The Nikon V3 announced and 70-300 VR for the 1 system

Joined
May 11, 2006
Messages
41,523
Location
CHARLOTTE
Real Name
Randy
Unfortunately I've come to the conclusion that what matters most is pixel quality. Why? Because all crop factor does is make me shoot stuff farther away. So effectively I never end up with any more pixels on target because I just keep extending the reach. Kind of like spending money adjusting to match income, so goes my behavior with pixels. The more I've got, the more my tendency to crop :confused:
I shoot the same all the time, I try to fill the frame and if I can't fill enough I don't take the shot
Do I sometimes get caught up in the action and still fire when I shouldn't, sure I do

But for me bodies are now more about FPS, buffer, high ISO, cropability.....they all have great IQ, including the d300
 
Joined
Mar 23, 2008
Messages
3,121
Location
Santa Barbara, California, U.S.A.
But for me bodies are now more about FPS, buffer, high ISO, cropability.....
Well, the V3 seems to have fps, buffer, and cropability - it's just lacking in the high ISO department, right? Ah yes, and AF with F-mount lenses isn't as good with only the center AF point...

Another issue is glass - the higher the density, the better your glass needs to be to take advantage! A D7100 with the 300/2.8 VR + TC-20 III starts to fall apart, too - too much optical degradation... On the D800, that combo is barely usable... With the 1-series I'd only use a naked lens, or perhaps a TC-14 on the 300 or 70-200!

I think the real appeal of the 1-series is not so much the extreme reach, but the smaller glass you can use. A 70-200 f/4 + TC-14 gives you almost 800mm on the V3, and very decent IQ :)

Mike
 
Joined
May 11, 2006
Messages
41,523
Location
CHARLOTTE
Real Name
Randy
Well, the V3 seems to have fps, buffer, and cropability - it's just lacking in the high ISO department, right? Ah yes, and AF with F-mount lenses isn't as good with only the center AF point...

Another issue is glass - the higher the density, the better your glass needs to be to take advantage! A D7100 with the 300/2.8 VR + TC-20 III starts to fall apart, too - too much optical degradation... On the D800, that combo is barely usable... With the 1-series I'd only use a naked lens, or perhaps a TC-14 on the 300 or 70-200!

I think the real appeal of the 1-series is not so much the extreme reach, but the smaller glass you can use. A 70-200 f/4 + TC-14 gives you almost 800mm on the V3, and very decent IQ :)

Mike
The cropability I've seen is frankly crap and the noise in the shadows reminds me of the d200

I suspect the adaptor is the kludge and native glass is the way to go but I'm not interested in duplicating glass just to go small, maybe in 5 years though:)
 
Joined
Oct 18, 2007
Messages
977
Location
Greensboro, NC, USA
There are other humans on this planet whose shooting needs are entirely different from yours. Surprise!! I ride a bike....a road bike....a lot. All over the place. And soon, I will be riding a road bike in Spain. I want pictures. I want a small, light, good DSLR camera, with zoom lenses, that I can also use with my existing glass. I want to be able to put this little marvel in a small bag on my handlebars and not feel like I'm carting home a load of firewood. I want an articulating LCD so I can shoot from non-standard angles. I think the V3 will meet my requirements. The only complaint I have is that there are none to be had. That's a stupid place for Nikon to be, in my opinion. I've got an order waiting at B&H, and I'm getting impatient. If it turns out to be the overpriced piece of crap you're all predicting, I'll sell it to you on Marketplace....for cheap.
 
Joined
May 11, 2006
Messages
41,523
Location
CHARLOTTE
Real Name
Randy
There are other humans on this planet whose shooting needs are entirely different from yours. Surprise!! I ride a bike....a road bike....a lot. All over the place. And soon, I will be riding a road bike in Spain. I want pictures. I want a small, light, good DSLR camera, with zoom lenses, that I can also use with my existing glass. I want to be able to put this little marvel in a small bag on my handlebars and not feel like I'm carting home a load of firewood. I want an articulating LCD so I can shoot from non-standard angles. I think the V3 will meet my requirements. The only complaint I have is that there are none to be had. That's a stupid place for Nikon to be, in my opinion. I've got an order waiting at B&H, and I'm getting impatient. If it turns out to be the overpriced piece of crap you're all predicting, I'll sell it to you on Marketplace....for cheap.

no need to take that tone, obviously there are lots of folks who care more about size than IQ and whenever I post something it's IMO, surprise !!
 
Joined
Nov 22, 2008
Messages
2,456
Location
Sydney, Oz
If it turns out to be the overpriced piece of crap you're all predicting, I'll sell it to you on Marketplace....for cheap.
it is overpriced but its not a piece of crap. i think the V1 is fantastic and the v3 appears to be a much better overall camera than the v1. AF is superb, IQ, for what it is, is excellent and the glass is small, light and SHARP.
to suggest that the v3 would or even should have d7100 like IQ is quite ludicrous. lets reverse this logic and say that our expectations of the d7200 is that its as small and light as the v3 and the kit lens will be the same size, weight and quality of the new 1 system kit lens. silly ? of course it is.

as has been mentioned, there is more to a camera than just the quality of its RAW images.
 
Joined
Jan 2, 2009
Messages
4,579
Location
Alaska
it is overpriced but its not a piece of crap...
That's the real issue, isn't it. For the same price I can buy a D7100.

I just took a three week trip to Europe and the only thing I took was the V1 with 10-30/30-110 kit lenses. There were definately times when I wished I had better gear with me. But for overall convenience, IQ relative to similar sized equipment, and shooting RAW images, it was the right choice for the trip. But no way I'm dropping $1200 to upgrade to a V3 with essentially the same ISO performance, slightly improved resolution, and a redundant lens that I don't need nor want.
 
Joined
Nov 22, 2008
Messages
2,456
Location
Sydney, Oz
agreed. same problem with the 1 series from the beginning dan. wayyyyyy overpriced and then it fire sales. personally i cant wait for the fire sale ! lol
 
Joined
Mar 23, 2008
Messages
3,121
Location
Santa Barbara, California, U.S.A.
agreed. same problem with the 1 series from the beginning dan. wayyyyyy overpriced and then it fire sales. personally i cant wait for the fire sale ! lol
I think we won't see fire sales like on the V1 anymore, because Nikon is going the other way and restricting inventory. The V2 still hasn't come down in price, even though the V3 is out...

Mike
 
Joined
Jan 2, 2009
Messages
4,579
Location
Alaska
...A D7100 with the 300/2.8 VR + TC-20 III starts to fall apart, too - too much optical degradation... On the D800, that combo is barely usable... ...
A poor lens may prevent a higher pixel count sensor from achieving its capability, but it WILL NOT make IQ worse than a lower pixel count sensor with the same lens. Given adequate light (i.e. no noise issues) more pixels = more detail. Period. Pick any given lens and put it on a D800 and a D700 and it will resolve more detail on the D800. Sure anyone can argue subjectively that they prefer the D700 image, it "just looks better", blah, blah, blah, but conduct on objective test with software and it will show that the higher rez image captures more detail.
 
Joined
Nov 22, 2008
Messages
2,456
Location
Sydney, Oz
I think we won't see fire sales like on the V1 anymore, because Nikon is going the other way and restricting inventory. The V2 still hasn't come down in price, even though the V3 is out...

Mike
You're probably right. But, I think it will come down to the $700-800 mark relatively quickly. I'm totally fine with paying $700 for a v3. I don't think that's cheap per se but it's a reasonable price. Kind of oly ep5 level.
 
Joined
Mar 23, 2008
Messages
3,121
Location
Santa Barbara, California, U.S.A.
A poor lens may prevent a higher pixel count sensor from achieving its capability, but it WILL NOT make IQ worse than a lower pixel count sensor with the same lens. Given adequate light (i.e. no noise issues) more pixels = more detail. Period. Pick any given lens and put it on a D800 and a D700 and it will resolve more detail on the D800. Sure anyone can argue subjectively that they prefer the D700 image, it "just looks better", blah, blah, blah, but conduct on objective test with software and it will show that the higher rez image captures more detail.
Fair enough, but if I have to choose between

- D800 + 300/2.8 + TC-20 = 900mm @ 15.4 MP in DX crop vs
- D7100 + 300/2.8 + TC-17 = 950mm @ 15.4 MP in DX + 1.3x crop

I would choose the D7100 combo for IQ... Or would you disagree?

Mike
 
Joined
Feb 26, 2009
Messages
419
I think we won't see fire sales like on the V1 anymore, because Nikon is going the other way and restricting inventory. The V2 still hasn't come down in price, even though the V3 is out...

Mike
That is why some people were buying the V2 from Canada earlier this year. Much cheaper than buying it in the USA.
 
Joined
Nov 8, 2008
Messages
425
Location
Portland
I'm on my third of the first generation one sensors. Did the J1 twice and and resold it twice, picked up the v1, ft1 and mated it to an 85 1.8 for in the pocket equal of a 200f2 of sorts. I have come to accept and work around the v1 with it's many issues and read the many reviews and opinions of the v2 and v3. Most recently was at an event where I would have liked to shoot the v1 for its silent operation, the output was crap and went to my d800e and got nice images with a lot more noise of the sound kind. In good light where you have to have fast focus the one is nice but for the money they are asking for the v3 I'd pick a DX or FX unless of some unique constraint like trekking the Himalayas . I find the iphone a equal to superior in most places.

If nikon is happy with small volumes at high priced they can continue this stupid trend. But without volume you won't build a user base to invest on lenses and sensors and software etc etc. They obviously didn't repeat the v1 mistake and need firesale price to move inventory but this high price will limit future adoption to niche users and current dslr users who don't choke on the price, a terrible strategy to grow their revenue, imaging sales position.
 
Joined
Jan 2, 2009
Messages
4,579
Location
Alaska
Fair enough, but if I have to choose between

- D800 + 300/2.8 + TC-20 = 900mm @ 15.4 MP in DX crop vs
- D7100 + 300/2.8 + TC-17 = 950mm @ 15.4 MP in DX + 1.3x crop

I would choose the D7100 combo for IQ... Or would you disagree?

Mike
I think we're talking about two different things. You're talking comparing different setups and I'm talking relative sensor performance with the same lens. Sorry for the confusion.
 
Joined
Mar 29, 2005
Messages
1,643
Location
Central, FL USA
I'm sorry. You're right, that was snarky. I need to skip these threads where my equipment gets trashed. I seem to buy the very things that get the most negativity.
Mary,
like you I cycle and the V3 will work out great for you. I have one and absolutely love it. I often take my off road bicycle to ride through the everglades and I take the V3 with me.
Take the V3 with you to the bike ride in Spain and you will not regret it.
There will always be naysayers and those that think they know everything, what matters in the end is how it works out for you..
 
Joined
Mar 23, 2008
Messages
3,121
Location
Santa Barbara, California, U.S.A.
I think we're talking about two different things. You're talking comparing different setups and I'm talking relative sensor performance with the same lens. Sorry for the confusion.
Yes, 2 different things. I agree with you that the same lens will give you higher resolution with a higher pixel density sensor (although the weaker the glass, the smaller the gains will be).

What I'm talking about is the ability to use a shorter, but optically better lens on a smaller, denser sensor and still achieve approximately the same IQ. That's what the V3 is all about, IMO.

My 2 examples were about getting to approx. 900mm with FX or DX. With the V3, I can use a naked 300 f/4 lens to get to approx. 880mm (with a slight crop from 18.2 to 15.4 MP, to make things equivalent). The naked 300 f/4 will smoke the TC-17 or TC-20 combos used in the DSLR setups! And it's much lighter and cheaper, too :)

Seems to me the only tradeoff here is 1-2 stops of high ISO performance compared to the larger sensors, right?

Cheers

Mike
 
Joined
Mar 29, 2005
Messages
1,643
Location
Central, FL USA
Yes, 2 different things. I agree with you that the same lens will give you higher resolution with a higher pixel density sensor (although the weaker the glass, the smaller the gains will be).

What I'm talking about is the ability to use a shorter, but optically better lens on a smaller, denser sensor and still achieve approximately the same IQ. That's what the V3 is all about, IMO.

My 2 examples were about getting to approx. 900mm with FX or DX. With the V3, I can use a naked 300 f/4 lens to get to approx. 880mm (with a slight crop from 18.2 to 15.4 MP, to make things equivalent). The naked 300 f/4 will smoke the TC-17 or TC-20 combos used in the DSLR setups! And it's much lighter and cheaper, too :)

Seems to me the only tradeoff here is 1-2 stops of high ISO performance compared to the larger sensors, right?

Cheers

Mike
Mike,
you are right on the money... ;)
 

Thorsten

Moderator
Moderator
Joined
Jan 19, 2009
Messages
4,458
Location
San Jose, California
Yes, 2 different things. I agree with you that the same lens will give you higher resolution with a higher pixel density sensor (although the weaker the glass, the smaller the gains will be).

What I'm talking about is the ability to use a shorter, but optically better lens on a smaller, denser sensor and still achieve approximately the same IQ. That's what the V3 is all about, IMO.

My 2 examples were about getting to approx. 900mm with FX or DX. With the V3, I can use a naked 300 f/4 lens to get to approx. 880mm (with a slight crop from 18.2 to 15.4 MP, to make things equivalent). The naked 300 f/4 will smoke the TC-17 or TC-20 combos used in the DSLR setups! And it's much lighter and cheaper, too :)

Seems to me the only tradeoff here is 1-2 stops of high ISO performance compared to the larger sensors, right?

Cheers

Mike
I tried set-ups like these (TC 2 or V1 on the 300/4) and frankly wasn't happy with the results from either one. I.e. too much background clutter due to the limited subject isolation. Or if you manage to frame the subject against the sky, then it's usually flying and you struggle with the focus. But on balance, if I carry a 300/4 anyway, I'd put a DSLR on it any day, with a TC 1.4 or 1.7 if needed, and pick a different subject if I can't fill the frame. That said, I loved the V1 but mainly because I could pocket it and still shoot at 300mm equivalent length (with native lens).
 

Latest posts

Links on this page may be to our affiliates. Sales through affiliate links may benefit this site.
Nikon Cafe is a fan site and not associated with Nikon Corporation.
Forum post reactions by Twemoji: https://github.com/twitter/twemoji
Copyright © 2005-2019 Amin Forums, LLC
Top Bottom