Hands-on with Nikon V2

Buy on GearShopFrom $746.959 deals

Nikon announced two major products at this year's Photo Plus Expo tradeshow in New York - a new constant-aperture F4 70-200mm zoom for its range of DX and FX-format DSLRs, and the V2, which replaces the V1 as the flagship in Nikon's 1 System. The CX-format V2 features an all-new 14MP CMOS sensor and a built-in flash, a proper exposure mode dial (oh, happy day...) but retains the same innovative Hybrid AF system and 1.4 million-dot EVF as its predecessor.

We caught up with Nikon on the first morning of the show, and managed to get some time alone with its new high-end 1 series camera and 18.5mm F1.8 prime - the fastest lens in the system (making it equivalent to a 50mm lens in terms of field-of-view and F4.9 in terms of depth-of-field). 

Our first impressions, seeing the camera 'in the flesh' for the first time, are that it isn't as ugly as it looks in photographs. Yes, it looks like a Sony NEX with mumps. But the lumps and bumps that characterize its external design are much less objectionable when you actually pick the camera up and start using it. We know this might be controversial, but we might actually prefer how the V2 looks compared to the V1...

This view shows the V2 without a lens mounted, and its 1" (13.2 x 8.8mm) CX sensor exposed for all the world to see. Much more businesslike in appearance than the J2 and even its predecessor the V1, the V2's lumps and bumps are functional, if not terribly attractive.

The protruding grip allows for an unusually firm hold (by MILC standards) and the faux-prism hump above the lens houses an EVF and a pop-up flash. 

Another thing that isn't all that apparent from press photographs is how small the V2 is. We didn't have competitive mirrorless cameras nearby to compare it to directly, but it's about the same size as the Olympus PEN Mini, if you ignore the viewfinder hump. The view of the exposed 1-inch CX sensor, above, should give you some idea. In terms of how it feels in the hand, the V2 reminded us of a slightly miniaturized Sony NEX-7, more than anything else. The same super-thin body, similarly nice metal construction, and a deep, rubberized handgrip.

Other than the pronounced hump, the 14MP V2 is one of the smaller mirrorless ILCs. Our model has pretty dainty hands (and charming nail varnish) and as you can see from this view, the V2 isn't much of a handful, even for her. Viewed from the back, the V2 is very different to its predecessor, The control layout has been overhauled, and enthusiasts will appreciate the exposure mode dial on the top-plate, and the control dial at upper-right. 

The rear of the V2 is quite different from the V1, and actually, rather NEX-like as well. It's dominated by a large LCD screen and integrated control dial/four-way controller, but unlike many of its competitors, the V2's rear LCD screen is fixed rather than articulated. New to the V2 is the vertical strip of buttons on the left of the screen, replacing the dense cluster of control points which surround the 4-way controller on the V1.

The V1's rear-plate mode dial has been deleted completely, to be replaced by a 'proper' exposure mode dial, complete with PASM positions, which can be found on the top of the camera - exactly where an enthusiast would expect to find it. Even better than this, the V1's sharp little control toggle has also been removed, and replaced by a more traditional control dial. 

The V2 is Nikon's most DSLR-like 1 System camera yet, and features about the most generously-proportioned hand grip that we can remember seeing outside of the realm of DSLRs.   The control layout of the V2 has been completely overhauled compared to its predecessor the V1. There's an exposure mode dial on the top, and to the right, a control dial which replaces the fiddly up/down toggle on the V1.

The V2 still has a proprietary 'multi accessory port' connector, limiting flash choice to the SB-N5 or new, more powerful, bounce-able SB-N7.

With the camera held to the eye, there's no novelty. The view is the same as you'll get through the EVF on the older V1, because it's the same viewfinder. That's no bad thing though. Although not class-leading, the 1.4 million dot display (800 x 600 RGB pixels) built into the V2 is bright, contrasty and detailed. There's a diopter wheel on the left, for those of us with less than perfect eyesight. 

The model that we handled is unfinished - Nikon reps were keen to stress that it might not perform quite as well as the final shipping cameras, but we're happy to report that with the fast 18.5mm prime attached, autofocus seems extremely fast and positive, even in the poor light of a tradeshow meeting room. The bigger the aperture, the more effective the V2's Hybrid AF system (which uses fast on-sensor phase-detection in good light, falling back on contrast-detection when illumination gets low) should be, and that certainly seems to hold true for this new prime. We should have a production sample of both camera and lens soon, and look forward to doing some real-world shooting. 

68
I own it
42
I want it
13
I had it
Discuss in the forums

Comments

Total comments: 452
1234
Scottelly
By Scottelly (1 week ago)

What I want to know is why is there not review of the V2? There are reviews of all sorts of point-and-shoot cameras (not all, I know). The V2 is an amazing little camera, and it has a significantly different sensor than the older V1. Why didn't it get a review?!?

0 upvotes
Scottelly
By Scottelly (1 week ago)

Here's a video:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9ytgacuL-s4

0 upvotes
Dtech
By Dtech (11 months ago)

Okay, I agree it is not the best looking camera from the front but most of the other angles aren't bad. Many of you might say the same while looking in the mirror.

Any ways on a more serious note, the focus seems to be more around the looks and the small sensor then the actual IQ. I have had the privilege of owning and testing the NEX-7, NEX-6, X-Pro1 and the OM-D EM-5. I dabble in stock photography and for those of you that don't there are some serious pixel-peepers on the editorial staff of many of the large stock sites. Of the cameras I mentioned, in terms of IQ the X-Pro 1 wins hands down. From what I have seen from the Nikon V2 (from Flickr etc) the IQ might just compete with the above camera's. I just ordered this camera with the 18mm F1.8 and we'll find out shortly.

It's funny how many people are willing dismiss a camera because of the sensor size but not consider the obvious - IQ. The first question should always be - how good are the darn pictures....

2 upvotes
Tbside
By Tbside (Apr 11, 2013)

Sadly in their wisdom Nikon wisely reconfigured the clumsy body of the V1 to a much more user friendly design—the V2. But during the process they stumbled big time—most likely to save weight, space or both they downgraded the battery. The charge of V2 battery is embarrassingly short; unfortunately no 3rd party battery maker supplies a heavy duty battery. The V1 battery is 7v, 2500mAh while the V2 is 1 7.4v 1435mAh a little over half of the V1. Thus running out of juice quickly making it very frustrating for the serious photographer. I carry four extras…

Comment edited 4 minutes after posting
1 upvote
drummercam
By drummercam (Feb 27, 2013)

Looks like it could use some help from Marc Newson.

0 upvotes
Tord S Eriksson
By Tord S Eriksson (Apr 23, 2013)

Make another sinking model, you mean?! The Newson version of Pentax was a sale dud, so why convert the V2 to something even more useless?!

0 upvotes
MPA1
By MPA1 (Feb 18, 2013)

I think the Lumix GH3 is a better camera....

0 upvotes
canschwab
By canschwab (Feb 2, 2013)

tazmac: Why do you have to come up with question like that? Let have some fun with life, ok?

0 upvotes
tazmac
By tazmac (Jan 29, 2013)

What are the chances the price will drop 60 percent after 7 months?

2 upvotes
DaytonR
By DaytonR (Jan 15, 2013)

Small sensors do lend themselves well in certain types of photography so this camera will probably do a great job in general. As for looks:
It looks quite nice from the rear,and the front part of this camera almost reminds me of those Sony superzooms from 12 years ago......

Comment edited 28 seconds after posting
1 upvote
princewolf
By princewolf (Jan 14, 2013)

DPR has been doing the right thing using ladies' hands for a change now...

3 upvotes
Pik2004
By Pik2004 (Jan 6, 2013)

This has to be one of the ugliest camera out there... Besides the ugliness, there 1 system is so disappointing (small sensors), I'm looking at other mirrorless brands: Samsung or Olympus or even Canon. I personally don't like Sony too much and don't see myself getting one, I must admit I like the path that they have taken in terms of mirrorless camera... but lens line up is pretty disappointing.

2 upvotes
joaquin100
By joaquin100 (Jan 10, 2013)

As Nikon user since always i dont like Sony either but i got tired waiting for Nikons offer in APS-C Mirrorless and i could not skip the NEX which coupled with Sigmas primes 19 mm / 30 mm are a compact and very sharp combos. regarding this Cam its OK not as nice as my little Pronea S but i am sure it works very well.

1 upvote
Varunjk
By Varunjk (Jan 6, 2013)

Dunno what minority I belong to, but I like it. A lot. Don't censure me yet, I am a bit of a design person at heart and this sort of blocky functionality appeals to me. Also, it's so easy to overdo - just look at Pentax.
But hey, seriously, what's not to like? The finish and build look impeccable, it's small, and I don't get the NEX-with-mumps comment at all. Influential journalism, anyone?

6 upvotes
Guidenet
By Guidenet (Jan 5, 2013)

I bought the J1 for my gal to replace her compact camera not her DSLR and she likes it. I avoided the V1 because of the lack of a PSAM wheel. I'll probably buy the V2 mostly to use and play with my long glass like my 300 f/2.8 and 500 f/4. That 2.7 crop ought to be fun for some birding.

I can't believe how some denigrate cameras over looks, though I think this one looks pretty good myself. I mean what kind of photographer pays attention to the looks of a camera? I suppose someone would have to not know much about photography to have to resort to this as a comment. Really.

I guess I'll have to get used to the EVF instead of optical on all my FX Nikons. That's the cost of going to such a small body and large crop factor. I just hope it's fast enough for BIF. If not, it will just have to be used for perched birds. The high frame rates are certainly nice. I'm also happily surprised over the apparent quality of a 1 inch sensor at higher ISOs. It's not my D700/D800 but good enough. :-)

7 upvotes
lpv
By lpv (Jan 4, 2013)

horrible...

3 upvotes
TheMimbo
By TheMimbo (Dec 29, 2012)

Looks fine to me.

1 upvote
Shunda77
By Shunda77 (Dec 17, 2012)

Your Momma so ugly, when she look in the mirror, she look like a Nikon V2!

6 upvotes
Shunda77
By Shunda77 (Dec 17, 2012)

But seriously it isn't that bad, in fact, I might buy one and permanently bolt it to a DX tele lens.

1 upvote
ennemkay
By ennemkay (Dec 16, 2012)

um, just buy an rx100.

2 upvotes
Bill Randall
By Bill Randall (Dec 11, 2012)

I like what I know about the camera, including the looks. Image quality has me concerned.

2 upvotes
CyberAngel
By CyberAngel (10 months ago)

It's not looks - it's the heart!
How big it is?
1" sounds perfect to me - right in the "middle"

2 upvotes
waxwaine
By waxwaine (Dec 7, 2012)

Seems those are quite big hands lady

1 upvote
max metz
By max metz (Dec 6, 2012)

Even a hint of being disparaging to anything Nikon can be thwart with danger on here, so suffice to say the marketing strategy of this Nikon series has always seemed an enigma to me.

Small sensor, slow lenses, good build quality and premium price would seem an unusual mix; though as this V2 camera represents the second generation its clearly seen as having a future.

Perhaps a small black $500 lunchbox with a phone camera embedded in the top corner of the hinged lid would find a market if it had white Nikon emblazoned on the side.

2 upvotes
Richard Murdey
By Richard Murdey (Dec 17, 2012)

Actually, ridiculing the Nikon 1 cameras is a accepted pastime for Nikon fanboys, just see nikonrumors. The defenders are a small but very vocal splinter group.

Nikon is nothing if not iterative. If it doesn't work, re-work. The Nikon 1 is very important for the company, with entry-level dSLRs no longer being such a cash cow.

1 upvote
Guidenet
By Guidenet (Jan 5, 2013)

Heheheh.. Typical Nikon envy perhaps.

0 upvotes
javaone360
By javaone360 (Dec 4, 2012)

It is so small.

0 upvotes
rusticus
By rusticus (Nov 29, 2012)

definitely the ugliest camera of the decade - here against the K-01 is awesome - not buy

Comment edited 42 seconds after posting
1 upvote
Just Ed
By Just Ed (Nov 29, 2012)

Probably not smart on my part, but might order one Tried the V1 and hated its lac of easy user control. IQ, not very good but ok for a carry around. The safe bet would be the RX 100 but the lack of a evf is probably going to bother me too much.

Am anxious to see if the IQ is any better and if the user controls are friendlier.

0 upvotes
Kevin Omura
By Kevin Omura (Nov 28, 2012)

I like the look of it actually. Reminds me a lot of the Nikonos RS which was a great camera.

2 upvotes
Emotion SideUp
By Emotion SideUp (Nov 28, 2012)

I had my suspicions that the 1 series was a video camera-recorder in disguised. The success of the Sony RX100 has confirmed my belief in this. Can't wait to see that sensor in the 1 Series...V3 coming this summer to a theater near you

0 upvotes
Racster
By Racster (Nov 25, 2012)

I am very curious to hear real world reviews after it is released. As for the looks of this camera, who buys a camera on how it looks. Buy it because of how your pictures look and how it performs.

3 upvotes
Bill Randall
By Bill Randall (Nov 19, 2012)

I see from the Canon and Fuji people here talking about how ugly this camera is, they must be running scared for some reason. The appearance of the camera indicates it is ready for business. It has a great grip feature which should be welcomed for use in many situations. It has a clean appearance interrupted only by useful items needed to function.

Once the camera is on the market and the professional reviews are in, I hope the reality lives up to the picture.

7 upvotes
Blanko00
By Blanko00 (Nov 19, 2012)

Why would you buy that? The appeal of the Nikon 1 range was, for me, primarily size. Why has if been inflated to the size if a bridge cam from 2007 when it could be pocket sized.
I was hoping that Nikon would keep the series as-is, but pop a P/A/S/M dial on top.
There was a lot of speculation that the 1 series was designed with not hurting DSLR sales in mind, this might actually boost DSLR sales... Looking at this in the show room, wouldn't you think "well, if I'm going to buy this, I might as well go the whole hog?
How do Fuji Get this sort of thing so right, so often, and all other manufactures just can't? Pentax Q, Just huh? Sony Nex, it's tiny...ta-dah, it's massive and unbalanced? Canon EOS M, the behemoth of mirrorless, slow, megalithic proportions and lumbering performance? Panylmpus, Neither fish-nor-fowl... but fun, and so nearly right it hurts? Nikon..close first time, worse second time?
Where's my 1 inched Fuji? I've got money?

1 upvote
thejohnnerparty
By thejohnnerparty (Nov 21, 2012)

If Sony could make the RX 1, you'd think they could have made this thing right in a V1 like package.

0 upvotes
gooseta
By gooseta (Nov 15, 2012)

c'mon, thats the ugliest thing i've ever seen... the grip is 2x bigger than the body... come on nikon, even a k-30 looks sexy next to this

0 upvotes
marike6
By marike6 (Nov 25, 2012)

The K-30 looks sexy all by itself. And the Nikon V2 might not win a beauty contest, but the images I've seen so far on Flickr look excellent.

http://www.flickr.com/photos/nikonisti/sets/72157631841064489/with/8118308221/

2 upvotes
rusticus
By rusticus (Nov 29, 2012)

ähhh - some pretty girls always make good photos

0 upvotes
WestSeattleDan
By WestSeattleDan (Nov 10, 2012)

I am a touring bicyclist cyclist in the summer packing camping equipment etc.. I am enthusiastic about this camera. Size and weight of the system camera and lenses are extremely important to me. I could care less about how the camera looks to others. I want a functional camera and I see the V2 as a big step forward in functionality. The 18mm f1.8 lens provides good low light performance for this small system and the 30-110 zoom is small. The DoF is not a huge concern to me. The Nikon commitment to expanding this system with additional lenses... will likely have me purchasing a V2 system for this summer's rides. The small sensor size and 2.7 multiplier is a big plus for me because of reduced size for longer focal length lenses. I am 6ft 1in with average to large hand size and I would not want a smaller camera body. .... I am enthusiastic about the V2.

10 upvotes
jimjim2111
By jimjim2111 (Jan 29, 2013)

Me too, the cycle touring thing. But, most of my photos are in daylight, sunny also, if my luck holds. Meaning, my canon ixus 220 (120g iirc, fits in cycling jersey back pocket w just a neoprene sleeve to keep sweat at bay, doesn't tug pocket out of shape) works fine-ish. Some others get sharper shots from older p&s cameras but the 1 series advantages of fast focus and less noise (than a compact) don't really help, I'm thinking.

1 upvote
migDP
By migDP (Nov 7, 2012)

ist a rumour, or NO ????? fuuuj !!! :-(

0 upvotes
Francis Carver
By Francis Carver (Nov 5, 2012)

Wow, this Nikon V2 camera is so butt-ugly, it must have been designed in the German Democratic Republic in the mid-1960s, and then never placed in actual production because even then, it was decided that she was just too butt-ugly. The word "homely" does not begin to describe its sheer vast ugliness.

0 upvotes
VivaLasVegas
By VivaLasVegas (Nov 6, 2012)

Yikes, after two plus weeks, this Nikon V2 is not growing in me, I tried and tried........this thing is so FUGLY!

0 upvotes
migDP
By migDP (Nov 7, 2012)

no no, its newer... it have been designed in the USSR in the mid-1982s :-)

0 upvotes
robmanueb
By robmanueb (Nov 14, 2012)

I like those German and Russian cameras! My first camera was a Praktika TL1000. Guns, cameras and engines none have to be pretty to do the job yet people love them and have them as icons. Ducati and Harley V-twins are not what I would call "naturally" beautiful, yet I love those too. People drool all over guns and where is the beauty in that? I've just bought a P7100, I love the looks, a black brick covered in buttons. So what!

Comment edited 44 seconds after posting
2 upvotes
Sad Joe
By Sad Joe (Nov 15, 2012)

I'm sure this is based on a Russian Zenit film camera from the 1980's that never quite made the market place - its really ugly and not nice ugly like a T34 tank - JUST UGLY!!

0 upvotes
thejohnnerparty
By thejohnnerparty (Nov 21, 2012)

LOL .... OMG ...... LOL .....OMG :-)

0 upvotes
Roland Karlsson
By Roland Karlsson (Nov 21, 2012)

So - its ugly. I wonder how the posters look? :)

1 upvote
Guidenet
By Guidenet (Jan 5, 2013)

Wow. These replies sound like they come from non-photographers with serious cases of Nikon envy. Nothing much about IQ, build quality or anything like that. Just comments about sex appeal and looks. Makes you wonder at their reasoning for why to buy some tool over another. I wonder if they sleep with their Fuji Camera or an Echo Chain Saw? LOL

1 upvote
Kabe Luna
By Kabe Luna (Nov 1, 2012)

In this case, form follows function to a catastrophic end: The 1 system cameras, in general, are as homely as Nikon's DSLRs are generally handsome, and this V2 is the homeliest yet, looking like the b@st@rd child of a Coolpix 990 and V1. By far, the most visually unappealing camera I've seen since the T-series Canons of the mid-80s. The stylists and sculptors of this thing must have been made to work in the dark. Yuck. If a camera is going to have such a prominent viewfinder bump, why not fit a semi-transmissive mirror and an optical (or at least hybrid) viewfinder? Sure, you'd lose a little light and, possible, degrade the IQ a little bit, but with such a tiny sensor, it's not like image quality is the priority or anything, right?

2 upvotes
kucink132
By kucink132 (Oct 31, 2012)

for the sensor size, the body isn't that small, combined with sensor size, its a big meh. sony nex offer smaller body, far bigger sensor, yeah sure sony lenses sucks, but the body is great for small legacy lenses. M4/3 offer greater lenses selection, and sensor are bigger too. to say that sensor size isnt everything, yes, its true like saying money isnt everything.

4 upvotes
Dabbler
By Dabbler (Nov 14, 2012)

With the 30-100mm lens you get 270mm equivalent, imagine how big that lens would need to be on a NEX. I have both and carry the long lens on the V1 and the 24mm Zeiss on the NEX.

0 upvotes
javaone360
By javaone360 (Dec 4, 2012)

Many people may not handle how small it is for all of the Nikon 1 lenses.

0 upvotes
zinedi
By zinedi (Oct 30, 2012)

Yes, you are right - I see it as some cancer malformation of a cheap Samsung phone.

0 upvotes
highwave
By highwave (Oct 30, 2012)

I think I finally figured out why the V2 looks this way. It totally makes sense.

This is the aftermath of the Fukushima Nuclear Disaster. It's a deformed mutant camera.

So everybody please be polite and stop posting comments on how ugly this camera looks starting right now.

Be considerate.

8 upvotes
Francis Carver
By Francis Carver (Nov 5, 2012)

Let's put it this way: Even Godzilla would not claim this one as his/her/its offspring. There were some pretty ugly East German and Soviet cameras in the 1960s, but the new Nikon V2 takes the cake over them in ugliness level. I dare any camera designer to cook-up something uglier than a Nikon V2. She's a raggedy dog, really she is.

0 upvotes
role_of_72
By role_of_72 (Oct 29, 2012)

My first thought is that this Nikon could have been a perfect camera in the Canon Pro1 era!
But today I'm not sure. It depends on the use of the individual.
I don't need shallow dof that much but print up to a3 size so it's certainly not for me.
Anyway I suppose the future Canon 'pro' M model will have similar ergonomics. Now that would be a hit! :)

0 upvotes
JimDoe
By JimDoe (Oct 29, 2012)

Are you positive you can't print up to a3 size with 14MP files from a 13.2 x 8.8 sensor?

0 upvotes
Joel Benford
By Joel Benford (Oct 29, 2012)

If you feel like downloading a sample file and trying the A3 print in the interests of science...

0 upvotes
role_of_72
By role_of_72 (Oct 29, 2012)

Sure I can print up to that size but I won't be satisfied with the result. :) And yeah, I checked the official samples. Maybe I could do something with them up to iso200 but anything above is a bit of a compromise. As I've said it depends on the individual and this was only from the iq point of view.
All in all I know my needs exactly and this time I'm not the target but it can be really good for other hobbists.

0 upvotes
Shamael
By Shamael (Oct 31, 2012)

What you say is totally dumb. I have made prints in A3+ from shots made with a Coolpix 880 with 3.3 mpix, and the result is quiet stunning. I bet all you want that one can print A3+ from any shot made with a 1 V1 without that you even notice the difference between that one and any shot made with a D300 or even a D7000
If you are not able to do a good print from that camera in that size, you have much to learn about photography.

5 upvotes
Dougbm_2
By Dougbm_2 (Dec 13, 2012)

I have seen good A2 prints from a Canon G10 so this would easily print large.

0 upvotes
Neil Morgan
By Neil Morgan (Oct 29, 2012)

Somebody didnt pass maths ?
Quote from above "the 1.4 million dot display (800 x 600 RGB pixels)"

0 upvotes
wizwally
By wizwally (Oct 29, 2012)

800x600 = 480000 pixels for each primary color (R-G-B)
480000* 3 = 1.4 million

11 upvotes
nawknai
By nawknai (Dec 11, 2012)

You suck.

0 upvotes
JimDoe
By JimDoe (Oct 29, 2012)

My beloved Konica Dimage A2 is back!
But it had VR, a tilting LCD monitor with a double hinge system, a data panel on the top, a tilting EVF, a deep and comfortable hand grip. an AEL lock button...
I should have kept it!

Comment edited 2 times, last edit 10 minutes after posting
2 upvotes
Joel Benford
By Joel Benford (Oct 29, 2012)

The Dimage was a really good feature set, it hit a sweet spot on functionality and usability. It's a terrible shame nobody has recreated it with updated internals -- think what it could do with a modern sensor and EVF.

[Though I wonder whether the glass could be upgraded to handle a modern sensor at a sane price.]

1 upvote
Tord S Eriksson
By Tord S Eriksson (Oct 29, 2012)

@Benford There are many cameras that would have been lovely to own, had they been been upgraded, once in a while, with more modern electronics, displays, and sensors - The V2 looks quite a bit like my ol' Olympus C-8080 compact, but my what a difference then it comes to usefulness. But the articulated display, I miss that!

Lens-wise, the C-8080 was second to none, but it was really horrbile in anything but perfect light, or when used with a sturdy tripod (that is, it was only useful at extremely low ISO - 200 at the very most).

But the V1 has impressed me so much that I have sold off everything Pentax I have owned (bar a few unsaleable items).

So now I have three Nikon (CX, DX & FX), one Canon, two Sony (NEX & HX), one Olympus, two Pentax (an old K-x, and very old SFX).

0 upvotes
99ISO
By 99ISO (Oct 29, 2012)

What' the point of a camera with the size and price of a DSLR and the sensor of a compact?

5 upvotes
panos_m
By panos_m (Oct 29, 2012)

Size of a DSLR?

3 upvotes
Blaufeld
By Blaufeld (Oct 29, 2012)

Probably he hasn't even looked at the article and accompaining photos, just looked at the main title and dismissed this "non-pro" camera... ;)

2 upvotes
Tord S Eriksson
By Tord S Eriksson (Oct 29, 2012)

In the same vein you could ask why spend thousands of dollars on a compact like Leica's X2, or the RX1?!

I have to tell you that buying the V1 was the best I've done to make me a better wildlife photographer, as suddenly you could use standard Nikon lenses and turn them into super-zooms - the VR 70-300 becomes 200-800mm zoom, with anti-shake! And with a close-up lens up front it also does perfect macro! And it has the fastest shutter I know of, and the quietest as well!

I have a few small DSLRs, and MILCs (all APS-C-sized), but none of these can outperform the V1 on a sunny day, nor do as good video.

In fact, I'd say that the only camera I have that in most respects overshadow the V1 is my D600, which doesn't weigh much more that a normal DX/APS-C DSLR!

For instance, the D3200 is a really nice camera, but with the same sensor 'pixel' density as my V1, it really only shines in really good light, just as the V1 does!

So Nikon 1 cameras are small, compact, and use small lenses!

1 upvote
kucink132
By kucink132 (Oct 31, 2012)

nah, leica x2 is APS-C size sensor while being pocketable, RX1? do you mean full-frame camera in pocketable size? yes, compare to these camera, nikon 1 is just meh except for that fancy AF speed. 1's lenses isnt that small considering tiny sensor. If people say that tiny sensor could advantage telephoto range, nah, i can just use my sony nex and cropped image myself :D

0 upvotes
Shamael
By Shamael (Oct 31, 2012)

with a smaller sensor your 300 lens will not become a 800 super zoom. The crop factor of the image is comparable to what a FF camera would capture with an 800 lens. Your lens is 300, nothing more nothing less. If you attach it to a FF camera you get your bird or what ever you have in the center at exactly the same size as with the V1, except that at the FF you get the complete landscape around the bird and in the V1 you get the bird only, since you have a sensor that has a size comparable to a small portion of a FF sensor.

2 upvotes
Shamael
By Shamael (Oct 31, 2012)

So, cutting the landscape around it, due to smaller sensor size, gives you only the impression you have an image similar to a 800 on FF, while on the end it is only a 300 mm shot with a crop down factor calculated. No lens will change it's focal length if used on smaller or bigger sensors, the content of the image will only give you this feeling. What you cut off from a FF sensor to make it smaller, is what you cut off from a FF image due to those missing pixels. It's like taking an A3 print from a FF and cutting all off around it to keep a crop of the subject in the center. Despite this, you lose the DR and IQ of a FF sensor by this sensor size reduction.

2 upvotes
omniuspi
By omniuspi (Nov 1, 2012)

This isn't entirely correct Shamael. These 1" sensors (especially the Sony but the V2 as well) have dramatically higher pixel density and great noise/color performance to match. Thus, although you are correct that the bird is the same physical size (hence "crop factor"), the number of pixels borne on the subject is greater in the case of the CX format vs FF. So, there is unquestionably an advantage to using them (though it comes with the tradeoff you describe). However, failure to understand this point can lead to someone incorrectly stating that the lens produces the same subject on both cameras - a point which is false and which you should not repeat.

0 upvotes
kucink132
By kucink132 (Nov 4, 2012)

higher pixel density only gives you CHANCE to make better image if lens is good(sharpness>nyquist limit). If lens sharpness isn't good, increasing pixel density will not improve everything, just like resize your image to a bigger size with photoshop.

0 upvotes
Francis Carver
By Francis Carver (Nov 5, 2012)

The 10-100mm Nikon zoom for the V-system is ugly, huge, dark, and expensive.

And if you need fisheye or ultra-wide angle shots, you cannot use the Nikon 1-system, period. Because the widest wide angle is 10mm (27mm in FF 135 equivalent). Nothing shorter than that, unfortunately.

But I guess for birders who want top use $5,000 Nikon telephoto glass on their cheap V1s and V2s, it all makes perfect sense.

0 upvotes
nawknai
By nawknai (Dec 11, 2012)

It's like an RX100, but better in terms of size (the RX100 was too small, even for my small hands), lens options, and features (better than any other camera on the market).

I'm happy with my Fuji X-Pro 1, but I don't think this is a bad camera. Also, the form is excellent. Other than the NEX cameras, most mirrorless cameras don't have a good enough grip.

0 upvotes
vFunct
By vFunct (Oct 28, 2012)

These cameras scream for Instagram/Facebook/Twitter integration.

Quick snapshots, easy to use, no massive post-processing needed. No one cares about sensor quality anymore since, they're all good enough now.

If they added the Android integration, they could very well compete against the Cell phone cameras with something like this.

All we ask for is a camera with a small sensor, some decent interchangeable lenses, and Instagram integration.

In the professional world, quickest to publish wins!

1 upvote
marike6
By marike6 (Oct 28, 2012)

You think professionals are using Instagram? Doubtful.

If this camera had Facebook/Twitter integration I would definitely NOT buy it. Because a bunch of share holders think we should be interested in the Facebook, doesn't mean we all want are cameras loaded with such bloatware. Besides if you need such a camera that has Android, Apps and WiFi, Niikon has the s800c.

6 upvotes
vFunct
By vFunct (Oct 28, 2012)

Yah. Professionals are using Instagram.

Next question.

5 upvotes
vFunct
By vFunct (Oct 28, 2012)

Not only that, everyone uses Facebook, Flickr, Tumblr, Twitter.

Do you like the Terry Richardson tumblr?

What do you think of Getty using Flickr?

And do you think all the corporate Facebook pages are produced with amateur photographers?

0 upvotes
vFunct
By vFunct (Oct 28, 2012)

Basically if you do not use social media, you are an amateur, and have no business taking photos.

Cameras without social media integration should be permanently banned. They are useless to professionals. They won't exist anymore in 5 years, like cameras without video do not exist anymore now.

1 upvote
magneto shot
By magneto shot (Oct 28, 2012)

VFunct, ur referring to the Leica Monochrome?

1 upvote
andros2k5
By andros2k5 (Oct 28, 2012)

Could you believe I don't put my photos on FB or twitter nor I use instagram ? And for those who use them 1,2MPx are enough... Very doubtfull professionals use this camera indeed considering the lenses it sports...

Comment edited 4 times, last edit 4 minutes after posting
0 upvotes
T3
By T3 (Oct 28, 2012)

@marike6 - Yes, professionals use Instagram. Pro photographers (at least the smart ones) use social media quite a bit. Photographers communicate their vision and talent visually, and social media venues like Instagram, Google Plus and FB are an integral way of doing that. Being a working photographer is about getting your photos out into the world for people to see. Visual social media outlets are very important to today's photographers. If you don't realize this, you're really behind the times.

Comment edited 2 minutes after posting
0 upvotes
JadedGamer
By JadedGamer (Oct 28, 2012)

Sure, use social media, but Google+ instead of Facebook for photos: Facebook scales down the images and has terms of service that gives them transferable rights to them. (Google only wants as many rights as they need in order to show them to other people.)

0 upvotes
marike6
By marike6 (Oct 29, 2012)

Sorry people got their panties in a bunch, but the point is most photo editors like LR, Aperture, etc have built in Sharing and social media tools and many have built in Filters exactly like Instagram.

I guarantee you won't see a Nikon D5, Canon 2Dx or Phase One Q250 with Facebook integration.

0 upvotes
JimDoe
By JimDoe (Oct 29, 2012)

I agree, but the lack of a touch-tilt screen is a shame for street photos.

1 upvote
T3
By T3 (Oct 29, 2012)

@marike6 - "I guarantee you won't see a Nikon D5, Canon 2Dx or Phase One Q250 with Facebook integration."

So now you're comparing this camera to a D5-, 1Dx- or PhaseOne-type cameras? LOL. You've completely lost the plot. We're talking about this particular camera and how social media integration would be cool on this particular camera.

Now that I think about it, you lost the plot from the very beginning when you brought up "professionals" in your original post. This isn't exactly a "pro" camera to begin with.

Plus, your concern about cameras being "loaded with such bloatware" is off the mark as well. It's not as of cameras are running operating systems that will slow down as a result of having these features. Do cameras run slower because they include art filters? Are you afraid that such features will take up valuable space on the camera's hard drive? LOL!

0 upvotes
Dougbm_2
By Dougbm_2 (Nov 2, 2012)

vFunct said: "Basically if you do not use social media, you are an amateur, and have no business taking photos."

I don't think so! More likely the other way round.

0 upvotes
Emotion SideUp
By Emotion SideUp (Nov 3, 2012)

BASICALLY, if you DO use social media, you ARE an amateur. You WILL be lost in an over-saturated sea of wallet size photos. That's IS up to you. A 1 second spot of Motion Snapshot is more useful than a social media still. Think animated GIF vs Icon. The fad will FADe with time and you'll end up wondering how a billion dollar was wasted by FB

1 upvote
Francis Carver
By Francis Carver (Nov 5, 2012)

Social media web sites are for life's biggest losers.

0 upvotes
thisisbenji
By thisisbenji (Nov 30, 2012)

I think that social media integration on these cameras would actually be nice. Let's not forget that these are not professional cameras.

0 upvotes
Sarge_
By Sarge_ (Oct 28, 2012)

Full frame mirrorless, Nikon. Everything else is 'meh'. Most likely, it seems Sony will take my money for that one. I'm a pro Nikon shooter, but for 'walkaround' I'm sold on the Sony NEX series at this point (roughly pocketable, for someone who's 6'2"). Canon has potential, but Sony has the lead in glass at the moment.

Nikon's AF system seems nearly ideal for skiing, but the (sensor) size matters...

Comment edited 44 seconds after posting
3 upvotes
yslee1
By yslee1 (Oct 28, 2012)

Real men use MF sensors. What is this "full-frame" rubbish?

3 upvotes
Pat Cullinan Jr
By Pat Cullinan Jr (Oct 28, 2012)

As a space alien, what should my sensor of choice be? I'm 4 ft 8 in tall and I wear zebra-striped body stockings with no pockets. ;)

3 upvotes
Tord S Eriksson
By Tord S Eriksson (Oct 29, 2012)

Sony's lenses for the NEX range have not impressed me - except the Zeiss-branded 24! Sigma 19 & 30 are very nice, but none of these lenses have anti-shake - a pity!

Keeping my NEX-5N, mostly for panoramas!

0 upvotes
Shamael
By Shamael (Oct 31, 2012)

I shoot pictures since 54 years now, i have never had any "anti-shake". You must all be big drinkers or do you all have Parkinson disease? I use my NEX-7 every day, MF with many lenses, the only one that has "anti-shake" is the one I keep at home in the shelve of my locker and I never use. You are all too much rotten by this hi-tech viruses that infect your brains. Oh yes, I do not use any social network, nor do I run on Instagram, Facebook, Twitter, Flickr or similar sites, like related in another comment. Maybe I am old fashion, who knows? Or are the others all suckers of the system?

Comment edited 2 times, last edit 1 minute after posting
5 upvotes
taktak91
By taktak91 (Nov 3, 2012)

You should know that in Japan, where most camera companies are based, mirror-less is proposed as "perfect camera for girls who are just stepping up from P&S", and enthusiasts see them as "perfect camera for digital geeks ("Real enthusiasts (men) use DSLRs")". Also, FF is received as "Spec for old people who just can't drop the film era dating back to Ur Leica ". So, if you go to Japan and scream for a mirror-less FF, you'll be viewed as an old lady stepping up from P&S. Are you such a person?

1 upvote
svenoftibet
By svenoftibet (Nov 12, 2012)

I have the nex6 and the Nikon 1V1 ...the nex still missses the shot sometimetime but the nikon 1 hits it a lot ,ore than the sony...and if you are talking glass for the mirrorless cameras...I think the Olympus OM-D has the best glass

0 upvotes
thewhitehawk
By thewhitehawk (Dec 18, 2012)

Sony sure has done a great of turning "full frame" race into the new "megapixel" race.

While you're busy arguing whether the V2 has a big-enough sensor or not, photos taken with phones are being printed on Time magazine.

I think that smaller sensor devices have done a much better job at evolving rapidly than full or APS-C-sized sensors have, and I think that makes DSL-R owners afraid and defensive for some reason.

Anyway, while you're busy arguing how many millimetres a sensor needs to be good I'll be going outside and taking some pictures with my crop sensor camera.

0 upvotes
KennethKwok
By KennethKwok (Oct 28, 2012)

I do have a big problem that it cannot take standard Nikon SB flashes (e.g. SB-400 SB-800). Else, I would have bought it.

3 upvotes
Roland Karlsson
By Roland Karlsson (Oct 28, 2012)

Thats a part of the general plan. There is no reason at all why flashes could not be standardised, so that they could be used on any camera - except marketing reasons. It just triggers and lets out some light - thats all.

0 upvotes
T3
By T3 (Oct 28, 2012)

@Roland Karlsson - actually, this is beyond the "general plan" since this Nikon camera won't accept other Nikon camera flashes. It's one thing to not have flash compatibility across different camera brands, but it's a different story when flashes won't work within the same brand. For example, Canon's mirrorless EOS M camera uses a standard Canon E-TTL hotshoe so it can do all the same things that Canon's E-TTL flash system can do. Nikon decided to go in the opposite direction, making their mirrorless system's flash completely incompatible with their Nikon CLS flash system.

1 upvote
Thoughts
By Thoughts (Oct 28, 2012)

Nikon made it clear in the beginning, 1 series aim different market, not DSLR users. I guess the cameras are developed by Coolpix people rather than DSLR department.

1 upvote
T3
By T3 (Oct 29, 2012)

@Thoughts - well, Canon also said that their mirrorless system is aimed at a "different market, not DSLR users." But that didn't keep them from still maintaining compatibility with their existing Canon flash system. Plus, a lot of Nikon DSLR users are considering buying-- or have bought-- a Nikon 1 cameras as a compact supplement to their DSLR gear.

If Nikon really wanted to aim for a completely different market from DSLR users, then why did they bother to offer the FT1 F-mount adapter for the 1 system? It's because they obviously want their DSLR users to also buy a 1 system camera. By offering cross compatibility with their DSLR system lenses, but not their DSLR system flashes, it makes for a disjointed, inconsistent strategy.

Comment edited 3 minutes after posting
2 upvotes
pavi1
By pavi1 (Oct 29, 2012)

My SB-8000 works on my Coolpix CP5000. In fact I used it for nearly 2 years on the CP5000 prior to buying the D70S.

0 upvotes
Tord S Eriksson
By Tord S Eriksson (Oct 29, 2012)

T3 wrote: "Plus, a lot of Nikon DSLR users are considering buying-- or have bought-- a Nikon 1 cameras as a compact supplement to their DSLR gear. "

I ended up in the Nikon gang, due to the V1, and now have both a Nikon DX and a Nikon FX, something that would not have happened otherwise!

I was totally Pentax, never planning to change. But the V1 fell into my lap (after my wife changed to a OM-D, giving me this surplus little nugget), and I couldn't resist it!

So the plan is to buy a V2 as well, some day in the future!

0 upvotes
Francis Carver
By Francis Carver (Nov 5, 2012)

I guess you will be buying one copy each of every single camera Nikon will release, right until the very end of time. Is that the plan?

0 upvotes
Spectro
By Spectro (Oct 28, 2012)

@ dancart, since the1 sensor is smaller, its 1:1 is smaller. If you want a cheap macro, a P&S and its tiny sensor is a macro by default.

1 upvote
JadedGamer
By JadedGamer (Oct 28, 2012)

Plus, they often can focus 1 cm in front of the lens (like my Casio EX-ZR200, or any Ricoh P&S I have owned), which also helps in the macro department.

0 upvotes
GabrielZ
By GabrielZ (Oct 27, 2012)

My favorite types of photography are landscape and macro. So the increased DOF of the smaller sensor, combined with compact size, low weight, ability to change lenses and relatively affordable price, would suit me quite well. But I want to wait for a full review to see how image quality measures up. And hope that down the line Nikon releases a real macro lens for this system.

3 upvotes
DanCart
By DanCart (Oct 28, 2012)

Im also surprised that Nikon hasnt added a macro lens yet for its 1 system cameras ,

0 upvotes
Strawberry Pie
By Strawberry Pie (Oct 28, 2012)

You could use the Nikkor 40mm DX macro together with the FT1 adapter.

1 upvote
Comac
By Comac (Oct 28, 2012)

Question; I could use my old Nikkor lenses with an adaptor?

0 upvotes
cesaregal
By cesaregal (Oct 28, 2012)

@Comac
Compatible Nikkor F Mount Lenses:
http://imaging.nikon.com/lineup/acil/accessories/mount_adapter_ft1/compatibility.htm

1 upvote
Pat Cullinan Jr
By Pat Cullinan Jr (Oct 29, 2012)

What's this? Communication and sharing of sound technical knowledge? Where're the insults, the irrelevancies, the condescending attitudes, the disdain, the bad grammar and spelling, the vulgarities?

Did you ever write a comment and then feel it was too sour or sarcastic? This is one of those times. But then, you can't be funny without being sarcastic, unless you stick to shtik like

"What do you call a fly with no wings? A walk."

0 upvotes
Tord S Eriksson
By Tord S Eriksson (Oct 29, 2012)

I like using my FT! adapter with my VR 70-300, and then add a close-up lens up front (I use Canon's, but there are other brands!). Superb insect macro lens. Second best is the 30-110, with a similar Canon close-up lens (smallest size available is 52mm, so you need some step-up rings).

Lovely!

0 upvotes
Strawberry Pie
By Strawberry Pie (Oct 29, 2012)

@Tord: if I may ask, which Canon close-up lens do you mean? (I'm curious because I'd like to try it myself.)

0 upvotes
Shamael
By Shamael (Oct 31, 2012)

Small size and light weight is a handicap in Makro shooting. A heavy Dslr is easy to keep quite in Makro, a mirrorless will force you to have a tripod in most situations. It is impossible to keep it quiet and every millimeter you move leaves you run out of focus on Makro. I shoot 1.5 second with the Fuji S5 and sometimes up to 2 seconds without any blur, with the NEX-7 it's limited to 1/25th, never i could make a sharp shot at lower speeds with it. It is absolutely too light. Mirrorless cameras have not only advantages, heavy body weight of the camera is a bargain when shooting long lenses handheld.

Comment edited 40 seconds after posting
0 upvotes
inevitable crafts studio
By inevitable crafts studio (Nov 3, 2012)

@pat cullinan jr: you wanna be the new house troll? nice tries so far ..

0 upvotes
emtx
By emtx (Oct 27, 2012)

For me look does matters - event its not priority and this one is ugly.Considering size, this camera is just little smaller than others which was criticised for it. Small sensor???

I shot with some Nikons - commission for website. I wondered about the colors. Well, I didn't need to do any major PP, but far from real. That was turning point - away from Nikon. IMO had a great time with Nikon D 300S, but too late for me.

Specs & AF is impressive. But I wonder about image quality with CX sensor. You can take great pictures even with 30 years old Lomo, but it cost 40 bugs and its FF :).

If you talk about functionality - fine. I start what I get for money...expensive!
If I get one for free - ou well, I will not send it to you for shipping - I sell it to some Nikon enthusiast and get more effective camera for this price.

Comment edited 3 times, last edit 13 minutes after posting
1 upvote
PenFan2011
By PenFan2011 (Oct 27, 2012)

Large point and shoot camera sensor, cheap point and shoot look, and a proprietary hot shoe. Wow, this insults Nikon users more than the first one in this series. At least Canon has more sense to use an APS-C sensor.

2 upvotes
Matthew Miller
By Matthew Miller (Oct 27, 2012)

Can the built-in flash trigger Nikon's wireless CLS flashes?

0 upvotes
T3
By T3 (Oct 28, 2012)

Nope. Apparently, Nikon has made the 1 system's flash as incompatible with their CLS flash system as possible: proprietary hot shoe, proprietary accessory flashes, and no CLS wireless triggering. Not sure what they were thinking.

1 upvote
yslee1
By yslee1 (Oct 28, 2012)

Ugh, CLS wireless would made the proprietary flash and shoe a lot easier to swallow.

1 upvote
Matthew Miller
By Matthew Miller (Oct 28, 2012)

Well, that's good for _me_, because I'm far less tempted by the system.

1 upvote
nunatak
By nunatak (Oct 27, 2012)

First barrier, to my mind, is it appears to be neither ergonomically friendly, nor pocketable. No indication of whether it's made of environmentally friendly materials, or will be another piece of toxic landfill in a few years. As a designer, it looks to me like a franken-cludge that was slapped together upon one evening's brainstorm, and after five bottles of saki.

The next barrier Nikon faces is the performance of their "improved" CX sensor. Is it just more lipstick on a pig, or can it deliver relatively rich, fat, data files that will replicate the wide range of tones, and crisp focused edges that the larger, more proven sensors do? To my mind that's a Herculean effort considering the price point Nikon has chosen to introduce this product.

IMO, these are just some of the earliest barriers Nikon has to cross to make this technology popular enough that they won't need to discount it by half (e.g. V1) before the next iteration comes to market.

4 upvotes
victorenglund
By victorenglund (Oct 27, 2012)

I second this post! Who is the Nikon 1 series for? The image quality is good, no denying that. For a CX size sensor! There are many tiny cameras with larger and better sensors. Want a stylish small one? How a bout a PEN Lite or a Sony NEX5? Want a practical one? How about a Panasonic GH3 or X-E1. A stylish and practical one? Olympus OMD-EM5.

The lens selection isn't very good and the crop factor is huge on legacy lenses. But the AF is very good! Yes, it's class leading! I guess this camera is great for sports and wildlife photographers who want a small camera then.

Regarding beauty. Beauty is in the eyes of the beholder so to each his own. Unless your a Leica camera I guess :-) I still think it's dog ugly!

3 upvotes
wetsleet
By wetsleet (Oct 27, 2012)

I think one of the most demanding subjects for autofocus is children. Also happens to be one of the more popular subjects for many camera buyers. Prosaic possibly, high-art possibly not, but priceless.

Comment edited 19 seconds after posting
3 upvotes
kucink132
By kucink132 (Oct 31, 2012)

if the srength is AF and video recording, i wont bother trying other lenses than kit lens for this body. interchanging lenses for tiny sensor doesnt make sense for me. thats why if i want to give excuse for tiny sensor, package must be small, like rx100

0 upvotes
dadaoftwo
By dadaoftwo (Oct 31, 2012)

I can't speak for the other Nikon 1 users, but it's perfect for my needs - taking pics of my young kids and beautiful wife :)
For years I went thru a series of PnS which just gave me years of disappointment - great for taking meaningless shots of buildings and flowers - but not where the heart is - my family!
Especially kids who move around at light speed! All I ever got were blurred faces or the frown after they've dropped a smile cos the autofocus on the PnS are soooo slow!
A DSLR is too big and complicated for my needs - and then the mirrorless and 4/3 came out and I was hooked! But unfortunately, all out of my price range - I got my J1 at a good price cos of all the haters out there! :) I knew about it's fast AF and that was priority #1 - good quality pics was a bonus - although I must admit, I still struggle to take good, unblurry pics of my kids inside the house in evening time - so that forces me to go out with them more and do stuff outside! Win for everyone!

1 upvote
Photomonkey
By Photomonkey (Oct 27, 2012)

I like the looks a whole lot compared to the previous version.

As a matter of fact, I recall several camera styling proposals in the seventies producing cameras that looked like this that met with great approval. I am glad we never got the circular cameras...

It invokes traditional camera SLR cues that make me feel that this a more serious camera than its predecessor. I realize that bothers some but I recognize that they are aware of people like me want a camera to look like.

Comment edited 4 minutes after posting
3 upvotes
ddolde
By ddolde (Oct 27, 2012)

Absurdly small no thanks I'd not want a free one

0 upvotes
Roland Karlsson
By Roland Karlsson (Oct 27, 2012)

If you happen to get one for free, send it to me. I will pay the shipping.

2 upvotes
olyflyer
By olyflyer (Oct 27, 2012)

That's because you don't have a clue. Anyway, if you'd get one for free I'd be glad if you'd send it to me. I'd pay for the shipping regardless where on the earth you live.

1 upvote
kucink132
By kucink132 (Oct 31, 2012)

better solution: after you get it, sell it on ebay, buy rx100 or any other system instead

0 upvotes
Total comments: 452
1234