Fuji Nikon COOLPIX A - no threat to X100 or X100s

C

carlb

All-Pro
Definitely a different audience for the newly announced COOLPIX A. For those with a "Point and Shoot" ethos but APS-C envy. Doesn't seem like a huge market segment to me, but perhaps I'm wrong. The X100 and X100s will run-around the Nikon with their better controls, built-in OVF, and their wide-angle lens attachment option.

Anyone see something in the COOLPIX A that I'm missing?
 
I was hoping Nikon would give me a reason to keep things "in the family" as I'm otherwise a Nikon guy. But no... not even close. Too wide, too slow, too little, too late.
 
Yeah, a 28mm field of view and near pocketable size. And a pretty nice set of manual controls - not as classic old-school as the X100, but pretty well done nonetheless. If you prefer a wider angle, as I do, you need to add the WCL-100 to the X100 to get it and then it's a somewhat cumbersome camera - the Nikon is anything but. I like viewfinders but I have cameras without them that I like just as much. I wouldn't want either the X100 or Coolpix A as an only camera, but as ANOTHER camera I see plenty to like in the Nikon. I'll likely check one out and it it improves notably on the GXR-28 (an open question, for sure), I'll buy it.

-Ray
 
For me it would have needed CLS control of at least one speedlight channel, VR lens and an EVF. $1100? No thank you. (I am also a Nikonian)
 
The problem that I see with the Coolpix A is 1) the name, and 2) the projected price. if I were looking for this type of camera I wouldn't dismiss the Nikon in comparison to the Fujis but when it hits the shelves its price needs to reflect the slower lens and lack of eye-level viewfinder.
 
My wife would prefer because it is smaller. She also would be more likely to buy it because it is says Nikon on it (she's NOT a camera person and is more aware of Nikon as a brand associated with great cameras than Fuji....despite a complete lack of Nikons in the house and a regular parade of Fuji's latest and greatest). But I think she might also freak out at the price and no zoom mechanism :rofl:

Also I think the name Coolpix makes it sound like a cute point and shoot and not a serious tool. If it performs well as I expect it well, it will sell in enough numbers to Nikonian loyalists and a few wide-angle guys like Ray. I don't think it will appeal to most Fuji users. Ricoh better show their hand for the GRD V before all the pre-orders are in.
 
I would say cumbersome is a subjective assessment. Hard to see how anyone could say any of these cameras are cumbersome. Then again, I have no problem carrying a D700 + 3 or 4 lenses for 4 or 5 hours when I'm hiking with my dogs. I weigh all of 155 lbs so it's not like you need to be Mr. Universe. I also see people snapping away with DSLR's all the time and nobody paying a bit of attention to them. That said, the one thing I find disappointing about the this camera (and I gave it some thought) is the fact that you are limited to 1/2000. You aren't going to be shooting this at F2.8 in daylight. There does not appear to be a built in ND filter (a really great feature on the X100 or S). Nikon is selling a filter adapter for $130. Then you can buy the viewfinder for $450. So you are now up to $580 + the price of the camera. That puts the price at around $1600. An X100S + Wide angle adapter is about $1800. I guess if smaller is the main selling point OK. It probably will focus faster than the X100S also. So that's two pluses.

That said it's a Nikon, I'm sure they will sell a lot of them. I would bet the lens and sensor are absolutely first rate. Indoors it will probably be a great camera or outdoors above F4. I shoot Nikon also so I like their products, just not this one.
 
Steve B. said:
I would say cumbersome is a subjective assessment. Hard to see how anyone could say any of these cameras are cumbersome. Then again, I have no problem carrying a D700 + 3 or 4 lenses for 4 or 5 hours when I'm hiking with my dogs. I weigh all of 155 lbs so it's not like you need to be Mr. Universe. I also see people snapping away with DSLR's all the time and nobody paying a bit of attention to them. That said, the one thing I find disappointing about the this camera (and I gave it some thought) is the fact that you are limited to 1/2000. You aren't going to be shooting this at F2.8 in daylight. There does not appear to be a built in ND filter (a really great feature on the X100 or S). Nikon is selling a filter adapter for $130. Then you can buy the viewfinder for $450. So you are now up to $580 + the price of the camera. That puts the price at around $1600. An X100S + Wide angle adapter is about $1800. I guess if smaller is the main selling point OK. It probably will focus faster than the X100S also. So that's two pluses.

That said it's a Nikon, I'm sure they will sell a lot of them. I would bet the lens and sensor are absolutely first rate. Indoors it will probably be a great camera or outdoors above F4. I shoot Nikon also so I like their products, just not this one.
Click to expand...

Good points. The size thing is very personal. I suppose it all begins with what do you shoot, and under what conditions.

This camera has no appeal to me. That's a good sensor for sure, and I don't doubt the lens will be capable, so it's not the camera, it's me - I just would not have use for a camera that is so limited.

I will say I continue to be disappointed in Nikon with their smaller cameras. I understand the business case for not threatening your existing lines. However, if you don't innovate someone else will and you will lose share anyway. Apart from it's lack of appeal to me, I simply find it crippled and disappointing, with no standout or redeeming features that set Nikon apart. A good but not cutting edge sensor, likely just 'good enough' AF, and most of all, no built-in VF. Most Nikon users who spend over $1k on cameras use a VF.

It's OK, and may even sell OK. But for me it just reveals Nikon as not taking this portion of the market seriously. An X100s, even with the 'cumbersome' adaptor, seems to offer more, and more value. Heck, never mind the s, a x100 does too.

I suppose the one advantage is size. Irrelevant to me, and my sense is that it's dubious at best for any deeper success.
 
I guess I used the word cumbersome - just to be clear I don't find the X100 or X100s to be at all cumbersome in its basic configuration. But if I were to buy one, I'd get it with the WCL-100 and leave that on most of the time. And with that lens protruding a good way off the front of the camera and blocking a good chunk of the OVF, to me it THEN becomes somewhat cumbersome, or at least loses a lot of that sort of perfect sized charm it has in its basic configuration. I have an X-Pro and an 18mm. If the X100 was designed at 18mm, I'd be all over it. But with its add-on lens, as stellar a lens as it seems to be, I'd rather just stick with the X-Pro and the 18 - the body is larger but the lens is more in proportion. And the X-Pro is not a small camera by any means, particularly with some really large lenses coming down the pike. Which is fine - I'll bet they'll be stellar lenses like the 14 has shown itself to be. But if I buy this "OTHER" camera, as much as I loved the size and feel of the X100 when I had it, I'd prefer the "A" for being the right focal length and more easily coat pocketable and even sort of pants pocketable. It's basically the same length and height as my LX7 and is a good deal thinner and I occasionally stick the LX7 in a pants pocket, so I imagine I'd do that even more with the "A". Which is not my sole criteria by a long shot, But all other things being equal, its not a bad thing if the controls are still good.

I loved the X100 and found it difficult to sell when I got the X-Pro - if it was a 28mm equivalent there would be no question for me. But to GET it to that point, it loses some of that perfect-size, all in proportion, goodness and becomes, at least to me, somewhat cumbersome....

-Ray
 
I'm sure I am not the 'target customer' for this Nikon, the RX100, the Oly XZ, and similar pieces.

My age is showing, but my idea of a compact camera goes back to HiMatics, Canonets, Rolle 35's, or at the last, the fixed lens Konica Hexar. The idea was that these were fixed lens cameras with full control and some automation, good lens, hotshoe, you could add filters, etc. And I've been a long-time Nikon fan: My Dad had an original F with the clip-on selenium meter, so I was sucked in a long time ago. I would love an F6 while there's still time . . . . .

But for the life of me, I cannot understand this new planform where I can have an add-on viewfinder or a flash, but not both. Plus I've got to hand it to Nikon on this one: For that little hotshoe optical finder, they want $450. And I thought Sony was charging nosebleed prices for RX-1 accessories !

So I suppose you can see I was hard-wired for X-cams long ago.

Really. $450. Really.
 
the sardonic iconic said:
Cybershot. Powershot. Coolpix. Finepix.

All terrible, from a scale of macho to docile. I suggest Cyberpix, or Powerfine.... the best of both worlds.
Click to expand...

I love it. I've never looked at their names in that way before, but they really are dreadful!

Cybershot - created at a time when 'cyber' was a pop-culture indicator of trendy futurism, with that Bubblegum Crisis feeling.

Powershot - who cares about the future, this camera gives you POWER!

Coolpix - obviously dreamed up over a late, late brainstorming session in Tokyo. Kurupikksu.

Finepix - I give up.
 
I have wondered how long it would take Nikon to join the brotherhood, alas, I think they may have missed the boat and despite the camera looking nice and being small I see nothing that would make me consider it in place of my X100.

The cost seems high and add to that the crazy price for an optical viewfinder, it is obvious someone has been looking at the Sony pricing structure and thought they could follow suite.

If Nikon had released it with a full frame sensor I think there would be a lot of interest especially at that price point but, for what it offer for the price I for one will pass it by!
 
the sardonic iconic said:
Yeah... as a Nikon guy this one is insanely hard to defend. It's etched glass in a tube. Plus the fact that, as you mentioned, it also means you can't use a flash/trigger/etc.
Click to expand...

Its utterly ridiculous but, as Nic noted, less then the Sony option for the RX1. Fortunately, there are plenty of far less expensive hotshoe mount optical viewfinders available with a 28mm field of view. I have an Olympus OVF I paid about $45 for that's made for 35mm at a 4:3 aspect ratio, but I've checked it with 28 at 3:2 and it works well enough - i just have to mentally cut off a sliver at the top and the bottom and extend the view out past the framelines to edge of the viewable area. But frankly, with a 28mm angle of view, I very rarely use a finder and rarely need it even when I do. I've had a GRD3 and/or a GXR-28 for a few years now and had an awesome little Ricoh OVF and I never ended up using it. So I'm excited about this as a great non-viewfinder camera. I sometimes use viewfinders for ultra-wide lenses and usually portrait length or longer, but rarely in the 24-35 range. I'm just more comfortable framing from different angles with those lenses and either use the LCD or frame on instinct, which I've gotten quite good at over time.

-Ray
 
I don't find the lack of an eye-level viewfinder (overpriced OVF aside) on the Coolpix A to be a problem, except for this camera being priced at a point where you start to think that it might have one. For a sizable portion of the camera buying market, eye-level viewfinders went from "must have" to "nice to have" as soon as they figured out how to get a decent sized LCD/OLED panel on the back of a camera.
 

Similar threads

R
Fuji Nikon d7000 vs Fujifilm x100 vs x100s vs x pro 1?
Replies
4
Views
2K
EgillBjarki
E
Biro
Fuji X100S or X100?
Replies
7
Views
3K
Iansky
Iansky
Matero
    • Like
Fuji Little help needed to make a decision, X100 vs X100S or wait X100T (or whatever)
Replies
14
Views
4K
rpavich
R
Back
Top