richard_wallace2

In a talk with a friend, i came to know that minolta cameras changed

"country of origin" in the 90's from Japan to China. My

dynax60/maxxum70 is also made in China though the lenses i've got

afterwards are made in Japan. This drove me to a question: Are the

models from the 90's made in China "worst" in any particular point

then those made i Japan, or this is just something a proud owner of a

Japanese Minolta says to win a discussion?

RWallace

Hello everyone!

I'm interested in buying a SRT101b. As far as I know the MC and MD

rokkor lenses can be used in the SRT101b, but my problem now is that I

don't actually know which was the original lens this body had in those

days.

Thanks in advanced,

RWallace

Bill Thorlin: I do the same exercice of with my budget. But my priority know goes to a second body from minolta "old school" that I've seen in a store around my place... I guess the 100-300 apo just has to wait a few more months.

Take care.

I own a 75-300 and as far as i've used it (long shots to moving targets), it managed to do its work very well and it wasn't very expensive. With the teleconverter the 100-300 has the advantage of working AF the 75-300 only works MF... at least soo said the guy working where i get my minolta stuff.

P

Jedidiah Smith:

KM isn't ruling around here because most people consider canon and nikon a better choice (marketing i'm guessing)... let them think so! There is a Portuguese site were you can have your photos online... can you believe that, besides my girlfriend, i'm the only one using a 35mm KM? And I bought it because... it was the best quality/price "brand" around here, and I'm very glad I did so!

Thank you all for giving a help.

I've been in a store today and the f/2.8-4 was tagged 560? (little less then $730). So I guess is not so overpriced as i was expecting (jolly good).

When I bought the my dynax60 a 28-100 f/3.5-5.6 lens came with it, no sense on trading for the 28-75 David Bedell mencioned... i think, at least for the time being.

I do tend to shoot bridges so the wide end could come in handy in some situations.

RWallace

Hello,

I've bought a KM recently (dynax60 aka maxxum70 in u.s.) and I'm

considering buying a "short range" zoom lens lens to cover all range.

So, what I'd appreciate a lot (since i'm a beginner in this matters)

is your honest opinion about the 17-35mm, the f/2.8-4 D or the f/3.5

G? The only thing I know about the f/3.5 is that it is a "circ" lens.

Thank you in advanced for the attention given,

Rwallace

Can everybody stop saying that Minolta is dead, dying, or going to in the next months! For weeks I've read this forum, and everybody keeps repeating the same thing. Minolta as a firm will be dead only if no other way is possible... at least I guess so. Nobody in there right mind would send a company like Minolta to the lost land of forgetness by no reason.

I appologice for giving a response like this in my first ever response here, but this was starting to get on my nerves. I bought my first KM not long ago and what I've heard was that they were managing to stay in the market very well (at the frenetic rate digital cameras show up... that has to be dificult), around here KM, thow not a very known company, can be found almost anywere... even in stores that never before sold KM products... I guess that must mean something, right?

One more KM user

RWallace