If you've decided on Coolpix A instead of X100s, please share your thinking.

Started Mar 8, 2013 | Discussions
jfjal New Member • Posts: 16
Re: I like 28 a WHOLE lot more than 35, and I like the size

Ray Sachs wrote:

jfjal wrote:

No proper viewfinder - useless (for me at least).

Just coming back from a skiing trip, bringing my X100 has once again demonstrated that in sunny conditions, LCD-viewfinders are totally useless. One need a proper one - optical or electronic. I have seen this many times - also with so-called high quality ones. Same goes for iPhone.

Cameras w.o. proper viewfinders are for people living in the urban shadow.

Your use of the word "proper" before every utterance of the word "viewfinder" both suggests and confirms your bias. I'm glad you bothered to qualify the term "useless" with "(for me at least)". Obviously the Coolpix A is not for you!

But cameras without viewfinders (proper or not - I'm wondering what an improper viewfinder would look like?) are not only for people living in the urban shadow. I shoot a fair amount in the urban shadow and shoot a fair amount well outside of the urban shadow and I have cameras both with and without viewfinders and use both in a multitude of locations and lighting conditions. Its true that SOME rear screens are not of much use in bright sunshine, and most weren't until about 2-3 years ago, but others have gotten very very good in very very bright light. Sony has a whole range of them with a "sunny weather" setting that I've used in unbelievably bright sun without any problem at all. The OLED screen on my Olympus OMD has served me well in very bright light as well - as has its viewfinder. In fact, the X-Pro's rear screen has been pretty effective for me outdoors in bright weather and its OVF has also.

So I'd suggest its more about shooting preferences than what's proper or necessary (for a lot of us). I like shooting both with and without viewfinders, in all kinds of weather. Usually, but not always, I'm happier with a viewfinder for portrait length lenses and longer. In that middle ground from about 35mm up to about 90, I can go either way depending on what I'm trying to shoot. And for lenses with field of views wider than 35 I shoot FAR more without one than with one. Sometimes if I have one I'll use it for more sedentary shooting, but rarely, and I've never missed one when I didn't have it, at least since the bad old days when LCD screens really WERE pretty useless in bright sun.

For a very small 28mm camera with excellent image quality and shooting characteristics, the viewfinder is the last thing I'd be concerned about. Your mileage obviously will vary, but that's all its about - personal preference - not proper or improper...

-Ray
-------------------------
http://www.flickr.com/photos/20889767@N05/collections/72157626204295198/

You are obviously not a skiing, mountain or even beach man - I maintain that in such (sunny) conditions you need a real viewfinder! Thanks to Fuji (could have been Olympus or Sony) for saving med from dragging heavy Nikons.

jtyoung Contributing Member • Posts: 526
Re: I like 28 a WHOLE lot more than 35, and I like the size

Ray Sachs wrote:

jfjal wrote:

No proper viewfinder - useless (for me at least).

Just coming back from a skiing trip, bringing my X100 has once again demonstrated that in sunny conditions, LCD-viewfinders are totally useless. One need a proper one - optical or electronic. I have seen this many times - also with so-called high quality ones. Same goes for iPhone.

Cameras w.o. proper viewfinders are for people living in the urban shadow.

Your use of the word "proper" before every utterance of the word "viewfinder" both suggests and confirms your bias. I'm glad you bothered to qualify the term "useless" with "(for me at least)". Obviously the Coolpix A is not for you!

But cameras without viewfinders (proper or not - I'm wondering what an improper viewfinder would look like?) are not only for people living in the urban shadow. I shoot a fair amount in the urban shadow and shoot a fair amount well outside of the urban shadow and I have cameras both with and without viewfinders and use both in a multitude of locations and lighting conditions. Its true that SOME rear screens are not of much use in bright sunshine, and most weren't until about 2-3 years ago, but others have gotten very very good in very very bright light. Sony has a whole range of them with a "sunny weather" setting that I've used in unbelievably bright sun without any problem at all. The OLED screen on my Olympus OMD has served me well in very bright light as well - as has its viewfinder. In fact, the X-Pro's rear screen has been pretty effective for me outdoors in bright weather and its OVF has also.

So I'd suggest its more about shooting preferences than what's proper or necessary (for a lot of us). I like shooting both with and without viewfinders, in all kinds of weather. Usually, but not always, I'm happier with a viewfinder for portrait length lenses and longer. In that middle ground from about 35mm up to about 90, I can go either way depending on what I'm trying to shoot. And for lenses with field of views wider than 35 I shoot FAR more without one than with one. Sometimes if I have one I'll use it for more sedentary shooting, but rarely, and I've never missed one when I didn't have it, at least since the bad old days when LCD screens really WERE pretty useless in bright sun.

For a very small 28mm camera with excellent image quality and shooting characteristics, the viewfinder is the last thing I'd be concerned about. Your mileage obviously will vary, but that's all its about - personal preference - not proper or improper...

-Ray
-------------------------
http://www.flickr.com/photos/20889767@N05/collections/72157626204295198/

I think it's still a deserved bias though. I've used the Sony NEX-7 and RX-100 in bright conditions outdoors and the LCD screens (while being excellent) still have been hard to see in those conditions without at least hand shading the screen. For many really bright situations, a viewfinder at the very least speeds composition.

(unknown member) Contributing Member • Posts: 565
Re: If you've decided on Coolpix A instead of X100s, please share your thinking.
2

I'm a long-time Nikon fan.  My dad had an original F with the selenium meter and the 58mm f1.4.  The idea of folding the D7000's sensor into a pocket camera is appealing, very.  Personally, for me, I'm not much for this planform where I can have a flash in the hotshoe or an add-on viewfinder, but not both.  Just me.

If I had been Nikon, I'd have folded this sensor/lenscombination into the P7700 and called it the '7728', but hey, what do I know?

This or a 100 or 100S is not a question I'd entertain, the Fujis are what I have in mind.  A day may come when I'll warm up to the 'block with a can sticking out of it' form factor, but this ain't that day.

All the best,

JW

Erational Regular Member • Posts: 184
Re: If you've decided on Coolpix A instead of X100s, please share your thinking.

I'm throwing my lot in with the pro- RX 100 camp.  If lack of a viewfinder is inconsequential, the smaller Sony offers a zoom and more resolution. The Sony anti-blur fuction can help with low-light shots.  Has the Fuji X20 been considered ?  You get excellent Fujifilm colors, a zoom AND a viewfinder.

As others have said, the Nikon seems limited and presently overpriced. But, competition is a good thing.  Personally, I think a 35mm perspective is nicer and more natural-looking than a 28mm.

Ray Sachs
Ray Sachs Forum Pro • Posts: 10,580
Re: I like 28 a WHOLE lot more than 35, and I like the size
1

jfjal wrote:

You are obviously not a skiing, mountain or even beach man - I maintain that in such (sunny) conditions you need a real viewfinder! Thanks to Fuji (could have been Olympus or Sony) for saving med from dragging heavy Nikons.

To quote the great Vince Vaughan from Wedding Crashers (well, he was great in Wedding Crashers anyway), "erronious, ERRONIOUS"!

I spent a few years living and skiing in Telluride, CO, so I know about mountain sun and snow, although that was back in the day where damn near EVERY camera had a viewfinder, so I make no claims from that period.

But I'm still a beach guy every chance I get and I've used both a Canon S90 and a Ricoh GRD3 as my go-to beach cameras for a few years and did just fine with them. I've also used an OMD quite a bit at the beach, both using the EVF and using the rear OLED screen, flipped up toward the sun no less, without incident. I used the S90 rather extensively on a very bright and sunny day in the Mediterranean on the Italian Riviera and did quite well too. And my go-to camera on that trip around the sunny Med (and it was sunny for three solid weeks, except for two days of storms) was the Olympus EP2, which had a pretty bad rear screen, but which I still used both with and without the detachable EVF.

A few examples just to show it is possible and not all that burdensome to shoot in bright environments with no viewfinder...

Canon S90

Canon S90

Nex  5 - also no viewfinder

GRD3

GRD3

GRD3

GRD3

OK, you get the idea... I get the appeal of a viewfinder, but to me its very much a situational appeal and there are a host of situations where I'm equally happy to shoot without one, including very very bright light settings. I get that you're not and I don't criticize you for that. And I'd appreciate the same courtesy toward those of us who don't feel terribly hampered by the lack of a "proper" viewfinder... Its nice that we all get to use what we like and that there are options for all preferences. The Coolpix A is not for you but it may very well be for me... This is all good.

-Ray
-------------------------
http://www.flickr.com/photos/20889767@N05/collections/72157626204295198/

leoda Regular Member • Posts: 224
Re: If you've decided on Coolpix A instead of X100s, please share your thinking.

I have owned and loved lots of Nikon gear for 30 years. Still do.

That aside, the Coolpix A is a very nice $600 camera, and comparing top views, you can easily see that the CoolpixA and the X100/100s are very different animals in terms of handling (not even mentioning the viewfinder issue).

The two cameras are really not comparable, except that they have APS sensors.

Mark Weston Senior Member • Posts: 1,069
Once again, nice photographs Ray

I sold my X100 in anticipation of the X100S. I currently use my NEX-7 for most of my photography. It has a wonderful EVF, but I only use it about 50% of the time. I also shoot from the waist with the flip out screen. For me, I would want at least one or the other (VF or flip screen). I also have a S90 that gets little use. Of these three cameras, the X100 is the greatest pleasure to use for me. The OVF, the manual dials, the overall feel of the X100 is perfect to me. I find that to be at least as important as the photographs I get from these cameras. Having said all of that, the Coolpix A looks interesting for the quality that they seemed to have packed into such a small body. I just do not think, I will be adding it to my collection at or near the announced price.

http://www.markwweston.com

AngryCorgi
AngryCorgi Contributing Member • Posts: 916
Re: If you've decided on Coolpix A instead of X100s, please share your thinking.

For me, I prefer 28mm to 35mm.  I also do not care for the xtrans filter.  I'm more like to consider a refurb X100 over the X100s for that reason.  I also really, really like the portability of the coolpix A and am very comfortable with the Nikon menu interface.  While I see the "A" being more properly valued around the $900 price, I figure the choice to build it in Japan has directly resulted in the $200 overvaluation.  I'd have no problem with it being built in China or Thailand and save that extra $200.  I'm not a country-of-origin-snob like some people appear to be.  The lens MTF chart is excellent, especially for a WA lens, and this is a big selling point for me.

-- hide signature --

-AC-

Photomonkey Senior Member • Posts: 2,594
Re: If you've decided on Coolpix A instead of X100s, please share your thinking.

Jman13 wrote:

IMO, the Nikon A is ridiculously overpriced. Yes, it's small, but an $1,100 camera without a viewfinder is simply absurd, especially with a relatively slow lens (for a prime) and limited external control. No thanks. At $700, it may have been attractive, at $1,100, it's frankly a joke.

I have been thinking about the Coolpix A for a while and can only think that they wanted to attract camera phone users with a high end sensor and price but a cell phone vibe.

 Photomonkey's gear list:Photomonkey's gear list
Kodak Pixpro S-1
Ariston Senior Member • Posts: 2,401
Re: If you've decided on Coolpix A instead of X100s, please share your thinking.
1

AngryCorgi wrote:

For me, I prefer 28mm to 35mm. I also do not care for the xtrans filter. I'm more like to consider a refurb X100 over the X100s for that reason. I also really, really like the portability of the coolpix A and am very comfortable with the Nikon menu interface. While I see the "A" being more properly valued around the $900 price, I figure the choice to build it in Japan has directly resulted in the $200 overvaluation. I'd have no problem with it being built in China or Thailand and save that extra $200. I'm not a country-of-origin-snob like some people appear to be. The lens MTF chart is excellent, especially for a WA lens, and this is a big selling point for me.

the X20 would be a way better option.

Velu Contributing Member • Posts: 505
Re: If you've decided on Coolpix A instead of X100s, please share your thinking.

I'm a photographer ... and therefore would not even consider a camera without a viewfinder !

I did not say you can't take great pictures with a "point n shoot", but again ... as a photographer ... NO ... plenty of reasons !

-- hide signature --

www.veluart.com

LTZ470
LTZ470 Forum Pro • Posts: 11,926
Re: If you've decided on Coolpix A instead of X100s, please share your thinking.

Coolpix A is way smaller, perfect for landscapes…should be super sharp at f/4…combined with RX1…lethal combo...

-- hide signature --

--Really there is a God...and He loves you..
FlickR Photostream:
www.flickr.com/photos/46756347@N08/
Mr Ichiro Kitao, I support the call to upgrade the FZ50.
I will not only buy one but two no questions asked...

rhlpetrus Forum Pro • Posts: 25,922
28mm and no AA, check your shooting habits

First, the non-AA sensor is very enticing. The sensor is the D7000's, which I still think is the best sensor around for APS_C in overal quality.

Me too, I think 28mm is a more versatile lens, since I shoot mostly WA. I have checked my shooting habits and I find I use the WA end of the midrange zoom in 80+% of shots when it's on the camera. It's 17mm or 25.5mm equiv on the D7000. With the V1 I use the 10mm f/2.8 most of the time, for both quality and FoV, and that's 27mm equivalent.

Do a statistic of your shooting habits: see which FL you use the most in your shooting, that may help you decide.

-- hide signature --

Renato. http://www.flickr.com/photos/rhlpedrosa/ OnExposure member http://www.onexposure.net/ Good shooting and good luck (after Ed Murrow)

 rhlpetrus's gear list:rhlpetrus's gear list
Leica D-Lux (Typ 109) Nikon D7000 Nikon 1 V1 Nikon AF-S DX Nikkor 12-24mm f/4G ED-IF Nikon AF Nikkor 35mm f/2D +4 more
InTheMist
InTheMist Veteran Member • Posts: 3,078
Re: If you've decided on Coolpix A instead of X100s, please share your thinking.

This Nikon fan thinks that the X100s stomps the Coolpix A in every conceivable manner other than size.

-- hide signature --

/Ridicule is not C&C nor is it being helpful nor "stating your opinion"
www.flickr.com/InTheMist

 InTheMist's gear list:InTheMist's gear list
Leica M Monochrom (Typ 246) Leica M-Monochrom Nikon 1 AW1 Nikon Df Nikon D810 +18 more
Daniel Lauring
Daniel Lauring Veteran Member • Posts: 9,343
Re: 28mm and no AA, check your shooting habits

rhlpetrus wrote:

The sensor is the D7000's, which I still think is the best sensor around for APS_C in overal quality.

Actually not.  If you consult DXO you'll see the new Sony and Toshiba sensors used in the D5200 and D7100 are the best APS-C sensors out there right now.  They have the best dynamic range and resolution.  IMHO, Nikon isn't serious about mirrorless until they show they are willing to put in the best they have into the effort.  The A is a half hearted, half baked attempt.  Without the best sensor and professional controls, it is too expensive for amateurs and too limiting for professionals.  Typical of Nikon and Canon in the mirrorless arena...too little, too late.  Those to giants of the photography world risk missing the boat on professional mirrorless because they either don't take it seriously, or are trying to protect their SLR cash cow.  They should take a lesson from Kodak (and how it concentrated on it's film cash cow.)

Ray Sachs
Ray Sachs Forum Pro • Posts: 10,580
Re: If you've decided on Coolpix A instead of X100s, please share your thinking.

Velu wrote:

I'm a photographer ... and therefore would not even consider a camera without a viewfinder !

I did not say you can't take great pictures with a "point n shoot", but again ... as a photographer ... NO ... plenty of reasons !

OK genius, tell me which of these PHOTOGRAPHS were taken using a viewfinder and which were not. I'm not claiming any of them are "great pictures" but I'm claiming they're all "photographs" and that I'm the "photographer" who took them. So differentiate for me, PLEASE. Or make a hell of a lot better case than you've made so far...

Go ahead, make my day.

-Ray
-------------------------
http://www.flickr.com/photos/20889767@N05/collections/72157626204295198/

leoda Regular Member • Posts: 224
Re: If you've decided on Coolpix A instead of X100s, please share your thinking.

@ Ray Sachs

Your postings on this thread are overbearing and obnoxious, and personally insulting of the people you are responding to.

If you want to improve your credibility, improve your manners.

photo perzon Veteran Member • Posts: 4,653
Re: If you've decided on Coolpix A instead of X100s, please share your thinking.

InTheMist wrote:

This Nikon fan thinks that the X100s stomps the Coolpix A in every conceivable manner other than size.

Not in the sensor size

eventually Nikon canon and fuji will have x100 and A versions

 photo perzon's gear list:photo perzon's gear list
Olympus Stylus 1 Panasonic Lumix DMC-ZS50 Fujifilm X70 Fujifilm X100F Fujifilm X-T100 +1 more
Ray Sachs
Ray Sachs Forum Pro • Posts: 10,580
Re: If you've decided on Coolpix A instead of X100s, please share your thinking.

leoda wrote:

@ Ray Sachs

Your postings on this thread are overbearing and obnoxious, and personally insulting of the people you are responding to.

If you want to improve your credibility, improve your manners.

Hey, people are entitled to like one camera over another and say why a set of features are better to THEM and I don't have ANY problem with that. But if someone is going to claim that to be a 'photographer', you MUST USE A VIEWFINDER, thereby denigrating all of the photographers who've used cut glass or LCDs or whatever to compose their images as "non-photographers", I'll come at them with all guns blazing and I'll be as nasty and overbearing as they are. If you can show me how I responded in an overbearing and obnoxious way when someone is just stating their case as an opinion without insulting a whole class of people who see photography differently than they do, I'll apologize. But in the case of this particular post, i was probably too nice.

Look, I have an X-Pro - its probably my favorite of my cameras. I shoot it both with and without the viewfinder(s). I have other cameras that have viewfinders and a couple that don't. I will never insult people who prefer to shoot with viewfinders. But if someone who prefers to shoot with viewfinders insults everyone who feels differently by suggesting they're not photographers, I'm going to get right up in their face and be as insulting to them as they just were to a whole class of photographers. And if he CAN differentiate which photographs were taken with and without viewfinders, I'll give him credit for that. But I'm betting he can't, disproving his ridiculous claim.

Looking back at my posts in this thread, I've arguably been obnoxious twice - in both cases to people who claimed that a camera could not be a good camera without a viewfinder. The first guy did not personalize it and claim that those using the non-viewfinder camera were less photographers, just that we were using inferior tools. I used sarcasm in my response. Perhaps I should have toned that one down a bit and still made my point. But the guy in this sub-thread portion of the thread who personally insulted all photographers who choose to shoot without a viewfinder deserved all I could give him and much more that I held back. In retrospect, I'll offer a partial apology for that earlier post, but not the one to this guy - no way.

-Ray
-------------------------
http://www.flickr.com/photos/20889767@N05/collections/72157626204295198/

Ariston Senior Member • Posts: 2,401
Re: If you've decided on Coolpix A instead of X100s, please share your thinking.

LTZ470 wrote:

Coolpix A is way smaller, perfect for landscapes…should be super sharp at f/4…combined with RX1…lethal combo...

I don't get the reference of being way smaller is perfect for landscape. but what I understand is that a small portable camera that can do landscape is a luxury and convenient to have. for landscape photography, the available DP2 Merrill selling for $800 brand new and possibly $500-$600 used is the obvious best choice.

Keyboard shortcuts:
FForum MMy threads