vasilis

Since you said you want to shoot low light. I do not think there is anything that can beat a konica minolta 5d with a 50mm 1.4 or 20mm 2.8 at low light (anti shake)... But either way I have a nikon d70 (which I recommend over a d50 mostly for the better kit lens that goes with) and I am very happy with it. The rebel xt also is fine. Maybe an idea would be to go to a shop that has the cameras you are interested in, since all of these cameras have CF cards (except d50) buy a CF card go try them and see which one you want.....

I think that the choice for a modern used film camera is F100 or F5. The autofocus of f90 or f4 are very slow compared to a modern body.

I would go for the minolta 7d as well if I had nothing. I have nikon d70 and I like it but I have used a lot minolta 5d and I love it! The 5d does not have very good build quality (according to my personal opinion) so I would go for the 7d which is the same but metal. The only thing I would check on the 7d is if it is fast enough (startup time, shutter delay).

Kari, wait a bit for some reviews of the S9000 to get out. Also go to a shop and try the cameras. That will help you decide and is the most important test. The list of disadvantages and advantages for the two cameras you mentioned is too long and if you start analysing all the points .... you get lost. For candid shots the Rebel will be faster so you have to go and see if the Fuji is fast enough. But on the other hand the fuji will be almost completely silent whereas the Rebel will be like a machine gun. For me the greater disadvantage of the Fuji is the electronic viewfinder. But also it depends on the money you want to spend as the Rebel will be more expensive....etc.

All are nice. I would be between the nikon d70 and the canon 350d. But if you state your needs it would help. Do you have already nikon or canon lenses. Although the best thing would be to go to a shop and see them and maybe try them and also try the minolta 5d and the new pentax maybe etc.

Just a small remark. I am using the nikon d70 and the minolta 5d. The minolta has a much faster autofocus than the nikon (even when I am using the nikon with an AFS lens) .

The comparison is valid and raises a good point. For example the lens of the sony DSC-F828 which is an equivalent 28-200mm with aperture 2-2.8 I do not know even if technologicaly is possible for an dSLR. It would cost and weigh more than a car.... Generally speaking P and S cameras have faster lenses than SLRs. This is due to the fact that the sensor is very small so the focal lengths and the coverage of the lenses are small and not a kilo of glass is needed (like in an SLR). Also to build a good lens for a P&S is easier and cheaper due the smaller size of the glass that it has to be shaped. Digicams have faster lenses and SLRs can use higher ISOs and all this is consequence of the sensor size. It is that sometimes people always remember the advantages of SLRs and forget the advantages of the digicams.

Does anybody else has the camera? (curiosity)

to JC: I 've seen it in other digicams as well and I think that in this sample of the dimage a2 it was a bit excessive. Also, I think in German is "smeer" and english is "smear" (although not sure).

 

And for Mark, I have used in the minolta the same card with the nikon (sandisk extra 2) and I can say that the minolta is slower. It is really rare though that I use a 3i/s rate for more than 3 images so I do not really care.

 

I think that the only real negative (for me) of the camera is that it feels a bit cheaper.

Thanks

I have done exactly the same procedure in an old FA. I have the advantage due to my work to have a virtually unlimited supply of chemical substances. I have cleaned the mirror using a substance called acetyl acetate. Other alternatives are acetone and methanol. Methanol is the best substance for cleaning optics in general, but it does not attack a lot the foam so it needs some patience. Bear in mind that methanol is highly toxic (blindness) and sometimes difficult to find. This only means that you should not directly inhale and you will be fine. After finishing you should put it in a place not accessible to others, putting a label on the bottle. Now, aceton attacks the foam and does not attack the mirror, but aceton will polymerize on top of surfaces, thus, leaving residues. Acetyl acetate does the same work as aceton but has the advantage of not leaving any residue. Disadvantage is that it is difficult to find. I do not know about the toxicity of acetyl acetate or aceton but I believe that if you do not drink them you are fine. Be gentle not to leave scratches on the mirror by applying more pressure than is needed (almost no pressure is needed). Use kodak photo paper.

And I forgot other disadvantages of the 5D because for me they are not very important.

1)It has to do with the speed of the camera. The shutter lag is the same with the d70. Maybe because of the faster autofocus Minolta wins (except if you use AFS lenses in Nikon). The startup time is close to 1 second instead of virtually 0 on the nikon d70 and on the canon 350d. And the drive mode although it is the same (3i/s) the buffer is only for 4 images and then the camera slows down considerably. For my needs I find the speed of the maxxum 5 acceptable, although for others, maybe it makes a difference.

2) Finally the 5d has an awfull very metallic shutter noise (I do not care)

Hello, this is mostly about your information.

 

my girlfriend just bought a new Minolta Maxxum 5d changing a Dimage

A2. here in switzerland they are available a week now. At the

beginning because I have a nikon d70 we were debating that it has no

logic to have the same or similar cameras (SLRs). Dimage A2 was a very

nice camera, fast, mechanical zoom ring, good EVF, Anti shake and most

importantly completely silent operation and also a tiltable screen. We

bought the first one (used) and we sent it back because it had hot

pixels. Then we bought a new A2 but the problem there was that the EVF

had this problem called smear (streaks of vertical whenever there is a

bright source) that makes it unusable at bright days. The technician

in Minolta said to us that yes smear is almost a standard in the

camera and he knows that is difficult to use on sunny days.....

Digicams are getting close but they are not there yet, so I will give

them 2-3 years more.

 

There my girlfriend got bored with the game that we change A2s until

we get it right so we went for the Maxxum 5d. (I think that Bill

Mitchell in photo.net played the same game).

 

Now, my impressions about the Maxxum 5d in comparison to my nikon d70.

Image quality is almost the same, I would not find a real difference.

Maxxum 5d has less noise at 1600, but this is due to more aggressive

noise reduction. The 18-70 of the maxxum 5d is a very cheap

construction but optically works fine and is sharp (this means more

than acceptable for the money). The 5d has more functions than the

nikon d70, a much better viewfinder and finally a much faster

autofocus. Functions that the 5d has and the d70 does not is low-key,

high key settings and also a very useful mirror lockup (coupled with

timer) and 100 iso. Finally the anti-shake is a dream come true. I

used the camera with 800 iso, anti shake on, a mirror lock-up and all

that with a 50mm 1.7. Only for that the camera worths it.

 

And now the only two problems (and a small remark) that I could find

in the camera.

 

1) build quality, it is not good the way that knobs and buttons are

made the camera feels cheap. This may not mean anything because even

if it feels this way it lasts.... but we are talking about the first

impressions

 

2) ergonomics of the camera. The ergonomics of the camera are not

good, do not imagine something terrible, it is just that it maybe

needs time, or that my hands are more compatible with the d70....

People were saying that 7d was perfect in this department well

according to my experience the 5d is not.

 

3) Small remark. The LCD on top I miss it, but I suppose you get used

to that as well.

 

Conclusion if the 5d turns out to be stable and not give problems I

think that it would be my preference now in this class of cameras. And

keeping in mind the prices of Minolta objectives in the used market

(next to nothing) it is a very good choice for any enthusiastic

photographer.

I do not understand where I should post, so I will post here. The camera is minolta autofocus something (I do not remember because I borrowed it for that day). The lens is a standard very cheap zoom lens 28-100 wide open. There was a festival. When is the closing date of the contest so I can post other photos???? <p>

 

<img src="http://d6d2h4gfvy8t8.cloudfront.net/3672879-md.jpg">

The pentax as you said had maybe the best viewfinder in the "cheap" dslrs. Also the maxxum 7d has an equally good viewfinder as the pentax.

Get the 18-70 with the very cheap 50mm 1.8. The 18-70 is fine for everything and the 50mm is a very goof quality lens that you will find extremely usefull for portraits and low light. The idea of the 18-55 as a backup is not good.

I agree with Ilka about some things. First in the real world is not like that, this is true, net is a testosterone driven environment. I also agree with her on the point that everybody is searching on the ultimate camera where there is not such a thing. Garry I do not disagree that people want to protect their investements, my only point is that most amateurs do not have a big investement to protect in order to care about this kind of problem. And this kind of debates usually are fuelled by amateurs..... (myself include in this case :-))

I am writing from the point of view of an amateur. I cannot find a reason to buy a camera based on sensor size. When wide angle lenses for dx did not exist I could understand it, now I do not see why. I do not know anything about the "war" between Nikon and Canon. I suppose that Canon got a big "pro" segment of the market with their FF sensors. Nikon is a smaller company, but I do not think that nikon goes bad with the d70 etc... <p> To be honest I do not think that the future of photography is on big sensors. I rather think that it is on small sensors. I do not think also that the future of photography is on digital SLRs but on an evolution of point and shoot designs. I have a nikon d70, it gives excellent results, weighs 1.5 kilos depending on the lens, makes the noise of a machine gun and people look at me like I attack them on the street. My girlfriend bought a minolta A2, I used it yesterday in the street, which is cheaper, it weighs 500gr, is completely silent, fast, it has a nice antishake, with the lcd I look down to the camera like an old tlr and people do not feel threatened while I snap silently away. The results are excellent, but a little bit less excellent above 100iso. What I am trying to say is that a sport proffesional photographer needs a big slr of three kilos, but for me even if they gave to me for free a d2x and a 70-200vr, I would just sell it. <p>I think that people are very focused on DSLRs and sensor sizes and we forget that the "other" cameras are advancing as well and they become better suited for the needs of most photographers. We think that the point and shoots are marketing, but more marketing effort and hype exists in the effort of companies like Nikon and Canon to sell proffesional camera to amateurs that they do not need them; giving the impression that if they have them they will be magically transformed to proffessionals.

Manel, if this thing is happening on long exposures, more than 1 or 2 seconds I would not worry a lot, but maybe you should take the opinion of an expert.

there is a guy that he made a whole page on hot pixels maybe you can understand it there ...<a href="http://webpages.charter.net/bbiggers/

DCExperiments/html/hot_pixels.html"> hot pixels </a>

shooting with the cap on does not fix the problem, it is just a test. BUT cameras sometime for night-long shots of some seconds they can use automatically a dark exposure (they leave closed the shutter) with the same time to subtract the dead pixels. You should find it in the manual under "noise reduction". Hope that helps

If it is in warranty, you can send it and they will do a remap of the sensor so the camera will not use the data from the specific dead or hot pixels. It will interpolate the value from the adjacent ones. you have to see when you have the dead pixels. The test is to take photos with the camera cap on with manual and different shutter speeds, see how many they are. All cameras have hot pixels when the shutter is long seconds. If you have them at speeds of less than one or half a second and if they get on your nerves maybe you should consider to reair it. If it is not in warranty though you should ask the price of repair first, maybe it does not worth it.

It is a dead pixel on the sensor but all cameras have them and they are mapped in the factory and the camera discards them and interpolates their values. The the self-remapping every month thing does not work, I tried it. But I returned it on the shop, they gave me the money back and I found it in stock new elsewhere..... so I bought it new.... very good camera

Thank you Lex,

From the shop the only thing they are willing to do is to give the camera and get the money back. So I like the camera but what would you do? <p>

thanks again,

Vasilis

I just bought a used minolta dimage a2 and I just found out that it

has two hot pixels that turn up in most photos. What do you think I

should do? 1) return it to the shop I bought it or 2) send it to

minolta to remap the sensor or finaly 3)it is so usual that I should

just forget it and use the camera. Apart from this problem the camera

is fine and I like it a lot...