Reading mode: Light Dark

G3 or Minolta 7i???

Go to last post
D

David Pye

Active member
Messages
55
Reaction score
0
Location
Kent, UK
I have been researching the G3 for my first digital camera. How does it compare to the Minolta 7i (apart from the obvious - 5m pixels, +£100) in terms of image quality, noise, sharpness, useability, etc.

Thanks for your thoughts in advance.
 
David Pye said:
I have been researching the G3 for my first digital camera. How
does it compare to the Minolta 7i (apart from the obvious - 5m
pixels, +£100) in terms of image quality, noise, sharpness,
useability, etc.

Thanks for your thoughts in advance.
Click to expand...
I have just got rid of my Minolta 7i and i'll tell you why. I had a G2 and was very happy with it but thought the 7i would be a good up grade. The problems were the results were worse than the G2 by a long shot. I've been a photographer for more years than I could metion but only a couple have been with dig but the G2 on top setting would give better results. I continued for sometime with the 7i as it handle very well the 7x zoom is great to use and it feels like my old SLR's but the biggest problem that took me over the edge was the time it took between images .30 seconds was a good day more a minute on most and that when you are trying to capture the "decisive moment" is just not on.

So if you want my advise go for the G3 i've ordered mine and if the reviews are true that on the Raw setting you're only waiting a second or so between images than I will be a happy bunny again..
 
A minute between shoots for the 7i ?
picnic said:
David Pye said:
I have been researching the G3 for my first digital camera. How
does it compare to the Minolta 7i (apart from the obvious - 5m
pixels, +£100) in terms of image quality, noise, sharpness,
useability, etc.

Thanks for your thoughts in advance.
Click to expand...
I have just got rid of my Minolta 7i and i'll tell you why. I had a
G2 and was very happy with it but thought the 7i would be a good up
grade. The problems were the results were worse than the G2 by a
long shot. I've been a photographer for more years than I could
metion but only a couple have been with dig but the G2 on top
setting would give better results. I continued for sometime with
the 7i as it handle very well the 7x zoom is great to use and it
feels like my old SLR's but the biggest problem that took me over
the edge was the time it took between images .30 seconds was a good
day more a minute on most and that when you are trying to capture
the "decisive moment" is just not on.
So if you want my advise go for the G3 i've ordered mine and if the
reviews are true that on the Raw setting you're only waiting a
second or so between images than I will be a happy bunny again..
Click to expand...
 
Thanks for your views. I was beginning to suspect the image quality after reading about noise on the 5m pixel ccd. It's a G3 then!

:)
gary ng said:
picnic said:
David Pye said:
I have been researching the G3 for my first digital camera. How
does it compare to the Minolta 7i (apart from the obvious - 5m
pixels, +£100) in terms of image quality, noise, sharpness,
useability, etc.

Thanks for your thoughts in advance.
Click to expand...
I have just got rid of my Minolta 7i and i'll tell you why. I had a
G2 and was very happy with it but thought the 7i would be a good up
grade. The problems were the results were worse than the G2 by a
long shot. I've been a photographer for more years than I could
metion but only a couple have been with dig but the G2 on top
setting would give better results. I continued for sometime with
the 7i as it handle very well the 7x zoom is great to use and it
feels like my old SLR's but the biggest problem that took me over
the edge was the time it took between images .30 seconds was a good
day more a minute on most and that when you are trying to capture
the "decisive moment" is just not on.
So if you want my advise go for the G3 i've ordered mine and if the
reviews are true that on the Raw setting you're only waiting a
second or so between images than I will be a happy bunny again..
Click to expand...
Click to expand...
 
For all fairness to 7i, the low noise in G3(or other Canon models) seems to be an image processing function rather than that of the raw data. I have seen RAW converted image from Canon using alternative converter(non-Canon) which shows significant more noise. So it is possible to get the same noise level if some post-processing package is used on 7i images.
David Pye said:
:)
gary ng said:
picnic said:
David Pye said:
I have been researching the G3 for my first digital camera. How
does it compare to the Minolta 7i (apart from the obvious - 5m
pixels, +£100) in terms of image quality, noise, sharpness,
useability, etc.

Thanks for your thoughts in advance.
Click to expand...
I have just got rid of my Minolta 7i and i'll tell you why. I had a
G2 and was very happy with it but thought the 7i would be a good up
grade. The problems were the results were worse than the G2 by a
long shot. I've been a photographer for more years than I could
metion but only a couple have been with dig but the G2 on top
setting would give better results. I continued for sometime with
the 7i as it handle very well the 7x zoom is great to use and it
feels like my old SLR's but the biggest problem that took me over
the edge was the time it took between images .30 seconds was a good
day more a minute on most and that when you are trying to capture
the "decisive moment" is just not on.
So if you want my advise go for the G3 i've ordered mine and if the
reviews are true that on the Raw setting you're only waiting a
second or so between images than I will be a happy bunny again..
Click to expand...
Click to expand...
Click to expand...
 
lol... that makes G3 even better... according to you 7i doesn't use image processing, but then you will have to do that for every picture and lets say you took 1000 shots are you going to tell me that you gonna post process every single picture? hm.. I don't think so... besides possible is not good enough...
gary ng said:
David Pye said:
:)
gary ng said:
picnic said:
David Pye said:
I have been researching the G3 for my first digital camera. How
does it compare to the Minolta 7i (apart from the obvious - 5m
pixels, +£100) in terms of image quality, noise, sharpness,
useability, etc.

Thanks for your thoughts in advance.
Click to expand...
I have just got rid of my Minolta 7i and i'll tell you why. I had a
G2 and was very happy with it but thought the 7i would be a good up
grade. The problems were the results were worse than the G2 by a
long shot. I've been a photographer for more years than I could
metion but only a couple have been with dig but the G2 on top
setting would give better results. I continued for sometime with
the 7i as it handle very well the 7x zoom is great to use and it
feels like my old SLR's but the biggest problem that took me over
the edge was the time it took between images .30 seconds was a good
day more a minute on most and that when you are trying to capture
the "decisive moment" is just not on.
So if you want my advise go for the G3 i've ordered mine and if the
reviews are true that on the Raw setting you're only waiting a
second or so between images than I will be a happy bunny again..
Click to expand...
Click to expand...
Click to expand...
Click to expand...
 
I admire your ability to find every chance to make yourself feel happier :-)

Well, seriously many people prefer the noiser image of RAW translated image using non-Canon converter as they see more detail in it.

So it is a personal taste and not some absolute thing. For me, I don't use RAW on my S30.

BTW, the so called noise is a non-issue in most situation except at very high ISO which all models suck(except DSLR) anyway.

However, putting noise aside, 7i is an overall better camera than G3, IMO. The built-in filter thread is convenient and less bulky than the solution of G3. Its wider and longer zoom is more useful(especially the wide side), its 5MP offset quite a degree of the noise issue, its built-in remote flash capability also beat G3.
SΘL said:
gary ng said:
David Pye said:
:)
gary ng said:
picnic said:
David Pye said:
I have been researching the G3 for my first digital camera. How
does it compare to the Minolta 7i (apart from the obvious - 5m
pixels, +£100) in terms of image quality, noise, sharpness,
useability, etc.

Thanks for your thoughts in advance.
Click to expand...
I have just got rid of my Minolta 7i and i'll tell you why. I had a
G2 and was very happy with it but thought the 7i would be a good up
grade. The problems were the results were worse than the G2 by a
long shot. I've been a photographer for more years than I could
metion but only a couple have been with dig but the G2 on top
setting would give better results. I continued for sometime with
the 7i as it handle very well the 7x zoom is great to use and it
feels like my old SLR's but the biggest problem that took me over
the edge was the time it took between images .30 seconds was a good
day more a minute on most and that when you are trying to capture
the "decisive moment" is just not on.
So if you want my advise go for the G3 i've ordered mine and if the
reviews are true that on the Raw setting you're only waiting a
second or so between images than I will be a happy bunny again..
Click to expand...
Click to expand...
Click to expand...
Click to expand...
Click to expand...
 
gary ng said:
SΘL said:
Member said:
I admire your ability to find every chance to make yourself feel
happier :-)
Click to expand...
yes, it's just funny how you turn things around...
Member said:
Well, seriously many people prefer the noiser image of RAW
translated image using non-Canon converter as they see more detail
in it.
Click to expand...
very interesting argument... thanks for a good laugh :-)
Gary ng
Click to expand...
Click to expand...
I agree with you about the usefulness of the &i especially the 28mm end of the zoom . But none of these are useful enough if you miss the bl...dy shot cos you're waiting around in between shot!!!!!
It's all realitive...
 
That is what puzzle me when I see the claim that time between shoots can be a minute. I was shocked. However, no one on the Minolta forum seems to notice this.
 
I did not understand anything you said.
picnic said:
David Pye said:
I have been researching the G3 for my first digital camera. How
does it compare to the Minolta 7i (apart from the obvious - 5m
pixels, +£100) in terms of image quality, noise, sharpness,
useability, etc.

Thanks for your thoughts in advance.
Click to expand...
I have just got rid of my Minolta 7i and i'll tell you why. I had a
G2 and was very happy with it but thought the 7i would be a good up
grade. The problems were the results were worse than the G2 by a
long shot. I've been a photographer for more years than I could
metion but only a couple have been with dig but the G2 on top
setting would give better results. I continued for sometime with
the 7i as it handle very well the 7x zoom is great to use and it
feels like my old SLR's but the biggest problem that took me over
the edge was the time it took between images .30 seconds was a good
day more a minute on most and that when you are trying to capture
the "decisive moment" is just not on.
So if you want my advise go for the G3 i've ordered mine and if the
reviews are true that on the Raw setting you're only waiting a
second or so between images than I will be a happy bunny again..
Click to expand...
 
That was a typo, right? What camera takes anywhere even near a minute between shots?
 
I don't know about the d7i? But, the tiff mode on my 717 takes anywhere from 30sec to 1 minute, per shot. Jpeg is fast, but the only noncompressed mode is very slow. Also, concerning noise....How can someone say it is a non issue. Maybe to you it's a nonissue. However, all of the 5mp makers are putting significant research into noise reduction. Take Sony for example. One of the changes in the 717 over 707 is an additional noise reduction step in slow shutter speeds. Their noise reduction can't even be shut off. Canon claims to have stayed with the 4mp for the time being because of "noise." I can tell you the most suprising thing about my Sony was the noise. Even at ISO 100, you have to get the exposure dead on. Even at high shutter speed in broad day light you can have significant noise in the shadows with a well exposed shot. I take a lot of architechtural photos and I have taken glass buildings where the glass didn't even reflect on the shadowed side, due to the abundance of noise. Look on the web and see how many 5mp shots are submitted at 100%. If, so how many used "neat image." I had seen a lot of super clean high resolution sharp images and thought, heh 5mp... But, the reality is, there is no free lunch. You gain some resolution, but loose some image quality via noise. It can be worked around, but it's one more thing! I have some beautiful images, but most of them required a lot of work to look really good at 100% resolution. The D7i looks like a great camera to me. I like every option on it. Real thought went into it's design. My camera looks like a video camera manufacturer decided to make a camera that would take still images. The minolta looks like a camera manufacturer made a digital camera for photographers. However...I could not get past the noise on the d7i myself. Now that I have taken a fair number of Sony shots I can say it has noise issues also. Whether they are acceptable is up to the individual eye. I think you both have some good points. I can see why someone would buy the minolta. I can also see why someone would stay away from it.
picnic said:
David Pye said:
I have been researching the G3 for my first digital camera. How
does it compare to the Minolta 7i (apart from the obvious - 5m
pixels, +£100) in terms of image quality, noise, sharpness,
useability, etc.

Thanks for your thoughts in advance.
Click to expand...
I have just got rid of my Minolta 7i and i'll tell you why. I had a
G2 and was very happy with it but thought the 7i would be a good up
grade. The problems were the results were worse than the G2 by a
long shot. I've been a photographer for more years than I could
metion but only a couple have been with dig but the G2 on top
setting would give better results. I continued for sometime with
the 7i as it handle very well the 7x zoom is great to use and it
feels like my old SLR's but the biggest problem that took me over
the edge was the time it took between images .30 seconds was a good
day more a minute on most and that when you are trying to capture
the "decisive moment" is just not on.
So if you want my advise go for the G3 i've ordered mine and if the
reviews are true that on the Raw setting you're only waiting a
second or so between images than I will be a happy bunny again..
Click to expand...
 
Canon G3 is only a 400m carmera, all of it is!
just compare with other 400m carmeras, plz..
David Pye said:
I have been researching the G3 for my first digital camera. How
does it compare to the Minolta 7i (apart from the obvious - 5m
pixels, +£100) in terms of image quality, noise, sharpness,
useability, etc.

Thanks for your thoughts in advance.
Click to expand...
--
maybe canon user, :)
 
sej1001 said:
I don't know about the d7i? But, the tiff mode on my 717 takes
anywhere from 30sec to 1 minute, per shot.
Click to expand...
That's TIFF mode. What's the delay in jpegmode or, if available, raw mode?
sej1001 said:
Jpeg is fast, but the
only noncompressed mode is very slow.
Click to expand...
Never mind - question answered.
sej1001 said:
Also, concerning noise....How
can someone say it is a non issue. Maybe to you it's a nonissue.
However, all of the 5mp makers are putting significant research
into noise reduction. Take Sony for example. One of the changes in
the 717 over 707 is an additional noise reduction step in slow
shutter speeds. Their noise reduction can't even be shut off. Canon
claims to have stayed with the 4mp for the time being because of
"noise." I can tell you the most suprising thing about my Sony was
the noise. Even at ISO 100, you have to get the exposure dead on.
Even at high shutter speed in broad day light you can have
significant noise in the shadows with a well exposed shot.
Click to expand...
I have a Sony S85 and I can confirm this. I didn't realize it was a Sony issue. All the more reason NOT to get another Sony.
sej1001 said:
Look on the web and see how many 5mp shots are
submitted at 100%. If, so how many used "neat image."
I have some beautiful
images, but most of them required a lot of work to look really good
at 100% resolution.
Click to expand...
I downloaded Neat Image, but haven't installed it yet. Is it as complex and time consuming to use as the instructions suggest? Is it tough to get the hang of?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Keyboard shortcuts

f
Forum
m
My threads
Mobile site
About
Editorial content
Cameras & Lenses
Community
All content, design, and layout are Copyright © 1998–2025 Digital Photography Review All Rights Reserved.
Reproduction in whole or part in any form or medium without specific written permission is prohibited.
When you use DPReview links to buy products, the site may earn a commission.
©GPS Media - Guides, Products, Services.
Back
Top