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

Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Old Nov 1, 2002, 8:19 PM   #21
Senior Member
 
sjms's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2002
Posts: 2,735
Default

actually on a regular basis. except for the occasional 13x19 home and 16x22 farmed out using genuine fractals 2.5. i do industrial shoots at work for the Mx training dept. lots of closeups with detail on components and wiring and such. i work in all sorts of less than adequate lighting and situations. they're now looking for me to do 360 panorama work in some areas. that i'm looking fwd to trying out. it keeps me from getting my hands dirty on occasion.

it's my personal preference to shoot RAW and go to TIFF or just shoot TIFF. when i shoot JPE its at xtrafine( that minimizes compression to 2.5:1 and in adobe rgb(saves a step). i have large enough cards to grab lots of those shots.
ISO i let float. between the strobe i have and the camera it has never gone above 200. coming from someone who shot k64 most of my life thats fast. yes ISO 800 on this does intro a bit of noise. then i shift to B&W mode and it starts to look like triX pushed.

and yes NHL i still have the MD lent to me. the IBM connection has yet to resurface to reclaim it. in the mean time it is as you said quite useable and it hasn't gone ckick click click dead yet. i could probably learn to live with it if it wasn't for that 10000ft limit. that i find unacceptable.
sjms is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Nov 1, 2002, 8:35 PM   #22
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2002
Posts: 163
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by sjms
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.
sjms, one of us misunderstands the nature of cropping and interpolation in digital photography. Cropping, as I understand it, doesn't entail interpolation. If you start with a 3000x2000 pixel image (or the JPEG representation of one), and you cut it in half, you end up with two 1500x2000 pixel images, without any interpolation introduced by the cropping. When Phil shows a detail of a shot at 1:1, that isn't really "magnified" or interpolated, that's just showing the detail at the resolution it has in the file it's taken from. That doesn't introduce any noise. The noise samples he shows are at 1:1.

You're overlooking my point. I've said nothing to imply that I'm looking for perfection. I've simply pointed out that it appears from the evidence I've seen that the 7xx has more of a problem with noise than its competitors from Nikon and Sony. Sure, they all have noise, but the 7xx has it worst.

That's a simple point, one that so far several 7xx owners here appear to be unwilling to acknowledge. If there's a good reason for these denials I want to know. I'd love to learn that I'm wrong about this, that there really isn't more noise, or that it's there because that improves the image overall in comparison to other 5 MP cameras. But so far no one has given any evidence for that, while I've seen plain evidence to the contrary. Instead of evidence what I've seen here is lots of speculation about why the 7xx is really not more noisy and snide comments about how the 7xx is for the advanced user while the others are for those who don't really understand photography, but I've seen no evidence. If there is any, I'd love to see it because I really like the features of the 7xx.
Sanpete is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Nov 1, 2002, 9:09 PM   #23
Senior Member
 
sjms's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2002
Posts: 2,735
Default

look all i can tell you is that the camera works for me i guess i'm either blind or blessed. mine have yet to show like that.

i think that when you get down to it no body cares. its working fo them. i owned one of each and the people who own my used ones are also happy with the results. people produce masterpieces with this as well as any other in its class. your looking for for an definitive answer and/or acknowledge that it is an issue. evidently for many of the users it is referred to as a not an issue. they're happy. snide comments aside. each current owner including myself had the opportunity to retun the camera after purchase for a certain amount of days of use. they did not. so they looked at the images and thy liked them Mr z does not. i'm not going to sell him on it if it doesn't work for him. if going to a d100 is going to make a difference to him have at it. it is a larger sensor (and that will reduce some noise) but the drawbacks are many. this is now the baseline problem of the digital camera- you cannot change the film any more.

if you want evidence go to the galleries and look at the images.
sjms is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Nov 1, 2002, 10:57 PM   #24
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2002
Posts: 163
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by sjms
if you want evidence go to the galleries and look at the images.
I have, and in the full size shots I see more noise in comparison. That's my point. Doesn't mean it's a bad camera, or a worse camera on balance than the other two that compete with it (Nikon and Sony), only that it has a problem in that respect. It would still be my first choice of the three, based on features, price (7i) and overall excellence. But if not for the noise, it would be even more tempting, enough that I might actually buy it.
Sanpete is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Nov 2, 2002, 12:01 AM   #25
Senior Member
 
sjms's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2002
Posts: 2,735
Default

then whats your point ? you have to make the decision is this tolerable to you. it seems i made mine amd many others too. you a have all the evidence you need to make your decision and only you can make that decision. so i leave you to it.
sjms is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Nov 2, 2002, 2:17 AM   #26
Senior Member
 
KCan's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2002
Posts: 1,625
Default

Sanpete,

Back to the time I used my film SLR , I sometimes got some horrible shots when I have to use 400 film, but they are great to me because of the picture itself, the soul inside, despite a total technical failure .
Sometimes I feel so pointless to dig deep in such easily evaluated matter , just try it yourself and make your conclusion if the result will suit your expectation for your need. Also, if a Nikon (or other) brand name means a "guarantee of picture quality" for you , go for it simply , even if it's not a better bang for your bucks ( is that what people say?).
KCan is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Nov 2, 2002, 2:24 AM   #27
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2002
Posts: 163
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by sjms
then whats your point ?
sjms, if you go back and read this thread from the beginning I think you'll be able to see the point. The camera has a problem with noise, more than others in its class. You and a couple others basically denied this, and judging from posts I've read in earlier threads, you've been denying it for a long time, claiming that those who point it out don't understand photography. NHL went so far as to call Phil Askey, whom I'd bet knows a bit more about photography than he, a moron. I'm just setting the record straight. You keep shifting the focus to other issues, like whether you or others made the right decision, or are happy with the results. That's not the subject of this thread, and it's not what I've been talking about. I'm glad you're happy. I'd be happy too with a 7Hi, if I had no money concerns. But despite all its virtues it's got a special problem with noise, one that people interested in the camera should be aware of. That's the point.

By the way, what's the question mark in your sig for?
Sanpete is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Nov 2, 2002, 2:36 AM   #28
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2002
Posts: 163
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by KCan
Also, if a Nikon (or other) brand name means a "guarantee of picture quality" for you , go for it simply , even if it's not a better bang for your bucks ( is that what people say?).
KCan, I'm not sure what you're responding to, but I haven't said any such thing. The rest of your comments would apply just as well to a cheap 1 MP camera, you know. That one can get great memories with any functioning camera is beside the point. Please see my response to sjms above.
Sanpete is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Nov 2, 2002, 8:03 AM   #29
NHL
Senior Member
 
NHL's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2002
Location: 39.18776, -77.311353333333
Posts: 11,547
Default

Quote:
You and a couple others basically denied this, and judging from posts I've read in earlier threads, you've been denying it for a long time, claiming that those who point it out don't understand photography. NHL went so far as to call Phil Askey, whom I'd bet knows a bit more about photography than he, a .....
Sanpete

I'm not denying that noise is not there, in fact all the links I provided discussed about it, but specifically zooming and magnifying on 'certain' picture and looking for it is not what most people do. Nobody stare @ a pixels all day on a monitor to judge a picture or the work of the person behind it.

The problem I have with Phil is he did not follow through on feedbacks from his readers that's adjustments on the D7's could mitigate the so call details vs noise problem, and make the results somewhat on par with other cameras. Also going through Minolta DIVU affects the results as well, and explain why some owners see noise vs others who are totally unaware of it, or when they set their camera to other mode than the standard setting that Phil had. If you also refer to his earlier preview of the D7hi (which is now corrected) he made several glaring mistake as if he held something against Minolta, especially in the WYSIWYG feature that make the D7's so much better and unique against other cameras in the same price range.

http://www.dpreview.com/forums/read....essage=3358391

Theses are all excellent cameras (Sony, Nikon, Minolta, etc ), but I wouldn't narrow down or zoom-in 'certain' pictures to find their minor weaknesses either such as CA, blooming, and unreal plastickly looks (that Phil ignored), and overlook all their other greatness just as with the D7's. It's really up to you... don't believe everything you read, just like every I post here (or any reviewers). Take some flashes to the store and try them out!

BTW Phil's review still have at least one mistake. Myself as well as several of my D7/D7i friends have got together and tried: The D7 and the D7i battery consumption are the same (the D7 might be even a little better with a slower clock)! So either they are both battery hogs or both are better than what Phil rank them in his review. They bracket the 5700, which is it? Could he have goof off on the original D7 and oversold a few CP5000 to his followers @ the time? (with a zoom, EVF, as well as a price deficiency to the original D7)

Can we all just go off and enjoy the pictures instead of looking for 'NOISE'?

http://www3.photosig.comhttp//www.ph...p?cameraId=329
NHL is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Nov 2, 2002, 9:03 AM   #30
Senior Member
 
sjms's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2002
Posts: 2,735
Default

the ? is for the now placed order for a Kodak DCS 14n. i was playing with it yesterday at photoplus in nyc among the other FF Dslrs. its not my F5 by any means but it is one very large evolutionary step in the right direction on the road to the supposed digital nirvana(but then there is that one type of "film" issue i have but at least it's kodak). as i said before we're now half way there. plus i have a few Nikon lenses i'd like to try out in digital without mag factors to deal with. finally a dslr where a lens is what it says it is.

now back to your nagging problem you have the issue with noise and my shifting issues. all digital cameras have a level of noise induced in them. you and phil have agreed that there is more than others. it hasn't been an issue with me plain and simple. don't buy what you don't like. it's that simple. this is not the camera for you. there now, i don't think i shifted the issue here.
sjms 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 5:56 PM.