My understanding is that the EHT images are a result of a lot (like, months) of data processing, not an image from the telescope. So arguably still not a direct observation.
Digital photographs are just the result of processing the sensor readings of photodiodes. It seems quite arbitrary to say one is an "image" and the other isn't just because the processing step is more complicated. Both accurately represent what you would see if you were there in person (ignoring false color etc.).