Cancelled my FZ1000 order for now.

Started Jul 6, 2014 | Discussions
technic Veteran Member • Posts: 8,932
Re: Check out these photos with that sensor and 70-300 CX

semifast wrote:

If you already have a DSLR that's superior to the FZ1000, why are you interested in it ?

My DSLR is slower with AF/focusing, framerate and for pointing the camera in the right direction for fast moving subjects (due to weight / size). A DSLR that can compete with these recent 1 inch sensor cameras on speed would be very heavy and expensive. I think that sometimes a smaller camera with long focal length, fast AF and high framerate can capture images that are impossible with my current camera. The image quality will be a bit lower than what I'm used to, but that's always better than missing most photo opportunities

The Nikon 1 V3 / CX70-300 combo looks like it could do the job for me but it is very expensive for a 'niche' application. If FZ1000 comes close to the Nikon combo I will probably buy it; I will keep an eye on what images users can take with this camera when it becomes available.

Vandyu Veteran Member • Posts: 8,891
Re: Nikon 1 V3 has Phase detect.
2

I'm not sure that Nikon wants to be competitive. For years they have produced superzoom cameras that cannot compare with the Panasonic FZ lineup. My impression is that they make a product to have something to offer friends and relatives of Nikon DSLR owners. I have owned Nikon cameras for years (DSLRs) and when I was looking for a superzoom, I considered all brands and wound up with the FZ150 after owning an FZ20 several years ago. Occasionally I get excited by Nikon's advanced P&S models, but when I read the reviews, that fades away.

phazelag wrote:

Lab D wrote:

Looks like another wish list turned rumor.

As for a an RX10 II, The 1 inch sensor has not changed much and none have PDAF pxiels to compete with the FZ1000 DFD. IF they increase the focal length the lens will get a lot larger or aperture smaller. Worst of all Sony has a habit of raising prices or keep price points the same (if new features are added especially) so expect another $1300 IF one ever comes which it may not for a while. I doubt they will add 4K soon because they are still trying to sell the AX100 for $2000.

I think if Nikon wants to be competitive the will put the same 1 inch sensor from the V3 in this camera. It has Phase detect and the reports say its pretty fast.

-- hide signature --

If life is, indeed, a journey, ask yourself how you can make it as interesting as possible, so that at each day's end, you can give a good accounting of what you have learned.

 Vandyu's gear list:Vandyu's gear list
Nikon D80 Nikon AF-S DX Nikkor 18-135mm f/3.5-5.6G ED-IF Nikon AF-S DX Nikkor 18-200mm f/3.5-5.6G ED VR II Nikon AF-S DX Nikkor 18-55mm f/3.5-5.6G VR II +9 more
cainn24 Veteran Member • Posts: 4,892
Re: Check out these photos with that sensor and 70-300 CX

technic wrote:

The Nikon 1 V3 / CX70-300 combo looks like it could do the job for me but it is very expensive for a 'niche' application.

It's almost offensively expensive actually. Everything about the system is way over-priced. I mean seriously, a 70-300 lens for $1000, that isn't even fast? We're only talking ~$550 for a micro four thirds equivalent. Yes, the effective reach is a little less, but you have superior light gathering capability (the Nikon 1 70-300 is only f/6.1 to f/7.6 in micro four thirds equivalent terms).

In fact with MFT you have access to a plethora of much cheaper glass. Cheaper bodies too, depending on your needs.

Really, I don't know what Nikon are thinking with their pricing. There will always be some adopters of course regardless of the price, but how do they expect to reach critical mass?

technic Veteran Member • Posts: 8,932
Re: Check out these photos with that sensor and 70-300 CX

cainn24 wrote:

technic wrote:

The Nikon 1 V3 / CX70-300 combo looks like it could do the job for me but it is very expensive for a 'niche' application.

It's almost offensively expensive actually. Everything about the system is way over-priced. I mean seriously, a 70-300 lens for $1000, that isn't even fast? We're only talking ~$550 for a micro four thirds equivalent. Yes, the effective reach is a little less, but you have superior light gathering capability (the Nikon 1 70-300 is only f/6.1 to f/7.6 in micro four thirds equivalent terms).

In fact with MFT you have access to a plethora of much cheaper glass. Cheaper bodies too, depending on your needs.

Really, I don't know what Nikon are thinking with their pricing. There will always be some adopters of course regardless of the price, but how do they expect to reach critical mass?

The nikon cx70-300 lens is probably worth the high price, it is well built and really sharp (judging from sample images) even at full zoom. This is not the quality you get from a m43 consumer zoom or the normal Nikon (DSLR) 70-300 zooms but a clear step up. Lenses that are a bit better are often much more expensive ...

I have more problems with the camera, price for a V3 + EVF is ridiculous IMHO compared to the competition. The cheaper m43 bodies definitely can't compete on (AF) speed so those are no option for me, the would be worse than my current DSLR. I don't think Nikon wants 'critical mass' with these prices ;-(

cainn24 Veteran Member • Posts: 4,892
Re: Check out these photos with that sensor and 70-300 CX

technic wrote:

cainn24 wrote:

technic wrote:

The Nikon 1 V3 / CX70-300 combo looks like it could do the job for me but it is very expensive for a 'niche' application.

It's almost offensively expensive actually. Everything about the system is way over-priced. I mean seriously, a 70-300 lens for $1000, that isn't even fast? We're only talking ~$550 for a micro four thirds equivalent. Yes, the effective reach is a little less, but you have superior light gathering capability (the Nikon 1 70-300 is only f/6.1 to f/7.6 in micro four thirds equivalent terms).

In fact with MFT you have access to a plethora of much cheaper glass. Cheaper bodies too, depending on your needs.

Really, I don't know what Nikon are thinking with their pricing. There will always be some adopters of course regardless of the price, but how do they expect to reach critical mass?

The nikon cx70-300 lens is probably worth the high price, it is well built and really sharp (judging from sample images) even at full zoom. This is not the quality you get from a m43 consumer zoom or the normal Nikon (DSLR) 70-300 zooms but a clear step up. Lenses that are a bit better are often much more expensive ...

Really? I haven't seen anything to suggest that the 70-300 is sharper than the MFT equivalents. Has there been any controlled testing that involved such a direct comparison?

The cheaper m43 bodies definitely can't compete on (AF) speed so those are no option for me,

I'd also be interested in seeing this particular difference properly quantified too.

coody
coody Senior Member • Posts: 1,875
Re: Cancelled my FZ1000 order for now - You should not place an order at all.

No text.

cainn24 Veteran Member • Posts: 4,892
Re: Cancelled my FZ1000 order for now - You should not place an order at all.

What a profound response.  Very well articulated too.

estero
estero Senior Member • Posts: 1,537
Re: Cancelled my FZ1000 order for now.

Where is Canon been??? How about an 18-2250mm?? with a 1"sensor.

halfwaythere Contributing Member • Posts: 889
Re: Cancelled my FZ1000 order for now.
1

I'm still trying to decide if this thread is pure trolling or a diversion meant to draw attention to the nikon 1 system.

I don't think Nikon will sabotage their 1 system by introducing a fixed lens alternative. They have enough problems as it is since their are selling most of their 1 products at firesale prices.

phazelag
OP phazelag Veteran Member • Posts: 3,145
Not Trolling. Lots of good stuff being talked about.
1

halfwaythere wrote:

I'm still trying to decide if this thread is pure trolling or a diversion meant to draw attention to the nikon 1 system.

I don't think Nikon will sabotage their 1 system by introducing a fixed lens alternative. They have enough problems as it is since their are selling most of their 1 products at firesale prices.

This isn't trolling.  My interest in the Nikon 1 system is based on the 70-300 CX lens.  Which is 189mm to 810mm equivalent.  The reason I posted in this Forum is because there plenty of people here who photograph birds who see the potential of that combo for birds and bugs.

I realize the P700 rumor is far fetched.  But there are plenty of people here who would still welcome a true super zoom with a decent reach.  I can't afford the Nikon 1 V3 with that lens right now.  The FZ1000 is more in line with my price and will meet many needs for me, but I am still baffled that High quality Superzoom from any company that could beet my FZ200 is still not out.  Yes the the FZ1000 is superior in lots of ways, but I still welcome a brand who makes maybe a 2/3rds sensor with 1000mm in high quality.

If you look at my gear, my galleries, my challenges,  I am not here to troll.  I am here like everyone else to talk the merits of equipment.  I would love for a company to pay me, but thats not happening.

 phazelag's gear list:phazelag's gear list
Panasonic Lumix DMC-LF1 Sony RX100 III Panasonic FZ1000 Fujifilm XQ2 Olympus Tough TG-4 +6 more
phazelag
OP phazelag Veteran Member • Posts: 3,145
Most people here have good intentions

halfwaythere wrote:

I'm still trying to decide if this thread is pure trolling or a diversion meant to draw attention to the nikon 1 system.

I don't think Nikon will sabotage their 1 system by introducing a fixed lens alternative. They have enough problems as it is since their are selling most of their 1 products at firesale prices.

I say this about all the forums, but especially this one.  People may not understand someones intentions of point of view until much clarification, but I rarely see a post based on an agenda.

 phazelag's gear list:phazelag's gear list
Panasonic Lumix DMC-LF1 Sony RX100 III Panasonic FZ1000 Fujifilm XQ2 Olympus Tough TG-4 +6 more
JoePhoto Veteran Member • Posts: 6,916
Re: Cancelled my FZ1000 order for now.

estero wrote:

Where is Canon been??? How about an 18-2250mm?? with a 1"sensor.

At constant f/2, I would buy it .... (ok, even if only 2.8).

But STILL not quite at my 14mm I want .... but at least it would not take much of a WA convertor to get there from 18.  (even easily doable from 20mm with a .7)

-- hide signature --

Thanks for reading .... JoePhoto
( Do You Ever STOP to THINK --- and FORGET to START Again ??? )

JoePhoto Veteran Member • Posts: 6,916
Skeptical of Nikon Super-Zoom

I am a 50 year Nikon user. Still have all Nikon glass.

But I am past my "pro" days and want super-zoom now.

Got the Nikon P-500 for its 22mm lens. But HATED the camera. (slow in every way - setup and shooting, HDR unusable, no filter-threads, etc.)

Maybe this new camera could/may be better, (really could not be worse), but I am skeptical of any super-zoom from Nikon.

With all the features on the FZ-1000, it seems like it only needs a 20mm WA and "waterfall" mode to be PERFECT.

-- hide signature --

Thanks for reading .... JoePhoto
( Do You Ever STOP to THINK --- and FORGET to START Again ??? )

halfwaythere Contributing Member • Posts: 889
Re: Not Trolling. Lots of good stuff being talked about.

phazelag wrote:

halfwaythere wrote:

I'm still trying to decide if this thread is pure trolling or a diversion meant to draw attention to the nikon 1 system.

I don't think Nikon will sabotage their 1 system by introducing a fixed lens alternative. They have enough problems as it is since their are selling most of their 1 products at firesale prices.

This isn't trolling. My interest in the Nikon 1 system is based on the 70-300 CX lens. Which is 189mm to 810mm equivalent. The reason I posted in this Forum is because there plenty of people here who photograph birds who see the potential of that combo for birds and bugs.

I realize the P700 rumor is far fetched. But there are plenty of people here who would still welcome a true super zoom with a decent reach. I can't afford the Nikon 1 V3 with that lens right now. The FZ1000 is more in line with my price and will meet many needs for me, but I am still baffled that High quality Superzoom from any company that could beet my FZ200 is still not out. Yes the the FZ1000 is superior in lots of ways, but I still welcome a brand who makes maybe a 2/3rds sensor with 1000mm in high quality.

If you look at my gear, my galleries, my challenges, I am not here to troll. I am here like everyone else to talk the merits of equipment. I would love for a company to pay me, but thats not happening.

I suggest you re-read the title of this thread. If that's not a cry for attention I don't know what is. And the fact that you base your argument on an unsubstantiated ludicrous rumor doesn't really help your claim that you're not trolling.

You either have a severe physics understanding deficiency that lets you believe that a manufacturer would build a product so ridiculous or you simply don't need the FZ1000. Either way it's not something worth sharing on the internet.

technic Veteran Member • Posts: 8,932
Re: Check out these photos with that sensor and 70-300 CX

cainn24 wrote:

The nikon cx70-300 lens is probably worth the high price, it is well built and really sharp (judging from sample images) even at full zoom. This is not the quality you get from a m43 consumer zoom or the normal Nikon (DSLR) 70-300 zooms but a clear step up. Lenses that are a bit better are often much more expensive ...

Really? I haven't seen anything to suggest that the 70-300 is sharper than the MFT equivalents. Has there been any controlled testing that involved such a direct comparison?

no, of course there hasn't been a controlled test (which would be almost impossible for bird shots etc. ...). But the images from experienced Nikon 1 users with this lens look VERY sharp, and most of the images I see from m43 zooms taken at the long end from the zoom look far from convincing. I'm pretty sure there is a significant different in lens quality (maybe also significant sample variation, on m43 ...).

P.S.: this is also a deciding factor for FZ1000: the top end of the zoom range needs to be really sharp near wide open, otherwise I'm not interested. For me the camera would be only for certain nature/wildlife/closeup shots and not for general use. I'm not really going to use the lower part of the zoom range (although image quality on sample shots looks VERY good for such a big zoom range). The short 'preview' on Luminous Landscape wasn't very positive about the top end of the FZ1000 zoom but I doubt LL is the most reliable source for this type of testing. Maybe the better sensor of FZ1000 (compared to Nikon 1) can compensate for slightly lower optical quality?

The cheaper m43 bodies definitely can't compete on (AF) speed so those are no option for me,

I'd also be interested in seeing this particular difference properly quantified too.

come on, everyone knows DSLRs have better AF (speed/tracking) than older mirrorless cameras ...

technic Veteran Member • Posts: 8,932
Re: Not Trolling. Lots of good stuff being talked about.

halfwaythere wrote:

I suggest you re-read the title of this thread. If that's not a cry for attention I don't know what is. And the fact that you base your argument on an unsubstantiated ludicrous rumor doesn't really help your claim that you're not trolling.

You either have a severe physics understanding deficiency that lets you believe that a manufacturer would build a product so ridiculous or you simply don't need the FZ1000. Either way it's not something worth sharing on the internet.

said otherwise: don't doubt, stick to the fanboy gospel and BUY with both hands!

technic Veteran Member • Posts: 8,932
Re: Cancelled my FZ1000 order for now.

JoePhoto wrote:

estero wrote:

Where is Canon been??? How about an 18-2250mm?? with a 1"sensor.

At constant f/2, I would buy it .... (ok, even if only 2.8).

the big question is, how are you going to carry it? The front lens will be at least 30cm diameter even with the 'modest'  f/2.8 aperture. And I guess you must be a bankster if you even contemplate buying such a lens

cainn24 Veteran Member • Posts: 4,892
Re: Check out these photos with that sensor and 70-300 CX

technic wrote:

cainn24 wrote:

Really? I haven't seen anything to suggest that the 70-300 is sharper than the MFT equivalents. Has there been any controlled testing that involved such a direct comparison?

no, of course there hasn't been a controlled test (which would be almost impossible for bird shots etc. ...).

By definition a controlled test wouldn't involve a restless subject. In order to get an idea of how much feather detail you can resolve with a particular lens in ideal conditions, all you need is subject matter with a similar degree of fine detail.

But the images from experienced Nikon 1 users with this lens look VERY sharp

What does and does not constitute "VERY sharp" is invariably a matter of opinion. In fact such strong adjectives should probably be reserved for describing prime lenses, unless you have phrases like "ridiculously, unbelievably, STUPIDLY sharp" in reserve for just those sorts of special occasions.

Anyway, perhaps an example would be the best benchmark

, and most of the images I see from m43 zooms taken at the long end from the zoom look far from convincing.

Show me the Nikon 1 70-300mm shots, at full tele, that have convinced you that it is clearly superior to the best results achievable with an equivalent MFT lens.

Understand though that I'm not just making you work here because I feel like being an a-hole, I'm actually very interested in having the best compact birding setup I can get myself. But I'm not about to be swayed by marketing hype and the enthusiasm it generates in lieu of actual definitive evidence.

The cheaper m43 bodies definitely can't compete on (AF) speed so those are no option for me,

I'd also be interested in seeing this particular difference properly quantified too.

come on, everyone knows DSLRs have better AF (speed/tracking) than older mirrorless cameras ...

Again, I am interested in the comparison between the Nikon 1 V3 and all the more affordable MFT bodies.

technic Veteran Member • Posts: 8,932
Re: Check out these photos with that sensor and 70-300 CX

cainn24 wrote:

But the images from experienced Nikon 1 users with this lens look VERY sharp

What does and does not constitute "VERY sharp" is invariably a matter of opinion. In fact such strong adjectives should probably be reserved for describing prime lenses, unless you have phrases like "ridiculously, unbelievably, STUPIDLY sharp" in reserve for just those sorts of special occasions.

Anyway, perhaps an example would be the best benchmark

one example is this post:

http://www.dpreview.com/forums/post/53972239

Keep in mind this is still very early, people have been using this lens for just a very short time, so you are not yet seeing the best they can do with this camera/lens combo. For me this looks very promising (and yes, of course one can also find bad shots from the cx70-300 lens with wrong focus, camera shake etc. ...).

Although this is a 'crap' Nikon 1 sensor, the IQ at higher ISO seems definitely better than from my (admittedly old) 450D DSLR

cainn24 Veteran Member • Posts: 4,892
Re: Check out these photos with that sensor and 70-300 CX

technic wrote:

cainn24 wrote:

But the images from experienced Nikon 1 users with this lens look VERY sharp

What does and does not constitute "VERY sharp" is invariably a matter of opinion. In fact such strong adjectives should probably be reserved for describing prime lenses, unless you have phrases like "ridiculously, unbelievably, STUPIDLY sharp" in reserve for just those sorts of special occasions.

Anyway, perhaps an example would be the best benchmark

one example is this post:

http://www.dpreview.com/forums/post/53972239

So you are saying that those shots, all downsampled to 3.2MP or so, are clearly better than anything that can be produced with a XX-300mm MFT lens?

Keyboard shortcuts:
FForum MMy threads