Reading mode: Light Dark

Seeking advice: Canon EOS M or Nikon Coolpix A?

Go to last post
S

Shurato

Member
Messages
34
Reaction score
2
Location
Baden, CH
Hi folks,

I came across a blow-out sale of the Canon EOS M, including kit-lens 18-55mm for a steal of 220$(!!)
At the same time, I saw the same store offering a clearance sale of some Nikon Coolpix A for around 440$. It got me quite inspired since from reading several user reviews and that one on DPreview this cam produces sharp results (apart from the mentioned vignetting) and excellent colour rendition in a compact body. Being a "high quality picture aficionado" myself this cam appeals to me also because of this no-frills look, and also being aware that it's a fixed lens cam at the same time, tempting me to explore this method of taking pictures.

Coming back to the Canon EOS M, the advantage to this one is being able to change lenses and the (even lower) price - very obviously.

This got me thinking since I was fancying acquiring an APS-C cam in a compact body anyways and both fit the bill perfectly in terms of budget and form factor. At the same time, both have got their quirks; the Coolpix A having some vignetting issues in the corner and the EOS M being kinda sluggish in terms of auto-focusing.

So I'm kinda little bit lost here or rather: Having a little bit too much information which I cannot really keep apart to make a clear-cut decision yet when wanting to produce some clean, sharp, excellent colour-accurate out-of-the-box pictures.
Thus my question, which of these two cams would you folks recommend when my first choices are:
  • producing clean, sharp images
  • with excellent colour rendition also in low light (I love taking night shots)
  • and good noise handling at higher ISO settings (read: low noise :-) )
As a side note, I was also wondering what fixed lens (f/2.8 or brighter) for the EOS M would produce identical imagery results as the Coolpix A in terms of sharpness?

Any expert advices are welcome.
 
It appears that you got the main differences between both cameras right. There are many good tests of both on the Web, so you can dive deeper into the differences. Just one additional point missed by many people: dust on sensor. Cameras constructed in a similar way to Nikon Coolpix A are not environmentally sealed, and opening/closing/zooming action of the lens causes some air exchange between outside and inside of the camera. Eventually some dust gets in, and a few particles will settle on the sensor. This process is cumulative. The EOS M is also not fully sealed, but the sensor can be easily cleaned after the lens is removed. This is why I would never buy a camera with a non removable lens assembly regardless of other advantages it may have (yes, I am fully aware that dust spots can be removed in post processing).

The EOS M with 18-55mm (very good lens, BTW) for $220... I would not hesitate.
 
I believe the advantage of the Canon EOS M and its much larger APS-C sized sensor will be most evident in higher iso/lower light pictures.
 
Hephaestus said:
? Nikon Coolpix A has APS-C format sensor.
67gtonr said:
I believe the advantage of the Canon EOS M and its much larger APS-C sized sensor will be most evident in higher iso/lower light pictures.
Click to expand...
Click to expand...
You're right, my mistake, I was thinking about a different camera. It appears that the ability to change lenses is the real difference.
 
I was thinking I would surely buy a Coolpix A when it was announced. But, 28mm is not a focal length I really like and the asking price remained too high last summer. Then the EOS M fire sale was on and I saw a lot to like especially with the 22mm.

The sensor in the Coolpix is much better. And with the mated lens should have noticeably better IQ in every respect. So if ultimate IQ is the goal (and you don't mind working with one lens) then I think, for now, the Coolpix would be the choice. The Coolpix also has more direct control options if that's important. Build quality of both is a toss-up.

Note that the Coolpix is about the same size as the M (with 22mm attached). The Coolpix is slightly smaller but not enough to matter.
 
By all accounts, the Coolpix A is a nice camera. Which camera would make more sense is probably more a matter of what you want out of a camera. While the M deal you talked about came with the 18-55mm, you could easily add the 22mm f/2 as well and the total cost would be under the $440 of the A. Personally, I'd rather have the M with the 22mm f/2 than the A, which has a slower and wider lens. Some folks really love the 28mm equiv FOV that the Coolpix A has, but it's really too wide for me as a general purpose FL. YMMV on that, though.

In terms of color, shoot RAW and you should be able to get either camera looking good. For JPEG, I personally prefer Canon's JPEG engine over Nikon's, but plenty of people have the opposite opinion.
 
Very bold statement, eh? Any proofs (please no more useless DxO test)
PaddyC said:
The sensor in the Coolpix is much better. And with the mated lens should have noticeably better IQ in every respect. So if ultimate IQ is the goal (and you don't mind working with one lens) then I think, for now, the Coolpix would be the choice.
Click to expand...
--
Thanks,
Markintosh.
 
Last edited:
PaddyC said:
I was thinking I would surely buy a Coolpix A when it was announced. But, 28mm is not a focal length I really like and the asking price remained too high last summer. Then the EOS M fire sale was on and I saw a lot to like especially with the 22mm.

The sensor in the Coolpix is much better. And with the mated lens should have noticeably better IQ in every respect.
Click to expand...
According to dpr, the Coolpix A has the same sensor as the Nikon D7000. The M has the same sensor as the Canon 650D. So, you can use the dpr comparometer to compare those two cameras (the D7000 and 650D) to tell you about the sensors of the Coolpix A and EOS M. If you do that, you'll see that there is no discernible difference between the sensors. That leaves lenses. Given that the Nikon has a fixed lens, the advantage has to go with the Canon here. You can put any number of different lenses on it. Given that the Nikon is nearly $1100 at Amazon, Best Buy, and B&H, the choice here is a no-brainer. You can get all three currently available EF-M lenses, and the body, for considerably less than the Coolpix A with just a 28mm (equivalent) F2.8 prime. In fact, once the new 55-200 is available, you can probably get all four EF-M lenses and the body for within about $100 of the Nikon. If you want an APS-C camera with a fast prime, the M with 22 F2, for between $300 and $400, seems like a much more attractive option than the Nikon for $1100, or even for half that price. The 22 F2 is really sharp, and a stop faster than the Nikon. Unless you are wedded to the 28mm (equivalent) field of view, the 22 F2 seems like a better bet. If you are wedded to the 28mm field of view, you can put the 18-55 on the M. At 18 (29mm equivalent field of view), it's 2/3 stop slower than the Nikon, but it has image stabilization, which I don't think the Nikon has (I could be wrong about that, but I didn't find it mentioned in the specifications on the B&H website). I would be incredibly surprised if the Nikon has better IQ, let alone noticeably better, in any respect than the M with 22 F2. I could be wrong, of course, but I would need to see some pretty impressive testing. I know what the M with 22 F2 (and with the other EF-M lenses, and with several EF lenses) can do. I've seen the two sensors tested against each other with comparable lenses. I'm sure the lens on the Nikon is pretty good (it should be for the price), but I see no reason to think it would be better than the 22 F2 on the Canon, especially because wide open on the Nikon is already stopped down on the Canon.
 
The EOS M is more versatile. If it is to be your main/only camera, this is a big consideration.

The EOS M produces terrific images, but I cannot vouch for night photos as I have taken few if any.
 
Alastair Norcross said:
Alastair Norcross said:
According to dpr, the Coolpix A has the same sensor as the Nikon D7000. The M has the same sensor as the Canon 650D. So, you can use the dpr comparometer to compare those two cameras (the D7000 and 650D) to tell you about the sensors of the Coolpix A and EOS M. If you do that, you'll see that there is no discernible difference between the sensors.
Click to expand...
Click to expand...
DxO gives a substantial advantage to the Coolpix A over the M. An overall score of 80 vs 65, 1.3 bits of colour depth advantage, 2.6 EVs of dynamic range, and close to a stop of high ISO.

I realize the eye test is valid but there are so many factors (including not comparing the actual cameras using DPR) that can mislead. At least DxO is standardized and reliable.

Alastair Norcross said:
Alastair Norcross said:
That leaves lenses. Given that the Nikon has a fixed lens, the advantage has to go with the Canon here. You can put any number of different lenses on it. Given that the Nikon is nearly $1100 at Amazon, Best Buy, and B&H, the choice here is a no-brainer.
Click to expand...
Click to expand...
Yes it's a no-brainer at full retail. But the OP mentioned he can get a Coolpix A for $440.00. So that makes the comp more interesting.
 
PaddyC said:
Alastair Norcross said:
PaddyC said:
According to dpr, the Coolpix A has the same sensor as the Nikon D7000. The M has the same sensor as the Canon 650D. So, you can use the dpr comparometer to compare those two cameras (the D7000 and 650D) to tell you about the sensors of the Coolpix A and EOS M. If you do that, you'll see that there is no discernible difference between the sensors.
Click to expand...
Click to expand...
DxO gives a substantial advantage to the Coolpix A over the M. An overall score of 80 vs 65, 1.3 bits of colour depth advantage, 2.6 EVs of dynamic range, and close to a stop of high ISO.

I realize the eye test is valid but there are so many factors (including not comparing the actual cameras using DPR) that can mislead. At least DxO is standardized and reliable.
Click to expand...
It is standardized. I'm not sure about reliable. It reliably tests the things it tests (though the fact that it gives different scores to the M and the 650D make me wonder just how reliable it is, even in this sense). I just have seen no evidence that those things have any relevance to actual photos. That's why I prefer to look at like for like comparisons of actual photos. If I set my watch to be exactly 97 minutes slow, it too would be reliable. It would be reliably 97 minutes wrong. And 1.3 bits of colour depth difference is literally imperceptible to the human eye (when the difference is between 22.1 bits and 23.5 bits). I am not saying that you could not devise a situation in which a bit more DR at low ISO (which is what the landscape DR score is supposedly about) would show up in a heavily processed shot, where, for example, you pushed the shadows by more than 3 stops. What I am saying is that I have never seen even one example of such a shot that was worth keeping anyway. I have repeatedly asked people to post examples of this extra DR at low ISO actually getting even decent shots, let alone ones worth printing, and have never had one, not one, posted in response. What the extra DR at low ISO (and it is only at low ISO, Canon sensors often have more DR at high ISO) does is allow you to push very deep shadows a bit more without excessive ugly noise. So, it only comes into play with a shot with enormously underexposed shadow areas in the first place. Whereas, you might be able to recover 2-3 stops of shadows on the M without excessive noise, you could recover 4-5 stops on the Coolpix A. If you recover 4-5 stops on the M, you will have more noise in the shadow areas. You can clean that up with a good noise reduction program, but it's obviously nicer, and easier, not to have to do that. But, my point is that this scenario is only likely to apply to a tiny percentage of shots in the first place. In the second place, I have never seen a single shot that's been subjected to this degree of shadow recovery that was one I would even display on the web, let alone print. I'm not saying such shots don't exist. But, it's remarkable that all the posters who claim that this is such a great advantage have never posted a single shot that demonstrates the advantage. I mean, they must have lots of such shots, or they wouldn't be constantly trumpeting this feature. Or so a reasonable person would think.
PaddyC said:
PaddyC said:
PaddyC said:
That leaves lenses. Given that the Nikon has a fixed lens, the advantage has to go with the Canon here. You can put any number of different lenses on it. Given that the Nikon is nearly $1100 at Amazon, Best Buy, and B&H, the choice here is a no-brainer.
Click to expand...
Click to expand...
Yes it's a no-brainer at full retail. But the OP mentioned he can get a Coolpix A for $440.00. So that makes the comp more interesting.
Click to expand...
Yes, I would take that $440.00 price with an enormous mountain of salt. If Amazon, Best Buy, and B&H all have the Coolpix at almost $1100, you know that a $440 deal is certainly a scam. You'll pay your $440, and then either never get the camera, get a different Coolpix (one of the compact P&S models), or get a phone call telling you that the battery charger isn't included, and will cost you an extra $400, and the battery also isn't included, and will cost you an extra $350 (and shipping is $100). These scams are well-known.

--
Alastair
http://anorcross.smugmug.com
Equipment in profile
 
Last edited:
Shurato said:
Hi folks,

I came across a blow-out sale of the Canon EOS M, including kit-lens 18-55mm for a steal of 220$(!!)
At the same time, I saw the same store offering a clearance sale of some Nikon Coolpix A for around 440$.
Click to expand...
What's the store? It's almost certainly a scam. Run away from that as fast as you can. All the reputable dealers have it for nearly $1100. Even the EOS M price is probably too low, but you can get that kit on Amazon for under $320.

Whenever you see a deal that's more than 30% lower than the big online retailers (Amazon, B&H, Adorama), it's a scam.

--
Alastair
http://anorcross.smugmug.com
Equipment in profile
 
Last edited:
Alastair Norcross said:
What's the store? It's almost certainly a scam. Run away from that as fast as you can. All the reputable dealers have it for nearly $1100. Even the EOS M price is probably too low, but you can get that kit on Amazon for under $320.

Whenever you see a deal that's more than 30% lower than the big online retailers (Amazon, B&H, Adorama), it's a scam.
Click to expand...
Actually I ran into the store to get it instead of ordering it online and I just got it in my hands now :-)
To be fair, I also gotta say that it was in Switzerland this clearance sale happened, specifically in the "Interdiscount" electronics store chain, which is the largest "electronics discounter" in my country. Rather by coincidence I saw one on display which was the last one; yet I didn't get it immediately since I was fancying having one being in the original packaging. So I was researching on their on-line portal and found one last one in original packaging in another town, so there I jumped on.
Anyhow, enough of this blabber, here's the proof:

c-pix-a_zps3eaa24dd.jpg


So 399 Swissfrancs is around 440$ under the current exchange rate.

So yeah, to sum it up, inserting an off-topic sentence, Switzerland has a high cost of living, is expensive etc., etc., yet when electronic stores are doing clearance sales, you can get some real steals when you get the right timing.

And for the Canon EOS M clearance sale deal:
https://www.interdiscount.ch/idshop...gitalkamera_-_spiegelfreies_System/detail.jsf

To sum it up, eventually I got the Nikon Coolpix A; when I had it in my hands again and playing around with it, this piece of tech just felt very impressive and invites to play and experiment with a fixed size lens. And boy, is this thing compact and lightweight for its sensor built in.

Anyhow, thanks to all for your expert advice and enriching contribution :-)
 
Last edited:
Shurato said:
Alastair Norcross said:
What's the store? It's almost certainly a scam. Run away from that as fast as you can. All the reputable dealers have it for nearly $1100. Even the EOS M price is probably too low, but you can get that kit on Amazon for under $320.

Whenever you see a deal that's more than 30% lower than the big online retailers (Amazon, B&H, Adorama), it's a scam.
Click to expand...
Actually I ran into the store to get it instead of ordering it online and I just got it in my hands now :-)
To be fair, I also gotta say that it was in Switzerland this clearance sale happened, specifically in the "Interdiscount" electronics store chain, which is the largest "electronics discounter" in my country. Rather by coincidence I saw one on display which was the last one; yet I didn't get it immediately since I was fancying having one being in the original packaging. So I was researching on their on-line portal and found one last one in original packaging in another town, so there I jumped on.
Anyhow, enough of this blabber, here's the proof:

c-pix-a_zps3eaa24dd.jpg


So 399 Swissfrancs is around 440$ under the current exchange rate.

So yeah, to sum it up, inserting an off-topic sentence, Switzerland has a high cost of living, is expensive etc., etc., yet when electronic stores are doing clearance sales, you can get some real steals when you get the right timing.

And for the Canon EOS M clearance sale deal:
https://www.interdiscount.ch/idshop...gitalkamera_-_spiegelfreies_System/detail.jsf

To sum it up, eventually I got the Nikon Coolpix A; when I had it in my hands again and playing around with it, this piece of tech just felt very impressive and invites to play and experiment with a fixed size lens. And boy, is this thing compact and lightweight for its sensor built in.

Anyhow, thanks to all for your expert advice and enriching contribution :-)
Click to expand...
I don't see how you could go wrong at that price, if you don't care for it you can probably sell it used at a profit.
 
67gtonr said:
Shurato said:
Alastair Norcross said:
What's the store? It's almost certainly a scam. Run away from that as fast as you can. All the reputable dealers have it for nearly $1100. Even the EOS M price is probably too low, but you can get that kit on Amazon for under $320.

Whenever you see a deal that's more than 30% lower than the big online retailers (Amazon, B&H, Adorama), it's a scam.
Click to expand...
Actually I ran into the store to get it instead of ordering it online and I just got it in my hands now :-)
To be fair, I also gotta say that it was in Switzerland this clearance sale happened, specifically in the "Interdiscount" electronics store chain, which is the largest "electronics discounter" in my country. Rather by coincidence I saw one on display which was the last one; yet I didn't get it immediately since I was fancying having one being in the original packaging. So I was researching on their on-line portal and found one last one in original packaging in another town, so there I jumped on.
Anyhow, enough of this blabber, here's the proof:

c-pix-a_zps3eaa24dd.jpg


So 399 Swissfrancs is around 440$ under the current exchange rate.

So yeah, to sum it up, inserting an off-topic sentence, Switzerland has a high cost of living, is expensive etc., etc., yet when electronic stores are doing clearance sales, you can get some real steals when you get the right timing.

And for the Canon EOS M clearance sale deal:
https://www.interdiscount.ch/idshop...gitalkamera_-_spiegelfreies_System/detail.jsf

To sum it up, eventually I got the Nikon Coolpix A; when I had it in my hands again and playing around with it, this piece of tech just felt very impressive and invites to play and experiment with a fixed size lens. And boy, is this thing compact and lightweight for its sensor built in.

Anyhow, thanks to all for your expert advice and enriching contribution :-)
Click to expand...
I don't see how you could go wrong at that price, if you don't care for it you can probably sell it used at a profit.
Click to expand...
Congratulations on your purchase. I didn't realize you were in Switzerland, and talking about an actual brick and mortar store. You certainly wouldn't be able to get it at anything like that price in the US. I have a Swiss friend who constantly raves about the quality of Swiss cheese. I'll have to add cheap electronics to the list of reasons to visit Switzerland. :)

--
Alastair
anorcross.smugmug.com

anorcross

Keen hobbyist since teaching myself film photography as a teenager in the 70s, using manual SLRs and black and white film. Love photographing people and animals.
anorcross.smugmug.com anorcross.smugmug.com
Equipment in profile
 
Shurato said:
Alastair Norcross said:
What's the store? It's almost certainly a scam. Run away from that as fast as you can. All the reputable dealers have it for nearly $1100. Even the EOS M price is probably too low, but you can get that kit on Amazon for under $320.

Whenever you see a deal that's more than 30% lower than the big online retailers (Amazon, B&H, Adorama), it's a scam.
Click to expand...
Actually I ran into the store to get it instead of ordering it online and I just got it in my hands now :-)
To be fair, I also gotta say that it was in Switzerland this clearance sale happened, specifically in the "Interdiscount" electronics store chain, which is the largest "electronics discounter" in my country. Rather by coincidence I saw one on display which was the last one; yet I didn't get it immediately since I was fancying having one being in the original packaging. So I was researching on their on-line portal and found one last one in original packaging in another town, so there I jumped on.
Anyhow, enough of this blabber, here's the proof:

c-pix-a_zps3eaa24dd.jpg


So 399 Swissfrancs is around 440$ under the current exchange rate.

So yeah, to sum it up, inserting an off-topic sentence, Switzerland has a high cost of living, is expensive etc., etc., yet when electronic stores are doing clearance sales, you can get some real steals when you get the right timing.

And for the Canon EOS M clearance sale deal:
https://www.interdiscount.ch/idshop...gitalkamera_-_spiegelfreies_System/detail.jsf

To sum it up, eventually I got the Nikon Coolpix A; when I had it in my hands again and playing around with it, this piece of tech just felt very impressive and invites to play and experiment with a fixed size lens. And boy, is this thing compact and lightweight for its sensor built in.

Anyhow, thanks to all for your expert advice and enriching contribution :-)
Click to expand...
Great price I was in Basel 2 weeks ago and nearly spent that on a 2 person diner at the McDonalds.....

Well that was 28 chf for 2 burgers fries and coke. Still caught me off guard.
 
Shurato said:
Hi folks,

I came across a blow-out sale of the Canon EOS M, including kit-lens 18-55mm for a steal of 220$(!!)
At the same time, I saw the same store offering a clearance sale of some Nikon Coolpix A for around 440$. It got me quite inspired since from reading several user reviews and that one on DPreview this cam produces sharp results (apart from the mentioned vignetting) and excellent colour rendition in a compact body. Being a "high quality picture aficionado" myself this cam appeals to me also because of this no-frills look, and also being aware that it's a fixed lens cam at the same time, tempting me to explore this method of taking pictures.

(...)

As a side note, I was also wondering what fixed lens (f/2.8 or brighter) for the EOS M would produce identical imagery results as the Coolpix A in terms of sharpness?

Any expert advices are welcome.
Click to expand...
Now eventually I went ahead and got the Coolpix A - and man, what a piece of nifty technique this is. It's truly pocketable, albeit a tad too big for a Jeans pocket of course, but it would fit pretty nicely in leg pockets as trekking pants have The fact that it sports an APS-C sensor and takes really good pictures with excellent colour rendition, good sharpness from corner to corner, minimal barrel distortion, makes it a winner to me. Shooting with a fixed lens is a first experience for me - and it's fun, adding to this "no-frills" property of this cam. It's just what your eyes see you take as a picture and done. Yet, at times having a small zoom would come in handy; if it was possible to have some kind of mini-zoom and yet keeping the same lens size when collapsed, i.e. something like 28-56mm (essentially a 2x zoom) it would come in very handy for doing some "basic framing" i.e. not needing to stand in the middle of the road when wanting to take a specific architecture photo :-) Maybe in a next iteration? And plus if the battery would hold (significantly) more than around 220 shots, it'd be awesome.
Now for the clearance-sale price I got the cam for it's worth every penny. At the same time, if money was no issue, to me it'd be even worth the regular price of around 1000$, yet, I'm pretty aware that this definitively goes into the "enthusiast budgetary accounting" category.

At the same time I gotta honestly say that the clearance sale for the Canon M of 220$ was very, very tempting too and I'm confident it'd be worth every penny as well. The decisive factor which made me choose the Nikon Coolpix A was its super-compactness for sporting an APS-C sensor and and having it "all integrated" with the lens. With the "compromise" that it's a fixed-lens cam only, yet it gives me a new shooting experience.
 
Alastair Norcross said:
PaddyC said:
Alastair Norcross said:
Alastair Norcross said:
According to dpr, the Coolpix A has the same sensor as the Nikon D7000. The M has the same sensor as the Canon 650D. So, you can use the dpr comparometer to compare those two cameras (the D7000 and 650D) to tell you about the sensors of the Coolpix A and EOS M. If you do that, you'll see that there is no discernible difference between the sensors.
Click to expand...
Click to expand...
DxO gives a substantial advantage to the Coolpix A over the M. An overall score of 80 vs 65, 1.3 bits of colour depth advantage, 2.6 EVs of dynamic range, and close to a stop of high ISO.

I realize the eye test is valid but there are so many factors (including not comparing the actual cameras using DPR) that can mislead. At least DxO is standardized and reliable.
Click to expand...
It is standardized. I'm not sure about reliable. It reliably tests the things it tests (though the fact that it gives different scores to the M and the 650D make me wonder just how reliable it is, even in this sense). I just have seen no evidence that those things have any relevance to actual photos. That's why I prefer to look at like for like comparisons of actual photos. If I set my watch to be exactly 97 minutes slow, it too would be reliable. It would be reliably 97 minutes wrong. And 1.3 bits of colour depth difference is literally imperceptible to the human eye (when the difference is between 22.1 bits and 23.5 bits). I am not saying that you could not devise a situation in which a bit more DR at low ISO (which is what the landscape DR score is supposedly about) would show up in a heavily processed shot, where, for example, you pushed the shadows by more than 3 stops. What I am saying is that I have never seen even one example of such a shot that was worth keeping anyway. I have repeatedly asked people to post examples of this extra DR at low ISO actually getting even decent shots, let alone ones worth printing, and have never had one, not one, posted in response. What the extra DR at low ISO (and it is only at low ISO, Canon sensors often have more DR at high ISO) does is allow you to push very deep shadows a bit more without excessive ugly noise. So, it only comes into play with a shot with enormously underexposed shadow areas in the first place. Whereas, you might be able to recover 2-3 stops of shadows on the M without excessive noise, you could recover 4-5 stops on the Coolpix A. If you recover 4-5 stops on the M, you will have more noise in the shadow areas. You can clean that up with a good noise reduction program, but it's obviously nicer, and easier, not to have to do that. But, my point is that this scenario is only likely to apply to a tiny percentage of shots in the first place. In the second place, I have never seen a single shot that's been subjected to this degree of shadow recovery that was one I would even display on the web, let alone print. I'm not saying such shots don't exist. But, it's remarkable that all the posters who claim that this is such a great advantage have never posted a single shot that demonstrates the advantage. I mean, they must have lots of such shots, or they wouldn't be constantly trumpeting this feature. Or so a reasonable person would think.
Alastair Norcross said:
Alastair Norcross said:
Alastair Norcross said:
That leaves lenses. Given that the Nikon has a fixed lens, the advantage has to go with the Canon here. You can put any number of different lenses on it. Given that the Nikon is nearly $1100 at Amazon, Best Buy, and B&H, the choice here is a no-brainer.
Click to expand...
Click to expand...
Yes it's a no-brainer at full retail. But the OP mentioned he can get a Coolpix A for $440.00. So that makes the comp more interesting.
Click to expand...
Yes, I would take that $440.00 price with an enormous mountain of salt. If Amazon, Best Buy, and B&H all have the Coolpix at almost $1100, you know that a $440 deal is certainly a scam. You'll pay your $440, and then either never get the camera, get a different Coolpix (one of the compact P&S models), or get a phone call telling you that the battery charger isn't included, and will cost you an extra $400, and the battery also isn't included, and will cost you an extra $350 (and shipping is $100). These scams are well-known.
Click to expand...
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Keyboard shortcuts

f
Forum
m
My threads
Mobile site
About
Editorial content
Cameras & Lenses
Community
All content, design, and layout are Copyright © 1998–2025 Digital Photography Review All Rights Reserved.
Reproduction in whole or part in any form or medium without specific written permission is prohibited.
When you use DPReview links to buy products, the site may earn a commission.
©GPS Media - Guides, Products, Services.
Back
Top