What an intriguing post! If you saw a D7 in a store you might
pause to look at it - then move on to a "real" camera - and would
not be swayed even if the images were excellent. This is surely
the way to buy a paperweight (How does it look and will it hold my
papers down?), but hardly the way to evaluate a tool for taking
photographs.
It seems to me that cameras, be they film, digital or camera
obscura are devices intended for the capturing of images.
Pesonally, I wouldn't care if the thing looked like a barn door, so
long as the controls were convenient to my hand and it captured
excellent images. Yes, I know, PS is always there. But PS can
offer only limited creative control - it will never be the
substitute for my vision.
I evaluate a camera for its ability to reflect, enhance and capture
my vision - to give permanency to the fleeting, to give longevity
to the transient. This has not one whit to do with what it weighs
or looks like.
Bill says that many (if not most) E-10 users purchased their
cameras for the fact that it looks, feels and acts like a true 35mm
SLR, and goes on to say that the E-10 "...replaced or supplemented
a full 35mm SLR package...". Well, I know that my 35mm experience
included at least 6 other lenses , interchangeable backs and prisms
and a 2 FPS motor drive. Clearly the E-10, nor any other digital
camera will replace my 35mm kit. But that is not why I got into
digital photography. If I had wanted a cognate for my 35, I'd have
stayed in film. I love digital, even with its shortcomings. I
love exchanging my dank darkroom for my laptop w/PS. I love the
spontaneity of the deletion process. I love being able to share my
images widely with others. But all of this does not mean that I am
willing to compromise my image quality to more than the least
degree necessary. It is a compromise to be sure, but to me, (and
my vision) image quality is the most importtant attribute. Thus I
will wait to see the D7 before I make my purchase decision (which
MUST be made in early July). Minolta's 35mm optics were always
quite good, and all the prelims say the lens is tack sharp with
virtually no CA. Further, distortion seems to be minimal. I am
concerned somewhat about the noise, for I do enjoy nighttime
photography a great deal and often find myself with long exposure
times. I do like the availability of the 7x zoom - again, an
enhancement to my vision.
Sorry for being so long winded - Bill's post just struck a chord
with me. I mean him no malice - I just have a different point of
view. Our visions, perhaps, differ.............
lawprofkk
Bill H
Heres hoping Oly get on with an E-10 successor with the D-7
announcement today. I for one will be going to Minolta Dimage 7
unless Oly fight back before July
Reading the prelimanary reviews and the comments in the thread, it
seems that while the Dimage has more pixels the ergonomics and EVF
will make it appeal to a very different user group.
I agree that for most of us increasing the number of pixels is not
the bottom line.
I do wish that Oly would consider improving the firmware to address
some of the issues that have been noted in this forum; i.e. speed
of LCD reviews; noise at high ISO's, compression algorithms etc.,
but at least now I'm not looking for more pixels.
Mike
