Add on lenses for DiMAGE 7Hi?

Ryan Witham said:

Sundance said:

Ryan Witham said:

Barry L said:

Ryan Witham said:

Well its slightly funny how they worked things. The 7Hi has the
bigger buffer but also has the extra-fine jpeg setting which is
almost lossless, so you can shoot that instead of tiff files. The
7i doesn't have the big buffer and doesn't have the extra-fine so
if you want to work with lossless or almost lossless images from
the start and then go from there once they are loaded on a pc, then
you have to do tiff or raw so the buffer is needed more.

Also i heard that the image quality was better on the 7Hi, i dont
know if its a couple hundred bucks better though.

Click to expand...

Click to expand...

I think i was just confusing actual image quality with compression
quality.

Click to expand...

--

There´s also the "Adobe RGB" feature, which IMO gives a far better
starting point for post-processing. The whole colour-space issue
with the D7 (and to a smaller degree D7i) is eliminated with D7Hi,
which has the choice between sRGB and Adobe RGB. Whether it´s worth
the extra cost is up to debate, but I think it translates to better
image Quality!
This, however is a digression from Your original Question!
I use a HAMA HR2 teleconverter, which gives a 400mm tele, with a
very slight vignetting in the lower right corner of the image. In
most images You won´t notice, but sometimes it´s necessary to
lighten the area a little. It only works at full zoom, so in effect
You have a fixed 400mm lens if You don´t like a "monocular effect"
to Your picture.

Best regards, Sundance

Click to expand...

Thanks for the info, i wasn't sure if the adobe rgb made much of a
difference.

Click to expand...

Ryan Witham said:

Ryan Witham said:

Sundance said:

Ryan Witham said:

Barry L said:

Ryan Witham said:

Well its slightly funny how they worked things. The 7Hi has the
bigger buffer but also has the extra-fine jpeg setting which is
almost lossless, so you can shoot that instead of tiff files. The
7i doesn't have the big buffer and doesn't have the extra-fine so
if you want to work with lossless or almost lossless images from
the start and then go from there once they are loaded on a pc, then
you have to do tiff or raw so the buffer is needed more.

Also i heard that the image quality was better on the 7Hi, i dont
know if its a couple hundred bucks better though.

Click to expand...

Click to expand...

I think i was just confusing actual image quality with compression
quality.

Click to expand...

--

There´s also the "Adobe RGB" feature, which IMO gives a far better
starting point for post-processing. The whole colour-space issue
with the D7 (and to a smaller degree D7i) is eliminated with D7Hi,
which has the choice between sRGB and Adobe RGB. Whether it´s worth
the extra cost is up to debate, but I think it translates to better
image Quality!
This, however is a digression from Your original Question!
I use a HAMA HR2 teleconverter, which gives a 400mm tele, with a
very slight vignetting in the lower right corner of the image. In
most images You won´t notice, but sometimes it´s necessary to
lighten the area a little. It only works at full zoom, so in effect
You have a fixed 400mm lens if You don´t like a "monocular effect"
to Your picture.

Best regards, Sundance

Click to expand...

Thanks for the info, i wasn't sure if the adobe rgb made much of a
difference.

Click to expand...

I checked on imaging-resource.com which also has extensive reviews,
and they commented on the 7i as being a bit too contrasty in many
situations, while on the 7hi, they mentioned everything as good, no
contrast problems. If they have the same lens why would that be?

Click to expand...

Barry L said:

Best to ask the reviewer. Maybe it's simply an issue of the
reviewer not mentioning that issue in the second review and
focusing more on the features that were different from the 7i. I
would suspect that the issue of being overly contrasty would be
identical. That is the reason why many owners dial in a slight
decrease in contrast on the 7 series in bright sunlight. It can be
corrected for. That's one of the features of the 7 series for many
people, lots of compensation and adjustment controlability. If you
are not ready, willing or able to use these controls the Sony 717
may be a better choice for you as would some other cameras.

There is no perfect camera and it's still hard to find a camera in
the price range that provides as much adjustability as the Minolts
7i/7hi with as good a lens range and performance. Almost any camera
in the same class will provide photos that are of high quality.

If one can afford to spend more money, dSLR's offer better (but
again, not perfect) performance. If you have enough money for a
house downpayment you can always go for a medium format camera and
matching digital back which will give even better performance.

Take a look at the photographs of Raymond Ruan, Melanie Kipp, Dirk
Vermeirre, Daniella, Martin Crespo, Jack Zucker, Francis Toussaint,
Lin Evans, Juli Valley and a host of others. Different cameras but
always outstanding photographs. It doesn't matter what camera the
individual photographer uses. The point is that the Minolta 7i or
7hi will give an individual a tool to take outstanding photos.
Every camera has issues which can be worked around.

Click to expand...

Ryan Witham said:

That would be nice if you could use the two together. 3x zoom in
combination with the 7x on the minolta, thats 21 zoom, which would
be dandy

Click to expand...

Max Ustinov said:

Even more so with Olympus TCON-300 + TCON-14B. The combination is
unofficially called TCON-314 and provides 3X + 1.45X = 4.45X. With
the DiMAGE 7x it may allow 31.15X zoom.

Click to expand...

Max Ustinov said:

Max Ustinov said:

Even more so with Olympus TCON-300 + TCON-14B. The combination is
unofficially called TCON-314 and provides 3X + 1.45X = 4.45X. With
the DiMAGE 7x it may allow 31.15X zoom.

Click to expand...

Click to expand...