D7 Image Quality

Costas Vlachos · Aug 5, 2001

Hi all,

I'm considering purchasing the Minolta DiMAGE 7. I like the SLR-style design and of course the 5 megapixel CCD. It supports the MicroDrive (a must), there are virtually no chromatic aberrations (a major +), the 28-200mm lens is fast and versatile, the EVF can greatly help shooting in direct sunlight, flex-focus is great with composition, uses AA batteries, has 49mm thread, better manual-focus handling, mechanical zoom, etc., etc. Theoretically, this camera appears to be the best there is among non-SLRs today.

BUT... I don't know if it's just me, but looking at Phil's D7 review samples and also at a few galleries posted here in the forum I am left with a feeling of disappointment regarding the D7's image quality. Of course image quality is subjective to some extent, but to my eyes most of the D7 images I've seen so far appear flat or washed-out, with a yellowish cast, over-exposed, and kind of grainy. I'm not saying the camera is incapable of producing good images. One needs to master the camera first before its performance can be maximised. The same thing holds true with the Canon PowerShot G1, which doesn't produce very good results when in AUTO mode, but is a truly spectacular camera when you learn how to use it. I really hope this is also the case with the D7. I've had the chance to play with the Nikon CoolPix 995 for about three weeks, and I must say that the images I've shot (most of them in AUTO mode) are clearly more pleasing (to me) than those of the D7.

Don't get me wrong, I'm not trying to throw negative comments on something I haven't even tried for myself yet. But... for such an expensive (and 5 MP) camera, the results I've seen so far just don't seem to do it for me. Phil gave the D7 an 8 for image quality, the lowest among the major "recommended" and "highly recommended" cameras. Judging from the samples, 8 seems pretty accurate to me. The Nikon CP990 and Canon G1 both got a 9 and the CP995 an 8.5. Even the old Casio QV-3000 got a 9, and again this can be seen by looking at the images. You don't have to look hard, just view Phil's samples of each of the cameras I mentioned above. Of course, there are many other good reasons to choose the D7, but to me image quality is the most important factor.

Anyone sharing my concerns? Am I expecting too much? Hopefully someone with a D7 will put my mind at rest by posting a few samples with that "wow" feeling (haven't seen one yet).

Costas

pka · Aug 5, 2001

I will for sure buy D7 as soon as it gets available here in CZ.

I will need to sell a lot of 35mm Nikon stuff for it, but I decided to go digital. The image quality of D7 is GREAT (I am G1 user), my concerns are power consumption, no mic for .avi, autofocus etc., but no image quality.
The main decision factor is the 28 mm and image quality ...
If you can affo d it, go for it, master the usage, amd have fun.
pka

Costas Vlachos said:
Hi all,

I'm considering purchasing the Minolta DiMAGE 7. I like the
SLR-style design and of course the 5 megapixel CCD. It supports the
MicroDrive (a must), there are virtually no chromatic aberrations
(a major +), the 28-200mm lens is fast and versatile, the EVF can
greatly help shooting in direct sunlight, flex-focus is great with
composition, uses AA batteries, has 49mm thread, better
manual-focus handling, mechanical zoom, etc., etc. Theoretically,
this camera appears to be the best there is among non-SLRs today.

BUT... I don't know if it's just me, but looking at Phil's D7
review samples and also at a few galleries posted here in the forum
I am left with a feeling of disappointment regarding the D7's image
quality. Of course image quality is subjective to some extent, but
to my eyes most of the D7 images I've seen so far appear flat or
washed-out, with a yellowish cast, over-exposed, and kind of
grainy. I'm not saying the camera is incapable of producing good
images. One needs to master the camera first before its performance
can be maximised. The same thing holds true with the Canon
PowerShot G1, which doesn't produce very good results when in AUTO
mode, but is a truly spectacular camera when you learn how to use
it. I really hope this is also the case with the D7. I've had the
chance to play with the Nikon CoolPix 995 for about three weeks,
and I must say that the images I've shot (most of them in AUTO
mode) are clearly more pleasing (to me) than those of the D7.

Don't get me wrong, I'm not trying to throw negative comments on
something I haven't even tried for myself yet. But... for such an
expensive (and 5 MP) camera, the results I've seen so far just
don't seem to do it for me. Phil gave the D7 an 8 for image
quality, the lowest among the major "recommended" and "highly
recommended" cameras. Judging from the samples, 8 seems pretty
accurate to me. The Nikon CP990 and Canon G1 both got a 9 and the
CP995 an 8.5. Even the old Casio QV-3000 got a 9, and again this
can be seen by looking at the images. You don't have to look hard,
just view Phil's samples of each of the cameras I mentioned above.
Of course, there are many other good reasons to choose the D7, but
to me image quality is the most important factor.

Anyone sharing my concerns? Am I expecting too much? Hopefully
someone with a D7 will put my mind at rest by posting a few samples
with that "wow" feeling (haven't seen one yet).

Costas

David Roberts · Aug 5, 2001

pka said:
pka said:

Anyone sharing my concerns? Am I expecting too much? Hopefully
someone with a D7 will put my mind at rest by posting a few samples
with that "wow" feeling (haven't seen one yet).

Costas

Click to expand...

Hi Costas,

I'm waiting for my D7 to arrive. Prior to ordering it I did a lot of research into the specs of the camera and read a number of reviews. Since others have got their cameras and posted examples of their work (and don't forget these are early works) I have downloaded most of them and amade prints after tweaking them in Photoshop to match my personal requirements. It is difficult to judge the image quality when you have to scroll back and forth across the screen and the image is backlit anyway. Makin gprints at 8 x 10 from the images has reinforced my decision to hold onto the camera when it arrives.

It is clear that people are using the camera for a wide variety of purposes and it seems to be coping very well indeed. One classic example is a series of shots of white-water rafting. Catalogue your needs and roam the postings looking for examples of those needs and I think you will be satisfied.
Good luck in your quest,
Dave Roberts

John S37185 · Aug 5, 2001

Costas

Take the sample images, tweak them in photoshop and then print them on your favorite photo-qualtiy printer at 8x10 or greater. I find most of the time the D7 wins any head to head competition. I am not alone, several internet reviewers agree.
John

Costas Vlachos said:
Hi all,

I'm considering purchasing the Minolta DiMAGE 7. I like the
SLR-style design and of course the 5 megapixel CCD. It supports the
MicroDrive (a must), there are virtually no chromatic aberrations
(a major +), the 28-200mm lens is fast and versatile, the EVF can
greatly help shooting in direct sunlight, flex-focus is great with
composition, uses AA batteries, has 49mm thread, better
manual-focus handling, mechanical zoom, etc., etc. Theoretically,
this camera appears to be the best there is among non-SLRs today.

BUT... I don't know if it's just me, but looking at Phil's D7
review samples and also at a few galleries posted here in the forum
I am left with a feeling of disappointment regarding the D7's image
quality. Of course image quality is subjective to some extent, but
to my eyes most of the D7 images I've seen so far appear flat or
washed-out, with a yellowish cast, over-exposed, and kind of
grainy. I'm not saying the camera is incapable of producing good
images. One needs to master the camera first before its performance
can be maximised. The same thing holds true with the Canon
PowerShot G1, which doesn't produce very good results when in AUTO
mode, but is a truly spectacular camera when you learn how to use
it. I really hope this is also the case with the D7. I've had the
chance to play with the Nikon CoolPix 995 for about three weeks,
and I must say that the images I've shot (most of them in AUTO
mode) are clearly more pleasing (to me) than those of the D7.

Don't get me wrong, I'm not trying to throw negative comments on
something I haven't even tried for myself yet. But... for such an
expensive (and 5 MP) camera, the results I've seen so far just
don't seem to do it for me. Phil gave the D7 an 8 for image
quality, the lowest among the major "recommended" and "highly
recommended" cameras. Judging from the samples, 8 seems pretty
accurate to me. The Nikon CP990 and Canon G1 both got a 9 and the
CP995 an 8.5. Even the old Casio QV-3000 got a 9, and again this
can be seen by looking at the images. You don't have to look hard,
just view Phil's samples of each of the cameras I mentioned above.
Of course, there are many other good reasons to choose the D7, but
to me image quality is the most important factor.

Anyone sharing my concerns? Am I expecting too much? Hopefully
someone with a D7 will put my mind at rest by posting a few samples
with that "wow" feeling (haven't seen one yet).

Costas

Dr. Gonzo · Aug 5, 2001

Costas Vlachos said:
Anyone sharing my concerns? Am I expecting too much? Hopefully
someone with a D7 will put my mind at rest by posting a few samples
with that "wow" feeling (haven't seen one yet).

Well, you're not alone. But you are going to be very unpopular in this forum posting something like that.

I posted something like this in another forum, and there has been a bit of discussion on the reasons.

http://www.dpreview.com/forums/read.asp?forum=1022&page=1&message=1353362

As for whether you're expecting too much, I think you may be. Remember the D7 is a consumer camera, and as such it's trying to be all things to all people -- and as a result some areas are bound to miss the mark slightly.

Bob Williams · Aug 5, 2001

Most of the D-7 images that have been posted so far have been
posted straight out of the camera for the purpose of showing
what the camera does. A lot of what you have seen from the
others has been edited images. The D-7 images I have down
loaded and printed have all been some of the best digital camera
images I have ever seen. It most likely is not the camera for
someone looking to print straight out of the camera tho. Of
course, i have never met the digital that was good for that yet.

Dr. Gonzo said:
Costas Vlachos said:

Anyone sharing my concerns? Am I expecting too much? Hopefully
someone with a D7 will put my mind at rest by posting a few samples
with that "wow" feeling (haven't seen one yet).

Click to expand...

Well, you're not alone. But you are going to be very unpopular in
this forum posting something like that.

I posted something like this in another forum, and there has been a
bit of discussion on the reasons.

http://www.dpreview.com/forums/read.asp?forum=1022&page=1&message=1353362

As for whether you're expecting too much, I think you may be.
Remember the D7 is a consumer camera, and as such it's trying to be
all things to all people -- and as a result some areas are bound to
miss the mark slightly.

Costas Vlachos · Aug 6, 2001

Many thanks to all who replied. I'm still undecided as to the image quality issue. Maybe I have to get my hands on a D7 and try for myself to see how I feel. I'll try to print a few of Phil's samples on my EPSON Stylus Photo 1290 and compare with some Nikon 995 prints I've made.

Thx again and please share your most impressive D7 shots. I just want some reassurance that the D7 is really up to (or better than) the image quality of the competition.

Costas

Costas Vlachos said:
Hi all,

I'm considering purchasing the Minolta DiMAGE 7. I like the
SLR-style design and of course the 5 megapixel CCD. It supports the
MicroDrive (a must), there are virtually no chromatic aberrations
(a major +), the 28-200mm lens is fast and versatile, the EVF can
greatly help shooting in direct sunlight, flex-focus is great with
composition, uses AA batteries, has 49mm thread, better
manual-focus handling, mechanical zoom, etc., etc. Theoretically,
this camera appears to be the best there is among non-SLRs today.

BUT... I don't know if it's just me, but looking at Phil's D7
review samples and also at a few galleries posted here in the forum
I am left with a feeling of disappointment regarding the D7's image
quality. Of course image quality is subjective to some extent, but
to my eyes most of the D7 images I've seen so far appear flat or
washed-out, with a yellowish cast, over-exposed, and kind of
grainy. I'm not saying the camera is incapable of producing good
images. One needs to master the camera first before its performance
can be maximised. The same thing holds true with the Canon
PowerShot G1, which doesn't produce very good results when in AUTO
mode, but is a truly spectacular camera when you learn how to use
it. I really hope this is also the case with the D7. I've had the
chance to play with the Nikon CoolPix 995 for about three weeks,
and I must say that the images I've shot (most of them in AUTO
mode) are clearly more pleasing (to me) than those of the D7.

Don't get me wrong, I'm not trying to throw negative comments on
something I haven't even tried for myself yet. But... for such an
expensive (and 5 MP) camera, the results I've seen so far just
don't seem to do it for me. Phil gave the D7 an 8 for image
quality, the lowest among the major "recommended" and "highly
recommended" cameras. Judging from the samples, 8 seems pretty
accurate to me. The Nikon CP990 and Canon G1 both got a 9 and the
CP995 an 8.5. Even the old Casio QV-3000 got a 9, and again this
can be seen by looking at the images. You don't have to look hard,
just view Phil's samples of each of the cameras I mentioned above.
Of course, there are many other good reasons to choose the D7, but
to me image quality is the most important factor.

Anyone sharing my concerns? Am I expecting too much? Hopefully
someone with a D7 will put my mind at rest by posting a few samples
with that "wow" feeling (haven't seen one yet).

Costas

Bo Eriksson53548 · Aug 6, 2001

Someone mentioned that most posted pictures was edited later...

None of mine in my PhotoPoint gallerys have any post-production other than the needed color-correction of the Minolta Viewer-utility. Othervise it is straight from the camera... Also note that the higher pixel-rate the more flaws get visible. That's why the D7-pictures in real resolution might look not quite so sharp, but as someone suggested, when printing out it will look every bit as sharp from the D7 than from any other Camera, and with the D7 you right now have the chance to make the prints a little bigger without pixelating...

Do however not expect 3000 dollar mechanics from a sub-1500 dollar camera. Considering everything I still say there is no more priceworthy camera that can give you pro-quality shots...

Personally I was amazed at the quality of some of my straight out of the box shots from the Garden. I got a bit worried for a while in the Map-test, but I'll return to that in another thread showing the unusual circumstances that led to that effect. And some of the more thought-through shots from the raceway yesterday at least I think is very good. Most people have rcognized the Helicopter shots and that I might have overdone the F-value for depth... But I'm still learning...

Best Regards

Bo Eriksson

Costas Vlachos said:
Many thanks to all who replied. I'm still undecided as to the image
quality issue. Maybe I have to get my hands on a D7 and try for
myself to see how I feel. I'll try to print a few of Phil's samples
on my EPSON Stylus Photo 1290 and compare with some Nikon 995
prints I've made.

Thx again and please share your most impressive D7 shots. I just
want some reassurance that the D7 is really up to (or better than)
the image quality of the competition.

Costas

abc · Aug 6, 2001

Costa,

I can't speak for the 955 because I have only taken a few test shots with it, and found its image characteristics virtually the same as the 990 (though Phil rates the quality of the 990 images as better than the 995, as I recall), but 8x10s from the D7, same scene side by side shots, blow away the 990 prints. The D7 lens is simply much better, and the resolution is considerably higher, and raw images, treated properly, will produce better images than jpegs.

The image quality is superb, but not consistently on a point and shoot basis. If that is what you are looking for, the Nikon 990/95 will produce consistently decent to good images on auto. It is a better camera for that kind of shooting to some extent. You have to act like a photogrpher to use the D7 to its potential, and the controls to do that are there for you.

It has taken me a week of non stop shooting to learn some of the basics of the the metering and other characteristics of the D7, at least to the point where I can make, not just luckily take, good images.

As someone else has said, most of the early images have been taken by folks who haven't yet begun to master the photographic tool they have just bought. (Obviously, I haven't either, yet). Check back in two weeks and you will see a lotmore excellent photographs than today.

In the meantime, I have no reservations in saying that the D7 will produce higher quality images, in both resolution and color fidelity, than the 9xx Nikons.

dh

Costas Vlachos said:
Thx again and please share your most impressive D7 shots. I just
want some reassurance that the D7 is really up to (or better than)
the image quality of the competition.

Costas

Costas Vlachos said:

Hi all,

I'm considering purchasing the Minolta DiMAGE 7. I like the
SLR-style design and of course the 5 megapixel CCD. It supports the
MicroDrive (a must), there are virtually no chromatic aberrations
(a major +), the 28-200mm lens is fast and versatile, the EVF can
greatly help shooting in direct sunlight, flex-focus is great with
composition, uses AA batteries, has 49mm thread, better
manual-focus handling, mechanical zoom, etc., etc. Theoretically,
this camera appears to be the best there is among non-SLRs today.

BUT... I don't know if it's just me, but looking at Phil's D7
review samples and also at a few galleries posted here in the forum
I am left with a feeling of disappointment regarding the D7's image
quality. Of course image quality is subjective to some extent, but
to my eyes most of the D7 images I've seen so far appear flat or
washed-out, with a yellowish cast, over-exposed, and kind of
grainy. I'm not saying the camera is incapable of producing good
images. One needs to master the camera first before its performance
can be maximised. The same thing holds true with the Canon
PowerShot G1, which doesn't produce very good results when in AUTO
mode, but is a truly spectacular camera when you learn how to use
it. I really hope this is also the case with the D7. I've had the
chance to play with the Nikon CoolPix 995 for about three weeks,
and I must say that the images I've shot (most of them in AUTO
mode) are clearly more pleasing (to me) than those of the D7.

Don't get me wrong, I'm not trying to throw negative comments on
something I haven't even tried for myself yet. But... for such an
expensive (and 5 MP) camera, the results I've seen so far just
don't seem to do it for me. Phil gave the D7 an 8 for image
quality, the lowest among the major "recommended" and "highly
recommended" cameras. Judging from the samples, 8 seems pretty
accurate to me. The Nikon CP990 and Canon G1 both got a 9 and the
CP995 an 8.5. Even the old Casio QV-3000 got a 9, and again this
can be seen by looking at the images. You don't have to look hard,
just view Phil's samples of each of the cameras I mentioned above.
Of course, there are many other good reasons to choose the D7, but
to me image quality is the most important factor.

Anyone sharing my concerns? Am I expecting too much? Hopefully
someone with a D7 will put my mind at rest by posting a few samples
with that "wow" feeling (haven't seen one yet).

Costas

Click to expand...

Tegenfeldt · Aug 8, 2001

Costas Vlachos said:
Hi all,

I'm considering purchasing the Minolta DiMAGE 7. I like the
SLR-style design and of course the 5 megapixel CCD. It supports the
MicroDrive (a must), there are virtually no chromatic aberrations
(a major +), the 28-200mm lens is fast and versatile, the EVF can
greatly help shooting in direct sunlight, flex-focus is great with
composition, uses AA batteries, has 49mm thread, better
manual-focus handling, mechanical zoom, etc., etc. Theoretically,
this camera appears to be the best there is among non-SLRs today.

Yes, the specifications are just (almost) perfect. I loved it on paper and I can assure you, I really love it after almost 2000 images shot with it! If you do get the D7 I believe you won´t be disappointed.

Costas Vlachos said:
BUT... I don't know if it's just me, but looking at Phil's D7
review samples and also at a few galleries posted here in the forum

...

Costas Vlachos said:
to my eyes most of the D7 images I've seen so far appear flat or
washed-out, with a yellowish cast, over-exposed, and kind of
grainy. I'm not saying the camera is incapable of producing good

This is due to color space restrictions, if you take the images throught the Minolta viewer and convert the images (jpg, tiff and raw) to a color space you can use in your workflow (such as sRGB or Adobe), THEN the images aren´t flat, on the contrary!

Costas Vlachos said:
images. One needs to master the camera first before its performance
can be maximised. The same thing holds true with the Canon
PowerShot G1, which doesn't produce very good results when in AUTO
mode, but is a truly spectacular camera when you learn how to use
it. I really hope this is also the case with the D7. I've had the
chance to play with the Nikon CoolPix 995 for about three weeks,
and I must say that the images I've shot (most of them in AUTO
mode) are clearly more pleasing (to me) than those of the D7.

I have had the CP950 and have the CP990, the D7 is better in almost every conceivable way. The specifications for the CP995 put me off to a dead stop, I wouldn´t switch my CP990 to a CP995 even if they paid me for it... More distorsions, less light, etc.

Costas Vlachos said:
Don't get me wrong, I'm not trying to throw negative comments on
something I haven't even tried for myself yet. But... for such an
expensive (and 5 MP) camera, the results I've seen so far just
don't seem to do it for me. Phil gave the D7 an 8 for image
quality, the lowest among the major "recommended" and "highly
recommended" cameras. Judging from the samples, 8 seems pretty
accurate to me. The Nikon CP990 and Canon G1 both got a 9 and the
CP995 an 8.5. Even the old Casio QV-3000 got a 9, and again this
can be seen by looking at the images. You don't have to look hard,
just view Phil's samples of each of the cameras I mentioned above.
Of course, there are many other good reasons to choose the D7, but
to me image quality is the most important factor.

I deem the image quality of the D7 to be better than the CP990, the D7 deserves a 9. Take a look at the updated (!) review, the images are better and more like what I get.

Costas Vlachos said:
Anyone sharing my concerns? Am I expecting too much? Hopefully
someone with a D7 will put my mind at rest by posting a few samples
with that "wow" feeling (haven't seen one yet).

Put your mind at rest by testing a D7 yourself, even if that means you have to wait a while, then decide what to buy. I bought the D7 among the first maniacs, but I don´t regret it one bit, the D7 is a fantastic camera. As with ALL cameras, the photographer creates great pictures, not the camera.

Peter Plewka · Aug 8, 2001

Costas,

if you like, send me your e-mail adress and I will send you an original picture from my D7 so you can see the untouched result yourself. I don´t know what they do with those samples that are to be found all over the net today. My pictures are not flat. They have a great contrast, wonderful colors and they are a lot better than everything you see from other cameras. The D7 is just the best you can buy today.

Peter ([email protected])

Costas Vlachos · Aug 8, 2001

Thanks to Tegenfeldt, Peter, and everyone else for their replies. I'm happy to report that since I started this thread I came across some very impressive D7 samples, so I'm beginning to trust the camera.

I'll try to print out a few D7 samples and see how they compare to my CP995 prints. Will post my impressions here.

Cheers,
Costas

Tegenfeldt said:
Costas Vlachos said:

Hi all,

I'm considering purchasing the Minolta DiMAGE 7. I like the
SLR-style design and of course the 5 megapixel CCD. It supports the
MicroDrive (a must), there are virtually no chromatic aberrations
(a major +), the 28-200mm lens is fast and versatile, the EVF can
greatly help shooting in direct sunlight, flex-focus is great with
composition, uses AA batteries, has 49mm thread, better
manual-focus handling, mechanical zoom, etc., etc. Theoretically,
this camera appears to be the best there is among non-SLRs today.

Click to expand...

Yes, the specifications are just (almost) perfect. I loved it on
paper and I can assure you, I really love it after almost 2000
images shot with it! If you do get the D7 I believe you won´t be
disappointed.

Tegenfeldt said:

BUT... I don't know if it's just me, but looking at Phil's D7
review samples and also at a few galleries posted here in the forum

Click to expand...

...

Tegenfeldt said:

to my eyes most of the D7 images I've seen so far appear flat or
washed-out, with a yellowish cast, over-exposed, and kind of
grainy. I'm not saying the camera is incapable of producing good

Click to expand...

This is due to color space restrictions, if you take the images
throught the Minolta viewer and convert the images (jpg, tiff and
raw) to a color space you can use in your workflow (such as sRGB or
Adobe), THEN the images aren´t flat, on the contrary!

Tegenfeldt said:

images. One needs to master the camera first before its performance
can be maximised. The same thing holds true with the Canon
PowerShot G1, which doesn't produce very good results when in AUTO
mode, but is a truly spectacular camera when you learn how to use
it. I really hope this is also the case with the D7. I've had the
chance to play with the Nikon CoolPix 995 for about three weeks,
and I must say that the images I've shot (most of them in AUTO
mode) are clearly more pleasing (to me) than those of the D7.

Click to expand...

I have had the CP950 and have the CP990, the D7 is better in almost
every conceivable way. The specifications for the CP995 put me off
to a dead stop, I wouldn´t switch my CP990 to a CP995 even if they
paid me for it... More distorsions, less light, etc.

Tegenfeldt said:

Don't get me wrong, I'm not trying to throw negative comments on
something I haven't even tried for myself yet. But... for such an
expensive (and 5 MP) camera, the results I've seen so far just
don't seem to do it for me. Phil gave the D7 an 8 for image
quality, the lowest among the major "recommended" and "highly
recommended" cameras. Judging from the samples, 8 seems pretty
accurate to me. The Nikon CP990 and Canon G1 both got a 9 and the
CP995 an 8.5. Even the old Casio QV-3000 got a 9, and again this
can be seen by looking at the images. You don't have to look hard,
just view Phil's samples of each of the cameras I mentioned above.
Of course, there are many other good reasons to choose the D7, but
to me image quality is the most important factor.

Click to expand...

I deem the image quality of the D7 to be better than the CP990, the
D7 deserves a 9. Take a look at the updated (!) review, the images
are better and more like what I get.

Tegenfeldt said:

Anyone sharing my concerns? Am I expecting too much? Hopefully
someone with a D7 will put my mind at rest by posting a few samples
with that "wow" feeling (haven't seen one yet).

Click to expand...

Put your mind at rest by testing a D7 yourself, even if that means
you have to wait a while, then decide what to buy. I bought the D7
among the first maniacs, but I don´t regret it one bit, the D7 is a
fantastic camera. As with ALL cameras, the photographer creates
great pictures, not the camera.

William George · Aug 8, 2001

Costas Vlachos said:
this camera appears to be the best there is among non-SLRs today.

BUT... I don't know if it's just me, but looking at Phil's D7
review samples and also at a few galleries posted here in the forum
I am left with a feeling of disappointment regarding the D7's image
quality. Of course image quality is subjective to some extent, but
to my eyes most of the D7 images I've seen so far appear flat or
washed-out, with a yellowish cast, over-exposed, and kind of
grainy. I'm not saying the camera is incapable of producing good
images. One needs to master the camera first before its performance
can be maximised.

I put a few photos up on the site below. All were run through the Minolta Image Utility.

http://www.photo.net/photodb/folder?folder_id=139553

Bill

Search

D7 Image Quality

Costas Vlachos

Forum Enthusiast

pka

Senior Member

David Roberts

Guest

John S37185

Well-known member

Dr. Gonzo

Senior Member

Bob Williams

Guest

Costas Vlachos

Forum Enthusiast

Bo Eriksson53548

Well-known member

abc

Forum Enthusiast

Tegenfeldt

Well-known member

Peter Plewka

New member

Costas Vlachos

Forum Enthusiast

William George

Forum Enthusiast

Keyboard shortcuts