08-22-2016, 11:22 PM
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.
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.