One thing I don't understand is that ISO 160 was chosen as the basic ISO of the 1 V2. The sample images I have seen has quite a lot noise (especially color noise) in the dark areas / shadows. Also the OOF background looks a bit noisy. It must have been possible to have a cleaner image if e.g. ISO 50 or 80 was chosen as the basic ISO. The P7700 with its much smaller sensor do it better at ISO 80 than the 1 V2 does at its basic ISO = 160 so I can't understand this design decision from Nikon.
#1. "RE: Nikon 1 V2, ISO 160 as basic ISO, why?" In response to Reply # 0
Most likely Nikon thought that base 160 would give the best signal/noise performance. But it almost doesn't matter because most sensors, like films, can vary a little on what actually happens versus the specs. What you're mostly seeing in shadows and such is the lack of dynamic range in the smaller sensor.
In any case, base ISO is based upon the abilities of the sensor and what its designed for.
#3. "RE: Nikon 1 V2, ISO 160 as basic ISO, why?" In response to Reply # 2
It's usually a tradeoff. What I sometimes do is (using Lightroom) find a noise reduction scheme I like and add it to the presets so when I import raw images from the camera it can apply the noise reduction like I want. Saves a few steps and gives nice results.
#4. "RE: Nikon 1 V2, ISO 160 as basic ISO, why?" In response to Reply # 3
I went for a D5200. Price is about the same and image quality much better. The size is not far away from the 1 V2 (you need a bag anyway). 1 V2 is not a pocket camera. The 1 V2 is: 11x8x5 and D5200 is: 13x10x8. Then of course SLR lenses are bigger buy they are also used on the 1 via the adapter. Crop factor 2.7 against 1.5 ...but if you crop from the 24MP you easy get a factor 2 or more ...so this was my reason to select the D5200 over the 1 V2. I don't need the special feature of the 1 V2 (60 frames pr. sec, high speed video etc....I need the swing out monitor more). Maybe the 1 V3....we will see.....