Is the Nikon j2 worth the price?

I want to upgrade from my current point and shoot (which is about 4 years old) but I also have a SLR (cannon rebel xt 350d, which has been around for over 5 years) I was looking into the Nokin j2 because I loved its look, saw some really great reveiws about it, most of all, it's like a point and shoot and an SLR combined, and is nice and small. (which is the main thing I'm looking for: a camera of great quality, but one that's nice and small. Now, I'm wondering it it's worth its $500 plus price. If not, are there any other small, great quality cameras that I should look into instead?

IMO, no EVIL is worth the price, and if you're asking, it certainly isn't.

I always carry a P&S in my pocket, only taking my DSLR system with me if I specifically want to shoot - I'd look at lenses/flashgun to fit the Canon in your shoes, rather than sacrifice an optical viewfinder and DSLR flexibility for a minor weight saving.

Simple answer… No.

No. Buy a real camera, like a Nikon D3100 / D3200.

I will go against the other answers given so for. The reason? I can give you facts, instead of pushing my old world views on you.

Up front, you need to know that there are lots of old, so called photographers that hate these kinds of cameras. They are known as mirrorless cameras, or ILC or EVIL. Take your pick.

The major gripe that grumpies have is the no viewfinder thing. And they sound like the old grumps that used to say "film till I die" back in 2002. And now what do they shoot with? A digital camera.

a viewfinder is nice to have, but there are cost issues, and size issues.ditto for all the direct controls of a dSLR.

The entire point of a camera like the Nikon 1 series (J1, J2, J3, S1) is to have a large image sensor, in a compact form so that it can deliver dSLR-like image quality. And in the case of the Sony NEX line, it can exceed the image quality of many popular dSLRs.

So having said all that, the J1 an J2 are fine, the image quality easily crushes that of all compacts and even serious and expensive compacts from Canon like their G series and the P series from Nikon. Is it the best for the dollar against the other large image sensor compacts? No. In the same price range, the Sony NEX line is better, but again, there's one big trade off, the lenses need to be larger because the image sensor is even larger. Same to some extent with a micro four thirds camera like a Panasonic GF5.

The J2 is a good compromise for someone that wants a simple point and shoot experience with better image quality and for a easier to carry option. But owning the camera isn't quite enough to get better image quality. Three more things you'll need to do.

1. Shoot in RAW format.until you get familiar, shoot in RAW+Jpeg mode.
2. Software to get the most from those images, like lightroom 4 from Adobe. You can try for free (30 days)
3. Get the right lens. The new smaller 11-27mm is a great walk around zoom, it's small and gets the job done. For low light work, the 10mm f/2.8 is ok, even better the 18.5mm f/1.8.

For big zoom the 30-110mm is good, not the best for low light.

Others mirrorless cameras to look at

Sony NEX F3, NEX 5R NEX 6
Panasonic GF5
Olympus PEN E PM2
Samsung NX1000, NX300

In my opinion the sensor in the Nikon 1 J2 is the issue. Although at 13.2mm x 8.8mm its larger than the sensor in your point & shoot, its far smaller than the sensor in the Sony NEX 5 which measures 23.4mm x 15.6mm. In the world of sensor technology bigger is always better or else Sony, Nikon and Canon wouldn't offer full-frame DSLR cameras with sensors that measure 24mm x 36mm - the same size as a 35mm film frame.

Another considration is that you already own a Canon (spelled witn one "n" not two) DSLR so buying the Nikon 1 J2 makes even less sense because you'll have to buy lenses for both cameras. Or sell your outdated Xt for about 10% of its original cost.

In my opinion a far better choice would be the Canon T4i.