Sony dsc d700 Poor pictures

I purchased the d700 and loved all the features. the battery life was amazing, the manual focus ring and zoom was much like a real 35 ml. It felt like a real pro camera. Then I took some pictures, blurry, low saturation, no color depth. They needed major tweaking and never looked as good as my olympus 600. I am an experienced photographer and have been using digital for 4 years now. I wanted to love this camera so much but the pictures stunk (plain and simple) and sony was no help. I can not believe some people think the picks are so good. Maybe mine and some of the other people I have read posts from got a defective one. I returned it and got a Nikon 950. The camera is not as professional and many ways, but the pictures are much better. If anyone out there is geting good pictures, sharp consistant focused and bright colors. Let me know I would try another if mine was defective. I tryed so many diff shots and settings I could not get any in focus.

Rob said:

I purchased the d700 and loved all the features. the battery life was
amazing, the manual focus ring and zoom was much like a real 35 ml. It
felt like a real pro camera. Then I took some pictures, blurry, low
saturation, no color depth. They needed major tweaking and never looked
as good as my olympus 600. I am an experienced photographer and have been
using digital for 4 years now. I wanted to love this camera so much but
the pictures stunk (plain and simple) and sony was no help. I can not
believe some people think the picks are so good. Maybe mine and some of
the other people I have read posts from got a defective one. I returned
it and got a Nikon 950. The camera is not as professional and many ways,
but the pictures are much better. If anyone out there is geting good
pictures, sharp consistant focused and bright colors. Let me know I would
try another if mine was defective. I tryed so many diff shots and
settings I could not get any in focus.

Click to expand...

If you search through this forum there is someone who I believe has been getting good pictures off the Sony and was complaining about the samples on this site, and is willing to download the pixs. Look under Sony DSC D700 image quality.

Rob,

I have heard similar problems from several people with D700s. I have been really happy with my D700, and I know others who our happy. Either I am easy to please, or Sony has a quality control problem on the D700. If you have not been to the unofficial D700 site you may want to go there and look at the samples and see if they are similar to your results.

The URL is http://www.charm.net/~mchaney/d700/index.html . I have a page linked from the site, but these pictures where taken right after I got the camera, I am getting ready to put a new page to show my latest results. Anyway I hope this helps.

Ed

Michael said:

Rob said:

I purchased the d700 and loved all the features. the battery life was
amazing, the manual focus ring and zoom was much like a real 35 ml. It
felt like a real pro camera. Then I took some pictures, blurry, low
saturation, no color depth. They needed major tweaking and never looked
as good as my olympus 600. I am an experienced photographer and have been
using digital for 4 years now. I wanted to love this camera so much but
the pictures stunk (plain and simple) and sony was no help. I can not
believe some people think the picks are so good. Maybe mine and some of
the other people I have read posts from got a defective one. I returned
it and got a Nikon 950. The camera is not as professional and many ways,
but the pictures are much better. If anyone out there is geting good
pictures, sharp consistant focused and bright colors. Let me know I would
try another if mine was defective. I tryed so many diff shots and
settings I could not get any in focus.

Click to expand...

If you search through this forum there is someone who I believe has been
getting good pictures off the Sony and was complaining about the samples
on this site, and is willing to download the pixs. Look under Sony DSC
D700 image quality.

Click to expand...

I have not had a problem with the DSC-700. As with any digicam....Hours of
experimentation may be needed to figure out all of the nuances of the camera
and the images and how to get the best image. With the D700 I have done
that (as I did on all of my previous digi-cams...except for the Kodak
260...hated it.) I am willing to email anyone my example shots (right out
of the cam...verifiable with PIE) of my work. You can see some of my
work at http://www.digitalcreations.net .

Ed Shropshire said:

I have heard similar problems from several people with D700s. I have been
really happy with my D700, and I know others who our happy. Either I am
easy to please, or Sony has a quality control problem on the D700. If
you have not been to the unofficial D700 site you may want to go there
and look at the samples and see if they are similar to your results.
The URL is http://www.charm.net/~mchaney/d700/index.html . I have a page
linked from the site, but these pictures where taken right after I got
the camera, I am getting ready to put a new page to show my latest
results. Anyway I hope this helps.

Ed

Michael said:

Rob said:

I purchased the d700 and loved all the features. the battery life was
amazing, the manual focus ring and zoom was much like a real 35 ml. It
felt like a real pro camera. Then I took some pictures, blurry, low
saturation, no color depth. They needed major tweaking and never looked
as good as my olympus 600. I am an experienced photographer and have been
using digital for 4 years now. I wanted to love this camera so much but
the pictures stunk (plain and simple) and sony was no help. I can not
believe some people think the picks are so good. Maybe mine and some of
the other people I have read posts from got a defective one. I returned
it and got a Nikon 950. The camera is not as professional and many ways,
but the pictures are much better. If anyone out there is geting good
pictures, sharp consistant focused and bright colors. Let me know I would
try another if mine was defective. I tryed so many diff shots and
settings I could not get any in focus.

Click to expand...

If you search through this forum there is someone who I believe has been
getting good pictures off the Sony and was complaining about the samples
on this site, and is willing to download the pixs. Look under Sony DSC
D700 image quality.

Click to expand...

Click to expand...

The model is extremely attractive but the images do not appear sharp and crisp on my monitor...also there is color artifacts that I saw in the original Japanese D700 phots. Composition of model is great. I don't see the image quality that is presented by some of the other digicams. ****

Derrick Threatt said:

Ed Shropshire said:

I have heard similar problems from several people with D700s. I have been
really happy with my D700, and I know others who our happy. Either I am
easy to please, or Sony has a quality control problem on the D700. If
you have not been to the unofficial D700 site you may want to go there
and look at the samples and see if they are similar to your results.
The URL is http://www.charm.net/~mchaney/d700/index.html . I have a page
linked from the site, but these pictures where taken right after I got
the camera, I am getting ready to put a new page to show my latest
results. Anyway I hope this helps.

Ed

Michael said:

Rob said:

I purchased the d700 and loved all the features. the battery life was
amazing, the manual focus ring and zoom was much like a real 35 ml. It
felt like a real pro camera. Then I took some pictures, blurry, low
saturation, no color depth. They needed major tweaking and never looked
as good as my olympus 600. I am an experienced photographer and have been
using digital for 4 years now. I wanted to love this camera so much but
the pictures stunk (plain and simple) and sony was no help. I can not
believe some people think the picks are so good. Maybe mine and some of
the other people I have read posts from got a defective one. I returned
it and got a Nikon 950. The camera is not as professional and many ways,
but the pictures are much better. If anyone out there is geting good
pictures, sharp consistant focused and bright colors. Let me know I would
try another if mine was defective. I tryed so many diff shots and
settings I could not get any in focus.

Click to expand...

If you search through this forum there is someone who I believe has been
getting good pictures off the Sony and was complaining about the samples
on this site, and is willing to download the pixs. Look under Sony DSC
D700 image quality.

Click to expand...

Click to expand...

Click to expand...

Sounds like you didn't have to look at the pictures before you made up your mind. You are prepared to find fault with any examples to justify your own prejudged opinions!

**** said:

The model is extremely attractive but the images do not appear sharp and
crisp on my monitor...also there is color artifacts that I saw in the
original Japanese D700 phots. Composition of model is great. I don't
see the image quality that is presented by some of the other digicams.
****

Click to expand...

Really... comments like this are not worthy of a response.

Robert Anberry said:

**** said:

The model is extremely attractive but the images do not appear sharp and
crisp on my monitor...also there is color artifacts that I saw in the
original Japanese D700 phots. Composition of model is great. I don't
see the image quality that is presented by some of the other digicams.
****

Click to expand...

Click to expand...

Well now, just how defensive can we get? Can't we express a concern or comment without being labeled as having "prejudged opinions". I, also, experienced soft focus pictures with the D700. In spite of wonderful design and manual features, the camera did not perform well for me. I have read many similar posts about lack of sharp and detailed images as well as rave reviews. Couldn't it be possible that some defective/problematic cameras were shipped?

**** said:

Robert Anberry said:

**** said:

The model is extremely attractive but the images do not appear sharp and
crisp on my monitor...also there is color artifacts that I saw in the
original Japanese D700 phots. Composition of model is great. I don't
see the image quality that is presented by some of the other digicams.
****

Click to expand...

Click to expand...

Click to expand...

Travels with Sony

I am one of the satisfied Sony DSC D700 users. After waiting for the camera to
come on the market, and reading the reviews of the camera here, I has some
trepidation about the purchase. But I had a long vacation coming up, and the

camera features were too good to pass up. I received the camera (from Beach Camera

in NJ) two weeks before leaving, and the first test pictures were sometimes blurry
and not always full of color depth. I took my film camera just in case.

I just returned from the 2 week trip to Europe. I used my Sony DSC D700 camera

exclusively. Some pictures did turn out blurry, but usually because I did not wait

long enough to let the autofocus focus (I learned to depress the shutter slowly and

let the auto focus do its job. Manual focus generally worked well, but auto was my
default choice.

Picture quality was good, but not great. I took my lap top to download and edit
pictures. In spite of a Lexar 128 mb flash card, which holds about 160 images of
"high" quality (second best level), the ease of digital photography encourages

the user to experiment with lots of pictures, and then let's you save the best one.
I ended up taking 50 to 70 pictures a day, or about 600 images in two weeks.

I did have to improve color depth on some images, and discarded about 5% as too

blurry. The rest were very good for snap shot pictures for a photo album. I would not

recommend many 8X10 prints, as the pixelation starts to show. Using Corel's Photo
Paint program let me do all the editing I needed.

Over all, I am VERY happy with this camera. Its features are extensive and far beyond

any other digital camera under $2000. The camera probably does not generate the best p
pictures, but for a travel camera, it sure met my needs.

Mitch Findlay
Los Angeles, CA

Hello- I bought a DSC700 the first day they arrived at my pro dealer. My hope was that the camera would be a replacement for my Kodak DCS410, which had no LCD and almost no wide angle ability due to the 2.5X magnification factor, but was really usefull for small product photography. (Made a lot of money with that camera)

The Sony is a really well put together machine, as are all Sony products. The problem is their anti-aliasing and color matrix scheme, which is just awful. Most of the soft images have nothing to do with the lens, it is the anti-aliasing softening up the images and the color matrix scheme adding way too much blue and red channel noise. Sharpness and blue channel noise were many times worse than my 410. After a week of trying to get it to work I returned it to the dealer and threw him $100 for the privelige of trying it out. I now have a Canon Pro 70 and a Nikon 950 and find them extremely good for the money. The Pro 70 has a brilliant CMYK color matrix scheme that creates very little blue channel noise on well exposed images, and they have a very mild antialiasing scheme which creates sharp images with a touch of alisasing. The Nikon is a super toy, but not quite as sharp as the Canon. It does have those awesome features- like the three preset modes, which I have set for Tungsten studio, Strobe Studio, and HMI studio for quick and dirty product photography with a number of different light sources.

If Sony can fix the image problems with the DSC700 I'll buy another one in a heartbeat! Those that are satisfied with the camera should enjoy it, but the fact is that it cannot match the image quality of the current breed of prosumer cameras. Image quality isn't everything, but for me it is the defining feature.

JAY

Hardly defensive Cathy, since I don't own the camera in question I have the Canon Pro70) and didn't take the pictures that were being nit-picked.

I looked at the pictures and found them to be very good and I think that if they would have been presented as having been taken with the current sacred cow camera, the Nikon 950, that no faults would have been found with them at all!

Cathy said:

Well now, just how defensive can we get? Can't we express a concern or
comment without being labeled as having "prejudged opinions". I, also,
experienced soft focus pictures with the D700. In spite of wonderful
design and manual features, the camera did not perform well for me. I
have read many similar posts about lack of sharp and detailed images as
well as rave reviews. Couldn't it be possible that some
defective/problematic cameras were shipped?

Click to expand...

Cathy, his assumptions are about as valid as his judgement. I made the comments on the pictures. I also do not own or plan to own a 950! I had the 700 and it was not adequate for our needs. The images were soft and the focus was very tenative. I believe his Canon can produce a consistently better image.

Robert Anberry said:

Cathy said:

Well now, just how defensive can we get? Can't we express a concern or
comment without being labeled as having "prejudged opinions". I, also,
experienced soft focus pictures with the D700. In spite of wonderful
design and manual features, the camera did not perform well for me. I
have read many similar posts about lack of sharp and detailed images as
well as rave reviews. Couldn't it be possible that some
defective/problematic cameras were shipped?

Click to expand...

Click to expand...

See site noted below in URL. Only the first shot of the pond was modified in any way. I had to play with color saturation on it. The big difference that I have found was to use the White Balance Hold and use a 18% gray card. Set the WB when lighting conditions change.

Rob said:

I purchased the d700 and loved all the features. the battery life was
amazing, the manual focus ring and zoom was much like a real 35 ml. It
felt like a real pro camera. Then I took some pictures, blurry, low
saturation, no color depth. They needed major tweaking and never looked
as good as my olympus 600. I am an experienced photographer and have been
using digital for 4 years now. I wanted to love this camera so much but
the pictures stunk (plain and simple) and sony was no help. I can not
believe some people think the picks are so good. Maybe mine and some of
the other people I have read posts from got a defective one. I returned
it and got a Nikon 950. The camera is not as professional and many ways,
but the pictures are much better. If anyone out there is geting good
pictures, sharp consistant focused and bright colors. Let me know I would
try another if mine was defective. I tryed so many diff shots and
settings I could not get any in focus.

Click to expand...

What about PRO 70, I had one and love it very much.

Rob said:

I purchased the d700 and loved all the features. the battery life was
amazing, the manual focus ring and zoom was much like a real 35 ml. It
felt like a real pro camera. Then I took some pictures, blurry, low
saturation, no color depth. They needed major tweaking and never looked
as good as my olympus 600. I am an experienced photographer and have been
using digital for 4 years now. I wanted to love this camera so much but
the pictures stunk (plain and simple) and sony was no help. I can not
believe some people think the picks are so good. Maybe mine and some of
the other people I have read posts from got a defective one. I returned
it and got a Nikon 950. The camera is not as professional and many ways,
but the pictures are much better. If anyone out there is geting good
pictures, sharp consistant focused and bright colors. Let me know I would
try another if mine was defective. I tryed so many diff shots and
settings I could not get any in focus.

Click to expand...