Hands On With the Nikon 1 FT1 Adapter – Part I – UPDATE

In Part I of the FT1 Adapter review I listed “documented limitations when using F-Mount lenses with the FT1 adapter”. The one I thought was impacting the versatility of the solution most was that

” – you can ONLY use MF or AF-S focusing (manual or single servo) with S area; this is probably the most important limitation you will have to deal with – no AF-C, no subject tracking”

Well, no more!! Nikon has released a full set of firmware upgrades for the 1 system. The most important new feature is that continuous servo auto-focus (AF-C) is now supported on ALL Nikon 1 cameras with AF-S lenses mounted via the FT1 Adapter.

Kudos to Nikon for listening to us and addressing one of the biggest limitations of the FT1 – AF-S combination!

The auto-focus area is still limited to Single using only the central sensor. I suspect this is a design limitation that is not likely to be addressed via firmware. Still, with AF-C we can now track moving subjects by keeping them in the center of the frame (which is what many of us do, anyways).

Be careful when upgrading the firmware: for all Nikon 1 cameras EXCEPT the V2, upgrade the camera firmware first and only then the FT1. If you have a V2 make sure to follow the instructions to avoid bricking the camera or adapter. You can find the firmware upgrades on the Nikon Support site.

I upgraded both the J1 and the V1 and they seem to work just fine in AF-C servo with the FT1. I will have a field update in about four weeks, so make sure you check back again soon.

I will be offline until then, working on a number of articles. Stay tuned.

Hands On With the Nikon 1 FT1 Adapter – Part I

One of the appealing features of the Nikon 1 mirrorless camera system is the ability to mount and use many of the lenses made for Nikon’s F-mount used in the company’s DX and FX DSLRs. After one year of field experience with the FT1 I thought it might be useful to share some of my findings. Please note that this is not a full product review. A number of highly regarded reviewers have already done that (hint: Google Search is your friend… ;~) ). So, here is the good, the bad and the ugly….

There are some documented limitations when using F-Mount lenses with the FT1 adapter:

– only AF-S and AF-I lenses meter and auto-focus; I have no experience with non Nikon lenses, but I understand it is a hit-and-miss proposition, as third party lens makers have not updated all lens firmware to work with the FT1 adapter
– you can ONLY use MF or AF-S focusing (manual or single servo) with S area; this is probably the most important limitation you will have to deal with – no AF-C, no subject tracking
– weight: this one is often neglected, which can inflict serious damage to your camera mount and bank account; I will speak more to this later

There are a few less obvious limitations you have to deal with:

– VR is on as long as the camera is active; as soon as it goes in Auto Power Off mode, VR turns off
– the size of the lens will interfere with the focus assist lamp and in some cases with the flash, especially the built in one on the J1
– the pixel density of the J1/V1 sensor is equivalent to that of a yet-to-be-built 70 MP full frame sensor; if the 36MP D800 has taught us anything, it is that you need exceptional lenses and great technique to realize the benefit of such pixel density; the same goes for the 1 system – mediocre lenses will be mercilessly exposed
– the crop factor is 2.7; this means that F-Mount lenses will not provide super-wide angles when mounted on the FT1; a 14mm prime becomes a 38mm wide angle lens;
– a similar rule applies for the DOF – you need to be at least three stops more open to get the same DOF with the same lens compared to FX

I assume by now you are just about to give up on the idea that the FT1 might be worth it. Despite the limitations above, I think the FT1 opens some amazing opportunities that would otherwise cost you a lot of money or not be achievable with a conventional setup.

Let’s quickly deal with how we can get around the limitations:

Using only modern, good quality AF-S lenses will take care of the AF and metering limitation and ensure you extract everything you can out of the sensor.

Don’t bother trying to take shots that require a super-wide angle lens or extreme subject isolation. Using large aperture lenses does help with low light photography, but remember that you loose between one and three stops of low light performance compared to larger sensor cameras, so you are better of using those if you have the option.

The weight problem is easily solved by purchasing a shoulder strap that screws into the tripod socket of the FT1 adapter. You can remove the camera’s own strap to make sure you are not tempted to grab the camera by it and damage the mount. I strongly recommend this setup whenever you use a lens that weighs more than 300g.

If you are using lenses with VR, set your Auto Power Off timer to the shortest interval you can live with. I use 15s, which greatly reduces the additional battery drain due to VR being on for too long. The camera starts up from sleep reasonably quickly, but make sure you do not get caught by the proximity sensor for the models that have an EVF.

Now the auto-focus limitation. In good light, the Nikon 1 focuses as fast as any high end DSLR. You can use this to overcome the lack of AF-C and subject tracking. Use quick bursts to shoot moving subjects. Try to pre-focus where possible and do not keep the shutter pressed half way. The longer you keep the shutter pressed, the longer the subject has to move away from the point of focus. With a little practice you will be able to get your keeper rate up to a reasonable value.

The combinations I have tested are:

– cameras – Nikon 1 J1 and V1 with the FT1 adapter
– lenses
– AF-S 35mm f/1.8 – portraits, night photography
– AF-S 85mm f/1.8, – fast telephoto (235mm equivalent), night photography
– AF-S VR DX 18-105mm – various situations; you are much better off using the 1 Nikkor 30-110mm lens if you have it, as it delivers the full Nikon 1 set of features in a much smaller package
– AF-S VR 70-300mm – long telephoto (up to 810mm equivalent); exceptional results in good light
– AF-S Micro Nikkor VR 105mm f/2.8 – mainly macro photography, but also as a fast 290mm equivalent telephoto

In an upcoming article I will share samples made with each of these lenses and briefly discuss key points.

Nikon D7100: DX With A Twist?

As I am sure most of you know, Nikon announced a new high end DX camera: the D7100. There are many interesting features about the new camera that I will be discussing in an upcoming article. Right now,  however, I only want to bring up one interesting feature: the 1.3 crop mode. In this mode, the camera uses a 15MP area of the 24MP sensor and has an effective crop factor of 2. Does this sound familiar in any way? That’s right! It is the crop factor of the m4/3 sensor cameras.

What if someone provided an adapter that allowed mounting m4/3 lenses on the D7100? Suddenly, a huge selection of moderately sized, moderately priced, high quality lenses would become available to the Nikon DX shooter. It would most certainly be a case of manual focus, but it might just be worth it. I would certainly snap up a few super wide angle primes, a few very fast primes and a small telephoto or two… How about you? Do you thing that would be a feature you would take advantage of?

DX or FX Lenses?

With the announcement of the new Nikon D7100 there is a lot of commentary on the Net regarding the lack of a full lineup of DX lenses made by Nikon. The argument goes that, in order to properly serve the DX user base,  Nikon should fill all (or at least most of) the gaps in their lineup of DX lenses irrespective of the availability of FX lenses of the focal length in question.

I cannot say I entirely disagree with this point of view. At the same time, however, I feel it should be (and perhaps is, in fact) a much smaller deal than it is made to be.

What makes a lens good? Every application has its own order of priority, so the list below can be shuffled in a number of ways:

• sharpness and resolution in the center
• sharpness and resolution corner to corner
• color reproduction
• vignetting (lack of thereof)
• chromatic aberration (lack of thereof)
• transmission
• distortion
• maximum aperture (considered in relationship with the maximum focal length)
• near focus distance
• VR
• AF
• Handling
• Weight
• Size
• Weather sealing
• Flare resistance

As you move up the ladder for each of those characteristics, price and sometimes size and weight increase, often in a non linear fashion.

Popular wisdom says that DX lenses have the advantage of being lighter, smaller and cheaper than their FX counterparts. That is correct, everything else being equal. Everything else is, for example, vignetting, softness in the corners, CA, maximum aperture.

However, everything is NOT equal when mounting an FX lens on a DX body.

Anyone who uses full frame cameras (film or digital) knows that lens quality becomes a problem as the distance from the center of the frame increases. Vignetting, softness in corners, CA are all too common for most full frame lenses. The center 1/3rd of the frame is generally fine. We do have the option of getting FX lenses that are near perfect corner to corner. As soon as we mortgage the house. And sell the car. And hire a Sherpa to carry them.

DX lenses aim to replicate the response of an average FX lens for the DX image circle. As a result, we have to deal with the same flaws as the FX shooters. How much more expensive would a DX lens be if it provided the same corner to corner performance as the top FX lenses? We don’t really know, because very few are made. The ones that are made are expensive, so here goes one advantage of DX.

On the other hand, if you take a decent FX lens and mount it on a DX body, you eliminate the flaws that make them average on an FX body and retain the best. The DX sensor only covers the center part of the FX circle produced by the FX lenses. We can only speculate how much more would a DX lens cost if we wanted to make it as good as the center of good FX lenses. My guess is that the price differential between DX and FX lenses would be much smaller.

The one advantage of DX lenses that remains is size. Even building up DX lenses to provide exceptional quality would leave them smaller and lighter than their FX counterparts.

On the flip side, buying DX lenses will lock you into the DX format or DX crop mode on FX bodies. FX lenses work fine on either format body. There are many photographers who use both FX and DX bodies. Using one set of lenses for both bodies generally makes sense.

As always, my advice is to understand what you want to do and get the best lens for your shooting style and objective.

Should you get the Nikon D5200?

The Watchful Eye of the Forest (Nikon 1 J1, 1 Nikkor VR 10-30mm f/3.5-5.6, ISO 100, f/7.1, 1/250).
While taking this shot I had the distinct feeling I wasn’t alone. It was only in post that I noticed why: the forest was watching closely … See more like this at Sorin Vacaru Photography

So, the cat is out of the bag. We know what sensor we are getting with the new Nikon D5200: a brand new 24.1MP DX format sensor made by Toshiba. When I say “brand new”, I mean it: it is the first sensor made by Toshiba for DSLRs (as far as I know).

We also found out, courtesy of dxomark.com, how good the sensor is: very good. Good enough to narrowly beat the Pentax K IIs for the top DX/APS-C format sensor based camera on the market. So, is it good enough for you to upgrade? Well, it depends where you are coming from and where you want to go.

If you are a D5000, D3000 or D3100 user, it may be time. In fact, you are in for a surprise: not only are you more or less doubling the resolution, but you are getting a lot more dynamic range, colour and tonal depth, as well as low light performance. Even more, the D5200 inherits the AF and metering sensors of the higher end D7000. You also get the Expeed 3A processor and 5fps continuous shooting.

Otherwise, the D5200 is pretty darn similar to the D5100, which in my book is generally a good thing. There is no mirror lockup (but there is mirror release delay), no top side display, no front control wheel, no dedicated controls for ISO, WB, etc. and no weather sealing.

The decision becomes a little more complicated if you own a D5100, still a very competent and competitive entry level DSLR. If you are looking for better AF and metering, the D5200 can deliver. However, so can the D7000. Other than 24 vs 16MP, the D7000 is a great value, especially if you expose your camera to the Great Outdoors. IMHO, the sensor alone does not justify upgrading your D5100 or D7000. You would have to move up to FX (D600) to see significant improvement in sensor performance. However, you would have to prepare to pay the DX-to-FX transition penalty.

A word of caution: if you are planning to take advantage of your shiny new pixels, do yourself a favour and stay away from the 18-55mm kit lens. While it is good value for the price, the lens is not a good match for the very high resolution and pixel density of the D5200. The 18-105mm Nikon zoom is a better alternative, although I wouldn’t make it my first choice, unless you add a few sharp prime lenses (14mm, 20 mm, 35mm, 85mm, 105mm).

If you have a sizeable budget for lenses, go for high performance zoom lenses (14-24mm, 24-70mm or 24-85mm and 70-200mm) from Nikon or other vendors. You will still need a few key prime lenses to bring out the best in your sensor.

For those looking to enter the DSLR world or buy a second/backup body, the D5200 can be a fantastic choice that will keep you shooting happily for many years to come.

Nikon D5200 Introduced in North America

Sun Rising Over the Mesquite Flats Dunes, Death Valley National Park
(Nikon D5000, Nikkor AF-S VR 18-105mm, ISO 200, f/8, 1/160s).
It is all about composition: I have never been happy with the original image. Something was off. The other day I decided to spend the time and look at the composition more closely. One crop later …… and voila!
See more like this at Sorin Vacaru Photography

No surprise here: as expected, Nikon made the D5200 available in North America. The big surprise came when it transpired that the 24MP sensor is made not by Nikon, not by Sony, but by Toshiba.

IMHO, this is big. Over the last few years, Nikon has held a clear advantage in image quality over its main rival Canon due to the very good Sony/Nikon sensors paired with the Nikon processing pipeline and Expeed processors. One of the few notable exceptions was the 10MP sensor used in the Nikon 1 series, manufactured by Aptina.

With a new player in the sensor manufacturing field, all bets are off. We will have to wait and see how well it performs in lab tests and in the field. This is critical for Nikon since the successor to the excellent D5100 has to be quite good to duplicate its success.

How Far Have We Come?!

(Apple iPhone 5, ISO 50, f/2.4, 1/3623, a.k.a. All AUTO).
Not bad for a phone camera. I pushed the photo a little bit on purpose to highlight how much data these tiny sensors are able to collect. See more like this at Sorin Vacaru Photography

Sometimes we get pulled into the whirlpool of “newer and better, faster, more and higher” and forget where we started. We forget that a few short years ago, pros were taking amazing pictures with cameras we wouldn’t be caught dead carrying today.

I somehow felt the need to step back and see how far cameras and sensor technology have come over the last ten years.

Here are a few interesting facts based on sensor performance numbers published by DXOmark.com :

1. The top scoring APS-C/DX format camera today, the Pentax K-5 IIs scores higher than ANY camera (regardless of sensor size) prior to July 2008; if we look at full frame/FX format cameras only, the K-5 IIs reigns supreme until December of 2008; this is only FOUR short years ago.
2. The best scoring camera with the much maligned CX (1″) format sensor, the Sony RX100, scores higher than ANY camera prior to September 2004.

What do these two simple facts tell me?

Well, first and foremost, forget about the specs, folks! Camera performance is no longer an obstacle to our creative accomplishments. It ceased to be a while ago.

Second, let’s talk about the future. In the electronics world, there is Moore’s Law. Moore’s Law states that the density of transistors that  can be placed on an integrated circuit doubles every two years. Camera sensors and processing pipelines are not unlike integrated circuits. From looking at historical data spanning over 10 years it appears that sensor quality follows an upward trend where sensors of double the area are ahead by about 4 years.

The CX – DX – FX progression, although not exactly a 1 – 4 – 8 area ratio is close enough. This would mean that in four years top CX based cameras should perform like today’s Pentax K5 and Nikon D7000. In eight years, we may have them perform like a Canon 5D Mark III or Nikon D600. Pretty impressive, don’t you think?!

Before some of you storm the site holding the laws of physics in their right hand, let me say that, although there are limitations to how many photons a small photo site can collect, improvements of the ENTIRE processing pipeline may compensate for those limitations. You can also drop the camera’s full functional specs from your left hand. These ideas refer to the sensor and image processing pipeline ONLY, NOT the entire package (controls, handling, lenses, etc).

I know this is a daring prediction and it is based on incomplete data and science, but in my calendar I marked the first week of 2017 with a note to review and comment on this article. Let’s hope 2017 will find us healthy and happy, each with a great camera in our hands. 🙂

Holiday (Camera) Shopping, Part 3 – APS-C/DX DSLR Cameras

Emerald Basilisk posing for the camera in La Selva, Costa Rica
(Nikon D5000, Nikkor AF-S VR 18-105mm, ISO 200, f/5.6, 1/200s).
Thanks to the 1.5x crop factor DX/APS-C DSLRs are great for wildlife photography, especially coupled with excellent low light performance, large buffers and good continuous shooting frame rates. Some cameras, like the D300s for example, are also built to pro standards which helps the camera withstand the wear and tear of outdoor shooting sessions.
See more like this at Sorin Vacaru Photography

Split Cedar Island at the mouth of the Barron Canyon in Algonquin Provincial Park
(Nikon D5000, Nikkor AF-S VR 18-105mm, ISO 200, f/5.6, 1/500s). Landscape photography is all about image quality at base ISO. With the “entry level” D3200 we get a 24MP sensor capable of over 13EVs dynamic range and 24 bits colour depth. The only catch: diffraction starts kicking in at f/8.
See more like this at Sorin Vacaru Photography

If I had to describe in one sentence the family of DSLR cameras with crop sensors (APS-C or DX) I would probably say something like: ultimate versatility for an affordable “total cost of ownership”. In this context, TCO means the cost of the camera, the cost of the lenses required to do the job, the complexity of the logistics (size, weight, etc), the cost of accessories, etc.

The one specification that defines the entire APS-C/DX camera segment is the size of the sensor: its surface is roughly half the surface of a full frame sensor or 35mm film. The resulting crop factor is 1.5x. This means that a lens with a certain focal length on a full frame or 35mm film camera will appear to have 1.5x that focal length on a DX/APS-C camera. The lenses also need to cover a smaller area than in the case of full frame cameras. The direct consequence of these two factors is that DX lenses are smaller, lighter and less expensive, especially at the telephoto end. The reverse is also true: there are fewer wide and ultra wide angle lenses available for crop sensor cameras.

Sports and Wildlife: While the venerable Nikon D300s is still a great performer in this category, it is clearly showing its age in the sensor department. I do not find that the price has been discounted enough to warrant a purchase this close to finding out what the successor will look like. Hold off or keep on reading. The top two cameras in this category must be the Pentax K-5 IIs and the Nikon D7000. In sensor performance, the $1,200 K-5 IIs comes just ahead of the D7000. However, priced as low as $900, the D7000 is a steal. If you are invested in F-Mount lenses, get it while you still can. The main drawback with the D7000 is the small buffer which will impact your continuous shooting performance.

Landscape Photography: The top two choices above (Pentax K-5 IIs or Nikon D7000) are also top performers in the landscape photography category. With over 14EVs dynamic range, a solid build and all exceptional handling, the choice is based on whether you are invested in a certain mount or not. If not, you can go either way, unless the lower price of the D7000 makes the difference for you (it shouldn’t, IMHO, since you will pay much more for new lenses). A very cost effective alternative for landscape photography is the Nikon D5100. It has the same 16MP sensor and image processing pipeline as the D7000, but you can buy it for $450. If you are willing to give up weather sealing and some controls, this is a Gift: get it quickly. If you are planning to print really big you may want to move up to a higher resolution sensor. The 24MP Nikon 3200 is state-of-the-art in terms of IQ. I hesitate to recommend it in this category because it lacks a few features that I feel are required for a good landscape camera: bracketing and mirror lockup or delay. This leaves only one eligible camera in North America, the Sony SLT Alpha 77. For $1,100 you get a weather sealed body with all the goodies you’d expect from Sony. Given the very high continuous shooting frame rate, you can use it as an action camera in a pinch, if you can live with the lower high ISO performance. If you are not in a great rush, or if you live in Europe, you can opt for the Nikon D5200 (it should be announced for NA early 2013). While the D5200 has the same 24MP sensor and image processing pipeline as the D3200, it does have bracketing and exposure delay, which makes it an excellent entry level camera for landscape photography.

There is on important catch: kit lenses, while adequate, will not allow you to get everything out of your 24MP sensor. You will need some better glass to do that. (I will post my DX lens list shortly after New Year, so come back and have a look …).

All-round Camera: Any of the cameras mentioned above will do just fine as your everyday DSLR. If you do not need bracketing or other advanced features, the Nikon D3200 is tough to beat. With a sensor performance score second only to the Pentax K-5 II/s it will only set you back $700, kit zoom included. The $450 Nikon D5100 body is the next step up in terms of features, but a step down sensor wise. As I mentioned you can always get the Nikon D5200 in Europe or wait for it to ship if you live in North America.

You surely noticed Canon’s absence from my list of recommended cameras. I find it hard to recommend over the other candidates given how much Canon sensor performance lags behind their competitors’. If you are a Canon shooter, you certainly have competent choices in each of these categories and IMHO there is not enough incentive to switch. I expect Canon will catch up with Sony sensors within a couple of years.

Finally, please remember that your needs may influence the final decision. There are many factors, other than pure image quality and body features and handling. Price, weight, lenses, buffer size, etc may need to be factored in. Regardless of your bias, it is a good time for us users: camera performance has been going up dramatically and prices have come down. Let’s hope that camera makers can still operate profitably in these tough conditions. We do want them around for many years to come, after all.

Holiday (Camera) Shopping, Part 2 – Mirrorless Cameras

(Nikon 1 V1, 1 Nikkor VR 10-30mm f/3.8-5.6, ISO 100, f/6.3, 1/160s).
If you thought you cannot get enough detail from a CX format sensor, I encourage you to download here and print these images. You will find that even though they are JPEG out of the camera, you can print quite large.
See more like this at Sorin Vacaru Photography

The Holiday Camera Shopping article was meant to be short and concise. Sadly, once I started writing the full frame section of the article I realized that I needed to split it in three parts: full frame, mirrorless and APS-C/DX. The main culprit is the mirrorless realm. The full frame section was easy and fun. Mirrorless is a mess. 😉 I am now sitting in front of the blank page wondering how I got myself into this pickle. Well, for what it is worth, here goes …

The mirrorless camera segment means radically different things to different camera makers. I have rarely seen such divergence of strategies for vendors/makers competing for supposedly the same market segment. Looking at the user side we see the same lack of consistency when it comes to requirements and expectations. In a way, this is typical behaviour for an immature market. IMHO, we are actually looking at several market niches, rather than a single segment. These niches have distinct providers and different consumers. The confusion stems from the fact that in all cases the solution happens to lack a mobile mirror and a prism, hence they are all labeled “mirror less” and painted the same colour. In reality, these cameras couldn’t be any more different.

We have four categories of mirrorless cameras:

1. Cameras with DSLR level IQ in a (somewhat) smaller package (this is similar to the high performance gamer PCs – running Windows on the gazillion core Intel processors with really expensive graphics cards; they are not pretty and can sometimes be expensive, but they get it done); Sony is firmly planted in this space; their NEX cameras demonstrate an image quality on par with or better than DSLRs
2. Cameras that allow a lot of flexibility and choice due to standardized and open specifications (the analogy here is your Linux platform where basically any piece of hardware will work; there is a lot of choice, from the very cost effective, low spec to the high performance and expensive); Micro 4/3 is the platform that fills this niche. Olympus and Panasonic have a solid lineup of cameras and lenses, augmented with lenses from third parties like Zeiss, Sigma, etc.
3. Cameras that are trying to make the shooting experience as seamless as possible, with emphasis on user interaction, shape, industrial design and simplicity. These cameras do not attempt to provide ultimate performance, unless the specific characteristic is essential for the desired user experience; they are targeted to mass consumers with the pro users tagging along; they do, however, strive to provide the ultimate user experience. (to continue our analogy, these products are not unlike Apple’s products; /rant on – before you flood my inbox, please remember that Apple had many, many years at it and the benefit of a genius at the helm, so be patient …. /rant off. I place Nikon and perhaps Pentax in this category.
4. The retro category is basically postulating that the classic camera design is the best thing since sliced bread. My computer analogy breaks down here. I cannot find a parallel between this trend and a trend in ANY other consumer technology space. The best I can do is to draw a parallel to the fact that mainframe computers are still being used in this day and age …. In this category, you guessed it, we have the Leicas and Fujis of the world.

(Nikon 1 V1, 1 Nikkor VR 10-30mm f/3.8-5.6, ISO 400, f/5.6, 1/160s).
See more like this at Sorin Vacaru Photography

You probably noticed the absence of Samsung and Canon from my examples above. Samsung is difficult to firmly plant in either category. They are trying a little bit of everything in categories 1, 2 and 3, which may prove to be their downfall in the end. Canon was the last major player to enter the game. In my opinion, their EOS M is still a larva with a gender yet to be defined. It does not excel in any area, so we will have to wait for EOS-M Take 2 from Canon.

Anyone who follows the mirrorless related discussions knows that opinions are extremely polarized: while some reviewers literally refuse to talk about the Nikon 1 system, established pro photographers produce works of art with them. While some will live and die by the image quality of the Sony NEX cameras, others will poo-poo the low selection of lenses, compared to the micro 4/3 world.

/rant on – the mirrorless space is so new that even spell checkers are oblivious to it. I have yet to find a word processor or web based interface that does not highlight “mirrorless” as a spelling error … /rant off.

Understanding that the single mirrorless camera market does not exist and that in fact there are a few distinct, non overlapping niches with their own providers and consumers goes a long way to explaining the intense debate raging on about anything and everything mirrorless. It is also my hope that it will help guide the reader of this article to making a better and more informed decision. On the flip side, this is not an exhaustive analysis of all available options. There are many other products that I could have named alongside the ones mentioned below. This is just my selection of the crop.

Without further due, let’s review the excellent options we have for each of the top three categories listed above. (I highly doubt that there are too many readers of this article willing to shell out between $1,000 and $7,000 on a mirrorless retro camera, so, for those interested, look up Fuji and Leica web sites).

1. Users looking primarily for a DSLR like image quality can expect some trade-offs in the auto focus and/or size/weight areas. Since the APS-C size sensor is big and requires large lenses, the cameras are not as small as other ones in the mirrorless category. The sensor is the single most expensive component of a digital camera body so you can expect a higher price tag as well. There are some excellent choices here coming from Sony. Any of the NEX  5, 6 or 7 models offer outstanding IQ at price points between $470 for the NEX-5N to $1,300 for the NEX-7. Beware, however, that the selection of lenses is somewhat limited compared to Micro 4/3 systems and you have to be willing to live on the cutting edge of technology (no retro styling here 😉  )

2. If you are looking for the best selection of lenses possible and a body with IQ close to the the DSLRs, Micro 4/3 is your middle name (and middle ground, by the way). At the high end the  $1,000 Olympus OM-D E-M5 body is an exceptional camera. Coupled with the wide selection of m4/3 lenses available you have an extremely competent package. The downsides are size and speed of auto focus. While better than many other cameras, it still lags the DSLRs IQ and AF and the Nikon 1s AF speed. If you are looking for an entry level m4/3 camera, look no further than the Panasonic Lumix DMC G3. Currently priced at $300 is has a 16MP m4/3 sensor. There is a wide range of m4/3 bodies available in the $300-$1,000 range. The Olympus E-PM1 sells for $350, while the higher end and newer E-PL5 retails for $550.

3. Whether you are a point-and-shoot user looking for a better camera without the size and complexity of a DSLR or a DSLR user looking for a smaller camera to carry around when you do not feel like dragging along the Beast, there are a few very interesting options available. For those looking for DSLR like speed in a small and very elegant package, the Nikon 1 series is a very strong candidate. In good light, the Nikon 1 AF and continuous shooting equals or even beats pro Nikon DSLR bodies. The styling and simplicity of the camera generates a lot of hate mail from category #1 users who crash landed in this category #3 ;-). Please, folks, go back to #1 where you belong and where you will live happily ever after. This category is for another user group. The price range is $299 for the Nikon 1 V1 (in other words, a gift from Nikon) to the $750 Nikon 1 V2 body (still as overpriced as the V1 was at its introduction). In between, you find the Nikon 1 J1 and J2 models. If you want to grab the V1, hurry up: I see signs that Nikon is clearing their inventory. All Nikon 1 cameras have a CX format sensor much smaller than the APS-C or m4/3 formats. Image quality, however, is surprisingly good given the small sensor. In some cases, IQ is better than some of the m4/3 counterparts and quite close to some APS-C based cameras.

If you are looking for a very small camera that can still perform, look at the Pentax Q and Q10…. and I mean S M A L L. The Q weighs in at a whopping 180g. While the very small sensor does fall behind the Nikon 1 in image quality, if you want to slip a good camera in the back pocket of your really tight jeans, the Q is it. Priced at $350 for the Q and $530 for the Q10 they are not likely to break the bank either.

I want to wrap up by reminding you that there are many, many very interesting choices available. The key to avoiding bitter and possibly costly disappointment is to understand that mirrorless cameras are very, very different in their strengths and weaknesses. With the DSLRs we can pick a model knowing that it will likely be a good all around performer in a wide range of shooting situations. This is not the case with mirrorless cameras. For the next few years, limitations of mirrorless camera technology will force us to understand what exactly we need from that particular camera and which model best matches our needs.

(Nikon 1 V1, 1 Nikkor VR 10-30mm f/3.8-5.6, ISO 100, f/6.3, 1/160s).
Shooting with a small sensor camera can also present challenges. Notice how the red channel is “blown out”? Overexposing when shooting with the Nikon 1 is not unlike blowing out highlights on slide film (Fuji Velvia). The lack of RGB histograms makes it even trickier to correctly adjust exposure. Having said that, you will be shocked to find out that the dynamic range and colour depth of the Nikon 1 sensor is equal to a leading camera maker’s entry level DSLRs (the company shall remain unnamed, hint hint nudge nudge … 😉 )
See more like this at Sorin Vacaru Photography

Camera Price Wars Continue

As I was saying in the Holiday Camera Shopping Post, Part 1, the price for the D800 dropped in the US by $200. What I was NOT expecting at all was the huge price drop for the D600: you can get the D600 with the 24-85mm kit lens for just under $2,000. Some of these discounts may last only a couple of days.

It appears now that in addition to the Nikon 1 V1, priced as low as $299, Nikon also wants to aggressively move the D600, perhaps pushing more D300/s and D7000 users to upgrade to full frame before next year’s introduction of the D400 and/or the D7x00. We have seen this pattern before, where Nikon introduced the more expensive D800/E before the D600. It worked then. Let’s see if it works again.

In the meantime, if you are in the market for a V1 or a D600, now it the time. The D800 may continue to be discounted in the future.