Please bring me up to speed on srt 101 vs. 202

I have googled unsuccessfully on trying to find out how the SRT 202

differs from the 101. Any info will be appreciated . Thank you.

In form and function they are pretty similar. The 101 will have more features. This should help.

 

http://home.pcisys.net/~rlsnpjs/minolta/srt.html

<em>"... trying to find out how the SRT 202 differs from the 101..."</em>

 

<p>In addition to Dick Sullivan's website (above), the definitive web referencein my

mindis Antony Hands's <a href="http://www.rokkorfiles.com/SRT%20Series.htm">The

Rokkor Files</a> website. </p>

 

<p>The <em>essential</em> differences between the two bodies are...

 

<ol>

<li>The 101 has mirror lock-up while the 202 does not. This is useful where camera shake

from a moving mirror is objectionable (eg., macro photography), but of little value

elsewhere. I've done a "fair" amount of macro photography using a bellows <em>without</em>

using the mirror lock-up on my 101, so I consider mirror lock-up an over-rated feature.</li>

<li>The 202 has a hot shoe for flash while the 101 doesn't. A $5.00 adapter will provide

this feature on a 101.</li>

<li>The 202 shows both the shutter speed and the aperture in the viewfinder, while the 101

only shows the shutter speed. My 102 shows both, but I can't say it's ever made a

difference to me.</li>

<li>The 202 has a place to insert the flap of a film box on the camera back, so you can

easily tell what kind of film is in the camera. </li>

</ol>

 

<p>Besides that, the differences are minimal. The 202 has a "multi-exposure"

feature that isn't much different from the same (undocumented) implementation on the 101.

Push in the rewind button as you cock the shutter and the film won't advance. None of my

SRTs has the "Safe Film Indicator" (202 only) so I can't comment on that.</p>

 

<p>Hope this helps.

The 101 was made from March 1966 to 1975, the 202 family (Sr-T202, Sr-T303b, SR505 and SR505s)was made from 1975 to sometime-not-later-than August 1978. The 101 went through 3 major generations: first from 1966-69 with 3 external detail changes in this period, second from 1969-73 with a major change around 1971, third and last generation was from 1973-75. The first version 101's were assembled with JIS external screws, which have a flat-slot head vs a phillips head, so these early 101's can be easily picked out. Also 1966-69 101's had the early Sr-V black speed dial ring (the barrel that turns for setting shutterspeed), post-1969-to-1980 Sr-t's had the 'tire-tread' type ring (with color to match body color).

 

The 202 family went thru ongoing modifications during its production, with a whole cluster of changes made around 1977.

 

All versions of the 101's and the 202 family's have shutterspeeds 'B', 1s to 1/1000s, have self-timers, and have locking depth of field preview buttons. The 1966-67 101's came initially only in chrome body, before 1968-69 black body 101's were introduced. All models in the 202 family were available in both chrome and black bodies.

 

Up until around 1971, all 101's came with mirror lock-up (MLU): at that time Minolta developed alternate parts groups for the "abolition" (their word) of MLU. After 1971 some 101's continued to be made with MLU, some did not have this feature. Minolta says that "early" (their word) 202's also featured MLU, but this feature seems to have been tied to 'using up' of left-over 102 family's front pieces and MLU seemed to be phased out very soon after 202's began production.

 

All 101's have viewing screens with 16lines/mm microgroove fresnel and center microprism spot, all 202 family models have the 16lines/mm fresnel with split-image center/microprism-surround spot. All 101's and 202's have the cemented-doublet eyepiece lens.

 

All 101's and 202 family models have that shutterspeed scale running along the bottom of the viewfinder field.

 

All 202 family models have the additional window-and-mirror setup to allow the lens' aperture to be seen reflected above the viewfinder field. No 101's have this feature. 101's are 'flat-faced', 202's have that separate bulged front name plate. All 101's and all 202 family models are engraved with 'CLC' on front nose cover (none of these models survived into the post-1980 'non-CLC' end).

 

All 101's have cold shoes, 202's have single-contact hot shoes. The 101's have a synch port on the left hand side of the nose, and can only use a flash with a cord. The 202 family models retained this port along with their hot shoe: the 1975-77 202 family's have a changeover switch on the LH side of the nose to allow this port to be changed-over to allow either 'X' or 'FP' synch, in 1977 this switch was deleted and later 202 family models have only 'X' synch hot shoe and port.

 

The method of anchoring the 101's shoe was modified over life of production (this is one way of telling when a given 101 was made) so that the last 1973-75 101's can be more easily converted to hot shoe.

 

The Sr-T101 was a "all areas" (Minolta's term) model: if one bought a new 101 from 1966 to 1975 anywhere in the world, it would always have been engraved Sr-t101. For Sr-t's developed after 1973, Minolta divided their markets into the North American, European, "3rd area" (their words) and the Asian markets. So the 202 family was engraved as the Sr-T202 for the USA and Canada market, the Sr-T303b for European and "3rd Area" markets, and the SR505 for the Asian market. The 1977 SR505s was also for the Asian market.

I don't believe ANY 202's had the MLU feature. The MLU was phased out before the 101 and 102 were discontinued.

 

IMHO, the only feature of use in the 101 that is lacking in the 202 is MLU. But a couple of the 202's added features have some value: The more complete viewfinder information is certainly worthwhile, as is the hotshoe.

Not all 101s have cold shoes. Some have hot shoes. But none of the 101s with Mirror Lock-Up have hot shoes.

The 2 topics Douglas Green brought up have been discussed on other forums. One of the members in one of these other discussions found Minolta's own answer as to whether 202 family models were one of models that had MLU at "kmpi.konicaminolta.us/eprise/main/kmpi/content/cam/cam_Faqs/cam_FaqD\etail/Faq341"

(sorry couldn't do link: this was Question #341 in the archives of the Interactive Q&A at Support under KonicaMinolta USA, KMPI). Anyway Minolta's own answer was that "early" (their word) models of the 202's had MLU (keep in mind their answer is 30 years after the fact). As part of couple of other discussions elsewhere, listings for a MLU 202 and a MLU 303b were separately found through Eb*y. And also part of one of these discussions was that to try to convert a non-MLU 202 to MLU'd 202 was an involved procedure: the 202 chassis is different from a MLU 101 or 102 (to be able to carry SLS), so to convert one cannot just change top covers and back doors, one would need to change whole front plates and mirror boxes assemblies. So in one or another of these discussions we're all still wondering whether these 2 MLU 202/303b Eb*y examples were original or were converted by some really dedicated & talented technician. I have a low number SR505 without MLU, which implies to me that MLU was indeed deleted very early if it was ever included at all, and only Minolta's own word as the only thing that ever would lead me to believe that MLU was ever put on a 202 from the factory. Me true believer. So much for this trivial point...

 

As to the 101's accessory shoe, Minolta's own Sr-T technical literature (including the post-1980 comprehensive Sr-T service manual) never shows a 101 with a hot shoe as they came from the factory, always with a cold shoe from the factory. As I said, the 1973-75 101's cold shoe is very easily converted to hot shoe by people other than Minolta. A few of these conversions are showing up now, and confusing some of us budding industrial archeologists...

Maybe you guys can help me here. I seem to be lost. I use my SRT bodies <em>interchangeably</em>.

That is, I never think about which body I'm usingonly which body has which <em>lens</em>

attached to it and which <em>film</em> in it. I use a -101, a -201, and a -102 with all

the various combinations of hot shoe, MLU, etc. that you'll find among them. And I've

never once heard myself say, "Thank goodness I had the f/stop displayed in the

viewfinder for that shot." Or "That ol' hot shoe sure saved the day on <em>that</em>

one!"

 

<p>MLU? Sure... the day I got my tripod I started doing flower and insect close ups. I <em>still</em>

use the same ol' Minolta Bellows SR set-up (made for the <em>previous</em> generation of

SR bodies and Rokkor lenses). Did some pics with MLU. Did some pics without. Compared

negs. Couldn't see any difference. Haven't used the -101's MLU since then (1968?). Still use the same

tripod, though. </p>

 

<p>So, it seems to me that the body is arguably the <em>least</em> important element in

the SRT equation. When you buy <em>any</em> SRT, you're buying into the <em>family</em>.

You're buying into the <em>Minolta System</em>. It's those Rokkor <em>lenses</em> that

provide the System's <em>real</em> "value." The <em>optics</em>. And the other

attachments (bellows, slide copiers, motor drives...). Not nearly so the <em>bodies</em>after

all, bodies are just a film plane, a shutter, and a light-tight place to stick a lens.

They're all pretty much the same. From the "lowly" SRT-100 (Ha!) all the way up

the line, the SRT bodies are <em>all</em> just the <em>same</em> film plane, shutter, and

place to stick a beautiful ol' Rokkor lens. Beyond that... <em>who cares! </em></p>

 

<p>I guess what I'm saying is... an SRT is an SRT, isn't it? Unless you're attaching the

camera to a telescope, is the <em>lack</em> of MLU gonna be a show-stopper for anyone? And

since there are no "dedicated" flashes for SRTs, is a hot shoe all <em>that</em>

importantan old-fashioned sync cord accomplishes the <em>same thing</em>! Some of

the SRTs have a top shutter speed of 1/500 instead of 1/1000, but is <em>one step</em> all

that big a deal? Okay... maybe it is. But, maybe not. </p>

 

<p>Either way, for what it's worth, I use a <em>different</em> taxonomy for SRTs. <em>This</em>

classification is meaningful to <em>me</em>, even though it hasn't been discussed so far.

To me, there are two broad SRT families: There are...

 

<ol>

<li>those SRTs which "remind you"  of what film is loaded into the camera by

using a neat little pocket to stick the flap from your film box into and... </li>

<li>those older ones which use a little ISO dial instead</li>

</ol>

 

<p>IMO, the dial doesn't cut it compared with seeing the actual film box flap!  The

box flap has a <em>lot</em> more going for it, you know? In addition to ISO, it tells you <em>instantly</em>...

Negative or slide? Color? B/W? B/W D-76? B/W C-41? To me, providing <em>this</em>

information so handily is the <em>biggest</em> difference among the SRT models.</p>

 

<p>Anyway, bottom line: aside from the above, aren't <em>all </em>SRTs pretty much

interchangeable unless you have some specific, esoteric application? Otherwise... what's

the big deal? An SRT is an SRT, isn't it? Am I missing something important?

In response to Bob Gentile's post, I'd say all features matter to the collector. To the user only those feature matter that he/she uses. If you are using several SRTs with different films loaded and are used to putting the film lable into the little memo loader at the back, not having this feature would obviously bother you. However, if your 202 is always loaded with B&W, and your 101 always with color film, you couldn't care less about the memo holder. Similarly, if you have always checked shutter speed and aperture in the viewfinder since way back in the 1970s, you probably wouldn't want to buy an SRT now that lacks this information.

 

As far as bodies being the least important part in the manual focus Minolta system, I don't know. I agree with you that differences between various SRT models are minor, but all SRTs are pretty darn nice cameras with a lot of advanced features for the time, and they started a long tradition for Minolta designing some of the most user friendly SLR bodies on the market. For example, which other camera of the SRT era boasts full aperture TTL metering? Since as SRT users, we are all used to this very handy feature, I dare say it would bother us if we had to go back to stop-down metering. So the camera body offering this convenience for me is an integral part of the enjoyment of the system - but of course I don't want to take any of your praise away from the fantastic Rokkor lenses ;-)

Personally, I find having the f-stop visible in the finder to be an indispensible feature.

<em>"... all features matter to the collector. To the user only those feature

matter that he/she uses..."</em>

 

<p>Ahhh... the <em>collector</em>! Never even considered that. Thanks, Frank. <em>Now</em>

all this talk makes sense. </p>

 

<p>You're rightas a <em>user</em> I could care less about most of these features

most of the time. I thought I'd appreciate the f/top in the viewfinder of my -102, but...

I never even look at it. (I usually have a pretty fair idea of how I'm going to expose a

shot <em>before</em> I look in the viewfinder.) But to a collector? Sure. And if you ask a

hundred SRT users, "When's the last time you used MLU?" you'll probably get 96

blank stares. But... yeah, I can see how MLU would have importance to a collector. </p>

 

<p> </p>

 

<p><em>"... I agree with you that differences between various SRT models are minor,

but all SRTs are pretty darn nice cameras with a lot of<br>

advanced features for the time..."</em></p>

 

<p>Exactly. That's precisely <em>why</em> I see the SRT body as being (arguably) the least

important element in the equation. To the <em>user</em>, <em>all</em> SRTs are pretty

darned nice!

Wow! Thank you for all the details. I recently purchased a very clean SRT 101 with f1.4 lens. I would rate it mint- or excellent++ . Price was $160.00 . Have not yet taken any photosw with it, but shutter speed seems to be accurate and the meter is consistent with my other cameras and standalone meters. Ivor Matanle, my classic camera guru is very high on Minolta SRTs. I have a 202 enroute to me. I will let you know what new features it may provide. At the least I expect to see f-stop info thorughthe viewfinder window. When I returned from Vietnam in 1967, I showed some slides I had take in Bangkok with an FT-QL with 50mm 1.8 lens. My brother-in-law then showed some slide take with a Minolota. I was very impressed with the contrast and crispness of the photos. I hope my cameras can do the same.

Don't believe everything you read in Ivor Matanle's books. There is a lot of misinformation and just plain opinion and conjecture in his writings.

Perhaps, but if you're looking for a 100% mechanical match-needle 35mm SLR, Minolta SRTs are certainly amongst the best. Although, $160 seems a high price to pay for even a Mint- SRT-101, unless it was black finish, or came with an iron-clad warrantee from a reputable dealer.

 

IMHO, the fair value for that camera is more like $100-120 in chrome finish. In chrome, even a Mint- SRT-102 with MLU is worth no more than $150 nowadays.