camera, or medium format. But yeah, if this 18.5mm f1.8 gives what someone needs, why 2nd guess the choice?

#22 thxbb12

thxbb12

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 536 posts
  • LocationGeneva, Switzerland

Posted 19 August 2016 - 02:30 PM

Perhaps it was a very valid choice for the OP.

 

All I wanted to say, which I realize wasn't clear, is that if one desires a mirrorless camera with EVF and "fastish" normal lens in a compact package, then better alternatives exist.

 

Now, as far as the Nikon 1 system goes, I think Nikon main failures were two-fold:

  • no prosumer body
  • subpar sensor

--Florent

Flickr Page


#23 Brightcolours

Brightcolours

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 4,542 posts
  • LocationThe Netherlands

Posted 19 August 2016 - 02:44 PM

I'd phrase it this way, personally:

  • Small sensor
  • Silly big lens designs which don't take advantage of the small sensor size

The V series is "prosumer" enough, not sure what they lack?



#24 JoJu

JoJu

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 2,213 posts
  • LocationSwitzerland

Posted 19 August 2016 - 03:40 PM

Studor 13 was not the OP, but his choice for the 1 V1 appears reasonable, given the time, the alternatives and it still is these days one of the fastest mirrorless system camera.

 

A prosumer camera within the 1 system should aready have an EVF, like the first two V-version had one. Cut it away and make the customer buy it again - what is the big advantage? EVF-less are all other bodies in the 1 system, even the AW type with water sealing - yes, one of the few MILC to dive with and without any additional UW-housing. Unfortunately, there are only slow AW lenses and no AW flash, so it's more a camera for bad weather than for snorkeling.

 

Also, an additional grip has to offer much more functions than only one more button.

 

The lens prices are (at least with the 32/1.2 "portrait" prime) too close to the ones with bigger sensor.

 

It also was unclear who is the target group for this system - and the "soccer moms"? actually, I don't know if they are willing to spend around 1500 - 2000 $ for a camera system which is limited AND expensive. The 70-300 (190-810 equiv) costs 900$, the tripod socket is another extra of 55  :wacko: The manufacturer behind all those additional gimmicks gives me the message "you can get everything, but you'll have to pay for all extras!"



#25 Studor13

Studor13

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 308 posts

Posted 19 August 2016 - 05:29 PM

When I bought the V1 (350€ with a lens) there really was nothing else like it.

 

At that time I thought that my 30+ Fmount lenses would shine on the V1. I found out that only CX lenses work great on the V1.

 

As Jo points out "The lens prices are (at least with the 32/1.2 "portrait" prime) too close to the ones with bigger sensor." Whilst this is true I have to tell you all that I'm no millionaire, but dropping 500€ on a used 32mm f1.2 is not a big deal for me. Also, I bought the 70-300mm CX new for the street price.

 

But look, I can sell them and make very little or no loss.

 

The thing that some people simply don't get is that if it says "Nikon" there will be enough people who will buy it. Just like Leica and ZEISS.

 

Sure, folks can go on about how Nikon is “going down the drain” but I really don't care. I doubt that I will still be alive when Nikon goes the same way as Kodak.

 

When I get in the mood I'm gonna post some shots that show that the J5 can match it will the D600 (in good light).

 

There are a lot of us who just want a small Nikon body to have fun with.

 

“Best” image quality, all the whistles and bells are not everything. We just want Nikon and no one is going to talk us out of it.


  • Brightcolours likes this
From the sunny side of the Alps.

#26 Klaus

Klaus

    Chief Editor

  • Moderators
  • 5,256 posts
  • LocationSydney, Australia

Posted 21 August 2016 - 12:03 AM

I'd phrase it this way, personally:

  • Small sensor
  • Silly big lens designs which don't take advantage of the small sensor size

The V series is "prosumer" enough, not sure what they lack?

 

A small sensor is a matter of taste. Honestly I was on the verge of buying a Nikon 1 but the lack of a viewfinder in the V3 was a showstopper.

Which lenses were big? Other than the 70-300mm maybe.


Chief Editor
photozone.de

#27 Brightcolours

Brightcolours

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 4,542 posts
  • LocationThe Netherlands

Posted 22 August 2016 - 11:02 AM

A small sensor is a matter of taste. Honestly I was on the verge of buying a Nikon 1 but the lack of a viewfinder in the V3 was a showstopper.

Which lenses were big? Other than the 70-300mm maybe.

All of the lenses are big (diameter), for such a small sensor and such small lens elements... so the small image circle does not bring a real advantage. 






0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users



© by photozone.de