Mirrorless Nikon 1 Debuts

shnitz

Mu-43 All-Pro
Joined
Aug 25, 2011
Messages
1,024
Location
Colorado Springs, CO
Most people here have talked about the "sweet spot" and most are aware of the IQ trade-offs. The feeling is that this has gotten too small, and that m43 is as small as one should go. Also, if the m43 sensor had better DR, I don't think hardly anyone would have many complaints (other than noise, which I've even see people complain about on a Canon 5Dii over on POTN!)

But the real issue is body size trade-offs. There is QUITE a bit of drop off moving from FF to compact DSLR to m43. Not that much at all from m43 to this new Nikon.

Nikon J1 (w/out EVF) 106mmX61mmX30mm, 277g
EPM1 (w/out EVF): 110mmX64xxX34mm, 263g

Nikon is providing no size advantage, yet you are likely losing some IQ and DOF control.

Panny 14mm 2.5, equivalent to FF 28mm 5.0 (DOF)
Nikon new prime: 10mm 2.8 equivalent to 27mm 5.6 (DOF)

Close, so again Nikon is providing no advantage, and losing about 1/4 stop in DOF (likely negligible on a wide angle. Don't feel like working the DOF Master this morning, so let's call it even). Lens performance will be something to test, but Nikon is really providing nothing at all on paper at least. Tests, of course, are the proof in the pudding.



And the EP3 is priced too high, as is the GH series, for those who want to do stills (it's a good price for a video rig). This Nikon system could likely have lower IQ and is priced as high, if not higher, still. Why bother? Size isn't different enough (see above).




Agreed Nikon P&S = POS. Only time will tell how this system works out. Here's one, completely solid data point that I am completely sold on: I am not buying one. m43 is on the edge of my preference for DOF control, and I hate kit lenses, so there's nothing more for me here. If you buy one, let us know how it performs. I am always interested in learning about new systems, even if they are not for me. It will be interesting to see the first real world results.
But who's to say where that sweet spot actually is? As much as you can argue that 4/3 is, I could argue that APS-C is, or this new Nikon CX. It's all about tradeoff, and how small people want the actual system to be. Again, all of those are arguments against m4/3 as much as they're arguments against the Nikon 1 cameras. Let's throw NEX cameras into the equation, and compare the top of the line Nikon, Olympus, and Panasonic, not bottom of the line (rounding up to the nearest half-millimeter, to make the chart easier to read):

Sony NEX-7 120 x 67 x 43 mm 415g
Olympus E-P3 122 x 69 x 34mm 321g
Panasonic GH2 124 x 90 x 76mm 392g
Nikon V1 113 x 76 x 44mm 294g

(The Olympus is excluding protrusions, the Nikon is including them, btw. If only Panasonic had the GF7 out to put in that list, instead of the GH2)

Well geez, look at that difference! I think your argument is more pro-NEX than pro m4/3! :rofl: Or, would you agree that maybe overall size of the body vs sensor size isn't the almighty determinant? Now, you have to worry about lens size, plus the Olympus doesn't have a viewfinder, etc. I'm still trying to convince my dad to buy in to m4/3, and get himself an E-P3. I still love the system. I'm just saying, don't call the kettle black.

The Nikon has pretty solid video modes as well, btw. You aren't paying that MSRP for a stills-only camera.



Psh, as if APS-C is actually any larger than Four-Thirds. It's only wider than Four-Thirds because it has a different aspect ratio, but that won't affect the image quality of the center capture portion. If there's a difference, it has to do with sensor TECHNOLOGY, not sensor size.

Yet Canikon users still bash Four-Thirds for having a smaller sensor, while they brag about the size of their own APS-C systems? Full Frame users actually have something to talk about, but Full Frame users don't bash APS-C cameras for only one reason... because the APS-C cameras have the same "brand name" on their cameras as the Full Frame. Stupid, if you ask me...

The same reason APS-C doesn't get bashed much for having smaller sensor (essentially Four-Thirds size but wider), is what might save Nikon. The Nikon 1 bears the Nikon name.
I have to disagree with your math. APS-C is also taller than 4/3, and has a larger surface area.
Numbers from Wikipedia:
Nikon APS 23.6 x 15.7mm
Canon APS 22.2 x 14.8mm
4/3 17.3 x 13.0mm
Even the smaller APS sensor, the Canon one, is 28% wider and 13% taller, giving a 46% larger surface area. It's not as significant as the difference between APS and full frame, or full frame and medium format, but it's still quite different. If Nikon manages to secure a sensor that's as advanced as the D7000 for this camera, it's going to pack a punch.

Plus, "Canikon" users don't bash m4/3. In fact, many of them have m4/3 cameras, including me. Also, full frame users aren't bashing APS. It's actually the opposite: I see much more non-4/3 bashing here than I see bashing of m4/3 on all other forums I frequent combined. This forum brings up "sensor warfare," "us against them" a ton. Rather, I see D700 users, for example, often touting the advantages of APS-sized cameras as much as they're bragging about what they have.


Definitely better launch then I was expecting. Looks as though they want to fight it out with m43s and did a decent job out of the gate.

Nikon fans tend to be pretty loyal so if the IQ shows itself to be pretty good, might just keep Nikon people from buying a X100 or m43 or NEX so all in all a good effort.

Canon must surely react now as well...

I wonder if we are headed now towards a format war that may not be settled until 2 or 3 3rd party lens manufacturers get behind 1 of them in a big way.. reminds me of the recent blu-ray vs. hd dvd situation.

I do think though that the price point is off a bit on the high side for the Nikon ILC compact.
Whoops, too late, we've already all bought Panasonics and Olympuses :smile:
 

drd1135

Zen Snapshooter
Joined
Mar 17, 2011
Messages
6,185
Location
Southwest Virginia
Real Name
Steve
It will sell because it's Nikon and because it's small. I'm betting the cheaper model (the J) is a bigger hit since it's targeted to the bigger audience, i.e., P&S upgraders. The higher end one will be popular with Nikon enthusiast and pros, which is a sizable market in itself. As mentioned before, it's biggest advantage over mu43 is the name on the body.
 

Ned

Mu-43 Legend
Joined
Jul 18, 2010
Messages
5,538
Location
Alberta, Canada
I have to disagree with your math. APS-C is also taller than 4/3, and has a larger surface area.
Numbers from Wikipedia:
Nikon APS 23.6 x 15.7mm
Canon APS 22.2 x 14.8mm
4/3 17.3 x 13.0mm
Even the smaller APS sensor, the Canon one, is 28% wider and 13% taller, giving a 46% larger surface area. It's not as significant as the difference between APS and full frame, or full frame and medium format, but it's still quite different.
The whole problem is that "46% larger surface area" math. That's because the sensor is wider. Last I checked, the lenses used on APS-C are just as round as the ones used on Four-Thirds... they are not oblong and oval. That "28% wider" difference does not affect the quality of the image within the same square area or within the same aspect ratio. Most APS-C and Full Frame shooters I know, who shoot professionally anyways, crop those extra edges off the sides of their image. So to them, shooting in a 5:4 aspect (ie, like 8x10) they only gain the "13%" advantage you speak of. Even if you don't crop though, you're not changing the IQ of each square pixel, you're only adding more on the sides. The claim by APS-C fanboys is that the larger surface area gives better image quality not that it "adds more image", which would be true.

I'm not saying 13% is not a difference (it would be silly of me to claim something doesn't exist when it's physically right there), but it's so little of a difference that differences in manufacture far outweigh that 13%. It's not enough to say that Four-Thirds is crippled over APS-C BECAUSE of the difference in sensor size. It's the difference in technology that makes the difference. The problem is that APS-C fanboys always claim APS-C to be "50% larger", not "13% taller".

PS, did you notice that the difference in height of Canon's APS-C is just as great (or close enough) to the difference between Canon and Olympus? So why do Nikon, Pentax, and Sony fanboys not bash Canon for their tiny sensors? Because they use the same APS-C name? They're different, but just as insignificantly so.
 

drizek

Mu-43 Veteran
Joined
Aug 5, 2011
Messages
492
I don't think most people shoot in 5:4. Hell, I compose in 16:9 mostly.

And the difference isn't in surface area, it is in pixel density. m4/3 cameras have more pixel density than APS-C sensors, so they have worse DR and more noise as a result.
 

Ned

Mu-43 Legend
Joined
Jul 18, 2010
Messages
5,538
Location
Alberta, Canada
And the difference isn't in surface area, it is in pixel density. m4/3 cameras have more pixel density than APS-C sensors, so they have worse DR and more noise as a result.
That's exactly what I'm saying, drizek... The pixel density doesn't change 50% within the same cropped 4:3 area just because you added more image to the sides, it only changes proportionately with the height which is a common factor. Using total surface area (the 50% difference) is the problem, due to the different aspect ratios. How you crop doesn't change that.

Think of it more logically rather than getting immersed in the numbers, and you'll see what I mean. The width is not a common factor, so it doesn't have the same bearing on pixel density.
 

Ned

Mu-43 Legend
Joined
Jul 18, 2010
Messages
5,538
Location
Alberta, Canada
Not necessarily so. They are smaller but not made by Panasonic.
Exactly. :) Don't get so hung up on size when there are so many more important factors at play.

That said though, I have seen a sample from the Nikon 1 and although it's very nice for a camera of its specs, it certainly doesn't compare with a Micro Four-Thirds setup.

I will also say that the 10MP is actually surprisingly low resolution for such a long format. It's nothing like the 10MP of an old Olympus DSLR at 4:3 aspect. Also, exposing onto such a long format is probably what makes the lenses seem so large for such a small sensored camera.
 

WT21

Super Moderator
Joined
Feb 19, 2010
Messages
6,638
Location
Boston
I'm just saying, don't call the kettle black.
At any rate, I'm sure you're a nice guy and all, but I said what I wanted to say, and don't actually care for the discussion. I've hoed this row for two years, researching and discussing the merits and limits of sensor size. The arguments are well documented for these kinds of discussions, with all the assorted facts, figures, measurements, etc. across here, DPR, etc. etc. I'll stay out of this one.

But to sum: the Nikon brings no advantage, is bigger (very slightly), costs more, and has a smaller sensor. It has an uphill battle to prove it's worth, outside of Nikon users.

If you get one, please do share your actual comparison.
 

WT21

Super Moderator
Joined
Feb 19, 2010
Messages
6,638
Location
Boston
I see much more non-4/3 bashing here than I see bashing of m4/3 on all other forums I frequent combined. This forum brings up "sensor warfare," "us against them" a ton.
Perhaps you're thinking of DPReview? I don't see that much of what you are claiming here on this site, and I post here with some level of frequency. Right now, there's a very positive post on a 5D from Kevin, and another on "100 things I hate about m43" -- there's a fairly balanced feel here. And a number of us frequent the two sister sites: seriouscompacts.com and talknex.com. I'm open to the system that gets me what I need -- right now, the best one is m43.
 

Ned

Mu-43 Legend
Joined
Jul 18, 2010
Messages
5,538
Location
Alberta, Canada
But to sum: the Nikon brings no advantage, is bigger (very slightly), costs more, and has a smaller sensor. It has an uphill battle to prove it's worth, outside of Nikon users.
Do you know the comparison of physical size between the Nikon and our Micro Four-Thirds cameras (like say the E-PM1 or something)? I'm curious, as I see pictures of the Nikon, and I've seen it next to a Nikon P&S and DSLR but nothing alongside a comparable system.

Perhaps you're thinking of DPReview? I don't see that much of what you are claiming here on this site, and I post here with some level of frequency. Right now, there's a very positive post on a 5D from Kevin, and another on "100 things I hate about m43" -- there's a fairly balanced feel here.
:thumbup: I agree. I think people here have a pretty open opinion on all different systems, and this forum houses a lot of those who use different systems side by side.
 

Bokeaji

Gonzo's Dad O.*
Joined
Aug 6, 2011
Messages
1,839
Location
Austin, TX
Grant said:
The thing is while I like the concept I am not nor have ever been a fan of small sensors. It is not that small sensors are bad it is just that by nature they have lots of DOF and for better or worse that is not my stick. Give me a large sensor and a f/2 or better lens and I am happy.

Still a pink camera would be so cool …
Would a pink, tiny sensor camera be good for street? No one would scowl at you for taking their pic. They'd all be smiling, in massive dof clarity, at yer silly pink camera!:)
 

WT21

Super Moderator
Joined
Feb 19, 2010
Messages
6,638
Location
Boston
Do you know the comparison of physical size between the Nikon and our Micro Four-Thirds cameras (like say the E-PM1 or something)? I'm curious, as I see pictures of the Nikon, and I've seen it next to a Nikon P&S and DSLR but nothing alongside a comparable system.
Hi Ned,

Nikon J1 (w/out EVF) 106mmX61mmX30mm, 277g
EPM1 (w/out EVF): 110mmX64xxX34mm, 263g
(both from DPR camera database)

These seem to be comparable cameras in terms of functionality, etc. and the J1 is just slightly smaller, though heavier and the EPM1 might be a bit thicker, since it's lens mount may not be counted.

Point being, they are very nearly the same. Stepping from an APS-C DSLR (say Canon Rebel) to an m43 is a huge drop. From m43 to Nex J1, not so much.

The relevant competitors, IMO, remain NEX and m43. Nikon and Pentax are not offering enough to make them worth the time, unless they can really blow us away with samples, but I just don't see that happening. It's not a "pot calling the kettle black" as some are claiming, it's a "there's nothing on paper that calls for a serious evaluation of this system" issue. I'll wait for early users, and if they say "The ISO of the Nikon is 1 or 2 stops better than m43" then I'll consider it, but personally, I'm also trying to get less DOF, not more, so I don't think this system will be for me.
 

Grant

Mu-43 Veteran
Joined
May 16, 2010
Messages
388
Location
Lunenburg, Nova Scotia, Canada
at yer silly pink camera!:)
Call it silly but as far as street photography goes who would dare mess with a guy caring a pink camera? Also a second advantage who would steal a pink camera? Just think of the insurance savings the possibilities boggle the mind. Now if they only put a Pink Hello Kitty on it or should that be called a Pink Hello Neko then it would really sell, I know I would buy one or two. :love:
 

Ned

Mu-43 Legend
Joined
Jul 18, 2010
Messages
5,538
Location
Alberta, Canada
Call it silly but as far as street photography goes who would dare mess with a guy caring a pink camera? Also a second advantage who would steal a pink camera? Just think of the insurance savings the possibilities boggle the mind. Now if they only put a Pink Hello Kitty on it or should that be called a Pink Hello Neko then it would really sell, I know I would buy one or two. :love:
I think that would be a pink Neko Moshi Moshi. =3
 

Canonista

Mu-43 Top Veteran
Joined
Sep 3, 2011
Messages
673
Location
Southern California
Ned said:
Yet Canikon users still bash Four-Thirds for having a smaller sensor, while they brag about the size of their own APS-C systems? Full Frame users actually have something to talk about, but Full Frame users don't bash APS-C cameras for only one reason... because the APS-C cameras have the same "brand name" on their cameras as the Full Frame. Stupid, if you ask me...
I think the reason FF users don't bash the APS-C format is because many own both. I love my 5D for landscape, portraits and low light photography, but need the higher fps and longer reach of my 40D. Different tools for different needs. I also haven't seen much, if any bashing, of m43 at the Canon forums like POTN. There's been quite a bit of interest in the m43, with the constant griping about whether and when Canon will have a mirrorless entry this decade.
 

Bokeaji

Gonzo's Dad O.*
Joined
Aug 6, 2011
Messages
1,839
Location
Austin, TX
Call it silly but as far as street photography goes who would dare mess with a guy caring a pink camera? Also a second advantage who would steal a pink camera? Just think of the insurance savings the possibilities boggle the mind. Now if they only put a Pink Hello Kitty on it or should that be called a Pink Hello Neko then it would really sell, I know I would buy one or two. :love:
if u buy a pink camera for st use, i will buy you a hello kitty sticker to put on it!
done and done!

;) :D
 

mister_roboto

Mu-43 Top Veteran
Joined
Jun 14, 2011
Messages
637
Location
Seattle, WA, USA
Real Name
Dennis
2011 What were they thinking top 3 list

Of the "2011 What were they thinking" top 3 list, in the category of cameras:

#3: Sony: lens choices and roll out
#2: Nikon 1: What?
#1: Pentax Q: I used to love you Pentax, when you were Pentax.

Seriously though- I'm REALLY perplexed by their choices for the N-1. Aside from what everyone else has posted, the COST. Nikon sells probably more D3100's than all of the µ4/3 cameras combined- they're probably going to make a hefty percentage from the sales of the 1's, even after R&D.

The 1/16000 shutter speed seems a bit silly for (as of now) slow kit lenses. I wish I had more than 1/4000 on my E-P2 though:smile: . Also welcome: Alloy body, and built in EVF.... but damn, talk about large DOF. Also the adapter is reported to be $200 USD, and with that crop factor- it'll turn everything into a telephoto.
 

~tc~

Mu-43 Hall of Famer
Joined
Oct 22, 2010
Messages
2,494
Location
Houston, TX
Wow, 8 pages since this morning ... and you all don't think people will be interested?

As for the sensor size, CX is what, 8mm tall, compared to 13mm for 43? There's your 50% difference ... I agree with Ned BTW, that almost all OUTPUT is cropped based on image (can read as "sensor") height, not width, and most of the common output sizes are closer to 4:3 than they are 3:2, so the extra pixels on the APS-C (and FF for that matter) are generally wasted.

I "moved up" from a P&S almost exclusively to have some control over DOF. I don't see how these cameras offer more options in that regard than the fast aperture/large sensor compacts out there like the XZ1 and LX5, and at a size disadvantage. But, it says Nikon on it, it will sell well just like all their truly POS P&S's have done for a long time now.
 

Ned

Mu-43 Legend
Joined
Jul 18, 2010
Messages
5,538
Location
Alberta, Canada
I think the reason FF users don't bash the APS-C format is because many own both. I love my 5D for landscape, portraits and low light photography, but need the higher fps and longer reach of my 40D. Different tools for different needs. I also haven't seen much, if any bashing, of m43 at the Canon forums like POTN. There's been quite a bit of interest in the m43, with the constant griping about whether and when Canon will have a mirrorless entry this decade.
Actually you're right... Micro Four-Thirds has started to earn quite a good reputation now. The bashing had occurred back with the Four-Thirds system, when they were all DSLRs. People see the advantage in a small body, but they didn't see it in a DSLR body. A lot of myths had gotten spread during that time, which is starting to go away now thankfully. :biggrin:

The 1/16000 shutter speed seems a bit silly for (as of now) slow kit lenses. I wish I had more than 1/4000 on my E-P2 though:smile:.
This will probably come in handy with the 10fps burst rate, or 60fps with AF lock... :eek:
 
Links on this page may be to our affiliates. Sales through affiliate links may benefit this site.
Mu-43 is a fan site and not associated with Olympus, Panasonic, or other manufacturers mentioned on this site.
Forum post reactions by Twemoji: https://github.com/twitter/twemoji
Copyright © 2009-2019 Amin Forums, LLC
Top Bottom