Previous news story    Next news story

Just Posted: Nikon 1 V2 Preview Samples

By dpreview staff on Jan 2, 2013 at 18:38 GMT
Buy on GearShopFrom $746.959 deals

We've just posted a gallery of real-world samples from the new Nikon 1 V2, with its bundled kit zoom, the 1 NIKKOR VR 10-30mm f/3.5-5.6. The V2 is a significantly different camera from its predecessor, offering much more enthusiast-friendly ergonomics and a new 14MP sensor, among other refinements. As well as 25 JPEG images we've also included four Raw conversions, to give a better idea of the camera's potential.

Nikon 1 V2 Preview Samples - Posted 4th December 2012

There are 29 images in the samples gallery. Please do not reproduce any of these images on a website or any newsletter / magazine without prior permission (see our copyright page). We make the originals available for private users to download to their own machines for personal examination or printing (in conjunction with this review), we do so in good faith, please don't abuse it.

Unless otherwise noted images taken with no particular settings at full resolution. A reduced size image (within 1024 x 1024 bounds) is provided to be more easily viewed in your browser. As always the original untouched image is available by clicking on this reduced image.

66
I own it
42
I want it
13
I had it
Discuss in the forums

Comments

Total comments: 226
12
carlos roncatti
By carlos roncatti (Jan 10, 2013)

This must be the worst jpeg engine i have ever seen...

0 upvotes
Esign
By Esign (Jan 7, 2013)

Beside me on my table stands my 30 years old Minox 35. It's about the size and weight of a RX100, have a wonderful fixed 35mm f/2.8 lens and some smart features. It's 4mm thinner than the RX100 and have a sturdy hatch closing the camera. A useful viewfinder with frame markings. Truly pocketable, even in the jeans back pockets, you could sit on it without being careless. But only manual focus with no focusing aid. No build-it flash, but a very small nice accessory unit kept in the other back pocket. And a really bad shutter mechanism that called for service every 6 months. And it is FULLFRAME, boys and girls. When are the Asian magicians going to better this?

1 upvote
BBking83
By BBking83 (Jan 7, 2013)

See what you've done!!

http://www.dpreview.com/galleries/reviewsamples/photos/2376544/bb_dsc_0218-acr-processed?inalbum=nikon-1-v2-preview-samples

I'm kidding. :P

But, it shows that there was a reason why I questioned it. A member for almost 5 years thought one was an out-of-the-camera JPEG where I only joined 5 days ago.

All I ask is for it to be clearer next time.

Thanks. :)

0 upvotes
Revenant
By Revenant (Jan 6, 2013)

An interesting (and possibly useless) observation from comparing the graphs at DXOMark:
The Nikon 1 models with the 10 Mp sensor apply noise reduction to the raw files, beginning at ISO 800, whereas the V2 with the new sensor does not.

1 upvote
Jared Huntr
By Jared Huntr (Jan 8, 2013)

Actually, this theory was debunked
http://www.dpreview.com/news/2012/10/16/Sandor-Barna-explains-how-1-inch-sensors-will-save-the-compact-camera

1 upvote
Revenant
By Revenant (Jan 8, 2013)

Interesting, so the sensor uses different signal paths for low and high ISOs, to maximize DR and minimize noise, respectively, thereby causing DXO to conclude that the raws are cooked at high ISOs.
But why doesn't DXO make the same conclusion about the V2? Either the new sensor isn't made by Aptina, and therefore lacks the DR-Pix technology, or DXO are now aware of how the sensor works. But shouldn't they remove the claims about "smoothed" raws from J1/J2/V1, then?

Comment edited 2 minutes after posting
0 upvotes
HowaboutRAW
By HowaboutRAW (Jan 5, 2013)

Sad that so many draw conclusions about the image quality in these comments.

Hey: The samples are jpegs, and jpegs don't come close to the total capacity of what this or any raw shooting camera can do.

So wait until y'all have raws and an updated ACR to extract them before even thinking of commenting about image quality.

1 upvote
Tord S Eriksson
By Tord S Eriksson (Jan 5, 2013)

Why didn't your team use some better lens? You used the 10-30 which is known to be the worst of them that are available for the Nikon 1 system!

All shots look a bit flat, and compact camera-like!

I had great hopes for the V2, but these shots are, on the whole, totally uninspiring! So I'll have to live with my V1 - sigh!

The V1 is the weirdest camera there is, button-arrangement-wise, but a darling when it comes to take photos, with any lens but the 10-30!

1 upvote
cyuill2007
By cyuill2007 (Jan 6, 2013)

Tord, I am a bit surprised you think the 10-30 is "the worst" kit lens out there. I'm satisfied with my copy, and I'm quite fussy about the quality of my lenses. I was pleasantly surprised by the sharpness of some closeup shots I took with the lens at 30mm. I only wish the maximum aperture was f/2.8-4 rather than f/3.5-5.6. But I guess a faster lens would have to be a bigger one.

1 upvote
Michael_13
By Michael_13 (Jan 6, 2013)

Tord: Because they want to show what you get.
At this price level, one can expect good quality from a kit lens. Most users do not buy additional lenses.
But even with a better lens, I would not like the V1. I am currently testing one and it is quite disappointing. Handling is awful and exposure unreliable. White balance indoors and screen are very good, though.

Comment edited 6 minutes after posting
2 upvotes
Ibida Bab
By Ibida Bab (Jan 5, 2013)

My $175 Pentax X-5 beats this Nikon to the dust.

0 upvotes
marike6
By marike6 (Jan 5, 2013)

lol. Sure it does.

1 upvote
zos xavius
By zos xavius (Jan 5, 2013)

I'm a huge pentax fan, but the X5 samples I've seen are some of the worst images I've seen from a camera recently. Compare them to the fuji X superzoom. Huge difference. The X5 image processor is great if you want to render your images with water colors!

2 upvotes
CameraLabTester
By CameraLabTester (Jan 4, 2013)

There is a psychological effect on the masses when using the number 1.

Number 1 means the best, the first, the leading edge, the innovator, the WINNER.

This camera is clearly NOT.

It is at best, mediocre, tired, full of caloric marketing fluff and bloated and overpriced.

Change the NAME and halve the PRICE.

See the sales soar.

.

3 upvotes
AnHund
By AnHund (Jan 6, 2013)

It's a great camera. J1 was number 1 in sales in Japan in 2012 of all mirrorless cameras. So they used a very appropriate name :-)

0 upvotes
vFunct
By vFunct (Jan 4, 2013)

This camera really needs the Android/WiFi interface. That's pretty much it!

0 upvotes
cyuill2007
By cyuill2007 (Jan 4, 2013)

I am convinced that, in general, those who dis the Nikon 1 system have never shot pictures with a Nikon 1 camera, or even picked one up. I have a Nikon D7000, and I get great images from it. Good camera! I have owned and been shooting with a Nikon V1 for 3 weeks, and I can get shots with it, when used right, that approach those I get with the D7000. I much prefer the videos I can get with the V1. And if I have to carry around a camera for an entire day I'd much rather carry around a V1 than a D7000.

These very nice test shots (which I recognize as being taken in and around Victoria BC Canada) indicate to me that the V2 produces similar images to the V1. I doubt I'll pick one up as I'm satisfied with my V1. But I am convinced that Nikon created a very viable mirrorless system that will only improve with age.

I don't think the Nikon 1 cameras will be to everyone's taste. That's why it's good there are lots of good alternatives.

My $0.02 worth.

5 upvotes
TravisLind
By TravisLind (Jan 4, 2013)

I looked at the J1, I bought an RX100, it's not so much that I am dissing the Nikon, but I do feel that the RX100 renders it largely irrelevant for many potential customers. IMHO the RX100 packs a better sensor (similar noise, better DR, better color depth, while having 2x the pixels) into a smaller body, with a lens that is as good as if not better, than the 10mm and the 10~30mm combined, at the time I made my purchase the prices were even similar, I think the Nikon fire sales were largely caused by the RX100 eroding their sales.

The J series makes more sense by adding the view finder which many find desirable. However even here you have the RX100 applying pressure from below, and similarly sized M4/3 and APS-C mirror less cameras pushing down from above, the market ends up very Narrow and honestly Nikon needs to do something more to make their products stand out.

4 upvotes
backayonder
By backayonder (Jan 5, 2013)

At the end of the day it is all about choice and what you want in a camera. I want a viewfinder.

2 upvotes
cyuill2007
By cyuill2007 (Jan 5, 2013)

@TravisLind

I appreciate your comments re the RX100. I looked at possibly getting a premium compact digicam as Xmas gift for my wife. She played around with my V1 for a few minutes and decided she didn't care for it. The V1 is definitely not a camera for her.

While testing a few premium compacts I was surprised at how fast their operation was. One of these cameras would probably have served me as well as the V1 did when I was on a recent trip. Perhaps better.

What causes me to still favor the V1 overall, however, is the ability to interchange lenses, and use existing Nikon lenses via the FT1 adapter. I'm looking forward to doing some bird photography with the V1 fitted with my 70-300mm zoom or 300 f/2.8 prime lens. You cannot do that with a premium compact. I also found the V1's built-in viewfinder to come in very handy when photographing in bright sunlight.

2 upvotes
Rachotilko
By Rachotilko (Jan 5, 2013)

@TrevisLind:

According to DxOMark, RX100's sensor is better in DR (and that in low-ISO settings). Noise-wise they are equal. BTW, DxO mark normalizes the results with respect to resolution.

When talking of lenses: RX100 optics have some shotcoming (mostly sharpenss, @wide-angle, closeup), an inevitable result of being a zoom packed in a small volume.

With Nikon1's lenses definitely offer more, in terms of quality and versatility. You can't do tele with RX100, and sharpeness of Nikon1 primes is clearly superior.

That means, I do not bash RX100. I just don't agree that Nikon1 system was made irrlelvant by it.

4 upvotes
Tord S Eriksson
By Tord S Eriksson (Jan 5, 2013)

I have managed to take pictures with my V1 that are very close to those I get with my D600 - sometimes better, when using exactly the same lens ;-)!

3 upvotes
Timmbits
By Timmbits (Jan 6, 2013)

@TravisLind, you are very right in that the Nikon1 series has been edged out of it's space by the RX100. No doubt about that. I would expect to see entire enthusiast compact fixed lens sector to move to a larger 1" sensor format (from the now prevalent 1/1.7"). Perhaps Nikon should seize the opportunity of already being tooled for 1" production, to introduce a better LX7, and get a jump on the rest of it's competition. Would definitely be the smart thing to do. Although the predictable thing would be to protect their V1 investment.
@cyuill, but you said that you already own a dslr for using your nice nikon lenses - what do you need the v1 for that for? you are wasting the majority of the image circle in doing that - it's like taking a crop from the center of your d7000 images.

Comment edited 7 minutes after posting
0 upvotes
cyuill2007
By cyuill2007 (Jan 6, 2013)

@Timmbits

You'll notice I referred specifically to using tele lenses with the V1. The extra crop factor of the V1 allows tighter composition of distant subjects. Last year I went out to take shots of snowy owls with my D7000 and a 70-300mm zoom and a 300mm prime lens. At 300mm the FOV with a D7000 is like a 450mm lens on a FF camera. The owls seemed distant using those lenses with my D7000. With the V1 the FOV is more like that of an 800mm lens on a FF body. Since the V1's 10 MP sensor has a higher pixel density than the D7000's I expect that I should get sharper shots than by cropping D7000 images down to only 4 or 3 MP, assuming the resolution of the lenses is sufficient. The few test shots I've done with the 70-300 indicate it should do a decent job.

0 upvotes
marike6
By marike6 (Jan 6, 2013)

I've owned the RX100 and now have a V1. There's no doubt the RX100 is an excellent P&S, but as a camera the V1, with it's dedicated EVF, super fast AF and image processing, great face detect and superior AF tracking, produces many more keepers.

0 upvotes
Richt2000
By Richt2000 (Jan 4, 2013)

Whats happened to the reviews guys? Nothing since dec 12th!
Really gone down hill of late. Yea, I know, its free, and your reviews are the best, but one camera a month is pretty poor for 'the worlds best photography site'...

4 upvotes
Tord S Eriksson
By Tord S Eriksson (Jan 5, 2013)

Probably off for a long winter vacation! Don't give a damned about us V1 users ;-(!

A Happy New Year, all!

0 upvotes
Michael_13
By Michael_13 (Jan 5, 2013)

Why do you complain?
Don't you think these people deserve some vacation, too?

0 upvotes
MarcMedios
By MarcMedios (Jan 4, 2013)

My sister just bought the camera and I had been really impressed on the specs but, when I used it for over 15 minutes, I was thoroughly disappointed. The feel of the camera is off, the handling... hard to pinpoint but it just did not perform to expectations

1 upvote
Monty71
By Monty71 (Jan 4, 2013)

I find it funny that the same people that bash this camera's small sensor and own m43 cameras usually insist that m43 are just as good as cameras with larger sensors.

Comment edited 16 seconds after posting
5 upvotes
marike6
By marike6 (Jan 5, 2013)

No you have it wrong, m43 users will insist that m43 cameras like the EM5 are better than FF. It's like the laws of physics get suspended but only for m43 formats relative to others.

3 upvotes
Anepo
By Anepo (Jan 5, 2013)

As an E-M5 owner I have looked up the FACTS and looked at DXO Marks, it out performs the Canon 600D with ease so there are no lies there.
And the Nikon 1V sensor is MUCH MUCH smaller than a micro four thirds sensor.

1 upvote
Tord S Eriksson
By Tord S Eriksson (Jan 5, 2013)

@Anepo

I do think the OM-D is superb (my wife got one), but I am not that sure it out-resolves my D600.

The number of keepers is very high with the OM-D is very high, but the dynamic range of the D800 is far better!

0 upvotes
flipmac
By flipmac (Jan 6, 2013)

@Tord S Eriksson

Anepo was referring to a Canon APS-C, not Nikon FF. If you look at DxO, the E-M5 (and by extension E-PM2/E-PL5) have better IQ than any Canon APS-C, such as 600D, 60D, 7D, etc. With a score of 71, the E-M5 is also not that far from NEX-6 (which has a score of 78).

@Monty71

The new V2 has a DxO score of 50, not even close to current m4/3 and APS-C. Coupled with a limited selection of (native) lenses, it's no surprise some bash it while at the same time they praise m4/3. To make matter worse, the Nikon 1 bodies and lenses are not even that small compared to other mirrorless, particularly m4/3.

@marike6

m4/3 is better than FF if the criteria is size/weight, budget, 5-axis IBIS, touchscreen, etc. I don't think anyone would actually state m4/3 is better than FF in terms of absolute IQ.

Comment edited 3 times, last edit 12 minutes after posting
0 upvotes
Apteryx6
By Apteryx6 (Jan 6, 2013)

@Anepo
FF sensor is 36mm across, actual APS C is 24mm (but so-called APS-C digitial cameras are always a little less, typically about 23.6mm, unless they are Canons, in which case they will be smaller), m4/3s is 17.3mm, 1" is 13.2mm.

So if 13.2mm is MUCH MUCH smaller than 17.3mm, how many MUCHs do you need to describe how much smaller m4/3s is than FF? Or can you just increase the size of the font on each of your 2 MUCHs?

1 upvote
Monty71
By Monty71 (Jan 6, 2013)

Folks, does it honestly really matter. seriously...think about how much passion people put into these message boards about equipment. The words "winning","better" etc. It's really silly when you think about it. When I look at a good photo I like to think it says something about this world we live in and inspire me to be a better person or contribute to the planet in some way. Does it matter if a photo of your tuna fish sandwich is better than someone else s . Far more importantly....the polar ice caps are melting!.....seriously.....look in the mirror...hold up your camera....and ask yourselves....is this camera going to make or break my day.

0 upvotes
Rachotilko
By Rachotilko (Jan 4, 2013)

Size comparison, if you wanna go tele (equivalent FOV range 70-300mm):

http://camerasize.com/compact/#375.90,185.347,392.43,ha,t

0 upvotes
gl2k
By gl2k (Jan 4, 2013)

In 8 months I'll buy it with a 70% discount.

3 upvotes
Tord S Eriksson
By Tord S Eriksson (Jan 5, 2013)

Sadly, by then it will either be discontinued, or replaced by the V1 Mark II!

0 upvotes
Timmbits
By Timmbits (Jan 6, 2013)

I'd rather pocket an RX100 at 70% discount.

0 upvotes
evoprox
By evoprox (Jan 4, 2013)

With m43 cameras getting better and better and flagships like the OM-D rivaling APS-C output it's nice to see serious investments in systems and cameras centered around one-inch sensors. In no time those critters will be up on par with what we get from m43 now. Can't wait for a serious system camera with the size of a RX-100 or a RX-200 with EVF and hotshoe but so far those Nikons don't cut it for me.

3 upvotes
sandy b
By sandy b (Jan 4, 2013)

Good lord people, its a camera that has some cool innovations, but is not for everyone. I think a bunch of insecure people love bashing Nikon, simply because they can. The camera seems to be selling well enough for Nikon to continue selling it, it has the best af of any small camera. Is it as nice a package as the new Oly? No, its not, but it will do fine in its own niche.

Comment edited 3 minutes after posting
1 upvote
Tord S Eriksson
By Tord S Eriksson (Jan 5, 2013)

The V2 was supposed to be an upgrade, quality-wise compared to the V1, not just one with the buttons in the right place (I love the buttons on the V2, hate those of my V1!

2 upvotes
Rachotilko
By Rachotilko (Jan 4, 2013)

What does the DxOMark says about the sensor:

http://www.dxomark.com/index.php/en%D0%A3%D1%8F%D0%9F%D0%9D%D0%A2%D0%8F%D0%A3%D1%8F%D0%9F%D0%9D%D0%A2%D0%9F%D0%A3%D1%8F%D0%9F%D0%9D%D0%A2%D0%9D/Cameras/Compare-Camera-Sensors/Compare-cameras-side-by-side/%28appareil1%29/849|0/%28brand%29/Nikon/%28appareil2%29/812|0/%28brand2%29/Sony/%28appareil3%29/643|0/%28brand3%29/Olympus

Compared to RX100:

- high ISO noise is almost identical.
- at low ISO's, Nikon1's DR is slightly worse.

Compared to older (12MPix) M43, such as E-PL1

- Nikon1's high ISO noise is very slightly worse than E-PL1
- Nikon1's DR at any ISO is much better than E-PL1 (!!!)

I do not get this prejudice against this wonderful camera !

5 upvotes
Timmbits
By Timmbits (Jan 6, 2013)

This just goes to show that you can make numbers say anything you want... especially if you control what you are comparing it with... like an outdated model from 2010 and that still gets a better overall score.

Comment edited 33 seconds after posting
0 upvotes
exifnotfound
By exifnotfound (Jan 4, 2013)

Man that's an ugly camera!

I've seen some really good shots taken with 1 system but what a bad idea for a camera, I'd never buy one.

I shoot Nikon and prefer the M system over the 1.
Then again I prefer the Olympus & Leica over both of them. :)

2 upvotes
Wubslin
By Wubslin (Jan 3, 2013)

Oh wow, Nikon still think they're relevant. Didn't need to read the article or see the images to know that, though.

0 upvotes
photobeans
By photobeans (Jan 3, 2013)

Nikon, you are not winning the battle in the mirrorless interchangeable system format with your 1" sensored cameras. It's just.. 'small'. Just give up and start over before you waste any more time and money.

7 upvotes
nixda
By nixda (Jan 4, 2013)

Um, they only have the No 1 selling mirrorless camera in Japan, by far. Looks like they have won the battle. Everything else isn't important to Japanese camera manufacturers.

4 upvotes
onlooker
By onlooker (Jan 4, 2013)

@nixda: Yes, the number one selling mirrorless is Nikon J1, near or maybe even below the original cost. Japanese are bargain hunting. If that's winning the battle, they are doing it the same way as dot coms were winning the battle in the late 90s.

4 upvotes
marike6
By marike6 (Jan 4, 2013)

Nikon 1 is not only small but offers AF Tracking that's far superior to any other mirrorless on the market.
As far as winning, Nikon doesn't have to dominate EVERY format as along with Canon they pretty much own the DSLR segment. But the Nikon 1 is more popular than you think. Have a look at Amazon sales ranking and you'll see how well the Nikon 1 cameras are selling. The J1 is 11th in Compact System Cameras. Not bad for a first generation camera.

3 upvotes
TheChefs
By TheChefs (Jan 4, 2013)

I was also surprised with Nikon 1s popularity when I travelled to Japan. It was in a lot of places. I don't have any beef with the small sensor. The strong points are great video and best autofocus in class. The bad points are the lack of good lenses and pretty bad interface...

3 upvotes
AnHund
By AnHund (Jan 6, 2013)

@photobeans.
J1 was the best selling mirrorless camera in 2012 in Japan :-)

0 upvotes
Pat Cullinan Jr
By Pat Cullinan Jr (Jan 3, 2013)

Lots of smearing at hi ISO's.

High cost/benefit, in my degraded opinion.

0 upvotes
Nate Soliz
By Nate Soliz (Jan 4, 2013)

You're correct... A lot of smearing at higher ISO. Why would they allow this?

0 upvotes
rfsIII
By rfsIII (Jan 3, 2013)

Dudes,
Could I put in a request for future picture testing: Please test the fill flash (also called synchro sun) capabilities when you shoot photos. It's such an important camera function because so many photos can be improved with a little fill to knock down the contrast ratio--especially when light comes from overhead or when shooting outside. For instance that nice photo of the woman: her gorgeous eyes are a little dark, the photo would be so much more appealing if we could see the color more clearly.
Whether you do it with the built-in flash or an accessory flash, a little light—Galen Rowell suggested -1.7 stops but some cameras have a specific fill flash button—would make some of these great pix that much better.

0 upvotes
Adrian Van
By Adrian Van (Jan 3, 2013)

Although I have a m43 Olympus Pen, these Nikon 1s always interested me. Nikon 1 performs really well in good light or moderate light with very decent image quality by these samples, and sounds like incredibly fast AF performance as I never owned one but did try out in the stores. My Oly EPL1 has great colours however Nikon has always had great colours as well, the AF performance of Nikon 1 sounds great for general use. M43 at 800 iso or higher has much better noise performance though. Even the Oly EPL1 has very clean 800 iso due to bigger sensor size better than Nikon 1. Hope Nikon makes a bit bigger sensor like m43 in same body size. Maybe someday, or else mirrorless APS-C to take my existing Nikon lenses (adaptor maybe needed). Should happen someday I think. If they want to really boost sales, work on one of these 2 options. However, for general public use these cameras are a step up in quality over advanced compact camera and can deliver excellent daylight photos for day to day use.

Comment edited 7 minutes after posting
0 upvotes
ybizzle
By ybizzle (Jan 3, 2013)

Bought a new Pentax Q for $250 that has about the same IQ as this at a fraction of the size and price. What a little gem and it gets compliments whenever people see it. :)

0 upvotes
Jimmy jang Boo
By Jimmy jang Boo (Jan 3, 2013)

Dream on. The Pentax Q does not have "about the same IQ". The Pentax Q is at best a novelty camera.

8 upvotes
ybizzle
By ybizzle (Jan 3, 2013)

It might not be as good on higher ISOs but up to 400, images are comparable. For $250 I get a compact feature rich camera, full HD video with manual exposure, an f1.9 lens, and tons of creative filters. Not to mention it's so much fun to shoot with.

For paid work, I would of course use my X100 or 60D which crush this V2 in the IQ dept.

1 upvote
ybizzle
By ybizzle (Jan 3, 2013)

One more thing...The Q is actually pocketable even with the prime lens. ;)

1 upvote
peevee1
By peevee1 (Jan 3, 2013)

Q is a total toy. All the P&S cameras in the recent enthusiast zoom compact roundup beat it buy a mile.
For $250 you can have a new Pana G3 for example.

1 upvote
ybizzle
By ybizzle (Jan 3, 2013)

You might be able to get a G3 body for $250 sure. Add the slow kit lens and you're way over. Not to mention it doesn't fit in the pocket! Come on now, they aren't even in the same league size wise! How often are you going to lug that around with the kit lens? Is it always going to be with you? Doubt it.

The Q isn't the greatest camera out there IQ wise, but it's the greatest camera for me because it's always with me. This means the crappy cell phone pictures are a thing of the past.

2 upvotes
backayonder
By backayonder (Jan 3, 2013)

What's the viewfinder % coverge on the Q?

2 upvotes
ybizzle
By ybizzle (Jan 3, 2013)

When I add the optional OVF, I'll let you know. ;)

0 upvotes
Cultured Vulture
By Cultured Vulture (Jan 3, 2013)

Where are you finding a Pentax Q with f/1.9 lens for $250? B&H certainly doesn't have it for that price.

1 upvote
ybizzle
By ybizzle (Jan 3, 2013)

Local store called London Drugs here in Canada. They were clearing them out for $299 and I talked them down to $250. ;)

0 upvotes
flipmac
By flipmac (Jan 3, 2013)

Gotta love London Drugs; for a grocery/drug store, they have a huge computer camera dept. It was there that I was able try E-M5, NEX-7/6, X-Pro1, XE1, etc. before any of the electronics/camera store I frequent have them (Bestbuy, Futureshop, Broadway camera, Kerrisdale camera, Lens and Shutter, etc.).

1 upvote
zos xavius
By zos xavius (Jan 4, 2013)

As much of a pentax fanboy as I am, you really need a reality check. The latest crop of P&S cameras will destroy the Q. Look on pentax forums and their own review of the Q. In a comparison with a m4/3 camera, the olympus destroyed it..easily resolving 2x the detail with only 2 more MP. So either the optics of the Q are really soft or the sensor is very soft or likely both. Toy. I really wanted one and have seen good images come out of it, but only when you view them at web or screen sizes. As soon as your start pixel peeping everything falls apart. They might make nice 8x10 prints, but I wouldn't shoot with any kind of camera I couldn't at least make prints 20" wide from. M4/3 will give you that kind of quality in a not much larger package. And yeah, the nikon v1 system will decimate the Q. It resolves a lot more detail. Measurbate yourself. I've seen enough to know which system offers the most "resolution." The Q is kind of cute though. Very toy camera like though.

1 upvote
ybizzle
By ybizzle (Jan 4, 2013)

Not sure how many times I need to say it. Yes the Q is not a powerhouse like the m4/3rd cams. Not sure why that is even mentioned here. Pixel peeping isn't my thing, shooting and having fun with photography is. Look at my gear list. If I wanted pure IQ, I have cameras that beat the Q. However, I want a tiny camera with me at all times that is better than my phone with full manual control. I get that with the Q at a bargain price.

I bet the next post will be "but the Canon 1DX will destroy the Q...What a toy..."

0 upvotes
TheChefs
By TheChefs (Jan 4, 2013)

ybizzle, I agree with you on the Q, it's damn fun camera. I own a K5 with limited primes, that's my IQ setup. My P&S is GRD4. I owned a m4/3, but I handed it down to my girlfriend since I didn't see any use for it.

The issue with m4/3 camera is that it's too big for handbag, so it so now use. I got her a cheap Q for Xmas to replace it, she loves it, has it on her all the time. The IQ beats GRD4, also very easy to take photos and it's a fun camera. Best of all, it fits into a hand bag. I want one, and a good friend of mine bought a Q after playing with my gf's one.

You have to play with one to understand why it's such a fun little cam.

2 upvotes
fakuryu
By fakuryu (Jan 4, 2013)

I have one of the latest PnS in the market right now which is the highly regarded Panasonic Lumix LX7, better in low light, wide, definitely has a faster AF and shot to shot times.

But I still prefer my Q and 01 prime in terms of IQ. Why? To the uninitiated, it has a magnesium body, the 01 prime is a sharp lens, as sharp as any prime lens in the market (I also do own some Pentax Limited Primes which IMHO are gems) and even with the small sensor, it does not have an AA filter. Yes, it does not have an AA filter like the Pentax K5IIs and the Nikon D800e.

My Pentax Kr + Limited lenses are in my dry box which just gets used when I need the IQ, my Oly EPL1 m43 is with my mom, I just let my sis use my LX7 and my Q is almost always with me.

1 upvote
ybizzle
By ybizzle (Jan 4, 2013)

Nice to finally see some responses that actually "get it". ;)

1 upvote
Mike_61
By Mike_61 (Jan 4, 2013)

Looks like the optional optical viewfinder will cost you as much as the Q itself. ;)

I'm glad Nikon brought out the V2 because it made the V1 affordable for me. After ebaying the 10-110 & FT-1 adapter from the $799 kit, my V1 + flash + 10-30 cost me less than $250! :) And I'm loving the built-in evf.

Comment edited 51 seconds after posting
0 upvotes
hammerheadfistpunch
By hammerheadfistpunch (Jan 3, 2013)

Its not that the IQ is bad, its just that the lens system and the proprietary hotshoe are dragging the whole concept down. CX is just too far left of MFT to be taken seriously. MFT i think is the line in the sand between "semi-professional/high end" and "consumer/toy"

1 upvote
flipmac
By flipmac (Jan 3, 2013)

I have to agree with he hotshoe issue. Why make a new one? Even Sony started using a 'real' hotshoe on their NEX. Canon, Olympus/Panaonsic, and Fuji use fairly standard hotshoe on their mirrorless. Nikon could've easily used their existing hotshoe and release small flash appropriate for the V1/2 then call it a day.

1 upvote
gulffish
By gulffish (Jan 3, 2013)

IQ is sub par, not close to being as good as RX100.

3 upvotes
Jimmy jang Boo
By Jimmy jang Boo (Jan 3, 2013)

How's that view finder working for you in bright sun? ;)

3 upvotes
JhvaElohimMeth
By JhvaElohimMeth (Jan 4, 2013)

viewfinder doesn't justify this nikon's EPIC IQ FAIL. RX100 is still superior. Buying a Nikon 1 with the 10-30 will cost about the same of having a smaller, better IQ and BRIGHTER Rx100. This new nikon 1 V2 give you inferior IQ with the price of a DSLR and the bulk of a good mirrorless
Maybe only J1 is worth it (just because the price fell down a lot...)

too bad nikon...

Comment edited 1 minute after posting
0 upvotes
JEROME NOLAS
By JEROME NOLAS (Jan 3, 2013)

Obviously Nikon DOESN'T CARE about you guys, so stop crying and buy mirrorless(Samsung, Panasonic, Olympus) just like I did...

Comment edited 15 minutes after posting
1 upvote
mgblack74
By mgblack74 (Jan 3, 2013)

You know, as a Nikon user I don't know if I'd get this. One of the biggest pluses of being in the Nikon system is it's flash and CLS system. But within their own brand, they have crippled this interchangeable lens camera with basically a proprietary hot shoe. I have a SU-800 and 3 flashes, and can't use them on this camera. Would an ISO hot shoe been so tough? There would be a lot more creative possibilities if the Nikon 1 system were CLS compatible.

4 upvotes
thejohnnerparty
By thejohnnerparty (Jan 3, 2013)

I like the photos, but they look a little washed out to me. Was it the lighting or are my eyes bad?

Comment edited 35 seconds after posting
0 upvotes
Dodi73
By Dodi73 (Jan 3, 2013)

Very funny the V2 didn't hit the shelves yet and V3 rumors are already out there !!!

0 upvotes
Thorgrem
By Thorgrem (Jan 3, 2013)

I don't get all this nagging about this nice little camera. I think the Nikon 1 series has great potential if Nikon put some serious effort in it. This V2 is a first sign of that effort. Nice little camera that looks different (I like it). I don't use it, and maybe never will but it stands out.

5 upvotes
Mato34
By Mato34 (Jan 3, 2013)

I agree 100% with you. But Nikon should show even bigger effort on that serious camera. J series are okay for the typical public, V might look something more "pro" and with better performance for that same public, but I think something like Nikon has done on the P7x00 compacts would be very well welcomed by really serious aficionados.

Perhaps it's just question of time, in fact the system it's just a little more than a year old.

Saludos!

2 upvotes
PatMann
By PatMann (Jan 3, 2013)

Thanks for the gallery and for including the raw images.

I like the look. I like the lens roadmap. The wide zoom and the portait lens they've promised, if they perform well, make this potentially a great system. If the next sensor and camera iterations fulfill their potential (how about that Sony, eh?), this could be a very tempting DSLR supplement, with imaging performance not far behind the D200 (except for DOF, but I DO have an SLR for that). I don't mind carrying it in a small belt bag - my pockets are already full.

I haven't had an SLR backup since my Nikon AF600 failed. That little P&S probably had a smaller envelope than the V2. My SLRs seem to be getting larger rather than smaller, so it would be nice to have a compact again. I require a finder, and like wide lenses, so the interchangeable lens system is a big plus over a P&S.

The ability to put the 70-200 f/4 on this for birding also has strong appeal.

But I still wish Nikon would complete the DX lens lineup first.

4 upvotes
gl2k
By gl2k (Jan 3, 2013)

Nikons pricing on the V1 is frivolous. When newly introduced it was pretty expensive but less than a year later Nikon now gives a 50% discount. Making early buyers looking really stupid. I know many early adopters will disagree but honestly guys don't you feel screwed ?
Only Sony surpasses this disgraceful behavior with its $150 lens hood for the RX1.

2 upvotes
Combatmedic870
By Combatmedic870 (Jan 3, 2013)

Its actually 61% off right now. $349 with kit on amazon. If i had the money i'd snatch it up for that price.

0 upvotes
mike kobal
By mike kobal (Jan 3, 2013)

the 1" sensor is the new m43, it will take some time for Nikon/Sony to get it right, by then Nikon will be so far ahead - it will start lapping the competition, my gf got the V1 on sale and I am blown away by the af speed,responsiveness, video quality and silent mode, now I am just waiting for the V2 price drop :)

Comment edited 4 minutes after posting
9 upvotes
photobeans
By photobeans (Jan 3, 2013)

How will Nikon be far ahead? Olympus, and rumored Panasonic, utilize Sony sensors too. I think it is Nikon that is far behind.

10 upvotes
Trollshavethebestcandy
By Trollshavethebestcandy (Jan 3, 2013)

http://i1214.photobucket.com/albums/cc498/43rumors/nik-epma.jpg

If Nikon made a body with the same proportions as the smaller of the M4/3rds in regards to the lens mount you would truly have something. A pocketable EVIL camera. What they have is something larger than M4/3rds bodies and that makes little sense unless your target market is soccer moms and that's what they have done thus far. They have gone consumer beginner mass market instead of a real cool niche. Why? Market share. Can they reduce the body by 30%? Yes. It would truly be a cool nich market product with the right lenses. Is there a market for a premium pocket EVIL cam? Yes but it's small. I hope they do an with lenses that are moderately fast and high quality. Will they? Methinks nay. I give it a 10% chance. The smallest of the M4/3rds is grabbing that market. Make a micro version of this system and the photo world would applaud. Again this is not a serious camera system yet but maybe in 4 years and hopefully much much smaller and not $1,000.

2 upvotes
marike6
By marike6 (Jan 3, 2013)

Mike is talking about CX cameras with 1" sensors. Neither Olympus or Panasonic produce any cameras with this format. And I totally agree about the V1. I also picked one up on sale last week and it's an extremely fast camera that's a pleasure to use. When I get around to adding the Nikon 18.5 1.8 it will be even better.

4 upvotes
HowaboutRAW
By HowaboutRAW (Jan 3, 2013)

mike kobal:

Sony did NOT make the V1's sensor, and likely did not make the V2's either.

1 upvote
Cane
By Cane (Jan 3, 2013)

Seeing as you bought the first one, you will not be ahead.

0 upvotes
Raist3d
By Raist3d (Jan 3, 2013)

Oh Nikon, I would take your smaller system more seriously if you offered some good small fast prime lenses and ability to do electronic shutter shooting as an option (maybe you do, haven't checked). You have a real nice flash attachment but the slower lenses...

0 upvotes
Raist3d
By Raist3d (Jan 3, 2013)

Oh it has an electronic shutter option. That's good.

1 upvote
marike6
By marike6 (Jan 3, 2013)

They just released an 18.5 1.8, the classical 50 1.8 in 35mm terms, and the sample images I've seen are excellent. Apparently they have several other fast primes in development that they filed patents for a while ago.

4 upvotes
thx1138
By thx1138 (Jan 3, 2013)

You mean the classical 50 f/4.9. It's hard enough getting DoF control on m4/3 with it's bigger sensor and Nikon uses a much smaller 2.7x crop sensor, so f/1.8 is basically kit lens speed for DoF.

3 upvotes
gsum
By gsum (Jan 3, 2013)

Oh Raist3d, you'd take the Nikon 1 system more seriously if you did a bit more research before posting. Take a look, for example, at the capabilities of the electronic shutter and the stills-while-videoing facilities.

1 upvote
spikemd
By spikemd (Jan 4, 2013)

The electronic shutter can be totally silent. Can shoot full mpeg pics while doing video and can shoot 600fps is super-slow mode which is very cool. The video quality is excellent.

0 upvotes
marike6
By marike6 (Jan 4, 2013)

@thx1138 No the 18.5 1.8 is only a "kit lens" if you insist on viewing everything in 35mm terms. The actual Nikon 1 kit lens is 10-30 3.5-5.6 which would have significantly deeper DOF. You tell me which you'd rather shoot with?

1 upvote
bewing77
By bewing77 (Jan 4, 2013)

Marike6 you where the one who claimed that the 18,5 is "the classical 50 mm 1.8 in 35 mm terms"' thx just pointed out that one of the defining feature of that classical lens is missing from the 18,5

0 upvotes
autoy
By autoy (Jan 3, 2013)

Actually I find noise pretty well controlled. On the other hand, it blows highlights like crazy, just like any bridge system. Dynamic range is terrible. No match for equally priced APS-C or even m4/3 mirrorless cameras.

Comment edited 2 times, last edit 5 minutes after posting
3 upvotes
marike6
By marike6 (Jan 3, 2013)

DR is as good or better than many popular m43 cameras like the G3 or EPL3.

From DxOMark Sensor Ratings:

Nikon 1 J1 11 EVs
Panasonic G3 10.6 EVs
Olympus EPL3 10.3 EVs

Also most so-called bridge cameras have tiny 1/2.3" sensors. The Nikon 1 has a 1" sensor just like the Sony RX100.

5 upvotes
gsum
By gsum (Jan 3, 2013)

How on earth do you judge DR by looking at a few JPG samples? Please think before posting.

Comment edited 20 seconds after posting
1 upvote
autoy
By autoy (Jan 3, 2013)

@marike6 DxOMark is just a benchmark. It also states the D800 has overwhelmingly better output than the 5DIII, while real life shots tell a completely different story.

@gsum Why not? You can tell quite a lot from a camera and sensor capabilities by its JPEG output. Ask Fuji users.

0 upvotes
Rachotilko
By Rachotilko (Jan 3, 2013)

DR of the sensor has nothing to do whatsoever with blown highlights. It is all about the noise in the shadows.

Tonecurves and exposition can be (and indeed are) adjusted by camera manufacturers to prevent blown highlights. The only limiting factor in doing so is : shadow noise.

Comment edited 2 minutes after posting
1 upvote
jim stirling
By jim stirling (Jan 3, 2013)

@ autoy
The D800 has a very clear advantage regarding DR compared to the 5DmkIII, which is readily demonstrated by raising the shadows or doing any serious manipulation of the RAW file. The extra detail on the D800 is also welcome making the D800 an excellent choice for landscape work. I have been very impressed with the image quality achievable with the D800 [ i typically use it for low ISO landscape and architecture} , though both are excellent cameras each with their own advantages .

0 upvotes
marike6
By marike6 (Jan 4, 2013)

@autoy The D800 DOES have better output than the 5D3, particularly regarding DR. You may not always see it looking at web JPEGS, but process raw files from each camera and you'll get significantly more flexibility and exposure latitude from the D800 files.

I bring up DxOMark because said Nikon 1 DR is "terrible" but their scientific testing from says the opposite.

0 upvotes
Camerabrain
By Camerabrain (Jan 3, 2013)

I've always thought of Nikon as the BMW of camera makers. They are better to stick with producing top quality at the higher price levels and let Volkswagen do cheap speed.

0 upvotes
AmaturFotografer
By AmaturFotografer (Jan 3, 2013)

"Volkswagen" market is just too big to be ignored.

2 upvotes
bobbarber
By bobbarber (Jan 3, 2013)

I'm sure that these images will print nicely at 8x10.

However, there is no reason for m43 owners to move to this camera, except maybe 60 f.p.s. for a few users.

I kind of like the idea of this camera, but the competition is strong.

0 upvotes
R Valentino
By R Valentino (Jan 3, 2013)

Just can't see why anyone would buy into the Nikon 1 system over 4/3s. The one ISO 800 image I looked at was awful. Didn't care to look at any more after that.

13 upvotes
Shunda77
By Shunda77 (Jan 3, 2013)

I just can't see why anyone would buy 4/3s over APS-C ............I can't see why anyone would buy APS-C over full frame..........I can't see why anyone would buy full frame over medium format.......and so it continues........

14 upvotes
spikemd
By spikemd (Jan 3, 2013)

Decent lenses, faster auto focus, better video (except GH2/3 but they are bigger)...and the FT1 adapter with legacy lenses is unbeatable for telephoto. The camera is much smaller than it appears in photos.

5 upvotes
Mssimo
By Mssimo (Jan 3, 2013)

Re: Shunda77
Why you ask...Simple. Great quality lenses.

7-14mm f4 -equiv 14-24
12-35mm f2.8 -equiv 24-70
35-100 f2.8 -equiv 70-200
60mm f2.8 macro -equiv 120mm 2:1 Macro
12mm f2 -equiv 24mm
14mm f2.5 pancake -equiv 28mm
17mm f1.8 -equiv 34mm
20mm f1.7 -equiv 40mm
25mm f1.4 -equiv 50mm
45mm f1.8 -equiv 90mm
75mm f1.8 -equiv 150mm
17.5mm f0.95 -equiv 35mm
25mm f.095 -equiv 50mm
and in 2013
42.5mm f1.2 -equiv 85mm f1.2!
150mm f2.8 -equiv 300mm f1.2!
a handful of surprise lenses

Any Questions?

12 upvotes
bobbarber
By bobbarber (Jan 3, 2013)

@spike

How small?

I just looked at V1 reviews, since the V1 is cheap on Amazon. One review showed it next to one the E-PL models, and it looked to be pretty much the same size.

I shoot a GH2, and I can't see any reason to go to this system, except the telephoto that you mentioned. I use the Nikon 105 2.5 and Nikon 180 2.8 on the GH2 with nice results. A lot of legacy glass is unimpressive, but those two lenses are still as sharp as hell, even with a 2x crop factor. I'm not sure I need more than 2x.

4 upvotes
Raist3d
By Raist3d (Jan 3, 2013)

Better auto focus? Needs better lenses though

Comment edited 20 seconds after posting
0 upvotes
Shunda77
By Shunda77 (Jan 3, 2013)

"Any Questions?"

Nope, but I have a Nikon equivalent option for every lens you just mentioned for my superior APS-C sensor.
And now I can bolt a V2 to them as well.

0 upvotes
AmaturFotografer
By AmaturFotografer (Jan 3, 2013)

@Shunda77

"...I can't see why anyone would buy APS-C over full frame..."

It's the price. Before the Nikon D600(let's pretend Sony A850 doesn't even exist), the price gap between the cheapest FF and high end APS-C is quite significant.

I think Nikon did a right thing in lowering the price, to differentiate it from m4/3rd offerings, just like the APS-C vs FF thing.

0 upvotes
Gediminas 8
By Gediminas 8 (Jan 3, 2013)

Mssimo,

"42.5mm f1.2 -equiv 85mm f1.2!
150mm f2.8 -equiv 300mm f1.2!"

By what miracle does f/2.8 on m43 turn into f/1.2 on FF, or even stay the same f/1.2 as you write?

They must be putting some serious pills in those OM-D kits.

0 upvotes
jim stirling
By jim stirling (Jan 3, 2013)

'@Mssimo
I will fix the list for you , You remembered to double the effective focal length and forgot to double the effective aperture { regarding both DOF and total light hitting sensor}
7-14mm f4 -equiv 14-24 F8
12-35mm f2.8 -equiv 24-70 F5.6
35-100 f2.8 -equiv 70-200 F5.6
60mm f2.8 macro 120mm F5.6 1:1
12mm f2 -equiv 24mm F4
14mm f2.5 -equiv 28mm F5
17mm f1.8 -equiv 34mm F3.6
20mm f1.7 -equiv 40mm F3.4
25mm f1.4 -equiv 50mm F2.8
45mm f1.8 -equiv 90mm F3.6
75mm f1.8 -equiv 150mm F3.6
17.5mm f0.95 -equiv 35mm F1.9
25mm f.095 -equiv 50mm F1.9
42.5mm f1.2 -equiv 85mm F2.4
150mm f2.8 -equiv 300mm F5.6

Any questions,

And lest you get upset I have 2 GH3 bodies, the 12-35, 35-100 , 100-300 along with the 12mm,20mm 45mm,60mm primes. For Nikon I have the D800 aging D700 14-24,24-70,70-200 along with the new Sigma 35mm F1.4, 50mm F1.4 , 85mm F1.4 , 105mm macro and the 300mm F2.8 .So i have no system bias and many of the lenses you list

Comment edited 2 times, last edit 6 minutes after posting
1 upvote
Tord S Eriksson
By Tord S Eriksson (Jan 5, 2013)

Not the best at ISO 800, and above, but what a camera with longer Nikon lenses, as the 30-110, or, with the TF1, 50/1.4G, or the 85/1.8G!

0 upvotes
Woodlink
By Woodlink (Jan 3, 2013)

Plenty of chicks will buy it because of the "Kutcher" effect.

Comment edited 22 seconds after posting
1 upvote
MAKfoto
By MAKfoto (Jan 3, 2013)

I'm only interested in pictures taken from FT-1 adapter and 70-200 F4, 70-300 ,300 F4 AF-s ,400 2.8 and 300+TC14 E II mounted on it at ISOs from 800 to 1000 for the 2.7 crop factor range and if it is worth buying for longer reach in somewhat better IQ.
The CX sensor is small but larger than bridge zooms ,Nikon could have make it to micro four third size for better IQ but that's just Nikon ...
Will never buy as a standalone body and it's lens system, any high end level PnS Canon ,Fuji or Panasonic are much better IMO.

1 upvote
Robert Garcia NYC
By Robert Garcia NYC (Jan 3, 2013)

I think these are good image with good color and sharpness.

5 upvotes
CameraLabTester
By CameraLabTester (Jan 3, 2013)

There is something about this camera...

Is it the inflated price?

is it the tired and ugly ergonomic shape?

Is it the marketing hype trying to conjure up new adjectives?

...or something else.

"I have a bad feeling about this..." --- San Holo

.

6 upvotes
Tord S Eriksson
By Tord S Eriksson (Jan 5, 2013)

I think it looks sweet, but the sensor sucks!

0 upvotes
BBking83
By BBking83 (Jan 2, 2013)

I'm still trying to get my head around why a RAW converter was used to adjust JPEGs??

0 upvotes
tkbslc
By tkbslc (Jan 2, 2013)

Why would that be a problem? You can do non-destructive edits to JPEGs with most RAW editors, too.

1 upvote
BBking83
By BBking83 (Jan 3, 2013)

Well, either the original file was actually shot in RAW or it was JPEG. It's not really a problem but it would be nice to know it how the camera handles JPEGs.

If the original file is in fact a JPEG, then I guess I could say that it could handle the colours better.

If the original file is RAW, why not upload it?

That's all. I'm just interested.

1 upvote
HowaboutRAW
By HowaboutRAW (Jan 3, 2013)

BBking83:

In this case, "RAW conversions" means the photos were shot as raws and converted to jpegs.

"If the original file is RAW, why not upload it?" Because generally DPReview doesn't put raws up for download until Adobe Camera Raw will extract that particular raw file format.

However Imaging Resource usually posts raws from new cameras before DPReview.

1 upvote
BBking83
By BBking83 (Jan 3, 2013)

OK, thanks. BTW, does it say that anywhere on this site?

0 upvotes
Barney Britton
By Barney Britton (Jan 3, 2013)

"As well as 25 JPEG images we've also included four Raw conversions"

4 upvotes
BBking83
By BBking83 (Jan 3, 2013)

Well, I was referring to the "Because generally DPReview doesn't put raws up for download until Adobe Camera Raw will extract that particular raw file format."

Thanks Barney, I did read that. However that means there were 8 RAW conversions, not 4...

4 were enhanced, 4 were not.

So the others, are they straight-out-of-the-camera JPEGs?

Comment edited 1 minute after posting
0 upvotes
Barney Britton
By Barney Britton (Jan 3, 2013)

Yes. We never present processed JPEGs as samples. Only straight-from-camera JPEGs and JPEGs converted from Raw files.

1 upvote
HowaboutRAW
By HowaboutRAW (Jan 3, 2013)

BBking83:

This basic line has been posted in the DPReview comments several times by Barney Britton, I believe:

"'Because generally DPReview doesn't put raws up for download until Adobe Camera Raw will extract that particular raw file format.'"

0 upvotes
tkbslc
By tkbslc (Jan 2, 2013)

Funny thing, these Nikon V2 comments are very negative, just like the V1 comments at launch. Why? Because it's a $750 body! It's got to compete with Nikon's own D5200, Sony's A57 and Canon T4i. So when you look at the image quality in comparison it's a huge let down.

Now if you view more recent Nikon V1 comments in the forums, they are very positive and glowing. Why? Because the V1 kit was down under $350 recently. At that price, it is competing with cameras like the Canon G12 or two year old M4/3 closeouts and the AF speed and image quality is very attractive for the price.

Bottom line? Price makes all the difference.

33 upvotes
noss
By noss (Jan 2, 2013)

thatswhy i read very few comments... :)

3 upvotes
CameraLabTester
By CameraLabTester (Jan 3, 2013)

Market forces win.

Early buyers are screwed.

The world turns...

.

4 upvotes
slncezgsi
By slncezgsi (Jan 2, 2013)

I have seen enough very good photographs taken with Nikon V1 to believe that it is a camera with excellent white balance, VERY fast AF and sharp lenses. So any kind of bashing only shows basic inability to accept that something less than FX format may deliver great results even if ISO 3200 is not butter-smooth.

Right now is V1/J1 absolute bargain. V2 is trying to cash new users but I guess will come down in price eventually. And if few more lenses will come out it will be just sunshine and rainbows.

If this makes you said, than what you do if you accidentally peed against the wind?

7 upvotes
AbrasiveReducer
By AbrasiveReducer (Jan 4, 2013)

This whole discussion, if that's what it is, makes me said.

0 upvotes
Aroart
By Aroart (Jan 2, 2013)

Wow, some of your negative comments make you look real immature . Maybe you should go out and shot instead of ranking on every little comment. Theres a place in this world for all types of cameras not just the kind you think should be made.

1 upvote
tkbslc
By tkbslc (Jan 2, 2013)

It's 10 degrees and hazy outside. I'd rather stay inside, thanks.

0 upvotes
onlooker
By onlooker (Jan 3, 2013)

> Theres a place in this world for all types of cameras

Judging from the plummeting prices of the original Nikon 1s, apparently the world doesn't think so.

3 upvotes
Nerval
By Nerval (Jan 2, 2013)

Not bad given the size of the sensor. Shame the WB and NR cannot be adjusted in ACR...

Comment edited 5 minutes after posting
0 upvotes
HowaboutRAW
By HowaboutRAW (Jan 3, 2013)

Shame you're making judgements without raws.

1 upvote
Nerval
By Nerval (Jan 3, 2013)

It was a joke about DPReview samples processed with ACR...

The WB seems a bit off on most ACR processed shots and colours not so pleasing, which is of course a result of the settings used for conversion...

Of course you can adjust WB and NR while converting raws...

Shame you do not have a sense of humour =P (just joking happened to me before, not catching the note)

The first night scene, for instance has much better colour balance on the camera jpeg than on the ACR-processed one. And that's down to DPR not adjusting the WB.

Comment edited 2 times, last edit 4 minutes after posting
0 upvotes
Revenant
By Revenant (Jan 3, 2013)

DPR always use the default settings when doing raw conversions.

0 upvotes
HowaboutRAW
By HowaboutRAW (Jan 5, 2013)

Nerval:

Then why not simply be straight forward and say you don't like the WB in the jpegs? Some of the jpegs were in camera, so that would be a problem with the camera's WB and some of the jpegs were done with a beta of ACR 7.

And still you appeared to be making judgements about the camera and image quality.

Why bother without raws, and if you care about in camera jpegs then wait a at least a few months after the camera ships.

0 upvotes
Nerval
By Nerval (Jan 7, 2013)

Gosh... I said WB from jpeg was better than from Raw...

If you prefer : DPR always use defaults in order not too discriminate.

But in the raw that they processed with ACR, the WB is Off...

That happens with ACR, the Recorded WB is not always read correctly by the software.

Adjusting it to the correct level, in my opinion is not being biased as many other camera's metadata are read correctly by ACR, thus giving the 'correct' (I mean as recorded by the camera) WB.

In these samples, the ones converted by ACR are less pleasing sometimes, and it is mainly down to not adjusting the WB and colours.

Why not be straight forward? Jjust a touch of humour usually does not harm anyone. We don't always have the same sense of humour, which is all right.

0 upvotes
Nerval
By Nerval (Jan 7, 2013)

To HowaboutRAW

Please, read my post, when I am being straitforward, before writing a response....

"The WB seems a bit off on most ACR processed shots"

Yes I had already specified on ACR processed shots.
Which given his comment, Revenant had understood on his first reading. So I do not think the way I express my ideas is in cause here...

0 upvotes
eddie_cam
By eddie_cam (Jan 2, 2013)

Why not upload the raw files. Would amazon go bust when doing so ...? ;-)

1 upvote
HowaboutRAW
By HowaboutRAW (Jan 5, 2013)

Do you have a version of ACR 7 that will extract Nikon 1 v2 raws?

Or were you going to use an updated Capture NX 2?

(I don't think the latter is very good, and don't really feel like paying for it, particularly since I have Photoshop CS6.)

0 upvotes
Total comments: 226
12