# Nikon 1 V3



## brian_f2.8 (Mar 12, 2014)

So Nikon released a new mirror-less camera tonight. Does anyone have an opinion about this? I thought Nikon would have tried to build something that would compete with the XT-1. The DF was a flop. FUJI and Olympus are doing well with their vintage style mirror-less looking camera's. While some will say that why would a Nikon build a new camera that is competitive to their own DSLR, I will say that mirror-less cameras are no where near DSLR's capabilities.


----------



## coastalconn (Mar 12, 2014)

Not bad only 1200 for the body and 10-30 (according to DPR it includes viewfinder and grip!) and  1K for the new 70-300 WTH????  Nikon has been hitting the bong apparently a bit too much...


----------



## amitchhabra (Mar 13, 2014)

provides u the fastest burst with autofocus at full resolution in its class. small grip, sharper image. It has tilting touch-screen LCD with built-in Wi-Fi....
I m looking forward 4 it.....


----------



## Hivess (Mar 13, 2014)

I plan to buy this camera, more suggestion please about it.


----------



## TheLost (Mar 13, 2014)

Here are a few things i found a bit...  disturbing (not sure that's the word... maybe 'troubling' is better)

<quotes from Nikon's press release>


> _the Nikon 1 V3 is a D-SLR owner's dream come true_





> _Capture thrilling views of sports, fast action and spontaneous moments with game-changing continuous shooting speed: 20 fps at full resolution with full autofocus performance._





> _The Nikon 1 V3's Hybrid AF System uses 171 AF points for contrast detection and 105 AF points for phase detection to lock onto your subject the moment it enters the frame with virtually zero lag on the camera's LCD display. Few cameras are better suited for fast action photography than the Nikon 1 V3._



*Hey everybody!!! Meet what Nikon whats to be your new D400!! *

It's strange how often they used the word 'D-SLR' in that press release.  

And OMG the price? Granted that $1.2k price is with the viewfinder and grip.. but.. really?  

And WTFudge?!? $1k for the new 70-300 f/4.5-5.6 VR 1 series lens?!?!?! That's double the price of the f-mount Nikon 70-300VR!!

Nikon missed the target with this one.

PS.  In 6 months when the V3 is $399 and the 70-300mm 1 lens is $199 i'll probably buy it


----------



## Crazydad (Mar 13, 2014)

I want to see how well that 20fps works in a high school stadium at night when the lighting sucks. Especially with f5.6 as the best aperture. Why the hell won't Nikon just do a D400?


----------



## DarkShadow (Mar 13, 2014)

There to busy F in around with mirror less and entry level DSLR that don't need updating.


----------



## KmH (Mar 13, 2014)

Crazydad said:


> Why the hell won't Nikon just do a D400?


1. Maybe because the vast majority of their DSLR sales are entry-level DSLR cameras.

2. Maybe because their market research showed them the market segment a D400 would serve (prosumer) was to small and that market segment was ripe an entry-level full frame camera (D600).


----------



## Derrel (Mar 13, 2014)

I am thinking that a 20 fps camera's lenses would need to have a VERY robust and sophisticated automatic diaphragm OR, since the camera uses no mirror, perhaps the lens will stop down to shooting aperture and stay "closed" as long as the shutter is depressed. Decades ago, Nikon developed the first battery-powered "motorized" camera, way back in the 1950's, and within 10 years made all Nikkor lenses with ball-bearing diaphragm mechanisms, so they could handle the stress of being used on the motor-equipped F-series cameras. But 20 fps? I think that might warrant a different lens diaphragm system than the 35mm-system lenses are using. I really have not checked into this new 1-series camera yet. Might read what's available later today.

As far as a $1,000 70-300 VR lens designed specifically for this new camera; that is expensive, but it might, and I say might, be the result of making a very high-quality lens with superb optics. The higher the initial retail price is on a Nikkor lens, typically the higher the lens's image quality turns out to be. That's long been a "thing" with Nikon's lenses, and especially the zoom lenses. High retail price allows more-complex, better-performing, and better-constructed lenses. I don't know yet, but the new 70-300 VR "might" be a professional-grade lens, made small, and made with slower maximum aperture so as not to make it huge and heavy. 70-300mm has long been the province of "consumer" type lenses, but keep in mind, *Canon currently has a $1,429 70-300mm f/4-5.6-L IS USM lens...
*
Canon EF 70-300mm f/4-5.6L IS USM Lens 4426B002 B&H Photo Video

This Canon 70-300 has two Ultra Low Dispersion lens elements, and a floating element design (floating element lens design is a Nikon optical invention, dating to the 1960's...) to improve image performance from close range to far. It's a "pro-grade" lens design, even though the majority of 70-300 lenses sold are either beginner-level, or consumer-level.


----------



## brian_f2.8 (Mar 13, 2014)

I agree, I feel they have done a ton of research and found that more people are now buying entry level dslr's(D3000/D5000 series) or mirrorless cameras. I bet they sell way more of those than a D4/D800 each day. So why invest into a mid level, to please a specific market. Of that market who wants a D400 some may leave when the 7D MII comes out but in reality they know Nikonians are going to stay. In a way they are doing a good thing for people who are currently working. They are making your options black n white. They are going to widen the gap between a pro body and a dslr camera.


I love my Fuji XE-2, its not going to replace my sports gear but it takes good pics of my daughters, scenery and its fun to use.


----------



## PropilotBW (Mar 13, 2014)

The only reason I would consider a mirrorless is if portability was more of  a priority than DSLR camera features.   Once you start the DSLR system, it's just doesn't make financial sense to start a new system under the mirrorless platform.


----------



## DarkShadow (Mar 13, 2014)

KmH said:


> Crazydad said:
> 
> 
> > Why the hell won't Nikon just do a D400?
> ...


Then I have to ask how small is the market for a D4s at $6500 price tag. I believe if Nikon build a D400 and priced it reasonably it would be one of there best sellers along with the 7100 and entry level models.


----------



## Derrel (Mar 13, 2014)

DarkShadow said:
			
		

> Then I have to ask how small is the market for a D4s at $6500 price tag. I believe if Nikon build a D400 and priced it reasonably it would be one of there best sellers along with the 7100 and entry level models.



Nikon says that D4 production at the Sendai, Japan plant tops out at 5,000 D4 cameras per month. So...there are 60,000 flagship models per year. These are "halo products" to amateurs and hobby shooters, and as such they provide a "lure" to the brand, as well as form an important part of the kit of high-level, high-visibility shooters.

Second, after high-end flagship camera have been replaced by newer models, those same bodies filter down to advanced amateurs, who buy them at very reasonable prices, and further perpetuate the Nikon mystique. You want a D3s? I have seen clean used ones as low as $1850 here in town, from a "real" brick and mortar store, Pro Photo Supply.


----------



## DarkShadow (Mar 13, 2014)

$1850 for a D3s wow that's a bargain


----------



## Mach0 (Mar 13, 2014)

DarkShadow said:


> $1850 for a D3s wow that's a bargain



Yes and I've been looking all the time. Their site isn't always updated. I just missed a set of
Pocket wizards lol.


----------



## Crazydad (Mar 13, 2014)

brian_f2.8 said:


> I agree, I feel they have done a ton of research and found that more people are now buying entry level dslr's(D3000/D5000 series) or mirrorless cameras. I bet they sell way more of those than a D4/D800 each day. So why invest into a mid level, to please a specific market. Of that market who wants a D400 some may leave when the 7D MII comes out but in reality they know Nikonians are going to stay. In a way they are doing a good thing for people who are currently working. They are making your options black n white. They are going to widen the gap between a pro body and a dslr camera.
> 
> 
> I love my Fuji XE-2, its not going to replace my sports gear but it takes good pics of my daughters, scenery and its fun to use.



You may be right, but I just have a hard time believing the market for a pro-bodied DX camera is that small. Personally, I know of some pro photographers who would jump on one with a current generation sensor (hi ISO/low noise) and 7-9 fps. A friend who does portraits with her D800 wants to shoot high school sports, but the D800 isn't the right camera, her D300s struggles with the poor lighting (even with 2.8 lens), and she can't afford $6K for a D4. She told me she would jump all over a $2K DX with 7-9 fps (RAW). And I would too.

The fact Canon has taken so long to update the 7D makes me think there may be some truth the small market for a prosumer DX, but I kind of think it is more trying to push the high end DX user into the FF realm. Which, in my case has prevented Nikon (or Canon) from getting my money. I have had $4-$5K ready for a while to spend on a new body and a couple of lenses for sports shooting and I truly hope to get a new camera before next fall. I have been shooting Nikons since the early 90's and would love to stay with them, but if Canon gives me what I need and Nikon doesn't, then I have to jump ship.


----------



## robbins.photo (Mar 14, 2014)

Crazydad said:


> brian_f2.8 said:
> 
> 
> > I agree, I feel they have done a ton of research and found that more people are now buying entry level dslr's(D3000/D5000 series) or mirrorless cameras. I bet they sell way more of those than a D4/D800 each day. So why invest into a mid level, to please a specific market. Of that market who wants a D400 some may leave when the 7D MII comes out but in reality they know Nikonians are going to stay. In a way they are doing a good thing for people who are currently working. They are making your options black n white. They are going to widen the gap between a pro body and a dslr camera.
> ...



Given canon's track record I would be very surprised if the mark ii used anything other than the exact same sensor as the 7d.   

Sent from my ASUS Transformer Pad TF700T using Tapatalk


----------



## brian_f2.8 (Mar 14, 2014)

Crazydad,

some good stuff in your last post. However, what you and I know is not what Nikon knows. I'm sure they have done their research on a pro dx body. Again my true feeling is that they are isolating people who work in the photography field from people who do not.  

Let's compare it to cars. Would Porsche make a 50k model that is comparable to a 150k model? Is a Cayman a 911? Of course not. 

I'm waiting to see the 7D MII and the D7200. Either of those cameras will meet most peoples needs. I enjoy my D3, plenty of life left, great imagery, raw files are small enough where I don't need to worry, it fits my needs very well. I shoot motorsports for the most part. I don't even know what 1600 ISO is &#128516;, unless I'm doing some high key shots. 

I know one thing, it seems that there are a lot of people who are waiting for these models. If I were Nikon or Canon Id either say we are or are not making these bodies so people can focus on their business and what they need. It seems like they are trying to be the next Apple, here are our iphone 6 leaks, here is iOS 8 leaks.


----------



## cgw (Mar 14, 2014)

Some perspective, probably unwelcome:

SOUNDIMAGEPLUS: The breathtaking ignorance of internet chatter forum busybodies. Reactions to the Nikon 1 V3.


----------



## Dao (Mar 14, 2014)

Derrel said:


> DarkShadow said:
> 
> 
> 
> ...



On top of that, the flagship model is also a marketing tool to drive the sales in the lower end market.


----------



## Crazydad (Mar 14, 2014)

brian_f2.8 said:


> However, what you and I know is not what Nikon knows. I'm sure they have done their research on a pro dx body.



So true that we are not in their meeting rooms. I would love to be in there and see the thought processes. Until a month ago, I was a marketing and operations analyst for a major computer manufacturer and can tell you from first hand experience that corporations do not always read the data correctly and do get things completely wrong. A few years back, the prevailing thought in that company was tablets would never be more than a small niche market and netbooks would be the main products, so we did not invest much into developing a tablet. Whoops, missed that one. Before that, we tried to get into the smartphone market with a phone with a 5" screen that would not fit in the back pocket of a pair of jeans. Why so big? Because the VP at the time was convinced that was the size people really wanted. He is no longer there, but his ego killed any chance we had of getting into the smartphone business.

My main point is that in large corporations, there are a myriad of reasons why certain products see the light of day and others don't. And quite often those reasons are based on either bad data or competing egos. If I had to guess, I would think it is a combination of Nikon going after DSLR market share (cheaper to update low end DSLR line than build new body) and a decision to sink the R&D budget into mirror-less thinking that is the next huge market. Time will tell if they got it right.


----------



## Patrice (Mar 14, 2014)

brian_f2.8 said:


> The DF was a flop. &#8230;..



Really? What do you mean by flop? The camera sells well where available and is well received by it's buyers. Other than rumour sites there are very few real sales figures available from Nikon to support your statement.



brian_f2.8 said:


> FUJI ----------are doing well



Not really - their imaging division financial reports for the last four years show losses and reductions in revenue.


----------



## DarkShadow (Mar 14, 2014)

Mach0 said:


> DarkShadow said:
> 
> 
> > $1850 for a D3s wow that's a bargain
> ...


Bummer.


----------



## Derrel (Mar 14, 2014)

cgw said:


> Some perspective, probably unwelcome:
> 
> SOUNDIMAGEPLUS: The breathtaking ignorance of internet chatter forum busybodies. Reactions to the Nikon 1 V3.



Thom Hogan is even more pessimistic than the Nikon fanboys that the SOUNDIMAGEOPLUS's David Hughes is ridiculing in his latest column...this new camera is apparently a MESS, according to Thom...and it's overpriced...


----------



## DarkShadow (Mar 14, 2014)

Given canon's track record I would be very surprised if the mark ii used anything other than the exact same sensor as the 7d. 

Sent from my ASUS Transformer Pad TF700T using Tapatalk[/QUOTE]

Well allegedly canon suppose to use the duel pixel CMOS in the new 7D but if the Sensor turns out not much better then what is already used in the 70D I wont be upgrading from the 60D any time soon. The duel pixel really don't flatter me but a Nikon like DR, low noise at high ISO and a great buffer and build quality would thrill me. I Also don't want a full frame price tag either and needs to be under two grand. I just have a feeling what's alleged on paper wont translate in the real world.


----------



## robbins.photo (Mar 14, 2014)

Dao said:


> Derrel said:
> 
> 
> > DarkShadow said:
> ...



Hey, who are you calling lower end pal?

I'll have you know I fully intend to by a D3100 soon, so I can turn pro.. lol


----------



## robbins.photo (Mar 14, 2014)

DarkShadow said:


> Well allegedly canon suppose to use the duel pixel CMOS in the new 7D but if the Sensor turns out not much better then what is already used in the 70D I wont be upgrading from the 60D any time soon. The duel pixel really don't flatter me but a Nikon like DR, low noise at high ISO and a great buffer and build quality would thrill me. However I don't want a full frame price tag either.



I'm one of those wait and see what happens guys myself. It will be interested to see where they go with it. Even though I shoot Nikon I really hope the 7D mark II is the bees knees, because the better it is the more it will encourage Nikon to put out something to top it. Lol


----------



## DarkShadow (Mar 14, 2014)

robbins.photo said:


> Dao said:
> 
> 
> > Derrel said:
> ...



Yea what's that guy talking about I had the D3100 and got one or two good shoots from it.:mrgreen: No serious though even the Nikon D3100 the detail from that little camera in raw was excellent. The 5200 is even better so I say don't knock them they perform just great with out needing a second mortgage to get one.


----------



## cgw (Mar 14, 2014)

Derrel said:


> cgw said:
> 
> 
> > Some perspective, probably unwelcome:
> ...



Neither has spent a weekend with the camera but at least Hughes resists Thom's Solomonic analysis of a camera he's never touched. I like Hogan but he sometimes reads like Ken Rockwell's smarter brother.

I share with Hughes a huge dislike of online blather, noise over signal, and the clueless blowhards and gear fetishists who talk about stuff they've never used, much less owned.


----------



## Derrel (Mar 14, 2014)

cgw said:


> Derrel said:
> 
> 
> > cgw said:
> ...



Yeah, Hughes...the rabid SONY fanboy who talked up the A7r as if were the second coming of Christ, and gave it RAVE reviews inside of one week. I saved some of the SOUNDEIMAGEPLUS Sony fanboy rave web pages from his first week with the camera...I loved the part where he said he'd delete any comments from people who dared criticize his beloved new Sony. Talk about online blather and B.S...Hughes excels at it.

Hughes was guilty of loads of online-FANBOY blathering about his beloved new Sony. TOTAL, unadulterated fanboy gushing. 

Hogan's commentary about the new Nikon 1 V3 was centered around obvious pricing issues and simple design facts: the introductory price of $1,200 in the US; the forced bundling of the EVF AND the 10-30mm lens; the fact that the EVF precludes use of the accessory shoe for a flash; the lack of lens hood; the absent filter threads...nobody needs to even touch the camera to comment on those types of things. Apparently to you, that's Solomic pontificating. Hilarious. FORCING customers to buy a camera body,the "optional" shoe-mounted EVF, AND another 10-30mm zoom lens? Lunacy on Nikon's part!

It's pretty obvious, as Hogan points out: Nikon is having a very difficult time designing a non-SLR camera, and it is, factually, pricing its 1-series mirrorless cameras at MUCH higher prices than its d-slr cameras. It's no wonder the $900 first-wave Nikon 1 cameras sat on shelves for months, and then were fire-sale priced at Targets and Best Buys all across the USA, just to get rid of the overstock! The new $1,200 price for a body,EVF, and a 10-30mm lens? My God...that is idiotic marketing.


----------



## runnah (Mar 14, 2014)

Swing and a miss. A big miss. 

After this and the DF I really am confused as to their market strategy. Really expensive niche cameras that compete with similarly priced but much better cameras in their own product line. Really confusing.


----------



## Derrel (Mar 14, 2014)

runnah said:


> Swing and a miss. A big miss.
> 
> After this and the DF I really am confused as to their market strategy. Really expensive niche cameras that compete with similarly priced but much better cameras in their own product line. Really confusing.



This is the kind of thing Thom Hogan has been saying for a while now. Sony's been doing the same thing: launching cameras that compete with their other offerings. It's like the executives have ZERO clue of who their customers are. That is the type of so-called "Solomic" analysis Hogan provided in his Nikon 1 V3 intro piece...Nikon launched the first 1-series camera's top model at $900...now they're offering a $1,200 body/EVF/10-30mm zoom package?

I guess maybe they figure why not--nobody bought the earlier two 1-series cameras, so every single North American buyer will want a new 10-30mm zoom!!

NOPE...this new camera will sell more D5300 kits than it will 1 V3 kits!

I used to sell cameras for a retail chain, years ago...I have never seen such moronic product lines from Nikon...just zero clue about the actual kind of customers that currently exist, and well, the left hand has no idea what the right hand is doing...all I can assume/guess is that the Japan home market's tendency to suck up ANY new camera due to brand loyalty and love for small and "new" is blinding the numbskulls running Nikon now.


----------



## runnah (Mar 14, 2014)

Missed opportunity if you ask me. Why not cancel the 1 series, keep the guts and give it a retro style body? Keep it under a grand and you reap in the dough. Instead you have a DF that wasn't much of a success and another iteration of the dead horse nikon 1.


----------



## brian_f2.8 (Mar 14, 2014)

There is a video on petapixel, a sports shooter used the new 1 for some photos. He seemed very happy with the quality. Totally agree with runnah, a big missed opportunity with the df and now this. The new 1 looks like a 200$ PnS.

Fuji and Olympus are going to take over the mirroless market very soon. There is a new patent for an 85-300 which will be a very nice lens, Im sure. At 300mm on a 1.5x, thats a nice bang for the buck.


----------



## TheLost (Mar 14, 2014)

cgw said:


> Derrel said:
> 
> 
> > cgw said:
> ...



Keep in mind that Thom Hogan actually uses the Nikon 1.  If you read his Safari blogs (on his site) you can see quite a few pictures taken by him and his students with various Nikon 1 camera's and lenses. He's probably more of an expert on whats right/wrong with the 1 bodies then most people.  He even said he's taking the V3 and the new 70-300 with him on his next trip (i think in aug).

At the end of the day its still priced higher then a D7100..  the 'kit' lens doesn't have a lens hood or threads for filters (IMHO it looks like a standard Point-n-Shoot lens).. No weather sealing.. No dual card slot..  uses Micro SD cards (ever drop one of those outside and try to find it?).  you cant deny its a big question mark on what they where thinking.


----------



## cgw (Mar 15, 2014)

_"Yeah, Hughes...the rabid SONY fanboy who talked up the A7r as if were the second coming of Christ, and gave it RAVE reviews inside of one week. I saved some of the SOUNDEIMAGEPLUS Sony fanboy rave web pages from his first week with the camera...I loved the part where he said he'd delete any comments from people who dared criticize his beloved new Sony. Talk about online blather and B.S...Hughes excels at it.

Hughes was guilty of loads of online-FANBOY blathering about his beloved new Sony. TOTAL, unadulterated fanboy gushing."


_Hughes' preferences are never ambivalent, granted, but at least he owns, shoots and processes the images made by the gear he discusses. And you? More noise than signal here, I'm afraid. That's what annoys Hughes, and me.


----------



## bigal1000 (Mar 15, 2014)

No Thanks !!!!!!!!!!


----------



## bigal1000 (Mar 15, 2014)

brian_f2.8 said:


> Crazydad,
> 
> some good stuff in your last post. However, what you and I know is not what Nikon knows. I'm sure they have done their research on a pro dx body. Again my true feeling is that they are isolating people who work in the photography field from people who do not.
> 
> ...



Please don't hold your breath !


----------



## Buck777 (Mar 19, 2014)

I would suggest that Nikon ( and canon ) are worried. I just saw what I would consider stunning images taken at a wedding from a XT-1. When I went in to my local camera shop - they know I'm a Nikon fanboy, I enquired about the XT-1. They admitted that the mirrorless is outselling the DSLR 10 to 1. Bear in mind in my corner of the world the XT-1 is more expensive than a D7100. The owner had brought one to 'back up' his D800, and said something quite remarkable - he said that this technology could see the death knell of the DSLR as we know it. His thoughts were that the US consumer was the only factor propping up the heavier DSLR market, but Nikon and Canon are seeing nosedives in sales. 
So Nikon must know that brands like Fuji and Sony are beginning to eat into the market. I would hazard a guess is mirrorless will be the big battlefield of camera manufacturers. 

I'm beginning to sway myself.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk


----------



## Derrel (Mar 19, 2014)

cgw said:


> _"Yeah, Hughes...the rabid SONY fanboy who talked up the A7r as if were the second coming of Christ, and gave it RAVE reviews inside of one week. I saved some of the SOUNDEIMAGEPLUS Sony fanboy rave web pages from his first week with the camera...I loved the part where he said he'd delete any comments from people who dared criticize his beloved new Sony. Talk about online blather and B.S...Hughes excels at it.
> 
> Hughes was guilty of loads of online-FANBOY blathering about his beloved new Sony. TOTAL, unadulterated fanboy gushing."
> 
> ...



Hughes jumped the gun and bought a camera that shoots 11-bit, highly lossy, VISIBLY-lossy, compressed RAW images...wow.....................................

Hughes jumped the gun and bought a camera that has FOUR lenses available...

Hughes jumped the gun and missed the huge shutter vibration problem the A7r has, due to its unfortunate mechanical first curtain shutter that closes, then opens, then closes again...

Hughes went off on a big fanboy love-fest with a brand-new toy.

ALL NOISE...ALL his own efforts to justify an expensive new toy. Noise comes in different varieties. Hughes' variety of noise is the typical internet kind--that of the brand new owner singing, "Laa-la-lal-la-la-laa-I-can't-hear-you-talking-about-issues-with-the thing-I just-boughtand need to rationalize!"

Of course, cgw, you were the guy who proclaimed the Sony A7 and A7r to be "*game changers*". lol 

So far, the new Sony A7 and A7r units are...not even being stocked by Best Buy in my entire metro area...sales turds....I wonder if the Nikon 1 V3 will be on closeout at 1/3 of its original retail price point within a year, like the original Nikon 1 models were. My guess? YES, it will drop in price severely, because frankly, the design, features, and target market are all "*missing in action*". Hogan listed its numerous flaws as a camera offering. And now, it's up against better cameras. Olympus has a new OM, the OM D-10 about ready to hit the streets...it will likely blow the Nikon out of the water in terms of sales. Body and 12-42mm zoom for $799??? Nikon 1 V3--buh-bye...


----------



## JerryLove (Mar 19, 2014)

brian_f2.8 said:


> Let's compare it to cars. Would Porsche make a 50k model that is comparable to a 150k model? Is a Cayman a 911? Of course not.


 It could be, if Porsch didn't cripple it for "strategic cost". Same with the Canon 6D


----------



## pixmedic (Mar 19, 2014)

im not a camera engineer, or a market analyst, or any kind of technology expert. 
I just find options that are within my budget at the time, and buy what I feel will work best for me and my needs.


----------



## brian_f2.8 (Mar 19, 2014)

JerryLove said:


> It could be, if Porsch didn't cripple it for "strategic cost". Same with the Canon 6D



No they wouldn't. They make several models for various markets. Entry level, mid grade and professional standard.


----------



## brian_f2.8 (Mar 19, 2014)

I have not played with an XT-1. My XE-2 is great for what it is. I need a DSLR for pro sports. Mirrorless will become the camera for most consumers. For working pros, we need dslrs.


----------



## pixmedic (Mar 19, 2014)

brian_f2.8 said:


> I have not played with an XT-1. My XE-2 is great for what it is. I need a DSLR for pro sports. Mirrorless will become the camera for most consumers. For working pros, we need dslrs.



umm.....no. 

Featured: 'Mu43 Wedding Experience' by SSSYURRR


----------



## brian_f2.8 (Mar 19, 2014)

Um yes. I'm talking about sports. I don't see fuji making 500mm lens. For weddings sure point has been proven. Maybe in time the technology will catch up but not now.


----------



## TheLost (Mar 20, 2014)

brian_f2.8 said:


> Um yes. I'm talking about sports. I don't see fuji making 500mm lens. For weddings sure point has been proven. Maybe in time the technology will catch up but not now.



The technology is here today...  You are shooting a DSLR for sports because Nikon is telling you that's what you need.  

Put a DX sensor on  V3 internals and tack on a F lens mount and you'd have a camera people would buy.

18mp
171-point AF system (w/ 105 on-sensor phase-detect auto-focus points).
20FPS
40 image RAW buffer

Nikon can make this camera... it has all the parts it needs.  

Side note: Lets talk about that FPS.. the buffer fills up in 2 seconds @ 20fps.. 4 seconds @ 10 fps.. ~7 seconds @ 6 fps..  that's dang impressive IMHO.


----------



## pixmedic (Mar 20, 2014)

brian_f2.8 said:


> Um yes. I'm talking about sports. I don't see fuji making 500mm lens. For weddings sure point has been proven. Maybe in time the technology will catch up but not now.



Olympus has a 300 mm f/2.8  m4/3 lens, which is 600mm equivalent in FF. 

I'd say that "in time" is today.


----------



## TheLost (Mar 20, 2014)

JerryLove said:


> brian_f2.8 said:
> 
> 
> > Let's compare it to cars. Would Porsche make a 50k model that is comparable to a 150k model? Is a Cayman a 911? Of course not.
> ...



Porsche originally 'crippled' the Cayman because they wanted a car placed between the Boxter and the 911...  However, LOTS of people (like me) think the Cayman is BETTER then a 911 due to its balance and weight.  They listened to their user base who thought the 911 was getting to big and heavy.. and they made a car people wanted.  (you also haven't shopped for a Cayman for a while.. cuz they aint $50k...  try closer to $80k)

Short answer... Porsche makes cars targeted for specific owners.  Nobody know's who Nikon is targeting their cameras at...


----------



## pixmedic (Mar 20, 2014)

I thought Nikon was targeting their cameras at photographers


----------



## molested_cow (Mar 20, 2014)

If I am looking to replace my D700 with something with video, this may be an option simply for the size and weight. Of course, I will probably hate it at first for the lack of physical controls.


----------



## brian_f2.8 (Mar 20, 2014)

As soon as I see someone at a NASCAR, Indy Car or PGA event with a mirrorless camera I'll let everyone know. 

I have no interest.


----------



## pixmedic (Mar 20, 2014)

brian_f2.8 said:


> As soon as I see someone at a NASCAR, Indy Car or PGA event with a mirrorless camera I'll let everyone know.
> 
> I have no interest.



Eh....
It wasn't that long ago that people said mirrorless would never be suitable for weddings. Give it some time...
I imagine it would be pretty nice to be able to shoot those sports using gear that weighs 1/4 of what the photographer is used to carrying around.

It will be interesting to see if anyone does start using mirrorless and what the results are like.


----------



## Derrel (Mar 20, 2014)

pixmedic said:


> I thought Nikon was targeting their cameras at photographers



Yeah, one might be tempted to think that, but Nikon is also clinging tenaciously to the laaaaaast of the point and shoot digital crowd. IMMSMC, Nikon in 2013 was #1 in sales of small, affordable compact cameras world-wide. The folks running Nikon are still trying to hang on in a declining market segment. There are places in the world where d-slrs are simply out of reach of the majority of citizens (developing world, China, etc.)

This whole $1,200 compact, smaller-than-APS-C, smaller-than-m4/3 even market, where the Nikon 1 series falls in the camera hierarchy...there really is not much competition from other camera makers. Maybe that's why Nikon thinks they have a shot with the 1-series. MOST of the serious mirrorless cameras today are m4/3 format (2x FOV factor), OR APS-C (Fuji X-series, with 1.5x FOV factor). As some speculate, it's possible that Nikon does not want to "validate" the m4/3 format by competing head-to-head with all the other players, like Panasonic, FujiFilm, and Olympus to name a few; by keeping the 1-series "separate" from the   m4/3 and APS-C sensor cameras, AND with an adapter link to Nikon F-mount, Nikon keeps the 1 series competing in its own, small pond.

But judging from on-line forum responses, the 1-series is not taking the world by storm; Panasonic OWNS the niche that emphasizes mirrorless camera video; Olympus has the gorgeous OM-series; Fuji has the sexy X-series, with a camera for almost EVERY level of shooter; Sony has tried everything it can think of, and has made some very fine cameras, both interchangeable and fixed  and fixed-mount zooms. Nikon is off in a separate niche, which is so far, not really garnering much buzz from the on-line camera press, or the web, or the tech web sites, or the photo magazines. Nikon, and Canon, both are the leaders overall, and are not really willing to go whole-hog in the mirrorless fray. The EARLY pioneers, Panny and Oly, have already captured a lot of mind share and market; Fuji is the darling of the camera press and many serious shooters; Sony has its fans too. The Nikon 1-series and the Canon M...ehhhh...not much traction...


----------



## pixmedic (Mar 20, 2014)

The only advantage I can see for the nikon 1 is the FPS.  In every other category it is actually behind even last year's MILC offerings from olympus, Panasonic, and Fuji. Probably Sony as well. 

The price tag on the V3 was pretty surprising. Maybe nikon Is hoping people will take it more seriously if it is more expensive. 

The v1 with 10-30 lens for $150 is tempting though, and I've seen that deal online a few times now. Now that I have the Olympus mirrorless, I don't really see myself getting the nikon.


----------



## runnah (Mar 20, 2014)

The real problem is that they have product line bloat. 18 DSLRs, 8 Nikon 1 series, 34 Coolpix. That's 60 different products to develop, market and produce. Having that wide of a product line confuses consumer and prevents a clear focus on future development.

My personal opinion is that cutting the DSLR offering in half would do them a big favor. Having 10 DSLRs between $500-$1000 that are only slightly different is very silly.


----------



## brian_f2.8 (Mar 20, 2014)

Very good point Runnah, that was Apple's approach. While Dell offers 50 different desktops, Apple gave a few options. This ensures manufacturing quality by only producing fewer models, increase quality control among many other things. Again, I would love to be a fly on the wall at Nikon meeting and see their logic. Lets say one thing about all of this, its nice to have options with photography.


----------



## TheLost (Mar 20, 2014)

brian_f2.8 said:


> Lets say one thing about all of this, its nice to have options with photography.



Agreed..  but whats the best Nikon option for a sports shooter?  There really isn't one...  its a choice of compromises.


----------



## JerryLove (Mar 20, 2014)

runnah said:


> The real problem is that they have product line bloat. 18 DSLRs, 8 Nikon 1 series, 34 Coolpix. That's 60 different products to develop, market and produce. Having that wide of a product line confuses consumer and prevents a clear focus on future development.
> 
> My personal opinion is that cutting the DSLR offering in half would do them a big favor. Having 10 DSLRs between $500-$1000 that are only slightly different is very silly.


 Agreed. I see the same problems on the Canon side.

Not only is there an apparent lack of differentiation, there's also (due to "strategic cost") stupid crippling that's prone to occurring when devices are so similar. Creating a clearer "here's who should buy this one" differentiation would be better.

Though in the specific case of the Nikon 1 V3 the problems might look more like this:
People that want to spend $1k+ on ICL cameras from Nikon will buy DSLRs. A mirror-less that could compete there would be offered in DSLR-like form factors and competative sensor sizes.

Everyone else doesn't understand the difference between a Nikon 1 and a Nikon CoolPix (except that the latter is cheaper, smaller, and they don't need to go buy lenses); but the point-and-click market is getting eaten alive by cameraphones.

Anyone who does fall inbetween these likely got a micro 4/3 camera for less money... making more, less expensive, lenses available.


----------



## brian_f2.8 (Mar 20, 2014)

TheLost said:


> Agreed..  but whats the best Nikon option for a sports shooter?  There really isn't one...  its a choice of compromises.



At what level? Mom n dad taking pics at soccer, a D7100 will do just fine. 

At pro level when there are other shooters your photos will be matched with? You want top of the line D4/D4s. If you are shooting basketball with a D7100 f3.2, 1/800, 1600 ISO and a guy next to you could be a'using a D4 f4, 1/1250, 3200 ISO. 

For argument sake ignore all other variables such as timing and position. The camera will perform better.


----------



## JerryLove (Mar 20, 2014)

TheLost said:


> brian_f2.8 said:
> 
> 
> > Lets say one thing about all of this, its nice to have options with photography.
> ...


 D4. Highest frame rate, highest ISO (indoor sports), most AF points.


----------



## TheLost (Mar 20, 2014)

brian_f2.8 said:


> TheLost said:
> 
> 
> > Agreed..  but whats the best Nikon option for a sports shooter?  There really isn't one...  its a choice of compromises.
> ...



I should preface this by saying... I am the guy at the high school basketball game with the D7100 next to the guys with the D4s's.  I shoot HS Football, Basketball, Rugby, Water Polo along with Youth sports (inside/outside).  I'm also one of the first people to shout how great the D7100 is..

.. but the fact is... its a compromise.  You will hit the buffer wall.. and you will miss a shot every now and then.  

The D300 was a GREAT camera..
The D700 was an AMAZING camera..  

Pick the D7100, D610 & D800 and then settle on what your giving up. 

The V3 is an enigma...  20fps.. great AF speed..  no weather sealing..  only sold as a KIT in the US..  micro-sd.. and priced higher then the 'flagship' DSLR D7100.  Its targeted at sports/action shoots.. just look at the website:
http://www.nikonusa.com/en/Nikon-Products/Nikon-1-Cameras/Nikon-1.page#PerformanceCameras


----------



## TheLost (Mar 20, 2014)

JerryLove said:


> TheLost said:
> 
> 
> > but whats the best Nikon option for a sports shooter?  There really isn't one...  its a choice of compromises.
> ...



The compromise on the D4 is: 16mp in a 24mp world and $6k of your hard earned money (not to mention lenses... a 300mm f/2.8 isn't cheap)


----------



## JerryLove (Mar 20, 2014)

TheLost said:


> JerryLove said:
> 
> 
> > TheLost said:
> ...


 While one might compromise cameras because of cost, cost itself isn't a compromise.

That's like saying "what's the best car for going fast", me saying "a Veyron" and you saying "but a Corolla is cheaper". The question needed to be different like "what's the best $1k and under camera for sports photography".

16MP is a non-issue for likely real-case sports scenarios where you wouldn't be resolving it by moving to Hasslebald or the like. Notice that professional sports digital photography existed 5 years ago when 24MB wasn't an option.


----------



## JacaRanda (Mar 20, 2014)

Just had a meeting with the main Canon dude.  Told him they better put out the 7Dmkii soon and it better have a  better sensor than the 70d.  He said okay but tell all the idiots to stop buying those cheesy 18 mp cameras with the crappy sensors.  Once I get the message out we are in like Flynn.  Give me just a couple of months to spam the world.  

That will trigger Nikon to get the D400 out and we all will be happy campers...................until the next thingy.

I keep getting a mental block on the whole dynamic range and low light issues with the 7D because I see so many doggone people out and about using them.   Unless folks are cleaning the crap out of their gear, a number of them look new or barely used (those that I am able to spy).

 For sports, I get it with crappy lighting on fields at night and in gyms, but I am too much of a wuss to be chasing hawks and bobcats in the dark. 

When I see a great picture on Flickr or 500px or anywhere else, I try to check out what camera was used.  Many times it is a 7D for wildlife.  I hope those photographers understand what a crappy sensor that camera has and that they are holding me back from getting my 7Dmkii. :evil:


----------



## JerryLove (Mar 20, 2014)

JacaRanda said:


> Just had a meeting with the main Canon dude.  Told him they better put out the 7Dmkii soon and it better have a  better sensor than the 70d.  He said okay but tell all the idiots to stop buying those cheesy 18 mp cameras with the crappy sensors.  Once I get the message out we are in like Flynn.  Give me just a couple of months to spam the world.


 Can you tell me how this story related to the Nikon 1 v3?


----------



## JacaRanda (Mar 21, 2014)

JerryLove said:


> JacaRanda said:
> 
> 
> > Just had a meeting with the main Canon dude.  Told him they better put out the 7Dmkii soon and it better have a  better sensor than the 70d.  He said okay but tell all the idiots to stop buying those cheesy 18 mp cameras with the crappy sensors.  Once I get the message out we are in like Flynn.  Give me just a couple of months to spam the world.
> ...



Nope


----------



## TheLost (Mar 21, 2014)

JerryLove said:


> While one might compromise cameras because of cost, cost itself isn't a compromise.
> 
> That's like saying "what's the best car for going fast", me saying "a Veyron" and you saying "but a Corolla is cheaper". The question needed to be different like "what's the best $1k and under camera for sports photography".
> 
> 16MP is a non-issue for likely real-case sports scenarios where you wouldn't be resolving it by moving to Hasslebald or the like. Notice that professional sports digital photography existed 5 years ago when 24MB wasn't an option.



Cost is a HUGE factor..  If it wasn't we'd all be shooting D4's with f/1.4 and 2.8 lenses.

Who is going to fork out $1.2k for a V3?  IMHO.. $699 would have been better.


----------



## JerryLove (Mar 21, 2014)

TheLost said:


> Cost is a HUGE factor..


 Being a factor doesn't make it a compromise.



> If it wasn't we'd all be shooting D4's with f/1.4 and 2.8 lenses.


 That's true for the "best for sports" criteria you originally set (though only when discussing Nikon exclusively). For macro photography, you'd likely do better with a D800 and its 36MP sensor.



> Who is going to fork out $1.2k for a V3?  IMHO.. $699 would have been better.


 I agree: the N1 seems a bit cost un-competitive. 

Though I suppose it depends on how you look at it. If it actually meets the specs... if it can actually take 20 full-resolution, focused, DSLR-quality images per-second: then this has just become a better sports camera than the D4... it's a bargain.


----------



## Derrel (Apr 30, 2014)

Nikon V3 First Impressions, article published by Thom Hogan.  Nikon V3 First Impressions | Sans Mirror ? mirrorless, interchangeable lens cameras | Thom Hogan

"I can sum everything up about my first day of shooting with the V3 in four words: what were they thinking?"

A litany of complaints follows. Targets were left missed. Clean, well off-target misses.


----------

