Thein's words

[giellaleafapmu]

I was reading Ming Thein's Blog and I stumbled on these words about the Nikon Coolpix A in a mini review of gear he has and which was done after a trip:

"Image quality is superb; the lens is very, very well matched to the sensor indeed. I think the overall image quality is possibly even better than the M9 and 28/2 Summicron-ASPH."

I mean, if it was in a Nikon forum that could be a normal comment done by people who never tried a Leica, but this is in a Blog of a photographer who is very fond of Leica gear and we are talking of a camera lens combo which costs about 12 times less than the Leica. Anyone had the chance to test this thing and compare it to the M9? Has Thein gone insane? I don't like the Coolpix A but if there is any truth in Thein's words and given the fact that probably in a while the Nikon is going to become cheaper this could be a nice proposition.

GLF

 

[NicoM]

There are many cameras/lenses that have the same/exceed Leica image quality, at a fraction of the cost. This isn't really a new phenomenon.

 

[back alley]

i wish it were cheaper...

 

[giellaleafapmu]

There are many cameras/lenses that have the same/exceed Leica image quality, at a fraction of the cost. This isn't really a new phenomenon.

Yep, I know, even a D800e with a 28mm f1.8 is less than a third of the price of a Leica, not to mention the Sigma with Foevon sensor, it is really not difficult to find cameras cheaper than Leicas. Still the combination of size, IQ, general usabilty and, most importantly, price seems nice in the Coolpix A (even tough I don't like the camera that much at first sight) if anything of what Thein says is true, especially if we wait a few mounts till the prices start getting a bit down.

GLF

 

[Paddy C]

Anyone had the chance to test this thing and compare it to the M9? Has Thein gone insane? I don't like the Coolpix A but if there is any truth in Thein's words and given the fact that probably in a while the Nikon is going to become cheaper this could be a nice proposition.

GLF

IIRC, Lloyd Chambers may have said something similar regarding the Ricoh GR. I can't speak from any sort of experience, but having looked seriously at both cameras and read reviews the lens-sensor combo on both appears to be amazing. Go take a look at Chambers' site and you may be able to find it.

 

[GaryLH]

I have said this before. I have two 35 crons.. An asph version and the v4. Guess which one gets used more.. The one everyone seems to dislike, the v4. I just like the way it draws much better. Yes the asph is sharper and has much better micro contrast, but the lens that is on my Ricoh gxr or CL or m6 more often then not is the 35 cron v4.

Everyone has different views of what makes a good lens/camera combo. Informed opinions count, but at the end of the day, if u can rent or test it out at the store, only u can really judge for yourself.

Gary

 

[35mmdelux]

Except for the high price looks nice to me...BTW how much extra is a viewfinder for the rig? Before you know it you're at M8 range (used of course).

 

[kbg32]

I like the Ricoh GR much much more. It's an extremely responsive camera with great IQ.

 

[Keith]

I think the overall image quality is possibly even better than the M9 and 28/2 Summicron-ASPH."

I'm not a Leica fan boy but this seems a bit 'out there' to me. 😕

 

[NazgulKing]

I'm not a Leica fan boy but this seems a bit 'out there' to me. 😕

The Sony RX1 is reputed to be as good as, if not better than the M9+35mm Summicron ASPH anyhow. So why is this impossible?

 

[Keith]

The Sony RX1 is reputed to be as good as, if not better than the M9+35mm Summicron ASPH anyhow. So why is this impossible?

I can accept that the Sony would have it over the Leica due to its (current generation) full frame sensor and Zeiss optics ... the Nikon I'm skeptical about sorry 😀

 

[noisycheese]

I'm not a Leica fan boy but this seems a bit 'out there' to me. 😕

I'll second that.

I do not doubt that the Nikon in question produces excellent image quality.

But to claim that a 16x24mm sensor in a 16.2mp camera that sells for $1100 USD produces better image quality than a 24x36mm 18mp M9 with a $4300 Summicron M 28mm f/2.0 ASPH lens mounted on it?

🙄 🙄 🙄 🙄

 

[Darthfeeble]

Is it that hard to conceive that another company who has been improving their product for quite some time wouldn't be better than a company who was grudgingly drug, kicking and scratching, into the digital realm? I had an M9, now I don't. It was OK, pretty darn good infact, but not exceptional. Well, in price it was.

 

[peterm1]

Nikons small sensor cameras do surprisingly well if kept within their obvious limits. I recently picked up a P7000 cheaply and found that its low ISO performance is excellent. I have not tried RAW but its JGPs are beautifully processed in camera to produce lovely images. This is a "no nonsence" camera - I have previously owned a Canon G11 and by comparison the Nikon (which otherwise looks and behaves much the same) is bereft of some of the software bells and whistles (such as a large plethroa of scene etc modes - The Nikon only has a few.) What interests me is the image quality and in this department even though the Canon does very well indeed, I have to say the Nikon does even better.

Is it better than say my M8. Maybe it is.

 

[Addy101]

He went with the Ricoh, not the Nikon. And with that bombshell, it is time to end the show....

 

[giellaleafapmu]

He went with the Ricoh, not the Nikon. And with that bombshell, it is time to end the show....

I know this, I read that post of him, I was just surprised to read the sentence in a Blog of a photographer who is usually quite precise in his descriptions and who is both a fan and (I believe) a testimonial of Leica. Probably, all this is good news meaning that level is so high in all brands that there is really little difference between superexpensive Leicas and APS (and probably 4/3) cameras of most makers. Good news for us, maybe not so good for Leica... 😀

GLF

 

[jsrockit]

I know this, I read that post of him, I was just surprised to read the sentence in a Blog of a photographer who is usually quite precise in his descriptions and who is both a fan and (I believe) a testimonial of Leica.

I've always been the type that liked the Leica M for the body more than the lenses. I like the no nonsense approach and I like a RF patch for manual focus (though I prefer AF these days). I was never the type to buy this because the lenses are so great. However, if you buy Leica because of the lenses, then you do know that they outperform most lenses when used wide open. That said, I think many companies are catching up to Leica these days with its lenses. And remember, the film GR lens was made in a LTM too! That should tell you how Ricoh felt about that lens.

 

[Paddy C]

There is a clear benefit to a fixed (non-zoom) lens matched to a sensor. Both can be optimized. Add the fact that both the Coolpix A and GR are a stop slower than the Leica and it seems completely plausible to me.

 

[Godfrey]

MT is a good photographer and a good writer.
Whether I agree with his equipment reviews and biases ... er, no. That's just infotainment to me.

G

 

[redisburning]

IQ is not min[lens, sensor]

it is highly unlikely that Nikon's lens is better than the 28 Summicron at equal print size. part of that is due to materials and manufacturing budget and part of it is due to the image circle of the sensor. however, it is highly likely that the much newer sensor design in the Nikon, in combination with a lens with a small image circle, remain competitive with the M9 in final output.

this sort of thing is the reason I don't really appreciate guys like Thein and Huff as reviewers. dubious, un-elaborated claims at the expense of a halo product that most people will never see, much less own. and sadly, people respond well to that sort of thing more as a rule than exception.

the sad steps of the plebian buyer:
1. reviewer is provided with product X by company that makes it
2. reviewer with access to premium brand claims product X to be just as good as premium product
3. reviewer points out repeatedly difference in price between product X and premium brand (how many times have you heard "sure (premium product) is a bit better, but not 3,000 dollars better!"?)
4. reviewer must mention that people who like premium product are probably snobs and it's just a tool and you shouldn't care
5. reviewer talks about how his click-through purchase links support content like this
6. reviewer encourages people in their comments sections to have at it over product X vs premium product
7. reviewer returns product X to maker and it is never seen on their site again, while they continue to use premium product despite it being the whipping boy in literally every review they make.

Ive seen this cycle in every hobby. knives, cameras, record players, flashlights, cars; doesn't matter. it's a common technique because it's easy and enough people are stupid enough to keep food on the table and the reviewer gets a steady stream of crap to try out.

this is why I personally prefer Lloyd Chambers; he is a reviewer for the people for whom good enough is not good enough.