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

Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Old Nov 5, 2002, 1:14 PM   #81
NHL
Senior Member
 
NHL's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2002
Location: 39.18776, -77.311353333333
Posts: 11,547
Default

Klaus

The Minolta is noiser (Minolta already said so). Can you make it goes away is the issue here.
Quote:
It is true that there are some noises left in the image captured by the DiMAGE 7i when you view with magnification of 100% or more on the monitor, in the meantime, we would greatly appreciate it if you would understand that the DiMAGE 7i are predetermined its noise reduction level aiming at enhancing texture and spatial effect of the captured image rather than the noises left, when you view the image by printed one or the whole image on the monitor.


Binji7

Try sharpness soft, and contrast (-3), you'll definetly get a lot noise @ +3.



Sanpete

Do you even comprehend what you posted? Is the filter arrays a piece H/W or are they filter coefficients in the firmware of the Minolta vs Nikon software which we already spoke about (and Minolta already said so)?

The IR source is from the subjects, it's the same going to either lens. The magnification makes the diffrence!

Like I said:
Quote:
... I really think the D7's is not for you. You will never be happy with it, IMO you'll be much better off getting some other camera.
NHL is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Nov 5, 2002, 1:15 PM   #82
Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2002
Posts: 99
Default

Hi DK - I love your Europe shots!

Oh I understand,

I just wanted to take some "unbiased" pics with known settings with the 7i so Nikon owners can review them for noise. 7i owners can reproduce the shots anytime they like.

I'm one of those guys that was "on the fence" between the 7i and 5700. 5700 is great camera!! I took some shots with one and liked it very much. I chose the 7i because it favored my shooting style better "manual zoom, external controls".

I did want to try out the suggestions from this post on settings that can be done to minimize noise, and post my findings for all to review and maybe get more insight as to other options that can be done to reduce noise on the 7i.


To NHL,

Thanks for the tip, I will shoot my first pic with the aforementioned settings and change contrast to -3 and sharpness set to soft and the other set with contrast 0, sharpness normal.
Binji7 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Nov 5, 2002, 1:21 PM   #83
Senior Member
 
Klaus DK's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Posts: 2,216
Default

Sorry Binji didn't mean to interfere.


SJMS:
There seems to be too many issues here, I confused!

I think I'll lean back and watch the on-going duel!


I'm joining SJMS for now!
Klaus DK is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Nov 5, 2002, 1:43 PM   #84
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2002
Posts: 163
Default

Binji7

Just crop your test photos to show a representative sample, but do post at pbase at 1:1 size. That's the most convenient way.

NHL

Why are you so consistently condescending when it's you who is consistently misunderstanding things? It really annoys me. Of course the arrays are hardware. Software can't turn a simple photodiode into a good color measuring device. That requires a physical filter to let only one color of light reach the photodiode. Maybe we can learn something from Phil after all:

http://www.dpreview.com/learn/Glossa...r_Array_01.htm

Do you still hold to your theory that the same amount of noise is present before filtering in all 3 cameras?
Sanpete is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Nov 5, 2002, 4:17 PM   #85
Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2002
Posts: 33
Default

I'm getting out of this discussion also. The noise is an issue to some, not to others. Again, lets just all get along.

What I still find amazing ( :shock: ) is the need of other brand camera owners to troll this forum so often.

I dont own a casio digicam, I never even saw a photo of a casio, also no prints.
I dont own a panasonic digicam, I never even saw a photo of a panasonic, also no prints.
I dont own a ricoh digicam, I never even saw a photo of a ricoh, also no prints.
I dont own a toshiba digicam, I never even saw a photo of a toshiba, also no prints.

:? Why in the world would I care how these (or any other cam's images) look?????

My equipent works to my satisfaction . I have no need to look into what I dont have or need, let alone in what I dont want to have.

:?: What purpose does it serve me if I go look at some casio shots, find something that to my taste isnt right, and then start telling in the casio forum (is there one?) how much better 'this or that' that I happen to own is.....

I hope that everybody, in any forum in any brand is happy with their cam .

And if not, at least I am :lol:

And now, lets review the posts in this thread so far.........
what users tried to give help, hints, clue's, insights.......
and who where only here to moan........

Nuff said!
fotograafdigi is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Nov 5, 2002, 8:48 PM   #86
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2002
Posts: 163
Default

fotog

Unlike you, I am looking for a digital camera, and the 7i is high on my list. I don't own a competing brand.

If someone makes controversial claims, including claims that a respected personality in the field of photography is a moron and that owners of other brands don't understand photography, don't complain when others take issue and try to show that the basis for the claims is faulty. No need to falsely attribute hidden agendas or to resort to name-calling. I came into this particular thread because NHL posted a link to it in response to my post in the General Q&A forum. I want to sort out all the claims and counterclaims and see what's what. I didn't set the tone of the discussion.

I appreciate your helpful tips.
Sanpete is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Nov 5, 2002, 9:47 PM   #87
NHL
Senior Member
 
NHL's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2002
Location: 39.18776, -77.311353333333
Posts: 11,547
Default

Sanpete

You've just exposed Phil biggests failing:
Quote:
While both cameras (probably) use the same brand of 2/3" CCD sensor the Coolpix 5700 uses a CYGM colour filter array, the DiMAGE 7Hi a more conventional RGB colour filter array. This can explain the difference in the distribution of chrominance noise.
Phil just used here a feature set from a more expensive dSLR CCD to embellish a camera that he prefered over another one. Here's the 2/3" CCD used by the 3 cameras:
http://www.sel.sony.com/semi/PDF/ICX282AQF.pdf

Like you can see for yourself, the R,G,B primary color filters are bonded to the 2/3 CCDs from the factory. I wouldn't buy a camera with another filter add on top would you? How else can they keep the tolerance of the individual filters to the photosites? (the actual factory built CCD with the above CYGM filter wouldn't fit the 5700 and would be cost prohibitive). One can't just mount a CYGM filter on a CCD designed for RGB anyway or vice versa!!! They have to be designed to match one another, and Phil is here again contradicting himself. One can't just mix and match filters on a particular CCD type, and how do you align them? You mention heat before...too

So, yes I still hold like fotograafdigi, to the facts the same amount of noise is present before filtering in all 3 cameras. Just check the output signals from the above datasheets which are all raw output by the way. Please read it carefully it might show you some insight on how a camera is made, and goes into some noise descriptions as well. Is it time that you should trust us a little bit more than Phil... since you're going to get a D7hi?

Why do you have to rebutt every thing we said when even yourself have demonstrated here that Phil is a little biais toward the N brand? This is the 5th 'innocent' mistake that I've observed in Phil writings, and they are all biais to the Nikon favor:1-battery problem, 2-color problem, 3-noise (which we all argued about), 4-original error on the D7Hi preview, 5-CCD just now discussed . So no I'm not making them up, and I have every reason not to regard Phil as highly as you do! May be you'll undestand when you buy the D7hi and realize for yourself that it does more than what Phil said... or a 5700 may not be as cracked up as what Phil made it to be?

Take a look back at the postings, you did not accept a single explanation from any single poster here, and just attacked everyone. Phil is your god, and everyone here are moron right?
NHL is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Nov 6, 2002, 2:34 AM   #88
Senior Member
 
Klaus DK's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Posts: 2,216
Default

NHL

Quote:
It's time to cut it out.

Remember ...top of this page
Klaus DK is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Nov 6, 2002, 3:17 AM   #89
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2002
Posts: 163
Default

NHL

Quote:
Phil is your god, and everyone here are moron right?
Why do you continually make such remarks? Can you point to anything I've said that would justify this assertion? You are the only one who has called anyone a moron.

Phil isn't my god, but he is a respectable and knowledgeable source for information on digital photography. You have repeatedly attacked him on the slightest of grounds, mostly imagined by you. Since you give him no credit, please accept this from another source, the British Journal of Photography:

Quote:
Building on the success of the Coolpix 5000, Nikon has announced a new digital compact flagship model, the Coolpix 5700 ... The sensor is a 2/3 inch interline type with five million pixels and complementary colour filtration.
The link is:

http://www.bjphoto.co.uk/cms/words/n...tures/39.shtml

The CCD chip is described here:

http://www.sony.co.jp/~semicon/engli...1/a6803029.pdf

If this is Phil's biggest failing, then Phil is doing very well indeed. As you can see, you have allowed your imagination to concoct not only an error Phil didn't make but a motive for him to make it.

Quote:
So, yes I still hold like fotograafdigi, to the facts the same amount of noise is present before filtering in all 3 cameras.
You seem to be confusing facts with what you want to believe. I ask you again, do you have any evidence that the images shot in raw with the various cameras with this CCD have the same amount of noise before further processing? (I've heard the Olympus E20 also uses it.) I think the fact the the owners of the other cameras don't report such noise is a pretty good clue that it doesn't exist. Klaus certainly didn't volunteer that his raw files produce such noisy images. But I await your evidence that they do.
Sanpete is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Nov 6, 2002, 8:42 AM   #90
NHL
Senior Member
 
NHL's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2002
Location: 39.18776, -77.311353333333
Posts: 11,547
Default

Sanpete

Noise - Minolta said it's there. All owners know this! We've also said you can turn it down: Benji7, How are those shots coming?

All CCDs generate noise! that the nature of it. We now have two datasheets with their respective characteristics so everyone can examine. The outputs are differents, but not noise-free (It helps to go back and study the previous Kodak application note)! In fact they are more similar than different in all respect except for the color coding. Can Phil (or you) tell us how do you go from Ye, Cy, Mg, and G's CCD raw output to an RGB display without a transformation or approximation? Is this why some pictures have tendency toward the red tone?

Can it be that Minolta is a little more truthful in direct mapping their RGB bits (from an RGB CCD)?

It's time for me to cut out too, this is moot! Sorry to bother everyone.
NHL 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 3:39 PM.