The Nikon One Touch Zoom or: How I Learned To Stop Worrying and Love the Point-and-Shoot

The Nikon One Touch Zoom or: How I Learned To Stop Worrying and Love the Point-and-Shoot

2000 1125 Josh Solomon

I’ve tried on multiple occasions to understand the hype behind the point-and-shoot set. Really, I tried it here. And here. And here. And here, too, to an extent. The conversation surrounding the hype and price of point-and-shoots is seemingly inescapable, and it’s admittedly ruined an entire genre of cameras for me.

But after finding a rather nondescript Nikon One Touch Zoom at my local thrift store for eight whole dollars and shooting it over the past month, I’ve been thinking maybe that angle, and maybe that entire conversation, misses the point. This camera has single-handedly changed my perception of the point-and-shoot camera genre as a whole, but it didn’t do it through being stellar at any one thing. It did it through being completely, remarkably average.

Befitting of the philosophy of expendability that defined consumer electronics in the 1990s, there’s not much history or information available on the so-called Nikon One Touch Zoom. It was released some time in 1997 to little fanfare, and can be seen as just another drop in the sea of blobby consumer point-and-shoots from the ’90s. A look at the specs of the Nikon One Touch Zoom basically confirms this.

It has a six-element in six-groups 38-70mm f/4.7-f/8 zoom lens that focuses down to 0.8m (2.6 ft). It’s controlled by some kind of autofocusing system and some kind of metering system, partially controlled by a DX coding system that supports ISO 100, 200, 400, and 1000 (sorry, 800 shooters). It has a built in-flash with (importantly) a built-in diffuser. Additionally it features an auto mode, a flash-always-on mode, a flash-off mode, a red-eye reduction mode, and it even supports mid-roll rewind if you wanna get freaky. It’s well-equipped, sure, but it doesn’t offer much more than any other point-and-shoot of the era.

The staleness of its specifications should look familiar to any avid Nikon user. Nikon has always eschewed using new tech in favor of stellar execution, and the same philosophy shows in this otherwise anonymous camera. The lens, although slow and prone to vignetting, is pretty sharp. Its zoom range is continuous, meaning that from 38-70mm, every focal length is available for use (great for me, as I am a 50mm die-hard). Its viewfinder zooms in along with the changes in focal length, something a Leica M wishes it could do. Even the somewhat pesky automatically-on flash system is stellar, and the built in diffuser makes even head-on fill flash look impressively natural (and I would say better than a Yashica T4). I’m convinced that, in the right hands, this camera can serve even a professional photographer well in a backup or vacation camera role, which is something I can’t say of some of the more hyped point-and-shoots out there.

It does, however, have its faults. The framelines in the viewfinder are hard to see in most lighting situations, the parallax correction lines doubly so. The AF is a little slow and the shutter lag is immense. The camera will sometimes even prevent itself from taking a picture if the flash isn’t charged, if the lighting conditions are simply too intense, or, in my experience, if it simply doesn’t feel like it. Its battery door isn’t the sturdiest, and the flexible ribbon that connects the battery to the rest of the camera is completely exposed, meaning that it could brick out if you’re not careful.

Perhaps the worst insult you can hurl at the Nikon One Touch Zoom is that it’s completely anonymous. It doesn’t have the capabilities, the looks, or the clout of the often Instagrammed luxury point-and-shoots, and is practically indistinguishable from its consumer-focused competition. It’s not some sleeper camera that’ll trounce a Contax T-series camera or render a Nikon F4 irrelevant, nor does it really punch above its weight. It’s just another little point-and-shoot that happens to make nice-enough images.

Herein lies the paradox of the Nikon One Touch Zoom, as well as many other faceless point-and-shoots – its anonymity is its identity. It’s truly just another camera. You touch a button, you get a picture. It’s that simple idea that makes point-and-shoots such great cameras in the first place, and what the Nikon One Touch Zoom AF gets so, so very right.

I’ve come to love the Nikon One Touch Zoom not because it offers anything different, but because it’s unremarkable. I’ve touched on this before with the Pentax K1000 – the beauty of a completely unremarkable camera is that you end up loving photography more than you love the camera. The lack of control afforded by a point-and-shoot encourages the shooter to just take casual, fun photos without any thought towards high art (although again, in the right hands, it certainly can make stellar photos).

What comes out on the other side are, more often than not, are memories distilled in their most basic form. When I got my scans back, I wasn’t overly impressed by the image quality (although the flash diffuser looked pretty good), but I was more taken by the memories this camera so casually captured. I remembered Tweezy the Vendor, the cotton candy vendor who heckled me for not having a bigger camera (to which I responded by holding up my F3 with a zoom lens); I remembered having dinner with my friends for the first time in over a year and singing “I’m With You” by Avril Lavigne with them at karaoke; I remembered developing cinema film for the first time in my friend’s girlfriend’s bathroom and getting grossed out by remjet runoff; I remembered taking my nephew to his first baseball game and seeing him smile when he recognized the field he saw on TV in real life. That little Nikon helped me document all of these moments without taking me out of the moments, as some complicated pro-spec cameras sometimes do. And at a time when happy experiences and memories are hard to come by, that’s worth everything to me.

I realize now that the simple joy of documenting life around you is the one thing point-and-shoots are best suited for, and the one thing I missed when evaluating them. Again, the point-and-shoot conversation online is so focused on market value (and capitalizing on that market value) that it’s hard to remember that we’re still dealing with cameras that, you know, take pictures. With this hyperfixation on cameras-as-investments, the conversation honestly starts to sound more like NBA free agency, trading stocks, or investing in crypto than it does photography. I know it’s important to acknowledge market value and that it’s a part of the hobby, but I hate that I’ve let that overtake my own enjoyment of these things as cameras or as things that could take pictures. Because when all is said and done, I’ve come to love this random little blob of a camera, no matter what it’s worth or will ever be worth.

So for those who need to know, here’s that value conversation: the Nikon One Touch Zoom cost me eight bucks at a thrift store. A quick search online has them at around twenty-five bucks. Will the price increase after the publishing of this article? I truly don’t know, and I think it would be arrogant of me to assume that it would, even though it seems to be the popular assumption in the comment sections. Nevertheless, if something happens, just find another zoom lens-equipped point-and-shoot. As James has pointed out here, there’s a billion of them. Find a working Pentax IQ Zoom, a Minolta Freedom, a Canon Sure Shot Zoom, or a Ricoh something-or-other. Doesn’t matter what it is, who shoots it, what it can or can’t do, what it’s worth or not worth. Just shoot it. Take photos of the people and places you love. After all, that’s what these cameras were made for.

Find your Nikon point and shoot on eBay here

Buy one from our shop at F Stop Cameras

Follow Casual Photophile on Facebook and Instagram

[Some of the links in this article will direct users to our affiliates at B&H Photo, Amazon, and eBay. By purchasing anything using these links, Casual Photophile may receive a small commission at no additional charge to you. This helps Casual Photophile produce the content we produce. Many thanks for your support.]

Josh Solomon

Josh Solomon is a freelance writer and touring bassist living in Los Angeles. He has an affinity for all things analog. When not onstage, you can find him roaming around Southern California shooting film and humming a tune.

All stories by:Josh Solomon
  • The most important word is: NIKON
    I have used this brand late, but I have ever known that this is a fantastic brand.
    Since I have some Nikon gears, this is a brand we can trust : they are serious (Japanese), they have great quality.
    What I like here we help us to want this camera. I believe by your review this is a great camera, I have just to add with Nikon we can’t go wrong.

  • A friend gave me his dad’s old early-2000s Nikon Lite Touch Zoom 70 Ws AF camera, and I took it with me on holiday this summer – has a lovely sharp lens, particularly great for portraits, I find. Have uploaded a few shots to Flickr, if you search for user “Warm Seas” – I shot on Ilford FP4, Kodak Ektar 100 and Agfaphoto APX400. Lovely review – thank you.

  • The high price tags on all the hyped, prime-lens 90s compacts has meant that I’ve avoided them. But I have been pleasantly surprised with the zoom compacts of the era. As long as I stay within their limitations, I’ve gotten good results. And so many of them can be had for $10-20. Thanks for the great review, Josh!

    • Definitely with you on that. Of the point-and-shoots i’ve tested for the site, the zoom-equipped versions have impressed me far more! Thanks for reading.

  • My One Touch rests on a bookshelf, my only ‘display’ camera. I should say “ours” as my wife and I bought it to take on our honeymoon back in 1997 ($104.00, I recall). It became our hiking and backpacking camera for the next five years, producing well exposed rolls of Kodak Gold 100, 200, 400 year after year in 100+ temps and single digit humidity in the high deserts we hiked in. Some of my favorite photos were made with it. A few years ago I took it out of retirement and shot a couple rolls. They came out just fine.

    Nice to see a nice review of the little fella. Thanks.


    • What a great story! I’m glad that One Touch served you and continues to serve you well. I hope mine proves to be as hardy as yours!

  • I have a soft spot, not for the unsung zoom lens point and shoot cameras, but for the Twin Lens point and shoots that seldom get any love. I have both a Canon Telemax with 38mm f/3.5 + 70mm f/6 lenses and an Olympus Infinity Twin with 35mm f/3.5 + 70mm f/6.3 lenses. These are very capable cameras that can be used like a prime lens point and shoot, but that also provide a useful portrait-length telephoto shooting option. Thes 70mm tele lenses also are generally faster (f/6 or f/6.3) than the long end of a zoom point and shoot as well. These are often found at very low prices.

    • I liked those, too, Lee. Mine is a Minolta Freedom Tele. I liked it well enough to buy a second one, just in case. 38mm 2.8 and 80mm 5.6. A good walk-around camera and I also kept one in the car. Leica adopted it for their first foray into p&s as the Leica AF-C1. I’ve found that there are otherwise unloved 1980s p&s with good lenses and with less annoyances than later p&s.

      • I tried the Minolta Freedom Tele. I liked the photos, but the camera was too big and bulky for my liking (plus the flash didn’t work.) I can see the appeal of the dual-lens cameras, since you basically have a prime lens of usually 38mm f/2.8 and they can be found cheap. But I prefer the smaller bodies of the zoom compacts, limitations and all.

    • Good call! The twin lensed point-and-shoots are a really interesting subset of cameras. I once shot a Canon Sure Shot Telemax and it provided me with some amazing photos. It might’ve just been the Tri-X I ran through it, but the 38mm f/3.5 lens on that lens really reminded me of old Leica Elmars. Beautiful, underrated cameras.

  • Picked one up the other day for 10 bucks thinking I got a deal. Come to the realization that the viewfinder doesn’t zoom with the lens along with a clicking noise as it goes through the range.

  • Hey Josh! What film do you recommend using for shooting with the One Touch? Thinking color mainly outside, mid-high light — similar to the baseball game shots you took.

  • Hey!
    Do you know what battery is needed for this camera?
    Great article!

  • Is the ISO setting in this thing DX only? Threw in a roll of Gold 200 only to realize I didn’t set the meter ISO and don’t know how. It’s automatic right?

    • I believe it is DX code only, however if a film is loaded that does not have DX coding on the canister, it defaults to ISO 100. Hope this helps.

  • Michael S. Goldfarb January 9, 2023 at 8:51 am

    Regarding the Nikon One Touch line, I have to mention that back in the mid-80s I got the original One Touch (model L35AF2) with the fixed 35mm/f2.8 lens for my girlfriend (eventually wife… eventually ex-wife).

    It was a very, very capable shooter, if a bit boxy and primitive compared to later point & shoot cameras; for example, you had to manually pop up the flash. It had excellent autofocus and autoexposure systems that worked really well (*), and it ran on cheap AA batteries. That Nikon lens was VERY sharp. (My parents had the original fixed-lens Canon SureShot at the same time, and its images weren’t in the same league.)

    I don’t understand why this camera isn’t more beloved now, a la the Olympus Stylus Epic and ITS “legendary” fixed 35mm/f2.8 lens. Certainly, the One Touch is not as sexy and pocketable… but I have also used an Epic on and off for nearly 20 years… and the pictures it makes simply aren’t as good as those from the old One Touch were.

    (* As I’ve complained here before, the Stylus Epic’s autoexposure programming always favors wider apertures over slower speeds, often yielding poor depth of field and soft images.)

    Just putting it out there…

  • Hey, nice review!!! Which film did you use ? the color are amazing!!

  • I got one new back in the early-mid 1990s for family snapshots. Prints tended to be soft, sent it back to Nikon once, I think it was better then returned, though I always had a lingering notion it was soft. Recently I dusted it off and ran a roll of 400TMY-2 through it, and, center sharpness and AF performance appear very good – it’s the peripheral sharpness I realize now that can be a little off in full-frame prints larger than 8×12. I do rather like this P&S!

Leave a Reply

Josh Solomon

Josh Solomon is a freelance writer and touring bassist living in Los Angeles. He has an affinity for all things analog. When not onstage, you can find him roaming around Southern California shooting film and humming a tune.

All stories by:Josh Solomon