Minolta Maxxum 5D - New dSLR

Discussion in 'Minolta' started by Siddhartha Jain, Jul 15, 2005.

  1. http://www.dpreview.com/news/0507/05071503kmmaxxum5d.asp

    "Konica Minolta has today announced the Dynax / Maxxum 5D digital SLR.
    This new digital SLR is Konica Minolta's answer to the Nikon D50 and
    Canon EOS 350D (Rebel XT), a more affordable digital SLR aimed more at
    the beginner market. It's both smaller and lighter than the Maxxum 7D
    and has fewer external controls (although those which are left are the
    most useful; WB, ISO, etc.). The 5D of course still features Konica
    Minolta's unique in-camera Anti-Shake system which stabilizes the
    sensor rather than a lens element."

    So its fibre glass as against the 7D metallic body and sports a 2.5
    inch LCD display. What else's different?

    - Siddhartha
    Siddhartha Jain, Jul 15, 2005
    1. Advertisements

  2. no prism,
    less LCD resolution,
    USB 1.1,
    no exchangable matte,
    motive programs,
    smaller (130,5 x 92,5 x 66,5 mm vs. 150 x 106 x 77,5 mm)
    lighter (590 g vs. 760 g)

    and hopefully much cheaper than the overpriced 7D

    There are some more minor differences, such as ± 2 EV in 1/3 steps only
    and extra white balance.

    - Martin
    Martin Trautmann, Jul 15, 2005
    1. Advertisements

  3. Siddhartha Jain

    Jer Guest

    Well, it *is* an entry level camera.
    Jer, Jul 15, 2005
  4. Siddhartha Jain

    Brian Guest

    Has anyone seen the $US prices for this? Here is some info from

    "The Konica Minolta Dynax 5D is available in September and will cost
    £599.99 body only, or £649.99 including the AF DT 18-70mm F3.5-5.6
    (D) lens.

    The price of the Dynax 7D has also been revised: body only £799.99
    (was £899.99), including the AF 28-100mm f3.5-5.6 (D) lens £899.99
    (was £999.99)."

    Any opinions on the comparison between the konica cameras and the other
    major brands?
    Brian, Jul 15, 2005
  5. Siddhartha Jain

    SMS Guest

    The 5D looks like a very good deal. In the U.S. it's priced at $800 for
    the body only.

    It's essentially a de-featured 7D, so they can be in the amateur
    segment. It'll be real competition for the Nikon D70s, but other than
    the anti-shake technology, it still isn't quite as good as the EOS-350D.
    If you have Minolta lenses already, or want the anti-shake in the camera
    as opposed to in the lens, then it's pretty compelling.

    I've added it to the website, and based the ranking on the fact that it
    is essentially a defeatured 7D.

    The U.S. price is $800 for body only, see

    Available in September 2005.

    What's ironic is that supposedly Konica-Minolta was not going to
    continue in the digital camera business, according to a report a month
    or so ago. But they would seem to be in the best position to be a real
    competitor to Canon and Nikon in the DSLR market, with products far
    better than Olympus or Pentax.

    SMS, Jul 15, 2005
  6. Siddhartha Jain

    SMS Guest

    The 7D is not hi-speed USB 2.0 either.
    No optional grip, appparently.
    The 7D has come way down in price, to less than $1200. KM apparently
    feels that the anti-shake feature is worth paying more for. It was very
    overpriced to begin with, especially with the more capable Canon 20D
    selling for much less.
    SMS, Jul 15, 2005
  7. More capable how?

    I have a 20D, but lately I'm wishing I'd gone with the K-M.
    Antishake would be real nice. Of course, the 7D wasn't for
    sale when I got my camera.
    Ben Rosengart, Jul 15, 2005
  8. Siddhartha Jain

    RichA Guest

    Why would you say the 7D is overpriced? Competitively, it's in league
    with the Canon 20D and once you outfit the Canon with a decent lens,
    doesn't it cost more than the Minolta? They have both avoided the
    plastic bodies of the entry-level cameras as well and that is where
    much of the money comes into play.
    RichA, Jul 15, 2005
  9. Siddhartha Jain

    SMS Guest

    The 7D was overpriced when it first came out. When I bought my 20D about
    nine months ago, the 7D was $1500 and the 20D was about $1200. Now they
    are both about $1200 for the body only.
    Actually this is not an area where most of the money comes to play. The
    polycarbonate bodies are used mainly because they are lighter and easier
    to manufacture to the tolerances required.
    SMS, Jul 15, 2005
  10. Siddhartha Jain

    Jeremy Nixon Guest

    Don't be silly -- it says "Canon" on it. It'll increase your lifespan,
    make you a sexual powerhouse, and do your laundry without complaint.
    Jeremy Nixon, Jul 15, 2005
  11. The 7D also has a 2.5" LCD (which my crappy 20/150 eye appreciates no
    end), but appears the 5D has far fewer pixels (115,000 vs 207,000).

    The green asterisks in the specifications at the URL above indicate
    differences between the 5D and 7D.

    Bob ^,,^
    Bob Harrington, Jul 15, 2005
  12. This was fixed in the v1.10 firmware update.
    Love my VC-7D!
    Bob Harrington, Jul 15, 2005
  13. Siddhartha Jain

    RichA Guest

    Right, cheaper. Face it; If plastic had any merits other than
    cheapness of mfg. or lightness, they'd use it across the line
    and they don't.
    RichA, Jul 16, 2005
  14. ???

    Our shop is selling them at £699- that's £300 less than the 20D body price.

    Martin Francis, Jul 16, 2005
  15. Siddhartha Jain

    Pete D Guest

    Sounds like a good idea, pay for IS only once.
    Pete D, Jul 17, 2005
  16. Siddhartha Jain

    SMS Guest

    The theory is good, but in reality the lens IS is better.
    SMS, Jul 17, 2005
  17. Siddhartha Jain

    Jer Guest

    How would anyone actually know which is better? Has anyone published
    empirical evidence from a rat study? Only my curiosity makes me ask.
    Jer, Jul 17, 2005
  18. Siddhartha Jain

    Jeremy Nixon Guest

    Don't be silly. Canon uses it. Around here, anything from Canon is
    "known" to be better than anything not from Canon, and studies or other
    evidence are unnecessary. How dare you question this universal truth?!
    Jeremy Nixon, Jul 17, 2005
  19. Excuse my ignorance, but I have no idea what this means.
    Isn't the prism this bit the image bounces around to the eyepiece?
    What exactly does this mean in performance and function? Would I/you
    miss it?

    Bartshumandad, Jul 18, 2005
  20. Siddhartha Jain

    Jer Guest

    Holy Silly Boy Batman! I've been known to question my own birth from
    time to time - but, if one views a particular print image in the family
    scrapbook, my little fat face was captured with a Brownie Hawkeye
    shortly afterwards. Damn conspiracy I tell ya. :)
    Jer, Jul 18, 2005
    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.