< ! --Digital window verification 001 -->

The best selling mirrorless camera for 2012 in Japan? The Nikon 1 J1!

Best selling mirrorless camera for 2012 in Japan

The best selling mirrorless camera in Japan for 2012 according to BCNranking is the Nikon 1 J1. The data is based on actual sales from approximately 2/3 of all Japanese retail stores.

In the DSLR ranking, Canon has the #1 spot followed by the Nikon D5100 and D3100. The D7000 got the number 5 spot with a total of three Nikon DSLRs in the top 5 list. Nikon D3200 is at #11, D800 at #16 and Nikon D600 at #20:

Best selling DSLR cameras for 2012 in Japan

This entry was posted in Other Nikon stuff. Bookmark the permalink. Trackbacks are closed, but you can post a comment.
  • Myrddin

    Oh so just maybe Nikon knows what they are doing with the N1 series and the detractors here who whine about Nikon not making enough $2,000 lenses for them to show off with are mistaken.

    I have a couple of the V1 bodies. They are not a replacement for my D300 and F-mount lenses. But I would definitely take a V1 over a D3100 or D5100.

    Oh and BTW, check out the math in http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Image_sensor_format

    For two lenses with the same angle of view and distance to subject:

    DOF1/DOF2 ~= d1/d2

    Where DOF is the Depth of field and d1 is the absolute aperture. Making the sensor size smaller in the F-mount format makes design of wide angle lenses a pain. The DX wides will never be as good as the FX wides. But the depth of field is determined by the aperture which is mostly a function of the front element diameter size which is usually the most expensive part and mostly determined by the diameter.

    All of which is merely demonstrating that the performance of the camera is determined by the size and quality of the lens. The size of the sensor is really not very important at all for a new format like CX.

    Choosing 1″ for the sensor size looks like the right move commercially and technically right now. Gives a massive reach advantage when using F-mount lenses and holds open the option of introducing an FX mirrorless body in three to four years time when that makes better sense.

    • Stefan

      I have to say, I agree that the 1″ sensor is pretty neat. Nikon seems to be the only company that has figured out how to make the sensor small, the lenses small, and the camera small (pocketable), but also created a decent different line of cameras silmultaneously with their own production of SLR and SLR lenses. People won’t complain about DoF when they roll out newer versions of the camera segmented widely at enthuasiasts, beginners, etc. and lenses with F/1 apertures. I’d love if samyang or tokina or another lens company started the lens development of this already :) Besides, in the future, software will still be able to manage more and more of previously distinct problems, and having a completely seperate line of production that extend into the future is a good choice, as long as it manages to stay on top of phone cameras. Anyway, let’s see, but I’ll stay optimistic

    • SleeperSmith

      Rofl. Fanboys need to justify their hurt feelings whenever they can.

      So I guess Canon sensors are better because they sold more.

      Rofl. People nowadays are seriously getting dumber and dumber. Rofl.

      • Myrddin

        Canon’s mirrorless offering only managed fifteenth place and nobody is raving about it.

        Olympus and Sony started with a big lead BUT there is a real question as to whether either company will stay the course. Both have big financial problems having lost their core markets. Olympus is at the center of a major financial fraud prosecution and Sony has been beaten out by Apple in its core business.

      • Falcone

        I just love it when those ‘Anti nikon Fanboys’ calling the rest ‘Fanboys’ names when he/she is no better or should I say way way below than the rest. Has absolutely nothing to substantiate he/her claim.

        • PAG

          Yes, but he is ROFL, even if he doesn’t know how to properly capitalize it.

    • Annette Ben.

      Still licking your wounds, Myrddin ?
      You should have known better in the first place…now you’re stuck with a lemon preaching to others how almighty it is.

      • MyrddinWilt

        I have been using Nikon gear 25 years. I have all the F-mount stuff as well.

        The best camera for the shot is never the one you left at home because it was too heavy.

        I only bought the second body a few weeks ago. The price of the B&H kit was only $100 more than the lens I wanted.

        • neversink

          I’ve been using Nikon gear for 42 years and guess what? I would never buy one of these cheap, plastic pieces of N1 junk they try to pawn off.

    • MyrddinWilt

      You didn’t get that d is the APERTURE not the aperture ratio. Which is why the comparisons work as they do.

      FX: 35mm f/1.2 = 30mm aperture

      DX: 28 f/1.8 = 15mm aperture

      CX: 14mm f/4 =3.5mm aperture.

      The math predicts that the CX result should have the same depth of field as the 35mm FX lens at f/10. That CX shot looks pretty much what I would expect to see with a 35mm lens at f/11. Its a wide lense so practically the whole frame is in focus.

      The depth of field on the FX sensor at f/4 looks pretty much the same as the depth of field on the DX sensor at f/2 which is what you would expect. The DX sensor looks a little shallower as far as focus goes. It looks like shit because the sensor is not as good and the transmission factor of the lens is worse.

      It is quite possible to get the same look as the FX frame on the CX format but you would need the same 30mm aperture which would make it f/0.5. You can’t do that on an SLR but you can on a rangefinder.

      Yes I have been reading folk making comparisons based on similar f-stop numbers here for years. But they don’t get that the depth of field is determined by the math and that says that the DOF is pretty much a function of the absolute aperture only.

      The reason for making a sensor bigger is actually to avoid the consequences of diffraction which is something that only bites you at the opposite end of the scale when you want to have a small aperture. When sensor efficiency permits an acceptable ISO, CX format should be able to deliver an effective 24MP package but going beyond that will be fighting quantum mechanics. Reason for going mirrorless on the FX camera will be to deliver 100MP and above.

      And in any case, if I want the shallow DoF or low light I will pull out the heavy gear. The N1 is for when I want OTHER characteristics. It is just a tool, sometimes a different tool gives you the result you want. Like long reach for bird shots.

      • Tommy

        So basically N1s are great for shooting birdies in excellent light conditions with these $2k+ lenses (crippled by f/10+ apertures) one normally shows off with, since these aren’t rangefinders.

        You can make a shot look worse by adding noise, overbright areas and such in postprocessing to get the result, but you can’t make it better the same way. Clients and families couldn’t care less about the math. DoF is what they see and demand right now, not something that’s theoretically possible, yet for some odd reason not accomplished until date.

    • neversink

      Myrddin -Your circular reasoning only justifies that you bought a lemon with a bunch of other lemmings. Your arguments are full of holes. Sensors in FF have improved enormously over the years, but that means nothing in IQ???? I’d rather use my iPhone camera before I waste my $$ on that Nikon 1 plastic and flimsy J1 and V1 crap.

  • Mikko Moilanen

    Japanese doesn’t seem to read dxomark.

    • Chimphappyhour

      No, just people who want to masturbate over specs.

  • Gordon Moat

    I think this shows that Nikon understands the mirrorless market. Despite other companies entering the segment first, Nikon was able to take the lead in sales.

    It also shows that the enthusiasts who either rave or complain about cameras are not the majority of buyers. Even on the DSLR list there are few cameras that are to be found being talked about often on enthusiasts websites. Price point and megapixels mean much more to the average camera buyer.

    • preston

      I wouldn’t be so sure that this means Nikon understands the mirrorless market. They have stated that their goal is to have the #1 market share. Well, just having the #1 model does not mean you have achieved your goal.

      Here is the total mirrorless market share according to the top 20 models’ sales: Olympus-28.8%, Panasonic-21.4%, Sony-18.4%, Nikon-13.3%.

      • http://www.gordonmoat.com/ Gordon Moat

        The figures are only for Japan and only for 2012. Understanding the market, and being the leader in sales, are two separate things. Besides, we are only stating opinions. I doubt Nikon are sitting on their hands waiting for the public to buy their products. We will know much more later this year about how well Nikon is doing.

        • Motherland

          No wonder Nikon keeps investing in it though — if that’s the Motherland’s favorite.

    • http://twitter.com/cenogravefinder Oskar Maggs

      “shows that Nikon understands the mirrorless market” the J1 only achieved 15% in it’s target market after 18 months they said they would achieve 50% after 6 months that to me is a fail! 2013 isn’t looking too rosy for Nikon 1 either…

      • Thom Konto

        Here in Norway the Nikon1 share is 38% and by far the most succsessful mirrorless camera.

      • http://www.gordonmoat.com/ Gordon Moat

        Where did you read that Nikon claimed they would hit 50% of total sales volume in six months?

        On what do you base 2013 not looking good for the Nikon 1 system?

    • http://www.facebook.com/wealthboomer J Gary Dean

      I had a Nikon DSLR and found it too big, too clunky and too tedious.
      I now look forward to the smaller Nikon 1 piece of shit since I can once again have fun with a camera.

      • http://www.gordonmoat.com/ Gordon Moat

        Perhaps the pink version will suit you. ;)

    • Canon & Sony Fanboy

      Even camera made of crap will sell well under Nikon name. But that’s the point of “Nikon understands the mirrorless market.” They figured it out that specs are not important, as long as it’s Nikon.

      • http://www.gordonmoat.com/ Gordon Moat

        I get lots of compliments about my crappy Nikon V1 and the images I make with it. However, if you are insecure and trying to make up for “shortcomings”, then you should go out and buy the biggest camera you can carry.

  • bjrichus

    Ummmmm…. Children….. This article has NOTHING to do with the quality of the camera or the images it is capable of producing.

    The number of sales/market share (which these reports are a measure of), relate to the number of units sold, not the quality or usability of those devices.

    Dumb asses will always buy the cheapest/bargain device when they should be looking at other factors. Also, lets not forget the “Hello Kitty” factor for the Nikon 1 range, which is huge in gadget happy Japan.

    This means nothing.

  • guest1234235123456124356

    This stat is pointless because it does not take into account how long a camera has been on the market. For example, Nikon D600 was released on September 13th, 2012, and has been on the market just for 3.5 months.

  • john harry

    …and then people stillbsays crap about the small camera like d5100 and nikon 1 version. d800? where r you on the list?

  • joe

    what nobody is mentioning is that olympus has 4 models in teh top 12. Nikon has 1, sony has 3, panasonic 3…in fact of the top 20 olympus has 7. Not too shabby…BTW…I’ve owned 2 Olympus and loved them. I’ve owned a Nikon, 3 Canons, 5 Fuji’s, and the epl1 and OMD. They’re all fun and all took great pictures. Only one that didn’t was a Lumix.

  • Fenny

    How much for Nikon J1 lens 30-110mm

  • Back to top