Minolta MN67Z

Don't bother .

No one could be bothered reviewing it either .

Just a basic , low budget camera with a 1/2.3" sensor . So not very good .

A lot of generic cameras are being made and branded with names that make you think your buying off a proper , respected camera manufacturer .

Your not .

These "Minolta" branded cameras aren't even made by Minolta ( currently known as Konica Minolta )

They ceased making cameras in 2006 when they sold that side of the business to Sony .

If you read the thread that was on top of this page before posting this , you would already know this .

And that kind of sums it up .

Generally speaking , if your looking for a camera , check out the reviews on this website and take it from there .

An offering from Sony , Nikon , Canon , Panasonic , Olympus , Pentax etc give the results your after .

Read the specifications , and reviews and you'll know what your getting , and what quality you can expect .

.

Firms that used to make cameras have had their brand names bought under licence , or just plundered , to make these low quality cameras sound like their built to the quality and standard that was once associated with them .

Now just lackluster things where the same camera from the same factory are sold as different brands in different markets .

Nothing special .

If your on a budget you would be better buying a used camera made by one of the respected manufacturers from a few years ago .

Quality lenses , quality sensors . A camera from the previous generation is a good buy and you can save a lot of money .

I've been using this camera for about 4 to 5 months now on a regular basis. I bought the camera when I had some money to burn, not expecting much. Assumptions are not always accurate. I am delighted with the camera - it way more than exceeded my expectations, and I have made many shots I couldn't have otherwise executed with the other gear I have.

It has a rather complex operating system, but it just takes some time to learn. The build quality is excellent. The weight and handling are superb, especially when using the maximum zoom (1568mm in 35mm equivalent). I use that lots. I can easily hand-hold shots and get outstanding results. That is contrary to one of my worst assumptions - how in the world can one hand-hold a 1568mm zoom?

This is the best small-sensor bridge camera I've ever used. Period. The only remaining question for me is durability and support. I can't answer the questions regarding what happens when something breaks - warranty work, etc. But, I'm seriously considering getting another unit for backup.

The only negative issue I've had is that under certain (undefined) lighting conditions I've had mild vignetting occur, especially in the upper left corner. This only seems to have affected about 5 percent of the images I've made with the camera - I'm up to about 500 count. I have not been able to predict when it will be a concern, and I usually get enough images of a target/subject that excellent quality images are also made in that session.

This is also the best low-light small-sensor camera I've ever used. I've made slow-shutter speed shots at max zoom with more than satisfactory results.

Again, I didn't expect much because of the issues regarding licensing of historical brand names, but whatever company actually makes this thing has done a good job. I'm hopeful support is there when needed - I just don't know about that.

The Minolta is very, very close to the Kodak PixPro AZ652. In fact it could be made in Miramar same as the Kodak. What I have seen from photos posted in the Kodak forum the PixPro is a fantastic bridge camera. Of course it helps to have a skilled photographer behind it as it is a well featured camera.

One of the very few differences between the two cameras is the LCD resolution, with the PixPro being twice as the Minolta. The Minolta does come with more battery power, though.

Thanks for the response. Yes, it's made in Miramar based on the label. I had assumed that the camera might be made by the folks who make the PixPro line. It does use the same battery type as some of those (LB-070). One thing I forgot to mention is that the documentation (user manual) is excellent.

The main differences between this bridge camera and the others I use (I'm a Sony A-mount and bridge guy, and Minolta back to the early 1970s) are the handling and light-handling capabilities - they are far better to me than with the Sony HX300, for example.

One thing I've yet to figure out is that in manual mode, it sets the EV at -3.0, and that value is not adjustable in Manual - only ISO, SS, and AP are adjustable. That number changed on me somewhere along the way, and I've yet to figure out how to get it back to zero.

Correction - it's made in Myanmar (Burma).

Wayne

JK Imaging owns the rights for the Kodak name for cameras.

The cameras are made by Myanmar Asia Optical International Ltd.

Asia Optical, based in Taiwan, has factories in several countries including Taiwan and China.

They made cameras for Kodak when it was still the original Kodak, also made some for Fujifilm, GE, Nikon, Ricoh, Canon and make those new Minoltas too.

In 2005 Asia Optical had to pay 33 million dollars to Kodak for having used Kodak patents to make cameras (in China) for Fujifilm.

Great info - thanks. Answers lots of questions.

W

Waniac said:

I've been using this camera for about 4 to 5 months now on a regular basis. I bought the camera when I had some money to burn, not expecting much. Assumptions are not always accurate. I am delighted with the camera - it way more than exceeded my expectations, and I have made many shots I couldn't have otherwise executed with the other gear I have.

Click to expand...

What is this "other gear" you have that you compare it too ?

A camera review without pictures means very little .

I'd be interested in seeing some , to see what it can really do , under various conditions .

Waniac said:

It has a rather complex operating system, but it just takes some time to learn. The build quality is excellent. The weight and handling are superb, especially when using the maximum zoom (1568mm in 35mm equivalent). I use that lots. I can easily hand-hold shots and get outstanding results.

Click to expand...

I'd love to see some , with the EXIF data intact .

Waniac said:

That is contrary to one of my worst assumptions - how in the world can one hand-hold a 1568mm zoom?

This is the best small-sensor bridge camera I've ever used. Period. The only remaining question for me is durability and support. I can't answer the questions regarding what happens when something breaks - warranty work, etc. But, I'm seriously considering getting another unit for backup.

Click to expand...

What are the other bridge cameras you've used to compare it too ?

If it's the only bridge camera you've used , it doesn't have a high target to beat !

Waniac said:

The only negative issue I've had is that under certain (undefined) lighting conditions I've had mild vignetting occur, especially in the upper left corner.

Click to expand...

That means the lens is decentred .

Vignetting is on the wide-angle shots and is even all round the frame in the corners .

If it's just one corner then the lens has been badly put together and is faulty .

it will likely as not effect sharpness amongst other things .

Waniac said:

This only seems to have affected about 5 percent of the images I've made with the camera - I'm up to about 500 count. I have not been able to predict when it will be a concern, and I usually get enough images of a target/subject that excellent quality images are also made in that session.

This is also the best low-light small-sensor camera I've ever used. I've made slow-shutter speed shots at max zoom with more than satisfactory results.

Click to expand...

Please provide sample shots .

Waniac said:

Again, I didn't expect much because of the issues regarding licensing of historical brand names, but whatever company actually makes this thing has done a good job. I'm hopeful support is there when needed - I just don't know about that.

Click to expand...

When these cameras first came out it was clear there are no support for them .

If they became faulty within a warranty providing it's not a grey import , at best the supplier will provide an exchange .

After that , the cameras scrap , there is no back up support for repairs etc .

Hi! Thanks for the response. I have four Sony digital SLRs/SLTs from through the years with the most recent being an ILCA 68. Haven't gotten into the E-mount stuff yet. I also use Sony bridge cameras and compacts - use an RX100 a fair amount on the compact side, and an HX300 is probably my most-used bridge. I also use iPhone lots for various shots. Started photography in 1972 while remote in Alaska. Learned print and slide processing while there. My most-used camera ever is the Minolta SRT-102.

Anyway, I just jumped on this site when I found the camera mentioned in this forum and joined. So, I haven't quite figured out how to upload samples to the forum yet.

In the meantime, I have a fair number of shots from the camera up on Flickr, and you're welcome to search me out - wjonessc. Some are good, some are not the best as I just tend to put up there what interests me at the time. And, some there are from other cameras I have. I've never put a bunch of stuff online, though, so I don't have tons of images up. When I get a chance, I'll try to figure out to upload some here.

Thanks again, Wayne

Waniac said:

Hi! Thanks for the response. I have four Sony digital SLRs/SLTs from through the years with the most recent being an ILCA 68. Haven't gotten into the E-mount stuff yet. I also use Sony bridge cameras and compacts - use an RX100 a fair amount on the compact side, and an HX300 is probably my most-used bridge. I also use iPhone lots for various shots. Started photography in 1972 while remote in Alaska. Learned print and slide processing while there. My most-used camera ever is the Minolta SRT-102.

Anyway, I just jumped on this site when I found the camera mentioned in this forum and joined. So, I haven't quite figured out how to upload samples to the forum yet.

Click to expand...

On the editing bar at the top of a new post or response (where the B, I, and U are for Bold, Italics, etc), the next to last icon is Insert Image. You can upload from your computer or phone directly to the post, one image at a time. Full size.

Waniac said:

In the meantime, I have a fair number of shots from the camera up on Flickr, and you're welcome to search me out - wjonessc. Some are good, some are not the best as I just tend to put up there what interests me at the time. And, some there are from other cameras I have. I've never put a bunch of stuff online, though, so I don't have tons of images up. When I get a chance, I'll try to figure out to upload some here.

Thanks again, Wayne

Click to expand...

Here are a few. Note that there was barely enough light to shoot the British Airways plane on approach. It was about 2.8 miles from me at the time, best I can tell. BTW, the previously mentioned "vignetting" apparently is not that - maybe a shutter issue during "break-in" - it has not happened again in a long time. Only other issue was one lock-up requiring battery removal and restart - that sort of thing has happened with many of my cameras though.

BTW, I found a user review of the Kodak PixPro AZ901 here in dpreview which is a sister camera to this one - with 90x capability vs. the 67x of this one - what I read was quite good for the most part. On this camera 281mm equals 1568mm in 35mm in the event you look at the EXIF.

Thanks for the help posting! (BTW again, the Chickadee was shot through a dirty window).

Wayne

I just noticed that the images I uploaded have no EXIF data - on samples on which I did some post-processing (I almost always do a little.) Sorry.

Wayne

Si comparamos a minolta MN67Z con nikon coolpix p900 cual cree que es mejor , cual me daría fotos con mejor calidad ?

Hike Pics said:

The Minolta is very, very close to the Kodak PixPro AZ652. In fact it could be made in Miramar same as the Kodak. What I have seen from photos posted in the Kodak forum the PixPro is a fantastic bridge camera. Of course it helps to have a skilled photographer behind it as it is a well featured camera.

One of the very few differences between the two cameras is the LCD resolution, with the PixPro being twice as the Minolta. The Minolta does come with more battery power, though.

Click to expand...

This camera shoots raw, raw+jpg and even has electronic shutter only high speed continuous shooting modes! I downloaded its manual-- check it out.

https://static1.squarespace.com/sta...1715800698804/MN67Z_User-Manual_2023+(LR).pdf

--
In the councils of government, we must guard against the acquisition of unwarranted influence, whether sought or unsought, by the military industrial complex. The potential for the disastrous rise of misplaced power exists and will persist. We must never let the weight of this combination endanger our liberties or democratic processes. We should take nothing for granted. Only an alert and knowledgeable citizenry can compel the proper meshing of the huge industrial and military machinery of defense with our peaceful methods and goals, so that security and liberty may prosper together.
-Dwight D. Eisenhower, 1961

I have both cameras.

I suggest you thoroughly read this post :

Hike Pics said:

I have both cameras.

I suggest you thoroughly read this post :

https://www.dpreview.com/forums/post/67995111

Click to expand...

Oh wow it has bad optics, I guess that means the Kodak PixPro AZ652 is bad too? There is one PixPro still in production and it has some good reviews and a bright lens 1248mm f/5.6-- the brightest superzoom lens I know of. The same lens as the Pentax XG-1. I have the Fuji S1 which is pretty good too, 1200mm f/5.6

I need the extra focal length to shoot small birds 100 ft away. I even use the 2x intelligent digital zoom. Since you stated the long end of the zoom is not good in the Minolta, the digital zoom is probably even worse?

I have a few PixPro models. The AZ528 has a very nice lens. My only complaint is that it doesn't have an EVF given that it has such a long lens.

I recently discovered that PixPro will be releasing 3 new models soon. I'm excited as to what they will be.

Hike Pics said:

I have a few PixPro models. The AZ528 has a very nice lens. My only complaint is that it doesn't have an EVF given that it has such a long lens.

I recently discovered that PixPro will be releasing 3 new models soon. I'm excited as to what they will be.

Click to expand...

I'm interested in what they produce too! Would you say the AZ528 is optically the best of the ones you own, better than the AZ652 and the AZ901? Its 1248mm f/5.6 lens is very similar to the lens on the Fuji S1. It's the same lens as the one on the Pentax XG-1. This site did a nice group review of these cameras at various focal lengths. The AZ528, like the Pentax XG-1 has a high speed electronic shutter continuous burst mode doesn't it? Is it 4 megapixel? Do you use that mode much or does it have a long lag before you can shoot a second burst?

Yes, in my opinion the 528 is better.

I've never had the camera in any burst mode so I don't have an opinion. The manual does say 4MP in Fast Burst, not something I would be interested in.

I invite you (if you haven't) to pop over to the Kodak Talk forum. There's a few PixPro shooters there and you could get a bit more info and opinions there.