Velocity Reviews - Computer Hardware Reviews

Velocity Reviews > Newsgroups > Computing > Digital Photography > Re: Have small, fixed-lens digital cameras passed their peak?

Reply
Thread Tools

Re: Have small, fixed-lens digital cameras passed their peak?

 
 
Mark Johnson
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      04-01-2004
David Kilpatrick <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote:

>Er, no, and I'm supposed to be reviewing the Minolta A2 in a Minolta
>user mag. I have to say my 7, 7i, and 7Hi images are often better. But I
>have no given up. I'm shooting only at ISO 64 and only RAW now. I can
>just discern a tiny gain in resolved fine detail, but there is certainly
>more noise, less exposure latitude, and the colour looks like a lower
>bit-depth rendering.


Sorry to hear that. People have been saying good things about the A2,
at least so far.

Have to see what's out around Christmas, then.


 
Reply With Quote
 
 
 
 
Andrew Koenig
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      04-01-2004
"Mark Johnson" <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote in message
news:(E-Mail Removed)...

> Sorry to hear that. People have been saying good things about the A2,
> at least so far.


Except for dcresource.com, where their reviewer is wondering if the camera
he has is a lemon.


 
Reply With Quote
 
 
 
 
John Navas
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      04-01-2004
[POSTED TO rec.photo.digital - REPLY ON USENET PLEASE]

In <4TZac.9284$(E-Mail Removed)> on Thu, 01 Apr
2004 19:15:12 GMT, "Andrew Koenig" <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote:

>"Mark Johnson" <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote in message
>news:(E-Mail Removed).. .
>
>> Sorry to hear that. People have been saying good things about the A2,
>> at least so far.

>
>Except for dcresource.com, where their reviewer is wondering if the camera
>he has is a lemon.


Perhaps so -- it happens:

<http://www.luminous-landscape.com/reviews/cameras/konica-minolta-a2.shtml>

Postscript

I'd like to add a brief postscript on the issue of product quality,
as well as product testing by buyers. My final test results with the
Minolta A2 were obtained with the third camera to come into my
possession. The first had a faulty Antishake system, and the second
was substantially soft -- possibly due to a lens element flaw. The
third camera is perfect so far, and is producing excellent results.

This is probably not indicative of what one can expect from Minolta,
and I've seen it before over the years with products from other
companies. This can be especially problematic with new models as well
as very early production cameras. ...

With a good sample, image quality was very good:

<http://www.luminous-landscape.com/reviews/cameras/konica-minolta-a2.shtml>
Konica-Minolta Dimage A2
Hitting One Over the Fence

Here is a brief verbal assessment of how the Minolta A2 compares to
the Sony F828 in terms of image quality. At the time of publication
of this review the Sony is the only other 8MP digicam which I have
run through DxO Analyzer.

* Distortion and Chromatic Aberration:

The Sony measures somewhat better in this regard, but in practice the
Minolta does not display either distortion or CA to any greater
extent in prints. I have no test for Purple Fringing, but in
empirical testing I found that while it can be quite noticeable on
the Sony I have never observed it on the Minolta.

* Vignetting

The Minolta measures a bit better, but again, there's little
difference to be seen in most practical situations

* Noise

The Sony and the Minolta measure similarly, but at high ISOs the
Minolta has the advantage

* Blur

The Minolta measures quite a bit better than the Sony .

<http://www.luminous-landscape.com/reviews/DXO-Tests/dxo-minolta-a2.shtml>
Konica Minolta Dimage A2 on the DxO Analyzer

The Bottom Line

Compared to the only other test measurements of an 8MP camera
performed so far, the Sony F828, the Minolta A2 performs very well
indeed. It is behind the Sony when it comes to measured distortion
and CA (not purple fringing, which we don't measure, and which is
another story).

Vignetting is a bit lower on the Minolta, though not by much.

Signal to noise ratio is just 1dB lower at ISO 64, but the Minolta
pulls ahead at higher ISOs.

It's when it comes to the Blur measurement -- how sharp the overall
system is, combining the lens and the sensor, that the Minolta really
pulls ahead.

This camera offers very fine optical performance and should be able
to produce high quality images, especially at low ISOs.

See also:
<http://www.luminous-landscape.com/reviews/DXO-Tests/dxo-olympus8080.shtml>
Olympus C-8080 on the DxO Analyzer

The C-8080 comes out a bit ahead, but not by much.

--
Best regards,
John Navas
[PLEASE NOTE: Ads belong *only* in rec.photo.marketplace.digital, as per
<http://bobatkins.photo.net/info/charter.htm> <http://rpdfaq.50megs.com/>]
 
Reply With Quote
 
 
 
Reply

Thread Tools

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 On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are Off


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Olympus Cameras - similar / consistent results from most of their cameras? Paul D. Sullivan Digital Photography 20 08-05-2007 08:03 PM
Cameras--Cameras--Cameras wagwheel Digital Photography 4 04-01-2007 01:12 PM
Cameras--Cameras--Cameras wagwheel Digital Photography 0 03-31-2007 11:38 AM
What the pros use to power their flashes... and their digital cameras. Dan Sullivan Digital Photography 21 01-04-2004 04:40 PM
People with both pocket digital cameras & bigger digital cameras zxcvar Digital Photography 12 01-04-2004 02:38 AM



Advertisments