The full frame sensor will come when the Nikon DSLR's start becoming mirrorless.

bgbs:

Then those bodies won't be SLRs.

Nikon already has a body and lenses which could readily take an APSC sensor. And electronics. The Nikonos V.

I have never had an underwater watchpiece which leaked, and some of those had shaft operated internal divetime rings. So, static vs. dynamic pressures have nothing to do with sealing abilities at great depths, where the sealing components are solidly pressed against the casing. The problems one might experience would more likely come from improperly cleaned / maintained seal system, or some careless assembling of the device.

thanks but is there waterproof filter besides the official accessory? in Nikon site it said using the official filter and the lens will not be shockproof
can't understand why and a great concern to me

Probably best to ask Nikon for clarification on that. But at a guess, it seems most likely that setup isn't considered shockproof simply because the filter won't be. They have a bad habit of breaking when dropped.

I am still shooting more film than digital and a slow flash sync is not an issue with everyday photos. But try freezing fish or wobbling see weed at 1/60

Exactly what I'm talking about, thank you for proving my point. Its the only mirrorless waterproof that shoots RAW, so preorder it and hope it doesn't leak ...but even if it does leak, that doesn't matter because it shoots RAW? Awesome.

AW1 is a nice try but lots need to improve, it need to be smaller and lighter, have F2 lens, with IS and at least 300 shot battery life. I would keep using my TG-2 for now

Jefftan–

The thing about jpegs, isn’t simply pixel peeping. It’s lack of colour, exposure and white balance control.

Yes, for a small jpeg only camera, that Olympus is good at ISO 400 and below. However being able to pocket a jpeg only camera means usually something other than high image quality.

I agree that Nikon would be best to release waterproofed versions of the faster 1 series lenses; there’s an F1.8 and F1.2. I assume Nikon will make waterproofed versions of these lenses, once this waterproofed 1 series body starts to sell.

Despite the fact that the Olympus has an F2.0 lens, and the fastest waterproofed 1 series lens announced is F2.8, the Nikon body has a much bigger sensor, which can easily be used at ISO 3200+ and of course the Nikon shoots raw.

Sadly Olympus was lazy with the TG series, and the sad irony is that when Olympus decides to Olympus makes much better lenses than anything from Nikon.

HowaboutRAW , I understand your pount. at first I am excited too but than I realize lens lose 1 stop, no IS lose at least 1 stop or more. than with at least 2 stop loss, how much better in low light really. again nice first try but at leats IS must be added to make it worthy for the extra size
not using the 10-30mm VR as kit is a serious mistake in my opinion

Photoexpo:

Note the “?” after “reborn”.

Photoexpo:

Note the “?” after “reborn”.

Have you not had a tomapple yet? They're delicious..... :)

I still find it hard to believe that it actually works fine at 15m. Bayonet allowing interchangeable lenses is a very bad thing to have at 15 meters in a small camera.

TFD--

I'll bet that Nikon develops more waterproof versions of already existing normal 1 series lenses once this tough variation starts to sell.

And then read what wolfie says above.

Wolfie: exactly when, or how, will you change lenses under water, or even above water between plunges? Very likely, the camera must be bathed in distilled water and allowed to dry considerable time first. The battery chamber seals might be finnicky, or apt to fail, after months' wear and tear. The water pressure tolerance might vanish, or the warranty void, after a few 6' falls. Or do wet hands never fail? Reviewers are apt to "baby" the camera, or submerge it only once, whereas a real world test would expose it to multiple stresses. $1,500 is a lot to put at risk if mere $250 sealed lens versions have a rather high failure rate. Or will it be proof enough to see Ashton Kutcher pose with the camera on a beach?

jkock2--

Look my local public ocean beach, you know with life guards, has fresh water showers.

So after using the camera in the surf, it's simple enough to rinse the camera off in the showers. Distilled water is not an absolute necessity.

Then without access to fresh running water, well you have to find a source of clean fresh water and those are kind of important for survival so it's likely something you'll have. (Guess in the middle of the desert, starved for water, you may decide to forego rinsing the camera before a lens change.)

And no, I've not forgotten that the camera and lens needs dry before the swap.

So, assuming no major manufacturing defect, this camera and the lenses will likely sell well for Nikon--unless say Panasonic announces something very similar next week.

Or of course you don't have to change the lens immediately, simply wait until in a clean and dry environment, like a car.

drewski70:

Many beach showers are out in the open, so take all the selfies you want.

Anyhow why take your beach clothes off to shower. Wash the salt out of them too.

Not suggesting you put your Olympus directly under the showerhead.

The point was reasonably clean fresh water.

calking--

Do you have any idea how much some people spend on camera gear, this is a tiny amount of money for some, particularly if you're say spending $14,000 on a family vacation.

jkoch2:

Sorry, but for a basic family of 4 in the US $14,000 is not a lot of money for a 2 week vacation. (That it can be done cheaper is a different question.)

The vacation you're describing is going to cost a lot more than that, a lot.

You've confused a couple with some money to spend on a vacation for the family, with some very rich family.

Don't forget, vacations oft include, airfare, car rental, sightseeing (like learning to scuba dive or sailing), hotels, meals, basic traveler's insurance, etc and no hair styling, so that's pretty easy to add up to $14000.

EVF useless for underwater or action shots. Even an LCD can be useless. Ergo, a GoPro lacks even an LCD. Shoot wide and WYSIWYG. AKA P&S.

Not planning to go underwater with it. Just wanted a rugged compact raw camera with EVF/OVF for outdoor use.

A standard hot shoe there would have saved the day though because I can put my Voigtlander 28mm OVF there. But knowing that Nikon 1 system has its proprietary hotshoe, this will never happen.

Rear LCD just doesn't work for me somehow. I've given it many honest tries.

LOL . . . but how about those times that it might get accidentally submerged . . . like taking it out for a canoe ride where you might go for an accidental swim . . . :)

Not hardcore enough for me. Not saying you said hardcore.

I don't think Nikon had the notion this would "save" their mirrorless. I also don't think there's the global demand for a waterproof IL CC you might think there is. Fact is, the overwhelming amount of recreational photographers don't reach for a waterproof camera to go play in bad weather. Sports buffs aren't going to use it during play. It's a niche item. Cool, sure, but niche.

Where you try ? at the pool or at the sea ? and what is the depth ?
Give more info

Given the fact that the Nikon 1-J3 sells for $250 why are they bringing out more new models? I thought Nikon announced they were to seriously rethink their Nikon 1 line due to poor sales most of which the decline in their sales was due to decline in Nikon 1 sales.

Their Digital Nikonos was plagued by leaking, flooding, corroded electronics...

AbusiveReader:

I already raised the point that Nikon was not the originator, in a reply OldArrow explained in detail that yes the first design came from somewhere else, but then Nikon spent years doing modifications and different versions of the camera bodies and lenses.

Do they give warranty for the leak proof ?

forsakenbliss:

Nikon shipped a digital Nikonos, when and for how long? There was an AF Nikonos.

Rod McD:

Reread the big F stop light gathering mistake in the original post--the OP confused DOF with light gathering.

Battesea,

Silly me I missed that huge mistake by the OP.

There's also that not-so-insignificant kick to the groin the rumored Sony FF NEX will cost. Can't wait to see all these Sony FF NEX fanboys taking $4000 worth of ILC into the sea to shoot little fishies. lmao

As an accomplished D800 user I know all about RAW.
As far as increasing shutter speed, that's hard to do without running the ISO way up on such a small sensor so that the results become, well, less than tolerable.

And yes I was part of that world before auto sensor/lens stabilization and one of the cures was fast glass, which none of these AW compacts have (even f/2.8 is not so fast), along with a flash, otherwise the picture was just not attempted.

If there ever was a place where VR would be beneficial, this has to be it.

jhinkey--

And with this Nikon 1 system you really can use ISO 6400. So don't be so quick to dismiss this system. This is very good in lowlight, probably better than a D800. (I guess Aptina may know something Sony doesn't) So yep you can increase shutter speeds to fix blur.

See this is one of the few cameras where the listed top ISO is actually useable, yes I'm sure, and yes you'll need to shoot raw.

@abrasive== so true, but then there'd be no reason to get the upcoming AW2 which would have that useful feature, for a price.

I think your comment was exactly right. This is a great camera for people who occasionally drop their camera. I, for one, never plan to drop the camera, so I rarely have the waterproof housing on when it happens.

AS far as HA RAW claiming the ISO 6400 will be better than the D800, I can't imagine that will be true. (No matter how much you like grain...)

I have not used either, so I can't say for sure, but there are some laws of physics to deal with. Also, about a hundred thousand camera reviews from people who know a lot about image quality.

Faster AF, maybe.

Low Budget Dave:

Well I have raw samples from both.

And the D800 is shadow noisy above ISO3200.

Guess you always print from D800 files at a resolution beyond 300 dpi.

And it's not like the Nikon 1s are noise free at ISO6400, they're just producing useable files, which is stretch for the D800.

HA Raw: I looked up some samples from the DP review of each, and the D800 completely buries the V1 at every ISO.

The color is similar at 6400, but only in JPG. In Raw, the chroma noise on the V1 is overwhelming. The resolution on the D800 is outstanding, even at 6400, while the V1 is only usable for telephone-size screens.

I admit that a lot of people are obsessed with sharpness, and miss out on the artistic look that can be obtained from the V1. In addition, the V1 might deliver better images for hacks like me, because of the blazing fast AF. (Also, since it is smaller, I might actually have it with me, if I bought one.)

But for sharpness, dynamic range, color, and low-light capability, the D800 is hard to beat. If your V1 works better, then there is a chance that your D800 needs service.