'Nano-Coated 32mm ƒ1.2 Getting Ready To Roll Out'

[Panther]

http://www.nikonusa.com/en/About-Ni...ry/Photos/h8c3r8pm/1-NIKKOR-32mm-f%2F1.2.html

 

[tomrock]

I hope you're right -- I'm looking forward to this lens.

 

[GuaroGuaro]

this has probably been said to death but such lens on a m4/3 Nikon system would probably have more enthusiasm than two replies....

 

[RecalcitrantRon]

this has probably been said to death but such lens on a m4/3 Nikon system would probably have more enthusiasm than two replies....

Doubtful. Part of the allure of the m4/3 is that it has been around for a while and Panny and Oly share the lens mount. It remains to be seen if the 1 series will gain any traction. Nikon really needs to adjust the price and probably also needs a new generation of sensor to get rolling.

 

[Panther]

Yes Nikon's handling of the "1" system is interesting......We're on the J3 with rock bottom V1 prices and now an S1 that doesn't seem to be gaining much traction...

And there's the Sony RX100 has the same sensor size but doesn't have interchangeable lenses yet on the surface appears to be a big seller...

I'd say size and autofocus speed are Nikon's biggest strengths in this market...2.7 crop factor is a plus with nature/wildlife shooting too :smile:

 

[RecalcitrantRon]

I looked at the Sony, but it is quite expensive when I could get a refurbished J1 with the 10-30 and 30-110 refurbished for $320.

 

[Panther]

I looked at the Sony, but it is quite expensive when I could get a refurbished J1 with the 10-30 and 30-110 refurbished for $320.

That's exactly my point. For some odd reason, the Sony RX100 appears to be selling more than the Nikon 1 even though it has a fixed lens.

 

[GuaroGuaro]

Doubtful. Part of the allure of the m4/3 is that it has been around for a while and Panny and Oly share the lens mount. It remains to be seen if the 1 series will gain any traction. Nikon really needs to adjust the price and probably also needs a new generation of sensor to get rolling.

1) lower price
2) smaller lenses (the current breed are not that much smaller than m4/3)
3) better cameras

but they will always lose on the sensor. I'm kind of happy it has been a monumental flop. All the more pressure they'll have to release an APS-C mirorless interchangeable lens system like sony and canon.

 

[RecalcitrantRon]

1) lower price
2) smaller lenses (the current breed are not that much smaller than m4/3)
3) better cameras

but they will always lose on the sensor. I'm kind of happy it has been a monumental flop. All the more pressure they'll have to release an APS-C mirorless interchangeable lens system like sony and canon.

I don't see how you can say they will "always lose on the sensor" not knowing what the future in sensor tech holds. Nikon wins on AF, at least for now, but that could change too. On what are you basing your opinion that the 1 series has been a "monumental flop"? As for the Canon, it has not been well received by the reviewers, but I have no idea if they are actually selling any.

 

[GuaroGuaro]

I don't see how you can say they will "always lose on the sensor" not knowing what the future in sensor tech holds. Nikon wins on AF, at least for now, but that could change too. On what are you basing your opinion that the 1 series has been a "monumental flop"? As for the Canon, it has not been well received by the reviewers, but I have no idea if they are actually selling any.

It is not going to matter what future sensor technology brings, as that applies equally to APS-C and m4/3 as such the reasons one would buy a larger sensor camera will still hold. the same argument has been made for decades about DX, and that hasn't made any difference as FX evolves forward too, therefore retaining its relative advantages. Sensor technology is therefore a moot point for the Nikon 1 series as the same technology will be in the sony E mount cameras, canon Mirrorless, and m4/3 gear. All pros and cons will fall the same way as they fall today. Did Nikon change the landscape with their CX offering and is m4/3 in trouble?

I think Canon M is the least of Nikon's problems for the 1 series for now. The CX format will never be a match for APS-C or compete in that market. Nikon is simply a non event in the mirrorless interchangeable lens APS-C market, lagging further than even canon. The CX rival are these guys
http://www.four-thirds.org/en/microft/lense.html

So the canon M is relatively a huge success to Nikon's non existent entry

 

[Thorsten]

I figured that Nikon 1 was meant to compete with P+S cameras, for buyers who normally buy such cameras but want something better (as their phone is now almost as good as those P+S). In other words its not for enthusiasts like us (except as backup / light option). And the Nikon 1 cameras should have no problem to attract those P+S folks as it is huge step up in every way. So it should be a big success, if it weren't for the price, of course. With a $900 lens in the lineup, P+ S folks will regard this system as an obscure novelty, and enthusiasts spend that serious dough on lenses for their real cameras. It's a pity because I think the Nikon 1 system is great and has just the right sensor size, too.