Go Back   Steve's Digicams Forums > Digicam Help > General Discussion

Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Old Apr 20, 2004, 8:19 AM   #1
NHL
Senior Member
 
NHL's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2002
Location: 39.18776, -77.311353333333
Posts: 11,547
Default 8Mp Cameras... The Winner is:

FYI

http://www.luminous-landscape.com/re...oosing-8.shtml
NHL is offline   Reply With Quote
Sponsored Links
Old Apr 20, 2004, 10:57 AM   #2
Junior Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2004
Posts: 12
Default

thank you so so much! This is exactly the kind of thing i was looking to read.

That's just a huge help. Despite the sony's ease of use and better design the purple fringing and image problems just seem to be a great detriment. Yes tomorrow i am going to buy a Minolta.
lomedome is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Apr 20, 2004, 9:04 PM   #3
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2003
Posts: 259
Default

quite a different end result can be found here: http://www.dpreview.com/ which takes actual picture/lens quality as a top priority....kinda what we buy devices to take pictures for in the first place. :P I'm not going to comment on luminous-landscape's reviews on the various 8mp cameras as my own conclusions are almost completely difference after actually holding/trying out alot of these camera models. :P
tkmckay is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Apr 20, 2004, 10:13 PM   #4
Junior Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2004
Posts: 25
Default

Spending that kind of money, build quality would be important if the differences in image quality are hard to differentiate in real life situations.

One thing about these cameras with big zooms is that the lens stick out a lot and gives me the feeling that they are prone to knocks. The Sony would win in my eyes.
Buckrogers is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Apr 21, 2004, 6:11 AM   #5
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2004
Posts: 120
Default

I read most of the reviews before choosing the A2. The points that most seem to agree on is that the Minolta is the best to use, despite having the most features, and that the Oly and Nikon compete hard for the wooden spoon in this area. As for image quality there was no concensus, except that the Sony had the most PF (possibly because it has the fastest lens?). I suspect there's little difference in real world quality. All said that the CCD isn't really usable beyond ISO400. As for build quality, none of the magazines were as critical of the A2 as the posted review - maybe he was unlucky. The anti-shake was the clincher from my point of view and the only thing missing is a remote control, which is a pity. Also a longer tele-converter would be nice. Maybe the new Raynox DCR-2020 (2.2X) will solve this.
Technophile is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Apr 21, 2004, 9:28 AM   #6
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2002
Posts: 3,585
Default

You can read all the reviews but the best thing is to do a test drive on the camera when ever possible.
gibsonpd3620 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Apr 22, 2004, 2:13 AM   #7
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2004
Posts: 120
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by gibsonpd3620
You can read all the reviews but the best thing is to do a test drive on the camera when ever possible.
You need both. The A2 has 180 page user manual. It's going to take several months to find its full potential. Modern cameras are highly complex technology. A few minutes trying it in a shop with someone talking in your ear is no substitute for a review by a professional who's had the camera for weeks.
Technophile is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Apr 22, 2004, 2:42 AM   #8
Senior Member
 
Onyx's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2004
Posts: 402
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Technophile
You need both. The A2 has 180 page user manual. It's going to take several months to find its full potential. Modern cameras are highly complex technology. A few minutes trying it in a shop with someone talking in your ear is no substitute for a review by a professional who's had the camera for weeks.
The sign of a good camera, or any piece of equipment, IMHO is that it's straightforward to use and intuitively engineered it does not require one to read 180 pages from cover to cover to get the most out of it.
Onyx is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Apr 22, 2004, 6:02 AM   #9
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2004
Posts: 120
Default

OK, so we sling away the user guide CD and we don't bother to read any reviews. If the camera's any good we can tell by trying it out in the shop and if we can't use properly it's a bad design - to precis the last two posts..

The A2's about as intuitive as it gets, but I don't think many people could work out everything it can do without reading the manual - or a detailed review. Maybe there are additional features that it could have, but the only one I can think of is infra-red remote control.

You don't need the manual once you've worked it all out - unlike my old Olympus C2500, which is/was a superb camera but a total pain to use despite having a fraction of the features. The reviews I read warned me off the Olympus 8080 and the Nikon 8700 for just the reason you mention.
Technophile is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Apr 22, 2004, 2:11 PM   #10
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2003
Posts: 259
Default

Quote:
The reviews I read warned me off the Olympus 8080 and the Nikon 8700 for just the reason you mention.
Yet for myself having owned mostly Oly cameras with a friend I go out hiking with alot owning a Nikon I found the Oly and Nikon the easiest to use....especially the Oly since a fair majority of the controls/menu's haven't changed.

Each to their own I guess. :P
tkmckay is offline   Reply With Quote
 
Reply


Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off



All times are GMT -5. The time now is 4:31 PM.