Kodak DX6490 vs Minolta Z2 ?!?

Discussion in 'Minolta' started by Guru, May 28, 2004.

  1. Guru

    Guru Guest

    Which one would YOU think is better???
     
    Guru, May 28, 2004
    #1
    1. Advertisements

  2. Guru

    BenOne© Guest

    Jim Spen wrote:


    According to the review sites, the images from the Kodak are superior to the
    S7000, and the 12MP S7000 pictures are no better than the 6MP pictures because
    interpolation can not add information that's not there.
     
    BenOne©, May 30, 2004
    #2
    1. Advertisements

  3. Guru

    BenOne© Guest

    Jim Spen wrote:


    Hi Jim,

    First I have to say I was wrong in my previous post. The review sites do
    NOT show that the DX6490 is superior to the S7000. It's the S5000, with
    3MP sensor, that doesn't produce photos as good as the DX6490.

    How can interpolation add information that the sensor does not record?

    The photos may look better because the interpolation to 12MP makes the image
    look smoother when printed at 8x10 size or larger, but it's possible you could
    do the same with Photoshop. I doubt there would be a visible difference when
    printing a 6x4 whether you left it in 6MP mode or bumped it up to 12MP mode.

    I would expect the Fuji to produce better photos than the DX6490, even though I
    don't own an S7000, because the S7000 has a 6MP sensor whereas the DX6490 only
    has a 4MP sensor.
    The electronic viewfinder and LCD screen don't have enough resolution for a
    manual focus control to be usable. Unless the screen showed the focus distance
    when focusing manually, in which case it would be usable.
    The DX6490 seems to work best if you leave the white balance set to daylight.
    I'm certainly not a pro, and still learning how to use the manual controls my
    camera has, so I guess there would also be a benefit to having more control over
    the white balance.
    I would say that's not essential, but being able to choose the level of JPEG
    compression is a must. Unfortunately I learned this lesson after I bought my
    camera and found rec.photo.digital. :(
    I know RAW or TIFF is better if you need to do post processing, but I don't have
    time.
    Yes, quite annoying when I'm trying to take photos of birds in the local
    Botannical Gardens. Not a problem when taking landscapes, photos of my family, etc.
    I bought myself an external flash and bracket to attach it the camera, so
    darkness isn't a problem anymore.

    Did you use the saturated or neutral colour setting? I found the saturated
    setting to be too saturated, whereas neutral is usually spot on or a bit washed
    out, which is easily fixed.

    I would prefer to take photos and not need to do any post processing though.
    Don't you think you're exaggerating a little bit there - "giant slow point and
    shoot" ?

    Still waiting for my lens adapter. Supposed to be available to the Australian
    online stores in a week or so. :(
    Me too.

    I just bought an 8 colour, 4800x2400, 2 pico litre dot size, A3+ printer (Canon
    i9950). If I wanted to print my photos at A3 size, they would only be 147dpi. I
    need at least an 8.2MP camera to get 200 dpi and 18.46MP camera to get 300dpi.
     
    BenOne©, Jun 3, 2004
    #3
    1. Advertisements

Ask a Question

Want to reply to this thread or ask your own question?

You'll need to choose a username for the site, which only take a couple of moments (here). After that, you can post your question and our members will help you out.