carlos roncatti: great resolution..but all raw files i've downloaded have the right and left sides noticeable blur compared to the center....
Carlos, that's exactly what I see as well. That plus rather extreme distortion at the wide end periphery. The IQ just isn't there in my opinion. I'm really surprised that so much was made of IQ. I'm comparing it to my DP2m and finding it sadly lacking in the IQ department.
Lin Evans: "the RX100 III offers the best image quality of any pocketable camera we've ever seen."
I guess you haven't seen Sigma DP Merrill cameras then....
I might agree that the DP Merrill cameras are a bit larger than the RX-100 III but they do fit in my pocket. As for image quality, unless you have something other than the images posted in the review, they are not even in the same universe in terms of IQ with my DP2 Merrill. I use lots of cameras from high end Nikons and Canons to Pentax, Olympus, and also a good number of Sony's. Frankly, other than resolution I wouldn't trade my Sony R1 for this new RX-100 III if the best it can do for IQ is what you have posted in the review samples. Not a single landscape image has decent sharpness in distant foliage and the edge distortion is quite apparent. Maybe I'm missing something, but I wouldn't trade my little Nikon 1V1 images for what I'm seeing. I'm seriously uncertain how you see these images as having superior IQ - sorry but that's my unvarnished opinion....
"the RX100 III offers the best image quality of any pocketable camera we've ever seen."
Are you "certain" that the EVF is an "Optional" extra? B&H says it comes with??? O.K. - comes with US kit and optional for European.... Got it!
daddyo: Sorry Nikon, but this seems like a bad joke. If you compare image quality between this and the Olympus E-M10, it's not even close. The E-M10 with 14-42mm lens goes for $799 right now, and includes a built-in EVF.What am I missing here?
Without refocus between shots 60 fps and with refocus 20 fps both subject to a 40 frames buffer. But you can keep shooting as the buffer clears. It's hard to argue that the 1V3 isn't a bit special in this regard.
So BarnET, I'm unclear about how you get 1350mm with the 75-300 or 100-300? Not sure how 60fps in 1080p is more useful than 60fps at 18 mp resolution? You've got to explain this to me... LOL I've got lots of Panasonics - I prefer my 1V1 by a wide margin. I would LOVE to have the 1V3...
grumpycat: who will buy this thing???
Like I said, If you like peripheral distortion and don't care about vertical being vertical then there's nothing wrong with an UWA. It doesn't make sense to try to shoot UWA with a 2.7 crop-factor camera so use a tool suitable for the task at hand if it floats your boat. Not having UWA hasn't hurt consumer camera sales that I can see.
I don't think having wider than 27mm is really all that important. The wider you get the more peripheral distortion. I've yet to see "noise" in a single print from virtually "any" of my 40 plus digital cameras. It's highly over emphasized by pixel peepers IMHO. If I need wider than 27mm I take multiple frames and stitch. If the subject isn't amenable to stitching (rare) I don't bother with the shot. Autofocus, ultra high speed video, zoom equivalent to 1350mm, ability to use nearly any Nikon lens, built-in intervalometer, incredible full resolution frame burst, etc., etc. That's what I call versatility. How many shots do you actually take at ultra wide angle? I can count on my fingers and toes the number I've taken as a professional in over 50 years of shooting everything from landscape to wildlife to fine art to portrait and weddings. It's just not a big feature IMHO...
The point is you are not "limited" to either a mechanical or electronic shutter, you can choose with the 1 series. I have to smile when I hear comments such as the one from Menneisyys about the "more versatile" other cameras. I've yet to see more versatile cameras than the V1,2,3 series. There is an amazing number of people who have strong opinions about the Nikon 1 cameras who have never held one in their hands. I find that quite amusing. I try not to form opinions about equipment I've not even seen myself. I love my 1V and it has a place in my bag beside my most expensive pro gear and lenses.
ThomasSwitzerland: With the review and response one can see the unclear direction. This comes from the unclear positioning of the Nikon 1” camera itself.
I have to buy a horrible looking viewfinder to attach loosing a flashpoint. I have to buy a grip to get a decent handling. And completely new lenses for an inferior sensor. What a weird business concept.
And you "have" to buy a battery to make your camera work - LOL. Come on, the EVF and grip are included and you don't "have" to buy the lenses, you can buy an adapter and use regular Nikon lenses like I do. If you don't like it, vote with your money. Want to make a bet? You'll lose because this camera will be Very Popular!
Bobby Handal: meanwhile in real life, owners of the V1 , V2 or V3 series know exactly how good these cameras really are, even though Nikon is not doing a good job in Marketing and some issues (like auto bracketing, Auto ISO WTF?, ITTL Wireless) - but Pricing Specially . This is the only compact mirrorless system that allows you to go over 800mm natively , that alone is a major selling point, if you add the silent shutter, and the good optics available, it is a no brainer.
Badi, it's a "test" that I do frequently, and I use the identical lens (55-300 VR) on my 16mp D7000 and on my 1V1. I get visibly better results at 300mm (810 mm equivalency) with my 1V1 than cropping the 300mm (450 mm equivalency) from my D7000. I also use the same lens on my D5300 and D7100. The convenience of having an extremely versatile and relatively tiny footprint is worth the price for me.
Is that the best you've got, or were you just looking in a mirror and admiring your reflection?
Try setting up the E-M10 to shoot wildlife. Can you get a 1350 mm FOV with the EM-10? Can you switch to electronic shutter with a built-in intervalometer and shoot time lapse? Can you shoot high frame rate for slow motion video? How about full resolution burst speed? Maybe you don't need these things, but some of us love them...
Continuation of above. Only one sensor type that I'm aware of actually achieves Nyquist resolution and that's the Foveon. CFA sensors without AA filters are improving, but do not yet come close to the theoretical limit. The little Nikon 1 series actually produce very good images. I have plenty of high-end dSLR's including Nikon, Canon and Olympus pro models. I love what I get from my Nikon 1V1. I carry it and a 55-300 VR and a couple 1 series lenses along with my expensive gear and I get great results with wildlife. These little cameras are dandy for time-lapse and telephoto reach with out breaking the bank or breaking your back to carry in the back high altitude country. They are extremely versatile. No, they are not resolution champs like the D800/E/808 but they have a definite place in my bag. If I could afford another camera right now the 1V3 would be near the top of my list.
Lots of people - they are back-ordered. Want to do some time lapse photos without exceeding the shutter life of your dSLR? How about a selectable mechanical or electronic shutter? Want to get some great telephoto shots without spending 8K on an 800mm lens for your super expensive FF body? I have lots of super expensive gear and I absolutely LOVE my 1V1..
Resolution is not measured in megapixels, it's measured in line pairs per mm. There is a theoretical Nyquist limit which is usually the smaller of the two pixel matrix numbers. How close a camera gets doesn't depend on sensor size. It's only one of a number of factors.
Lin Evans: Why ping on the camera in the review conclusions for having an LED hard to see in sunlight when Nikon provides an EVF?
Double checked - comes with lens, grip and EVF...
According to B&H the electronic viewfinder and a lens comes with the 1V3 - link: http://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/1038908-REG/nikon_27695_1_v3_mirrorless_digital.html?gclid=Cj0KEQjwopOeBRC1ndXgnuvx8JYBEiQAq4RPt_qz657h0eWYAb53iF9tZnxeT6K2R6prdEPPItW4GHYaAieC8P8HAQ
To Daddyo - you have a misconception here. It never ceases to amaze me how many people are, after all these years, still confused by smaller sensors and persist in calling it a "crop." It's not a crop in any conventional sense. The entire optical resolution is vested in the FOV. There is no "crop" - that's a very old and tired argument. A "crop" would be shooting at the FOV of the lens in this specific case on an FX camera then losing pixels by "cropping" to the FOV of the 1V3. This isn't happening, the 1V3 is filling the sensor with the full 18 megapixels of data. You may argue that the data isn't as good as an FX camera with an 800mm optical lens - that's a different argument, but there is no "crop" here. This is misapplying the meaning of the term.
Why ping on the camera in the review conclusions for having an LED hard to see in sunlight when Nikon provides an EVF?