Previous page Next page

Nikon Coolpix A Hands-on Preview

March 2013 | By Richard Butler


Preview based on a pre-production Coolpix A

A number of factors have helped spur a great increase in the diversity of camera types now available. The Nikon Coolpix A - an APS-C compact with a fixed 28mm equivalent F2.8 lens - is the latest example and is something that would have seemed incredibly unlikely just a few years ago.

The ongoing competition from smartphones has prompted manufacturers to look for ways to offer higher image quality from compact cameras (and carve out the kinds of profit margins that no longer exist in the compact market). Meanwhile, the advent of the mirrorless camera has helped demonstrate that there's an enthusiast market that wants something other than a DSLR. And, in a quirk of fate, the popularity of smartphone shooting has helped introduce a new generation of photographers to the experience of shooting with prime lenses.

The large sensor, fixed-lens camera is a prime example of this new diversity, and the Coolpix A is just the latest offering. The 28mm-equivalent Nikon joins models from brands including Fujifilm, Sony and Sigma in offering small cameras with prime lenses.

The Nikon Coolpix A is built around a 16MP CMOS sensor - the same one that performed so spectacularly well in cameras such as the D7000. The sensor's microlenses have been designed to work with the camera's wide-angle lens, to reduce corner shading, despite the wide-angle lens mounting fairly close to the sensor. It doesn't gain the on-sensor phase detection elements that have started appearing on some of its contemporaries, however.

The Coolpix A follows the lead of the Pentax K-5 IIs and Nikon's own D7100 in doing away with the optical low-pass filter. We can only assume that Nikon's engineers have concluded that attempting to process out any additional moiré was the lesser evil, compared with the sharpness usually sapped by the filter.

Nikon Coolpix A key specifications

  • 16.2MP 'DX' format CMOS sensor
  • 18.5mm (28mm equivalent) F2.8 lens
  • ISO 100-6400 (with 12,800 and 25,600 equivalent extension settings)
  • 3.0" 920k dot LCD
  • 14-bit uncompressed NEF Raw shooting capability
  • Up to 4fps continuous shooting
  • 1080p movies at 24, 25 or 30fps
  • i-TTL compatible hotshoe

As with those other brands, this is an unashamedly enthusiast-targeted product. Nikon makes clear that the camera is primarily intended as a second camera for DSLR users, with PASM exposure modes brought to the fore, and a menu system that's 'much more DSLR familiar than Coolpix familiar.' So, while the Coolpix A does offer nineteen scene modes, including 'Pet Portrait,' they are all clustered together under a single option on the mode dial, leaving room for two user-definable positions.

The Coolpix A will be available in a choice of two colors - DSLR-style black and a 'titanium' colorscheme that brings to mind the elegant Contax G-series rangefinders.

In addition to its external controls and interface being consistent with Nikon's DSLRs, the camera is also compatible with Nikon DSLR accessories. It uses the same 7.4Wh battery as the 1 System J-series cameras and has an i-TTL compliant flash hotshoe. Sadly, though, while it does include a built-in flash, it isn't able to operate as a remote flash commander, so you'll have to attach at least an SB700 to the body to gain the ability to control flashguns remotely.

28mm equivalent Nikkor lens

The Coolpix A has a lens with 7 elements arranged in 5 groups, with one of those being an aspherical element. Nikon promises 'professional quality' in terms of sharpness and corner consistency. Mounting a wide-angle lens so close to the sensor poses a problem, one that Nikon says they've overcome in two ways, first by applying an anti-reflective coating to the sensor. Then they designed the microlenses to cope with the sharp angles from which light will approach the sensor.

The Coolpix A has a dedicated manual focus ring, which can be used to override autofocus at any time.

In front of it is a slim screw-off ring that covers a thread which can be used to mount an (optional) adaptor, to allow the use of 46mm filters or the HN-CP18 hood.

The lens extends when you power up the camera, so startup isn't immediate (although it's still pretty quick). It has a 7-bladed diaphragm and a lens shutter that work together for essentially silent operation. We do not yet know the how fast the flash sync speed is, though.

Movie shooting

The Coolpix A can capture 1080p movies at 24, 25 or 30 frames per second and save them in the MPEG4 format with H.264 compression. The camera allows limited exposure control (you can set exposure before recording and adjust exposure compensation in some exposure modes), but it doesn't include an external mic socket, limiting audio quality. The Coolpix A does offer the ability to trim the videos it's shot in-camera, if you simply want to edit a single clip for upload to the web, though. You can also extract a single fame as a still image.

Optional accessories

The Coolpix A has been designed to share a range of Nikon's DSLR accessories, including flashguns, IR remotes, GPS and Wi-Fi modules - clearly in the hope that existing Nikon users will add the camera to their kit bags. The only unique accessories are a hot shoe mounting optical viewfinder (which will costs around $450) and an UR-E24 adaptor/lens hood pack that allows the use of 46mm filters (recommended price around $130).

The DF-CP1 optical viewfinder includes brightlines that mark 90% scene coverage.


If you're new to digital photography you may wish to read the Digital Photography Glossary before diving into this article (it may help you understand some of the terms used).

Conclusion / Recommendation / Ratings are based on the opinion of the reviewer, you should read the ENTIRE review before coming to your own conclusions.

Images which can be viewed at a larger size have a small magnifying glass icon in the bottom right corner of the image, clicking on the image will display a larger (typically VGA) image in a new window.

To navigate the review simply use the next / previous page buttons, to jump to a particular section either pick the section from the drop down or select it from the navigation bar at the top.

DPReview calibrate their monitors using Color Vision OptiCal at the (fairly well accepted) PC normal gamma 2.2, this means that on our monitors we can make out the difference between all of the (computer generated) grayscale blocks below. We recommend to make the most of this review you should be able to see the difference (at least) between X,Y and Z and ideally A,B and C.

This article is Copyright 2013 and may NOT in part or in whole be reproduced in any electronic or printed medium without prior permission from the author.

Previous page Next page

Comments

Total comments: 441
1234
Ben O Connor
By Ben O Connor (3 months ago)

I am using Olympus XZ-1 , and also its new rival, they want to keep its light power at F 1,8 - 2,5. And to keeping its power They make a big lens, that it does not fit behind lens blades... Smilar thing occoured in G 1X of canon. Well it also has APS-C (DX ) size sensor... many times bigger compare to XZ-1

Well you might say "well they are both zoom cameras, its a fixed lens!" then how can you tell me Leica´s X1 & X2 ?

Its just interesting to see, such a big sensor, preety small diameter glass.

0 upvotes
marike6
By marike6 (3 months ago)

The Canon G1X sensor is actually not APS-C, but is actually smaller than both Canon APS-C (1.6X), and the APS-C size sensors that Nikon uses (1.5X crop).

Comment edited 2 minutes after posting
0 upvotes
Timmbits
By Timmbits (3 months ago)

18.5mm divided by 2.8 doesn't make for a large opening, and you don't need much glass for that.

0 upvotes
Bamboojled
By Bamboojled (2 months ago)

Timbits- don't know your issue, but obviously you are talking from a lack of information.
First it does not matter how much glass was used to create this lens as so far it smokes anything Samsung (LOL) has to offer.
Second the lens and sensor were designed to work together with special filter array on the sensor to make up for the short working distance from the lens (AKA Pocketable)
Third the lens has if i remember correctly 7 elements in 2 or 3 groups with one aspheric lens in it.

0 upvotes
JEROME NOLAS
By JEROME NOLAS (3 months ago)

As soon as the price comes down to sane levels, I will buy it.

0 upvotes
Timmbits
By Timmbits (3 months ago)

hey Nikon, you sold your first unit! =D

0 upvotes
rsjoberg
By rsjoberg (3 months ago)

From the comments it appears that this is not a camera for everyone, but it certainly is a camera for me. Besides the obvious use as a carry everywhere camera I can see two uses for it that make it ideal.

The first is that I can use it to cover the wide end when I go light with my D7000, 35mm and 60mm lens. The second is as a supplemental digital camera when I'm out shooting with my 4x5 field camera.

I see the limitations as simply part of the package. I carried a Rollei 35 as a backup camera back in the day. Later I picked up a Contax G with the lovely Zeiss lenses, but it couldn't fill the Rollei's place because of the size —same with the Leica M3 before that. As far as the cost goes, I'll wait until I see a full test and can get some kind of discount, but I've blown so much on photography over the years that $1000 more or less just doesn't seem like that big a deal.

3 upvotes
David Zamora
By David Zamora (3 months ago)

Finally, a comment that makes sense. It's tiring having to read all of the comment bashing by the younger crowd that doesn't understand the need for such a camera.

2 upvotes
Bearsdenoboe
By Bearsdenoboe (3 months ago)

If Nikon is hoping to launch a full range of professional products with this, they urgently need a 'pro' name: Coolpix is a pathetic, amateurish attempt at Japanese English, and anyway "Cool" went out years ago, thankfully, with Tony Blair. "Dig this, Chicks!"

I do hope that they expand soon to a FF/FX version with interchangeable lenses, with a fast AF system. Users of existing Nikon lenses would flock to such a system (when a DSLR is not needed), but Nikon would open up a new market here and need not be afraid of losing customers.

Without such a model however, they will lose out heavily to Fuji, as soon as a FF X-Pro 2 comes out (next year?). Some indeed prefer Nikon's colours (for landscape) compared with the more muted tones emerging from otherwise superb Fuji results (that 35 mm lens!), and would happily remain loyal, assuming a mirrorless FF 24 - 36 MPX.

1 upvote
iamthenewguy
By iamthenewguy (3 months ago)

So do you think FinePix, as in Fuji FinePix X100, sounds better? I'm guessing most people will drop the coolpix and just call it the Nikon A just as people dropped the FinePix from the X100.

0 upvotes
JadedGamer
By JadedGamer (2 months ago)

So what does "Ixus" mean? You know, Canon's name for their cheapest P&S cameras (as opposed to the PowerShot branding for the more expensive ones)?

0 upvotes
artHarris
By artHarris (3 months ago)

I have always wanted a truly small camera which is capable of producing high quality BIG prints; my Nikon D300s is too big to carry on ski tour! For years I have had to be happy with the small Canons; the G12 being the latest, and I love its close focusing (flowers) and pivotting screen; the true view-finder is a real plus.
Now, I am spoilt for choice, but it is truly a no-brainer - the Sony RX100 beats all. It may not have the pivotting screen and lacks a view-finder, but in all other respects, it has everything. And this Nikon "Copy" doesn't have any extras to justify its almost double price; even at a similar price, the Sony wins. As for the Canon G1X: too big, no close focus, no pivoting screen. So, put to the real test over the last 2 months, the Sony is everything I had hoped for.

Comment edited 2 times, last edit 4 minutes after posting
2 upvotes
TJGKG
By TJGKG (3 months ago)

I agree with you. I also own the RX100 and think it is a marvelous camera. The pictures look just as good as ones taken with my D7000 (which has the same sensor as the Coolpix A) and I don't have to lug all that equipment around. So for twice the price as the RX100, I don't see any advantage.

2 upvotes
tjdean01
By tjdean01 (3 months ago)

I begged for a camera like this for years and then around 2010 or so stopped with photography. I come back to my hobby and WOW, there are so many compact cameras with fast, sharp lenses to choose from. Let's count all the cameras in this category: RX100, P7700, G15, s110, DP1x, PM2 + 20mm or 14mm, XZ-2....I'm sure I'm missing some too. Some there are better than others in certain categories but what it comes down to is that for its size, at that 28mm focal length, the "Coolpix A" should be usable at ISO 3200 and will probably be the best camera EVER [in its size class] with those variables. The PM2 + 14mm 2.5 lens will be a big rival, not to mention its stabilization. But the Nikon A is a bit smaller plus the 14mm lens is not known for fantastic sharpness. I guess the size vs IQ vs price comparison all comes down to the sharpness of its lens, because price and size-wise it's similar to PM2 + pancake.

0 upvotes
Timmbits
By Timmbits (3 months ago)

Who knows... maybe after reading all the feedback, Nikon will put this on sale for half the initially announced price.

2 upvotes
Benarm
By Benarm (3 months ago)

A cheaper M4/3 body with F1.8 prime lens captures more light than this $1100 Coolpix DX. Pathetic Nikon!

Comment edited 45 seconds after posting
4 upvotes
Timmbits
By Timmbits (3 months ago)

it's ok for a landscape lens.
I can't wait for them to introduce the version with a 45mm equivalent f1.4

1 upvote
zinedi
By zinedi (3 months ago)

Again and again - no built-in viewfinder - no camera. Be happy Fuji - competition is still blind.

6 upvotes
RStyga
By RStyga (3 months ago)

I assure you for many people, as well, it'd be bulky viewfinder camera, no compact-enough camera. There's nothing unusual or inferior about a compact camera with no viewfinder. I don't like Nikon A much, if at all at the time, but the lack of viewfinder is not one of the reasons.

1 upvote
lightandday
By lightandday (3 months ago)

I agree with you - it needs to be built in not a add on that gets in the way all the time !

Comment edited 5 minutes after posting
1 upvote
N13L5
By N13L5 (3 months ago)

I think its a well thought out package, except for the lens. at 1k, it should be stronger in that area.

It seems Nikon insists on putting a no-go problem into all their smaller products...

1 upvote
marike6
By marike6 (3 months ago)

I think it's the small size that prevented them from designing it with a faster max aperture.

Pocketability is the new spec of the 21st century.

I'm not a fan of the growing trend of miniaturization, but some are.

Personally I'd sacrifice small size for faster lenses, but I don't have a problem with an f2.8 wide on APS-C. The D7000 has great high ISO abilities, and the A samples show several terrific bokeh shots.

1 upvote
misspiggy01
By misspiggy01 (3 months ago)

what´s the no-go exactly?

why don´t you get the sigma dp1m with 28mm f2.8 for 1k streetprice?
or the leica x2 with 35mm f2.8 for 1.8k?

Comment edited 8 minutes after posting
0 upvotes
Nukunukoo
By Nukunukoo (3 months ago)

Granted that the most expensive optical viewfinder is from Fujifilm but at $599 (a little more than Nikon's) it has a LCD overlay for focus points, and status indicators and sync zooming capabilities. And for that price it has a great camera built around it for free! It's called the X20. Don't get me wrong, I'm also a Nikon user (D600 and D7000), but I just wished they priced it competitively and tweaked a few more features. True, tis small but for its intended market, *uber* small is not the deciding factor nor hardly the top issue.

Comment edited 3 times, last edit 10 minutes after posting
1 upvote
systemBuilder
By systemBuilder (3 months ago)

Heard at Nikon headquarters, 9 months ago :

employee: Boss! Sony is killing us with their RX100 enthusiast camera!
boss: Not to worry shinto-san. Use a Sony-like sensor, Sony specs, and double the Sony price. Dress up the camera to make it look "rugged". As a cost savings measure, include a 28mm lens like Sony, we'll just omit the zoom. We shall say that focus is always more valuable than zoom! We shall destroy them with our products, as we are Nikon. There is no other!
employee: Oh Boss! We love you so much ...

1 upvote
olyflyer
By olyflyer (3 months ago)

Nice camera. Good luck Nikon.

Anyway, people will whine about this camera also. Pathetic.

0 upvotes
TJGKG
By TJGKG (3 months ago)

Why would you say it is pathetic to complain about this camera? It's an $1100 Coolpix. Unless that lens is the sine que non of 28mm DX primes in the Nikon arsenal what is there to justify that price? The RX100 gets great pictures with a smaller sensor, better lens at half the price. You can stick a V12 in a VW bug but it doesn't mean you are going to get the same performance as a Rolls.

2 upvotes
iamthenewguy
By iamthenewguy (3 months ago)

The Fuji finepix X100S is the closest competitor and is more expensive at $1299 and people are buying that. So obviously there is a market, you just aren't part of it.

0 upvotes
JadedGamer
By JadedGamer (2 months ago)

The X100S also is more rugged, has switchable OVF/EVF, a different sensor technology (that sadly OS X/iPhoto/Aperture/iOS do not support out of the box for RAW) and seems far more user friendly. Worth the difference IMHO.

0 upvotes
systemBuilder
By systemBuilder (3 months ago)

I would buy 2x Panny 20x travel zooms for the cost of that viewfinder BWWAAAAAAhHHHH!!!

0 upvotes
Ted D300
By Ted D300 (3 months ago)

Love the optical viewfinder...but $450!!!

1 upvote
caskauge
By caskauge (3 months ago)

Every rumour I heard said the A was supposed to have an integral, X100-esque hybrid viewfinder. For $1000, it should, or at least include the viewfinder in a rebate price.

Too slow, too limited and above all too much.

0 upvotes
tintin168
By tintin168 (3 months ago)

no for me, i want zoom lens 25-150, and this too pricy

1 upvote
Nukunukoo
By Nukunukoo (3 months ago)

No

2 upvotes
marike6
By marike6 (3 months ago)

Yes.

5 upvotes
Nukunukoo
By Nukunukoo (3 months ago)

Drop the price and that ridiculously priced OVF accessory and maybe...

2 upvotes
Mal_In_Oz
By Mal_In_Oz (2 months ago)

If I had a dollar for every apologist making excuses for stupid Nikon or Canon products, I could buy Olympus.

0 upvotes
harold1968
By harold1968 (3 months ago)

If I wanted an outstanding 28mm f2.8 lens and sensor I would buy the brilliant Sigma

I am sure this is a great camera, but it's interesting how much Nikon and Canon are behind Sony, Fuji and Olympus.

I have a Sony RX1 and Olympus OM-D which pretty much covers my needs.
It would have to be pretty spectacular for me to move in the next few years to be honest.

0 upvotes
Timmbits
By Timmbits (3 months ago)

the difference is that nikon and canon are busy protecting their market share, and product lines they are heavily invested in. seeing them introduce these products, reluctantly, is damage control on their part.

1 upvote
Dougbm_2
By Dougbm_2 (3 months ago)

Sure - if you stick to low ISOs but the Nikon will perform better at high ISOs.

1 upvote
ChrisKramer1
By ChrisKramer1 (3 months ago)

I like it but 1100 euros appears way too much, considering the prices of the Canon, Sony and M4/3 competition.

And Panasonic provided an optical viewfinder for the LX3 for much less than 450 dollars.

Comment edited 43 seconds after posting
0 upvotes
kadardr
By kadardr (3 months ago)

I am looking forward a full frame Canon G1 X with a prime lens for this price...

1 upvote
TJGKG
By TJGKG (3 months ago)

Or at least the next version of the G1X. As with any first version, Canon has to fix a few issues with the G1X (close focussing being the first). But at $300 less and a lot more flexible, I think the Canon is a better deal.

2 upvotes
andy le anh
By andy le anh (3 months ago)

Well, I could slip $1000 in my pocket easily.

1 upvote
showmeyourpics
By showmeyourpics (3 months ago)

Hi there, it presents itself as a nice little camera but I believe that all boils down to where you draw your line between size and functionality. I am a part-time pro fine art photographer. Portability is meaningless to me if the camera does not allow me to capture (most of) the pictures I see. I grew up with film, prime lenses and pentaprisms. My basic setup was 2 OM2n bodies with Fujichrome 100 and 400, and prime lenses from 18mm to 300mm. Today, I could not work with a single prime lens and without a viewfinder (I find LCD's to be miserable for precise composition). My ideal compact camera is a Dx with a 4-5x bright zoom starting at 24mm and an external EVF. Now I am getting by quite nicely with a G12. But that's just me.

Comment edited 5 minutes after posting
0 upvotes
Jon Ragnarsson
By Jon Ragnarsson (3 months ago)

Looks like a really nice camera, quality design, but for that price....?
And what's with all those 'previews' here on dpreview, I'm still waiting for a full review of a lot of of cameras...

1 upvote
guyfawkes
By guyfawkes (3 months ago)

The lens reminds me of my "walk-around" film camera of the mid to late 1990's, the excellent Ricoh GR1, which many may recall, and which was a very compact full frame 35mm camera with a fixed f2.8/28mm lens.

Unlike this Nikon, one didn't have to fork out a small fortune for an external viewfinder. In those days camera buffs expected it to be built-in!

1 upvote
marike6
By marike6 (3 months ago)

Yet the GRD IV VF is only a little bit less than this Nikon A VF. I'm a huge fan of the GRD, but I'm not sure you can compare a 1/1.7" sensor camera with this APS-C camera, no matter how good the GRD is.

As far as the GR1, there are a lot of small film high end film cameras that were expensive like the Contax G series. The difference is on film camera you had to have an optical VF, on a digital camera you have the feed from the LCD or an OVF/EVF.

0 upvotes
Reality Check
By Reality Check (3 months ago)

The OVF is a 'benefit' of any traditional styled camera body - not a consequence... It is fast, accurate, clear, sharp.. everything an LCD and EVF are NOT.

1 upvote
kadardr
By kadardr (3 months ago)

A very nice $600 camera. That will be the actual price in one year.

0 upvotes
Shamael
By Shamael (3 months ago)

You said it, even if you see Nex3N with 16-50 lens for 500$, then it gives you matter to say, who the heck has made this price. 600 is highest limit. At that price it sells like fresh bread.

1 upvote
Kund
By Kund (3 months ago)

In one year, for 600$, there will be many, much more interesting cameras...

2 upvotes
Nukunukoo
By Nukunukoo (3 months ago)

Indeed, like the 1" X30!

0 upvotes
marike6
By marike6 (3 months ago)

Sony made the FF RX1 for close to $3000. Why is it people think it a company can sell a tiny APS-C camera with cutting edge features like no-AA filter, and a lens tuned for the sensor, for $600 and make a profit. It's a good thing none here run camera businesses, as they'd all be out of business. If you think a cheesy NEX-3N is equivalent to this Nikon, go buy it and enjoy.

3 upvotes
ChrisKramer1
By ChrisKramer1 (3 months ago)

"Cheesy" or not, at the end of the day, it is the image quality that matters. I would be very suprised if this Nikon approached my Sony NEX 5n in image quality. And I think the $450 price tag for the optical viewfinder tells us all we need to know about the pricing policy.

1 upvote
Timmbits
By Timmbits (3 months ago)

@chris, how much is a VF for your 5n? and why wouldn't the image quality be as good? we're not talking DoF control here, after all, and aren't the sony nex lenses heavily criticized in the community?

0 upvotes
HENNIGArts
By HENNIGArts (3 months ago)

The Nikon Coolpix A looks nice. But why has it a 2.8/28mm lens? I would have preferred 2.0/35mm like the Fujifilm X100 has. That relatively slow lens stops the big sensor from being really useful.

0 upvotes
Timmbits
By Timmbits (3 months ago)

my guess is that it's a camera for landscapes, tourists on vacation, and kids' birthday parties. lol
and they'll come out with a 30mm f1.4 later (ok, I don't actually believe that, but I wish someone would)

0 upvotes
misspiggy01
By misspiggy01 (3 months ago)

you mean like canons slow 24-70 2.8 usm for 2.2k?

0 upvotes
Fletch50mm
By Fletch50mm (3 months ago)

It's freaking tiny... Nearly Pentax Q small without a lens.

Comparisons to GR, Cannon S, Panny LX, Leica Digilux, Sony RX100 etc. are far more appropriate than all this rambling about NEX, Fuji, MFT...

There isn't anything on the market quite like this. It's a truly pocket-able aps-c camera.

1 upvote
EinsteinsGhost
By EinsteinsGhost (3 months ago)

NEX-3N w/20mm 2.8 is almost the same size. And just a tad deeper with 16-50 lens, for $500.

0 upvotes
Fletch50mm
By Fletch50mm (3 months ago)

It's not pocket-able - the lens is too deep.

0 upvotes
Shamael
By Shamael (3 months ago)

Never seen Dickies low down jeans. You can put a d60 with lens in the pockets. You need pants with larger pockets. A Nex3N with a pancake fits in any pocket of correct size. I put the Nex-7 with the 16 pancake in just any large pocket.

Comment edited 3 minutes after posting
0 upvotes
Timmbits
By Timmbits (3 months ago)

ok... how about a NX300 with their highly acclaimed 30mm f2 pancake? aside from being 11mm longer (7/16") it's height and thickness is the same as this Nikon.

Comment edited 3 minutes after posting
1 upvote
peevee1
By peevee1 (3 months ago)

RX100 is still smaller, lighter and better. ;) For half a price.
Hell, E-PM2 will Pana 14/2.5 is about as good and small for half a price, and you have a lot of cash left for another nice lens like 25/1.4 or 17/1.8 or 45/1.8.

0 upvotes
joshxiv
By joshxiv (3 months ago)

RE: Viewfinders -

The Nikon VF is just a simple non-electronic VF - But since the lens is a 28mm EFOV, you don't have to buy the Nikon finder - there are excellent 28mm finders out there for about USD $160-200.

Even the Oly VF-1 (designed for a 35mm EFOV) (USD $85 ) can be used for a 28mm FOV if you use the whole viewfinder and ignore the brightlines.

Or even a 21/25 VF, if you only use the 25mm brightlines, will probably better approximate a 28mm FOV, depending on whether you shoot within a couple of feet or whether you shoot at infinity most of the time.

1 upvote
RStyga
By RStyga (3 months ago)

How much smaller *really* this $1100 camera is it to a ~$350 Olympus E-PM1 with a Panasonic 14mm (28mm equiv.) F2.5 pancake? Or, to have a resolution parity, to an Olympus E-PM2 with a Panasonic 14mm F2.5 pancake? And how fast does it focus? I know the PMx+14mm combo focuses practically instantaneously (~<0.15"). One has to be desperate to have the alleged high-ISO IQ advantage of the Nikon and external controls to justify the pronounced extra cost.

1 upvote
Fletch50mm
By Fletch50mm (3 months ago)

It's pocket-able - nothing you mention is

0 upvotes
RStyga
By RStyga (3 months ago)

I think you have not checked the following:
http://camerasize.com/compare/#163,445

Panasonic 14mm weights 55g. So, PM1+14mm is actually slightly smaller and lighter (and very much cheaper).

1 upvote
Fletch50mm
By Fletch50mm (3 months ago)

But the lens protrudes on the PM1. It's not jeans pocket-able.

0 upvotes
RStyga
By RStyga (3 months ago)

It does, although slightly, but the body is thinner than A. Nikon A is not pocketable, anyway. GRD is, for instance, not Nikon A. Plus, I don't know any photographer who would put a camera in their pocket, literally. A PM1+14mm fits in a tiny compact-camera case, and the whole thing fits in my tiny wallet/beanbag bag, which I carry with me anyway. Splitting hairs here and at very high $$ premium.

Comment edited 3 times, last edit 8 minutes after posting
1 upvote
Fletch50mm
By Fletch50mm (3 months ago)

It's only a couple of millimeters bigger than a GRD with a sensor that's twice the size of a MFT camera. There is nothing quite like it on the market, It's a technical marvel.

2 upvotes
RStyga
By RStyga (3 months ago)

A large sensor does not make much else than the lens slightly larger (in diameter). Have you seen a non-Merrill Sigma DP up-close? I'm not sure Nikon A is a marvel. Pentax Q, however, is an engineering marvel.

0 upvotes
RStyga
By RStyga (3 months ago)

I have used Olympus XZ-1, Pentax Q, Ricoh GRD, Olympus PM1 and I can attest that Nikon A, being the size of XZ-1, is neither pocketable nor tiny. It surely is very compact but not just "a couple of millimeters bigger" than GRD! Not a chance.

0 upvotes
Timmbits
By Timmbits (3 months ago)

@rstyga hahahahaha you're joking, right? a pentax-q an engineering marvel??? it has a 1/2.3" sensor, and it is not difficult at all to find smaller cameras than the Q with a sensor of the same size. it's only distinction is to be a cheap camera with interchangeable lenses instead of built-in.

1 upvote
RStyga
By RStyga (3 months ago)

It's by far the most compact ILC in the world; what more do you need to praise it engineering-wise? A large sensor? Are *you* joking, now?

0 upvotes
nvonstaden
By nvonstaden (3 months ago)

$450 is way over the top on a viewfinder..should be included.....can't use a rear window in the low light conditions of photojournalism...very distracting and kills your nite vision.

3 upvotes
HiRez
By HiRez (3 months ago)

Yeah, that alone pretty much made me stop reading. What is it with these compacts and their absurdly priced accessories ($130 lens hood for Fuji X100)? It's not like they're giving the cameras away.

2 upvotes
Edgar_in_Indy
By Edgar_in_Indy (3 months ago)

Is it true that there's no Shake Reduction???

0 upvotes
Fletch50mm
By Fletch50mm (3 months ago)

The focal length is 18.5mm... it doesn't really need it and would increase size and... ehm cost!

1 upvote
Edgar_in_Indy
By Edgar_in_Indy (3 months ago)

Shake reduction is always good to have. Regardless of the focal length, it will always let you use a slower shutter speed (assuming you're not shooting a moving subject.)

Probably, they didn't want to increase the size of the lens by putting it in the lens. And they didn't want to put it in the body because their DSLR customers might discover that there's nothing stopping Nikon from providing in-body SR! They've gotta protect their in-lens SR racket afterall.

Comment edited 25 seconds after posting
3 upvotes
sjgcit
By sjgcit (3 months ago)

I'm at a loss to know why anyone would get this thing, especially at £1000 each. It look quite lame compared to an RX100 ( which has a faster lens at 28mm and even zooms ).

A fixed lens camera needed to be at least f1.8 or f1.4 to attract enthusiasts at £1000.

The viewfinder price is practically an instruction not to buy the camera. You could hardly insult the buying public more.

So too expensive to attract consumers, but too inadequate to attract enthusiasts.

Total miss.

5 upvotes
Joed700
By Joed700 (3 months ago)

I agree with you. Let's just say that the 28mm (35mm eq.) performs well. That means you are paying for a very expensive 28mm f/2.8 lens. The body design doesn't even have a retro look to it like the Fujifilm X100s. What's wrong with Nikon lately???

Comment edited 28 seconds after posting
1 upvote
RadPhoto
By RadPhoto (3 months ago)

What about the sensor size? I do own RX100 and X-E1 and the APS-C sensor advantage is obvious!

1 upvote
technic
By technic (3 months ago)

I bet the Coolpix A destroys the RX100 for corner sharpness near wide open, and for general IQ. If it doesn't than it is DOA.

And even though the lens is 'just' f/2.8, the equivalent aperture is about the same as for RX100 at 28mm effective.

0 upvotes
TJGKG
By TJGKG (3 months ago)

What is the point of having a big sensor if the glass isn't really that great? The RX100 has a Zeiss lens which is 1.8. The AF is outstanding. I just don't see the Nikon being worth twice as much when it doesn't offer anything more than what you could get from a NEX.

3 upvotes
Keto
By Keto (3 months ago)

Probably wouldn't buy it myself, but I'm really impressed with the size of it.

3 upvotes
Expat Nomad
By Expat Nomad (3 months ago)

Snakes alert. Love the concept, but;
- Ridiculous unit price
- ridiculous viewfinder price
- Add on to use filters
- No hood on the lens
- No articulated screen
- No touch screen
- No stabilisation
- 1/2000 max shutter
- No wireless control via inbuilt flash

Lens is a bit wide and slow for my preference, but that is my preference.

3 upvotes
jkonrad49
By jkonrad49 (3 months ago)

If AF speed is reasonable, it couldl be excelent for quick streetfoto. You do´t need art.screen, touchcscreen, hood, 1/4000, viewfinder (blindshooting) etc. You need only this smal pocketable camera with wide lens and good high ISO quality.
It´s too expensive, I agree. But what isn´t? (Fuji X100, Sony RX1...)

0 upvotes
Roland Karlsson
By Roland Karlsson (3 months ago)

As usual, the optional view finders are very expensive. We are talking about the price of two normal compact cameras - for one view finder. Maybe the view finder is very good, but $450 for it is laughable.

2 upvotes
jkonrad49
By jkonrad49 (3 months ago)

Looks excellent. I see the only two problems - no proprietary viewfinder and high price. 28 mm/35mm equivalent wide lens much better than 35mm. Really pocketable.Current price of the optical viewfinder is ridiculous. I am looking for this camera next year, when the price drop under 800 USD. And the viewfindr undr 200 :-). I like my D700 and 10 lenses, but I use more and more V1 and 10-30 zoom :-).

0 upvotes
Infared
By Infared (3 months ago)

So overpriced is all that I have to say..ESPECIALLY the viewfinder. Its laughable.

1 upvote
rocklobster
By rocklobster (3 months ago)

Canikon just can't get it right can they. The EOS-M is a bland effort with stiff competition from Sony and this camera is curiously what the Nikon 1 should have been. What I mean is that this sensor should have been in the interchangeable lens camera and the 1 inch sensor in the Coolpix derivative.

Rock-on M43 and NEX.

7 upvotes
Timmbits
By Timmbits (3 months ago)

Yes, that would seem logical... DX for their mirrorless and 1" for this package... but I think the opposite happening is an admission from Nikon that they were wrong about the 1" sensor in the Nikon-1 line, otherwise they would have used it here too.

Comment edited 6 minutes after posting
1 upvote
wallbreaker
By wallbreaker (3 months ago)

nice looking camera..but I agreed with jefftan better deal with nex

0 upvotes
Jefftan
By Jefftan (3 months ago)

why not buy NEX-3N for $500
how much bigger and with 3 times zoom

1 upvote
Shamael
By Shamael (3 months ago)

Smaller, with a 20 mm pancake just about 10 mm thicker

0 upvotes
underxposed59
By underxposed59 (3 months ago)

And everyone thought the Sony RX1 was ridiculously priced.

2 upvotes
Infared
By Infared (3 months ago)

looks attractive compared to this!!!!!!!!!!!!!

0 upvotes
jkonrad49
By jkonrad49 (3 months ago)

And still is overpriced - RX1. Nikon A should cost about 800 and is OK. But I miss viewfinder....

0 upvotes
Mescalamba
By Mescalamba (3 months ago)

RX1 is tiny bit expensive, but what you wont know unless you get one is, that its expensive from good reasons. I would say that its Sony trying to match Leica.

And they actually succeeded, at least as much as its possible given price.

Nikon trying to match Sony is unfortunately laughable at best. Tho I think its rather sad..

0 upvotes
harold1968
By harold1968 (3 months ago)

The RX1 lens performs better then the Zeiss 35mm f2 ZF which is £1000.
The FF sensor is one of the best you can get, the cheapest comparable camera is the D600 at 1,500.
Add in the miniaturisation and suddenly the RX1 is looking good value

0 upvotes
Marty4650
By Marty4650 (3 months ago)

The optical viewfinder costs as much as an Olympus E-PL2 two lens kit.

Is it made of platinum or gold?

3 upvotes
Mescalamba
By Mescalamba (3 months ago)

24 carat gold plated poo. As is whole camera..

Comment edited 8 seconds after posting
3 upvotes
mosc
By mosc (3 months ago)

it's just a concept. You know if you wanted one you'd buy some chinese knockoff for <$50.

0 upvotes
sportyaccordy
By sportyaccordy (3 months ago)

I take back anything bad I had to say about the EOS-M. That is basically Canon's NEX. This is a really expensive toy.

0 upvotes
Marty4650
By Marty4650 (3 months ago)

Anyone notice.... this is the only camera in it's class that has a lens shutter cap device?

This is a convenient feature found in every cheap P&S camera today, but hard to implement in larger sensor fixed lens cameras.

1 upvote
Michael_13
By Michael_13 (3 months ago)

Yes, and a huge pain once this thing gets a bit bent or dented.
I prefer more sturdy protection.

1 upvote
Markintosh
By Markintosh (3 months ago)

Very funny! I guess now EOS-M doesn't look so expensive anymore:)

1 upvote
Isit13
By Isit13 (3 months ago)

The lens is surprisingly small in diameter considering it is a DX sensor, could the relatively high f-stop number for a prime play a part in this?

0 upvotes
Michael_13
By Michael_13 (3 months ago)

Very likely so, because I don't assume that Nikon found a way to circumvent the law of physics. :-)

1 upvote
Ben O Connor
By Ben O Connor (3 months ago)

interesting camera, a soup of all ideas....

but no electronic vf. hmmm...

1 upvote
AbrasiveReducer
By AbrasiveReducer (3 months ago)

I hope it's more successful than the 28ti. But, if the idea is that this is a substitute for your "regular" camera, I think 28mm-only is too restrictive. I've had several Ricoh GR digitals and yes, for quality, a prime wide angle beats a zoom every time (not to mention size & weight). But there are numerous occasions when 28mm-only or 35mm-only just won't get the job done.

0 upvotes
forpetessake
By forpetessake (3 months ago)

Let's see, Sony RX100 cost 1/2 of this one, and has very similar lens on short end F/4.9 vs F/4.2 in FF equivalent. I would expect images at 28mm to be very close in all respects, but Sony has many other advantages. So if Nikon wants to compete in this segment, they should lower the price to under $500, otherwise it will be yet another fiasco.

3 upvotes
technic
By technic (3 months ago)

I don't expect images at 28mm to be very close at all, unless stopped down to f/8 or so (and even then the Nikon will probably look better thanks to the bigger sensor). RX100 has a compromised lens, I think this Nikon will have much better IQ in the borders / corners near wide open.
If it is worth double the RX100 price, that's another question. Definitely not for the average hobby photographer who wants longer focal lengths - but Coolpix A is a niche product for specific types of use.

0 upvotes
Total comments: 441
1234