Sick as a Touit - Part 2 - Nikon 1 better than Fuji + Zeiss?

All images Nikon 1 V1 camera and Nikon 1 lenses

So who would have thought it? A heavily discounted 18 month old model Nikon 1 V1 camera + Nikon 1 zoom lenses produce sharper results than a Fuji X camera + £1000 Zeiss prime. Did I really write that? Well yes I did and on the evidence of my own images and the raw samples I linked to in my last post that does seem to be the case.

I've looked again at the Zeiss raw samples just to see if I was mistaken and I have somewhat changed my opinion. They are actually worse than I first thought they were! Is this some mistake? Have Zeiss sent DSLR Magazine some rejects? There was however another post - link here - that said this:-

'....he made a comparison between the 12mm Zeiss and the 14mm Fuji, and between the 32mm Zeiss and the 35mm Fuji. “To be honest I do not see something that strikes me, the files look similar, maybe the Zeiss 12mm is a bit smoother and not as sharp, or maybe it is more creamy than the 14mm Fuji, and maybe the 32 Zeiss is a bit sharper, or has better micro contrast? I can not tell really the differences.'

So another reject lens?, or is this going to turn into a pattern? I did write in a previous post that I believe Zeiss has a patchy record when it comes to lenses. Some are great, some are not so great, but from the raw samples from DSLR Magazine, these Touits are definitely in the latter catergory. I guess the more we see, the more we can make a judgement. But it did occur to me that naming a lens range after a parrot wasn't exactly a great start! (Thought I'd put that in in case anyone doesn't get the reference in the heading. 'Sick as a Touit (parrot?)' No? OK please yourselves.




However, speaking of judgements, I've already made one of my own. The Nikon 1 V1 files I have are capable of incredible sharpness at base ISO, with a superb eye-popping colour rendition that suits what I do perfectly. The weather has changed here (for the worse of course!) and that has given me a chance to get to grips with editing the huge number of images I took when the sun did come out. And the ones that impress me the most, again and again are my Nikon 1 images. They look great. I've already uploaded lots of them to picture libraries and they are already selling. 

I did have a look and a feel of the Nikon 1 V2, and while it has a better layout, I didn't like it as much as the V1. Added to the fact that all the raw samples from the V2 that I've seen and processed look to have more luminance noise at low ISO's and considering what I can get with upsized files from the V1, I see little point in buying one, though with my record of changing my mind, don't rule that out.

Using the Nikon 1 lenses I have I just love the 6.7-13mm wide-angle zoom and 30-110mm telephoto zooms. Both are seriously good lenses and produce files that I've only ever seen bettered in terms of sharpness by the Sigma DP Merrills I had. It just makes me think about whether I'm the only person to have noticed this. 

Does everybody just shoot jpgs. with the V1? (Which are not very impressive I must say) or is it really some kind of 'secret wonder camera' that is only bought by family snapshooters and completely ignored by 'serious' photographers? To be honest, I don't really care. I know it works for me and works seriously well. Apart from the fact that the system is light and small, yet beautifully made, it is a joy to use. And while I may not rate it aesthetically and may be buying a camera that was so unsuccesful that it has to be heavily discounted to get it off the shelves I actually love it. Well, not it as such, its pretty much a black box, but love what it produces. When I decide which one of the 10-100mm zooms to get I will pretty much have a complete set of lenses and even if Nikon wind the whole thing up tomorrow, I'll still think I'm onto a winner. In terms of what its all cost me so far its less than 1 and 1/2 Touits and I'm pretty sure on what I've seen so far that I got the better deal.