OK, I'm done... F707 goes back

Hi Bryan

read your post with interest - I just bought a G2 to complement my E-10, and it does the job admirably - I certainly agree with other comments about comfort level, the percentage of good shots seems very high.

Incidentally, if you can't run to an E20 why not consider an E10 - they're pretty cheap right now, and I've had a huge amount of pleasure out of mine over the last year, a really great camera. Diane (another old G1 diehard) has just got herself an E-10 and seems pretty pleased :-)

kind regards
jono slack
Of course, there's that Nikon on the way . . . . Or maybe you'd
fancy the E-20?
I am kinda wondering about the Nikon 5000, but when you can't find
a Nikon user to say anything good about it, you have to be
cautious. :)

I do fancy the E-20, but don't think my wallet could touch it.

Bryan
 
Bryan, thanks for the great comparisons which I'm sure have already helped many decide on which camera to buy. I, too, was considering the F707, but when I read about the flash problems (the random blue cast) I immediately knew the F707 was not for me. I take lots of indoor flash shots. I use my 550EX (an excellent flash BTW) mostly bounced off the ceiling or side walls. Based on your comparisons I don't think the Sony flash can seriously compete. Also, the inability of the F707 to pre-flash and set custom white balance is plain stupid and a major let-down! With my G2+550EX I press the * button and the G2 pre-flashes and sets the custom WB with the 550EX in the bounce position, thus compensating for the colour of the bounce surface. The result: Exceptional colours which are very accurate (no blue casts, etc.) and 100% consistent. And the F707 doesn't even have RAW which means the bad WB must be corrected in PhotoShop... I'm not saying the F707 is a bad camera. It certainly has its strengths (that 5x zoom is really tempting). But overall I must say the G2 fits my needs better than the F707.

I couldn't help noticing the attitude of the Sony guys in the Sony Talk Forum where you also posted the comparisons. Somehow I feel that we Canon guys 'n gals are more civilised and peaceful people. We just use our cameras, we don't let our cameras use us! There are some Sony fanatics out there ready to attack whoever posts a negative message no matter how justified it may be. Anyway, I'm happy to be on the Canon side.

Good to have you back Bryan, and keep shooting & sharing.

Costas
I've probably stirred up enough trouble in the Sony forum, don't
you think? :)

Anyway, it's time for me to come back fully to the Canon camp. The
following is a message I just posted in the Sony Talk Forum
concerning my decision to stay with the G2 and to return the F707
to Sears:

----

I've been pretty quiet for the last week, because I've been trying
to get consistent results from the F707 I bought at Sears and have
been comparing my results with other galleries on this forum. I'm
just not liking what I'm seeing. It's been frustrating, and the few
posts I've made in the last week have probably shown that
frustration.

Not only that, but in head-to-head comparisons with the G2, I may
not get the same level of detail in portraits with the Canon, I've
found the G2 to be fairly effortless in getting quality shots.
That's important to me with active children that I'm trying to take
photos of and enjoy their company at the same time.

It's hard to tell how this story would have ended if the random
blue syndrome hadn't appeared... RBS, that's my acronym (with
apologies to Ulysses), as I still say it isn't a flaw just confined
to the flash. Maybe I would have kept it, maybe not. The F707 had
some things I liked, but there was still plenty that I did not...
especially when compared to the G2 that I also owned.

I'll miss the following:

1. I warmed to the EVF, though I still think it looks like a VCR
viewfinder
2. Loved the fast startup time
3. Enjoyed the nightframing (though somewhat gimmicky, IMO)
4. Has a better "shutter click" sound
5. Location of the tripod mount
6. Long battery life
7. Loved the longer zoom, and will miss that the most!
8. Last shot preview with the left arrow button
9. Longer movies
10. The laser focus... my kids really love that
11. Quick one-button manual white balance
12. 5MP instead of 4
13. A usable ISO 400 (if it's really ISO 400)

But there are still some things I don't like:

1. Memory sticks... too small and expensive
2. The "green auto mode" seems to only choose shutter speeds of
1/30 and above, and you have to set SCN mode for longer exposures
(will newbies figure this out?)
3. Way too many keystrokes to delete an image... given the smaller
size of the memory sticks, this is essential.
4. Preview of images take too long to load (and holding shutter
button gives a low-quality preview)
5. Zoom button is upside down and inconvenient... no chance of
one-handed operation like the G2.
6. The goofy Sony colors (mostly green and red)... IMO, no excuse
for that.
7. The flash... there's NOTHING to love about the F707 flash (more
below)
8. The camera strap keeps getting twisted because the connectors
swivel 180 degrees (OK, so I'm picky, but that bugs me)
9. My wife thinks it's ugly
10. The CA is still more pronounced
11. The worst implementation of Auto White Balance that I've
experienced on a digicam... and not enough white balance presets
12. No saturation control (in-camera)
13. A constantly smudged LCD.
14. Noisy shadows
15. Blue everywhere

Then there were the G2 features that I didn't think I could live
without:

1. RAW format
2. Chris Breeze's Downloader Program
3. The microdrive (can you say "sweet"?)
4. The tilt-swivel LCD
5. The IR remote
6. The 420EX flash and the hotshoe
7. Multiple focus zones
8. Colors that are correct and white balance that works (for the
most part)
9. Almost no noise

About that flash situation... the blue-shift isn't near as bad as
the fact that all photos must be done at full aperture with the
flash. For me, that's deadly. The HVL-F1000 flash makes the Vivitar
283 look like a BMW. The cold shoe left me... well, cold. And then
there's the blue shift that appears mostly with the flash, but in
daylight, too.

The kicker for me was when I took both cameras to a "Team Building"
event at work for my employees. With the G2, I just kept happily
snapping away, and managed to fire off over 200 pictures with the
internal flash without thinking of running out of space. With the
F707, I had two 128 meg sticks and constantly worried of running
out of memory. In fact, I did run out before the day was done, and
that was bad.

Then looking at the pictures revealed more... the G2 shots were
nearly all perfectly exposed. The F707 shots were not nearly as
good... over 3/4 had some sort of blue-shift, and the detail
difference wasn't as noticable as when I had lots of time. In fact,
I got more out of focus shots with the F707, and the colors really
bothered me more than I thought they would.

The G2 shots I uploaded to the Internet with no editing, and the
F707 shots required me to edit nearly every one... which took me
over two hours.

Then there was my overall feeling that I developed about the two
cameras. The G2 makes me feel confident that I'll get an acceptable
shot or maybe even an exceptional one, from time-to-time. There's
nothing that really irks me about the camera.

The F707 I knew had more of a chance of an exceptional shot, but
produced a greater number of unacceptable ones. Not only that, but
the obvious flaws in the camera ended up making it a love-hate
relationship for me. It's kinda like that first dent in your new
car... you get a sick feeling, and no matter how hard you try, your
eye keeps going to the flaw.

Finally, I don't think I could bring myself to rewarding Sony with
my dollars, my confidence they'd address the problem, or my
patience. As I've said before, this camera may be ahead of its
time, but that shows in many ways that aren't very appealing. I'll
give a look at the next model, but by then, I expect other
manufacturers to have surpassed the bar that Sony raised and then
dropped.

Most here won't be surprised with my choice, and some will say I
made my decision before I started. I know I can't convince them,
but I really wanted to like this camera. I really feel like I gave
it an open-minded shot, though some will disagree... but it IS my
choice in the end.

I do want to hang around after this goes back. I've developed an
affection for many of you, and I'm wanting to see if Sony addresses
your concerns with this camera. And I'll always be looking at your
photos while thinking what might have been. ;)

Thanks, everyone!

Bryan
 
I sure know what you mean about 3x zooms and portraits. I've shot very few portraits with the G2 so far. Happily, the few portraits I've done did exhibit some background blurring, although not to a great degree. It is difficult to blur backgrounds with 3x zooms, as you've said.

So, for the time when I do need to blur the background, would you kindly share how you did that in PS?

Regards,
Scotty
The images seldom need any work in PS, except for a sharpening
action that I run on them.
I agree with what you're saying. Just want to add: the more I learn
photoshop, the harder it becomes to find a cam whose images I'll
accept without editing them in Photoshop. ;-))

For all 3x digital zooms I will need PS to blur the background on
the portraits, for example.

http://pbase.com/image/299288
 
What about your printer drivers? A friend of mine cannot use his HP
PhotoSmart 1100. I though that you can use Win2000 printer drivers
for XP. Is that true? Thanks!
Yes, I have the Epson 1280 and I am currently using the Win2K driver for it and it works just fine. For some reason, though, even after installing the driver and status monitor, it comes up with the "Add new hardware" dialog when I first boot up... it still thinks the printer is new hardware. For now, I am just clicking on Cancel since I already installed Epson's driver - I don't want to use the XP drivers because I heard they are not as good.

Travis
 
Hey, did you ever get a chance to do any ISO testing to find out
how accurate the ISO figures are with these two cameras? Do you
still plan on doing that before you return the 707?
Yes, I'm still planning to do that test. However, I doubt I post it in the Sony Forum. Few there would be interested, I think, in hearing any more comparisons from me.

Bryan
 
Yes, I'm still planning to do that test. However, I doubt I post
it in the Sony Forum. Few there would be interested, I think, in
hearing any more comparisons from me.
Bryan
Probably a good idea! ;-) I wouldn't avoid the forum altogether because there are quite a few who appreciated what you have done. On the other hand, I'd also probably refrain from commenting further on the 707 itself. Wow, a few of those guys really got defensive... but I guess it's a natural reaction when you want something you own to be perfect.

I think there are several classes of 707 people:

1) Those who already own the 707 and have no problem accepting the white balance problem and/or don't mind waiting for a fix. They feel the 707 is the right camera for them and the blue cast is something that isn't a deal-breaker.

2) Those who owned the 707 but simply couldn't live with the WB problem but would have otherwise kept the camera. These people may buy the camera again if the problem is fixed or they may feel burned and move on to something else.

3) Those who feel the the white balance problem is not the only thing that makes the 707 a deal-breaker. Other issues have certainly been relavent such as inconsistent/inaccurace color, chromatic abbertion/blooming, poor external flash choices, more noise than expected, etc.

Do you feel you fall into category #2 or #3? From your tone, it appeared that the blue cast problem was a major reason you are returning the camera, but not the only one? If they fixed this problem, would you have kept the camera? Although I have no first-hand experience with the camera, the aforementioned issues would still make the 707 undesirable to me. But I can see how many would be more than satisfied with the camera if this one issue was resolved.

Travis
 
Do you feel you fall into category #2 or #3? From your tone, it
appeared that the blue cast problem was a major reason you are
returning the camera, but not the only one? If they fixed this
problem, would you have kept the camera? Although I have no
first-hand experience with the camera, the aforementioned issues
would still make the 707 undesirable to me. But I can see how many
would be more than satisfied with the camera if this one issue was
resolved.
Nah, there was more that the Random Blue that set me against this camera. The overall way that Sony "booted" flash implementation and the cheesy add-on flash would probably have sent it back to Sears even if the camera were perfect in white balance.

It's still sitting here on my desk. I hope Sears doesn't get difficult with me.

Bryan
 

Keyboard shortcuts

Back
Top