Avantgarde
12-14-2004, 12:48 PM
Here is a little review I posted at another fourm for those looking at the camera. Also I find the AF to be better in low light at wide angles, it's pretty decent still a bit slow but not bad, just at tele does the AF fail quite ofter and who is going to use 200mm focusing on the dark corner of a room that often. Anyhow here it is, I'm liking the camera more and more. icon_biggrin.gif
I have never used an A2, but I have owned a 7U. Image quality is quite good, no complaints there, and ISO 50 and 100 are quite good, 200 is a bit nosey, and 400 is noisy too BUT it's not really that bad, it's quite usable and some pics are quite good at 400 and any image at 400 run through a Noise reduction plug-in is easily very usable. 800 is a different story, very very noisy, I'd only use this if there was no other choice, and with the anti-shake I don't see why 400 isn't sufficient under most normal conditions. 800 can clean up with a plug-in and print 4x6 fine, but no larger. I would have no problem going to say 11x14 at 400, maybe larger.
I find auto focus to be pretty fast in daylight conditions and accurate. Indoors changes performance a lot. In a room light with 3 40 watt bulbs the auto focus will hunt at times and in general is quite slow. I am surprised at how dim the LCD seems to be also, in comparison to a Panasonic FZ20 at the same ISO, the LCD is much brighter and focus is quite fast with accurate focus almost every time. When the focus locks it sometimes is correct and sometimes isn't. I do find the auto focus to be much closer when using the wide focus area, but when switching to a point focus it's hit and miss. I would love to know how an A2 is in this area. Also to note the auto focus in the same lit room is quite accurate at wide angle, but it's telephoto where the AF really suffers and I'm not sure how much you would be using 200mm in a indoor room at night with only mediocre lighting, so this may not really pose a problem, at the wide angle it is slower then in daylight but not bad, still a bit slower then the Panasonic, I really don't understand why there is no AF assist light, that is a feature that should be on EVERY digital camera with an option to turn off if you don't like it. I would also like to do more testing on people then just on things in the room.
I really like the Anit-shake, having used the Panasonic OIS and the Canon IS system it's up to par to both but seems to produce a bit sharper results, I think this is to moving the CCD and not a lens like the former two. Since you are always maintaing a perfect alignment with the lenses there is less distortion then there would be with moving optics. The lens is good, fringing is kept low and distortion is also low, images are very sharp across the entire zoom range. While the movement of the zoom ring feels a bit flimsy the lens is decently constructed, just a smother zoom ring would have been nice. Macro mode works well as I suspected, I've always liked the macro mode on the Minolta camera and same here.
As for the EVF and LCD, I know many complain about the EVF, but I have never used an A2 for comparison to a high res EVF so in my book almost all EFV's I've used are, to put it bluntly, junk. I really don't like them and wait for the day a SLR-like digicam has a true optical view finder, who ever does that first and well will win me over, the EVF is actually better then the one on the Panasonic. I am second guessing myself and thinking maybe the A2 is better but unless that EVF on the A2 is as smooth as butter I can't see me liking it, after using optical finders in SLR guess I'm just spoiled. The LCD though is nice and swivels to all the standard positions. While it could have been a bit larger with some more pixels it's not bad, and is very useable. What I don't like is the LCD will gain up in low light, but when the camera starts to AF the LCD reduces to standard gain and gets very dim. I don't understand why it does this, it would make for better focusing to remain gained up. Also on a side note while the automatic zoom on the manual focus is nice there are times where I don't want it zoomed in and I cant seem to find away to keep the view zoomed out, I still have more to read in the manual so maybe I will find it but it should be a on/off setting in the menu like as in other cameras I have used.
The camera while all plastic and at when first picked up feels kind of flimsy but after a couple days now I don't feel the same I am use to the weight of a Canon 20D and actually find the A200 very refreshing for it's weight and anyone could easily carry it all day, you might even forget it's there. Also the flimsiness has gone away, I now think it's quite well built for all plastic, everything fits together well and nothing seems loose, I did drop the camera accidentally from my desk (about 3 feet) on to a carpeted floor and had no worry about anything breaking. It is solid for it's size and weight and I think many will feel the same as me thinking "Oh My its cheaply made" to "Oh I just dropped it, oh well nothing will be broke" It feels just as sturdy as my (no longer working) Dimage 7. The controls are well layed out and easy to access quickly once you learn where they are, everything falls near a finger for me.
My complaints:
They are quite few, the poor AF in low light at higher zoom.
The LCD be quite dark at times in low light
And my other complaint is about not only this camera but also my old Dimage 7. Minolta cameras to me seem to be VERY picky about CF cards. I had CF cards that worked in every other camera I own, but don't work in the Minoltas, and now I have a 5GB Microdrive that works like a charm in all my camera but will not, no matter how I format, work in the A200. This is very disappointing as I only have one other card that is of sufficient size to even bother using and it's only a 512 and in raw mode that is quite limiting, I don't want to have to buy a card when I already have one. This has occurred with both Minoltas I've owned, I'm not sure why though. I even had a 1 gig card fry in my old D7, I still don't know if it was the card or the camera.
Other then these complaints I find the A200 quite nice. Overall it's a Light, well built very capable 8 Mega pixel camera, while at times I think maybe I should have gotten the A2, I've read much about the A2 that it isn't flawless either. Maybe with a couple firmwares AF will improve as on the D7 did. Most important to me is that it's designed well in the way that taking pictures isn't a task, it's quick, easy and delivers good quality, with maintaing a lot of features that aren't found on other Digicams (such as 30 sec exposures) and coming in at a good price point.
**Update**
The Af isn't as bad As I though, only lacking at full telephoto in dark and I don't see that being used that much. Use manual focus if you have to. I am really taking a liking to the camera it's light but well built and takes great photos.
--
Visit my:
Gallery: http://www.pbase.com/wintermist
Website: http://www.avantphoto.com
and Sister site: http://www.starfire-graphics.net
I have never used an A2, but I have owned a 7U. Image quality is quite good, no complaints there, and ISO 50 and 100 are quite good, 200 is a bit nosey, and 400 is noisy too BUT it's not really that bad, it's quite usable and some pics are quite good at 400 and any image at 400 run through a Noise reduction plug-in is easily very usable. 800 is a different story, very very noisy, I'd only use this if there was no other choice, and with the anti-shake I don't see why 400 isn't sufficient under most normal conditions. 800 can clean up with a plug-in and print 4x6 fine, but no larger. I would have no problem going to say 11x14 at 400, maybe larger.
I find auto focus to be pretty fast in daylight conditions and accurate. Indoors changes performance a lot. In a room light with 3 40 watt bulbs the auto focus will hunt at times and in general is quite slow. I am surprised at how dim the LCD seems to be also, in comparison to a Panasonic FZ20 at the same ISO, the LCD is much brighter and focus is quite fast with accurate focus almost every time. When the focus locks it sometimes is correct and sometimes isn't. I do find the auto focus to be much closer when using the wide focus area, but when switching to a point focus it's hit and miss. I would love to know how an A2 is in this area. Also to note the auto focus in the same lit room is quite accurate at wide angle, but it's telephoto where the AF really suffers and I'm not sure how much you would be using 200mm in a indoor room at night with only mediocre lighting, so this may not really pose a problem, at the wide angle it is slower then in daylight but not bad, still a bit slower then the Panasonic, I really don't understand why there is no AF assist light, that is a feature that should be on EVERY digital camera with an option to turn off if you don't like it. I would also like to do more testing on people then just on things in the room.
I really like the Anit-shake, having used the Panasonic OIS and the Canon IS system it's up to par to both but seems to produce a bit sharper results, I think this is to moving the CCD and not a lens like the former two. Since you are always maintaing a perfect alignment with the lenses there is less distortion then there would be with moving optics. The lens is good, fringing is kept low and distortion is also low, images are very sharp across the entire zoom range. While the movement of the zoom ring feels a bit flimsy the lens is decently constructed, just a smother zoom ring would have been nice. Macro mode works well as I suspected, I've always liked the macro mode on the Minolta camera and same here.
As for the EVF and LCD, I know many complain about the EVF, but I have never used an A2 for comparison to a high res EVF so in my book almost all EFV's I've used are, to put it bluntly, junk. I really don't like them and wait for the day a SLR-like digicam has a true optical view finder, who ever does that first and well will win me over, the EVF is actually better then the one on the Panasonic. I am second guessing myself and thinking maybe the A2 is better but unless that EVF on the A2 is as smooth as butter I can't see me liking it, after using optical finders in SLR guess I'm just spoiled. The LCD though is nice and swivels to all the standard positions. While it could have been a bit larger with some more pixels it's not bad, and is very useable. What I don't like is the LCD will gain up in low light, but when the camera starts to AF the LCD reduces to standard gain and gets very dim. I don't understand why it does this, it would make for better focusing to remain gained up. Also on a side note while the automatic zoom on the manual focus is nice there are times where I don't want it zoomed in and I cant seem to find away to keep the view zoomed out, I still have more to read in the manual so maybe I will find it but it should be a on/off setting in the menu like as in other cameras I have used.
The camera while all plastic and at when first picked up feels kind of flimsy but after a couple days now I don't feel the same I am use to the weight of a Canon 20D and actually find the A200 very refreshing for it's weight and anyone could easily carry it all day, you might even forget it's there. Also the flimsiness has gone away, I now think it's quite well built for all plastic, everything fits together well and nothing seems loose, I did drop the camera accidentally from my desk (about 3 feet) on to a carpeted floor and had no worry about anything breaking. It is solid for it's size and weight and I think many will feel the same as me thinking "Oh My its cheaply made" to "Oh I just dropped it, oh well nothing will be broke" It feels just as sturdy as my (no longer working) Dimage 7. The controls are well layed out and easy to access quickly once you learn where they are, everything falls near a finger for me.
My complaints:
They are quite few, the poor AF in low light at higher zoom.
The LCD be quite dark at times in low light
And my other complaint is about not only this camera but also my old Dimage 7. Minolta cameras to me seem to be VERY picky about CF cards. I had CF cards that worked in every other camera I own, but don't work in the Minoltas, and now I have a 5GB Microdrive that works like a charm in all my camera but will not, no matter how I format, work in the A200. This is very disappointing as I only have one other card that is of sufficient size to even bother using and it's only a 512 and in raw mode that is quite limiting, I don't want to have to buy a card when I already have one. This has occurred with both Minoltas I've owned, I'm not sure why though. I even had a 1 gig card fry in my old D7, I still don't know if it was the card or the camera.
Other then these complaints I find the A200 quite nice. Overall it's a Light, well built very capable 8 Mega pixel camera, while at times I think maybe I should have gotten the A2, I've read much about the A2 that it isn't flawless either. Maybe with a couple firmwares AF will improve as on the D7 did. Most important to me is that it's designed well in the way that taking pictures isn't a task, it's quick, easy and delivers good quality, with maintaing a lot of features that aren't found on other Digicams (such as 30 sec exposures) and coming in at a good price point.
**Update**
The Af isn't as bad As I though, only lacking at full telephoto in dark and I don't see that being used that much. Use manual focus if you have to. I am really taking a liking to the camera it's light but well built and takes great photos.
--
Visit my:
Gallery: http://www.pbase.com/wintermist
Website: http://www.avantphoto.com
and Sister site: http://www.starfire-graphics.net