[Studor13]

V1 + 30-110 @110mm f5.6 vs D800 + 70-200 f2.8 @200mm f5.6 (resized to 8MP)

 

Please note that this is 400€ vs 4000€ and that @f5.6 the 30-110 is wide open and the 70-200 is at near optimal aperture.

 

 

 

V1 vs D800 left image full size

V1 vs D800 right image full size

 

 

J5+32mm f1.2 wide open vs D800+85mm f1.8D wide open (note the film/3D look)

 

 

J5 vs D800 wide open left image full size

J5 vs D800 wide open right image full size

 

 

J5+32mm f1.2 @f2.8 vs D800+85mm f1.8D @f2.8

 

 

J5 vs D800 @f2.8 left image

J5 vs D800 @f2.8 right image

 

 

J5+6.7-13mm vs D600+24-85mm VR

(my copy of the 24-85mm is very soft on one side)

 

 

J5 vs D600 left 18MP

J5 vs D600 right 18MP

 

 

J5+32mm f1.2 + 4T close-up attachment



1920 pix wide

 

 



1920 pix wide

 

Haters can hate but the Nikon 1 rocks. Those that say otherwise, please post something.

[JJ_SO]

Studor13, I know what a trouble it is to upload pictures here.  But a 320×213 pixel picture is very close to useless to compare those very different systems

[Studor13]

Well Jo, I know that. That's why I spent a whole bunch of time uploading full sized files to Flickr and then making (careful) links for you to have a detailed look at.

 

Please, try clicking on one of the links I provided.

[JJ_SO]

Thanks a lot, I look into it this evening.

[toni-a]

J5+32mm f1.2 wide open vs D800+85mm f1.8D wide open (note the film/3D look)

 

 

J5 vs D800 wide open left image full size

J5 vs D800 wide open right image full size

 

 


Well comparing the 2 pictures we have a clear winner, better background blurr and cleaner skin without noise  and sharpening artefacts. although not the same lighting and exposure settings used 

[JJ_SO]

I looked into some of the pictures. I don't feel at ease but obviously the Nikon 1 belongs to the category "underestimated".

 

It's a mixed bag: I know for myself that the D800 or D810 are not as sharp or detailed as a Sigma Merrill. I also know how easy it is to miss focus or to get blur by shutter vibration with the D800. Then, downscaling to 8 MP is just not what I bought a FF camera for - so I do the coward solution and say I prefer to look at the prints. But no matter how I look at it or search for explanations that the pictures are not that far away from each other - I cannot see a big reason to prefer a FF DSLR against a mirrorless. Next to the fact, that the 1 V do focus very fast and keep a wider range of focus points at disposition.

 

However, at the picture with the bicycle my question is: 110 mm at the 1 are equivalent to 297 mm FF. But you use a 200 mm lens and show the same frame of both pictures. Something is fishy...   I'm not so convinced by this comparison, especially because I don't know about wind or tripod and mirror up before - if you shoot the D800 at 1/6 sec, anything can happen  :unsure: . This camera is a 7.2V powered earthquake to most tripods.

 

The portraits are great, but here I come with the next doubts: It's impossible in my opinion, that f2.8 at a 85 mm look worse than on a 32 mm. I think, in the second row you confused the cameras, the left one on flickr is the FF D800 version. In the first portrait row it's the other way round, so therefore everything looks as to be expected. At 100 / 160 ISO, but when I look at my 85 mm pictures the ISO is very often 4 or even 5 digits and here I see still a lot benefit of FF.

 

But still an extremely capable camera, I'd say. Close to no shutter vibration, reliable AF with eye detection and the (today and for new items) price relation is (1V3 + EVF + 32/1.2) 1721.- to (D810 + 85/1.8G) 3194.- so it's by far not 1 to 10, more like 1 to 1.86

 

And I'd say the portraits are double as good in FF - while the other pictures... I refuse to talk about the 24-85, it's a kit lens and cheap, but not cheap enough for the soft corners and massive distortion. The macro shot is really a clear advantage for mirrorless.

 

My concern against the 1 system, even if you show very well done results, are the opposite of fast lenses. Out of 13 one with f/1.2, another one with f/1.8 and the rest f/2.8 and worse. No. Simply not enough for what I want.

[stoppingdown]

Well, apart from the fact that I also think that the second portrait row has the cameras swapped, I'd say that the V1 does an excellent job considering it costs 1/10 (of course, if one considers that 8MP are enough). The problem - which is one of the reasons I didn't consider it - is the incapability of having a shallow DoF at full aperture as bigger sensors have (I mean: at least MFT sports some very fast lenses, such as f/0.95). True that I mostly do landscapes, but also flowers.

 

PS I hope I'm not spreading FUD... but many have noted this comment by DPreview:

 

 

(we're leaving Nikon 1 cameras out of the list, as we believe the series is no longer being developed.)


 

[Studor13]

 Something is fishy...   I'm not so convinced by this comparison,

 

Nothing fishy there Jo. It's to show a CX to DX (equivalent) comparison. That is, 297mm to 280mm-ish.

 

“It's impossible in my opinion, that f2.8 at a 85 mm look worse than on a 32 mm."

The 32mm at f2.8 is seriously sharp! 85mm at f2.8 is not necessarily worse, just maybe not as sharp.

 

"I think, in the second row you confused the cameras, the left one on flickr is the FF D800 version."

No, there is no confusion there for me. It is represented correctly. I didn't mention which is which. I said one is left side and one is right side.

 

BTW, you can get full EXIF details here. Click on each photo and look for "show EXIF".

 

The thing about the 1 system is that not only is it underestimated it is misunderstood.

 

The complaints are that the sensor is too small and that dof is not shallow enough.

 

The starting point should be it is a small sensor and that there is a lot of dof.

 

It is great for:

- travelling

- hiking

- macros

- landscapes

- general photography

- street photography 

 

And contrary to what people say, it is actually quite good for shallow dof portraits.

 

As for the discontinuation of the 1 System the new DL series show that the 1" sensor is here to stay.

 

Buy cameras based on what they say they do and not what you think they should do.

[JJ_SO]

I was referring to the very nervous bokeh with 32 mm @ f/2.8. I think, the more modern 85/1.8 G will be equally sharp at f/2.8 and still deliver better background blur. Plus cheaper...

 

I already was looking at EXIF and I concluded the pictures were in the order like the descriptive text. But the second portrait row was not.

 

I understand all the topics the Series 1 is a very good or better option. What you could add is highspeed shots (1/16.000 is not bad, 60 fps as well and 20 with AF-C...). My main concern is not, the system is not capable, not after I saw your first pictures years ago, but still, I need fast lenses and here the system sucks.

[stoppingdown]

As for the discontinuation of the 1 System the new DL series show that the 1" sensor is here to stay.

Buy cameras based on what they say they do and not what you think they should do.

 

Well, I buy cameras if what they say they do matches what I think they should do. My needs come first, products must fit (for what is possible, it's clear I'll always have to accept a trade off).

 

When I choose, the sensor plays a role, but the system is important too. 1 System was about cameras with interchangeable lenses. DL series isn't. Nothing wrong about that, just a different thing. For instance, their max. aperture is f/1.8, which won't produce a background as smooth as a f/1.8 lens for a bigger sensor; their max. focal equivalent length is 500mm, which is not enough for me. I'm stuck with what Nikon offers. Maybe they will add other cameras, maybe not (frankly, I don't think that when the 1 System was announced many people would have bought it knowing it would have been dead by 2016, just five years after their introduction).

 

Even Sony doesn't provide longer focals, but the fact that is an interchangeable system made me possible to find the Sigma 150-600mm, etc.