A very different Nikon 1 V3 mirrorless camera is rumored for January

After disappointing sales in Europe and the US, Nikon has not given up on their mirrorless solution. New Nikon 1 products are expected to be announced during the 2014 CES show in early January including a new V3 camera. The new Nikon 1 V3 will have a design closer to the Nikon Coolpix P-series (P7800). The rumor is that the accessory port will be removed and replaced with a fully compatible flash hot shoe to compliment the SB-300 ($147). The pop-up flash will also be able to act as a wireless commander.

The FT-1 lens adapter will receive a firmware update to match up with the new V3 features.

Expect some good deals on the current Nikon 1 models in the second half of December.

Nikon may also announce the previously leaked  Nikkor 1 10-100mm f/4-5.6 underwater lens for the AW1.

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

    After looking at the V2 you can see why they’ll make it a little more conventional.

  • saywhatuwill

    After looking at the V2 you can see why they’ll make it a little more conventional.

    • istreetshooter

      The V2 is ugly, for sure, but an APS-C sensor would have made it an overall more attractive camera.

      • KnightPhoto

        APS-C (DX) is the Nikon 2 system

        • istreetshooter

          Maybe Nikon 2 V#, but for sure not Nikon 1 V1/2. Bummer. If Nikon moved away from CX in the future, the CX lenses would have no future.

      • BBBinOhio

        Not for me it wouldn’t. I need 800mm of reach without a lot of weight and bulk. The bigger the sensor the bigger and heavier the load.

        What I want is a 1″ sensor that has close to the same image quality and low light capability of a good APS-C sensor. And Sony has already shown us that it’s possible.

        And I don’t care about ugly!!!! Form follows function!!! Have it feel good in the hand and take great pictures with a quality build, and I’m sold.

        • Spy Black

          Considering the lack of function in the Series 1, you’re right about that form following function thing…

          • david schmutzler

            true, hot shoe, articulating screen and a shutter speed dial would be nice.

            but “lack of function” is a very subjective thing.
            my guess is, you never used a nikon V1 or V2.

            • Spy Black

              It was a cynical joke…

            • david schmutzler

              “bring it back to something that resembled a camera”
              holy shit, what does a real camera need in your eyes? big, bad sensor and an ethernet port?

              as i said before, you either didn’t use a nikon 1 or have issues.

            • Spy Black

              I don’t know how you use a camera, but I know how I use one. I expect real controls for common processes and a standard hot shoe for flash and radio triggers, among other things.

            • david schmutzler

              well, “real” controls is kind of arbitrary with “real” cameras like modern CaNikons, because all you do is telling the processor to dial it down or up a notch if you are using modern lenses.

              of course you can shoot with manual lenses, but that you can do on a nikon 1 as well 😉

              as for “common processes”, you know you can take influence on parameters on the nikon 1 cameras as well, yes? some things are inside the menu and some things are missing, i give you that. if you need specials like HDR or things like that, the nikon 1 line is not for you.

              hotshoe and the other stuff: if you need it, if you are a professional or demanding enthusiast, the nikon 1 line up is obviously not for you.

              BUT that doesn’t mean, that it is a bad camera.
              and some pros had a lot of fun shooting with it. because they see it as what it is: a camera. not a professional one and not without shortfalls. but a camera. depends SOLEMNLY what YOU do with it. and you just mock it with “it does not have this and that…” yadayadayada…

              do you really need it in every day situations?

            • Spy Black

              I need it in whatever camera I use, because I’ll never know when I need it. I have an old Richoh 500G compact camera that I bought for $25 used in the 90s, and that camera has the functionality that the Nikon 1 doesn’t. If I had a choice between the 500G or the N1 for $25 each, The Richoh would win.

            • david schmutzler

              ok. i will not dignify the comparison between a film camera from the 70th and a digital camera with a response…

              you win.

            • Spy Black

              Ah, corrected…

            • Spy Black

              I hope Nikon finally wakes up to the reality of their neutered cameras, and it appears that is exactly what is happening. The very nature of this article seems to indicate that Nikon has realized how stupidly they’ve botched this so far, and are apparently trying to make amends. That’s a good thing.

              They’ve invested way too much into this system not to make them not only fully functional, but competitive. If they plan to pit these cameras up to their competition, they’re not only going to have to be as capable, they’re going to have to start pricing them more down to earth.

              This system has good potential, and Nikon is almost there, but it’s going to have to go across the entire 1 series, the Js and as well as the Vs. These days, that means EVFs for all the camera, full control dials and interfacing, and a real-world pricing.

            • david schmutzler

              “the V2 was an attempt to bring it back to something that resembled a camera”
              holy shit, what does it need to be a “real” camera? a big, bad, manly fullframe sensor and an ethernet port??

              as i said, you either didn’t use one or you have issues, justifying your choice of camera.

        • Agreed. And Nikon typically takes Sony sensors and improves on them (to get better low light capability). I think the CX, though young, has lots of potential!

        • istreetshooter

          “What I want is a 1″ sensor that has close to the same image quality and low light capability of a good APS-C sensor. And Sony has already shown us that it’s possible.”

          Well, that’s the problem for Nikon isn’t? I hate bulk, too. It is great for digital work, but Nikon needs to kick it up on the V3 for print work.

          I do like my V1s for travel. How many of the mirror less cams can actually keep focus on a moving subject? Not many.

      • I like the small sensor and 2.7x crop factor. If I want better DR and low light, I’d go Full Frame.

        APS-C is good for someone who has/wants only *one* camera (a good compromise of size and quality) but I think a CX sensor makes more sense for a camera meant to *compliment* your FX camera (D610, D700, D800, D4)

        • istreetshooter

          I’d actually like a Nikon that resembles the Fuji X models. I’ve gone through the D70, D80, D90, and V1; and I have a V2 and D300s at work. What I’d like is for Nikon to make a compact APS-C the way Fuji and Samsung have done it. Is that so hard, Nikon?

          • david schmutzler

            Fuji X is not an option?

            • istreetshooter

              I’m debating it. I wish they focused faster, like V’s, and I’d have to reinvest in lenses. Tough choice.

            • david schmutzler

              true. the X-E2 does focus pretty fast. IQ is very good. i read many times, that people ditched their APS-C for Fujis system.

              it really is a tough choice. for me, it will be the nikon 1 system and the fuji x side by side.

    • But… I requested an S2 design… 🙁

  • Fgonz

    NR: With a 4k video?

    • That is a possibility – 2014 is supposed to be the year of 4k video.

      • Davidvictormeldrew Idontbeliev

        Hope they roll out 4k in the D400 and a D800 update with 4k

  • NateCrisman

    If the V3 has no improvements over the V2 except a standard hotshoe and nikon wireless CLS compatibility…Im still sold. Getting the 1 series into basic wireless flash system will now set me free for indoor photos in low light. No more ISo3200 @ F1.8 and still getting motion blur during all the typical family uses with my V1.

    Not sure how hot I would be about a movable LCD. I kinda think that is a durability liability for my use. I can see myself snapping off the damn LCD in disney world and being sunk!

    • longzoom

      What V3 needs is the same size dramatically improved sensor, close to Sony’s one 10 or 100. The line of lenses is very good now, plus middle rings for FF glass.

      • david schmutzler

        +1 sensor update would be nice. and there will be a new aptina sensor in the V3. i would like to see a sony sensor in the V3, because they are really on the edge with their products.
        BUT to keep away from sony and support other vendors is a good thing to mee, too.

        • longzoom

          Somehow I hope Nikon will address every of this things you are talking about, Gentlemen. They have no rights to make mistakes now, no way to take one more step to financial catastrophe.

          • david schmutzler

            i am not an expert, but with the competition, nikon need to add some features we nikon 1 user want.
            and i think, they learned from the past year. Sony came down hard with the NEX and the A7 line (and to some extend the RX1, which is out of the price range for potential nikon 1 users of course) Olympus got the OMD and the PENs some attention and Panasonic got some pretty nice percentages, too. Plus Fuji has an impressive line up.
            With all that in competition, the V3 mustn’t fall short. or it has to be quite inexpensive…

      • The lenses are pretty great. An improved sensor and this easily competes against the M4/3 systems. Low light still won’t be as good, but CLS might negate that.

        • kreislauf

          can’t wait to own the 32mm. test shots were very nice…

      • NateCrisman

        I’m fine with the current v1 image quality….if I had to choose between a better sensor w/ +1 stop of ISO or the CLS + real hotshoe….

        I’ll take the flash upgrades thanks.

    • Spy Black

      It’s amazing the bizarre reaction people have to an articulating screen, like it was deigned to purposely break exactly when you suspected it would.

      Articulating screens should be standard issue in all cameras. Two years into my D5100 I’ve yet to find myself in a situation waiting to somehow rip off the screen from the camera, and I’ve used that camera in studio and outdoors environments in all four seasons and weather conditions. Contrary to every doomsayers comments otherwise, I still see my screen exactly where I left it.

      • I love my (Sony) articulating screens, and often shoot from the waist. If Nikon ‘goes big’ with video on the one series, an articulating LCD is a ‘must’.

      • Thom Hogan

        Agree. Plus, the full swivel screen has an advantage in that you can turn it to face in while traveling so that you don’t damage the LCD surface. Really ought to be on every camera, even a D4.

    • Fred Flintstone

      The SB-N7 set me free just fine…

      • david schmutzler

        true, but for $140 i would want to rotate horizontally, too.
        that kept me from buying the flash as of yet.

        • SB-N5 perhaps?

          • david schmutzler

            too expensive. sells used right now for €100 on ebay. but consider its size, it is a nice thing 🙂

            • Adorama has a Grey Market version for $129 New, though probably more used available now. Really incredible little flash, especially that it uses camera battery power. I run a diffuser off EBAY on mine. You can dial flash compensation way down and use it as a flash sync trigger.

    • Nikon flash and CLS is a huge, huge selling point for Nikon systems. It’s a shame Nikon didn’t offer this from the ‘get-go’ on the one system.
      I think they didn’t realize who the target market is for the camera, and so didn’t market it for enthusiasts.

      • NateCrisman

        Exactly. I can see not offering CLS on the J1-3 or S1. The V series would have been better received if a CLS commander accessory flash had been offered.

  • RakSiam

    Are they going to try and charge $1k+ for it? Or have they finally learned that lesson?

  • 1 V2 is just ugly, but the AW1 was the first in the series that filled a need for me. Should get it tomorrow.

    • Congrats – looks like a really cool/fun camera!

    • Thom Hogan

      It’s curious to me how many people seem to think that. That was my dealer’s first reaction, too, when he unboxed his first AW1. Yet I don’t really see it as any different than the J1 design on steroids.

      • Your dealer thought the AW1 was ugly or useful?

        • Thom Hogan

          His exact comment was something along the lines of “if Nikon had designed the original Nikon 1 looking like this…” But frankly, I just don’t see it. The AW1 does look like a lot like the original J1, only with beefier shoulders and torso. Sure, the dial moved up top, but I just don’t see any major change to design or even build quality. The J1 was built like a soap bar make of steel.

  • Rhonbo

    Nikon finally figured out what we wanted 2-3 yrs later. Now if the flash sync can be made faster we will have a winner if the price is right. Being the top end 1 series this will probably be expensive for what it is in 2014. Hopefully the sensor will be an updated version as well.

    • david schmutzler

      i think it will be a new 14MP 4k aptina sensor.

  • JR

    I had a Nikon 1 V1, sold it cause I was not impressed with the image quality.
    The camera itself had good points and bad ones. Basically an overpriced point and shoot. In the end its the image quality that makes it for me.
    For the price, the quality is just not there compared to others.

    • istreetshooter

      For my uses, the V1’s superior focusing speed got me to ditch my Olympus Pens.

    • david schmutzler

      if the image quality is not for you, it’s not for you.
      pixel peeping is somehow bad, i give you that.
      and many of us just do that: watch their images with 100% scaling on their screens. that’s ok with me, i don’t judge.

      but actually printing the taken shots gives me very nice photos and i really love my V1. but that’s just me.

    • groucher

      I depends what sort of photography you’re into and how you view your shots. For action, the 1 series has no competition – 60fps at full resolution is incredibly useful and fitting e.g. a 300mm FF lens gives you 810mm equiv with no loss of aperture. Printed results up to A3 are fine and the 10mp sensor gives 5 times the resolution of an HD telly if you want to view photos that way.

  • PhotoAl

    I really like the V2 design so I hope they don’t change it too much. It’s good to see that the future models are at least rumored to be CLS compatible. Also, I’m curious how much the sensor will improve. I’m sure that’s what most people will also be wondering since low light performance isn’t the V2’s forte.

  • Fgonz
    • Spy Black

      That would certainly breathe some life into that eunuch system 1, along with the proposed hot shoe, articulating screen, and of course an actual PASM wheel. They could borrow a bit from the Df and give it a shutter speed dial, as well as an electronic F-stop/utility ring around the lens mount, a la Canon S110. Then it would actually start to resemble a real camera…

      • My D3 does not have a PASM dial. Why do people want this dial?

        • Spy Black

          Because your D3 isn’t a point ‘n shoot. Have you ever worked with a digital non-DSLR?

          • I used a V1 in a restaurant project as a secondary camera, with the SB-N5 mounted. Other than that I have honestly never used a non-pro DSLR. My old F4S has a sort of PH PL A S M switch under the shutter speed dial, but I don’t see a reason for that to be more prominent. Are people switching between modes that often?

            On the V1, I ride the exposure compensation and shoot largely in A (aperture) mode. Even on my D3 I largely shoot aperture priority, except with lighting set-ups when I shoot M (manual). The D3 uses a button and a command dial (assigned) to select Mode.

    • Tony Anastasi

      If they use that 4k chip – and deliver on the 4k thing – they would sell a boat load of them instantly. the entire video market will pounce on them like theres no tomorrow… otherwise the sony’s RX10 is on my list (and a couple of them, purely just for the video). I already use the Sony RX100 for video along with a few other cams in multicam interviews. And I’m more then happy with the 1″ sized chips in that. and they have to expand on that nikon v2 – say 5-10 seconds of pure 24frame raw still frame awesomeness at min 4k. nikon knows there’s a cult like following purely for that 1second of 30frames of raw out there already, so expand the buffer to 5-10seconds and make us happy! 🙂

  • fjfjjj

    My Nikon 1 with my 1-10mm, 10-100mm, 100-1000mm, and 1000-10000mm lenses is the perfect system!

  • stormwatch

    I hope that Nikon would introduce the 4k 50mbits video with this new camera, except adding the standard hot shoe (which they should have added a long time ago). Like it’s many products in the past 3 years, V1 series could have been a breaktrought for the Nikon, but they ruined it almost completely with some totally insaine decisions….

  • FredBear

    Wake me when Nikon bring out the Nikon 2 system with at least APS-C sensor size in an Oly OMD size body.

    • KnightPhoto

      They could make the Nikon 2 in a true FM2-shaped and perhaps even smaller body.

      • FredBear

        Didn’t want to push my luck 😉

        • Kassim

          Hahaha.. as a matter of fact, it’s doable. Even with FX sensor. Sony RX-1 is even smaller than the Nikon FM2. Add a mirrorbox and they’ll have a top seller.

          • phil

            Add a mirrorbox, and you have a Df.

            A bulky, heavy DSLR that pretends to be compact, but fails.

            • groucher

              The Df’s bulk and weight isn’t primarily due to it’s mirror box. The problem is that the Df is covered in controls, displays and wheels to accommodate a massive amount of functionality. Strip the camera down to its essential functions and most of those controls and the rear display would not be needed. You would end up with a digital FM/FE, a camera body size not much bigger than a V1 but containing a FF sensor. Not for everyone but I’d have one like a shot if Nikon ever had the guts to do it.

            • NateCrisman

              And your camera bag still has to weigh 8lb since your now carrying around FX size glass.

              Oh joy…you reduced the body size/weight by 40%. But your kit only lost 3% of the total weight.

            • david schmutzler

              the DFs bulk is partly due to the functions you mentioned. but mostly the design of the lenses made the space between sensor and mount necessary.

    • Sorry, the Nikon 2 system will have a Full Frame sensor… 🙂

      • FredBear

        That’s Nikon 3 system 🙂

  • KnightPhoto

    A V3 with EXPEED4 and high band-width video will be great. Dare we hope for a return to the EN-EL15? 😉

    I’ve made a commitment to the Nikon 1 system, recently acquiring the 6.7-13mm, the 18.5mm (silver edition are beauts!) is coming for Christmas, and the 32mm is on my watch list. A go-anywhere 18-35 zoom with VR, 50mm f/1.8, and 85mm f/1.2 compact kit has a certain attraction. Add a 190-810mm VR ED/fluorite zoom at 15fps RAW and what’s not to like?

    • PhotoAl

      That’s my usual kit (V2 + 6.7-13mm, 18.5mm, and 32mm) and I couldn’t be happier. When I need more reach I add the 30-110mm which doesn’t add that much weight. I think Nikon did a great job in choosing the CX sensor’s size.

      • david schmutzler

        +1 here. the 6.7-13mm and 32mm will be here soon.
        right now i am very happy with 18.5mm on the camera and a 10mm in my jeans.
        plus i have 3 awesome c-mount lenses for lower light shooting which are perfect for the CX sensor. love my V1…

      • Ed in Philly

        +2 here. V1 + 6.7-13mm + 18.5mm + 10-100mm (non-PD) is a great light travel kit when taking the DSLR isn’t an option.

  • ragamofyn

    I believe the Nikon tide has turned. Nikon, with its flagging sales, now has to throw caution to the wind and start delivering products that are knock-outs. they will need to start delivering the best products for the price point, and if that cannibalize sales from its own product line — no problem. better to sell a Nikon than to lose a sale to a competitor. and, if a product is cannibalized out of existence, it doesn’t deserve to live anyway.

    a lot of design decisions in recent Nikon products have been somewhat arbitrary or half-baked. the lack of video on the Nikon Df (would it have cost Nikon much to provide a feature that the sensor, processor, imaging pipeline, etc. already supports in the D4?), the introduction of a 36MP sensor on the D800 (instead of the D4’s sensor in the D800 and the 36MP sensor in a D4x), the lack of aperture control during movie mode for the D600/D610, etc. etc. *Every* Nikon body seems to be a compromise (save perhaps the D800, D4, and D7100) even at it’s current price point. The “that wouldn’t have cost Nikon much more to include…” phrase is too often spoken.

    let’s hope Nikon’s stock landslide makes them wake-up and fight like the underdog. when Nikon’s on-top, they are lazy and complacent: they’re a much better underdog. remember the bygone days of Nikon’s pathetic high ISO vs. Canon? and the sudden turn-about that two new generations of sensors brought? that was Nikon at it’s best — when it feared the worst.

    • ronin

      All the features in the world don’t help if your QA fails and you end up blaming your customers for shoddy expensive products, or, worse, ignore their concerns.

      There is no indication that this policy will stop. To the contrary, expect more support cost cutting and more customer-blaming. When sale are your driving force, who cares about post-sales?

      • ragamofyn

        agreed. I don’t know if Nikon has a worse customer service / problem ratio than its competitors, but for a company that keeps sending out PR messages that talk about great design, technical perfection, etc. from their design and engineering bureaus in Japan, the final product that rolls off the assembly line is definitely lackluster.

        the very prominent “MADE IN JAPAN” stenciling on the top deck of the Coolpix A and Df is obviously a marketing ploy: the overt in-your-faceness of this proclamation seems more cowboy than ninja.

        anyway, you’re right — no indication yet that the policy will stop. let’s hope an underdog position will make them change their mind.

        • Thom Hogan

          Of the Nikon cameras with problems, generally we’ve seen more of them from Japan than from Thailand. The D600 was really the first Thailand production problem in a long time.

          • Espen4u

            Don’t blame the Thais for that, it should’ve been caught in the validation at the end of the design phase.

            • Thom Hogan

              I blame Nikon.

              I don’t really care where something is built. What I care about is the quality and reliability of the product. All I was doing is noting that the Thailand plant has had a long run of delivering products that work as expected. With both of Nikon’s DSLR plants showing systemic QA issues that weren’t dealt with quickly, the only conclusion you can come to is that Nikon has lowered their standards. Considering that Nikon is so quick to deny warranty repair and so averse to admitting a mistake, this is becoming a toxic situation that I believe they must correct, and quickly.

            • Espen4u

              So do I. The Nippon way for handling mistakes is generally bad for business, the sooner they see that the better.

    • Guest

      You’re right, but i expect Nikon’s laziness and complacency will still be felt through 2014. Big ships turn slow, it seems to me they are waking up but not quite out of denial yet. Another year of poor sales will likely do the trick though

      • ragamofyn

        Sad, but true. Let’s hope they make it through the narrows.

      • Thom Hogan

        Another year of poor sales will put them into very poor financial health. Worse, if Canon manages to execute when they don’t, we’ll just simply have a repeat of what happened in the late film era, where Nikon’s market share slipped to 25% while Canon’s slowly built to almost half the market.

        Nikon has problems on all fronts at the moment:

        1. Precision hasn’t proved they can deliver results. They continue to struggle to find growth, and they basically waver back and forth between small profitability and modest loss. No growth, and marginal new products.

        2. The Instruments & Other businesses have been non-profitable for a long time. No growth, no significant new products/business, and continued losses.
        3. Compact cameras have collapsed and even Nikon’s big shelf and emerging markets push is now stalled and rapidly losing sales. Completely unclear if they can ever recover this market, which by my count was 20-25% of their overall sales. Almost certainly unprofitable at this point. No growth, no significant new products.

        4. Mirrorless never really delivered the numbers they anticipated. They’ve been constantly revising their numbers downward here. There is still first generation inventory in the channel, too. Complete stall in the market, now losing market share slowly, and probably headed towards unprofitable. No growth, no significant new products.

        5. Low-end DSLR sales drooping and lots of earlier generation cameras still plentiful new, so they’re selling against themselves. No growth, no significant new products, only same-old, same-old iterations. Marginally profitable, but area most under profit pressure at the moment.

        6. High-end DSLR sales also weak, mostly because Nikon simply doesn’t produce what the user wants (D300 replacement, D700 replacement). No growth, no significant new products. Still profitable, though.
        7. No new business entered. No growth.

        Note the commonality amongst Nikon’s problems. They all stem from EXACTLY the same things: conservative product development, not listening to customer needs, poor QA/service issues, no real creative exploration of their expertise. The only conclusion is that this is management malfunction.

        So what do you think is going to happen? You have three choices:

        1. Replacement of management.
        2. Management recognizes its problems, changes.
        3. Things continue as before with current management.

        • 5Mirror

          Choice 3. … till the Big End

          • Thom Hogan

            That would be my guess, too. I’ve seen no indication that the current management or succession plan is in danger at the moment.

        • I would guess the management changes. Major shareholders will push for that.

          One problem I see is years of marketing, not just from Nikon, telling everyone that megapixels was the main “feature” they needed. After that price became the other main emphasis. So the average potential end user looks down the checklist of features, and tries to make a quantifiable value play based upon number of boxes ticked. This happens despite many end users never using even half the “features” of cameras they purchase.

          I think killing the marketing department, or maybe bringing in outside designers could liven things up. Pentax tried with Marc Newson, though arguably Pentax was already dead in the market. Guide the perceptions of end users beyond “features” and towards capturing images, and place some emphasis on the appearance of the cameras as desirable design objects. Obviously don’t forget ergonomics.

          Another issue is that aging baby boomers drove the market for digital cameras. After many of them have bought D800 cameras, what is left for them beyond more lenses, yet lens sales are not that great. It is understandable to target disposable income, but if photography cannot get away from being a hobby of old people, it will die with them. Get some products out there that can appeal to late 20s to early 30s professionals. Throw in some Nikon Ambassadors who are young, just not clueless actors.

          • Thom Hogan

            Marketing can be changed overnight. All it takes is someone with the right thinking given full charge. Consumers respond to the message, period. So if they’re no longer responding, change the message.

            Marketing in the camera market has traditionally been what I’d call “lazy marketing.” The easy things: bigger number is better, lower price is better, more features is better. Anyone can do those types of marketing. Requires no imagination, no connection with the customer, no deep thought.

            What you’re talking about is Product Management, which may or may not be part of the marketing department depending upon how the company is organized. Nikon has more and more been getting PM wrong, and marketing has been lazy. That’s a deadly combination, long term.

            I’ve said it many times: user benefit. But that’s tough for the Japanese companies because they just aren’t connected closely to their global customers, so they don’t understand what benefit the user wants, let alone gets.

            And if the customer is only going to buy accessories to a camera they’ll keep for a long time (D800), then why the heck aren’t you making more and better accessories? Not overpriced cables, but real, important, and useful accessories, like radio control flash? As I write repeatedly: a failure to see users, a failure to understand user benefits, a failure of product management.

            20 and 30 year olds are a different problem. It’s unclear (and probably unlikely) that they want DSLRs when they outgrow their smartphones and GoPros, et.al. You need to develop products that are natural upgrades for those folk. But if you aren’t talking to and understanding customers, then you haven’t the faintest idea what product might resonate with them.

            • Sounds like much more of a cultural issue. A Japan centric approach may work in Japan, but would miss sales elsewhere. I’ve heard the 1 Series did better in Japan than outside the country. I just really wonder what a real advertising agency could do with the current direction. I also wonder what an outside design studio could accomplish. We’ve seen this is the automotive world, so why not camera makers?

            • I’ve been thinking on this a bit more. The interview with Gotu-san reveals some interesting ideas behind the products, like the mention of a digital S3. One other thing that stuck out was mirrorless with the comment that a backlit viewfinder contributes to eye fatigue, which is why he felt the optical viewfinder was a better choice.

              I get the feeling of an awareness of heritage in some of the thinking of Nikon, but that can only have a limited ability to revive a brand. As much as I think a digital S3 would be cool, I cannot imagine it being more than a niche product.

              I don’t think the CX idea is bad. If you look at the 2.7x multiplier to get 35mm to 6×4.5, then the 2.7x multiplier to get CX to FX seems logical. Third party support is not good, though perhaps Nikon is not open to licensing discussions (i.e. – flash terminal and lens pinouts). I think more could be done with CX, despite the continual forum bashing on “enthusiasts” websites.

              If the camera companies, especially Nikon, do not make changes, I think they will find themselves following the path seen by medium format camera companies, and become small niche makers, or vanish. I think a buyout at this time would be terrible, because the product lines would become locked in development, and new ideas would be delayed. It would be great if Nikon could take some savings from killing low end Coolpix, and invest in a design center outside Japan.

            • Thom Hogan

              A “digital S3″ is not any new thinking. It’s looking in the parts bin and past product line to see if there’s something else they haven’t tried yet that might resonate. That’s actually Nikon’s problem at the moment: look at the Df. What problem did it solve? Meanwhile, look at Sony’s forward thinking. I’d prefer Sony’s approach to Nikon’s, though neither is quite connecting with the customers they need to.

              There’s nothing wrong with 1”. If you believe that sensor trends will continue down the path they have for the past two decades (and there’s no reason not to), you would think that you’d get to “more than good enough” at a lower price point for the chip. The current trend would predict the next 1″ round will be almost equivalent to previous 16mp APS/DX generation, for example. (By “next” I don’t mean something that would deploy this year, but rather 18 months further out.)

              With CX, heck with third party support: FIRST party support is not good. Where’s the full CLS hot shoe support? Non-existent. Everywhere you look you find roadblocks or barriers for EXISTING Nikon users.

            • I didn’t make any claim that a digital S3 was new thinking. The Df is not new thinking either. What those products address is heritage. This is a tactic used often in advertising for numerous companies; everything from Jack in the Box to Burger King have revived brands based upon this, and numerous automotive companies pay homage to heritage. However, as I stated before, this is not going to gain new ground.

              What problem does the Df solve? Beyond technical comparison (light weight, 16 MP sensor), the only thing the Df “solves” is a desire for nostalgia. This is what I mean about “heritage”. The problem is that this cannot work as a long term strategy. There is no new ground covered by heritage. The sales would go more towards long term (aging) existing users, than towards attracting new customers. It questions who at Nikon is young and pushing forward new ideas. Perhaps everyone making decisions at Nikon is too old and out of touch?

              I can be impressed with Sony, in that they try lots of different things, but they really do seem to be all over the place. I like the idea of the RX1, other than the price, and the lack of built-in viewfinder. Sony suffered in the past from trying so many directions they lost focus (pun intended). I think Sony will gain sales, but maybe not in the realms that enthusiasts praise so highly.

              I keep hearing enthusiasts demanding mirrorless, but I don’t get what solution is being accomplished by that. What does problems does mirrorless solve? We had compact film cameras with autofocus and no mirror box, yet those were not called mirrorless. I can see the point that Gotu-san makes in one of the interviews, that an electronic viewfinder shining a light in your eye adds to eye fatigue. It appears what people want in mirrorless is smaller cameras. I like that in Nikon CX, and the smaller lenses to go with it. Why CX works for me is that it is quick and responsive to use, with low shutter lag and fast autofocus. When we look at smartphone cameras, few end users care about chip size, nor lens specifications. How is it that camera makers cannot do small cameras as cool and fun to use as smartphones? Even Samsung doesn’t get that right with their cameras.

            • Thom Hogan

              Right. Nikon has been dipping in the parts bin like crazy lately. The AW1, Coolpix A, and Df are just the most obvious examples. None of these things seem focused to me. But doing another parts bin/nostalgia grab isn’t going to get them anywhere, just as the Df didn’t.

              The problem I now see is that everyone is concentrating so much on >US$1000, and even >US$2000 cameras that they’re essentially killing themselves softly. Sure, profit and maybe even profit margins is higher on the high-end stuff, but the volume is far lower, which then starts to increase their costs back up. People ask why the D610 and Df has the 39-sensor AF system. Probably because the volume they use that sensor brings price down.

              Nikon did a rethink on everything, which was good. Unfortunately, then they botched that rethink by pricing it so out of the margins it tanked. The rethink? Nikon 1. The Nikon 1 cameras are 2500 parts. There’s absolutely no way that a J3 costs Nikon more to make than a D3200, yet…why are the prices where they are? And the Nikon 1 could have been made cool and fun, but apparently Nikon doesn’t understand cool, despite using that word in an entire line of cameras ;~). And right now no one at Nikon is having fun, either, as their primary business is under assault from all directions.

            • I was impressed enough by the Nikon 1 system that I was one of the early buyers of the V1. I still use it and even recommend the refurbished ones as great bargain choices. Of course the internet buzzed at how the V1 was too different, and demand appeared to be for more expected controls. The critics got the response in the V2, which some consider to be quite ugly. It’s weird for me to go places with just my V1 and get compliments on how good looking a camera I am carrying. The usual next question is whether the lens can be changed. It never fails to impress average people.

              Completely agree on pricing. Those who watch closely now expect prices to drop, and wait to purchase. I suspect the parts bin approach is supply change management pushes, though again that points towards management issues.

              Smartphone cameras lack many of the controls on compact cameras, other than maybe a physical button to use to release the (electronic) shutter on the smartphone. The successful smartphones have used design to sell in volume. I don’t see comments about the lack of a PASM dial on an iPhone or Galaxy. Nokia may be taking the biggest steps in smartphone cameras, despite trailing Apple and Samsung. I would still bet that Nokia 1020 outsells quite a wide range of mirrorless cameras. Makes me wonder a bit on the future of those cameraless smart lenses introduced by Sony.

        • Guest

          My prediction would be that no matter which of those choices happen, and i’d guess it would be 3, 2014 is still likely to be a poor year for Nikon.

          They say it took 4 years to design and bring to market the Df. Everything that is coming down the pipe has to have been in place for years now, since before sales really started to go south.

          If they replace management tomorrow and management says to engineering “We need you to deliver us a D400, J3, D4x, D700 replacement that fixes x,y,z and adds revolutionary features a,b,c and we need these camera’s in the market immediately” its just not going to happen.

          Therefor, how can 2014 not be another year of the same? With a response time that is measured in years, its the choices not made 18 months-2 years and more ago that are going to hurt Nikon next year more than anything they can do today.

          • Thom Hogan

            I’ll have much more to say about this in an article shortly.

            First, about the “four years” thing. If it really TOOK them four years to design a Df, then something is totally wrong. You have to watch for the nuance in the Japanese wording on these things. I believe they said that they first STARTED the project four years ago. That’s long enough ago that they probably considered launching the Df instead of the D600. They chose not to. Now that they’re sure that they’re in the DSLR doldrums, they probably green lighted the Df project that was on the shelf as a new-looking camera to tide them over while they work hard at trying to get to a new generation of DSLRs, whatever that may be. Personally, I don’t like that kind of approach, but it seems to be the one Nikon is using.

            No doubt the D300s replacement, Nikon 1 replacements, and D3x replacement have all been worked on for some time, too. As I’ve written elsewhere, I have a great fear that Nikon sees weakness in certain camera sales as being weakness in the type of camera, not for a particular product. To put that in historical context, the D2h was the right product. It failed because its sensor was 4mp in an 8mp world, and didn’t really deliver the level of results Nikon promised. In other words, they should have done the D2h, they just should have done it right ;~). But with a lot of models now showing weakness in sales, I suspect that they just think that the DSLR era is over and they’re iterating filler until they try something else. I don’t believe the DSLR era is over, and certainly not in the pro world. Thus, the proper products were D4, D4x, D800, D800x. Maybe an entry model, so add the D600. That would be a strong, sellable FX lineup done right. Instead we have D4, D800, D600, Df. A confused FX lineup with no rhyme nor reason.

            How 2014 turns out is dependent upon how long ago Nikon realized they had a problem, and what they decided to do about the problem, simple as that.

            • Guest

              Don’t get me wrong i’d like to see them have a good year. Maybe the D4x will be a 54mp beast that challenges medium format and the D400 and J3 will be every bit the camera that we should of had this year.
              Assuming they have one of those years where every product is exactly what we were hoping for, will it still cost them sales being late? Is consumer confidence shaken from these bad couple of years? Has there been damage to the brand and/or an irreparable change to the marketplace as a result of this mediocre performance that will hurt Nikon regardless of whether they get their mojo back?
              I mean personally i was waiting for and wanted to buy into a D400 in the last 18 months but obviously it never came. Which forced me to look at mirrorless, and the first thing i looked at was the Nikon 1 system because of brand recognition. But there were no serious camera’s there either. So I’d classify myself as a guy who reluctantly bought into another system and another brand [m43, Em1] because Nikon just happened to abandon serious development in DX for the couple of years i was in the market. That money is spent now and as a consequence i’m invested in another system. Swapping back would take some serious convincing.
              I don’t think DSLR is dead by any means but the question for Nikon is does making the camera people want increase sales and revenue to former levels or merely hold market share and revenue where it is? In essence, by not pushing hard to make upgrading camera’s a necessity rather than a luxury, by not defending the dominance of DSLR over emerging mirrorless and smartphone challengers has that redefined the landscape forever? Is it a case of an opportunity missed now gone forever? By leaving the door open for a period of time to let challengers in have Nikon devalued the concept of a DSLR and as a DSLR maker created for themselves a smaller market in which to operate?

            • Thom Hogan

              A D4x, even if successful, doesn’t really move the bar much for Nikon. Too low volume. Nevertheless, it’s important for them to keep the top end as halo products.

              A D400 and V3 have the chance to move the bar some. The D400 should be a highly profitable product, and it would have sold in significant volume had it been done on time.

              You asked “will it cost them sales for being late?” Yes. Disturbingly, the D7100 is a very good camera and selling decently, but there are still D7000’s in inventory. Ditto the D5300 and D3200 and their older models. So sales are already slowing throughout the line.

              Then there’s the issue of what the D300 owners did. Some went to the D700 or other FX bodies. Some went to D7100 bodies. Some are still waiting. By not executing a regular line up on a regular schedule, Nikon users had to make decisions if they needed a new body. Some of them have, and you probably don’t get them back with a D400.

              Similar things are true of the Nikon 1 line. So you’re losing users, some to other products in your line, you’ve got remaining inventory to get rid of, and we’re in the midst of a DSLR sales slump. Those things all point to a D400 selling less well than it would have a couple of years ago.

              But here’s the thing: Nikon has NO stated or even implied plan for the future that we users can figure out. The FX lineup is now official a mumbo-jumbo of cameras. The lower DX lineup looks like it’s just executing the same old formula forever. Nikon 1 suddenly is an underwater camera. The Coolpix A is the DX wide angle lens. And prosumer DX is the D7100 and nothing else. What’s the future? How would I plan for the future as a customer? The only place we’ve got a full set of lenses is FX, after all.

              Yes, I’m harsh about this. But if I were in charge of product management and the current Nikon interchangeable camera lineup is what I produced, I’d expect to be fired. For a company who’s predominate business is cameras, Nikon’s lineup looks like an unstructured mess. It can’t stay that way. And that’s before we get to how they’re marketing and actually selling things.

            • David

              Hello Thom , we meet again in these forums. I hate to say I told you so, but my emails to you over at least two years complained regularly about Nikon and some of their newer products and odd decisions/choices.
              The chickens have come home to roost and now M4/3s has the product range and growing choices that leave Nikon as an also ran in all areas bar the PJ/Sports world.
              From the incredible DSLR in your pocket GM1 to the sublime EM1 plus the lens road map nobody apart from the above mentioned top tier pros should really take any interest Nikon’s lower level current stagnant ,tired and forlorn line up.

            • Thom Hogan

              It’s not that clear cut, and you, like a lot of people, are ignoring actual sales. The EM-1, best case, will sell 150,000 units this year. The D3200 will sell 10x that or more. Technically, the D3200 will outperform the EM-1 on most things, and it’s less than half the price.

              The problem with Nikon’s lineup is exactly what I’ve been writing about for a long time now: it allows leaks from their customer base at a time when they should be mopping up those customers. Fujifilm, Olympus, and Sony appear “alive” and Canon’s and Nikon’s poor actions have given them more life than they should have, but Canikon, despite their mistakes, are still in the 75-80% market share for interchangeable lens cameras. The real issue for Nikon is that its most loyal customers are losing faith in the series of actions we’ve seen in the last two to three years.

            • David

              More than losing , totally lost faith and moved on and unlikely to come back more like. I think you miss the point by some of your comments – there is no way i would now be interested in using a D3200, or anything similar, even if it were free. It and its ilk are horrible plastic soulless bodies with no prime DX lenses and slow big plastic DX zooms. I bought and still use a D40x pus 18-70-mm as a camera for the family to use generally. That was way back then, when there was little choice, today there are many smaller , lighter cameras /systems to choose from which are good enough. That is the crucial point that you seem to ignore. It is a trade off factors, and the advantages of the non DSLR brands, for me at least, outweigh any perceived/ real performance / IQ gains offered by the old duopoly below the the minority top pro level.

              Your sales percentages are presently correct , but for how much longer? The tide has turned, irretrievably in my view, and Nikon in particular needs to recognize they are not functioning in a vacuum and wake up to the new reality. The problem is more deep rooted than just their present product range it is also about their lack of customer liaison and communicating their intentions as you have highlighted many times.

              Fujifilm have the right idea, not only with new products, appearing to be interested in their customers wishes and delivering without holding back. Okay, small sales at present but so what,they have to start somewhere . Likewise M4/3s, and now Sony is flexing its not inconsiderable muscle who knows where this could end up. With Nikon , nothing but ill feeling. I am potentially a target customer for the Df , but I do not like it at all ,it is a fake, way too late, and a dead end. No amount of crowing about the wonders of this dodo will persuade me to like it.
              I disagree with your opinion that the non Dslr brands only appear ‘alive’ because of Nikon’s recent poor actions. It is much more serious than that , look what they have achieved, from almost nothing, in a mere four years compared to Nikon . Canon do not have quite the same problems and I still retain faith in that company.

            • Thom Hogan

              I’d be the first one to say that Nikon has its work cut out for them. But frankly, there’s nothing stopping Nikon from doing the same sort of camera as Sony, and quickly. People continue to undervalue the legacy lens thing, and overvalue the “just use an adapter” thing. And people continue to misinterpret Internet hype with reality.

              Fujifilm’s “small sales”? 700,000 total X10, X20, X100, X-Pro 1, XE-1, and X-M1 cameras sold in two years. Yes, that’s a capital S in small. If losing money and not gaining any tangible market share is “the right idea,” then I have some Blackberry stock to sell you.

              I like Sony’s aggressiveness, but to date that hasn’t changed their overall market share by even 1%. I also believe they continue to shoot themselves in the foot. After successfully establishing NEX they’ve now crippled it multiple times with their actions, including dropping the name.

              Finally, you don’t get pricing or elasticity of demand. The sweet spot for whatever remains of the camera market is US$400-1000 and going down. Of Sony’s cameras, the modestly successful RX100, and the now looking old NEX and SLT lines are all that are left for them in that price range. You’re not going to dominate the camera market with US$1800+ offerings. The reason why everyone keeps heading that way is that they’re trying to get margin back. But everyone, including Canon and Nikon, is making some fundamentally unsound decisions in that respect.

            • David

              If there is nothing stopping them, well why don’t they get on with it, the market will not wait another four years while the think about it. No DX wide angle prime in nearly 12 years, no D400 type body, yet 2 years late, 1 series -dubious choice/size sensor/terrible ergonomics, Coolpix bettered by nearly all others and now retro Df done wrong with a silly UK price.
              I think they have had plenty of recent opportunities to show their chops but doggedly persist in following some weird hidden agenda.

              Perhaps one of the reasons the competitor brands are failing to take off in a major way yet is the conservatism of the US market. The huge budget advertising campaigns bombarding the uninitiated into believing cheapo DSLRS and lenses from the big two is the only way to go is obviously still effective and reflected in sales figures . Doesn’t mean its the right path long term.

              To put it bluntly, if Nikon themselves appear to be ambivalent about delivering anything really photographer centric, below the top pro lines, why should punters be interested in Nikon when other companies do seem willing to provide more considered choices and solutions.

              As for low sales well luckily for the non Dslr crew cameras are only part of their business and can be supported a bit longer.

            • Thom Hogan

              Good question. But I think most of it has to do with the fact that the Japanese companies aren’t completely connected to their potential global user base and don’t see the user problems that need solving. Sony gets the connection/share trend a bit more, partly because they absorbed a smartphone maker and have computers/tablets as well. Though they’ve yet to show that they fully understand it ;~). Most of the disruption is coming from Silicon Valley, and most of the disruption is software based, which is where the Japanese are weak, especially for global audiences. To design the “perfect” camera for tomorrow, you’re shooting at a moving target, too, and Silicon Valley and its siblings are the places where that target is being moved.

              The reason why DSLRs still sell is because they’re cheap and perform amazingly well. All this hyped up interest around the Sony A7r, for example, is ignoring things like burst shooting, continuous AF, top flash sync, lag, and a whole host of other small things. A lot of people are going to be disappointed putting their legacy glass on those bodies, too (at least Fujifilm got that right and put in lens-based correction in to deal with the side-to-side issues with short mount wide angle like the Leica M’s people think they want to use).

              What the hype over the A7 is boils down to “full frame at US$1800 kit.” While I like the A7’s, the number of times I’ll pick the A7r and use it over my D800 is not all that frequent at the moment. Some of that is lenses, some of that is just subtle but important performance and handling issues.

              I’m not so sure about the contention that the other Japanese camera companies can continue to lose money making cameras. Of those, only Fujifilm and Ricoh can really say that, as the digital camera business in each is almost a decimal point in their corporate earnings. Sony’s whole consumer electronics side is in a critical situation. The pressure to cleave the profitable insurance/movie/music businesses from the electronics is growing, and if that happens, all hell breaks lose, as is happening at Panasonic. Panasonic is fragile in terms of its ability to hold on to a still camera business. Olympus is in dire straits. If they don’t meet their optimistic estimates for their second half of the year, there will be strong calls to close down the camera group.

              A lot of the Japanese consumer electronics industry is right now hanging on yen devaluation. They’re hoping that they can get double duty out of this (look more competitive than others by having lower prices, but still raise overseas prices just enough to get some profit margin back).

              As for Nikon, I would have “bet the company” back in 2010 if I were running it. That clearly isn’t what they’re doing. They’re trying to milk every last bit out what they’ve been doing before making any major changes. I think a lot of the Japanese companies were still hoping that the camera downturn really was just economic doldrums in world markets and will magically resurrect itself when GDPs all turn positive. However, I think they now all realize its more than that.

              They’ll all watch what Sony is doing and see if it gives Sony any traction. If it does, they’ll just all pile on and the game will revert back to the market share slices it was in the 90’s.

            • David

              Interesting observations and predictions. I sincerely hope the Olympus camera division will not be allowed to fold as in they are one of the classic real camera brands, with a great history of innovation.

              Despite your fears about Sony considering possibly pulling back,they would be in the best position to join further in the camera side of Olympus and allow more time for growth and traction.

              It is unfortunate that Sony, Panasonic and Olympus who between them have produced some excellent alternatives to Nic/Can should face this uncertainty/ crisis/ dilemma. Seems unjust somehow- it implies that disruption in markets does not necessarily succeed. Or is it that that the majority of punters are now just a load of sheep and do not know anything about real cameras or photography in the digital era.

              The enthusiast market may be in terminal decline as cameras are now repeatedly bought by the masses as just another cheapo consumer durable – price rules. Long term value, and less obvious, intangible/ important factors to enthusiasts meanwhile are drowned out under a deluge of tomorrow’s landfill.

              The photography world will be the poorer if innovation is allowed to be stifled by the big two.

            • Thom Hogan

              The problem for Olympus is that they’re still trying to dig out of the giant cash hole they created with the investment fraud over a decade ago. Selling a big chunk of the company to Sony raised enough cash to deal with many of the short term issues, though it diluted the stockholders, so they’re now looking for higher returns. But the camera division continues to bleed. Badly. And it’s getting smaller, so it’s ability to turn that around and bring significant positive cash is getting diminished. It’s basically become an ROI problem, just like Panasonic is experiencing and why Panny shut down plasma TVs, amongst other groups (and is still working their way through groups to close; basically their goal is 5% ROI by end of next year or gone).

              Sony, like the others, is letting ego get in the way of rational business decisions. If anything, they’re doubling down on their consumer electronics bets (other than perhaps TVs, but even there they aren’t really backing off much). If Sony were a Western company, it’s doubtful they’d have made it this far. The Japanese companies are much harder to predict because culturally they act different. However, the yen devaluation being driven by the new prime minister is causing issues: Western money is flowing into Japan looking to find bargains. If this continues, at some point we’re going to see a takeover attempt of a Japanese company from outside the country, I’ll bet. We’ve already seen attempts (Renasas, for example, though it now looks like Sony will attempt to buy it; that’s the way the Japanese have kept this from happening before–buying their own–and given Sony’s investment in Olympus, the likelihood would be that Sony just take over the Olympus camera group if Olympus really feels they need to cut it).

              While I agree with your last line, I’m not really seeing true innovation in cameras by the Japanese. Sure, mirrorless might qualify, but its not a big step, and not the step that will save the industry.

    • FredBear

      Well you see there’s the carrot (camera) and the donkey (consumer). If you give the donkey all his carrots (features) at once he won’t perform (buy) the next time you want him to when you dangle another carrot in front of him.
      It’s called ‘controlled release’ – you want the donkey wanting more (hunger) for the next offering (generation) otherwise performance (sales) drops.
      If Nikon (or any other company) gave you what you need at one time where would their future sales lie other than new potential customers?

      • ragamofyn

        agreed. Nikon is definitely doing “controlled releases” of features, which stinks.

        there’s a big difference between “controlled release” and “castrated release”. A LOT of the complaints regarding current Nikon products is not about Nikon holding back on new technologies: it’s the purposeful disabling or exclusion of a feature which was only done to increase product differentiation (and not clearly to cut costs).

        • FredBear

          That’s the problem. They have to leave out some features so they can put them in the next generation to entice sales or differentiate them from their other models. What they leave out is to some ‘castration’ whilst to others it’s a panacea. e.g.
          Many have said they wanted a the D4 sensor in a D800.
          Many said they wanted ‘manual controls’.
          So we get a Df without a movie mode to kill two birds with 1 stone whilst still differentiating it from the D800.
          Not to mention Nikon’s intention to make products with higher profitability levels as shown in the Df’s pricing.

    • Thom Hogan

      You’re jumping the gun a bit here. The P7800 is a US$600 camera. Do you really think the V3 will be US$600? or US$700? or even US$800?

      You are correct in the assessment that the tide has turned. Even Nikon must be fully aware of how weak and vulnerable many of their offerings now are. They don’t have an answer to Sony RX models, they don’t have a mirrorless camera that looks competitive with the recent Fujifilm, Olympus, and Sony offerings, DSLR sales are weak with multiple older generations still in the warehouse, and the Df didn’t even sell out, despite being a low volume production run. The current “strengths” in their lineup are few: D7100, D800, basically. So it’s clear that they will make adjustments.

      My question is whether they actually see the user demands correctly enough. The trends are: smaller, lighter, full functionality, lower price, return to traditional controls, exceptional lenses, and so on. They’re just not executing on that: same size, managed functionality, higher price, fiddling with controls, mediocre lenses. I won’t believe that Nikon actually sees their problem until they produce a camera that shows that they understood user demand. Of the recent cameras, the D7100 was the one that came the closest to that.

      • hojomo

        (following rant is more at Nikon, not Thom)

        I bought a rx-10 and have used it for a few days now. It is basically replacing an entire V2 kit (with 10-100pd) I acquired used, to pay for it. I don’t regret the decision at all.

        I miss ILC ability in theory, but as a compact carry-all, for me not essential. The burst shooting is sorely missed, 4k video clips and ability to spray and pray for stills is very very nice, ft-1 adaptor factor…and that’s about it.

        I really hate the manual focus implementation of the Nikon 1 series/lenses (yes, there’s a single 32mm extravagence). General ergonomics suck, and with both of these issues, the rx-10 compares much more favorably.

        The lack of a manual focus ring (who cares if it were even larger at that point??) on the 10-100mm PD was such a ridiculous decision in an otherwise outstanding lens. The single AF in the V2 was fantastic 90% of the time…

        Why the hell was there not a V3 for me to buy this holiday season with say Sony rx-10’s better ergonomics and video features (peaking, zebra, etc.), a 14/16mp (don’t need 20mp for a 1″ sensor), even fatter buffer for 4k clips, 60/50p?? This sensor is basically Super 16 if I’m not mistaken. The entire platform screams make both video and stills capable (at least for the flagship/one model)!!

        I have also considered the D7100 for a new main backup, but in the end Nikon can’t even give you a decent codec and 60p…so that killed it for me. If all you need is stills, the D7100 is a great main backup imho.

        I use Nikon DSLRs for paid/artistic shooting. I have a lot of money/decades/love in Nikon gear, but I think my D800E is likely to be my last Nikon purchase.

        I think the A7r is no replacement for my D800E as a stills camera, and sadly the video doesn’t look that great (not that D800 is spectacular). I could easily see the next version being a compelling replacement for most of what I look for with my current Nikon gear.

    • Mansgame

      The generation that had the D700, D3, and D300 was Nikon at its absolute best (in still photography anyway). Photographers could look at Canon and say “Nikon cares about picture quality and not the megapixel war”.

      Now Nikon is at its worst.

      • david schmutzler

        there is the D610, the D3x and, well the D7100.
        truth be told, i find the nikon line up very nice and would pick a nikon over canon every time (hate the design with the drive button in line on canon bodies)

        • Mansgame

          D610 is last year’s sensor and technology at this year’s price. It’s the exact same camera as the D600 except it’s fixed issue they never existed. You can’t sing Nikon’s praises for that. D3x is 4 years old and only a sucker would buy it now at the prices they go for.

          They have no real mirrorless option, their lenses need updating, and their customer service stinks.

      • David

        Absolutely right. i have been banging on about this for several years now and consequently have bought nothing from Nikon since the D700.

  • Bigeater

    So all you J and V users, how well does the adapter work? Because most of what I shoot is indoors and it would be nice to be able to use my f1.4 and 2.8 Nikkors and all my CLS gear.

    • HM Eye

      it works great … especially the 50/1.4G and the 85/1.8G

    • The adapter works flawlessly with AF-S lenses

  • Anon

    Ain’t holding my breath…

  • whisky

    guess i’ll pick up an FT-1 first, as they should be selling off the shelf in the new year.

    • Wasco

      Unless Nikon comes out with an updated adapter for the V3

      • david schmutzler

        uhm, why should they make a new adapter?

        • Wasco

          Gee, I don’t know why I’d think Nikon might make the old adapter obsolete on a new model. Maybe it has something to do with all the disparate batteries, rechargers, battery grips, power connectors, eyepiece attachments, remote shutter cords. etc. that I’ve collected over the years.

          Seriously, perhaps there will be auto-focus improvements that will require a new lens adapter.

  • Neopulse

    Pretty sure if this month up until xmas they make the V2 <$550 with a better discount on their lenses (or body+lens) I think it will sell pretty well. But there really hasn't been a sale on the V2. It doesn't like dropping below that $896.95 mark :-/

    • david schmutzler

      ridiculous price for the V2. i love my V1, but 900 dollar for a V2 is not something i would do. but i guess it will be sold for $300, when the V3 will be out.

  • Doc Rivers

    More freaking Bricks. Nikon please produce more woefully under 12mp small sensors. Yes Nikon you don’t listen to your customers. More..bricks please..and oh yeah..way over price! could u please!

    • ronin

      Nikon went out on a limb and delivered the Nikon V1 with somewhat radical modernistic minimalist styling, unlike that of any other camera. It didn’t have to resort to Olympus or Fuji sort of pseudo-retro- a sort of cowardly exit on product design, bailing on being creative in favor of being safe.

      The V1 didn’t do it. Some have compared it to a minimalist Soviet industrial kind of look. I think it’s something Morlocks would have built as gateways to their underground cities.

      It’s unique, minimalist in an Apple sort of way, and really speaks of leading edge industrial design.

      The market hated it. I like it. Easy to hold, easy to use.

      The worst part is the lack of easy access to controls. But that’s my control freak nature. I find that if I let go and just concentrate on my image, trusting the technology to do its own, that somehow this camera does a remarkable job of nailing the shot more than any other camera.

      • ereshoping

        They resorted to pseudo-retro for the Df!

  • Doc Rivers

    These cameras only sold..(white color) to all the MetroSexual, Homosexuals in Japan. Every boy who looked like a girl..bought the white versions of these bricks. They truly didn’t expect much, except the cool factor.

  • Bryran

    I have no idea why their marketing or product plan people selected CX project. This is really a joke. Not only US and Europe, in Asia the sale volume is also bad too.

    • david schmutzler

      because it is kind of logical.
      it does fill the gap perfectly for nikon between compacts and APS-C cameras.
      sales volume is also not too bad. the V1 and J1 sold considerably well in the US and especially in asia.

    • ronin

      Bryan, since you know, please tell us the worldwide volume for CX, and contrast with same for micro 4/3, Sony, Fuji, Canon.

      • david schmutzler

        that’s what i thought. just jibberjabber about not selling the nikon 1

    • PD

      I saw many ppl using Nikon1 in Asia. Actually I own 2… CX isn’t bad, with the experience from V1 and V2 I think Nikon will do a better job with V3.

      • david schmutzler

        you should see the people here in germany. just saw a nikon 1 camera once in wildlife. but i see tons of DSLR users at every corner.
        some days ago i was at my local dealer and there was a guy in a suit, who was interested in the 1Dx!
        when the clerk showed him the high speed sequential mode, the customer said, and i quote: “this is the sound i need”
        the guy didn’t even know what the AE-L button did, by the way!
        crazy people here (where the money is).

  • Stephen

    They should put CX on hold and relocate resources and investment to other projects instead.

    • david schmutzler

      no they shouldn’t. CX is a good thing.
      sadly, of course, you can’t impress others with the SIZE of the sensor, so it’s a bad show-off camera.

      • phil

        you can’t impress others with the size of the cameras either – because they are just as big, as MFT cameras.

        Why did Nikon waste the benefit of the smaller sensor ?

        • Andy Aungthwin

          I have V1 as well as an NEX 5.

          Quality wise the V1 is as good if you don’t pixel peep. (And I much prefer the straight out JPEGs from the V1)

          But the big difference, pardon the pun, is that the lenses for the NEX are huge compared to the 1.

          This is something that just doesn’t get across.

          Small sensor = small lenses.

          BTW, I also have a D300 as well as a D800 and the V1 compares well when the others are resized to 10MP.

          • Vladimir

            Greetings to You, the NR crowd !
            Beeing total noob in optics (and somewhat frustated owner of d7000 – because of strange skin tones, and slowish liveview focusing). I got an idea that I want to share:
            1) Sony has established itself as a leader in sensor research and production (my educated guess). So they are willing to sell more sensors at greater prices. They challenge the market with rx100 (advanced compact), RX1, A7. In dslr segment it logically translates into FF upturn. Canon/Nikon are Fine with the move to FF – they will sell more expensive lenses.
            2) But CaNikon want to make profit in low-middle price segment. And Nikon comes with 1 system. They market it (as with PanaOly) as “good enough quality in compact body and lenses”. But this setup is still more bulk compared to rx100. And I guess that no more than 20% of consumers really need the Interchangable_Lens_Thing.
            So Nikon 1 will loose sales to coming advanced compacts with 1″ sensor. I guess Nikon will move to bigger sensor in MILC eventually.

            • Vladimir

              And my take on frequently mentioned argument that APS-C lenses are too big for compact system. Many ppl mention that they need portable tele lenses. So, the proposition is:
              1) make APS-C sensor system with high quality standart zoom and primes. Sensor with high pixel density (equal to 10Mp CX sensor) and high sensitivity.
              2) If someone desires telephoto lense with compact size – make it cover only 1″ area. Make same (high) quality as current Nikon 1 lenses. The camera will save image from center (CX-crop) and this will give more reach, as we always have from small-sensored cams.

            • Vladimir

              Thom, can you comment on the proposition of mine? To make big sensor MILC, but keep some tele-lenses covering only central part (CX-crop mode) of the sensor. May be Sony is having this possibility checked with transition of NEX to FullFrame.

            • ronin

              I suspect that far more money has been made selling Nikon 1 stuff than Sony RX100 stuff, and hence there is no need for Nikon to introduce yet another mirrorless line of bodies and lenses and accessories and support. If you haven’t noticed, Nikon is pinched and can scarcely afford to launch yet another redundant line when it already has a well established and popular mirrorless line.

            • Thom Hogan

              True. And probably by a large margin, as the Nikon 1 products are extremely cheap to make. At the same price Nikon would make more money than Sony.

            • Vladimir

              Several years ago APC-S sized sensor was price-justifiable only for dslr. Now we see Sony’s initiative to bring 1″ to mass-marketed advanced compact. Canon, Nikon, Ricoh, Fujifilm released several pro-compacts with APS-C sensor. How will Nikon explain their consumers, that Hi-ISO performance of CX-sensored Nikon 1 is good enough, if Sony releases RX200 with 1.5″ sensor and say f/2.4 – f/5 lens. It’s similar to battle of m43 against dslr FF. I see many complaints that 25 f/1.4 in m43 system is just too slow in terms of DOF control.

              I see that Nikon targets Nikon 1 to those customers, that had compacts previously. These will appreciate good ergonomics (with familiar LiveView), responsiveness and snappy autofocus, (almost) compact size and good super-zoom kit lens.

              Nikon 1 will give these customers experience of Interchangeable_Lens concept. And next time Nikon will market them their FF solution.

            • Thom Hogan

              Please try this experiment: ask everyone you see with a camera (including smartphone users) what size the sensor is in their camera. The number of people in the market that think in terms of sensor size is minimal, and really only at the high end. The number that actually understand it well is even smaller.

              Quick, what’s the size of the sensor in the GoPro? Right, it doesn’t matter, does it?

              On the other hand, virtually anyone that picks up an RX100 and a Nikon 1 WILL notice a difference in focus speed. So I’d say that both Sony and Nikon are tasked with getting things right, still.

            • david schmutzler

              au contraire. i JUST met people, that are obsessed with sensor size.

          • Agreed.
            (and I also have/had a NEX5, NEX6, NEX7, GF1, GF3, D700, & A7)

    • CX is simply ahead of its time.

  • Roy

    Even Nikon user, if I have to invest in a tiny sensor system, m4/3 will be my choice, not CX surely.

    • david schmutzler

      pick your poison.
      perhaps someday, when you had to invest in a tiny sensor system (OMG) you will realize, that photography is not about the best equipment possible.

  • user

    P7800 body + standard hot-shoe + wireless flash trigger (CLS) + all Nikon 1 goodies = SOLD!
    Please do it right this time I’ve been waiting for this camera for too long!

    • Exactly! They got the sensor size right for a small, portable system. They nailed the autofocus better than anyone else. They screwed up ergonomics (V1), features (V1, V2 – lack of CLS, standard hot shoe) and price. Hope they can do better this time.

      • zoetmb

        No. The way to save this line is to put a DX sensor in them, just as the Coolpix A has (although not at the $1000 price).

        • Thom Hogan

          Sure, and start yet another lens set? ;~)

          • MyrddinWilt

            Exactly, there is zero point to a DX mirrorless. It is only one stop in any case.

            There is a case to be made for an FX mirrorless though. In fact the Df is almost there. If the pentaprism had been removable it could be replaced by an electronic viewfinder. Lock up the mirror and you have a mirrorless EVF body that takes invasive F-mount lenses.

            Being able to use the V1 as a lossless teleconverter is a pretty good trick.

            • Thom Hogan

              Uh, not so fast. DX mirrorless is about two stops from CX (Nikon 1). Moreover, if you graph performance versus sensor price, you find that the sweet spots are basically m4/3 and APS/DX. If you do what Sony just did with the A7s, you’re likely going to leave profit margin on the table, and then you’re back to the largest imaging circle, which has ramifications on lens size.

              Your recipe for FX mirrorless would work for ANY large sensor camera Canon or Nikon make because it depends on “if” and that “if” means you’re removing the entire viewfinder, metering, and focus systems, which means you have to replace them.

            • What do you mean by ‘sweet spot’ Thom? The best compromise of size vs. IQ? Isn’t that very subjective??

            • Thom Hogan

              I mean best compromise of price versus quality. Price increases nearly exponentially with area of the sensor, image quality increases more linearly.

          • KnightPhoto

            Yes. A DX mirrorless lens set for the Nikon 2 system. Which would explain all your missing DX lenses.

            Thom, is there any shred of possibility that the CX mount diameter is big enough that a Nikon DX mirrorless (Nikon 2) mount could share it? The benefit would be an ability to natively use any Nikon 2 lens on the Nikon 1 cameras. Vice versa, Nikon 1 lenses could be used on Nikon 2 cameras in crop mode.

            And the FT-1 could be shared between Nikon 1 and Nikon 2 cameras also.

            • Vladimir

              My view on topic is similar. Nikon should have made Nikon 1 with APS-C from the first day. Because:

              Several years ago APC-S sized
              sensor was price-justifiable only for dslr. Now we see Sony’s
              initiative to bring 1″ to mass-marketed advanced compact. Canon, Nikon,
              Ricoh, Fujifilm released several pro-compacts with APS-C sensor. How
              will Nikon explain their consumers, that Hi-ISO performance of
              CX-sensored Nikon 1 is good enough, if Sony releases RX200 with 1.5″
              sensor and say f/2.4 – f/5 lens. It’s similar to battle of m43 against
              dslr FF. I see many complaints that 25 f/1.4 in m43 system is just too
              slow in terms of DOF control.

              I see that Nikon targets Nikon 1 to those customers, that had
              compacts previously. These will appreciate good ergonomics (with
              familiar LiveView), responsiveness and snappy autofocus, (almost)
              compact size and good super-zoom kit lens.

              Nikon 1 will give these customers experience of Interchangeable_Lens
              concept. And next time Nikon will market them their FF solution.

            • Thom Hogan

              Why? Why not just make the consumer DX DSLRs smaller and fill in the lens set? Could be done faster, solves the current problems, and would be highly competitive.

              Despite what you read on the Internet, there’s not this overwhelming consumer demand to make everything mirrorless. People are buying mirrorless cameras because they’re smaller and lighter and competent, not because they’re mirrorless.

        • El Aura

          I really don’t understand what people think when they say ‘put a DX sensor in them’ or ‘they should make the Nikon 1 a DX system’. It’s like saying Leica should put a MF sensor into there M line and make it a DSLR. It wouldn’t be a Leica M anymore, it would be a completely different camera, it would be a Leica S. But I don’t see what sense a statement like ‘the Leica S is a Leica M with a larger sensor and mirror and prism added’ makes.

          The Nikon 1 wouldn’t be the Nikon 1 anymore if it had a DX sensor. The name Nikon 1 is not a placeholder for ‘Nikon’s mirrorless camera system’, it is much more, it is the system as it exists today.

    • Thom Hogan

      Of course the P7800 isn’t exactly selling like hotcakes, either ;~) What Nikon appears to be doing is trying to solve two problems with one bird.

      Everyone should remember that I criticized Nikon for not doing this in the first place. Nikon 1 is just Coolpix Pro. That’s the way it should have been approached from day one, and had they done it that way and moderated price a bit, they wouldn’t have the failures they’ve had. The question now, however, is whether it’s too little too late. Hard to say until we see the final version of the V3.

      • decisivemoment

        If they really make full use of everything Aptina is claiming about the new sensor, it will be unique in a good way. And unique in a good way is what they need right now.

        • Thom Hogan

          Specifications and usability are two different things, as any early Nikon 1 user can tell you. Bottom line is that Nikon may be technological capable, but they (1) don’t have a clear view of who the Nikon 1 user is or should be; and (2) they have consistently designed the camera to work in ways that the users that do get it dislike.

      • Carmen Clark

        I’m excited about the V3. I love my V1 for everything it is, rather than everything it isn’t. the Hi ISO is good enough – I also shoot D700 and know what nice high ISO looks like but the V1 is better than I expected, and WAY better than my old D200 was which was a semi-pro DSLR a few years ago. Technology always moves on you just have to find a way of using the technology in a way that suits you. I have a few minor issues with the V1 – but not enough to make me jump to V2 – mainly because of the cost. BUT the rumoured V3 does look to have enough extra features for me to spend out that extra money …. maybe waiting for a secondhand deal though as the V1 I purchased was only ever meant to be a compact replacement for me but has become way more than that, I even take it out on portrait shoots as a second camera when I take my D800 and I leave my D700 at home, it’s shot 10x more frames than the D800 in the 6 months I’ve had it. Now there’s some nice primes in the lens range the 1 series makes a whole lot more sense and I get more pleasure out of using the V1 than I’ve ever had from any camera before.

  • Cesar

    Please Nikon do yourselves a favor and pull the plug on the Nikon 1…

    • Thom Hogan

      No. Just fix it. Unfortunately, the things that are being mentioned are only part of the needed fix.

    • At the very least, the Nikon1 is a great test-bed for Nikon to define their mirrorless options. I’m sure all Nikon’s (DX and FX) will be mirrorless some day.

  • It’s funny to see so many coach photographers complaining about sensor size. The CX size makes perfect sense to replace high-end compacts (the low end is pretty much dead already). So far Nikon screwed up the 1 line with bad ergonomics (V1), lack of CLS (while the damn coolpix has it) and a number of other things – sensor size wasn’t one of them.

    CLS support with built in flash, standard hot shoe, minor improvements to the V2 ergonomics and most importantly, sane price will sell these little babies. You don’t need insane ISOs or megapixels for standard headshots or general portraiture work. Working with small lights you don’t need shallow depth of field (working aperture for most of my portraiture work is somewhere between F/4-f/8).

    Put your 50mm F/1.4 or F/1.8 on this baby, and you have 135mm (230 if you use the 85mm) – perfect when you want to use reflectors (white/black) for headshot backgrounds.

    Just wanted to point out a less obvious use-case for these little cameras – the 2.7x crop factor has a lot of advantages (reach, depth of field for products where DoF is always too small), location scouting, etc.

    • Mansgame

      Bigger sensor within the same generation is ALWAYS better. That’s just physics. Unless of course you don’t care about those silly “coaching” stuff like dynamic range, detail, and high ISO stuff…that’s just for posers lol.

      • istreetshooter

        Yes, agree.

        I don’t see why those wanting a larger sensor are criticized when Nikon’s isn’t selling the 1 system like hot cakes. Nikon has done good stuff with its sensor, but its losing customers to Olympus, Fuji, etc. Read their forums–it is a lesson in how non-users see Nikon.

    • Mansgame

      Bigger sensor within the same generation is ALWAYS better. That’s just physics. Unless of course you don’t care about those silly “coaching” stuff like dynamic range, detail, and high ISO stuff…that’s just for posers lol.

  • Glass1/2full

    I started to write a post about how hopeful i am that Nikon might find it in their hearts to activate the 4k video capabilities of one of these amazing sensors they source from Aptina.
    But then i realised its very likely i’m only setting myself up for disappointment. Nikon hate video. I hate Nikon for it. And thats unlikely to ever change.
    Instead, i am excited by the fact that more lame Nikon 1 system camera’s most likely means more exceptional 1 system lenses. That hopefully catches the attention of Blackmagic and gives them a reason to do a CX mount version of their 2014 version pocket camera, which is more likely to be 4k than anything by Nikon.
    And 4k Blackmagic camera paired with Nikon 1 system lenses is something to be very excited about in my opinion.

    • Thom Hogan

      Well, if we all think Nikon is disconnected from users in designing still cameras, they’d be further disconnected from the video user, wouldn’t they?

      Too much consideration of design from the engineering (technology) standpoint, and not enough from the user need/use standpoint. Common theme throughout Nikon’s product line.

      • Glass1/2full

        The common theme throughout Nikons product line is: Digital camera design achieved perfection in 2010 and we really don’t see any need to move beyond that.

        The irony as far as DSLR video is concerned is that it was Nikon, with the D90, that started it all. Canon reacted by rushing it into the 5dm2 and it became a massive hit. I think their aversion to video might just boil down to sour grapes that Canon got all the credit for their idea 😉

        • Thom Hogan

          If you believe that, then please never get involved in product management ;~). Also, don’t buy a camera made after 2010 ;~).

          There are hundreds of features, procedures, performance aspects, and issues that I’ve documented for clients that still need improving on current camera designs. While it may be true that the basic control functions are mature (they ought to be, they’re 30+ years old), we are still fighting things like a 20-year out-of-date DCF definition that restricts some of the very things that would be useful now.

          I suspect you have it backward. Nikon rushed to get video into the D90. As such, it was very sketchily implemented and basically was just a bunch of JPEGs strung together (Motion JPEG). Canon actually had a much more mature and nuanced approach to DSLR video when they launched it a few months later.

          If Nikon did indeed think that they invented the idea and then got all upset because someone else did it better, that is a big indictment of their product management mentality. If you make ANY product today, you will be copied and imitated. You only survive by doing it better, keeping ahead of the competition, and continuing to make innovative and useful moves. Your assessment would have Nikon acting like a child.

          • Glass1/2full

            Sorry Thom my comments were intended to be read as tongue in cheek, not to be taken literally.

            I of course think there are a multitude of ways the DSLR can and should be advanced, what i meant was Nikon seem to have reached a point at which their vision for a device has matured and is more or less stalled, making these minor updates each product cycle less and less relevant to consumers. If i could be involved in product development for just a day… man, so many idea’s. I think you’d be pleasantly surprised what i might come up with. But what backseat driver doesn’t think he could do a better job. Regardless, innovation is long overdue in the realm of DSLR camera’s.

            So far as the video. Canon did a poor job also in the 5dm2 but the difference was that they listened when customers said “hey we see potential here this is how you could do it better.” They implemented new frame rates and opened up possibilities for manual control and monitoring of audio and were for a short while quite accommodating to the whole DSLR filmmaking revolution. That is until they launched a cinema division and moved all the advancements to more expensive dedicated video devices.
            It seems video is just a feature that was possible so got added, by Nikon, Canon or whoever and was enthusiastically received by a small segment of users. Feeling the implementation was fairly rudimentary they waited, somewhat foolishly it seems in hindsight, for that baseline video feature set to mature. In 5 years it has failed to do that and i guess all that really means, frustrating as it is to those of us who believed in a different outcome, is video on DSLR’s is what it is and there is no real desire from a Canikon pov to invest resources into changing that significantly.
            Meaning the one time prediction by many that professional stills and motion would meet comfortably in an affordable hybrid device might not actually happen as soon as once thought. But hey its 2013 and we’re not riding around on hoverboards either so i guess reading tea leaves isn’t an exact science 😉

  • mattv

    I shoot for most car manufacturers in the UK and most car mags from Evo to Autocar , i shoot Nikon FF and 1 V2 , Front covers and Dps all with V2 in raw using FT1 adaptor and FF Lenses . The V2 in right conditions is fantastic . Ive never had any complaints on quality and I’ve never had any issues . Too much pixel peeping and sensor size comments about Nikon 1 .Nikon brought out the FT1 and like many other pro’s noticed , they did so for good reason . It has its place in my kit line up and for good reason .Why in the world would anyone care what the camera looks like ? Its what it can do and what your photos look like surely ?Thats what keeps me employed .I personally can’t wait to get the V3 , most pros would agree there is no perfect one stop shop camera does all , thats why they have certain bodies for certain tasks … 60 fps coupled with a 300mm 2.8 .No contest .

    • FredBear

      “The V2 in right conditions is fantastic”.
      That pretty much sums it up.
      If one wants a small camera as a ‘go anywhere’ camera then one needs it to be able to perform under all (or at least ‘most’) situations – not ‘staged’ conditions with chosen controlled lighting.

      • Clubber Lang

        Exactly, I choose my camera for shooting in all of the wrong conditions. If I need to take a picture of a black cat with terrible tungsten lighting in a friends living room….I should be able to do it damn it! (Sarcasm)

        • FredBear

          Yup, that’s where the V2 shines.

      • Mansgame

        Exactly, my D600 may have dust and oil issues, but if it’s clean before a shoot, I’m very confident that it can deal with any kind of lighting situation.

        • FredBear

          D600 is a very competent camera. Very happy with mine too.

          • Mansgame

            And that’s the saddest part about how Nikon ruined a perfectly good camera with a bad shutter and bad customer service. The dynamic range on the D600 is amazing. I have a love hate relationship with mine. just when I start loving it, I notice the spots returning and my love turns to deep deep anger.

            • FredBear

              The frequency of the spots should diminish with time to a point where they’re a ‘non entity’ – hopefully before the shutter gives up 😉

      • Mansgame

        Exactly, my D600 may have dust and oil issues, but if it’s clean before a shoot, I’m very confident that it can deal with any kind of lighting situation.

  • broxibear

    Maybe this patent is part of the V3…


  • neversink

    I’ve always pondered about the future of this product. However, this new v3 camera may be the answer to Nikon’s 1 problems of poor sales. However, this could have been in production for quite awhile and maybe the last hoorah before Nikon jettisons the whole project and starts anew. For Nikon, I hope this is successful. However, I doubt they will put a bigger sensor in the camera given the size of the lenses in the 1 series.

  • fixerboy

    Too late – waited for a reasonable non DSLR camera from Canon but the EOS-M missed the makr with it’s AF.

    The Nikon V1 fell flat too with the need to navigate menues for common function changes and that strange decision to use a proprietary hotshoe.

    The Olympus EM1 covered all requirements and is simply fun to use without any of the frustrations provided by Canon and Nikon.

    What’s taking them so long to produce a camera like the EM1?

  • JacktheLad

    As I am only really interested in the video side of things does anyone with some technical expertise know if the 4k @ 24fps would be possible. I know the samsung galaxy note 3 does it, so through massive compression it is feasable. The feature on the v2 that excites film makers the most is 4k RAW 60fps. This is brilliant for adding HQ gradable slomotion sequences to films, but is currently very crippled by the buffer size. 40 images or 0.6 of a second capture. If they could get this up to at least 120 frames it would be a hugely useful filming tool. Does anyone know how likely this is to be a feature improvement?

    • Thom Hogan

      The current Nikon 1’s have just enough bandwidth internally to do one second of 60 fps at 14mp. Assuming that you could just reconfigure the numbers (not quite that easy, but let’s do it anyway for illustration) you’d get 30 fps video at 8mp (4K) for almost four seconds. So something would have to change (EXPEED4, for example). But I don’t think we’re very far from that with the current technologies. It’s certainly do-able today at a cost.

      The problem I have is that this adds cost to the product (more memory, faster ASIC, new sensor) to serve a relatively small audience that would buy it. Nikon’s problem is more fundamental: they need still camera users to buy the Nikon 1. If they’re going to spend money and fix problems, they need to start there.

      • JacktheLad

        Thanks Thom I guess it does effect all other parts when you start wanting a higher buffer. The other idea I had is that as the file would be 3 times smaller (approx) if the colour information was dropped, ie b&w burst only. Then theoretically 3x the amount of files could be saved. Is this something that could be implimented as a feature or would it take more processing power to strip the colour info than it does to add it to a file? This would allow 3x the pictures at the existing buffer size?

        • Thom Hogan

          Essentially you’re talking about CinemaDNG, ala what the Blackmagic Pocket Cinema Camera does. It’s still a pretty big stream of data for 4K. 8 million times 30 times how many ever seconds you want to record. In other words, 240Mbps minimum.

  • pavel

    never interested in 1 series because it did not look like 7000 series. finally they might do it and I might buy it… the only other thing I’m missing is in-body IS. do it and I’ll buy it (espite of having already too many cameras)

    • There’s been a lot of debate about IBIS vs. OSS (VR) but from the images I’ve seen, and comparisons, VR seems to do a better job.

  • John Chandler

    i have the nikon 1v1 its okay as long as you keep the iso at 100, but the moment you go higher its not so good. i got it so i could put my 200m lens on and take advantage of the 2.7 crop factor. picked one up for $200, i dont use it often, more of a novelty. it cant bracket. poor grip, kinda heavy for its size. i wish nikon would add more features in the menu and such. i’d say ok for a beginner but not for ppl who expect more if they own a dslr already. its an easy point n shoot cam.

  • Ion Portraits

    Nikon must focus on cameras with phenomenal low light performance!
    I hope they give us a version of 1 with less pixels (for me six million is ideal) that will take good quality photos night and day.
    This world can do without one more camera with an overpacked sensor. So, at least one model in the line up for romantics like me? The rest sounds very promising! I’ve been flirting with 1 system from the very start, hopefully they’ll do it right this time.

    • 6MP is a little thin I think 🙂 If for whatever reason you captured this amazing image when out with your N1, and it was only 6MP, it wouldn’t meet the MP criteria of many stock photo companies. And while a poster sized print might be do-able you’re likely really pushing it.

      Granted, most shots today are simply shared online, or printed 8×10 or smaller… but if I capture a truly great shot, I’d like to have the option to do more with it.

  • jk

    they must discontinue this series , or they may go bankrupt.

    • Adrian Gopal

      Why?.. I love the 1 series now, after getting the AW1. It’s focus is fast, images are good. Noise can be a bit intrusive at higher ISO’s, but there are ways to work around it. I have been introducing it to many friends and they like it. I agree with Ion Portraits, that they need to improve low light performance. And they should have keep things simple by using the same hot-shoe accessory as all their DSLR’s, would have been beneficial for current Nikon users that wanted a lighter camera and had existing accessories. What I hope is that they fix the shutter speed cap when using the FT-1 with F-mount lenses. I dont see the reason why they need to do that.

  • tharealmb

    i really like my V1, only thing bothering me is not being able to turn off image review. For sports with burst, this is annoying as hell, since if someone moves in a different direction, i see it after they have moved. Not during like a DSLR.

    all this about noise… most people don’t even know what noise is if they aren’t a photographer. ANd most don’t care, if it’s not the colored bright yellow/red/green you get when shooting ISO128000 with your 10-year-old compact.

    Pro’s may disagree but they serve an entirely different market which the V1 isn’t intended for, and B need a reason to justify their equipment and salary.

    Nikon V1 with the FT-1 adapter to use all my lenses is an awesome combination. for proof see the comparison i made between the D7000 and V1 with the same lens/same weather:

    • Nice comparison!

    • ereshoping

      Agree entirely. Cant they nobble the review issue with a firmware update. At least give us a choice.

  • Mansgame

    The only thing that will make the V3 remotely interesting is if it comes out with an FX sensor. They an call it VD3.

    • david schmutzler

      o my god, another size-fetish.
      go, pet your 35mm full frame camera.

      • Mansgame

        Your girlfriend can never be too pretty, your car can never be too fast, and your camera sensor can never be too big.

  • Mansgame

    The only thing that will make the V3 remotely interesting is if it comes out with an FX sensor. They an call it VD3.

  • decisivemoment

    7800 user interface good, CLS flash commander mode good, ability to play nice with SB flashes very good, lack of any accessory on current hotshoe design to play with CLS bad.

    I trust it will have the new Aptina 14MP backlit one-inch sensor, along with enough on-board computing power to make full use of this chip’s apparently phenomenal bandwidth. If it performs up to what Aptina has been claiming, it will set a new benchmark for being able to do very well in both stills AND video.

    Let’s hope they rediscover the joys of the EN-EL15 battery.

  • CRB

    same RX100 sensor and a 35mm 1.4 lens eq,…then im sold…

  • decisivemoment

    I wonder if that FT-1 update will also include goodies like off-center AF for existing bodies?

  • Steven

    I have and love the V1.

    The CX sensor combined with the fantastic 6.7-13mm lens allows me to do the architectural photography I have always wanted to.

    Infinite depth of field and extreme sharpness and contrast.

    MF, DX and FX cannot touch the depth of field of CX.

    My desire in the V3 is to see a higher resolution CX sensor that can keep up with the 6.7-13mm lens’s resolution without losing the distinctive Nikon 1 look. Also better low light capability in the sensor and a few control button tweaks to make them more user friendly.

    Here is my V1 set so you can see what this fantastic camera can do and why I love it: http://www.flickr.com/photos/54171644@N07/

    • KnightPhoto

      Fantastic set Steven, really enjoyed it!

      • Steven

        Yep, love that V1!

        I will be at the CES this year and will hunt down Nikon and see that V3.
        Hope they don’t screw it up.

  • Paul

    I tried V1 & J1 – fail! well-made good feel and the viewfinder on the V1 excellent, but the image quality was very poor and where is the bundled flash for the V1? an extra £100 !! no

  • poop

    when will there be more deals for the 1 j3 in 2014?

  • Steven Norquist

    I am at the 2014 CES right now and I talked to all the Nikon reps and they said there is no V3. They don’t have any plans for a V3, nor is there a V3 being produced. The rumor was false.

  • UserNew

    where are the new Nikon 1? Have anybody seen some News on CES?

  • Back to top