CP+ 2016: Hands-on with Nikon DL compacts

Does it have a 9mm f2.4 -25mm f4 pz pancake lens I can put on it?

The Olympus M.Zuiko Digital ED 7-14mm F2.8 PRO costs more than the DL18-50 on it's own and is a hell of a lot bigger on a GM5 than the Nikon. GM5 also doesn't do 4K. The fancy Olympus zoom isn't stabilized (neither is the GM5) too.

This isn't a CDAF system either at 20fps with PDAF. The DL18-50 is very impressive. I agree the 24-85 has A LOT of competition and the 24-500 seems like a pure FZ1000 knock-off but the wide angle stands alone and the others are at least competitive and reasonably priced.

It's an odd focal range.

How about the Panny 12-30mm?

TEdolph

I dunno....the XZ-1 has one of the last CCD's in the high end segments. Sure the video sucks. But at base iso,the per pixel detail is extremely high with the very sharp lens it has.

I wish people would look at downsampled images when they talk about noise rather than describing low-resolution as a sensor feature.

The 12MP A7S is easy to compare against it's 42MP A7Rm2 cousin. Downsampled to 12mp, the ISO 12,800 images look better from the 42mp monster. At lower ISO's the difference is more extreme (favoring the larger MP sensor). At ISO 50, bring on the resolution. A cell phone's pixel pitch is sufficient IMHO.

I'd prefer a J5 for $1,100 with a 24-85 f1.8-f2.8 kit lens too but they ain't gunna make that lens and it'd cost $1,000+ on it's own if they did.

Hard to stomache $2,000 for a V3 with a viewfinder and some hypothetical 24-85 speedy zoom. An A6300+18-105 f4 is <$1,500 and is APS-C.

This was always a problem with the 1 Series-grossly overpriced.

Tedolph

The thing is, making these fast lenses for the 1 Series ILC, they will be a lot bigger than what's on a fix lens irregardless if they have the same sensor size. If they do, a lot of people will be whining about the size. The physics involve for designing fix lens and interchangeable lens is totally different.

But the way I look at it, this is just my opinion, the 1 Series will fade away sooner that expected. If they ever will come out with a V4, it better have a built in EVF, better sensor/IQ go back to SD card, higher capacity battery, better grip, etc, etc, etc priced less than $700.00. If not I will jump ship to M4/3. I like these new DL series but I still love the flexibility of ILC's.

Thom agrees with you guys (http://www.sansmirror.com/newsviews/oh-oh-nikon-1.html). He thinks N1 is toast.

and still awkward menus, strange colors, and no touchscreen..

False, according to Picasso, art critics talk about art, composition, meaning, artists talk about where to get cheaper pigments.

Especially poor artists who produce poor art.

"No artist has a conversations about his brush. None."
You, clearly, know no artists...

pocket mark II

With all the attendant crap that floats around in people's pockets I could never understand the urge to stuff a thousand dollar camera in one.

With the possibility of dust going inside, I don't think pocket is a good idea.

For all the short comings(and there are plenty for both cameras)the Nikon A and the GR were very nice cameras. In that size range nothing will produce better results for stills. While many people who never print anything will not notice a difference, a 1in sensor cannot match an apsc sized sensor

"we need pocket-able APS-C or quit"
please, people say they want this and that but don't buy them. Nikon coolpix a was a pockable aps-c but it nobody bought it and it went on a fire sale. Samsung N1 was so cool that nobody bought it and it discontinued. Manufacture do study and try to produce a product that sale to keep the cost down. All these niche cameras are expensive, few people with big income or no kids (more like empty nester, grown kids) will buy them.

Pockable aps-c you are force to use a cheap kit lenses like the sony e-mount lenses. Once you put a good piece of lens in front of it isn't small anymore. Understand physical would help from odd comments.

Simply not true. You need prime glass to really step up significantly past IQ of these 1" sensor cameras, which means a ***much*** bigger camera.

The lenses in both the Coolpix 'A' and the GR cannot be surpassed in that size range. They match the very high quality of their APS-C sensors, and no 1" sensor-ed camera can compete.

I prefer LX100. Lx100 is not small as this but no big difference and has view finder. Lx100 announced almost 2 yrs earlier than this.

What Panny doesnt have is a pocketable high-end compact. The RX100 are just about pocketable - The LX100 is not.

I'd actually love Panny to resurrect their 1/1.8" (I think, the LX3 size..) sensor, for a really small compact camera.

Renato, It has those dials: The DL18-50 f/1.8-2.8's GUI and menus are very similar to Nikon DSLRs, as are the command dial with PSAM control, rotary multi-selector, power switch, customizable Fn (function) button and RAW (NEF) capabilities. Focal length can be set in steps or adjusted fluidly across the zoom range with the lens' precision zoom ring, while the control ring allows precise adjustments of aperture, shutter speed, manual focus or even white balance.

The Squire, very true, but Nikon nor Canon nor Sony currently have a competitor for the new Panasonic ZS100. :-)

Nikon has the unique DL18-50, Panasonic has the unique ZS100, and Sony has the unique RX100 series.

...and a 1" sensor beats the living daylights out of mobile phones. It IS "SIGNIFICANTLY better".

That is exactly part of why we are seeing this 1" sensor push- the tiny 1/2.3" sensors have been replaced by cell phones for most users.

The IQ of 1" sensor is way better than of any smartphone, I have both.

Right you are sunjester, I've been multi-tasking a bit too much! These comments meant to accompany the low end Coolpix release.
Sorry.
Still, why no Adobe RGB colorspace? I feel same "Let's leave something out so they must buy better" applies to such omissions.

Silly comment, almost every Nikon as ever lets you choose SRGB or AdobeRGB Colorspace. As long you don't work professionally, and into the Prepress Enviroment, SRGB is preferred. (yes, my TFT is hw-calibrated) and i do know the difference between them.

Companies are going where the money is. Currently, selling compacts within 600-1000$ range is one of the most profitable activity in this shrinking market (margins are the point).
So, if you want money for Nikon to develop the FF mirorless you dream about, don't look down on product ranges you're not interested in.

Looking at these cameras and capabilities, I would say these are certainly nikon's forte, which is making excellent cameras. While these won't be as nice IQ wise as a Fuji, they will run circles around them with AF and video.

This segment is hot, these cameras easily compete with the RX10/100, and given the impressive performance of the 1 series AF, I'm betting the AF will be much better. And Nikon outsells Fuji many times over. They don't need a competitor to the Xpro2, Fuji is a small niche brand.

Give it up. Nobody is making money with mirrorless cameras, Sony 's camera division lost 23% of its business in 2015. Nikon and Canon sell more cameras than anyone else in the world. There is nothing that m43 or the RX100 can do that these new DL cameras can't. If you don't like it, don't buy it. Nobody cares.

Dynax, you miss the #1 point of the unified design of compact cameras-- compactness.

Panasonic's m43 line has far more going for it than the Nikon 1 system.

Not necessarily the end, but to be competitive the Nikon 1 system needs more (and faster) lenses, and updated bodies with some of the features these DL compacts have. The Nikon 1 system isn't even compatible with Nikon's flash system, but the DL range is!

The 1 system will always give the benefit of multiple lenses, but unless Nikon makes some really fast lenses it will be obvious they don't care that much about the system.

I'd suggest the opposite.

vermaden, could agree with you with that lenses, but I think Nikon could have made a lot of simpler things before, mostly regarding design (controls/handling) and UI.

In fact, I think that even after this DL cameras, the biggest threat to the 1 system is still Nikon and their decisions regarding the system.

Saludos!

As a DSLR owner, the Nikon 1 system doesn't interest me. I don't want a second set of lenses for another system. This fixed lens compact based around the 1" sensor does interest me. Just like the Sony Rx1 sits along side their alpha system, this DL can sit beside the 1 system and open up new markets for Nikon. This isn't about killing off an ILC system. It's about adding a new segment and (competing w Sony) taking a price of the premium compact pie.

>> Nobody cares, prefer real cameras.

david vella, if nobody cared there would not be a discussion here. If you did not care your comment would not have been here either. But you bothered and spent time to post a comment and already contradicted yourself.
If nobody cared then these cameras would not have demand and companies would not have invested in R&D.
But... there is demand and clearly even you are interested judging by you posting a comment. It is a different matter why you may be yet holding back you personal buck.

@Squire: at once? N1 users have asked for ages for fast zooms, they should have released these a long time ago. I am one that dropped the system in favor of the Leica LX100, because of that, I'm not going back to Nikon (despite the fact that the 18-50 range would fit my needs better than the 24-75 in the LX100).

I guess if you never shoot anything in bright sunlight. Or don't need to stabilise the camera at low shutter speeds. Or like shooting snaps with a mobile phone. Maybe then. You're falling into the trap of thinking "because so many people eat McDonalds burgers they must be very fine food indeed".

I have been in Egypt and in the Giza area several of times (where the three big pyramids stand) and I still managed to take photos (with RX100) that I wanted, without a viewfinder. I could´t believe that I could do that. Kudos to myself!

How did I ever manage to take images with the NX500 last year? Probably I'll never know. I bought it because I thought that even if it lacks an EVF it i still a good camera. Same goes for the NIkons. An additional WVF would be nice though.

It's possible to drink a glass of water whilst standing on one's head too. I find it more convenient to be upright.

My impression is most people find finders more inconvenient than useful. Then offering that feature as an "add-on wart" makes more business sense. What kind of devices that are put to market follows.

"Nikon's scatter-gun randomised approach to compact mirrorless camera design"

I would hardly call the DL series a random approach. They are entering a market segment which has been proven to be very popular with consumers, and competing directly with similar products from Sony, Canon and Panasonic. In addition, they're launching a product (the DL18-50) that's pretty much unique to Nikon.
And the comparison to Sigma is very strange. Sigma offers four models with single focal lenghts, while Nikon offers three models with different zoom ranges. How is this any different from Sony's RX100 and RX10, or Canon's G series?

The 1 system, on the other hand, hasn't exactly been very competitive in the mirrorless ILC market. Why Nikon hasn't offered some of the features they now give us in the DL series, and made some more fast lenses, and settled on a good design (eg. all three V models have had different design concepts!), that's anyone's guess.

I shot all the time in full daylight with no EVF. I'm glad they left it off. You need one, so buy it. I don't need, so I save dough. Easy.

I would buy a camera with no view finder. I have Sony RX100M4 since the month it was released and I hardly ever used viewfinder even in bright sunlight. It is just too cumbersome to use the way you have to pull it out - takes too long to prepare and your snap may be lost if you need long to prepare.

What is more I never found it to be a problem that I did not use viewfinder despite that camera has it. I only used viewfinder to know how it is used and what it is like really. Not in practice.