Mine suffer from front focus issue, but yours seems different from your description in the page, which is kind of wierd, especially the one shot at very high shutter speed, seems there's obvious shake?

Keep showing this... clearly the photographer doesn't understand the concept and proper way to do. It's not the technique problem, it's the photographer.

I think you mean the photographer technique?
My meaning of the technique is as in the "concept".

Focus and Recompose is common, especially when those days without all these AF points or during film days. It's the photographer facing the problem and doesn't understand the concept and focus plane, etc.
Don't blame the technique.

As I said above, it's important to understand how it works, the concept, focus plane, etc. Don't blame the technique.

This problem is more apparent on larger sensor with wide aperture as the DOF is more shallow, even MORE if you shoot close-up.
Even with compact or handphone camera, if there is close focus or macro setting, the DOF can be shallow and people will still face this problem.
Instead of blaming the technique, try to understand what happen and compensate for it.
Example:
Try shoot close-up on a miniature model at widest aperture, focus on the eye and then recompose, if you change your angle, it'll be more obvious; Or try hold the camera 45 degrees, do close-up focus and recompose with the camera now straight, you would notice the YOU have shifted away from the focus plane, you can compensate back by moving foward/backward a little accordingly.

Adding on, on wider angles, and if you stand far enough which gives you more DOF, you'll have less problem even using wide apertures like f/1.8.

This post has been edited by Andy214: Sep 22 2011, 01:20 AM

Can la, don't like that...

I notice in the video, one part when the photo is captured, the screen blacks out and got sort of "loading/saving" progress. Isn't it kind of slow compared with current competitors?

Daylight most camera will do fine, even phone camera.

The ISO range for this "1" camera is 100-3200, expandable to 6400.
I watch some videos, I think the unique part is the shooting modes, tracking, focusing? But I'm not sure why the delay during/after capture, and so on, feels like compact cam performance? Hope its not so.

Well, maybe I should put "generally", you may see many picture take outdoor in daylight. You may not be able to tell if it's DSLR (with "normal" lens), point and shoot (high end or low end), Handphone camera, etc easily. Sometimes, you can even see nice quality photos taken with point and shoot, while you can also see poor quality pictures taken with DSLR.

This post has been edited by Andy214: Sep 22 2011, 11:00 AM

But how many people do 1:1 pixel mapping? When you post up to internet, or even print out; For daylight photo, you can hardly tell the difference, unless you know the camera very well. In broad daylight outdoor, even handphone camera can do wonders.

Haha, cool bro, don't so worked up.

Just saying that in day light outdoor, with enough light, most camera will do fine, "generally". Not saying DSLR is not good or anything.
So, for J1 or V1, if outdoor daytime, nothing much to compare, plus, most of the sample you see, are in smaller resolution; But in lowlight or dark area, even with small resolution, we can clearly tell the difference and see how well the camera will perform.

---

Added on September 22, 2011, 11:45 amThat's not the problem. There're much more capable mirrorless already on the market, Nikon is already slow by years, and perhaps they wanna do like Nintendo DS/Wii? A different approach?

This is kind of risky, especially the pricing and not knowing what Canon might come out later. If it fails to meet the demands, what will Nikon do? Will they continue? If not, what happen to those who invested into this system?

Nah, not trying to prove wrong or right, just saying, or DSLR is no good, or handphone is better, maybe for DSLR user to hear something like handphone can take good picture, or cannot differentiate between DSLR and handphone, can be "uncomfortable" and thus trigger the emotion. But, honestly speaking, maybe for "pro" they can tell lah, I'm no pro, and most people cannot even tell the difference. Let's be honest, show a bunch of pictures mixture of DSLR, point and shoot (low end to high end) and handphone camera, let people check and review it, they won't be able to tell the difference, and sometimes you'd be surprise they like the quality from certain pictures which maybe from point and shoot or handphone or DSLR.

In lowlight, it'll be different story and the output will be very obvious.

I think, this is a good example (maybe the pros may think otherwise):
http://www.facebook.com/media/set/?set=a.1...38229269&type=1


This post has been edited by Andy214: Sep 22 2011, 12:00 PM

How does the shutter lifespan for mirrorless counted or works?
Does the 60fps or the "1200fps" thing actually affect shutter counts?

Not sure if it's impressive or not, because it's been done by Sony since long ago with their SLT and also other mirrorless.

Maybe this is even more faster or accurate, but by how much? and is it noticeable difference?

"60fps" and "1200fps", I wonder how it affects/counts for shutter count. How does it works for these mirrorless?
It did mentioned "eletronically", I suppose it's not related to shutter count as in 1fps = 1 shutter?

Not sure it's under movie mode; I remember it says capturing stills at 60fps and you can merge them for movement or something, jpeg movie.
I suppose it doesn't affect shutter count, just curious

I suppose so too, but the way they put the "60fps" and "1200fps" is kind of confusing as it doesn't put like video mode (e.g. 720p @ 60fps; instead it talk about capturing every moment as if capturing photo; I guess some sort of marketing tactic or something to make people "WOW" when others are doing 12fps. You know, people who see will say, this camera can do 60fps... although, the actual should be 10fps.

100% to go for Nikon.

The Sigma "looks" like a good deal from it's definition, but you should check out the reviews as well as how it looks, see YouTube for examples. Don't be tempted by the name and macro, and it doesn't even come with "OS" (Optical Stabilization).

Yea, some up to 1:3 or 1:2, but you will need to zoom to max and at minimum focusing distance; It's good for normal macro, like foods, miniatures, toys, rings, etc.

The 55-300mm is pretty new, metal mount and better image quality, good MTF chart. The 55-200 seems soft at 200mm, while this 55-300mm does better. It's lightweight, easily shakes like crazy when zoom to max, until the VR kicks in, and the focusing is slow compared to 70-300mm Nikkor. Reviews also mentioned that 70-300mm, it's soft at 300mm, but the 55-300mm does better at 300mm.

There is dedicated Flash unit for V1, and also other accessories which complements video recording (including bigger touch screen enabled display).

It's nice to have that, but still mean need to spend for the additional "accesssories", but at least there is an option.

Interesting news? Recent news said that Nikon started this mirrorless earlier than micro 4/3 launch, it's about 4 years ago. What's more, they're saying something about DSLR quality.

http://nikonrumors.com/2011/09/23/last-nik...spx/#more-22802

"When we started with this development, it was quite some time ago, it was prior to the Micro Four Thirds launch (almost four years ago)

We are quite confident that we achieved almost exactly the same quality as our DSLR

(Oh the Nikon 1 sensor) We developed it; we engineered and developed this sensor inside Nikon. But for the production side, that is done by our partner."

There're also ISO comparison with other mirrorless (including high end Compacts).

This post has been edited by Andy214: Sep 28 2011, 02:20 PM

Oh my... Nikon's latest "bold" statement/post in FB sparks a big controversy everywhere...

http://www.petapixel.com/2011/09/28/nikon-...ipment-he-uses/

Maybe they phrase/write it wrongly, or maybe it's the person who post it.

Anyway, that's some big mess; Wonder how will Nikon try to fix it.

You mean this?
http://www.pixel-peeper.com/