Steve Huff v3 first impression/review

[istreetshooter]

I read his review, and it wasn't a review, it was a non review. How can anyone respect that? He did nothing besides take it out, ***** about how it felt cheap, and apparently felt too good to do any tests or post any photos or anything, I think it should be immediately dismissed.--
https://www.flickr.com/photos/northoceanbeach/

I concur that it wasn't a review and he clearly states it isn't one. I don't always agree with him, but his review of the Nikon V1 convinced me to buy one. I, too, was underwhelmed by the V2 because I expected more, and I don't have plans to buy the V3. I liked the V1 so much that I bought two, but I've been underwhelmed enough by the follow-ups to buy the Sony A6000.

Some of his reviews, particularly bag reviews, seem too positive.

 

[Bill Dewey]

em10 - $700
em1 - $1300
v3 with grip and evf - $1050
gx7 - $1000

So, we have the v3 right in the middle of the Olympus models, and a "pick-em" with the GX7. Pick the factors you think are more important. Better AF for tracking? Sensor size? Built-in stabilization? Nikon vs Olympus?

Thanks for giving me those models to choose from ;-)

Those are all matters of choice. One thing appears rather obvious to me, if the V3 is so darned over priced, then I guess looking at price only, the others must be as well, other than the em10.

For me the utility of the V3, and the Nikon 1 system, suits my personal needs for the AF tracking and ability to fully utilize my Nikon lenses that I already have "sunk costs". If I did not have those needs, the other brands would of far more interest to me, and I might even go so far as to say that if this was going to be my primary camera, rather than my 2nd or 3rd body, the others would be of more interest as well.

Point being, if you are going to complain about the V3 price, then at least be fair and make the same complaint about the others. As I, and others, have noted the bundle simply does not make a ton of sense. But would Steve Huff not be complaining about "too expensive" if the bundle was not in place? Hard to tell, I can't read his mind.

 

[Bill Dewey]

Nikon must really enjoy having customers who announce in advance that they will pay any price for their future camera, sight unseen, even if it's absolute garbage.

Personally Bill , I think if the V3 was at $500-$700 without the options included ,many of these same folks would still be bitching about the price or something else. Many folks just come in here to harp and complain just for the sake of being heard.How simple is it, if the camera isn't for you, or is too expensive, don't buy it, move on, why waste time trying to convince others to feel the same way, go get that other great deal of a camera system you constantly compare the V3 to. As far as Huff's tirant for 3 sec. on the V3, who cares. I have no problem paying the $1200 for the V3 package, couldn't care less what others think, I don't buy for them. Months from now while everyone is still ranting on about the same nonsense I will be enjoying my almost new V3. When the new V4 comes out, I will buy that one too.

Well, I just wonder what Leica thinks of THEIR customers, or what you think of them.

I am not going to try to put words in WCguy's mouth, but what I get from his post is that if Nikon gave you 2 V3's for the price of one people would still complain. Heck, I know folks who have a 300mm f2.8, 400mm f2.8, 500mm f4, 600mm f4 and the 800mm f5.6, all the latest versions because they wanted them. Heck, that makes the V3 even less than a drop in the bucket, and I can actually carry the V3 wherever I go! Try that will all the "long glass", and you have to factor in the cost of a Sherpa or two.

 

[Brandon birder]

As an interested party in the V3, that was a disappointing read. Hum!

Not sure why so many are disappointed. It wasn't a review. He gave no time to getting to know the camera nor in getting the best images from the camera. I will be playing with one next week and hope to spend more time than he did before I write any report.

It is expensive and so what is needed is to see if the extra features of the V3 merit that expense. That imo takes a few weeks to assess properly.

 

[jeff-c]

So, would people be much happier with the V3 if the entry cost was $500 instead of $1200?

EVF - $330
Grip - $164
FT-1 - $240

Prices from the Nikon USA site

If my math is close to correct that all adds up to about $730. Going to some even higher math, $1200 - $730 = something close to $470.

Hmmmmm, and that includes 1 lens. What is the price of comparable bodies/systems? Would the reviewers and pundits, Thom Hogan included, have a different "opinion" if Nikon did not force the "bundle" price.

In my case I will sell the FT-1, as I already have one, along with a lens, so I will reduce my total outlay by perhaps $400, I just don't see how the V3 itself is that expensive, considering other cameras in the category.

That's not how to derive the V3 body only price as a bundle price includes discount of all the parts.

Since Nikon does sell V3 body only in Japan, a quick check in kakaku reveals follwing:

V3 body only: US$766

V3 10-30 kit: US$841

V3 EVF/Grip: US$1,147 which is in line with the US V3 super kit.

Digging through past news we have:

V2 10-30 kit: US$899.95

V1 10-30 kit: US$899.95

So it seems the V3 10-30 kit is pretty much the same as the V1/V2 kit.

However, both V1 and V2 have built-in EVF and V3 doesn't. And V2 has built-in grip which costs Nikon a dime or so. V3 in my opinion gives Nikon a much better profit margin, either selling with or without EVF/grip.

The FT-1 is a temporary giveaway by Nikon USA.

 

[Nung]

I'm still trying to sort this all out. The a6000 seems to be a completely different beast. With an APS-C sensor the lenses are not going to be small if some reach is needed. Seems like the choice would be more an a6000 vs a DX camera.

I already have an FX camera. If I am going to buy something that is almost as big and heavy as a DX camera with lenses almost as big and heavy, then I'll buy a DX camera so I can at least use all of my existing lenses.

Some of the other options given have poor lens choice or aren't even interchangeable lens (x100S). So I for one am a bit baffled by the advice. The v3 seems to fit a unique spot that is different enough from DX to be with the trouble.

I am considering the v3 as a companion to my FX camera, but am honestly somewhat nervous about the image quality and low light capability. If it can come close to what my D300 used to do (dof differences aside) then I think it would work for me. Even if it would land somewhere between the D200 and D300 in low light capability that would still be impressive. But I'm really not sure.

The lens size has always been the NEX series's main problem. Also there are very few good lenses which doesn't help either. It's size is quite reasonable if you're using a pancake prime lens but anything else, it becomes quite large. To get the best out of the camera, you most likely need to go with Zesis lenses, which cost you an arm and a leg.

If you already have a FX camera, going with DX isn't gonna give you much of a size advantage. The low light performance isn't that much worst then a D300. Certainly similar or pretty close to my old D90.

 

[dougjgreen1]

em10 - $700
em1 - $1300
v3 with grip and evf - $1050
gx7 - $1000

So, we have the v3 right in the middle of the Olympus models, and a "pick-em" with the GX7. Pick the factors you think are more important. Better AF for tracking? Sensor size? Built-in stabilization? Nikon vs Olympus?

Thanks for giving me those models to choose from ;-)

Those are all matters of choice. One thing appears rather obvious to me, if the V3 is so darned over priced, then I guess looking at price only, the others must be as well, other than the em10.

For me the utility of the V3, and the Nikon 1 system, suits my personal needs for the AF tracking and ability to fully utilize my Nikon lenses that I already have "sunk costs". If I did not have those needs, the other brands would of far more interest to me, and I might even go so far as to say that if this was going to be my primary camera, rather than my 2nd or 3rd body, the others would be of more interest as well.

Point being, if you are going to complain about the V3 price, then at least be fair and make the same complaint about the others. As I, and others, have noted the bundle simply does not make a ton of sense. But would Steve Huff not be complaining about "too expensive" if the bundle was not in place? Hard to tell, I can't read his mind.

 

[dougjgreen1]

Nikon must really enjoy having customers who announce in advance that they will pay any price for their future camera, sight unseen, even if it's absolute garbage.

Personally Bill , I think if the V3 was at $500-$700 without the options included ,many of these same folks would still be bitching about the price or something else. Many folks just come in here to harp and complain just for the sake of being heard.How simple is it, if the camera isn't for you, or is too expensive, don't buy it, move on, why waste time trying to convince others to feel the same way, go get that other great deal of a camera system you constantly compare the V3 to. As far as Huff's tirant for 3 sec. on the V3, who cares. I have no problem paying the $1200 for the V3 package, couldn't care less what others think, I don't buy for them. Months from now while everyone is still ranting on about the same nonsense I will be enjoying my almost new V3. When the new V4 comes out, I will buy that one too.

Well, I just wonder what Leica thinks of THEIR customers, or what you think of them.

I am not going to try to put words in WCguy's mouth, but what I get from his post is that if Nikon gave you 2 V3's for the price of one people would still complain. Heck, I know folks who have a 300mm f2.8, 400mm f2.8, 500mm f4, 600mm f4 and the 800mm f5.6, all the latest versions because they wanted them. Heck, that makes the V3 even less than a drop in the bucket, and I can actually carry the V3 wherever I go! Try that will all the "long glass", and you have to factor in the cost of a Sherpa or two.

 

[photoreddi]

As an interested party in the V3, that was a disappointing read. Hum!

Not sure why so many are disappointed. It wasn't a review. He gave no time to getting to know the camera nor in getting the best images from the camera. I will be playing with one next week and hope to spend more time than he did before I write any report.

It was disappointing to some of his readers that previously might have respected his exaggerated, admittedly fan-boyish (which he readily admits) reviews.

.

It is expensive and so what is needed is to see if the extra features of the V3 merit that expense. That imo takes a few weeks to assess properly.

Even ignoring the non-optional features (articulating, touch sensitive LCD, faster speed, etc.) the V3's image quality is significantly better than the J1/V1. The V2 only advanced IQ by a much smaller amount. The IQ difference is seen in crops of images posted by Steve Huff using the 10mm lens with his son's J1 and the V3.

http://www.dpreview.com/forums/post/53610138

 

[AustinTed]

The lens size has always been the NEX series's main problem. Also there are very few good lenses which doesn't help either. It's size is quite reasonable if you're using a pancake prime lens but anything else, it becomes quite large. To get the best out of the camera, you most likely need to go with Zesis lenses, which cost you an arm and a leg.

If you already have a FX camera, going with DX isn't gonna give you much of a size advantage. The low light performance isn't that much worst then a D300. Certainly similar or pretty close to my old D90.

A D3300 would be half the weight as a D800. That might be enough for some people. But you are right that it doesn't come close to the V3. Ultimately you run into the same lens size issue with DX as you do with the NEX.

Nikon positioned the CX system in a unique way in terms of the overall compactness and speed of the system. It is something that could continue to live on even if DX went fully mirrorless in the future. They positioned it a unique way and they are pricing it accordingly. Much of the debates rage around how many people value it's uniqueness.

 

[Kevin Omura]

Nikon must really enjoy having customers who announce in advance that they will pay any price for their future camera, sight unseen, even if it's absolute garbage.

Personally Bill , I think if the V3 was at $500-$700 without the options included ,many of these same folks would still be bitching about the price or something else. Many folks just come in here to harp and complain just for the sake of being heard.How simple is it, if the camera isn't for you, or is too expensive, don't buy it, move on, why waste time trying to convince others to feel the same way, go get that other great deal of a camera system you constantly compare the V3 to. As far as Huff's tirant for 3 sec. on the V3, who cares. I have no problem paying the $1200 for the V3 package, couldn't care less what others think, I don't buy for them. Months from now while everyone is still ranting on about the same nonsense I will be enjoying my almost new V3. When the new V4 comes out, I will buy that one too.

Well, I just wonder what Leica thinks of THEIR customers, or what you think of them.

I am not going to try to put words in WCguy's mouth, but what I get from his post is that if Nikon gave you 2 V3's for the price of one people would still complain. Heck, I know folks who have a 300mm f2.8, 400mm f2.8, 500mm f4, 600mm f4 and the 800mm f5.6, all the latest versions because they wanted them. Heck, that makes the V3 even less than a drop in the bucket, and I can actually carry the V3 wherever I go! Try that will all the "long glass", and you have to factor in the cost of a Sherpa or two.

 

[Hman83]

In the UK, the GX7 is available for £750 with the 20mm F1.7 II (worth £290) and the new 12-32mm lens (worth £300) which has received great reviews. This makes the GX7 body valued at £160! Both the 20mm F1.7 and 12-32mm lens are the ones I want so this is an absolute stonking deal for me. A further £100 can be saved if the normal 14-42 lens would do.

Loading…

www.parkcameras.com

Also, the new 12-32mm is as small as the new Nikon 1 PD zoom 10-30 lens which further makes the case of the small Nikon 1 lenses as an advantage void; which can be seen here:

Loading…

camerasize.com

Through in a free 2 year warranty from Panasonic to bring it in line with Germany and this for me is really icing on the cake.

 

[Northoceanbeach]

I don't think we can compare it to prices from japan or any other country, that's not that far removed from saying I found a street stall in Korea that had the V3 for 500, or some guy was selling them out of the back of his van.

You certainly cant subtract for the viewfinder. That is NOT worth $350. A camera like this should come with one built in, or if they want to make it remofeable, it's still a part of the camera. I think the grip should be too.

I did go read the short comparison to the j1. It doesn't look that much better. I feel like the v3 should offer a significant improvement over the j1. What was sony's first mirrorless, c3? Something 3. The new a6000 is a huge improvement. Even the nex 7 was. I'm glad to know my j1 is really good. But to get me to upgrade I need much better. Since he mentioned the microSD card again, I think his review is almost entirely based off of that. It's not that big of a deal. Maybe microSD is the future. Nobody said the new iPhones were crap as they slowly shrank the SIM cards. The battery is basically the same as j1 so that's good. the lens looks great, but no threads? I'm new, but I'm under the impression that A polarizer is one of the things you can't reproduce pp.

--

Northoceanbeach1

Explore Northoceanbeach1’s 70 photos on Flickr!

www.flickr.com

 

[dougjgreen1]

Nikon must really enjoy having customers who announce in advance that they will pay any price for their future camera, sight unseen, even if it's absolute garbage.

Personally Bill , I think if the V3 was at $500-$700 without the options included ,many of these same folks would still be bitching about the price or something else. Many folks just come in here to harp and complain just for the sake of being heard.How simple is it, if the camera isn't for you, or is too expensive, don't buy it, move on, why waste time trying to convince others to feel the same way, go get that other great deal of a camera system you constantly compare the V3 to. As far as Huff's tirant for 3 sec. on the V3, who cares. I have no problem paying the $1200 for the V3 package, couldn't care less what others think, I don't buy for them. Months from now while everyone is still ranting on about the same nonsense I will be enjoying my almost new V3. When the new V4 comes out, I will buy that one too.

Well, I just wonder what Leica thinks of THEIR customers, or what you think of them.

I am not going to try to put words in WCguy's mouth, but what I get from his post is that if Nikon gave you 2 V3's for the price of one people would still complain. Heck, I know folks who have a 300mm f2.8, 400mm f2.8, 500mm f4, 600mm f4 and the 800mm f5.6, all the latest versions because they wanted them. Heck, that makes the V3 even less than a drop in the bucket, and I can actually carry the V3 wherever I go! Try that will all the "long glass", and you have to factor in the cost of a Sherpa or two.

 

[coolcatdaddy]

However, the delay of a refined N1 system camera led me to experiment with m4/3. I bought a Panasonic G6 and equivalent lenses to the 10-30/30-110 for $639 from B&H....only $90 more than the original V1+ 2 lens purchase.

--

Warren

me too. got tired of being in limbo and bought a used omd-em5. i mean i dont really see the ft-1 as a real solution to the dearth of 1 lenses. i got the 1 system to AVOID having to buy full sized lenses.

 

[timmer350]

This is making it really hard for me to choose the V3 or a m43... I wanted to see the quality of the new 1 70-300 before making my decision. Waiting till June is going to be the only solution. The m43 alternative would be the 100-300...

T

 

[Kevin Omura]

Nikon must really enjoy having customers who announce in advance that they will pay any price for their future camera, sight unseen, even if it's absolute garbage.

Personally Bill , I think if the V3 was at $500-$700 without the options included ,many of these same folks would still be bitching about the price or something else. Many folks just come in here to harp and complain just for the sake of being heard.How simple is it, if the camera isn't for you, or is too expensive, don't buy it, move on, why waste time trying to convince others to feel the same way, go get that other great deal of a camera system you constantly compare the V3 to. As far as Huff's tirant for 3 sec. on the V3, who cares. I have no problem paying the $1200 for the V3 package, couldn't care less what others think, I don't buy for them. Months from now while everyone is still ranting on about the same nonsense I will be enjoying my almost new V3. When the new V4 comes out, I will buy that one too.

Well, I just wonder what Leica thinks of THEIR customers, or what you think of them.

I am not going to try to put words in WCguy's mouth, but what I get from his post is that if Nikon gave you 2 V3's for the price of one people would still complain. Heck, I know folks who have a 300mm f2.8, 400mm f2.8, 500mm f4, 600mm f4 and the 800mm f5.6, all the latest versions because they wanted them. Heck, that makes the V3 even less than a drop in the bucket, and I can actually carry the V3 wherever I go! Try that will all the "long glass", and you have to factor in the cost of a Sherpa or two.

--
Bill Dewey
www.thefocusedeye.com

What I think of most Leica customers nowadays is not all that much. They are buying camera jewelry to wear. I find it amusing that a Nikon owner would strive to be like Leica customers.

You sure you want to go down that same narrow minded path as huff?

Yup, there are Leica customers who are probably non photographers but there are plenty who do use the equipment myself included.Perhaps because I have always viewed the camera as a tool, just as a carpenter views his hammer as a tool or a musician his guitar. That is esentially all these things are, no more and no less.

I said MOST Leica customers. I did not say ALL of them. But I do mean to include the folks who buy $5000+ commemorative edition bodies, and anything that's Leica-Branded Panasonic product that is available for far less under the Panasonic brand. The fact is, Leica DOES make great lenses, which, BTW can easily be adapted to Sony mirrorless bodies, Micro-4/3 bodies, Fujifilm bodies, Ricoh bodies, etc.

I feel comfortable saying that the percentage of current/recent Leica buyers who actually know about and knowledgeably use the specific things that Leica products provide photographically relative to the competition is a small minority of the overall customer base. I used to be one of them, back in the film days - but I bailed when it became apparent that the tax to own a modern Leica digital body would exceed that of a recent model used car.

And you would be incorrect. And you would again be incorrect in assuming that the cost of a digital M body is higher than the value of a recent used car. Perhaps if you swapped recent for decent I might reconsider those statements.

The only part of any of that I agree with is that you can attach Leica M lenses through mount adaptors to a lot of various bodies such as my Nikon 1's and M4/3 gear among others.

 

[Paul Pasco]

This is making it really hard for me to choose the V3 or a m43... I wanted to see the quality of the new 1 70-300 before making my decision. Waiting till June is going to be the only solution. The m43 alternative would be the 100-300...

T

 

[dougjgreen1]

Nikon must really enjoy having customers who announce in advance that they will pay any price for their future camera, sight unseen, even if it's absolute garbage.

Personally Bill , I think if the V3 was at $500-$700 without the options included ,many of these same folks would still be bitching about the price or something else. Many folks just come in here to harp and complain just for the sake of being heard.How simple is it, if the camera isn't for you, or is too expensive, don't buy it, move on, why waste time trying to convince others to feel the same way, go get that other great deal of a camera system you constantly compare the V3 to. As far as Huff's tirant for 3 sec. on the V3, who cares. I have no problem paying the $1200 for the V3 package, couldn't care less what others think, I don't buy for them. Months from now while everyone is still ranting on about the same nonsense I will be enjoying my almost new V3. When the new V4 comes out, I will buy that one too.

Well, I just wonder what Leica thinks of THEIR customers, or what you think of them.

I am not going to try to put words in WCguy's mouth, but what I get from his post is that if Nikon gave you 2 V3's for the price of one people would still complain. Heck, I know folks who have a 300mm f2.8, 400mm f2.8, 500mm f4, 600mm f4 and the 800mm f5.6, all the latest versions because they wanted them. Heck, that makes the V3 even less than a drop in the bucket, and I can actually carry the V3 wherever I go! Try that will all the "long glass", and you have to factor in the cost of a Sherpa or two.

--
Bill Dewey
www.thefocusedeye.com

What I think of most Leica customers nowadays is not all that much. They are buying camera jewelry to wear. I find it amusing that a Nikon owner would strive to be like Leica customers.

You sure you want to go down that same narrow minded path as huff?

Yup, there are Leica customers who are probably non photographers but there are plenty who do use the equipment myself included.Perhaps because I have always viewed the camera as a tool, just as a carpenter views his hammer as a tool or a musician his guitar. That is esentially all these things are, no more and no less.

I said MOST Leica customers. I did not say ALL of them. But I do mean to include the folks who buy $5000+ commemorative edition bodies, and anything that's Leica-Branded Panasonic product that is available for far less under the Panasonic brand. The fact is, Leica DOES make great lenses, which, BTW can easily be adapted to Sony mirrorless bodies, Micro-4/3 bodies, Fujifilm bodies, Ricoh bodies, etc.

I feel comfortable saying that the percentage of current/recent Leica buyers who actually know about and knowledgeably use the specific things that Leica products provide photographically relative to the competition is a small minority of the overall customer base. I used to be one of them, back in the film days - but I bailed when it became apparent that the tax to own a modern Leica digital body would exceed that of a recent model used car.

And you would be incorrect. And you would again be incorrect in assuming that the cost of a digital M body is higher than the value of a recent used car. Perhaps if you swapped recent for decent I might reconsider those statements.

Sorry, but you can certainly buy a recent model used car for under $6-7K, which is what a Leica M-Type digital body sells for presently. I also think you would be very hard pressed to prove that the MAJORITY of current Leica buyers are taking superior photos with their ~$7000 bodies than the average professional photographer can routinely take with much more pedestrian Nikon or Canon DSLRs. But feel free to show me whatever proof you can muster to that effect. My statement was an opinion based upon the majority of Leica shooters I've met in recent years. You claiming it's incorrect - well, feel free to back that up with some factual basis.

BTW, a cursory check of the AutoTrader online shows that within the area near where I live - Southern California, which is an expensive market for cars, any number of used cars can be found from 2008 or newer with asking prices under $6000. And that's ASKING price, not selling price.

Loading…

www.getauto.com

The only part of any of that I agree with is that you can attach Leica M lenses through mount adaptors to a lot of various bodies such as my Nikon 1's and M4/3 gear among others.

 

[MarsObserver]

In the UK, the GX7 is available for £750 with the 20mm F1.7 II (worth £290) and the new 12-32mm lens (worth £300) which has received great reviews. This makes the GX7 body valued at £160! Both the 20mm F1.7 and 12-32mm lens are the ones I want so this is an absolute stonking deal for me. A further £100 can be saved if the normal 14-42 lens would do.

http://www.parkcameras.com/26386/Panasonic-DMC-GX7---20mm---Black.html

Also, the new 12-32mm is as small as the new Nikon 1 PD zoom 10-30 lens which further makes the case of the small Nikon 1 lenses as an advantage void; which can be seen here:

http://camerasize.com/compact/#544.416,472.397,ha,t

Through in a free 2 year warranty from Panasonic to bring it in line with Germany and this for me is really icing on the cake.

I loved my 20mm f1.7 lens (had it for many years) and the GX7 looks like a camera! L750 seems like a good deal.