XD-11 result

Discussion in 'Classic Manual Cameras' started by royall_berndt, May 18, 2013.

  1. The XD-11 has terrific metering. I'm almost always satisfied with its exposures. This shot was taken with Minolta's 70-200 F4 MD zoom. I believe I was at 70mm. Kodak Ektar. [​IMG]
     
  2. Excellent street shot Royall
     
  3. I know it as the XD-7, last of the metal-bodied Minoltas, and a fine camera. I'd agree with you about the metering, Royall; the Minolta SLR's were all pretty good in that respect. Nice pic; a moment well-captured.
     
  4. "The XD-11 has terrific metering."
    Aperture and shutterspeed priority modes driving an electronic shutter, just like in any typical Classic Manual Camera. ;-)
     
  5. Also in shutter priority mode it takes a last instant reading at shooting aperture to compensate for lenses that fail to close
    down to aperture selected by camera.
     
  6. Also in shutter priority mode it takes a last instant reading at shooting aperture to compensate for lenses that fail to close down to aperture selected by camera.​

    This is the reason I would never use the XD-11 in shutter priority mode.
     
  7. Les,
    Can't help but wonder now: do you understand "[...] encompass all cameras up to the electronic/autofocus era"? An electronic, camera, with automation driving an electronic shutter? How do you reconcile "shutter priority mode" with "manual"?
    And that's not even touching on the "Classic" bit.

    I propose once more to rename this forum to "Any Old Crap". That, or expect people to heed the description and intend it expresses. You can quote the bit perfectly fine. But can you also stop ignoring it?

    If anyone thinks this camera is an exception, please do explain, at length, why it would be a Classic camera that has a place here despite being an embodiment of the electronic cameras the forum description says this forum is not for. That would be interesting indeed.
     
  8. Les,
    You caught me, trousers down... ;-)
    So you do acknowledge that machines like the XD-11 and the OM-40 do not belong here. Good. Even though you managed to quote the rule that explains why not, yet failed and again fail to see what it says. "up to the electronic/autofocus era". The XD-11 is an electronic camera from that era excluded by the bit you repeatedly quote. The comments made about it are about it's electronic modes that drive its electronic shutter. Very CMC, that.
    So not a "classic" (or if you think it is, explain why you think it is. That would be at home here.)
    Not "manual" (having a manual mode itself is already proof that it is not a manual camera.)
    A camera, true. A camera. Like so many.
    It's not difficult. A Minolta XD-11 is "Any Old [Thing]" needing batteries to run the thing. Not a CMC.
     
  9. I agree with Les because otherwise we would need another forum for the XD-11, Pentax LX etc... I don't think they belong in the modern film camera as they are not modern.
     
  10. Les,
    The mods have seen fit to set the rules you quote, then proceed to flout as if you not just quoted them.

    We don't need to be overly strict.
    But we shouldn't also lose focus to the degree that Chinons and Minolta XD-11 are discussed in this forum. There are plenty CMCs that do qualify.
    So leave out the millions of uninteresting also-rans that don't even make it through the filter the mods have set. Uninteresting, banal, electronic cameras are not CMS by anyone's definition. Even though you can show pictures that prove they are cameras.
    If you think otherwise, don't discuss it with me. Ask the forum operator to change the scope of this forum.

    BeBu
    The Modern Film Cameras forum is exactly the place for these cameras.
    Does anyone ever read the "about this forum" bits and not think they are something of no consequence, just there to ignore?
     
  11. I've recently put my posts on the XD7 (11) and XE1 in the Modern Film Cameras forum. I'm the last person to nitpick about definitions, bur despite their classic look and feel these are clearly complex electronic devices and should not by the accepted definitions be in the CMC forum - although I tend to prefer this forum as it seems more active and sympathetic.
     
  12. There was a time when the MFC didn't exist as a forum. But as we all have experienced and seen this is a tolerant and sympathetic forum and we're not going to to let a the few misplaced posts spoil our continental breakfast. I use this model and when I get around to making a post I will probably put it in the "other" forum, even though all my buddies are here. I just came into aYashica FX-D Quartz thanks to this Forum and when I take delivery I will likely do a VS post with this XD 11 . which btw is the best SLR I own; best shutter ( quiet ) best screen ( brightest ) most intutive to use etc .... I do love that opening shot the red is great!!
     
  13. Les as for the OM there is only the OM-1 and the rare OM-3 that would fit Q.G. definition all other OM's are not manual. They all have at least aperture priority AE.
     
  14. While I don't think the XD-11 is a great camera and have one and don't like it very much but I do think it's an important milestone in the Minolta line of cameras and for that it's certainly a classic to me.
     
  15. Les, Bebu,
    I can imagine that you like to imagine what other people may think. But be so polite and don't assume that because you imagine it it is true.

    Re the OMs and Classics: the true classic among the OMs is the OM-2. It is one of those exceptions that the rules you quote and then ignore talks about.
    It can be argued why it is a classic, matching the rules you quote and [etc.]. And it (argue the case) could be done and would be perfectly at home in CMC, and be interesting. So if you feel that the XD-11 should be at home here, please do argue the case, Bebu. Turn a "look how an inconsequential camera can actually take a photo!" thread into something at home in this part of PNet.

    But no. Search PNet (you felt moved to do that, but talk about drums beating in my head, Les? :)) for samples of me not being as strict as you say i should not be? :) Why is it so hard, Les, to accept that an XD-11 is not a CMC? That the MFC forum is the place to discuss that camera?
    (And that one of the many picture threads/forums is the place to show pictures, if all that is said about the camera is what brand and model it is and that it works?)
     
  16. Nice diversion, Les.<br>I could, and may, make a case for the CMC status of many cameras. But certainly not for the Minolta XD-11.<br>A thing that, quite simply, does not belong here (no matter from what oblique angle you want to look at it, i.e. not even if i would or would not make a case for any camera myself).<br><br>Now say, Les: are you proposing that PNet abandons the structure it has grown into over the years?
     
  17. But back to the images for a moment. I like the one w/ the selective focus on the guitar, but don't like the bokeh and the harshness between different things that are not in focus. The first shot (this is just my personal opinion, and you know what they say, opinions just like XXXXXXX, they're all different and we all have one) I don't much get. The lens IQ is quite nice, as is the color, but it's a scene I see repeated maybe 10 or 20 times a day. It's irritating to see it live, it's the same to see a photo of it.
    I've been guilty of posting things in the wrong place more than a few times, always by accident. It would be nice to see less categories, but I've been posting here long enough that I sorta know where things go. But not always.
     
  18. The XD-11 has one mechanical normal shutter speed, the OM-2 has none -- so as far as battery dependence goes, the XD-11 is more useful w/o a battery than an OM-2. To me the "manual" & "classic" are mostly about manual focus, manual film advance (w/o an add-on motor), and control dials instead of buttons/menus. Both the XD-11 and the OM-2 would be clearly understandable & usable to most 35mm camera users from the 30's to the 70's but the same could not be said for a Minolta Maxxum. It's the form & function and not the internals that distinguish the modern from the classic.
     
  19. Let's be correct, Erik: the OM-2 also has mechanical shutterspeeds. Two, if you also count B.<br>But this is not about other cameras that also (!) would not qualify as CMCs.<br><br>You think the definition as provided by PNet should be discussed, possibly changed? So do i (but Les says we may not, even though he flouts the definition himself).<br>Meanwhile, it's clear that no matter what way that discussion might be going, the XD-11 will not qualify.
     
  20. Let's be clear: what exactly is the mechanical speed on an OM-2 other than B? Why doesn't it work on my OM-2 where I just took the batteries out and checked. Do you have one in your hands that works? Why is this not mentioned in the OM-2 manual where only the B/Reset position is noted?
    It's clear by my definition that the XD-11 is OK. It's also clear from the practice of the last several years, that cameras like the XD-11 and OM-2 are at least tolerated by most. There are not so many postings on such cameras that ignoring the ones you don't care for is a burden or causes other articles to go off the front page significantly quicker.
     
  21. The OM-2 doesn't have any other mechanical shutter speed besides B. But really I don't count the 1 mechanical speed like 1/60 is ok to call it classic or manual. I don't even consider this fact. Camera like the Hasselblad 2000FC which if you don't have a metered prism it doesn't even have a meter and yet it always requires a battery to work. And sure it's a classic and manual camera.
    Let me say something, Minolta is one of the major camera manufacturers before it sold it business to Sony. If Q.G. doesn't agree with this then I can stop here. In the Minolta line of cameras the XD-11 is an important milestone for Minolta. It was the first camera to have both modes of automation. Before that camera manufacturer built their camera and lens mount to optimize for one type of automation only. The XD-11 use a lens mount that wasn't optimized for shutter priority AE and thus it did the final check of the aperture before taking the shot. For better or worse the XD-11 was also the first(correct me if I am wrong) to use array of LED to indicate shutter speed. There was no innovation to the Minolta line until the Maxxum. I have no softspot for the XD-11 and I can't make a camera a classic. The real reason for it to be a classic is that if Minolta fans speak highly about it and you can verify that by checking website like the Rokkor files.
     
  22. BeBu, it's possible the Pentax ME beat the XD to market: both were released in 1977 so it's a quibble. The first use of LEDs instead of a meter needle or filament bulbs was in the Fujica 801 in 1972.
     
  23. I think you're right Erik, I remember now the MX and ME were introduced at the same time and was before the XD-11. The introduction of the XD-11 made other camera makers nervous at the time. Canon rapidly introduced the A-1 the next year with the additional program mode and the digital display in the viewfinder. The XD-11 may not be a good camera but it's a classic.
     
  24. Goodness! I just come here to see film stuff, couldn't care a gnats snot what it comes from, if you don't like..don't look!
    Back to original post, love the shot...captures youth well, phone in one hand, cigarette in the other..and the red works a treat.
     
  25. Why do we have to put up with the disruptive posts from one individual who never adds anything of value to this forum.
    We have a number of excellent posters like Rick, JDM, Tony, and others who provide us with pictures and a bit of history to the hobby we all love.
    I doubt if Royall came expecting the Spanish Inquisition. Thanks you for your post Royall.
    I also would like to thank the others whose posts make this my favorite forum on photo.net.
     
  26. No-one expects the Spanish Inquisition!
     
  27. Q.L., it would be so nice to have you come out from under the rickety-rackety bridge and initiate a thread, showing and describing some of the undoubtably CMC items from your fine collection and even possibly posting a few examples of your work. It would make a refreshing change from your banging on about the definition of a CMC...
     
  28. While i'd love this to be a thread about me, it - alas - is not.
    Erik, i stand corrected. I confused the OM2 with the OM-4, which also offers 1/60.
    But again: "But this is not about other cameras that also (!) would not qualify as CMCs."

    Bebu,
    You appear to be confusing Classic Manual Cameras for Classic Camera Manufacturers.
    Why do you find it difficult to recognize that "the XD-11 is an important milestone for Minolta. It was the first camera to have both modes of automation. Before that camera manufacturer built their camera and lens mount to optimize for one type of automation only." is exactly why this thing does not fit the definition of a CMC as given by this forum's 'charter' ? (And no: a Hasselblad 2000 FC may be a Classic (debatable), but it certainly isn't a classic manual camera. Again for the very reason no other than you know and mention already.)

    James,
    I would love to read a post of yours that doesn't include references to military and war.

    Rick,
    You're just cross that someone dared question your Chinon making an appearance in the CMC forum.

    Marc,
    You talk about "value to this forum". Stop a while to think about what "this forum" is and how a picture taken by a modern film camera, without even any discussion of the camera itself, could do that: add value to this forum.
    The OP might not have expected the Spanish Inquisition. He could and should have known that this is not the place to get a photo-critique. (And he even got his photo-critique anyway.)

    In short: people, you all spend a lot of energy getting worked up about this. Why not spend some of that energy on making sure you don't make a mess of what the good people of PNet have constructed. If they say this is the place for CMCs, provide another place for MFCs, yet more places for 'look at my picture' threads, who are you to ignore that?
     
  29. Hmmm...

    http://books.google.co.nz/books?id=u_bNdx5vKxIC&pg=PA274&lpg=PA274&dq=rickety+racketybridge&source=bl&ots=Q-CYrg-nWI&sig=5F6hUVYjwoo5PLgFoQU9LdAuTmg&hl=en&sa=X&ei=3eyZUcCWLs6eiQfb9oHYDw&ved=0CC0Q6AEwAA#v=onepage&q=rickety%20racketybridge&f=false
     
  30. That's your answer to "who are you to ignore that?" I see...
     
  31. Uh, back to the camera...

    I posted here because the XD-11 is manual focus and I've seen posts on it in this forum before. Cheers, all.
     
  32. Les,<br>Whether this forum is dedicated to what it is dedicated to is not a matter of you voting. If you want to change it, submit a proposal and have a discussion about it. After which a decision may be made on the matter by whoever is in the position to.<br>The 'charter' is posted in plain sight. You are requested, by PNet, to take the trouble to read and take note of it. Ignoring it, claiming that you can do that because you think it fit is rather antisocial, uncommunity-like behaviour.<br>Who do you think you are that you can decide that a forum is dedicated to whatever you think it is?<br><br>Now you want me to explain to you what a classic camera is? I'll happily oblige. I have done so on several occasions, right from the start, when it was discussed what this forum (then yet to be started) would have to be devoted to.<br>The decision then was to interpret "Classic" as meaning what the charter still says. So be it. Could have been better, but it's fine. What is not fine is that people like you treat such a decision as if it was made by a bunch of imbeciles and not worth anything.<br><br>If i would explain the difference between any old camera and a classic camera to you, someone here will again show himself to be rather uncivil and start saying things about it being o.k. to freely ignore that too. A personality-trait that, wanting to point out something then acting as if he never heard of it, demonstrated by that same person quoting the charter, then proceeding to ignore it.<br><br>Meanwhile, show yourself to be a civil person, and take note of what the charter says this forum is about.
     
  33. Concern Troll
    A person who posts on a blog thread, in the guise of "concern," to disrupt dialogue or undermine morale by pointing out that posters and/or the site may be getting themselves in trouble, usually with an authority or power. They point out problems that don't really exist. The intent is to derail, stifle, control, the dialogue. It is viewed as insincere and condescending.​
     
  34. Q.G.'s bona fides as a crank and all-round irritant are already well-established. He should bear in mind that his "hero" status isn't a life peerage and can be revoked for incivility and/or disutility to the site and its community. I'd personally like to see him benched for a month or so if he can't keep his stick on the ice.
    BTW lovely shot, Royall. Thanks for sharing.
     
  35. Isn't it heart warming to see how much energy people spend searching the web for all sorts of things they can use to hurl at someone. Amazing... Threats, even.<br><br>Amazing that these very same people can't seem to find, or understand what this site expects of them.<br>Or is it? Not really<br><br>Ah well. Such is life on the web.<br>Time will tell if, despite all this face saving posturing, you will have learned a bit. I'm not overly optimistic, but still... hope springs eternal. Just look, for instance, at what Erik took this experience to: a fresh thread that is not just about a very inreresting topic, but one that is firmly at home here in CMC.
     
  36. If you want a ruling here it is.
    The XD-11/XD-7 is an appropriate camera for this forum.
    Those who wish to dispute forum policy should take it up with site administration (contact@photo.net), not me. Discussion of forum policy IN the forum is not encouraged, in fact it's highly discouraged.
    What would be excluded? Anything autofocus. Anything in current production (-> Modern Film Cameras). Anything which is solely dependent on electronics for all shutter, metering, information display and film winding functions. Example? Probably the Canon T90 might be a good one. It's certainly a classic, but fails on the "electronics" clause.
    What's not allowed? Bitching an moaning IN the forum about what should be allowed in the forum. Off topic postings. Repeat violators of these policies will likely be suspended.
    You wanted a ruling, now you have it.
     
  37. Thank you Bob.
     
  38. Thanks Bob. That's simple and clear, and easily understood.
     
  39. Not to debate forum policy at all, but just express my appreciation for the postings here on all these different cameras. If there's something I'm not interested in, I don't read it; but more often than not, I read and learn.
     
  40. Greg - excellent approach. If you're not interested in it, don't read it.
    If you do think the inclusion of whatever you don't think belongs here is a problem for the forum, email contact@photo.net and complain that the forum is being ruined.
     
  41. Royall, there is an Autowinder D and dedicated flash available for the XD-11 (200-X). Should be available at a bargain price. Also, the Rokkor 45mm f2 is a compact normal lens that enables the XD to fit in a jacket pocket.
    With the winder its easy to do multiple exposures since the rewind button can be accessed from the back of the autowinder.
     
  42. goodness me what a kerfuffal over nowt
     
  43. Another XD-11 tip: when the camera is packed in a bag pressure on the shutter release might drain the batteries (courtesy of VF LEDs). Set the shutter speed dial to "O" when packing the camera in a bag or backpack. This is a mechanical speed and the shutter button requires more travel to engage. Also, if batteries fail this is a mechanical 1/100 second.
     
  44. I think the OM-2000 should qualify alongside the OM-1 and OM-3. It is all manual, has no auto focus and in technical terms, is quite classic. :)
    Fight on, Brothers !
     
  45. The OM-2000 was made by Cosina so it's a little bigger than the Olympus-made OM series, but I remember reading a test report on it. Although it doesn't have the following of the traditional OM series, it is an inexpensive way to have an OM body that can reach 1/2000 second. Similar in specs to Yashica FX-3 Super 2000 and Nikon FM10. I don't have one, but I'm holding out for one with the bronze finish.
     
  46. note to anyone who would wish to get one of these: try to find a camera belonging to the latest production series, with the over/under exposure control lever in the inward position as depicted in this photo. Earlier cameras had the lever in opposite outward position, and it is only too easy for the lever to be accidentally moved by the photographer's hand, the strap etc. so producing unwanted over/under exposures. I learned this the hard way.
    00bg7B-539067684.jpg
     
  47. A further XD tip: in shutter priority mode it will automatically shift the shutter speed if the user-selected speed is to fast or
    slow to allow the camera to set the correct aperture.
     

Share This Page