Is the Nikon V1 now obsolete? Not quite (an opinion)

[--]

Three beautiful pictures.

 

[meeker]

Thanks a lot!

 

[meeker]

New strap arrived Friday:

 

[--]

What a beauty. How do you find the V1 with the Voigtländer lens? Is it easy to focus?

/ex-Xpanded

 

[meeker]

Yes, the focussing is quite easy with EVF, and the small sensor means the DOF is huge compared to FF.

 

[rbelyell]

meeker, as i recall from my use w mf lenses, the camera in no way recognizes such a lens is attached, and therefore neither the focus aid evf magnification, nor any camera auto metering works. is that correct? i found those features, or lack of them, made using the v1 in this manner extremely frustrating....
tony

 

[meeker]

Correct. It's manual focus without metering. I just use sunny 16 or an incident meter and then check the histogram - the meter does give the right exposure values from what I can tell. I haven't gone street shooting with this combo, but I figure at f5.6 even zone focussing would give acceptable results (e.g. at f5.6 the DOF is 14 ft with subject at 20 ft, increasing 22 ft at f8). I guess ease of use is all relative - it's easier than walking around with a zorki, and I had a lot of fun with that camera.

 

[meeker]

A single shot (no HDR) at iso3200, converted to B&W in SilverFX

 

[Clark.EE]

"Foreign" Glass on the V1

"Foreign" Glass on the V1

i really went back and forth before i posted this, because its not my intent to rain on anyones parade, but i bought one, very cheap, with kit zoom, but solely for use as a telephoto (2.7x) alternative to my gxr m mount. i wanted to mount RF and other legacy glass for wildlife, birds etc.

i'm sorry, but i am greatly disappointed in the IQ used this way, or in fact even with the kit zoom outside on a sunny day. ive used it with some great lenses, the cv color heliar 75/2.5, summicron 40/2 and elmar 90/4, the contax T sonnar 135/4, the konica ar 57/1.4&100/2.8 and the kit lens, in good light and got results noticeably not as good as my old and long gone olympus ep2.

now, i unapologetically pixel peep. i look at most of my work at 50-100% crop and expect subject clarity from the in focus areas. this is especially my expectation when shooting wildlife. i dont get that from this nikon, with any glass, in the best of conditions.

now maybe i'm using it wrong or i expect too much, and again, i dont mean any disrespect to those who like it. but for my purposes, if those might be shared by others thinking of this rig, i thoughti should add my opinion.

please feel free to differ if your experiences with similar equipment for similar usage varied.
tony

Have you tried a Leica M 8/9 with those lenses?
How are your results then?
What sort of adapter do you have?
I imagine it is very difficult to focus with these "longer" lenses on the V1.
Has anyone else tried it?
Even the 40mm would be 104mm on the V1.
Have you any wider "M/m39" lenses to try on the V1?
Be interested to hear from anyone that has.
Not that i am going to go out & buy an adapter.
Imagine a 15 Heliar would be interesting?
Just happen to have one as well.

Paid £214.99 for my V1 + 10-30.
Very pleased with it.
2*100% crops of our village Church attached.
1 taken with V1 (13.6mm) on the 10-30 ISO 140
The other M9 + 35 Summarit ISO 160 (Darker coloured stone)
The Leica is, of course sharper etc etc. But the Nikon is not bad.
& dont forget you can buy 27 Nikon V1`s for the Price of the M9 & a "cheap" Summarit 35.
I think the Nikon has done a better job with the colour of the Stone!

My "M9" is a loan Camera, from Leica while they mend mine. It has, I think, various issues! So i may, or may not be doing Leica Camera AG a disservice!