Camera Labs

Look at sample image #1: For ISO 800 this is not bad for a sensor sporting only one third of the area of a DX-sensor...

_________________
Thomas (beware: Nikon-fanboy and moderator!) My Lens Reviews, My Pictures, My Photography Blog
D800+assorted lenses

I think they look clean. Definitely interested in picking up a used model.

(price is a bit high,if you ask me.) but that 10.1 megpickle range is cute enough to get my attention.

I'll take it with a 10mm.

_________________
WHO I AM BLOG, WHAT I DO BLOG
Facebook
*most of my photos nowadays come with a blog post. Please take some time and stop by

That isn't really valid though, we don't know what Nikon has done with it.

And my argument was not directed towards image quality, well not alone anyway. I am sure the production models will be decent enough in that department.
Some actual real world shots here:
http://www.dpreview.com/news/1109/11092 ... allery.asp

_________________
Canon 5D MkII -|- Sigma 24mm f/1.8 | Carl Zeiss 35mm f/2.0 | Canon 50mm f/1.4 | Canon 100mm f/2.8 Macro | Lensbaby Composer
Canon A-1 -|- Canon 28mm f/2 | Canon 35mm f/2.8 | Canon 50mm f/3.5 Macro

Yeah the price is ... [cough].
One thing that definitely is in favor of electronic viewfinders: You can judge dof MUCH better than on standard optical viewfinder screen that tend to be much too translucent and thus showing dof to look much deeper than really is.
Unfortunately a CX sensor with a f/3.5 lens will have too much dof anyway...

_________________
Thomas (beware: Nikon-fanboy and moderator!) My Lens Reviews, My Pictures, My Photography Blog
D800+assorted lenses

I like the car analogy, up to a point.

Your lens inventory says you have a well equipped SUV. Maybe even a crew cab 3/4 ton pickup when you consider all the weight.

With the NEX do you have to use the Pentax and Konica lenses in the stop down mode?

It has often been said that the best camera is the one you have with you. That's also true of lenses. And I see that as a basic problem with all interchangeable lens cameras. You can do a great deal with an ILC; but only if you have the right lens with you. Kind of like the sports car with several sets of tires for different conditions. You can pull a trailer with all the tires and jacks in it to be ready for anything; but then it's no longer convenient to use. (analogous to a camera bag full of lenses and accessories)

My preference is to use something like an S90 or G12, or even an FZ28; knowing that there will be a compromise in IQ at higher ISO; but accepting that as a trade off for portability and convenience.

I do have a DSLR. I use it for my grandaughter's hockey games (she's a high school senior and plays at a very high level) ; and I use it for family portraits with more complex lighting, and not much else. But I no longer lug it on cruises and trips like that. It sometimes goes on car trips. Everything else gets covered by one or more P&S models (we have 5). So by analogy I have an SUV and several sporty cars. (is the S90 a Miata?) The G12 is sort of a sporty hatchback; and the FZ28 is a sport sedan - soon to be replaced by and FZ150.

Jerry

_________________
Jerry

Whoa, the 10-100mm super-zoom has 21 (!) lens elements.
This must be an all-time high (the DX 18-200 has only 16 elements).
And I found something funny: all MTF-charts of the new lenses are now measured at 20 lines/mm and 60 lines/mm vs. 10 and 30 lines/mm on the DX and FX lenses. Now is this really true or did nikon just realize that they meant 10 line-pairs/mm when the said 10 lines/mm and are now correcting for their error and say 20 lines/mm (meaning 10 line-pairs/mm)???
Can anybody shed any light on this little mystery?

_________________
Thomas (beware: Nikon-fanboy and moderator!) My Lens Reviews, My Pictures, My Photography Blog
D800+assorted lenses

Yes, with a caveat - you can go full manual mode, stop down metering and setting your own shutter, but you can also use the camera in Aperture Priority mode, setting the aperture on the lens and letting the camera do the metering for shutter/ISO which feels pretty much no different than aperture priority on any DSLR.

I agree the best camera is the one you have with you. And with mirrorless systems, they can be carried in 'light' mode with a single lens and the overall size, weight, and volume are well below a DSLR. The physical dimensions don't even tell the whole story - it's more about volume - the mirrorless cameras overall are so much thinner throughout the body and lighter too, that even with relatively 'large' DSLR like lenses, it still feels significantly more portable and is less conspicuous. If I set my NEX on a dinner table, it doesn't take up as much space as if I were to stick my DSLR up there...so it just becomes that much easier to bring along where a DSLR wouldn't generally be considered appropriate...yet will still yield the types of results one might need in such low light situations as churches, restaurants, hotel lobbies, etc.

To be sure, I also have an ultracompact pocket cam that I bring when I know for sure the DSLR and even the NEX is inappropriate...so indeed I'm willing to compromise a lot to have a camera on me all the time, and stick with that same maxim - the best camera is the one I have on me.

As far as the limitations of the mirrorless systems - interestingly I often find myself using my NEX with the 18-55mm kit lens - which ends up being about the size and weight of a smallish superzoom or prosumer. In that mode, it's still much lighter and smaller than a DSLR, and seems to hit that same balance of compromise between size/portability and IQ/ability. The slowish kit lens is counterbalanced by the camera's ability to shoot clean up to ISO6400, which gives me more overall versaility in low light situations than I could get from a P&S, even with the slowish and compromised kit lens. Of course, it's even better if I use a nice fast prime, which I'll sometimes do, but the kit lens gives me that prosumer-style portability and the camera's outstanding sensor allow me to get DSLR image quality with it.

I used a superzoom before DSLRs - still have it, in fact. But I tend to do a lot of wildlife/bird photography, and a lot of night photography, including high ISO handheld, so my particular shooting, a DSLR is pretty much a must. I like the mirrorless because it can at least sub for the DSLR when I want to do the night and low light handheld stuff.

_________________
Justin Miller
Sony DSLR-A580 / Sony 18-250mm / Minolta 50mm F1.7 / Sigma 30mm F1.4 / Tamron 10-24mm / Tamron 200-500mm / Tamron 90mm F2.8 macro / Minolta 300mm F4 APO
Sony NEX5N / 18-55mm F3.5-5.6 / 55-210mm F4-6.3 / Pentax K adapter / Konica K/AR adapter / bunches o' Konica & Pentax lenses!

Galleries:
http://www.pbase.com/zackiedawg

Hi everyone, I've finally finished my Nikon 1 preview / news analysis. I decided to let the info soak in for a couple of days first.

Anyone agree with my thoughts?

See my Nikon V1 preview.

Interesting thoughts Gordon. I like the sensor size analysis which allows the technically interested reader to put things in perspective.

Comparing to the Panasonic G3/GF3 is a bit tricky. I think the J1 is the direct competition for the GF3, but the G3 and V1 are different cameras. Current rumors suggest that the GF3 was intended to open up a gap for a second GF to be released in November and that this GF will be called the GFX1 (the true GF1 successor) featuring an EVF. That camera would be the V1 competition.

_________________
Canon 7D | EF-S 17-55 f/2.8 IS

There's always a risk when you buy into a whole new system. A new sensor size, new lenses and new cameras. Is it going to survive, will there be new models coming out in a few years, will the lens-range expand, what will the quality be. Primes?

"Grippability" seems low...larger lenses will create a very front-heavy package and it looks like the pop-fashion designers got to run with this one, without any thought to how awkward it will be to carry the camera in your hand.

My Fuji X100 puts this design to shame and even with it's "frictionized" surface, event that camera is awkward to walk around with in one hand.

I think this move on Nikon's part may disgruntle their DSLR crowd - why is Nikon blowing these innovation on a pop-camera? Wouldn't the DSLR crowd be more interested in the world's fastest AF more than fashion-conscious snap-shooters? Couldn't the same be said for the FPS rate or even video speed? Nikon's top end cameras have a solid grip on press-photographers who take a LOT of their pictures by raising them over the head of a crowd and pulling full-auto. Aren't these features exactly what would attract them?

Instead, this is offered to people who wants to color-coordinate their camera with other accessories and carry-alls and purses and t-shirts.

As for pure design-appeal they fall short in several ways. OK, so they don't want to go retro like Fuji - fair enough. But are they going futuristic or even contemporary? No, the form and shape is what..late 1970's-early 1980's. The only industry who could design anything worthwhile during those two decades were the British and French hi-fi scene. Cars, clothes..everything else..was just depressing..lol.

I'm not merely emphatically unimpressed with this move from Nikon, I think it's a series/system that will die a horrible whimpering death in under 10 years and I don't think Nikon will win hearts and minds when this happens.

Cheers

_________________
Nikon stuff and other stuff, but not nearly as much stuff as I really want!

Why isn't this tech rolled into a DSLR? Quite simply I think the DSLR, as good as it is, has too much old baggage to carry around for such a shift. AF speed not only depends on the camera but also the lens. As Olympus has shown with their claimed "fastest one-shot AF" on their latest bodies, it also took specifically designed lenses to achieve that.

The fps rates are probably due to a combination of low pixel counts and in the case of the J1 the lack of a mechanical shutter. Regardless of sensor size, I would have preferred a minimum of 12MP. While 10 fps is certainly possible with a DSLR, it can't be easy to get all those mechanical bits flying around.

I have to wonder if they might scale this up in the future. If people are willing to give up OVF, they could release a big sensor model like the Sony SLT series. Except in this case it would truly be mirrorless. Now that body would require FX/DX lenses and the size would have to accommodate that. But maybe they could use the freed up space for something else, like an on demand ND filter for example.

_________________
Canon DSLRs: 7D, 5D2, 1D, 600D, 450D full spectrum, 300D IR mod
Lenses: EF 35/2, 50/1.8, 85/1.8, 135/2+SF, 28-80 V, 70-300L, 100-400L, TS-E 24/3.5L, MP-E 65, EF-S 15-85 IS
3rd party: Zeiss 2/50 makro, Samyang 8mm fisheye, Sigma 150 macro, 120-300 f/2.8 OS, Celestron 1325/13
Tinies: Sony HX9V.

It reminds me of Canon releasing DIGIC V on the S100.
Ironically Nikon even went as far as calling their D3s a Porsche compared to the V1's supersonic jet AF speed.

Maybe the increased DoF has a role to play in this as well? I don't know the math, but read that at 35mm equivalent focal length, f2.8 and a subject distance of 4m, the DoF is 12.7m. For m4/3 that would be 6.48m, APS-C 3.95m and full frame only 2.38m. Obviously the 1 series has much more room for error. Or am I missing something?

_________________
Canon 7D | EF-S 17-55 f/2.8 IS

That could be a contributing factor. Don't ask for the reference, but I have read the DSLR AF aims to get it within the DoF for consumer levels, and tighter to the true focus for "pro" models. If you have a deeper DoF, then obviously it follows you could be further off and still be good enough.

_________________
Canon DSLRs: 7D, 5D2, 1D, 600D, 450D full spectrum, 300D IR mod
Lenses: EF 35/2, 50/1.8, 85/1.8, 135/2+SF, 28-80 V, 70-300L, 100-400L, TS-E 24/3.5L, MP-E 65, EF-S 15-85 IS
3rd party: Zeiss 2/50 makro, Samyang 8mm fisheye, Sigma 150 macro, 120-300 f/2.8 OS, Celestron 1325/13
Tinies: Sony HX9V.

Decent analysis Gordon...tries to cover as many bases as possible in a preview, and comparisons to other mirrorless models. A few points I'd raise - validity unknown at this point, but things worth considering:

As to the pixel size - I've seen a lot of comparisons including yours go to the Sony 24MP APS-C sensor as a direct comparison, because based o sensor dimensions and number of MP, the Nikon's pixel density would seem to be the same. However: If the Nikon sensor also has to incorporate the autofocus sensors onto that same 1" sensor, don't they effectively steal real estate? And therefore, wouldn't the pixels need to be designed smaller than would typically be the case for 10MP on a 1" sensor? If they use a system similar to Fuji, then they designate certain pixels to only receive 1/2 the light, and those pixels will not be part of the image gathering process. Or have they designed the sensor so that, say, every 5th pixel on the sensor is replaced by a phase detect sensor - the sensor could be actually as dense as a 12MP or 14MP sensor would be on 1", but with only 10MP of pixels dedicated to image gathering. Just a question, yet to be answered.

Also remember the speed claims are as yet unproven. Fuji also claimed their on-sensor phase detect was the answer everyone was looking for - in practice, it was slow, inaccurate, and unreliable, and that camera and technology quickly faded away. Do we yet know if Nikon's talking a good game, but may not have the performance they're claiming? And what of low light? Obviously they acknowledge their phase-detect system doesn't work in low light, and they switch to contrast-detect - how fast/slow is that compared to the competition? Will the Nikon be a superfast focus camera in excellent light, but as soon as it fades, it becomes the dog of the mirrorless world? Unknown.

What of buffer size? The speed claims are impressive - 60fps - at full res! For how many frames? How many RAW? That's been the clear downfall of most cameras with fast speed claims - look at Sony's compacts when they bragged on hitting 10fps at full res - it lasted for 10 shots, JPG only, and required waiting 5-10 seconds afterwards for the buffer to clear. It might be unfair to give the Nikon the instant crown against all the competitors until real world speed comparisons can be made - some of those 5fps, 7fps, or 12fps competitors might have a larger buffer or handle RAW better...all still to be determined.

And I do think it's a fair point to raise not only about depth of field control of the larger sensors, but also the quality of the OOF - so far, the Nikon's much deeper DOF is apparent, and where it is OOF at least with the initial samples and kit lens, looks pretty harsh. As great as Nikon is with lenses, will the sensor allow them to get the desired bokeh from them?

_________________
Justin Miller
Sony DSLR-A580 / Sony 18-250mm / Minolta 50mm F1.7 / Sigma 30mm F1.4 / Tamron 10-24mm / Tamron 200-500mm / Tamron 90mm F2.8 macro / Minolta 300mm F4 APO
Sony NEX5N / 18-55mm F3.5-5.6 / 55-210mm F4-6.3 / Pentax K adapter / Konica K/AR adapter / bunches o' Konica & Pentax lenses!

Galleries:
http://www.pbase.com/zackiedawg

On the speed/buffer only, their pdf brochure lists:



So if you get the top model, you get over 3 seconds of continuous shooting at 10fps. There is no wording to say if this is limited to jpeg or raw.

_________________
Canon DSLRs: 7D, 5D2, 1D, 600D, 450D full spectrum, 300D IR mod
Lenses: EF 35/2, 50/1.8, 85/1.8, 135/2+SF, 28-80 V, 70-300L, 100-400L, TS-E 24/3.5L, MP-E 65, EF-S 15-85 IS
3rd party: Zeiss 2/50 makro, Samyang 8mm fisheye, Sigma 150 macro, 120-300 f/2.8 OS, Celestron 1325/13
Tinies: Sony HX9V.