MP Burke: The big advantage Nikon has is the name. I can imagine that part of Nikon's marketing strategy will be to give these cameras to well known professionals who normally use Nikon full frame cameras. They can then take a few photographs with the V system and help market it as the camera they use when they want a "pocket" or walk around system.
HP had the name too. They were the biggest producers of PCs. Come to think of it, Motorola, Nokia, all had the names.
ooicl: NEX-7 looks much more attractive...
yukonchris: As a photographer, I'm disappointed. As an Olympus user, I'm quite pleased.
Frankly, I don't see Nikon's 1 System threatening Olympus, Panasonic, Sony, or Samsung who offer better looking cameras with bigger sensors, and similar form factors. Sony's NEX models, in particular, look much better.
Also, if Nikon pumps tons of cash into promoting their tiny sensor range, it will only serve to reinforce Olympus' long standing assertion that the 4/3rds sensor really is the best compromise for most common photographic tasks, sitting as it does, well above this new camera's sensor in size, and only slightly down from APS-C in size. In short, Nikon may prove that 4/3rds is the sweet-spot in sensor design, providing both quality and compactness.
I don't think Olympus and Panasonic could have wished for a better scenario. The System 1 - Too large to be compact, too ugly to be chic, too small to be good. How's that for a sales line? Olympus and Panasonic should send Nikon thank you letters.
Sensor capabilities can improve. It's the sensor size that will limit the system. There are not a whole lot of lenses you can use on the system with a crop factor of 2.7.
I really can't figure out which segment of the market would fall for this system. Every other edge this system has over the others (all the gimmicky motion modes) will be lost in the next iteration of the next M43 or NEX camera. The sensor size makes absolutely no sense at all. If Nikon means to capitalize on its F mount, the crop factor of 2.7 would mean all F lenses become tele (unless you have the few rare sub-24mm lenses).
It's disappointing to see a venerable giant lose all common sense.
kimnk: Good improvements, but i bet we'll see a whole flood of people throwing tantrums because its doesnt have everything they wanted.
I guess the forum just proved you right.
But it's all good. They complain, Fuji listens, we get the updates.
opticaloptimum: The sad thing is that software cannot fix the X100's main weakness: that the lens is very soft when wide open, especially when focussed close. This is stated clearly in the DPReview review and is evident in the review's photo of a little girl, whose face is not sharp even though in the centre of the picture. What is the point of having a f2.0 lens if it cannot take sharp pictures? The main use of f2.0 for me would be portraits where the face is sharp but the background is out of focus. In my opinion the X100 fails in this respect. It seems that Fuji gave keeping the lens small priority over being sharp.
opticaloptimum: do yourself a favour and just buy an SLR.
Get a weekly update of all that's new in the digital
photography world by subscribing to the Digital Photography Review