• Log in with Facebook Log in with Twitter
Photo

The Nikon 1 V3 is ...


  • Please log in to reply
29 replies to this topic

#1 Klaus

Klaus

    Chief Editor

  • Moderators
  • 5,428 posts
  • LocationSydney, Australia

Posted 06 April 2017 - 11:32 AM

... discontinued now. So the Nikon 1 lineup has no top-spec model anymore.

 

The announced special edition DSLR models for the 100y anniversary feel almost as if Nikon is following Leica now ...


Chief Editor
photozone.de

#2 borisbg

borisbg

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 447 posts
  • LocationLos Angeles

Posted 06 April 2017 - 04:34 PM

Nikon marked their 100 years anniversary as follows: Canceled new products (DL), discontinued a whole line of products, and "repainting" old products. :D.

This is exactly what every Nikon user wished for... We are done being photographers, we can become collectors now.


  • JoJu likes this

#3 Brightcolours

Brightcolours

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 4,832 posts
  • LocationThe Netherlands

Posted 06 April 2017 - 04:53 PM

Collectors of glass models of cameras. :D



#4 Studor13

Studor13

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 356 posts

Posted 06 April 2017 - 05:22 PM

... discontinued now. So the Nikon 1 lineup has no top-spec model anymore.
 

Yes, I thought that this would be be the case when I got my V3+lens for 399€.

But after getting back from vacation where I used the V3, V1 and J1 I have now realized that IQ-wise even the J1 is good enough. I have no plans to "upgrade" for the foreseeable future and I'd bet that there are a lot of folks just like me.
From the sunny side of the Alps.

#5 thxbb12

thxbb12

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 592 posts
  • LocationGeneva, Switzerland

Posted 06 April 2017 - 09:08 PM

Sure, but that definitely doesn't encourage current users to buy new lenses if the system is dead.


--Florent

Flickr Page


#6 JoJu

JoJu

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 2,838 posts
  • LocationSwitzerland

Posted 06 April 2017 - 10:16 PM

Except some stores throw out there stock and one is happy with the tiny and speedy Nikon 1 cameras.

 

I think it's a pity that Nikon didn't put ore effort and better low light capabilities (maybe with a low res sensor) in it. Certain features I did like - just never enough to get me one. There were the 3 versions of the V-model, until one came out with a plug-in finder. Would have been a cool thing to get short distance wireless connection with a free to handle finder, while the camera takes a difficult or dangerous position, but that would have been way too innovative for granny Nikon.

 

There was always something very interesting for me and something very odd, like a cool feature from the predecessor just skipped away. I could never come over me to open my wallet wide enough.



#7 toni-a

toni-a

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 1,280 posts
  • LocationLebanon

Posted 07 April 2017 - 04:49 AM

. There were the 3 versions of the V-model, until one came out with a plug-in finder. Would have been a cool thing to get short distance wireless connection with a free to handle finder, while the camera takes a difficult or dangerous position, but that would have been way too innovative for granny Nikon.


Don't Nikon models have remote live view ? With my canon 750D you can activate live view wirelessly on smartphones or PC you can easily handle the camera in difficult or dangerous position and shoot, you can even adjust image parameters. I expect Nikon entry models with wifi to have that since it's easy to implement.

#8 dave's clichés

dave's clichés

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 1,736 posts

Posted 07 April 2017 - 06:24 AM

 I'm placing a bet that for the actual anniversary, which I think is in August, there will be many new announcements.

 

 A new DSLR/s with a RBGW sensor and a new mirror-less system, add to that a 300mm Fresnel prime  and a very wide angle zoom.............any cancellations are just to make financial space for these IMHO.

 

 

 however,  it's just a verbal wager ....nothing fiscal!



#9 JoJu

JoJu

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 2,838 posts
  • LocationSwitzerland

Posted 07 April 2017 - 07:12 AM

The 300 mm Fresnel lens is already existing and the 14-24 neither really old nor really bad, soooo....? I'm sure I miss a point but which?



#10 Studor13

Studor13

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 356 posts

Posted 07 April 2017 - 08:17 AM

 

I think it's a pity that Nikon didn't put more effort and better low light capabilities (maybe with a low res sensor) in it. Certain features I did like - just never enough to get me one. There were the 3 versions of the V-model, until one came out with a plug-in finder. Would have been a cool thing to get short distance wireless connection with a free to handle finder, while the camera takes a difficult or dangerous position, but that would have been way too innovative for granny Nikon.

 

There was always something very interesting for me and something very odd, like a cool feature from the predecessor just skipped away. I could never come over me to open my wallet wide enough.

 

I don't think Nikon or anyone else could make the 1 cameras better in low light for some people.

 

The problem that has always existed is that people make their conclusions based on viewing at 100% on their monitors.

 

When you look at any of the 1 cameras (I have 4) on the screen, even at base ISO there is “noise”.

 

But when you print it is a different story. I have just printed a bunch with some that were taken with a V1 at ISO 800 and I assure you that there are no issues. Remember, the V1 is about 5 years old technology.

 

You can see the sizes of my prints in the image below with a comparison against the V3.

 

And before someone says “Oh, but there are no prints there that are A2 or bigger”, well I have a D800 for that and that is another story.

Attached Files


From the sunny side of the Alps.

#11 JoJu

JoJu

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 2,838 posts
  • LocationSwitzerland

Posted 07 April 2017 - 09:26 AM

I think, Nikon would have made a better success with these cameras, if they had offer a trial period and gave it into the hands of hesitating customers.

 

A couple of them I touched, but always the battery was missing or it looked in a way that I urged to wash myhands afterwards. The concept was great, the price steep and "get the feeling" could have convinced me, but 1000...2000 bucks is nothing I just burn got fun.



#12 Brightcolours

Brightcolours

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 4,832 posts
  • LocationThe Netherlands

Posted 07 April 2017 - 09:42 AM

I do not think the concept of the Nikon 1 was great. A smaller sensor than MFT, lenses with oddly unnecessary bulk, prices to match the MTF and APS-C mirrorless offerings instead of undercutting them. If you mean the concept of the name Nikon on them? 

The only thing that was (and still is) impressive is the speed and accuracy of the (PD) AF system, making them able of tracking well.

 

The only system that made less sense was the Pentax Q, but at least that had the size to match the sensor size.



#13 Studor13

Studor13

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 356 posts

Posted 07 April 2017 - 10:12 AM

I do not think the concept of the Nikon 1 was great. A smaller sensor than MFT, lenses with oddly unnecessary bulk, prices to match the MTF and APS-C mirrorless offerings instead of undercutting them. If you mean the concept of the name Nikon on them? 

The only thing that was (and still is) impressive is the speed and accuracy of the (PD) AF system, making them able of tracking well.

 

The only system that made less sense was the Pentax Q, but at least that had the size to match the sensor size.

 

 

As I said, the 1" sensor makes great images, so there is no need to compare with MFT.

 

Not sure what you mean about unnecessary bulk but the J5 is seriously small. I actually prefer the size of the V1 because it uses the same battery as the top-end Nikons which means that battery life is great.

 

As for pricing, who knows? I recently bought the wife an Apple Watch and just out of curiosity I went and priced Hermes watch bands. Do you have any idea what crazy prices these are? And yet Hermes reported record profit/revenue last year.

 

I just don't think that price is truly the/an issue.

 

What killed the 1 System is all the Fake News and Alternative Facts crowd.


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

#14 JoJu

JoJu

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 2,838 posts
  • LocationSwitzerland

Posted 07 April 2017 - 10:14 AM

For "great" I don't think Nikon 1 first, but a couple of features were/are still neat. IQ, as Studor says, shouldn't be examined at 100%. But the basic concept and the availability of longer FL from the F-system was not so bad.

 

Although, havin said that bit of touching them: They always failed to feel worth the price. Light, plasticky, made for tiny hands, sort of consumer camera for semi-pro prices (the V versions), the other versions had no dedicated EVF and made not much sense for interchangeable lenses if all buyers just get a kit lens.

 

Anyway, Nikon now discovered the "what-goes-beyond-Superzoom?" segment and will announce something like a 125× zoom thing (24-3000 mm equiv). So, if you get up early enough, you have the 3000 mm zoomed around lunch time, then you go back to landscape and will be right in time for a sunset @ 24 mm  :lol:



#15 dave's clichés

dave's clichés

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 1,736 posts

Posted 07 April 2017 - 10:18 AM

Rumour has it that it's an F2.8 300mm Fresnal lens.



#16 JoJu

JoJu

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 2,838 posts
  • LocationSwitzerland

Posted 07 April 2017 - 10:25 AM

Not sure what you mean about unnecessary bulk but the J5 is seriously small. I actually prefer the size of the V1 because it uses the same battery as the top-end Nikons which means that battery life is great.

 

Yeah, and with1 V3 they went for an EN-EL20a battery which is smaller tahn the EN-EL15. I remember, this was my showstopper. They separated the EVF to bring the price down, so you get now body around 650.- + EVF for another 300.- and end up in a region I also could get a D7200. The 1 V3 has some advantages, yes, but simply not enough to beat the DSLR in terms of IQ.



#17 Brightcolours

Brightcolours

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 4,832 posts
  • LocationThe Netherlands

Posted 07 April 2017 - 10:32 AM

As I said, the 1" sensor makes great images, so there is no need to compare with MFT.

 

Not sure what you mean about unnecessary bulk but the J5 is seriously small. I actually prefer the size of the V1 because it uses the same battery as the top-end Nikons which means that battery life is great.

 

As for pricing, who knows? I recently bought the wife an Apple Watch and just out of curiosity I went and priced Hermes watch bands. Do you have any idea what crazy prices these are? And yet Hermes reported record profit/revenue last year.

 

I just don't think that price is truly the/an issue.

 

What killed the 1 System is all the Fake News and Alternative Facts crowd.

What I meant is it even has a smaller sensor than MFT, let alone APS-C, and yet the price does not reflect that. 

The J5 is not a lens, as far as I understand. I said the lenses have unnecessary bulk. You have a tiny sensor, yet the lens barrels are as wide as any APS-C mirrorless lens. They could have designed things better, to make the case for "small is beautiful". They did not, and in my opinion that was a flaw in the concept.

 

So yes, on the prices, the concept, the profit, it clearly has not worked out for Nikon.



#18 Studor13

Studor13

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 356 posts

Posted 07 April 2017 - 10:58 AM

AFAIK, the Hermes watch band is the same length as the one I ended up ordering for 20€. And yet people are buying the Hermes alternative for not 2 or 3 or even 5 times the cost but 50 times my fake one. Yes, the Hermes go for 1000€!

 

Something must have worked for Nikon because I have the J1, V1, J5 and V3. Not to mention just about every single CX lens.

 

And now that the system has probably ended doesn't mean that my cameras will no longer work. They may have even become collectors items.

 

Oh, unnecessary bulk? More fake news.

 

Please tell me where there exists a 85mm (equivalent) f1.2 lens that is smaller than the CX 32mm f1.2 lens?


From the sunny side of the Alps.

#19 Brightcolours

Brightcolours

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 4,832 posts
  • LocationThe Netherlands

Posted 07 April 2017 - 11:18 AM

You have your equivalences in a bunch.

32mm x 2.7 = 86.4mm. 

f1.2 x 2.7 = f3.24

 

About unnecessary bulk: Meaning specifically the huge width of the smaller aperture lenses, due to the wide mount with no point, the wide choice of "standard barrel" which does not relate to the small sensor. It makes the lenses unnecessarily big for this small system, and visually "fat". Which did not help sales much.

 

As seen on the 30-110mm, the 11-27.5mm and even the AW 11-27.5mm, the 10-30mm, the 10-30mm PD, 6.7-13mm, 18.5mm.



#20 Studor13

Studor13

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 356 posts

Posted 07 April 2017 - 11:54 AM

You have your equivalences in a bunch.

32mm x 2.7 = 86.4mm. 

f1.2 x 2.7 = f3.24

 

About unnecessary bulk: Meaning specifically the huge width of the smaller aperture lenses, due to the wide mount with no point, the wide choice of "standard barrel" which does not relate to the small sensor. It makes the lenses unnecessarily big for this small system, and visually "fat". Which did not help sales much.

 

As seen on the 30-110mm, the 11-27.5mm and even the AW 11-27.5mm, the 10-30mm, the 10-30mm PD, 6.7-13mm, 18.5mm.

 

Unfortunately, what you wrote is the sort of thing that confuses people.

 

85mm or 86.4mm is the same as far as making an image goes.

 

f1.2 is f1.2. It is NOT f3.24. But you know that but you want to add to the confusion, right? Yes, the dof is f3.2 but the lens is still an f1.2 lens. No need to multiply it by 2.7.

 

I don't have the AW lenses but to suggest that the 30-110mm is “fat” really shows the effect of fake news. The J5 is easily the smallest 1 camera and yet the 30-110mm is more or less the same width as the body. Remember, this is like a 80-300mm lens. 

 

I once had the Sony NEX-5. You would be horrified how “fat” the 18-55mm kit lens is.


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




0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users



© by photozone.de