The crop factor

....

And, one more thing. Who wants a camera that only produces good
images at ISO 100? (Read the A1 test in Feb '02 Pop Photo)
..and I still don't see the point of your statement!
Radu
...........................
I think the point is that if less noise and more speed is available at close to the same cost, why shouldn't I take those tools and use them, rather than rationalizing the A1' obvious weaknesses (resolution/noise) as character-builders?

--
Z-Man
 
And, one more thing. Who wants a camera that only produces good images at ISO 100? (Read the A1 test in Feb '02 Pop Photo)
..and I still don't see the point of your statement!
Me neither, but it's a good discussion-stirrer...
It's based on a still-developing consensus around the theory that
densely packing APS-sized sensors [instead of spreading the pixels
out on larger {FF} grids], may a causative factor toward the noise
issue at higher ISOs.

Does anyone out there own the mythical Contax Digital? This is
supposed to be a 6 MP FF camera, that was announced several years
ago, but I've never seen it tested, don't know anyone who owns one,
and don't see it advertised anywhere. It would be interesting to
learn about its performance at higher ISOs, if the camera, in fact,
exists at all.
I did see it tested, and in fact, it's still on sale in Europe. How much does it cost? Guess... ?1,400 - quite a little for a Contax.

And, only recently, it received quite a nice review (Christmas shopping list for digital cameras) in one of the European magazines. Sorry - I can't tell which, I usually browse through every available one in the shop, and don't buy them, so I really can't tell. So - based on that review, you would say it's a very good camera.

Based on other reviews, however... Not so. It seems its ridden by noise problems at ISO 200 and above. So 6 megapixels don't mean much noise-wise if you don't have good design.
--

'Nuclear powered vacuum cleaners will probably be ready within 10 years,' Alex Lewyt, of the Lewyt Corporation, a vacuum maker, predicted in The New York Times on June 10, 1955.
--- A warning to all technophiles
 
....

And, one more thing. Who wants a camera that only produces good
images at ISO 100? (Read the A1 test in Feb '02 Pop Photo)
..and I still don't see the point of your statement!
Radu
...........................
I think the point is that if less noise and more speed is available
at close to the same cost, why shouldn't I take those tools and use
them, rather than rationalizing the A1' obvious weaknesses
(resolution/noise) as character-builders?
Heck, I've read Phil's review, and I really think the A1 is a formidable camera with very good features and remarkable image quality. Sure - if you use in-camera processing, what do you expect? Switch to RAW, however, and you'll have a lot more potential.
--

'Nuclear powered vacuum cleaners will probably be ready within 10 years,' Alex Lewyt, of the Lewyt Corporation, a vacuum maker, predicted in The New York Times on June 10, 1955.
--- A warning to all technophiles
 
I think the point is that if less noise and more speed is available
at close to the same cost, why shouldn't I take those tools and use
them, rather than rationalizing the A1' obvious weaknesses
(resolution/noise) as character-builders?

--
Z-Man
Randy,

A camera with less noise and more speed with a 28-200 mm (@ 2.8/3.5) equivalent zoom and AS for about the same money? Please let me know which one and my A1 will get replaced ASAP.

Sorry if I misled to believe that the only things I like about my A1 are resolution and noise. Au contraire, pardon my French and this is why I stick to my Nikon F100 and the Nikkor lens kit.

Thanks,

--
Radu
...........................
Dubito, ergo cogito...
 
I knew his points weren't completely valid. I just don't know enough of the technical jargin to sound intelegent, so I wasn't going to flame. He wasn't distinguishing between film and digital enough to make sense.

On another, but similar note: It's amazing how many people think that DPI is a digital camera term, and has something to do with pixels. Indirectly it does, but not they way most people use it. BTW, I am refering to customers at print shops, not people using this forum, who are much more educated (in general).

Thanks for getting things straight.
--
Oops, Formatted, forgot my password, but I am still
-Matt Davids
http://www.pbase.com/ph0t0man
 
Some of you out there seem resigned to accept an APS-sized sensor
on the upcoming DSLR,
Actually I am not really resigned to accepting anything since I am satisfied with the Minolta A1. Granted that may be the result of having a number of other cameras, digital and film, that can be used if the need arises.
And, one more thing. Who wants a camera that only produces good
images at ISO 100? (Read the A1 test in Feb '02 Pop Photo)
Darned if I know. I seem to be getting good results with the A1 at both ISO 100, which is really a bit higher if you compare it to film ISO ratings, and at ISO 200 as well. I rarely if ever shoot anything using an ISO of 800. I suppose at some time I have stuck a roll of film with an ISO 800 rating in a camera. Darned if I can recall ever doing it. But then I do not shoot sports shots so maybe that is why I do not need it. I do use film with an ISO rating of 400 when using my Minolta 7000 35 mmwith a big telephoto lens.

I guess the thing for me to do is to go out and shoot some stuff at 400 and 800 to see just how poorly my camera is performing. Boy my wife is going to kill me when I tell her the new A1 is just not up to my photographic skill level.

Chips2
 
This text is here simply because the forum robot would not allow an empty page!
 
BTW, what type of Minolta film camera do you own? Type of lenses?
14mm f3.5 Sigma - lousy close-up, and subject to ghosting outdoors,
but relatively low distortion, and adequate sharpness at medium
apertures.

16mm f2.8 Maxxum - a terrific lens!

20mm f2.8 Maxxum - see 16mm

28mm f2 Maxxum - see 16mm

50mm f1.4 Maxxum - not as good as the three Maxxum wideangles
listed above, but better than the Nikkor f1.4 I owned previously,
especially at the widest apertures.

50mm f2.8 Maxxum macro - sharp and contrasty

135mm f2.8 Maxxum - Here's where I really screwed up! I ordered
this lens more than a dozen years ago -- right after Minolta
dropped it from their catalog. (135mm is my favorite focal length
for portraits.) Anyway, I mounted the lens on my camera, and was
amazed at how incredible sharp it was -- through the viewfinder!
Then, I made the mistake of "inspecting" it, and noticed dust
between the elements, so I returned it for a replacement. Weeks
went by, before I received the replacement lens. The second lens
is not nearly as sharp as the one I returned, and has the same dust
between the elements! I thought of asking for the original back,
but just wound up keeping this one.

500mm f8 Maxxum Reflex - this is the lens that initially drew me
into the Maxxum system. I use it primarily at airshows. It lacks
the contrast of a good all-glass lens, but it's a heck of a lot
handier to carry around.

24-85 Maxxum i-series - for a zoom, this lens is sharp and
contrasty, but there's too much distortion at 24mm to use it for
interiors, and 85mm is too short for head shots. I think I would
have been happier with the 28-105, and I know I would perfer the
28-135 Canon IS.

100-300 (non-APO) Maxxum i-series - not one of my favorite lenses.

I'm still using the original 7000i I bought in 1989, and the 8000i
I bought when Minolta rolled-out the xi series, which I think was
one of their greatest blunders. I would have bought the 600si when
it was introduced, but it lacked MLP. Had Minolta introduced the
Maxxum 7 ten years earlier -- or even five -- I would have bought
it. By the time it came out, the handwriting (digital) was on the
wall, and I thought, "Why bother?"

Now, I'm just waiting to see what Minolta comes up with in the
digital realm.
Question 1: How many good pictures have you missed while swapping lenses or trying to decide which one to use?

Question 2: How many good pictures have you missed because the camera or a key lens was at home?

Question 3: If you made the sensor 6Mp full frame, would you then be under utilising the lens resolving power?

And in answer to your question, I am more than happy with my A1. When resolution is critical, I will get my medium format gear down. A DSLR solution to my photography needs would have cost me at least £1500, but would most likely have stayed at home with my 35mm gear for all the same reasons that the 35mm gear does (cumbersome, difficult to carry, slow to change lenses, a point and shoot would cover 99% of what I am likely to see today). Whatever the technical flaws of the small sensor camera, it can take great photos that go to A3+, which is just fine for me! If noise is improved and the price / weight / size do not increase, then I would say that a worthwhile improvement was made. If however, the camera gets bigger, heavier and more expensive to kill the noise, my A1 will stay.

Chris
 
If there is a crop factor, I'have to buy an 18 mm ( very expensive )
The Tamron 19-35 3.5-4.5 and Tokina 19-35 3.5-4.5 are not that
expensive, and are (supposed to be) pretty good. I have the Tokina
myself, does have not such bad distortion, not much vigneting (non
with crop factor), and pretty sharp too. Just a tip in Minnie sells
what we want.
--
Daniel
Hi Daniel,

I have the Tamron 19-35 and it is what I call 'plastic fantastic'. Pretty good lens at reasonable price.

I don't get hang up on this crop factor. As a matter of fact, I do prefer a crop ratio of 1.5-1.6x. Besides, I still plan to use my Maxxum SLRs and shoot film especially for landscapes.

Cheers,

José

--
Come and visit me at:
http://www.pbase.com/jmb_56

 
...........................
I think the point is that if less noise and more speed is available
at close to the same cost, why shouldn't I take those tools and use
them, rather than rationalizing the A1' obvious weaknesses
(resolution/noise) as character-builders?

--
Z-Man
Randy,

A camera with less noise and more speed with a 28-200 mm (@
2.8/3.5) equivalent zoom and AS for about the same money? Please
let me know which one and my A1 will get replaced ASAP.

Sorry if I misled to believe that the only things I like about my
A1 are resolution and noise. Au contraire, pardon my French and
this is why I stick to my Nikon F100 and the Nikkor lens kit.

Thanks,

--
Radu
...........................
Dubito, ergo cogito...
I'd settle for an A1 with a 50 ISO setting - I'sure this would settle much of the noise. Couple this with the excellent AS and you've got an effective 200. As one who cut his photographic teeth on Kodachrome ASA 12 this would be photographic nirvana...
--
TonySD
 
Question 1: How many good pictures have you missed while swapping
lenses or trying to decide which one to use?

Only at airshows I'll have the 500 on one body, and the 20 or 28 on the other, and an aerial shot will appear, that's too wide for the 500. I've had these lenses for awhile, so I pretty much know what perspective I want.
Question 2: How many good pictures have you missed because the
camera or a key lens was at home?

I used to worry about this, but now, I do what I used to do with my 50, when I first got into photography -- make the scene work for the lens(es) I have with me. Besides, if I'm doing interiors, I'll take the 20 (if it's a very small room, I'll bring the 14 along for insurance). When I want a sense of depth, without exaggerated perspective, I'll bring the 28. The biggest problem I have, is in deciding when to bring the 50 macro, and not the 1.4. (Sometimes, I wish Minolta had brought out a 50 f2 macro, like Olympus.) Fortunately, the 50 f1.4 is so small, I carry it with me almost all the time. I bring the fisheye when I'm in the "fisheye mood", and shoot entire rolls with this lens alone, making the scene work with that lens, and occasionally, I'll do something with the 20, view the print, and return later with the 16 for a more unique perspective.
Question 3: If you made the sensor 6Mp full frame, would you then
be under utilising the lens resolving power?

I don't know what the optimum MP count needs to be -- I've heard numbers like 24MP, for digital to equal an outstanding 35mm slide, others have said the D1s surpasses film, and equals medium format. I was mainly referencing the noise issue, and suggesting that spreading the pixels out on a larger grid might solve the noise issue.
And in answer to your question, I am more than happy with my A1.
To all you A1 users out there, my apology for a flip remark at the end of a long thread -- I should have worded it differently.
 

Keyboard shortcuts

Back
Top