Well, this really goes here

http://nikonrumors.com/forum/topic.php?id=3889&page=9

If like me you are having any problems with the view only coming up in the EVF instead of the rear screen, I found a tip that actually works from Earl Rich in Mont Vernon NH. Simply thoroughly clean the EVF and all will go back to the normal duel screens.
We forget sometimes the simple things, or maybe the the sensor in the EVF is super critical about light,
Either way this tip works , thanks Earl.

Glad you can wait - I can. I grew up on TLR and 4x5 ground glass focusing, and I still own a Hasselblad 500C, Mamiya C3 system, a Minolta Autocord, a Kalloflex and a 127 Primo Junior (japanese copy of the baby Rollie). But for street shooting, the comparison should be to my M4P. Those TLRs had shielded hoods and magnifying lenses to allow precise composition and (shudder) manual/selective focusing in sunlight. No matter how much precision you pour into a P&S, of you're basically shooting blind in bright sunlight, why not just use an iPhone?

P7700 Coolpix Thoughts about the display: I've owned all the Coolpix advanced point and shoot cameras. From the P5100 to the P7100 all amazing in their own right. I have to say that I was taken aback when I heard the upcoming P7700 will not have a viewfinder and then I thought how many times I use the viewfinder on my P7100 answer: (not much at all). When I'm not shooting my DSLR I heavily use the LCD on all of my point and shoot cameras as I do with my smartphone. I agree with the user that started the thread in stating that the use of the articulated LCD allows image taking ability at angles you couldn't get looking through a viewfinder unless you are laying on the ground. What I've realized when shooting in a LCD-centric world is that it reminds me of the days of shooting medium format Rolleis and Hassleblads composing the image through a top viewing focus screen. It's a different way of seeing -- if you are accustomed to standard corrected image SLR viewing. I welcome the P7700 I've been able to create amazing images with the use of LCD viewing photography. I cannot wait to get my hands on the P7700.

New x-e1 rumored below 1000 USD, 16 mpx

msmoto said:

As to my thoughts... it does not do anything for me. I want to see the shutter speed dial and the aperture ring from the top. And have Fuji's sensor from the X-Pro 1 in a Nikon which accepts "F" mount lenses.

The new X-E1 will have the same sensor as the X-Pro1, and Novoflex is making an F mount adapter. (and Fuji is making an M mount adapter)

This would make a KILLER combo.

Eric said:

So, I disagree with 'an onymous'. I believe that a viewfinder allows a more stable shooting position, allows more critical focus as a consequence of eyesight adjustment in the VF and it forces the photographer to adopt the cameras viewpoint thus resulting in potentially superior framing. I believe that a rear LCD screen is a great tool for image review and fine focus on a tripod, but a VF still has a place. ... Just because it is old technology does not necessarily mean it should be thrown out.

I agree, except with the P7000 Nikon got it ALL wrong. It has the worst optical viewfinder since the Holga. Axing it on the P7700 makes sense, as it was probably un-used by 99% of the people that bought the P7000/P7100.

In the "not a dslr" category, Fuji has zigged where everyone zagged, and I think they have a real winner with the X-Pro1. So much so that I almost went with it instead of the D7000 when I went to replace it. The "newness" of the new Fuji lens system made me stick with Nikon though, as I would like to see what the next Fuji X-mount bodies and glass have to offer.

Eric, I'm with you. I'm close to purchasing a Fuji X100 or an X-Pro1 (I have 3 Leica M lenses) solely because they are the only APC rangefinder-configuration cameras that have eye-level viewfinders.

One possibility is to use a "Flashpoint LCD Foldaway Viewfinder" (check Amazon) designed to allow videography with eye-level "Liveview" for video. Works wonderfully for my D7000s, but would be really kludgy on a P7700.

And Eric - even if you have eyes that focus when an LCD is 6 inches from your eyes, without the camera clamped to your forehead and cheek, good luck shooting at 1/10 second hand-held.

Mel

Well, the P7700 has a lot of the same specs as the P7000. Same sized sensor, same size LCD display, same lens spec. Presumably it will have improved ISO capability. I'll have to see the reviews, but unless the IQ is significantly better, I doubt I'll upgrade. The Fuji X-Pro1 does look attractive, particularly when the new zoom becomes available.

Lots of folks seem to be enamored with using a rear LCD screen for composing. For me, with my over 50 eyesight, I have to hold the camera too far away to be able to evaluate focus, and then I can't hold it as steady as I want when I get my elbows away from my body. Consequently I believe that there will always be a place for a VF (electronic or optical) that has the ability to compensate for eyesight issues. An articulated LCD screen does keep you out of the mud, but I'm afraid I'd be missing the best shot if I wasn't actually laying down (or climbing up) to see from that perspective...Granted that there are times when you simply cannot frame without an articulated LCD(usually in a crowd), but I rarely run into them . For me, the main advantage of an LCD (aside from image review) is the ability to zoom in for critical focus on tripod shots.

So, I disagree with 'an onymous'. I believe that a viewfinder allows a more stable shooting position, allows more critical focus as a consequence of eyesight adjustment in the VF and it forces the photographer to adopt the cameras viewpoint thus resulting in potentially superior framing. I believe that a rear LCD screen is a great tool for image review and fine focus on a tripod, but a VF still has a place. ... Just because it is old technology does not necessarily mean it should be thrown out.

I've been waiting for the P7100 replacement while considering that, the GX12, the G1X, and the X-10. P7100 was in the lead, just didn't like the partially-articulated screen, especially when there already are cameras with in it in that class, the Canons. That's the part the 7700 got right.

For me, the lack of VF is a game changer.

You're welcome to your opinion. I do not share your opinion. There is nothing you or anyone can say to change that, as my needs, perspective and purpose for the camera may be different than yours.

Maybe there will be more new news tomorrow.

See post from an onymous above

I just posted a p7000 image on PAD. I could be happy with a P7000 or a P7700 if the IQ was adequate. From a usability standpoint, the P7000 is not too bad and I'm sure that the P7700 will be better. Unfortunately, the P7000 is not sharp enough and too noisy. However, since it is two generations newer, the P7700 may be a lot closer to what I want for a "Glove box camera".

I guess I'm old fashioned, but I prefer to have an OVF in bright light. I also prefer an OVF because I can adjust it for my eyesight which means I can snap a shot without putting on glasses.

If Nikon were to put a d7000 sensor into the P7700, I might buy one. Granted, compared to a D4 the P7000 tends to get in the way more than I'd like, but at 1/10 the price I'm willing to be a little forgiving.

My concern is that those little lenses just aren't going to ever have the resolution to support a large sensor and the IQ I'm looking for.

... Years ago I had a Coolpix 5700. It had an EVF and rear LCD, no OVF. Horrible shutter lag and abysmal battery life.... But the concept...

You could put an APS-C sensor in any camera, no problem. The issue is the size of the lens required, and battery life. Look at the Canon G1X and you'll start to see how much of a problem a P&S with a large sensor can be.

Nikon should be able to put a DX sensor in a camera like the V1. The only aspect which requires size is the mirror mechanism. The rest is simply the electronics and mount for the lens. The main aspect of size, like an M9, is to be able to hold it comfortably. And, this is something a lot of the P & S cameras lack is being large enough to hold. The latest Cool[pix is an utter failure in the pro mirrorless camera, but Nikon may have a new model in the wings...maybe with a number like Nikon RD1.....

I want to see Nikon put a DX sensor into a "rangefinder" or EVF or OLED body.

What can be done using current DX glass and eliminating the DSLR viewfinder?

Can you save enough apace to make the camera more compact?

Can you save enough money from eliminating the SLR veiwfinder to pay for an OLED display?

If you use the DX sensor and current DX lenses perhaps you are already having to use too large a body.

I am just wondering how easy, or impossible, it would be for Nikon to design a "rangfinder" type body using the DX sensor and allowing for use of existing DX lenses?

Can Nikon produce a truly pocketable camera (collapsible lens maybe?) with a DX sensor producing IQ equal to that of the top of the line DX DSLR's?

Can we get the D3200 sensor and electronics in a smaller "rangefinder" type form factor?

Is the D3200 the smallest and lightest DX sensor body Nikon can produce?

Maybe what I want is impossible which is why Nikon went with a new sensor size when it created the Nikon 1 system.

Hi, I left the thread open so more folks could jump in and complain about the new camera.... but renamed it so they could find it.

As to my thoughts... it does not do anything for me. I want to see the shutter speed dial and the aperture ring from the top. And have Fuji's sensor from the X-Pro 1 in a Nikon which accepts "F" mount lenses.

Hi everybody, so there we have the new P7700 Coolpix and I couldn't help but notice how many complained on the lack of EVF, so here's my repost below of the post on this forum which I left under the new coolpix announcement post, purposely a challenging tone but hope it could provoke some thoughts on the rather brainwashed habit causing people crying out for an EVF.

---
Repost:

It's an outdated habit to glue your head together with a black box, one have to think why SLR were designed in the first place, not because you should keep your eye glued together with the camera, it was merely a limitation of the old days!
Once upon a time when the camera engineer found a way to let the photographer to see exactly what the lens captured there were no other ways to solve it, but today with the digital era and LCD's people have come to not be able let an old habit go, eg. glue ones eye together with a viewfinder, how absurd.

There is nothing wrong taking picture by viewing the main LCD on the backside of the camera, but something that have left me wondering is, why on earth doesn't camera makers put on a high quality bright OLED displays on cameras, how come something so vital haven't found its home on cameras but instead can be found on nearly any new smart phone these days??

The future isn't EVF, but OLED and other new display technologies allowing for a bright, colour correct and contrast rich images under virtually ANY light conditions, high time to bury an old habit all you above posters complaining about the new Coolpix not having EVF.

---

To add some further input to above post, I for one have found many situations when I can't take a picture without viewing through the viewfinder, it may be because of lack of space, have to take a picture well above, below my height, taking a picture level with the ground but due to muddy dirty wet ground I don't want to lay down... all these 3 situations are true handicaps for a viewfinder while a display (preferably with swivel) wins any day.

Comparing with smart phones, cameras are lacking in the following compartment:
* Virtually all cameras, and in particularly Expensive DSLR's have no OLED display.
* No Gorilla glass, particularly on DSLR's forces one to use a screen protector with No contrast what so ever makes it very hard to view anything under strong light conditions when ruggedness is needed.
* DSLR's have no touch screen
* DSLR's have comparatively small displays, Samsung S3 have 4.8' screen.

A photographers most important tool is ones own eyes, so why not serve the eye with the best display technology in the camera industry is a psychological mystery, a complete blunder in a double sense.

There, what's your thought, are we just old fashioned or what makes it so "difficult" for some people to adopt a new way of using a camera?

And just FYI, my last camera for the past 3 years was the Nikon D700.

Cheers

I saw this mentioned on the BBC. I can think of a lot of very cool things to do with this, not least of which is to turn it into the mother of all electronic viewfinders:
http://spectrum.ieee.org/biomedical/bionics/augmented-reality-in-a-contact-lens/0

They've only got one LED so far, but someday I'll be walking around with one of these wirelessly connected to my Nikon D8 in live view mode.

A little late but... http://nikonrumors.com/2010/02/07/there-is-a-patent-for-a-new-nikon-af-s-nikkor-50mm-f1-2g-lens.aspx

jonnyapple said:
I'm not claiming there's anything wrong with the F-mount, and of course I don't think it will just disappear. Like Niko said, the newer mount would be backward compatible with the F-mount because there's no reason not to make it so.

But what if you could get a full frame 14-24 2.8 that weighs half as much as the current one, takes filters, and costs half as much, too? That is the kind of improvement that I think you might be able to make for wide angle lens design if you didn't have to worry about moving the image from its natural position just behind the lens to where the sensor is currently—3-4 cm behind the lens because the lens has to stay clear of the moving mirror. Telephoto lenses (f>50mm or so) wouldn't change at all because that lens-sensor distance isn't an engineering limitation. In fact, if the sensor size changed, you could have a standard adapter to the new mount for FX and use a teleconverter that expands the image circle to cover the new, larger format.

Powered zoom is not an issue. You can just add contacts to newer bodies on the F-mount and when you have a powered zoom lens it would recognize and drive it.

That wasn't directed at you, I was just wondering if there were any apparent constraints.

Obviously most of us aren't professionals, and can't afford a change, so it'd be nice if the F mount stuck around for say, I dunno, another 100 years or so?

I mean, I'd like to stick old lenses on new bodies. :D

I'm not claiming there's anything wrong with the F-mount, and of course I don't think it will just disappear. Like Niko said, the newer mount would be backward compatible with the F-mount because there's no reason not to make it so.

But what if you could get a full frame 14-24 2.8 that weighs half as much as the current one, takes filters, and costs half as much, too? That is the kind of improvement that I think you might be able to make for wide angle lens design if you didn't have to worry about moving the image from its natural position just behind the lens to where the sensor is currently—3-4 cm behind the lens because the lens has to stay clear of the moving mirror. Telephoto lenses (f>50mm or so) wouldn't change at all because that lens-sensor distance isn't an engineering limitation. In fact, if the sensor size changed, you could have a standard adapter to the new mount for FX and use a teleconverter that expands the image circle to cover the new, larger format.

Powered zoom is not an issue. You can just add contacts to newer bodies on the F-mount and when you have a powered zoom lens it would recognize and drive it.

gelu88 said:
The question right now is what is lacking in the F mount that would require a new design.

It is known that the diameter is too small for a AF-s f 1.2 lens.

Also this mount might not support powered Zooms, which might be important later on.

Thats pretty much all i can think of, I really think the mount will go forward for many decades to come.

That's what I'm wondering too. Are there any engineering issues that make the F mount unusable anyway?

If it's not broken, don't fix it.

Ronin.1 said:
How many people worry about CPM or DOS compatibility on their computers any more? A time comes for everything.

Yes, but it costs me almost nothing to convert my DOS stuff to newer formats. IF you are referring to executable files, then still, it costs relatively little to buy newer versions of most software that people use. My glass costs quite a bit more.

At some point Nikon needs to ask themselves whether backward compatibility of lenses designed for digital capture is really all that important. There is a decent selection of lenses to supply the existing user base for both analog (film) and digital capture. Those with a good selection of F mount lenses would, presumably be able to use an adapter so that they would not need to dump everything immediately.

How many people worry about CPM or DOS compatibility on their computers any more? A time comes for everything.

gelu, I think the main reason it would happen is actually to simplify wide angle design, not go to faster lenses. But I also see it happening to cover larger format sensors. Why? Because eventually you'll push the limits on all the specs and the way to keep selling things is to go to bigger sensors to keep pushing the specs.

I don't see a need either. Not when you have cameras like the D3S that shoots ISO 102,400. I'd rather Nikon work on getting less noise at ISO 102,400 than have to lug around an expensive f.95 or f1.2 FX lens.