guy_mansford

I'd suggest buying a poor quality example of your particular camera. I have 3x XD7's, Two to use and one to use for spares. Cheap and effective. This will probably be cheaper than getting someone else to do the repair, if you can do it yourself. Two going on Ebay at present for low prices- but probably too good to tear apart!

Thanks for your attempts. The minolta link works fine (although most of the geocities links are to the old site and don't now work). Unfortunately Minolta's stuff is fairly recent and no wireless flash controller manual. Similarly on rokkor files (except his stuff is obviously too old, not too new!). Any other suggestions???

Since the merger, konica/minolta seem to have deactivated the page

on their website that provided pdf manuals of obsolete cameras,

flashes etc. Does anyone know where (if anywhere!) this page is now

available. I only ever managed to find things on the U.S. site, but

that seems largely disabled now. I'm particularly after the wireless

flash controller manual, but I'd like to know where all of them have

gone! If you've got the manual in pdf that I'm after, please let me

know.

What is an extension ring? Macro lenses have two modifications. Firstly they are optimised optically for close work. Secondly they have a lot of "movement" in the lens so the front elements can be wound out a long way from the film plane. This enables them to focus very close up. An extension tube is a metal/plastic ring with a lens mount on the front and a camera mount on the back. They generally come in three lenths eg 7mm 14mm and 21mm. They can be used singly or in combination so give extension from 7mm to 42mm. They are mounted between the lens and camera body to increase the close focusing ability, but whilst mounted lose the infinity focus.This enables non-macro lenses to focus extremely closely. Cheap and effective with no degradation in image quality.

seeing as you've got about the best portrait lens made (imho), why don't you stick with it and use a small extension tube (cheap) to get closer?

Just a thought!

I had one that seized up on me and wouldn't close down quickly enough to expose correctly. Not worth repairing as you can get them very cheaply on ebay. I quickly replaced it however as its the sharpest lens I've ever tested particularly at f1.7 onwards. The new lens is fine and equally sharp. Get a new one!

I have no experience of the 50mm, but the 58mm is potentially wonderful. I have just shot some available light shots at a gig on it wide open at f1.2 and they were great. I bought one example which had severe yellow discolouration because of breakdown of the radioactive isotopes in the glass. This lens was extremely unsharp. The next example however is excellent and incredible value at ?80 for an f1.2 lens. As far as I know you won't have any trouble with MC lenses. I use an XD-7 and all the manual lenses are fine.<div></div>

Like you I was frustrated by the lack of explanation by minolta about their flash system. I use the M7 and although I don't always understand how it does it, the flash system is brilliant. Everything from the metering to a wireless setup with 6 individual flashes works perfectly. Just use it and you wont look back!

if your looking for a solid non-plasticky camera, then the max5 and other low cost bodies are not for you. The 800si is an excellent heavy solid professional spec camera and hugely better than the max5 unless you value light weight and short lifespan. The 9xi is excellent too and the max7 is better than all of them. The 9xi needs cards for some operations though which is a bit of a nuisance. You are right though that the older cameras are a much better buy. I've got all of the above and would replace the 800si before the others if stolen (always my test for value)

Hi, I've tested the 1.7 the 1.4 and the 2.8 macro. The 2.8 is a stunning lens and by far the sharpest even wide open. The 1.7 is very good indeed particularly for the stupid prices you can buy it for second hand. My 1.4 isn't very good at all. I suspect I have a bad example. It's significantly worse than the other two 50mm lenses. The old manual mc 50mm 1.4 is even better though!

hope this helps

Hi, you can use as many off camera 3500xi's as you want. I've used 6 at once for a difficult lighting job and they all worked fine together. Obviously with several you have to be careful with placement. The on camera flash (popup or 3600hs) doesn't contribute to the picture. It flashes to turn on the other units and flashes to turn them off. You don't need a wireless controller its all built in. Unfortunately all the flashes will be turned on and off at the same time. So if one is 1m from subject and the ones for the background are 5m away then you aren't going to get a balanced exposure. I find it is all very simple to use and just works. Minolta make very little of it and there is not much in the way of info they provide. In practice just try it out. It works in bright sunlight, over long distances and is a lot better than the max5 manual would have you believe. Have fun!

If you already have a linear polariser you might not need to bother. The theory is that the auto focus may not work with a non-circular polariser. A friend of mine always uses a linear (with a maxxum 5) and has no problems. But if you dont have a polariser and are buying for the maxxum then get a circular.

If you have a slow transparency film, on a tripod with a cable release (and don't forget mirror lock up), then the macro is considerably sharper across the picture. Not much difference in the centre, but towards the edges its a lot better. I've tested both, and the 2.8 macro is about the sharpest lens I've ever tested (as good as the contax g lenses). Its a beautiful lens, but its a lot heavier, gives a dimmer view for focusing but does do macro (too close for insects though). With hand held photography i'd go for the lighter lens, unless macro is vital, but then I'd take a 100mm macro.

There is a huge difference. I bought a 20mm minolta which is great and then got a mf Minolta 16mm non fisheye. They are totally different. their use however is limited so I would buy one extra-wide-angle and stick to it. 20mm will have many more uses than a 16 or 17, but occasionally nothing will do but a 16mm! The 20mm will be an excellent intro to wide angle, then if you take a lot of photos on it, you might look at a wide lens. I find it a very steep learning curve to properly use these ultra-wides. They're not easy!

Hi, sorry to hear about the death of your 5! I own both of these cameras and there is no comparison in the build quality. The 5 is wonderfully compact and has great features for the price, but build quality isn't one of them. No it isn't built to last a long time, it is built to a very price sensitive budget. The 7 however is magnificent. It has everything you could ask for and is built to last. It is fairly light and superficially plasticky but I find is standing up well to the wear and tear of backpacking photography.

Surely if you don't have a PC then digital photography is unlikely to be for you. I use digital but I use my 7 a lot more than anyother camera. It's such a professional tool - buy one!

Guy

Quick, buy the 28-85 whilst you get the chance. I have most of the minolta zooms and this is simply the best despite being very cheap on Ebay. Tough Metal construction, very sharp at all lengths. Thoroughly recommended. I had mine stolen and immediately bought another one. Enough said.

thanks for this helpful and in-depth comparison. It's interesting that the 2.8 was as good as the 1.8 in 35mm, whilst the difference between the 28mm f2.8 and f2 is enormous. I'm not suprised you found the zoom impressive. I only have the AF version, but it is stunning and much better than the 24-105mm that came with my Dynax 7. It's the best of several zooms I own and apart from being rather heavy is near perfect. I had it stolen recently and didn't hesitate on using the insurance money to buy another straight away! What better advert is there than that. Thanks for the website,

Guy

I don't have experience of the 28/2 MD but have both the AF 28/2.8 and Af 28/f2. These are essentially the same lenses as the MC/MD. From my use and testing the f2 is a far superior lens and one of the finest I've ever used. It is as sharp as any of my contax lenses and I think the best lens made by Minolta. Maybe it's worth the extra money??

kkk, I bought it new (unlike most of my other minolta af lenses) and it really is a stunning lens. No it's not any sharper than the 50 1.7 but is a brilliant lens and really good value

Richard, I don't have experience of the f2.8 lens, but have two versions of the f3.5 (I "bought" a 2.8 on Ebay and was sent a second 3.5 instead - but got it for free!). Having compared it under test conditions with the AF 2.8 135mm it is an extremely sharp lens from f4 onwards. Looking through my tests for most of the mc/md/af lenses, it really stands out for its detail even wide open. Haven't bothered trying to buy another f2.8, is it worth it?

The best repairers for minolta manual stock in UK is http://www.lehmannsdirect.co.uk/mainindex.asp

I think they charge £50 to repair and service, with the obvious proviso that with no spare parts in stock, they may not be able to mend it! I've bought a couple of old tatty bodies off ebay that I send for them to use as salvage parts - just an idea.

I have no experience of the 28-70, but do use the 24-105. Its very good at 50 or wider but quite poor above 50mm. It shows lack of sharpness unless well stopped down to f8. This is hugely worse than minolta primes of this length and much worse than the 28-85 metal version. This is only with my testing of one sample however so others may have better examples of this lens. I suspect that you do actually get something for the extra $600 though!

It's a very good lens for the price. Also a desirable focal length to add to your kit. The only word of caution is that the 28mm f2 is hugely better (but more pricey). I picked mine up on ebay for only a few pounds more and it was well worth it. Both good lense though!

I use the Minolta but also have an old Tamron 90mm f2.5 which is excellent but only to half life size. I suspect you'll find they are all similar. The main thing is to get one! They are a brilliant length of lens that I use for a huge number of photos.

I use the autofocus sigma 400 5.6 with a dynax 7. It's a good lens and reasonably sharp for the price. It's solidly built and fairly heavy. The autofocus is slow (not good in low light with that aperture). I'd overall recommend it for the price but I don;t have much experience of other vendors of long lenses!