Previous news story    Next news story

Just Posted: Preview and first impressions of using the Nikon V1

By dpreview staff on Oct 23, 2011 at 00:00 GMT

Just Posted: Hands-on preview and real-world shooting experience with the Nikon 1 system. Launched last month, the Nikon J1 and V1 small-sensor mirrorless cameras have created a lot of discussion among our readers. We've been using both the Nikon J1 and V1 for some time, and ahead of our usual full review treatment we have prepared a brief hands-on preview, preview video and a 3-page article about using the higher-end V1 model.

Hands-on preview video

318
I own it
35
I want it
36
I had it
Discuss in the forums
110
I own it
11
I want it
24
I had it
Discuss in the forums

Comments

Total comments: 210
12
frosti7
By frosti7 (Oct 23, 2011)

Video typo:
Panasonic 14-140 lens is F4, not F4.5!

P.S thank you so much for showing those lens next to each other, it seems that they virtually the same size, even thou the panasonic is a tad faster and covers larger sensor,
good job nikon, i can see choice of smaller sensor is being paid off, sigh

1 upvote
CriticalI
By CriticalI (Oct 23, 2011)

The Nikon has a power zoom, which is quite useful for a video camera, and does not require the massive in-camera correction for vignetting and corner softness that the panny does.

Have a look at photozone and see just how "well" the panny really performs, and note that internal correction does not recreate the loss of quality it just hides it. However it makes raw shooting pointless.

On the other hand why not compare the 30-110 zoom with the equivalent panny? Quite a bit smaller and quite a lot sharper in the corners.

1 upvote
Chez Wimpy
By Chez Wimpy (Oct 23, 2011)

"Massive correction for vignetting" no
"However it makes raw shooting pointless." no

You clearly want to bash m43... fine, but at least get your facts right.

1 upvote
johnparas11zenfoliodotcom
By johnparas11zenfoliodotcom (Oct 23, 2011)

http://www.adorama.com/alc/article/Nikon-J1-AdoramaTV

0 upvotes
Jorgen E
By Jorgen E (Oct 23, 2011)

"One of the fastest AF systems in the history of photography".

Quite a contrast to the crappy AF systems in most mirrorless cameras today. And then I'm being kind, not even mentioning AF-C performance...

3 upvotes
Richard Butler
By Richard Butler (Oct 23, 2011)

Actually AF-C is the 1 system's main improvement over other mirrorless cameras. The latest PENs are at least as fast as the Nikons in AF-S mode and the recent Panasonics are comparable.

3 upvotes
Ken Aisin
By Ken Aisin (Oct 23, 2011)

When Panasonic and Sony implement hybrid AF in their mirrorless cameras to match the Nikon 1 on AF-C performance, there won't be any reason to buy the Nikon 1.

Expensive price tag + tiny sensor + unpocketable size = FAIL.

0 upvotes
JPnyc
By JPnyc (Oct 23, 2011)

Simply put, Nikon just came up with a way to combine the 'Worse of 2 Worlds'.
In and by itself, THAT is actually a new idea. Or maybe just an answer to a question nobody asked.

Behind the scenes they probably had discussions like:
R&D chief: We need to spend more money to develop a really good, small large sensor camera.
Marketing chief: Nah, that's what everybody else does. Let me have half the money it takes to do that and I'll make us sell a ton of LARGE SMALL sensor cameras!

13 upvotes
digby dart
By digby dart (Oct 23, 2011)

dpreview used to be a place were those interested in photography could catch up on the latest photography news and read impartial reviews of gear from a variety of manufacturers, that didn't seem to change much when Amazon bought the site some years back - however the recent push for this new Nikon system has really confirmed a change in the flavour of this site.

In short order the Nikon 1 system has been given its own forum, supported by a seemimgly endless series of articles advertising the system - articles now often followed by links to Amazon to purchase into that same system.

Most of the response to the Nikon offering has been negative, dispite this the push goes on undaunted. Disappointing.

Comment edited 2 minutes after posting
3 upvotes
Jorgen E
By Jorgen E (Oct 23, 2011)

Another m43 guy, groaning about the injustices of the world...

3 upvotes
Simon Joinson
By Simon Joinson (Oct 23, 2011)

so because the response to the initial launch was negative we should ignore a new system from one of the biggest names in photography? Did you complain about the coverage we gave to the Sony A77 around its launch? Or for that matter the NEX system or the Olympus PEN E-P1? And did you actually read/watch the (IMO very balanced) content before deciding it was 'advertising'? We've seen a ton of interest in this system and we'd be mad not to produce content to feed that interest. As for the 'support us by buying from' links - they've been there for a decade and you'll find them on every competitor site too. It helps cover the costs of producing a free-to-view website.

16 upvotes
wetsleet
By wetsleet (Oct 23, 2011)

whatever the merits of your other points, I would hate to see DPR reviews simply reflect the uninformed prejudice of the forums.

Everybody on the forum has an opinion (great!), but surely none of that should have any influence on the content of a DPR pre/review. Most especially in this case, where none of the forum opinion is based on any experience of the product!

So let the preview fly in the face of the forum group-think - if that is what they found when they put their hands on the product, which none of the forum scribes have done yet.

Comment edited 14 minutes after posting
1 upvote
vshin
By vshin (Oct 23, 2011)

Actually, I admire how dpreview is sticking to an objective perspective despite the negativity from defensive m43 and NEX owners. It's especially ironic to hear the naysayers going on about sensor size when the cx sensor actually performs better than the ancient m43rd's.

1 upvote
Vlad S
By Vlad S (Oct 24, 2011)

digby dart, the purpose of dpreview is not to affirm whatever opinion is expressed in the forums, but to offer reviews of the equipment based on the first hand experience and testing. Have you experienced the 1 system first hand to dispute DPReview's opinion?

1 upvote
bryanbrun
By bryanbrun (Oct 23, 2011)

Too many weaknesses:

10-30mm lens. Wow. 20mm of total focal length control.

650 - 900 price.

No depth of field control without mounting a 100mm lens.

Lenses are too large compared to Micro Four Thirds.

No wide angle lenses.

Controls are gimped. Why no PASM on a $900 camera when the dial is there?

Due to sensor size and 2.7 crop factor older Nikon lenses will be difficult/impossible to use.

There is no value proposition when you compare this with a $500 dollar Olympus E-PM1, which can mount an array of very small and high performing (~F2.0) lenses.

There is little or no interest in the Nikon 1 format. Take a peak at the Nikon 1 forum to see the definition of moribund.

The only place for this system is at a $300 to $500 price point with an array of small pancake lenses.

Comment edited 1 minute after posting
14 upvotes
Andy Crowe
By Andy Crowe (Oct 23, 2011)

"20mm of total focal length control"? The 10-30mm is a 3x zoom with exactly the same focal length coverage as every other 28-84mm equiv kit lens.

8 upvotes
Jorgen E
By Jorgen E (Oct 23, 2011)

As already pointed out: you don't measure "focal length control" i millimters. It's a 3x zoom. Quite normal, actually.

"DoF control" isn't automatically "bad" just because DoF is large. It entirely depends on what you're shooting. DoF will work BRILLIANTLY for a macro shooter, with a 40/2.8 DX Micro-Nikkor mounted on his V1.

"No WA lenses"? When did you last experience a COMPLETE camera system being released from day one? There are several lenses in the pipeline, as we speak.

"Due to sensor size and 2.7 crop factor older Nikon lenses will be" -- a blessing for som shooters, and a bit harder to use for others. The 50/1.4 will be a brilliant short tele, the Micro 40/2.8 will "equal" the 105/2.8 FX Micro, the 85/1.4 will be a very potent sports tele lens.

And, isn't it funny, how it always seem to be the persons usually hanging out in the m43 forum, who also have the strongest views against the new Nikon 1 and CX format? Just saying...

9 upvotes
pauly6734
By pauly6734 (Oct 23, 2011)

This dog is DOA!

3 upvotes
bryanbrun
By bryanbrun (Oct 24, 2011)

"The 50/1.4 will be a brilliant short tele, the Micro 40/2.8 will "equal" the 105/2.8 FX Micro, the 85/1.4 will be a very potent sports tele lens."

A 50mm lens on the Nikon 1 becomes what? something like a 127mm?

That lens is useless to me inside my house.

The crop factor of older lenses on this system makes them useless in the vast majority of shooting scenarios.

0 upvotes
Jorgen E
By Jorgen E (Oct 25, 2011)

Good thing I'm not "inside your house", then...

Why on earth would it matter to me, if you find 50mm with a 2.7 crop useful for indoors shooting, or not?

What a weird comment...

1 upvote
kucink132
By kucink132 (Oct 28, 2011)

smaller sensor is smaller sensor, and overpriced is overpriced. It's just that simple. Worthless

0 upvotes
Alan NEX
By Alan NEX (Oct 23, 2011)

Lovely pictures. but once again the audio is out of phase rendering it useless to those listening in mono, and unfocused in stereo. Seems like there's a problem with the kit somewhere, a mic cable? or mixer problem? It's fixable in software, but you may have a hardware problem in the chain somewhere.

1 upvote
CameraLabTester
By CameraLabTester (Oct 23, 2011)

This will be a great test of how marketing fluff can fool consumers.

With new technology features grinding to a halt, marketing and advertising hypnosis are the latest objectives of leading edge camera makers.

9 upvotes
CameraLabTester
By CameraLabTester (Oct 24, 2011)

"These are the cameras you're looking for...
run along and BUY now..."
(waves Jedi hand)

1 upvote
thethirdcoast
By thethirdcoast (Oct 23, 2011)

Thanks for doing this.

I especially liked the shot-to-shot time and AF tracking segments of the video. I'm a little envious of the Nikon's write and cycle times after shooting my Pentax Kx in RAW for the past few days.

The size comparison with the Panasonic G3 was pretty startling...the Nikon is about the same size with the significantly smaller sensor. I also don't care for the simplified mode dial on the Nikon. I will be curious to see how the Nikon 1 vs Pentax Q comparison turns out.

1 upvote
keeponkeepingon
By keeponkeepingon (Oct 23, 2011)

It's interesting that DP Review used a big MF43 camera instead of one of the small ones such as the GF3 or EPM1 or even the EP3 w. OVF.

0 upvotes
Richard Butler
By Richard Butler (Oct 23, 2011)

We were looking at the Nikon model with a viewfinder, so I thought we should use an MFT camera with one too.

4 upvotes
xteapot
By xteapot (Oct 23, 2011)

Maybe I'm the only one here to think this camera is a great innovation.

Motion Snapshot for example is the feature I always want to see in digital camera. This feature will allow me to take snapshot like I do with my cameras (D7000, GF2) but with a short movie from the snapshot too. So after a trip I have both still images and a simple movie clips without having to put any afford to record a clip at all. I don't know about other but to me this is a killer feature.

Motion tracking is another feature that is very important to capture any moving subject. If V1 have can do what it claim this will be the first small camera that is truly usable for moving subject like kid, pets or sport.

About image quality since I rarely print and only share my image with my friend and family through internet so V1 image quality is plenty.

If motion snapshot and auto focus tracking are working as I expect I will definitely buy Nikon V1.

4 upvotes
G Davidson
By G Davidson (Oct 24, 2011)

I too see motion snapshot as a great feature. My 'movies' are often to capture the motion of a scene the way a still picture can't. With full HD video we can have something very high quality for this purpose, in this case taken at the same time as the 'snapshot'. Personally, I am looking forward to a possible DX version of this to have the larger sensor, but I am sure this will be capable of some great results.

0 upvotes
WERAQS
By WERAQS (Oct 23, 2011)

G12 still way more better than this camera, even S95.

4 upvotes
M Jesper
By M Jesper (Oct 23, 2011)

Not for mom.

0 upvotes
dgc4rter
By dgc4rter (Oct 23, 2011)

One could, perhaps, also argue whether a $1000+ Interchangeable Lens Camera that's difficult to fit inside the average handbag with anything other than the smallest pancake lens is suitable for mom either.

2 upvotes
fuego6
By fuego6 (Oct 23, 2011)

A major fail which just goes to show how the industry has hit a wall technologically at this point. I do hope these folks are spending lots of $$$ of R&D of SMALLER ZOOM LENSES... because until they get the zooms to close in on the package size.. there is really little reason to buy into these tiny body cameras... I'll take my DSLR with the same size lens any day into battle over these DSLR wanna-bes..... Nikon dropped a dud on this one.

4 upvotes
CriticalI
By CriticalI (Oct 23, 2011)

No, they said they were not going to compete with entry level DSLRs and they didn't. Why make two products for the same market?

Honestly, why do people think that they are the only arbiters of desirability? A lot of soccer mums buy SLRs to follow their kids at sports day and fail because they can only afford consumer lenses and cheap bodies. This little camera can follow action at 10fps with pretty good accuracy.

Its not for me, its not for you, its for a much larger market of people who are not camera forum gear nerds like us.

4 upvotes
RobG67
By RobG67 (Oct 23, 2011)

Physics limits the size of lenses, zooms especially. Complaining about the size of lenses is akin to complaining that you can't flap your wings and fly - IT SIMPLY CANNOT BE DONE with the technology currently to hand.

0 upvotes
Andy Crowe
By Andy Crowe (Oct 23, 2011)

Do you consider the new Panasonic X 14-42 small enough?

Comment edited 1 minute after posting
6 upvotes
Dustinash
By Dustinash (Oct 25, 2011)

The GH2 would eat this camera for lunch and give birth to a george lucas film. Go for the nex if not the gh2 or wait for gh3. I think it will plunder all the current line of cameras. Except that new full frame canon. Wow, it shoots in the dark. COOOOOOOL

0 upvotes
dgc4rter
By dgc4rter (Oct 23, 2011)

I can't see, for the life of me, why anyone would want to buy this in favour over a D3100 which is cheaper, accepts any current Nikon lenses and isn't that much larger and heavier. It's also got a 14 MP APS-C sized sensor. It sits better in the hand and has an optical viewfinder as well as a tilt screen.

There's a few technological advances with the AF and video but nothing truly deal breaking. And are "soccer mums" going to be bothered about switching lenses. They may as well get the D3100 so their hubby's collection of Nikon glass will fit on it.

Sorry Nikon. I love their DSLRs, having both the D700 and D7K and I know I'm not the intended market, but this 1 series will not be a market leader by a long chalk. It might find its way into the heart of Nikon die-hards and the "more money than sense and style" Porsche Cayenne owners but unless they could have brought out a Sony NEX-7 beater, they should stick to what they're good at.

4 upvotes
marike6
By marike6 (Oct 23, 2011)

How about 1080/60i for slow-motion video? If your a HDSLR shooter, this would make a good b-camera due to the variety of frame rates over the D3100.

0 upvotes
Lights
By Lights (Oct 23, 2011)

It looks to me that the lenses are fairly huge for the camera's format. They might as well have went with the APS-C like Sony. They could then have then had the option of using existing lenses. Another problem I see is wide angle lens design and cost of. It's bad enough with M43. In all seriousness, the Nikon seems much the same size, with lens....as my M43 camera does with legacy lenses. The advantage to these cameras is at least 'having the ability' to be very small. Especially when cutting the sensor size down, as there do seem to be physical limitations in doing that, regarding some aspects of image quality. I've always respected Nikon, but this seems a bit strange.

0 upvotes
Ring A
By Ring A (Oct 23, 2011)

I'm with PHOTOJOE55, wake up, Nikon

1 upvote
PHOTOJOE55
By PHOTOJOE55 (Oct 23, 2011)

A case of too little, too late? more than that, it's a copycat, and a very bad one at that. 2 weeks ago members were debating sensor size, and they argued with me to no end.. Well I hope they're happy. As for the members, I said, they are not photographers, they are NIKONERS, that's all they cared about. And For NIKON to even admit that they spent 4 years on this. It appears they don't even know what direction they are going. With this attempt at a small body, large lens, oblong, unbalanced (the camera too, not just NIKON) with Mark Ellwood doing their Podcasts (you have to hear it to believe it) I am so sorry I switched in 85 because now with 10k in glass and another 5-6k on accessories what do I do? Nikon will get what it deserves. They've made custiomers into enemies, who were expecting a more refined full frame. Just look at the competition. Anyone who buys a coolpix with exchangeable lenses gets what they deserved. This is disgraceful, completely DISAPPOINTING!!! ...Joe Prete

1 upvote
Davidwa
By Davidwa (Oct 23, 2011)

I agree with you 100% that this is a disappointing camera for serious photographers, but why would you want to sell all your Nikon gear just because they bring out one camera you do not like.

5 upvotes
magneto shot
By magneto shot (Oct 23, 2011)

why would anyone buy this instead of the NEX or m43? Nikon should just eat the humble pie and followed the footstep of :
1) NEX : using APSC all nikon lens owner would be able to use the new camera
2) m43 : at least you get much better picture quality and bokeh capabilities due to sensor size, compared to 1"

Instead, Nikon just want to show the world that they are able to innovate and produce a system for the sake of producing one.

Comment edited 44 seconds after posting
2 upvotes
Eleson
By Eleson (Oct 23, 2011)

It will be intersting to see.
It fits perfeclty in the Nikon line-up, but if u have $650 or $900 to spend on camera, where on your personal hot-list will this one end up? Especially if u look at superzooms as well.

0 upvotes
fuego6
By fuego6 (Oct 23, 2011)

This camera was a huge mistake and such as waste of R&D and marketing $$$... if I had $800 to spend on a camera - it would be on something that makes sense! Might as well just get a GF1 with huge lenses instead of this thing... BAH... Major fail!

1 upvote
Lee Jay
By Lee Jay (Oct 23, 2011)

"why would anyone buy this instead of the NEX or m43?"

Because it can focus on moving subjects.

0 upvotes
magnumgf
By magnumgf (Oct 23, 2011)

Nikon can make the system. The question is, can they make buyers?

0 upvotes
Mike Ronesia
By Mike Ronesia (Oct 24, 2011)

I'm not saying one way or another if this will be a good system or not, but I do know that Nikon has tons of people that will buy it for the name. I'm amazed at how many people buy blind and don't even compare to the competition.

0 upvotes
Rich
By Rich (Oct 24, 2011)

Have to agree the thing is going to be a hard sell at this price, I went into Best Buy last night to look at the J1 and the first thing I see are a row of much cheaper GF and NX cameras. Nikon is really going to have to do some marketing to convince the soccer moms out there that they need this much speed (and it won't help one bit when they go into the store to try it out and it focuses no faster than anything else since it's low light and not using phase detect)

0 upvotes
CJ
By CJ (Oct 23, 2011)

Nice camera, but it's quite weird (on all that kind of new cameras) how the lens is big in respect of the body. I'm wondering how it's handy during a reportage or so. At the moment it seems relegated to the amateur and not something a pro can choose for working for.

On the other side the fuji X-100 can work with no problem as pro reportage camera due to his structure and the size.

I'm waiting something like the X-100 with small interchangeable primes (maybe the problem of the size of those lens is that are zoom)

0 upvotes
Absolutic
By Absolutic (Oct 23, 2011)

Guys this video preview was absolutely awesome and I learned a lot. It all became clear. How come you've never done this before? You must do these video reviews for all your future cameras! Does it take a long time to prepare?

0 upvotes
MGJA
By MGJA (Oct 23, 2011)

Again, excellent presentation. And it's so refreshing to see video previews actually add value - showing us auto focus speed, shutter noise and card writing times simply cannot be done well in print.

Well done, dpreview.

3 upvotes
gl2k
By gl2k (Oct 23, 2011)

I love the picture with the two hands holding the cam. So ... this is considered small and compact ? It's as big as any other cam in this league.

The only thing that is indeed small on the "1" series is the sensor. Well done Nikon.

7 upvotes
princewolf
By princewolf (Oct 23, 2011)

Is it me or is this the first preview video (except for focus demonstrations and sample videos of course) posted by dpreview? Looks like they did a great job, I only want more of these!

2 upvotes
Ashley Pomeroy
By Ashley Pomeroy (Oct 23, 2011)

They did one for the Sony NEX-7 a while back.

2 upvotes
taotoo
By taotoo (Oct 23, 2011)

"Sensor 2/3rds the size of Nikon DSLR sensor".

This is wrong surely?

0 upvotes
Jorgen E
By Jorgen E (Oct 23, 2011)

Yes, that should be: "approx. 1/3 the area of an APS-C sensor, and 1/2 the area of an m43 sensor".

Comment edited 1 minute after posting
1 upvote
Richard Butler
By Richard Butler (Oct 23, 2011)

Sorry about that - I did one take saying '1/3rd the size of' and one take saying '2/3rds smaller than.' Clearly in the best take I managed to mix the two.

I've just corrected it.

0 upvotes
zxaar
By zxaar (Oct 23, 2011)

comparisons with Q are conspicuously missing. Are reviewers afraid that Q would kick N1 ass in size department. Wouldn't it be far to put all the other options (NEX, samsung,Q) also on table for others to see how they compare in size, after all reduction in size is what they are trying to achieve at the cost of image quality (to different degrees).

1 upvote
Jorgen E
By Jorgen E (Oct 23, 2011)

The "Q" has a smaller sensor than my P&S Canon (and it's about as tiny). I'm sorry, but the "Q" will, for obvious reasons be compared with high end P&S. Not DpReview's fault, but Pentax', for having put a microscopic sensor in an otherwise somewhat interesting camera.

0 upvotes
Barney Britton
By Barney Britton (Oct 23, 2011)

We're going to be publishing samples from the Q very soon, so you can decide for yourself how it stacks up against the V1/J1.

3 upvotes
Starred
By Starred (Oct 23, 2011)

Off topic, but Presenter could use a smaller sized jacket ;-)

3 upvotes
jaykumarr
By jaykumarr (Oct 23, 2011)

our website name should be changed to dPREVIEW.com

2 upvotes
Barney Britton
By Barney Britton (Oct 23, 2011)

Previews are followed by reviews. Previews are not written instead of reviews, they are written to give you something to read before the review is finished. This can take quite a long time, because usually, previews are written using pre-production cameras, which we cannot (and do not) review. We have to wait for production cameras before we can proceed from the preview stage. Sometimes we get sent them quickly, sometimes it takes a while. In the meantime, surely something is better than nothing?

9 upvotes
Peter Hayward
By Peter Hayward (Oct 23, 2011)

Excellent idea to include the video of the "review" and the presenter has a great accent:). DP has really done well lately with providing much more than press releases on the front page. Well done, please keep it up.

4 upvotes
Ingloryon
By Ingloryon (Oct 23, 2011)

Can anybody tell me why should I buy a compact camera which is as expensive and not-that-compact-with-lenses as reflex cameras?

5 upvotes
johnparas11zenfoliodotcom
By johnparas11zenfoliodotcom (Oct 23, 2011)

yep-- as much as I am a nikon user.. i can't see the reason why I would go with this..

0 upvotes
Vandyu
By Vandyu (Oct 23, 2011)

I must agree. I won't be spending $1,150 on a camera that is front heavy, bulky, and, basically, has no grip. I understand that Nikon had to produce a camera to compete with the NEX series from Sony, or lose market share, but I won't be buying any camera of this type. Knock off about $400 and it might make more sense.

0 upvotes
Jorgen E
By Jorgen E (Oct 23, 2011)

Expensive? Well, why this constant comparing with the V1, then? The J1 is $649, including the 10-30 lens. The V1 seems to have features not present in e.g. the m43 offerings it's usually compared with (EVF, high-quality LCD, usable AF, etc).

1 upvote
Managarm
By Managarm (Oct 23, 2011)

m43 doesn't have EVFs, high-quality LCDs and usable AF?

What year are you coming from, Marty McFly?

4 upvotes
Jorgen E
By Jorgen E (Oct 23, 2011)

"the m43 offerings *it's usually compared with*"

In other words, m43 cameras like the GF3 ($599), the NEX-C3 ($649), and the E-PL3 ($699). These m43 offerings are absolutely more like the $649 "J1 + 10-30" combo, than the V1.

1 upvote
carljervis
By carljervis (Oct 23, 2011)

Nex is aps-c, not m43

0 upvotes
Lee Jay
By Lee Jay (Oct 23, 2011)

"Can anybody tell me why should I buy a compact camera which is as expensive and not-that-compact-with-lenses as reflex cameras?"

I can't understand why anyone would buy any of these mirrorless interchangeable lens cameras. None of them are enough smaller than a dSLR to change how and when you'd carry them and they all have significant performance disadvantages compared to the dSLRs without saving any money either.

0 upvotes
johnparas11zenfoliodotcom
By johnparas11zenfoliodotcom (Oct 23, 2011)

if the V1 had a built in flash, it can do CLS with my SB flashes.. you know backward compatibilities.. biggest issue for me is the built in flash..
I am a nikon user (d90) with all the lenses and flashes..I am into the system..but I can't go to this 1 system...

0 upvotes
acktown
By acktown (Oct 23, 2011)

I hear the video just fine. Thanks for the preview! Since I work in a retail camera store, I got an early sneak peak and absolutely love the V1 compared to my D700 and D90

0 upvotes
cactusgeorge
By cactusgeorge (Oct 23, 2011)

Curious. How does one compare a FF D700 to a V1? Seems like there is very little to compare.

8 upvotes
Rolo King
By Rolo King (Oct 23, 2011)

There are so many things you can compare a V1 to a D700 on. They don't need to share the same sensor format. For each occasion, you choose the best tool available to you by comparing them while having in mind all the variables specific to that need/occasion.

1 upvote
rockjon
By rockjon (Oct 23, 2011)

It's at least lighter than D700 and D90. It's got them beat there. Can't say the same thing about photo quality.

1 upvote
Barney Britton
By Barney Britton (Oct 23, 2011)

This is fixed now, sorry for the inconvenience. Everything should be live and visible on the site. If you're still seeing broken links, delete your cache, reload and it should be fine.

0 upvotes
FMPhoto
By FMPhoto (Oct 23, 2011)

This is the second video I have watched and I don;t know what it i, but I can't hear a dang thing you are saying unless I have absolute silence in the house and my computer volume pegged.

0 upvotes
Barney Britton
By Barney Britton (Oct 23, 2011)

Sorry everyone, technical issues here - this content isn't scheduled to publish until later tonight but the news story has got a bit ahead of itself. We're working to get everything on the site as soon as we can. Normal service will be resumed shortly.

2 upvotes
tee1000
By tee1000 (Oct 23, 2011)

Hi Barney,

I would strongly recommend recording the audio in mono for those videos. Right now you have big trouble with phase problems in the audio track. Listeners with stereo speakers or headphones do not have problems. But those who have a mono speaker in their laptop will hear almost nothing. The right and left side of the stereo audio is nearly 100% phase inverted. Just do it on mono for those videos and everything is cool.

Regards,
Tobias

0 upvotes
Leo
By Leo (Oct 24, 2011)

Hi Barrney,
It is very nice ho have new updates/posts from dpreview on weekens! :-)
Leo

0 upvotes
MySmallCamera
By MySmallCamera (Oct 23, 2011)

Can't view. It says video is private. And page not found.

0 upvotes
Total comments: 210
12