Steve's Digicams Forums

Steve's Digicams Forums (https://forums.steves-digicams.com/)
-   Sony (https://forums.steves-digicams.com/sony-34/)
-   -   Can Sony Recover from the H-7/H-9 Fiasco? (https://forums.steves-digicams.com/sony-34/can-sony-recover-h-7-h-9-fiasco-127482/)

mtclimber Aug 14, 2007 6:20 PM

I wonder how difficult it is for a very large corporation like Sony to face up to the fact that the H-7 and H-9 cameras are OK but certainly not worth the price that they are currently selling at around the world. In sort, they goofed!

I for one, think that they would recover a great deal more consumer confidence and good will if they just scrapped the whole H-7 and H-9 program, and admitted that they screwed up.

If they do not do something quickly, their whole ultrazoom market will head toward the Canon S-5, the Panasonic FZ-18, the Olympus SP-550 or the Fuji S-8000. If I was in the camera business, and of course, I am not, I would surely not want to loose market share. The Sony A-100 Alpha is already heavily discounted and users are having a myriad of problems, why throw away any more of your camera market?

I honestly like Sony cameras, and have owned many of them over the years, including a lot of cybershots, the H-5 and the R-1. However, Sony has a REAL PROBLEM on their hands, and it is high time that the 'fessed up and admited their problem.

Sarah Joyce

Wirraway Aug 15, 2007 7:43 AM

Hi there Sarah
Ditto on your post, I use only Sony camera's, DSC-F707, DSC-H5 and a DSC-W100 but if I were buying today I would not touch any ofSony's 2007 offerings.

After looking at the newCanon S5and Panasonic FZ18images that have been posted on the internet, Sony need to go back to the drawing board and get their act together .

mtclimber Aug 15, 2007 2:27 PM

Wirraway-

I am with you 100%. That is exactly what I was attempting to focus upon in this thread. Sony made some major camera decisions for 2007 that have to have cost them a significant loss of market share.

In, my opinion, they should be hard at work at trying to stem their losses by creating new camera offerings that do not cause faithful Sony users to simply walk away as they are doing right now. All we can do is hope, I guess,

Sarah Joyce

Cyberf828 Aug 16, 2007 3:03 PM

I am sure it didn't bother them a bit(Sony). People are still buying them cause if you are a average point and shooter its not going to bother you the issues that they bring up. I tested a H9 myself and I thought it was a nice camera and the photos turned out great.

nickphoto123 Aug 17, 2007 6:16 AM

With these one sentence assertions about Sony and the H9 I believe a re-visit to a Reality Check is in order:

http://forums.steves-digicams.com/forums/view_topic.php?id=572423&forum_id=28

Regards,

Nicholas

slipe Aug 17, 2007 4:56 PM

nickphoto123 wrote:
Quote:

With these one sentence assertions about Sony and the H9 I believe a re-visit to a Reality Check is in order:

http://forums.steves-digicams.com/forums/view_topic.php?id=572423&forum_id=28

This is more than a one sentence assertion: http://www.dpreview.com/reviews/sonyh9/page19.asp

I agree that most users will probably be happy with the camera and that Sony isn't in danger of losing a large share of the digital camera market. But there are enough limitations to make me consider a different camera.

Best quality JPG files from an 8Mp camera at around 2Mb is an absurdly high compression. My pocket 7Mp Casio camera puts out 4Mb files at best quality. Files from my old 5Mp Sony V1 are about 2Mb and I always thought the compression was a little high for that camera. Sony's "burst" mode isn't quite as much of a joke now that it is up to an eye watering 1.9 fps, but lowering the JPG quality wasn't the way to achieve that IMO.

I could live with some purple fringing and CA to get the extra zoom range. It doesn't affect that many shots and I can always take care if it with Photoshop. But having NR and compression artifacts even at 80 and 100 ISO with no raw or menu selections to turn it off would be a problem to me. Most cameras need more menu control IMO, but the H9 seems especially limited.

I see no reason why a camera of that level doesn't have a hot shoe. Canon finally put one on the S series and Panasonic has had them on their large superzooms for a while.

I had a camera once with a clunky interface and decided I would pay more attention to that when considering a camera. The H9 is set up fine as a P&S, but not for anyone who wants to have more control.

Having f4.5 at full zoom with less effective stabilization could be a problem in less than ideal light.

The hardcore pixel peepers would have problems with your version of what a 100% crop is. I resized your original back to 3264 pixel width and took the same crops. They were about a thousand pixels square. I suspected they weren't right when they were both exactly 500 pixels. Even using the info palette it is very difficult to get exactly 500. Setting the crop tool for 500 pixels just changes whatever you crop to 500 pixels – it isn't a 100% crop.


nickphoto123 Aug 17, 2007 9:32 PM

Hello Slipe,

Thanks for your response and opinions.

Regarding my 100% crops. They are 100%. The posted full size image as indicated is 4x6 at 300 dpi. That is 1800 x 1200 pixels.

With my Selection tool at fixed size I set it at 500x500 pixels.

Using my selection tool at 500x500 pixels I cropped out of the 4x6 images the 100% crops that I have posted.

Bottom line, for the price, the H9 is a fantastic camera.

Nicholas



slipe Aug 18, 2007 12:17 AM

Quote:

Regarding my 100% crops. They are 100%. The posted full size image as indicated is 4x6 at 300 dpi. That is 1800 x 1200 pixels.

With my Selection tool at fixed size I set it at 500x500 pixels.

Using my selection tool at 500x500 pixels I cropped out of the 4x6 images the 100% crops that I have posted.
It doesn't really matter whether you crop the full sized image and then downsize the crop or downsize the image and then crop. You are representing approximately 1 million pixels from the sensor with 250,000 pixels onscreen. That isn't a 100% crop.

I'm glad you are happy with your camera and anticipate you will continue to be pleased with it.


nickphoto123 Aug 18, 2007 6:23 AM

Hi Slipe,

You are missing an important point.

I am talking about a 'final' image, PP to my liking, if needed, including cropping,for presentation, from which I took a 100% crop.

Nicholas

slipe Aug 18, 2007 12:46 PM

nickphoto123 wrote:
Quote:

You are missing an important point.

I am talking about a 'final' image, PP to my liking, if needed, including cropping,for presentation, from which I took a 100% crop.

You could logically argue that your H9 is a DSLR since you view the scene through the lens. They dropped the "reflex" requirement with pellicle mirrors, so the argument might be logical. But it would be confusing to refer to it as a DSLR regardless of your logic because that is outside convention.

When you view an image 100% by convention you are viewing a full sized image with a pixel to pixel screen ratio. So unless your picture is from a cellphone you have to scroll around to see it all.

It really irritates people to put a full 8Mp image onscreen, but there are times when you want to display a part of that 100% image. By convention that is a "100% crop". There is a one to one screen pixel ratio.



All times are GMT -5. The time now is 11:07 AM.