Small-sensor + Long lens combo, is the Nikon 1 the best choice?

Started 7 months ago | Discussions thread
nigelht
Regular MemberPosts: 382Gear list
Like?
Re: Small-sensor + Long lens combo, is the Nikon 1 the best choice?
In reply to John Sheehy, 7 months ago

John Sheehy wrote:

Greg A A wrote:

John Sheehy wrote:

frank-in-toronto wrote:

i use the v1 along with my d600. the difference in iq is HUGE. however, for small web posts, the v1 is fine. for anything large, printed or cropped, it's junk.

You know what's really junk? A v1-size crop from a DSLR, compared to the same lens using a v1.

Huh? In no circumstance is a Nikon 1 comparable to a D4, D800, D600, D7100, D3S ...

Wrong. Exactly in the circumstance I described, the larger area of a larger sensor is of ZERO value. Sensors are not like dish antennas, where you get more signal with a bigger antenna. They are bigger surfaces that can capture a larger area of the image projected by the lens.

What? No. The V1 isn't bad in good light but in low light a larger sensor does get more signal (number of photons) than a smaller one because generally each pixel is individually larger. There are diagrams and articles all over the place to illustrate this even in a crop situation since your scenario doesn't describe the lighting level. A D4, D800, etc x2.7 crop in low light is generally better than a V1 shot especially given the noise our sensor has at higher ISO.

In terms of whether a V1 is better than a D4, D800, etc crop goes in good light depends on the lens.

This chart here:

from this thread by rob_b illustrates the pixel density difference and potential advantages of the V1/V2 for very long shots.

As for the OP, the Nikon 85mm f1.8 reportedly has slow but accurate AF since it's not meant for sports but portraits. The 70-200 f2.8 is reported to be "verra nice" which is to be expected from such a classic lens.

Shooting a 50mm f1.8 G as a 135mm focal length equivalent works reasonably well for when lighting is really bad too. Given that this is a $220 lens and the 105mm f2.8 is a $900 range lens the FT-1 is an economical and effective way to make use of any existing Nikon glass since you are already a Nikon fan (which implies you might have a Nikon already…).

The FT-1 probably impacts the handling of the camera more with the 50mm than any of the bigger lenses which generally would dominate the size equation.

The system does lack for fast native telephotos and zooms. A native 300mm f2.8 would be killer for the N1 birders although it would be expensive. Not as expensive as a 810mm lens would be though...

A native 70-200 f2.8 would be great for indoor sports as would a native 85mm f1.8 with a fast AF.

Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
Post (hide subjects)Posted by
Keyboard shortcuts:
FForum PPrevious NNext WNext unread UUpvote SSubscribe RReply QQuote BBookmark post MMy threads
Color scheme? Blue / Yellow