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

Discussion in 'Digital Photography' started by Mark Johnson, Apr 1, 2004.

  1. Mark Johnson

    Mark Johnson Guest

    David Kilpatrick <> 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.
     
    Mark Johnson, Apr 1, 2004
    #1
    1. Advertising

  2. "Mark Johnson" <> wrote in message
    news:...

    > 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.
     
    Andrew Koenig, Apr 1, 2004
    #2
    1. Advertising

  3. Mark Johnson

    John Navas Guest

    [POSTED TO rec.photo.digital - REPLY ON USENET PLEASE]

    In <4TZac.9284$> on Thu, 01 Apr
    2004 19:15:12 GMT, "Andrew Koenig" <> wrote:

    >"Mark Johnson" <> wrote in message
    >news:...
    >
    >> 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/>]
     
    John Navas, Apr 1, 2004
    #3
    1. Advertising

Want to reply to this thread or ask your own question?

It takes just 2 minutes to sign up (and it's free!). Just click the sign up button to choose a username and then you can ask your own questions on the forum.
Similar Threads
  1. Folklore

    Film Scanners - About reached their peak ?

    Folklore, Sep 30, 2003, in forum: Digital Photography
    Replies:
    37
    Views:
    876
    Philip Homburg
    Oct 3, 2003
  2. Dan Sullivan
    Replies:
    21
    Views:
    1,360
    Dan Sullivan
    Jan 4, 2004
  3. jpc

    peak to peak vs rms noise in images.

    jpc, Apr 1, 2004, in forum: Digital Photography
    Replies:
    24
    Views:
    9,301
  4. fancy nospam tunes
    Replies:
    7
    Views:
    413
    Roger N. Clark (change username to rnclark)
    Jan 5, 2005
  5. chuckcar
    Replies:
    0
    Views:
    904
    chuckcar
    Jun 17, 2010
Loading...

Share This Page