D7 or Olympus E-20n

The Man · Nov 13, 2001

Chris Clark said:
Mike Roberts said:

Robert Martin said:

Ok what do you think ....Which is better, a Minoalt D7 0r a Olympus
E-20N.
I'am thinking on getting one or the other

Click to expand...

What type of photography do you do? Question can not be properly
answered without more data.

Mike Roberts

Click to expand...

I have looked at both and as a pro photographer the Olympus kicks but.
The Minolta is a joke. Piece of plastic rubbish. Go for the Olympus

well, you just proved that you did NOT look at both cameras than as the Dimage 7 is not plastic, the chassis/body of the camera is all metal. Only some of the buttons, battery door cover and grip are plastic. If you choose the overpriced, overweight, and weak lens Olympus thats fine and I wish you the best of luck and much enjoyment with your camera, but don't pass along false information to others about the Dimage 7. For a METAL camera that you called a joke, I've been shooting one since July and the pinted pictures up to 16x20 are nothing short of spectacular. I'm pround to show them next to others I've shot with my Minolta Maxxum 9 and Maxxum 7 film cameras and my prints from my older Nikon system. The Dimage 7 is by far the best digital camera I've ever owned and/or used and i've used a LOT of digital camera since they came onto the comsumer market about 6-7 years ago. Sure, there are better cameras but I'm not spending $5500 for a Nikon D1X body and than more for a lens to go with it.

The Olympus E20 is a fine camera but it can't justify its $1999 price for the features and lens that it has. Even looking through the Olympus forum, I see E10 owners who love their cameras and were waiting for the next model very disappointed in the E20 - not enough upgrade to bother AND twice as expensive and all other 5.2 MP models. At the regular price of $1299 the Dimage is a great camera but with Minolta's new $300 rebate, at $999 it's an even better camera and value.

Mark H · Nov 13, 2001

Hi Pete,

Hopefully I can answer one or two of your D7 questions.

In Automatic Modes:

At a certain low light level the D7 viewfinder switches to monochrome mode. It does this because of the excessive colour noise which is a result of the high gain being applied to the low signal (low signal/noise ratio).

The signal is low because the camera is always updating the viewfinder something like eight times a second (maximum 1/8th sec shutter) even when the required exposure time is several seconds. This implies that the gain that can be being applied, to maintain a constant viewfinder brightness, stretches well beyond ISO800, probably to ISO25600, maybe more. I can testify that if you find a REALLY DIM subject, the viewfinder noise level, even in mono mode, is extraordinary! (of course at this point the camera won’t auto-focus).

Also, I have found that the camera continues to ‘exposure preview’, even into the mono viewfinder mode, but there is a maximum gain limit (of course): At a very low light level I found that the change in viewfinder image brightness whilst adjusting + - EV, stopped partway through the EV compensation range (I had found maximum viewfinder gain). Of course, at this point ‘exposure preview’ is academic because the viewfinder is not only monochrome but the noise is shocking!

In Manual Mode:

Interestingly in manual mode the viewfinder stays in colour until the shutter speed selected changes from 4s (the maximum manual choice) to Bulb, regardless of light level, aperture chosen or any other settings. This is an opportunity to see the high colour noise level at low signal levels, particularly in the red channel.

Curiously with the ISO800 set, I’ve noticed that the viewfinder image lightens as the shutter speed is decreased to 0.7s but then becomes dimmer and stays constant at 1s and longer (until bulb), this I don’t understand.

Finally, I think the question of the huge gain range required to cover the potential range of light levels is explained as follows: Probably, electronic shuttering deals with high light levels until the shutter time approaches the maximum 1/8th second (maybe shorter), as explained above, at which point amplification has to be applied to an increasingly weaker signal until finally maximum gain level is reached.

I hope this confirms or adds to your understanding of the D7, and digital cameras in general.

Regards.

Mark H.

P.S. Isn’t the D7 an interesting, as well as brilliant camera!?

Chris Clark · Nov 14, 2001

Mike Roberts said:
Chris Clark said:

I have looked at both and as a pro photographer the Olympus kicks but.
The Minolta is a joke. Piece of plastic rubbish. Go for the Olympus

Click to expand...

Ah. The ignorance that there is only your type of pro shooting. How
wonderful it must be. A lot of pros are not even using digital,
yet. In fact, those who are, are generally on the lower tiers or
pro-dom, i.e. wedding photographers, portrait photographers,
newspaper photographers. The pros I look up to (landscape, Nat'l
Geo, etc.) still use film. Go figure.

And did he say he wanted a camera good enough for a pro? If he did
I would of told him that the only thing worth his time then is a D1
series camera. Everything else is a compromise.

Sorry to have obviously offended you.

But I just can't understand why people are prepared to spend £800 sterling or thereabouts on this sort of gear. Incidently,If I was shooting landscapes, I could get myself a Pentax 6x7 for less than the price of this.

I'll bet you're not still shooting with this camera in 12 months time, because it won't last the course. And I'm not poking fun of your pictures because I haven't seen them. I'm poking fun at this sort of overpriced gear that belongs in a christmas cracker!

Mike Roberts said:
Now, if you would like to make fun of something, take a look at my
photos.
http://www.photo.net/photodb/user?user_id=378035

Mike Roberts

P.S. BTW, what plastic? The camera is mostly metal just not that
ugly black retro ca-ca.

Michael Brown · Nov 14, 2001

Pete said:
Now I take it you have one - so I'd
love to hear your observations about how the EVF behaves and how
realistic the preview is - compared with the captured image, when
you are shooting in low ambient that requires long exposures. Put
another way, beyond what shutter speed is the EVF no longer useful
for previewing the quality of captured exposure (ignoring color)?
And beyond what shutter speed is the EVF no longer useful period?

I don't have a D7 so I can't answer those questions - but I think the other response to your questions does.

I'm still deciding which digicam to get. It's a decision between D7 or Olympus E10 - about which I unintentionally started a huge flame war in the Oly SLR forum a few days ago!

Michael.

Andrew Cruickshank · Nov 14, 2001

Chris Clark said:
But I just can't understand why people are prepared to spend £800
sterling or thereabouts on this sort of gear. Incidently,If I was
shooting landscapes, I could get myself a Pentax 6x7 for less than
the price of this.

It must be bizzare -- and it's also bizarre that people put out
this kind of money or more on 35mm SLRs and rangefinder kit.

Chris Clark said:
I'll bet you're not still shooting with this camera in 12 months
time, because it won't last the course. And I'm not poking fun of
your pictures because I haven't seen them. I'm poking fun at this
sort of overpriced gear that belongs in a christmas cracker!

Well speaking for myself I spent this kind of money for
a piece of kit that would entertain me, challenge me,
and get used a lot. It's been more fun so far compared
with any other piece of photographic kit I've ever bought
barring my first SLR -- which with inflation (including the
cost of lenses) probably cost a bit more than £800.

As for lifetime of the kit. You don't have to ditch in
12 months and in the three years or so I expect mine to
last before there's something worth buying as a replacement
I expect to have used it rather a lot.

---------------
Andrew.

Claymore · Nov 14, 2001

Chris Clark said:
Chris Clark said:

Chris Clark said:

Chris Clark wrote:
I have looked at both and as a pro photographer the Olympus kicks but.

Click to expand...

Click to expand...

Sorry to have obviously offended you.
But I just can't understand why people are prepared to spend £800
sterling or thereabouts on this sort of gear. Incidently,If I was
shooting landscapes, I could get myself a Pentax 6x7 for less than
the price of this.
I'll bet you're not still shooting with this camera in 12 months
time, because it won't last the course. And I'm not poking fun of
your pictures because I haven't seen them. I'm poking fun at this
sort of overpriced gear that belongs in a christmas cracker!

-----------------------------------------------------------
Chris old boy, you're a pro photographer of what? I've been a Pro
Photographer longer than you have been alive! (53 years). Published
in 143 countries, including Nat Geo, Time, Life, ect. Taught at the
University for 12 years. I knew a great camera (D-7) when I saw it.

Funny, but over on "your" forum, people are asking if anyone has
had success printing 11X17 prints without pixels. Here we are talking
about how nice our 26X36 prints have come out with no massageing
in the computer. OH! and I traded in a 645 on the D-7. Great choice.

Enjoy your what-ever it is,
Clifford of San Diego Take a look;> > >

http://www.imira.com/album/guestview.asp?aid=334506

also the same address but =301320 and =312710 Good shooting!

Pete · Nov 14, 2001

Michael Brown said:
I'm still deciding which digicam to get.

Me too - likely between the Sony 707 and the D7. Honestly, both of them are quite close - but the misses are almost outrageous. How could Minolta have ever shipped the D7 with alkaline cells? I have the horrible feeling the camera was designed for 1.5 volts per cell and the real problem with so so battery life on NICADS may be less an issue of capacity then it is one of voltage - that NICADS start out at around 1.2 volts per cell. I say this because I've read that some people with fancier chargers seem to find that their D7 batteries have more then 50 % capacity left when the camera gives up on them. I have to wonder if this is just a low voltage detector that was designed for alkalines or does the camera really have a problem with lower voltage. Either way, If this is true, its a very serious oversight.

The 707 has had problems with blown reds and a blue cast with flash. There are some reports back that the cast is fixed by a recall and that perhaps the tendency towards saturation has been toned down. There are also issues with over sharpening. Neither sharpening nor saturation is adjustable as they are on the D7. The lens may say Zeiss on it but it sounds like it isn't so hot when you look at chromatic aberration and barrel distortion at some settings. The D7 lens sounds first rate and it's got a very nice wide-angle capability. Right now you can only get a 128 meg stick for the 707. The D7, in contrast, takes a 1 gig microdrive. And with the recent price drop, you can buy one with the savings.

Michael Brown said:
about which I unintentionally started a huge
flame war in the Oly SLR forum a few days ago!

I've found the forums fun, interesting and useful but there's also some excess testosterone out there. Some people take your honest opinions and treat them as if you've insulted their cameras. From the reactions you get from some people, you would think you had cast aspersions on their mothers or wives and children or all three. Now some people ask for it - but most are just trying to express an honestly felt opinion or, like you and I, just trying to make a good decision.

Good luck!!

Pete

Pete · Nov 14, 2001

Mark H said:
Hi Pete,

Hopefully I can answer one or two of your D7 questions.

Thanks Mark, I appreciate the detail with which you responded. It will help me home in on some things I'd like to try when next I get to the store

Mark H said:
P.S. Isn’t the D7 an interesting, as well as brilliant camera!?

I think it has many fine points and I'm seriously considering it since I heard the price dropped.

My remaining concern is the battery life. Not that it hasn't improved with NICADS as compared with the alkaline cells the camera was initially shipped with. It's just that I have a nagging suspicion it could have been a lot better without much effort.

Several readers on this forum with more elaborate battery charges have found 50% to 60% capacity remaining in their NICADS when the camera gives up on them. This could have one or more causes. NICADS start out at roughly 1.2 volts vs. 1.5 for alkaline when fresh. It could be that the camera really doesn't function at the lower voltages you find with partially discharged NICADS. Or worse - it could be that the camera would work but that the threshold of the low voltage detect circuit was design for a higher voltage and arbitrarily shuts off the camera sooner then need be. The low voltage detect circuit makes an estimate of battery life remaining based on battery terminal voltage under load. I'm assuming the camera was designed for alkalines because it was initially shipped with them and therefor the circuit does not realize the capacity left in the NICADS because it's fooled by their lower voltage. Now Minolta could fix this second problem by just changing the threshold - assuming the camera would work at lower voltage.

Pete

Mark H · Nov 14, 2001

Hi Pete,

I must point out, before anyone else does, that you should not use NICADS (NiCd) but NiMHs (Nickel Metal Hydride) rechargeables. There is quite a substantial difference in capacity (and they're also more enviromentaly friendly - no cadmium).

Also, the camera is definately designed to work with NiMH batteries. Page two of the manual clearly states "Because of the low performance of alkaline batteries with digital cameras, the use of NiMH batteries is recommended".

It was a very embarassing mistake of Minolta to supply the camera with alkaline batteries that died after 5-10 mins. In the UK Minolta very quicky started supplying the camera with NiMH's and an inexpensive charger in place of alkalines.

A set of 1600-1800mAH NiMH cells will power the camera for somewhere between 1.5 and 2 hours continuously, but the camera has various power saving modes and configurations. Most people report that they rarely get through more than 2 sets of batteries in a pretty busy day (100-200 shots or more). It's a good idea to have 3 sets of batteries and invest in a better/faster international voltage charger if it matters.

The battery life issue is most noticeable when you first get your new toy and are geting to know it and playing with it a lot. A mains adaptor could be usefull, but it needs to be able to dish out about 1.5Amps at 5 or 6 volts which is not common, Minolta make one as well as an external battery pack (very expensive).

Cheers for now.

Mark H.

Mark H · Nov 14, 2001

Hi again,

Forgot to mention: Reports of 50% battery charge remaining are allmost certainly inaccurate/missleading. The voltage versus charge level curve for the NiMH cells makes it difficult if not impossible to gauge the remaining charge. The voltage drops very slowly until the final 10% or so when the voltage drops very fast. For this reason you get little time after the D7 battery low warning appears before the camera shuts down.

Here's a couple of links to sites/pages with good info on NiMH batteries, well worth reading if you get a D7.

http://www.gpbatteries.com/

http://www.greenbatteries.com/

http://www.nimhbattery.com/maha-educate-batteries.htm

Mark H.

Pete · Nov 14, 2001

Mark H said:
Hi Pete,

I must point out, before anyone else does, that you should not use
NICADS (NiCd) but NiMHs (Nickel Metal Hydride) rechargeables.

You're right - I misspoke - NIMH. And that's the type of cell some people are reporting underused capacity on this forum - when the camera gives up.

Mark H said:
It was a very embarrassing mistake of Minolta to supply the camera
with alkaline batteries that died after 5-10 mins. In the UK
Minolta very quickly started supplying the camera with NiMH's and an
inexpensive charger in place of alkalines.

I'm still wondering if it wasn't an even more serious mistake designing around alkalines and then shipping with NIMH. It wouldn't be the first time some engineer powered his prototype with a power supply on the bench - never checking performance with batteries.

Mark H said:
A set of 1600-1800mAH NiMH cells will power the camera for
somewhere between 1.5 and 2 hours continuously, but the camera has
various power saving modes and configurations.

This is also what I read that most people report getting after their batteries are conditioned and with smart power saving choices. Still my question is how much more could they get if the only issue is the low voltage detect threshold of the camera. I tried to find a place on the Minolta WEB site to ask this question. I found an e-mail address for Minolta Canada - and dropped them a line.

Mark H said:
A mains adapter could be useful, but it needs to be able to dish out
about 1.5Amps at 5 or 6 volts which is not common, Minolta make one
as well as an external battery pack (very expensive).

Radio shack might have something like this although I don't know about the connector. It's odd that they get a lot for the external pack when you don't have to pay that much for a gel-cell of reasonable capacity.

Pete

Mark H · Nov 14, 2001

Pete said:
Pete said:

It was a very embarrassing mistake of Minolta to supply the camera
with alkaline batteries that died after 5-10 mins. In the UK
Minolta very quickly started supplying the camera with NiMH's and an
inexpensive charger in place of alkalines.

Click to expand...

I'm still wondering if it wasn't an even more serious mistake
designing around alkalines and then shipping with NIMH. It wouldn't
be the first time some engineer powered his prototype with a power
supply on the bench - never checking performance with batteries.

Pete,

I think you may have missread/misunderstood my message. I'm quite sure the camera is designed for NiMHs, the mistake being supplying with alkalines which hardly work (to save money).

Mark.

Pete · Nov 14, 2001

Mark H said:
Hi again,

Forgot to mention: Reports of 50% battery charge remaining are
almost certainly inaccurate/misleading.

Could be - no one is specific about how they are determining this. And I don't know what the camera's drain is on the batteries in the various usage modes.

Mark H said:
The voltage versus charge level curve for the NiMH cells makes it difficult
if not impossible to gauge the remaining charge. The voltage drops very
slowly until the final 10% or so when the voltage drops very fast. For this
reason you get little time after the D7 battery low warning appears
before the camera shuts down.

That's always been true of this type of cell - that's why many years ago ('70s) someone made a deposition cell that sat in shunt with a very low ohms resistor in the main current line that actually plated and unplated a conductor inside the cell (a glass tube) as a function of current X time. A separate set of electrodes in the cell could be read to determine end states of charge, discharge (forcing the cell to be in the charge and discharge path). Today, the same thing could be done with a sense resistor, some circuitry and some code in the processor.

My point is still that if the camera was designed for alkaline behavior / voltages and then switched to NIMH after release and without any modification to the LV detect threshold or better yet, a change to a true capacity circuit, there could be untapped power in those batteries.

Pete

Mike Roberts · Nov 14, 2001

Chris Clark said:
Sorry to have obviously offended you.

Sure you are.

Chris Clark said:
But I just can't understand why people are prepared to spend £800
sterling or thereabouts on this sort of gear.

Go look at my pictures. Maybe they will help you understand.

And the camera has dropped to $900 US (due to shrinking economy and a competitive market) for those scared (or too poor) to be early adopters. I could of waited, but then my pictures from my trip out west would not be as nice.

Chris Clark said:
Incidently,If I was shooting landscapes, I could get myself a Pentax 6x7 > for less than the price of this.

Less price? Not taking 3000+ images in 3 months.

Chris Clark said:
I'll bet you're not still shooting with this camera in 12 months
time, because it won't last the course.

Really? What do you want to bet? Are you implying it will break? Or that I will not like it in 12 months?

Chris Clark said:
And I'm not poking fun of your pictures because I haven't seen them.

I'm poking fun at this sort of overpriced gear that belongs in a christmas > cracker!

Maybe you should look at my pictures before you jump up and jam both your feet in your mouth.

Mike Roberts

Pete · Nov 15, 2001

Mark H said:
I think you may have missread/misunderstood my message. I'm quite
sure the camera is designed for NiMHs, the mistake being supplying
with alkalines which hardly work (to save money).

Hi Mark,

Yes that could very well be the case - that it was a last minute decision to go the cheap way. Not a wise decision - when you consider the original list price of the camera. It's much harder to imagine that someone just looked at the capacity numbers for alkaline without considering the impact of higher rate discharge. I still can't believe we lost a planetary probe because of a mistake in units.

Pete

Paul Jalbert · Nov 15, 2001

Robert Martin said:
Ok what do you think ....Which is better, a Minoalt D7 0r a Olympus
E-20N.
I'am thinking on getting one or the other
Robert

Considering that the D& is now available for under $1,000 you have to ask if the Olympus is more than twice as good. Mechanically I'm sure it is, but as far as the final result (the print), I'm not so sure.

Dr. Gonzo · Nov 16, 2001

The Man said:
Even looking through
the Olympus forum, I see E10 owners who love their cameras and were
waiting for the next model very disappointed in the E20 - not
enough upgrade to bother AND twice as expensive and all other 5.2
MP models. At the regular price of $1299 the Dimage is a great
camera but with Minolta's new $300 rebate, at $999 it's an even
better camera and value.

That's a distortion. E-10 owners are not disappointed because the E20 is a disappointing camera. It's because the E-10 is a VERY tough act to follow and few of us can justify the expense in the upgrade, which isn't all that much from the E-10 to the E-20 (in our opinions). Most of us E-10ers already consider them superior to Dimages so the E-20 is only building upon that superiority. This is not intended as a flame, but rather a clarification of a misrepresentation of what is being said.

Dr G.

Mark H · Nov 16, 2001

Yawn!

So sensitive Gonzo!

Who cares?

Dr. Gonzo said:
The Man said:

Even looking through
the Olympus forum, I see E10 owners who love their cameras and were
waiting for the next model very disappointed in the E20 - not
enough upgrade to bother AND twice as expensive and all other 5.2
MP models. At the regular price of $1299 the Dimage is a great
camera but with Minolta's new $300 rebate, at $999 it's an even
better camera and value.

Click to expand...

That's a distortion. E-10 owners are not disappointed because the
E20 is a disappointing camera. It's because the E-10 is a VERY
tough act to follow and few of us can justify the expense in the
upgrade, which isn't all that much from the E-10 to the E-20 (in
our opinions). Most of us E-10ers already consider them superior to
Dimages so the E-20 is only building upon that superiority. This is
not intended as a flame, but rather a clarification of a
misrepresentation of what is being said.

Dr G.

Andrew Cruickshank · Nov 16, 2001

Dr. Gonzo said:
That's a distortion. E-10 owners are not disappointed because the
E20 is a disappointing camera.

If they're disappointed in it then it is a disappointing camera
for them. No ifs or buts.

Dr. Gonzo said:
It's because the E-10 is a VERY
tough act to follow and few of us can justify the expense in the
upgrade, which isn't all that much from the E-10 to the E-20 (in
our opinions).

But then as you say the reason it's disappointing is not its
absolute performance -- but that it's such a small increment
on the evolutionary scale.

I was disappointed with the E-20 -- I was expecting Oly to
wait till next year and come out with something a big step
up from the E-10.

The good thing that's come out of this is that the E-10 is
much better value while it's still available.

--------------
Andrew.

Dave/Houston TX · Nov 16, 2001

Mike,

That's great! I didn't know you was frum da hood?

D7 Rules. Rock on.

D7 or Olympus E-20n

Leading Member

Senior Member

Leading Member

Forum Enthusiast

Senior Member

Senior Member

Well-known member

Well-known member

Senior Member

Senior Member

Well-known member

Senior Member

Well-known member

Senior Member

Well-known member

Member

Senior Member

Senior Member

Senior Member

Forum Enthusiast

Keyboard shortcuts