Previous page Next page

Nikon 1 V3 Review

July 2014 | By Eugene Lee
Buy on GearShop$1,196.95

Since the original 1 V1, AF and continuous shooting speed have been a standout feature in Nikon's mirrorless offering for users who want interchangeable lens versatility in a small form factor. The 1 V3 makes a large step toward being a true enthusiast-oriented camera with the addition of features such as twin control dials, two customizable function buttons (a third if using the add-on grip) and a new 18MP 1"-type sensor with no AA filter. Add to that a high-performance hybrid contrast and phase detect AF system, a new Expeed 4A processor, and you have a very capable camera for most shooting situations.

The obvious change from last year's 1 V2 is the loss of the built-in electronic viewfinder, which is now an optional extra. Also available as add-ons are a DSLR-like grip and an adapter ring to attach any F-mount lens. This modular approach allows users to build-up or strip down the V3 to their liking - this should boost its appeal to enthusiasts (although for U.S. buyers, the only option is to buy the kit with EVF and grip). However, at the same time, the V3 still has many 'creative' modes that simulate various art filters and a 'live preview' scene control mode for beginners to blur background or stop action without having to learn aperture or shutter speed numbers.

The V1's cumbersome access to key settings annoyed many enthusiasts. While the V2 addressed some of those issues, it still felt like Nikon could do better with the V-series for serious shooters given the J- and S-series cameras were clearly aimed at people stepping up from smartphones and compacts. The question for the V3 is: Does it now provide enough direct control, customization and image quality to make advanced users give the 1-series a second look?

Nikon 1 V3 key features

  • 18.4MP 1"-type CMOS sensor, no AA filter
  • Hybrid AF with 171 contrast-detect and 105 phase-detect points
  • 20 fps with continuous AF and subject tracking
  • Raw file capture
  • 3" tilting touchscreen with 1.04M dots
  • 1080/60p video capture
  • Wi-Fi connectivity with remote control via app

The new sensor and AF system are the headline features of the V3. The V3's 18.4MP CX-format CMOS sensor is a bump up from the 14.2MP found in the V2. It also lacks an anti-aliasing (low-pass) filter that potentially gives the V3 sharper, more detailed images. Along with the sensor, the new Expeed 4A processor enables the V3 to shoot 20 fps in full-time continuous autofocus mode - even when shooting Raw files - and an astounding 60 fps in single focus mode.

Nikon's 1-series from the beginning had one of the fastest AF systems found in mirrorless cameras. The V3 is no different. It uses a hybrid system, combining 171 contrast and 105 phase detection areas. In comparison, the V2 had 135 and 73 respective areas. The phase-detect areas cover almost 100% of the frame, making the Sony a6000 with its hybrid AF system the V3's only serious competitor in this respect. With high fps and quick AF speed, the V3 has the chops for shooting fast action, whether it be sports or a spontaneous moments with kids.

The V3 can now shoot 1080/60p full-HD video with the ability to capture full resolution still images during recording. There's also a high-speed option and slow-motion capture ability at 120 fps at 720p.

And in what is becoming a standard feature on many new cameras, Wi-Fi is now built-in (no NFC). You can transfer images to your smartphone or control the camera remotely using Nikon's Wireless Mobile Utility app.

Key specs compared

Finding a direct rival to the V3 is tough. The Sony a6000 is the nearest competitor in terms of AF performance. The Panasonic Lumix DMC-GM1 and Samsung NX Mini are some interchangeable lens cameras that are physically smaller than the V3. Meanwhile the Sony Cyber-shot DSC-RX1000 III is the benchmark 1"-type sensor camera for image quality and its built-in lens is brighter than the Nikon's kit zoom.

 
Nikon 1 V3
Sony a6000
Panasonic GM1
Sony RX100 III
Effective Pixels  • 18MP • 24 MP  • 16MP  • 21MP
ISO Range  • 160-12800

• 100-25600

 • 200-25600  • 125-12800
AF System

• Hybrid contrast and phase detect

• Hybrid contrast and phase detect

 • Contrast detect  • Contrast detect
Screen • 3"
• 1,037,000 dots
• 3"
• 921,600 dots
 • 3"
 • 1,036,800 dots
 • 3"
 • 1,228,800 dots
Sensor Size • 1"-type
• (13.2 x 8.8 mm)

• APS-C
• (23.5 x 15.6 mm)

• Four Thirds
• (17.3 x 13 mm)
• 1"-type
• (13.2 x 8.8 mm)
Built-in flash • Yes • Yes •  Yes •  Yes
Continuous drive • 20 fps continuous AF
• 60 fps single AF
• 11 fps continuous AF • 5 fps • 10 fps
Storage • microSD
• SD  • SD  • SD
Weight (inc batteries) • 381 g (0.84 lb) • 344 g (0.76 lb)  • 204 g (0.45 lb)  • 290 g (0.64 lb)
Dimensions • 111 x 65 x 33 mm
(4.37 x 2.56 x 1.3")
• 120 x 67 x 45 mm (4.72 x 2.64 x 1.77")

• 99 x 55 x 30 mm (3.88 x 2.16 x 1.2")

• 102 x 58 x 41 mm (4.02 x 2.28 x 1.61")

Wi-Fi • Built-in • Built-in • Built-in • Built-in

Optional accessories

When the grip is attached to the camera it adds a shutter button, another front command dial, and third custom function button.

The GR-N1010 grip and DF-N1000 electronic viewfinder are included in the US V3 kit. They are sold separately in the UK and Europe.

Kit options and pricing

In the US, a V3 kit with the 1 Nikkor VR 10-30mm F3.5-5.6 PD-Zoom lens, DF-N1000 electronic viewfinder and the GR-N1010 grip is available for $1,199.95. The 1 Nikkor VR 10-30mm F3.5-5.6 PD-Zoom and the 1 Nikkor VR 70-300mm F4.5-5.6 lenses are also available for $299.95 and $999.95 respectively. An FT-1 mount adapter is also available for $239.95.

In the UK and Europe the V3 will sell for £799.99/€949 with the 10-30mm lens only. The kit with 10-30mm lens, EVF and grip will be available for £1049.99/€1249. The FT-1 mount adapter will sell for £229.99/€279.


If you're new to digital photography you may wish to read the Digital Photography Glossary before diving into this article (it may help you understand some of the terms used).

Conclusion / Recommendation / Ratings are based on the opinion of the reviewer, you should read the ENTIRE review before coming to your own conclusions.

We recommend to make the most of this review you should be able to see the difference (at least) between X,Y and Z and ideally A,B and C.

This article is Copyright 2014 and may NOT in part or in whole be reproduced in any electronic or printed medium without prior permission from the author.

Previous page Next page
61
I own it
65
I want it
20
I had it
Discuss in the forums

Comments

Total comments: 625
1234
beavertown
By beavertown (2 months ago)

The V1 and J1 produce better IQ than this 1200 bucks wannabe Leica toy.

2 upvotes
brownie314
By brownie314 (2 months ago)

That my be true, but they all suck compared to the latest generation m4/3 sensors. I think 1" is interesting, but, until they can get IQ up, I think 1" should be in the lower cost catagory. I can't imagine Nikon will move a lot of these (after the initial rush of pent up demand from existing N1 users).

4 upvotes
nerd2
By nerd2 (2 months ago)

Actually BSI 1" sensors (RX series and NX mini) show comparable images to non-BSI m43 sensors.

3 upvotes
beavertown
By beavertown (2 months ago)

@ brownie314

The problem is Nikon, they don't want to make a better sensor for the N1 system.

The choose Aptina deliberately instead of choosing Sony or Toshiba.

2 upvotes
john Clinch
By john Clinch (2 months ago)

Hmmm maybe they need a sensor with onchip phase detect AF

2 upvotes
brownie314
By brownie314 (2 months ago)

nerd2 - yes, I was refering to the Nikon 1" sensors from Aptina. I know the Sonys are better.
beavertown - I agree - Nikon may do better with the N1 system if they would just buy the 1" sensor from Sony. The problem is, they may not get the AF speed and FPS speed with the Sony sensor. But, I think the V3 is a niche product anyway. Way too expensive for what it does.

0 upvotes
rpm40
By rpm40 (2 months ago)

I still see a noticeable gap in IQ between the 1" and 4/3 sensors- at least as much as the gap between m4/3 and aps-c, but generally more. In the comparison tool, the Nikon and the Rx100iii both seem almost 2 stops behind a typical m4/3, say the em10 (which surprises me, since the current gen m4/3 sensors are almost 2 years old now).

Also, I agree with the earlier poster- WOW does raw make a difference on this cam.

0 upvotes
brownie314
By brownie314 (2 months ago)

rpm40 - I thought so too, but I don't have the technical numbers handy to back up what I am seeing.

0 upvotes
ryan2007
By ryan2007 (2 months ago)

The Cons to the review make this a deal breaker. A proprietary Hot Shoe, that was what the Minolta Film cameras used to be like and the selling point for Nikon Over Canon and Minolta at the time was how backwards compatible Nikon is.

With Fuji X, Sony, micro four thirds out there I think Nikon is banking on current Nikon users or just name recognition in the name Nikon that people will buy it just because of the name and being brand loyal is a #1 mistake and hand in hand with being emotionally attached to gear.

I also think just because others have a mirrorless camera they want a piece of that pie.

1 upvote
disraeli demon
By disraeli demon (2 months ago)

I've tried a V3 in store and it finally seemed to answer all the handling issues I'd had with previous V series cameras. I loved the body design, the feel of it, the snappy response... but the fact is, I don't use tracking focus that much and I don't need those high burst rates. I use a Panasonic GX7 that's much cheaper, has a bigger sensor, built-in EVF, IBIS, better noise and DR, proper hot shoe and has a huge selection of lenses (which are pretty small - I own five primes covering 24mm to 90mm FF equivalent, and with one on the camera I can comfortably fit the other four into the leg pockets of my cargo pants). With careful shopping, the whole shebang cost me about the same as the RRP of the V3 plus 32mm (and I know that's not comparing like with like, but I think it does demonstrate how disproportionate Nikon's initial pricing is, especially when you see how badly the Sony 1" sensor shows theirs up.)

Comment edited 12 minutes after posting
6 upvotes
HowaboutRAW
By HowaboutRAW (2 months ago)

disraeli demon:

While the dynamic range on the GX7 is better, noise with the Panasonic is not great above ISO 3200, so similar to the Nikon.

And put PanaLeica lenses on that GX7, and the cost goes up a good bit, so too image quality. (Okay, I see you acknowledge your comparison is not like for like, but try to see beyond the pricing of the Nikon.)

0 upvotes
b craw
By b craw (2 months ago)

Ryan 2007:

For its fairly small body (for APS-C) one might NX300 also include in terms of competition, and of course the NX mini. Compare the image quality of the NX300 to the Nikon (low ISO jpeg, high ISO raw) and the Samsung runs circles around it.

But, I do understand that AF speed and overall performance are to be the selling point with this Nikon. It is just that I expect more than the softness this model offers with a 1" sensor (result of kit lens?); other 1" sensor cameras do much better. At $1300 this just seems a big pill of a compromise to swallow.

Comment edited 3 minutes after posting
1 upvote
b craw
By b craw (2 months ago)

$1200 - sorry, my mistake.

0 upvotes
HowaboutRAW
By HowaboutRAW (2 months ago)

b craw:

The better 18.5mm lens improves the IQ a good bit with this Nik-One V3.

The Samsung NXmini on the other hand has a very good kitzoom--though it doesn't have the frame rate and AF of the Nik-One system and not many lenses either.

0 upvotes
brownie314
By brownie314 (2 months ago)

Yup - I shot 2 N1 bodies for over a year before I sold everything. They just don't do well in low light. Even with the 18.5 prime. I bright light they are OK, but that is not what I do most of the time.

Comment edited 2 times, last edit 3 minutes after posting
0 upvotes
HowaboutRAW
By HowaboutRAW (2 months ago)

brownie314:

I assume you shot raw.

But what I don't understand is why if you wanted a lowlight camera you'd not get something with a bigger sensor, with less pixel density?

It's not like the sensor in the Sony RX100 or RX100 is a great lowlight sensor, now that latter may be better than the first of these Nik-One series bodies.

Comment edited 2 times, last edit 12 minutes after posting
0 upvotes
brownie314
By brownie314 (2 months ago)

HowaboutRAW - yup, always shot raw.
Well, I was shooting in conditions that I didnt really consider low light until I got the N1 system. It was indoors, but day time with light streaming in through several windows. But still, if ISO had to be higher than 800 to maintain shutter speed - it was trouble.
Also, my 2 N1 bodies had this weird color to them that was hard to get rid of. Kinda yellowish. I tried hard as h@ll with grey cards and hours dorking around with colors in post - but it was a nagging problem. Ended up a lot of times just converting to B&W.

0 upvotes
HowaboutRAW
By HowaboutRAW (2 months ago)

brownie314:

Okay.

I think the lowlight performance has improved.

Comment edited 11 minutes after posting
0 upvotes
brownie314
By brownie314 (2 months ago)

HowaboutRAW - I hope they also figured out what color profiles work with this sensor.

0 upvotes
Saldahna
By Saldahna (2 months ago)

I wonder how many of you guys have seriuosley tried to use the V3 and other cameras of the V series. I'm a SLR Shooter but my D800 and the holy trinity stay more an more at home, or will be used for Landscapes. Please try this camera by yourself before you judge.I've tried the Sony A6000 but the back screen is like a mirror....and the Lenses are to big. I want something small with power. That is the V3 with EVF and Grip. I love my DSLR but I also love these small V series cameras.

15 upvotes
HMeYe
By HMeYe (2 months ago)

I'm 100% with u ... tried the A6000 and didn't like it ... People on the net like to do the bashing about the Nikon 1 system without knowing the power of this system ....
and this is Y I love the Nikon 1 system : https://hmeye.wordpress.com/2014/03/25/why-i-love-the-nikon-1-system/

5 upvotes
disraeli demon
By disraeli demon (2 months ago)

Oh drat... I tried to reply to this and for some reason it's appeared as a reply to Ryan2007's comment above. Basically, tried the V3 and was really impressed, but M4/3 gave me better features and IQ for a lower price with a much better selection of lenses. If I really needed tracking focus, it might be a different story.

Comment edited 36 seconds after posting
0 upvotes
b craw
By b craw (2 months ago)

Saldahna:

I respect your point; a camera can definitely transcend snap judgments if one handles it and experiences it in terms of performance. And, I try not to overemphasize image quality tests as they may be proven deceptive in actual use. But, man, these images do not look acceptable to me for a $1200 camera. But I should look into other sites testing before declaring that definitively.

Comment edited 2 times, last edit 12 minutes after posting
3 upvotes
b craw
By b craw (2 months ago)

Of course that price includes the EVF and grip. And, I have to say, it is a pretty handsome camera with those two elements attached.

0 upvotes
Fotogeneticist
By Fotogeneticist (2 months ago)

Take a look at Imaging Resource's test shots. They are much better... however, Nikon's JPEGs are terrible. RAW is the way to go with this camera--which works for me. They seriously need to do a firmware upgrade to improve their JPEG engine from the start. In the images on this site, at ISO 1600, the Nikon V3 RAW images look sharper than the Sony RX 100 Mk III RAW images.

3 upvotes
Jonathan F/2
By Jonathan F/2 (2 months ago)

I'm a hardcore Nikon DSLR shooter and I'm going to have to disagree. If you want a well-rounded mirrorless system M43 is the way to go. It doesn't have the continuous focusing of the Nikon 1, but for everything else M43 is just a better system overall. And yes, I did try going all in with the Nikon 1 for my mirrorless system and I eventually sold everything to go back to M43. The biggest drawback is the Nikon 1 sensor, it's just not very good.

2 upvotes
mpgxsvcd
By mpgxsvcd (2 months ago)

This is a great camera for someone who doesn't know what a great camera is.

23 upvotes
Geomaticsman
By Geomaticsman (2 months ago)

Exactly. It's hard to understand why Nikon would develop a premium priced system around a series (1) of cameras with such a poor performing sensor. Heck, any of Nikon's entry-level DSLRs will run rings around this puppy.

2 upvotes
viking79
By viking79 (2 months ago)

What is poor performing? None of Nikon's pro cameras can shoot at the frame rate this can: 20 fps with continuous focus or 60 fps focus locked (full resolution). This is by far the best performing sensor on the market for frame rate. I imagine it gives up a little image quality to achieve this performance. Everything is a trade off.

4 upvotes
Geomaticsman
By Geomaticsman (2 months ago)

My apologies for not being clear: I was talking in terms of IQ. FPS and all the other hyped up metrics are useless if the IQ isn't up to snuff, which it isn't.

9 upvotes
Robert Peters
By Robert Peters (2 months ago)

Wow. Maybe that's why I no longer own a D700 and D800.

0 upvotes
oselimg
By oselimg (2 months ago)

A lot of people on this forum also don't take pictures bu take gear.

0 upvotes
calking
By calking (2 months ago)

@ oselimg:
Perfectly stated.

0 upvotes
Kay Fisher
By Kay Fisher (2 months ago)

I was excited to see the V1 but couldn't understand or live without bracketing.
I watched for firmware update for bracketing but...
Then the V2 came out - still no bracketing..
Then the V3 came out and still no bracketing and now they took off the viewfinder.
Go figure.

6 upvotes
Fotogeneticist
By Fotogeneticist (2 months ago)

I agree completely. Bracketing is huge, especially when limited by dynamic range. Is it that hard to do this?

Here's another thing I've been waiting for in the V series: Creative Lighting System compatibility. Without off camera flash capability, a camera is in the point and shoot category. The ability to control lighting is one of the things that I think separates a camera suitable for professional use from a point and shoot (manual control being the most important feature of a pro camera, of course).
I can still work with the camera, but it would really be helpful if Nikon would listen up to its most faithful supporters and start including some of these basic features, otherwise, Nikon will continue to lose them. I'm on the fence now on this V3.

2 upvotes
chadley_chad
By chadley_chad (2 months ago)

Same reason why I never went with the D3000 series .... Great little low cost camera, ruined by not having something as simple as bracketing. Stupid!

2 upvotes
Richard Murdey
By Richard Murdey (2 months ago)

Bracketing is for the belt-and-suspenders crowd. A useless waste of shutter actuations, battery life, and storage resources.

1 upvote
Fotogeneticist
By Fotogeneticist (2 months ago)

For those of us who shoot high DR images (>11 stops DR), bracketing is VERY useful, and this camera, with it's limited dynamic range in the shadows makes it a requirement for some photographs. I often use the setting sun in my landscapes and even with my D700, used exposure blending to capture it simultaneously while capturing foreground detail. Bracketing is VERY useful for landscape photographers who want to go beyond the limitations of digital sensors. http://www.pbase.com/atmabini/image/111165379

2 upvotes
Richard Murdey
By Richard Murdey (2 months ago)

@Fotogeneticist Yes sure, HDR. I mean apart for that or similar niche applications. General photography, there's really no need.

1 upvote
Fotogeneticist
By Fotogeneticist (2 months ago)

Richard, just for the record, I don't wear belt-and-suspenders. ;-)

0 upvotes
chadley_chad
By chadley_chad (2 months ago)

@richard Murdey .... No idea what that comment is supposed to mean but its clear your the sort that sticks your £90 camera on auto and snaps away. For those more creative, bracketing in most cases is essential. You should investigate it before knocking it!

0 upvotes
Just a Photographer
By Just a Photographer (2 months ago)

IMHO Nikon doesn't want to eat its own tail.
They don't dare to compete against their own DSLR's
That's why they don't take mirrorless cameras serious.

But I think its better to eat your own tail, then to be eaten by your competitors.

10 upvotes
new boyz
By new boyz (2 months ago)

They wait for Canon to make the real move. M series is not a serious attempt. Also true for Canon.

1 upvote
km25
By km25 (2 months ago)

Nikon, join the mirrorless club with a real camera, APS-C or FF. You still make MF lens! People who want small cameras want pocket cameras, they can careless about any of the mirrorless feachers. Nikon would be able to make an A7, with lens already-ready. Dump the V series.

5 upvotes
Michael_13
By Michael_13 (2 months ago)

There's always something utterly idiotic about these Nikons:
V1 had a crippled mode dial this one has fiddly micro SD.

I'd really like to meet the guy at Nikon who is coming up with these "features".
;-)

12 upvotes
Sonyshine
By Sonyshine (2 months ago)

I think he works for Canon ;)

8 upvotes
Eddy M
By Eddy M (2 months ago)

Smack him! :)

2 upvotes
Sonyshine
By Sonyshine (2 months ago)

He may be a 'she'.....

3 upvotes
DaytonR
By DaytonR (2 months ago)

Gosh who would have seen that one coming ...micro SD card slot , thats a surprise , micro SD cards are quite adorable though ! :)

0 upvotes
AbrasiveReducer
By AbrasiveReducer (2 months ago)

Except for image quality, sounds like a great camera.

9 upvotes
Black Box
By Black Box (2 months ago)

Other than that, how was the play, Mrs.Lincoln?

8 upvotes
mcshan
By mcshan (2 months ago)

Black and Abrasive, Enjoyed both your comments and in different ways you each nailed the value of IQ. Even the strongest Nikon defenders would have to admit it appears IQ could have been much better. The bad IQ and foolish choice of micro SD would keep me away from this camera.

0 upvotes
falconeyes
By falconeyes (2 months ago)

> Except for image quality, sounds like a great camera.

Except for image quality, a recent smart phone sounds like an even greater camera...

Comment edited 31 seconds after posting
1 upvote
ThePhilips
By ThePhilips (2 months ago)

DPR, now you are obliged to at least test IQ of the Samsung NX Mini.

0 upvotes
Barney Britton
By Barney Britton (2 months ago)

We have until recently only had access to the 9mm lens for that camera... but it's on the list.

1 upvote
dpmaxwell
By dpmaxwell (2 months ago)

Strange. You only have had access to the 9mm lens. DPReview's parent company - amazon.com - tells me I could get an NX Mini with a 9-27mm lens by Friday with free shipping, or tomorrow if I were willing to pay an additional $3.99.

LOL

4 upvotes
ThePhilips
By ThePhilips (2 months ago)

@dpmaxwell, who know how DPR wants to test the camera. Theoretically they can put an NX adapter on it and use the same lens they use for the bigger NX cameras. But probably it doesn't work for whatever reason. Or Samsung simply hasn't supplied the adapter.

0 upvotes
Sonyshine
By Sonyshine (2 months ago)

For those Americans moaning that the V3 is expensive at $1200 USD just bear in mind that the V3 (incl EVF and grip ) in the UK is £1049 or at todays exchange rate $1797 USD.

If the V3 kit was sold at the equivalent of $1200 USD in the UK - £700 it would sell very well indeed!

Enjoy your low priced camera! :))

4 upvotes
pacnwhobbyist
By pacnwhobbyist (2 months ago)

So it's even more of a rip-off in the UK than it is here?

13 upvotes
Sonyshine
By Sonyshine (2 months ago)

It won't sell well in the UK at current prices I noticed that someone was selling the V3 with lens at £700 on Amazon today - so prices are falling, once they do fall to sensible levels the V3 will sell - but not until prices do fall.

0 upvotes
Just a Photographer
By Just a Photographer (2 months ago)

There are far better mirrorless camera's available for $1200,00...

6 upvotes
HowaboutRAW
By HowaboutRAW (2 months ago)

Just a Photographer:

Not with this AF speed and frame rate there aren't.

Sony A6000 is starting to approach these capacities. But then there are the native Nex lenses to deal with. Unlike the A6000, these 1 bodies are nearly silent too.

So yes, it is expensive.

Not all of the lenses are excellent, though none are bad, unlike some Nex lenses, which are to be avoided.

Comment edited 3 minutes after posting
0 upvotes
kangoo1707
By kangoo1707 (2 months ago)

@HowaboutRAW: do u have problems with SEL lens? why are you bashing Sony all the time. OP didn't even mention Sony

0 upvotes
BarnET
By BarnET (2 months ago)

Why don't we compare the best both systems have to offer and throw Fuji in the same mix.

Sony a6000 + fe 55mm f1.8
Fuji xe-2 + 56mm f1.2
Nikon v3 32mm f1.2

I have a feeling the nikon gets raped in resolution

0 upvotes
HowaboutRAW
By HowaboutRAW (2 months ago)

BarnET:

First why bring up APSC sensored systems?

Comment edited 2 minutes after posting
0 upvotes
HowaboutRAW
By HowaboutRAW (2 months ago)

kangoo1707:

Pay attention to why I brought up the A6000.

No, the Sony Nex lenses mostly aren't very good.

Generally the Sony A system lenses are a good bit better.

0 upvotes
marc petzold
By marc petzold (2 months ago)

Sadly, some ppl just don't get it - the V3 isn't the ideal system camera for everyone - but for some people it'll do way fine it's job, it wasn't designed for ppl looking for the best IQ & the lowest price, of course. For instance - i'm way happy with my older V1 Nikon 1, the sensor isn't great "says DXOMark", so goes the same for the Lumix G1 - and i've made good pictures with both of them, technical specs, facts are one thing - and the other half, or truth is, what you'd make out of it. Good light, i'd consider to go out and make photographs, instead of discussing this thing here.

Comment edited 2 minutes after posting
8 upvotes
pacnwhobbyist
By pacnwhobbyist (2 months ago)

Do you really think the $1300 price tag is justifiable though? It just seems like there are much better ways to spend your $1300 than on this thing.

5 upvotes
pkosewski
By pkosewski (2 months ago)

@pacnwhobbyist
There are always some better and worse ways to spend money. If someone earns $500/month, he should spend his $1300 on food or education...
If someone earns $10000/month and likes gadgets, shouldn't he buy the fastest camera available today? He could also get a D810. He'd have 2 best cameras in their segments and only one bag of lenses to carry. :)

The price is not to please people. It is chosen to make some expected sales. Maybe they simply don't want to sell many V3s.

2 upvotes
Just a Photographer
By Just a Photographer (2 months ago)

People are not insane. They get the picture very clearly.

The Nikon 1 series is just not able to compete to other mirrorless camera's that are far better in most things the V3 can do.

3 upvotes
pkosewski
By pkosewski (2 months ago)

You miss the point. Other cameras are better in most things the V3 can do - true. But other cameras can't do what V3 can. This is the selling point.
This is not an all-round camera made to compete with other mirrorless and amateur DSLRs. This is really obvious, but still most people try to evaluate it as a competition for Oly M10 or Sony a6000.
V3 is just a fast sensor with great AF. The rest of the camera was put together with what Nikon's engineers found in the drawers.

And as I said earlier: Nikon might really not want to sell this camera. High price would make sense then, wouldn't it?

5 upvotes
wansai
By wansai (2 months ago)

your logic is a little odd. you seem to be implying that if picture quality isnt a concern and high price isnt a concern, this is a great camera.

frankly, if the food isnt good and the price is high, i simply wouldnt eat at that establishment. if the price was commensurate with the food quality, sure it makes sense.

i have nothing against the nikon system as it can fill a need for some, but your logic seems way off base.

2 upvotes
Just a Photographer
By Just a Photographer (2 months ago)

pkosweski - Are you trying to say that the V3 is a 'professional' mirrorless camera?

I think you have no clue what the competition has to offer.
Olympus / Panasonic and Fuji have a far more professional mirrorless line-up then Nikon has to offer at this moment in time.

0 upvotes
pkosewski
By pkosewski (2 months ago)

But there are at least 2 ways you can rate "greatness". You can do it by taking price into account or ignoring it.
For me V3 is a great camera, because of what it can do. I'm sure in 1-2 years every manufacturer will have a high-end MILC model with similar AF and 20 fps. But still - Nikon did it before everyone else. I'm not interested in the price.

By the way: is $1000 really that much?
If Nikon made a camera with V3 speed and D4s IQ and features, it would be the greatest camera ever made. It would also be the most expensive Nikon (D4s costs $6500). And no one would criticize the price, because it would be all right in a pro-camera.

So now we have 2 interesting mirrorless cameras: A7S and V3.
A7S offers first-rate IQ with mediocre performance. It's called the best camera ever, a bargain and so on (at $2500).
V3 provides great performance with mediocre IQ. At $1200 it is called overpriced...

0 upvotes
pkosewski
By pkosewski (2 months ago)

@Just a photographer

What makes a camera "professional"?
Yes, I think V3 has features, which might get attention of professionals. It might make their job easier and this is all that matters.

I imagine this could be a perfect camera for paparazzi. IQ is easily good enough for newspapers or even magazines. 60 fps make it easier to get a good shot. The 2.7x factor doesn't hurt, either. It should also shine with sport and nature.

Surely, V3 is not a camera for landscape, wedding or product photographers, but there are so many more ways you could earn money with a camera...

0 upvotes
Carlton Foxx
By Carlton Foxx (2 months ago)

This is definitely not a Hasselblad H5D-200, but if you look at the samples you can see what this camera is awesome at: it's a lifestyle camera for people who want to document their travels, their kids, and their nightlife without the bulk of a DSLR but with great focus and impressive color. I see it as a camera for high-tech people who have enough disposable income for a cool and different camera, but not enough for a Leica; people on their way up. Early-career engineers, or a vet just out of school... This is not the camera for stockbrokers or executives.

As the review says: nothing else offers the same balance of size, autofocus, and interchangeable lenses.

3 upvotes
JordanAT
By JordanAT (2 months ago)

" and interchangeable lenses."

You say that like it's a good thing. From the system lenses I've seen, it appears more of a hindrance. You certainly have identified the market, though. We used to call them yuppies.

1 upvote
Sonyshine
By Sonyshine (2 months ago)

I'm a plumber and 1 series shooter.....never been called a Yuppie before! :)

0 upvotes
47872Mike
By 47872Mike (2 months ago)

"In the end we wanted and expected more because there is so much potential."

- Really? Just because it is being launched at a high price, it must have "so much potential"??

4 upvotes
quezra
By quezra (2 months ago)

No the potential is that Nikon 1 offers a unique crop factor with interchangeable lenses. Unfortunately the sensors have been lackluster, the lenses have been lackluster (or overpriced), and the bodies have been lackluster and overpriced. If they simply made one where they copied and pasted the spec-sheet of the GX7 or A6000, priced at V1/2/3 launch prices, and offered a fast tele zoom to go with it (f/2.8 minimum for this tiny sensor thanks), I'd be all over it.

But now the RX10 and FZ1000 have beat them too it and shown how it's done. With a better sensor and faster lenses...

Comment edited 1 minute after posting
8 upvotes
The Smoking Camera
By The Smoking Camera (2 months ago)

Took the V3 to Tokyo last month. Fast, quiet and a nice variety of lenses that fit in a small bag. Not just a niche camera IMHO. A photo or two below.
http://www.dpreview.com/forums/thread/3693924
http://www.dpreview.com/forums/thread/3693468
http://www.dpreview.com/forums/thread/3691100
http://www.dpreview.com/forums/thread/3691582

Comment edited 3 minutes after posting
10 upvotes
Sonyshine
By Sonyshine (2 months ago)

Stop it Joe!

You are making me want a V3 even more - even if they are the equivalent of $1797 in the UK!

1 upvote
The Smoking Camera
By The Smoking Camera (2 months ago)

You're right Sonyshine. Crazy prices. Luckily you make the V1 sing so no need to upgrade - just yet.

0 upvotes
Sonyshine
By Sonyshine (2 months ago)

I still 'want' a V3, and a 70-300CX lens but together thats £2,000 or about $3,400 of your money! :((

0 upvotes
lolopasstrail
By lolopasstrail (2 months ago)

Exactly right with regard to the price. But why single this model out for a price ding in DPR Reviews, while ignoring the high price of other items?

Exactly right that it cannot compete with larger size sensors. But why single this model out for a smaller format ding in DPR Reviews, while formats such as micro 43 are not dinged for being naturally inferior to larger formats?

One reason DPR Reviews are good for feature description, but not really for comparison. Their criteria are subjective and ever changing, making it difficult to compare apples and apples.

2 upvotes
quezra
By quezra (2 months ago)

Because it's the only one selling an EVF-less model in a price range that all other manufacturers include an EVF standard with it? Even if we forgive the tiny sensor, its competitors by feature set are E-PL5/6, NEX-5s, NX200s, X-A1s - they are priced significantly below the V3. Nikon are clueless, or else relying on clueless customers to get away with a rip-off.

9 upvotes
47872Mike
By 47872Mike (2 months ago)

I think it's almost certainly the latter.

3 upvotes
ThePhilips
By ThePhilips (2 months ago)

"while formats such as micro 43 are not dinged for being naturally inferior to larger formats?"

So you want DPR to troll on your behalf?..

"Their criteria are subjective and ever changing, making it difficult to compare apples and apples."

... while too "dinging" them for "inferior" reviews??

What's wrong with you people?!

0 upvotes
joyclick
By joyclick (2 months ago)

With Nikon's background,there should have been an outstanding 1" sensor camera out there since long but no.Ditto Canon>They just don't want to and intend to till the fire from the Rivals' achievments reaches their buts and very survival is under threat

3 upvotes
sandy b
By sandy b (2 months ago)

In raw compared to the sony, a little bit more color noise, quite a bit sharper.

0 upvotes
dpmaxwell
By dpmaxwell (2 months ago)

True, but in regard to "sharpness", do take note that the Nikon is using a prime lens in that comparison tool - the 32mm f/1.2. That lens costs as much as the RX100III itself.

12 upvotes
BarnET
By BarnET (2 months ago)

With that lens the nikon is the same price range as a fuji xe-2 with the 56mm f1.2 or a nikon d610 with 85mm f1.8g

How does it fair in that comparison?
Let's compare the nikon iso 800 to the iso 200 of the rx100.
Since the kit lens of the v3 is 2 stops slower while the kit is still more expensive.

It can't even compete at the same iso's. So that would be a good laugh.

0 upvotes
Homam
By Homam (2 months ago)

Poor Image Quality... Too bad....

5 upvotes
photoguy622
By photoguy622 (2 months ago)

Nikon should have come up with a better kit lens for the V3, like Fuji has on the X-E2.

This kit lens is a disgrace on an enthusiast level camera - average apertures and sharpness, power zoom and no filter threads.

3 upvotes
sandy b
By sandy b (2 months ago)

Its sharper than the Sony its compared to if you look at the raw files.

1 upvote
photoguy622
By photoguy622 (2 months ago)

I did see that, it's amazing what some JPEG processing can do!

1 upvote
dpmaxwell
By dpmaxwell (2 months ago)

The Nikon RAWs in the comparison tool are taken using the $900 Nikkor 32mm f/1.2, not the kit lens. That is where the "sharpness" is coming from, which is all well and good, so long as you understand the value proposition to get that kind of a result.

Comment edited 59 seconds after posting
9 upvotes
photoguy622
By photoguy622 (2 months ago)

@dpmaxwell: That's right. I forgot that detail!

0 upvotes
BarnET
By BarnET (2 months ago)

Photoguy.

Fuji had that lens with the xe-1 almost 2 years ago.
Similar image quality from the sensor too.
The xe-1 is not the fastest camera to use though.

0 upvotes
Fogsprig
By Fogsprig (2 months ago)

Stunning features, excellent ergonomics (IMO), user-friendly controls.
But the IQ isn't there. It's just something wrong with high ISO engine and dynamic range.

1 upvote
47872Mike
By 47872Mike (2 months ago)

The review makes particular mention of its poor imaging performance at LOW ISO.

2 upvotes
haiiyaa
By haiiyaa (2 months ago)

jpg looks bad. However RAW looks very good and almost compareable to m43. But why is there so much noise in the blacks, even at iso 200?

3 upvotes
D1N0
By D1N0 (2 months ago)

poor dynamic range.

5 upvotes
Valentinian
By Valentinian (2 months ago)

When Nikon released originally the system 1, were they trying to undermine the m4/3 ? or were they experimenting with the mirrorless system (without interfering with their APS-C ?
In any case, Nikon's System 1 did not undermine the m4/3; however, they succeeded experimenting with the mirrorless system (and probably made a lot of money as well).
So, now that the system 1 is showing its inherent high end limitation, is Nikon ready for a FF (or APS-C) mirrorless?

1 upvote
ludwik123
By ludwik123 (2 months ago)

I am sure Nikon are listening to the users.
Next year's Nikon 2 system will be better.

0 upvotes
Bhima78
By Bhima78 (2 months ago)

I like the idea of the Nikon 1 better than a FF mirrorless from Nikon. Honestly, Nikon already has some great FF cameras, making an FF Mirrorless would really only give consumers the ability to have a good, touchscreen and maybe a bit higher burst. The size, once you put a decent lens on it, would end up being a wash.

I'd rather they keep on keeping on with the 1... hopefully the next gen of sensor tech like organic sensors will help increase the DR and ISO performance to levels that would be acceptable for this price bracket.

0 upvotes
AngryCorgi
By AngryCorgi (2 months ago)

Wow. You shouldn't ever shoot JPG with the V3. Worst JPG engine I've seen in quite a while. Very Sony-P&S-esque!!

5 upvotes
JordanAT
By JordanAT (2 months ago)

Except that no enthusiast in their right mind will shoot with this. It's a fashion accessory which means that outside of the marketing shots, the output of this camera will never be RAW put though a proper conversion engine. The target audience doesn't even know how to open a RAW photo, much less what to do with the bland images that pop up (in comparison to the pre-enhanced, sharpened JPGs OOC).

2 upvotes
Stephen787
By Stephen787 (2 months ago)

too much noise reduction at base ISO, i would not recommend this to my worse enemy as a camera. No matter how fast is the focus, how fast it can shoot.

4 upvotes
peevee1
By peevee1 (2 months ago)

Between fixed-lens Sony RX and Panasonic FZ1000 (and a horde others undoubtedly coming with this sensor) and dirt-cheap now m43 and Sony NEX cameras, the whole Nikon 1 system is as pointless as ever. Maybe if its 70-300 were not so overpriced, and it had a good specially made 1:1 macro it would be interesting for some applications.

18 upvotes
Sonyshine
By Sonyshine (2 months ago)

Interesting that you spotted the macro potential. I use my V1 as my primary macro rig and its very very good indeed. Fast to focus, sharp and that wee bit of extra DOF to make all the difference, nice and light to hand hold in the field too. I use the Nikon 40mm micro lens on the FT1 adapter - but yes, a native macro lens would b e brilliant.

My V1 macro set:

http://www.ipernity.com/doc/i.kirk/album/637457

2 upvotes
Lucas_
By Lucas_ (2 months ago)

It's yet an interesting camera, but I guess it'll need further development to cope with the competition later generation technology, mainly in IQ ( Nikon should just buy the Sony 1" sensor ). Price is definitely another big issue.

0 upvotes
Sonyshine
By Sonyshine (2 months ago)

The big negative aspect of the Sony 1" sensors is lack of on sensor PDAF - this is what makes the Aptina sensor just so much fun to use - the blazing fast autofocus is just brilliant!

4 upvotes
Cheng Bao
By Cheng Bao (2 months ago)

Nor does aptina version has pdaf as shown on its website.
I believe ospdaf can be customized on sensors.

The big different of sony sensor aptina sensor is readout speed, although Sony sensor is capable to out put whole sensor area at 20fps, however, high speed af may need higher fps for certain area. Previous aptina sensor has 700M bps output ability for single lane, while Sony one has only 576M. That could make difference on af speed.

Let's see how fast fz1000 can focus.

0 upvotes
Sonyshine
By Sonyshine (2 months ago)

The Aptina sensors as used in all Nikon 1 series cameras do have on sensor PDAF - that is what makes their focusing so fast. They switch to CDAF in low light.

Comment edited 3 minutes after posting
1 upvote
Cheng Bao
By Cheng Bao (2 months ago)

@Sonyshine, but aptina sensors itself don't have OSPDAF
https://www.aptina.com/products/image_sensors/ar1411hs/
https://www.aptina.com/products/dslr/ar1011hs/
That means PDAF pixel could be customized.

Another example, EM-1 use a sensor based on panasonic MN34230, which has OSPDAF as revealed by chipworks,
however, MN34230 itself don't have any PDAF pixels
http://www.semicon.panasonic.co.jp/ds4/MN34230PL_E.pdf

0 upvotes
Higuel
By Higuel (2 months ago)

«...Considering the V3's price tag, someone upgrading from a point-and-shoot, or enthusiasts looking for an all-purpose tool should look at the alternatives since there are many other cheaper cameras with good handling, less low ISO noise (and larger sensor), and broader lens selection in a relatively portable size.» Enough said!

Comment edited 24 seconds after posting
19 upvotes
Higuel
By Higuel (2 months ago)

3 clicks to finally reach the article: the site is getting even more user-unfriendly then ever!!! -_-

14 upvotes
SDPharm
By SDPharm (2 months ago)

Totally agree. I don't get the point of having a mini page that is nothing but a link.

4 upvotes
SDPharm
By SDPharm (2 months ago)

Now that I come to think of it, I guess I do get the point. This mini page essentially doubles the number of total clicks to the article, and as a result boosting the total clicks to DPR and makes DPR rank higher in search engine ranking.

7 upvotes
Carlton Foxx
By Carlton Foxx (2 months ago)

It is my understanding that number of clicks has fallen as a metric for website ranking. It's supposedly much more about quality of content these days. Hopefully someone with more real knowledge than I will comment.

1 upvote
SDPharm
By SDPharm (2 months ago)

> It's supposedly much more about quality of content these days.

Since there are no universal rules for the quality of content, one of the few objective criteria is the number of clicks.

1 upvote
Higuel
By Higuel (2 months ago)

Yep, and the price the old readers of dPREVIEW pay is not only to have mini texts as opposed to a REAL report as GOOD Writers&journalists do since the beginning of History! But also to wait many weeks to see a review presented first in small pars so they can get more clicks! Not to mention amaaaaazing videos of a colonoscopERGH sorry for spoiling next week big surprise article!!! I meant the past video of the inside of a washing machine!!!
We can only hope that one day we will have as many crapy and UNrelated vídeos here as we could have found in you tube!

I guess before it happens eventually I will stop coming to dPREVIEW completely! For me it WAS the one site I went for Reviews, NOT Previews! But those good old days are gone :/

0 upvotes
mpgxsvcd
By mpgxsvcd (2 months ago)

A DSLR can operate as a mirrorless camera if you raise the mirror. However, a true mirrorless camera cannot be a DSLR. I think Nikon is perfecting their mirrorless technology on the 1-series so that they can apply it to a DSLR.

They should make a fullframe DSLR that can run with smaller sensor sizes. It would operate as a mirrorless camera in A-PSC and 1” modes and get the AF, quietness, and shot to shot performance that mirrorless cameras offer. Then in full frame mode it would have wider angles and shallow depth of field.

Sony, Olympus, and Panasonic have proven that a true mirrorless camera is all 90% of the population needs to get great images and videos.

If Nikon wants to sell new cameras they need to adapt to market changes. Mid-range DSLRs with hybrid optical/electronic viewfinders is the only viable market I see for them. Put 1-series technology in the smallest possible full frame camera and give it a hybrid viewfinder and they will regain the ground they have lost.

2 upvotes
Andy Crowe
By Andy Crowe (2 months ago)

There already are DSLRs that have on-chip PDAF points for better live view and video AF, and Nikon FF DSLRs can already operate in APS crop mode at a faster max framerate.

However DSLRS can never have the short flange distance and thus smaller lens size of a mirrorless camera, and (other than SLT) none have EVFs with videographers having to use cumbersome LCD eyecup adapters.

3 upvotes
BarnET
By BarnET (2 months ago)

Evf's also have other benefits primarily for manual focussing.
Mirrorless also work brilliantly with manual vintage glass. Auto Exposure works too.

Dslr's are still much better action camera's with their lag free unlimited dynamic range ovf's. Tracking fast movement with an evf is still a pain with my gx7.

0 upvotes
sandy b
By sandy b (2 months ago)

I will get one just for birding, that makes it worth the price of the ticket alone. The V3 and CX70-300 cost over $2000, and is well worth it.

Look at the Nikon 1 forum at the BIF and other shots with the combo. Incredible. Hand held 810 mm equiv. with amazing AF. For low light I have my D600. For everything else I am getting a V3. I like how Nikon has reacted to the market and made the enthusiast model.

Now, either get the Sony sensor or tweak the Aptina, and it will be a do anything camera.

4 upvotes
Denis the Menace
By Denis the Menace (2 months ago)

I'll wait for the V6 :-)

3 upvotes
Sonyshine
By Sonyshine (2 months ago)

I prefer V8's myself..... Vroooom Vroooooom, Vroooooom!

6 upvotes
Denis the Menace
By Denis the Menace (2 months ago)

I was thinking small. I was being optimistic in thinking it would only take them a few more shots before they got it right. ;-)

1 upvote
Sonyshine
By Sonyshine (2 months ago)

Maybe by the V12......

4 upvotes
capanikon
By capanikon (2 months ago)

I agree, N1 has an advantage for super tele work. A FX body with an 800mm lens will set you back some $20,000 but you can get the same reach with N1 for 1/10th as much.

2 upvotes
Reilly Diefenbach
By Reilly Diefenbach (2 months ago)

If anyone thinks the V rig will have the same image quality as a D7100/D800e with a big tele they will be disappointed.

2 upvotes
justmeMN
By justmeMN (2 months ago)

I'll wait for the V8 in Tomato Red color.

1 upvote
brownie314
By brownie314 (2 months ago)

Yes, it seems for this one very specific thing - the N1 is the way to go. But for EVERYTHING else - there are better options.

0 upvotes
Photo_AK
By Photo_AK (2 months ago)

Capanikon - to reach 800 mm, you don't need $20.000:

D7100 + Tamron SP 150-600mm f/5-6.3 Di VC USD = $2.100
(900 mm equiv.)

D7100 + Nikkor 500/4 = $9.500
(750 mm equiv.)

D7100 + Nikkor 400/2.8G + 1.4X TC = $10.600
(850 mm equiv.)

D610 + Nikkor 600/4G + 1.4X TC = $12.000
(850 mm equiv.)

2 upvotes
brownie314
By brownie314 (2 months ago)

Good point Photo_AK. It looks like the D7100+SP 150-600 might be even better than V3+70-300. A little more reach, better AF, and most probably better IQ.

2 upvotes
mpgxsvcd
By mpgxsvcd (2 months ago)

The Sony RX100 MKIII and upcoming Panasonic LX8 will finally kill the 1-series line and I don't think Nikon will shed a tear. They never wanted this line to succeed. They simply wanted everyone to say "Mirror-less cameras are inferior so I will keep my DSLR".

In reality the other manufactures proved that mirror-less can be better, smaller, less expensive, and more versatile. Now Canon and Nikon just look like they have missed the boat. DSLR and mirror-less sales are beginning to decline. However, some mirrorless cameras are not declining as fast as most DSLRs.

13 upvotes
Jogger
By Jogger (2 months ago)

The way things are going the 1-inch compacts are going to replace a lot of mirrorless cameras, esp. those consumers who never go beyond the kit lens. The RX100m3 makes a lot more sense than the GM1 for 99% of consumers.

This puts a lot of pressure on the low end of mirrorless.. meanwhile, mirrorless have never been competitive at the high end.

14 upvotes
sandy b
By sandy b (2 months ago)

None of them have the AF with focus tracking that can compete with the Nikon V3. That going to matter for those who do more than snapshots.

6 upvotes
mpgxsvcd
By mpgxsvcd (2 months ago)

With a 1" sensor and higher focal ratios you really don't have that shallow of depth of field. Of course AF is going to be fast with a small sensor and a higher focal ratio.

Let's see them get fast AF with a larger sensor and an F1.8 lens.

4 upvotes
sandy b
By sandy b (2 months ago)

MPG, really, then why can't the other companies do it?

0 upvotes
quezra
By quezra (2 months ago)

Actually *both* Sony and Nikon have been getting away with overpricing 1" sensor cameras because of lack of competition in this sector. Once Panasonic and Samsung (and maybe Olympus?) get some foothold here, the price will come down a lot, or else Nikon 1 should just fold up shop now. Look at the price cuts on RX10 since the FZ1000 was announced. The writing is on the wall...

2 upvotes
BarnET
By BarnET (2 months ago)

Jogger

True but the rx100 mkiii is also more expensive.
The gm-1 with 12-32 + 45mm f1.8 is a similar priced combination.
That shallow depth of field does make the gm-1 a much better portrait shooter.

But your point stands if you don't want to change the lens a compact is almost always the better option. Whether you go Panasonic fz1000 vs DSLR + 18-135 or rx100 mkiii vs mirrorless with kits.

There are ofc exceptions. Fuji's kitted with the 18-55mm for instance.

0 upvotes
Everlast66
By Everlast66 (2 months ago)

Some nikon fans are hoping to buy this 1" sensor camera, and after some persistent watering and exposure to sun to get it grow to full frame ...

5 upvotes
nunatak
By nunatak (2 months ago)

all comparisons are relative. the IQ coming out of the V series is still much better than what was remotely possible from the film based Pentax Auto 110 or Minolta 110 SLRs. to improve IQ, the film manufacturers poured $$$ into new technology with the resulting innovations percolating upward and eventually finding their way into larger formats ... thus benefiting everyone.

at this time, the main benefits of the N1 system are speed, stealth, and a breadth and reach of top shelf glass other systems have yet to match. with improved sensors, a standard hot shoe, better wi-fi access, focus peaking, and a strong value proposition ... Nikon can still snatch victory back from the jaws of despair. JMO.

4 upvotes
ThePhilips
By ThePhilips (2 months ago)

"at this time, the main benefits of the N1 system are speed, stealth, and a breadth and reach of top shelf glass other systems have yet to match."

When you put this legacy "breadth and reach of top shelf glass" on N1, it loses both "speed, stealth" and eronomics, gains size and weight, and becomes a pretty ordinary (overpriced) camera.

If you are really after the Nikkor DX/FX glass, you'd be better served by e.g cheaper D5300.

2 upvotes
nunatak
By nunatak (2 months ago)

the N1's native 6.7~13mm, 32mm f1.2, and 70-300mm are stealthy AND at the top of their class. there are no other 1" systems that offer anything near the quality of these nikkors.

that said, IQ remains a function of sensor + high quality glass + accurate focus and nikon still has some work to do on the sensor portion — albeit mostly addressing marginal light.

"If you are really after the Nikkor DX/FX glass, you'd be better served by e.g cheaper D5300."

actually you'd be better served by a D800E/810. however there are trade offs including size, weight, and $$$. the N1 series is as close to perfect a companion for addressing those trade-offs. the few barriers the V3 force onto the user can be addressed by making it a better (more competitive) value proposition, and addressing most of it's shortcomings in the V4. JMO.

2 upvotes
Bhima78
By Bhima78 (2 months ago)

While I like the 1 system, their zooms aren't that great imo. Pretty slow on the f-stop if you ask me... especially for such a small sensor.

1 upvote
ecm
By ecm (2 months ago)

So disappointing. As though bells and whistles will make up for spectacularly poor image quality. 76% is being charitable. And $900 for a fast 85mm equivalent? Please.

7 upvotes
sandy b
By sandy b (2 months ago)

For what it does well, its worth the price alone. My $4000 gear bag full of FF gear can not do this as well as the V3 and cx 70-300:

http://www.dpreview.com/forums/post/54024278

http://www.dpreview.com/forums/post/54019877

http://www.dpreview.com/forums/post/54015974

6 upvotes
Sixpm
By Sixpm (2 months ago)

I have made a 60" x 40" print from the V3 with the standard zoom is 'better' than my ancient Nikon F2 with Tri-X pan, both in resolution and in grain structure. Digital is so much better even with a 1" sensor that most are not yet fully aware of, seeing is believing.

It's amazing how many people are dissing this wonderful camera, those who rant keep on ranting, those who love to shoot with the V1/V3 keep on shooting.

Comment edited 39 seconds after posting
1 upvote
47872Mike
By 47872Mike (2 months ago)

" 76% is being charitable".

Calling it "charitable" is being polite.

4 upvotes
ThePhilips
By ThePhilips (2 months ago)

"My $4000 gear bag full of FF gear can not do this [...]"

There is nothing special about those photos.

Conclusion about the "bag": wrong glass; teleconverter is missing.

Comment edited 2 minutes after posting
2 upvotes
ecm
By ecm (2 months ago)

@Sixpm:
"I have made a 60" x 40" print from the V3 ...."
So you said in an earlier post.... and also about a Ricoh camera a few months ago. Printing a lot of those 40 x 60's are you? you'd think you would run out of wall space pretty quick. Followed up with a straw man argument and an ad hominem attack. Gotta love te interwebs.

@sandy b:
Why do you point out photos from a different camera? Is it the same sensor?

In all honesty, I don't care enough about it to pursue this further; you spend your money however you like. I find it interesting, though, that neither of you really directed your comments to me, but rather to the greater audience. Why is that?

2 upvotes
sandy b
By sandy b (2 months ago)

I simply pointed to you to extremely good photo's to refute your silly commentary about spectacularly poor images.

0 upvotes
BarnET
By BarnET (2 months ago)

Sandy if you already have a full frame....
Why not add the 1200 buck 150-600mm instead of buying over 2000 bucks of crippled by design crap?

0 upvotes
Sixpm
By Sixpm (2 months ago)

As it happens, I do make lots of 60" x 40" prints for fun and for my own study of camera/lens/sensor/quality. In fact, this has become my own standard for my own test, the first digital camera for this exercise is the Epson RD1 and even a 6mp can print up beautifully without any jaggies when done properly.

This is a free world and everyone is free to express whatever and same applies to those who rants with disagreement, it's ok for me too. :)

0 upvotes
Rooz
By Rooz (2 months ago)

so i guess people weren't satisfied with only whining about cameras they've never used or owned or even seen; now some have to whine about the reviews of the camera they are whining about aswell. lol

i own it, i love it. i run it along with my EM1 and D800e. love them all for different reasons.

2 upvotes
Wolfphotography
By Wolfphotography (2 months ago)

I agree. I own one (and a V2 as backup) and It's my "go to camera" for travel. Compact and very capable. I also own two Nikon DSLRs & assorted lenses.

0 upvotes
ThomasSwitzerland
By ThomasSwitzerland (2 months ago)

With the review and response one can see the unclear direction. This comes from the unclear positioning of the Nikon 1” camera itself.

I have to buy a horrible looking viewfinder to attach loosing a flashpoint. I have to buy a grip to get a decent handling. And completely new lenses for an inferior sensor. What a weird business concept.

10 upvotes
gianstam
By gianstam (2 months ago)

I see your point but every system needs time to be mature (see μ4/3). Τthe 1'' sensor becomes better and better. A few years later the Nikon 1 may be a good alternative for telephoto work (small lenses, very good PDAF)

Comment edited 33 seconds after posting
1 upvote
ThomasSwitzerland
By ThomasSwitzerland (2 months ago)

I fully agree with you, gianstam. The 1" sensor will have a strong future between compacts and APCs. I feel the big one or two have slept awhile and try to roll over their laziness. Such a camera does not fill shareholders' expectations and consumers' requirements. And it is a bad engineering example.

Hence, I find their marketing inappropriate and not trustworthy.

3 upvotes
Lin Evans
By Lin Evans (2 months ago)

And you "have" to buy a battery to make your camera work - LOL. Come on, the EVF and grip are included and you don't "have" to buy the lenses, you can buy an adapter and use regular Nikon lenses like I do. If you don't like it, vote with your money. Want to make a bet? You'll lose because this camera will be Very Popular!

1 upvote
beavertown
By beavertown (2 months ago)

NX Mini deserves a review for its IQ and cheap price.

3 upvotes
Greg Gebhardt
By Greg Gebhardt (2 months ago)

SMALL SENSOR is a deal killer

2 upvotes
Menneisyys
By Menneisyys (2 months ago)

Nope, it's not being "small" that is the problem - after all, some recent, decent cameras (RX10, all RX100's, FZ1000) also have a 1" sensor. It's delivering significantly worse noise performance that is.

And, of course, the ridiculous price of the entire set...

12 upvotes
Paul Kersey Photography
By Paul Kersey Photography (2 months ago)

If you don't need to compare with other systems, Nikon 1 V cameras are really decent. I miss my V1. Lenses are great too.

Comment edited 42 seconds after posting
3 upvotes
aandeg
By aandeg (2 months ago)

I for one would like to see dpreview return to a more consistent style of review. This is what built dpreview.

These wildly inconsistant and fox news like reviews lead to some interesting comments but make researching cameras harder.

4 upvotes
Higuel
By Higuel (2 months ago)

But the dPREVIEW gets what they want: people clicking! See the other post about it, a fellow reader explained it better then I can! -_-

0 upvotes
lorenzo de medici
By lorenzo de medici (2 months ago)

Regardless of the merits (or lack of merits) of this camera, the review is painful to read. The identical information is repeated over and over, as if one hadn't just been told the same thing on the previous page. It's a poorly written review, stating the obvious, and containing no valuable insights. The camera scored 76, which is being generous. The review scores about 50.

16 upvotes
Higuel
By Higuel (2 months ago)

Yes, unfortunately dPREVIEW is more interested in profits and publicity then in the quality of it's service! :/
It's a real shame! It WAS the best review site a few years ago! :(

0 upvotes
b craw
By b craw (2 months ago)

Certainly DPR is concerned about these things; welcome to the contemporary reality. Nonetheless, DPR does well to provide information and artists features still of interest to visitors. I'm always looking in - no substantial complaints here.

Comment edited 53 seconds after posting
0 upvotes
Higuel
By Higuel (2 months ago)

b craw: just check lens rentals blog and you will see what is REALLY GOOD information servisse! :)

Comment edited 2 times, last edit 40 seconds after posting
0 upvotes
D1N0
By D1N0 (2 months ago)

10mp would have been enough and would have improved iq. Nikon doesn't want this to succeed.

7 upvotes
Denis the Menace
By Denis the Menace (2 months ago)

I think Nikon need to be congratulated for not producing too many of these cameras :-)

14 upvotes
spitfire31
By spitfire31 (2 months ago)

One problem affacting all cameras with electronic viewfinder/monitor only, is *viewfinder delay*.

I became aware of this when shooting stills of a comp guitarist with my Panasonic LX7 and happened to have my other eye open. The guitarist's right hand in the viewfinder worked in counter-phase to his actual movements!

In effect, what you see in an electronic viewfinder (unlike a true SLR) is a recording of what has already happened.

You trip the shutter guided by a delayed cue.

Then I realised why it was so difficult to capture people's expression or a sudden gesture – they were already history!

Now, I'm re-learning to shoot with both eyes open – one for composition in and the naked one to see what' is actually happening in real-time.

But if shooting wildlife with a long tele, it may be almost impossible to see how a bird is turning its head with the naked eye.

Why hasn't DPR pounced on this aspect of mirrorless cameras? It is a real hurdle to nailing action.

4 upvotes
Zeisschen
By Zeisschen (2 months ago)

It's been mentioned a lot actually in several reviews. But there are big differences between the EVF. The latest generation shows mostly very little lag in normal light. In low light the EVF refresh rate is mostly a bit slower, so lag is more noticeable. But this is mostly under conditions where you can hardly see anything through an OVF. I heard the A7s EVF is the best ever, extremely good even in low light with very little lag.

2 upvotes
spitfire31
By spitfire31 (2 months ago)

By Zeisschen: "It's been mentioned a lot actually in several reviews. But there are big differences between the EVF. "

I don't read all reviews, so that may well be the case.

I'm aware that there are differences, but all the more reason, then, to make measurements and comments of viewfinder lag a standard feature of reviews, isn't it?

0 upvotes
badi
By badi (2 months ago)

@spitfire
Yes, this is one negative aspect of the evf I also found out the hard way. It bothers me when using manual lenses on a mirror-less body, and when the subject is moving is very hard to focus, because if you trigger the shutter when the subject enters the focus area, due to this lag, in reality it already exited.

But, as Zeisschen said, EVFs are evolving, and soon this lag will be kind of history... too bad I will not change my camera too soon.

0 upvotes
Petak
By Petak (2 months ago)

There is a lag between reality and what you see in the EVF and then there is a lag between you pressing the shutter and the shutter actuation. You have problem with the latter, while the former is actually an advantage giving you certain reaction time if you keep your both eyes open and on the subject and the EVF simultaneously. After all everything you see with your naked eyes and send to your brain to work out has already happened some time ago - it's just a lag that we have learned to deal with. Same with cameras. Too much theoretical discussions on specs and too little actual shooting experience and creative photography.

Comment edited 6 minutes after posting
6 upvotes
spitfire31
By spitfire31 (2 months ago)

@Petak
You don't quite make sense, man.

The 'lag' between eye and reality is negligible and, as it is something we have got hardwired from very early years.

The lag between pressing shutter button and actual exposure is also negligible in a reasonably modern camera, on the order of milliseconds.

But viewfinder lag can be on the order of tenths of seconds and can't be compensated for, because what you see has already happened – it's gone!

A good photographer learns to anticipate action. But anticipation is irrelevant if what you see, and consequently base your prediction on, is already water under the bridge.

0 upvotes
Zeisschen
By Zeisschen (2 months ago)

@spitfire

for example the Fuji X-T1 has EVF lag time of 0.005 seconds. That's not something the eye can see. You won't miss a shot because of that. YOUR reaction time is some tenths of a second, not the EVF.

2 upvotes
Petak
By Petak (2 months ago)

The image in the EVF is taken from the sensor - same as the picture. The chain of events is "reality + EVF lag = EVF image + shutter lag = picture" If you are looking through the EVF only the only lag between the EVF image and the picture is the shutter lag.

0 upvotes
spitfire31
By spitfire31 (2 months ago)

@ Petak: In your lag calculation, you are missing out the in-camera PROCESSING of the sensor picture. You see, the analog information read out from the sensor has to be *digitised* and then *processed* to produce a relevant image.

This processing is done after the shutter has been tripped, when you take a picture. In that situation it's largely irrelevant if the processing takes some time.

But in producing an 'almost-realtime' moving picture in the viewfinder, processing time makes *all* the difference.

So, you are completely mistaken in stating that shutter lag is the lag-inducing component in viewfinder lag. I suggest that you might want to read up on digital photography basics.

@ Zeisschen: Thanks for the information! It seems that mirrorless camera designers are catching up, at last.

Comment edited 25 seconds after posting
0 upvotes
Petak
By Petak (2 months ago)

I'm sorry, spitfire, but I'm afraid you have compl!etely missed my point again and I don't believe in "third time's the charm" :-)
Have a nice day,
Peter

0 upvotes
JanMatthys
By JanMatthys (2 months ago)

It's a fair review, although the 76% rating is higher than it should have been. This is an over-priced niche product, not an all-around camera, Nikon has to overprice it to make up for lost sales of average consumers who don't need 800mm reach or 1billion FPS. However, having poor IQ, no real hot shoe and noise at low ISO's is simply inexcusable.

23 upvotes
elf kerben
By elf kerben (2 months ago)

Every new N1 have new limitations, this sucks Nikon. Yes you would like to have 2000$ or 2000€ for this system, but then make it right, you know all the stuff, first update v1 picture review firmware, as a sign of your good will, then give v2 and v3 the battery status.

Yes the battery fail on the v1 had you cost money, but a "pro" user or a normal user would like to know if the camera crashs your original-retail-cost a lot-battery and will now longer working in v1.

Go on nikon - the heart of the image? or?

2 upvotes
radissimo
By radissimo (2 months ago)

One step BEHIND: Nikon 1 V3 Review

9 upvotes
aandeg
By aandeg (2 months ago)

Well dpreview does better at hosting trolls than reviewing cameras. At least your good at something!

Camera is not for me and I am a N1 user. Missed the mark as does those fiddly and over priced MFT cameras. Though for them it seems being overpriced is a positive.

0 upvotes
wlad
By wlad (2 months ago)

the problem is that a 5 generations old MFT camera still outperforms the latest generation Nikon 1 sensor...

4 upvotes
aandeg
By aandeg (2 months ago)

And much cheaper Nikon aspc camera's 5 generations old outperform all MFT cameras. Your point?

0 upvotes
wlad
By wlad (2 months ago)

which 5 generations old APS-C Nikon outperforms the OMD EM1 ?

2 upvotes
Andy Crowe
By Andy Crowe (2 months ago)

Both those claims are bunk, tho comparing the Nikon to other 1" sensors the IQ should be better

0 upvotes
gsum
By gsum (2 months ago)

This is the worst set of samples that DPR has posted in a long time. They do not convey the capabilities of the camera or its lenses in any way. There are no examples of the essence of the 1 series cameras - the 60fps burst capability and super-fast autofocus nor of the edge/corner performance of the lenses.

2 upvotes
Total comments: 625
1234