Can't decide - Nikon vs. Konica Minolta

I'm about to make the jump from my Canon S1-IS digital point-and-shoot to a
DSLR model, but I'm torn between the Nikon D70s (with the 18-70mm AF-S DX
f/3.5-4.5G lens) and the Konica Minolta Maxxum 7D, with a KM 28-100mm AF
f/3.5-5.6 lens.

My father-in-law recently bought a D70s. I have used it a little, and I
quite like it. But from what I've read, the 7D seems to be more camera. It's
a little more expensive. I have no experience with Konica equipment, hence
the reason for my post.

I'm open to suggestions or points to consider. I'm no professional, but I
have enjoyed using my 35mm SLR for the past 5 years (a 15 year old Yashica
FX-3). I plan to use a new DSLR primarily for shooting my kids (with the
camera, not with a gun) and perhaps a little outdoor/nature photography.
What are your thoughts on how these two lenses compare?

Any advice is appreciated.

 

The Konica includes image stabilisation in the body, which may be
attractive after what you have been used to on the Canon S1-IS. Don't
Konica offer a lens with a wider angle than 28mm ( I assume that's 43mm
equivalent). 43mm may be restricting for indoor photos of children.

David

 

For one, the lens is better with the Nikon. Another, I believe the
Nikon has more useful features. Lastly, I think Nikon has a better
reputation and is doing better business. Clearly the Nikon lens has a
wider low end. The zoom ratio on the 28-100 is a little high (more than
3x). Further, the Nikon lens has AF-S, which you will love! It is
quite and fast. You can grab it and focus manually if you desire ...
while in autofocus mode! The optics are very good. My comment about
the zoom ratio above 3x may not really apply in the low focal lengths,
but who can say [definitely the 18-70 has more than 3x as well]?

I am curious to see what "more" it has to offer. I can say I have been
VERY happy with the D70.

 

Morgan,
Many answers sent will be biased by those who think the camera THEY
bought for THEMSELVES is the only one suitable for everyone else to
buy, and they will denigrate the other brands!!! Figure out which
features matter to YOU. Figure out which camera handles best in YOUR
HANDS. Listen to 'features argument' not about Brand, which will be
biased (no one likes to look stupid so they have to justify what they
have already purchased)!!!
The Nikon lens goes wider angle (equivalent to 27mm wide angle on
35mm film), but the Minolta goes to longer telephoto (about 150mm on
35mm film). So which is more important TO YOU? I like to shoot
interiors when I travel to Europe (fabulous churches, castles and
museums) so I would choose the one with a wider lens as standard. But
maybe you need to shoot soccer photos of your son/daughter with a
longer lens like the Minolta has! But don't use that as the sole
selection criteria, since you can always get additional lenses in the
focal lengths you need! As for relative ease of use, the DSLRs are
all so automated that they can serve as expensive point-and-shoots, so
don't let that deter you from the D70...it can be used similarly to the
Minolta in auto-everything mode!
Consider what type of battery each takes (proprietary form factor
or generic AA, etc.) Consider the type of memory each camera takes
(commonly found CF), or slightly more difficult to find or more
expensive other package) Consider how easy is it for you to find some
accessories for that camera in local stores, where you can go to try
things out, and consider how readily you can buy accessory items on the
web when you local store does not stock them.

 

IMHOP the differences between cameras is a wash.
Minolta and Nikon each have their advantages.
I have a D70 because I have used Nikons for years and have a big investment
in Nikon lenses.
I heartily endorse the D70, particularly if you want to use the RAW format
in order to see what a dSLR can really accomplish.
If you want to stay with JPEG you may be happier with a camera that has a
fixed lens, is smaller and easier to handle. Many are quite sophisticated
and some (this will incite flame wars) are even superior, because they are
more usable by the individual consumer, to dSLRs if you are satisfied with
JPEG images.

 

Do yourself a favor... go to a good camera store and see how nicely an
inexpensive Pentax DSLR is at home in your hands :^)

 

Yes, 18-70mm 3.5-6.5DT. Afaik its the Kit-Lense of thhe 5D, and might be a
better choice.

 

Aside from the lovely 20mm f/2.8 K-M have two 17-35mm lenses that are
both very good. One is very expensive, the other slightly slower and
quite reasonable in price.

 

I'm sure you have been. But the 7D is simply better all 'round.

-Anti shake in-camera for all lenses.
-Much better controls and control layout
-Larger and higher density monitor
-Better range of ISO speeds

One thing I wish the 7D had that the D70 has, is 1/500 sync speed. A
minor point, but a point.

Cheers,
Alan

 

With the 7D you get anti-shake and a larger monitor. Not to mention a
very complete set of controls on the body of the camera that all but
obviate menu diving.

The 17-35 f/var from K-M is very nice; not sure about the 28-100, but
that's a pretty decent range for general photography.

The 18-70 from Nikon is an interesting range of FL's as well. If you
think you'll be doing more wide angle shots, that's a good choice.

Cheers,
Alan.

 

Thanks to all who commented. Your input was valuable.

After much deliberation and a trip to a local camera store (I was able to
handle both cameras for a few minutes each) I finally made my pick. It was a
close race, but I finally chose the D70s. My final decision was mostly based
on the fact that I've heard nothing but praise for the Nikon's 18-70mm lens.
Having not been able to find much info on the KM lens, I was a little
uneasy. The camera store I visited did not have the 18-100 in stock, so I
couldn't see it. Of the 4 KM lenses they had, none were what I would
consider "reasonably priced." So, given the wide selection of new and used
lenses available for the Nikon (staggering compared to KM lense choice and
availbility), I figured I would have a much easier time to locate additional
lenses at a reasonable price when the time comes.

Thanks again.

 

Big deal, lots of photos get taken without and some of them are actually
pretty good.

If that is the sort of layout you want, if not then it isn't.

Good but not that important.

The main ones are there and work well.

Very minor, many only sync at lower speeds, 5D for example.

 

Certainly a big deal and thanks for highlighting that. ;-)

With Canon and Nikon to get this you have to buy the individual IS/VR
lenses that have the facility. With Maxxum you get it with the camera
for all the lenses you already have and will buy in the future. So yes,
it is not only "Big" but a "good" deal too. So you can shoot at slower
ISO's and longer shutter speeds.

You have to use it to understand it. You literally forget that there
are menus... you simply don't need them for all but a few special
situations. (BTW: most any review in most any magazine points out the
superior Minolta control layout ... and this goes back to models like
the 800i, Maxxum 9 and Maxxum 7 to name a few).

Not according to a few friends of mine who use D70/D70s and flipped when
they saw my monitor.

Until you want shallower DOF (and forgot the ND) or a high speed low
light shot (and don't care about the noise).

I meant minor for the OP. Not minor for me.
For studio shooting with studio flash, having the highest possible sync
speed is important for absolutely crisp shots and for reducing the
exposure of high ambient light where not needed in the image (but needed
for crisp manual focusing). MF cameras such as Hasselblads's sync at
1/500 and others (some Pentax lenses, IIRC) at 1/1000. It is a minor
point to most SLR shooters but an important point to me as I do do a lot
of studio shots. And no, HSS does not at all cut it.

Cheers,
Alan

 

I had a brief chance to use one of the Minolta DSLRs. It feels like an
old-school camera that just happens to be digital. Kind of weird (in a
good way). Canons feel like computer peripherals to me. Low-end Nikons
(like the D70) are somewhere in between. Pro Nikon bodies are *almost*
as "camera-like" as the Minolta, but not quite; still too many "press
this while turning this other thing" functions, which isn't necessarily
bad, but it's not quite as zen, or something.

 

LOL , luckily you can turn it off though.

His father in law will likely not appreciate it nor will the OP.

Yes well, hardly something to get flippy about. My 2" hi res screen is very
good also, still only give it a good.

This is marginal at best. You must change your mind a lot. The D70s goes up
to 3200 anyway. And I never forget the ND.

I am sure you did.

Not sure the OP actually has a studio yet?? Anyway 500th is still good
enough I think.

 

The KM 7D also provides ISO up to 3200

 

Why not go with the leader in DLSR's and get a Canon? A year ago I
considered the D70 (Had owned Nikon film gear ) and decide that Canon
had the best system now and for the future.


*************************************************************

"I believe that all government is evil,
in that all government must necessarily make war upon liberty...

From "Mencken's Creed"
H.L. Mencken (1880 -1956)

 

Yes but I am sure not spending that much on a 6 MP camera that has noise
issues.

 

What? Less noise than the D70 is a problem?

http://www.dpreview.com/reviews/konicaminolta7d/Samples/ISO/lumi-graph.gif

 

Speaking as a Nikon D70s owner who has already taken hundreds of pictures, I
can suggest to all of you that the "noise" issue is bogus. My son uses a
Canon D20. Both cameras take incredibly good pictures under all lighting
conditions....no matter what the technowonks keep saying....

PC