Minolta podcast...

Specifically for the discussion of the A-mount DSLR range
Forum rules
No more than three images or three external links allowed in any post or reply. Please trim quotations and do not include images in quotes unless essential.
classiccameras
Viceroy
Posts: 1044
Joined: Sun Oct 21, 2012 9:33 am

Re: Minolta podcast...

Unread post by classiccameras »

I'm really impressed with the Nikon Z50 Inc supplied kit lens, Its one of the nicest easy handling cameras I have held. yesterday in my local Camera Store, all controls are at hand with out having to stretch for them, they just fall under your finger tips, the grip is nice and the camera is not that heavy even with the Magnesium body, OK, no IBS but neither does the Canon so nothing has changed from their larger brothers
Some one at Nikon took ergonomics to a whole new level.

On reviews it gets top marks for most things, and I would consider dumping my Micro 4/3 in favour of it. I'm that impressed. Not many kit lenses yet, but the numbers are growing, A DX adaptor would be good. not that I have any DX lenses, but there are plenty of used ones out there.

Having said all that about the Nikon, the Canon M50 comes a close second in my book plus there are adaptors available and I have a couple of Canon lenses that can be fitted to the M50. Both cameras look, feel and hold beautifully compared lets say A Sony ILC and my GX7.

Back to Pentax, it was the K70 middle range I was interested in but it seems most reviewers did not like its over complex menus - systems, some even bewildering and confusing if your new to the camera. Plus weight and size kicked it into touch for me.

My A58 and Minolta lenses stay for nostalgic reasons.
User avatar
bfitzgerald
Subsuming Vortex of Brilliance
Posts: 3996
Joined: Fri Sep 26, 2008 10:48 pm

Re: Minolta podcast...

Unread post by bfitzgerald »

That's interesting the Z50 not used one but it didn't get a lot of attention. Evidently the kit lenses are quite good
Some say it was a mistake to do DX/APS-C for Nikon Z - it's probably not because there is potential for different buyers and wildlife shooters. Remains to be seen where they go with crop Z, I'd like to see IBIS on an updated one.

A lot of people have written Nikon off, thing is they do still have a big user base if they can make the right choices/clear out some of the dead wood management from previous years (I think a few left), I wouldn't put them out of the game at all.

Talking of big these were pretty hefty for their day ;-D
28259-ts_0.jpg
28259-ts_0.jpg (84.25 KiB) Viewed 5423 times
classiccameras
Viceroy
Posts: 1044
Joined: Sun Oct 21, 2012 9:33 am

Re: Minolta podcast...

Unread post by classiccameras »

The Z50 is quite a bit more expensive than the Canon M50. buying a Nikon would for me be starting from scratch with a new system, I could not afford it. But my old 650D and kit lens could be sold as part way for the M50,
Both the Z50 & M50 tick quite a few boxes for me, APS-C sensor in a small DSLR shape body, mirrorless and fairly decent glass, plus I have always been a fan of Canon colours.
User avatar
bakubo
Tower of Babel
Posts: 5865
Joined: Tue Nov 06, 2007 7:55 am
Location: Japan
Contact:

Re: Minolta podcast...

Unread post by bakubo »

bfitzgerald wrote: Wed May 26, 2021 2:05 pm Talking of big these were pretty hefty for their day ;-D
You are going to make classiccameras start to drool. :lol:
User avatar
bfitzgerald
Subsuming Vortex of Brilliance
Posts: 3996
Joined: Fri Sep 26, 2008 10:48 pm

Re: Minolta podcast...

Unread post by bfitzgerald »

classiccameras wrote: Wed May 26, 2021 4:02 pm The Z50 is quite a bit more expensive than the Canon M50. buying a Nikon would for me be starting from scratch with a new system, I could not afford it. But my old 650D and kit lens could be sold as part way for the M50,
Both the Z50 & M50 tick quite a few boxes for me, APS-C sensor in a small DSLR shape body, mirrorless and fairly decent glass, plus I have always been a fan of Canon colours.
I don't know what you have gear wise sounds like various things from different makers.
I've generally avoiding mixing makers unless there is a reason. I can't afford switching, but then if I look around and start clearing out gear I don't use - it suddenly adds up to quite a bit. Potentially thousands adding it all up
If I were buying right now photography mostly forgetting about video - I'd be looking at that grey market D610 selling for £550 odd new, dig around for a few lens deals etc, job done (with a view to picking stuff that can be adapted to Z ie third party/AFS). Or possibly a Canon DSLR used same plan ie think about adapting later on. That's if Canon ever get around to making a really good EOS R body that doesn't cost a fortune (R lens prices are bordering criminal)

I wouldn't rule out Sony but you either into it or not and the E mount stuff is not my cup of tea so far anyway. A good tool but not so much fun
EOS M is a one hit wonder I think if it does the job go for it, long term I've doubts about how it will fare - doesn't matter if it does what you want.

I'm not really sure where Nikon are going with Z APS-C, I expect more stuff but they are quite slow in 2021
I'd be much more inclined for full frame buying now from scratch used or new. I'm not sure the APS-C systems offer good value, in fact they really don't once you factor in the native lens prices. That applies for Fuji X and Sony E APS-C too expensive for a crop system unless you are buying it bit by bit. I can get full frame stuff used for way less, that's my take I know some people want the smaller sizes.

A Mount has some use used as the lenses can be bought for not that much, most of them bar the boutique stuff, that's basically what I did over the years gradually acquire bits, some of which I honestly don't need. I'm down to 19 lenses! I think 4-5 is enough for most people, hence I've been clearing out things recently. All the SLR mounts are fairly good value used now and probably will be even more going forward. I certainly wouldn't be putting down big cash on native mirror less systems - but adapting lenses. I'd try to stick to a single maker if possible bar maybe I'd keep the old 5d's and a few lenses if I did get rid of it later on. Most of it would have to go


The RD3000 was also chunky for it's day!
4665156_orig.jpg
4665156_orig.jpg (114.33 KiB) Viewed 5388 times
classiccameras
Viceroy
Posts: 1044
Joined: Sun Oct 21, 2012 9:33 am

Re: Minolta podcast...

Unread post by classiccameras »

I have a Panasonic FZ330 Bridge,

A Panasonic GX7 with a budget but excellent 12-32, used

Sony A58 plus standard kit lens, Minolta Konica F/2.8 17-35, and Minolta 24-85 The Sony collection cost me total of about £450 used.

Canon 650D with standard kit zoom, plus 15-85 and 28-135. All from the used market

Yes, too many different brands, I need to thin the collection down, and stay with one brand. My only brand new purchase was the Panasonic FZ330. I will put that to one side while I choose what to sell. It's my fault for succumbing to temptation.
User avatar
bfitzgerald
Subsuming Vortex of Brilliance
Posts: 3996
Joined: Fri Sep 26, 2008 10:48 pm

Re: Minolta podcast...

Unread post by bfitzgerald »

That's not too bad I've seen far worse! I'd stick with one system whatever it is and just get things you will use
I only started having a clear out when I was talking to my mother, who said to me "why do you have 12 cameras and so many things do you use them all?"
Of course I don't use them or most of it, and I can't justify having so many bodies (A77/77ii/99 2 x 5d's), A6300, 2 x Dynax 7's one Dynax 5, Dynax 60 couple more older film cameras. Then I started looking at the lenses and most of them don't get used, add in the accessories too and it's out of control GAS in some ways. And I didn't need 4 normal zooms either (28-85, 28-105mm, 24-105mm, 28-100mm) - hence I sold the 60 Dynax and kit lens the other day. I didn't need the 50mm F1.4 either as I have the 50mm F1.7. Probably don't need 3 tele lenses the 70-210mm F4, 100-200mm F4.5 and 80-200mm F2.8

Assuming there is some work this year (last year was a total wipe out almost for obvious reasons). I only need 2 working bodies and lenses that I would use for jobs. As far as the tube videos I only really need decent 1080p, perhaps one MILC camera could be justified for review items. That's about it really.
For most people for FF would be a 16/17-35mm, 24 or 28- something standard zoom (F4 or F2.8), a tele lens 70-200mm F4 or F2.8 and a fast prime say 50mm or equivalent. That's 4 lenses, even if you wanted a longer zoom 70-300mm or 400mm that's up to 5. Thing is you start thinking about other things (ie macro lens), then you're up to 6. More than that it just goes on and on and is probably just GAS once you go over that. I think a handful is enough for most unless you're a specialist shooter wildlife/sports.

The whole thing (ie talking to my mother) got me thinking..."less is more", so something has to give or rather go!
classiccameras
Viceroy
Posts: 1044
Joined: Sun Oct 21, 2012 9:33 am

Re: Minolta podcast...

Unread post by classiccameras »

There is an old saying, not specifically aimed at photographic equipment, if you haven't used it for a year you don't need it. Thinking back to my 35mm film days it was just 2 bodies 2 standard lenses, f'1.7 and F 1.4, 1 135 F.2.8 telephoto lens and a 28 or 35 wide angle. One body was loaded with slow slide film and the other with faster film all depending on the weather on the day. I did several Farnborough air shows with that set up and had stuff published. I was no pro, just a keen AP.

The only pro work I have done over recent year and not much since lock down, is taking pictures of houses/property for sale for the estate agents, boring, and they soon dumped me for a pro photographic company with contracts. mind you it cost them big money compared to my petrol money. I have always shied away from FF mainly because of body size and expensive glass, you need good lenses to do the sensor justice.

Common sense says stick with Micro 4/3 as there is a good selection of lenses from both Panasonic and Olympus, not much from the third party though, plus a thriving used market.
However, I have always preferred APS.C format and the better depth of field you can get for landscape work

I don't want to spend any more money on A mount.

One route to take is sell the Micro 4/3 camera as I don't have a system built round it and the Canon 650D and build a APS.C system round the Canon M50, lens support for this camera is poor but improving slowly, older lenses can be used with adaptor which is available so OS is still maintained. pity no IBS but at least most canon lenses and third party are OS, yes less is more and that was so true in my film days. I don't see why that should change with digital.
User avatar
bfitzgerald
Subsuming Vortex of Brilliance
Posts: 3996
Joined: Fri Sep 26, 2008 10:48 pm

Re: Minolta podcast...

Unread post by bfitzgerald »

I don't mind interior photography as it's more relaxed, that got hit last year as the hospitality industry shut down pretty much over here.
There are larger companies trying to muscle into this, their rates are awful and it's IMO not worth even powering on the camera. I was approached by a company for "food photos" pre pandemic. They had very specific instructions about shots for restaurants and food shots, and frankly the 50 euro per job fee was a joke so I said thanks but no thanks. They are trying to turn photography into an "Uber" service. Yet the shoot brief said you had to shoot the images on a full frame camera (hmmm) as if that would make any difference.

Yes find what works best and stick to it, I'm not sure where A mount will end for me. I could trim it down a bit and just roll with what I have - or one day I might wake up try something new and never look back. It's not worth worrying about really. I can pick things I like and dislike about all the makers including Sony (they are not all bad and not all good). I suppose wallet wise it would be less dramatic if I adapted the A Mount lenses later on - that's down to Sony to see where they go or don't with their LAEA5, or if I can put up with the LAEA4 (it is usable just limiting in some ways)

Z50 got some good reviews such as this one. I think the body design looks a lot more comfortable than the A6xxx Sony's
https://www.amateurphotographer.co.uk/r ... -50-review

It's worth trying a few things over time, nothing wrong with that
Nikon-Z50-vs-Sony-Alpha-a6600-back-view-size-comparison.jpg
Nikon-Z50-vs-Sony-Alpha-a6600-back-view-size-comparison.jpg (35.47 KiB) Viewed 5325 times
Nikon-Z50-vs-Sony-Alpha-a6600-size-comparison.jpg
Nikon-Z50-vs-Sony-Alpha-a6600-size-comparison.jpg (39.98 KiB) Viewed 5325 times
Nikon-Z50-vs-Sony-Alpha-a6600-top-view-size-comparison.jpg
Nikon-Z50-vs-Sony-Alpha-a6600-top-view-size-comparison.jpg (26.92 KiB) Viewed 5325 times
classiccameras
Viceroy
Posts: 1044
Joined: Sun Oct 21, 2012 9:33 am

Re: Minolta podcast...

Unread post by classiccameras »

Most of my House shots were taken from the road so they can be displayed in the agents window for sale.
The Nikon gets praise from AP, although not surprising seeing AP have been a staunch supporter of the big 3 ( Nikon, Canon and Pentax ) since film days.
However on this occasion the Nikon Z50 gets high marks and justifiably so does DPr who also gave it high marks as did several other review sites. With a kit lens added on it becomes way out of my price range which makes the Canon M50 a far better proposition and some half decent kit lenses at good prices to.
Looking at the pictures of the Z50 and A6600, I would prefer to hold the Z50, ( it was really nice when I held it for a few seconds or so ) and Canon M50 than the A6600. It also appeals to me holding a DSLR shaped body with the eye piece in the right place rather than a compact type body with off set eye piece, I had the A6000 and did not like it. I'm pretty sure A mount will get phased out and probably not that long to go, Sony are in top gear promoting their other cameras, but they need to do better with design and prices and up grade that dire kit lens,

I was always impressed with the A57 and A37, they got those right but not so impressed with the A58. I would replace the A58 with the A37 because its so small and compact and it produced superb pictures even with the standard kit lens which was a good performer. Still the A58 is not all bad.
User avatar
bfitzgerald
Subsuming Vortex of Brilliance
Posts: 3996
Joined: Fri Sep 26, 2008 10:48 pm

Re: Minolta podcast...

Unread post by bfitzgerald »

It varies on sites I look around AP can be alright sometimes they get carried away. I know Ephotozine are huge Pentax fans, I read a review on a Pentax older lens, not an old review just a retro type one not that long ago. The images were truly awful, yet were praising the lens!. But that's another story the review sites vary a lot I never take one on it's own. You can add photography blog/phoblographer to the ignore list too rare to find useful feedback on either
Imaging Resource seems in slow motion so far behind they are out of the loop these days, I rarely go there anymore. There are some good blogs around if you care to look. Feedback is always personal though, new buyers have a tendency to be overly praising of their new toy!

On body size I think Sony made a deliberate choice to stop making small A Mount cameras, possibly to avoid clashing with "E mount". You can see the last 3 models all based off the A77 platform, A68/77ii/99ii. Perhaps saving money, or maybe they just didn't want to make small bodies. Whilst I quite like the handling of these cameras overall - they could have been a bit more compact. I am quite fond of the 5d body, it's about right size wise for an SLR, if it had a grip option and a few tweaks to the body button layout ideal for a MILC too. I could easily have been made into a FF platform. The A57/58 is similar in size to the MInolta - though with wasted top plate space which seems to have been a Sony thing and still is on E Mount (at least the A77 style bodies used it better)

Moving forward whatever direction that might take. I consider design/handling to be very important. All makers make mistakes and do good things. It's about finding the right combination that works. I think here Sony are well behind the others in terms of body design APS-C and full frame, which is a shame - yet no signs they are willing to learn and evolve from that. it is consistently mentioned by many people, yet continues to be ignored by Sony for some reason? The 5d remains a superior body design even though it's from 2005, with a good solid comfortable grip, plenty of mount to grip clearance and a body size that is still quite compact. The front dial placement is also perfect as it's angled

There is an interesting blog on ergonomics here. Perhaps he has too much time on his hands, but I found some of his points quite valid and worth reading
http://cameraergonomics.blogspot.com/
Konica-Minolta-Maxxum-5D-vs-Sony-SLT-A57-size-comparison.jpg
Konica-Minolta-Maxxum-5D-vs-Sony-SLT-A57-size-comparison.jpg (52.17 KiB) Viewed 5286 times
Sony-SLT-A55-vs-Sony-Alpha-a6000-size-comparison.jpg
Sony-SLT-A55-vs-Sony-Alpha-a6000-size-comparison.jpg (42.17 KiB) Viewed 5286 times
Sony-Alpha-A7-III-vs-Konica-Minolta-Maxxum-5D-size-comparison.jpg
Sony-Alpha-A7-III-vs-Konica-Minolta-Maxxum-5D-size-comparison.jpg (42.75 KiB) Viewed 5286 times
Post Reply

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 21 guests