A2 images too soft? Not good at point & shoot?

[PRGeno]

I'm strickly a novice, and only since my new A2 arrived have I started getting back in to photography. Before the A2 arrived, I had been ignoring my old Minolta X700 film camera for many years.

I have been lurking here for awhile, and seen the posts stating how soft the shots are, and how poor point and shoot shots are directly from this camera. Since playing with it for a very short time, I just don't understand where this criticism is coming from.

Now I'm far from any kind of expert, and I don't shoot charts or calibration targets. Here is one of my very first shots, taken in RAW format, but in program mode - pretty much pointed and shot. According to Exif data, the camera set itself to 1/60, f3.2, ISO 200. I processed this in Photoshop CS, via Adobe's RAW plugin, only to get the 100% crop, and convert it to Jpeg for posting. Being a JPeg, this isn't as good as it actually looks prior to compression losses.

I bought this camera to be able to learn and play in manual mode. If this is what this camera can do on it's own, and it has as much flexibility and power as everyone know it has, then I'm certain I bought the right one for me.

 

[John Shelton]

If this is 100% crop, it is indeed, a great example of the A2's sharpeness as a P&S camera.
JS

I'm strickly a novice, and only since my new A2 arrived have I
started getting back in to photography. Before the A2 arrived, I
had been ignoring my old Minolta X700 film camera for many years.

I have been lurking here for awhile, and seen the posts stating how
soft the shots are, and how poor point and shoot shots are directly
from this camera. Since playing with it for a very short time, I
just don't understand where this criticism is coming from.

Now I'm far from any kind of expert, and I don't shoot charts or
calibration targets. Here is one of my very first shots, taken in
RAW format, but in program mode - pretty much pointed and shot.
According to Exif data, the camera set itself to 1/60, f3.2, ISO
200. I processed this in Photoshop CS, via Adobe's RAW plugin,
only to get the 100% crop, and convert it to Jpeg for posting.
Being a JPeg, this isn't as good as it actually looks prior to
compression losses.

I bought this camera to be able to learn and play in manual mode.
If this is what this camera can do on it's own, and it has as much
flexibility and power as everyone know it has, then I'm certain I
bought the right one for me.

--
John

 

[jezlyn]

I'm sorry, I don't own an A2 (although I am really torn between it and an 828), I own a Sony F717 currently. I've been watching A2 threads just to get a feel for whether or not I want to get it.

That all aside, I just wanted to say that I love this picture. You have a very cute cat. It made me chuckle out loud.

 

[PRGeno]

She is a very cute, and very large. Her name is Cleo and she is a pure bred Bengal, weighing in at about 18lbs. She makes us chuckle all the time too.

As far as the A2 is concerned, this shot was one of my first 10 shots, with virtually no experience operating the camera. It was shot using full program mode, and I did nothing but zoom in and shoot.

There has been several people complaining about their A2s, for various reasons, on this forum. Some of the most frequent complaints have been about images being too soft, and having to post process every image.

Well at least in my situation, that hasn't been the case. This shot of Cleo is a perfect example of why I am so happy with this camera.

PG

That all aside, I just wanted to say that I love this picture. You
have a very cute cat. It made me chuckle out loud.

 

[Klaudio]

what you see posted influence you too much. We have been through the same with the A1 and only with the arrival of the A2 some of the pressure has been taken off our shoulders ;-)

Some people just like to complain, some are convinced of certain things and will ignore 100 facts against it and use 1 particular example to make their point, some expect other to tell them what to do without even trying. You just can't change it... it's the human condition ;-)

People that want to get the best out of their camera will produce wonderful images with any modern prosumer cam, and people that want to complain will always find something to catch on. Some have legittimate reasons and some probably not.

Cleo is really cute and I'm sure she'll be a perfect model for a lot of your shots. now if you catch one shot with a really Joyfull espression, that you are all set for the just started Challenge 5 (see below) , and that will make you focus on taking pictures ;-)

Claudio

--
http://www.pbase.com/klaudio

http://www.pbase.com/mtf_foto_studies/5_joy - Challenge 5: Joy

She is a very cute, and very large. Her name is Cleo and she is a
pure bred Bengal, weighing in at about 18lbs. She makes us chuckle
all the time too.

As far as the A2 is concerned, this shot was one of my first 10
shots, with virtually no experience operating the camera. It was
shot using full program mode, and I did nothing but zoom in and
shoot.

There has been several people complaining about their A2s, for
various reasons, on this forum. Some of the most frequent
complaints have been about images being too soft, and having to
post process every image.

Well at least in my situation, that hasn't been the case. This
shot of Cleo is a perfect example of why I am so happy with this
camera.

PG

--
http://www.pbase.com/klaudio

http://www.pbase.com/mtf_foto_studies/5_joy - Challenge 5: Joy

 

[Vancemac]

Not really disagree... more like I'm still trying to figure out this A2 situation. I absolutely love this camera, but I'm struggling with some soft focus issues. I'm not sure yet, though, whether it is:

a) general soft focus issue
b) the AF just misses a lot
c) unrealistic expectations on my part
d) operator error (my own inexperience)

I will post some extensive comparison pics in a day or two between my A2 and my old Canon G3. Answer D should always be the first consideration, and I'm definitely working through that one.

Answer C is an interesting one... for instance, your cat picture would have blown me away 6 months ago (prior to getting serious about digital photography and obsessively reading this site) -- but when I compare it to a shot like this (posted recently by another A2 user), it seems soft to me (as do most of my shots, even when comparing to G3):

http://www.pbase.com/image/26963848

Vance

 

[netscorer]

Animal close-up shots are very difficult to get sharp. Lots of small hairs make even sharp lense's life difficult, plus any slight movement of your pet may ruin the picture.

I think you made a marvelous job capturing true feline nature here

As for sharpenss, I would wish to be able to clearly separate hairs on a cat's head (it is especially obvious if you look for rather large hairs in cat's left ear).

This is strictly MHO, but this picture is rather soft looking and would be even softer if printed (unless big amounts of sharpening are applied).

Cheers,

netscorer.

I'm strickly a novice, and only since my new A2 arrived have I
started getting back in to photography. Before the A2 arrived, I
had been ignoring my old Minolta X700 film camera for many years.

I have been lurking here for awhile, and seen the posts stating how
soft the shots are, and how poor point and shoot shots are directly
from this camera. Since playing with it for a very short time, I
just don't understand where this criticism is coming from.

Now I'm far from any kind of expert, and I don't shoot charts or
calibration targets. Here is one of my very first shots, taken in
RAW format, but in program mode - pretty much pointed and shot.
According to Exif data, the camera set itself to 1/60, f3.2, ISO
200. I processed this in Photoshop CS, via Adobe's RAW plugin,
only to get the 100% crop, and convert it to Jpeg for posting.
Being a JPeg, this isn't as good as it actually looks prior to
compression losses.

I bought this camera to be able to learn and play in manual mode.
If this is what this camera can do on it's own, and it has as much
flexibility and power as everyone know it has, then I'm certain I
bought the right one for me.

 

[djedi]

Don't know if this will downsize well, but in full size the sharpness is rather awesome. In any case, if you need to count the number of teeth in a cat's mouth, here's your chance. Luckily, KoDo's friendly!
Djedi



--
frustrated photog

 

[PRGeno]

I thank you for the kind compliment on my shot. I have found our dog to be much more difficult to capture than Cleo. The dog is all black, with long flowing fur. Now that has proven to be a challenge for me and my A2 to capture. That's not to mention the challenge of getting her to hold still long enough to properly compose a good shot.

I'm not sure I see the softness as you do. I can almost count the hairs on Cleo's head. Again, this was a quick point and shoot capture, but if this is an example of what I get from my A2 on a fairly regular basis, I'm going to be thrilled with this camera for a long time to come.

I love the other Bengal roaring shot in this thread. Animals shots are so much fun.

PG

Animal close-up shots are very difficult to get sharp. Lots of
small hairs make even sharp lense's life difficult, plus any slight
movement of your pet may ruin the picture.

I think you made a marvelous job capturing true feline nature here

As for sharpenss, I would wish to be able to clearly separate hairs
on a cat's head (it is especially obvious if you look for rather
large hairs in cat's left ear).
This is strictly MHO, but this picture is rather soft looking and
would be even softer if printed (unless big amounts of sharpening
are applied).

Cheers,

netscorer.

 

[PRGeno]

A Bengal's pelt is so different than any other house cat. They have lots of personality, and are quite photogenic.

Don't know if this will downsize well, but in full size the
sharpness is rather awesome. In any case, if you need to count the
number of teeth in a cat's mouth, here's your chance. Luckily,
KoDo's friendly!
Djedi

 

[DigitalAngel]

I love the cat pictures. Both photos are amazing in detail. I also have an A2 and I love it.



--



Digital Angel
http://digitalangel214.fotopic.net/c115829.html

 

[djedi]

I love the cat pictures. Both photos are amazing in detail. I also
have an A2 and I love it.

Are those your kittens? Nice kitty....., Niiiicccce kitty!
djedi

 

[DigitalAngel]

I love the cat pictures. Both photos are amazing in detail. I also
have an A2 and I love it.

Are those your kittens? Nice kitty....., Niiiicccce kitty!
djedi

Well...I don't have any more mice...

--



Digital Angel
http://digitalangel214.fotopic.net/c115829.html

 

[walter matthews]

Looking at your shot and as suggested about the hairs in the ears, I also conclude that your shot is a bit soft. Moreover, I have observed the same kind of softness from my Fuji S2 when I am using the 80-400 VR lens.

I have been thinking for a long time now and your post with this thread prompts me to ask the following question.

Is it possible that the anti shake machinery, whether it be Canon IS, Nikon VR or whatever, actually end up putting a little shake into every picture. In other words, they try to stabelize the image by compensating for the movement of the camera but if the zero point is off, or for that matter if there really isn't a real zero but, as is more likely, an approach to zero, then that non zero shake stayte could account for a lot of subtle blurr.

I know that with my Nikon 80-400 VR, I can get sharper shots if I tie the lens down on my big tripod and turn off the VR.

I'm not criticizing the vibration reduction capability either because there are so many shots that I would never be able to get, but, I am asking the question of whether or not we might get better absolute resolution if the vibration reduction is turned off?

It is important to know this too because, in situations where we need the resolution, say at the formal shots of a wedding where 20 or more people will be in the picture, it might be prudent to put the camera on a tripod and shoot w/o the anti shake machinery, or with a strobe where the speed of the flash will stop everything and the anti shake is not needed.

 

[jezlyn]

She is a very cute, and very large. Her name is Cleo and she is a
pure bred Bengal, weighing in at about 18lbs. She makes us chuckle
all the time too.

Wow, 18 lbs! I used to have a hefty cat who was appropriately named Chubby, but he wasn't nearly that heavy.

There has been several people complaining about their A2s, for
various reasons, on this forum. Some of the most frequent
complaints have been about images being too soft, and having to
post process every image.

Well at least in my situation, that hasn't been the case. This
shot of Cleo is a perfect example of why I am so happy with this
camera.

It is a very good picture! I still chuckled at it when I looked at it again. What a cute expression. I tried out an A1 at Microcenter to try to get a feel for what the A2 would be like, and I must say, compared to what I'm used to on my Sony F717, the button layout was quite a change. I am still torn between the 828 and the A2, but leaning more towards the 828 because of the "familiarity" factor of the controls and body style, as well as being able to reuse my camera accessories. However, I keep hanging out around the Minolta forums because the A2 is still very appealing.

Augh, what a decision... I won't be buying a camera right away because the finances aren't there, but I'm always planning in case I win the lottery or something (well, if I won the lottery, I'd buy both cameras and maybe a DSLR ).

Thanks again for sharing the picture of your cute cat!