1. Reminder: Please use our affiliate links for holiday shopping!

Anyone buying a NIkon V1 2 lens kit for $1150!

Discussion in 'Open Discussion' started by WT21, Oct 24, 2011.

  1. WT21

    WT21 Mu-43 Hall of Famer

    Feb 19, 2010
    Boston
  2. krugorg

    krugorg Mu-43 Hall of Famer

    Jul 18, 2011
    Minnesota USA
    Haha, I think I will pass on that one and wait for the next Panasonic and Oly bodies.

    I don't necessarily think it is over-priced versus the E-P3, just don't understand what the point of the camera is, outside of the Nikon faithful.
     
    • Like Like x 1
  3. shnitz

    shnitz Mu-43 Top Veteran

    989
    Aug 25, 2011
    Austin, TX
  4. Jonathan F/2

    Jonathan F/2 Mu-43 Hall of Famer

    Aug 10, 2011
    Los Angeles, CA
    I'm tempted...once the V2 come out and these hit the bargain bins. I'm done buying any of this stuff new, mirrorless is much cheaper 1 gen behind!
     
    • Like Like x 1
  5. WT21

    WT21 Mu-43 Hall of Famer

    Feb 19, 2010
    Boston
    EPL2 + Kit cost me (total) $300. I'm with Jonathan F/2. I try to buy used. The 25mm will not fall in price for a while, however.
     
    • Like Like x 1
  6. RT_Panther

    RT_Panther Mu-43 Legend

    May 4, 2011
    Texas
    I have a J1 single lens kit :smile:
     
  7. If it offered me something substantially different and or better than what I already have...although for that price it would need to be a LOT better. Otherwise, I don't need to buy another camera and I certainly don't need to buy another camera system just for the sake of it.
     
    • Like Like x 1
  8. JJJPhoto

    JJJPhoto Mu-43 Veteran

    252
    Jul 8, 2011
    Cincinnati, OH
    Jerry Jackson Jr
    If the 1 system cameras at least used the Nikon DSLR flashes/speedlights then I might consider purchasing a V1 or J1 and lenses, but there is nothing about the current 1 system that remotely interests me.

    Even if Nikon sold the V1 kit for $299 it would be a junk camera in my eyes.
     
    • Like Like x 2
  9. SRHEdD

    SRHEdD Mu-43 Top Veteran

    967
    Feb 24, 2011
    Viera, Florida USA
    Steve
    Hit the oly site now and snap up something on sale. Money MUCH better spent.
     
  10. Canonista

    Canonista Mu-43 Top Veteran

    563
    Sep 3, 2011
    L.A.
  11. shnitz

    shnitz Mu-43 Top Veteran

    989
    Aug 25, 2011
    Austin, TX
    You can't compare a once in a blue moon deal, or used prices from some random person, as a fair comparison against retail for a camera that has barely been released. My great-grandfather just gave me his Leica IIIf with a Summitar 50mm lens, and my dad just gave me a Nikon D40 with 50mm f/1.8 and a 70-210 f/4 lens, so where does that put m4/3 in terms of quality for the money? In the toilet, that's where.

    "Better" is a funny word, very vague. My G2 takes very noticeably worse pictures than pretty much every camera I own, from a Mamiya RZ67 to a Linhof Technika to a Nikon D200. Yet, it's a "better" camera for many situations, imagine that.

    If you're looking on spending your money "better," then you shouldn't be investing in m4/3. You can easily find better image quality for the money. Considering that m4/3 still aren't pocketable, you aren't losing out too much in size in many cases by just getting a Canon T3i or Nikon D3100 (until you start doing more telephoto work). Also, again, you're comparing sale prices of a well-established camera system to a brand new product. If everyone had the same outlook as you when the Olympus E-P1 was released, this forum wouldn't exist today.
     
  12. Jonathan F/2

    Jonathan F/2 Mu-43 Hall of Famer

    Aug 10, 2011
    Los Angeles, CA
    I'm glad people buy this stuff new so I don't have to. The real value is in the lenses, in fact all the lenses I own I bought new. Bodies are disposable. Believe me, I have my eye on the V1. The only reason I went M43 originally is because Nikon didn't offer anything at the time. And when The E-P1 was released it was expensive compared to getting a smaller sized DSLR! Now that prices have gone down, mirrorless is looking really good.
     
    • Like Like x 1
  13. Hikari

    Hikari Mu-43 All-Pro

    Nov 26, 2010
    ????

    Well, I stick my E-P1 in my coat pocket. And it is much, much smaller then an APS-C DSLR even compared to the body without a lens.
     
  14. kevinparis

    kevinparis Cantankerous Scotsman

    Feb 12, 2010
    Gent, Belgium
    not only smaller but in many situations easier to handle... mine lives on a wrist strap, which gives m the use of both hands at a moments notice ....say to light a cigarette or more often carry two bags of groceries.

    K
     
  15. yottavirus

    yottavirus Mu-43 Regular

    115
    Aug 13, 2011
    Completely agree with all your points but this one especially.
     
  16. John M Flores

    John M Flores Mu-43 All-Pro

    Jan 7, 2011
    Somerville, NJ
    If I was doing more rig work - mounting cameras to motorcycles and cars and such - I'd definitely be interested in these smaller sensor ILCs because every ounce counts when it's hung off the end of a 2'+ pole on a vehicle moving down the road. For example, this was taken with a Ricoh GX100 hung off the back of a Kawasaki with a Manfrotto Magic Arm:

    2997214205_b8d4ecabc8.
    Old Mission Peninsula on a Kawasaki Concours 14 by john m flores, on Flickr


    I'd be looking anxious for specific features like intervalometer, eye-fi compatibility, manual controls, ability to mount NDs, weatherproofing, strobe control, etc...

    It's a niche market for sure, but these smaller cameras do have their place.
     
  17. RT_Panther

    RT_Panther Mu-43 Legend

    May 4, 2011
    Texas
    JonathanF/2
    You said it best in the other forum...:2thumbs:

    Nikon could have easily built a mirrorless system around an APS-C sensor but it would have been so "good", that it would have intruded into the sales of their extremely successful DSLRs, (D3100/D5100)

    So Nikon really had no choice but to design their own sensor/format/system....(Because we all know that Nikon & Canon would never join the MFT group)
     
  18. Ha, for a minute there you had me thinking that I'd made an odd comparison between completely dissimiliar cameras but no, it turned out that all I did was say that I wouldn't spend money to sidegrade to to a similar camera system that on paper appears to offer me no tangible improvements over what I currently have.
     
  19. WT21

    WT21 Mu-43 Hall of Famer

    Feb 19, 2010
    Boston
    I mentioned what I spent on the lens, because you had said "As opposed to your $300 kit lens 14-42mm?" -- I was correcting your mis-statement of fact, that the 14-42 did not cost me $300. Nor does it cost $300 in value even if purchased new, as you can buy it with a nice kit camera, sell the camera, and end up paying a lot less than $300.

    It is, however, a perfectly legit statement and comparison, because my original post was "Anyone buying a NIkon V1 2 lens kit for $1150! That's a bit rich for me, for what you get."

    It's exactly as I said -- for what I would get (tiny sensor everything in sharp focus, albeit in a brand new camera), $1150 is too rich for me for what I want to achieve. I have cheaper options. $300 for an EPL2 + kit lens was, indeed, a good buy, but they can be routinely had for $350-400.

    I am going to make my decision on the options in front of me, not on some Platonic ideal of pricing.
     
  20. Jonathan F/2

    Jonathan F/2 Mu-43 Hall of Famer

    Aug 10, 2011
    Los Angeles, CA
    The more I look at the 1 system, it is pretty obvious the designers/engineers were constrained. When left to go balls out, these are the guys who made the D3S, perhaps one of the best digital cameras to date. It's the only camera on the market that does a true 12800 ISO. There's a difference with cameras that claim that ISO rating, but can actually back it up with the AF, FPS, metering and sheer horsepower to fully realize that kind of low light performance.

    Yeah, the 1 system was neutered from the get-go!