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

Started Mar 8, 2013 | Discussions
Velu Contributing Member • Posts: 505
Re: If you've decided on Coolpix A instead of X100s, please share your thinking.

We are cool Ray, no need to apologize ... certainly not twice !

And yap ... you'd have an even bigger issue with H.C.B. !!!

Ray Sachs wrote:

Velu wrote:

Yes, Velu is from Belgium and NO, English is not his first language, it's actually his fourth ( Dutch/fFlemish, French and German are the official ones over here ! )

Ray, you were probably too nice. Any jerk deserves such reaction, only ... isn't there a saying in English ... "Never assume !" ?

My comment wasn't meant in a "jerky" way.

At first I did choose not to reply but in order to clear the air I'd like to emphasize a few things.

This is my original mail:

" 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 !"

You read " if you use a camera without a VF, you are not a photographer" ...

I mention that I am a photographer and perhaps this is a first "language barrier"-error.

A "photographer" over here means that you make a living (regardless if that's partly or 100%) by taking pictures, and that's, for several reasons, just not feasable doing so with a camera without VF).

( agreeing or disagreeing with that, we can discuss ...)

THEREFORE , having the choice between two camera's, I'd not even consider the one without a VF !

This might (or might not) clear the air ...

In order to reply the OP I prefer to provide facts. Image quality-wise, no one can tell (yet) ... size, you can ... and size is obvious for anyone ... but the lack or presence of a VF is not that obvious to everyone !

A number of posts here mention the lack of a VF. You "defend" and proof that working without is feasable, but please don't forget, owning several camera's with/without VF provides you with the CHOICE !

There are circumstances and moments you just can't use an lcd. At times using a VF can be more discrete ! Correct framing ... and so on ...

My question to you ... if you have to make the choice ... camera with or without VF ... what's it gonna be ?

By the way, you did post a number of nice "photographs", but unfortunately I'm not a genius so ...

Velu - thank you for the clarification. I DID misinterpret your intent - very probably a language issue - and I hereby apologize unequivocally. I was wrong. Yes, your post does clear the air, rather completely - thank you!

With your additional clarification, I agree with you more or less totally. You're right that by having multiple cameras, I have a choice. In many cases I would choose to go out with a camera without a viewfinder but in some cases I would only choose a camera with one. To me it's less about brightness than focal length because some rear screens have gotten so good in bright sunlight that I'd never hesitate to rely on them. Sony come to mind as the best but others are also very very good now. But for any lens of portrait length or longer, I'd much rather have a viewfinder for the stability both of the composition and the actual firing of the shutter. I just find more precision is needed at those focal lengths. I use my OMD for almost all such shooting and it has an excellent EVF that even uses the stabilizer on while composing the shot - with very long lenses I find this tremendously advantageous.

Ironically, my X-Pro generally is mounted with lenses at wider focal lengths where I'm least likely to feel the need for a viewfinder. But I like the OVF so much on that camera that I use it a lot anyway. I don't need it, but I greatly enjoy it. So I don't claim to be entirely consistent here. If I get the Nikon, it won't replace my Fuji - it would largely replace my essentially fixed lens Ricoh GXR-28 which I've never shot with a viewfinder and don't feel any desire to. So I wouldn't hesitate too buy the Nikon if I see a compelling advantage to use it rather than the Ricoh.

Anyway, sorry for the misunderstanding and, again, my apologies. It seems we actually agree almost completely on this question. If I was to own only one camera (what a terrible thought!) it would almost certainly have a viewfinder - probably the OMD among my current cameras. Not because its my favorite camera - it's not. But because its by far my most versatile and quite capable at everything I've tried doing with it.

PS By the way, the only "connection" I have with H.C.B. is the fact that he had a viewfinder but he even managed to take great pictures through a hole in a fence with his viewfinder blocked

The funny thing is HCB was dismissive in his day of TLR cameras, which were generally shot at waist or belly level. He was quoted as saying something along the lines of 'if god had wanted us to shoot from that angle, he'd have put our eyes in our bellies instead of our heads'. So if he was around today and still held to that opinion, I'd have had a bigger issue with him than I mistakenly thought I had with you! He was highly unforgiving of those who shot without eye-level finders. But I'd still respect him overwhelmingly as a photographer

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

-- hide signature --

www.veluart.com

camerosity Senior Member • Posts: 1,615
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.

Leica X1 retailed for $1999 - with no viewfinder. When the Fuji X100 came out at $1299 it obliterated the Leica X1. Now Leica has the X2, now Fuji the X100S. Getting the picture now?

Nikon is taking aim at the Sony RX100, not the Fuji X100, in this case. And yes, the price for the Nikon A is high, but the price has already fallen a bit for it at Best Buy.

Will I buy the Nikon A? Nope. It looks like a cheap Coolpix to me. Why not design it to look like the Nikon 35Ti or 28Ti? That would get my attention for sure. They had superb Nikon f2.8 fixed focal length lenses, that were considerably more expensive to manufacture as they had to cover a full frame piece of film. There is no reason why Nikon couldn't make a digital 35Ti or 28Ti. I'd buy one. But not the A, which is still a digital point and shoot.

A Nikon P7700 with a DX size sensor? Now you're talking!

 camerosity's gear list:camerosity's gear list
Nikon Coolpix P7800 Nikon Coolpix 990 Nikon 1 V1 Panasonic Lumix DMC-GX85 Nikon 1 J5 +13 more
Dabbler
Dabbler Senior Member • Posts: 2,038
Re: If you've decided on Coolpix A instead of X100s, please share your thinking.

Having the DP2M I can say for landscape it is a good choice. But given all its shortcomings (low battery life, slow autofocus, very slow SDHC write times, etc) I can't agree its the obvious best choice. That designation might go to the D800E ; )

-- hide signature --

Michael

 Dabbler's gear list:Dabbler's gear list
Sony RX10 III Nikon D800 Sony a6000 Sony a7S Sony a7 II +16 more
Ariston Senior Member • Posts: 2,401
Re: If you've decided on Coolpix A instead of X100s, please share your thinking.

Dabbler wrote:

Having the DP2M I can say for landscape it is a good choice. But given all its shortcomings (low battery life, slow autofocus, very slow SDHC write times, etc) I can't agree its the obvious best choice. That designation might go to the D800E ; )

of course, although it was only a reference to the IQ per pixel level compared to the D800E. but ultimately we are making an IQ comparison against the Coolpix A for landscape which IMO wouldn't even be possibly at the same level as the DP2M. anyway, what did push my curiosity further is the DP3M which could be of great use for studio shots for portrait work and macro. I'd like to try one if it's available. I'll be shooting with the DP2M soon. it was suppose to be this week but it's getting pushed back due to my hectic schedule this week.

Daniel Lauring
Daniel Lauring Veteran Member • Posts: 9,343
Re: If you've decided on Coolpix A instead of X100s, please share your thinking.

Ariston wrote:

of course, although it was only a reference to the IQ per pixel level compared to the D800E. but ultimately we are making an IQ comparison against the Coolpix A for landscape which IMO wouldn't even be possibly at the same level as the DP2M.

If Nikon had done this right they would have put the D5200 sensor in the Coolpix A and had a 1.3x crop factor yielding the equivalent of a 15Mp 56mm lens.  Until Nikon puts there best sensors in their mirrorless cameras, they can't be taken seriously.

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

Daniel Lauring wrote:

Ariston wrote:

of course, although it was only a reference to the IQ per pixel level compared to the D800E. but ultimately we are making an IQ comparison against the Coolpix A for landscape which IMO wouldn't even be possibly at the same level as the DP2M.

If Nikon had done this right they would have put the D5200 sensor in the Coolpix A and had a 1.3x crop factor yielding the equivalent of a 15Mp 56mm lens. Until Nikon puts there best sensors in their mirrorless cameras, they can't be taken seriously.

that would be the best thing that Nikon could have done. too bad Nikon is just plain stubborn. anyway, it's their loss. and it's good to have other options.

Canadianguy Senior Member • Posts: 2,075
Re: If you've decided on Coolpix A instead of X100s, please share your thinking.

Companies exists to make money – I don’t think Fuji is any different than Nikon.

It would be interested to see if Fuji releases the 23mm f2 lens for their X-cameras this year per their Roadmap – because it would not help sales of the X100s.

Daniel Lauring wrote:

Ariston wrote:

of course, although it was only a reference to the IQ per pixel level compared to the D800E. but ultimately we are making an IQ comparison against the Coolpix A for landscape which IMO wouldn't even be possibly at the same level as the DP2M.

If Nikon had done this right they would have put the D5200 sensor in the Coolpix A and had a 1.3x crop factor yielding the equivalent of a 15Mp 56mm lens. Until Nikon puts there best sensors in their mirrorless cameras, they can't be taken seriously.

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

Daniel Lauring wrote:

Ariston wrote:

of course, although it was only a reference to the IQ per pixel level compared to the D800E. but ultimately we are making an IQ comparison against the Coolpix A for landscape which IMO wouldn't even be possibly at the same level as the DP2M.

If Nikon had done this right they would have put the D5200 sensor in the Coolpix A and had a 1.3x crop factor yielding the equivalent of a 15Mp 56mm lens. Until Nikon puts there best sensors in their mirrorless cameras, they can't be taken seriously.

Well, given the shadow banding issues being shown from the D5200 in numerous threads on here, I'm not so sure the D5200 sensor > D5100 sensor. The D5100/D7000 sensor is one of the best available on the market even today. When the X100 came out, Fuji sourced a Sony 12MP sensor with a 12-bit ADC while the D7000 (announced 4 days BEFORE the X100) made use of a newer Sony 16MP sensor with a 14-bit ADC and some small in-house tweaks from Nikon.  Pentax did the same thing. Fuji had access to the same base sensor from Sony, but opted to save money and use the cheaper sensor that had been around a while already. Does that mean the X100 should not have been take seriously??

I'm not following your logic.

-- hide signature --

-AC-

Clint Dunn Senior Member • Posts: 1,553
Re: Nonsense...
1

marike6 wrote:

InTheMist wrote:

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

No offense, but that statement is utter nonsense.

I'm guessing you've never worked with X-Trans RAW files in Lightroom because if you had you wouldn't be talking about "stomping". A Nikon DSLR shooter who has a specific and successful workflow, but with the X100s needs to go messing around with Silkypix or Capture One just to get Fujifilm RAW files to look anywhere near as detailed as 8-bit JPEGs, has certainly not "conceived" of all the pros and cons of each camera.

Marike6 - Have you been living under a stump??  LR4.4 has vastly improved RAW conversion for XTrans.....if you haven't tried it go download it.

-- hide signature --
 Clint Dunn's gear list:Clint Dunn's gear list
Leica SL (Typ 601) Carl Zeiss C Sonnar T* 1,5/50 ZM Voigtlander 15mm F4.5 Super Wide Heliar Carl Zeiss Distagon T* 1,4/35 ZM Leica SL 24-90mm F2.8-4 +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.

Canadianguy wrote:

Companies exists to make money – I don’t think Fuji is any different than Nikon.

It would be interested to see if Fuji releases the 23mm f2 lens for their X-cameras this year per their Roadmap – because it would not help sales of the X100s.

I believe it's a 23mm f1.4, not f2.0. But I think your question is even more valid with a faster coming lens. Although I'd expect such a lens to be somewhat close to the X100s in price, so it might not hurt the camera sales since some may see the price of the lens and decide to get the whole camera instead...

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

Keyboard shortcuts:
FForum MMy threads