Help me decide - DSLR vs V1

[mallik]

<p>At the outset, let me announce I have been spoilt by Leica rangefinder M6 TTL (don't throw me out of this forum). I cannot afford a Leica digital anymore.<br>

I have, from my film Nikon camera set up 50mm f1.8, 24mm f2.8, 70-210mm f4.5, 500mm f8 mirror lens and host of filters etc. I realized these add up to a lot of value if I have to replace them now. I enjoy using ALL of these lenses. So one idea, is to buy a low end DSLR like D3100 and use all these lenses. I have no qualms using manual lenses with no AF. I grew up on them! I will get to use all my lenses and will fairly cover all kinds of photography, like I did in the past, and deliver (hopefully) very good results on the APS-C and large camera. BUT, I hate large cameras; not just about weight but the barrier they create for being able to use in a casual conversation with people informally or at events. I am a serious hobbyist, and shoot all kinds of photography, but my MOST interest is in candid/people photography (perhaps cover 70% of my photography). For this kind of candid photography, I feel the Nikon V1 suits me best - small, fast, does not distract my target etc. I LOVE small cameras (just as I did the Leica). But I am worried, the V1 does not provide shallow depth of field, which I used all the time with the Leicas, and enjoyed shallow DOF, got some good photographs. <br>

Question is, is it possible to get very nice people photographs (environmental) with very wide DOF? How much okay is it to have all your photographs with near same long DOF? Unable to decide between versatility of DSLR vs convenience of the V1 (I have been bowled over by Steve Simon review of V1). What would you advice?</p>

[ShunCheung]

<p>If you are interested in mirrorless cameras and would like a larger sensor, I would look into the Sony NEX line. Nikon's V1 and J1 are fine as casual cameras, but their sensor will always be very small.</p>

[jose_angel]

<p>I cannot speak about the V1, the only I can say is that again and again every new little camera released is born fast enough, good enough and reliable enough for the first time, in comparison with SLRs before, and now, with DSLRs...</p>

<p>If you "have been spoilt by a M6"... Welcome to the -real- world of "<em>concentrate on the essential</em>" kind of photography! Really. As you mention, the drawback is size and weight... but I wonder if a M6 is less distracting than, e.g., a D700... a Leica is sometimes more distracting than a Nikon. Both are "big black pro machines" these days. Leicas are way more confortable to carry, I agree. But there isn`t another choice (IMHO).</p>

<p>As another M6 user, I`d advice you to buy a full format camera (new or second hand) and any AFS lens. A 50mm "standard" will work, but always AF. With an MF lens, you`ll be wasting a very important and useful feature. I think a D700 would be perfect.</p>

<p>If you don`t want to spend on a high end camera, an APS-C format one seem to me also a good idea. The same, I`d get a cheap "standard" prime (35/1.8G) instead of using a MF lens. You`ll be losing a f/stop in terms of DoF, but that`s not a huge problem using a fast prime (you can also take it as an advantage when using AF).</p>

[Peter_in_PA]

<p>go to a Wal Mart and handle the D3100. If that's not too big for you... I'd go with that. (Try the Canon, too). I concur with Jose's idea about a 35mm f1.8. I LOVE walking around with my D90 with that lens (I sometimes wish they also made really teeny 24mm and 18mm primes like it, even f2.8 would be okay).</p>

<p>The "1" cameras are upscale point-and-shoots (nothing wrong with that). But they are not serious cameras and are TOO small in the hands to do serious photography imho.</p>

<p>There's also a new Fuji rangefinder-style system that looks intriguing. But it's pricey.</p>

[jack flannery]

<p>The V1 is a pretty nice bit of engineering, completely let down by bean counters. The body is well built and the rear controls are cheap. It is very snappy but the little lag switching from the LCD to the viewfinder is annoying. If Nikon would nut up and build a V1-prime, it would be a viable small system. They just about got it. Just about. </p>

[eric friedemann]

I was initially turned off by the sensor size and price of the J and V cameras. However, I'll admit that I took some test

shots at my store with the V camera against the Olympus E-P3 with a sensor twice the size and the V camera gave

virtually identical results for resolution and noise (comparison or 10mm prime on the V vs. the 17mm prime on the Oly).

 

 

That said, if you want a digital camera to compare with a film Leica and have similar characteristics, I've been wowed by

the output of my recently-purchased Fuji X100. It was pricey, but at high ISOs, I'm getting 8x12 prints that are more

grainless/noiseless than I could ever get from a piece of high-ISO 35mm film. Also, the 35mm f/2.0-equivalent lens on

the X100 is brutally sharp.

[waltflanagan]

<p>I like my V1 but I shoot it differently than my D3. For me the V1 replaces my compact, not my DSLRs so I'm rarely going for shallow DOF anyway. The V1 has a great viewfinder, fast AF system, and very high fps rate. Better than many DSLRs and other mirrorless systems.</p>

<p>The D3100 is fine but the viewfinder is relatively small so you may not enjoy manual focus on it. If you want a "Leica digital" you could get something like the Sony NEX (preferably the 7 with great EVF) or the Ricoh GXR M module. There you only have a 1.5X crop factor (same as Nikon DX) so you can still get pretty shallow DOF and they have manual focus assist stuff like focus peaking. Micro 4/3 is cheaper but with a 2X crop factor.</p>

<p>Oh yeah, I have Nikon, Leica M, and C mount adapters for my V1 but with the 2.7X crop factor it's a different experience shooting them and everything is 100% manual. The V1 controls aren't the greatest for 100% manual operation.</p>

[omari_stephens]

<p>What are you going to be doing with the images after you shoot them? Also, is this camera going to go everywhere? How important are the results? (Get fired? Lose friends? Just frustrated? Meh, whatever?)<br /><br />I played around with my friend's V1 a little while ago. I really dislike the lack of physical controls, which is why I didn't get it. If you want shallow depth-of-field, CX probably isn't the right answer either. Personally, I owned a Fuji X100 for a year and ran ~15,000 frames through it. I liked all of the physical aspects (the lens was amazing), but it was dog slow in every way imaginable. I've finally replaced it (and good riddance) with a Sony NEX-7, which I love; I'm 1,500 frames into the NEX-7 in the month that I've had it. My main problem is that there's only one physically-short lens (16/2.8) and it kind of blows. Sigma's in the E-mount game, though, so that's a good sign. Hopefully better pancakes to come.<br /><br />At the same time, I've owned at least one DSLR since 2004, when I got my D70. I have a pair of D300 now, and I'd never part with them (except for a D400... come on, Nikon...). For me, when I go somewhere for the purpose of shooting, I use the DSLRs. For AF, there's still not a whole lot that gets close to the MultiCAM 3500, <a href="http://forums.dpreview.com/forums/read.asp?forum=1039&message=40890827">not even newer, lesser Nikons</a>. When I'm primarily doing other things, I have the mirrorless because it's small and doesn't get in the way, but it's still easy enough to pull out that I don't think twice about trying to capture interesting photographic opportunities.<br /><br />As for your point on distraction, yes, large cameras are distracting, but so are small cameras. I've shot street with my D300+24-70 as well as my X100. I would argue that the barrier to conversation/socialization at events isn't your camera, large, small, or nonexistent, but rather your mindset. Are you there to document or to interact? It's near impossible to do both. Even when I had my X100 up to my eye, it prevented me from talking to people. Even when I do photographic thought experiments, with no camera at all, I'm still focusing my finite attention on photography, which necessarily steals my attention from actual social interaction. And likewise, I have no problem kicking back with folks even when I'm wearing my 2-body harness with a 24-70 and a 70-200 — it's all about the purpose and the mindset.<br /><br />That said, I definitely agree with you that size is a big deal. Keep in mind that even small DSLRs are big. Here's a great analogy that I heard somewhere: a tablet is just a small laptop, right? And a smartphone is just a small tablet, right? So why would you want anything other than a laptop?<br /><br />This post has gone on long enough, so let me conclude.<br />1) For me, a mirrorless camera is in a different class of size from any DSLR. Like a laptop vs. a tablet. I have both, because they each have different strengths and weaknesses.<br />2) Any mirrorless you get that has a decent viewfinder will not actually be pocketable like a P&S. It's a tablet, not a smartphone.<br />3) If you shoot subjects that move, AF is a game-changer. I don't care if you love MF, AF will make some kinds of photos possible that aren't possible without it. That said, make sure to find a camera that does MF well, since sometimes the AF will fail you.<br />4) EVFs (especially good ones) have strengths. I can manual-focus on my NEX-7 much faster and more-accurately than on my D300 because it automatically magnifies the viewfinder (5.5x or 11x) when I start twisting the MF ring.</p>

[rossb]

<p> If you buy a Nikon DSLR remember that all the models below the D90 require a lens with a motor in it or an AF-S I believe is what they call it. I am thinking your Nikon glass does may not have a motor. If that is the case then the D90 or D7000 would be the bottom line in order to use your Nikon glass.</p>

<p> On another note the Fuji X-Pro 1 is a pretty cool camera. Expensive but it is of the rangefinder size and look. However I do not think it actually has a rangefinder. Not sure how it works but it has 3 prime lenses available for it. If I were rich I would buy one of those. </p>

[omari_stephens]

<p>Ross: correct. I believe there are exactly two groups of digital cameras that do rangefinder-style manual focusing. The digital leicas, and the Epson RD-1. I'm really not sure why people tend to think of cameras like the X100 and the X-Pro1 as rangefinders — they use contrast-detect AF, which makes them even less similar to traditional rangefinders than, say, your run-of-the-mill DSLR with phase-detect AF.</p>

[bebu_lamar]

<p>If you like the M6 and have the lenses for it I can't see why the M9 isn't the best choice. Although it's pricey not as expensive as Nikon or Canon top of the line. It's the lenses that make a Leica system very expensive and you don't have to buy them.</p>

[jose_angel]

<p>The "cheapest" M9 is $7000... a 36Mp D800 is $3000. Isn`t the D800 the current Nikon <em>top of the line</em> model?</p>

<p>It`s all expensive; cameras, lenses, accessories, <strong>upgradings</strong>... like with luxury watches, you pay a huge bonus for the excelence (well, some would say <em>for the box of that excelence</em> if we talk about watches and camera bodies... ). Nothing wrong with it; I appreciate Leica products.</p>

[omari_stephens]

<p>Jose: The Nikon top-of-the-line model is the D4, at $6000. Canon's top-of-the-line model is the 1Dx at $6800.<br>

That said, it's certainly not accurate that Leica is cheaper than Nikon or Canon. They are in the same price range, sure, but $7000 > $6800 any day of the week. Of course, other than the price, the cameras aren't actually comparable at all.</p>

[david_ralph1]

<p>A low end Nikon DSLR will not meter with your old manual focus Nikkor lenses. I have some of the same Nikkors as you do, and they were a real pain on the D70s, which was a mid line body when it came out. A separate, hand held meter or taking test shots and referring to the histogram after the fact to ferret out the exposure does not make for fast, impromptu people shots or candids which you want to do. A low level body will also likely have a pentamirror finder, darker than a pentaprism finder on the higher level bodies.</p>

<p>You will have to get a higher level camera, such as a D300 or higher. Not sure if the D7000 meters with the old lenses, but if so, it might be your best bet in a brand new body. Otherwise, if shopping for price, think about a used D300 or D300s level body.</p>

<p>A low level body, with kit lens, will get you into very good images, with a responsive and sharp autofocus lens, just not a large aperture or pro build.</p>

[Andrew Garrard]

<p>Just to add an opinion, I'm with Shun - look very closely at a Sony NEX. The low-end Nikons are fiddly to manual focus and won't meter properly, a D700 or D800 is big and (relatively) expensive - not that the M6 is as small as I might have expected. A NEX would let you adapt both Nikon and Leica lenses. You won't get rangefinder focussing, but you do get manual focus assist, and the sensor is much bigger than the V1. The latest interchangable lens Fuji is also nice, but much more expensive (than a NEX 5, at least).<br />

<br />

You might also look at the micro 4/3 systems, but they've got smaller sensors. The Samsung range won't let you adapt Leica lenses.<br />

<br />

I'm a little confused about whether your existing Nikon lenses are autofocus, since there are different versions of each. If they are, they won't autofocus on a D3100 (you need at least a D90 for an autofocus motor), but if not then you're obviously not missing out by using an adaptor.<br />

<br />

Good luck with whatever you choose.</p>

[andylynn]

<p>Both Nikon and Leica lenses can go on a Sony NEX camera using some cheap adapters.</p>

[Andrew Garrard]

<blockquote>Both Nikon and Leica lenses can go on a Sony NEX camera using some cheap adapters.</blockquote>

 

<p>Just to elaborate on that (since Shun and I both suggested this route)... Nikon F-mount and Leica lenses will adapt to NEX, micro 4/3 and the Fuji X lens mount with a simple mechanical shim (no optics). F-mount lenses will adapt to the mount used by the Samsung NX series (and also Eos Canon bodies, in case that's relevant), but Leica (M) lenses won't.<br />

<br />

F-mount lenses which are also "G" (have no aperture ring) need an adaptor that allows manual aperture control. These are slightly more expensive, and some are less precise. This doesn't sound like a problem for your lenses.<br />

<br />

I'm not aware of any adaptor which will allow Nikon lenses to autofocus on anything but a Nikon camera (although I see no reason why one couldn't be made, whether through direct control of the focus or something in the style of the TC-16A autofocussing teleconverter).<br />

<br />

If you're not worried about autofocus, there's no particular reason to stick to a Nikon system for what you want. Particularly since the cheap Nikon bodies won't meter properly with pre-autofocus lenses, whereas the mirrorless systems all will (in, obviously, aperture priority or manual mode with stop-down metering).</p>

[craig_shearman1]

<p>My guess is that anyone brought up on Leica and Nikon manual focus would be rolling in the floor laughing at the J1/V1. Not sure which model they reviewed, but it got trashed even by Popular Photography, which usually can find something nice to say about all its advertisers. If you're happy with what you have, do you have an actual need to go digital? Personally, I went from Nikon manual focus (F2 and FM bodies and about a dozen prime lenses) to a D200. The D200 works fine with all my older lenses. Not the latest in the digital lineup but still a solid camera and very affordable used at this point.</p>

[eric friedemann]

Craig, you're right, I wouldn't replace a Nikon F-variant or a Leica M-variant with a J or V camera, but the J and V

cameras have been selling steadily at my store to people who want a little more flexibility and sensor size than they'd get

with a ZLR, like the Nikon P510, but who don't want to carry a camera even as large as a D3100.

 

 

I don't like anything about the J and V cameras. I find the fit and finish of the cameras and lenses to be cheap-feeling for

the price. The dedicated SB-N5 is so stupidly small, cheesy and overpriced as to be an embarrassment to the brand, and

if you want to shoot flash with the V1, you have to buy one:

 

 

http://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/823609-REG/Nikon_3617_Nikon_1_SB_N5_Speedlight.html

[adam_weaver]

<p>I don't own one or shot one extensively (which largely invalidates what I have to say) but I handled one at B&H a few weeks ago and was really impressed with the evf finder (much over the NEXes) and the speed of focus and shutter release. The camera body felt solid as did the lenses (of course within reason, as they're not thousands of dollars.) The lenses have been reviewed really positively (for what they are.) The prime is supposed to be really nice. The rotating wheel control on the back irritated me and seemed too sensitive. That is the only drawback I noticed, of course not having downloaded or printed images. If you are interested in people, candids, catching the moment, reasonable display sizes, and portability, I honestly am very positive on the V1. I think as sensors improve, their choice of a small sensor and subsequently small body, and particularly lenses, is going to prove really wise. Buy one from somebody who decided they didn't like it, and shoot away. You can always re-sell at a very minor loss (if at all.) </p>

[Andrew Garrard]

<p>I put myself down as "not the target audience" for the J or V - too pricey, to small a sensor (especially for sharing lenses - let alone older lenses - with bigger formats), too fiddly to get at the basic controls. I doubt I'm alone in this forum, and I would expect the original poster to be in this category as well, coming from a manual background. To me, the main trick of these cameras is autofocus speed, and that doesn't seem to be high on Mallik's list of priorities. That said, far be it from me to tell anyone to dismiss something without trying it.<br />

<br />

Eric: if you're actively selling the things and you're still panning them, I have to commend you for your honesty!</p>

[eric friedemann]

Andrew, I wouldn't predicate my camera-buying decisions on advertisements featuring Ashton Kutchner, but what do I

know. The Nikon name has a certain cache, and people come into the store asking for these cameras. By God, if

someone wants to buy a J or V camera, I want to sell it to him.

 

 

That said, we received more black Fuji X100 kits than we though we would. I bought one and love it. I've been in the

photo business for more than 30 years and people won't listen to me and buy one of these Fuji kits, but they'll listen to

Ashton and buy a J or V camera.

[nicolaiecostel]

<p>A friend owns a canon 5Dmk1 with 135L, 35 f2 and 85 1.8, he gets great IQ from that combo. But recently he bought a J1 with 10-30 and he started using it more and more instead of the 5D, when he is photographing his kid.<br /> Why ? Well, the size has an important role, the IQ is not as good, let's be realistic, but its good enough and the full-HD video mode is fantastic.<br /> He is happy with it and there are many situations where he preferes to use it instead of the big DSLR kit. Regarding the IQ of the sensor, even at max ISO, if you shoot raw, the images are pretty ok, definitely good for a 4x6 inch print, or bigger.</p>

<p>It all depends on what your limitations are, and also, I would consider the J1 instead of the V1, price/performance it's very good.</p>