V2 sample photos from DPR

http://www.dpreview.com/galleries/reviewsamples/albums/nikon-1-v2-preview-samples

Comments anyone?
- Jon

They are good or OK up to ISO 800, slightly disappointing I would say.

It's hard to judge from these samples, but the majority look excellent in terms of sharpness. There is a hint of a grain pattern in even the base ISO that I find to be film-like and quite pleasing. The high ISO pictures are somewhat confusing. The hairs on the woolley mammoth and the bear show smearing due to noise reduction, yet the head of the stag looks sharp and detailed. Overall, a decent representation of the quality of images one would expect using the V2.

--
Charles.
http://www.dpreview.com/galleries/9945787145/photos
Even though you are on the right track - you will get run over if you just sit there.
-Will Rogers.

The ISO 800 image quality is barely beyond P&S quality level. (sitting woman with glasses) Maybe RAW developed in NX2 looks better. But for me this is way below what I find acceptable. Probably using a fast prime and the VR system would help in some situations but even then it's not my cup of tea.

That photo at 800 ISO ( lady with glasses ) looks excellent to my eyes - there is very little grain.

http://frankclark.smugmug.com/

--
Frank

Not impressed...

Sure, low iso pictures are very good, as expected.

But high iso are disappointing.

It's a pity Nikon doesn't want/know how to improve low iso performance of its 1" sensor.

Next time?

--
André
http://a.barelier.free.fr/

The color neutrality, skin tones,  exposure and WB are very good. The high ISO images look a bit flat, the shutter speed in some of those shots (1/6sec) shows the VR is impressive. My overall impression is that the images are great if the V2 sold for $450, disappointing for a camera costing $850, considering other cameras like the Oly e-pl5 offer superb image quality and sell for $599

I just wish DPR would take a few shots in bright sunlight. These are mostly quite flat and dreary which is known to be bad for small sensors. Too bad DPR is in the sub arctic rainforest of the Northwest. Coming from the UK they probably think sunshine just hurts your eyes and causes highlight clipping. If they would just send me a camera I would be glad to do some shots in the sunny south for them. Under the flat conditions at "full size" plus another click they look sharp and clean but its hard to tell much about the colors.

Sorry but most of you dont get the message !

its not Nikon...technology is at a limit... physics is at a limit.......

A D4 has 54 % Quantum efficiency and the D3s around 57 %..........

The quality of the  pixels of the V2 is around the same level the pixels are just much smaller....

if you want better quality with a V2 yiou need faster lenses and for those you need deeper pockets !

Peter

Really? A standard Kit Zoom Lens for a D600, D4 etc is 24-85mm F/3.5 ~ F/5.6 which gives you physical apertures from 6.85 ~ 15.17mm. with a imaging circle  >35mm . Said lens costs about $300. A similar lens for a tiny 1" sensor would have to be 10-30mm F/1.8 ~2.8 projecting an imaging circle 4x smaller than FX, why would such a lens require "deeper pockets"? A fuji XZ-2 has a longer zoom at F/1.8 to F/2.8 and it sells for $500

Sorry, but I don't get it.

Not to start another Sony vs Nikon war, but it seems to me that the RX 100 gives better high iso pictures than the V1/2, despite its 20MP.

Give me a V2 with the RX100 image quality, and at a decent price, and I'm sold. 14 MP is plenty. Even 10 MP is OK for me.

But as said by another fellow below, the price level of the V2 is way too high.

Can you believe it? In France, the V2 + 10-30 costs EUR 780. That's $1000.

Crazy...really.

André
http://a.barelier.free.fr/

It's a beautiful sunny day today here in the Seattle area.  Not a cloud in the sky.  Too bad they don't pop out and take a few more pics.

Wrong on a couple of counts. The new 24-85 kit lens for the D600 costs over $500.00 from most sources I checked and the equivalent lens for CX would be closer to a 9-31mm, f1.3-2.1. The XZ-2 doesn't compare as it's for a much smaller sensor than even the CX and it's depth of field would be much greater.

--
Regards, Paul
Lili's Dad

Where can I get one?

Sounds a bit like the new, rumoured X20, although it is expectd to sell for $600, I think.

--
Cheers
Trevor G
Silkypix tutorials at: http://photo.computerwyse.com

A F 1.2 lens needs deeper pockets the a F 4 lens..

I didnt say very deep pockets....

But the problem is that Nikons marketing department are hesitant to introduce

faster lenses that need deeper (not very deep) pockets and sell the Nikon 1 system at

a not very understandable price policy price point..... 1 year before at 9004 and the year after at 295$.....

Peter

The Sony isnt much better.. I own both..

peter

A bit mixed. Lady with glasses is slightly underexposed and not sharp . Also look at bb_DSC_0229 - beautiful image, but I'm not sure where focus is because nothing is sharp and the gradients are not smooth despite low iso. Some of this could be down to the lens used.

From a noise perspective they look ok'ish, but given what I said above, this could be in part thanks to heavy noise reduction which has taken away some sharpness and definition.

What is disappointing is that all of these photos have been take with the mediocre 10-30mm lens, which has lower contrast and lower color transmission than the prime lenses. I think some shots take with the prime lenses would show noticeably better image quality. I hope DPR uses some primes for their review, at least.

- Jon

If you have 600 $ cash and you spend it on a camera I can tell you

that you will have more then 3 options...but here are some...

spend it on a camera like the D3200 or D5200 with the kit lens...

or spend it on the Nikon series 1 or spend it on a superzoom like the lumix Fz 200

I can tell you you will look at an incredibly better image quality on th D5200

or a much lesser image quality like the series 1 or even lesser image quality in an FZ 200..

But you will have difficulty to put the D5200 into your coatpocket and you will have difficulty

when you want the equivalent of 600 mm at 2.8  if you dont use the superzoom..

so horses for courses and just accept that the things that concern image quality are what they are..

Peter

Peter, it seems you are responding to Jon's post without first reading it. A poor lens will give poor results in front of any camera. Jon was kind when he described the 10-30 as mediocre. I would have chosen different words. Yes, the 18-55 DX kit lens is much better, but still not as good as the 18.5 f/1.8 prime for N1. So your "incredibly better image quality" comment is a bit too broad to be meaningful.

A discounted V1 with the 18.5 prime is a lot of IQ and portability for the money. That combo is about £440 here in the UK.

The D5200 is significantly more expensive (£730ish with kit lens) and not even available in the US yet. The older D5100 + 35mm f/1.8 DX is about £480. Compared to the V1 or V2, it would provide better IQ at higher ISO, but its video mode is inferior and possibly also its AF.

Horses for courses as you say.