I like taking pictures, how about you?
olyflyer: Nice camera. Good luck Nikon.
Anyway, people will whine about this camera also. Pathetic.
The Fuji finepix X100S is the closest competitor and is more expensive at $1299 and people are buying that. So obviously there is a market, you just aren't part of it.
Bearsdenoboe: If Nikon is hoping to launch a full range of professional products with this, they urgently need a 'pro' name: Coolpix is a pathetic, amateurish attempt at Japanese English, and anyway "Cool" went out years ago, thankfully, with Tony Blair. "Dig this, Chicks!"
I do hope that they expand soon to a FF/FX version with interchangeable lenses, with a fast AF system. Users of existing Nikon lenses would flock to such a system (when a DSLR is not needed), but Nikon would open up a new market here and need not be afraid of losing customers.
Without such a model however, they will lose out heavily to Fuji, as soon as a FF X-Pro 2 comes out (next year?). Some indeed prefer Nikon's colours (for landscape) compared with the more muted tones emerging from otherwise superb Fuji results (that 35 mm lens!), and would happily remain loyal, assuming a mirrorless FF 24 - 36 MPX.
So do you think FinePix, as in Fuji FinePix X100, sounds better? I'm guessing most people will drop the coolpix and just call it the Nikon A just as people dropped the FinePix from the X100.
dark goob: These are great for video and casual stills. The slowdown feature is really sweet. Different market category than other mirrorless cams, not sure why everyone feels compelled to compare it to OM-D or NEX-7 since they are totally different market segments.
Just because two things are the same price doesn't mean they are directly comparable. Comparing a $30K mini-van and a $30K sedan wouldn't make any sense. They are both vehicles to get you from point A to point B but have different functions, looks, features, and target markets.
andros2k5: Can't understand Nikon 1 line, its all-around lens 10-100 is slow (one of the slowest with it's f4,5-5,6) and as bulky and heavy as the AF-S 18-200 VR... Olympus equivalent is half the weight and a lot smaller (not considering it has o cover a near 2 times larger sensor area).Nikon V1 image quality was far from its mirrorles rival, now we have 16MP, sure we need it ? Perhaps leave it at 10MP and improving IQ would have been a better choice...
The 10-100mm that you are comparing is mainly for video. For someone like me who doesn't need smooth zooming then yes, it's way too big and expensive. But for me, I just use my 10mm the majority of the time and it's pretty easy to carry the little 30-110mm as well just in case I do need a method of zoom other than my legs.
Get a weekly update of all that's new in the digital
photography world by subscribing to the Digital Photography Review