nicolaiecostel: Having used a friend's J1 and tried out another friend's V1,I must say that the 1 series from Nikon might me the most underrated camera system ever.
I bet most people dismissing the 1 system on this website have never even tried one.
Let me see if I've got this right.
So, you claim yourself to be a "photographer", but it took you two bodies, 4 lenses and a year to come to the conclusion that the IQ from the 1 series is basically that of a P&S?
I don't think you know anything about photography, let alone owning two 1-series cameras.
I have shot events using the V1+6.7-13mm for wides and D800+70-200mm for teles and I can tell you that none of my viewers complained about the IQ.
ttran88: No EVF, RX100M3 has the pop up evf. Couldn't they borrow that technology from Sony. It's hard to take Nikon's or Canon's mirrorless offerings seriously. The former comes out with this and the latter has a camera but doesn't want to sell it to everyone. Trying to not hurt your dslr sales? It doesn't get any more obvious than this.
The J series has never had nor will it ever have an EVF. If you are looking for an EVF try the V series.
Studor13: These "tests" make me laugh.
Try doing this regularly over an entire European winter nights:Leave the lenses on a tripod and shoot 1 to 2 hour long exposures. Make sure you have a few days where you are certain to get some serious condensation coming down onto the lenses.
After 3 winters my 14-24 is still going strong without any problems. I also have the 16-35mm f4 but I don't dare risk this lens because I am fairly certain that it would die a very sudden death.
There is far more to a lens than some apparent sharpness in the corners when viewed at 100% on a D810!
And BTW, 1mm is not insignificant on an extreme wide angled lens.
The problem I have is that people will jump up and down and say "Oh look the Tamron is sharper but is $600 cheaper" without understanding that the $600 difference has very little to do with whatever perceived sharpness the Tamron may or may not have.
These lenses have to perform in tough conditions, yet we never ever see such comparisons.
BTW, no way the 16-35 is as good as the 14-24 @ 16mm until f11.
These "tests" make me laugh.
Timmbits: I can't beging to imagine what I would do with 50MP. what print sizes do you need to go in order to even make this interesting?
I have 20MP on my Samsung, and it's already large file sizes and plenty of resolution.
imho, we need larger photosites. BSI on all sensors. higher sensitivities. improved DR.
@VignesIf you DO need/want only 10MP with great sized pixels why not buy it? Well, it's because that option is no longer available. (ignoring old models, of course)
Let's say Nikon and Canon get into another round of pixel wars. We could have a 100MP FF within 5 years. Then you will have 50MP as the base model.
Do you know what is the lowest number of MP you can get from an entry level Nikon DX? Yes, it's 24MP. Does everybody want/need an entry level camera with that many pixels?
So, please stop with this "if you don't need argument".
I'm not at all saying people don't need 50MP. I'm sure there are at least two people on DPreview who actually need it.
But if I say I need only 10MP but with good sized pixels, who will listen to me? Just as there are people who "need" more MPs I'd bet there are people like me who want less MPs in return for better color rendition.
But I am wrong and you are right, right?
I have a D800 but recently bought a D600 because 36MP is just too many pixels for the overwhelming number of times that I shoot.
The number of big prints that I do is small and the number that actually sell at that size is even less. The most popular print sizes that sell are 30x45cm.
Some people want more pixels and that's fine. But the most important thing for me is the smoothness of colors in the highlights, and as is neither the D800 or D600 are that smooth. They are not even close to how my eyes see these highlights, so in print...
I'm no scientist but I am fairly sure that the larger the pixel size the more chances that the colors are going to be more accurate.
And this is why medium format cameras are so expensive. Big sensor = big pixels.
Canon now has 50MP on a relatively small sensor but people here think that all of a sudden they are going to compete with MF cameras.
I think that this is what Timmbits is on about. He is entitled to his opinions, you know.
batmatty: Maybe someday Nikon will release a camera that doesn't need to be serviced every few months. Wishful thinking for 2015!
How many Nikon cameras do you actually own?
I have a D800, D600, D300, D70, F100, F50 and even an FE2.
The only camera that I ever had for service was the D70. And that was to have some dust removed from the sensor before I knew how to do it myself.
That's not to say that some bodies don't need service but if you think that every Nikon camera needs a service every few months (your own words) you clearly are an idi0t.
phazelag: I really like this camera but a 1/4000th shutter on a $2300 body is joke. These games are idiotic in my opinion and a big reason why started looking away from CaNikon.
I have a D300, D600 and a D800. I bought the D600 after the D800 because of a number of things I needed it to do alongside the D800.
!/8000 or 1/4000 makes no differences to me. I could probably even set auto ISO so that my D600 drops down to ISO 50 automatically and then I would effectively have 1/8000.
There are quite a number of things that make the D800 more 'pro' than the D600. The 1/4000th shutter speed "artificial feature" that you keep going on about is not one of them.
Do you have either the D750 or the D810 to actually backup what you are talking about?
You do realize that you can dial in ISO 50 which effectively gives you 1/8000, right?
And if you slap on a CPL at ISO 100 you get almost 1/160000.
Sometimes I think I will just scream.
Look, the "buyer" apparently has been "investing" in Lik for years.
So, let's say he goes to Lik and says "I want to buy this phantom shot in B&W. And since I have been a loyal customer of yours for years how much would you sell me one for".
Lik says "How about 6.5 Big Ones?.
Really, I mean is this guy just going to pull out his checkbook and write 6.5 with 5 zeroes on the end?
Personally, I think Lik is about to go bust and this is just a desperate attempt of making him look like he's doing just great.
Jogger: Better to have an RX100/G7X type compact that you keep as you upgrade phones and such.
Take care, Einstein. Next time it might not be an old lady but a guy with a knife that doesn't take too kindly to your style of "Street photography".
Are you some sort of a pevert?
If you take a photo of someone, then that's what you've done.
Lying about your intentions is not what Panasonic has in mind with this camera.
In any case how is it that you can fool anyone in thinking that you are reading an eBook when the phone is pointing at someone's face and your elbows locked in the photo-taking position?
Yeah right "Einstein", the lens on the "phone" looks just like a lens on a real camera.
Stick to Relativity or something.
Retzius: This week Sony releases the A7II with 5 axis IBIS and Nikon answers with...
wait for it...
The gold edition Df
Pretty much sums up the state of things in Nikon land atm
Sure, you get a lot of Likes and even a laugh out of me but people's memories are short.
Nikon was yearrrrrs behind Canon in coming out with a FF but look where things are now?
And take a look at the number of serious f1.8 lenses Nikon now has, which how many did you say Sony has?
GPW: Hey Nikon, If you really want to give us something to get excited about, give us a D400 with 10fps, D750 auto system, a 25 raw buffer and pro build. IDIOTS
You really know how to contribute to a thread which has nothing to do with a D400.
Maybe you should take the time to read the heading. You know, it says Df!
And why are you so angry? You're going to give yourself a heart-attack.
Enjoy your wait, moron!
If you are so smart why not get the Canon 7D II?
People are really sick of idiots who start threads with "Hey Nikon". And "Give us a D400". There is no one from Nikon here. Are you that stupid?
In case you haven't worked it out there will be no D400.
Nikon has come out with about half a dozen FX bodies in the past two years.
You can't get it, right?
And please, don't give us this sob story of how many Nikkor lenses you have invested in. Sell the system run by "IDIOTS", go to Canon and shut the F up.
What a great day.
Finally, all those Nikon D300/D7100 shooters waiting for the D400 can now finally switch over to Canon and shut the F up.
Congratulations Canon. Now you will have to put up with their continual moans and whines.
Langusta: I'm having a hard time finding worse camera in this price range.
How many cameras in this price range do you (and all the people giving you a thumbs up) actually own?
I'd bet the answer is zero.
The Smoking Camera: I can only imagine how much better the IQ would be from those other mirrorless cameras if it got the shot I was able to with the V3.
I think you deliberately missed the point.
People buy the V3 or anything else for their own reasons.
Whether the fps advantage is "at best a fringe benefit" or not, is surely up to whoever it is that is buying the camera.
But it seems that there are a determined number of people that keep popping up and have this constant need to diss the V3.
I don't have this camera, so I can't really comment on it. So, why do you feel the need to jump up and down and say things like "..doesn't outweigh the cost/IQ ration in any respect?
I am assuming, of course, that you yourself don't actually own a V3. Is this correct?
And please, don't go on about such and such's tests zoomed in 900% which shows this, that and the other.
I have prints (30x45cm) from a D70, D300, D800 and a V1, and I assure you that no one can tell the differences in terms of sharpness and color accuracy.
For the majority of things you are right. But there are things where 20 or even 60 fps will make a difference.
The other day I was shooting bees flying in and out of their hives with my V1. To get a "perfect" shot with a certain number of bees in flight AND being in focus is very much dependent on the number of fps.
It has very little to do with technique. It's simply a (high) numbers game.