Minolta wake-up !! Dooms days is coming

Darrin Behm · Sep 3, 2003

José B said:
Yeah right! Why is it I keep coming back to the Maxxum 300/4 as the
poor man's option (instead of another brand's DSLR system)? I mean
everytime I think about getting a DSLR system and looking at how
much money I will spend, it is not worth it.

José

Yup that is why the 10D is going back this week. I'll be getting the 200/2.8 G and 300/4 G and maybe even the 85/1.4 G once I sell off my Canon lenses on ebay. Load up with slide film and snap away.

Darrin

--
Remember, never eat more than you can lift.

José B · Sep 3, 2003

Darrin Behm said:
Yup that is why the 10D is going back this week. I'll be getting
the 200/2.8 G and 300/4 G and maybe even the 85/1.4 G once I sell
off my Canon lenses on ebay. Load up with slide film and snap away.

Darrin

Darrin, I always thought you had the perfect set up with both of your Minolta and Canon systems (Elan 7 and the 10D). From what I can gather you have a 50/1.4 on the Canon right? I thought that this lens along with the 10D is a great combo for portraiture.

Man, those are pretty serious prime lenses. I have the 85 G and I've said numerous times that it is a joy to use with the 7. KEH has a decent 300/2.8 but at US$ 2200, still too rich for my blood. If only Minolta is a slam-dunk to launch a DSLR w/ AS, I might consider that beautiful lens.

I am just curious here since I almost went with the 10D too, what are the reasons for returning the 10D and going back to shooting slides? Don't get me wrong, the workflow of scanning slides never bothered me.

Best regards,

José

Darrin Behm said:
--
Remember, never eat more than you can lift.

--
Come and visit me at:
http://www.pbase.com/jmb_56

Mark K · Sep 3, 2003

José B said:
José B said:

Just save up for that Minolta 400/4.5 G! And if you can swing the
600/4.0 I bow to your greatness ;-)

Click to expand...

This is the main reason that I maynot stay with Minolta. The prices of these long telephoto lenses are high and very similar among Canon/Nikon/Minolta. With abscence of IS and DSLR, Minolta is the alst platform I will jump on

José B said:
Yeah right! Why is it I keep coming back to the Maxxum 300/4 as the
poor man's option (instead of another brand's DSLR system)? I mean
everytime I think about getting a DSLR system and looking at how
much money I will spend, it is not worth it.

José

--
Come and visit me at:
http://www.pbase.com/jmb_56

--
Mark K
http://www.pbase.com/mark_k

Darrin Behm · Sep 3, 2003

José B said:
Darrin, I always thought you had the perfect set up with both of
your Minolta and Canon systems (Elan 7 and the 10D). From what I
can gather you have a 50/1.4 on the Canon right? I thought that
this lens along with the 10D is a great combo for portraiture.

Too good. My wife just about spit when she saw the detail in the portraits I shot with the 10D. Had to doctor them up in PS and Neat Image to make them more acceptable for her. ;-) One of the big reasons I am going back to Minolta is I hate the Canon flash system. I'm not even using D lenses with the Minolta and the flash system kicks the Canon's butt. Oh yeah and not having built in wireless s@#ks on the Canon.

José B said:
Man, those are pretty serious prime lenses. I have the 85 G and
I've said numerous times that it is a joy to use with the 7. KEH
has a decent 300/2.8 but at US$ 2200, still too rich for my blood.
If only Minolta is a slam-dunk to launch a DSLR w/ AS, I might
consider that beautiful lens.

That is why I am looking at the 300/4. $2200 on one lenses is a bit much!

Bob S gave me the heads up about the 200/2.8. I never realised how small it was till I took a look at it. Plus after using primes on both systems I am addicted to them.

José B said:
I am just curious here since I almost went with the 10D too, what
are the reasons for returning the 10D and going back to shooting
slides? Don't get me wrong, the workflow of scanning slides never
bothered me.

Colors. Slides with Minolta glass are a joy!

--
Remember, never eat more than you can lift.

J A K · Sep 3, 2003

steve jacob said:
Are you serious? Thought the Canons' res was much better or was
that only with primes?

Hi Steve - for you viewing pleasure. The Canon zoom lenses are excellent (of course, given identical build quality, a prime trumps a zoom). I don't have any complaints about my Canon lenses. I'm simply reporting that at f/5.6, the 7i rules (remember, at f/5.6 the 28-135 IS is wide open while the Minolta has been stopped down to f/5.6).

http://www.pbase.com/jkurkjia/10d_vs_7i_resolution

Regards,

Joe Kurkjian, Pbase Supporter

http://www.pbase.com/jkurkjia

Caerwall · Sep 3, 2003

Well said I have the same gear and couldn't agree more. I would much rather an A1 than a "cheap" 300D with a cheap lens.

I you are serious - go the whole hog for a 10D and a truckload of lenses. Beat the pulp out of an A1 all right - and save you in gym fees carrying it all around.

Portability & "pretty good"=A1
Fantastic if you can carry it=10D + a few good lenses
Pretty good but a compromise=300D

Those that hanker after a real camera=DSLR will get their rocks off with a 300D but for me I will have a 10D for what it is good at and an A1 for when I want to travel light and still get an acceptable result.

I can't see where the debate is - they are horses for different courses.

Thomas Karlmann said:
I think a DSLR is carrying a bit too much of the past (film) with
it. What do you get with a DLSR? A tiny LCD view AFTER the photo
was taken -- that's about it. With my D7i, I get a real-time
display, with histogram, then after I take the shot I get a
postview of the stored image -- all without removing my eye from
the viewfinder. The LCD? I never use it. As far as I'm concerned
it can break and fall off.

No DSLR can do these things. The ONLY thing DSLRs have right now
are: 1) somewhat better image quality, maybe; 2) focal lenghts
beyond the 28-200 range -- IF you lug a heavy bagful of glass
around.

But to have a camera with all the features of the A1? Yes! Trade
for a 300D -- no way.

The 300d? I don't see what all the fuss is about. I have a 10D,
and anyone serious about photography would get that model instead.
I don't want or need a dumbed down 10D, and I certainly don't feel
that the 300d gives much competition to the A1. 300d owners are
likely to buy cheap lenses as well -- that's good -- as my images
will always be better.

Thom

fastmickey said:

SEPT 18, the day for Canon releasing the pro-consumer price killer
300D.. Minolta Dimage A-1 will be no exception of being pushed over.

I have to agree my Dimage 7i is an excellent camera... it even earn
me my 1st photo award in a open contest recently. But have to say,
it does fall short optically compare to others "REAL" D-SLR. I'm
waiting to upgrade a Minolta D-SLR body for the past 6 months, but
once again in disappointment when I hear about A-1 (another Dimage
upgrade).

By Christmas or New year, I properly will switch to Canon or Fuji
D-SLR body with a purchase of a few good lens. Have to thanks
Minolta for the good old D7x ...but those guys are sitting on 1
body design for way too long.. the pro-consumer market have very
little room left for Minolta !!

http://www.pbase.com/fotomickey

Click to expand...

--
TomC

Jim Samuel · Sep 3, 2003

There are many people, myself included, who prefer the all-in-one format of the Dimage 7i (which I have) or the A1.

I enjoy having to carry only a single camera and a pouch with some extra CF cards in it. I contrast that to my 35mm outfit of two Canon SLR bodies and five lenses.

The introduction of the 300D is not going to make me change my mind. Eventually, I may get a Canon 10D but that would be in addition to the Dimage, not as a replacement. It would be the same as me having a 35mm point & shoot in addition to my SLRs.

Jim

fastmickey said:
SEPT 18, the day for Canon releasing the pro-consumer price killer
300D.. Minolta Dimage A-1 will be no exception of being pushed over.

I have to agree my Dimage 7i is an excellent camera... it even earn
me my 1st photo award in a open contest recently. But have to say,
it does fall short optically compare to others "REAL" D-SLR. I'm
waiting to upgrade a Minolta D-SLR body for the past 6 months, but
once again in disappointment when I hear about A-1 (another Dimage
upgrade).

By Christmas or New year, I properly will switch to Canon or Fuji
D-SLR body with a purchase of a few good lens. Have to thanks
Minolta for the good old D7x ...but those guys are sitting on 1
body design for way too long.. the pro-consumer market have very
little room left for Minolta !!

http://www.pbase.com/fotomickey

Jon Read · Sep 3, 2003

Caerwall said:
I can't see where the debate is - they are horses for different
courses.

The debate is quite simple - both the A1 and the EOS 300D + 18-55mm lens are around the same price.

This obviously leads people to question which they should go for - after all, the image quality of the 300D should be better.

Myself, I'm going for the A1. Purely because I'm used to lugging around 2 film SLR bodies, three lenses and a P&S digital - and I'm fed up with it.

If I were going out specifically to shoot photos, I'd take the SLR any day. However, for taking on a trip, or for wandering around with, I'd rather take the A1 as it's more portable.

The fact is that I can only afford one or the other (actually, I can't even afford one

), and the A1 wins... just.

But yes, I agree - horses for courses.

Cheers,
J

fastmickey · Sep 3, 2003

Hi Jim

I total agree with you, and I'm proud with my D7i & is a great all-round pro-consumer camera & I plan to keep it as the general purpose camera. My plan is to get a 10D or S2Pro & go for 1 or 2 lens specially for portriat works.... I find Dimage fall-short too much in this area( eg. Depth of Field control to enhance the person appeariance).

My wife who know very little about camera also understand where D7 fall short when I compare my D7's photos and someone Fuji S2pro's photos from the photo contest.

Personally, I feel Minolta make very good cameras, but feel either they don't know how or react too slow to their customers needs. The Dimage5 to A1 revolution is almost like getting MS-Window's upgrades... where you start-off with Window95...98v1.....98v1.5....98SE......XP....etc...etc They all the same with a small additional or corrected feature everytime.

Jim Samuel said:
I enjoy having to carry only a single camera and a pouch with some
extra CF cards in it. I contrast that to my 35mm outfit of two
Canon SLR bodies and five lenses.

The introduction of the 300D is not going to make me change my
mind. Eventually, I may get a Canon 10D but that would be in
addition to the Dimage, not as a replacement. It would be the same
as me having a 35mm point & shoot in addition to my SLRs.

Jim

fastmickey said:

SEPT 18, the day for Canon releasing the pro-consumer price killer
300D.. Minolta Dimage A-1 will be no exception of being pushed over.

I have to agree my Dimage 7i is an excellent camera... it even earn
me my 1st photo award in a open contest recently. But have to say,
it does fall short optically compare to others "REAL" D-SLR. I'm
waiting to upgrade a Minolta D-SLR body for the past 6 months, but
once again in disappointment when I hear about A-1 (another Dimage
upgrade).

By Christmas or New year, I properly will switch to Canon or Fuji
D-SLR body with a purchase of a few good lens. Have to thanks
Minolta for the good old D7x ...but those guys are sitting on 1
body design for way too long.. the pro-consumer market have very
little room left for Minolta !!

http://www.pbase.com/fotomickey

Click to expand...

--
http://www.pbase.com/fastmickey

*isteve · Sep 3, 2003

Joe - I'm stunned! Little did I know just what a lens I have been sitting with all this time. The edge performance diff is simply incredible!!! Very interesting how the Canon fall off is very aysmmetric (more on side than the other) but opposite for both lenses.

The fact that they are also only having to cope with a smaller image circle than they are designed for is even more surprising - I would NEVER have guessed it would be so bad on what is after all a 1.6X crop!

Knowing how much many "L" lenses cost (about as much as a new A1!!) this changes my preconceptions about price-performance considerably.

Be interesting to see the 828 performance in this comparison, as well as the 18-55 lens on the 300D, but overall this bodes well for A1 fans.

As an aside - I have noticed one very obvious thing - DLSR shooters seem to be having far more critical focus issues that prosumer users because of the DOF issue. 5.6 on the D7i gives a lot more lattitude than on a 300D. I wonder if folks are prepared for this???? I regularly use my D7i indoors (parties). AF is useless (sorry Minolta) but if I set the aperture manually to F6.2+ and the focus manually to 2M, everything from 2M outwards is pretty much fine - I just stand 2M + away and use flash comp to get the right exposure.

Steve

J A K said:
steve jacob said:

Are you serious? Thought the Canons' res was much better or was
that only with primes?

Click to expand...

Hi Steve - for you viewing pleasure. The Canon zoom lenses are
excellent (of course, given identical build quality, a prime trumps
a zoom). I don't have any complaints about my Canon lenses. I'm
simply reporting that at f/5.6, the 7i rules (remember, at f/5.6
the 28-135 IS is wide open while the Minolta has been stopped down
to f/5.6).

http://www.pbase.com/jkurkjia/10d_vs_7i_resolution

Regards,

Joe Kurkjian, Pbase Supporter

http://www.pbase.com/jkurkjia

DrMark · Sep 3, 2003

I dumped my Nikon F5 for a D100 and never looked back. Upgraded lenses and got the immediacy I wanted in Alaska, once you go digital, "good" digital you will never look back. Look for the blown highlights in this one

David Goolsby said:
I've been thinking about going with the 5400, the A1 and staying
with my Maxxum 7 (or going with whatever replaces the 9). My
reasoning? With the 5400, I'll be able to scan absolutely HUGE
files that can be blown up to a size beyond anything currently on
the maket digital (except medium format with a digital back).
Digital still doesn't have the dynamic range of film (blown
highlights are the norm, even for the D1) and to me THAT is more
important than 5, 6, 8 or 10 megapixels will ever be.

J A K · Sep 3, 2003

steve jacob said:
Joe - I'm stunned! Little did I know just what a lens I have been
sitting with all this time. The edge performance diff is simply
incredible!!!

Yup - the 7i is a super performer from the standpoint of edge-to-egde resolution performance.

*isteve said:
Very interesting how the Canon fall off is very
aysmmetric (more on side than the other) but opposite for both
lenses.

Well, it is almost impossible to find a decent 35-80; it is the cheapest Canon lens made. Personally, I find it hard to believe Canon can make such a bad lens.

*isteve said:
The fact that they are also only having to cope with a smaller
image circle than they are designed for is even more surprising - I
would NEVER have guessed it would be so bad on what is after all a
1.6X crop!

Knowing how much many "L" lenses cost (about as much as a new A1!!)
this changes my preconceptions about price-performance considerably.

You don't need all "L" lenses. The trick is to avoid the "not so good" lenses. For example, I have two "L" lenses (17-40 and 100-400) and a 28-135 IS. IMO, the 28-135 IS is a superb lens that does not weigh an arm and a leg, is reasonably priced, and fun to use.

*isteve said:
Be interesting to see the 828 performance in this comparison, as
well as the 18-55 lens on the 300D, but overall this bodes well for
A1 fans.

One other thing to keep in mind is even with a perrfect lens the 10D will appear a bit soft (anti aliasing filters do this). I would not trade off the AA filter for higher resolution though. Any time somebody is wearing clothes with a checker-board pattern, you run the risk of MAJOR aliasing patterns in your picture. A good AA filter is an expensive add-on for any camera. I wish my 7i had an AA filter (but I really can't *****, it is such a great camera).

*isteve said:
As an aside - I have noticed one very obvious thing - DLSR shooters
seem to be having far more critical focus issues that prosumer
users because of the DOF issue. 5.6 on the D7i gives a lot more
lattitude than on a 300D. I wonder if folks are prepared for
this???? I regularly use my D7i indoors (parties). AF is useless
(sorry Minolta) but if I set the aperture manually to F6.2+ and the
focus manually to 2M, everything from 2M outwards is pretty much
fine - I just stand 2M + away and use flash comp to get the right
exposure.

Yes - if you have never shot a full-frame 35 mm camera and started out with a 7i (for example), there is a little adjustment to your shooting habits necessary for best performance if you change to a 10D or worse, any full-frame SLR film camera.

Well Steve, I'm glad you found this discussion illuminating (no pun intended). Have a nice day.

Regards,

Joe Kurkjian, Pbase Supporter

http://www.pbase.com/jkurkjia

Jeremy Rosenberger · Sep 3, 2003

Thomas Karlmann said:
The 300d? I don't see what all the fuss is about. I have a 10D,
and anyone serious about photography would get that model instead.

Of course they'd get the 10D. Nobody who's even remotely serious about photography could possibly consider such an incompetent piece of equipment as the 300D. I'm surprised anyone can take pictures at all with such junk. People might as well get a disposable camera.

Excuse me, but the 300D is capable of doing everything that I'd want from it, and then some. So the 10D, although certainly a more capable piece of equipment, isn't worth the cost difference (which, no matter how you slice it, is significant) to me. But then I guess I'm not "serious" enough for you.

Thomas Karlmann said:
300d owners are likely to buy cheap lenses as well -- that's good -- as my
images will always be better.

I was going to reply to this, but on second thought, I think it speaks volumes on its own.

Cheers,
Jeremy

--
Jeremy L. Rosenberger
http://www.frii.com/~jeremy/

David Goolsby · Sep 3, 2003

Darrin Behm said:
José B said:

I am just curious here since I almost went with the 10D too, what
are the reasons for returning the 10D and going back to shooting
slides? Don't get me wrong, the workflow of scanning slides never
bothered me.

Click to expand...

Colors. Slides with Minolta glass are a joy!

You are my hero ;-)

Like I said before, as good and convenient as digicams are the dynamic range just isn't there yet. Glad to see that you realize along with José and me that one shouldn't give up analog (film/slides) just to go digital. There will come a time when one will wish that they had just a little bit more 'reach' in color fidelity and detail, only to realize they always had it until they sold their film camera!

Darrin Behm said:
--
Remember, never eat more than you can lift.

--
David

I shoot people all the time–but I use cameras, not guns!
http://homepage.mac.com/david_g_force

David Goolsby · Sep 3, 2003

Awesome shot José. I see no reason to feel the Kodak CD is any better though. All they did is punch up the saturation in the red channel. But I see no more detail in it than I do in your scan.

José B said:
José B said:

Agreed! This is a major pain to deal with when it occurs. The sad
thing is that it can be avoided if the developer doesn't rush the
process. I've had a few scans where there were so many specks it
looked like snow (in summertime photos no less!) I've just picked
up some slide film and will be giving that a go (along with the
T-Max I told you about previously)

Click to expand...

My 1-hour developer's Kodak CD is not bad. It is free (bundled w/
1hr. service). Here's a comparison between my scan via Dual III and
their own. Film: Agfa Ultra ISO 100
Camera: Maxxum 7 and Maxxum 100/2.8 Macro (D).

Dual III scan:

Kodak CD scan:

--
Come and visit me at:
http://www.pbase.com/jmb_56

--
David

I shoot people all the time–but I use cameras, not guns!
http://homepage.mac.com/david_g_force

David Goolsby · Sep 3, 2003

Ummm, where's the detail on the underbelly of the fish? You can't see it because of blown highlights. Don't get me wrong because I want to go digital with a good DSLR myself (hopefully, someday, Minolta) but I will ALWAYS shoot film/slides alongside it. I personally would have held on to the F5 instead of putting all my eggs in one basket.

Nice shot nonetheless. The D100 is a good camera in the hands of someone willing to take the time to learn it (just as in any camera) and you obviously took the time to learn.

DrMark said:
David Goolsby said:

I've been thinking about going with the 5400, the A1 and staying
with my Maxxum 7 (or going with whatever replaces the 9). My
reasoning? With the 5400, I'll be able to scan absolutely HUGE
files that can be blown up to a size beyond anything currently on
the maket digital (except medium format with a digital back).
Digital still doesn't have the dynamic range of film (blown
highlights are the norm, even for the D1) and to me THAT is more
important than 5, 6, 8 or 10 megapixels will ever be.

Click to expand...

--
David

I shoot people all the time–but I use cameras, not guns!
http://homepage.mac.com/david_g_force

*isteve · Sep 3, 2003

DrMark said:
David Goolsby said:

I've been thinking about going with the 5400, the A1 and staying
with my Maxxum 7 (or going with whatever replaces the 9). My
reasoning? With the 5400, I'll be able to scan absolutely HUGE
files that can be blown up to a size beyond anything currently on
the maket digital (except medium format with a digital back).
Digital still doesn't have the dynamic range of film (blown
highlights are the norm, even for the D1) and to me THAT is more
important than 5, 6, 8 or 10 megapixels will ever be.

Click to expand...

David Goolsby · Sep 3, 2003

Interesting comparisons. It takes a brave person to admit that, at least in your case, one can spend more money and end up with less. Your honesty is greatly appreciated.

J A K said:
steve jacob said:

Are you serious? Thought the Canons' res was much better or was
that only with primes?

Click to expand...

Hi Steve - for you viewing pleasure. The Canon zoom lenses are
excellent (of course, given identical build quality, a prime trumps
a zoom). I don't have any complaints about my Canon lenses. I'm
simply reporting that at f/5.6, the 7i rules (remember, at f/5.6
the 28-135 IS is wide open while the Minolta has been stopped down
to f/5.6).

http://www.pbase.com/jkurkjia/10d_vs_7i_resolution

Regards,

Joe Kurkjian, Pbase Supporter

http://www.pbase.com/jkurkjia

--
David

I shoot people all the time–but I use cameras, not guns!
http://homepage.mac.com/david_g_force

J A K · Sep 3, 2003

David Goolsby said:
Interesting comparisons. It takes a brave person to admit that, at
least in your case, one can spend more money and end up with less.
Your honesty is greatly appreciated.

Hi David:

Thanks for the compliment regarding my honesty. While I appreciate your comment, I don't want to leave you with the wrong impression about what is more and what is less. I really did not end up with less (I paid more to get exactly what I wanted). You have to bring the whole picture into play (and it is a very complex picture).

I love going to the zoo. The 7i just did not have the necessary range. With the Canon 100-400 mm zoom and taking into account the 1.6X crop factor of the 10D, I have one heck of a telephoto lens.

Another thing - my resolution comparison has to be considered very carefully. While the 7i was slightly better than the 28-135, we have to take into account that a tripod and flash was used. Outdoors, during real world hand-held testing of resolution (about 20 feet away from the target), even at about 1/1500 sec shutter speed (if I remember correctly), the IS designed into the 28-135 proved it to be the better lens overall from the standpoint of effective resolution. IS is a pretty fantastic tool; it improves the effective resolution of the lens during real world hand-held shooting. If the A1's AS works well, and if Minolta can get around the problem of losing focus if the subject moves during acquisation, then that will be one heck of a camera.

But wait, there is more. When I go to the zoo (and sometimes during scenic photography) I prefer to shoot with a polarizer (animals with shiny coats look MUCH better when a polarizer is properly used). I still like to have a shutter speed around 1/500 sec to make sure motion blur caused by the subjects movement will not screw up my picture. Well, believe it or not, I can shoot the 10D at ISO 400 and 800 without much concern about in-camera noise and the harsh contrast normally encountered at high ISOs.

Fact - the 10D AF acquisation speed is head and shoulders above that of the 7i. I also love to take pictures of my grand-children. Focus lock and tracking is a very important factor when you shoot children at play. The 7i was incapable of tracking anything in motion without losing focus. With the 10D, I can acquire and track focus without a problem (oh what fun).

So - no surprise to anyone - photography is full of tradeoffs.

Don't get me wrong - I love the 7i. It is a small high performance camera more than suitable for 90 percent of the applications out there. For sure it will be with me on all flying vacations. The 7i is just a perfect camera - very powerful features and capable of great pictures without breaking your back carrying a camera around with fifty million lenses in tow.

Regards,

Joe Kurkjian, Pbase Supporter

http://www.pbase.com/jkurkjia

David Goolsby · Sep 3, 2003

I agree that one must look at the whole picture. I should have presented an entire picture too. I simply meant that a lot of people expect better pictures or to become better photographers just by going digital. There are inherent weaknesses in either format but the question remains (asked of no one in particular) "does the system do what you want it to?" You honestly pointed out that in one aspect, the D7 lens CAN outperform the obviously overall superior Canon lens. Many people bought the D7 and D7i expecting miracles. "It just can't keep up when I'm shooting a track meet" or "I went to the opera house and the resulting pictures were terrible" What did they expect from what was clearly marketed 'general purpose' digicam. Minolta made no promises and misled no one on the capabilities of the camera (at least no more so than it's same-market competitors)

I just wanted to give you credit for not saying "I went with the 10D because the D7 just doesn't do what it does". Well, that's an obvious statement. Being aimed at totally different markets (pro-sumer vs. DSLR enthusiast) and having paid significantly more, it is SUPPOSED to be a better camera. You chose to show others that the D7 can stand on it's on merits and that one has to be willing to pay for the features that improve upon it if they want better.

J A K said:
David Goolsby said:

Interesting comparisons. It takes a brave person to admit that, at
least in your case, one can spend more money and end up with less.
Your honesty is greatly appreciated.

Click to expand...

Hi David:

Thanks for the compliment regarding my honesty. While I appreciate
your comment, I don't want to leave you with the wrong impression
about what is more and what is less. I really did not end up with
less (I paid more to get exactly what I wanted). You have to bring
the whole picture into play (and it is a very complex picture).

I love going to the zoo. The 7i just did not have the necessary
range. With the Canon 100-400 mm zoom and taking into account the
1.6X crop factor of the 10D, I have one heck of a telephoto lens.

Another thing - my resolution comparison has to be considered very
carefully. While the 7i was slightly better than the 28-135, we
have to take into account that a tripod and flash was used.
Outdoors, during real world hand-held testing of resolution (about
20 feet away from the target), even at about 1/1500 sec shutter
speed (if I remember correctly), the IS designed into the 28-135
proved it to be the better lens overall from the standpoint of
effective resolution. IS is a pretty fantastic tool; it improves
the effective resolution of the lens during real world hand-held
shooting. If the A1's AS works well, and if Minolta can get around
the problem of losing focus if the subject moves during
acquisation, then that will be one heck of a camera.

But wait, there is more. When I go to the zoo (and sometimes
during scenic photography) I prefer to shoot with a polarizer
(animals with shiny coats look MUCH better when a polarizer is
properly used). I still like to have a shutter speed around 1/500
sec to make sure motion blur caused by the subjects movement will
not screw up my picture. Well, believe it or not, I can shoot the
10D at ISO 400 and 800 without much concern about in-camera noise
and the harsh contrast normally encountered at high ISOs.

Fact - the 10D AF acquisation speed is head and shoulders above
that of the 7i. I also love to take pictures of my grand-children.
Focus lock and tracking is a very important factor when you shoot
children at play. The 7i was incapable of tracking anything in
motion without losing focus. With the 10D, I can acquire and track
focus without a problem (oh what fun).

So - no surprise to anyone - photography is full of tradeoffs.

Don't get me wrong - I love the 7i. It is a small high performance
camera more than suitable for 90 percent of the applications out
there. For sure it will be with me on all flying vacations. The
7i is just a perfect camera - very powerful features and capable of
great pictures without breaking your back carrying a camera around
with fifty million lenses in tow.

Regards,

Joe Kurkjian, Pbase Supporter

http://www.pbase.com/jkurkjia

--
David

I shoot people all the time–but I use cameras, not guns!
http://homepage.mac.com/david_g_force

Minolta wake-up !! Dooms days is coming

Senior Member

Forum Pro

Veteran Member

Senior Member

Forum Pro

Well-known member

Active member

Forum Enthusiast

Active member

Veteran Member

Senior Member

Forum Pro

Leading Member

Senior Member

Senior Member

Senior Member

Veteran Member

Senior Member

Forum Pro

Senior Member

Keyboard shortcuts