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

Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Old Nov 1, 2002, 9:26 AM   #11
Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2002
Posts: 33
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Klaus DK
Oh sorry, I meant it in a friendly way!
I think the most terrible thing about the 7hi is it's viewfinder. h.
No worries, my post was intented to be just sarcastic in a funny way, pls dont take it the wrong way.

b.t.w., agree on the viewfinder, would love the option of switching beteen real-time preview dependand on exposure info (like the EFV), and a optical view (as in 'normal' SLR).

But I guess that's a bit much to ask :roll:

Anyhow regardless of camera model, image noise, and viewfinders, the weekend's here (at least for me), and let's all make some great images

Enjoy!
fotograafdigi is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Nov 1, 2002, 9:29 AM   #12
Senior Member
 
Klaus DK's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Posts: 2,216
Default

Yes, that's what it's all about!
Klaus DK is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Nov 1, 2002, 2:25 PM   #13
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2002
Posts: 163
Default

I'm confused by some of the comments in this thread. Is anyone seriously questioning the idea that there is a noise problem with the 7xx that exceeds that found in similarly priced and featured cameras? The comments about Phil's review at dpreview baffle me. Take a look at the shots and judge for yourself (the noise section is at the bottom of the page):

http://www.dpreview.com/reviews/mino...e7i/page15.asp

That's not just "texture" or detail--it's obviously noise, graininess that has been introduced where it doesn't belong. Not a problem if you're going to print 5x7s, probably, but if you're going to push the limits of your camera in printing, cropping or online viewing, that's obviously a problem, even if post-processing offers partial, and labor intensive, solutions. Does anyone really disagree with that? If not, then why not just acknowledge that it's a problem and stop griping about those who notice it?

On a totally different topic, what is the trouble with the viewfinder that a couple of you are tallking about? I thought the viewfinder was supposed to be one of the big plusses for this camera. I've heard some complaints, but I've never heard that it was the worst feature of the camera!
Sanpete is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Nov 1, 2002, 3:09 PM   #14
Senior Member
 
sjms's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2002
Posts: 2,735
Default

picture 1 7Hi extra fine image 2.5 compression

http://www.pbase.com/image/6613510

picture 2 blow up of small section at 267% blown up again(100%) to actually be readable on screen essentially stomped on 2x by bicubic interpolation.

http://www.pbase.com/image/6640902

you will note the "noise" in the clouds. remove it and you loose texture and definition.

if you want better you have 2 choices
1- get a 13 MP camera
2- get out your slr and start shooting kodachrome.
sjms is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Nov 1, 2002, 3:43 PM   #15
Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Posts: 65
Default

I should probably clarify that I'm relatively new to photography, only started last December when I purchased the CP995. I admit I have a lot to learn about the technical aspect. But I'm eager to learn and love my hobby. So when I see "Noise" in my images I get upset and frustrated. I just need to get to know the D7Hi better. After all, with so many satisfied 7Hi users on here it's obviously the camera operator and not the camera. Giving me tips like "Use 1S0 100 with flash/low light conditions" and "never use auto WB" really helps. I belong to a local camera club and make a lot of 8 x 10 prints. Any other suggestions you can provide would be greatly appreciated.

You guys have been great on here. Please be patient with me. Ok?

SteveZ
Steve Z is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Nov 1, 2002, 4:29 PM   #16
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2002
Posts: 163
Default

sjms, I can't figure out your explanation of the noise close-up. Is that an interpolated version? And why do you talk about the problem of removing the noise? I'm more interested in the problem of its being there in the first place. Are you implying that having this noise is beneficial, and that the only cameras with less noise and at least equal detail, texture and definition are 13 MP or film? What do you base that conclusion on? Why wouldn't the Sony and Nikon that are the closest competitors with the 7Hi be good alternatives with less noise?

By the way, Phil's review of the 7Hi has just been posted at dpreview.com. He still thinks the noise is the biggest problem in comparison to the Sony and Nikon alternatives.
Sanpete is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Nov 1, 2002, 6:20 PM   #17
Senior Member
 
sjms's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2002
Posts: 2,735
Default

any time you crop it is interpolated, to show noise you create more by blowing it up if i were to crop out a section it would be too small to define visually. the program has to fill in the blanks. some "noise" and i say some "noise" is actually texture. digital is limited to defined levels of color unlike film which has a theoretical infinite range of color. so for some people this fact must be made clear. its business nothing personal. a digital image no matter what camera is going to have it because if it can't define it within its operating parameters its gonna try to fake it. as minolta put it they try not to overprocess in camera. any jpg will produce noise from compression. shoot tiff and it is reduced. these are ccd based imagers. they process colors in a grid pattern and then also fill in the blanks.
is some noise beneficial. no noise is not, texture is. and we have a problem defining the difference because of perception. show me a digital camera that can define the fluff in a cloud fully. if you photograph a person in a knitted sweater taking up only 10-15% of the overall image and then zoom into that sweater your going to see blocks and what would be refered to as noise trying to recreate the knit pattern in the sweater. but there isn't enough definition because there ain't enough MP to do it. go to a kodak dcs 14n it will improve dramatically or a eos1ds. or sigma foveon based imager also.
your looking in the wrong place for perfection. digital is not perfect. i believe it was said just a few months ago that 5-6MP was good enough to produce a good image. that was because thats what they had at the time to sell us. kodak 5 years ago said it would take about 25 MP to equal Kchromes resolving quality. well they're half way there now and still getting larger. tell me is it because the need to or is it marketing.? people say its not needed because 5-6MP "works just fine".

converting raw to tiff to jpg or what ever it will induce noise no matter what.

it gets real tiring because when it comes down to it the overall cry is MY CAMERA IS BETTER THAN YOUR CAMERA. i'm more than satisfied with the results mine gives me. and there are moments that it doesn't satisfy me too. i have learned the limits of my tools and myself. i have seen some outstanding artistic images from it none of which are mine at the moment.
sjms is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Nov 1, 2002, 6:40 PM   #18
Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Posts: 65
Default

SJMS, do you make 8 x 10 (or larger) prints of your shots taken with your D7? I do and I've had great success with my CP995, but no success yet with the 7Hi. Which Quality Mode do you shoot on? ( I use Fine or Extra Fine) Which Color Mode? (I use Nat. sRGB) Now that I know how keep "Noise" at a minimum with the right ISO settings, can you make other suggestions on how to maximum print quality?

SteveZ
Steve Z is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Nov 1, 2002, 6:52 PM   #19
NHL
Senior Member
 
NHL's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2002
Location: 39.18776, -77.311353333333
Posts: 11,564
Default

Steve Z

You seem to generate quite a lot of 'noises' on both dpReview and here regarding your apparent 'imaginative' problem. Set the camera on 'Soft' if it makes you feel any better, you can also decrease the contrast and it will be just like any other camera out there. (I prefer detail so I leave my on normal)

At your level of experience use the 'FINE" setting, the camera is the fastest that way.
NHL is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Nov 1, 2002, 7:17 PM   #20
Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Posts: 65
Default

lol I'm trying to learn this thing, NHL, honestly I am. My LSD days are long gone.
Steve Z 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 11:57 PM.