The A2 is interesting, but a bit noisy (as in image noise) for my taste.
The 4000 is VERY interesting – but I haven’t gotten my hands on one yet.
Chris Cox,
Thanks for your reply. It has been a whole day and you have been the only one to do so. Ill now take some time to explain my needs concerning a digital camera by telling you my photographic background. I have been doing photography for about 30 years. First as a sideline and last 12 years full time. Main income is lower and mid priced weddings, various social events and portraits. (Ill never be rich but Ive never missed a house payment.) Have always used 35mm and always have informed clients of 35mm limitations.
The last few months I have gradually included some digital photos from wedding ceremonies into the brides albums. Minolta 7H, 5 mega pixel. I was not immediately impressed. Satisfied, but not impressed. However, after working on a series of somewhat under exposed digital photos by using shadow/highlight I was truly amazed. The digital photos were much better that the 35mm shots.
My has 20 years in photo lab work and does my printing. She was equally impressed. I must pause here to say the most credit goes not to myself, or the 7H, but rather to Photoshop.
Now, my question: Do you believe that the noise problem with the A2 should eliminate it from consideration for my needs? My plan is to purchase a good noise reduction plug in. I believe that the 8 mega pixel cameras from Konica-Minolta, Canon, Nikon and Sony all use the same Sony chip. Therefore, all of the other brands have this same noise problem. The A2 has the features I want.
By the way, if I get the camera, that Epson 4000 is a certainty.
Thank you, and Im sorry post is so long.
Chris Cox,
Thanks for your reply. It has been a whole day and you have been the only one to do so. Ill now take some time to explain my needs concerning a digital camera by telling you my photographic background. I have been doing photography for about 30 years. First as a sideline and last 12 years full time. Main income is lower and mid priced weddings, various social events and portraits. (Ill never be rich but Ive never missed a house payment.) Have always used 35mm and always have informed clients of 35mm limitations.
The last few months I have gradually included some digital photos from wedding ceremonies into the brides albums. Minolta 7H, 5 mega pixel. I was not immediately impressed. Satisfied, but not impressed. However, after working on a series of somewhat under exposed digital photos by using shadow/highlight I was truly amazed. The digital photos were much better that the 35mm shots.
My wife has 20 years in photo lab work and does my printing. She was equally impressed. I must pause here to say the most credit goes not to myself, or the 7H, but rather to Photoshop.
Now, my question: Do you believe that the noise problem with the A2 should eliminate it from consideration for my needs? My plan is to purchase a good noise reduction plug in. I believe that the 8 mega pixel cameras from Konica-Minolta, Canon, Nikon and Sony all use the same Sony chip. Therefore, all of the other brands have this same noise problem. The A2 has the features I want.
By the way, if I get the camera, that Epson 4000 is a certainty.
Thank you, and Im sorry post is so long.
Q,
Check the reviews at: dpreview.com
From the reviews that I have read recently in periodicals, for this price range I would head toward the new Nikon (I think D70) or the new Canon Rebel.
James
James,
I have read various reviews including the one you mentioned. Im aware that there is a noise problem. I just dont know how bad the problem is.
If I were to purchase either of those I would have the additional cost of purchasing the lenses for them. In a lot of cases a good lens costs more that the camera body. The A2 has zoom built in and it is a fairly good lens, considering its a zoom. Ive had above average results with my Minolta 7Hi.
I appreciate your reply and informing me of dpreview.com.
Q,
I must be missing something but why do want to pair an A2 with and Epson 4000?
I haven’t had time to try the A2 with noise reduction software yet. But post-processing won’t produce any miracles…
Ian Lyons
A2: Because I want to change to digital without a large investment, and because Im just plain tired of carrying three 35mm camera bodies and 4 or 5 lenses.
Epson 4000: Long lasting and good-looking prints. I also do a lot of restoration work for local photo lab.
And I most certainly would appreciate your comments on either product.
I don’t think you’ll have a problem with noise. You really have to push the limits for noise to be a problem. I shot my daughter’s wedding with a D7i and almost all of mine came out better than the "pros" she had hired. I’d love to have the A2 but just bought a new house instead. Go figure.
Gary – The A2 sensor is a bit noisy. I would put it in the consumer camera range, not professional range.
Q,
In their respective area of the market both are excellent. The 4000 is BIG and FAST. It costs a LOT of $’s just to put ink it. For high quality volume work it’s perfect. The A2 is a high end point and shoot. Like all point and shoot digicams and relative to a conventional 35mm SLR or even a digital SLR it is amongst other things SLOW.
If money is tight I would spend the $’s on a digital SLR such as those from Canon or Nikon. An Epson 2200/2100 would be fine for any large framed pictures the customer requires. For the album shots – outsource them to a third party.
To sum up: the 4000 is a pro printer and the A2 is a point and shoot – a marriage destined for the divorce court!
Q,
If you’ve not yet read the new review on the Olympus C8080 at dpreview.com, I suggest you do. It is reportedly the fastest in operation with an excellent battery life compared to its 8Mpx competition. Also, the image noise seems to be the best of the lot, although this seems to be due to the noise filtering technique employed, which still softens the image a bit. If you need the wide-range zoom of the A2, it may be your best bet for an all-in-one, but I’d otherwise say the Olympus merits strong consideration. It is also reported as having the best build quality and sharpest lens among the Canon, Nikon, Minolta, and Sony competition. I have the Olympus C5050 and have been very pleased with it, save for being a 5Mpx camera with short-range zoom.
If you’re not in too big a rush, my understanding is that Popular Photography’s July issue will have a topic on these new 8Mpx EVF cameras, possibly with some information comparing them to the 6Mpx DLRs. As DP Review mentions, the 6Mpx DSLRs with their larger sensor will tend to offer a cleaner, smoother-looking image that may still enlarge just as well or better than a high-end 8Mpx EVF camera. As Ian mentions, the DSLRs also seem to offer better speed of operation. But, if you really prefer an all-in-one sort of camera, then I suspect the difference in image quality may not be so significant as to concern you too much.
Regards,
Daryl
Q,
I’ve been surfing around this morning and found more reviews of the Olympus, Minolta, and other 8Mpx EVF digicams at <
http://luminous-landscape.com>. The Olympus C-8080 doesn’t seem to get as much favor there as it did at DP Review, although the image quality is still highly regarded. I also found an interesting essay comparing the Canon 1D MKII and PowerShot Pro 1, both 8Mpx cameras, yet the former an excellent and pricey DSLR. The image comparisons showed the increased noise in the image that is inherent with the smaller sensor in the Pro 1, but these were at rather large magnifications. The author stated that only those looking at the photos with a very critical eye would likely notice the differences, particularly if the images were further cleaned up some in Photoshop.
Anwyay, if you’ve not been to The Luminous Landscape, you may find it worth reading for yet one more reviewer’s opinion on various cameras.
Daryl
Are you sure that the new name is Koninolta and not Monica? 😀
Thanks to all.
Gary, Chris is correct in that different sensors are in the 7 series and the A2. I have read other reports that say, as Chris said, the sensor is noisy. Congrats on the new house
Chris, I respect your opinion. It is not what I want to hear but will be taken into consideration. I may be able to do some test shots with an A2 and then I will have a better idea as to how bad the noise is.
Daryl, Thanks for website and info.
Pierre, Konica is taking over Minolta so of course it is Koninolta. Hey, wait a minute. Monica, now that is good.
Ian, I agree with you on every count. However, there are things to consider. My wife is a photo lab tech and has been printing my work for 20 years. It is not a pro lab but she is a pro technician. Im spoiled because she does a great job. In a preview album of about 100 + prints she makes sure the colors and densities are consistent. Because that lab has not kept up with the digital age their clientele is dropping off. Her job now may be in danger.
Wedding photography is somewhat unique in that your lighting may constantly be changing, indoors outdoors for instance. I dont want to outsource printing for this reason.
Concerning slowness you make a valid point, however wedding photography does not require the same speed as sports. Photographing groups I often find myself waiting for the flash to recycle. My flash, a Metz CT60, is the most professional piece of equipment I own. I have worked for years doing more with less. Even my SLR 35mm equipment, most of it 20 to 30 years old, has never been pro equipment. Still, I usually have very happy clients due mostly to my use of lighting and creative posing. Im not the worlds best photographer by any means, but Im not half bad and customers like what I provide. Ill repeat that the prices for my wedding photography are in the range of hundreds, not thousands of dollars.
Again, thanks to everyone for your time. Any other comments will be appreciated.
I too have just completed a LOT of research for a new digital camera. PC Magazine, 16 March 2004 has quite a nice little review of several digital cameras. However, after all that I decided on the older version of the Konica-Minolta. The A2 at 8 megapixels was a bit noisy for my taste; but the A1 at 5 megapixels was just right. It has many of the same features that the A2 has. So far, it has performed very well. The battery life is extraordinary. I purchased a 1 gig memory card and can shoot top quality pictures without having to run for more batteries. And the tie breaker between the two…the cost. When Minolta came out with the A2, the price of the A1 went way down. If you can still get an A1, you will not be disappointed.
One thing to remember is that most of the new 8MP cameras are using the same Sony 8MP sensor….
But the final call is up to you, your standards and your needs.
