Nikon V3 impressions

[chrisk]

who woulda thought the 1 series would make me a nikon fanboy all over again ? lol

i bought a v3 as an impulse buy from teds about a month ago. i had intended on waiting until it dropped in price but due to the lacklustre appeal of the 1 series in australia, some places are already discounting them. i bought it for $799 with the new PZ kit lens and the 10mm/2.8. then added the VF for $309 i just sold the nikon V1 with the original kit lens and the 10/2.8, (cos i already have one), for $325 so the v3, VF and little PZ lens set me back $785. not bad. not long after i found the 32/1.2 refurbed off the camerabox on ebay for $700AUD shipped.

Pros of the V3:
most of the issues i had with the v1 have gone, the issues that remain are bearable...its actually what the v1 should have been. feels like an almost complete camera needing refinement whereas the v1 always felt like a beta version.
AF is blazing fast, and i mean BLAZING
maybe with the exception of the d700, it meters better than anything ive shot with. bang on every time
colours are bang on accurate out of the box
size is great, nice and small
the rubberized grip is fantastic.
Build quality is excellent
finally a tilting screen ! awesomeness
finally a tilting screen with touch control and most improtantly touch AF. brilliant.
it has a mode dial
the couple of extra buttons are great to have
PUF is nice and its a semi-bouncy one that can tilt back a bit. nice
video is excellent
IQ at base iso is excellent
IQ up to iso400 is very good
IQ up to iso1600 is good
somehow nikon have managed to retain that very filmlike grittiness in the images that i so loved in the V1. there's something about the processing engine and the files that just look very appealing.

cons:
the nikon 1 menu system sucks ass.
the front vertical dial sucks ass. my fingers keep knocking it
ability to customise what buttons do is limited, maybe im spoiled with olympus
auto iso implementation is crap., it only has auto iso800 and auto iso 3200. i want auto iso 1600, id have thought this wsa the MOST important one and you cant do it. a brainless limitation. it also wont let you select a min shutter speed, just like olympus. stupid.
iso1600 is average
iso 3200 is passable; anything higher is rubbish

the 32/1.2 btw is a work of art. its probably the best built nikon lens out there. feels like its been carved out of a block of solid metal. its very zeiss-like and the IQ is absolutely brilliant. this is a GREAT lens

heres a selection of shots ive enjoyed taking.

Anticipation by .Chris.K, on Flickr

. by .Chris.K, on Flickr

Sausage Sizzle Saturday by .Chris.K, on Flickr

. by .Chris.K, on Flickr

its no EM1, and certainly no d800e, but for what it is, for why i bought it, its a big thumbs up, very happy camper.

[ozimax]

Excellent review Rooz, sounds like a great camera. I was only thinking about the 32mm today. I've never seen one let alone shot one.

[chrisk]

I found most retailers in oz now seem reluctant to hold any 1 series glass in stock. The 32mm is even a special order item in US retailers. Mine looks brand new, so not sure what was refurbed. I certainly wouldn't be paying $1k for it. But $700 isn't obscene considering how good the lens is and how well it's built. It's certainly a luxury. Put it on a camera with 20fps CAF which is deadly accurate and you have a winner.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

[zafra52]

Lovely pics specially 1,2 & 4. I am glad you are enjoying your new camera.

[chrisk]

V1 vs V3

20140710-EM100138 by -.Chris.K-

20140710-EM100141 by -.Chris.K-

20140711-EM100144 by -.Chris.K-

20140711-EM100149 by -.Chris.K-








Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

[Matt. K]

Excellent review! I always enjoy hearing other peoples opinions of camera gear. The B&W of the man sitting looks technically nice!

[aim54x]

Great to hear about your purchase...I have been looking at the 32mm and the 6.7-13mm with great interest. I am just not ready to part with that sort of money for either of them yet.

[Murray Foote]

Interesting review. It's not on my potential list at the moment but things that might interest me are the capacity for wildlife ultratelephoto with standard Nikon lenses and the AW model.

[chrisk]

Everything I've seen from adapted tele lens' on the 1 series is pretty mediocre. The new nikon 1 native 70-300 has produced fantastic results though. Not sure why nikon isn't making a couple of faster aperture tele zooms. One would think the market would be there for it with people looking to get light and compact reach. I'd buy a 70-200/2.8 in a heartbeat.

[Murray Foote]

Thom Hogan says he uses one with full-sized telephotos. Maybe it takes an expensive prime like a 300m f2.8 to make it sing.

[chrisk]

Thom Hogan says he uses one with full-sized telephotos. Maybe it takes an expensive prime like a 300m f2.8 to make it sing.

yeah, they can be used and the results are very good with the exotics, but anything less than that and the results are average. quite a few guys on another forum use it with the 300 and even 400 and the results are very good but as they've pointed out, they get better results combining the same lens with the TC20 and cropping the shot.

[Murray Foote]

... especially with the D800/810. I was having battery problems in Greenland with the D800 and I had to shoot very distant musk oxen with the D3. What I could crop to was very different.

That's good to know about the V3. I don't need to have it in the back of my mind to maybe get one for that reason. Also, unless it's changed since earlier models it also doesn't have good continuous autofocus so not so suitable for birds in flight.

[chrisk]

CAF in good light is superb. it only starts to go downhill when the light starts getting low.