First Nikon 1 System Photos!

[Photo-John]

Any chance that you would try shoot some bird in flight? You could start with the seagulls...they're bigger and slower

That's a great idea. I suck at shooting birds and they're really hard. So if I can do a halfway decent job, the camera should probably get all the credit

[Anbesol]

So, do you mean to say that the AF tracking ability of an Oly with the 45mm 1.8 is still not as fast as Nikons tracking at f/5? I'd bet that the higher refresh rate afforded to CDAF with 8-16 times more light will produce better CDAF tracking than Nikons PDAF at f/4.5-5.6. I could be wrong, I'm only speculating, but I find it hard to believe otherwise. Have you used the Oly 45?

[Photo-John]

So, do you mean to say that the AF tracking ability of an Oly with the 45mm 1.8 is still not as fast as Nikons tracking at f/5? I'd bet that the higher refresh rate afforded to CDAF with 8-16 times more light will produce better CDAF tracking than Nikons PDAF at f/4.5-5.6. I could be wrong, I'm only speculating, but I find it hard to believe otherwise. Have you used the Oly 45?

Yes - I mean that *no* other compact system camera can even come close to what I was able to do with the Nikon J1. You'd have to step up to a DSLR with phase detect auto focus to get comparable performance. I have no doubt that the small sensor and increased depth-of-field help. But focus is focus and I shoot continuous auto focus all the time so I know what's good and what isn't. I have tried a few times with the Olympus E-P3 and it's pretty much worthless with continuous auto focus for the stuff that I shoot. Pre-focusing is the only way to ensure a good photo with the Pen cameras. Add the high frame rate of the J1 into the equation and you'd need to step up to the Nikon D3s or Canon EOS-1D Mark IV for comparable performance. And those are $5000 camera bodies.

It's really pretty nuts what Nikon has done with this camera. I'm not saying everyone should buy it or that it's the best compact system camera. Not at all. If image quality is your top priority then it's not the camera for you. But for anyone who wants a packable camera to shoot action video or stills, there's nothing that can match it right now.

You asked about the Olys 45 - you mean the new 45mm Micro Four Thirds prime? I haven't tried it yet but I don't think it will make any difference. This is a matter of the way the different auto focus systems work. Nikon's "hybrid" system just plain kicks ass.

[AgingEyes]

So, do you mean to say that the AF tracking ability of an Oly with the 45mm 1.8 is still not as fast as Nikons tracking at f/5? ...

Are you saying the Oly can do flight shots like these:

Assorted photos


I want to find out if the Nikon 1 AF or the Oly for that matter can at least do this:

The Eagle has Landed

or this:

Snow goose

[Anbesol]

Well, certainly not with the 45mm, a 90mm equiv the bird would be a dot. But yeah I think M43 could with its 90-250 and four thirds adapter, or some other super telephoto option. Certainly the Nikon wouldn't do that with its available kit, regardless of its AF quality it has no lens with the right reach. Its certainly not going to fill the frame with a bird at its 30-110 or 10-100 (+2.7x crop), that is clearly the work of a super telephoto ala 400mm equiv minimum. I suppose you could attach a nikon AF-s lens, not sure how useful that is considering how little of the glass is used.

I don't know how you prepared for the shot, do you chase the birds with tracking or do you shoot them with single shots?

[Franglais]

My first reaction was like Anbesol: why use a consumer compact to shoot birds?

But if you put the 200mm f2 on the V1 that gives you the equivalent of a 540mm f2 doing 10 frames/second in a compact, lightweight package. Might be useful to some people.

[AgingEyes]

My first reaction was like Anbesol: why use a consumer compact to shoot birds?

Why not ??

But if you put the 200mm f2....

Think 500 f4.

[AgingEyes]

I don't know how you prepared for the shot, do you chase the birds with tracking or do you shoot them with single shots?

Simple: pan and track. It's no different from shooting F1 or bicycle race. Only that birds don't follow a track.

If what Photo-John said about the Nikon 1 AF on those cyclists, it should be able to take a shot like that of the soaring snow goose or the landing bald eagle. A soaring bird is not flying fast. A landing eagle is slowing down to a stop, i.e., it is far from fast. If Nikon 1's AF is really that good, as long as it can shoot at a fast shutter speed and that the photog can pan/move the camera to keep the focus on the bird, then I expect Nikon 1 be able to take shots like that.

As for being close to the birds, it depends on the birds and where you are sometimes. I have shot snow geese in flight using a 17-50 on a D300. I suggest testing it on seagulls because some of them are big and easy to come across even in the city...or go to fisherman pier...or even a parking lot And you have a good chance to get close to them or they fly close to you. I have even shot seagulls in flight using a point-and-shoot in the city. Of course a lens of longer focal length would help.

[Anbesol]

Kind of a waste of a lot of glass to throw it on a 2.7x conversion. Seems like carrying a bazooka to shoot pellets. There is sweet spot, and there is the itty bitty spot of a 2.7x crop, though you're right, it would be quite telephoto. Can we really consider Nikkors AF-S options as viable choices for the Nikon 1?

[Photo-John]

Kind of a waste of a lot of glass to throw it on a 2.7x conversion. Seems like carrying a bazooka to shoot pellets. There is sweet spot, and there is the itty bitty spot of a 2.7x crop, though you're right, it would be quite telephoto. Can we really consider Nikkors AF-S options as viable choices for the Nikon 1?

I sort of agree about AF-S Nikkors. For one, they're huge compared to the camera and it sort of defeats the purpose of the small body. On the other hand, what if you're shooting video and the Nikon 1 offers the best performance video capture for your needs? Then, it might look goofy, but the 70-200 f/2.8 VR II might be the perfect tool for the job.

One thing is for sure, the Nikon 1 cameras are stirring things up a lot. I expect we'll see the same auto focus technology trickle up into the next generation of Nikon DSLRs and that will make more sense to most people. Right now, I think the people who will be most interested in the J1 and the V1 are hardcore Nikon owners and backcountry sports shooters - especially those who shoot video and stills. I'm including a photo of the "Nikon 1 Concepts For The Future" display at PhotoPlus. Note the row of lenses. They're all unmarked models and none of them exist for real. But the obvious message is that Nikon plans to fully support and fill out the new camera system.

[AgingEyes]

I sort of agree about AF-S Nikkors. For one, they're huge compared to the camera and it sort of defeats the purpose of the small body.

It's not about what size of the camera body you're using. It's about what that camera body can do for you.

[Photo-John]

It's not about what size of the camera body you're using. It's about what that camera body can do for you.

That's really the point of what I've been saying about the Nikon 1. Thanks for saying it better than me

The Nikon 1 doesn't have the best image quality - especially for the price. However, for people who need really good auto focus on a small camera, I think it's going to be great. I do need to test it more, though. One session of CX racing isn't enough. Bird in flight photos is a great idea and I will give it a shot

[AgingEyes]

Kind of a waste of a lot of glass to throw it on a 2.7x conversion. Seems like carrying a bazooka to shoot pellets. There is sweet spot, and there is the itty bitty spot of a 2.7x crop, though you're right, it would be quite telephoto. Can we really consider Nikkors AF-S options as viable choices for the Nikon 1?

I don't know what it means by a waste of glass. If the combo can give you the shots, how can that be a waste of anything ??

[Anbesol]

Who would really want image quality to take such a distant back seat to autofocus? The disparity between Nikon and the competition of image quality is huge, and further, Nikons kit lens (no surprise) is soft as all heck with CA galore. The CA and softness was not only the worst of ALL of the CSC's, the difference between the J1 and competition can be spotted 30 feet away.

Heres a Nikon J1 corner of a resolution chart, bottom left corner


And heres what Olympus does


Image quality is more than just "better" on the Oly (or panasonic or olymus), its in a whole different league of better. We can barely even call Nikon competition, honestly: at low ISO even the Canon S95 is better than the J1.

I understand that it may have acceptable, even good AF tracking, but considering how behind the competition it is with the REST of its underwhelming feature-set, I still think this is a terrible, pathetic camera release. Unfortunately, since its release, it has outsold Sony, Panasonic and Oly in the KC area. The reason: idiots, who think that just because Nikon made it means its gold. God, people can be brain dead.

Yes, I'm here to talk bad about the Nikon. Because it is a bad camera and it shouldn't get a pass just because Nikon has the majority of American's brainwashed with their brandism. This camera they released is truly a piece of garbage that doesn't deserve to sit next to its superior competition. Clearly, Nikon is banking on idiots who just buy it cause its Nikon.

[AgingEyes]

Who would really want image quality to take such a distant back seat to autofocus? The disparity between Nikon and the competition of image quality is huge, and further, Nikons kit lens (no surprise) is soft as all heck with CA galore. The CA and softness was not only the worst of ALL of the CSC's, the difference between the J1 and competition can be spotted 30 feet away.
[snip]
I understand that it may have acceptable, even good AF tracking, but considering how behind the competition it is with the REST of its underwhelming feature-set, I still think this is a terrible, pathetic camera release. Unfortunately, since its release, it has outsold Sony, Panasonic and Oly in the KC area. The reason: idiots, who think that just because Nikon made it means its gold. God, people can be brain dead.

Yes, I'm here to talk bad about the Nikon. Because it is a bad camera and it shouldn't get a pass just because Nikon has the majority of American's brainwashed with their brandism. This camera they released is truly a piece of garbage that doesn't deserve to sit next to its superior competition. Clearly, Nikon is banking on idiots who just buy it cause its Nikon.

Wow! C'mon man, what have Nikon done to you...really ?

I'm a Nikon shooter but I have yet to buy its compact point-&-shoot.

Anyhow, here's another review:

Rob Galbraith DPI: Review: Nikon's J1 and V1 cameras and 1 Nikkor lenses

Feel free to go tell him you disagree and he's such an idiot

By the way, he was the one who started all the fuss about the Canon 1D Mk III's AF problem

Image quality is important. But then, what kind of quality you need also depends on what you use the final images. Large prints or web-viewing, for example, and what kind of photos you're shooting. I'd say the quality requirement for family shots could be not as demanding as those that would be used for gallery exhibition.

Besides, nobody says you have to buy Nikon. Just use whatever you're happy with.

Peace?

[Photo-John]

Yes, I'm here to tlk bad about the Nikon. Because it is a bad camera and it shouldn't get a pass just because Nikon has the majority of American's brainwashed with their brandism. This camera they released is truly a piece of garbage that doesn't deserve to sit next to its superior competition. Clearly, Nikon is banking on idiots who just buy it cause its Nikon.

Ha ha! Nice rant

For what it's worth, I am a Canon EOS owner and you know I love the Olympus Pen cameras. I also get to use everything. And I think the Nikon 1 cameras are great. I've continued with my J1 auto focus testing and it's still impressing me. I shot a running dog last weekend with my EOS 7D, the E-P3 and the Nikon J1. As expected, the 7D's continuous auto focus performed the best. I got zero sharp photos with the E-P3 - totally voiding any image quality benefits it has. And although the J1 wasn't as successful with the dog as with cyclists, I still got some very nice photos with the continuous auto focus. I also saw Galbraith's review a few days ago and pretty much agreed with everything he had to say.

I do agree that there's a certain kind of Nikon owner who has blinders on and will buy anything with the Nikon name on it. But the photographers I know - the action sports pros, skiers and mountain bikers - they're interested because the Nikon 1's auto focus will allow them to pack small and light and still get the shot. I think I've said this before but this is a case of the right tool for the job.

[Anbesol]

The Nikon 1 has its own specific set of 4 consumer-grade lens. The micro four thirds system has something around 45, including consumer and pro grade optics covering the gamut of focal ranges.