Are Nikon 1 cameras worth the investment? - A kind of review of the 32mm f/1.2 lens

With better and better phone cameras, the market for small point-and-shoot cameras shrink. A small camera is often not much better than a phone camera, and in a few cases it may be worse.

One of the attempts at capturing the low end or mid range camera market is the Nikon 1 series - mirrorless cameras with exchangeable lenses. They produce very good results, just like many phone cameras. Often a Nikon 1 takes better photos than a phone, but it will not fit in a small pocket. While many nowadays always carry their phone around, they often do not bother with a camera.

The question then arises if it is really worth it to invest in a Nikon 1 system.

Personally, I will say it is, if you get the 32mm f/1.2 lens. It costs a fortune, about three times the cheapest Nikon 1 camera, but it opens up possibilities that one does not have with other lenses. As an example, look at the photo below, taken inside Kunsthaus Zürich in dim light. With any other Nikon 1 lens, one would have had to crank up the ISO above 500, something that would have meant a grainier photo. In addition, it would have been difficult to isolate the sculpture in the front from the painting in the background, as no other Nikon 1 lens can achieve such a shallow Depth of Field as the 32mm f/1.2.

In the Background: Ferdinand Hodler's painting Heilige Stunde (1907). In the foreground: Aristide Maillol's sculpture Monument à Cézanne (1907). I have no idea why it is called like that. It does not look like him very much. Didn't Cézanne have a beard?

Another example of the shallow depth of field of the 32mm f/1.2 is this panther chameleon sitting peacefully on a twig. The shallow depth of field makes the eye focus on the chameleon in the foreground. Another chameleon in the background is so fuzzy that it can almost be taken for a dark leaf.

Panther chameleon, Furcifer pardalis. Photo taken in the Masoala Regenwald in Zürich Zoo.

Finally an example of shallow depth of field of some painted glass. The painting on the front of the bottle can be distinguished from the painting on the back of the same bottle, due to the shallow depth of field. This would hardly have been possible with another current Nikon 1 lens.

Painted glass bottle from le Musée de l'Œuvre Notre-Dame in Strasbourg. 

Does this mean that a Nikon 1 serves no purpose with other lenses than the 32mm f/1.2? No, they are decent cameras with most lenses, but the number of situations where they are better than a good smartphone goes up if one gets the 32mm f/1.2. Hopefully Nikon will provide other equally good lenses in the future.

A D800 is a Privilege - Not an Obligation

If one buys an expensive camera, it seems logical to make sure one uses it fully. “If it has 36 megapixels, use the 36 megapixels.” “If it has 14-bit files, use every last bit.” “If it has splendid autofocus and perfect auto-whitebalance, use them.” “If it has a Pet Portrait scene mode, use it!” No, wait! Not the last one. Your expensive camera is unlikely to have a Pet Portrait scene mode.

However, if one thinks about it, the camera should not tell you what to do. You should be able to tell the camera what you want. I tell my camera what I want.

• I use DX mode on my D800. Not all the time. When I need a really narrow depth of field or a lot of detail, I use FX. I'm glad it is there. However, when I do not need FX, I do not use it. With DX, my files are smaller; more of them fit on my harddisk, and they are quicker to edit.
• I use small basic jpeg files with my D800. Not all the time. Usually I shoot RAW. However, when I just want to take photos of labels or signs to remember what they said, there is no reason to use anything but the smallest bad quality files one can get. And, to be honest, even small basic jpeg files are pretty good with a D800.
• I use 12-bit lossy compression on my D800. I do that almost all the time. The average file size is less than 30 Mb. If I had used uncompressed 14-bit files, the average file sized had been around 75 Mb per picture. If there is a really delicate occasion, I can switch on lossless compression and 14-bit for a photo, but those delicate occasions are rare in my world.
• I use cheap lenses on my D800. I happily use a Nikkor 50mm f/1.8D. Not all the time. I have specialised high-quality lenses, for things like macro, zooms and wide angle purposes. I use those lenses when I want to do macro, zooms or wide angle photos. But when I want to carry light, I can use a 50mm f/1.8D, which in many cases does a decent job.
• I use manual focus on my D800. The D800 has a good auto-focus system, but sometimes I just feel I want to be in control, so I often twist the little focus ring on the lens instead of using the expensive auto-focus system built into the camera.
• I use manual ISO on my D800. People praise the auto-ISO feature, but I want to be in control, so I rarely use auto-ISO.

All those things do not mean that I paid money for things I do not use. I do use them. I know the camera is there for me when I want it, and that's why I bought it - to know that it has what I need when I need it.

And what about the Pet Portrait mode? If I use a camera with a Pet Portrait mode, do I take advantage of it? No. The scene modes of cheaper cameras frighten me. I do not know how they work, and I do not know how to take advantage of them. I much prefer to use the standard PSAM modes. If I buy a camera with a Pet Portrait mode, I pay for something I will not use.

It is all a matter of finding the right level.

Conversion of Zoom Rates for FX, DX and CX sensors

Nikon has three sizes of sensors for their current models of cameras with exchangeable lenses. The same lens gives different angles of view depending on which sensor it operates on. If you, for example, like using a 50mm prime lens on your D700 camera (FX sensor) and you want to use a lens with a similar width on your D5100 camera (DX sensor), you should get a 35mm lens. (You should actually get a 33mm lens, but that does not exist, and 35mm should be close enough.) More about that here.

The table below gives some common focal lengths in mm and their equivalent with other sensors.

Sensor type:	FX	DX	CX
Crop factor:	1	1.5	2.7
	28	19	10
	50	33	19
	70	47	26
	200	133	74
	270	180	100
	300	200	111

Some cameras with FX sensors are: D700, D800, D3, D4,

Some cameras with DX sensors are: D300, D7000, D5100, D3200, D40, D50, D60, D70, D80, D90

Some cameras with CX sensors are J1, V1.

Which lenses autofocus on a D40, D40X, D60 or D5000?

The low range Nikon cameras D40, D40X, D60 or D5000 can only autofocus with lenses with built in motor, for example Nikon's own Silent Wave Motor (SWM). These cameras lack autofocus motor themselves - something which makes them smaller, lighter and cheaper.

Nikkor lenses with "AF-S" in their name should auto-focus on these cameras.

Sigma lenses with "HSM" (Hyper Sonic Motor) in their name should auto-focus on these cameras.

There are also a number of Tamron lenses that should auto-focus on these cameras, but I have not found any reliable way to tell which ones. The secret letters to look for may be "di" (digitally integrated), but there seems to be no confirmation that it is a fool proof sign.

Macro with a Sigma 70-300mm F4-5.6 APO DG MACRO lens

The Sigma 70-300mm F4-5.6 APO DG MACRO lens has a macro mode that may be difficult to switch on and use. It is only available when the focal length is between 200 mm and 300 mm.

The switch on the lens cannot be changed to "Macro" when you take the lens out of the box, as the focal length is at 70 mm .

Only once you have zoomed to a higher focal length than 200, you can change the switch.

You now have a minimum focusing distance of 95 cm. Without macro mode, the minimum focusing distance is 150 cm, as with a lot of other 70-300 mm lenses, like Nikon's own one. In other words, you can get much closer to the subject with the Sigma.

If you now rotate the focus ring to a smaller distance than 150 cm, then you cannot switch macro mode off. To switch back to normal mode, you first have to rotate the focus ring to a distance above 150 cm.

Manual Focus with a D40X, D40, D60 - or any other Nikon

If you use a low end Nikon DSLR like D40, D40X or D60 together with a number of lenses without built in autofocus, like Sigma, Tamron or even Nikon's own AF 50 f1.8D, then you have to use manual focus - that is, you have to move the focus ring around the lens until you are in focus.

Nikon has an in-focus indicator, that lights up in the form of a green dot in the viewfinder to show when you have the subject in focus:



The in-focus dot is there on most other Nikon cameras as well, in case you choose to use manual focus on them.

(I feel like an idiot for not having realised this before. I probably shot around 1000 pictures with manual focus without looking for the green dot. But it is quite well hidden in the manual.)

Solving the Low Light Problem

Most of us occasionally end up in situations where there is too little light for a good shot. There are several more or less obvious solutions.

Flash. I have not got much successful experience of flashes, which I find often end up too hard and artificial. Besides they do not work in long distance situations, like public evening football matches or Peking Opera.

Aperture. Increase the aperture (lower the F-value), and more light falls on the image sensor.

Shutter speed. Increase the shutter speed, and more light falls on the image sensor.

ISO. Increase the ISO value, and the image sensor becomes more light sensitive and can handle low light. At the same time noise increases in the picture. How high ISO values one can use with success depends much on the camera.

And then my favourite solution:

Change lens. It may not be intuitive to talk about "fast" or "slow" lenses. A lens is mostly fairly static glass, after all. However, some lenses allow for bigger aperture than others. That means that they work better in low light situations. Even in normal light, you can increase the shutter speed more, so it is easier to capture, for example, birds in flight.

My "fast" lens is a AF Nikkor 50mm f/1.8D. It is small enough to fit in my pocket. It weighs just 155g compared to the 560g of my AF-S DX VR Zoom-Nikkor 18-200mm lens. It cost not much more than 150 euro. And it is much faster than the 18-200mm lens, which has a maximum aperture of just f/3.5.

The 50mm f/1.8D is not a DX lens, which means that the equivalent picture angle for most digital cameras is 75mm.

The 50mm f/1.8D has no zoom, but that is actually often a blessing. As I know I cannot change the zoom, I concentrate more on getting the other values right when in a hurry.
Luckily, 75 mm is more or less my favourite angle. I often end up there around even with the 18-200 lens.

The 50mm f/1.8D has no auto focus, when used on Nikon's low end DSLRs (D40, D40x or D60). That is not always that bad. It is sometimes easier to manually adjust the focus than to select the right focus points. Besides, manual focus is what our grand-parents used, and it worked fine for them.

With all other current Nikon DSLRs (including my D300) the auto focus should work.

Some review of the 50mm f/1.8D, claimed that it provides "super sharpness". That is a slight exaggeration, but the lens is more than adequate in most situations. I tested it on a tripod against my 18-200 zoom and the low end AF-S DX Zoom-Nikkor 18-55mm that came bundled with my D40X. I applied each of the lenses to my D300 and shot the same section of my bookshelf at maximum and minimum aperture. The low end 18-55 actually did slightly better than the 50mm f/1.8D. However, the difference was very small. In a handheld test, the 50mm f/1.8D of course was much sharper than the other two, as it allows for much bigger aperture and therefore quicker shutter speed.