Nikon Spanked By m4/3 in DPR Review?

Started Jan 21, 2012 | Discussions
Everdog Veteran Member • Posts: 4,837
Nice, but not practical for most.

TEBnewyork wrote:

BTW, most of your shots are with F5.6. I guess you could as well use Nikon 70-300mm on DX body and crop a bit. 5 times cheaper, 3 times lighter.

I hope you enjoy those cameras. For most that would be too expensive a combo.
Plus you will need to duplicate lenses which for me is not practical.

The best part of Micro Four Thirds for me is the choice of body sizes, and all the good lenses without the need for adapters.

I actually played with a Nikon J1 for a day, but found the GF3 with the 14-42X pancake lens to be slightly smaller, and better in most ways. The image IQ was better on the GF3 IMHO which suprised me too. Also, I could not fit the J1 in my pocket with its zoom lens. The GF3 does fit.

I'll check back with the Nikon in a year. I think the were very smart to with the smaller sensor and this is where Sony goofed up. The NEX lenses are too close in size to APS lenses and in at least one case much larger. Long term the Nikon system makes more sense. I worry though that Nikon won't try to compete with its own DSLRs. Time will tell.

Melbourne Park Senior Member • Posts: 2,683
Re: Nikon Spanked By m4/3 in DPR Review?

TEBnewyork wrote:

Those were a few of the shots I already had loaded on DPReview in the gallery while I was I was stuck with a long airport delay last night.

Sorry, this curiosity of the system got started with a trip that I made to Kenya where I've posted that I could have used about two more stops of available lens speed or ISO. On that trip I used the GH2 and 100-300 for 95% of my shooting and > 75% was at the 300mm end of the 100- 300 lens. What I could have used is a way to put the 100-300mm on a gimbal instead of handheld for everything. So, with the Nikon I get f2.8 and if I want to use a teleconverter I can still go longer and stay faster.

I did not in any way say that the Nikon 1 is more robust system etc.. I did say that I was testing it out for long lens use.

What I will say is that Nikon got it very right with the power they put into they system. On the G3 if I do a burst of just three shots even with a fast card I have to wait a while to review the shots and it gets annoying. Just not the case on the V1. The processing power they put in the camera should be a lesson to m4/3.

Silent shooting with the electronic shutter also works quite well.

Again - nowhere did I pronounce it a better system overall right now. But then again the combo of the V1 and NEX 7 will probably end up replacing my m4/3 kit.

micksh6 wrote:

TEBnewyork wrote:

If you want to take advantage of the crop factor the 70-200 f2.8 (approx 190-540mm) makes for a very fast long lens.

Seriously? $2400 lens and 1.5 kilogram heft is all what I need to get advantage of Nikon 1 system? Where can I sign?

BTW, most of your shots are with F5.6. I guess you could as well use Nikon 70-300mm on DX body and crop a bit. 5 times cheaper, 3 times lighter.

Olympus are the best setup for most third party lenses. Because they have IBIS. No one else has. But for you, perhaps a Sony A65 or A77 might be the best choice.

Back to Nikon, it looks like a committee made camera. Hence they introduced two of them. And both have some really major failings, not including the sensor issues. And worst probably the cost and bulk of their long zoom tel lens. Its heavy, costly, and big. Perhaps Four Thirds really is the right compromise afterall.

IMO the reason Olympus did not introduce an EVF, was because of some kind of marketing plan that Panasonic and Olympus must have laid out years ago. Fortunately soon we'll get an Olympus with an EVF in built, and it might be a great camera. I just hope the people pricing it are not the same ones as those that priced Nikons 1 cameras, which IMO are overpriced for what one gets (in other words, what one paid for but missed out on).

 Melbourne Park's gear list:Melbourne Park's gear list
Olympus OM-D E-M5 Olympus E-1 Olympus E-M1 Sony Alpha a7R II Sony Vario-Tessar T* FE 16-35mm F4 ZA OSS +7 more
Ron Joiner
Ron Joiner Contributing Member • Posts: 970
Re: Narrow in one sense

Potential buyers for the Nikon cameras will not be reading DPReview.

Ron
--

E-30, E-510 (with 51r), E-330, ZD 11-22, ZD14-54, ZD40-150 Mk II, FL-36, ZD50 f2, Sigma 135-400, Manfrotto tripod and head

http://www.flickr.com/photos/ronjoiner/
http://joiner.shutterchance.com/

 Ron Joiner's gear list:Ron Joiner's gear list
Olympus PEN E-PL5 Panasonic Lumix DMC-G6 Panasonic Lumix DMC-GF1 Panasonic G85 Olympus M.Zuiko Digital 45mm F1.8 +8 more
TEBnewyork
TEBnewyork Forum Pro • Posts: 11,337
Re: Nikon Spanked By m4/3 in DPR Review?

Melbourne Park wrote:

Their zoom the 30-110 is teeny and that is the lens to get. The 10-100 is a 28-280 and is optimized for video like the 14-140 or the Sony 18-200. That particular lens for all the systems is big.

Back to Nikon, it looks like a committee made camera. Hence they introduced two of them. And both have some really major failings, not including the sensor issues. And worst probably the cost and bulk of their long zoom tel lens. Its heavy, costly, and big. Perhaps Four Thirds really is the right compromise afterall.

-- hide signature --
ohmydentist Senior Member • Posts: 1,933
Re: About the price

It's realy shameful that the V1 kits cost more than m43 kits.

-- hide signature --

^ ^

Just Shoot !

TEBnewyork
TEBnewyork Forum Pro • Posts: 11,337
Re: Nice, but not practical for most.

Everdog wrote:

TEBnewyork wrote:

BTW, most of your shots are with F5.6. I guess you could as well use Nikon 70-300mm on DX body and crop a bit. 5 times cheaper, 3 times lighter.

I hope you enjoy those cameras. For most that would be too expensive a combo.
Plus you will need to duplicate lenses which for me is not practical.

I will I know that it is an expensive and not practical for some. I don't recommend it as a solution for most and am not endorsing that as a solution. M4/3 hits a happy medium between resolution and speed. As for lenses I don't really see any major overlaps that I need.

Sony 18-200, 30 macro, 50 f1.8, ultrawide zoom (not decided on yet), fast portrait

Nikon 10-30, 30-110, 40 macro (DX lens can do portraits for now) 70-200, 1.4x TC

I like macros for close focus not and sharpness not necessarily macro work

The best part of Micro Four Thirds for me is the choice of body sizes, and all the good lenses without the need for adapters.

I actually played with a Nikon J1 for a day, but found the GF3 with the 14-42X pancake lens to be slightly smaller, and better in most ways. The image IQ was better on the GF3 IMHO which suprised me too. Also, I could not fit the J1 in my pocket with its zoom lens. The GF3 does fit.

J1 and V1 are very different in handling to me. I would not have bought a J1. I had a dud 14-42x and returned it but wasn't wild about the power zoom. I didn't find the switch for zooming in a particularly good spot. I could get used to it but the IQ on my just was screwed up

I'll check back with the Nikon in a year. I think the were very smart to with the smaller sensor and this is where Sony goofed up. The NEX lenses are too close in size to APS lenses and in at least one case much larger. Long term the Nikon system makes more sense. I worry though that Nikon won't try to compete with its own DSLRs. Time will tell.

I was not interested in the V1 until I used it and felt how responsive it was. Definitely a revelation. Then when you put it on electronic shutter and it goes silent, even better.

-- hide signature --
TEBnewyork
TEBnewyork Forum Pro • Posts: 11,337
Re: About the price

The V1 kit with two lenses was $995

So:
E-Pl3 $600
40-150 $250
EVF $180

G3 $579
45-200 $250

-- hide signature --
Jeremy_T Senior Member • Posts: 1,224
Re: Narrow in one sense

Ron Joiner wrote:

Potential buyers for the Nikon cameras will not be reading DPReview.

Certainly true for a large number of people. Of course there's a "trickle down" effect, too - even though they might not read DPR directly, they might have a friend (or a friend of a friend) who they turn to for advice who does.

But then again, I think the price will make it a non-starter for much of that target audience to begin with.

 Jeremy_T's gear list:Jeremy_T's gear list
Olympus OM-D E-M5 Olympus M.Zuiko Digital 45mm F1.8 Panasonic Leica Summilux DG 25mm F1.4 Panasonic 20mm F1.7 II
Lisa O
Lisa O Senior Member • Posts: 2,505
Re: Nikon Spanked By m4/3 in DPR Review?

It's seems to me they just don't think it's a photographers camera. They call it a fun, fun, fun camera for Soccer Moms. That might have worked back when most people went down to their local camera shop and the salesperson could demonstrate the features but that doesn't happen much nowadays. Also the price is 20%-30% too high, but I think i have recently seen rebates on the system.

-- hide signature --
 Lisa O's gear list:Lisa O's gear list
Sony RX1R II Olympus E-M1 Fujifilm X-T10 Sony Alpha a7R II Nikon D7200 +27 more
Everdog Veteran Member • Posts: 4,837
Re: Nice, but not practical for most.

TEBnewyork wrote:

As for lenses I don't really see any major overlaps that I need.

Sony 18-200, 30 macro, 50 f1.8, ultrawide zoom (not decided on yet), fast portrait

Nikon 10-30, 30-110, 40 macro (DX lens can do portraits for now) 70-200, 1.4x TC

I like macros for close focus not and sharpness not necessarily macro work

Well the Sony 18-200 and Nikon 10-30/30-110 pretty much overlap.

IF Sony follows though with the A55 replacement with the 24MP sensor, then you could get everything in one package. That Nikon with the big adapter just seems akward to me and makes little sense.

It is shame you got a bad copy of the 14-42X lens. I was shocked at how sharp mine was. It fits in my pocket and is an amazing lens. It is funny that my 2 best lenses are pancakes.

btw, tell me more about how the V1 feels. I only held on for a second and it seemed heavy. The sensor, lack of fast lens and no flash killed it for me. With a NEX you can live without a flash, but not the Nikon.

TEBnewyork
TEBnewyork Forum Pro • Posts: 11,337
Re: Nice, but not practical for most.

First up the 70-200 is about a 200 - 540 f2.8 lens. With teleconverter it is 280 - 756 at f4. It is hand holdable without tele-converter has a tripod foot for use on a gimbal. Not practical for most people and as I said i'm comparing it to the 100-300 with the custom tripod collar from Germany (a super well made adaption for the 100-300 that I highly recommend).

V1 feels good in the hand. It does weigh more than you would expect but I prefer a solid camera. I didn't go into m4/3 to have microscopic pocketable. I bought it to not carry a huge back of full frame lenses (I know that flies in the face of the 70-200 but that is not part of my everyday kit).

For me the size of the GF3 starts to get too small unless all you want for it is the 14-42x or one of the small primes.

I bought the flash for the V1 and really like it. Swivels and bounces and does a great job.

I'm not telling people to go out and buy the Nikon 1 and the issues that DPReview brought up are valid. In the thread on the Nikon forum the reviewers basically said if they solved the firmware issue would it change the review and the answer was yes (so similar to the firmware update on the X100 and NEX 5).

http://forums.dpreview.com/forums/read.asp?forum=1058&message=40377603

I was headed to AZ this weekend and the combo I chose for the weekend was the NEX 7 with 18-200 and contax G 35mm. fits in a very small bag/camera insert and in my carry on bag for the weekend. The NEX 7 is by far the best mirrorless camera so far, great controls, great IQ.
--
terry
http://www.terrybanet.com

pendigital Regular Member • Posts: 272
I disagree.

Jorgen E wrote:

LincolnB wrote:

... but they were quite limited and specific in any praise. They did not like it as a general purpose camera nor as a 'downgrade' for current DSLR owners. Their recommendation was limited to P&S upgraders shooting fast moving objects in bright light. That's narrow.

Exactly. I know 4 people (5, incl myself) who has bought the V1. And guess what, we're all keen Nikon DSLR shooters, ranging from "keen amateurs" to "seasoned semi-pros". The review doesn't reflect this one bit, but rather focuses on how this camera will be "to hard to use/understand for Soccer Moms".

This review should have been split up in two separate parts -- J1 and V1.
They are NOT the same type of camera!
They do NOT attract the same type of customers!

Nikon marketing is great. That is why Nikon DSLR owners are even considering the J1 or V1. I know zero pro's looking for a compact solution considering the J1 or V1. Frankly I've been using the Nikon system for longer than most posters here have been alive and between the super slow G evolution of the lens line and the introduction of plastic in what should be premium lenses I have been unimpressed by alot of Nikon's decisions for decades.

Ilkka Nissilä Veteran Member • Posts: 4,107
Re: Nikon 1 sounds pointless, even the focus system not impressive

There will be fast primes and other lenses over time. Micro Four Thirds was several years old before there was a proper lineup of primes. The Nikon 1 system is very new, it's somewhat understandable they didn't start with fast primes (since it's not an enthusiast market camera, but a consumer one).

As to the autofocus, I think on sensor phase detect AF is the way of the future. One thing that is special about it is that the F mount AF-S Nikkors autofocus on adapter as well as they would on a DSLR. There is no CDAF jitter when PDAF is working.

sigala1 Veteran Member • Posts: 3,818
Re: Nikon 1 sounds pointless, even the focus system not impressive

Ilkka Nissilä wrote:

As to the autofocus, I think on sensor phase detect AF is the way of the future. One thing that is special about it is that the F mount AF-S Nikkors autofocus on adapter as well as they would on a DSLR. There is no CDAF jitter when PDAF is working.

According to the review, Nikon DSLR lenses are not fully supported. They only work in S-AF mode, and they don't focus as fast as the native "1" lenses.

" The FT1 allows F-mount lenses to be used with 1 System cameras with impressively few limitations. AF-S lenses will achieve focus (using the cameras' phase-detection system, interestingly), and VR is supported using those lenses that offer it. Focus is 'single shot' only though - AF-C is not an option, and the system is noticeably less useful in poor lighting than we'd expect from one of Nikon's entry-level DSLRs, so although the 2.7x focal length magnification might be tempting, don't expect either the V1 or J1 to offer D7000-like (or even D3100-like) focussing speed or accuracy when coupled with one of your F-mount AF-S lenses."

justmeMN Veteran Member • Posts: 6,879
Poor camera for snapshooters

They call it a fun, fun, fun camera for Soccer Moms.

A DPR Con is:

"Conservative Auto ISO behavior can result in dangerously slow shutter speeds indoors (especially frustrating for social photography and continuous-advance shots of indoor sports)"

The Nikon 1 is a snapshot camera, that fails at auto-indoor snapshots. It's strange that Nikon managed to screw up something that is so simple and obvious.

pendigital Regular Member • Posts: 272
Re: Poor camera for snapshooters

justmeMN wrote:

They call it a fun, fun, fun camera for Soccer Moms.

A DPR Con is:

"Conservative Auto ISO behavior can result in dangerously slow shutter speeds indoors (especially frustrating for social photography and continuous-advance shots of indoor sports)"

The Nikon 1 is a snapshot camera, that fails at auto-indoor snapshots. It's strange that Nikon managed to screw up something that is so simple and obvious.

Having been both in love and frustrated by the Nikon DSLR interface all the way back to the D100 I am actually not suprised.

Everdog Veteran Member • Posts: 4,837
Re: Nice, but not practical for most.

TEBnewyork wrote:

I'm not telling people to go out and buy the Nikon 1....

Last year I told people that a sensor a little smaller than the 4/3rds sensor may be the best size. Lenses will be smaller and I personally like the larger crop factor.

I am sticking by that and so I think the Nikon is a good idea. Time will tell. My fear is that the higher ups at Nikon won't let the 1 compete with the DSLRs. They can't afford to let people thing that the larger format is being replaced.

Currently I am waiting to see what this OM camera is all about and then the GH3. If they let me down, then maybe I'll switch to Nikon. Maybe by then they will have a better sensor and better lenses.

pendigital Regular Member • Posts: 272
I don't own a J1 or V1

Kwick1 wrote:

It's unbelievable to me that DPR said that the Nikons had better high ISO performance than m43. Did they even look at their own comparison tool? It's not even close. The Nikons turn to mush while even the E-PL1 are great.
--
Thanks,

Mark
http://www.olwickphotography.com

But just by using their own comparison tool I have to agree with you. The V1 and J1 look nearly unuseable vs. the E-PM1 for example.

illy
illy Forum Pro • Posts: 12,160
Re: Nikon 1 sounds pointless, even the focus system not impressive

sigala1 wrote:

Ilkka Nissilä wrote:

As to the autofocus, I think on sensor phase detect AF is the way of the future. One thing that is special about it is that the F mount AF-S Nikkors autofocus on adapter as well as they would on a DSLR. There is no CDAF jitter when PDAF is working.

According to the review, Nikon DSLR lenses are not fully supported. They only work in S-AF mode, and they don't focus as fast as the native "1" lenses.

but it's still better than the 4/3rds to m4/3rds kludge

 illy's gear list:illy's gear list
Nikon D200 Nikon D5100 Panasonic Lumix DMC-GF1 Nikon AF-S Nikkor 50mm f/1.8G Sigma 500mm F4.5 EX DG HSM +4 more
TEBnewyork
TEBnewyork Forum Pro • Posts: 11,337
Re: Nikon 1 sounds pointless, even the focus system not impressive

Night and day difference. The Oly 150mm f2 was not useable on the G3, and my Oly 4/3 14-54 is just OK.

The 70-200 on the V1 is lightning fast.

illy wrote:

sigala1 wrote:

Ilkka Nissilä wrote:

As to the autofocus, I think on sensor phase detect AF is the way of the future. One thing that is special about it is that the F mount AF-S Nikkors autofocus on adapter as well as they would on a DSLR. There is no CDAF jitter when PDAF is working.

According to the review, Nikon DSLR lenses are not fully supported. They only work in S-AF mode, and they don't focus as fast as the native "1" lenses.

but it's still better than the 4/3rds to m4/3rds kludge

-- hide signature --
Keyboard shortcuts:
FForum MMy threads