Minolta Maxxum 5D - New dSLR

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

  1. Siddhartha Jain

    Skip M Guest

    Jeremy, do you actually contribute anything here, besides snide comments?
     
    Skip M, Jul 18, 2005
    #21
    1. Advertisements

  2. It's cheaper and lighter to make the pentaprism that redirects the
    incoming light from the reflex mirror up to the viewfinder out of
    mirrors and empty space, than to use an actual all-glass prism.
    Downside is the former method usually results in a somewhat darker
    viewfinder image.
     
    Bob Harrington, Jul 18, 2005
    #22
    1. Advertisements

  3. Siddhartha Jain

    Jeremy Nixon Guest

    Hell, I don't know, ask Google. The camera-brand-advocacy does get old,
    though.
     
    Jeremy Nixon, Jul 18, 2005
    #23
  4. Check e.g. the dpreview on the 7D. I don't know about any real
    comparisons and a reproducable test setup. I remember, the German
    'Stiftung Warentest' wanted to verify the IS some time ago. But I don't
    know the results and setup.

    - Martin
     
    Martin Trautmann, Jul 18, 2005
    #24
  5. I checked geizhals.at for German/Austrian prices.
    2004-01 2004-05 2004-08 2004-10 2004-12 2005-02 2005-05 2005-07
    K 7D 1490 1350 1319 1149 1023 955
    C 20D 1323 1258 1216 1173 1249 1175
    N D70 1100 999 1045 999 887 707 709 649

    Don't ask me about a 2004-08 price legend when it was announced 2004-09
    I guess it's some date rounding effect.

    dpreview compared it to the D70 - that's why I chose the same models.
    http://www.dpreview.com/reviews/konicaminolta7d/page20.asp
    (K+N: 6 MP, C: 8 MP)

    Prices are in Euro. Since these prices include the German tax (16 %),
    it's almost 1:1, taking the price as USD.

    Maybe you can share similiar prices for UK?
     
    Martin Trautmann, Jul 18, 2005
    #25
  6. I was told about some kind of 'tunnel' impression when it's done by
    mirrors. Maybe it has some extra effect for higher eyepiece-to-eye
    distance (e.g. wearing lenses). Maybe it's less precise along the full
    range of operating temperatures.

    or maybe it's just some kind of tradition: every better camera has a
    prism. Attempts to make something cheaper use mirrors.
     
    Martin Trautmann, Jul 18, 2005
    #26
  7. Siddhartha Jain

    Skip M Guest

    In other words, no. That's what I thought.
     
    Skip M, Jul 18, 2005
    #27
  8. Siddhartha Jain

    Jeremy Nixon Guest

    Did you ask Google, or was that just a snide comment?
     
    Jeremy Nixon, Jul 18, 2005
    #28
  9. Siddhartha Jain

    RichA Guest

    There is no reason why this should be the case. There are dielectric
    coatings now that reflect over 99% of the incident light therefore
    loss at each mirror surface is negligable. In fact the prism,
    with it's internal light path (traversing glass) results in a certain
    amount of light absorbtion which means the prism system shouldn't be
    able to produce as bright an image as the mirrors. In other areas
    apart from cameras, no one uses prisms when mirrors can be employed.
    Binoculars use prisms because they are robust and can be kept in
    position more easily than a group of mirrors.
    -Rich
     
    RichA, Jul 18, 2005
    #29
  10. Siddhartha Jain

    RichA Guest

    Since little or no magnification is involved, this would not be an
    issue. The "tunnel" effect could be the result of using mirrors that
    are too small to maintain full image illumination. Prisms can suffer
    the same effect if they aren't made of the correct glass. Previously,
    prisms made of BK4 did have the effect. It can bee seen in cheap
    binoculars if you hold them up and look at the "exit pupils" those
    tiny discs of light that seem to be in front of the eyepiece lenses.
    If the exit pupil isn't uniformly illuminated (the edges of disk have
    a squarish dark area superimposed) the prisms are either too small for
    the light cone or they are made of inferior glass.
    Prisms have one main attribute; They are strong and there is only one
    optical element (the prism) that needs to maintain optical alignment.
    Multiple mirrors don't have those attributes. Also, if the light path
    is open to the outside air you will eventually get dust on the mirror
    surfaces.
    -Rich
     
    RichA, Jul 18, 2005
    #30
  11. Thanks, that clears that term/issue up nicely for me. I will pay
    attention when I can get a 5D/7D side by side. I will go back and have
    another look at the D70/50 specs, and Canon's too now.

    cheers
    Steve
     
    Bartshumandad, Jul 18, 2005
    #31
  12. Siddhartha Jain

    Skip M Guest

    Well, I googled, didn't find much at all, didn't have time or inclination to
    delve further. So, yes, it could be taken as a snide comment. But I just
    found one that was useful, so I may be forced to reconsider my assessment.
    It's not the brand advocacy, it's the brand slamming that gets to me. I
    don't, nor ever have, derided another's choice in equipment, except in
    instances like G. Preddy and the Sigma. And that was only in the context of
    the blaring advocacy of one brand and the slamming of another.
     
    Skip M, Jul 19, 2005
    #32
  13. Siddhartha Jain

    Jan Böhme Guest

    What gets me isn't even the brand slamming, but the whining about the
    supposed inane brand advocacy of others.

    To me, an occasional poster who owns an old Pentax film SLR, an Nikon
    Coolpix 995 and a Panasonic FZ-20, it is quite clear that this
    newsgroup as a whole spends about an order of magnitude more time
    whining about Canon brand advocacy than it spends on actual Canon
    brand advocacy.

    Jan Böhme
    Korrekta personuppgifter är att betrakta som journalistik.
    Felaktigheter utgör naturligtvis skönlitteratur.
     
    Jan Böhme, Jul 19, 2005
    #33
  14. Unless you like to use wide, fast lenses. Then you can pretty well
    forget about IS in a lens, if you shoot Canon.

    Why yes, this *is* a pet peeve of mine. :)
     
    Ben Rosengart, Jul 20, 2005
    #34
  15. Siddhartha Jain

    Ton Maas Guest

    That may be true but not necessarily so. Materials too are sometimes
    chosen for their marketing value instead of their practical usefulness.
    If people are willing to pay extra for some fancy materials, they will
    be gladly introduced into the product. After all, the additional cost is
    usually only a fraction of the increased sales price :)

    Ton
     
    Ton Maas, Jul 20, 2005
    #35
  16. Siddhartha Jain

    RichA Guest

    True, there isn't much point in owning a camera made of polished brass
    or gold plated but they have been sold, but then a stainless steel
    chassis or magnesium chassis or body panels do have attributes that
    are practical such as stength or lightness of weight.
    -Rich
     
    RichA, Jul 20, 2005
    #36
  17. Siddhartha Jain

    Alan Browne Guest


    So much has been made about IS v. A-S. IS is indeed better by 1/2 to 1
    stop than A-S. A-S _still_ gives you 2 stops or more on most lenses,
    whether an $80 50mm f/1.7 or a $1,300 80-200 f/2.8.

    Minolta lens owners like myself are not about to abandon or attempt to
    sell $10,000+ lens collections that get 2 stops margin with A-S to spend
    that money all over again on Canon IS lenses. For that matter, a
    Minolta owner with $1,000 in lenses won't either.

    Cheers,
    Alan.
     
    Alan Browne, Jul 23, 2005
    #37
    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.