Nikon Coolpix A: Mini-review--the first 24 hours.

studio460 · January 21, 2014

[Here's an excerpt from my previous post from my original Nikon Coolpix 'A' thread:]

Just opened the USPS Priority Mail box which was waiting for me [last night] when I got home . . . I just shot a couple of available-light frames in my office, and the colorimetry and overall image quality is contrasty, super-sharp, and pretty. The Nikon A's out-of-camera .JPGs have a "snappy-ness," and "looks-great-out-of-camera-ness" that my NX200 never had . . .

</blockquote>

Nikon Coolpix 'A': First impressions

• The Nikon 'A' is an attractive product--a beautiful piece of minimalist industrial design. • It's significantly less bulky than my Samsung APS-C NX200 mirrorless-ILC. • Turn off the fake shutter sound in the menus, and it's quiet. • The 'A' provides excellent "feel," and superior tactile feedback from all mechanical buttons and controls. • At first blush, the images from the Coolpix 'A' may be even better than ones taken with my Nikon D7000. • Very Nikon-like operationally (e.g., menus, controls, etc.). • My favorite operational feature may be the dedicated ISO button--simply depress and spin the top dial.

Here's a photo I took comparing the size of the Nikon 'A' to my Samsung NX200 APS-C ILC:

First Nikon Coolpix 'A' shots at my desk:

<img src="http://studio460.com/images/NikonA-4.jpg" alt="" /> ISO: 100

<img src="http://studio460.com/images/NikonA-t1.jpg" alt="" /> ISO: 100

<img src="http://studio460.com/images/NikonA-t2.jpg" alt="" /> [100% crop]

First Nikon Coolpix 'A' shots outside: <img src="http://studio460.com/images/NikonA-t9.jpg" alt="" /> ISO: 100

<img src="http://studio460.com/images/NikonA-t3.jpg" alt="" /> ISO: 800

<img src="http://studio460.com/images/NikonA-t4.jpg" alt="" /> ISO: 6,400

<img src="http://studio460.com/images/NikonA-t5.jpg" alt="" /> ISO: 560

mag_miksch · January 21, 2014

to me it seems to be a liitle underexposing

studio460 · January 21, 2014

Mag said:

to me it seems to be a little underexposing

</blockquote>

Possibly. I had the same impression on a few frames as well, but when I auto-corrected in post, the exposure remained the same. I believe the shots at my desk were shot in aperture-priority mode. The shots I took today were all in program mode (I was trying to get an idea of how "smart" the camera's program mode is). Here's a straight-out-of-camera, aperture-priority, matrix-metered exposure, shot in broad daylight--of the other high-contrast, daylight exposures, the camera appeared to do similarly well:

Albins images · January 21, 2014

Ralph, you are doing Nikon a great service!

I am beginning to like the Coolpix A !!

studio460 · January 21, 2014

My apologies if I inadvertently helped to make anyone's wallet lighter. Let me re-post this information again:

The Nikon Store, and other retailers are currently selling Coolpix 'A' refurbs for $899. Plus, the Nikon Store is also offering an additional 10% discount, resulting in a selling price of $809.96, plus tax.

</blockquote>

studio460 · January 21, 2014

AF performance:

I was initially about to post an erroneous review of the Coolpix' AF performance, until I realized I had the Coolpix' AF-mode set to macro the entire day (the lens hunted for a few seconds on every shot). I'll have to do another AF field-test tomorrow to confirm how fast or slow it is under real-world conditions. This was one of my most important performance metrics, since slow AF means missed shots, period. Especially since the Nikon 'A' has gotten somewhat mixed reviews on AF performance--some report it's fast, and some say it's a bit slow.

RaymondC · January 21, 2014

I would like to know how good is the focussing ie AF? Let's say wide open aperture and AF onto the person's eye, do you get the tack sharp'ness? What about in night time and if you wanna AF to the buildings and you shot this on a tripod on base ISO with the self timer. As a SLR user, I've been thinking about this well when I can get a used copy and I prefer the Ricoh GR which is based on the same sensor I think. I can live with a fixed lens.

With those bright light scenarios or tripod scenarios does its APC sensor compare fairly well with a APC dSLR in similar situations?

ilkka_nissila · January 21, 2014

When I was looking for a fixed lens high quality compact, I checked out the Coolpix A, and I tended to prefer its output more than the Fuji X100s that I bought. However, the AF on the Fuji is much faster and I like the optical viewfinder (which would be an accessory on the A). Now that I've used the Fuji for a while I have to say that I find it difficult to post-process the images to match closely what I get from my Nikons and from that point of view maybe I should have purchased the A. But the Fuji does have advantages (fast AF, hybrid viewfinder, f/2 lens) it's just that I've used Nikons so long I find it a bit more difficult to get exactly what I want from the Fuji.

studio460 · January 21, 2014

Yes, I have those same questions, Ray. As I said, I think AF performance (after overall image quality) is the single most important feature in a pricey compact. I do like the full-frame AF point selection on the 'A'. You move the AF point in a smooth vertical or horizontal direction (but, not diagonally) by depressing one side or the other of the multi-selector. At first it moves slowly, then as you keep the selector depressed, it picks up speed. I didn't have any time to shoot any human subjects today at work (I had to uh, work), but I definitely intend to perform the wide-open, AF-point-on-the-eye test at my earliest opportunity. If it's any help, in static tests at my desk, this is what I did (using specific points on my keyboard), and it appeared to work quite well. I'll try to post a report on as many of these AF scenarios as possible, hopefully tomorrow night.

studio460 · January 21, 2014

Ray said:

What about in night time and if you wanna AF to the buildings and you shot this on a tripod on base ISO with the self timer . . . With those bright light scenarios or tripod scenarios does its APC sensor compare fairly well with a APC dSLR in similar situations?

</blockquote>

The Coolpix 'A' does have a self-timer, as well as built-in compatibility with Nikon's low-cost IR remote. With the low-light shots I've done so far (e.g., resting on a desk, or a parking meter on the street) tripod time-exposures should easily be within the realm of this camera. As far as comparing well with a DSLR, the images I've gotten so far appear as good or better than those taken with my Nikon D7000.

studio460 · January 21, 2014

Ilkka said:

. . . Now that I've used the Fuji for a while I have to say that I find it difficult to post-process the images to match closely what I get from my Nikons and from that point of view maybe I should have purchased the A . . .

</blockquote>

It's interesting that you say that, Ilkka. One of the nice surprises about the Coolpix' sensor and in-camera .JPG processing is that there were no surprises. The Nikon picture settings produced out-of-camera .JPGs exactly as I'm used to seeing from my full-sized Nikon bodies. When set to "vivid," colors are rich, saturated, yet still natural. I was never happy with the images from my Samsung sensor, and they definitely had a different "look." This experience made me wary of non-Nikon APS-C compacts, warranted or not.

That said, it's always easy to second-guess your past purchase decisions. As you said, the Fuji has speedier AF, a hybrid viewfinder, and a lens that's a full-stop faster--those aren't insignificant differences, and with cameras this feature-packed, there's always going to be trade-offs.

studio460 · January 21, 2014

Nikon 'A' single-point, auto-focus performance update:

I'm happy to report that single-point, daylight-exterior AF performance appears excellent. It's fast and sure, and an order of magnitude faster than my two-year-old Samsung NX200 ILC (which had a faster, f/2.4 lens). Under normal interior lighting, it's similarly fast. It feels like it only takes a "moment" to acquire and lock focus (I never felt like I was "waiting"). Nor did I experience any hunting or re-focusing. In extremely low-light conditions (office interior with all lights off), it will struggle with low-contrast targets (as would any DSLR), but will still almost immediately lock-on when pointed at a high-contrast target, even in the very dim light of an unlit office interior. I'm not sure why anyone would characterize the Coolpix' AF as "slow." To me, it feels fast. I'll test under more varied conditions to confirm.

Nikon 'A' AF-point selection:

There aren't discrete AF-points which you "tab" through--it behaves as if there's a continuous array of AF-points across the entire sensor area (even if in fact they really are discrete AF-points). The active AF-selection point moves smoothly in either of two axes, controlled by the rotary selector button. Although I wish the AF-point moved a little faster from the get-go, once the selector button has been depressed for a few moments, as I mentioned, it starts to move more rapidly across the screen. Overall, AF-point selection is good, and better than traditional "tabbed" AF points, once the cursor gets going, and allows for very precise AF-point positioning. I didn't realize that modern compacts now allow you to select focus points anywhere in the frame--this can become a huge advantage when making more artistic compositions (plus, avoids the perils of focus-recompose), and is a feature which bests even fancy full-frame Nikon DSLRs.

vrankin · January 21, 2014

Exspeed 2 isn't the fastest AF processor. It killed the P7700 for me, with an active little granddaughter to photograph. Hopefully, Nikon has a premium APS-C compact in the works with Exspeed 4.

studio460 · January 21, 2014

I wouldn't assume that the two systems are directly comparable. The P7700 uses an EXPEED C2, a different processor than the EXPEED 2 used in the Nikon 'A' (how they're different, I have no idea). Plus, I would guess there are other contributing factors which determine the overall performance of an auto-focusing system, beyond just the processor.

kylebybee · January 21, 2014

Doesn't roughly $1,000.00 seem high for a point and shoot? Especialy one that has only one focal length.

studio460 · January 21, 2014

Dynamic range: Daylight-exterior tests.

Attempting to test the Coolpix 'A' more as a fully automated "point-and-shoot," I turned on Active-D lighting (set to "auto"), and shot some daylight tests in program mode. Shooting daylight exteriors rendered impressive dynamic range. What looked blown-out, even just to my eyes, still rendered detail in the sky in the digital capture (will post image samples when I get home). Here's some DxO dynamic range data for reference:

DxO Labs' "landscape" (dynamic range) data:

Nikon D800/E: 14.4 EV Nikon D7000: 13.9 EV Nikon Coolpix 'A': 13.8 EV Nikon D7100: 13.7 EV Ricoh GR: 13.5 EV Fuji X100S: 12.4 EV

studio460 · January 21, 2014

Kyle said:

Doesn't roughly $1,000.00 seem high for a point and shoot? Especialy one that has only one focal length.

</blockquote>

Yes! But, think of it this way . . . think of it as a D7000 with an 18mm f/2.8 lens on it, only much sharper than the AF Nikkor f/2.8D F-mount version. Then make it about the size of a pack of cigarettes (albeit, 100s). At the Nikon refurbished price of $809, it's a bit more attractive. I paid $100 more than the Coolpix' retail selling price of $1,097 for my Samsung APS-C NX200 ($899), and its 16mm lens ($300) back in 2012, and the Coolpix totally out-shoots it in every dimension (except for lens interchangeability). Anyone who owns and uses a Nikon 'A', Ricoh GR, or Fuji X100S, will tell you these new APS-C compacts are in a different league than cameras from just a few years ago. I know it's only a single focal-length, but the image-making capability and operational ease these new compact cameras offer is pretty amazing.

lex_jenkins · January 21, 2014

"Doesn't roughly $1,000.00 seem high for a point and shoot? Especialy one that has only one focal length."

</blockquote>

Actually these are very good values compared with the golden age of P&S 35mm film cameras, when comparable fixed focal length cameras were introduced with MSRPs well over $500 and were less capable.

Take a look back at MSRPs for 1990s models like the Minolta TC-1 (1996 MSRP $2,100!), Nikon 35Ti/28Ti (($1,120-$1,220), Contax T2 ($1,250), Konica Hexar AF ($1,200) and Ricoh GR1 ($800).

APS sensor digital P&S cameras like the Coopix A, Ricoh GR Digital, even the lightly regarded Canon EOS M, all offer more features, better autofocus and exposure, and arguably better resolution than most folks got with typical consumer grade 35mm film, apart from the differences due to recording format sizes.

Granted, these cameras are aimed at a niche market - candid snapshooters, folks who take a camera everywhere but want more than a cell phone cam - but those of us in that niche are fortunate to have these choices. Just a few years ago I wouldn't have bet on any APS sensor digicam being available in a camera this small and selling at a street price of under $1,000.

ShunCheung · January 21, 2014

Yes! But, think of it this way . . .

</blockquote>

As long as you are willing to spend some time to look for it, there are always justifications for a camera (or lens) purchase. :-)

I practice that myself.

Andrew Garrard · January 21, 2014

Ralph: Just to be pedantic, the DxO figures are for the Fujifilm X100, not the X100s. They've not tested any X-Trans sensors yet, I believe, probably because doing raw testing on a non-Bayer layout is tricky. The X100s images show very low noise, but there's some evidence that the available raw converters are doing more digital noise reduction than when processing a Bayer sensor. The X100 is substantially older (pre-D7000, more contemporary with the D90). I suspect the X100s, with a newer sensor, is more comparable to the D7000; all I've got to go on is the images on dpreview. Honestly, while I'm currently taking a hard look at an X100, I'd be very tempted by the X100s if it weren't for the size of the price gap.

I do think these cameras are on the pricey side for what they are (hence my X100 aspirations) - though the finder arrangement and the faster lens bumps up the cost of the Fujis. The Coolpix and Ricoh are reasonably pocketable, whereas the X100s is pretty chunky and more about the "experience" - though my D800 dwarfs it. Sony will gladly sell you a DSC-RX1 if you want to think a Coolpix A is small and cheap. If you won't buy a compact without a zoom the Canon G1x and Leica X Vario will gladly empty your wallet and fill your bag.

Still, there are things that these can do that a DSLR or even mirrorless can't. The integrated ND filter (okay, not Nikon), the quiet leaf shutter and flash sync abilities, the fact that they really fit in a pocket (though comparing an X100 and a DMC-GM1 might be unfair). The Fujis' rangefinder view. I'm tempted for all these reasons - having something I can bring out without drawing too much attention to myself, or use with fill flash in bright light when I'm out and about, is appealing. I just wish they were a bit cheaper. Though that's true of most mirrorless cameras.

Speaking of which... Ralph: I didn't realise you'd spent so much on the NX200. Thank you for the contribution to my salary, but... ouch. I can see why you might expect a lot from its image quality. I forget how much these things cost new(ish) - I got my GF2 as part of a clearance offer (my Panasonic store was changing management) well after its replacement was out, and my V1 was end of life. Most of these cameras ought to be easier to make than a DSLR, but I guess economies of scale and a lot of practice are kicking in.

RaymondC · January 21, 2014

They are on the pricier side. However for a APC compact camera that's a niche. I could always go for a smaller sensor I suppose .. but for a SLR like quality when you have to go light and small ie to the beach, the picnic, travelling with the other half do I wanna take that SLR ..

studio460 · January 21, 2014

CORRECTION:

DxO Labs' "landscape" (dynamic range) data: Nikon D800/E: 14.4 EV Nikon D7000: 13.9 EV Nikon Coolpix 'A': 13.8 EV Nikon D7100: 13.7 EV Ricoh GR: 13.5 EV Fuji X100 [non-S]: 12.4 EV

</blockquote>

As Andrew correctly points out, I mistakenly entered the dynamic range EV data for the much older, Fuji X100 in my previous post, not the X100S (for which there is no DxO data).

studio460 · January 21, 2014

Nikon Coolpix 'A' dynamic range sample images: [out-of-camera .JPGs; Active D-Lighting "on" (auto); program mode.]

studio460 · January 21, 2014

Nikon Coolpix 'A' low-light torture test: [out-of-camera .JPGs; Active D-Lighting "on" (auto); program mode.]

ISO: 6,400; f/2.8 @ 1/60th.

[100% crop]

studio460 · January 21, 2014

Nikon Coolpix 'A' 48-hour impressions:

• The Coolpix' power button is genius. It's a spring-loaded momentary switch: flick inward once, it's on--flick inward again, it's off. Quick, easy, and sure. No "rotating" or "positioning" a click-stopped, power-on knob (something I've fumbled with on many occasions with other compacts). I would've never believed that such a simple design feature can enhance your overall shooting experience, and since you're always trying to conserve battery power, you're constantly using this button. • Yes, the motorized lens has to extend on power-up (and, recede on power-down), but it seems to happen quickly enough not to slow you down from taking your first shot. • Off-center compositions requiring extreme AF-point positioning is easily accommodated by the full-frame focus point selection. This is a feature (which is non-existent on Nikon's traditional DSLRs) I wasn't aware of, and it's really, really useful. • AF performance is very serviceable under virtually all but the toughest of lighting conditions. It ranges from super-fast, to very acceptable. • Contrast-handling and program-mode shooting is very good, with the camera always exposing slightly to the left (as opposed to "ETTR"). While this can increase shadow noise, the camera is very well-behaved in preserving highlight detail (which I prefer). • For Nikon shooters in particular, the Coolpix 'A' produces familiar colorimetry and scene-rendering on par with other Nikon full-sized, DX-format DSLRs. • The included EN-EL20 battery charger has no cord, and no transformer--an Edison plug just folds out from the bottom of the compact charger. • The premium paid for this level of APS-C performance in such a compact, lightweight package seems well-deserved. • With a $1,000+ camera, you get an upgraded strap! Don't knock it--it's very nice. Stitched black leather-like material that's smooth on the branded side, textured on the "inside." A bold, yet understated, silver Nikon logo adorns each end of the strap. Good-looking, and, just nice!

Sign In

Nikon Coolpix A: Mini-review--the first 24 hours.

Recommended Posts

Link to comment

Share on other sites

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Days

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Days

Link to comment

Share on other sites

Link to comment

Share on other sites

Link to comment

Share on other sites

Link to comment

Share on other sites

Link to comment

Share on other sites

Link to comment

Share on other sites

Link to comment

Share on other sites

Link to comment

Share on other sites

Link to comment

Share on other sites

Link to comment

Share on other sites

Link to comment

Share on other sites

Link to comment

Share on other sites

Link to comment

Share on other sites

Link to comment

Share on other sites

Link to comment

Share on other sites

Link to comment

Share on other sites

Link to comment

Share on other sites

Link to comment

Share on other sites

Link to comment

Share on other sites

Link to comment

Share on other sites

Link to comment

Share on other sites

Link to comment

Share on other sites

Link to comment

Share on other sites

Link to comment

Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

Create an account

Sign in