Just posted: Nikon Coolpix A real-world samples gallery

No, the two close up images in the above samples were shot at f2.8 to because the photographer wanted to make shallow DOF images to blur the background. Shallow DOF and soft corners are not the same thing.

I can't imagine any Nikon fan being disappointed by the files from this camera.

Apr 7, 2013*permalink

sean lee

can I put third party 28mm. optical viewfinder found on ebay instead paying $ 450?
Is it gonna work?

Apr 6, 2013permalink

Alexander Vienna

why did you not post some high ISO shout... 800 and 1600 ISO...?

Apr 6, 2013permalink

crsantin

The only thing wrong with this camera is the price, for me at least, I cannot justify it.

Apr 5, 2013permalink

Richard Fossum

I bought this camera three days ago, and I've used it a lot already. As a D700 user I can totally jump straight into using it, with the controls being very similar. The ergonomics and feel of this camera is close to perfect, with the smallish size adding to the total package: I've tried a lot of compacts in this range lately, but the build quality, the wide focal length and its files just does it. It costs quite a bit, but after handling it in the store, even taking some days to think about it, I just knew it! I might seen euforic about it, and it is almost that good. Gone is the feeling "Nice pic, if I only shot it with my D700 and 24 pc-e" (which was left at home, anyway). At least, go pick it up and just feel it. I personally guarrantee that you'll forget both the price and that this is actually a compact camera. And no, I'm not paid to say this, I just wanted to share my enthusiasm :)

Apr 5, 2013permalink

Nikonworks

Again, I must blow my own horn and thank DPReview for taking my advice on shooting 'Real World' samples.

Only downer is they took my suggestion and ran with it, without a public 'Thank You' to me.

Thanks for the Real World samples.

Apr 5, 2013permalink

(unknown member)

Correlation is not causation. I'm pretty sure they've posted real-world images from other cameras before the review was published in the past.

Apr 5, 2013permalink

Nikonworks

Take my word, they did not.

I'm talking causation, not correlation.

Read my post on the issue and you will agree.

Apr 5, 2013permalink

Sarge_

What are you on about?

DP Review has been providing 'real world' sample images of cameras they test... pretty much forever. For as many years as I've been reading the site.

Apr 5, 2013permalink

whtchocla7e

Do these cameras come with a free slap in the face?
Because that's exactly how I'd feel after spending $1500 for one.

Apr 5, 2013permalink

In fairness the list price is (a rather high) $1099, so you'd be right to feel a little embarrassed.

Apr 5, 2013permalink

There's no doubt it's a luxury item, but then again, it's a first of sorts in terms of size with a metal "made in japan" build, and a nice quality 18 2.8 Nikkor that was designed for this sensor. And actually price is pretty much inline with similar APS-C compacts.

I'm not sure what it is about the Coolpix A that brings out so many comments about it's price as this is not the first expensive camera we've seen. If you consider that the mostly plastic D5200 is $800 USD body only, the price of this camera doesn't seem at all that high. Sure we'd all like to pay less but this camera doesn't scream rip-off to me at all because of it's size, build, and the high quality files it produces.

Apr 5, 2013permalink

marike6 - if you look at Leica's X2 ($2,000, F2.8 lens), it seems pretty reasonable, but compared to the Fujifilm X100S (excellent hybrid EVF, lens that's 1 stop faster) for $1300, it looks a bit steep.

It's $100 more than the Sigma DP1 Merrill's list price and Sigma doesn't have the economies of scale that Nikon has (and that's before you think about how the development costs of their respective sensors are amortized).

Apr 5, 2013permalink

zodiacfml

People buying in this focal length has another camera(s) in their possession. Pretty expensive to add to what we already have. Speaking of sensor, it is a sensor from the D7000 which is still good but should be cheap to make nowadays.
I can't wait for a less wide focal length and better price.

Apr 6, 2013permalink

Bamboojled

R Butler - No one is arguing that the camera is expensive, but it seems to me that you have mentioned it 3 or 4 times and DPReview has harped on the price more than a few times despite it having a much better sensor than the Fuji X100 and better performance than the Leica, and better performance than the Sigma, if one takes all of the factors into account (High ISO, Dynamic Range).

Then you bring out as an argument the economies of scale as an argument for the other cameras cost... as if this is an excuse and Nikon should say, hey even though our camera is better in detail, has greater dynamic range, has the best high ISO performance, and possibly the best lens optically of all, in the most compact APS-C camera in the world, we should charge less cause we make a lot of cameras, so we don't have a right to get equivalent dollars for a camera that competes in a specific segment and outperforms most if not all the competition.

How does that even make sense???

Apr 6, 2013permalink

@r butler

This set of sample images are some of the best ever from DPR, so it's a bit surprising that you guys are so fixated on the Coolpix A's price.

And no, I wouldn't agree that the Leica X2, with it's 230 K LCD and f2.8 lens at $2000 is reasonable. But the Coolpix A at $1096 , if you consider the pricing of the rest of Nikon's lineup (D5200 and V2 for $800 body only), sort of makes sense.

Versus the competition, the Coolpix A is far smaller than the X100s, X2 and DP2 and the production costs of miniaturization are not cheap (see RX1).

I'm also an X100 fan and agree that on first blush it seems like a better deal, but consider the lower end LCD panel on the Fuji (460 K vs 920 K on the Coolpix A) and the poor video quality on both of the X100 cameras as compared to the high quality video on the Coolpix A.

It seems clear that DPR is already planning to pan the Coolpix A because of some arbitrary feelings about it's price. And these images speak for themselves.

Apr 7, 2013permalink

AlexeiD

Here are raw files from Nikon Coolpix A and a original not processed video.
http://fil.io/FL5k7/Nikon%20Coolpix%20A
I'm very impressed with the shot at ISO 25600

Apr 4, 2013*permalink

DaveCS

I have played with the camera at my local shop and, to be honest, I liked how it felt in the hand. I've been waiting for a "replacement" to the Ricoh GRD series (yes there's talk of a GRD V with an APSC sensor but I've seen no proof nor any firm confirmation from Pentax/Ricoh). I honestly thought Nikon was dumb for bringing this camera out - I've since changed my mind.

This camera has a lot going for it - not just great IQ as many have stated - the ergonomics (which is what led me to the GRD series in the first place) are ALMOST as good as Ricoh - I would say that the Coolpix A is second only to the GRD in terms of ergonomics. The sensor is ridiculously good and so is the lens on the A - yes it costs more but compare it to the Sigma DP Merills. This camera fits into my pocket has better IQ than my Samsung smartphone and I would enjoy using it. Those are 3 winning reasons right there to look at this seriously.

Apr 4, 2013permalink

At the CP+ show in Japan last month, Pentax Ricoh had a display case of GR models, from film versions up to the GRD IV, with the name and year marked on a label for each. At the bottom of the case was an empty shelf with a label saying:

2013 ?

Apr 4, 2013*permalink

xc1427

I totally agree with DaveCS. Ricoh is working very hard, I think, on the GRD V. My intuitive thinking is that some very unique feature is being added on, which will not disappoint its core user. Because otherwise it should have come at the same time of Nikon A. After all, I wish they would conserve the auto SNAP mode in the next generation. This active autofocus mode seems working more or less the same way as the old film rangefinder(TC-1, etc). It is superb useful for street.

Apr 4, 2013permalink

An APS-C GRD? I'd buy one in a heartbeat. It's doubtful though that they'll be able design a small APS-C GRD and keep a similar 28 f/1.9 type lens. We shall see what they present but count me in for sure. The hardest part will be choosing between the GRD V or this camera. Ricoh know how to make photographer friendly cameras and Nikon knows optics and IQ.

Apr 4, 2013permalink

The lack of negative comments here speaks volumes about the IQ presented in these samples and the images that Richard made with the new Coolpix A. Congratulations DPR and thanks for the new samples. Great job.

Apr 4, 2013permalink

tkbslc

I think most people knew it would be excellent. The main complaints even with the launch announcement were focal length and price.

Apr 5, 2013permalink

rxbot

FYI- mikekobal who loves the X sensor posted a mini comparison A versus X100s, he said the A sensor lens combination was the sharpest APS-C sensor lens combination he had ever seen. He also said the A lens was better than the Fujii. I would add someone elses OVF and the A would still be a lot smaller package' plus the APS-C sensor blows away m4/3s and smaller sensors. The A is not a camera 4 me, I would probably choose X-E1 but I am sure it will fill many peoples needs.

Apr 4, 2013permalink

(unknown member)

I love my G1 X.

Apr 4, 2013permalink

Matthew Miller

How is posting "I love my [competing camera]" on a thread "rational discussion"? It's irrelevant noise at best.

Apr 4, 2013permalink

(unknown member)

Now THOSE are some rational arguments against a completely random statement under an article about the Nikon A. My statement was the result of the train of thought started by this article. Nikon went to two extremes: the 1 system and the A. They chose to forego an affordable APS-C P&S (or the near-APS-C sized sensor in the G1 X) and instead came out with a prime fixed lens camera (aka P&S minus any kind of zoom). Totally legit cameras, the 1 and A. Still, I prefer Canon's approach of making a versatile and relatively cheap large-sensor P&S, which by the way was called all kinds of bad names when it was released. Funny that making a prime extremely expensive P&S gets the praise of some who despise the G1 X. Makes me think some people who would call me names like "fanboy" or "shill" might have a little bias of their own....or is it just charging soooo much more makes it painfully clear what the use of this camera is? I always said the G1 X was hard to nail down...by some, anyway.

Apr 5, 2013permalink

Is this Random Camera Appreciation Day?

Apr 5, 2013permalink

(unknown member)

I guess I could have acted like so many people who frequent non-Canon forums and come into a Canon camera comments section or forum saying "that's so ugly" or "they're charging how much for a P&S?" or something else that is strictly negative then lead directly into a list of all the cameras that are better than this one or would make more sense to buy....maybe throw in "why would [camera company name here] bother making this camera when they should be using their resources to make a [name of camera market segment they're "ignoring" here]?" I, however, can understand the use of most cameras a company decides to produce because there are some very small differences in camera design that can make a huge difference in usability in certain situations....and that can be worth a lot of money to some people. I was simply saying that I'm glad somebody made a camera for me. If you like this one, I'm glad somebody made a camera for you, too. On a side note, looks like Angry got deleted. :(

Apr 5, 2013*permalink

(unknown member)

Jimmy, some might consider a feature difference betwen cameras a game changer and others might not. The A has a nice manual focus ring that the G1 X does not. 16.2MP vs. 14.2. Same 2.8 max aperture. 28mm fixed vs. 28-112mm eq. $1,100 vs. $600. No doubt there are image quality differences that are also very important and the A is certainly smaller than the G1 X. Sounds like the A also has snappier AF. If you consider the starting price of the G1 X at $800 and that the A will surely drop a few hundred in the next year or two I don't think it's unreasonable to consider there are some situations where these two would compete against each other as well as the RX100 (maybe the RX1 in terms of size, lens, performance although definitely not price and I'd bet IQ of the RX1 is noticeably better, but I haven't checked). Is it a Nikon "me too" camera? I don't know. Can a company respond to a camera within a year? A fixed lens is easier to design than the G1 X zoom, so maybe? Still nice.

Apr 5, 2013*permalink

mike kobal

I just tested the A and am blown away by the image quality, not too concerned about f2.8, af speed however, is, well, last generation, I expected it to be a little faster, but most impressed by how tiny this camera really is and image quality, now when is the $300 rebate coming?? :)

Apr 4, 2013permalink

photo perzon

Here is how I got my A for $899 + tax at Best Buy. I walked in and asked to talk to a manager. I aksed for a price match to Best Buy's Feb 19 sale for $899. They said yes. Now I am contacting J&R and showing them my receipt so that they can price match. We'll see. I'm comparing the two A's for copy quality. So far so good. I find the A to be the perfect camera. I put a $ 200 Voigtlander glass OVF on it and it is super clear. X100S IQ in a pocket.

Apr 5, 2013permalink

ovatab

I will wait for $300 rebate + free OVF

Apr 5, 2013permalink

LJohnK2

The Image Quality for Nikon JPEG's looks top notch....better than my D5100 for sure....takes a Nikon standard SB-400 mini flash to boot.

My only quandray is the price.....for $1,000 I can buy a really nice lens or just about a D7100.

Apr 4, 2013permalink

AnHund

Very good images, not to say fantastic.

Apr 4, 2013*permalink

AngryCorgi

Even though these are quick-n-dirty samples in appearance (not a ton of variety), they do a fair job of showcasing the lens at different apertures. It's pretty freaking sharp @f/5.6 across the board. Impressive stuff.

Apr 4, 2013permalink

plasnu

I just confirmed that 28mm is not for me. Thank you for the samples.

Apr 4, 2013permalink

piratejabez

Where's the photo used in the thumbnail?

Apr 4, 2013permalink

I felt it was too similar to some of the other here and the focus point wasn't quite where I wanted it. I thought it worked nicely as a thumbnail but it didn't make sense in the gallery.

Apr 4, 2013permalink

piratejabez

The composition looks great. Thanks for the explanation :)

Apr 4, 2013permalink

AshMills

I really want something like this, (DX or IDEALLY FX ) chip with the ability to fit lenses.

I need a silent, (or very quiet) low light nikon, with a lens mount.

Please Nikon!

Apr 4, 2013permalink

jhinkey

Images look pretty good. I'll wait for it to come down in price a bit before considering adding it to my FX lineup. It's nice that the interface is similar to my D800.

Apr 4, 2013permalink

tommy leong

this may be the reason for the price of Coolpix A

"..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."

Apr 4, 2013permalink

AbrasiveReducer

There are three reasons. One is that dropping the price to $850 wouldn't sell many more cameras so why give early adopters a break. Two is that some people won't trade a fixed, 28mm lens with higher image quality for a zoom regardless of the price. And three, of course, is that it's Nikon which is hugely important to some people.

Apr 4, 2013permalink

bobbarber

The images look fantastic. The price is too high. This is a camera to buy used in a year or two or three.

Apr 4, 2013permalink

That's a good way to reward camera companies for creating exciting new products with cutting edge technology and form factor: wait 3 years and buy of on Ebay.

Thankfully, not everybody shares your theory on cameras like this, and this camera should sell very well because of what it offers.

Apr 4, 2013permalink

bobbarber

Well, if I had more disposable income than I do at the moment, then I would buy the camera right now.

But nobody has a responsibility to "reward" anybody for creating a new product. And let's be honest, many new introductions (not this product) are fairly meaningless.

I'm a m43 user (was, until a couple of weeks ago, when somebody broke into my house and liberated my GH2s, among other items), but I see no point in "rewarding" Panasonic for the GH3. The GH1 and GH2s give you more bang for the buck right now.

Look, if we were all shooting with two-megapixel Kodaks and this camera came out, all of us would be like, "I have to have it!" But there isn't THAT much difference between this camera and others on the market. So... nice to have, but not essential, and can be waited for.

Apr 5, 2013permalink

JEROME NOLAS

Looks fine to me...The only problem for me is high price, so we all have to wait.

Apr 4, 2013permalink

rondom

any optical correction on JPEGs or is this exactly what the lens captures in RAW mode?

Apr 4, 2013*permalink

LensBeginner

Am I the only one to find Bokeh a little disturbing and not very tidy?
OTOH it looks like the dynamic range is good, actually more than good.

Apr 4, 2013*permalink

tkbslc

It's probably just a lack of blur that is making it look less smooth. 28mm equivalent and f2.8 isn't a bokeh monster on any camera.

Apr 4, 2013permalink

LensBeginner

It's more an issue of shape.
It looks very similar to the bokeh of a Sigma tele I have: tree branches appear doubled, split, and hedges get a halo.

Apr 4, 2013permalink

Rupert Bottomsworth

Just another "me too" camera.

Apr 4, 2013permalink

four under

Whatever.

Apr 4, 2013permalink

GeorgeZ

Wow, I just saw for the first time what they charge- almost 1.000€.
You can get a 5200 with 2 lenses for the same money. I know it's a premium compact but how on earth are these prices calculated? The sensor can't be the reason, the electronics or body neither. Remains the lens, but I doubt it's more expensive to make than a 18-55 kit lens. I guess they just want to make 5x the profit they make with a equally priced DSLR.

Apr 4, 2013permalink

Gully Foyle

How much should a D5200 cost with a premium 2.8/28 in a small (i.e. pocketable) metal package? A 1.000€ sounds fair enough to me.

Apr 4, 2013*permalink

GeorgeZ

My Nokia 808 has a 28mm prime f 2.4 lens- I doubt it costs anywhere near as much as a 2.8 prime lens for a D5200. Nor does the A's lens.

Apr 4, 2013permalink

Grevture

George: The Nokia 808 has a 8x10 mm sensor, the Coolpix A a 18x24 mm, more then five time larger, which does have some implications for lens design ... And if there is anything letting the Nokia 808 down as a camera, it certainly is its lens.

Not a very relevant comparison ...

Apr 4, 2013*permalink

GeorgeZ

Grevture: of course I know that. What I was saying is that an expensive prime lens such as for the 5200 is a totally different thing from the Coolpix 2.8 lens. As is the one in the 808. I'm just arguing manufacturing costs, nothing else.

Apr 4, 2013permalink

Grevture

George: I still fail to see your point. You brought up the Nokia 808 lens which bears no comparison at all in terms of performance, or complexity.

As for comparing with a D5200 with kit zooms, you are comparing high volume products where both the lenses and large portions of the camera itself share design with many other products. While the Coolpix A is a dedicated niche product with lots of parts that has to be designed uniquely for the Coolpix A.

As for a 28/2.8 lens for a D5200, it could be made larger which makes the design cheaper and it does not have to deal with the problems you get with a wide angle lens up and close to a digital sensor. Ask Leica who has to make special microlens arrangements on their sensors to allow for their not very telecentric wide angle lenses. Also take a look at the 35/2 lens at the Sony RX1, both in size and price for the whole package.

I can agree it is a pity the price for the Coolpix A is high, but I can also see what is causing it.

Apr 4, 2013permalink

Michael_13

@GeorgeZ:
The lens is certainly more expensive than a kit version: Better quality and lower quantity.
Look at the prices of excellent primes: 500€ and more are not unusual.
If you know how prices are calculated you understand that selling prices are largely based in cost per unit. You can also imagine that such a camera has eaten a large chunk of development costs, because it is very different from the other models.

Apr 4, 2013permalink

dpmaxwell

@ Gully Foyle - "How much should a D5200 cost with a premium 2.8/28 in a small (i.e. pocketable) metal package? A 1.000€ sounds fair enough to me."

Without the viewfinder and flip screen? $850. Similarly priced Fuji X100s has a hybrid viewfinder and a faster prime lens.

Apr 5, 2013permalink

io_bg

I'd buy a Coolpix B if it had a 24mm f/2 lens. The rest could be left unchanged.

Apr 4, 2013permalink

Camediadude

Nice blossoms. This is definitely an interesting new model. I hope that all of the manufacturers come out with some "serious compact" variants in due time.(This is a market segment that I don't think could even be saturated enough.. just give me some more viewfinders, and I will be happy as a clam!)

Apr 4, 2013permalink

JacquesBalthazar

Purchased my "A" this week, and getting to grips with it. The IQ is awesome. Files are very crisp, ultra detailed (certainly as good and maybe better than Nex 7 + best glass, even if 16 MP vs 24 MP).

It IS trouser/jacket pocketable (was wearing jeans yesterday and comfortably played bowling with camera in jean pocket). It is substantially thinner than a J1+10mm. It is also lighter , and does not make your jacket hang lopsided. Am using my old Ricoh GV2 VF (small and light as well).

In other words awesome IQ that you can always carry with you.

I had hesitated with X100s, but after borrowing one for 30 mins during a Fuji demo, I was really underwhelmed by the IQ at f2. Kind of defeated the 1 stop advantage. At the end, I decided that X100s was more style than function (for me) and not worth the extra bulk.

Anyway, 28mm eq makes the A very versatile (cityscapes, indoors, parties/groups). It is snappy in operation and excellent in low light. Close focus is fine. Very well built.

Apr 4, 2013permalink

iudex

The portability and small size is the biggest advantage of the A. However this may be also the only advantage, since the image quality is comparable to other APSC cameras with good prime lens and the lack of VF and limitations of wide-angle lens mean significant disadvantage in comparison to competitors (X100s or any CSC with prime lens e.g. NEX-6).

Apr 4, 2013permalink

I'd like to see actual tests that support better IQ than Nex 7. I am not sure of that. In fact, I doubt it. But as long as you are pleased with it.

Apr 4, 2013permalink

tkbslc

Looks awesome, but I can already see the very wide fixed focal length would get boring quickly just from these 20 samples.

Apr 4, 2013permalink

I had similar thoughts as i looked at the samples, as good as they are. Having said that, it would be the best 28mm lens you ever had! And that is how I would choose to view it, and will, when I get one late this year. Perfect for some shooting on the street among other things.

Apr 4, 2013permalink

bobbarber

Yeah, that is kind of a problem. I take a lot of closeup portraits at 80-100mm equivalent. These shots do look good though.

Apr 5, 2013*permalink

dpLarry

As nice as this camera is, an apsc sensor in a subcompact is overkill. It'll appeal to a select group of cu$tomer$.

For me and most people, the excellent 1 inch 10megapixel sensor from the J1 and V1 in a subcompact body at a reasonable price will be appealing.

(of course there's the rx100 but doesn't mean that Sony has to be the only one in that market segment.)

Apr 4, 2013*permalink

zodiacfml

The only overkill here is the price. I doubt if you can enumerate half of the non-dslrs than has an apsc sensor. Sigma has been selling of this type since the DP1.
If you don't see the difference of a larger format versus the 1 inch format, then, this is overkill for you and people with a P&S or smartphone.

Apr 4, 2013permalink

dpLarry

zodiac I went to photography school in my teens back in the 80s so don't you be lecturing me about image quality.

But like I said, it'll have limited appeal. And I never said anything about a 1 inch sensor having the exact same image quality as an apsc sensor.

But if you want it cheap and you want to have a dslr sensor in a subcompact then you should go to Disneyland. Or wait a year or 2 or more maybe the price will come down. Though It'll probably have a little discount very soon and a bit more later.

Apr 4, 2013*permalink

AbrasiveReducer

It's a specialty/status product. (Which is not to say it doesn't produce great images). 28mm is my favorite focal length and I've owned a bunch of Ricoh GRs, but sooner or later you run into something that can't be properly photographed with 28mm. Then, you need a second camera and the whole compact thing goes out the window.

Apr 4, 2013permalink

Why not just say this camera is not for YOU rather than speculating what kind of appeal the Coolpix A has for other photographers?

Apr 4, 2013permalink

zodiacfml

I'm not teaching you on IQ, I'm just saying if you don't appreciate the difference in IQ then it's overkill for you but not the "most people" that you say, though it is valid if you refer "most people" those who don't visit this website and probably only has a P&S or smartphone in their lives. Though the 1 inch sensors from the Nikon 1 or RX100 are good and cheap, there is still a noticeable difference in IQ in an APSC especially outside the resolution criteria.

DSLR sensor in a subcompact you say? I had the Sigma DP2 for $400, brand new. The NEX is also an option for cheap APSC, but the lenses aren't exactly pocketable.

Apr 6, 2013permalink

The lower left-hand corner of the STOP sign pic shows amazing detail.

Apr 4, 2013*permalink

Beat Traveller

Thanks for posting some pics, it's all helping me weigh up some options for my next camera. I like this one's pocketability and sensor, but the comments about the user interface are a definite con. As is the price.

Apr 4, 2013permalink

gl2k

Fence image (DSC_0127) shows that there is pretty much DOF. More than I would like to see. I credit this to the APS-C sensor and f2.8 aperture.
Most of the sample images could be taken with any P&S as well. If this camera style is what I like I would rather buy a V1. Dirt cheap and gives me the same shooting experience.

Apr 4, 2013permalink

MarkInSF

Not comparable, really, except that Nikon makes both. The V1 sensor is smaller, and the camera is bigger, has a nice electronic viewfinder, and offers impressive speed. The A gives you a bigger sensor in a smaller body. I really do like my V1, and the low price I paid, but this clearly offers more potential image quality.

Apr 4, 2013permalink

So you are complaining about DOF, but you would prefer a camera with even more deep DOF, significantly less IQ and around 2 EV worse high ISO ability? Interesting.

Apr 4, 2013*permalink

sean lee

Good IQ, but no high ISO and no micro shots....

Apr 4, 2013*permalink

mumintroll

Not bad all. I can imagine to have this camera in my pocket. When price will be 700$.

Apr 4, 2013permalink

photo perzon

I put a $ 200 Voigtlander glass and metal OVF on the A and it is fantastic. Nothing better than clear glass. Looks just like the Nikon.

Apr 4, 2013permalink

Just what I was about to suggest. $450 is an insult to the world economy.

Apr 4, 2013permalink

PhotonTrapper

Again... No challenging low light conditions, that a larger sensor is supposed to cope with better. I'd think it's the one type of shot you would post, that potential buyers would be interested in seeing, instead a bright daylight post card scenes that virtually any modern camera is able to capture. And, again... no "macro".

Wonder why...

Apr 4, 2013permalink

Some high ISO examples would not come amiss. Can you add some? Thanks.

Apr 4, 2013permalink

I'll try to shoot some low-light samples.

There is at least one close-focus shot in there (the peeled-up fly-posters), but with a 10cm minimum focus distance and a 28mm equiv field-of-view, this isn't a camera for close-up detail.

Apr 4, 2013permalink

iudex

We would really like to see indoor or night shots at ISO 1600 and higher.
Just like PhotonTrapper wrote, any camera can make good pictures in bright sunny day at ISO 100.

Apr 4, 2013permalink

I'll try to add some later today, if I get a chance. First I'm off to shot the studio scene.

Apr 4, 2013permalink

Evaristus

I got mine today in Boston, unfotunately I did not bring my laptop to load images (only my kindle), from iso 2000 on the noise is incredibly high, in good light and iso 100 very sharp, I 'll wait to check images at home in my computer but looks bad to me.

Apr 5, 2013*permalink

tommy leong

nice
No complaints about image quality.
in fact , shouldn't it be the same with the rest of Nikon?

only thing is, would i want an 18.5mm f2.8 fixed lens.
i could see plenty of depth in those sample shots.

its kinda of a little bit here and there, but not outstanding in
any department.

Apr 4, 2013permalink

Pretty impressive. Maybe it's me, and I am not criticizing any technique in capture, but, some processing looks to be needed for greater contrast in some of the shots.

I'd own one if the OVF wasn't such a premium priced item. Maybe a third party one will come along.

Apr 4, 2013permalink

alfredo_tomato

I just did a search on the "bay" and found an assortment from $30 to are you effin kidding me.

Apr 4, 2013permalink

Ha ha, I like than snappy vernacular style.

Apr 4, 2013permalink

What exactly are you saying here?

By alfredo_tomato (5 hours ago)

I just did a search on the "bay" and found an assortment from $30 to are you effin kidding me.

Apr 4, 2013permalink

I don't speak Kentucky so I can only speculate that you would put a $30 viewfinder on the camera. Okay.

Apr 4, 2013permalink