The Nikon mirrorless mockups I received few weeks ago were pretty accurate:
God work Admin… As always…
“God of the rumors”
Ask the same guy if he have a picture of my D900.
Thank you Peter.
(only 14 days left until the “French Photokina” start in Paris.)
Kudos Peter. Rock on.
Rock on Fakewell or maybe i should say well of fakeness.
Who sent the mockups pictures to you?
This is truly one of the ugliest cameras I’ve ever seen. How much more work and money would it have cost Nikon to make it look a little more like a classic rangefinder and a little less like space-garbage. Style it a little more like the X100 and you’ve got something.
Blah, looks don’t count for machos, I for one welcome our new Nikon One overlords!
If this camera performs as good as marketing pushes I’m the buyer. Nevermind the looks or missing PASM modes, small and fast shooting/responsive camera is all I need^H^H^H^H want beside my D700 to carry as everyday snapshot camera. Even if the only one available is pink one when I arrive to counter desk
Well, most of my female friends like them. They love the colour and the shape. I guess this camera is aiming at women. To feminine for guy to came one of these small mirrorless.
Bull. Sleek and minimal. Take out the clumsy EVF hump and get someone who understands graphic design and branding to work on the logo placement and proportion and you’d eat it up if it had a Leica badge.
For most people this is not Big Hands/IAmComings. I am not going to come unless they release a camo edition.
Part of marketing is how the item looks and how it attract costumers… I can’t complain about the features and the technical specs about the new nikon mirrorless cameras because they are good and it will get better as soon as they release the second version. The one thing that I don’t like is how it looks, I know they are trying to make it more simple but they need to be more creative rather than making it looking like a plain rectangular box.
Can we just stop the complaining about the camera until we see actual pics and video of this thing? The last thing the people who are going to buy this thing will want, is to have it look like a 70′s camera.
Admin, could you just delete all the “I want my D4″ comments? Of all these whiners, how many will actually be buying a D4 or D800? 5%?
Did you see the comments that M4/3 performance hasn’t improved much over the last year, while Nikon/Sony sensors have? If these camera’s can get M4/3 quality in a smaller package, then Nikon has a winner on their hands that will not eat into their own D3100 sales.
I don’t see any problem talking about other cameras such as the D800 in the Nikon V1 post. Some of the people complaining will quiet down somewhat over time, just like how people mature as they get older. Other complaints are constructive and insightful. And of course you have a few who tread off the beaten path and have no interests in any of the products but are here to shoot arrows.
I think the really interesting thing about the V1 is its size. You will get superior image than a smart phone and be able to carry it nearly everywhere. One area where Nikon excels is their image processing engine – their cameras produce cleaner images – especially at higher ISO than arguably anyone else.
we dont need to wait. It is Point and shoot camera where you can (but makes no sense to) switch lenses.
“If these camera’s can get M4/3 quality in a smaller package, then Nikon has a winner on their hands that will not eat into their own D3100 sales”
On the contrary the Nikon 1 line will definitely bring about the entry-level SLR bodies’ demise sooner. Maybe not within a year but within a few years. I voted “No” in the polls but that does not mean I will not buy a Nikon 1 in the future. It only means I will not buy the V1 or J1.
Yes, Nikon DX image sensors will continue to have better image quality than M4/3 today and into the future. But the image quality of smaller image sensors including the Nikon 1 will improve also. When the point is reached where I can say “yes” to: “can I trade image quality for a lighter body/lens combo?” then that’s the time I say: “hello Nikon 1″ and probably “goodbye DX/FX”
Nikon has to innovate and adapt and the Nikon 1 is evidence of that. It’s the future of the entry-level prosumer bodies … like it or not
Probably less than that. 1% may be.
Most will have tail behind their legs once they see the price. Those who can afford one are likely to have already bought a D3, D3S, D3X, D700 and spend their time taking pictures rather than whinning.
Most of the people that complaint about D3S is an old crappy camera can’t afford one anyway.
Sometimes it really sucks to be right, doesn’t it.
Outstanding work on the scoop, though.
I have to admit, when I saw it I thought, no way. But it was very close!
That’s why I keep checking your wonderful site…still hoping I can get the D700s or D800 before summer 2012.
Yes, and I was thinking: this cannot possibly be true! Some drew a rectangle with mspaint and put a mic, evf , mount picture, and some other bits and bops where it would fit.
Imagine my surprise when finding out Nikon apparently indeed uses mspaint for it’s design department.
Probably the same people who thought of the iamcommings.com domain….
Agreed completely. I thought the original “sketches” were exactly that. Can’t believe the form Nikon used with this camera.
Then again I did see a photo of a true magnesium body for the V1 which might partially explain the rather ugly duckling like appearance.
The J1 is much more attractive in a minimalist sort of way. IMHO what kills the appearance of this camera is the viewfinder.
I gets weirder, because when the design department was ready (After about ten minutes judging from this) the engineering department had cuts on there hand from the sharp corners.
So they used a sander to just sand off a little on the edges.
Then they went and figured the largest sensor that would fit in this would be a 2.7crop sensor. Which, by the way, is why it is a 2.7 inch. Nobody has ever used that size, nobody will use it, and nobody will use it again, but that’s because it was purposely built for this body: The largest they could it in it….
So far for I was trying to be funny..
What’s not funny is this:
This camera is supposed to be for people who have outgrown there Point and Shoots. At least according to Nikon.
But that’s just wrong reasoning. When someone outgrows there compact, they want more control. Not a slightly larger sensor with less control. Or invest in a system (Lenses) that you can’t use again when you’ve outgrown that 1.
And certainly, for that price, the person who has outgrown their compact and ready to spend cash (Aparantly) will probably be choosing a proper DSLR or Micro 4/3′s… Not this paltry thing.
Please D800 mockups too, from the same source…
What with the Typhoon hitting Japan I am not going to be surprised if the rumors slow down for a bit.
If Canon is releasing a new Pro camera, then Nikon needs to drop the new D4 on them.
Key word being ‘if’ there. So far the only news is on printers.
Nikon will not release if Canon is unable to due to the tsunami.
Canon will not release if Nikon is unable to due to the tsunami.
That is just the way they work out there.
The design of the Nikon V1 is modern as in modern art. It is a minimalist approach, thus the designation of “1″. Use your DSLR to show your sophistication, and the V1 to show your simplicity. The V1 is designed to disappear into its surrounding, and not become the object of intense admiration. It is simplicity at the highest form – causing you to think about the picture and not the tool (or equipment). It’s small, it’s light, and it’s advanced.
You could say only 1 word instead – ugly.
Beauty is in the eyes of the beholder! One man’s ugly is another man’s treasure.
I’m with Remedy.
I’m with Andrew.
There are also things objectively ugly and this is one of them.
Let me put it this way, imagine absolutely nightmare-ish dreadfully ugly woman with absolutely hideous face. Now I’m pretty sure there would be out there at least 1 guy who’d say she is pretty (this however would be strictly subjective) but objectively she still is an utterly ugly mofo.
Same with other things. Some may like it but they are really objectively ugly.
Things are either subjective or objective… there is no in between and there is certainly no “little bit of this and a little bit of that.” Beauty is subjective. Period. You can’t put a number on beauty. People have tried and pageants were held but it remains all opinions. 1 + 1 = 2. That’s objective truth. No one in their right mind out there would dare argue with that.
it’s basically the p300. i just find it a little too expensive for its target (the way i see it). A coolpix with $250 plus lenses…
if I had to pick, I do like and prefer the mock-up…what can I say, I am a sucker for clean straight lines.
Put Your camera in a shoe box. Can’t go much more straight than that.
I truly hope this camera sells well.
After calming down, letting it all sink in, and thinking about the potential for this little camera I realized that it would be better for us all if this camera sells well.
The reason I’m thinking this is that if Nikon succeeds in this “mini” market then perhaps there will be a chance that we’ll someday see a digital FM2/FM3a.
Technically speaking Nikon could still go the mirrorless route and even utilize an EVF with such a camera. The main size constraint would be the sensor to flange distance.
Or, how about a even smaller mirrorless D3000 (or D5000) with an EVF and a tiny grip all while still boasting a DX sensor.
With bigger sensor maybe.
What a waste, I want my D800 or whatever it is going to be called. More turds for idiots, Nikon get your head out of you know wheree.
Bread and games as usual
If only the DSLR news would come
A nice new full frame lens would be great in October!
Am I the only one who has been reading the specs on this camera and thinking about how it will relate to the future enthusiast and pro DSLRs?
Think about what the D700 and D3s could do in relation to the mid level cameras (D90, D300s, D7000, etc)
The mid level cameras are incredible. Really. The pro cameras, though aging, are amazing. They blow everything else out of the water, even today.
Now think about the frame rates, AF points, etc on the One series. Imagine what the D4 is going to be like in comparison.
Y’all need to look at this camera for what it is, and most importantly, think about what it points to as you go up the future camera lines.
Your parents never had it so good.
Your reflections make a lot of sense indeed.
Exactly. The tech in the Nikon 1 is astounding and only means huge things for the new pro bodies that will drop soon. You guys need to stop bitching about this camera and start seeing it for what it is. Dual core Expeed III anyone? 70 something AF points? On sensor hybrid phase and contrast AF? 60fps burst?
Close indeed! Well done!
I was surprised at the size comparison in the pic at http://www.43rumors.com/
The m4/3rds body is the Olympus E-PM1 (“mini”) which is smaller than the E-P3, but still, the V1 looks almost large by comparison. The E-PM1 is positioned at a lower price point that the V1 and has a larger sensor. (Obviously, the real question is image quality rather than purely one of sensor size, but still….) The remaining question is just how much smaller the lenses of the V1 will be and the resulting size of the total package the user will be carrying around.
The other question about size is the Goldilocks question. What is too large, what is too small and what is “just right”? I suppose the market will decide the answer to this question with the Q, the V1, the various NEX choices and the choices within the micro 4/3rds community. It should be interesting to observe.
If your hands can hold it then it’s big or small enough … depending on your point of view
Hmm, I wonder what it’ll be like to hold a smaller violin
…better comparison would be the E-PM1 to the J1.
The V1 has a built in EVF. Slap the EVF on the E-PM1 and you’ve got a bulky, blobby looking monsters compared to the V1.
You do have IS built into the body with the E-PM1, but Oly has sadly disabled it for video and replaced it with some horrid digital crap.
I don’t like the highlight handling and DR I’m seeing in the Nikon 1 demo videos that weren’t done by marketing, so the 4/3rds cams appear to win there.
But size I’d call a draw, leaning a bit towards Nikon. Sony won’t rest on their laurels and the IQ doesn’t seem any better than the significantly smaller Pentax Q. If they don’t have a follow-up by the end of next year with improved DR, 50% more MP, and better high ISO performance, I’d call it a stillborn flop.
Far as body design, I like it (the black body anyway).
This is not in the same category as an iPod, but, a few years ago, I was surprised to overhear a conversation about selecting the color of an iPod. For a significant portion of the market, color is a much more important consideration than we comprehend…even if we don’t like some of the choices. Some other cameras are being offered in colors…and they are all ‘green’, as in the color of money because of the sales they generate. Not everyone feels constrained to choose between black, “chrome”, or the occasional white body.
They will sell very well in Japn
Nikon rep let us try theme here at Jessops – Poor picture quality at ISO 800 and above so it is only a “bright light camera.” And since there are no fast lenses (without adapter) available yet….it needs to be VERY bright light.
Viewfinder is in the wrong place. Our entire staff was not impressed – Sony did well to place the viewfinders to the left.
No 24p video?
No blurry backgrounds – shots look like point and shoot snaps.
Again we couldn’t find much to like about either camera.
Can I post links to pictures that we took with them?
Thanks for the first hand evaluation. It says a lot that the higher ISO performance is not good. I have to say that the GF3 and E-PM1 appear to have a clear pricing edge and, based on your report, an IQ/ISO performance advantage. The lens size based on sensor size edge probably goes to the Nikon, but, without a competitive image, it matters little.
Unless the shipping cameras have markedly better IQ/ISO performance than the one you tested, this will not be good for Nikon.
Just sad NR even posts this camera. Where the hell is the D4 and D800 or D700s? who cares about over priced small sensor garbage. Its not like its a Fuji x100 with lenses. Hell even Fuji is better. Better step it up or we switch to Canon.
with a confetti-sensor ? NEVER
I think this camera target at female user. natrurally, all the negative comments here are from guys.
I for one, like the design. Very simple, clean lines, modern. Technology is always getting better so who’s to say this won’t perform as good/better than M4/3? Looking forward to reading the dpreview of this one!
An accurate mock-up of the ugliest camera of the 21st century. Still glad I pre-ordered a NEX-7.
Excellent work. NR is spot on again as always.
I don’t think these are bad looking cameras and remember, these are not aimed at veteran DSLR owners (more for novices). But the real sticking point is price. These cameras are going to have to drop around $300.00 to become big sellers. And they will sell in Asia—where mirrorless seem to be more popular.
Even Hogan began his comments by saying it “is overpriced in the US and wickedly overpriced elsewhere”.
To me that means that the completely misjudged the market which bodes I’ll for this project. Everyone thought Pentax was crazy pricing the Q so high. Now that Nikon have priced their entry even “worse” one can only reach a similar conclusion about them.
The big issue will be Nikon’s other mirrorless projects which one presumes are either already in production or rapidly approaching production. Should Nikon reaccess the viability of them and either adjust the price point or, perhaps, abort the project and design something that will fit a price point that will stand a chance of meeting sales expectations.
If Nikon should chose to simply blunder on because “it is too late to change” things could get really ugly.