< ! --Digital window verification 001 -->

Nikon 1 V2: what others are saying

Pin It

Two days after the official announcement, this is what other website have to say about the Nikon 1 V2 mirrorless camera:

"Nikon 1 V2: An Interchangeable-Lens Camera For Clueless Photographers (And No One Else)" /Gizmodo

"A Serious-Looking Mirrorless for People Who Don’t Want to Think" /Petapixel

"Whereas the J2 was frustratingly incremental compared to the J1, the V2 will likely represent a more significant upgrade when it lands on shelves" /Engadget

"The company has finally addressed our previous gripes by adding a mode dial along the camera's top panel" /Cnet Asia

"Our first impressions, seeing the camera 'in the flesh' for the first time, are that it isn't as ugly as it looks in photographs. Yes, it looks like a Sony NEX with mumps" /dpreview

"I can only think they were trying to evoke the big block on the Nikon F Photomic with the unusual pop-up flash design, but all I can think of is the overhanging nose of an elephant seal" /Imaging Resource

"The V1 doesn't have any direct competitors at its price; most models with a built-in EVF are more expensive, but they all have larger sensors" /Cnet

"Slow View is particularly interesting and although it takes a minute or two to get your head around it, it could prove very useful in a range of situations. In essence, the camera records 40 full-resolution images at 15fps from the moment that the shutter release is half pressed. While the release remains half-pressed the camera plays back these 40 images in slow succession so that you can decide which is the one you want to keep. When you reach that image, pressing the shutter fully-home records it to the SD card" /Techradar

"All that is a step in the right direction, yet somehow Nikon's managed to make the V2 look a bit like a bridge camera from about five years ago. It's all boxy lines and angles and, while it's small, its exterior aesthetic still doesn't get us excited" /Pocket Lint

The new Nikon 1 V2 is expected to start shipping on November 29th, 2012.

This entry was posted in Nikon 1 and tagged . Bookmark the permalink. Trackbacks are closed, but you can post a comment.
  • Jorgen

    Wow… You know, as much as was said about the V1 originally, at least it looked great. This is… Pentax-Q/K01-like-ridiculously fugly!

    • Jan Toude

      At first Nikon 1 V2 seemed to me ugly. Yesterday I saw it in the flesh at 17th Saint-Petersburg PhotoFair. And now I like it.

      • AlpCns

        Of course you are right but be careful: intelligent comments are never very popular.

      • jose

        You’re trying too hard to keep your job at Nikon, bro.

        • http://www.dpreview.com/members/954247102 Jan Toude

          Nikon 1 V1 is perhaps a nice camera, but Olympus OM-D E-M5 is much better overall, IMHO.

  • bigeater

    I dunno man, 14mp, ability to use F-mount lenses, what’s not to like once the price comes down a little bit? Especially with the easy rental of full-frame and medium-format equipment, this is the perfect scouting/behind-the-scenes camera. If you’re not booking 150 days a year of shooting, why devote all that money and square footage to equipment storage.

    • Ronan

      What the HECK are you on about?

      Lets stick a GIANT F lens on a tiny body? Why?

      $1000 for this POS is ridiculous. Make it $500 and then you are talking.

    • `/1nc3nt

      Women buy bags for a grand or two, only for wearing it couple days in a week. What’s the difference dude?

      • Fred

        True, though most times many women will not “wear” a bag more than once. Women are more likely to wear clothes and carry bags :-)

  • Bavid Daily

    “Nikon 1 V2: An Interchangeable-Lens Camera For Clueless Photographers (And No One Else)”

    +1

    • iamlucky13

      An amusing title, and to be sure, it reflects my sentiments about at least the V1, but they don’t meaningfully support it.

      Most glaringly, they completely ignore enthusiast demand for compact camera to complement our bigger rigs. The V1 failed at that, but the jury is not yet out on the V2.

      Example:
      “But the V2 isn’t for pixel nerds, it’s for people who don’t know one image sensor from the next.”

      Or are willing to make compromises for size. For what it’s worth, the existing 10MP sensor tested out pretty well for image quality when you factor in how small it is. I’m still leaning more towards M4/3 than CX for a couple reasons, but high ISO performance down near the bottom of the list of considerations.

      Gizmodo’s review mainly focuses on all the annoying consumer fluff the V2 inherited from the V1, like the “I don’t know what the hell I’m doing mode.”

      If that’s all the V2 is, then I agree with Gizmodo. However, it appears with the V2, Nikon is actually trying to make a camera the user can control somewhat without getting lost in layers of menus.

      If Gizmodo had even offered a shred of argument Nikon had failed in this regards, they’d have an article worth writing.

      As is, they’ve basically done nothing but re-reviewed the V1, and pretended they were writing about the V2.

      • jack

        gizmodo isn’t exactly the place I go to for photography expertise…

  • Geoffrey Gonads

    If you really want one, wait 12 months when it will have been ditched when common sense prevails at Nikon and the price will be 60% cheaper.

  • DM

    I just don’t understand why people care how their camera looks. As long as it is comfortable to hold, easy to use and produces great images I don’t care how it looks.

    This is even worse considering the people that visit this site. And all this time I thought most people here were more or less serious about photography and their equipment. I guess it’s the same people that stand in line for a new iPhone or iPad not because they need it, but because it’s the newest coolest fashion accessory.

    • Abraham Collins

      So Nikon’s next camera could have a pair of bouncy testicles hanging off the bottom and you wouldn’t bat an eyelash?

      • Geoffrey Gonad

        To be fair, it could be a hit with the ladies.

        • CreativeAngle

          And they should certainly release it in pink to motivate ladies to buy

      • jacob

        It’s quite about time Nikon show they’ve got some balls :)

    • http://www.davidkasman.com David K

      I agree. These camera fetish folks seem awfully wrapped up in their gear looking “good”, in their eyes anyway. If it doesn’t have a certain look, it won’t project their idea of cool. Not only is their self esteem wrapped up in the status symbol aspects of their gear, but they are very closed minded from an industrial design perspective. It seems that the only cameras that look good to them are either “one box” designs or ones that have a super integrated, pro, amorphous computer design look (e.g. D4).

      • ifLookGoodMustBeGood

        Common dude!
        If you buy a BMW, you only buy because of the engine and the seat?
        If you buy a phone you only buy it because you can make call with it?
        If you buy a laptop, it is only about the specification?
        Your glasses is only about the glasses?
        Your cloths is only to warm you up?

        • Nikola

          * Good point, which is why I bought a Subaru instead, rather than paying for the ‘image’;)
          * No, but couldn’t care less how my phone _looked_ [from Palm Treo through HTC G1 to Samsung Galaxy line]. I’m assuming your point is looks vs. functionality, not functionality vs functionality [phone calling vs data storage vs media playback etc]
          * Laptop? What else could it be than about specifications?? [assuming weight/battery power are specs]. Are there people actually buying laptops and considering their “looks”???
          * Em, that one is tautology, so yes. If for others glasses are also about potatoes, more power to them :)
          * No, they’re also there so people don’t point and laugh ;)

          Anyhoo, your comment is I assume meant to be humorous. Different objects have different uses: a painting is meant to be about “how it looks”. A backhoe probably isn’t.
          There’s nothing wrong with a functional tool looking attractive, but I just don’t get all these comments, talking about a camera and the only criticism being the looks.

          I guess I’ve been going to the wrong bars, the camera around my shoulder has never been something that enhanced my pickup abilities :P

          • http://www.photo.net/photos/greghallphotography Greg Hall

            HEY!! I own a Subaru…

            • RC

              Ewwww, why

      • Jorge

        @David –
        I see you are in the “99%” I’m so sorry.

        • Pablo Ricasso

          The price of Nikon’s success is that former Canon snobs have migrated here to dispense with their douche bagishness.

    • Funduro

      I remember reading post on another forum of a photographers being seen using his new Fujifilm X-100 in an amusement park. I was astounded that he stated it in his post and was taken aback as to why he was insecure in being seen using it. From the images he posted he looked like he knew how to use it and compose.

      • Funduro

        oops : . . . . photographer being insecure about being seen . . . .

    • Jonas Poing

      Because we have to be in fashion. Photography is for the birds. Looking good is all that matters.

      • one more thing

        The reason this camera should look good is that it obviously isn’t made for serious photographers. I will not consider the 1 series until they have at least an APS-C sensor, or preferably a FF sensor.
        The only people i’ve seen using these cameras are 21 year old girls traveling for a year, or other people who want a step up from a P&S but have no clue about cameras.
        For people like this, looks is extremely important.
        This camera is seriously ugly, but if it had a FF sensor, i’d be preordering it…..
        For people who don’t know about sensors, etc, than looks become a lot more crucial in their decision… and this thing is a monstrosity.

  • lol

    haters gonna hate

    • Ronan

      And morons will keep posting, like you just showed us ‘lol’.

      The camera sensor is too small.
      Mounting a big F lens on a tiny body defeats the purpose of it.
      It’s too expensive for what it does.
      Damn they made it ugly…

      • RakSiam

        Sensor is too small for what? What uses do you have that need a bigger sensor?

        As mentioned, these smaller cameras are about compromise. In order to get a smaller, more travel-friendly package you give up some sensor size.

        I have a V1. It takes fine photos. I have printed some images at 12″ x 18″ and they look stunning.

        There aren’t that many menus. And once you get used to them it takes very little time to get where you need to go. The V2′s extra controls will make it even easier to use.

        Everyone focuses too much on specs and not enough on real world pictures.

        • Big J

          +100

        • jim h

          +100

          14 mp is enough for anything I’ve ever done. Face it, DSLRs are big and heavy. Disparaging the “looks” of a camera strikes me as a little over the top. I can’t possibly afford this camera, but I’d like to have one.

        • jack

          +1000
          Basically you get a compact D200 with superior AF, Auto WB, high ISO, and AE. The only thing you are missing is ease of access to advanced modes (somewhat addressed here) and lack of shallow dof control.

          If the only tool you have for photography is dof control, you should probably buy a book instead of a new camera.

        • Bintang

          +1
          I agree with you guys!

  • Plug

    The camera seems an impressive upgrade from the V1, which I own and enjoy, and having thought that changes would be small, now have to decide whether to pass the V1 onto my son and get a V2. I am astonished that some, apparently reputable, believe that looks are of primary importance. Surely performance is, or is the jewelry dimension really that important in people’s minds? The V2 is not good looking, but then neither is an A10 Warthog and that does a job! I’ll bet that many of the contibutors here are plain ugly. Now me, I’m handsome….:)

    • Nat Mouncey

      Sir.

      I take extreme offense to your remarks about the look of such an incredible piece of technology. Not good looking? Quite the contrary, I believe it to be one of the most beautiful pieces of design in recent memory!

      How dare you besmirch such a noble countenance? Does a job? Indeed it does, Sir. Indeed it does. Please refrain from comparing the lovely A10 to that odious shite (that’s right, shite) piece of soccer mom tomfoolery of a camera.

      Good day, Sir.

      • Plug

        My admiration for the A10 is clear in my post. Beauty takes many forms. I come from a country that produced Concorde and Aston Martins, sleek lines and elegance, so I suppose I have a certain bias. The A10′s beauty is in its brutal ergonomics. Please accept my apologies if you misunderstood me.

      • Timo

        @ Nat
        ..so why don’t you mount it on your hood as radiator mascot…?

        Concerning the layout and function gizmodo nailed it to the point!

    • Gary

      Plug

      “Now me, I’m hansome”

      I see what you did there “kid” – now, which street did you come from?

  • Joel

    I wish I could find some love for this camera, but I really cant unfortunately. The small sensor limits my ability to isolate the subject, and one can’t but feel that someone who was looking to upgrade from a P&S toward something more serious would instead opt for a low end DSLR such as the D3200.

    Nikon, I’m all for mirrorless, but for love of god make it something compelling such as dropping the 24mp APS-C sensor into something of a similar size and feature set. Better yet, be the first second behind Sony to give us a FF in a mirrorless body. Sure it’d be expensive, but the 1 system just doesnt appear to stir too much excitement.

    • AimlessShooter

      Small sensors have the advantage in shooting groups of people because of the large DOF. Try photographing a group of people in full auto mode on a DX or FX with a fast lens. The camera focuses on the nearest subject, chooses f3.5 or 4, and you end up with the people in back out of focus. A P&S sensor will have everything in focus every time. And a camera phone sensor? Even better for groups people. A smaller sensor is better for a full auto type shooter that doesn’t understand DOF and aperture.

      • Mike

        Your first mistake was putting it on full auto for a group shot. Cameras, like computers are dumb. They do what you ask and are good at that, but they don’t think better than we do. And if the photographer doesn’t know what they are doing, the camera will show that too.

      • Timo

        @aimless
        ..why do you even want a camera when a smartphone serve you better?

        You’re clearly not the targetgroup for any serious camera,not even for a Nikon 1 toy.

      • Allen W.

        Aimless simply said ” A smaller sensor is better for a full auto type shooter that doesn’t understand DOF and aperture” which IMO is not an inappropriate opinion to express. He/she did NOT say that was the way he/she took photos.

  • http://www.dltp.co.uk David Thomas

    Agree with Joel – Nikon would sell tons of cameras based on Sony equivalents of RX1 and RX100.

    The Nikon 1 is a good system its good they getting some more lenses out but would prefer an APS Mirrorless range – perhaps they could do this in future Nikon 2.

  • Pdf Ninja

    I would’ve put aperture control on the lens, and exposure compensation on the body, instead of a mode dial. 15fps, 2.7x crop, slow motion may be useful for some, but it’s a niche.

    Looks are important. For most people a camera is not a tool that pays the bill.

  • PAG

    I was just banding hawks this past weekend and didn’t bring my D7000 out to the blind. I used my wife’s V1 to capture images of hawk releases, not the easiest type of photography. It did just fine (when the hawks were at least a little cooperative). The AF on the V1 rocks.

    If Nikon would make a 50-200 super telephoto (135-540 FX equivalent) this would be a great compact bird and sports outfit. The increased DOF that pros and enthusiasts seem to hate along with the great AF system would actually be a huge plus for amateurs yielding more in focus images. If Nikon can overcome the current limitations of using an F-mount lens they wouldn’t even need a dedicated Nikon 1 lens.

    C’mon, Nikon. Show the wildlife photographers a bit ‘o love. This is how you get them hooked. [Insert my obligatory requests for D400, 300mm f/4 upgrade, 80-400mm upgrade, and maybe 400mm f/5.6 here.]

    • Plug

      +1 on all points. And remember that DOF is severely limited with longer telephotos so the smaller sensor can be a plus.

      • http://www.alexandremarc.co.uk Alex

        Well, regarding Dof, I think it is a misconception:
        Given that on Fx sensor 500mm f/4 give 10cm dof at 10m
        and (for the exemple) Dx sensor 335mm (500mm equivelent) f/5.6 give 10cm dof at 10m.
        you can see there is only 1ev difference which is totally balanced by the ability of Fx sensor to deal with higher ISO (more than 1ev).

        Crop sensor allows you to carry a cheaper and lighter gear at all time. Fx sensor allow narrower dof at same aperture + ability to crank up the ISO if needed

        • Timo

          Your dof calculation is a misconception!
          A 335mm (besides there is none) would have a larger dof at the same distantance and same aperture than a 500mm. If you go from an aperture higher by one stop the dof becomes higher. Thus a 500mm @ f 4 has never the same dof as a 335 @ f 5.6

          • Alex

            sorry i meant Fx f5.6 and Dx f4

        • PAG

          Alex, I get what you’re saying but I think you’re off a bit. I went to the online depth of field calculator “DOFMaster” and calculated roughly 500mm equivalents. Here’s what it returned:

          Nikon 1: 180mm at f/5.6 = 0.11 feet
          D7000: 320mm at f/10 = 0.11 feet
          D4: 500mm at f/18 = 0.11 feet

          That looks like more than one stop.

          You might be able to come up with an equivalent with a D800 at a smaller f-number and cropped to 14MP, but a) I’m too lazy to do the math right now and b) size, weight, and cost aren’t remotely comparable so it doesn’t mean much anyway.

          • Plug

            Your numbers confirm my observation.

          • Alex

            Allright, if dofmaster says it ! Thats it …
            I have been using a small calculator app on my phone for long to calculate dof when needed, I never had any problem with it but should consider to check its accuracy.
            Sorry for the mistake.

            • PAG

              That’s just the first DOF calculator that came up in my Google search. I’m assuming it’s reasonably accurate, but I definitely don’t have a dog in that hunt. It could be coded by a 15-year old who failed Physics I for all I know!

          • alex

            I have just been on Dofmaster and checked :
            Nikon1 at 30ft 168mm f4 = 0.84 ; f4.5 = 0.94ft
            D7000 at 30ft 300mm f8 = 0.94ft
            D800 at 30ft 450mm f11 = 0.87ft ; f12.7 = 0.98ft

            from f4.5 to f8 you need to crank up the ISO x3.5 (1.75ev)
            from f4.5 to f12.7 you need to crank up the ISO by x8 (3ev)

            guess what :
            nikon1 dxomark 372iso
            d7000 dxomark 1167iso= nikon1 x 3.1 (x3.5 would be 1300 iso, I guess D7100 will do !?)
            d800 idxomark 2853iso = nikon1 x 7.7 (x8 would be 2976 iso … get a D800E for those bits missing !!!)

            So here is my point.
            Not a real difference.

      • Alex

        Ooops rather 14cm … according to the calculator you can find here and there. (comparing d700 to D7000 here)
        Another exemple :
        Fx 75mm f/11 = 2m dof at 4m
        Dx 50mm f/8 = 2m dof at 4m

        • PAG

          In the world of bird photography, a focal length of 50mm on a DX camera isn’t realistic. A more realistic example are the focal lengths I used above. Here’s a similar example in metric, with DOF equivalents of roughly 85cm at 15m distance:

          Nikon 1 – 180mm @ f/5.6
          D7000 – 320mm @ f/10
          D700 – 500mm @ f/16

          So definitely more than a stop.

          For the person who wants to do casual wildlife and sports, (or just tote around a very light outfit on a given day), the V2 with a decent telephoto could be a great combo.

          • alex

            @PAG, i did some more maths above, with dofmaster online to please you.

          • Big J

            Hmmm…. a V2 with the FT-1 +55-300mm DX kit lens. That could make a good combo for an amateur right?

  • Sarrafo

    The white version os much more interesting. But I dont want any.

  • Bernard

    Nikon have improved the looks over the original. I quite like it. What’s all the fuss Guys and Gals… LOL

    If image quality is significantly improved then this should sell better. I agree the launch price is at a level where the likes of the Fuji MILC with APS C come to mind, but those Fuji lenses will be bigger and cost significantly more, which is the advantage the Nikon 1 Series holds. Some of the smaller Micro 4 Thirds cameras are also pushing the case size of the lenses down to the point I would fear the mechanisms are more fragile. I am not aware of any repair stats for these but Nikon has not tried to make the 1 series gear extra small, which is a good thing as trying to hold stuff too small and fragile is almost as bad as having gear that is too big and heavy. The smaller sensor also suits video for users that would find AF challenges with a bigger frame. Clearly aimed at giving the best for more frequent and less planned general use. It seems real photographers who own these are not moaning half as much as those who do not…

    I look forward to test results, especially in real life use where some of the smaller sensors have a greater performance drop off in low light… If they can squeeze more image quality out and loose some of the usage quirks of the original, then it looks a lot more promising…

  • Frank

    Looks like a camera taken off of the set of 2001:A Space Odyssey. You know, the movie that was made 44 years ago in 1968! Nikon just doesn’t seem to get it. Making it white won’t make people think: Oh wow! it’s white, it must be like something out of Apple’s design studio. It must be cool ’cause it’s white. Wooooo.
    Uh -no. It looks like a cheap plastic $40 toy camera.
    Epic fail – again.

  • Phil Service

    I wager that virtually all the extremely negative sentiments about the V1/V2, in this discussion thread and in “review” sites on the web, have been made by people who have spent no time shooting with the V1 in the real world. It’s fast, it’s quiet, most folks barely notice it’s there, and you can carry it happily all day. AF performance is better than any other mirrorless camera. I think a lot of people are just mad because Nikon hasn’t made the mirrorless that they want.

    • Samony

      Exactly. For those who are waiting for a digital SP rangefinder, please go out and shoot with what you’ve got because it’s not coming anytime soon.

  • zoetMB

    I don’t currently own (in fact I’ve never owned ) a P&S camera. I was at the New York photo show yesterday and played with some of these Nikon 1 cameras and I have to say that I sort of liked them. They certainly didn’t respond as quickly as my SLRs and DSLRs, but they seemed to take pretty good pictures, they focused well and the videos looked pretty good. There are times that I wouldn’t mind walking around with a small camera like this instead of lugging the big DSLR and large lenses.

    I played a bit with the Olympus and some of the Pannys and a few others on the show floor and my daughter currently uses a Sony NEX. In a cursory look, I didn’t find any far better or far worse than any other. In person, I don’t think the Nikon looks bad, but I don’t remember if I was looking at the the old models or the new ones. Obviously, I would have been happier if the Sony’s had a larger sensor. Nikon did have a pro photographer demonstrating photos he took with the Nikon 1 camera and if you weren’t told that these were Nikon 1 photos, you never would have been able to tell (although they were all styled with over-saturated color)

    The old models are on sale: B&H is selling the J1 with the 10-30mm lens for $447 and the V1 for $479 (vs. $550 and $900 for the new versions). I think that’s actually a pretty good deal.

    • FF

      +1

  • http://www.chrisandcami.com Chris & Cami

    My question is, does the V2 disable Continuos AF when used with the FT1 Mount? I’m primarily an FX shooter. But for wildlife and sports, I love using my DX sensor cameras to get a little extra reach on my telephoto lenses. The 1.5x crop makes my 200-400 act like a 300-600. If I could get full AF capabilities on a CX sensor camera, I’d buy one in a heartbeat! Unfortunately on the J1 and V1, you only get center point AF-S. I’m OK with the center point limitation…but AF-C is pretty much a requirement for shooting moving wildlife. Anyone heard wheter we’ll get AF-C capabilities using the FT1 on this camea?

    • Phil Service

      Good question. I’s also like to know if the V2 will do exposure bracketing, if there’s a live histogram, and there’s a warning about blown highlights/shadows during image review — three features that are missing from the V1. I think we’ll need to wait until Nikon releases the user manual or until someone tests a production unit.

  • george

    Who cares, that camera is UGLY! Ugliest upgrade, hands down! Ugliest CSC, hands down! Oh, man nikon fanboys are going to hear about it for a long long time to come.LOL

    • http://Www.pens.co.uk neil Cleere

      It’s a bit pricey for the specs but I think that Nikon have decided the future for their flagship mirrorless camera lies with a small sensor. I suspect their reasoning for this is future-proofing. Sensor quality will improve with every new iteration/generation of this system and a few years from now image quality will match the performance of much larger sensors of today. When that happens, Nikon will have a mature and comprehensive system camera based on a small sensor that will deliver quality images that surpasses the needs of the target market by a long way. The small sensor will allow for a very compact design and low prices in what will become a very competitive market. It will never please serious photographers that want creative control over every image, but then again it was never designed for that market. However, some serious photographers will not object to having it as a pocket system camera and beginners will love it for the professional looking results it can produce for displaying on Facebook pages etc. Give Nikon some credit; after all they have been producing some of the most groundbreaking cameras for some time now and they have a huge pedigree in setting trends rather than following them and they don’t seem to get much wrong.

      • `/1nc3nt

        101% agree.

        BTW: Internet is full with Schadenfroh mentality. Most people just want to see others fail because of their irresponsible, destructive email. Making a big brand like Nikon or Microsoft as public enemy is a sport for them.

  • Peter Krieger

    Just my two cents:
    [A] the V2 looks more like a ‘traditional’ SLR; but could use some styling.

    [B] if Nikon were to design and manufacture a camera that resembles the F3, in this format, much as Olympus has done w/ the OMD5 or whatever it is called, the response would be astounding.

    [C] the J2 and the J1 don’t look all that different;

    • A K

      Defenitely agree with that!

  • Ken

    The only news for those who want V2 is, the price will go down dramatically within weeks…

  • Jorge

    That has got to be the Fugliest camera I have ever seen. Honestly, I’m a Nikon shooter through and through. However, my small carry everywhere camera is a Lumix LX5; whenever a friend, family member, or a work associate asks what P&S to purchase the first thing I tell them is “stay away from Nikon”. It kills me to say that…

    • grant torres

      Sir, where did you buy your LX5? I’ve got one
      but mine is not lens-interchangeable.

      • dalia

        the lx5 is not interchangable lens wise, hes basically saying that the V2 is so damn ugly he prefers a pano fixed lens PS camera instead, regardless of whatever. nothing can save that V2 POS, not even a pardon from the pope.

        • Jorge

          @grant torres:
          @dalia
          Thank you. My LX5 is not an interchangeable lens camera. It is a fantastic tool that is with me everyday. I’m sitting here in the hospital where I’ve been since last Saturday (being discharged today), and guess whats in the backpack I threw together with some clothes? My LX5.
          Even when I pack to travel with all my Nikon Gear, the LX5 always goes along for the ride…

    • Allen W.

      Visually I like it. Fugly can be beautiful if it is also functional. Like the earlier A-10 example.

  • Jabs

    You know what was almost the first thing that came to my mind when I saw the picture of the black Nikon 1 – V2 model?

    F3AF without the MD-4 Motor drive – looks to me like a miniature one as I had an F3AF years ago and loved it too.

  • Andy Schulz

    nice try, but what is useless for me is there is no way to connect an external flash or any hotshoe to install a flash trigger system, would be nice to use it for studio flash use. Anybody out there knows if there is a chance to do that? Regards Andy

    • Big J

      Optical triggers for the flashes? Best thing I could think of.

  • tony T

    Tthat is one freaking ugly ass camera…perfect to hang around the necks of ugly people.

    • Plug

      You should try it then.

  • Alex

    Other comments to attest my previous posts regarding DOF on Nikon1 vs Fx :

    - Photozone says the equivalent DOF of the Nikon 1 lenses at f/4.5 is f/12 on Fx => 3ev to compensate with ISO. If your are using iso400 on Nikon 1 you will need to push up to iso3200 on D800, D4 etc. to compensate the stop down
    (http://www.photozone.de/nikon1/701-1nikon101004556v1)

    - Some people will say “yes, but you are losing a lot of Dynamic Range if you push up to 3200 iso”. According to http://www.dxomark.com : Nikon1 at iso400 = 10ev and D800, D4 at iso3200 = 10ev as well …

    - Graphs from photozone will also tell us that you are losing IQ dramatically passed f8 on Nikon1.

    Conclusion : Gaining DOF by having a crop sensor is not the point of DX or Nikon1 cameras, as you can obtain the same on FX by stopping down and compensate with ISO. But they surely can offer same or EXTRA reach with a lot cheaper, smaller and lighter package. That looks very convenient to me.

  • Z

    Hate it that it can only use proprietary SB-N5 or SB-N7 flashes … would have liked to use a SB 400 … dang …

  • brownie

    I think many have missed the point of the nikon 1 system. I have the J1. I also own a d7000, and have shot other Nikon dslr and Canon dslrs. This system is not just for compact upgraders. It is a small system to compliment you dslr when you don’t want to carry a huge camera around. And the small sensor – genius. The IQ may not be up to the latest aps-c IQ right now, but just wait a few years, the IQ on this 1″ sensor will be VERY good. And then guess what – every other camera company will be struggling to get a camera out based on a 1″ sensor. Other companies have been able to make the bodies very small, but you can’t miniaturize lenses when they still have to cover an aps-c image circle. Nikon is ahead of the game right now. They will take some heat for a while, but you will see the strategy start to work in a few years when the IQ of this system starts to get very good.

  • Back to top