Better than the Coolpix A (?)

For the images that you shoot, do you save them in RAW or JPEG? Some cameras can't do RAW.

Also, do you print images on large paper? If you do, you might want to look for a camera with more megapixels. If you only view them on the computer screen, then this doesn't matter much unless you are shooting at far-off wildlife, in which case you may be cropping the center of the image. Then you may want the extra megapixels.

–B.G.–

For something really weather and dunk resistant, consider the Coolpix AW 120. Also cold- (14*F) and shock- (2m drop) resistant.

I'd get one but I still have the AW 110 and am very happy with it. I don't think there are a lot of differences between the 2.

It can produce some really good results with a little post-processing with Photoshop. But then, most images need some post-processing.

What is a Coolpix A ?

I'm not familiar with the Nikon Coolpix camera you're looking at so I can't say if the RX100i is better or not.

Best Buy is selling the RX100i new for $500 but there are a number of them available on Amazon used and refurbished for less than $350. I had an opportunity to play with the mark one for about a week and thought that it was pretty wonderful but that I wanted the tilting screen and view finder enough to save my pennies for the iii. I was pretty impressed with the lens and how fast it is so knowing me, I may buy another mark i and just deal with not having those features.

The only issue I had with mine is that I got it for a song from Best Buy as an "undamaged open box item." Unfortunately that wasn't totally true and the lens cover kept sticking in a partially closed position when I turned it on. It was easy enough to gently tap to get it to open right away but I decided to return it while I was still covered.

One feature the mark i doesn't have, and I believe is absent on the ii and iii as well, is an internal Intervalometer for time lapse photography. There are a couple work-around options available if this is important to you. I only spent any real time researching the mark i and couldn't find a firmware upgrade for it that would include this option or the ability to download the play memories ap for it like I can with my A6000.

Short answer. Good IQ for landscape option… the RX100i is the cat's bootie.

No existential questions Franco.

Sorry I forgot that there is in fact a camera called Coolpix A….

You'll probably get similar results with both. I haven't handled the Nikon but I know it has a great reputation. The only thing I'd be wary of is that focus ring on the Nikon. One more thing to get sand and grit in. GR is smaller/more pocketable and looks like a couple oz lighter. I'd probably spring for the Ricoh mostly because I love the Ricoh user interface and build quality and haven't seen the Nikon, but you'll get killer pics with either.

Thanks Brendan. My main concern is having whatifitis after the fact as regards the Ricoh.

Here's an interesting comparison between the GR and Coolpix A

http://www.ephotozine.com/article/ricoh-gr-vs-nikon-coolpix-a-field-report-22665

Thanks Ian, that's a good one I hadn't yet seen.

I received a PM earlier from someone who would prefer to remain anonymous but she's a physical therapist and her name rhymes with Mennifer Jitol… Apparently the RX100iii does have the ability to download aps, including the Timelapse ap.

Not an APS C sensor but still a fine camera.

I am really, really happy with my RX100iii. I still want an APS-C camera at some point to do more with my 3 yo niece (she's super fun to take pictures of), but for a backpacking camera it just blows me away.

Yea I've been really tempted by the rx100. I'll probably pick up v1 or v2 for backpacking. I love my a7 but am unsure I want to lug that around.

Nathan, i didn't have v1 for long but I'd opt for v2 or v3. V1 lacks a moveable screen which I find really useful for taking pictures of stuff low to the ground or above my head.

Note that the new iii is 24mm, the older ones only 28mm, which to me is a massive difference. For those who don't insist on the largest sensor, the Canon S110 is on sale now for $180. It is smaller and lighter, shoots RAW, and has a great lens. If most shooting is daylight, shooting RAW and using photoshop, the sensor size difference is not so apparent. Note also that both these have moving lens that can easily get bashed in or clogged with dirt.

Found a GR on sale yesterday and couldn't help myself. It should arrive next week and I'll have a little while to get used to it before heading to New Zealand next month.

My wife has an RX100i and while it's better than my S90, the difference was somewhat underwhelming. Hopefully the Ricoh is a good step above either.

The image quality of my Ricoh GR is MUCH better than my old RX100i that broke. I love my ricoh. Sometimes I wish I had a zoom, but the prime lens is so crisp that I forget I need it unless I'm trying for a very specific effect.

In comparison to the coolpix A, the ricoh is a bit more customizable with buttons and functions, and has a better grip. The ricoh isn't discontinued either like the coolpix a, so there may be a few more firmware updates in the future.

Either way, the coolpix a and the ricoh gr are the best pocketable cameras current made, IMO.
100x better than something decent like the Canon S110, and 1000x better than regular point and shoots like the aw110 mentioned above.

Also, carry your camera on your shoulder with a lowepro dashpoint case so you don't drop it in the river. :-)

How is the Ricoh GR size wise as a pocketable camera?

Its very pocketable if you don't care much about a filter. However if you want a filter, the tube attachment makes it too big to be pocketed. However the tube seals up the lens a bit more to keep it clean, so i always have the filter tube on the camera with a polarizer and i just use my dashpoint 20 case. Its easy to pop off the filter tube if you don't want it on (low light, etc).

As it happens I was able to buy a Ricoh GR with a coupon back in December. It wasn't quite 400 bucks, but it was close so I went for it. I've been using two different S90s exclusively since 2009, and felt like I had gotten pretty close to that cameras limits. Having wanted a little more for a while, a trip to New Zealand in January and a kid coming this summer seemed like a good excuse to buy something.

I like taking pictures, but don't put a ton of time and effort into it. I tend to run and gun throughout the day and rarely stop for more than a minute to shoot.

Overall I like the GR. The controls are very well thought out. I can do pretty much any mode changes I want with gloves on, which hasn't been the case since I gave up my FM2n. The camera powers up super fast for a digital, and the burst mode works very well. The routine useability of the GR is a massive improvement over the S90.

I find the autofocus on the GR underwhelming. Detailed reading of the manual reveals what the various settings do, and with practice I've been able to mostly get it to do what I want, but I'd still characterize the close focus/macro ability as just plain poor. This remains a big disappointment given the cost.

Image quality is better than the S90, and I'd spitball it as on par or better than my wife's RX100 mark1. It prints tack sharp. I still lust after a DP2M, but it's probable that my skill and lack of dedication are holding the GR back. Video quality and sound are also very good.

I haven't had durability issues with the plastic body, but I do worry about it. The light weight is nice, but if given a vote I'd pick a metal body instead. I also dislike the large hollow around the lens when it's open and deployed. It functions as a huge catch for rain drops and snowflakes and I worry about the longterm impact on the cameras life.

Overall I'm happy with the GR. It's far from perfect but has been a worthy investment.