Nikon 1 J2 – All Quiet on the Eastern Front

I only mentioned the sales because you mentioned the sales.

The RX100 is smaller in every measure. The RX100 is 101x58x36mm. The J1 112x61x30. And while the RX100 is deeper, that includes a lens with a 18-100mm equivalent focal length. Add in the 31mm of Nikon's 29.7-74.25mm equivalent lens and the J1 is larger all around. Even Nikon's 27mm pancake lens adds 22mm, still making the J1 larger. The RX100 grows when the lens extends, but that doesn't affect its pocketability. Moreover, the lens on the RX100 is both sharper and much faster, with a maximum aperture of f/1.8.

I agree. One of the first P&S with a large sensor. It was groundbreaking. The problem is, this should not have taken them so long. This should not have been groundbreaking. Moreover, as we saw from Canon, simply putting a large sensor in a camera was not enough. It had to be engineered around that sensor and priced correctly. Canon produced the completely crap G1X and charged way too much for it. It was a sales failure as a result. It wasn't completely about the sensor. It was about the total package.

I did little macro work with the RX100, so I cannot comment on it. But if you like macro work, why not get a dedicated lens on a larger sensor? I do all of my macro work with the 60mm EF-S on a Canon EOS 20D. It's an excellent combo.

I agree that the J1 and V1 are faster cameras, but in their price bracket, my experiences with the E-M5 and the new NEX-6 were much better. I'm sure that the E-PL5 will be just as fast or faster as well. Other cameras will always be able to catch up, but the V1/J1 will always have a smaller, less capable sensor and a difficult value proposition unless Nikon drops the price significantly.

I completely disagree that the V1/J1/V2/J2 are more versatile cameras. Unless Nikon produces a super-fast lens, the Sony will always have a huge ace in the hole. And being forced to carry around multiple lenses does not make the Nikon more versatile/compact, it makes it less.

I am angered by the Nikon 1, not threatened. I am angered because it is the creation of an arrogant company that is relying on its massive distribution network to push out retrograde products at high prices. Instead of innovating, instead of giving us the most for our money, they try to maximize profits and prevent cannibalization of extant products.

And when Nikon commands such a large hunk of the market, when they don't move forward, they drag the entire industry down to their speed. That pisses me off.

Very surprised that Nikon can come put with such an UGLY camera.

LOL ! ! !

I guess the product engineer was asleep or quarreled with his wife the day when the camera was designed.

Or perhaps it is a JOKE from Nikon ? !

I guess you didn't bother reading the article where the J2 competes very well against both the RX100 and cameras with larger sensors like the Olympus EP3. 

And the Nikon 1 has the advantage of actually being able to do great AF tracking because of the PDAF (a feature that NO current mirrorless has) and shoots 12 to 15 fps burst rate.  If that kind of performance is "stupid", where does that leave the competitors? 

So I don't know what's stupid about a camera with solid IQ, and AF and processing performance that blows the doors off the competitors. 

The J1 is a best seller on Amazon, is found in all big box stores like Best Buy and Costco here in the US, and is consistently in the top sellers in the Asian markets.

Lastly, here's a tip.  It's not enough to say something is "stupid" you have to say why you think it
's stupid. 

Birdives,

I absolutely read the article. I don't care how it compares to other cameras, I have problems with the very concept of the camera.

It's an overpriced camera with a tiny sensor that will always underperform other cameras with larger sensors. It's the same reason why almost everyone discounted 4/3 when it first launched back in 2003. 4/3 was designed to solve technical issues of the time. Those issues no longer exist, so we are left with a camera system that is by design inferior.

The Nikon 1 takes this problem to a new level. Sony's RX100 is much more logical. Take a small sensor and make a small camera. Don't take a small sensor and make something bulky.

The IQ is good for a sensor of its size. To say that it is generally good is an overstatement. All of my time with the J1 left me feeling like I was using an expensive point-&-shoot... which I was, and the images looked like it.

If Nikon had taken the benefits of the V1/J1 and put it into a P&S with top-quality glass, I would have called it a marvel--the next generation of P&S technology, destined to compete with the influx of cell phone cameras. But they didn't. Instead, they built a bulky, fundamentally inferior camera at a high price.

And I don't understand how you can say it compares well with other cameras. Vis-a-vis the Sony, 1.6 fewer stops of dynamic range? You call that comparing well? And it doesn't compete at all in comparison to the Olympus E-M5. And while we're on the subject of comparing it to 4/3 sensors, they sucked! Everyone knows that the 4/3 sensors made by Panasonic weren't competitive. That's why Olympus (finally!) ditched them for Sony, and why even Panasonic has likely started using Sony's sensors for the GH3.

The continuous shooting uses a great number of technical tricks (such as the electronic shutter) that results in distortion of images that I don't like. The standard, "shutter-open-expose-shutter-close repeat" mode of continuous shooting is only 5fps (on the V1, the J1 only has an electronic shutter).

Moreover, the burst rate fills up the buffer so quickly, that you can only capture a second of time in photos. The window is too small. I have as good a chance of getting a shot if I simply fire off one and hope that I got it.

That's not to say that it's bad. Using the standard 5fps shooting rate allows for ten seconds of time. That's good, but no better than other cameras.

And the J1 and V1 only began selling well on Amazon after the large price drop in anticipation of the J2 and V2. Before that they were somewhere around 500th.

The J1 only has 73 reviews after being on the market for a year. The V1 has 47. The Sony RX100 has 159 after having been out for only five months and is still, right now, outselling the V1 and J1. The V1 is #144 in "camera & photo," while the RX100 is #14. The Sony NEX-5n is #17.

For further information, we can look to Flickr. The J1 is 32nd in the Nikon list, and the V1 is 46th. They don't even appear on any other lists. The J1 had 82 users yesterday upload images, the V1 only 48. The NEX-5n had 311. The RX100 had 167. The E-M5 had 339. Even the old Panasonic GF1 had 173.

All of the data indicates that the Nikon V1/J1 are being destroyed in the marketplace. And rightfully so. They are overpriced and under-designed, intended not to provide the consumer with the most for their money, but wedge a product into Nikon's extant product line-up without competing with their DSLR business. It is a cowardly product.

Moreover, merely being available in locations doesn't equal sales. And the Asian markets are unique. Both Panasonic and Olympus have been doing very well there, and everywhere else they are tanking hard.

So here's a tip for you, too. Don't condescend to people you don't know and about whom you have little information. Nor should you read into their posts and infer things they didn't say.