The beginning of the end?

[bfitzgerald]

Today I was taking a few shots with the film 7, and frankly it blows the A57's EVF apart there is really no comparison at all.

Yes, the Minolta Maxxum/Dynax/Alpha 7 has a great viewfinder. I bought one in January 2002, my last film camera, and put about 3-4 rolls of slide film through it. I then bought a Minolta D7i and haven't used film since. Too bad. My $599 Maxxum 7 still sits unused and got almost no use.

I remember these comments about it:

http://www.luminous-landscape.com/colum ... 4-06.shtml

Two of the main reasons: it has the brightest, cleanest finder you have ever laid eyes on, and it has wonderful, superfast, super-positive autofocus. Minolta claims that the Maxxum 7's autofocus is the world's fastest. I'm not in a position to dispute or confirm that claim, but let's just say I can believe it.

I've used quite a few FF bodies from various makers and I put the 7's VF up against a 5dMkII, bar % coverage the Minolta's VF is sharper brighter and bigger.
The top of the range Nikon 35mm bodies are solid has to be said beefy build, but in the 7's bracket I think it's without doubt the best 35mm body I've used, plastic body or not, stick back problem or not. It's fully loaded and you really want for nothing unless you want tank like build (I've yet to break a film 7)

I liked it so much I bought 2 but my ultimate goal is a limited version maybe some day

Back to Sony well they're done their NEX thing (bar the expected FF model)
So now they have to wow people with A mount, bodies and lenses, let's see what turns up.

[classiccameras]

I should imagine that most OVF are going to blow EVF's apart, but I have seen some pretty awful and dim DSLR OVF, Olympus being one such make that left a lot to be desired. Early Canikons were 'nice but dim' as well. Pentax seem to stand out for very good OVF.
I think both systems have their advantages and disadvantages depending what you want from them.

My only Minolta film cameras are the MD X Range, X500 and XD-7, with an assortment of manual focus MD Rokkor lenses that have not really been equalled optically since. I use both cameras with E-6 film occasionly and still get a lot of pleasure from using them. You should see the looks I get at some of the scenic shoots I go to by DSLR owners, and the odd comment, mostly favourable. The view finders on my X cameras are as you would expect, very bright, and virtually 100%. They are a pleasure to look through and composition is that much easier edge to edge.

I mostly use Digital now, but I won't let film die. Fujifilm just announced that Provia F100 is back on the market by popular demand!!

[classiccameras]

Just seen a A-58 second hand on LCE, body only for £299.

[Atgets_Apprentice]

I'd sooner go for a second hand Dynax 7.

All this talk has put me in the mood to trade up!

[pakodominguez]

I'd sooner go for a second hand Dynax 7.

All this talk has put me in the mood to trade up!

I have one, almost new (few rolls on it)
1500$ for you

[Atgets_Apprentice]

1500$ ?

http://www.ffordes.co.uk/product/12112917405081

[pakodominguez]

1500$ ?

http://www.ffordes.co.uk/product/12112917405081

well, if this is the best camera ever for you, 1500$ might be the the value of the Maxxum 7, right?

[bfitzgerald]

The limited version goes for about £500 odd boxed as new or around there. Some German ebay sellers try to get £150+ for a film 7, that site above seems to sell them at £75-£99 which is much more sensible for a good condition body.

[Greg Beetham]

I was having a snoop on the web looking for any info about the 7 Limited Edition and found a nice write up about the standard 7 by none other than Gary F. http://photo.net/equipment/minolta/maxxum7
Greg

[bakubo]

Cool old stuff. I remember thinking the KM 7D had a pretty good design too. Too bad both of my 7D cameras were defective lemons. Nice body design though. I wrote about it here more than 8 years ago:

http://www.dpreview.com/forums/post/11907833

[classiccameras]

I'm thinking of going backwards to the A200 as back up body with OVF. Plenty about second hand and from reading the reviews, it stood out as exhibiting stunning image quality, which was never really achieved at that level on later models. I almost never go above ISO 400 with most of my landscape at 100 or 200 at most. No live view but thats not important to me. I would try and get one with a low actuation count if possible.
Anything to watch out for on the A200 before I take the plunge, let me know.

[Atgets_Apprentice]

The only thing I remember about the a200 was the lack of DoF preview. It was no better than my a100, so I got rid quickly & got an a300.

[bfitzgerald]

Well open to debate on a few areas, A100 was basically a KM5d with more neutral tonality/colour and with a 10mp sensor
A200 did remove some items, no MLU, no DOF preview (it does has P shift if that matters)
A200 AF is faster (in good light by a fair margin) the AF though isn't as good for accuracy as the Km5d in low light (EV0 instead of EV-1), and you can get a "proper" grip for the A200-350 bodies, unlike the KM or A100

The only reason the A200 was popular, it was cheap quickly fell to £299 odd. I owned one for a few years as a second body. There are lots around and selling for very little really (not surprisingly due to it's initial low price) The biggest annoyance was the menu dive for flash exp comp, the capped auto ISO at 400 both a bit annoying (and no sticky memory for the main menu), and the DRO on the A200 is mostly a waste of time it does very little v the better level selectable levels on other models. Battery life is quite good on the A200 too, handling is "ok" as well.

At it's uber low price it's certainly worth a look, I've toyed with picking up another one it's actually not a bad camera in most ways, it was just at the time I felt the 5d was a better all round camera, and more suited to low light so I got another one of those to replace it. Build of the A200 isn't as good as the 5d/A100, but it's "ok", the LCD is very very vulnerable to marks and scratches unlike the 5d's tough lcd so if you pick one up look for an LCD protected one, or pick up a protector yourself.

[Greg Beetham]

The reason why I like both the KM5D and the A100 is they are both CCD sensor cameras, (A200 as well I'm pretty sure) they stopped making them I think because they are more expensive to make than CMOS sensors, (I read somewhere) I also think they produce a more natural look too, (skin tones are good from both) but perhaps the CMOS has more DR potential.
Greg

[classiccameras]

Your right about CCD sensors and IQ, Olympus had the Kodak CCD sensor right up to the E-500. After that all models had a Panasonic CMOS Sensor which then enabled live view to be used. Olympus earned the reputation with the Kodak sensor as having the finest Jpegs in the business and very little was gained from using RAW.
Its generally recognised that a CCD sensor at low ISO settings is a better sensor for IQ and superb colours. Noise was/is a problem above 800 and DR was a bit limited, although some of that can be fixed in PP.
Actually, noise never worried me a great deal and a little noise as seen on the 4/3 format enhanced definition and perceived sharpness. I always use my Oly with the noise filter off.
Yes, from reading the spec sheets in the reviews, the A200 had a CCD sensor and it also had a OVF that was very good and quite large [95%]. After the intro of the CMOS sensor on later models the OVF became smaller and not as good.

With early CCD equipped cameras such as the Oly E-500 and Sony A100/200, stunning results could be had if a high resolution lens was used, such as the Zeiss 16-80 or a prime. The sensor really needed to be worked by a good lens to get the best out of it.
Today, mediocre kit lenses can be software managed by the on board processor to give respectable results although a high quality bit of glass will still out perform it.