Minolta Maxxum 7000 - Landmark AF camera

<p><strong>Minolta Maxxum 7000 - Landmark AF camera</strong><br /> AKA Minolta 7000 AF<br /> <br />1985<br /> Kadlubek Nr. MIN1050<br /> <br />Wikipedia's article at the time of this posting was a good summary ( http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Minolta_Maxxum_7000 ). Another good summary is at http://www.mir.com.my/rb/photography/hardwares/classics/maxxum7k/index.htm . The latter puts the status of the Maxxum fairly clearly as "the World's first Body-Integral Autofocus SLR." Actually, this <em><strong>IS</strong></em> more significant than the "largest four-milling location south of the Smoky Hill River" - if you are careful how you define your terms, you can be first at anything you want. The Maxxum is a genuine landmark in Camera history.<br /><br />The story is pretty well known: How Minolta stole a march on the other camera makers and beat them, if only just, to the market with the first really practical AF SLR.<br /> How they got cute and used a crossed-X on "Maxxum" that looked just like that used by Exxon. How Exxon slapped them down.<br /> How Honeywell got them for patent infringement on the AF system to the tune of 127.6 million US dollars.<br /><br />The story and links to the other claimants to "first" is indicated in the articles linked to. <br /><br />My own interest in this camera is as one of the cameras that were in many ways "classic" but were not "manual" in any sense that made it possible to post on them except in places like the Sony/Minolta or Canon EOS or other forums where, honestly, the emphasis was very heavily on modern digital cameras and their fine points. Not that historical posts were necessarily unwelcome in those forums, it was just, well, we (who also liked cameras made <em>after</em> the 1970s) didn't have a place of our own. Now we do. Thanks.<br /><br />Anyhow, on one forum thread that had mentioned this camera recently, I indicated that, despite the help from other members of Cameras Anonymous, I was looking on eBay for a Maxxum in working condition. The next thing I knew one of the other members here, who apparently <em>really</em> likes the Minolta Maxxum 7000 a lot, offered to send me one. So thanks very much to Ralf Jakoel. What a guy! I was very pleased to get one, and he even sent it with batteries--and it had none of the commoner signs of age (such as a grip 'oxidation' or 'bleeding' LCD). As you can see in the pictures below, this was an exceptionally fine specimen.<br /><br />I was able to find a very inexpensive, but appropriate Maxxum AF lens on eBay, the Minolta Maxxum Zoom 35-80mm f/4(22)-5.6 lens. The camera is rather business-like, and while I find it pleasing, it does not actually make it onto my continously-growing list of "most beautiful SLRs ever". This lens, however. somehow tickles my fancy. It's easy to use, both manually (once you figure out where the switch on the body is that makes this possible) and in AF. It has a built in lenscap, and it is simply really, really "kawaii" ((可愛さ) - that is "cute." ( http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cuteness_in_Japanese_culture ).<br /><br />I was really most interested in the "automatic" features of the camera, so I quite intentionally just used it automatically. <br /><br />First, here is an early advertisement from Modern Photography of March 1985 showing the initial crossed xx. On the right, is a later ad from MP too, but from November of 1986.</p><div></div>

<p>Here is the camera with the built-in cap closed.</p>

<div></div>

<p>Here are some pictures<br />The city library, indoors. Fuji 200 C/N film</p><div></div>

<p>One of our very nicest librarians.</p>

<p>Unfortunately, this, as a grab shot, shows the weakness of the AF system in low light and pushing the envelope.</p>

<p>This 1985 technology is not so fast or accurate as later AF systems.<br /> It's like the states that had the first interstate highways had crappy interstate highways by the time everyone else got there (sorry Pennsylvanians). I am perfectly willing to stipulate user issues as being primary here, but the camera does seem to require a little more deliberate and careful procedure than the latest digital AF cameras.</p><div></div>

<p>Today was primary day, and given good outside light, and more deliberate action on the user part, the AF worked well.</p><div></div>

<p>Finally, a great patriotic gesture for Election Day</p><div></div>

<p>That's all folks.<br />I was really pleased to have a chance to try this out. Thanks again Ralf.</p>

<p>I'm still wedded to my old East German cameras, though<br /> ( a big surprise coming there in a week or so on CMC, CA failed me yet again..... I am a camera collector and I haven't bought anything in 10 hours...).</p>

<p>We used to sell Maxxums. It took me a couple of years to finally buy one even though I could get it at invoice price. The 35-80 (both "i" series and xi series) wasn't well respected, but a lot of the blame rests on newbies who used the camera in program mode so the lens worked at its widest apertures (where it's performance was less than optimal). At the middle apertures it was quite nice. As JDM says, the Maxxum 7000 (and its poor cousin the 5000) focused more accurately in bright light. When the first 7000's were tested, most testers claimed to get a higher percentage of sharp photos than they did with manual focus. Obviously, an experienced photographer can often do better with manual focus sometimes. <br />I once owned a 5000 and used it with a 28-85 f3.5-4.5 Maxxum lens. Even though this lens was a little faster, it still liked lots of light to focus. If a dedicated flash was attached, though, the flash emitted a deep red (near infrared) pattern to aid focusing. If flash wasn't needed it could still be used as a focus aid. It would even focus on a blank wall.<br>

What did the other camera makers do about it? Canon abandoned its ill-fated T-80 for the EOS system. Nikon came out with the 2020, Olympus with the OM77 AF, Yashica with the 230 AF, and Pentax had one as well (can't recall the model). All of them were a bit slow to focus like the Maxxum, but each offered invovations of their own. So the race was on to make improvements. Minolta's initial success likely spurred the others to continue R&D. Those companies that failed to jump on the AF bandwagen, eventually quit making SLR's (well okay Leica continued as did Contax). Late in the game Contax came out with a system. </p>

<p>Comparisons are invidious, especially for a gift horse, but I could see why Canon EOS and the lens-based solution to AF triumphed in the market place.<br>

That being said, I'd put the Canon "Power Zoom" (the only one of its kind in the Canon lineup) and the EOS 700 -- which are very comparable to the Minolta zoom in market intentions -- as superior to the Maxxum lens and camera combination in AF capability. As I said, the Minolta solution is in the body, so it's a different kettle of fish than in-lens AF.</p>

<p>My wife had one of these (actually still has, but not used since she got her magnificent Nikon F100), and it's indeed a very nice camera. Although the controls are entirely non-traditional, they're ergonomically pretty good, and the camera performs well, with a very accurate meter.</p>

<p>As JDM has discovered, it's hardly at its best in dim light with a slow zoom. The autofocus works decently with a fast lens, but hunts incessantly with a slow one. My wife abandoned autofocus for the most part, because it burns up batteries pretty quickly. You can get it to behave a little better if you look for vertical or nearly vertical lines or edges at the required distance and then hold the focus. If you're shooting indoors, the 50 prime lens is worth getting because the focus is much more reliable.</p>

Interesting thread... nice to have a place for this.

 

Here's my Maxxun 7000 page, with a couple of ads, a Popular Science article, and copies of 3 autofocus patents,

owned by Honeywell.

 

http://basepath.com/Photography/Minolta7000.php

<p>Nice page, Marc, but then all of yours are. :)</p>

<p>Excellent, <strong>JDM</strong>. I've had a few AF Minoltas but never a Maxxum, and this is an intriguing post. In the end EOS won, for me... Great page, <strong>Marc</strong>.</p>

<p>Very nice indeed.That autofocus lawsuit is often thought to be the reason why Minolta eventually exited the camera business, though I suspect the true story is more complex than that - see, for example, this post by the sometime VP of camera marketing at Minolta in the US, <a href="http://blog.shutterbug.com/jonsienkiewicz/vectis_wrecked_us/">Vectis wrecked us</a>.</p>

<p>I don't have a 7000 myself, though heaven knows I have enough other Minolta cameras from the AF and MF eras. (Perhaps one day one will arrive attached to a lens I'd like from eBay.)</p>

<p>I've always liked the Minolta glass. That little zoom on JDM's camera was part of a bargain line at the time, priced competitively with third party lenses even when new, but it is a pretty decent performer except for speed, and the built-in cap/hood assembly is quite convenient. It's a good walking around lens. You can get that lens from KEH for 20-odd bucks now. My wife's favorite Maxxum lens was the higher-line 70-210/F4 macro zoom.</p>

<p>My wife was getting interested in photography beyond the usual snapping, and signed up for a long weekend workshop with a prominent Vermont photographer, focusing on lake and marine photography. About two days before the session, her Maxxum packed up and quit. She ended up having to borrow my shabby old Konica T3 with only a normal and a Sigma 35-70 lens, and though she learned a lot at the session, she was handicapped at every turn by its short lenses, dim and klunky viewfinder, and unfamiliar metering. During the Maxxum's stay at the camera hospital, we got talking and thinking about cameras and such, and we allowed as how she ought to get something more up to date and reliable, so she went out and got a Nikon F100, which is, of course, hard to beat. The Minolta came home and has been in retirement ever since, a potential backup perhaps for traveling, but otherwise it sits there, too nice to sell for the pennies it's now worth.</p>

<p>I should probably battery it up one of these days and run some film through it, just to keep its spirits up.</p>

<p>That ($20US) is exactly what I paid for the little lens, by the way. It works fine if you don't strain it.</p>

<p>Nice post JDM.</p>

<p>I think everybody with an interest in "classic modern" cameras owes it to himself to try out one of these.</p>

<p>Many of us remember what a game changer this camera was when it was first introduced. If you were buying a serious SLR at that time, you really had to consider seriously whether this autofocus bandwagon was something you wanted to jump onto or was just a passing fad.</p>

<p>I'm still betting that it's a fad. But the cameras are cheap enough now that I can hedge my bet and buy some AFs to use for appropriate occasions.</p>

<p>My own is a 5000 which I use with a Minolta 28-80mm 3.5-5.6, a Quantaray 100-300mm 4.5-6.7 LDO, and a Vivitar Series-1 19-35mm 3.5-4.5, and an 1800AF dedicated flash. And I really do use it. Never mind comparing it to other cameras; the gear gets the job done and has a few clever features. I don't even mind too much that it is styled like a 1985 Honda Prelude.</p>

 

<p><em><strong>Excellent</strong> <strong>thread</strong></em>, JDM. I also received a wonderful 7000 body from Ralf (he <em>is</em> a great guy and supremely knowledgeable about all things Minolta) and to be honest, I've had more fun with this camera than almost any older AF camera I've owned or used. I think that knowing the history behind it contributes to its mystique for me, and it's actually quite a good performer, despite slower performance compared to newer cameras. This was really a landmark camera in a lot of ways. Interestingly I bought the exact same lens for the camera, although mine may not be in quite as pristine a condition as yours is. I find that I rather like the lens and the built-in lens cover is wonderful! Thanks for this post. It was very timely, since I'm currently putting a roll through the camera. Hopefully I'll have something to share soon!</p><div></div>

<p>Considering how very convenient that combination shade and cap is, I wonder that it's so rarely adopted. </p>

<p><em>'...Yashica with the 230 AF... All of them were a bit slow to focus like the Maxxum, but each offered invovations of their own. So the race was on to make improvements. Minolta's initial success likely spurred the others to continue R&D. Those companies that failed to jump on the AF bandwagen, eventually quit making SLR's (well okay Leica continued as did Contax). Late in the game Contax came out with a system.'</em></p>

<p>The old Contax UK website has this curious claim:</p>

<p>http://www.contaxcameras.co.uk/history.asp</p>

<p><em>'The pressure was building over a long period of time for Yashica and Carl Zeiss to enter the Auto Focus business. Yashica was prepared to do this and showed a prototype at Photokina in 1982. This prototype was based upon the Contax 137 series of camera bodies and had an in-board motor drive coupling which mated to the installed Carl Zeiss 50mm fl.4 lens. <strong>This camera design, changed very little, eventually did appear on the market as the Minolta Maxxam 7000.</strong> There was resistance from Carl Zeiss to embrace autofocus technology because it was felt that the lenses would have to be made from lighter materials such as plastic. Needless to say, Contax did not go forward with the introduction of this 137 based AF camera.'</em></p>

<p>So was this Yashica technology? How did the deal work with Minolta, and was Yashica affected by the lawsuit? If this is historically accurate, why (even if Zeiss wasn't interested in a Contax version) didn't Yashica go to market earlier with an own-branded camera rather than sharing the technology with Minolta?</p>

<p>JDM,</p>

<p>Thanks for reminding me that I had this camera at one. My father gave it to me along with the 50mm f1.7. That lens was absolutely amazing. It was the only lens I ever used with the camera. The camera gave up the ghost and I sold the lens before I knew better.</p>

<p>I hope everyone will indulge me as I am going to post a dozen photos take with camera. Looking at the photos brings back memories of my trip to Honduras, Guatemala, London and Ireland. It was also the camera that I brought to Japan. I can now buy it used for as low as 3.50$!</p>

<p>Mike</p><div></div>

<p>Photo 2</p><div></div>

<p>Photo 3</p><div></div>

<p>Photo 4</p><div></div>

<p>Photo 5</p><div></div>