bill_thorlin

It seems somehow appropriate that what is probably my last ever posting on this website should be a valediction to my favourite cameras.

 

My first Minolta was an SRT101 bought in Nairobi in 1969 with a Christmas bonus. I did my research and the specs seemed as good as, if not better than, anything else available. I tried out the cameras and the ergonomics for me were far superior. This camera has been 16,000 foot up mountains, in deserts, on beaches, frozen, baked, covered in salt spray and sand and volcanic dust and rain - heck it has even survived two of my children learning their photography on it.

 

I am just about to go and get the results from the latest roll put through it - it is damn nigh indestructible.

 

I upgraded ( if that is the word ) to a 7000 in the mid-80s again having done my research. Great camera for almost all the same reasons. There have followed a variety of numbers of 7000i - 3xi - 404si - 800si and 7s (just got another one at a bargain price ).

 

After the first 2 cameras I gave up all the research and trusted Minolta to get it right and they have barely ever let me down.

 

Unless Sony come up with a full-frame offering I doubt I will need to buy any more ( and in this case I will be doing my research ! ). I have thought about a 9 but really the only good reason I can come up with is that I can say I own a 9.

 

Do not forget the lenses - the particular stars amongst MANY range from a Rokkor 58mm f1.4 and in AF a good old 50mm and a 70-210 ( actually a 75-210 in practise ) beercan and a 100mm f2.8 macro ( stunning ). Who could ask for better.

 

There are some odds and ends around as well, including ( shhhh ) a little P&S digital.

 

It has been a great ride and I hope that Sony are good enough to pick up the baton and take things forward up to the Minolta standards.

 

Kwaherini.

For "may" read "will" - and it has.

Was there another one ?? How could I miss that ?? Must have had a mental block or Selective Reaction Syndrome !

Peter - forgot to mention that one resource for comparison of lenses is - www.photodo.com - and click on lens search. It may cover some of the lenses you are considering. I do not necessarily agree with all their ratings but on the basis of lenses I have used that they have covered I would reckon a "success" level of over 75%.

 

Unbiased reviews are sometimes hard to come by.

Peter - there is a thread entitled "Lens suggestions please" dated 12 September on this forum which might be worth a read as it may just add a little more to the knowledge base - the last post gives someones reaction to moving from a 75-300 to 100-300 APO for example.

Pete - sparrows and gulls can still be a major challenge. Do think about the 400mm option as it is not expensive and you can get away without a TC a lot of the time so it would level up the speed element.

 

Be warned - you might not want to part with the "beercan" once you have got it :) I assume you meant 100 quid ( symbol irritant ) and that is fairly realistic but do not rush in. Be aware that with a 2x TC you will lose AF most of the time.

 

Craig - the Sigma is often around but it is what I would call very pricey.

Ummm - not an easy one at all. Michael Hohners site - www.mhohner.de - will give you the start dates. He might possibly be aware of the end dates.

 

I recollect reading that the serial numbers bore no relationship to anything much so they may not be of any help.

 

I wish you luck with this.

Not knowing what camera you use does make it a little difficult talking about lenses as the performance of a lens is altered if used on a digital, given the crop factor.

 

First port of call for Minolta(Sony) lenses is - www.mhohner.de - which lists all the AF varieties.

 

For birds, most wildlife and most sports the bigger the lens the better. 300mm is about the minimum you can use to get worthwhile results unless you are going to go in for hides and all the rest - normally you will be just too far away. Most times, as most people say, you will need 400mm upwards or 400mm plus a teleconverter. For a 400mm you are probably going to have to settle for an f5.6 - anything faster will cost you one heck of a lot of money.

 

Primes between 100mm and 200mm are pretty thin on the ground - basically only a 135mm in various incarnations. The 200mm f2.8 is also not a cheap lens - in fact it is pricey.

 

The 70-210mm is a terrific lens but I cannot see it solving your problem on birds and the rest - for what it is meant for, it is as I said terrifc. A 1.5x teleconverter can be used on it whilst still retaining AF but still it is going to be on the short side.

 

There is also the 100-300mm APO but it is fairly slow at f4.5-5.6 and worse with a TC attached. It would probably be just about inside your budget from what I can make out. There is a 100-400mm but these come up very rarely and are pricey.

 

The option to me seems to be a choice between Tokina and Sigma for a 400mm. The Tokina is a pretty good lens for the price you pay and also pretty sturdy. Have no first hand experience of the Sigma but I believe the older versions sometimes have compatibility problems that you need to make sure do not exist on your camera before you buy the lens. If going this route it would be sensible to retain the 70-300 to give you cover.

Thanks - I am not ignoring the responses but trying to find some valuable time to study them properly.

Rose-Marie - the big problem with common sense is that it is not common enough - otherwise we appear to be much in accord.

Just a few thoughts that might help in your deliberations ( it seems that you are set on using zooms so have restricted myself to comments in that area ).

 

The kit lenses are, as far as I am concerned, basically to attract peoiple to the camera and give an attractively priced option for a total kit to start with. They are basically of acceptable quality but are somewhat bog standard.

 

There are quite a lot of older Minolta lenses still available second-hand from some of the bigger dealers and fleabay etc. Do bear in mind that you have to factor in the "crop factor" when looking at non-digitally specified lenses.

 

I would suggest that you have a look at the 24-105mm ( becoming 36-157mm approx. on the Alpha ) which is a good all purpose, everyday, walk about lens. I would also second the old 70-210mm "beercan" ( giving you 105-315mm ) great optics, fixed f4 and readily available but not dead cheap.

 

If you want to go wider than a "factored" 36mm then you are into territory where I do not go. If you want longer than 315mm then an easy, cheap way is to consider a teleconverter - the 1.5x will retain full AF on the camera.

 

As a final thought a good old prime like the 50mm ( either 1.4 or 1.7 ) might just open your eyes a bit :)

 

Happy hunting

I'm trying to find out if Tokina will support what they have made in the past in the Minolta mount :(

 

As to the future I suspect that they will wait and see if the Sony involvement will make it worthwhile for them to start making lenses with this mount - money talks !

Potential minefield this one.

 

We feed the birds in our back garden but only after we had checked the whole position out. Basically we took the view that so much of the natural habitat for so many of them had been destroyed that some correction of the balance and some assistance for their survival was/is justified. We have also relied on guidance from the RSPB the largest wildlife conservation organisation in Europe. I readily admit that we also get great pleasure from it.

 

Baiting purely for photography is I am afraid a very different matter. I do not believe that it is for the benefit of the animal but purely a means to an end which in most cases is either for money or for competitive superiority. It does also lead to danger for both animals and humans if it involves large and dangerous species - there are many, many recorded cases of animals "having" to be put down because they are a risk to humans, not because of their shortcomings but because it was deemed acceptable for humans to behave in this way.

 

I lived in Kenya for many years and visited for many more and as a result of my work I came into contact with many people involved with wildlife and I can hardly think of one that approved of baiting, even though they may have in the past.

 

A classic case of the effects of mans behaviour is a subject of much interest at the moment. The number of urban foxes are growing very rapidly. Why ? Because there are mountains of edible litter left out every night because people are to lazy to dispose of it properly. The solution ? Cull them.

 

Mark - I know your views on bird table photographs but often it is about the only way to get photographs of the LBJs :)

Checked ( hold ) baggage = problem

 

Carry-on baggage = no problem upto 800asa ( people have claimed there is but nobody has ever produced proof ).

 

If you can get a hand inspection then so much the better but attitudes to this vary from airport to airport.

 

Do not know what the rules are like in US but watch out for problems with over-size hand luggage being refused and stuffed in the hold ( check with your airline ).

 

Rob - my experience is that they have got wise to this and are not amused/impressed and can become unhelpful. Additionally it makes it more difficult for the genuine cases. I think playing by the rules here is in all our best interests.

<div></div>

Some may remember I posted some while back about photographing Hobby as a pair

had appeared locally - suffice it to say as soon as I had it all planned they

decided to leave, helped no doubt by a chap teaching his sons to fish along the

little river they had been quartering.

 

Rather than abandon my project I decided to have a try at Common Terns ( Sterna

Hirundo ) which I knew frequented a nature reserve/bird sanctaury nearby. Not

the brightest of choices to attempt as they are almost as good aerialists as

the Hobby.

 

Anyway I made the attempt and got some results ( variable quality ) but one

problem has surfaced - when photographing a white bird against a bright blue

sky the underside of the bird comes out inaccurately ( as regards the species )

dark.

 

Does the rule of over-exposing for a white subject still hold good or is there

something else one can do to alleviate this problem arising on the actual

photograph ( i.e. not manipulating ) ?<div></div>

"atarters" - what the heck are atarters ? - I think I meant "starters" - OHIM !

Craig's questions are valid and I would add two more - do you want to stick with Minolta(Sony) glass or will any make do ? Prime or zoom ?

 

It might be worth your while for atarters to go to - www.mhohner.de - where you will find a detailed list of Minolta(Sony) lenses past,present and future. Take a look at those and based on your requirements perhaps you could come back to us with some amplification.

It might be worth remebering in this context what Sony has actually said by way of press release :-

 

"Sony will accelarate development of new digital SLR cameras based on and compatible with the Maxxum/Dynax lens mount system with a view to MARKETING THESE MODELS THIS SUMMER"

 

"FOCUSING ON RELATIVELY INEXPENSIVE MODELS"

 

The capitals are mine but the words are from Sony.

Keep trying - one day you might, just might, get it right.

Alternative view - leave it alone and let it evolve naturally as it has done ?

Pete - "I am still a film guy" - under the new direction this site is undergoing you cannot say that - you must refer to yourself as a "Nostlgia buff" who uses "Off-brand" equipment :)

 

Sean - perhaps to summarise :- 1) Do not try and learn everything all at once, it will do your head in, especially given the size of the manual. 2) Work out which bits relate to the sort of photography you want to do and really get to grips with them. 3) If your answer to 2) is "everything" then break it down into 5 or at the most 10 specifics and work your way through them. 4) Take your time and expand as you go.

 

Happy travelling.

I have very few problems with AF so can I continue to use it ? :)

 

Seriously though there are good reasons to use either system on the basis of horses for courses. Have you ever tried AF on a macro or tried to get a split second out of context opportunistic shot with manual ?

 

Much also depends on the camera and/or lenses you are using. Some are pretty damn quick in AF, some suffer shutter-lag and some are just grindingly slow.

 

There may be some fear of MF in the early days of the photography voyage for some people but having cut my teeth on an SRT101 there was no choice and it just became second nature. Perhaps there is some merit in the idea that if you want to become "serious" it would be good to start off with an old manual only camera - after all it will cost almost nothing to get hold of a good one with a couple of lenses.

 

If people just want to be happy snappers then they will never get past AF and who can blame them.

 

Just out of interest, do you feel there is a noticeable problem specific to Minolta or is it merely that you are into this forum ?

"What will Sony do next?!?" - not a clue on anything for certain but I think it is a happy thought that it will actually be something :)

 

Just go back some nine months ( gestation period ? ) and think what the mood was then.

Hey - let us hang on a bit here. Sean asked a fair question from his point of view and hoped for feedback from someone who actually uses an A100. Sometimes responses on p.net can be a bit harsh and not very welcoming for a newcomer - let us hope that this forum is not really like that and somebody can engage in a meaningful dialogue and maybe elicit the exact areas of concern.

 

Anyway Sean - I have found that trying a thing out in "real life" is always a good way to learn ( admittedly with the manual handy ) and does help to crystallize the problem areas. Go and shoot as well as waiting for answers.

 

As to spelling - the comments seem a bit "ad homynym" or is that "ad hominem".