Minolta MND20 44 MP

I hope this is the right subforum.

Just came across the Minolta MND20 44 MP. Does anyone have a more experienced opinion on it than the viewers of the Home Shopping Network? They are saying it's bad, and the fact it's being sold on HSN is not a good sign in my eyes, but I'm keeping an open mind.

A127943 wrote:

I hope this is the right subforum.

Just came across the Minolta MND20 44 MP. Does anyone have a more experienced opinion on it than the viewers of the Home Shopping Network? They are saying it's bad, and the fact it's being sold on HSN is not a good sign in my eyes, but I'm keeping an open mind.

Minolta , or Konica Minolta as it became known after the merger ceased making digital cameras when it sold that side of the business to Sony in 2006 .

A few years ago a firm that were importing/ making cheap cameras started slapping a Minolta badge on them as they had earlier won a case where they were doing the same on binoculars and the court had declared "Minolta" was an abandoned trademark and we're free to continue.

When they started doing it with cameras , I'm guessing Minolta had learned their lesson on past court failures ( Honeywell and Exxon ) and called it quits !

So these current "Minolta" cameras have nothing to do with the original Minolta or Konica Minolta cameras .

So make of that what you will . Personally, I wouldn't touch them with a barge pole !

A127943 wrote:

neilt3 wrote:

A127943 wrote:

I hope this is the right subforum.

Just came across the Minolta MND20 44 MP. Does anyone have a more experienced opinion on it than the viewers of the Home Shopping Network? They are saying it's bad, and the fact it's being sold on HSN is not a good sign in my eyes, but I'm keeping an open mind.

Minolta , or Konica Minolta as it became known after the merger ceased making digital cameras when it sold that side of the business to Sony in 2006 .

A few years ago a firm that were importing/ making cheap cameras started slapping a Minolta badge on them as they had earlier won a case where they were doing the same on binoculars and the court had declared "Minolta" was an abandoned trademark and we're free to continue.

When they started doing it with cameras , I'm guessing Minolta had learned their lesson on past court failures ( Honeywell and Exxon ) and called it quits !

So these current "Minolta" cameras have nothing to do with the original Minolta or Konica Minolta cameras .

So make of that what you will . Personally, I wouldn't touch them with a barge pole !

Thank you. Your words express why those HSN viewers are probably right.

Strange how I think I've seen two Minolta stores around here when they outta business.

Minolta aren't out of business, there still trading , but these days sell just office equipment.

Printers and scanners etc , as they always did along with Konica before the merger .

Which is why they merged .

All they did was sell the imaging side of the business, just like Olympus has done recently.

They don't sell cameras now is all .

Hike Pics wrote:

I just checked out the manual. Do you realize it has a focus free f3.2 lens? It doesn't even say what size sensor is in it so it could be a tiny 1/3.? one. I would also question any kind of IQ coming from 44MP from it. Honest, an old G600 would be better!

Fixed Focus , focal length of 7.36mm and aperture of F/3.2 , 16x digital zoom ( ie , it just crops the image ) and the only way you'll get 44mp is if its interpolated from a much smaller image . Use that 16x digital zoom and I'm sure you'll just end up with mush !

Certainly one to avoid . You can do much better if that's your budget , new or used .

Even buying a lightly used camera that's just a few models previous to current offerings from well known brands like Canon , Nikon , Sony etc , will give much better results at a good saving .

.

@ O.P ;

I've not used a G600 , so can't comment , but for a compact camera the £15-£20 DiMage X1 does a nice job with it's periscope style built in optical zoom lens . Only 8mp ( IIRC ) but does a good job and fit's in any pocket . The DiMage A200 has a really good 28-200mm ( 35mm equivalent ) lens and can be picked up for around £25 .

I've done quite decent sized prints from that , viewing on a TV or PC screen , you could view much bigger .

Both of these cameras can provide prints of a decent size , or viewed on any screen . Most likely they will provide a much clearer , sharper , higher resolving image than the claimed 44mp of the so called minolta .

For a good camera on a budget you could look for a Sony NEX E-mount camera .

An NEX 3 with 18-55mm lens can be picked up for around £75 .

A127943 wrote:

Hike Pics wrote:

Do you realize it has a focus free f3.2 lens? It doesn't even say what size sensor is in it so it could be a tiny 1/3.?

No, I didn't realize that because I found very little information on this camera. Seems like it's "new". The blowup prints on HSN looked acceptable,

You'll most probably find that the sample shots weren't even taken by this camera .

A bit like the adverts on TV for video games state " not actual game footage" , as the advert looks like top of crop CGI , but the real game display is back from the 1980's !

which made me wonder if this thing was actually any good. Many signs are now screaming, no chance.

@neilt3
Not needing to buy anything. This was more of a, "could this be a good camera for a cheap price, that would be worth snagging?" I appreciate everyone making it abundantly clear and sad to learn of Minolta's fate.