joseph_krasniewicz Posted August 9, 2004 Share Posted August 9, 2004 Anyone know how Konica-Minolta's antishake compares to Canon's IS? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bob_katz1 Posted August 9, 2004 Share Posted August 9, 2004 One is proven technology, and the other is just a concept that has never been tried on an SLR body. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Greg M Posted August 9, 2004 Share Posted August 9, 2004 It will be interesting to see how Konica Minolta "solves" the problem of integrating the image stabilization within the body. It seems doing it that way will limit the ultimate size of the imaging sensor due to how image stabilization works. I for one hope to someday be able to afford a full sized, or at least 1.3 crop image sensored body so I'll not be too upset if Canon never copies that technology if it cannot be applied to the larger digital sensors. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
david_hargreaves Posted August 9, 2004 Share Posted August 9, 2004 Look at popphoto.com - there is an article in the latest review. The minolta antishake seems to do just as well as the Canon, maybe better. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Greg M Posted August 9, 2004 Share Posted August 9, 2004 It does work very well.....in the A2 with it's thumbnail-sized imaging sensor. Whether it works well for me isn't the question and no one's tested the SLR version yet. Is it technology that keeps sensor sizes from ever even approaching a full 35mm frame size is what I wonder. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jeff_plomley1 Posted August 9, 2004 Share Posted August 9, 2004 Even if Minolta's mechanism of solving vibration is equal to or marginally better than Canon's, they still have a long way to go to before coming close to the complete "system" Canon offers professional photographers. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
suman Posted August 9, 2004 Share Posted August 9, 2004 I think Minolta has a better chance. Integrating IS in body solves the problem of setting up of new line of lenses with IS. I think it is more wiser choice to have IS in the body instead of a section of lenses which are indeed costlier than a non-IS version. If Minolta can solve this issue, they will definetely win a large market share from Canon IS and Nikon VR users. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
erich_budeshefsky2 Posted August 9, 2004 Share Posted August 9, 2004 By using a larger sensor to 'see', the MTF gain for anti-shake on Konica/Minolta system is also greater. Canon's IS lens system has a 2-3 stop difference, and Konica/Minolta's version is expected to be higher difference--possibly from 3-5 stops. Case in point, comparing the Minolta A1/A2 to the Canon S1 with IS. Canon has 1/2.7" sensor, while the Minolta A2 has a 2/3". And Minolta has gotten accolades for the A1/A2 stabilization, while the Canon S1 didn't win any. Studying the Canon IS design, it shares a common USM motor around the same movable lens. This saves costs, but it also limits the maximum F-stop to 2.8 So that is why you will never see a Canon IS lens faster than a 2.8. Konica/Minolta will take faster lenses and stabilize them too. Konica/Minolta design is similar to Contax. They(contax) developed a 35mm film camera that will AF with MF lenses, by moving the box by microradians, thus saving owners from purchasing more Zeiss lenses. I know Minolta doesn't have Zeiss lenses, but at least they learned to make some good glass. I heard that Minolta engineers were trained by the Germans before WW II. The company they trained from is Rollei. So I am excited to see how Minolta glass stabilized compares against Canon's IS, particularly in extreme low light on the MTF bench. Notice I keep saying MTF..MTF.. I know this is the best way to compare lens to lens. On a bench measuring light. No human preference to get in the way, as well as repeatability. And about the earlier comment about a full-size sensor. Since the Contax design (a full-size 35mm film box) moves a few hundred micro-radians, I expect it to work on Konica/Minolta design since you can get that much space by increasing the mirror box a bit. So it will look a bit hefty when you look at it. And we haven't seen much full 35mm sensors since they cost so much. Manufacturers make more $$$ on the small sensors ie--have hundreds of 2/3" sensors made on each die, rather than tens of them full-sized. Also professional market share is a lot smaller than the consumer market share. How many have Hassie's versus Canon's???? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Greg M Posted August 9, 2004 Share Posted August 9, 2004 The problem with your Hassy vs. Canon digital argument is the price of Canon DSLR's are going down- not as fast on the pro end but compared to what you had to pay 5 years ago even the 1Ds is cheaper. Hasselblads have never dropped in price and never will go down. They will develope cheaper digital backs for the Hasselblad to keep it's image quality superior, but in the end they will lose out because the consumer will never see the cost break because it's a "Hasselblad". Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ron c sunshine coast,qld,a Posted August 9, 2004 Share Posted August 9, 2004 Not sure what Erich was talking about-'full size sensor',etc. <P>Just to be certain... <BR>The minolta in body IS uses an 'aps' size sensor-in other words the same as canon's 1.6 crop or nikon's 1.5 crop.This allows them to move the sensor for image stabilization yet still be within the image circle of a standard 35mm film lens.The sensor can move up to 1cm!(report/interview on dpreview.com) <P>To answer the original question....i'd pick the minolta sytem ANY DAY!! <BR>Yes minolta don't have anywhere near the variety of lenses that canon have - <br>But being able to use ANY lens in IS mode is a priceless advantage.This is a whole new ball game and canon + nikon are,by no fault of their own,on the outer. In the long run they will HAVE to offer in body IS to compete.The big worry i have is that they will drag their feet big time Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jimstrutz Posted August 9, 2004 Share Posted August 9, 2004 I agree. In body IS, if it works well, is a great idea, and certainly appears to put Minolta back in the top innovators seat. Every thing else I've read that might be in the pipeline seems to pale in comparison. Of course, they've been on top technically before and haven't been able to stay there. They certainly have been lagging in the DSLR dept up 'til now. Time will tell, if Minolta can get in the lead dog position this time. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
steve_rutledge Posted August 9, 2004 Share Posted August 9, 2004 I doubt Minolta will truly shake (ha!) the industry with it's AS system. It will be innovative and probably be very useful, but Minolta has created excellent advancements in photography in the past and is still sitting as a distant 3rd behind Canon and Nikon. Minolta beat Canon & Nikon to the punch with in-body AF, wireless flash as well as afew other minor achievements but still hasn't improved its standings in the pro market. As a former Minolta user (Maxxum 9 & a bunch of pro-grade prime lenses) I believe that the reason for this is simply their lack of support for professional photographers. Consumers see pros walking around with a brand on their strap, and choose the same name when they walk into a camera store.... Their Sept. release of K/M's FIRST DSLR is a prime example of the lack of pro support. For the last umpteen years people have seen nothing but digital Canon & Nikon's around photo journalists necks and that is not likely to change because Minolta has released a "pro-sumer" grade dSLR. (possibly priced between the dRebel & 10D) Personally, I think the only way Minolta could've gotten back in the game was to release a PRO grade dSLR with the AS system (specs like the 1D mk2), a afew SSM (usm) lenses (their 28-70 2.8 is a slow pig) and offer it at an increadibly cheap price. Basically give it away so that pros use them like toiletpaper and EVERYONE sees people carrying them. Considering their merger with Konica, I doubt they are in any financial position to do this so they'll probably be stuck with their current 5% (total guess..) of the market. Basically this is exactly why I dumped my entire Minolta system on ebay and switched to Canon. Not to mention the fact that while I really like the high end Minolta gear, as of September I would have ONE option for a dSLR, while with Canon I have 4 current dSLR's, and a bunch of discontinued models to choose from. (I have a 1D mk2 backordered at Henry's in Toronto...) Long story short, While I'm sure Minolta's AS system is going to be stellar, I highly doubt it will change the face of photography and cause a mass selling spree of Canon & Nikon gear on ebay. Cheers! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jamiew Posted August 10, 2004 Share Posted August 10, 2004 I think people that mention Minolta does not compete professionally with Canon/Nikon (Canikon) are missing the point. While I am sure Minolta would love the $$$$ that come with the professional market, they know it's a big step and they are looking to make a niche for themselves. Their cameras bodies are very innovative, and in many ways better than Canikon's. If it works as well as in the A2 (and is reliable) having IS in the body is AMAZING. I would love to have something like that with my 50/2.5 Macro (A lens I always use handheld). Go go Minolta!!! - An EOS user ;) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
poul Posted August 10, 2004 Share Posted August 10, 2004 both sigma and tamron have all (or almost all) of their lenses with minolta mount; that, with basic set of lenses from minolta, covers almost every need (how many lenses do you need if you are not a gear geek or specialty photographer?). and that, with the fact that every lens instantly becomes IS, makes it very attractive proposition. i know for myself, if this new dSLR is any good, i am damping canon. plus, minolta is unlikely to play silly tricks like canon with their disabled firmware on drebel, so the camera will be as full featured as it can be - and to think about it, all these features cost close to nothing to camera manufacturers and are used only to distinguish different grades of slrs on a marketplace. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
yakim_peled1 Posted August 10, 2004 Share Posted August 10, 2004 <p> <a href="http://www.dpreview.com/news/0408/04080402dynax7interview.asp">Konica Minolta Dynax 7 Digital interview</a> on DPR. </p> <p> Me? I'd love to see a 3D with the Mk II chip, 45 AF points and AS that will also work with IS lenses. Oh, it's so nice to dream.....</p> <p>Happy shooting,<br> Yakim.</p> Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
julianradowsky Posted August 10, 2004 Share Posted August 10, 2004 Never mind the lens or AS/IS debate, what is really important is the quality of the sensor and the images is produces.<br><br>How does Minolta really compare in that department to the Canon (or even Nikon for that matter). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
steve_rutledge Posted August 10, 2004 Share Posted August 10, 2004 Well, lets just look at past examples of minolta's APS sized sensors... oh wait, they don't have any... Really, I love Minolta gear, and I'd love to see them succeed in the mid/highend camera industry but I've been defending them for YEARS now and Minolta (as a business..) has constently let me down as far as support as a photographer. Lens upgrades take years to materialize, and when they do they are priced way too high. (Take a look at Minolta's new 70-200mm f2.8 SSM) 3rd party accessories are harder to find, and often are not even made (take a look at some of the new offerings by Sigma.. there is no Minolta mount option for quite a few of the the newer DX lenses as well as the 120-300mm f2.8 EX) The dSLR thing has been a constant thorn in my side. I had gobs of Minolta equipment but like alot of Minolta photographers, I had to look to other manufacturers for a DSLR.. (I don't have any interest in the tiny sensored ZLRS like the A1/2) AS could be awesome, and I hope it re-instates Minolta as a key player in the dSLR market but I have no interest in switching back. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ron c sunshine coast,qld,a Posted August 10, 2004 Share Posted August 10, 2004 Ah <BR>....THAT will be the potential problem with in body anti shake system (ASS).Sensors need cooling to give good low noise images and the swinging sensor doesn't allow normal heatsinks because of their mass.It will be interesting to see how that all turns out as the smaller digicam with ASS has been said to be noisier than it's competitors-not sure if that's true,just what i heard. <P>There's another problem for minolta in all this as well.Current canon/nikon/pentax users will assume that their manufacturer will do something similar and just wait.Unfortunately for minolta,people won't jump straight away Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bob_katz1 Posted August 10, 2004 Share Posted August 10, 2004 <i>"Jim Strutz , aug 09, 2004; 10:38 p.m. I agree. In body IS, if it works well, is a great idea, and certainly appears to put Minolta back in the top innovators seat. Every thing else I've read that might be in the pipeline seems to pale in comparison. Of course, they've been on top technically before and haven't been able to stay there. They certainly have been lagging in the DSLR dept up 'til now. Time will tell, if Minolta can get in the lead dog position this time."</i><p> It seems to me that about a month after K/M announced this camera, they issued a press release saying they were ending their R&D on digital cameras altogether. It would be awfully hard to get in the lead dog position that way... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jamiew Posted August 10, 2004 Share Posted August 10, 2004 KM is not ending R&D on digital cameras. Where did you read that? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
._._z Posted March 15, 2005 Share Posted March 15, 2005 Bob seems to specialize in deriding anything that doesn't have a Nikon nameplate on it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now