PCWorld Forums: Hands On With The Nikon 1 J1 - PCWorld Forums

Post your comments for Hands On With the Nikon 1 J1 here

Simply awful review, what a waste

As the specs are at this time I don't see the new camera line going very far.

Compare the Nikon's to...

The Panasonic with a 16mp sensor. Or even the soon to arrive Sony with a 24mp sensor. Sorry but the 12 vs a 24 sensor just won't cut it. Yes the Nikon's do have the advantage of a compact size, but isn't photography all about the quality of the image?

MrHasselblad, on 23 September 2011 - 05:35 AM, said:

Certainly Panasonic, Sony, and Olympus see this type of camera going very, very far. In particular, the smaller (but still very large, historically speaking) sensor is applicable for video use as well... both Panasonic and Sony have camcorders that use the same compact lens systems as their digital still cameras.

MrHasselblad, on 23 September 2011 - 05:35 AM, said:

The quality of the image isn't measured entirely in Megapixels. And one danger of the ever increasing megapixel rating is the every shrinking sensor site size. Diffraction limits are already a problem at large f-numbers with these smaller, high pixel-count sensors.

The other thing... these may not be primary cameras for everyone. I'm pretty happy with my Canon 60D, but it doesn't fit in my pocket. I have a Panasonic TZ5 that does, which is slightly broken and in need of replacement. That new Panasonic GF3 isn't much closer to the P&S size than the Canon size. Nikon's clearly going for this same market. Could even mean they're thinking video down the road... after all, with all these video camera companies entering the still market (Sony, Panasonic, even JVC a little bit), they need to invade someone else's territory.

This also leaves Canon as the only major SLR or camcorder vendor without this kind of camera.

It's a good start. No doubt Nikon will steadily improve it. No camera will ever please every critic, but critics do help guide the engineers and designers. I want to check out the J1 when it goes to market.

Megapixel: The quality of the image is not a function of megapixel size unless you are peeping. 6mp blown up to a 8x10" print at a viewing distance of 1 foot is indistinguishable from a 10, 16 or 25 megapixel one. Heck, for most shots you won't be able to distinguish a 2.5 megapixel one from the above.

Small Sensor: What is going to make a difference is the lens quality on large apertures, diffraction limit on smaller ones, and the type of subject being shot. Most importantly, poor lighting necessitates an ISO that is going to introduce noticeable image noise quicker. The reviewer noted that. The only thing he didn't mention was the depth-of-field advantage of a larger sensorâ€Â"but if you want DoF, you shoot the Nikon D3 he does, not a Sony NEX, nor a Samsung NX, nor Olympus/Panasonic µ4:3. (I own a E-P2 µ4:3 BTW so I'm not interested in buying a Nikon 1).

Market: The mirrorless market is moving what people are buying. Other than a brief, pent-up burst of customers, nobody is buying mirrorless ILC cameras that are complicated (E-P1/E-P2), retro (X100), or simply have a big sensor and crummy lenses/too big lenses (Sony NEX), no matter what the price (Samsung NX) or how fun it is (Pentax Q). Instead what people are buying are ILC cameras that are small (the smaller the better), with a simplified UI like their pocket cameras that they are upgrading from. That market doesn't own a dSLR or is selling their current one on eBay because it is too big and they never carry it around. Thus you see things get smaller (GF1 -> GF2 -> GF3), much smaller (E-P1 -> E-PL1 -> E->PM1), simpler (dials and buttons gone, touchscreens everywhere), and cleaner (handgrips gone). Nikon 1 decides to shortcut that trend by actually coming out with a model that is smaller than the smallest (other than the Pentax Q it is the smallest and uses the smallest sensor), simpler than the simplest (4 modes in the dial, everything in a menu), and cleaner than the cleanest (the optional handgrip costs a lot and must be attached to the tripod mount).

If you don't like it, buy something else. You didn't. That's why Nikon isn't making the camera you are asking for: an ugly, retro-inspired camera with a APS-C sensor that somehow magically has a line of pancake lenses and Nikkor quality all under the entry price of $500â€Â"oh yeah, and an optical viewfinder all in the size of something that fits in your pocket. Well that and the fact that neither Nikon nor Canon can't violate the rules of physics… yet.

Keep hoping though. The rest of us will keep shooting.