A2 vs A1

Please light me on the difference between the A2 and A1 except
the Mpix resolution.
I read that the A2 has a 922 000 pixel viewer. I that the same on the A1 ?

I would rather get a 5 Mpix than an 8 but would like fast focus
nice electronic viewer. Is the A1 good or does the A2 has really an interest
(except the higher res)

Many thanks for info

Yann

Hi Yann

I have an A2 and tested it against my brother's A1. Some things that are apparent without having to conduct a scientific-like study:

ycmarseille said:

Please light me on the difference between the A2 and A1 except
the Mpix resolution.

Click to expand...

The increased resulution of the A2 deos not really produce sharper images than the A1. I think the actual picture sharpness is limited by the optics and the autofocus system.

ycmarseille said:

I read that the A2 has a 922 000 pixel viewer. I that the same on
the A1 ?

Click to expand...

The electronic viewfinder on the A2 looks washed out. That on the A1 has nicer colors. Viewfinder resolution is too low for reliable manual focusing even on the A2. The focus check (magnification) is not implemented well.

ycmarseille said:

I would rather get a 5 Mpix than an 8 but would like fast focus
nice electronic viewer. Is the A1 good or does the A2 has really an
interest (except the higher res)

Click to expand...

I use my A2 often to make movies and I think the turn out ok. I have to use manual focus in movies though because the autofocus often would hunt back and forth. Estimate the object distance, then turn the manual focus ring until the distance indicated in the display is what you guess for the actual distance. Image stabilization (AS) is a must for movies. Movies on the A1 are useless for me because its movie resolution too low.

For both the A1 and A2:

The optics is good. The autofocus system has problems when looking at moving objects. When the scene is not well illuminated, the autofocus becomes very slow (lack of AF assist lamp).

Another point: The A1 requires about 40% less light for the same brighness and color noise as the A2. This means almost half the shutter speed. See the following thread:
http://forums.dpreview.com/forums/read.asp?forum=1024&message=10810694
or
http://forums.dpreview.com/forums/read.asp?forum=1024&message=10343702

The A1 does not suffer from the histogram problem discussed here:
http://forums.dpreview.com/forums/read.asp?forum=1024&message=9979630

Hope this helps.
D M T

I have an A1 and other than the limitations of all small sensor digicams I love it. It's many features have made me grow as a photographer. Here's a couple links to a site where you can read user's opinions and if you click on the "photos created with this camera" link in the upper right hand part of the page you can view many photos of each camera.

A1 page: http://www.betterphoto.com/reviews/reviewItemDetail.asp?reviewItemID=3311

A2 page: http://www.betterphoto.com/reviews/reviewItemDetail.asp?reviewItemID=4886

enjoy, Barry

Good points D M T. I used the A1 for over a year and now I have an A2 and I pretty much concur with your synopsis. The only thing I have had to contend with is little hot spots (Hot pixels) in my A2 on long exposures at 64-100iso. It appears to be inherent in the A2 and did not show in the A1. I PS then out from time to time but in day shots its not an issue most of the time. Both excellent cameras. I would not hesitate to recommend either one. The lower res EVF in the A1 is not an issue I find annoying, as long as you trust AF or bracket then 99% the shots comes out sharp and clear.

D M T said:

I have an A2 and tested it against my brother's A1. Some things
that are apparent without having to conduct a scientific-like study:

D M T said:

Please light me on the difference between the A2 and A1 except
the Mpix resolution.

Click to expand...

The increased resulution of the A2 deos not really produce sharper
images than the A1. I think the actual picture sharpness is limited
by the optics and the autofocus system.

D M T said:

I read that the A2 has a 922 000 pixel viewer. I that the same on
the A1 ?

Click to expand...

The electronic viewfinder on the A2 looks washed out. That on the
A1 has nicer colors. Viewfinder resolution is too low for reliable
manual focusing even on the A2. The focus check (magnification) is
not implemented well.

D M T said:

I would rather get a 5 Mpix than an 8 but would like fast focus
nice electronic viewer. Is the A1 good or does the A2 has really an
interest (except the higher res)

Click to expand...

I use my A2 often to make movies and I think the turn out ok. I
have to use manual focus in movies though because the autofocus
often would hunt back and forth. Estimate the object distance, then
turn the manual focus ring until the distance indicated in the
display is what you guess for the actual distance. Image
stabilization (AS) is a must for movies. Movies on the A1 are
useless for me because its movie resolution too low.

For both the A1 and A2:
The optics is good. The autofocus system has problems when looking
at moving objects. When the scene is not well illuminated, the
autofocus becomes very slow (lack of AF assist lamp).

Another point: The A1 requires about 40% less light for the same
brighness and color noise as the A2. This means almost half the
shutter speed. See the following thread:
http://forums.dpreview.com/forums/read.asp?forum=1024&message=10810694
or
http://forums.dpreview.com/forums/read.asp?forum=1024&message=10343702

The A1 does not suffer from the histogram problem discussed here:
http://forums.dpreview.com/forums/read.asp?forum=1024&message=9979630

Hope this helps.
D M T

Click to expand...

Hi there,

I have the same question as Yann (I can't decide between the A1 and the A2), but I am slightly surprised by the answers of DTM (not meaning I disagree, I just would like some more comments).

D M T said:

The electronic viewfinder on the A2 looks washed out. That on the
A1 has nicer colors.

Click to expand...

Isn't this tunable? (contrast/saturation).

D M T said:

Viewfinder resolution is too low for reliable
manual focusing even on the A2.

Click to expand...

I have often read that the A2 was probably the only bridge with which manual focusing had a sense. Better, one could even control the DOF. Could someone confirm/discuss?

-I am used to dynax/maxxum 7 auto-focusing. Is focusing speed/reliability with A1 and A2 better/worse?

D M T said:

Another point: The A1 requires about 40% less light for the same
brighness and color noise as the A2. This means almost half the
shutter speed.

Click to expand...

So, for equivalent brightness, the A1 iss quite better "noisewise" than the A2?

Thanks for your help,

FC

Hi,

Let me preface this response with the fact that I don't own either an A1 or A2. I am ordering an A2 in a few days after months and months of study, playing, and thought. So with that clarification here's my .02 worth.

caton said:

caton said:

The electronic viewfinder on the A2 looks washed out. That on the
A1 has nicer colors.

Click to expand...

Isn't this tunable? (contrast/saturation).

Click to expand...

Even if the viewfinder does seem a little washed out, what is seen through the viewfinder does not affect the result of the shot taken. Yes you can boost in camera contrast/saturation if shooting in jpeg. it doesn't matter a whole lot in raw.

caton said:

caton said:

Viewfinder resolution is too low for reliable
manual focusing even on the A2.

Click to expand...

I have often read that the A2 was probably the only bridge with
which manual focusing had a sense. Better, one could even control
the DOF. Could someone confirm/discuss?

Click to expand...

The viewfinder on the A2 is awesome!!!! It is the closest thing yet to the clarity of an optical viewfinder. Compared to any other camera's I've looked through it's a dream. As to manual focus, the A2 can enlarge the center area up to 10x to see what the focus is doing. From what I've seen it's great.

caton said:

-I am used to dynax/maxxum 7 auto-focusing. Is focusing
speed/reliability with A1 and A2 better/worse?

Click to expand...

The A2 is one of the quickest auto focusing camera's that I've held. Even comparing to my canon slr's. The focus can be frustrating if using multi segment mode as it will sometimes focus on a different part of the frame than you intended. With flex focus mode, focusing seems to be bang on and fast.

The A2 has soooo many great features that I haven't found in a complete package on any other camera. I know that it is a very advanced camera with so many variables that you can set it to shoot the way that you want to shoot. It may take some time to decide how set it up but that's the fun, isn't it? Take lots and lots of pictures.

Good luck

--
Pax

A link to A2 pdf Hypertexted tinked manual put together by Dan Huff
http://www3.telus.net/northernliteaerocraft/A2.html
'If you can't be good....... Be good at it!!' - me

After studying the matter for a long time, I thought I had ended up deciding to buy an A2, since it has all the manual controls I need and gives a lot of value (and a compact size) compared to a dSLR.

Then I started comparing photos taken with A1 and compared to those taken with A2. To me, it seems that:

1. A1 shows at least as much detail as A2.

2. A2 has more noise in the gray/black but less so in the colours.

3. A2 has more purple fringing (although not more than one can live with I suppose) than A1.

The first point would be the most important one for me, since I'm a graphic designer and will use the photos commercially. Is it just me, or is the 8MP in A2 something that is more visible in the marketing than on the photos? Is this camera actually more harmonious with the 5MP sensor, and will I be happier with that alternative?

It seems to me that a number of you have experience with both cameras. What are your opinions?

ycmarseille said:

Please light me on the difference between the A2 and A1 except
the Mpix resolution.
I read that the A2 has a 922 000 pixel viewer. I that the same on
the A1 ?

I would rather get a 5 Mpix than an 8 but would like fast focus
nice electronic viewer. Is the A1 good or does the A2 has really an
interest
(except the higher res)

Many thanks for info

Yann

Click to expand...

--
Zakk 9, the number 9 zakk

Sorry guys, I guess Yann lives in Marseille, so I'll answer in french.
Bonjour Yann,
J'habite Marseille aussi.

J'ai acheté un A2 il y a plusieurs mois. De toutes les photos que j'ai vues, je pense pouvoir dire que la différence n'est pas significative avec le A1.
(En tout cas, personnellement , je ne la vois pas).

Les seuls éléments qui m'ont fait pencher pour le A2 sont la vitesse de mise au point (sensée être nettement plus grande sur le A2), et surtout le viseur (EVF).

J'ai jeté un oeil dans le viseur du A1 : difficile, pour moi, de prendre des photos avec ça. Je viens d'un Nikon argentique, et je n'utilise jamais l'écran LCD pour viser. C'est pourquoi j'ai longtemps attendu avant de passer au numérique, qu'un viseur décent sorte. C'est la cas de celui du A2.
Cela dit, ça reste un viseur électronique, mais c'est le meilleur.

Si tu veux économiser de l'argent, et de la place sur tes cartes mémoire et disque dur, et si tu peux te satisfaire du viseur du A1, n'hésite pas : prends le A1.
Si tu es allergique aux viseurs électroniques standard, prends le A2.
Cordialement,
André

caton said:

-I am used to dynax/maxxum 7 auto-focusing. Is focusing
speed/reliability with A1 and A2 better/worse?

Click to expand...

Focusing speed with the Ax cameras is terrible RELATIVE to the Maxxum 7. I've got a Max 7 and an A1 and there is a huge difference btwn them. I've also tried the A2 and don't find it to be much faster than the A1.

Basically, I don't think any non-SLR digicam can focus as fast as a good film or digital SLR.

Larry

I have owned an A1 for several months. I did try the A2 but have very limited experience with it. Its EVF is noticeably better than that of the A1, but still, it didn't give me the thrill. I shall second that it is still not good enough for reliable manual focussing. For that you have to resort to the distance scale displayed (as in the A1).

caton said:

I have often read that the A2 was probably the only bridge with
which manual focusing had a sense.

Click to expand...

Why, bridges like the Oly E10 and 20 have true optical ttl finders. Must be better for manual focussing. Too bad their zoom range is so limited.

caton said:

-I am used to dynax/maxxum 7 auto-focusing. Is focusing
speed/reliability with A1 and A2 better/worse?

Click to expand...

The Dynax 7 is one of the fastest film SLRs around, when equipped with a good lens. Certainly faster than the Canon EOS 33 or the Nikon F80. Don't expect ANYTHING remotely as fast as that from a prosumer digicam. In good light, the autofocus of the A1 isn't terribly slow - not much slower than the Dynax 505si film SLR with the kit lens. In low light, it is in fact much slower, as the A1 does not use flash preflashes for subject illumination, the way Minolta's consumer-grade film SLRs do. If you have a contrasty subject, the AF system can lock focus in surprisingly low light (after some hunting, that is), but with more homogenous surfaces in the AF area, it can actually screw up even in reasonably well-lit interiors. The curse of not having an AF assist lamp. Also, Continuous AF is not adequate for tracking a fast-moving subject, even in good light.

However, please note that these are the only complaints I have about the A1. The lens is sharp from corner to corner, with very little variations across the aperture range. Chromatic aberration is low. For my film SLR, I have searched in vain for a lens of this focal length range and with the same optical characteristics. This GT glass is marvelous!

Further to the point of comparing the A2 to the A1, the A2 seems to have a more limited dynamic range than the A1. This should hardly come as a surprise, since the sensor photosites are smaller. Also, the battery lasts longer with the A1. As to noise: when I started taking photographs with the A1, I noticed there was some noise even at "ISO 100". Probably because "ISO 100" on the A1 actually corresponds to 160 ASA (see Phil's note on this at http://www.dpreview.com/reviews/minoltadimagea1/page16.asp ). I tried RAW and it was even noisier than JPEGs, also in line with Phil's observations. However, when I learnt about 'exposing to the right' with RAW (see http://luminous-landscape.com/tutorials/expose-right.shtml ), I did a RAW test again, and bingo! got a silky smooth pic at "ISO 100", with almost no perceptible noise. The only problems remaining with RAW are card capacity issues and lack of in-camera magnification to check for critical focus.

Anyway, I decided in favour of the A1 and haven't regretted it since. But if you want to take videos, definitely go for the A2. And of course if truly fast AF is what you want, coupled with a really usable MF mode, save up for the Dynax 7Digital. Especially if you have some good Minolta glass already.

the evf is remarkable and makes a big difference in focusing and determining exposure (especially with the live histogram).

dave

ycmarseille said:

Please light me on the difference between the A2 and A1 except
the Mpix resolution.
I read that the A2 has a 922 000 pixel viewer. I that the same on
the A1 ?

I would rather get a 5 Mpix than an 8 but would like fast focus
nice electronic viewer. Is the A1 good or does the A2 has really an
interest
(except the higher res)

Many thanks for info

Yann

Click to expand...

--
Dave Brown
http://homepage.mac.com/dmjbrown
http://www.pbase.com/ragingangel/
'Experiencing the world, one image at a time...'

I'm considering moving from the A1 (which I really like) to the A2. I wnet to the local Wolf Camera today to get my hands on an A2 to see if there's any overwhelming difference that would make my decision any easier.

I've heard a lot of comments on the EVF and the focus speed but it's hard to weigh these comments without putting the camera in your hands. I was somewhat dissappointed. I didn't find anything better about the EVF or focus speed of the A2 that's any better than the A1.

Knowing that there is no noticeable difference in functionality of the camera, I now must decide if there is a noticeable difference under the hood of these two cameras. Particularly if an 8mp camera is better than a 5mp camera.

My first thought is no. I rarely print anything larger than 8x10. However, will a 8mp photograph enhance my abilities to crop an unedited image? Is the extra 3mp's worth the money? Or would I be better served by sinking the money into a telephoto lens?

ycmarseille said:

Please light me on the difference between the A2 and A1 except
the Mpix resolution.
I read that the A2 has a 922 000 pixel viewer. I that the same on
the A1 ?

I would rather get a 5 Mpix than an 8 but would like fast focus
nice electronic viewer. Is the A1 good or does the A2 has really an
interest
(except the higher res)

Many thanks for info

Yann

Click to expand...

Hi,

If you didn't notice any significant difference between the 2 cameras, then don't go for an A2 : according to the use you have, the 8MP won't give you better pictures.
You'd be better to save your money and buy a telephotoconverter.
That would give you much more possibilities and fun.

However, I'm a little bit surprised you didn't notice difference concerning the EVF.
I tried both, and that's why I have choosen the A2.

Are you sure the refresh rate was settled at 30 im/s ? (there are 2 possibilities : 30 im/s and 60 im/s).
Cheers
André

coppertop said:

I've heard a lot of comments on the EVF and the focus speed but
it's hard to weigh these comments without putting the camera in
your hands. I was somewhat dissappointed. I didn't find anything
better about the EVF or focus speed of the A2 that's any better
than the A1.

Knowing that there is no noticeable difference in functionality of
the camera, I now must decide if there is a noticeable difference
under the hood of these two cameras. Particularly if an 8mp camera
is better than a 5mp camera.

My first thought is no. I rarely print anything larger than 8x10.
However, will a 8mp photograph enhance my abilities to crop an
unedited image? Is the extra 3mp's worth the money? Or would I be
better served by sinking the money into a telephoto lens?

ycmarseille said:

Please light me on the difference between the A2 and A1 except
the Mpix resolution.
I read that the A2 has a 922 000 pixel viewer. I that the same on
the A1 ?

I would rather get a 5 Mpix than an 8 but would like fast focus
nice electronic viewer. Is the A1 good or does the A2 has really an
interest
(except the higher res)

Many thanks for info

Yann

Click to expand...

Click to expand...

This really is a tough call, as far as I'm concerned.

I have an A1, so part of the decision to upgrade comes down to dollars and cents. How much can I get for my A1 vs. what do I have to pay for an A2. Or, do I keep the A1 and get an A2 in addition (would love to, but that's a lot more money.

There are tradeoffs here. The A2 does have a better EVF and a higher MB CCD (and maybe a lower ISO, but from what I've read, the natual ISO is still about the same). However, the noise seems to be higher , there are also some firmware issues, and the flash seems to perform differently from the A1.

If I could upgrage for a couple hundred bucks, I might go for it, but so far, I feel like I would end up paying almost as uch for the upgrade as I did for the A1 in the first place (I got a good deal on it). At that cost, I would be better off to buy an A2 and keep my A1.

I very seldomly print anything greater than 8x10, so this is also a consideration.

--
John Fagerberg
http://www.pbase.com/jafent2002

Wow, that is surprising as I noticed the EVF and the speed up instantly!

As for the MP boost, I think if you consider issues like cropping you will quickly realize that throwing away 3mp of crop on an 8mp shot is much better than throwing away about 2mp of a 5mp picture.

Cheers,

Dave

coppertop said:

I've heard a lot of comments on the EVF and the focus speed but
it's hard to weigh these comments without putting the camera in
your hands. I was somewhat dissappointed. I didn't find anything
better about the EVF or focus speed of the A2 that's any better
than the A1.

Knowing that there is no noticeable difference in functionality of
the camera, I now must decide if there is a noticeable difference
under the hood of these two cameras. Particularly if an 8mp camera
is better than a 5mp camera.

My first thought is no. I rarely print anything larger than 8x10.
However, will a 8mp photograph enhance my abilities to crop an
unedited image? Is the extra 3mp's worth the money? Or would I be
better served by sinking the money into a telephoto lens?

ycmarseille said:

Please light me on the difference between the A2 and A1 except
the Mpix resolution.
I read that the A2 has a 922 000 pixel viewer. I that the same on
the A1 ?

I would rather get a 5 Mpix than an 8 but would like fast focus
nice electronic viewer. Is the A1 good or does the A2 has really an
interest
(except the higher res)

Many thanks for info

Yann

Click to expand...

Click to expand...

--
Dave Brown
http://homepage.mac.com/dmjbrown
http://www.pbase.com/ragingangel/
'Experiencing the world, one image at a time...'

Another advantage of the A2 EVF is in playback, you can look at your shot at a quality which rivals your computer screen. I can see straight away if my shots are well focused or too noisy etc. Its something that took me a while to realise, but the quality far exceeds the Lcd and i always review shots usingh the EVF.
John Fagerberg wrote:
Stewart C

John Fagerberg said:

This really is a tough call, as far as I'm concerned.

I have an A1, so part of the decision to upgrade comes down to
dollars and cents. How much can I get for my A1 vs. what do I have
to pay for an A2. Or, do I keep the A1 and get an A2 in addition
(would love to, but that's a lot more money.

There are tradeoffs here. The A2 does have a better EVF and a
higher MB CCD (and maybe a lower ISO, but from what I've read, the
natual ISO is still about the same). However, the noise seems to be
higher , there are also some firmware issues, and the flash seems
to perform differently from the A1.

If I could upgrage for a couple hundred bucks, I might go for it,
but so far, I feel like I would end up paying almost as uch for the
upgrade as I did for the A1 in the first place (I got a good deal
on it). At that cost, I would be better off to buy an A2 and keep
my A1.

I very seldomly print anything greater than 8x10, so this is also a
consideration.

--
John Fagerberg
http://www.pbase.com/jafent2002

Click to expand...