Who cares what comes next my gear works fine (images)

[jamesdak]

Instead of all the speculating I just use what I've got. Here's

some images taken this weekend with the 7D handheld using a 300mm

f/4.0 lens and a 1.4x teleconvertor II

 

Shorteared Owl<div></div>

[jamesdak]

Another<div></div>

[jamesdak]

Yet Another<div></div>

[jamesdak]

Final one<div></div>

[chris_harley1]

Hey nice work, nice and sharp and handheld. TC's are on the wishlist but my new baby will need feeding according to my girlfriend. Priorities sigh!

[jamesdak]

Yeah those priorities do suck! For many, many years I got by with the old Minolta 28-85mm f/3.5-4.5 zoom and a Sigma 400mm f/5.6 APO and a Toking 80-200 f/2.8. Then everyone started dumping thier Minolta gear to go digital with another brand and I started getting great glass at a wonderful price. Otherwise my priorities would have won out over the new lenses. Right now there are a few more items I'd like but with the current state of prices there's no way I'm buying anything.

 

Here's one more taken with the combo mentioned in the original post:<div></div>

[peterblaise]

.

 

I concur - use what we got and enjoy, and any Sony delights to come sooner or later will just be icing on the cake, but don;t wait - go out and shoot somethign now, and bring it back alive! =8^o

 

If Minolta went out of business immediately after making any number of my Minolta gear, I'd be just as happy with that gear.

 

* Minolta SR T 101 system -1960s

 

- still unbeatably rugged and inexpensive and accurate.

 

* Minolta HiMatic series - 1970s

 

- completely self contained, inexpensive and accurate, super quiet - and the HiMatic E has such sweet bokeh in it's progressive shutter, like the STF Smooth Trans Function of later designs - the Minolta Alpha/Dynax/Maxxum 135mm f/2.8/[T4.5] STF manual focus A-mount (the ONLY manual focus lens made in the Minolta A-mount!) and Minolta Alpha/Dynax/Maxxum 7 camera STF feature.

 

* Minolta X-700 system - 1980s

 

- full auto exposure and drive (forward) capabilities and TTL OTF flash, easy manual features, still excellent and uses all Minolta SR T 101 lenses - cool! W-a-y more sophisticated than my Canon AE1!

 

Minolta Alpha/Dynax/Maxxum 507si/600si/650si - 1990s

 

- sophisticated intelligence - "si" - taking the goal of anti shake into ACTIVE electronics whereas the X-700 series were a bit passive regarding keeping the shutter speed on a bent ramp against photographer's hand-held shake - the "si" series knew the focal length of the attached lens and adjusted accordingly, unlike the X-700 bending for a 50mm lens and all others fall where they may! "Sophisticated intelligence" also heralded the superlative Minolta exposure which proved so foolproof compared to Canon and Nikon in their day in magazine comparisons - the Minolta.14-honeycomb and sophisticated intelligence always overcame reviewers attempt to trick the exposure system far better than the so-called competition. What competition - after all, IT'S A MINOLTA! ;-) I still see pro and semi-pro and amateur contributions to publications and stock around the world based on this camera's image capture. Oh, yes, and a return to the direct read-out KNOBS controls, Minolta's way of apologizing for over doing it on computerization and multi-function push button sequences!

 

* Minolta DiMage Scan series - Dual and Elite - 2000s

 

- so I can keep my FILM cameras and at least FujiFilm (promising to stay even if they are the "last man standing") and not be too distand from the digital processing world. Great!

 

* Minolta DiMage 5-7-A-series - 2000s

 

- hey, the introduction of AS Anti Shake on a MINOLTA logo'd camera (narray a "Konica" anywhere to be seen on the A1 - YEAH!) What a delight! ISO 800 + AS = +~2 stops hand held to ISO 3200 in a very early yet sophisticated digicam with a superb lens, great ergonomics - another perennial contributor to publications and stock around the world.

 

Jim, you're absolutely right. Why speculate? Why not do what defines being a photographer - PHOTOGRAPHING!

 

Click!

 

Love and hugs,

 

Peter Blaise peterblaise@yahoo.com Minolta A (1950s) through DiMage A (2000s) Photographer, and Minolta Alpha (1990s) in between! http://www.peterblaisephotography.com/<div></div>

[robert_paul1]

There is nothing wrong with your equipment, but then you're lucky, you've made the jump to digital. However, many others have not made the jump, so we are left to speculate as to what will come from Sony. The 7D is a very good camera, IMHO. It has enough pixels and technology to give you a very good picture. Any future camera will be more evolutionary, rather then revolutionary, in my eyes.

[jamesdak]

Robert - Actually I've only partially made the jump to digital. I shoot all sorts of cameras according to the desired results and uses for those results. I also still shoot a couple Maxxum 7 bodies along with several manual focus Minolta film bodies and even some rangefinders. I have a Dual Scan IV I use to convert my velvia slides to digital when needed. The 7D is great for stuff to be used on the web. If I need high quality large printed images though, I'm still shooting film. Heck, I'll even break out the old Mamiya 645 1000s medium format SLR for some shots everynow and then.<div></div>

[peterblaise]

.

 

Yes, Jim, EXACTLY - we have TONS of great Minolta photographic gear already and it's not suddenly BAD because there new stuff on the horizon or because Minolta tanked, so USE WAHT WE'VE GOT and enjoy!

 

Click!

 

Love and hugs,

 

Peter Blaise peterblaise@yahoo.com Minolta Photographer http://www.peterblaisephotography.com/

 

PS - I have a strange feeling that sooner or later, Sony will take on Canon full frame, just to show that they CAN do it. See Sony Qualia (now discontinued, I imagine monies have been diverted to Sony DSLR development and marketing) for a tease on how much Sony is willing to spend on ZERO return "impression" gear: http://www.dpreview.com/news/0306/03061002sonyqualia016.asp<div></div>

[bob_gentile]

<strong>Robert: </strong><em>"... There is nothing wrong with your equipment, but

then you're lucky, you've made the jump to digital. However, many others have not made the

jump, so we are left to speculate as to what will come from Sony..."</em>

 

<p>Speaking for myself, I'm one who <em>hasn't</em> made the jump to digital (cameras and

lenses). I still shoot with my trusty old SRTs and Rokkor lenses and I could care less

what Sony is up to. As long as I can scan my negs, I can do anything a digital shooter can

do.<p>

BTW, great images, Jim!

[kin_lau]

Excellent stuff Jim. I've handled a 7D that belongs to a friend, and it's a very nice handling body.

 

ps. That's a Burrowing Owl in the 1st shot.

[roger_smith4]

Hey Jim, no disagreement with the text, but what are you using to downsize the images? They are coming up very blocky and pixellated in my browser. I've had this problem with some free resize programs.

[unohuu]

I am certainly happy with what I have. Shot Friday before Mothers's Day.<div></div>

[unohuu]

Trying again. 7D with Sigma 28-70 f/2.8 and 3600HS Flash<div></div>

[unohuu]

More recent images with the 7D and 70-210 f/4.0<div></div>

[unohuu]

7D and Sigma 28-70mm f/2.8<div></div>

[jacob_napthine]

Jim, excellent pics! BTW love your XD-7. Looks very cool. Did you custom make the leather yourself?

 

Lucius, very cool pic of the pipes. Like it alot.

 

Cheers

 

Jake

[jamesdak]

I had to downsize the images again at work to fit the format here. Used what I had, Windows picture editor. If you go to this PBASE site you can see better examples: www.pbase.com/jhuddle

 

I'm not an Owl expert but it looked like a Shorteared Owl when comparing it against my field guide. Educate me on why you think it's a burrowing owl please, thanks!

 

The XD-7 was recovered with a goatskin kit from cameraleather.com.

[bill_thorlin]

Jim - given your predilection for anything 7 just thought I would let you know that there is 7 Limited Edition Kit going on fleabay UK item number 7619394900 - might take some explaining to the memsahib though :)

 

As to the owl, size is the quick determinant - Burrowing Owl 9 to 11 inches long and Short Eared Owl ( if the same as UK version ) 13 to 17 inches long so about 50% bigger all round including wing span. Short Eared Owls tend to have more of a "dish" round the eyes making them more prominent and the "ears" are not always apparent.

[jamesdak]

Bill- thanks for the explanation on the Owls. Per the size I'd say Burrowing is right as he was a smaller sized fellow. I guess I need to both look and "READ" what the field guide says,LOL!!

 

Thanks guys!

[theaudiodoc]

Good point Jim, and very nice photos! I too will probably be relying on Sony for a digital SLR and some long lenses. Don't have anything long enough to get any shots like yours. That's why I hope Sony brings out a fast 500mm lens. Though I suppose an older MC/MD lens would do just fine. Maybe I should start a new post to get input from everyone on this subject.

Robert

[kin_lau]

Hi Jim,

 

Just a little late to the reply, but it's hard to describe with words alone. But looking at one, the difference should be obvious. Size is also an excellent indication.

</p>

I often think of Short-Eared Owls as having eye-makeup/mascara :)

</p>

 

<img src="http://www.istop.com/~gabe/IMG_0302_wink_650.jpg">

</p>

Short-Eared Owl.

[jamesdak]

Kin, I see what you mean! Nice shot and thanks for setting me straight earlier.

Jim

[bill_thorlin]

Wish it was always so simple - try sorting out the hawks between male/female/immature :)