Maybe time for a change, some advice

[james_frater]

Over the years I have collected a nice selection of Minolta Gear, which I love

using. Currently I use a KM 7D and a KM Dimage A2, with flashes, lenses, etc.

 

The 7D with grip fills my hands and makes me feel like a photographer with

confidence.

 

BUT, I am getting a bit itchy for something more, I need a future with

expansion, and I do not think Sony can offer that.

 

I have been looking and liking the Nikon D80, SB600 flashgun, and a couple of

Nikon lenses.

 

I am looking at selling all my Minolta SLR and DSLR gear, which would give me

enough for the conversion to another system, at the moment that would be

Nikon, but who knows maybe Canon.

 

Basically the way I feel now, even if Sony comes out with something bigger and

better, I just cannot seem to take what they have on offer seriously anymore.

I do not feel like a proud photographer if I walk around wearing a Sony A100.

I do not see Sony taking me to a serious level of photography, even as an

enthusiest.

 

I thought the move to Sony would be positive. But within weeks of the A100

being released, both Nikon and Canon came out with models with 10mp sensors,

with the Nikon D80 leading that 10mp market in that price range, and Pentax,

Olympus are now hitting the market with more serious offerings. Sony just does

not seem to be the benchmark, like Minolta had been over the years with

innovation in the camera market.

 

I am just wondering if anyone can offer me anything in the way that would make

me stay with Minolta and Sony.

 

To me Canon and Nikon have serious camera's and even more serious lenses for

photographers. Sony has a mish mash of KM stock and a bunch of items still

waiting to be released.

 

Why stay, why wait, maybe something from Sony this year sometime???

 

When I can get what I want and feel good moving to another brand right now.

[DEGREEFOTO]

'I do not feel like a proud photographer if I walk around wearing a Sony A100'

 

I'm sorry Jimmy...but I usually walk around with clothes on...and do not on average worry about the type of camera I use or more important what other photographers use. Although there has been great debate on this issue...I am one of those that believe that the photographer takes the picture and not the camera. Sure, some models, brands have their respective limitations, more so when professional work is involve to a certain extent...but from your posting I feel that you are suffering from the 'Brand Marketing Bug' and all the hipe to get the most'recent and the best' camera one can purchase.

 

If you need to feel good by moving to another brand then do so...but IMHO, I would take a closer look at what is really required to make you feel even better...the whole thought process and inspiration together with the end result and not just the instrument that was part of it.

 

Artur

[mlynch]

Jimmy:

 

I'm with Artur's point.

 

That being said, I recently sold all my Minolta gear accumulated since the 7000 came out through the 7D.

 

Why, well I was a little frustrated with Sony's lousy job on the takeover of KM, but it finally boiled down to:

 

A. I own a Nikon F4s and some Nikon lenses through some good fortune several years ago.

 

B. I enjoy using "older" technology (witness is my Canon FD collection) but also need to go digital for some of my interests.

 

C. I needed to consolidate my equipment base down to what I knew would get most use.

 

D. Nikon allows me to use great manual focus glass on the D200 body as well as AF. The D200 lens compatibility is about the same as the F4s.

 

If you only have Minolta/Sony gear I'd think long and hard about switching. It was a very difficult decision for me and you never get back the money you've spent in trade. Most people who you share your pictures with seldom ask about the camera used ...

[james_frater]

My issue is not so much the lenses, etc, its the camera body, and the future.

 

Film cameras for example are different, not so much the body, but lenses and film made the difference. Not so with digital, I feel the 7D model is great, but I want more. And the A100 does not do it for me.

 

I play chess, and the trainers and greats of the game say, "play with tournament size peices and board as you would in a tournament" thus I use correct size chess peices, and it feels good playing with them.

 

I an questioning that what I have is just not enough anymore in the digital photography world.

[dw fletcher]

I don't know if I'm right about this, but it seems to me Canon is the one always coming out with the latest and greatest body with Nikon lagging a step or two behind. They're a small company. If I were to switch from Minolta, I'd go with Canon.

 

Personally, I'm okay sticking with Minolta but I can understand why others may not be. I don't think Sony would've bought KM if they weren't serious about competing in the camera market, and to do that you have to innovate. Sony could be a major player if they want to be. For years the pro market was dominated by Canon and Nikon, but it's a whole new ballgame now. If Sony has designs on edging in, they did the right thing by buying Minolta. I'm hoping they follow through on it.

[robert_paul1]

Jimmy, you might want to wait one more month before deciding what to do. I say this because the PMA (Photo Marketing Assoc.) show is less than a month away. After talking with the Sony people at CES last month, I'm pretty sure that Sony will make their move at the show. They have no more excuses to give, like "We just bought the K/M photo business a year ago," or "It takes time to develop new products," or "We just came out with the A100."

 

From all indications, PMA 2007 will be the real start date for Sony to enter the DSLR market. The A100 was a stopgap to prevent the Minolta faithful from abandoning ship enmass. If they don't show a new DSLR or DSLRs at the show, then I don't blame you for wanting to jump ship. They cannot afford to wait to some later date after the show to show new product.

 

That being said, if Sony does show something like a full-frame sensor DSLR, Nikon and Pentax can also be expected to have similar product in short order due to Sony selling their sensors to other camera makers. Unless Sony decides to keep such a sensor to themselves, it most likely will show up in other cameras.

 

However, there are other manufacturers of sensors that may have something new that Nikon or Pentax may choose over the Sony sensor. I read somewhere that Foveon may have a new sensor that might appeal to the camera makers. And there are some other types of sensors, other than CCD or CMOS, coming on line.

[james_frater]

Actually, thanks for that, I did not realise (PMA) was so close. I will wait a bit longer. If they cannot reveal something to the world at the show, then I think I am out, and will switch.

 

If Sony cannot soon show to the world their plans and some better gear than the current stuff. Then I am afraid they can count me out of any of their future plans.

 

It has been long enough. One camera based on a KM 5D model, re-bagged KM lenses, flashes, is not enough anymore. The time for waiting is over. PMA will be my deadline. Otherwise I am switching and will get on with life with another brand.

 

I believe I have held in and defended Sony long enough, time for them to give back more. IMHO

[peterblaise]

.

 

Earlier: "...within weeks [sic: months] of the [sony Alpha DSLR-]A100 being released, both Nikon and Canon came out with models with 10mp sensors, with the Nikon D80 leading that 10mp market in that price range, and Pentax, Olympus [Leica and Sigma, too] are now hitting the market with more serious offerings..." [Note: do you mean "more serious than their own previous offerings" or "more serious than Sony"? Please clarify.]

 

You're absolutely right to move on if the Minolta lineage makes you feel uncomfortable, makes you feel less than "this moment's top dog".

 

However, all the cameras you listed are essentially equivalent with only subtle differences, if any, between them. About the only thing that differentiates them is their design lineage ergonomics, things like "...grip fills my hands and makes me feel like a photographer with confidence..." if that matters to you.

 

Oh - it does!?! Hmm ... well then, why not just buy a Sony Alpha DSLR-A100 and slap a "Turbo II" sticker on it and be happy that you have something unique, beyond the competition at the moment, as you seem to care about so much more than whether or not the gear supports your photographic vision?

 

Jimmy, if you're lookin' more at your gear than at your subjects and at your resulting print outs, then maybe you're right - move on to other gear to look at. If you "...need a future with expansion..." than by all means, live in the future, not in the present. Buy an entry level 10mp camera from someone else who happens to have a top-of-the-line camera that you're not going to buy anyway. If that'll make all the difference that matters to you, then by all means do it. We could use some nice used Minolta gear.

 

Me? I can't imagine anyone else holding a camera that would make me feel bad about my own choices. I don't compare my camera, my car, or my girlfriend to anyone else's camera, car, or girlfriend. =8^o I compare them only to my own criteria. If your criteria is: knowing there's something better in the lineage, then go for it. However, if your criteria is mastering your photography ... you can't do better than "Only From The Mind of Minolta!"

 

The Sony has gotten highest marks for image clarity and detail, and with Adobe CS3 on the horizon with raw conversion with "vibrance" adjustments, all I can say is "what noise?" And with full frame Zeiss lenses in the wings, with the attendant promise of a Sony full frame sensor, what more did you say you think you might ever need?

 

Do you want ONE camera that's a part of a big line of cameras all offering features and benefits you DON'T have in your one camera, or do you want one camera from a company that puts their ALL into the one camera they're selling you TODAY?

 

- Click! Peter Blaise, Minolta Rokkor Alpha DiMage Photographer

[james_frater]

I feel that Nikon, Canon are going in the right direction.

 

"Only from the minds of Minolta" If that was only so these days.....

 

Just look at the lenses, Flashes, acessories for Nikon and Canon. One only has to look at the prices and reviews to see that nikon, Canon lenses are top shelf,(albeit you have to pay the money for it)

 

Thats not to say that Minolta does not have quality glass, but on a whole, the others simply are better.

 

It is not about having the latest model. Because I cannot afford the biggest and best, and by the time I buy for example (Nikon D80), the D90 will most likely be in the works with more MP, etc.

 

But that is just it, Nikon and Canon keep coming out with newer models, better models. KM then Sony are not doing that in the Digital SLR market.

 

Yes lenses are important, But so to is the digital body aspect. I went from a positive, defending Sony person. To being dis-illusioned one.

 

I love my KM gear. But I want a Sony DLR, that makes me feel Sony is serious about camera's. BUT even then, the lenses from the other makers are just so plentiful and from all reviews, better.

 

Maybe that is why pro's use Canon and Nikon, and hardly any Minolta, Pentax and Olympus anymore.

[robert_paul1]

Jimmy, you're not the only one wondering if Sony is ever going to come out with more. I just checked out a forum on dpreview.com, and one of the subjects is whether a 'Sony DSLR community' exists. In the past, there has been discussion about Sony's pricing of lenses and accessories.

 

To date, Sony has not been very good about communicating with the users of their DSLR about the future, which leads many to question Sony's commitment to the market. At CES, I addressed my concerns to the Sony DSLR people, and I hope that others will question them as well. From my talks with the reps, they seem aware of these forums and the issues that have been raised. Let's hope that they will react and help calm the troubled waters, with answers.

[drjedsmith]

Ummm...come back to the film ranks. :-)<BR>

For awesome color, Velvia will blow the socks off the next digital body you buy. Anway, I was kind of in the same boat, and going back to Minolta manual bodies and Rokkor primes. It will be Fuji Acros and whatever color film I decide on for a long while yet, I think<BR><BR>

Getting everything ready to print optically in the garage.<BR><BR>

Seriously, the advice was good. Wait one more month for PMA, then decide.<BR>

Jed

[peterblaise]

.

 

I think there are at least 3 "communities", and only 2 spend money to keep the factory alive (guess which the manufacturer's cater to?):

 

- professional

 

- consumer

 

- enthusiast

 

I put the consumer in the middle because the professional and enthusiast often are at odds with each other, and the consumer is in the middle, not sure to lean one way or the other. Sony is #3 with only ONE camera body because ... because Pentax, Olympus, Panasonic, Sigma, Fuji have *less* than one camera body? I don't think so!

 

Anyway, as revealed, this is a "brand-spankin'-new gear" thread, not a "photography" thread. Given the three marketing groups above, which to YOU think care most about photography and which care most about the gear? Now imagine you're a manufacturer lookin' for money - where would YOU look?

 

The name "Sony" means way less to me than does the knowledge that 100 or sp "Minds of Minolta" are on board. Anyway, here's my office desk - the Sony logo is so bright it distracts from reading the screen - I covered it with tape:<div></div>

[george_setterfield1]

Despite all the rationalization I think you are just bored with Minolta/Sony stuff and want new toys. Nothing wrong with that, happens all the time with eg. cars and partners, but I think you should recognize the syndrome for what it is. Unless you desperately need full frame (why?) or a stack of new lenses Sony should do fine, particulaly since you already have two good cameras.

Not trying to criticize, just clarify.

[jimmy_english]

I've have & use ..... 2 650si w/5 lenses ..... XG-M & X-700 w/4 lenses ..... and had the slow focusing 7000 when they first came out. So I'm a Minolta fan. I've been trying to come up with a reason to buy an A-100 but can't. I also use Bronica 6X4.5 & 6X6 medium format gear. So when I have a lab process my C41 I can get up to about 70 megapixels worth of image. And that's what it's about. If I need speed(machine gun shots) it's the 650, a little fun out it's the X series, but if I want an IMAGE that I'll be remembered for I need something with more film area. Let the labs upgrade their scanning equipment(it's their business). I suggest you use a bigger format & forget chasing technology. You can buy a 6X4.5 or 6X6 or 6X7 kit for less than the body only of the A-100. You'll have to LEARN how to take the photograph rather than have the machine do it for you.... Just my .02 ... Jim

[jimmy_english]

SQ-A Yellowstone River (hand held)

 

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v57/Jim.e/22020007.jpg

 

ETRs Fireworks (tripod mounted)

 

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v57/Jim.e/zzzz-fireworks.jpg

[craig_gillette]

Wait until PMA. Most of the time I'd suggest go with what you want and is available "now." But today, this close to PMA (or a fall Photokina), it makes sense to hang on - for any company's news. If you don't like what you hear or don't hear? Go.

 

Last November or so, I got tired of trying to shoot flying birds with my 7D and hearing bzzz, bzzzz, bzzz, and hearing clicks from others around me. And having the choice of too expensive hand-made gem lenses or Sigma.

 

I think Sony has two options for PMA - one is blow us away with announcements, prices and availability of an enhanced product line. Or expect to watch more people leave.

 

I really like my KM stuff. I'm hoping that if I can do well enough with selling some of it, that maybe I'll keep the 7D and maybe the 50mm and then grab a cheap but serviceable general purpose 2.8. I've had some of it for about 30 years. The old film stuff, I'm keeping. Will I keep the 7D? Depends on how most of the rest of the kit sells.

[ilkka]

I have three Minolta bodies and 8 lenses, couple of flash units etc. etc. I have given Sony until end of June to come up with a new, better, serious body for their SLR system. If they do, I am very likely to stay with them. If not, I will jump ship and get the new full frame Canon that is sure to follow the great 5D, sooner or later. If that does not arrive soon enough, I will get a simpler Canon DSLR body to start with. Sony is a big company with lots of resources. The A100 is basically a rewarmed Minolta 5D. They have got a whole department of ex-Minolta engineers. They must be working on something. Sony has now a once in a lifetime chance to be a serious player in digital SLR market. If it screws this up, nobody will ever believe in their coming again. Time is starting to run out on them. That is why I decided that I give them until this June.

 

On a completely different note. The image quality between any of these new 10 or so megapixel DSLRs is practically speaking identical. You will not get any better pictures with a Nikon D80 than you can with Sony 100 or Canon 400 or 30D. If you like new toys, Nikon is better than Sony because they have now a lineup of 6 different DSLR bodies. But the differences in real life image quality between most of their offerings will be minimal.

[james_frater]

I think though, you put one those those Nikon or Canon lenses worth a few thosand dollars on. The image quality will change. I do not think KM and Sony has high quality lenses that can match those on Nikon or Canon. There is simply more choice with Canon and Nikon.

 

I will wait for PMA, if the news is good I will happily stick with Sony.

[robert_paul1]

Jimmy, Sony does have quality glass that is the equal to what Canon or Nikon has, but you are right, Sony does not have enough choice. Plus the prices Sony wants for Minolta glass is unwarranted. They need to re-think their pricing strategy for the lenses. Sony must be following the strategy of their game division, sell the control unit for a low price, or even a loss, and make extra money on the game cartridges.

[p.magnuson]

There's some interesting comments on this thread.

 

I can't see much difference between what you can get with Nikon or Canon in comparison to Minolta/Sony, I'm sure Sony won't let the market stagnate in the long run, I can see there is more lens choice etc. with the others but why swap now when you don't know what the future holds??

 

I also don't really see why people want to upgrade so soon after getting a Camera, the 5D has been around for only 12-18 months and the 7D not that much longer. They both take good pictures, as does the Alpha.

 

If I had my camera equipment stolen, I would be open about what I replaced it with, but going to the trouble of replacing it when I don't need to seems silly. Although Peter, I would like one of those Turbo II stickers for my 5D, where do you get them from?

[jamesdak]

Jimmy,

 

Maybe I can offer so insight. I bought a 7D about a year ago and used it extensively with a lot of quality Minolta glass. It performed well in most areas but was lacking in sports and bird in flight shots. The AF tracking ability of the 7D is subpar when compared to previous Minolta bodies like my wonderful Maxxum 7. Now some folks when argue this point but I did enough comparision shooting in the field with my own gear to justify my statements. My 300mm f/4.0 was a completely differernt beast on my Maxxum 7 than the 7D. On the 7D when I tried to track a bird I get off one frame, the camera would hunt, acquire, shoot, hunt, acquire, shoot, etc. Very annoying and inneffective. I missed way to many shots with it. Then I broke out the Maxxum 7 and tried the same type shots with the same technique, viola success!!! Then I rented a Canon 30D and thier 400mm f/5.6 lens. Back to the field and shot both the Canon and the 7D. The Canon blew away the 7D in AF performance when it came to tracking birds in flight. So, I sold off some of my Minolta lenses including the 300mm and picked up a Canon 30D, 400mm f/5.6L USM and a 70-200mm f/2.8L USM IS lens. I kept my 7D, 24mm,35mm 50mm, 100mm to handle my macro, landscape, and portrait type shots.

 

Things I've noted. Ergonomics are not a problem with the 30D and are just almost as easy to use IMHO as the 7D's. I never had a dust problem with the 7D but the 30D seems to attract a lot of dust to the sensor. 30D requires an exposure more to the right of the histogram to ensure a noise free shot. Battery seems to last longer but that is probably due to the limited us of the IS lens so far.

 

Minolta's high end glass is a good or better than Canon's. Right now I feel that my Minolta 300mm was sharper than the highly regarded Canon 400mm I am now using.

 

You can actually buy whatever Canon lens you need right now, you cannot say that about the new Sony lenses.

 

All and all I would not have bought the Canon without a specific need. I was already well covered with my Minolta prime lenses and if the AF was better on the 7D would not have needed to look elsewhere.

[machts gut]

"I do not see Sony taking me to a serious level of photography, even as an enthusiest."

 

I doubt any brand will take you "to a serious level of photography". It's your inspiration that will do it and any camera is only a tool.

 

Stefan

[phil_derosier]

OK. Let me weigh in. Back-in-the-day, Minolta was all the rage ... they served up the biggest bang for the buck--hands down. Minolta was kickin' butt and takin' names, with Minolta's crescendo -- the Maxxum 9.

 

I think I must own -- or have owned -- just about every lens and nick-nack in the Minolta stable of offerings (except that 600MM!). To feel that my system could keep pace with Canon//Nikon at far less cost gave me goose bumps.

 

No such titillation with Sony. Nice camera, but no ... well, you know what I mean.

[robert_paul1]

"I also don't really see why people want to upgrade so soon after getting a Camera, the 5D has been around for only 12-18 months and the 7D not that much longer."

 

With film cameras what you state is true, much of the improvement in your pictures were a function of the film used. As advances in film came along, you were able to 'update' your camera by using a newer, better film. It didn't matter so much what camera body you used as basically they were used as a light 'faucet'. As long as they allowed the correct amount of light on to film, (via aperture and shutter settings) you got good pictures.

 

However, with digital cameras, you have to get a new camera body to get the type of improvements one is seeking. The Alpha A100 is known to be noisy at ISO of 800 and above. If you were using ISO 800 film, and you were unhappy with the results of a brand of film, you could switch to another brand of film, but keep the same camera. You can't do this with digital, you have to switch bodies. The advances being made with digital are coming faster and faster. Minolta was rumored to have been working on a DSLR that would allow components to be swapped out as technology changed, so that if you bought a 10MP sensor camera and they came out with a 16MP sensor, you could upgrade without having to buy a new body. Right now the only way to upgrade a digital camera is thru software updates, but that doesn't put a faster processor into your camera body. It pretty much like a notebook computer, where other that a few memory and hard drive changes you are stuck with what you bought. If you want to upgrade, you'd have to buy another notebook. Whereas, if you bought a desktop PC, you can make all kinds of changes to the inner works.

 

Digital has come a long way but still has a way to go. Could all that has come about in DSLRs been imagined back just 10 years ago?

[james_frater]

I love my 7D, but it is outdated, the MP is too low now. Even with good lenses there is still too much limitation.

 

The thing is, I am now at a point where I am printing stuff out A4, A3 and larger. A4 is fine, A3 is also okay, but larger prints I am not being wow'd.

 

I do not think the A100 is worth upgrading from the 7D. Personally I think the make of the 7D is simply better, (of course the A100 has better electronics) but that is just about it. I love the 7D body, dials, and buttons. The A100 looks like a toy for begginers, just like the 5D did. (Thats not saying they are crap camera's in my view, far from it)

 

If Sony wants to keep me they have to come out with a 7D type camera with 10mp plus and some new bells and whistles. Otherwise what is the point.

 

Sony now has to wow the more serious photographer, not the entry level to minor enthusiest.