Best 35mm SLR Konica or Minolta?

<p>I've got the itch to purchase my next camera. I think I want to add a Konica and Minolta SLR, later on I'll think about a Vivatar. Konica being very close to my heart since my dad had one and it was the first camera I learned to shoot with. I wish I knew the model number of the Konica he had.<br>

A Minolta just because I like them.<br>

Wondering which are the best models of these two brands. I tend to like the older models with leatherette bodies.<br>

Suggestions please! Thanks a ton!</p>

 

<p>If you can find a "minty-to-excellent" Konica or Minolta, they are both excellent cameras. My preference is Konica, a T3. However I have used several Minoltas from the 100 series and always had publishable work during my newspaper days. It boiled down to workflow for me. Konica suited me better. Both systems offered excellent lenses and system accessories. Older Vivitar lenses were very good. If you like the handling & features of the Minoltas, choose that! It's a tool, and for me, the workflow matters.</p>

<p>You may find that you want both. The Konicas are a little more difficult to find, but when one turns up it is reasonably priced as are the Minoltas. <br>

Liana- if the Konica your dad had was very compact it could have been either a TC or T4. Slightly bigger (and taking a AAA or AA battery) was the Cosina-made TC-X. If it was big then it could have been an Autoreflex A, A2, or A3 (lacked self-timer) or a T, T2, T3. The last T3 was the T3N. All are very capable picture takers. I hope these descriptions help you narrow down your search a bit.</p>

<p>If it matters, I think it will be easier to find a Minolta over a Konica, as Minolta had a wider range of cameras for sale, and nearly everyone sold the SRT series in every store (both camera and department stores) when I was growing up. They have their quirks now that they're both in their old age, but good examples of each are around.<br>

It also depends on the features you want in the camera (all-mechanical or some form of autoexposure). Leatherette was on pretty much every manual-focus Minolta I know of, even my X-700, which has plastic top and bottom decks (the XD-11 had pretty bad leatherette that shrank after a number of years and Konica had that same shrinking leatherette on their T4 and TC models). So it's better to think about the features you want, then decide what to get.</p>

<p>"Best" is pretty subjective since both those companies made such good manual cameras. I'm not going to comment on Konica becuase I don't know it as well as most, but in Minolta there are:</p>

<p>-Pre-SRT (SR-2, SR-1, SR-7, might be others). These are early, no meter, bayonet mount with "auto" stop-down lenses SLRs that have a lot of "firsts". Well made, and you can still use them.</p>

<p>-SRT (any model) - these all have the same body design, mount, meter and shutter. Model numbers ending in 2 or 3 (SRT-102, SRT-202, SRT-303) add some useful features like an aperture periscope in the finder. The 102 has mirror lock up. The meter is match needle with "CLC" which does a basic but often effective backlight compensation. If you can find one in EX condition or get one CLA'ed it's a great classic camera with old school feel and tanklike qualities but since these have been out of production for 30 years there are a lot out there that are scuzzy on the inside, need new foam, have the shutter off or the meter needing calibration, etc. The metal and leatherette on the body are designed to outlast human civilization.</p>

<p>-XD series - classic Leica/Minolta collaboration (the R4 is almost the same thing). Small, light, nice in the hand, feature rich with M/A/S modes and full exposure info in the finder, silicon meter. Uses alkaline batteries you can get easily. Vertical metal shutter. Excellent smooth feeling operation that shows its pedigree. It was made very late in the manual SLR era so a lot of the automation features are what you'd find in a 1980's camera, making some purists not accept it as a "classic". This is by far my favorite film camera for actual use. Many samples have their leatherette peeling off so this gives you a good excuse to get some luxury covering from cameraleather.com.</p>

<p>-X-700 and X-570. These were made in the 80's from plastic so I don't think I can call them "classic" but they are functionally excellent cameras and can be use with a PX series flash (little known tip: an Adorama brand TTL cable for Nikon works perfectly with a PX flash) for off-the-film TTL flash metering. This was a brand new feature at the time. The 570 is supposed to be the inferior model, not having P mode, but in return you get a more informative finder in M mode so a lot of people prefer it.</p>

<p>-XK - the "pro" Minolta. Tanklike build, interchangeable parts, shutter to 1/2000s. Very nice camera, though my preference is still for the XD.</p>

<p>The lens mounts are all compatible but as new features were added they made improvements. E.g., an MC lens for an SRT or XK works on an XD or X700 but without S or P modes (because MD lenses have a couple extra parts to enable aperture control from the body), but an MD lens for an XD or X-700 is fully compatible with an SRT or XK.</p>

<p>I like the Konica T3, but because it calls for mercury batteries, it's a bit hard to feed. I use hearing adi batteries and a 2/3 stop ASA offset, and it meters quite well, but zinc-air batteries don't last long, and the T3 has a tendency to turn itself on by accident. For shooting, it's a good machine. The viewfinder is not great, and the accessory flash bracket is a bit of a nuisance. It's pretty noisy too, but the meter is good, and it's got that wonderful all-metal heft and feel. Pick it up, and you know you have a proper "classic camera" in your hands. Konica Hexar lenses are also correspondingly robust as well as optically fine. And the all mechanical shutter makes it entirely functional even with no batteries in it. The meter needle in the finder is well set up, and the shutter priority is very easy to get used to.</p>

<p>I have a slight bias toward Minoltas, at least the later ones, because they just work so very well, and I've always found Minolta meters to be pretty reliable. Minolta lenses seem to be a bit easier to find also, and third party lenses can be very inexpensive, so if you're looking to amass a cheap fleet of lenses, this might be a factor. If you're willing to stretch the "classic" designation, and not too worried about plastic, an X700 is an awfully nice camera to use.</p>

<p> </p>

<p>I've always had a thing for the Konica T3 and Minolta XK. I like the entire Minolta lineup especially in black. Their finish was very satiny.</p>

<p>Since nobody asked, I'd choose an XE, but they're all prone to some idiosyncrasies, being all fairly old. The SRT and Konica T and A series (up to the 3 IIRC) use mercury batteries. The Minolta XE can have some prism desilvering, and all X prefix Minolta cameras need batteries to work at all speeds. The XK is rather expensive if you want a decent example. The XD is the most flexible of all the X-series cameras. The XG series is more amateur in scope except for the XG-M, and the X-numbered series is generally good, but has more plastic and can suffer from the dreaded bad capacitor syndrome.<br>

As I say, they all have their quirks. The best news is that lenses are not too expensive and you can get a good set of either brand without great expense. Both mounts are more or less orphans now, so digital shooters aren't poaching the good ones like they are the M42 lenses.</p>

<p>I would go with the T3 or the Xe's. The Konica is very heavy, which can be good or bad, depending on your outlook. Both cameras are well built, and the quality of their optics is unquestioned.<br>

Kind of need to fondle both to see which floats your boat.</p>

<p>Steer clear of any camera that uses mercury batteries like the SRT series. The survivalists will argue for all sorts of work-arounds but the truth is they're old, mass-produced cameras that were often bettered by their offspring. Minolta outsold Konica. There are huge numbers of 70s and 80s Minoltas rolling around. Most were amateur-owned and many remain in remarkably good shape due to light, occasional use. They're also bargains, as are common focal length MC/MD lenses. Something like the Minolta X700, though short on retro fashionability, is a great user camera that's often available with a 50mm lens for a $100 or so.</p>

<p>I guess I'm a survivalist. Some of the later manual focus Minoltas (XG series in particular) were just a hair this side of junk in materials and construction, and the X370 and X700, while somewhat above the bottom tier, seem to be quitting at an amazing rate due to capacitor failures. The SRTs are very well built, and I'd rather have a working SRT with a dead meter than a working meter on a dead X-series camera.</p>

<p>I'll second the T3 as the best of the Konicas.</p>

<p>I have both brands in my collection and got my start with Konica. The Autoreflex T2 is a very durable camera. Over time it develops problems with the "bumper" which is used as part of the shutter mechanism. Greg Weber can fix this problem easily. The T3 had problems with the shutter where it would fire again as the film advance lever returned to its resting position. The problem can be fixed but it can also come back. For this reason I would skip the T3. The later T3N solved that problem and is my favorite of the full size mechanical Autoreflex cameras. I have two T3N cameras and use one occasionally. I wouldn't let the battery problem worry me too much. The MR-9 adapter can be used in cameras which took PX-13 batteries. If you have an older camera overhauled it can also be converted to use the non-mercury batteries. The Autoreflex T2 I use has 675 hearing aid batteries in it and the T3N was converted so I use 1.5 volt MS-76 bateries in it. The lower priced TC is also a decently made camera. You can always go to cameraleather.com for new skin. The TC and T4 models both suffer from shrinking skin. Most FS-1 cameras still around do not work because of electrical problems. Even the last FT-1 cameras made are about 25 years old by now. Greg Weber can still repair them but that doesn't mean something else won't go wrong. A overhauled Autoreflex T2 or T3N can be expected to give any years of good service.<br>

I have both SRT model Minoltas as well as later X-700s. If you like the mechanical cameras anything from the second model SRT-101 (silver film speed dial) on is good. Most of the 101s have mirror lock-up and the 102 also has the feature. The 102 is probably the nicest of the SRT series. The ones I use most are a 101 and a 201. I think the finder in the 201 is a little nicer. Rarer models like a black 102 can be more expensive but take the same pictures. The XK and XK Motor models are full system cameras and can be nice to use if they are in good working order. The problem is that they are rarely in good working order. If you want a good mechanical full system camera (removable finders, screens, accessory motor/winder) a Canon F-1 or Nikon F2 would be a better choice. The well liked XD cameras were only made for a few years. In 1981 the X-700 was introduced. It stayed in production for approximately 20 years. Although it lacked the Shutter Priority automation and vertical metal shutter of the XD cameras it had TTL flash capability, interchangeable screens, an accessory motor and winder, a very bright viewfinder and had a sensitive and accurate meter. The X-700 is not "all plastic." It has both metal and plastic parts. I do not care much for the other X series cameras like the XG-7, XG-9, XG-A, XG-M, X-7and X-9. The X-370 is nice if you don't need interchangeable screens or a depth of field preview feature. Most older Minolta cameras will also need some service. <br>

</p>

<p>It depends to some degree on your preferences. If you like slightly large, heavy, capable cameras, the T3 and XE are a good pair. If you want something more compact and less solid but still versatile, the T4 and XD are a pretty good match for each other. If you're really old school, the SRTs and the earlier Autoreflexes kind of go together.</p>

<p>I own an FS-1. Maybe I'm lucky, but the electronics in mine are fine. Problem is, it's not a very good camera. It was an achievement to get integrated power winding in an SLR, but the compromises made for the sake of that achievement hurt the camera compared to its contemporaries with no winder and compared to the succeeding generation of self-winding cameras.</p>

<p>I only have one Konica SLR and it's the Autoreflex T, a pretty cool camera with a great solid feel to it. I love Minoltas so much that folks on this forum are probably tired of me always talking about them. I have an SR-T 102 that I absolutely love. It's a very sturdy camera that has a wonderful metering system and handles very nicely. My favorite Minolta, in fact one of my favorite cameras period, is the Minolta XD-11. It's an amazing camera with a very accurate meter and both shutter <em>and</em> aperture priority, not one or the other as was common in other cameras of that time. It's the film camera I use the most. If you can find one in excellent condition, buy it!</p>

<p>Even with the mercury battery problem, I'd still look at either the Konica Autoreflex T3 or any of the Minolta SRT series. You can almost always restore them and use them. As much as I like my X-700, if I were going on a long trip aware from shops and other facilties I'd take my SRT 201 or 101 along or at least my XE-5 or XD-5. Especially the SRT as there are no capacitor failures to worry about. Hey, I bet if Woody Allen (in the movie Sleeper) had found an SRT or a T3 in that 200 year old Volkswagen he got running, he'd have gotten that camera to work as well.</p>

<p>Hi,<br>

Wow, thanks for all the information and the opinions. I have a lot to consider. I'm leaning toward an XE Minolta. Not sure about the Konica yet though, I need to do some more research.<br>

Are there any good Minolta or Konica SLR's that don't require a battery? One reason I love older cameras is that I don't have to fiddle around searching for batteries.<br>

Oh and someone ask if I like manual or auto.. I like manual cameras better, I rather make my own decision on the settings than let the camera make them for me.</p>

<p>I think an XE requires a battery for the shutter. So does the XD, unless you only want the shutter at 1/100. An SRT or XK only uses the battery for the meter. Same with older Konicas but I'm not sure at what point they went to electronic shutters...</p>

<p>Like the XD, the XE has limited use without a battery. w/o battery the XE will fire at B and 1/90 second.</p>

<p>Good summary, everyone. You can use the SRTs with a C.R.I.S. adapter, although I don't understand why they are so expensive at $30. The Minolta XDs and XEs use lithium or silver batteries and I would never consider using alkalines in them. All of these are nicely made cameras.</p>

<p>The only Konica's I have ever owned are the Auto S2s, which I consider to have the all time biggest bang for the buck, since I bought mine new in a PX in Vietnam for $35. Still working, a great design.</p>