Nikon reveals it's mirrorless '1' system

[user237428934]

The only option for Nikon fanboys in the "enthusiast/special camera" section. So it might sell there.

 

[kdemas]

Although this may not be the camera for me or many of our RFF crowd I think some pretty interesting features are being overlooked or discounted a bit. Smaller sensor, yes, but:

- Active and Passive auto-focus... a big deal.
- Resulting fast auto-focus (with real tracking, unlike m4/3 which is pretty useless in that regard. Trust me, I use it).
- 135 point auto focus (41 as well for area mode).
- Notice the top shutter speed? 1/16,000th (electronic) & 1/4000th (mechanical). My GF1 and G1 can't hang with that electronic speed.
- Up to 60 FPS in High Speed mode, 5 in "regular".
- Focusing down to 1 cm.
- Base ISO of 100.
- Matrix Metering (Nikon's matrix is superb).
- High quality EVF (1.4M) and LCD (921K).
- iTTL compatibility and a cool little SpeedLight.
- PASM capability though located in Menus.
- Raw compatibility.


Some corrections from earlier posts:
- Best Shot Selection is Optional, you don't have to use it with a burst.
- PASM exists, in menus (not ideal obviously for many of us).


Anyway, not trying to be a fanboy at all, as a matter of fact this probably isn't the camera for me. It is, however, a bit more robust than many of the "Big Expensive P&S" type comments littering the thread.

As always, choice is good! For some this is probably a neat solution, for others not. Personally I'm always happy when there's one more variant out there for all of us to review and choose accordingly.

I look forward to seeing real-world IQ and performance when this comes out.

Kent

PS- I'm more interested in one day seeing a Pro style D(x) that will have a pro interface and some of the advantages of an EVF or data overlay type system. One day...

 

[re_visible]

So bad...

So bad...

This is just wrong.

Here is why:

High ISO seems bad (LX5 bad, see here), the sensor is small, the camera and lenses still as big as the old Pana GF1 System. Lenses are slow. No direct controls (go to the menu to select A/P/S/M modes? Really?!). No standard “hot shoe”.

On the plus side, AF sounds good, it’s fast, it has good video (I guess so).

But in daily use, what does really matter to most of consumers?
It's a Nikon, so there are some people out there to buy it, but not enough to make this a real competition for other C/EVIL cameras.


Now, it is only Canon left to screw it up, and leave the market to Panasonic, Olympus and Sony. And that’s good news for me and many of other RFF people.

 

[user237428934]

I don't like or want a touch screen menu. I don't know of any pro cameras using touch, maybe there are some?

Phase One Digital Backs (IQ Series) have touch control for menus and zooming.

 

[rxmd]

Now, it is only Canon left to screw it up, and leave the market to Panasonic, Olympus and Sony. And that’s good news for me and many of other RFF people.

Why is it good news for you (let's ignore other RFF people for the time being) if Canon screws it up? I'm genuinely curious.

 

[Phantomas]

Blabla, you're all too late to the party. Mirrorless -shmirorless, so last Tuesday. REAL photographers from MAGNUM have moved on to Nintendo 3DS. Woohaha!

Martin Parr and 3DS.

 

[rxmd]

Why is it good news for you (let's ignore other RFF people for the time being) if Canon screws it up? I'm genuinely curious.

I think these newer cameras are trying to do their best to save the small consumer digital market from a take over by cell phone cameras. Some of the newer cell cameras perform as well or better than the small digital cams of a year or so ago. I think it's about staking out a new (multi-lens, EVF) market. It's in the interest of all the camera makers to defend this turf. Apple and Android are moving into this market as their camera phones get better.

People will use what suits their needs best. No matter if the cat is black or white, if it catches mice it's a good cat. Nikon is trying to develop their business and that's all. I don't subscribe to the epic battle of the cameras against the cellphones. If at some point cellphones are good enough to replace a camera for me, then good riddance to the camera.

However, what I don't see is what that has to do with the question, which was why re_visible (and supposedly many other RFFers) will be happy if camera maker X "screws it up".

 

[re_visible]

This way

This way

I was just being mean, but there is a real chance there, if Canon doesn't take the NEX line serious and goes the Nikon way.

There is no way Canon will step into the m4/3 market, because they are "too big" to do that (in their own mind), and coming out with an APS-C mirrorless would harm their entry DSLR market (where most of their profits come from).

So the most probable way will be an own format/mount combination, prosumer and entry level cameras.
And all that years after Oly/Pan, Sony and Samsung have presented some really nice systems and have gathered experience.

So if it is not REALLY revolutionary, it will fail.

Why is this good?
Well, I think the really big companies can only learn from really big failures.They just have to screw it up, before they get serious about things.

 

[sevo]

I would hate to see any of the camera companies go away. I still miss Minolta's meter products. I used them over many years and still have a Minolta meter.

These still exist, Kenko got hold of the meters division.

 

[sevo]

So the most probable way will be an own format/mount combination, prosumer and entry level cameras.

They certainly won't be betting all their consumer DSLR sales on the EVIL horse right now, when the former still dominate and EVIL sales outside Japan are very limited. But I have no doubt that Nikon and Canon already have a plan B shelved, and will eventually roll up the EVIL market from the professional end.

 

[gavinlg]

I agree with Frank here. The sensor may be a little better, but the camera operation went to consumer level. Most folks that are comfortable with a SLR/ DSLR will find the non-touch screen interface friendly. I think it's why they are popular as used cameras. I don't like or want a touch screen menu. I don't know of any pro cameras using touch, maybe there are some? In bright light, it's difficult to see even the best LCD. Many pros and advanced users don't chimp, once a digital cam is set up. But then you need an optical VF. If you chimp in bright light with an active subject, you will miss a lot of pictures. Look at the sports guys who have several Cams + different FL lenses set on tripods. They can't chimp - they can't even look into the cameras, excepting the primary.

The G3 isn't really a different interface than the G1, it's smaller, neater and has a touchscreen added, and has a better EVF. The touchscreen is just an addition - you don't have to use it, and no functions rely on it.

Considering the g1 struggles to shoot over iso400 without pretty horrid noise, and the G3 can shoot iso2500+ cleanly with more megapixels chucked in, I'm still voting it as a pretty large upgrade.

 

[gavinlg]

http://www.dpreview.com/news/1109/11092210nikonj1samplesgallery.asp

Samples at dpreview. IQ looks pretty rubbish IMO... Definitely a step down from m4/3

 

[Paul T.]

I think that, in one fell swoop, Nikon has given the 4/3 format new credibility.

They're trying to protect their SLR market, but haven't thought this through. By suggesting this one inch sensor gives acceptable image quality, they're in effect saying that 4/3 is in a premium category.

They had the choice of taking a slice of their own market with their new launch - or letting the competition take that slice. They've opted for the latter. It's a classic strategic mistake. I like Nikon, and I'm sorry they've done it.

 

[Sonnar Brian]

Wow- the sensor size is almost identical to the KAF-1600 used in the Kodak DCS-200.

"empower users with new ways to tell stories through photography, driven by imaginative next-generation technology."

I am going to puke.

 

[gavinlg]

I think that, in one fell swoop, Nikon has given the 4/3 format new credibility.

They're trying to protect their SLR market, but haven't thought this through. By suggesting this one inch sensor gives acceptable image quality, they're in effect saying that 4/3 is in a premium category.

They had the choice of taking a slice of their own market with their new launch - or letting the competition take that slice. They've opted for the latter. It's a classic strategic mistake. I like Nikon, and I'm sorry they've done it.

I agree 100%. If they had gone a slight big bigger than m4/3 or even to aps-c like the nex, m4/3 would have been the odd one out - the one with the 'sub-par IQ', but instead they've now really made m4/3 seem good.

M4/3 seems to be the 'goldilocks' sensor size of these mirrorless cameras - not too big a sensor to have big lenses like the NEX, not to small so that it's perceived as a toy like the nikon1.

 

[jsrockit]

I think too many people are assuming that this camera was made for serious photographers.

 

[rxmd]

I think too many people are assuming that this camera was made for serious photographers.

I think too many people are assuming that this camera was made for them.

 

[Keith]

I think too many people are assuming that this camera was made for serious photographers.

I try never to laugh at my photos or smile when shooting for that matter ... does that make me a serious photographer? 😀

 

[rxmd]

I try never to laugh at my photos or smile when shooting for that matter ... does that make me a serious photographer? 😀

This is a serious photographer:

(by Garry Knight)

No Nikon 1 anywhere in sight, case solved, QED.

 

[Adanac]

This is a serious photographer

Looks like a photographer in pain if you ask me. Neck and back strain at least. 😉

Back to the topic at hand, someone over on photo.net has posted observations after handling one. Of interest to me were points 2 and 4:

2) Controls and menus are quite a mess. Aperture/shutter priority, manual mode as well as ISO - everything is in the menu, which is too simplistic and not sophisticated. No customization to speak of (custom menus etc.) At least the V1 would deserve better controls.
4) The cameras are slow. Like, really slow. It takes ages to switch between the display and EVF.

For the consumer moving up from a P&S that wants more control (or doesn't know they want it but needs it to make certain types of shots) it seems counter productive to make it hard to do such things.