Go Back   Steve's Digicams Forums > Digital Cameras (Point and Shoot) > Konica Minolta

Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Old Jun 21, 2004, 7:35 AM   #11
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2004
Posts: 120
Default

amazingthailand wrote:
Quote:

The small cameras like the D7i or A1/2 are nice toys, and are great for casual carry around photos, but leave a LOT to be desired.

They are slow when compared to the dSLRs
- Shot to shot times are slow
- AF is slow
- AF often inaccurate
- write times are slow
- image buffer is small, resulting in you having to wait on the camera after taking an image
- have high image noise, even at base ISO
- shutter lag
Quote:
I don't think you have used an A2. None of this is true.
Technophile is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Jun 21, 2004, 8:46 PM   #12
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Posts: 851
Default

And I don't think you have used a dSLR, if you think they are not.

I was also generalizing the digicam market as a whole vs the dSLR market.

For you, these may not be an issue either, only you can answer that.

Declan
amazingthailand is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Jun 21, 2004, 10:51 PM   #13
Guest
 
Posts: n/a
Default

It depends on the need, instead of the skill of the "measurebator".

I've used an 2.1-mp Olympus C2100UZI, a5mp Minolta Dimage 7i, a Canon 3-mp D30/DSLR & now I'm usingthe newer5-mpMinolta A1. Unless I was showing you 11x13 prints (or larger), I would bet that none of you could tell me which camera took which image. If I showed you 8x10's I KNOW (because I've tested it on manyexcellent photogs)you couldn't tell what camera made which image.

I defend & agree regarding the sensor size of the D30 (& any other DSLR)...the images are great & noise free at higher ISO's. I loved my D30 & was wanting a 10D or the (unknown) replacement but after haveing a boating accident & several Mtn Bike wrecks, I have been tied to a tripod for years. The Dimage A1 is the first camera I've used that allows me to hand hold again.

Do I wish it was a DSLR? Not really, I already knew the majority of functions from my older 7i. I am very much looking forward to the new Minolta DSLR with similar "anti-shake" built into the body instead of the lenses...but I know the freedom I now have results in better images from my A1.

(As an aside...I think every photographer would benefit from being tied to a tripod for a year at least...makes you work on quality rather than quantity).

My 2 pennies & worthevery centyou actually paid...
  Reply With Quote
Old Jun 22, 2004, 3:23 AM   #14
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2004
Posts: 120
Default

amazingthailand wrote:
Quote:
And I don't think you have used a dSLR, if you think they are not.
Not true. The defects you mention (shutter lag, slow autofocus, bad autofocus, etc, etc) are not inherent defects of a non SLR. The only differences between an SLR and the non-SLRare the optical viewfinder, the removable lens and the larger sensor. Any other differences are down to the non-SLR being cheaper and are not inherent in the design. The A2 is actually very fast. You should try one before criticising it. The internet is a great tool for spreading information but if it's increasingly abused with disinformation it becomes fairly useless.

As for the bigger sensor being less noisy, that's true. If you want to shoot high ISO you need a bigger sensor. Otherwise you don't, and, as Kalypso said, most people will struggle totell the difference between the pictures taken with the two types of camera.SLRs have big sensors largely because they're derived from 35mm cameras and the manufacturers wanted to provide a camera that could utilise the existing 35mm lenses. This is a practical solution to the problem but not the best technically. If you were starting from a clean sheet of paper a dSLR wouldn't have a 36mm, or even a 23mm sensor. Even with current technology it's not needed. In a few years the sensors will have evolved to the point where it's just plain wasteful to have such large sensors - with the requirement for huge heavy lenses. Even the newly designed 4/3 system might seem too large at 17mm.


Technophile is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Jun 22, 2004, 5:00 AM   #15
Junior Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2004
Posts: 1
Default

It depends on what you want. I have an A2 and just bought a D70. The A2 had focus problems but they were fixed with the new firmware. The reason I bought the D70 is that I couldn't stand the noise at slower shutter speeds. If you crank up the ISO to get faster shutter speeds then the noise increases dramatically. I found it unacceptable even at ISO 200, but there are several advantages to the A2 including the live histogram. If you don't mind doing the post processing then the noise can be removed at the cost of some sharpness. I also have a cannon 10D which is my favorite camera for high quality but the damn thing wieghs a ton.

For me the D70 takes much higher quality foto's, but that's me. There are many happy A2 users out there. Actually having re read this I guess I am just confusing you more, so let me just say that in my opinion the D70 takes higher quality pictures but does not have all of the features that the A2 has so I guess my answer would be do you want higher quality (D70) or more features A2.:?
largeman is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Jun 23, 2004, 2:21 PM   #16
Junior Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2004
Posts: 6
Default

I am a happy A2 owner. I went from a 35 mm that will outshoot a D70 so neener neener. The down side of my 35mm is with a 70-200 zoom, flash, and motor drive the thing weighs a ton. I guess that would be useful if I needed a club.

My A2 went to that last band gig I went to. The AE1 stayed home.
drool is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Jun 25, 2004, 6:56 PM   #17
Junior Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2004
Posts: 5
Default

Do you compare theA2 (or the D70)with a 35 mm. camera....It has nothing to do with the case.... The D70 Is a much better camera then the A2 ( look above).

I you want a camera that it's better then a 35 mm. - you will need to get at least a 11 or 16 mpix. camera...



/Johnny
netsat_99 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Jun 26, 2004, 12:37 AM   #18
Guest
 
Posts: n/a
Default

netsat_99 wrote:
Quote:
Do you compare theA2 (or the D70)with a 35 mm. camera....It has nothing to do with the case.... The D70 Is a much better camera then the A2 ( look above).

I you want a camera that it's better then a 35 mm. - you will need to get at least a 11 or 16 mpix. camera...



/Johnny
Gee...that's a pretty big assumptionthat you are basingon what you want instead of what somebody else might want. Measubaters are a dime a dozen...
  Reply With Quote
Old Jun 28, 2004, 12:41 PM   #19
Junior Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2004
Posts: 6
Default

I guess I didn't make my point very clear. Comparing an A2 to a D70 is a bit like apples to nuclear submarines. That's why I compared my 35 to the D70. It's not totally relevant. The A2 is a tiny little thing compare to a D70 with a full compliment of lenses. Yes the D70 will outshoot it performance wise but if the camera stays at home (like my war club AE1) because of bulk then it's not going to get ANY pictures. An A2 in the hand is worth more than a D70 and two lenses on the shelf.



End of rant.
drool is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Jun 28, 2004, 7:43 PM   #20
Junior Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2004
Posts: 4
Default

netsat_99 wrote:
Quote:
Do you compare theA2 (or the D70)with a 35 mm. camera....It has nothing to do with the case.... The D70 Is a much better camera then the A2 ( look above).

I you want a camera that it's better then a 35 mm. - you will need to get at least a 11 or 16 mpix. camera...



/Johnny
Sorry folks, gotta jump in here on this one. How many of you regularly make 30x40 prints? I've been a photographer all my life, and I can tell you I haven't made one. From my 35mm gear, that is. I just finsished selling off the last of my F4s and F5s. Not getting into name calling, but those two cameras are among the best ever made. I now shoot with my Konica Minolta A2. It, like ALL cameras, has its shortcomings. However, I print 30x40 prints all the time. I shoot in JPEG, and my customers can not believe the quality they get. I would have NEVER gotten prints of this quality out of my film cameras (save the 4x5 and many hours in the darkroom).

Let's face it. Too much nitpicking. I'm interested in results, and I have the prints hanging on my wall to prove it. Don't get me wrong, I'm not saying the A2 is the end all camera, but what more to you want out of a $1000 "toy" than killer 30x40s!!!!

......soap box slides under the table.......

Keith




keithfzr 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 6:21 PM.