Minolta DSLR coming - Herbert Keppler et al declare

Discussion in 'Minolta' started by Alan Browne, Dec 12, 2003.

  1. Alan Browne

    NJH Guest

    Yes. I don't have the 5400, but I'm very happy with the software Minolta
    supplied with my Scan Dual III (dunno if that's different software) and for
    that matter I like and use the DiMAGE Viewer Utility all the time. I have
    never understood why some people complain about the latter. It's limited of
    course, but then it's not intended to be a substitute for Photoshop or
    anything like that.

    I hope that's right. My friend who went from a Canon EOS 35mm system to
    Canon digital (D30 and then D60, last I talked to him) was not too thrilled
    that his thousand-dollar 17-35mm lens only have him the equivalent of about
    a 28mm lens at the short end. Heh. My 7i and 7Hi do that and in either case
    the whole camera cost me a lot less than his 17-35 cost him.

    If that 1.3x multiplier turns out to be correct, my 17-35 will give me the
    equivalent of about 22mm at the short end. Not too shabby.

    I agree. If Sigma can make lenses in those various mounts, why not bodies?

    That's about what I expect too. The Maxxum 7000 after all was a darn good
    camera even though it had to break completely new ground (such as no new
    digital SLR today will have to do), and the second generation was far
    better. I still have a pair of 8000i's and enjoy using 'em from time to
    time.

    Neil
     
    NJH, Dec 14, 2003
    #21
    1. Advertisements

  2. Alan Browne

    NJH Guest

    I doubt it. Minolta has a history of producing innovative and even
    cutting-edge stuff. It was the *other* camera makers that had to "play catch
    up" after Minolta brought out the Maxxum in 1985, remember.

    Then they can sell off their Nikon and Canon stuff and go back to Minolta if
    it produces a camera better for their purposes, can't they? Obviously brand
    loyalty is not a factor there.

    ???
    What on earth do you find "obnoxious" in his post? No offense, but are you
    some sort of crazy person?

    Neil
     
    NJH, Dec 14, 2003
    #22
    1. Advertisements

  3. Alan Browne

    Alan Browne Guest

    ....no they are from a German magazine. And what was printed there was
    different enought from the other one as to make them distinct.
    ....no, Pop photo just published it after visiting Minolta.
    ...that's what they claim, but you can go around spreading falsehoods if
    you like. (kinda like your Canon 10D v. Sigma SD-9 tests).
    Since I have an investment in serious Minolta glass, it is perhaps
    natural that I encourage them to go further. I guess you are one of
    those 'smug' brand clowns, so be it. That's your problem.
     
    Alan Browne, Dec 14, 2003
    #23
  4. Alan Browne

    Alan Browne Guest

    I'm not sure where the D companies are with stitching. It SHOULD be
    part and parcel of their systems... though not neccesarily in-camera.

    Cheers,
    Alan.
     
    Alan Browne, Dec 14, 2003
    #24
  5. its nothing to do with Minolta....you are just obnoxious, and that's why you
    are despised so much here by so many.....
     
    Betty Swallocks, Dec 14, 2003
    #25
  6. Alan Browne

    Gordon Moat Guest

    You know . . . . . funny thing is that when wireless image transmission becomes
    more common, this idea could become reality. Recall the early 1990s Formula One
    car racing era, prior to banning some telemetry and electronics, that it was
    possible for engineers half way around the world in Japan to actually tune the
    engine to run differently, all while the car was being driven in a race.

    Now extend that to cameras, perhaps in some future photography class, then you
    create a Brave New World of photography. The instructor could critique the image
    soon after the shutter button was pressed, and then communicate directly to the
    student any tips, or derogatory remarks.

    You could get even scarier with having all photojournalists cameras transmit to a
    government agency for consideration prior to release for publication.
    Objectionable images could be immediately censored. Since there already is some
    image censorship in the US and Israel, this would be easy to implement technology.
    Of course, then rouge photojournalists would return to film to tell the true
    story.

    Ciao!

    Gordon Moat
    Alliance Graphique Studio
    <http://www.allgstudio.com>
     
    Gordon Moat, Dec 14, 2003
    #26
  7. (Alan Browne) wrote in
    Well, if you can move the CCD chip, it shouldn't be a big deal to
    stitch the pictures together. Or at least provide a program to take
    those 4 pictures, and stitch them together in a computer.

    -Leonhard
     
    Leonhard Pang, Dec 14, 2003
    #27
  8. Alan Browne

    Lewis Lang Guest

    Subject: Re: Minolta DSLR coming - Herbert Keppler et al declare
    Alan:

    Just look at the (probably faked) email name, it includes your own in a
    disparaging way - its middle contains "knobheadbrowne". You are dealing w/ a
    troll, probably the same troll who made disparaging remarks about your teeth
    (or at least it wouldn't surprise me). Why bother to reason w/ the
    unreasonable?

    Regards,
     
    Lewis Lang, Dec 15, 2003
    #28
  9. Alan Browne

    Lewis Lang Guest

    Subject: Re: Minolta DSLR coming - Herbert Keppler et al declare
    Gordon:

    You're forgeting one very important point - I was going for the ultimate, not
    an instructor wirelessly making comments through/to his students cameras but a
    chip itself _as the instructor_. Since alot of photography seems mechanical
    figuratively (aesthetically sterile), and, literally, and it is captured
    (mostly) electronically (either through use of mini-computers in cameras and/or
    digital cameras themselves) it seems no small leap to go to the next step which
    is to just eliminate the instructor, or camera club judge all together. Now if
    we could just go one step further than that and eliminate most of the perennial
    bad photographers we'd be swimming in pudding... or at least micro-chips ;-)...
    maybe some kind of custom function that has certain bad photographers stand to
    close to the edges of cliffs.

    J/K

    ....what I really meant to say is that the bad photographers (photography
    teachers, camera club judges, et al) should take one or two steps beyond the
    cliff for that wonderful Vertigo perspective ;-)

    P.S.-Please disregard the above. We need more photographers, both good and bad
    to take pictures of meaningless sunsets, their dog's asses, their family's cut
    off heads, more meaningless sunsets and, I did mention their dog's asses,
    didn't I?, and the under side of their thumbs (or the undersides of their dog's
    asses, whichever is more convenient) - after all, somebody's got to provide
    content to mini-labs ;-).

    Regards,
     
    Lewis Lang, Dec 15, 2003
    #29
  10. Alan Browne

    Alan Browne Guest

    Hi Lewis,

    Thanks. OTOH, Betty bothers me not...

    Cheers,
    Alan
     
    Alan Browne, Dec 15, 2003
    #30
  11. Alan Browne

    Lewis Lang Guest

    Subject: Re: Minolta DSLR coming - Herbert Keppler et al declare
    :)

    Regards,
     
    Lewis Lang, Dec 15, 2003
    #31
  12. Oh right. Have you EVER known a pro that uses Minolta? Minolta caters
    to the amateur, a much bigger market. A pro needs better glass than
    Minolta offers.

    There is room for three D-SLR manufacturers at the consumer level.
    Right now there is only one, Canon. The market is very young. Nikon is
    late, Minolta is late, but it's not too late. What they have lost is
    the highly profitable early adopters that pay the most for new
    products.
     
    Steven Scharf, Dec 19, 2003
    #32
  13. Alan Browne

    NJH Guest

    There have been many pros who use Minolta.

    They ALL "cater to the amateur" for exactly that reason.

    Nonsense. Minolta lenses are, generally speaking, the equal of Nikon and
    Canon lenses. Published lens tests show this. They all make expensive
    professional-grade lenses and cheaper consumer-grade lenses.

    Whether those new products are "highly profitable" or not just because they
    cost more is not so clear. There are all those R&D costs that have to be
    recovered before there's any profit. And Minolta may be smart to let others
    handle all the new-technology bugs first.

    Consider the field of 35mm SLRs. Minolta was "late" there too, but then went
    on to enormous success. And where are the pioneers? Where's Exakta been for
    the last decade or so? Kaput. How about Praktica? Kaput.

    Neil
     
    NJH, Dec 19, 2003
    #33
  14. Alan Browne

    Alan Browne Guest

    You are one of the entrenched snobs. It is true that Nikon and Canon
    offer more variety of high quality glass (along with crap) and that they
    are used by a lot more pros. Freeman Patterson is one pro who uses
    mainly Minolta. As for glass, Minolta may not have a great variety, but
    in their top glass thay have stellar performers v. Nikon/Canon.

    20mm f/2.8 : Minolta + Nikon tie for best
    35mm f/2.0 : Minolta
    50mm f/2.8 : Minolta
    50mm f/1.4 : Minolta + Canon tie for best
    100mm f/2.8 : Minolta
    200mm f/2.8 : Minolta + Canon tie for best

    Source photodo sharpness/distortion figures.

    And the differences between these lenses are so minor as to be
    imperceptible in almost any image other than a test target.

    Yes, Nikon and Canon have secured the pro market. But to say that the
    lean line of Minolta lenses is not as good as Nikon and Canon is gross
    exageration.

    Cheers,
    Alan.
     
    Alan Browne, Dec 19, 2003
    #34
  15. Alan Browne

    Lewis Lang Guest

    Subject: Re: Minolta DSLR coming - Herbert Keppler et al declare
    Harry Benson (Life magazine, People, etc., yes, I've known him and even taken a
    workshop or two with him), I believe Mel Di'Giacomo (Newsweek PJ has used, in
    addition to his Nikons and Leicas a Minolta CLE), W. Eugene Smith (didn't know
    him because he died a couple of years before I got into serious photography,
    but he used Minolta equipment on his Japaneese mercury poisoning "Minimata"
    essay, along w/ numerous other brands of equipment throughout his life), can't
    think of her name because its been more than a decade but I knew a famous
    flower/still life photographer whose work was featured in "Minolta Mirror",
    Freeman Patterson (whose work I know but not him personally also uses Minolta's
    lenses and in particular the 100/2.8 Maxxum macro lens, I believe, whilst Gary
    Waltz(man?) who did a superb photo essay published both on the web and in a
    magazine about his dad who commited suicide I believe used Minolta manual focus
    equipment for that and uses/d a 9xi and various Minolta TTL wireless flashes
    for his newspaper/PJ work - these are just off the top of my head.
    Better glass? Have you used any great degree of Minolta glass? There lenses are
    second to none. My 24-50 f/4 Maxxum is tied to the noted Nikon 25-50mm AIS zoom
    (which I also owned and is smaller and just as sharp if not sharper, focuses
    closer (about 1.2 feet or so) for best image quality in its class. Minolta G
    glass is also supposed to be tops in its class (28-70/2.8 G and 80-200/2.8 G).
    Other people can comment on Minolta gear they've used/use and/or seen results
    from. Unless you qualifiy what you mean by "needs better glass than Minolta"
    what you say sounds biased and/or ignorant (pick two of the two) as it really
    doesn't describe the Minolta lens system at all. Not everyone needs a 400/2.8
    IS or VR or whatever.
    There is room for as many different consumer DSLRs as the market will
    buy/stand.
    Nikon is/will be coming out w/ their D70, and most likely both Pentax and
    Minolta will be coming out w/ entry level DSLRs too and it wouldn't surprise me
    if Oly had a baby DSLR for those who want to dip their toes into their system.
    Sigma, Sony and Fuji are also other possibilities too, maybe even Contax will
    have a BDSLR (baby/consumer digital SLR) but they would be a long shot as I
    doubt the N digital was that successful, but an NX-like BDSLR might be ;-).

    The market is very young. Nikon is
    Consumers who are not wedded to their lens gear at the entry level will
    continue to buy into whichever brand of BDSLR they will feel comfortable with
    whether it ends up being Canon's or someone else's. What Canon has done is
    gained an early entry point which will hopefully lead to more market share into
    the BDSLR segment of the market.
     
    Lewis Lang, Dec 20, 2003
    #35
  16. mmmmmm look what scuttled out from beneath it's rock....
     
    Betty Swallocks, Dec 20, 2003
    #36
  17. Alan Browne

    Lewis Lang Guest

    Subject: Re: Minolta DSLR coming - Herbert Keppler et al declare
    P*L*O*N*K!
     
    Lewis Lang, Dec 20, 2003
    #37
  18. A pro may need a lens that Minolta doesn't offer but those he can get
    from Minolta are usually quite good, looking at the G lenses for
    instance.
     
    Matthias Andree, Dec 22, 2003
    #38
    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.