What's new
DPR Forum

Welcome to the Friendly Aisles!
DPRF is a spin-off of dpreview. We are a photography forum with people from all over the world freely sharing their knowledge and love of photography. Everybody is welcome, from beginners to the experienced professional. From smartphone to Medium Format.

DPRF is a community for everybody, every brand and every sensor format. Digital and film.
Enjoy this modern, easy to use software. Look also at our Reviews & Gallery!

Why Sony / Minolta at all?

This is for sure an interesting topic. I was not comparing the A1 with the 14n Steve,as you rightly point out they are in different leagues.I was comparing the newly announced SLR digital from Minolta. Kevin sums it up well in his comparison with the evolution of film over the last 150 years. My own view is that apart from the absolutely awful design of film SLRs which simply don't fit a human face and the format which in most instances is cropped when printing,that in the 14n ,file size is not really a problem now.Its a matter of quality both in lens resolution and chip fidelity. The Dimage 7 has been designed to be used by humans,it handles very well and causes no discomfort when being used,I can only applaud the designers for doing a truly excellent job The Ai may be a great camera but it is still saddled with the same lens as the 7 series and retains the quality issues. Why the new digital SLRs are being made in traditional format I don't know,there is no longer a need for a lens in the centre of the camera as there is no film to transport from one side to the other.The offset lenses of cameras like the Minolta A1, Olympus E20 Nikon coolpix and Fuji offerings are the logical way forward. With Sony's 828 offering 8 megapixels for the same price as a Minolta A1 coupled to a T*coated f2.8 Zeiss lens Minolta will need to do more than just tweak and existing design,no matter how revolutionary it was when introduced. Definitely a case of applying Moors Law. Michael
 
You can bag vintage Zenit SLR for £100. DIY yourself a pin hole camera. You can bin the computer and get a typewriter. You can send back the cell phone and get a carrier pidgeon. You can live and love your musuem world to death.

Meanwhile those of us who have invested thousands in Minolta lenses would like the choice to have a £1,000 digital SLR as do Nikon and Canon users. Techonlogy changes. Just as zoom lenses and AF came along, digital is the new direction. As for it being expensive, we just want the choice to spend that money or not. Those of you who want to the A1s, fine, but some people want the flexibility of a DSLR.

As for digital being expensive. Try getting pro-cibacromes hand prited, or buying top quality B/W paper for printing. 10 rolls of provia properly developed costs $150. Now shoot a hundred rolls in a year and digital don't look so expensive.

Nobody is forcing anybody into the ditigal game. And we are happy for you luddites to carry on with whatever vitage technology you like. Just let's have minolta enter the 21C.
 
The pros and cons of film vs digital could go on and on. But I go back to what I initially stated...it is whatever media provides you with the magic and satisfaction you seek through telling a story through photography. Each has it's advantages and disadvantages and one only has so much money to spread around. Each serves a need and as long as your happy with the results than it doesn't matter what the Jones' are doing.
As for Minolta, I think they were a little slow in the coming of new products due to the recent merger with Konica. But until they announce what new products they have, keep shooting and capturing beauty wherever you may find it
happy.gif
 
Konica Minolta hear$ you loud and clear. Start saving for next September for a killer DSLR! And why not send your ideas to http://www.konicaminolta.com in the meantime so they can know exactly waht you want and how much money you will have saved up! ;-) In the meantime, you can avail yourself of the world's highest qulaities in film scanners for your current shooting AND all your previous archives of film (NO digital camera offers THAT!) in Minolta's Dimage Scan models - Elite 5400 and Dual III and the new IV - world class and all three less than ~US$1000. Also, ever try to shoot with a digital camera? Pause, delay, wait, maybe we got it, check the LCD, play with the buttons, have your candid subject pose again, pause, delay, wait, maybe we got it, check the LCD, play with the buttons, have your candid subject pose again, pause ... you get the picture (er, maybe you don't get the picture! And that's my point!)

Click!

Love and Hugs,

Peter Blaise

Minolta Photographer

http://www.peterblaisephotography.com and so on ...
 
>>Konica Minolta hear$ you loud and clear. Start >>saving for next September for a killer DSLR!

Unless you have spoken directly to Minolta. At the moment all we have is another rumour. There have been rumours around for the last 3 years. If one was cynical you could say that this suits Minolta, as we keep loyal to the brand.
 
UKsnapper: I understand that you were not making comparisons between the A1 and the Kodak. The point that I wished to make and failed to do was: if Minolta did come out with a 14 mb CCD similar to the Kodak 14n, the price in all likelyhood would prohibitive to a nonproffessional, amatuer, hobbist of limited means such as myself. Nuff-said. ;)
I agree and really enjoyed your observations on the ergonomics of camera designs. When I think of the face prints all over my Maxxum7 & 9000 and compare that with the Dimage, the difference is quite noticeable. I just placed an order for the BP-400 battery pack grip and extra battery to improve the hand hold.
 
It would be nice to see Minolta get into the game and produce a high end digital SLR. Even though I would not be able to afford it, the technology will trickle down to more affordable models. I agree with Michael when he states that the companies need to open up to new ideas for the cameras. I think part of it is that pros tend to be slow to jump at radical ideas. It is hard enough to get them to accept digital let alone try a camera that looks different. I really liked the statement by Janis that basicly we shouldn't get to wound up in technology and forget what photography is all about. Many a great photo has been taken on equipment that has not been top of the line. I do feel that with my Minolta 7i that I have made compromises for the conveinence and price for a fixed focal digital SLR that covers a 28 to 200 range. Maybe that wasn't the best camera, but the price of the true digital SLR's is out of my league right now. Maybe with film at present I would get a better photo also, but not as easy to store and manipulate. At the end of the day I have had many people look at the photos and truly enjoy them, because they are not looking for every little flaw, but hopfully a well thought out photo. There is nothing wrong with a little debate though, and I do feel in the long run, digital will eventually be the way we take our photos.
 
Kevin Janis and all are right about the equipment issues. Although I use a Dimage 7Hi extensively, I use an RTS 3 Contax for my 35mm work.the back up 35mm camera is a Yashica FR bought second hand in 1985. the RTS once failed on whilst photographing some people,the film wind was faulty.I simply switched to the Yashica and finished the job.The resulting snaps were every bit as good with the £25 Yashica body as they were with the £1200 Contax body. The point I'm making is that the equipment we buy may well give us a pride of ownership and a feeling of confidence (?) when using it but for most of us, even the lower end of the market cameras will exceed our expectations and often our capabilities. On the point of Pros being reluctant to get into digital I'm not in agreement. Pros tend to buy equipment that will do a job and earn them money,a small number bought digital cameras that cost £25,000 some years ago.these same cameras can be found on Ebay for £300 or less but who would want them now? I believe that the only way the manufacturers THOUGHT that pros would buy into digital was to present traditional bodies with digital internals but you would be surprised at the large numbers that quietly bought cameras like the Nikon coolpix to use alongside their film cameras telling clients it was just for the art director to see and then present the images as finished work after editing The problem with digital files is storage and access. It does not take long to fill a 100gb hard drive and they really do have to be catalogued properly otherwise you will spend days looking for the image you want,even DVDs fill up quickly and have to be handled very carefully . You can take a snap out of your pocket and show people your new motorcycle etc but try that with a DVD !

Michael
 
I belong to Minolta family (as amateur) more than 15 years, with a few Minolta bodies and many lenses. I always believed that Minolta offer more than other manufactures for the money. I love sharpness, contrast and color saturation of Minolta lenses in despite of distorsion or flare in most of cases. Bodies were fantastic
But now digital was happened... Where is Minolta? No DSLR, no response of development neither rumors.
In my opinion, it's too late for Minolta to produce a high end DSLR. Who wanted to buy a serious DSLR, he bought Nikon or Canon, and couldn't wait for Minolta. The rest, like us, Minolta-warships, amateurs, hobbyist, with collections of old lenses, equipment and a lot of nostalgic are still waiting. I personally expect a cheaper body like Canon EOS D300, which supports old flashes and objectives. Buying rangefinder digital camera does not satisfy me, because of very small CCD sensor (no optics can be good and sharp enough for so small surface), too big barrel distorsion in "wide (38 mm)" angle, cheap constructed plastic bodies (Z1), no possibilities of using old flashes (3200i, 3500xi)...
I can still wait, but not too long. In opposite I'll (unfortunately) be obliged to switch to other manufacturer.

Joe
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top