Maxxum 7D - $1600...Ouch!

Opinions on the $1600 price tag of the new Maxxum 7D?

 

For myself, photography is a hobby. I just can't justify spending

that kind of money on a hobby. I love my Maxxum 7 film camera and

really planned to stick with Minolta, but this camera just is not

targeted towards the "hobbyist". I'm disapointed Minolta has

marketed towards only the pro/semi-pro with their initial D-SLR

offering.

 

I'm seriously contemplating switching to Nikon. Granted, the

reviews on the 7D are pending, but I know I can get a quality D70

with lens and save about $400.

These are only reported preices there is still no fixed price. And the price will fall in 6 months. I also cant afford it

i don't think you should compare its price with the d70's or canon rebel D's. Now, the fact that there's no cheaper alternative, that sucks:) but hey, film is not dead yet;)

Probably a dumb question, but where was this price posted?

Price is being advertised as a pre-order price on Adorama and Ritz camera.

 

I'm sure the price will drop, but I doubt if before the holidays...maybe 6 months or so. I'm also hearing rumors of a lower end 5D sometime later next year. I know I won't wait that long to go digital.

I'm disappointed in the price, but probably going to settle in and wait for the price to drop from the introductory price. This camera is not competition for the D70 or Digital Rebel, it is taking on the 20D. The built-in Anti-Shake is a big feature. A D70 with just one IS lens will cost the same as the 7D, and with this camera I can still use all my old lenses and have the AS, too. Rumors abound regarding a 5D showing up maybe in first quarter of '05, and if that camera has AS, it would be the deal of a lifetime. I lived without DSLR for all these years, I can hold out for a few more months.

I'd don't beleive Minolta has the user base to set the actual price that high. Now matter how vaulable AS is if you don't move enough product then you have to lower your price. That's my .02

A lot of people have been waiting for a Minolta DSLR for a very long time. Maybe not me and you, but some people are not really limited in their spending when it comes to photography, and they are willing and able to pay a lot of money for Minolta's first DSLR, especially if it comes with a nifty feature like in-body anti-shake. It would be downright stupid of Minolta if they didn't take as much money as possible from this market segment first, before they lower the price and/or introduce an entry level model. Both Nikon and Canon have done the same.

I will wait. Also in the Netherlands the price is 1600 euro (even more expensive than in the USA). It has to drop for me, otherwise the price is simply too high for me. I also would like to have the battery-pack, hence extra money to pay. I hope that the price will drop to around 1200 euro within some time.

The minolta users have had to wait too long to be ripped of now by Konica-Minolta. But, it all is about the economics of it...

Anti shake is a $300 premium (at least) per lens for those that offer it. If you knock a 1 time $300 fee off the top of the $1600 tag you get a better price comparison between the 7D and the Canon 20D or Nikon D70.

Hey, I am also a hobbyist and hobbies are expensive, aren?t they? how much money one can afford to spend on the hobbie is a complicated question.

First of all, the digital bug is a tough one to defeat. I couldnt resist to get a digital compact, the first 2 months I used it a lot. Now I mainly use it to prepare lecture notes, copying diagrams and that kind of stuff. But it doesn feel the same as holding a 'true' camera (my 600si with vertical grip, for instance).

If I hadnt tried digital before and was with the 'urge' to try it, I'dgo for the little brother KM Z3 with anti-shake. Or even the A2. But to have the maxxum 7d as first digital camera requires a lot of money and honestly, unless one is a professional and spends a fortune on film, it is not justified. I made my minolta bodies antishake for $20 (go to your photo shop and get a monopod, that'll do the job). I also got a $150 2400 dpi film scanner. In total I didnt spend more than $200 and I enjoy both worlds. Yeah yeah.. I know, I spend money on film and printing, but it still feels like real photography, with that uncertainty of not knowing how the pictures will come out just after picking them up from the chemist.

I will wait at least a year or 2 before even thinking of buying one 7D or 5D whatever is available then. Too much money for what I still can do with my MF minoltas(according to my needs).

The 7D is far more of a camera than the cheaper Nikons and Canons. The anti-shake is one thing, but the viewfinder image is much larger than in the N/C products so it should be easy to get reliably focused images manually or with AF (because you can see what is going on).

 

I think the price is entirely justified considering that this is a fully-featured general-purpose DSLR, unlike the N/C products which cannot be used on moving subjects or produce unreliable results when used on them. Even as a Nikon user with 11 lenses and 3 bodies, I am seriously considering the Minolta product.

Stabilization with wide and normal lenses is very compelling. The high-ISO

performance looks outstanding. The viewfinder definitely sounds like a step

up from any affordable DSLR from other manufacturers.

 

All together, not bad, especially for low-light shooting. Definitely some

differentiation from the competition.

 

If only Minolta would release some fast (f/2.0 or better) wide (on the 7D, not on

the film cameras) primes...

 

The new 17-35 f/2.8-f/4.0 is slow at the tele end. It will be interesting to see

reviews. The 17-35m f/3.5 G is probably too expensive for my blood; and

probably also too slow.

just for the body alone ??? guess i have to learn to have my hands steadier when taking pictures or carry a monopod when shooting.....

the key question is will this DSLR have enough punch to attract first time buyers away from Canon or Nikon? Time will tell.

It is a tad on the high side, but as most of us are surmising the intro price will eventually drop.<p>

For better or for worse, I recently upgraded from a 7i to an A1.<br>

The <i>better</i> part is the antishake feature, and the vastly improved auto focusing.<br> I'm not as young and steady as I use to be, and a tripod, etc. are out of the question doing street photography.<br>

The <i>worse</i> part is that had I known (right!) I would have held off for the 7D.<p>

As to pricing of the 7D, i guess some folks are more in a rush than others, 'cuz there's someone in Canada selling them.<br>

<a href=http://cgi.ebay.com/ws/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewItem&category=30020&item=3846098059&rd=1&ssPageName=WDVW>HERE</a><p>

Cheers!

Wow, $1600 is expensive.

7D is definite better then 300D but I will say generally it is slightly below 20D. (I know I will get shot at this).

D7 is maybe slightly better then D70.

I am confuse with the positioning of 7D. Shouldn't Minolta tries to attract people to the Minolta camp?

Based on the Australian price for a 7D with a sigma 28-105 lens of $A 2500 with tax which would translate to $US 1590 without tax. The lens is probably worth $100, which means that the australian price for the translates to $US 1,500 for the body.

 

Equipment is always more expensive in Australia than US, so I would expect for the Body to sell for $1,400 to $1,450 in major stores in the US.

>>>the key question is will this DSLR have enough punch to

attract first time buyers away from Canon or Nikon? Time will

tell.<<<

 

 

Count me in. I don't think $1600 is a bad price though I wish it

was lower than the 20d(say 1299 or 1399). I haven't read the

spec fully but I'm very happy about the finder, Lg lcd, AS, low

noise and particularly the ablity to use two batteries at once and

good old AA batteries compatible in emergency say during travel

in less developed places. The only problem is a wide angle

zoom. I want something atleast 24mm(35mm speak) on the

wide side say f4 constant but no sigma. We'll see.

IMO the price is fair given feature set but I realize it's all relative to where you're coming from. For those with no minolta glass and looking for entry level DSLR it may not be the best deal in town (although I think people are underestimating the usefulness of AS given the slow lenses many people use). For those of us with thousands invested in minolta G lenses and film bodies the D7 is a bargain.

 

Think of it this way -instead of spending US$4000 on a minolta 300m 2.8 I can buy the D7 for $1600 and instantly my 80-200 f2.8 becomes a 120-300 f2.8 and my 300f4 becomes a 450f4 and I get all the other benefits of digital plus AS! I'll do that trade anyday!

$1600 may be a bit high, but the main issue is the long-term viability of the Minolta system and the upgrade path. Essentially you need to have some faith about Minolta to get the 7D.

 

Take Fuji as an example. They introduced the S2 in February, 2002 along with the Canon D60 and Nikon D100. The S2 was a bit more expensive but has a lot of fans. The problem is that two years later, Fuji announced the S3 at PMA 2004. Now 8 months since that announcement, there is still no S3 on the market. Worse yet, even the S3 is still based on the pretty out-of-date Nikon N80 body. If you are a S2 user, at least it uses Nikon F mount lenses and you can always get a Nikon body. Exactly how Minolta will do 2, 3 years down the road is kind of an unknown, at least in my mind.

 

Evaluate that and make your own decisions.

I'm enjoying the varied opinions. I suppose $1600 is relative...depends on your needs. For a pro, semi-pro or serious hobbyist, the 7D offers some great features at a competitive price. I wonder, though, if the price is competitive enought to attract many Nikon or Canon users?

 

I also wonder if continuing to buy into Minolta is wise. I have a modest investment in one Tamron lens for my Monolta. I can replace that lens with a Nikon or Canon mount for $350. Along with a Canon 10D or Nikon D70, I can switch to a brand which I know will be here, will continue to develop for years to come, and still save $100 - $400. Will Minolta continue to develop and improve upon their D-SLR line for years to come? Will poor sales of the 7D "kill" the Minolta venture into the D-SLR field?

What retailer are going to carry it (adorama and B&H are a given) I can buy canon and nikon stuff almost anywhere. If some of the mainstream retailers like best buy and walmart (I don't buy stuff there just and example) do not carry it, how many 7D's are really going to be sold? With that higher price and no mainstream retailers the only people buying the 7D will be people with minolta lenses. Will this work? I think it will just get the minolta digital line cancelled and once again minolta AF users will be swinging in the wind. What retailer will risk carrying the 7D when they can definatley move canon stuff

Shun,

 

In your line of thinking (typical) no one should buy anything but

Nikons and Canons. This is the same fear factor that allows

Nikon to screw people with only two models, the D2 series and

the d70. E1 and the D7 looks great I say especially if viewfinder

is important to you.

I think the 7D is WAY above 20D.

 

Does anyone have recommendations on which of the Minolta prime lenses within the range 20 mm to 100 mm are good buys? I would like to get something like 20 mm, 35 mm, and maybe 85/100 mm or something like that. I don't want to spend terribly much. The camera and lenses would be for general city shooting. I would definitely use wide apertures and in low light.