Subscribe Contribute Advertise Facebook Twitter Instagram Forums Newsletter
Nikon mirrorless system announced
Display Avatars Sort By:
Roger Caffin
(rcaffin) - BPL Staff - MLife

Locale: Wollemi & Kosciusko NPs, Europe
Re: Re: Its all about the ISO on 09/22/2011 21:41:39 MDT Print View

> imagine the potential for military/intelligence community reconnaissance use?
Would the mil buy something that cheap????
Anyhow, while it is already advertised in 4 colours, mil use would require a fifth ...
Hum ... maybe you (they) could double the price for camo?

Cheers

Bob Gross
(--B.G.--) - F

Locale: Silicon Valley
Re: Re: Re: Its not all about the ISO on 09/22/2011 22:43:44 MDT Print View

We can only dream...

The SR-71 Blackbird reconnaissance plane could fly at Mach 3.2 and it carried several cameras, one of which could resolve 6-inch painted lines on a parking lot while the aircraft was at an altitude of 83,000 feet. Now, that's a camera.

--B.G.--

Rog Tallbloke
(tallbloke) - F

Locale: DON'T LOOK DOWN!!
Re: Re: Nikon mirrorless system announced on 09/23/2011 01:07:26 MDT Print View

The small sensor is a real disappointment. When I saw the first leaked photos I was excited by the prospect of a good built in EVF and thought this was going to be the micro 4/3rds camera that would prise my wallet open.

I'm not going to pay that sort of money for a new camera with a smaller chip.

I might pick up a second hand one in 3 years time though.

John Frederick Anderson
(fredfoto) - F

Locale: Spain
"Nikon mirrorless system announced" on 09/23/2011 06:34:49 MDT Print View

There's been a huge step in minaturization in cameras recently, and buyers are spoilt for choice.
My hiking camera is a Fuji F30, and it's 6 excellent megapixels is all I need. YMMV.
If I had to replace it now, I'd look at the Fuji X10 on spec, as there are no images out yet.
It seems to strike the best balance between lens speed, sensor size, and file size of the small cameras in the class below m43.

Edited by fredfoto on 09/23/2011 06:36:28 MDT.

Rick M
(rmjapan) - F

Locale: London, UK
Looking good on 09/23/2011 19:10:30 MDT Print View

Looking at the out of camera JPEGs under Still Life and Noise sections here,

http://www.digitalcamerainfo.com/content/Nikon-Mirrorless-J1-Digital-Camera-Review/Sample-Photos.htm

it seems like the J1 CX sensor performs "good enough" up to ISO1600. BTW, the camera comparison makes it very obvious Panasonic REALLY needs to work on their JPEG output. Yuck!

I updated my NX2 soft to v2.2.8 and the NEF files I've found also look pretty good with the noise being of the type that is easy to process without too much smearing of detail. Maybe this explains the premium pricing?

Rick M
(rmjapan) - F

Locale: London, UK
DxOMark score on 09/28/2011 21:13:17 MDT Print View

Looks like DxOMark sensor score according Nikon Rumors to is about the same as the latest m4/3. Low light/high ISO seems to be trailing but the difference is insignificant.

http://nikonrumors.com/2011/09/28/nikon-1-test-results-from-dxomark-are-out.aspx/#more-23006

Edited by rmjapan on 09/28/2011 21:14:29 MDT.

Greg F
(GregF) - F

Locale: Canadian Rockies
Not enough depth of field control on 09/29/2011 10:52:45 MDT Print View

My only real issue with these cameras is the loss of depth of field control. I have a oly 510 and am in the process of buying an EPM-1. And really to get decent background blur you really need a minimum of f/2 at portrait lengths 45ish lens * 2x crop. To get the equivalent on the Nikon you need f1.4 on a 33mm lens. They definately can make that lens but can it be small and will they make it given that the focus of this system P&S photographers.

So this system is definately not for me as the current lens offerings do not meet my needs and it takes years to build up the lens lineup to where it needs to be. 3 years later and there is finally a fast small relatively inexpensive portrait lens for m4/3.

I think that if they can get the price down to around that $500 point it will be a success. Truthfully though if you put this sensor into an oly XZ-1 type body with a collaspable zoom lens I would be tempted by its small size. But as an interchangalbe lens product I'm not sure it works.

Rick Dreher
(halfturbo) - MLife

Locale: Northernish California
Re: Not enough depth of field control on 09/29/2011 12:15:01 MDT Print View

Hi Greg,

I presume you're speaking of the MZuiko 45/1.8. Here's an early reaction from a photo blogger I respect.

http://www.stevehuffphoto.com/2011/09/28/the-olympus-45-1-8-lens-arrives-wow-1st-look-video-review-soon/

I think Nikon's been a bit too clever in staking their mirrorless niche. My guess is it could become a bit of a cult camera, but not a marketing hit. The buzz compared to, say, the Fuji X100 is minor indeed and I think the Pentax Q system will actually compete for sales because it's really cute and tiny. Pixel counters aren't going to be drawn to either system.

Cheers,

Rick

Fargo Jacobs
(Fargo83) - F
Very good comment on 12/22/2011 00:13:56 MST Print View

Stephen Chan, thank you a lot for sharing! You comment is really very informative and it's clear you know what you are talking about!

Edited by rcaffin on 12/22/2011 02:15:17 MST.

Rakesh Malik
(Tamerlin)

Locale: Cascadia
Re: Re: Re: Nikon mirrorless system announced on 12/28/2011 13:21:25 MST Print View

> The small sensor is a real disappointment.

Hear, hear!

I got tired of the fact that the Canon and Nikon prosumer and professional cameras are beasts, almost as big and heavy as my 4x5 kit, so I was pretty interested when I saw the announcement that Nikon was getting into the mirrorless act... until I learned that they were going with a tiny sensor, at which point I decided to switch completely from Nikon to Sony.