Minolta Hi-Matic 7s

Recently seen some great threads about the Canon QL 17, thought I'd

share a photo of one of it's often overlooked 'brothers'; the

Minolta 7s. Very similar, I like the Minolta slightly better myself,

but as far as I care the Canonet, Minolta, Konica Auto S2 and

Yashica GSN are very similar, and equally loveable cameras.<div></div>

very nice, simplicity at it's finest.

 

Todd

I have the Canon QL17 GIII, only handled the Minolta 7s. My initial impressions:

 

1. The Minolta is significantly bigger.

 

2. The shutter on the Minolta has a much more pleasing action and sound.

 

3. The Minolta I held had a foggy VF, but the RF patch was still bright and I could focus easier with the Minolta than with my Canon, whose VF I have cleaned.

 

4. Dials on the Minolta are easier to manipulate.

 

5. The Minolta will meter in full manual mode and has aperture priority and fully automatic in addition to shutter priority, whereas the Canon has shutter priority and non-metered manual.

 

I would love to run some film through the Minolta to see how it compares. I love the way the lens on the Canon renders textures and foliage.

I don't think the GSN has the all manual option the others have. However its low light exposure system is more capable. (I think)

I have the HiMatic 7s and am impressed with the quality of photos. But it is definitely bigger and heavier than the Canon QL17. I had the QL17 but was not crazy about it. Also had a HiMatic 7sII. That's the one I should have keep. Some of the sharpest slides I've ever taken.

Excellent photo.

Jonas,

 

Wow! I have a 7s in the black finish. My photos don't look anything as good as that! Great work!

 

--Micah in Nc

I have a Hi-Matic 7s and a Hi-Matic 9. I think they have great optics and for outdoor photography provide very acceptable results. As mentioned above, they are quite a lot larger and heavier than the later Canonets, and would probably be difficult to use as an unobtrusive street shooter. I like that they can be used without a battery. Had this been true of the Hi-Matic 11, I probably would have one of those also.

 

Here's a couple of shots from my Hi-Matic 9, taken last year on 12-year old Kodak Ektar 100. These were cropped a little and rotated, but otherwise no image modification was performed.<div></div>

Focusing down a bit with the Hi-Matic 9<div></div>

I also happen to like the 45mm focal length of my Hi-matic 7s and 9. The Hi-Matic 7sII is the most attractive-looking of the Hi-Matics in my opinion, but it has near-cult status with the collectors and usually commands a price two to three times that of its Hi-Matic predessesors, and it has a 40mm focal length that I probably would not appreciate too much.<div></div>

I have a Hi-Matic 7, a 7S, a 7SII and two Hi-Matic 9s. About 8 and a half years ago I was experimenting with the 7S when my son took his first steps. I will always think about that camera when I think of my son as a small child. The models before the 7SII are somewhat large. They are even larger than the Konica Auto S2 and Auto S1.6 cameras I have. The most common problem with these old models is that their leaf shutters get gummed up. A competent repair person can take care of this as long as an amateur didn't try to pry the shutter blades loose first. You can take some very nice pictures with one of these older Minolta models but try to handle them with some care. They are not as robust as an SRT-101 or similar camera.

nice!

i got 1 myself. love the little bugger myself. the pix it produces is a throwback to my

youth. one thing i can't stand though is the lens' predisposition to flaring as seen in the

above pic.