Originally posted by JPT Whatever you say about the Nikon 1 system overall, it was the one system that had continuous autofocus sorted from the first models, so I think it's worthy of discussion in this thread.
I found the performance of those cameras to be pretty impressive. I think it's a pity that they said the AF performance was better than similarly priced DSLRs, but didn't test that directly. However, it seems that the days when AF is listed in the "cons" list for mirror less cameras are gone and they are pretty much on a par now.
It will be interesting to see whether Nikon goes ahead with the rumored D2300 mirror less F- mount camera. Could Sony's lower end A-mount camera lose the translucent mirror? Will Canon use its dual pixel system to release an EOS model without a mirror?
Most importantly for me, will Ricoh ever make a K-01 follow up? Ironically, Pentax did it first, perhaps too soon, but recently they have been talking up the benefits of traditional DSLRs. I note that Ricoh is practically the only manufacturer that doesn't have any implementation of on-sensor PDAF. That is a bit worrying because Pentax could end up where they were before - losing sales because of sub-standard autofocus performance.
Pentax would have to do something miraculous with either a a K-01/another Q followup then. I got one of the discounted J1's from buydig (came with a copy of LR 5 for about $150), and picked up a 30-110 lens for another $100, and while the sensor isn't as good as Sony's 1", I've found the AF a near revolution.
And I don't think that's all just because I'm used to Pentax, and compared to the K-01, it blows it away in terms of AF. Pentax needs to be worried because Sony, Nikon, Oly, Panasonic are figuring out how to get it done with mirrorless, and while the quality isn't up the larger sensor of my K-01, I really like the size of the Nikon 1 series.
I would imagine that the V3 is better, but at $1200 or so, Nikon needs to put the drugs away.