Nikon 1J5

WestEndFoto

Hmmm, being the owner of a V3 and the $1000 cheap 70-300, and the $900 cheap 32mm I guess I'm fooling myself into thinking I can actually see all of those pixels. And honestly the 30-110 zoom is no slouch either. Sure, the kit lens isn't anything to write home about, but what kit lens is? Also, remember CX sized lenses are easier to make sharp than FX ones, look at the MTF. Don't believe me though:
https://photographylife.com/photographing-butterflies-with-the-1-nikon-cx-70-300
https://photographylife.com/sample-bird-images-using-1-nikon-cx-70-300-lens

I don't know. How can you tell how sharp it is with an internet image, unless you crop a corner.

Here are a couple of mine from the same butterfly conservatory. Don't critique my technique too much. This was the first day I tried out the lens as it was delivered to me the week before.





It is hard to tell the difference between the Nikon 1 images in the article and mine using my D800 and 200 f/4 lens. Mine look quite a bit sharper in Lightroom than on Flickr. We might just be comparing different display mediums. One difference is that my images seem to have much lower ISO values with higher shutter speeds. Not sure why. My images were also taken on a cloudy day as were the ones in the Photography Life article.

Perhaps an interesting test would be too take a shot of some detail with your Nikon 1 and lens of choice. A valley, looking up, with a forest is ideal as there is detail at every resolution. Then pixel peep. Is there detail at the pixel level? If not, the sensor is probably out resolving the lens.

manhattanboy

@Westendphoto
Nice pictures above!

Has anyone inspected the sample photo here:

The colors in the grass are a little washed out and there is noise in the shadow portion of the arm.
Nonetheless, I am so tempted to jump on this. I have the 1j4 and pair it with the 70-300, which is a sharper lens then this 30-110 they shot this on. I wish they would announce whether their will be a viewfinder, because then for all practical purposes you could streamline the 1 series line down to one camera plus attachments.

kennychick

I'm waiting for a DF type full frame mirrorless that use the F mount. I wonder if I'll ever see that happen.

manhattanboy

I'm waiting for a DF type full frame mirrorless that use the F mount. I wonder if I'll ever see that happen.

The main advantage of the N1 is the much smaller lenses. The 70-300mm CX lens is super tiny for its range. F mount lenses will be the same size. There are minor advantages of FF mirrorless over FF DSLR with an F mount (such as a silent shutter), but the real benefits are at high fps, in which case the mirror movement and view blackout become significant issues for the DSLR.

Ironheart

Perhaps an interesting test would be too take a shot of some detail with your Nikon 1 and lens of choice. A valley, looking up, with a forest is ideal as there is detail at every resolution. Then pixel peep. Is there detail at the pixel level? If not, the sensor is probably out resolving the lens.

Your wish is my command. Peep away. Best to click on the photo and go to flickr, and get highest resolution.

PB_PM

And that answers the question. Downloaded and viewed the original size file, it's all mush at 100%.

Ironheart

Are you looking at the grass in the foreground? Can you post a pic as a counter-example so we can see what you mean. I should mention this was handheld at 1/500, and it was breezy. I'll go back with a tripod.

PB_PM

Are you looking at the grass in the foreground? Can you post a pic as a counter-example so we can see what you mean. I should mention this was handheld at 1/500, and it was breezy. I'll go back with a tripod.

I did keep in mind the Flickr compresses photos, so I'm betting the actual original looks better at 100%, but I'm not overly convinced. I found the same issue when I was using the kit lens with the Nikon 1 V1 a few years ago, when I wanted to give the series a chance.

In the grass, and just about every part of the frame it looks mushy besides the sky in the background. I threw this series of 100% crops together in Photoshop. View the larger file to see what I mean.

Larger Size

Ironheart

The close foreground is not in focus, e.g. The tree trunk and the fence-post are clearly OOF as I was focusing on the horizon, dead center of the photo. This is why I would like to see counter-examples not crops of my own photo :-)

PB_PM

Not sure if this is what you mean, but counter photo, nothing wonderful, but it works:
D800 + Sigma 50mm F1.4 Art at F8. Oh and yes, it was windy for this shot too.

Large Version
And a 100% crop

Large Version

Ironheart

Heh, your 100% crop looks like, well, crap, here too. Don't take this personally :-) I'll get to a real computer in a few.

PB_PM

Heh, your 100% crop looks like, well, crap, here too. Don't take this personally :-) I'll get to a real computer in a few.

I was going to say, it looks tack sharp in Lightroom at 100%... In any case it's about 100% sharper than the V3 sample you provided, so crap isn't a word I'd use.

Ironheart

It's pretty much impossible to compare. I went to my computer and the files you posted are 640x480 so not much detail there to see.

PB_PM

Forgot to post the larger links (1024x768), I'll edit to include them. No bigger than that, since I don't post larger than on the web, period.

manhattanboy

@PBPM the N1 series is not as bad as you are making it out to be.
Hand holding is a problem to keep the iso down but with a great lens like the 70-300 it really can produce some nice pics.
Here is a link with 100% crops for you to pixel peep. http://www.sansmirror.com/lenses/lens-reviews/lenses-for-nikon-1-cx/nikon-70-300mm-f45-56-cx.html
The J4 is now barely more than $200.
IMHO it is a steal at that price.

donaldejose

The Nikon 1 system needs a better sensor. Hopefully, the back sided sensor in the J5 will allow use of higher ISOs.

DizzyK2

Nikon J5 is released today. Unfortunately, Amazon, BH Photo, and Adorama have NONE in stock. What gives? I sold my J1 refurb to a friend in anticipation for the J5 and now I'm without a decent sports camera for this weekend's soccer match.

I also have an Olympus E-M5 with the Panasonic 45-200 lens to shoot soccer and let me tell you, its painful. Last weekends game I kept about 8% keeper rate with more than 50% blurry, misfocus... Frankly, the E-M5 sucks for sports. My J1 usually averages a 40% keeper rate (Ones I actually keep and post up for the parents) with almost 90% of the shots in focus. I got the J1 to test out last spring it its been a great workhorse for U11 soccer.

I'm hoping the J5 will have better low light performance since that was the biggest problem I had with the J1. I sold it with the 10-30, but I kept the 30-110 in anticipation for the J5. At this point, I'm tempted to grab a Sony A6000 package to test it out. ARgh! Why Nikon why?!? Why can't you ever get your inventory shit together???!?!

heartyfisher

lol I think the blame is not with nikon :-)

heartyfisher

The Nikon 1 system needs a better sensor. Hopefully, the back sided sensor in the J5 will allow use of higher ISOs.

http://home.comcast.net/~NikonD70/Charts/PDR.htm

The sensor seems nicely improved over the the previous Nikon1 versions ! Finally beats some of the previous generations of DX sensors like the D70/D80 and even edges out the 7D and D300 !

PB_PM

Yay! it's only 8 years behind current DX models, and 9 years behind FX models. Okay, that's not too bad, considering the sensor size.

heartyfisher

Yay! it's only 8 years behind current DX models, and 9 years behind FX models. Okay, that's not too bad, considering the sensor size.

:-) but its just about level with canon's full frames and crop sensors ;-) I think the J5 might be usable ...

heartyfisher

I have been looking at some J5 4K video .. IQis great but that 15fps is so distracting! I understand that there are ways to fill in the gaps to get 30fps. Some sort of inter frame interpolation to smooth it out .. anyone know how to do it ?

PB_PM

:-) but its just about level with canon's full frames and crop sensors ;-) I think the J5 might be usable ...

Nah, that's why we don't use Canon cameras...

In all seriousness though, the images out of the J5 looks rather nice, in terms of noise at moderate ISO's (aka up to 800). Even the earlier Nikon 1 V1 I had for a while wasn't that bad, I considered it about as good as the D80 in that regard. I'm sure most of the high ISO samples people are posting to the web have a heavy dose of noise reduction applied in post, along with some downsampling to make them look better. Now that it is a 20MP sensor that is a workable option for web viewing and small prints, so that's nothing to look down on, for a camera that will mostly be used by people for Facebook shots.

manhattanboy

I finally bit the bullet and ordered one. Probably a waste of money but I use the J4 as a travel camera a lot now as it fits into a pocket. Hopefully the addition of proper shooting modes will allow for even greater use than shooting in auto all the time.

Spy_Black

"...I use the J4 as a travel camera a lot now as it fits into a pocket."

That's a helluva pocket you got there. ;-)