dpreview review samples

Photo
20 / 23
Navigation
Back to album
Slideshow
Start
Nikon J1 Preview Samples:
DSC_0129
Viewed 46272 times
DSC_0129
This photo is in 1 album:
Nikon J1 Preview Samples
Nikon J1 Preview Samples
(23 photos)
This photo is marked as:  Safe.
Camera:
Lens:
Available sizes: Small, Medium, Large, Original (3872×2592, 5.5MB)
Captured: Jan 2, 2011
Uploaded: Sep 22, 2011 (UTC)
Focal length: 10 mm
Shutter speed: 1/80 sec
Aperture: F5.6
ISO: 6400
Exposure comp.: -

Comments

Total comments: 18
ezradja
By ezradja (Sep 24, 2011)

It's really creepy too see some fanboy. I thought only apple fanboy can go worship the brand very diligently. The Big N and sometime C too I noticed :) LOL.

Compare with (slightly) smaller sensor (older generation sensor) from pro-sumer digicam such as G12 or LX5 of course this Nikon 1 system win, slightly. (please comparing the pic. yourself at imaging resource)

Compare to the same price range, the same "lifestyle" target market product, the new released Sony NEX-5N, then there's a lot different, stark different. Well, not surprise at all because what, the sensor on NEX5N is much much bigger than V1/J1.

The only small sensor that made a different in the past was from Fujifilm SuperCCD, and that with limitations, of course. But the newer design, dynamic range was improved and the noise was handle well. The EXR sensor was actually quite good. The not released yet Fujifilm X-10 would has EXR sensor with slightly bigger sensor than the sensor from F-series. (continue)

0 upvotes
ezradja
By ezradja (Sep 24, 2011)

The EXR sensor with its limitations already has low noise at high iso capability (the F-series), so the X-10 would worth wait, IMO.

What I just can't help to question is, why you have to embrace the smaller sensor (albeit. worse high iso noise vs. the newer APS sensor - not that from D80 or worse, from that old full frame Kodaks-LOL) while you just can't have much smaller lens system. Haven't you saw that 10-100mm (equiv. 28-280mm) lens? With 72mm filter size! How matter small V1/J1 bodies, but with that enormous lens attached, don't you think that ridiculous? Or attached that enormous AFS 300mm f2.8 nikkor on them! mooted the point of being small and "compact".

How about ultrawide lens (zoom or fixed)? Of course you'll need ultrawide and or wide lenses! And to compensated the high noise, you'll want brighter lens, of course max. aperture 2.8 or bigger are more preferable). Guess what, those wide lens gonna be big, so again, being compact and small body would be pointless.

0 upvotes
ezradja
By ezradja (Sep 24, 2011)

There was a reason why (in celluloid term) 35mm format succeed and the 110 format and classic APS format dead. And that medium format has only a few users, not to mention the large format. That's because the 35mm format is the best compromise way of handling, quite reasonable size lens system, and acceptable image quality. The important thing to be considered is also the diffraction effect. The 35mm still somewhat somehow still far in that limitation (film and size format)

In digital era, the format has change, in the battle of full frame 35mm, the APS size sensor, and 4/3 size format. The diffraction effect depend on the resolution and the quality of the lens, but the limitations is still there, you just can't denied physic principles.
Notice how 4/3 lens is smaller, but only slightly smaller. And the bright lens and wide lens still big, not tiny.

0 upvotes
ezradja
By ezradja (Sep 24, 2011)

Now just imagine, you have this V1/J1, and use one of the lens, yes, the DOF is wide, you can use f4 and has everything in focus, but is that the limit of diffraction effect on the sensor? if you move to f8, do the image still sharp, on soften because of the effect of diffraction? Now tell, what is the point of being interchangeable if the lens is useless at some f-stop :)

0 upvotes
clchanhk
By clchanhk (Sep 24, 2011)

It is quite obvious that the process helps a lot as its noise reduction is quite obvious. However this is a totally usable picture to me.

What this image impress me most is not the degree of noise but the dynamic range. Even in such a high ISO it can still maintain such a wide dynamic range which we can still see the stuff inside the shop while the tube is so bright! Originally I am planned to go for the Sony NEX but now Nikon show me what it is capable to. Nearly all image are solid in the corners and the color reproduction is rich. However, being a Nikon user (I stick with the Nikon brand since the F80), this color tone is rather "non-Nikon" to me which makes me somehow not really get used to. It is not as solid as the previous model but I still think the image quality is good.

0 upvotes
pisang
By pisang (Sep 23, 2011)

Better than D80 at ISO 3200 (hi 1).

0 upvotes
steven8217
By steven8217 (Sep 23, 2011)

Impressive !!
The noise at ISO-6400 is cleaner than my D300S APS-C sensor !
Well design, show us some slow motion video clip !
...and D800 please !

0 upvotes
cmvsm
By cmvsm (Sep 23, 2011)

Very challenging shot with the neon lighting and shadows. Very impressive!

0 upvotes
uhoh07
By uhoh07 (Sep 22, 2011)

Good lord, guys, enough with the silly vertical snaps.

Not a good infinity shot I can see--lets see the skyline so we can at least get an idea.

0 upvotes
Julio
By Julio (Sep 22, 2011)

Not bad at all actually.

Most people insist in comparing this new system to m4/3 since, to date, that has been the only sub-APSC interchangeable lens option. Personally I'm looking at this system as a G12 or P7100 upgrade and as such, it's a hell of an upgrade!

0 upvotes
EPICphotography
By EPICphotography (Sep 22, 2011)

Sucks? :)
At 6400... Sucks..?
This camera has a potential.. For 75 years... Nikon is not that dumb... They have their R&D... This image beats the m4/3...sincerely..

0 upvotes
Andrei Todea
By Andrei Todea (Sep 22, 2011)

6 years ago I was getting these results with a much bigger camera at ISO 800. While this ISO 6400 performance is not stellar, it's usable and it certainly proves the system will produce amazing photos in the (near) future!

2 upvotes
Kim Seng
By Kim Seng (Oct 3, 2011)

Yes It is true.

0 upvotes
Peter Hayward
By Peter Hayward (Sep 22, 2011)

It just may have some potential yet .... at 6400 this is impressive, to me.

0 upvotes
steveh0607
By steveh0607 (Sep 22, 2011)

Sucks? For 6400? Get a little perspective.

0 upvotes
JukkaV
By JukkaV (Sep 22, 2011)

ISO 6400 says EXIF

0 upvotes
Andreas Roca
By Andreas Roca (Sep 22, 2011)

Sucks!

0 upvotes
ezradja
By ezradja (Sep 24, 2011)

nice too see someone being honest :)

0 upvotes
Total comments: 18