My plan is to purchase a large sensor compact camera, built in flash, no flip screen, all black camera... a digital Contax T3.
hiplnsdrftr: So now you can press this little black cigarette pack up against your eyeball and look like a real dimwit... perfect.
Then again, I guess there's always gonna be people that want to drive their car using reins, those that wish their cellphone had a rotary dial?
After 30 years of squinting and peeping through all shapes and sizes of viewfinders I can honestly say I often prefer using the camera screen for shooting.
So unfortunately no where near being a kid... Even holding the Contax T3 up to my face always felt strange. Like having an eye-patch. On small cameras I'd much rather use an excellent screen over a mediocre EVF, or any viewfinder for that matter.
Maybe I'm just spoiled by the viewfinders on the dozen or so Pentax 67 I've owned, my excellent Nikon F3hp or the viewfinders on my 1Ds2, 1DS3 and 1Dx.
My appreciation for "screen shooting" was hard to come by, as a life long film shooter I resisted digital cameras for quite a few years. Once I gave in I learned to love digital photography to the point that I prefer it. Instead of shooting 100 rolls of film in a month, 2400 shots at an expense of $5,000, I can now shoot upwards of 10,000 shots in a month at an expense of $0.
In any case this old dog learned to evolve.
So now you can press this little black cigarette pack up against your eyeball and look like a real dimwit... perfect.
Digitall: Nikon what people want is a digital version of S3! By the way nice camera, the price is not so nice..., and this camera deserve a better design IMO, more refined design, to not look like her "low-cost" P&S sisters. But it is still desirable!
Yes, Nikon blew it by naming it Coolpix. I will have to overlook this one flaw.
photo perzon: I bought it at Best Buy for $899HEre's how:Walk in and speak with a manager. Ask him to match the Best Buy sale for $899 on Feb 19. Tell him managers have been matching it.I got it.Now I have two A's. One I got at JR, one at Best Buy. I'm comparing the two for differences. So far none.One advantage of f2.8 is a lot is in focus. The 1.8 cameras are great but a lot if not in focus.I find the IQ same as X100S, at half the volume! Pocketable, and when you use it at parties or dinners, it looks like "a normal camera." You don't look like the enthusiast.
The camera looking "normal" is actually a huge advantage for a lot of my assignments.
MarcMedios: Another absolutely useless P&S and POS camera that will be purchased by a few people with more money than sense.
1. Non-interchangeable lens and not even a zoom? Toy camera.2. No viewfinder? Soccer mom3. That ugly round appendage you have to pay extra for, which increases the size of the camera considerably? An afterthought
I'd rather buy a Fuji X20, really, APS-C or not
As a professional photographer I will say this...
I almost never use a zoom lens. Even if my P&S camera has one. I sometimes use a zoom on my pro bodies but its a Canon L zoom.
On small P&S cameras I never use the viewfinder if there is one, I much prefer using the screen. I find it to be much more dynamic style of shooting as opposed to pressing a cigarette pack sized camera up against my face.
I don't care about the accessories, their design or their price as I'm not going to buy them.
As it stands the Nikon A and the Ricoh GR are the closest thing there are to a digital Contax T3. Which is like having my prayers answered.
mrwul: Set aside the price, an increasing group of people are not in favour of carrying around a bulky DSLR.
Instead they seek an outstanding compact camera, fitting in a big (coat) pocket, or a small 'belt bag', with preferrably an APS-C sensor. They may be the "once in a while photoshooters", but whilst doing so, they donot wish compromise on quality too much, accepting that compact cameras are simply incomparible to DSLRs.
I think there aren't too many compact camera's with an APS-C sensor.
Fujifilm x100s: 127x74x54mm (5x2.91x2.13"), 16.3 MP, 2.8" screen (460.000 dots), 35 mm, abt usd 1400
Leica X2: 124x69x52mm (4.88x2.72x2.05"), 16.2 MP, 2.7" screen (230.000 dots), 36 mm, abt. usd 1950
Nikon Coolpix A: 111x64x40mm (4.37x2.52x1.57"), 16.2 MP, 3" screen (921.000 dots), 28 mm, abt. usd 1100(famous D7000 sensor)
The Coolpix A is the smallest and have a 3"/921.000.In this specific segment, at this moment, I believe they offer competitive product.=
Thankfully the Ricoh GR might force down the price of the Nikon A.
Rachotilko: This feels like they admit the EOS M did not do it. So they try to fight M43 from different direction.
uh, as an actual professional photographer, I will say that while I use a 1Dx I also have a GF1, was tempted to buy a NEX7 and/or an XE1 and currently plan on buying the Nikon Coolpix A.
I can only speak for myself but I have no reservations of adding mirrorless cameras to my kit. If Canon made a serious mirrorless camera I would likely buy it.
I used to buy every Canon Gx and Sxx that came out. I definitely don't do that any more. Other than the 1D series Canon no longer exists for me.
hiplnsdrftr: Camera sounds amazing. Probably the smallest APS camera available.
"It has a 7-bladed diaphragm and a lens shutter that work together for essentially silent operation."
The NEX cameras sound like a bomb went off when you push the shutter (GF1/GX1 also).
For anyone desiring a truly compact, pocketable yet versatile (has a built in flash) silent camera... this is it. Without any other real alternatives. Thats worth a $1,000 to me.
Super small APS camera, flat black, silent shutter... my dream camera.
zinedi: Again and again - no built-in viewfinder - no camera. Be happy Fuji - competition is still blind. Competition still sleeping.
This camera is nearly perfect for what it is intended to be.
A viewfinder would make it unnecessarily larger. I'm fine holding a dSLR up to my face but I'm much more comfortable shooting with a screen on a GF1 or a S95 sized camera.
Obviously its not for everyone. For those that want viewfinders or tilt screens or F2.0 there are a plethora of other choices.
filmrescue: I can get the no viewfinder but if you're skipping the viewfinder then at least have a flip screen. Pretty boring offering from Nikon here.
Flip screen would just make it bigger and clunky. If you want a flip screen theres plenty of other choices.
camerosity: No EVF? No thanks. Once again, Nikon is introducing a camera that is overpriced by about 30%. If this had an EVF I'd definitely consider it. But the main reason I love my X100 is for the hybrid viewfinder. And image quality is outstanding. Sorry Nikon, try again.
Viewfinders are not necessary for such a small camera. And you would just like you were pressing a pack of cigarettes up to your eye.
Obviously, Nikon's goal was to make a very small camera... they succeeded wonderfully.
lighthunter80: With a f2.0 lens and below $1k this would be a great camera. No other APSC camera is so small. I would get one... Sad that they went with only 2.8
I'm pretty sure the lens would be significantly larger at F2.0...
Having a fixed lens allows the flash to remain small and unobtrusive...
You can't have everything, specially when it's a camera this small. Really, the more I look at the specifications the more I want it!
And I'm a Canon CPS member.
Camera sounds amazing. Probably the smallest APS camera available.
Thank god for this camera... maybe it will force Canon to get serious?
Princess Leia: Canon is falling behind this market. Nikon high end compact is in the works and Sony is way ahead with Rx1.
Sony protects their dSLR sales by pricing the RX1 at a premium... Canon protects their dSLR sales by releasing a purposely crippled mediocre EOS-M.
Almost all my cameras are Canon. I wish there was a serious offering from Canon. Like you say, they are falling behind.
Upon handling one in B&H, yeah, it feels amazing. Messing around with it only convinced me that it's rock solid.
Definitely not quite compact. No getting around that.
The price, yes, it's expensive. Keep in mind, in 2000 a Contax T3 with a fixed 35mm lens was about $1,000 and you still had to buy film and pay for processing. My guess is that the price works out to be comprable in the long run, depending on how much you shoot.
so is the all BLACK X100s going to be another limited, over priced deal?