I like the G1X approach - much better than the Nikon 1. My only concern to be honest is the 20cm minimum macro distance. Will that be sufficient? I like to shoot macros.
ThomasX: looks great....However, I hoped it will be in the $13k range.Way too expensive for me. Bummer!
how embarrassing1.3k of course
looks great....However, I hoped it will be in the $13k range.Way too expensive for me. Bummer!
noobdprseller: Posted by magnumgf : "Do you actually take pictures or do you just spend your time writing in forums? What you wrote seems to make sense, only of you have some ulterior motive such as selling cameras. I wish you the best of luck with that. I suppose the suckers who fall for your nonsense deserve what they get."
My dpreview gallery, some taken with almost a decade old dslrs needing photographer to think like film days & not rely on the cameras thinking.I have also been shooting rangefinders since the 80's, starting with Yashica Minister.
Anyone with experience of shooting fim rangefinders, sould find shooting through X10 OVF easy.Anyone who has used compact digicams with an ovf should find shooting through X10 OVF easy.Anyone who has not used digicams with ovf shouldl after a while become accustomed to X10 OVF.
What a silly attack you made on me magnumgf.You made an idiotic & immature attack on mr.Moronic twit attack as you have made should be sent to the trash.
I think you are completely missing the point here.(Most) people on this forum understand that "old" SLRs or rangefinders allowed for good pictures to be taken.But all of them (at least the ones that I knew,e.g. old Nikon F cams, Leica M etc.) gave you a hint on exposition status AND focus information in the OVF!How are you going to get this information if not shown in the OVF? It is NOT a question of experience to take good pictures without such information at hand. Its just a game of luck. I see only one way: taking the cam off the eye, adjusting parameters, checking exposition on screen, looking through OVF again, composing image, then taking the picture while hoping light didn't change too much in the meanwhile, and hoping the cam picked the right focus point(s)......This is not very practical, and error prone, but maybe I am the one missing a point, then please educate me, I' eager to learn.
magnumgf: Looks nice with the retro style and metal body. Otherwise totally incomprehensible. Can anyone tell me what the point of a viewfinder that does not show what you get in the picture, it only shows 85% and it has parallax error. On top of that it does not show ANY shooting information, not even focus. You would be better off looking over the top of the camera if you ask me. There are other cameras out there with much bigger sensors, can be fitted with electronic viefinders that give you all the shooting into, can use a variety of lenses and only cost slightly more. Why would you pick the Fuji over them?
A functional fail, but looks sweet.
I was already wondering - how to work with an optical viewfinder that gives me no focus information? I could potentially survive having no other information at hand when looking through it, but focus? Does that mean I have to rely on the camera picking the right focus point? No way...I can't take pictures like that.Or did I misunderstand the concept?
Erik Neu: The macro shots have shallow DOF, as everybody would expect. The pictures are not a good choice for showing the real world performance of the optics of this camera.I hope somebody uploads a landscape, portait and some indoor low light pictures.Some people on the street with the lens wide open would be nice too.
Your posts with the link have no informational value.They simply are advertisements for your website, to generate traffic.This is inappropriate, and a misuse of this forum. A pity that you don't get it.(no further comment from my side now)
24images: It seems a nice camera . Since I ve been so disappointed by my X100, I am suspicious. I don't believe this view finder will be better than the pathetic one on the G11. 85% coverage and no parallaxe correction, forget about it !
Why were you disappointed by the X100?
"...you have to repeat...otherwise you get lost..."
Come on, this is not a place to advertise for anything! Imagine all posters would do that-what informational value would remain with this forum!?
I second the previus poster, this is annoying and I will not look at this either, to not support annoyances like that.
Angelfire: Superb products from Nikon. If the actual real life reviews are as good as I expect them to be, I will be getting the V1 plus the 10mm pancake for every day shots, the 10-100mm designed for video lens and the new mini strobe. When it becomes available I will also be getting the converter attachment so that I can use my 70-200 VRII plus teleconverter for a fast and inexpensive solution to wildlife and sports photography (equivalent to 1080mm).
The V1 will be outstanding for photographing my great nieces and nephews who never stand still and for macros of insects. I can just see now the photograph of a bee or a butterfly taking off from a flower captured with ease using the V1's AF capabilities and motion snapshot stills. Brilliant design from Nikon if it is as good as Nikon's publicity suggests and I love the plain design even though I will have to use a sub menu to access Aperture priority etc.
At this price level, it's IQ should be better than the G12 and on par with some MfTs. Apparently it isn't. So what is left? Speed: is good according to Nikon. Build: let's give it some advance credit, probably good. Usability: upgraders, donwn- or sidegraders will miss the controls. Design: nope. Accessories/lenses: behind competition. Size/pocketability: not better than MfT. Not enough to be a compelling offering.
Sounds a little like copy & paste from a Nikon marketing release, but well, I respect your opinion. Congrats Nikon, you found your first potential customer who even likes the design!
Here is one of the first image quality comparisions:
Unfortunately, worse than enthusiast compacts and others....even the term "catastrophe" is being used (relating IQ to pricing).
Current compact camera users who want to upgrade: way to expensive, will go for enthusiast compacts.Current enthusiast compact camera users: will miss the external controls, will go for EVIL or DSLR.Current EVIL users: will not downgrade from larger sensor, more controls, better looks etc.Current DSLR users: will potentially buy an Oly/Pana/Sony EVIL with it's larger sensors & controls while not even being bigger than the new Nikon thing!Everybody: appalled by ugly design.
So where is this huge market that Nikon has found? Outback bushwackers? Toddlers? Carthusian monks?
@pixelplayerEverybody considers looks on everything. This is just the human factor, sorry.And, "..does NOT EVEN work as a status symbol..." means that ugly looks come on top of some other disappointments for a former Nikon afficionado.
It is actually unbelievable how much Nikon failed in my eyes. Not only is the segment they are trying to address with this thing not existing or small, they also do not satisfy the expectation of those people like me who have been holding back with buying a MFT in order to wait and see what Nikon will bring to the party.
I don't give a damn on whether or not they believe to cannibalize any other segments, I want a smaller than SLR camera with exchangeable lenses and better than compact images, especially at low light. And I won't buy something that offers smaller size sensors than other established systems, at a higher or the same price level. And, something that is darn ugly. No way.
this thing doesn't even work as a status symbol! Its too ugly!
Small sensor.Ugly.Expensive.Very disappointed long term Nikon fanboy, having waited too long for a mindblowing MFT competitor from favourite brand.Bye bye Nikon.