Author Topic: Nikon's new 1 series cameras compared to Micro Four Thirds (Read 1745 times)

voyager · « **on:** September 22, 2011, 02:05:58 PM »

With a smaller sensor, why are the Nikon cameras so large?

Do you still want to buy one?

Source: http://www.43rumors.com/nikon-versus-micro-four-thirds-comparison/

Olof in Amsterdam · « **Reply #1 on:** September 22, 2011, 02:10:05 PM »

Did you notice the built-in viewfinder?

voyager · « **Reply #2 on:** September 22, 2011, 02:13:35 PM »

I did, but the same device could be set on top of the E-PM1 with the same size.

shnitz · « **Reply #3 on:** September 22, 2011, 03:02:50 PM »

First, good job comparing the size of the top of the line Nikon with the bottom of the line m4/3 cameras. It makes for a nice, fair comparison, especially with many m4/3 people angry at the GF3 and E-PL3 because while they're smaller, they're less usable in "serious" photography than their predecessors due to their removal of controls. The GF3 can't use a viewfinder, so there's that. The Olympus would make the E-PM1 much less pocketable.

Look at the differences in on-camera controls between the Nikon and m4/3 cameras that you compared:
http://thisismynext.com/2011/09/21/nikon-v1-j1-video-photos-camera-preview/
http://www.dpreview.com/reviews/panasonicdmcgf3/
http://www.imaging-resource.com/PRODS/EPM1/EPM1A.HTM#

Second, sensor size isn't the only thing that determines the body size. The V1 is magnesium inside, just like the D7000. There's no point in making a camera so small that it isn't comfortable to hold or use.

Also, have you compared the size of the NEX-7 to m4/3 cameras? Take a look at these specs:
Sony NEX-7 120 x 67 x 43 mm; 415g
Olympus E-P3 122 x 69 x 34mm; 321g
Panasonic GH2 124 x 90 x 76mm; 392g
Nikon V1 113 x 76 x 44mm; 294g

So, by your reasoning, who would want an m4/3 camera, because the NEX-7 is as small both the flagship Olympus and Panasonic! I wish the rumored GF7/GFX1 was out, because it would be better for that table, but you still get the picture.

voyager · « **Reply #4 on:** September 22, 2011, 03:09:41 PM »

Hey there, shnitz.

I did not take the photos, and if there was a comparison made with any other cameras I would have posted it as well. You do however have a good point.

cosinaphile · « **Reply #5 on:** September 22, 2011, 06:53:39 PM »

for nikon to offer a 900 dollar compact with a intigrated vf , which tells me its aimed, unlike the smaller j1, at camera enthusists.... that has 4 or 5 camera gimmicks on an otherwise bare i"command' dial on the camera,but lacks direct input for psam and iso ....is insanity..

when it comes to small cameras , nikon seems cursed ,............ they never get it right!

further......promoting this as a system with such a small sensor ...without a normal a portrait ..and a macro of decent speed is the business plan of madmen!!
this small sensor could have launched fast kit zoom ...at least 2.8 -4...for goodness sake!...something ....anything to balance or explain the choice of a much smaller sensor than any other mirrorless system except the pentax Q

every single better compact camera has a fast zoom there is no excuse for this insanity!

are the executives at nikon on drugs?? ..i wonder if any of them ever picked up a camera and just shot picture for the pure joy ...the act of picture making
and the creative manipulation of shooting parameters psam and iso?

i think these japanese suits smiling and holding up the new camera bodies with a painted smile in the various publicity photos are a detrement to the engineers and visionaries at nikon and other companies who work to realize new products , they hamper the vision with a cowardly outlook and lack of imagination of verve when choosing lenses in the launch lineup!

tom-ep1 · « **Reply #6 on:** September 24, 2011, 01:23:30 AM »

http://translate.google.com/translate?hl=en&sl=auto&tl=en&u=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.focus-numerique.com%2Ftest-1302%2Fcompact-nikon-v1-bruit-electronique-12.html

why i should want this camera?

lisandra · « **Reply #7 on:** September 25, 2011, 12:44:36 PM »

Quote

First, good job comparing the size of the top of the line Nikon with the bottom of the line m4/3 cameras. It makes for a nice, fair comparison, especially with many m4/3 people angry at the GF3 and E-PL3 because while they're smaller, they're less usable in "serious" photography than their predecessors due to their removal of controls. The GF3 can't use a viewfinder, so there's that. The Olympus would make the E-PM1 much less pocketable.

Look at the differences in on-camera controls between the Nikon and m4/3 cameras that you compared:
http://thisismynext.com/2011/09/21/nikon-v1-j1-video-photos-camera-preview/
http://www.dpreview.com/reviews/panasonicdmcgf3/
http://www.imaging-resource.com/PRODS/EPM1/EPM1A.HTM#

Second, sensor size isn't the only thing that determines the body size. The V1 is magnesium inside, just like the D7000. There's no point in making a camera so small that it isn't comfortable to hold or use.

Also, have you compared the size of the NEX-7 to m4/3 cameras? Take a look at these specs:
Sony NEX-7 120 x 67 x 43 mm; 415g
Olympus E-P3 122 x 69 x 34mm; 321g
Panasonic GH2 124 x 90 x 76mm; 392g
Nikon V1 113 x 76 x 44mm; 294g

amazing...are you justifying this camera? you like it?

Quote

So, by your reasoning, who would want an m4/3 camera, because the NEX-7 is as small both the flagship Olympus and Panasonic!

have you seen nex lenses?

cosinaphile · « **Reply #8 on:** September 25, 2011, 07:48:57 PM »

the clunky oversized nex system lenses and generally absymal
opticalperformance of these lenses from the universially panned kit zoom, to the weak performing primes is the main reason i have not preordered a nex 7 ,

that camera body [putting aside an overpixel packed sensor ]is a well concieved machine with proper dials and inputs

note to sony... mirrorless full frame lenses like zeiss leica voigtlander nikon and others show the proper size of lenses
that can be made instead of the "coke cans" designed fr the mostly absurdly tiny nex bodies

as for the nikon 1 lenses , there huge for the image circle they provide too the video specific 10 -100 slow zoom is a huge honking can of peaches the

the 10mm 2.8 is like the lumix 14mm2,5 which serves a much larger sensor and is a half a stop faster to boot in a similar sized housing....total fail.....i wanted to love this system, i really did

Nikon's new 1 series cameras compared to Micro Four Thirds