Randy44818
Well-known member
- Messages
- 191
- Reaction score
- 0
-
Welcome to the new forums! Please read this first. For known issues we are working to resolve, click here.
Minolta challenge
- Thread starter Bob Robertson43546
- Start date
Randy44818
Well-known member
- Messages
- 191
- Reaction score
- 0
Randy44818
Well-known member
- Messages
- 191
- Reaction score
- 0
Mark Forsyth
Member
- Messages
- 39
- Reaction score
- 0
Randy wrote:
[deletia]
I see no reason, posed by either Canon or Minolta, for people to be deserting the E-10. Hell, we havent even SEEN let alone played with a real production model Minolta camera. For all we know it may well turn out to be a complete dog..
Ooroo
Mark F...
[deletia]
In this country the D30 costs about twice as much as an E-10. THEN you have to go out and buy a lens or two.
I see no reason, posed by either Canon or Minolta, for people to be deserting the E-10. Hell, we havent even SEEN let alone played with a real production model Minolta camera. For all we know it may well turn out to be a complete dog..
Ooroo
Mark F...
probepro
Veteran Member
I never said the D-7 would "trash" or "blow away" anything. In fact, I complimented the E-10. As for Jaja-Belgium and Pekka, their pics would be superb with just about any 3+ MP camera on the market today. From
what I know so far, the D-7 has the features, performance, and value I've been waiting for.
Yes, there are going to be other 5 MP cameras to come out after the D-7, and yes, each will advance the technology a bit more. You have a keen grasp of the obvious.
.
Peter Hughes
Active member
This thread is very typical of photo forums: which lens is sharpest, which film has the finest grain, who uses the best coatings--ferociously debating the tiniest points of technical minutiae. Then you see the photos the people are taking: their kids’ birthday parties, snapshots of the dog, macro pix of flowers, etc. And endless tests, tests, tests. Like, what difference does it make, man! Get out and take exciting pictures!
Keith40620
Member
The real downside of having a pro looking camera is people NOTICE you a lot more, good, for your EGO, bad for your PICTURES.The downside to having a "professional looking camera" is I keep
getting people asking to load their films for them. Happens all
the time especially when there's a lot of tourist around)
Chris
Keith40620
Member
Hot topic, this Minolta thing. May look ugly and toyish, I personally don't mind, as long as it gets the job done better than the competition. Seems a lot of people feel threatened here..
Well well well..
Well well well..
- D7 goes from 28 to 200. That makes 2 expensive add-on lenses you don't have to buy. Digital photographers have been begging for wider lenses than 35 or 38mm.
- 49mm fixed filter thread. If you want a 20mm, add any 0.7 converter.
- EVF: lets you control white balance and other settings before shooting, like camcorders.. nice isn't it?
- High-quality LCD, presumably better than E10
- Ergonomics: no-one really knows how the thing behaves. To me, it looks it is going to be MUCH FASTER and EASIER to use because of having so many dials. Navigating through menus is horrible and takes a lot of concentration. Dials are much better. You say that to change the exposure mode, you have to turn the dial on the left of the prism, press the middle button and rotate the index dial on the right.. correct but if exposure mode switching is what you do often, the dial on the left is already set, all you do is press the middle switch and rotate the dial, which is exactly how a lot of electronic SLRs function.
- camera size: for me, the smaller and lighter, the better. I am hoping for an 8MP 14-600mm f1,2 smaller than a cigarette pack. Why would you need anything bigger?? If you want to lift weights, go to the gym.. ;-)
- I just hope (please God listen to me thats really important) Minolta makes this camera FAST to start and use. I have missed countless pics because of slow startup times and slow Play to Rec switching. My previous camera used to be a Leica M4-2 rangefinder. Beats any digital hands down for speed, except mayby D30 and up.
Keith40620
Member
Hihihi,
Why not spray paint the thing in black so you look soooo much more professional..
Why not spray paint the thing in black so you look soooo much more professional..
That's a VERY good point, Ken! I'm doing a model shoot on Sunday
with a person who has never posed for a "professional" photographer
before. She works behind the counter at my MBE and I've been trying
for weeks to convince her to pose for me. If I pulled out a toy
like the Minolta she'd instantly doubt the wisdom of agreeing to my
request, thinking that I was just some jerk who was trying to take
sleazy pix of her. (And I'm certainly no jerk!- ) The E-10, on
the other hand, looks like a professional tool and says to the
model instantly, 'This guy knows what he's doing.'
Ken Huckeba
Leading Member
Well, if you noticed, it was nothing about EGO, it was about credibility. The professionals know all about this, ESPECIALLY when it comes to models. You just TRY to get a coy girl into it if you look like you have a toy in your hand. Show up for some business photos looking like a kid with his handicam. Not to mention that this is something shooters (I shoot every week, sometimes twice a week) know and photographers know is that mass DOES matter when it comes to slower shutter speeds. A light gun or camera tends to ruin a lot of shots! I see a LOT of soft pictures that were caused by just that. I really don't like being noticed when I'm shooting, that's one of the great reasons to have the flip up display. I'm not arguing about some mental thing here, it's a tangible practicality. I, like another poster above would LOVE to have an 8mp camera with a 14-300 IS zoom on it that would hold five hundred pictures and had a TTL flash good for forty feet and had TTL metering plus batteries that would last a week and it was only as large as a pack of cigarettes but the Dimage 7 ain't it!The real downside of having a pro looking camera is people NOTICEThe downside to having a "professional looking camera" is I keep
getting people asking to load their films for them. Happens all
the time especially when there's a lot of tourist around
you a lot more, good, for your EGO, bad for your PICTURES.
Chris
Ken
MikeA
Veteran Member
I have some years of experience with cameras of several types. I will probably end up making that sort of decision for myself.
(Oddly, though the layout of my present digital camera is not the best possible such layout, somehow I manage to have taken a few photographs with it that please me. It's the damndest odd thing. It isn't refreshingly simple with the one EVF with which I have experience. I haven't yet seen even any crude attempts on-line to depict how the Dimage's EVF viewfinder image appears. I can barely check manual focus with the EVF I now use. Doubled resolution would likely help quite a bit with that. "Likely"...a weasel-word. The usefulness of the new EVF remains to be seen. As it were.
Easy enough to predict in the absence of the camera itself.
And you might be right--it might not change.Then again , some users might not have any problem with the grip.
Again, it's a your-mileage-may-vary sort of world. I couldn't care less about how it looks. I don't take pictures of the camera itself, after all. In the hands of a sufficiently skilled photographer, does it provide the capacity to create an image of high quality? I consistently fail to be moved by other issues. I know--there must be something terribly, terribly wrong with me.
All the more reason to despise it!Well now you mention it...Nah. It's the wrong color. I thought EVERYONE knew that.
MikeA
Veteran Member
So who's winning?
Bill Harris
Veteran Member
To quote you from your own post two months ago
MikeA said:
"But I have no clue about digital photography." and " I find the E-10 quite attractive"
Now your the expert? In two Months?
MikeA said:
"But I have no clue about digital photography." and " I find the E-10 quite attractive"
Now your the expert? In two Months?
Another downside Tourist asking you to take their pictures.
Ever look through a dirty viewfinder of a cheap P&S of the
typical tourist? Shudder Shudder
An Upside "beauty" queens and the like smile very prettily
for you. They think you are from the newspaper) now
that cannot be too bad for yr pictures!
Ever look through a dirty viewfinder of a cheap P&S of the
typical tourist? Shudder Shudder
An Upside "beauty" queens and the like smile very prettily
for you. They think you are from the newspaper
) now that cannot be too bad for yr pictures!
The real downside of having a pro looking camera is people NOTICEThe downside to having a "professional looking camera" is I keep
getting people asking to load their films for them. Happens all
the time especially when there's a lot of tourist around
you a lot more, good, for your EGO, bad for your PICTURES.
Chris
MikeA
Veteran Member
Uh...let's see. We go from a 4-day old quote compared with an apparently conflicting several-hour-old quote, followed by the intentionally humorous question "So who's winning"? (did you, er, manage to miss the ""?)
The foregoing reason elicits the following reply, for some reason:
The foregoing reason elicits the following reply, for some reason:
How you made the transition from the question which was intended light-heartedly to the idea that it was some claim of expertise is...well, I'll leave it to you to work that out. But thanks.
Jack40001
Leading Member
I agree! I use the camera in tropical environment and do climb and cross waterfalls. That why I like light weight and long and very wide (28mm) zoom. I need fast startup times, fast image flush times. If possible virtual no barrel distortion, very fast shutter times and obsolutely microdrive support so now I'm thinking to get the dimage 7 as it suits me better... I have not ever had a digital camera and have to learn working with it. I considdered the E-10, but maybe not best choice for me... I feel for getting a dimage 7 instead. We will see what it gives...
Jake.
Jake.
Jake.
Jake.
Andrew Grant27981
Veteran Member
I was able to take pictures I liked with my Oly 3000. However, I hated not being able to switch easily between Aperture Priority/Shutter Priority and Manual mode. I also hated not having exposure info on the top LCD or in the viewfinder. Since exposure and focusing are the most important controls on a camera, I want them to be easy to use.I have some years of experience with cameras of several types. I
will probably end up making that sort of decision for myself.
(Oddly, though the layout of my present digital camera is not the
best possible such layout, somehow I manage to have taken a few
photographs with it that please me. It's the damndest odd thing.
The EVF is the big question mark. It may work very well. However, Minolta apparently suggests using the digital zoom for manual focusing.It isn't refreshingly simple with the one EVF with which I have
experience. I haven't yet seen even any crude attempts on-line to
depict how the Dimage's EVF viewfinder image appears. I can
barely check manual focus with the EVF I now use. Doubled
resolution would likely help quite a bit with that. "Likely"...a
weasel-word. The usefulness of the new EVF remains to be seen. As
it were.
There is no way it will change. By the time reviewers get a camera, the production lines are being tuned. The hardware design is pretty much fixed at this point. Changes will be in firmware.Easy enough to predict in the absence of the camera itself.
you might be right--it might not change.
True. However in the absence of a tripod, a poor grip leads to soft pictures due to camera shake.
The last comment was intended to be humerous. However some professional photographers do need their equipment to look professional. The clients expect it. I am more interested in how easily I can produce high quality images with a given camera than if it is theorically possible to produce high quality images with that camera.Again, it's a your-mileage-may-vary sort of world. I couldn't care
less about how it looks. I don't take pictures of the camera
itself, after all. In the hands of a sufficiently skilled
photographer, does it provide the capacity to create an image of
high quality? I consistently fail to be moved by other issues. I
know--there must be something terribly, terribly wrong with me.
I don't despise it. It looks like a good camera for the money. The color does give us a clue as to the intended market though.All the more reason to despise it!Well now you mention it...Nah. It's the wrong color. I thought EVERYONE knew that.
Jack40001
Leading Member
Not exactly, Andrew.I was able to take pictures I liked with my Oly 3000. However, II have some years of experience with cameras of several types. I
will probably end up making that sort of decision for myself.
(Oddly, though the layout of my present digital camera is not the
best possible such layout, somehow I manage to have taken a few
photographs with it that please me. It's the damndest odd thing.
hated not being able to switch easily between Aperture
Priority/Shutter Priority and Manual mode. I also hated not having
exposure info on the top LCD or in the viewfinder. Since exposure
and focusing are the most important controls on a camera, I want
them to be easy to use.
The EVF is the big question mark. It may work very well. However,It isn't refreshingly simple with the one EVF with which I have
experience. I haven't yet seen even any crude attempts on-line to
depict how the Dimage's EVF viewfinder image appears. I can
barely check manual focus with the EVF I now use. Doubled
resolution would likely help quite a bit with that. "Likely"...a
weasel-word. The usefulness of the new EVF remains to be seen. As
it were.
Minolta apparently suggests using the digital zoom for manual
focusing.
They didn't suggest digital zoom, but they did suggest using 4x magnify the image in the EVF when manual focus during macro shot. This is a great feature! The EVF seems to have an excellent resolution and response as well that it works in extremely low light conditions, where you can see just black with your eyes, the EVF show still detail. The autofocus does work perfect in extremely low light situations as well.
There is no way it will change. By the time reviewers get a camera,Easy enough to predict in the absence of the camera itself.
you might be right--it might not change.
the production lines are being tuned. The hardware design is pretty
much fixed at this point. Changes will be in firmware.
True. However in the absence of a tripod, a poor grip leads to soft
pictures due to camera shake.
The last comment was intended to be humerous. However someAgain, it's a your-mileage-may-vary sort of world. I couldn't care
less about how it looks. I don't take pictures of the camera
itself, after all. In the hands of a sufficiently skilled
photographer, does it provide the capacity to create an image of
high quality? I consistently fail to be moved by other issues. I
know--there must be something terribly, terribly wrong with me.
professional photographers do need their equipment to look
professional. The clients expect it. I am more interested in how
easily I can produce high quality images with a given camera than
if it is theorically possible to produce high quality images with
that camera.
I don't despise it. It looks like a good camera for the money. TheAll the more reason to despise it!Well now you mention it...Nah. It's the wrong color. I thought EVERYONE knew that.
color does give us a clue as to the intended market though.
Keyboard shortcuts
- f
- Forum