Minolta announcements

Discussion in 'Minolta' started by Leonard, Jul 15, 2005.

  1. Leonard

    Leonard Guest

    Maxxum 5D. In-body stabalization arrives at the entry level. If
    the ergonomics are as good as everyone says the 7D's are it could
    be very interesting.

    New reduced coverage lenses. Oooh, including an 18-200. That's
    sure to be good. I like the way they list Anti-Shake as a lens
    feature in the press release. Also:

    "To ensure consistently high quality images, the Dynax5D/Maxxum5D uses
    an optical system ideally suited to a large (23.5 x 15.7 mm) CCD, in
    addition to spherical lenses to reduce spherical aberrations, AD
    (anomalous dispersion) glass, and a special lens coating that reduces
    flaring that often occurs in digital SLR cameras."

    1) They mean a small (23.5 x 15.7 mm) CCD
    2) Is the flaring that often occurs specific to digital cameras? I'm
    sure I've seen it on film.
    3) I can only imagine that Minolta did not intend to suggest that
    their use of spherical lenses reduced spherical aberrations.

    - Len
     
    Leonard, Jul 15, 2005
    #1
    1. Advertisements

  2. One thing that Minolta don't shout about is that, because they move the
    sensor rather than lens elements to achieve image stabilisation, the lens
    image circle has to be proportionately greater than the actual sensor size
    to cover both the sensor and its movement.

    Whilst this means that Minolta cannot take full advantage of the smaller
    image size on the CCD in the lens design, it could mean that their lenses
    remained suitable for 35mm full frame. However, these new lenses "cannot
    be used on 35mm cameras". It is a great feature, though, which
    automatically turns existing lenses into image stabilised ones - and a
    good selling point for their system.

    Cheers,
    David
     
    David J Taylor, Jul 15, 2005
    #2
    1. Advertisements

  3. Leonard

    ASAAR Guest

    It's not full frame, but that's only slightly less than 1/2 the
    area of full frame sensor. That would make it much larger than the
    sensors used in P&S cameras. I don't know the exact size of the
    sensors used in the Nikon and Canon DSLRs having 1.5 and 1.6 crop
    factors, but think that I read somewhere that the 20D had a sensor
    2/3 the size of a full frame. If that's the case, then the 5D's
    sensor would be in turn, about 2/3 the size of the 20D's sensor, so
    that would still be a fairly large sensor. Except for those that
    lust after full sized sensors. :)
     
    ASAAR, Jul 15, 2005
    #3
  4. Leonard

    ASAAR Guest

    You're probably right, and thanks for the correction. But since
    my last msg. I found the article that had the info. I recalled. In
    a piece referring to hands-on evaluation of a 20D it said:
    Was "2/3" a typo, or does it not refer to 2/3 the area of a 35mm
    film frame? I suppose it probably meant 2/3 the height and width,
    making it a smaller sensor, (2/3)*(2/3), or 0.44 times the full
    frame area vs. the 0.67 (2/3) that I thought that they meant.
     
    ASAAR, Jul 15, 2005
    #4
  5. Leonard

    ASAAR Guest

    Really? What is the necessary increased image circle when going
    from 23.5 x 15.7 mm to 24 x 36 mm? If I remember my trig. formulas,
    that corresponds to image circle diameters of 28.26 and 43.27 mm.
    Do you think the maximum sensor excursion would require an image
    circle as large as 43 mm? In the horizontal plane that would allow
    the sensor to move (43.27 - 23.5)/2, or about +/- 9.9mm. I'd be
    amazed if any IS system could cope with camera movements that need
    such large corrections. While I don't know how much the sensor
    travels, it seems to me that it might be in the neighborhood of plus
    and minus a millimeter or two (for a 23.5 x 15.7 mm sensor), which
    could be accommodated by a much more modest increase in the size of
    the image circle. That doesn't mean however that the lenses don't
    actually have image circles large enough for full frame cameras.
     
    ASAAR, Jul 15, 2005
    #5
  6. I think you're right - I don't know the amount of sensor movement either,
    but to stabilise for some long lenses might mean quite a lot of movement
    was required (this is one aspect where moving the lens element wins). In
    any case, a small falloff at the corners under image stabilisation might
    well be an acceptable compromise.

    What the Minolta announcement means is that the sensor doesn't move enough
    to cover the full 35mm frame, and might tell us something about what the
    system limits are with longer focal length lenses. Some sort of objective
    test of stabilisation systems would be most helpful in establishing both
    performance and limitations!

    Cheers,
    David
     
    David J Taylor, Jul 15, 2005
    #6
  7. Leonard

    Darrell Guest

    Hmmm, Minolta missed the boat. They are too late the 5D should have been
    brought out first instead of the 7D. In fact a year later they finally have
    some digital lenses.
     
    Darrell, Jul 15, 2005
    #7
  8. Leonard

    ASAAR Guest

    Well now I'm confused. :) I thought that the 20D had a
    reasonably large, though not full frame sensor. But 8.8 x 6.6 mm
    (58sq.mm) is tiny, only 1/15th the area of 24 x 36mm (864sq.mm).
    That seems more like the smaller size I thought was used by some of
    the P&S dcams. Guess I'll have to follow your dpreview link to see
    what I'm missing.
     
    ASAAR, Jul 15, 2005
    #8
  9. Leonard

    Darrell Guest

    The KM, Nikon and Pentax all have the same sensor size, because they all use
    the same sensor. This is a APS-C (23.5 x 15.7 mm) size CCD. The Canon 20D
    has a 22.5 x 15.0 mm, or a sensor or 8.5% smaller than Nikon, Pentax and
    Konica-Minolta. All of these are "full-sizes" sensors. If you are talking
    about a 35mm frame (24x36mm) sized sensor, I doubt it will happen. All the
    makers are building more and more DX/EF-S (DA/DT et al) format lenses.
     
    Darrell, Jul 15, 2005
    #9
  10. It's about the image quality. If you don't understand or care about image
    quality, you won't care about larger sensors.
    It's only the way of the future if you care about image quality, and are
    willing to sacrifice convenience for said image quality.

    As long as photography involves collecting photons focused onto a planar
    sensor with a lens, a larger planar sensor will provide better image
    quality, and a smaller planar sensor will provide greater convenience. It's
    an engineering tradeoff, and it's never going away.

    David J. Littleboy
    Tokyo, Japan
     
    David J. Littleboy, Jul 15, 2005
    #10
  11. Since I'm grumping at you in another corner of this thread, I'll take this
    change to point out that you are spot on here<g>. The vast majority of the
    problems digerati whimper about are problems they just never noticed on
    their film cameras since they never looked closely. With digital we look at
    every image at 100% pixels and see all the infelicities we never noticed
    with film.

    David J. Littleboy
    Tokyo, Japan
     
    David J. Littleboy, Jul 15, 2005
    #11
  12. Leonard

    Leonard Guest

    It's certainly a lot larger than those sensors. But all of the
    other Minolta SLR lenses you can get are designed for a somewhat
    larger sensor.

    - Len
     
    Leonard, Jul 15, 2005
    #12
  13. Leonard

    ASAAR Guest

    I guess I was doubly confused. I read the above too quickly and
    thought that you were saying that the 20D's sensor was 8.8 x 6.6 mm.
    On re-reading it I got it the way you intended, which strangely
    enough was exactly how you wrote it. :)

    Back now to the strange "2/3 film-size chip" mentioned in the
    article I previously quoted. Armed with the 20D's sensor size (22.5
    x 15.0 mm per dpreview) I got approx. 27mm for its diagonal (the
    diameter of the smallest image circle that would completely contain
    it). For a 36 x 24 mm sensor, the diagonal would be about 43mm.
    The 27mm diagonal turns out to be very close to 2/3 the size of the
    24 x 36mm full size frame's diagonal. So that may be what was
    behind the above "2/3" figure mentioned in the article.

    To tie up a loose end, the article was "Shootout In The Old West"
    (Four Pros In A Digital SLR Showdown) by Steve Anchell which
    appeared in the current (July 2005) issue of Shutterbug. It's
    nothing like the reviews seen on the web (dpreview, Steve's Digicam,
    etc.). Here, each of the four were given a camera (that I think
    they had little or no previous experience with) to simply take
    pictures (in the Rockies) and report their impressions, along with
    pros and cons. The four cameras evaluated were Canon's 20D, Konica
    Minolta's Maxxum 7D, Nikon's D70 and Olympus's E1.
     
    ASAAR, Jul 15, 2005
    #13
  14. Leonard

    Pea C Guest

    It seems to be the same sales politics as in classics - Dynax 7 and then
    Dynax 5, then Dynax 4, Dynax 60...
     
    Pea C, Jul 16, 2005
    #14
  15. Leonard

    Pea C Guest

    Any comparison between 7D and 5D can be found on the net somewhere? I've
    read there are some limitations in adjusting of the 5D. And what about
    the material of the body - glass fiber plastics? Any price level already
    known?
     
    Pea C, Jul 16, 2005
    #15
  16. Leonard

    Darrell Guest

    What "full-frame" sensor will they use? I am not aware of any at this time
    that can make it into a 2006 dSLR. Rumours are just that, rumours. KM may
    not be in the market next year, as they are feeling financial hardship right
    now. With earnings falling well short of projections.

    I don't see KM strategy as good, Nikon (D1, D1X, D100) and Canon (1D,
    D30,D60 et al) released their high-end cameras in 2000-2001. K-M finally
    launched their 7D in late 2004, but with stupid marketing, in Canada you had
    to buy a body, grip and enemic flash for CDN $2,400 in when it appeared on
    the shelves early December 2004. Last week they finally released several DT
    lenses. Too little, too late. The 5D will hit shelves late summer/fall 2005,
    or several months after the D50. They (KM) arrived at the party, when
    everyone else was going home...
     
    Darrell, Jul 18, 2005
    #16
    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.