Ah, and another remark on the missing in-body/sensor-based stabilization:
I join Gordon here in my disappointment:
- lens-based IS has to be paid for with each lens you buy
- lens based IS makes each lens more vulnerable to failure, as the mechanism is pretty complex and sensitive. And lenses are supposed to have longer lives than bodies, so why complicate construction and shorten mtbf (meantime between failure) for them
- even short primes could use stabilization if only to use longer shutter-times, lower ISO and smaller apertures in stills.
- and a small and light system like the V1 and J1 with a small prime will always be prone to more shake than a hefty DSLR. I remember throwing away a lot of images on my first p&s (w/o IS) because pressiong the shutter just made me move the camera in the most critical moment
Now, everybody who reads my latest lens reviews knows that I rant about Nikon skipping on IS/VR in primes and would love to see sensor-based IS for their DSLRs. This is the more valid for the new cameras, as it would have allowed Nikon to begin with a clean slate, and I think Nikon has seriously made the wrong decision here.
Thomas (beware: Nikon-fanboy and moderator!) My Lens Reviews
, My Pictures
, My Photography Blog