Professional Web Applications Themes

Minolta Sufficient? - Photography

[email]mf06daol.com[/email] (MF06D) wrote in news:20030717155939.27580.00000084mb-m23.aol.com: > I truly love my Maxxum 7000i body, and I am at the point where I want > to expand my system contents: body, 35-70 f/4 MACRO, 50mm f/1.7. I > have three questions: > > 1. Is it a good idea to expand on my Minolta equipment collection, or > would it be more advisable for me to switch to a Canon body/system? > etc... > > Thanks. > Matt > Stay with Minolta-they make excellent lenses and you can get as good a results with them as you would with Canon or Nikon. ...

  1. #1

    Default Re: Minolta Sufficient?

    [email]mf06daol.com[/email] (MF06D) wrote in
    news:20030717155939.27580.00000084mb-m23.aol.com:
    > I truly love my Maxxum 7000i body, and I am at the point where I want
    > to expand my system contents: body, 35-70 f/4 MACRO, 50mm f/1.7. I
    > have three questions:
    >
    > 1. Is it a good idea to expand on my Minolta equipment collection, or
    > would it be more advisable for me to switch to a Canon body/system?
    > etc...
    >
    > Thanks.
    > Matt
    >
    Stay with Minolta-they make excellent lenses and you can get as good a
    results with them as you would with Canon or Nikon. In the end its the
    picture that counts. regards,
    John B.
    John Bateson Guest

  2. #2

    Default Re: Minolta Sufficient?

    Think of the Maxxum5 as supplementing your 7000i and not replacing it.

    You might find it handy to have 2 camera bodies that use the same set of
    lenses. I like to have one loaded with B&W film and the other with color.

    Or on my most recent weekend trip, I had one loaded with Velvia 50 for
    daylit scenics, and the other with a 400-speed color negative for those
    pictures of friends and family.



    MF06D wrote:
    > I truly love my Maxxum 7000i body, and I am at the point where I want to expand
    > my system contents: body, 35-70 f/4 MACRO, 50mm f/1.7. I have three questions:
    >
    > 1. Is it a good idea to expand on my Minolta equipment collection, or would it
    > be more advisable for me to switch to a Canon body/system? I mostly do serious
    > amateur work...candid portraits, travel photography, lanscapes, etc. Nothing
    > professional, at least not yet, and nothing involving a studio. I do not plan
    > to make professional photography my profession, simply a hobby of mine, albeit
    > a very serious one. I never thought of switching systems, but I wanted to get
    > some other opinions on it.
    >
    > 2. If I stay with Minolta, I would like to someday purchase a Maxxum 5 to
    > replace my current body (beter metering system, more AF points, built-in fill
    > flash). My concern is that in the B&H used department, my current camera goes
    > for 199$, while a new Maxxum 5 can be had (not necessarily from BH) for about
    > 150-175$, body only. What is it that makes the 7000i worth so much after so
    > many years? Would I be improving on much by purchasing a new body?
    >
    > 3. I am interested in purchasing a zoom lens for my Maxxum system (if I do in
    > fact stay with Minolta). I would most likely purchase one used, on ebay, from
    > BH, etc. I would like something in the 28/70mm - 200/300mm range. It would be
    > nice to only spend about $80-150. I want something that isn't a total piece of
    > crap with tons of flare, etc; and I am fully aware that I will compromise image
    > quality if I purchase a zoom lens.
    >
    > Thanks.
    > Matt
    Mike Marty Guest

  3. #3

    Default Re: Minolta Sufficient?



    MF06D wrote:
    > I truly love my Maxxum 7000i body, and I am at the point where I want to expand
    > my system contents: body, 35-70 f/4 MACRO, 50mm f/1.7. I have three questions:
    >
    > 1. Is it a good idea to expand on my Minolta equipment collection, or would it
    > be more advisable for me to switch to a Canon body/system? I mostly do serious
    > amateur work...candid portraits, travel photography, lanscapes, etc. Nothing
    > professional, at least not yet, and nothing involving a studio. I do not plan
    > to make professional photography my profession, simply a hobby of mine, albeit
    > a very serious one. I never thought of switching systems, but I wanted to get
    > some other opinions on it.
    Yes, expand away. But if Minolta don't do the DSLR thing, then we will
    all be feeling the pain as we adopt the Canon song.

    > 2. If I stay with Minolta, I would like to someday purchase a Maxxum 5 to
    > replace my current body (beter metering system, more AF points, built-in fill
    > flash). My concern is that in the B&H used department, my current camera goes
    > for 199$, while a new Maxxum 5 can be had (not necessarily from BH) for about
    > 150-175$, body only. What is it that makes the 7000i worth so much after so
    > many years? Would I be improving on much by purchasing a new body?
    Skip it. Get the Maxxum 7 or wait until the fall to see if the DSLR
    rumour pans out...
    The Maxxum 5 is a bit shy of serious.
    >
    > 3. I am interested in purchasing a zoom lens for my Maxxum system (if I do in
    > fact stay with Minolta). I would most likely purchase one used, on ebay, from
    > BH, etc. I would like something in the 28/70mm - 200/300mm range. It would be
    > nice to only spend about $80-150. I want something that isn't a total piece of
    > crap with tons of flare, etc; and I am fully aware that I will compromise image
    > quality if I purchase a zoom lens.
    The 75-300 (Minolta) is like all of its ilk ... okay up to 'round 200mm,
    then it gets soft and fuzzy. Used in the US$125 - $175 range.
    The 100-300 is better, and more $$$

    I have not heard anything good about superzooms (28-300) but I saw a
    slideshow a few months ago that was impressive.
    >
    > Thanks.
    > Matt
    Alan Browne Guest

  4. #4

    Default Re: Minolta Sufficient?

    On 17 Jul 2003 19:59:39 GMT, [email]mf06daol.com[/email] (MF06D) wrote:
    >I truly love my Maxxum 7000i body, and I am at the point where I want to expand
    >my system contents: body, 35-70 f/4 MACRO, 50mm f/1.7. I have three questions:
    Keep those lenses. They are both great. Get the 70-210/4 and pick up a
    24-50/4 and you'll have a great set of lenses for cheap! If you want
    longer then go for the 75-300/4.5-5.6 MACRO (the older Metal one)
    They even have a great 500/8 AF Mirror lens. I found a new one at
    WalMart for less than $200.
    >2. If I stay with Minolta, I would like to someday purchase a Maxxum 5 to
    >replace my current body (beter metering system, more AF points, built-in fill
    >flash). My concern is that in the B&H used department, my current camera goes
    >for 199$, while a new Maxxum 5 can be had (not necessarily from BH) for about
    >150-175$, body only. What is it that makes the 7000i worth so much after so
    >many years? Would I be improving on much by purchasing a new body?
    If B&H has a 700i for $199 in their used department then they are
    going to have that camera there for a long time. You can get them on
    Ebay for $100 or less.

    Go for the Maxxum 5. Or look for a slightly used Maxxum 7. With all
    the people selling them off because Minolta has not come out with a
    DSLR they are going for a good price. With the Vertical Grip on the
    Maxxum 7 you have a great camera.

    With the Maxxum 5/7 you also have built in Wireless flash capabilities
    that your 7000i does not have. Definately something you'll want to
    play with!



    Valder

    Valder Guest

  5. #5

    Default Re: Minolta Sufficient?

    28-200 zoom is NOT sharp, even at 4x6 inch.

    Get the 24-50 or 24-105. They are good.

    Ming.

    ¦b 17 Jul 2003 19:59:39 GMT, MF06D <mf06daol.com> ¼g¹D:
    > I truly love my Maxxum 7000i body, and I am at the point where I want to
    > expand
    > my system contents: body, 35-70 f/4 MACRO, 50mm f/1.7. I have three
    > questions:
    >
    > 1. Is it a good idea to expand on my Minolta equipment collection, or
    > would it
    > be more advisable for me to switch to a Canon body/system? I mostly do
    > serious
    > amateur work...candid portraits, travel photography, lanscapes, etc.
    > Nothing
    > professional, at least not yet, and nothing involving a studio. I do not
    > plan
    > to make professional photography my profession, simply a hobby of mine,
    > albeit
    > a very serious one. I never thought of switching systems, but I wanted to
    > get
    > some other opinions on it.
    >
    > 2. If I stay with Minolta, I would like to someday purchase a Maxxum 5 to
    > replace my current body (beter metering system, more AF points, built-in
    > fill
    > flash). My concern is that in the B&H used department, my current camera
    > goes
    > for 199$, while a new Maxxum 5 can be had (not necessarily from BH) for
    > about
    > 150-175$, body only. What is it that makes the 7000i worth so much after
    > so
    > many years? Would I be improving on much by purchasing a new body?
    >
    > 3. I am interested in purchasing a zoom lens for my Maxxum system (if I
    > do in
    > fact stay with Minolta). I would most likely purchase one used, on ebay,
    > from
    > BH, etc. I would like something in the 28/70mm - 200/300mm range. It
    > would be
    > nice to only spend about $80-150. I want something that isn't a total
    > piece of
    > crap with tons of flare, etc; and I am fully aware that I will compromise
    > image
    > quality if I purchase a zoom lens.
    >
    > Thanks.
    > Matt
    >


    --
    Using M2, Opera's revolutionary e-mail client: [url]http://www.opera.com/m2/[/url]
    Ming Guest

  6. #6

    Default Re: Minolta Sufficient?

    MF06D wrote:
    >
    > I truly love my Maxxum 7000i body, and I am at the point where I want to expand
    > my system contents: body, 35-70 f/4 MACRO, 50mm f/1.7. I have three questions:
    >
    > 1. Is it a good idea to expand on my Minolta equipment collection, or would it
    > be more advisable for me to switch to a Canon body/system? ...
    Every big manufacturer makes good systems - including Minolta. Unless
    you
    really need something specific (e.g. Canon's image stabilization lens),
    you
    may as well stick with Minolta - they're as good as anyone else.
    >
    > 2. If I stay with Minolta, I would like to someday purchase a Maxxum 5 to
    > replace my current body (beter metering system, more AF points, built-in fill
    > flash)...
    The 5 is a great little body - for the price and size it's very capable.
    With
    the 50mm f/1.7 it makes for a very compact SLR. Some people find it too
    small for them, and some that if you want to do everything manually that
    manipulating the aperture and shutter speed on the same dial is awkward
    - I
    don't find those to be particular problems for me. If you want something
    a
    bit more beefy with separate controls, you may want to look at the 7,
    although
    it's nearly 3 times as expensive. The 7 also has some advanced metering
    displays, showing how each of the metering cells differs from the chosen
    setting (I suppose if you wanted to, you could use this mode on the 7 to
    make it a 14 pixel digital camera!)

    I'm not always sure that more AF points is a good thing - more chance of
    you
    and the camera disagreeing on what to focus on! I usually turn them off
    except
    for the centre, focus using that and recompose. I find the spot meter
    very
    useful in the 5 when taking theatre shots (don't know if there's one on
    the
    7000i).

    If the 7000i is still going strong, you have the best of both worlds,
    and
    run the 5 in parallel!

    One caveat - on the most recent bodies, Minolta have upgraded the
    communications
    between the camera and an external flash, so if you have a flash-gun, or
    are
    going to get one, you may want to check compatibility between the gun,
    the 5
    and the 7000i.
    >
    > 3. I am interested in purchasing a zoom lens for my Maxxum system (if I do in
    > fact stay with Minolta). I would most likely purchase one used, on ebay, from
    > BH, etc. I would like something in the 28/70mm - 200/300mm range...
    I like to keep zoom ranges down to about 3x. The 10x 'superzooms' (1)
    tend
    not to be particularly sharp and (2) tend to have small apertures at the
    long end - just where you want a big aperture!

    The tele everyone recommends is the 70-210 f/4 - which you should be
    able
    to find for somewhere around $100.

    My everyday shorter zoom is the 24-85, which although it has some
    distortion
    at the ends of its range is very sharp.

    Another lens you may like to look at is the 100mm f/2.8 macro. Very
    sharp and
    doubles up nicely as a portrait lens too (unless you need to go for
    soft-
    focus portraits!).

    Simon

    --
    --------------------------------------------------------------------------
    Dr. Simon J. Harris email: [email]s.j.harrisic.ac.uk[/email]
    Mechatronics in Medicine Laboratory, tel: 020 7589-5111 x 57068
    Department of Mechanical Engineering,
    [url]http://www.me.ic.ac.uk/case/mim/[/url]
    Imperial College of Science, Technology and Medicine,
    Exhibition Road, London SW7 2BX
    --------------------------------------------------------------------------
    Carlton Dramatic Society web site: [url]http://come.to/carltondrama[/url]
    --------------------------------------------------------------------------
    Simon Guest

  7. #7

    Default Re: Minolta Sufficient?

    I'm surprised that nobody mention that the 35-70/4 macro is one of the best
    cheap zooms arround.
    Keep that zoom! No 28-200/300 zoom will come close. The only comparable zoom
    lens in that range in Minolta line up would be 28-70 G.

    If you want smth in 70-200 range get the old 70-210/4 or is that 70-200/4?
    Ppl keep saying how good it is and cheap.

    Have fun and hope that Minolta will come out with DSLR this year.

    Marko

    "MF06D" <com> wrote in message
    news:aol.com... 
    expand 
    questions: 
    would it 
    serious 
    Nothing 
    plan 
    albeit 
    get 
    fill 
    goes 
    about 
    so 
    in 
    from 
    be 
    piece of 
    image 


    Marko Guest

  8. #8

    Default Re: Minolta Sufficient?



    Marko B. wrote: 

    The 80-200 f/2.8 G is quite something in sharpness, and if you asked me
    which lens, the 28-70 or the 80-200 gave me the best results v. my
    expectations, it would easily be the 80-200. (I have both). These are
    champagne budget lenses.
     

    It's the 70-210 f/4 and yes it is a great lens. (A friend has one and
    turns in spectacular work). There are many used ones about.
     

    Rumour mill sez....

    Alan Guest

Similar Threads

  1. Minolta 7D in Canada?
    By stator in forum Photography
    Replies: 1
    Last Post: December 10th, 09:57 PM
  2. Minolta 7i
    By jagman in forum Photography
    Replies: 1
    Last Post: September 1st, 03:54 PM
  3. Minolta Lenses
    By Leonhard Pang in forum Photography
    Replies: 5
    Last Post: July 17th, 05:59 PM
  4. Minolta Digital SLR?
    By Yung Mah in forum Photography
    Replies: 12
    Last Post: July 16th, 05:26 PM

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 60 61 62 63 64 65 66 67 68 69 70 71 72 73 74 75 76 77 78 79 80 81 82 83 84 85 86 87 88 89 90 91 92 93 94 95 96 97 98 99 100 101 102 103 104 105 106 107 108 109 110 111 112 113 114 115 116 117 118 119 120 121 122 123 124 125 126 127 128 129 130 131 132 133 134 135 136 137 138 139