Nikon that shoots like iPhone ?

<p>Hi folks, <br>

OK, I may be in the wrong place, but since I'm a Nikon shooter, here I am. Is there a Nikon (or any other brand for that matter), that shoots like an iPhone (slim, smallish, touch screen shooting) but with high quality images like a high-end compact or SLR ? <br>

Apart from the 41Mp Nokia 1020, that is. Perhaps there is a Nikon or some other camera-brand equivalent?<br>

Thanks. </p>

<p> </p>

<p>Reason: my significant other is a brilliant iPhone shooter, but the IQ leaves her wanting. </p>

<p>Hi Wee-Ming, Sony's QX10 and QX100 might serve as a suitable alternative:<br>

<a href="https://www.google.ca/#q=+QX10+and+QX100++">https://www.google.ca/#q=+QX10+and+QX100++</a></p>

<p>Nikon is reported to be working with Google on the camera for the forth coming unlocked Nexus 5 which will have Android KitKat.</p>

<p>No, not really. Is the shutter button really such a bad thing? There are plenty of slim models that are good (and don't count out Canon Elphs) but usually with a button to fire the shutter.</p>

<p>The Sony addon lens could go on the iPhone but it's huge. A future Android phone would just replace the iPhone with a phone that's got a bit better camera but a different interface to learn - not really a nice thing to do to one's wife.</p>

<p>I have an iPhone and absolutely hated using the screen to snap a shot, until I discovered that the volume up button snaps the shutter. I just don't understand why anyone would want to touch the screen, it is the most awkward way to snap a shot I've ever experienced. Whenever I see someone with an iPhone using the screen, I tell them about the volume shutter release and they're incredibly grateful.</p>

<p>My work issues us Blackberry phones, so I don't have an iPhone (I don't have to pay for a plan either, though). But I've always been a bit jealous of those who do. I was thinking of getting the new Nokia Lumia 1020 cameraphone just for fun (which looks more camera than phone), though I don't know how it compares to the iPhone 5s in low light (which apparently is improved in the 'S').</p>

<p>Nokia Lumia 1020:</p>

<p>http://www.nokia.com/us-en/phones/phone/lumia1020/</p>

<blockquote>

<p>my significant other is a brilliant iPhone shooter, but the IQ leaves her wanting.</p>

 

</blockquote>

<p>Brilliant photographer with a poor 'camera' (but good phone?) There's hope for 'proper' cameras after-all. :-)</p>

<p>On a recent horse cross country event, I was joined in my professional position, next to a big jump, by a group of iPhone-carrying parents.</p>

<p>The weather was poor and the light dim and they were all having shutter-lag problems with the inevitable problem of how can it pre-focus on a horse that hasn't 'taken off' yet? Equally interesting were the various comments about the fact that by the afternoon, with a fully charge in the morning, the cameras were running out of juice. None of them managed a day and were all worried that they didn't have the power to check their email or phone home for their partner to pick them up or put the dinner on!</p>

 

<blockquote>

<p>The Sony addon lens could go on the iPhone but it's huge<br>

</p>

</blockquote>

<p>There's no getting away from the truth, my D700 + grip + 70-200mm VRII is simply HUGE compared to pretty much everything else on the course. There's a very good reason for that...that's what it takes to shoot 3000 frames a day in poor weather without re-charging or missing a shot. <br>

<br>

You 'Cannot put a Quart into a Pint-Pot' combined with 'A Jack of all Trades, but a Master of Non' sums up phone-camera hybrids....they are primarily communication devices that happen to take pictures. However, their convenience often captures the shot, 'cos the proper camera is left at home! <br>

<br>

Just to quieten some inevitable replies, I'm not saying you <em>NEED</em> a 6 pound camera to take great photos........Being in the right place @ the right time and with the right skills is as, or sometimes more, important than the right camera.</p>

<p>I found this review of the current crop of cameraphones, including the new iPhone 5s, and the Nokia I mentioned:</p>

<p>http://framework.latimes.com/2013/09/28/iphone-5s-camera-comparison-test/</p>

<p>After reading techradar's review of the Nokia 1020, I'm now solidly <em>against</em> buying this cameraphone. The main reason is Nokia's one-second-longer-than-an-iPhone 5's shutter lag (in fact, speed was one of the main draws of Nikon 1's line-up). Plus, the ultra-long save times for its ultra-large files. Not to mention the fact that Windows Phone 8 (the only platform on which the Nokia phone is available) doesn't support Instagram (WTF, Microsoft?). Here's techradar's less than stellar review:</p>

<p>http://www.techradar.com/us/reviews/phones/mobile-phones/nokia-lumia-1020-1165253/review</p>

<p>In light of that review, the iPhone 5s wins. That said, I think I'll be going back to my Samsung NX200 APS-C ILC, with its fast 16mm f/2.4 lens as a "daily shooter." Not nearly as pocketable as an iPhone (and, the main reason I don't carry it with me everyday), but paying for a data plan I don't really need just isn't worth it to me. But, if Nikon/Google can come up with something better, I'm all ears.</p>

<p>This one ? : <a href="http://nikon.com/news/2013/0905_cpx_02.htm">http://nikon.com/news/2013/0905_cpx_02.htm</a></p>

<p>Firstly, forget Nokia's '41 megapixel' April fool's joke. Even <a href="http://conversations.nokia.com/2013/07/11/nokia-lumia-1020-picture-gallery-zoom-in/">Nokia's press machine </a>can't make its pictures look any better than the average 12 megapixel proper camera with a decent lens. Highly compressed JPEG capture from a 41 megapixel sensor? - Please! It's so tragically ridiculous it's not even laughable.</p>

<p>Wee-Ming, let's remind ourselves of a truism: Cameras don't take great pictures - great photographers do.<br>

It's a fair bet that your partner would take great pictures with any type of image capture device, and all that the camera will affect is the technical quality. So maybe the ergonomics of how it works aren't really that important?</p>

<p>The Nikon touch screen camera linked to above looks like a promising substitute for a camera phone, but other designs have big advantages. For example, a camera with a swivel and tilt LCD can be viewed high or low with ease, and can get low and high angle shots that are nearly impossible with a fixed screen design.</p>

<p>Everything that's been discussed so far has been at 2nd or 3rd hand; with no input from the person who'll actually be using the camera. Wouldn't it be better to discuss your other half's wants in depth, rather than leave it for a bunch of complete strangers (us) to make fairly random suggestions?</p>

<p>I feel obliged, since Samsung are my employer, to mention the Galaxy Camera/S4 zoom/Galaxy NX range. I've no personal experience with them, however.<br />

<br />

RJ: My impression, from reviews, is that the Nokia 41MP cameras are actually pretty good - for an overall image. Can they match a larger sensor with a decent pixel count? Of course not. But - for a phone (and most compacts) - there's a big sensor and half-decent lens in there. A sensor and lens of that size ought to be capable of good capture quality even if its megapixel count was much lower. There's been a lot of rubbish about how the "downsampling" produces good sensitivity - this is rubbish; it can reduce some aliasing issues, but what produces good sensitivity is a large capture area (or at least, a large aperture, which at a given f-stop and field of view means a large sensor).<br />

<br />

Some of Nokia's samples in good light aren't too bad at full resolution, but obviously I'm not in a rush to trade in my D800... (For what it's worth, my own phone is still an elderly HTC, although the screen is failing. I've been known to carry a GF2 around for snaps, and it has a touchscreen, but it's much bulkier than a phone.)</p>

<p>Andrew, I'm not denying that the pictures from Nokia's 1020 are reasonably good <em>for a phone camera</em>. What I object to is the selling of it on megapixel number alone to a gullible market easily swayed by big numbers and hype. This product is the result of pure desperation by Nokia to claw back some of their rapidly dwindling market share with a spurious USP. OK, it's done its job and briefly grabbed some headlines, but really it's just another phone with a camera. Let's get over it!</p>

<p>Nokia would have been much better off dropping their SL5 locking 'security' that's alienated their former customer base and done nothing for sales. They should realise that nobody wants to spend 50 quid and a week's time to get a phone unlocked in these days of competition between service providers and their tariffs.</p>

<p>Interesting question!</p>

<p>But doesn't almost all compacts shoot like a smartphone? That is holding the camera at arms length and using the screen to compose.</p>

<p>The iphone and other smartphones are popular due to having it with you at all times, ease of use and good-enough image quality for most users.</p>

<p>I'd suggest looking for a small great camera and then using your phone to share the images with the rest of the world. So you use the camera as the capture device and then the phone for the rest.</p>

<p>I'd take a look at the Fuji X100S with a wifi card like eye-fi. It's small, no zoom lens that sticks out, it has about the same focal length as the iphone and image quality is awesome.</p>

<p>A camera that is just a little better than the phone might not be enough to actually bring it along. But if it's significantly better as the X100S is, it would be a worth it. With it's retro styling it might also turn into a conversational piece.</p>

<p> </p>

<p>I believe Nikon themselves would do well to upgrade their software and open up to other standards, adding art filters and why not photo apps? And yes, I am thinking of the advanced DSLR models.</p>

<p>Borgis - I could not care less about trying to edit a photo on a low-resolution 3" screen on a camera. Making the interface configurable is another matter entirely, and there are a number of things I'd be doing to the Nikon BIOS if I ever had the free time to hack it!<br />

<br />

Pete: Most cameras don't have a touch screen (though some do). That's probably a primary difference from an iPhone camera experience.<br />

<br />

RJ: The Nokia big sensors are actually pretty big even for a compact camera. But you're quite right that a lot of nonsense has been said about these sensors, and anyone with the delusion that they're a competitor for a D800 or a medium format digital rig is going to be disappointed. I'm actually almost tempted by one to use solely as a compact camera, but attaching them to two phone operating systems that have no appeal to me has thus far put me off. (And the watch with a 41MP sensor in it is a tad too expensive... Besides, I've only just got my Pebble.)</p>

<p>What about Nikon 1 camera (J or S) with a prime lens, like 10/2.8 or 18.5/1.8? While it does not meet the 'touch screen shooting' requirement, it surely meets the rest: slim, smallish, and with high quality images. And it is cheaper than an iPhone ;-)</p>

<p>The problem (here) with the 1 (and I speak as an owner, albeit of the V which is a bit bulkier) is that they're not <i>that</i> small, the menu system was... not designed by Apple, and I'm not sure how much it would gain you. If you want a small device with a 1" sensor, the Sony RX100 variants are pretty convincing. I'm personally not a fan of their interface, but nor was I desperate for a camera in this class. The 1 series have plenty of advantages, but most of them come when you start taking up a lot more space than an iPhone.<br />

<br />

There are micro 4/3 and Sony (and Samsung) interchangeable lens systems that do have touch screens, but they're not incredibly tiny. It depends how "thin" is acceptable...</p>

<blockquote>

<p>"What about Nikon 1 camera (J or S) with a prime lens, like 10/2.8 or 18.5/1.8?"</p>

</blockquote>

<p>Even though I've enjoyed using the V1 and 10-30 VR kit zoom for almost a year, I'm still reluctant to recommend the Nikon 1 System as a system mirrorless camera. It is a great camera if you want a P&S on steroids and don't plan to invest heavily into the "system". The 1 System AF is very quick, and the top panel ergonomics are great - the shutter release feel is excellent, and the video button is handily placed. The rear panel ergonomics... eh, not so much. Better with the V2 and J3 though.<br>

<br>

Other than the reasonably priced S1 and kit zoom, the J-series and V-series models seem high priced compared with the rest of the market. When I bought the V1 and kit zoom for $300 at the December 2012 blowout price, it was the best value in a P&S or compact camera anywhere, bar none. After the prices went up again, not so much. The EOS M is now the best value in a high end P&S camera.<br>

<br>

The CX sensor is much better than any teensy 1/1.7" or smaller sensor on any P&S digicam or cell phone cam. But it's not quite up to the standards of the Micro 4:3, and can't match the APS-C sensor mirrorless models.<br>

<br>

The 1 System has very quick AF, which was a huge factor for me. But some recent model Olympus Micro 4:3 models have comparably quick AF, judging from some YouTube videos.<br>

<br>

Also, the 1 System lacks in-body stabilization. That's a huge factor for me as well. The only VR lenses are variable aperture zooms. While I might be tempted by the 10/2.8 pancake prime, it's still not fast enough to offset my shaky hands in dim lighting. I really need in-body stabilization. Olympus and a couple other mirrorless system cameras offer that - although they're pricey as well.<br>

<br>

And if you do a lot of video the 1 System may not be the best choice. While the HD video is very good, there's no articulating screen, which makes them unhandy for shooting from the perspective of kids and pets, or for accurately framing overhead views in crowds.<br>

<br>

Nikon has some potential but if you don't really need interchangeable lenses the Sony RX100 is the best choice in a one-inch sensor camera (Sony's one-inch sensor isn't the same as Nikon's Aptiva-manufactured CX sensor, other than in size).</p>

<p>I've been reading more cameraphone reviews. I now have a new favorite--the waterproof, Sony Xperia Z1 (Android), and the Nokia Lumia 928 (Windows Phone 8) as a close second.</p>

<p>Lex said:</p>

<blockquote>

<p>Nikon has some potential but if you don't really need interchangeable lenses the Sony RX100 is the best choice in a one-inch sensor camera (Sony's one-inch sensor isn't the same as Nikon's Aptiva-manufactured CX sensor, other than in size).</p>

</blockquote>

<p>No, I don't really need interchangeable lenses--not for a point-and-shoot replacement (plus, I can't seem to find my Samsung NX200). Maybe an RX100 is in my future? Is 1" that bad? Though, I wasn't exactly thrilled with the performance of the APS-C sensor in my Samsung NX200, so perhaps going smaller is a mistake (for whatever reason, I just never liked any of the images from my NX200; however, the images I looked at from the recent crop of Sony NEX models seemed excellent when I demo'd them at a local dealer a couple weeks ago). Maybe I should just buy a NEX6, and be done with it . . . again.</p>

<p>I shoot neither with smartphone nor with Nikon 1 camera. So take my opinion with a grain of salt.<br>

It seems iPhone's camera app is vary basic, and provides features that are enough only for very basic P&S. The sensor is tiny and the (prime) lens is the same. So, as always, it is up to to user - one can find a way to overcome the limitations of the camera, he/she still take good pictures.<br>

This seems to be the case stated in the original post. Plus the need to find a camera that provides better quality images compared to iPhone. There was no need stated for a lot of features and external controls, and viewfinders, and so on.<br>

Hence, Nikon 1 - the smallest camera from Nikon, with a sensor a few times bigger and better than typical P&S cameras. At the same time compact, with few simple controls.</p>

<p>Consider a Nikon Coolpix A or a Ricoh GR for your partner. Ming Thein has a great comparison of these APS C Compacts at http://blog.mingthein.com/2013/05/07/battle-of-the-28mm-compacts-ricoh-gr-vs-nikon-coolpix-a/<br /><br />These seem to be great cameras, but they are limited to one focal length, 28mm equivalent wideangle. This limitation makes them quite compact, so both are pocketable high quality cameras.</p>

<blockquote>

<p>"Is 1" that bad?"</p>

</blockquote>

<p>Far from it. The one-inch or CX sensor is terrific. Nikon proved a P&S type camera is capable of extremely quick AF and frame rates. Sony proved it could be done in a very small camera body, smaller even than some Coolpix models.</p>

<p>I'd like to see Nikon dump the entire teensy sensor Coolpix lineup and make CX their primary Coolpix format, with only two or three distinctly different models: a model with fast midrange zoom for the "serious" snapshooters; a variable aperture superzoom for folks who don't mind the compromises of slow lenses in exchange for the superzoom; and maybe one niche model with a 14mm f/1.4 lens (equivalent to 35/1.4 on 35mm film or FX format) for fans of those great compact rangefinders like the Canonet GIII QL17, etc., or even Nikon's own 35Ti. I don't know how many of the latter Nikon would actually sell, but it'd make 'em the darlings of cult camera buffs and wannabe street shooters and candid photographers.</p>

<p>Keep in mind that I'm biased toward smaller sensors because of the advantages in lens size and DOF. I shoot mostly candids and prefer small cameras - not for "discretion" because I'm not a sneaky hip shooter, but because heavier cameras aggravate my back and neck injuries and wrist arthritis. And I usually prefer a busy milieu. I'm not a bokeh addict who shoots everything at f/1.4 to isolate the subject from cluttered surroundings. To me, the world is a stage and I want to see the surroundings as well as the primary subject. The one-inch sensor is the sweet spot between the advantages of a somewhat larger sensor (reduced noise at high ISOs, overall better resolution of fine detail) and the advantages of a smaller sensor (greater DOF even at f/2.8 or f/4).</p>

<p>And as Steven suggested, the APS-C sensor cameras like the Coolpix A, Ricoh GR and perhaps the EOS M, are tempting alternatives. I love the Ricoh ergonomics - best in any compact camera - but would lean toward the Coolpix A for at least limited TTL flash capability with my SB-800. However the EOS M is heavily discounted now and is easily the best value in an APS sensor compact/mirrorless model.</p>