clinton_abe

Michael- How much are you willing to pay for one, including shipping to where ever you live? I have an unused Minolta 2X M/A Converter-S. It has a sticker price of $175, from Southwestern Camera (don't me where the store is). It appears to have everything, but an instruction manual. I say that, because even though it is fairly obvious how to use it, there is a little bag with what looks like a plug/cover in it, but I have no idea what it's for. The box has seen better days, but what do you expect for something that's over 20? years old.

Who makes the lenses is not important to me, as long as they maintain a level of performance that is to be expected from a Sony and from the price charged for the lens. Also, I hope that Sony settles on a more uniform appearance than KM did, especially towards the end. Nikon lens have a 'look' that easily identifies it as a Nikon. The finish has that Nikon look. Same with Canon.

"Ever since Sony and Konica Minolta began collaborating on a joint digital SLR camera project in July 2005, I have seen many similarities in our corporate cultures. Sony is renowned for its unceasing exploration of new avenues, while Konica Minolta has a long history of developing groundbreaking technologies, like the world's first auto-focus SLR camera and an exclusive anti-shake system. Leveraging our similarities and benefiting from our differences, we now merge our efforts in a shared commitment to the development of digital SLR cameras."

 

The above quote from the head of Sony's AMC Division, Toru Katsumoto, should lay to rest any doubt that KM will continue to have a hand in the production of Sony's DSLR. KM will build the cameras as an OEM supplier to Sony.

Seeing how Sony is the second largest shareholder of Tamron, the likely manufacturer of the (majority of the) Sony lenses will be Tamron. Why would Sony buy a large percentage of Tamron and not use them? After all part of the profits Tamron makes will go into Sony's pocket. The other manufacturer would be KM, which will probably continue to make the 'G' series lenses under the Sony Alpha name. I doubt that you'll be seeing any other lens manufacturer making lenses for Sony, under the Sony name. To me, the question is how many of the lenses will be new, as opposed to being re-badged KM lenses.

Stephen- I think you should of stuck with your first set of pictures. The second set shows, based on what I can see, is that a modern zoom lens can equal, or out perform, an older prime lens. Again, the reduced contrast in the picture taken with the Minolta MD lens, could be atttibuted to it lacking the coating of a lens designed for digital.

 

Anyway, keep trying.

Stephen- What would you like me to say? I could say 'Bravo' for putting so much effort into taking a picture with an old Minolta manual focus lens that could of easily been done with the Zuiko lens. Or, I could point out that the picture taken with the 'prime' Minolta lens is not sharper than the picture taken with a zoom lens. (Although to be fair, it is hard to judge, based on the picture size summitted.) Perhaps, you would like me to point out the difference in contrast between the two photos, perhaps caused by the lack of proper coating on one of the lenses.

 

Stephen, tell me what you want me to say, and I'll do it.

Andrew- You might want to do some reading about OLEDs before you say there isn't any real advantages to OLEDs. Here's a link to an article about OLED vs LCD.

 

http://www.xbitlabs.com/articles/editorial/display/oled.html

 

As you can see there are several advantages to OLEDs. If you're too lazy to click on the link, I'll give you some of the advantages 1) OLEDs have a wide angle of view than a LCD screen. 2) OLEDs don't need a backlight like an LCD, so you have lower power consumption, and therefore are able to use the power saved for other purposes, like taking more pictures between charges. 3) The thickness of the OLED display is less than a LCD display as you don't need backlighting, meaning thinner and lighter cameras.

Andrew- Then why have companies like Hoodman and Delkin come out with folding shades for the screens? And have you seen an OLED screen?

Rob- You said you couldn't find a 5D. Perhaps you should check Ritz Camera. I know the Ultra Ritz store in my area has one for sale. Also, I believe the new Summer catalog for Ritz shows it in there. Ritz put together the catalog after KM's announcement that they were getting out of the photo business, so I'm led to believe that they may have bought out what ever supplies KM had.

Peter- I seriously doubt that the 7D and 5D will be true collectables. Look at a real 'collectable' like the 9Ti, where only 400 sequentially numbered units were produced for the entire planet. Their isn't a high demand for them. And even if the 7D and 5D were 'collectables', then using them would lower their value as a 'collectable'.

Andrew- They're good enough that Canon is planning to use them in more and more products. And have you ever tried to view a regular screen on the backs of most digital cameras on a bright sunny day? OLEDs over come that problem. If you can't see the screen what good is it?

Peter- I mentioned the article because I hope Sony, with their new DSLRs, uses the best technology available irregardless of who invented it, and not take the attitude that they're not going to use it because they didn't invent it. If you've tried to view the screen on the back of just about every digital camera, in bright sunlight, you'll know how hard it is to see anything. OLEDs solve this problem. This is not about having the newest toy on the DSLR, but a very useful invention. They can get a jump start on the competition in employing this technology. I would expect Canon to use OLEDs across the board in a couple of years. I don't know if it is possible to retrofit OLEDs displays on exsisting products, but if it's possible someone will.

Peter- I saw the article on MSN and was from Reuters (I believe). When I posted my 'question' on this forum, I was going to put a link to the article, but by then it disappeared. The technology has gotten to the point, as well as the price has dropped, to where the manufacturers can comfortably use this technology in their products. I know Sanyo has a Hi-Def camcorder with an OLED screen. In the future, you'll see HDTVs using this technology. Right now the largest screen is around 20". In a few years, this could completely LED and LCD TVs. Canon is using another techonogy for the TVs. They're coming out with SED screens.

Robxxto- Perhaps you should re-read the post I left. The price drop I refered to was for the KM 7D, not a Sony DSLR. And I'll ask you, what I asked another poster, where have I ever said I was an 'insider'??? Keep your snide comments to yourself, as it wasn't warranted.

Shirish- I believe this matter has been covered in the past on several occasions. You might want to check the past forum questions.

IMHO, you should wait. Based on the press releases from Sony an KM, the Sony DSLRs will be made by KM, who will make them as an OEM supplier to Sony. In the meantime, I'm sure there will still be some new 7Ds floating around. And once the Sony DSLR is released, the price of those units are likely to drop.

As I recall the pin pattern on the older Minolta hot shoe was the same as on a Nikon, but not a Canon. You run the risk of frying some circuit using the flash.

"Your suggestion protects the bad seller. If you have shotty customer service and your customers feedback is not visible until they leave feedback, problem solved: Don?t leave feedback and all your sins are hidden."

 

Chad- I can see your point about it protecting a bad seller. Perhaps, if they give each party a 72 hour (or whatever time period) window to respond to the negative feedback, and if either party fails to do so within the time period, whatever feedback left is posted. For example, say I have a bad experience with a seller and decide to leave negative feedback. The seller is given a look at the comment, but it is not added to eBay. The seller in order to retaliate, does likewise for me, even if the problem with the transaction wasn't my fault. I, in turn get to see the sellers comment, but it is not posted on eBay. Once each party sees the feedback to be left, a clock starts that gives each party 72 hours to leave a response. In the meantime, both of the initial feedbacks are held in a 'holding pen'. Then both parties are given 72 hrs to respond, but without the opportunity to see what the response will be. Once the time is up, whatever feedback and response that was entered is put into feedback. Normally, either party has 30 days or so to leave feedback, but in the case of negative feedback, the clock starts when a negative comment is entered. And once the time period ends, the other party forfeits their right to leave feedback. If for some reason, the first person to leave feedback leaves a positive or neutral, but for some reason, the othe person leaves a negative comment, the original party is allowed to respond and the other party is not allowed to do likewise. I don't know if I made all that clear.

 

Anyway, I can see the trouble with the feedback process. Even watching some customers in a retail store, I can see that they have unreasonable expectations and get upset at the littlest problem and goes running off looking for a manager. Perhaps they do this to try and get a discount for their 'troubles'.

The feedback process on eBay is not perfect. As it is voluntary, not every seller or buyer leaves feedback on a transaction. I've left positive feedback for a seller, and not gotten one in return. A person who has a negative experience will be more likely, IMHO, to leave feedback. They, eBay, should institute a system where both parties have to leave feedback, before they are added to the parties feedback rating.

 

Also, in talking to a number of eBayers sellers, I've heard cases where the buyer has left negative feedback, because of some small problem, like the item was received a day late, or some other nit-picky problem. A seller I talked to told me that he had problems in collecting the money a buyer owed, and left a negative comment. In retaliation, the buyer left negative feedback where none was warranted. I recently bought a computer cable from a Power Seller (>10,000), there were problems in the transaction, with the seller saying the item was shipped, when I finally took the matter to resolution, the seller agreed that the item was not shipped and refunded my money, and gave me an additional $2. I debated whether I should leave feedback, and of what nature. In the end, I decided not to leave any. If I had left a negative comment, would the seller then leave a negative comment for me? I couldn't in good conscience leave positive feedback. After looking at the situation, where the seller probably sells dozens of items a day, and where much of the transaction is 'automatically' done, such as notification of 'End of Transaction', 'Shipping Notice', etc., I realized that dispite the good intentions of the seller, SHIT happens. Sometimes something goes wrong, and the important thing is whether the other party tries to rectify the situation. In this case, the seller DID stay in contact, although it may have taken longer than I would like, but understandable seeing the volume the seller does.

 

Before placing a bid, I check the feedback of a seller, and if I see a pattern of problems, I won't bid. However, if it is an isolated incident, like 1 out of 50 transaction (98%), or if it was a long time ago, I will not hesitate to bid. So far, knock on wood, I haven't been burned.

I was reading about the development of OLED displays, Organic Light-

Emitting Diodes, and how they will be replacing LCDs in many

consumer products. The advantages of OLEDs in a digital camera is

that unlike a LCD screen that is used on the back of most digital

cameras, they don't get washed out when viewed in sunlight, OLEDs

are bright and vivid, so you can see what you've shot without having

to shield the screen. Another advantage is that the response time is

much faster so that you don't get a jerky image. In fact, it is

predicted that soon you won't need the mirror and prism that are

used in a DSLR as the OLED will give you an image that is actual

time. Already several digi-cams and digital cameras are using OLEDs.

Canon is reported to be coming out with a number of products in the

next year that use OLEDs instead of LCDs. Hopefully Sony will be

using this technology in their DSLRs, and not take the attittude

of 'we're not using it, because we didn't invent it.'

Don't worry Bill, I'll keep asking you about what equipment you own and USE every chance I get.

Bill- Why do you continue to call eBay- 'fleabay'? On one hand you recommend them and on the other hand you insult them with your nickname for them. Tell me, what items have you brought at 'fleabay'?

 

I have bought a number of items on 'fleabay', and have been pretty satisfied with what I bought.

bill- Are you a politician??? You keep skating around my question of what equipment you own and USE. As your last post shows, I went out with my Maxxum 9 and shot a roll of film. Isn't that USING my equipment??? Again, I'll ask you, "What equipment do you own and USE?" If you've posted a list of the equipment, why don't you or one of your buddies post a link to your privious response?

 

I've noticed that in the past, you rarely answer a question posted on this forum with any 'technical' nature, you merely make an observation or comment. Is this because you don't actually own or USE any photographic equipment?

bill- Your memory must be slipping, as you did ask me want I "owned and USED". I listed the equipment that I owned and when pressed by you as to whether I USED it, I went out and shot a roll of film. However, you refused to answer my question as to the Minolta equipment you owned and USED. Click on the following link and see for yourself-

 

http://www.photo.net/bboard/q-and-a-fetch-msg?msg_id=00Dw2r&tag=

 

In a later forum question, I did ask you again what equipment you owned and USED, so I'll have to dig that one out to refresh my memory as to whether you finally answered it. However, when I directly asked you in the above link, you refused to answer it. To save me some time, I'll ask you again- Bill Thorlin, what equipment to you own and USE???

Chris- What predictions have I made??? Once again you're accusing me of doing something that is not backed-up by the 'facts' that you've dug out. I have NEVER said that I got some in-side information from the factory. I have been up-front with my 'credentials'. When asked by Bill Thorlin, what equipment I used, I quickly answered his inquiry, something that he refused to do in return. When you asked what companies I repped, I answered quickly, but you only say what you do, not what company you work for. I have never mislead anyone, and as you have found out, I have been consistent in what I post.

 

You made a point of my 'attacks' against other posters, but you haven't posted what other posters have said against me, without any provocation on my part. For example, look at the response I got with this forum 'question'. And don't forget the attacks that were heaped against me when I posted the famous question "Film is Dying", or "More Proof Film is Dying". However, if you look at the substance of those two posts, you'll see that my 'predictions' about film are becoming more and more true.

 

I have had a couple of other forum users, email me about subjects that were brought up on this forum and I have been open and whenever I can, helpful to them.

 

It seems that there are a few posters on this forum, of which you are one, that no matter what I post, will take issue with. If I were to say "The sun is hot", you'll say "No it isn't". If you don't like the 'question' that I orginally posted on this forum, then don't post a reply and attack me. You, and a few others, seem to eagerly seek out my posts to look for any errors or something yoy can attack. You don't add anything to the discussion, you just want to make personal attacks against me. So, don't make it look like you're a 'saint', 'cause you ain't.