Why no 1 series supertelephoto?

9viii

Right now the best method of getting super telephoto images on a budget is small sensors behind sharp lenses. Nikon has the 1 series, and they have some of the best lens tech in the world. So why aren't we seeing a super sharp 300mm on Nikon 1 mount? The big SLR cameras are still getting their telephoto lenses upgraded, but it's like none of the manufacturers think these amazing little cameras will ever be taken seriously.

ads

Buy an FT1 adapter and stick whatever supertelephoto on the front you like...

Wesley

I think it's because 98% of the buyers got it for the compact size and not for the crop factor of the sensor.

TaoTeJared

I don't understand your question - they do have 300mm equiv.
1 NIKKOR VR 30-110mm f/3.8-5.6 = 81-297mm equiv
1 NIKKOR VR 10-100mm f/4.5-5.6 PD-ZOOM = 27-270mm equiv.

The idea that these need the same focus as DSLRs is very misplaced. DSLRs outsell these, have a much greater demand and for a greater profit margin than the 1 series does or ever will.

sevencrossing

If really want a super super zoom, try the Digiscoping Adapter DSA-N1 for the 35mm equiventent of 1750mm
(manual focus)

Msmoto

@9viii

Welcome to the forum.....and stick around and listen to some of the knowledgeable folks speak. There is an amazing amount of useful info....

Godless

Nikon has the 1 series, and they have some of the best lens tech in the world. So why aren't we seeing a super sharp 300mm on Nikon 1 mount?

Forget the Nikon 1, get a m4/3 body and Panasonic 100-300mm.. you get a better sensor and a 600mm eFOV.

9viii

Thanks for the responses.

Buy an FT1 adapter and stick whatever supertelephoto on the front you like...

It's certainly not a terrible idea, but how good is the autofocus compared to using a native lens?

Nikon has the 1 series, and they have some of the best lens tech in the world. So why aren't we seeing a super sharp 300mm on Nikon 1 mount?

Forget the Nikon 1, get a m4/3 body and Panasonic 100-300mm.. you get a better sensor and a 600mm eFOV.

Again, not a terrible option, but I know that Nikon could do a lot better. Getting a good camera behind a decent lens isn't hard, getting a super lens in front of your camera is much more rare.
Given prices though, I may have to look into that MFT a little more.

Godless

but I know that Nikon could do a lot better

Well, yeah, Nikon could do and should do a lot of things like RELEASE THE D400 ALREADY but it seems they never listen to buyers anyway. So is that really a concern, what they could do, if they aren´t going to?

ads

"how good is the autofocus compared to using a native lens?"

The only limitation is single point focus - seems to be just as fast and accurate as native based on my experience.

Mind you, for serious wildlife shooting I still prefer a DSLR - and I suspect Nikon would like it to stay that way :-)

TaoTeJared

Again, not a terrible option, but I know that Nikon could do a lot better.

Nikon is good, but that statement is a bit misplaced. Other companies do lenses as good as nikon, and actually better (in the lower considerations) than nikon. Olympus, Fujifilm & Pentax have always had some of the highest performing lenses in the business and have hedged their bets with m4/3 (DX-Fuji) and are pumping out top grade glass for those systems - far better than Nikon has done for DX or the 1 system. Panasonic, is newer to the game but all Panasonics can use Oly glass, and have also teamed up with Leica to use their lens designs and the quality if there for sure on the models that are Leica branded.

I'm not saying the grass is greener on the other side, but other companies have a different focus than Nikon and it is always advantageous not to be "hooked" on a name, but to look for the format leaders. It does not seem Nikon nor Canon really want to be in this area so I fear things will always lag on this front. Although a good little system, the nikon 1 was never intended to have supper tele zooms.

Nikon and Canon are focused on FX DSLRs first, DX second, and everything else is a distant third.
Pentax, Fujifilm, Samsung and Sony seem to be content in the DX arena as a primary focus, and dabble in other formats as well.
Olympus and Panasonic have hedged their bets with m4/3 and have abandoned everything else but compacts.

paulr

As a user of both FX and Nikon 1 cameras I find that the two formats work well together. I have used a
300 2.8 prime lens with a x2 mk 111 converter which works out at 1620mm focal length with some very acceptable results, subject to a very sturdy tripod. The 2.7 Crop factor works well with macro work and all in all the Nikon V2 when coupled with the pro glass can achieve interesting results. The one lens i use on the V2 is the 10-100 PD lens which can produce excellent sharp results ,and with it's electric silent zoom facility is perfect for Video work.
In all cases i use the camera which suits the intended use, but both formats have their advantages. The V2's lightness certainly makes this camera my off duty camera and my FX Pro camera is, these days, strictly for professional work.

Msmoto

Has anyone actually looked at the image of a V1 with a long tele (400mm or more) compared to the crop image of either a D800 or D4 which gives the same size?

guitarvirtuosoab

even putting a relative small (and slow and not overly great) 70-300 VR on the F mount adapter on the front of the tiny N1 series going to be so front heavy and uncomfortable. A light but highly unbalanced camera is more annoying to use than say a heavy gripped d800 with a 120-300 2.8 OS I on the front. (this actually balances pretty well in my opinion). Even the 70-300 + FT1 will probably rip off the N1 mount if you don't support the lens.

Symphotic

I fired off a couple of shots with the V1 mounted to a 70-200 and a TC-20, (1080 mm equivalent) but the day was overcast and windy and the subject was moving slightly in the wind so that even a 1/80 sec exposure gave me blur. I'm waiting for a bright, sunny day. I can say that since only the middle of the lens FOV is used, the image is potentially very good. The balance seemed just fine. I do have a picture posted a long time ago on a photo I took handheld from a moving boat at sea using the 70-200 and the V1 (122 mm, 330 mm 35 mm equivalent):

ads

"Even the 70-300 + FT1 will probably rip off the N1 mount if you don't support the lens. "

It doesn't even come close (I have an IR converted J1 and have shot with the 70-300 on it) but in any case you should always support a telephoto lens regardless of what body its attached to - physics dictates the balance point will always be forward of the body (no matter how heavy the body is) with a lens that protrudes any significant distance beyond the body.

All you have to do is move your lens supporting hand a little further forward. If you want a compact/budget telephoto and the image quality is what you want it seems a pretty small compromise...

TriShooter

The quick answer is no one needs an expensive telephoto exclusive to the Nikon 1 System only. Why?

The existing Nikon telephoto lenses take fine pictures on Nikon 1 System with the FT-1 Adapter, so why would anyone want to spend big bucks on a fast telephoto lenses for Nikon 1 only, when we already have lenses available that can be used on all three Nikon systems, FX, APS-C, and Nikon 1.

BTW. I frequently use a 400mm f3.5 on the V1, and love the combination. Pictures are razor-sharp.

Juergen

Here is an example of a J2 with a AF-S 600 f/4 attached to it.
+1 to TriShooters comments above.


Bigger size here:
http://farm6.staticflickr.com/5515/9064040905_5110623c70_o.jpg

Has anyone actually looked at the image of a V1 with a long tele (400mm or more) compared to the crop image of either a D800 or D4 which gives the same size?

I have actually tried to do that, shooting the moon with the combination:
D4 - TC 17 - AF-S 600
vs
J2 - AF-S 600
But it was a very windy night, so none of the pictures was really a keeper.
I will try again and post here.
Jürgen

Juergen

Has anyone actually looked at the image of a V1 with a long tele (400mm or more) compared to the crop image of either a D800 or D4 which gives the same size?

Ok, here you go:
D4, AF-S 600 crop



J2, AF-S 600 no crop



I hope the subject illustrates a bit how both combinations compare.

Jürgen

snakebunk

@Juergen:
Thank you for the great comparison! This is much more interesting than 100% crops. You don't happen to have a DX-camera laying around?

Am I right to assume that if the motive is far away the J2 starts to outperform the D4 because you have to crop more than the D4 can handle?

Msmoto

I like the D4 image better, except for the highlights...Thanks, Juergen

NSXTypeR

Has anyone tried the Nikon 1 series cameras with the 105mm Macro?

I'd be curious to see some samples.

Juergen

@Juergen:
Thank you for the great comparison! This is much more interesting than 100% crops. You don't happen to have a DX-camera laying around?

I have a D 70S, which I could re-activate. Would be interesting.

Am I right to assume that if the motive is far away the J2 starts to outperform the D4 because you have to crop more than the D4 can handle?

The answer is not so easy. The set-up was more of a "lab set-up". For the D4 I used a remote cord and mirror-up and for the J2 I used a ten second timer to avoid any motion blur.
That is not a real life shooting condition. I don't think in a typical long lens application, like birds in flight, the J2 would handle well enough to achieve such results. But that is my guess only, I did not try it yet.

I think it is safe to say, that using the Nikon 1 system with professional lenses is a viable option and giving surprisingly good results.

Has anyone tried the Nikon 1 series cameras with the 105mm Macro?

I'd be curious to see some samples.

Not yet. But you are right, this is very interesting and I certainly will try it out and post the results.

Jürgen

Golf007sd

@Juergen: Nice work. Thanks for sharing.

Juergen

Has anyone tried the Nikon 1 series cameras with the 105mm Macro?

I'd be curious to see some samples.

Here you go.
I just added a bit of a background in Photoshop.

Best regards,
Jürgen

NSXTypeR

Wow, that's really nice!

How large were those figures? I can't tell the scale of things.