simpatico
Forum Enthusiast
Dr. gonzo started a thread late last night where he asked if there were any pro photographers using the Dimage 7. There was a lot of flaming and trolling and other nonsense going on at the time so the thread got embroiled in it due to the good doctors reputation. Anyway, I think the question itself was valid so I am going to put it out again for anyone else to share their opinions.
This was my response...
As I was reading the Oly SLR forum earlier today, I read this post http://www.dpreview.com/forums/read.asp?forum=1022&page=1&message=1433116 where Zach Arias said "Looking at that New Sony and after getting my hands on a D7, I can say that the E-10 is a better camera. It's more like a real camera than an art school student design course camera like the Sony or the D7."
Not sure if I'm interpreting this properly, but to me that sounds about right, the d7 is a camera for an artist who wants the freedom to create images that reflect their vision. The strength of the camera is in its image control. It isn't a workhorse camera that you sling over your shoulder and charge up a shear rock face with. its a camera that you tuck away in a pouch until you reach the part of the cliff your headed for, then you pull it out, you think about what you are trying to capture, you take a minute to make sure that your vision and the cameras vision are in tune, and you take the picture that you want.
The sony f707 in the same situation will give you a beautiful picture, it just might not be the one that you want.
A D30 or a D1x will give you a picture as good as your vision or even better if you let it.
In terms of build quality, all of the cameras will hold up fine, however you would treat the minolta or the sony as if they are expensive pieces of electrical equipment. If you beat on them and they keep working you say man this is really well built. However if you beat on them and they break you blame yourself.
The e-10, the d1x, and the d30 are yours to abuse and pound in tent spikes if you wish. If you breakone of them you can get all up in arms about it. They make them heavy so you know this.
Again back to the pros, if my livelyhood depended on the camera, I wouldn't be an early adopter. As noted by Stephen earlier in this thread, Its a really big deal for a successful photographer to change anything about the way that they work.
I'd feel a lot more comfortable doing it, knowing that there were already a couple of hundred photographers successfully making their livelyhood off the same camera. Hence the E-10 is a choice camera among dozens of professionals, because there are applications where it has been proven to work well.
Also the focus on the D7 is slow, not dreadfully so, but noticeably so. Leaving my eos at home since I got the D7 a few weeks ago I'm really aware of the difference, but at the same time, I still feel comfortable going forward, its just going to take some adaptation of my technique. If I had relied a lot on continuous autofocus previously, that would be a really significant change to swallow. I'm still learning how to use it in different situations.
No doubt there will be professional applications to which the camera is very well suited, however I suspect that in a case like this a professional might shell out the money for the camera, as an experiment, and try using both systems for a while, to see how and if the D7 could work, before changing anything about his or her routine. If the professional really wanted to go digital and was sure of it, they would wait until the could afford something proven, a D1x, Eos D30, 1v...
An art school student, someone who knows a lot about photography, someone who knows a lot about digital image manipulation, someone who is ready to dive in and learn all about photography and/or anyone who just wants the freedom to experiment a lot, this is the market where the D7 lies at this point. I photograph as an exercise in composition. I do a fair amount of freelance performance photography, I experiment a lot, I've sold some art prints. However I don't rely on my photography to live. If I did, I probably wouldn't have just gotten a D7.
Anyway, thats where I see the camera now.
yrs
kirk
This was my response...
As I was reading the Oly SLR forum earlier today, I read this post http://www.dpreview.com/forums/read.asp?forum=1022&page=1&message=1433116 where Zach Arias said "Looking at that New Sony and after getting my hands on a D7, I can say that the E-10 is a better camera. It's more like a real camera than an art school student design course camera like the Sony or the D7."
Not sure if I'm interpreting this properly, but to me that sounds about right, the d7 is a camera for an artist who wants the freedom to create images that reflect their vision. The strength of the camera is in its image control. It isn't a workhorse camera that you sling over your shoulder and charge up a shear rock face with. its a camera that you tuck away in a pouch until you reach the part of the cliff your headed for, then you pull it out, you think about what you are trying to capture, you take a minute to make sure that your vision and the cameras vision are in tune, and you take the picture that you want.
The sony f707 in the same situation will give you a beautiful picture, it just might not be the one that you want.
A D30 or a D1x will give you a picture as good as your vision or even better if you let it.
In terms of build quality, all of the cameras will hold up fine, however you would treat the minolta or the sony as if they are expensive pieces of electrical equipment. If you beat on them and they keep working you say man this is really well built. However if you beat on them and they break you blame yourself.
The e-10, the d1x, and the d30 are yours to abuse and pound in tent spikes if you wish. If you breakone of them you can get all up in arms about it. They make them heavy so you know this.
Again back to the pros, if my livelyhood depended on the camera, I wouldn't be an early adopter. As noted by Stephen earlier in this thread, Its a really big deal for a successful photographer to change anything about the way that they work.
I'd feel a lot more comfortable doing it, knowing that there were already a couple of hundred photographers successfully making their livelyhood off the same camera. Hence the E-10 is a choice camera among dozens of professionals, because there are applications where it has been proven to work well.
Also the focus on the D7 is slow, not dreadfully so, but noticeably so. Leaving my eos at home since I got the D7 a few weeks ago I'm really aware of the difference, but at the same time, I still feel comfortable going forward, its just going to take some adaptation of my technique. If I had relied a lot on continuous autofocus previously, that would be a really significant change to swallow. I'm still learning how to use it in different situations.
No doubt there will be professional applications to which the camera is very well suited, however I suspect that in a case like this a professional might shell out the money for the camera, as an experiment, and try using both systems for a while, to see how and if the D7 could work, before changing anything about his or her routine. If the professional really wanted to go digital and was sure of it, they would wait until the could afford something proven, a D1x, Eos D30, 1v...
An art school student, someone who knows a lot about photography, someone who knows a lot about digital image manipulation, someone who is ready to dive in and learn all about photography and/or anyone who just wants the freedom to experiment a lot, this is the market where the D7 lies at this point. I photograph as an exercise in composition. I do a fair amount of freelance performance photography, I experiment a lot, I've sold some art prints. However I don't rely on my photography to live. If I did, I probably wouldn't have just gotten a D7.
Anyway, thats where I see the camera now.
yrs
kirk