Reading mode: Light Dark

Just got my A2 - first pictures

Go to last post
Will Rose said:
I see a lot of purple fringing (although admittedly not as much as
the Sony 828). A lot more than on the A1 or 7hi.

I also see a general lack of sharpness. It might be a focusing
problem, but I saw similar softness in some of the Minolta sample
pics.

The sample pics for the Canon Pro1 on the Canon web site look a lot
better than what we've been seeing from the A2, IMO.

I was really looking forward to the A2, too.....
KentO said:
Hi,
Thanks for your responses.

I´ve been out shooting today, and the weather has been sunny today,
so I have posted more interesting pictures, all taken at ISO64. I
have been looking for purple fringing in my pictures, but I don´t
see that much of it. There is some in the first picture of my
gallery however. Btw, I had to remove the previous pictures to make
room for these ones.

http://hem.thalamus.nu/~gvp012191/A2/

EVF: It seems that the EVF itself can produce a better quality
image than the camera can produce as a live preview. If you look at
a picture in play mode there is less noise and better color than
you see when using it as a viewfinder. It is good as a viewfinder,
but even better for reviewing your pics. I tend to use the Quality
(30 fps) setting all the time since you do see a difference in
image quality.

And yes, it has f11.

So far I am very pleased, but I still have a lot to explore...

Kent
Click to expand...
Click to expand...
Those are quite cleverly done on the Canon site, and we have no idea of the post-processing.

Everyone here has of course been using the A2 at default, which is unlikely to be optimal.
--
Regards,
DaveMart
Please see profile for equipment
 
From the samples I have seen so far, everything is as expected: The A2 produces soft images without details due to HEAVY Noise processing.

Here are two A1 Samples Straight from the Camera: (JPEG FINE)

http://objective.bitfikler.com/geirove/web/images/fullsize/PICT2131.JPG

or this one:

http://objective.bitfikler.com/geirove/web/images/fullsize/PICT2159.JPG

This is NOT surprising: Why do you all think the 8 mpix cameras have ISO 64 (that turns out to be ISO 50 or less)? of course becasue they have problem with noise.

Heavy noise reduciton will reduce these 8 mpix cameras to mediocr 5 mpix cameras. Mediocre because they force you to use a SLOW ISO setting that totally takes away the advantage the AntiShake gave the A1. I can shoot at ISO 200 with my A1 and get good results, AND use AS.

Take a look at ISO 100 to ISO 800 A1 shots here:

ISO 200: 100% crop:
http://home.online.no/~geiroves/PICT0004_cropped.jpg

ISO 400: 100% crop:
http://home.online.no/~geiroves/PICT0005_cropped.jpg

ISO 800: 100% crop:
http://home.online.no/~geiroves/PICT0006_cropped.jpg

Try this with the A2!

The only thing I envy the A2 users are the much improved EVF: I want an A1 with this EVF !! :-)

Geir Ove
KentO said:
Hi,
Thanks for your responses.

I´ve been out shooting today, and the weather has been sunny today,
so I have posted more interesting pictures, all taken at ISO64. I
have been looking for purple fringing in my pictures, but I don´t
see that much of it. There is some in the first picture of my
gallery however. Btw, I had to remove the previous pictures to make
room for these ones.

http://hem.thalamus.nu/~gvp012191/A2/

EVF: It seems that the EVF itself can produce a better quality
image than the camera can produce as a live preview. If you look at
a picture in play mode there is less noise and better color than
you see when using it as a viewfinder. It is good as a viewfinder,
but even better for reviewing your pics. I tend to use the Quality
(30 fps) setting all the time since you do see a difference in
image quality.

And yes, it has f11.

So far I am very pleased, but I still have a lot to explore...

Kent
Click to expand...
 
Geir Ove said:
Here are two A1 Samples Straight from the Camera: (JPEG FINE)

http://objective.bitfikler.com/geirove/web/images/fullsize/PICT2131.JPG

or this one:

http://objective.bitfikler.com/geirove/web/images/fullsize/PICT2159.JPG

This is NOT surprising: Why do you all think the 8 mpix cameras
have ISO 64 (that turns out to be ISO 50 or less)? of course
becasue they have problem with noise.

Heavy noise reduciton will reduce these 8 mpix cameras to mediocr 5
mpix cameras. Mediocre because they force you to use a SLOW ISO
setting that totally takes away the advantage the AntiShake gave
the A1. I can shoot at ISO 200 with my A1 and get good results, AND
use AS.

Take a look at ISO 100 to ISO 800 A1 shots here:

ISO 200: 100% crop:
http://home.online.no/~geiroves/PICT0004_cropped.jpg

ISO 400: 100% crop:
http://home.online.no/~geiroves/PICT0005_cropped.jpg

ISO 800: 100% crop:
http://home.online.no/~geiroves/PICT0006_cropped.jpg

Try this with the A2!

The only thing I envy the A2 users are the much improved EVF: I
want an A1 with this EVF !! :-)

Geir Ove
KentO said:
Hi,
Thanks for your responses.

I´ve been out shooting today, and the weather has been sunny today,
so I have posted more interesting pictures, all taken at ISO64. I
have been looking for purple fringing in my pictures, but I don´t
see that much of it. There is some in the first picture of my
gallery however. Btw, I had to remove the previous pictures to make
room for these ones.

http://hem.thalamus.nu/~gvp012191/A2/

EVF: It seems that the EVF itself can produce a better quality
image than the camera can produce as a live preview. If you look at
a picture in play mode there is less noise and better color than
you see when using it as a viewfinder. It is good as a viewfinder,
but even better for reviewing your pics. I tend to use the Quality
(30 fps) setting all the time since you do see a difference in
image quality.

And yes, it has f11.

So far I am very pleased, but I still have a lot to explore...

Kent
Click to expand...
Click to expand...
Geir, they've all been shot at normal sharpness, which I suspect causes hideous in-camera processing to kick in - we will only really be able to judge the camera when we see shots with NR off and shot at soft - I put one of the images(the one of the guy in the camera shop, with the Kodak batteries) into PS and it had sharpening halos! That was before I added any sharpening!

In general though, I agree with where you are coming from, and I don't hold out much hope for any of these 8MP cameras.

Interstingly, some have found the Pro1 to be a lot better - I think it is just because they have been more clever in shooting and processing the shots, as although Canon are the king of noise reduction, their expertise is chiefly in CMOS sensors where they can address pixels individually.

There still remains the possiblity that they are substantially better than the others - I wouldn't want the Pro1 though as it uses a filter adaptor, has no mechanical zoom, no IS and a lousy movie mode.
--
Regards,
DaveMart
Please see profile for equipment
 
...it's been bothering me.

Is the logo on flash housing "Minolta" or "Konica Minolta"? I was wondering whether the earlier pictures were mock-ups for marketing purposes, or whether they were the real macoy.
KentO said:
Hi,
After reading a lot on this forum for some months, I finally took
the step!

I bought an A2 today, and I have so far played with it for a couple
of hours - indoors at night only.

My first impression of the EVF is that it is as good as I hoped.
This is really a big improvment. I tried the different settings
(Quality/Motion). According to the manual Quality means 30 fps,
640x480, Motion means 60 fps 640x240. I tried changing the setting
back and forth, and the difference is not that big - at least not
at first sight.

I also made som shots at different ISO for comparsion, see gallery:
http://hem.thalamus.nu/~gvp012191/A2

I bought the camera in Sweden, the price was SEK 9995 including
VAT. This corresponds to (without VAT) EUR 870 or $1100. The price
diffrence to A1 is only about $125. In the store I bought it, they
even had the A1 at the same price! (but they would lower it now).

Regards,
Kent
Click to expand...
--
Ad space for sale
 
The difference in detail is obvious in the balcony railings (and was so even before I saw the file names). There is much more detail in the bottom one. Noise is about the same.

There is also a hint of the CA that the 828 is famous for at DPreview around the top edge of the building.

I notice Popular Photography had a review of the 828 in their latest issue. They didn't mention CA at all.
fotog said:
This?



or this?



How's the noise?
Click to expand...
 
Geir Ove said:
The only thing I envy the A2 users are the much improved EVF: I
want an A1 with this EVF !! :-)
Click to expand...
Hear, hear! 5mp is fine with me too. Give us an A1 with improved EVF, and an IMPROVED DRIVE MODE, pretty please.

-Will
 
They might not have mentioned the PF, but I've seen it in SO many samples.
Peter Spiro said:
There is also a hint of the CA that the 828 is famous for at
DPreview around the top edge of the building.

I notice Popular Photography had a review of the 828 in their
latest issue. They didn't mention CA at all.
fotog said:
This?



or this?



How's the noise?
Click to expand...
Click to expand...
--



Beauty is in the eye of the Bee-holder...
 
The first picture is very similar in terms of amount of PF to the Sony 828 I briefly owned which I returned because of the purple tree trunk !

I am beginning to conclude that PF is going to be a major problem for all the 8m cameras.
 
I haven't posted here for a long while, but have recently started to follow the Minolta forum after the announcement of the A2. I have been looking to buy an allrounder kind of a camera myself and so had sincerely hoped the A2 would do better than the rest of the pack. I must say I'm a bit diappointed with the early samples. The ones that KentO has posted(Thanks a bunch KentO for posting them), do show quite a bit of CA & purple fringing. I tried real hard at fixing them in software, but didn't have much success. Shooting at ISO64 all the time and possibly at apertures F4 or smaller to control noise & CA/PF is a serious limitation and quite annoying too. (And ISO 64 is not that clean either). Not to mention, having to fix all of this in Photoshop for possibly every picture you've taken at the end of the day.

I'd still like to wait for Phil's reviews before I dismiss this camera as it still has some great features, but I'm seriously considering the A1 now.

By the way, A1 owners, does the A1 exhibit the same amount of CA/PF as the A2, and if not, does anyone know why an 8mp sensor has more CA/PF than a 5mp one?

Thanks
Manju
Geir Ove said:
Here are two A1 Samples Straight from the Camera: (JPEG FINE)

http://objective.bitfikler.com/geirove/web/images/fullsize/PICT2131.JPG

or this one:

http://objective.bitfikler.com/geirove/web/images/fullsize/PICT2159.JPG

This is NOT surprising: Why do you all think the 8 mpix cameras
have ISO 64 (that turns out to be ISO 50 or less)? of course
becasue they have problem with noise.

Heavy noise reduciton will reduce these 8 mpix cameras to mediocr 5
mpix cameras. Mediocre because they force you to use a SLOW ISO
setting that totally takes away the advantage the AntiShake gave
the A1. I can shoot at ISO 200 with my A1 and get good results, AND
use AS.

Take a look at ISO 100 to ISO 800 A1 shots here:

ISO 200: 100% crop:
http://home.online.no/~geiroves/PICT0004_cropped.jpg

ISO 400: 100% crop:
http://home.online.no/~geiroves/PICT0005_cropped.jpg

ISO 800: 100% crop:
http://home.online.no/~geiroves/PICT0006_cropped.jpg

Try this with the A2!

The only thing I envy the A2 users are the much improved EVF: I
want an A1 with this EVF !! :-)

Geir Ove
KentO said:
Hi,
Thanks for your responses.

I´ve been out shooting today, and the weather has been sunny today,
so I have posted more interesting pictures, all taken at ISO64. I
have been looking for purple fringing in my pictures, but I don´t
see that much of it. There is some in the first picture of my
gallery however. Btw, I had to remove the previous pictures to make
room for these ones.

http://hem.thalamus.nu/~gvp012191/A2/

EVF: It seems that the EVF itself can produce a better quality
image than the camera can produce as a live preview. If you look at
a picture in play mode there is less noise and better color than
you see when using it as a viewfinder. It is good as a viewfinder,
but even better for reviewing your pics. I tend to use the Quality
(30 fps) setting all the time since you do see a difference in
image quality.

And yes, it has f11.

So far I am very pleased, but I still have a lot to explore...

Kent
Click to expand...
Click to expand...
 
Manju Shekhar said:
I haven't posted here for a long while, but have recently started
to follow the Minolta forum after the announcement of the A2. I
have been looking to buy an allrounder kind of a camera myself and
so had sincerely hoped the A2 would do better than the rest of the
pack. I must say I'm a bit diappointed with the early samples. The
ones that KentO has posted(Thanks a bunch KentO for posting them),
do show quite a bit of CA & purple fringing. I tried real hard at
fixing them in software, but didn't have much success. Shooting at
ISO64 all the time and possibly at apertures F4 or smaller to
control noise & CA/PF is a serious limitation and quite annoying
too. (And ISO 64 is not that clean either). Not to mention, having
to fix all of this in Photoshop for possibly every picture you've
taken at the end of the day.

I'd still like to wait for Phil's reviews before I dismiss this
camera as it still has some great features, but I'm seriously
considering the A1 now.

By the way, A1 owners, does the A1 exhibit the same amount of
CA/PF as the A2, and if not, does anyone know why an 8mp sensor has
more CA/PF than a 5mp one?

Thanks
Manju
Click to expand...
Here's a CA fix that works fine from Shay Stevens:
http://www.shaystephens.com/Purple_Fringe_Reducer.atn

Developed for the 828, wouldn't you know! And the answer to your question is that the A1 has nowhere near the same amount of CA, and no-one has seen this amount from a Minolta GT lens before.

As to why, I was surprised to see this amount from the A2 - I had thought it was a lens issue in the 828, but suspicion must be coming back to the sensor now - although the Pro 1 has not shown much CA, but then again we have only seen carefully managed manufacturers sample shots from the Pro1.

No one has tried the A2 on any optimised settings yet, though, minus on the contrast and with soft sharpening - I think the noise reduction is doping horrible things to the images,and they are over-sharpened at normal settings
--
Regards,
DaveMart
Please see profile for equipment
 
I loaded a couple of these pictures into my editor and played around with them a little to determine some of the characteristics.

1. The lake photo taken into the sun shows plenty of CA. However, I believe that it was also taken at F11. It looks like we've exceeded the limits of acceptable diffraction at F11. No amount or type of sharpening was able to bring this back into an acceptable range for me. It did print ok at 8x10, but not acceptable for larger prints.

2. The row houses. Sharpened much better and probably taken at F8. (somebody with Exif data correct me here). Downsizing this photo to 5MP resulted in exceptional results (standard bicubic). I was able to subsequently sharpen the photo and achieve a quality file that was every bit as good as anything I've seen from normal 6MP DSLRs.

I would suggest that others do what I do with any new camera or lens. Resolution test it at various focal lengths and F-stops. This way you will learn the sweet-spot for the system and also what settings to avoid. Various printable resolution charts are available on the web.

Optical laws of the universe indicate that F8 is the upward limit for acceptable diffraction when using a 2/3" sensor.
 
Thanks David. Well, the core problem still remains. Because of its bad S/N ratio, an 8mp sensor just doesn't give us enough room for post-processing the images, even when taken in RAW. This means that any minor adjustments in curves/levels, saturation would exaggerate the noise in the image.

I think stuffing 8 million pixels in a tiny 2/3" sensor is a mistake, by all the manufacturers. 5mp is about the limit you can push this sensor to, even if the lens resolves more. You've got give those pixels some breathing space.

-Manju
David Martin said:
Manju Shekhar said:
I haven't posted here for a long while, but have recently started
to follow the Minolta forum after the announcement of the A2. I
have been looking to buy an allrounder kind of a camera myself and
so had sincerely hoped the A2 would do better than the rest of the
pack. I must say I'm a bit diappointed with the early samples. The
ones that KentO has posted(Thanks a bunch KentO for posting them),
do show quite a bit of CA & purple fringing. I tried real hard at
fixing them in software, but didn't have much success. Shooting at
ISO64 all the time and possibly at apertures F4 or smaller to
control noise & CA/PF is a serious limitation and quite annoying
too. (And ISO 64 is not that clean either). Not to mention, having
to fix all of this in Photoshop for possibly every picture you've
taken at the end of the day.

I'd still like to wait for Phil's reviews before I dismiss this
camera as it still has some great features, but I'm seriously
considering the A1 now.

By the way, A1 owners, does the A1 exhibit the same amount of
CA/PF as the A2, and if not, does anyone know why an 8mp sensor has
more CA/PF than a 5mp one?

Thanks
Manju
Click to expand...
Here's a CA fix that works fine from Shay Stevens:
http://www.shaystephens.com/Purple_Fringe_Reducer.atn
Developed for the 828, wouldn't you know! And the answer to your
question is that the A1 has nowhere near the same amount of CA, and
no-one has seen this amount from a Minolta GT lens before.
As to why, I was surprised to see this amount from the A2 - I had
thought it was a lens issue in the 828, but suspicion must be
coming back to the sensor now - although the Pro 1 has not shown
much CA, but then again we have only seen carefully managed
manufacturers sample shots from the Pro1.
No one has tried the A2 on any optimised settings yet, though,
minus on the contrast and with soft sharpening - I think the noise
reduction is doping horrible things to the images,and they are
over-sharpened at normal settings
--
Regards,
DaveMart
Please see profile for equipment
Click to expand...
 
ekn said:
I loaded a couple of these pictures into my editor and played
around with them a little to determine some of the characteristics.

1. The lake photo taken into the sun shows plenty of CA. However,
I believe that it was also taken at F11. It looks like we've
exceeded the limits of acceptable diffraction at F11. No amount or
type of sharpening was able to bring this back into an acceptable
range for me. It did print ok at 8x10, but not acceptable for
larger prints.

2. The row houses. Sharpened much better and probably taken at F8.
(somebody with Exif data correct me here). Downsizing this photo
to 5MP resulted in exceptional results (standard bicubic). I was
able to subsequently sharpen the photo and achieve a quality file
that was every bit as good as anything I've seen from normal 6MP
DSLRs.

I would suggest that others do what I do with any new camera or
lens. Resolution test it at various focal lengths and F-stops.
This way you will learn the sweet-spot for the system and also what
settings to avoid. Various printable resolution charts are
available on the web.

Optical laws of the universe indicate that F8 is the upward limit
for acceptable diffraction when using a 2/3" sensor.
Click to expand...
quick course on diffraction please?
 
ekn wrote:
...
ekn said:
2. The row houses. Sharpened much better and probably taken at F8.
(somebody with Exif data correct me here).
Click to expand...
EXIF-data:
Pic 1 (house with trees): ISO 64, F3.2, 1/60s
Pic 2 (lake with sun): ISO 64, F4.0, 1/125s
Pic 3 (lake with duks on ice): ISO 64, F6.3, 1/100s
Pic 4 (houses in a row): ISO 64, F4.0, 1/250s
 
David Martin said:
KentO said:
Hi,
Thanks for your responses.

I´ve been out shooting today, and the weather has been sunny today,
so I have posted more interesting pictures, all taken at ISO64. I
have been looking for purple fringing in my pictures, but I don´t
see that much of it. There is some in the first picture of my
gallery however. Btw, I had to remove the previous pictures to make
room for these ones.

http://hem.thalamus.nu/~gvp012191/A2/

EVF: It seems that the EVF itself can produce a better quality
image than the camera can produce as a live preview. If you look at
a picture in play mode there is less noise and better color than
you see when using it as a viewfinder. It is good as a viewfinder,
but even better for reviewing your pics. I tend to use the Quality
(30 fps) setting all the time since you do see a difference in
image quality.

And yes, it has f11.

So far I am very pleased, but I still have a lot to explore...

Kent
Click to expand...
Thanks for the post - that is starting to give us a much better idea.
I wonder if you could comment on how much lag there is in the EVF-
if you look through that, and at the scene with your other eye, is
the delay in the EVF perceptible?
Click to expand...
If there is a delay, I can't see it.
Kent
Member said:
We were hoping that that had been reduced to negligeable
proportions - but early indications are that it is still
substantial, and so it would be difficult to use the A2 for sports.
I notice that your sharpness and contrast are both set to normal,
as is your EV.
For those scenes it appears that the default sharpening is rather
harsh, and the DR is quite difficult in some of those shots.
I'm wondering if it would be possible to take a couple with the
sharpening at soft, the contrast at perhaps -2 and the EV at -1?
Thanks again!

--
Regards,
DaveMart
Please see profile for equipment
Click to expand...
 
I also looked at several A2 samples other than the ones posted in this thread, and they looked good in my opinion. There is one sample that displays ISO 64, 100, 400, and 800 I believe, if I can locate that post I'll post the link here. The ISO 800 sample was VERY impressive and although they display some noise, ( no where near as bad as your ISO 200 snow sample ) it was more than usable. Plus it was indoors shot against an incandescent lamp. I dont agree that the 3 samples you show from your A1 look better at all. I too see where you're coming from in stating that 8 mpix cams are only going to produce images that look like soft 5 mpix cams, but I believe if you look closely you'll see there is more resolution, and more detail. In my opinion once you see sample images composed, and shot under excellent lighting conditions, you will see the difference. The A1 is a great camera, it takes great photos, and I personally think the A2 will be even better. I was told that the EVF is amazing, and that in itself is a big step towards better cameras. The auto focusing on the A2 is lightning quick, and I look forward to getting one when they are available in my area.

I would also like to thank Kent for posting those samples for all of us to look at.

ENV
Geir Ove said:
Here are two A1 Samples Straight from the Camera: (JPEG FINE)

http://objective.bitfikler.com/geirove/web/images/fullsize/PICT2131.JPG

or this one:

http://objective.bitfikler.com/geirove/web/images/fullsize/PICT2159.JPG

This is NOT surprising: Why do you all think the 8 mpix cameras
have ISO 64 (that turns out to be ISO 50 or less)? of course
becasue they have problem with noise.

Heavy noise reduciton will reduce these 8 mpix cameras to mediocr 5
mpix cameras. Mediocre because they force you to use a SLOW ISO
setting that totally takes away the advantage the AntiShake gave
the A1. I can shoot at ISO 200 with my A1 and get good results, AND
use AS.

Take a look at ISO 100 to ISO 800 A1 shots here:

ISO 200: 100% crop:
http://home.online.no/~geiroves/PICT0004_cropped.jpg

ISO 400: 100% crop:
http://home.online.no/~geiroves/PICT0005_cropped.jpg

ISO 800: 100% crop:
http://home.online.no/~geiroves/PICT0006_cropped.jpg

Try this with the A2!

The only thing I envy the A2 users are the much improved EVF: I
want an A1 with this EVF !! :-)

Geir Ove
KentO said:
Hi,
Thanks for your responses.

I´ve been out shooting today, and the weather has been sunny today,
so I have posted more interesting pictures, all taken at ISO64. I
have been looking for purple fringing in my pictures, but I don´t
see that much of it. There is some in the first picture of my
gallery however. Btw, I had to remove the previous pictures to make
room for these ones.

http://hem.thalamus.nu/~gvp012191/A2/

EVF: It seems that the EVF itself can produce a better quality
image than the camera can produce as a live preview. If you look at
a picture in play mode there is less noise and better color than
you see when using it as a viewfinder. It is good as a viewfinder,
but even better for reviewing your pics. I tend to use the Quality
(30 fps) setting all the time since you do see a difference in
image quality.

And yes, it has f11.

So far I am very pleased, but I still have a lot to explore...

Kent
Click to expand...
Click to expand...
 
KentO said:
Hi,
Thanks for your responses.

I´ve been out shooting today, and the weather has been sunny today,
so I have posted more interesting pictures, all taken at ISO64. I
have been looking for purple fringing in my pictures, but I don´t
see that much of it. There is some in the first picture of my
gallery however. Btw, I had to remove the previous pictures to make
room for these ones.

http://hem.thalamus.nu/~gvp012191/A2/

EVF: It seems that the EVF itself can produce a better quality
image than the camera can produce as a live preview. If you look at
a picture in play mode there is less noise and better color than
you see when using it as a viewfinder. It is good as a viewfinder,
but even better for reviewing your pics. I tend to use the Quality
(30 fps) setting all the time since you do see a difference in
image quality.

And yes, it has f11.

So far I am very pleased, but I still have a lot to explore...

Kent
Click to expand...
Thanks. Pictures are as good as maybe expected. I did on #1 the sharpness trick and the result is an amazing sharpness without halos or noise:
USM
First pass: Amount 23, Radius 60, Treshold 0
Second pass: Amount 500, Radius 0.2, Treshold 0
Hans
 
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