The image above was taken with the Nikon COOLPIX A. The camera was set to Aperture priority mode and f5.6 was selected as this produced the best result from the lens. With the sensitivity set to 100 ISO the camera metered an exposure of 1/320. As usual for this test the camera was otherwise left on the default settings. The Olympus XZ-2 produced its best results at f4 where it metered 1/800th with the sensitivity set to 100 ISO.

Conditions on the day were bright Spring sunshine producing a scene with a high tonal range with bright highlights and deep shadows. Overall the COOLPIX A did a good job with the exposure producing a result capturing the full tonal range with the tiniest bit of clipping in the shadows on the RGB histogram.

As for the crops, the first one shows a good level of detail with the smaller architectural features of the chapel clearly visible. You can clearly make out detail in the stonework as well as in the grass and rocky outcrops in the forecround.

The slight atmospheric haze means the lighthouse isn’t as distinct as it often is so we can’t learn much from that, but the chimneys and window frames of the middle distance and foreground of this crop again show a good level of detail with clean edges. You can make out the individual tiles on the roof in the near foreground of this crop. The edges and fine detail in the third crop from closer to the edge of the frame are also very good and this is one area in which the COOLPIX A’s fixed focal length prime lens wins out over competitor zooms where the edge details tends to suffer compared with the centre of the frame. There’s not a hint of chromatic aberration here either, although Nikon may be correcting it in-camera. In the final crop back in the centre of the frame once again there’s very little to complain about with nice crisp edges on the window frames and fine detail well resolved by the lens and sensor combination.

Compared with the crops from the 12 Megapixel Olympus XZ-2, the 16 Megapixel COOLPIX A crops show a smaller area with larger detail. The other thing to remember here is that the APS-C sized sensor in the COOLPIX A is physically larger with a much bigger surface area than the 1/1.7in sensor in the Olympus XZ-2. The first crop from the XZ-2 does look just a little softer with the fine detail not so clearly picked out. Likewise, the edges in the second crop don’t look quite so crisp as on the COOLPIX A, but at this stage it’s hard to tell if this is just a consequence of the different sized detail or there’s something more going on.

In the third crop from the frame edge there’s a clear difference between the quality of the COOLPIX A and the Olympus XZ-2 though. The XZ2 crop not only suffers from quite visible colour fringing but the edges are much softer and smaller details are blurry. Back in the centre of the frame for the fourth crop, there’s much less of a difference, but this crop I think confirms what the first two hint at. The edges and fine detail in the Olympus XZ-2 crop aren’t as crisp and clearly defined as in the COOLPIX A crop. Taken overall, these crops show that the larger, higher resolution sensor in the COOLPIX A, combined with its 28mm prime lens produces clearer, sharper, better images with a higher level of detail than the Olympus XZ-2 with its smaller 12 Megapixel sensor and 3x zoom.

My COOLPIX A RAW quality results on the next page will provide evidence of how much, if any, of the difference is due to processing. Alternatively, see how these models compare at higher sensitivities in my COOLPIX A Noise results.

The image above was taken with the Nikon COOLPIX A. The camera was set to Aperture priority mode and f5.6 was selected as this produced the best result form the lens. With the ISO sensitivity set to 100 ISO the camera metered an exposure of 1/320. As usual for this test the camera was otherwise left on the default settings. The Olympus XZ-2 produced its best results at f4 where it metered 1/800th with the sensitivity set to 100 ISO.

I processed both files in Adobe Camera RAW using identical settings: Sharpening at 70 / 0.5 / 36 / 10, Luminance and Colour Noise Reduction both set to zero, and the Process to 2012 with the Adobe Standard profile. To reduce white balance differences I also set the white balance to for both files to 6000k. These settings were chosen to reveal the differences in sensor quality and isolate them from in-camera processing. The high degree of sharpening with a small radius enhances the finest details without causing undesirable artefacts, while the zero noise reduction unveils what’s really going on behind the scenes.

This set of crops from the COOLPIX A’s RAW files processed in Adobe Camera RAW 7.4 shows the most detail I’ve yet seen from an APS-C sensor. It was fortunate that Adobe released an update to camera RAW adding support for the COOLPIX A’s RAW files the day before we were due to publish this review. So credit is due to Adobe as well as to Nikon for these excellent results.

In the first crop you can clearly make out the finer detail in the chapel walls though, interestingly, there looks to be a little bit of a red fringe around the door suggesting Nikon is correcting some fringing on in-camera JPEGs. Despite the slightly hazy conditions you can also make out the lamp room of the light house and the foreground roofs and windows are crisply defined. The quality of the lens is really brought out in the third crop which has detail as sharp as anywhere else. It also backs up Nikons claim that aberrations have been dealt with optically and no digital massageing is required to eliminate them.

The fourth and final crop from close to the middle of the frame is the most impressive though. The level of detail here is pretty high by any standards from the stonework in the distant building with the white van parked in front to the individual roof tiles visible on the buildings in the foreground. It’s clear to see that the COOLPIX A’s 16 Megapixel sensor is without doubt resolving more detail than the Olympus XZ-2 and judging by these results I’d say it’s likely it also outperforms many APS-C DSLRs. If this is indicative of the kind of quality it’s possible to achieve without the optical low pass filter it’s likely we’ll see many more manufacturers taking this route in future.

Now see how these models compare at higher sensitivities in my Nikon COOLPIX A Noise results.

To compare RAW noise levels under real-life conditions, I shot this scene with the Nikon COOLPIX A and the Olympus XZ-2, within a few moments of each other at each of their ISO sensitivity settings.

The Nikon COOLPIX A has a 28mm equivalent fixed focal length lens. To match its field of the view the zoom lens on the Olympus XZ-2 was set to its 28mm equivalent maximum wide angle position.

The COOLPIX A lacks image stabilisation and it was disabled on the XZ-2 for this tripod-mounted test. All other camera settings were left on the defaults.

To compare noise levels under real-life conditions, I shot this scene with the Nikon COOLPIX A and the Olympus XZ-2, within a few moments of each other using their best quality JPEG settings at each of their ISO sensitivity settings.

The Nikon COOLPIX A has a 28mm equivalent fixed focal length lens. To match its field of the view the zoom lens on the Olympus XZ-2 was set to its 28mm equivalent maximum wide angle position.

The COOLPIX A lacks image stabilisation and it was disabled on the XZ-2 for this tripod-mounted test. All other camera settings were left on the defaults.