Motor Drive for X700

I

idutta

Would a motor drive that is mounted on Minolta XG-M work for an X-700?

Thanks,
Indranil
 
I

idutta

Is there some way of getting the MD-90 motor drive to work on an X-700. The MD-1 seems to be prohibitively expensive.

Thanks,
Indranil
 
M

mike_lachance

My advice, don't run a motordrive on Minolta cloth shutter SLRs (especially the X-700, X-570 and X-370)... Although the drives are great performers, the abuse they inflict on the shutter springs and internal film advancing systems within the cameras is too much for them to handle.

I have owned (2) X-570s and an X-700. The first X-570 i bought new in 1984 and it served faithfully for 16 years before i retired it. This camera was used and abused and took all the punishment i could muster, with the exception being, not once did I ever attach an MD-1 motor drive to this '570.

The second X-570 and subsequent X-700 were both in great shape and well taken care of. With these two cameras, i used the MD-1 and within 15 months both cameras failed. Same problem. Shutter lock up due to binding advance mechanism and shutter interlock. Such failures are common on X-Series cameras only if they are used with the motor-drive!

This is unfortunate, as I LOVE the MD-1, from a performance standpoint, the MD-1 is worth every penny. From a practical standpoint, it is a death wish for your X-Body.

I am now the happy owner of a beautiful XK from 1974. Now this is a camera that will take a beating and remain a fully functional tool.
 

peterblaise

Well-Known Member
Hi Michael,

BS.

Somebody's gotta stop this kind of erroneous smear tactic!

My two Minolta X-700's have been Motor Drive 1 run for years with NO PROBLEM.

Join
Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!
and
Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!
and
Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!
to chat with ~2,000 Minolta X-series users who can share lots of stories of function and failure WITHOUT DENIGRATING AN ENTIRE LINE OF CAMERAS based on their personal experience with 1 or 2 or 3 cameras. Failures, lots of failures in the archives there - yet no one claims that the entire line of X-cameras is incapable of proper function.

And if mine did ever fail, I'd get 'em fixed and keep right on usin' 'em!

Without complaining.

And without claiming that the entire line of cameras from Minolta are incapable of being motor driven.

Geesh, if I claimed that every car is incapable of being driven whenever my own one car needs repair, I'd never own a car, and I'd never get anywhere.

Shucks, even Rolls Royce has a service department - just because you've had a few failures doesn't mean much since these cameras have been in production for years with hundreds of thousands of them in operation (millions?). 2 or 3 out of ... anyway, all we're ever gonna hear about on the web is the failures since the working ones don't make us write in asking, "Help, my camera is working and I don't need any help!" Right? Ss even 100 stories on the Internet doesn't mean much, statistically.

And your investment in an XK costs how much compared to getting your X-series cameras fixed? And other than 1 additional stop of shutter speed ... anyway, if you wanna read horror stories about the expense and impossibility of camera repair, join the 165 members of
Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!
and read the archives! Scary! Yet, no one there claims the entire line of Minolta XK-cameras is incapable of proper function!

And why, oh why did you retire your first X-500?

I think you are telling us more about you as a camera handler than you are telling us anything useful or authoritative about the cameras which you handle.

The same thing happens with cars, or anything - "I had a Honda and it died on the highway once when I floored it trying to pass a truck- Honda's may be nice, but they can't take being floored!" Plug your own personal experience in here and all you hear is the pain of the person who owns something that needs service, not the quality service offering potential of the entire range of products from the supplier and their support services.

Geesh!

Click!

Love and hugs,

Peter Blaise Monahon Minolta Vivitar Tamron Fujifilm Ilford Kodak et cetera Photographer peterblaise@yahoo.com
Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!
 
U

Uksnapper

Posted by Peter Blaise Monahon (Peterblaise) on Thursday, October 09, 2003 - 2:44 pm: Hi Michael, BS. Somebody's gotta stop this kind of erroneous smear tactic!

I think we should be saying which Michael ! Michael W
 
M

mike_lachance

Sheesh, Calm down please Peter. The fact that you've had great luck with the longevity of your X Camera does say something. And I *DO* love the X-570 and X-700 dearly. I have shot hundreds of rolls through these cameras over a VERY long period of time, so i do think i have a basis to judge the line. The fact that they have failed under such consistent circumstances (and i treated them very kindly) indicates much truth to what I've said.

That being said, I feel part of the problem may be in not having regular CLA done on these cameras. If you are going to ABUSE the shutter and advance mechanisms of the X-Series with a very fine performing MD-1 (I loved mine) than by all means take your camera in FIRST and have them do a CLA. Better safe than sorry....

And as for this problem not being common? here are some snippetts i easily ran across... (there are hundreds like these:

"I had my X-700 freeze up on me after less than a year of use. This is when I began to read about others problems with the camera on photo.net, so I sold it with no regrets."

"My X700 also suddenly stopped working and had to have the electronics replaced. I had it repaired under warranty, and I ran only a few rolls through it and it died again. Same symptoms.."

"I had it [X-700] about a year. Made in China. Was taking a timer picture of me. High humidity in the New England states, but the camera had been working perfect no problems. Set the timer posed heard the click. Came back to find the mirror was stuck in the picture mode. I could not wind.."

"In my opinion, the minolta x700 is simply not a camera that can withstand alot of film. I put 10+ rolls a week and the advance lever always breaks, the circuitry eventually blows, or the shutter speeds do not remain precise. The circuitry recently blew.."

"I've seen more than my fair share of tanked X-370s and X-700s broken from their somewhat overfragile plastic geared film transport mechanisms when rapidly advanced, or the magnets on the shutter rails starting to loose their kick, or spontaneous failure of the circuitry.."

"the camera was fixed once for a shutter problem during that time (actually it was close to the end of the warrantee). Then in 98 the shutter stop working once again.."

"the shutter is frozen again, almost same as happened before, I had to send it back to the store, the repair warranty had expired, I got an estimate two days ago for the cost of yet another X-700, stating the whole electrical circuit and shutter control circuit have to be replaced.."

"I don't know too much about cameras and when I got my Minolta X-700 35mm SLR camera I was very happy with it for about a year. I went on vacation and came back with negatives that were half exposed. It turns out that the shutter magnets went and once that happens you can get it fixed but it will keep happening every six months or so for the rest of your camera's life."

"Actually, I'm not surprised you had trouble with this camera. Minolta has one of the poorest reliablity records of all the camera brands and the X-700 is one of the worst cameras for malfunctions ever made. Minolta eventually stopped making them just so they wouldn't have to deal with the warranty returns (or have to keep making parts. A real dog of a camera!"

"...Also at times folks jam the wind mechanism by forcing the Motor Drive coupler, thinking that it's the battery compartment. the battery cover is in the Bottom Center of the camera, not on the Release Side of the camera. Finally a shutter problem can cause this same jam. As we are a Minolta Authorized Service Center we'd be glad to help out with the repair..."


So, yes, the 570 and 700 and awesoem cameras.. I loved mine, but the XK offers a bit more durability. the titanium shutter and interchangeable viewfinder and prism are reason enough to own one. And the cost? XKs can be found for under $400 with lenses and accessories included.
 
M

mike_lachance

Quote by Peter Monahan
"I think you are telling us more about you as a camera handler than you are telling us anything useful or authoritative about the cameras which you handle. "

Peter, I respectfully request you do not make this a personal thing. I make no assumptions on you personally, as you should not either. If you cannot stand the fact that MANY MANY photographers have abandoned these cameras for THE SAME EXACT REASON than do not try to compensate for reality by resorting to personal attack. I wont do that to you.

The fact remains, what i have said was my honest experience with the line, and the results of which gave me the needed info to make an informed decision on what i want to use. I lost valuable shots on two occaisions with the X-700 and X-570 before i recognized the consistency of the problem. Ive used so many cameras over the past 20 years under so many circumstances, that a consistent failure point DOES stand out from the crowd.

Be safe and have your X Series CLA'd. Do the regularly and it WILL last a lifetime. But add up the cost and time involved in the long run and other camera options may be more practical.

That being said, I loved using the Powergrip, I loved using the MD-1, I loved my 280PX and 360PX (some of the best flash photos i have ever taken were with the 280PX in TTL mode), I loved using my X-570 and (briefly) the X-700 and X-570#2. They are beautiful cameras, well crafted, extremely ergonomic, and extremely versatile. The lenses are top notch. (I have some extremel amazing Minolta optics I love and still use)...

So... take a deep breath and lighten up, Francis (Peter).
 

camhound

Member
My two-cents' worth: I've owned and shot with Minolta X-700 and X-570 bodies since 1983, and have used both the Autowinder G and MD-1 drives on both without any ill effects that can be attributed to the mechanics. The circuitry within the MD-1 halts the drive at the end of the advance stroke, relieving much of the stress and strain other winders rely on to "turn off" at each frame. The only time an MD-1 would be directly responsible for overwinding and stressing the curtain/advance mechanism is when the drive has been abused and/or poorly maintained to the point where its internal adjustments are out of alignment, and even then it's most likely to just lock up the drive, not the body.

A far more common failure of the shutter and advance is related to the death/drying out of the electromagnetic's capacitors (a total of three exist, I believe). When these die, the shutter and advance die with them. I've had this happen to two out of more than 11 bodies I've owned, and it's a quick fix for someone with the proper tools and talent (and a bit of finesse with a soldering tool).

As for longevity, my first X-700 is still going strong (after 20 years), and has had literally thousands of rolls (24- and 36-exposure) through it, using the Winder G for the first few years, and the MD-1 ever since (call it 15+ years with the motor drive). In fact, it'd feel naked without an MD-1 attached.
 

peterblaise

Well-Known Member
------------------------------------------------------------------------



> Joe Pietruch (Camhound) wrote:

> ... my first X-700 is still going strong (after 20 years), and has had literally thousands of rolls (24- and 36-exposure) through it, using the Winder G for the first few years, and the MD-1 ever since (call it 15+ years with the motor drive). In fact, it'd feel naked without an MD-1 attached ...

Peter Blaise responds:

Hi Joe,

My sentiments and experience exactly.

Though I like going naked now and again! ;-)

That is, I occasionally like stripping down my Minolta X-700 to be sans MD1 and Zing wrist strap, and I mount a 50mm f/2 or a 45mm f/2 lens and hide it in a little tiny fanny pack and then go out and do some clandestine street photography - and no one knows I even have a camera 'cause it's so small and inconspicuous.

And accurate.

And reliable.

And quiet!

And light weight!

And SMALL! ;-)

... can't do that with an XK -- too bad!

--------------------------------------------------------------



> Michael R. Lachance (Mike_lachance) wrote:

> ... "I have shot 1undreds of rolls through these cameras over a VERY long period of time, so i do think i have a basis to judge the line ....The fact remains, what i have said was my honest experience with the line" ...

... and Peter Blaise responds once again ...

Hi Mike,

No.

As noted statesman Winston Churchill is reported to have said, perhaps not in so many words,

"Honesty is nice, but accuracy is better."

Mike, you have a basis for judging your own experience. Experience with ... 3 ... cameras?

You have no basis for judging any experience other than your own, and certainly NO basis for judging entire factory productions over dozens of years!

However, to witness 2,000+ other experiences, we can all visit the MUG Minolta User's Groups now on Yahoo! Groups, as mentioned earlier in this thread.

--------------------------------------------------------------

NOTE: I am 100% confident that you and I are NEVER going to agree, nor are we going to change each other's minds.

--------------------------------------------------------------

My only hope is to counteract the apparent or supposed "authority" of your comments so other people have an opportunity to asses your comments in some perspective, so that this list does not become a misinformed "poor Minolta, really made some bummer cameras" list.

Mike, I think you have had legitimate experiences with cameras that were NOT appropriate for you in substantial ways. I'm glad you found another Minolta camera that apparently pleases you. Other photographers in similar situations have found Nikons, Canons and other cameras brands that pleased them. I wish you all well. Good luck. I have Nikon, Olympus, Canon, Yashica, Contax, Pentax and so on, along with my hard working Minolta collection. I am not easy to please, and Minolta uniquely pleases me (after 40 years of experience at it!).

However, just because you found a few cameras to be inappropriate for your own photographic purposes does NOT say anything about those cameras, and certainly does NOT say anything about those cameras for any one else!

And, I offer to everyone willing to read this far into the thread that the cameras you walked away from are PERFECTLY appropriate for thousands (millions?) of other people whose photographic experiences may or may not correspond to yours.

Sorry you had some bummer experiences. Shame you can't send to me the cameras you left behind. I'd love to have the chance to appreciate them. I hope they are serving someone else well.



> Mike wrote:

> ... "I feel part of the problem may be in not having regular CLA done on these cameras. If you are going to ABUSE the shutter and advance mechanisms of the X-Series with a very fine permorming MD-1 (I loved mine) than by all means take your camera in FIRST and have them do a CLA. Better safe than sorry...."

Peter Blaise responds:

You are being presumptive, Mike. You haven't told us that you EVER got them fixed and what a certified Minolta service technician might have said was the cause of failure. Were they early production models that Minolta fixed with subsequent production modifications, and everyone else's versions are just fine? Was there a piece of broken film jammed inside the mechanism? We will never know - and neither will you. By the way, the shutter and advance mechanism have no way of knowing if they are being triggered manually or by a motor winder or motor drive.

All my Minolta service manuals show steady, consistent improvement in Minolta cameras throughout their production, especially such long lived models as the Minolta X-series cameras. It stands to reason that the one's that died in your hands may be different than the ones that live on in other people's hands.

Without SPECIFICS of the (unrealized) repair that your cameras apparently needed, which so far you decline to suggest that you had repairs done to your cameras, we are in the dark, and your comments about "the whole line" fall extremely short of ACCURACY! Sorry, but regardless of how all encompassing you think your experiences are for the rest of us, you are really only speaking for yourself, NOT the entire production line of Minolta X-series cameras, nor other people's experiences!

CLA Cleaning, Lubrication and Alignment will NOT fix a problem with a weak design and could not have prevented failure due to supposed stress from a motor drive accessory. The Minolta X-series was the world's largest selling camera at the time, so it is expected to read quotes from techs who saw lots of ones needing service, and quotes from people who bought early ones that exhibited failures that were remedied under warranty and in later production changes. What you have absolutely no reference to are ... the thousands (millions?) of Minolta X-series cameras that ain't got no problem, and your indictment of the whole line just makes no sense.

Think of it this way - what's the world's most popular car - the VW Beetle (or Toyota Corolla, Ford Model T ... any number of cars qualify depending on how you measure). Well then, if there are TONS of them out there, then even at the smallest statistical failure rate, there must be thousands of failures at the repair shops, and thousands of stories of those failures. Meaningful? Sure - but only to the factory quality control and designers, so they can make the next ones impervious to preventable failures. And also consider that they are now out survive their competitors in years of happy owner's use, so they are older than their now unused competition, so additional service is to be expected - versus their competition which are just junked and thrown away.

And while I'm speaking of cars, I think your experiences corresponds to this: I can buy a 20,000 mile warranty tire and a 40,000 mile warranty tire, drive them both the exact same NORMAL way, and I'd expect the 20,000 mile tire to wear out first. By your standards, NORMAL use of that 20,000 mile tire should be considered ABUSE since the tire wore out before the 40,000 mile tire.

Wrong!

I don't think your logic survives much scrutiny, sorry.

Normal use coincidentally leading to unrelated failure is not "abuse".

But, as I said, the ones that are NOT at the repair shop NEVER GET MENTIONED. Thousands (millions?). So, lots of stories of broken ones are a natural byproduct of being the world's largest selling camera line at the time. There are many, many more untold stories of happy customers with Minolta X-series cameras in their hands!

Finally, I imagine there are far fewer MD1s out there than X-series cameras that fit them, and many X-series cameras don't fit the MD1, so it's a moot point to say they would ALL fail if "abused" by strapping on an MD1 if the MD1 won't even fit!

"Abused" - geesh! Mike, I do not believe that you abused your cameras into failure by using an MD1. They failed because they failed. Period. If you ever had enough trust in Minolta to have had them fixed properly, and then when they came home, strapped the MD1 on 'em, you'd probably still be using them now!

> Mike quoted a bunch of unreferenced Internet comments on supposed failures of Minolta cameras.

Peter Blaise responds:

And your point?

This is no news. I already mentioned hundreds of failure stories already exchanged on the MUG (see above and earlier in this thread), and NONE of those stories support your contention of "failure of Minolta X-series cameras with cloth shutters dying prematurely due to wear and tear of so called abuse from the Motor Drive 1".

None of the stories from the MUG support your argument.

Funny, none of the quotes you supplied support your argument either!

In fact, the ONLY quote you offered regarding the MD1 is from a Minolta Authorized Servicer who comments on user abuse, NOT camera failure.

Conversely, Mike, to apply your reasoning elsewhere in the universe, pick any other manufactured product with which you have had a failure and tell us about the whole production line from your one or two or three personal experiences, okay? Maybe then we can see if your line of reasoning is appropriate. Say ... had a refrigerator fail? A car need repair? A shoe fall apart? A radio break? What?

"That GE stove burned my dinner once - GE stoves suck!"

Right.

... so, for $400 I can buy 2, 3, even 4 Minolta X-series cameras, or I can buy just 1 and then have spare money to get it fixed IF it ever breaks, and in the meantime I can afford lots of film and processing for $400.

... and you've only got one Minolta X-series camera with no film for $400.

Cool.

To each their own.

I can see how your chosen camera gear is appropriate for you. Join
Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!
and enjoy!

I hope you or at least others may see how their own camera gear choices may be different and appropriate for them, and my camera gear choices may be different and appropriate for me.

> Mike wrote:

> ... Calm down please Peter ... I respectfully request you do not make this a personal thing ...

Peter Blaise responds:

Mike, you can ONLY make your sharing here personal - as you are the only person in the world who has any insight into the honesty and accuracy of your awareness of your own personal experiences. I am only trying to help (a) ward off anyone thinking you speak for anyone else's experience but your own, and (b) perhaps direct you into heightened awareness of your own experiences upon revisiting them (if you could get your broken cameras back and get them fixed, eh?).

And, I have nothing against you personally, as we don't know each other personally, hence the silliness of suggesting that you experienced me as not "calm" when all you experienced was your own interpretation of my written words, your own reading of my written words!

Mike, I only have a problem with your reasoning, and with your vicious, inaccurate, out of context, unreferenced quotes.

Other than that, I think we are getting along just fine.

Just fine!

How 'bout you?

;-)

Click!

Love and hugs,

Peter Blaise Monahon Minolta Vivitar Tamron Fujifilm Ilford Kodak Adobe Hewlett Packard et cetera Photographer peterblaise@yahoo.com
Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!


------------------------------------------------------------------------
 
M

mike_lachance

Peter, It is apparent you simply like to hear yourself (or read yourself) talk. But it is overwhelmingly clear that you have no clue what the hell you are talking about in regards to your freudian dissection of the psychoananlytical and socio-photographic disabilities you cast upon my scarlet-lettered being. My God man. Please come down off your perch and realize that I may infact have every bit as much wisdom as you, and to assume i have never read the MUG is assinine and pretentious.

But to argue with the likes of you, who seem rather bent on throwing tiny daggers from every other breath? Why?

Perhaps a simple re-reading with attention, yes, actually pay attention to what OTHERS are saying..... perhaps this will allow you to understand that I think the X-Series was the best SLR line of the 1990's. Hand down. I loved my '570, and was extremely proud to own the 700. If not for the love of my first '570 i would not have bought the second, nor the 700. But with age, as in all things, perfection can falter. There are far more (as a percentage of total units sold) XKs that have had LESS problems after 25+ years of use.... than the '700. This does not mean to say there are more XK's around today, as there just werent that many produced or sold.. the 700 was produced in such large numbers as to saturate its market... (Again, a great product, recognized and bought by the masses)...

So... I will please ask that you: a) stuff a sock in your debasing and insulting rhetoric. b) accept that you have been lucky to apparently shoot 53 million photos over 125 years with your 45 year old X700... (might as well be the story you weave).. and that others, in fairly good numbers, have experienced MANY problems, (but all of them CONSISTENT) with the X570 and X700 cameras that are usually over 15 years old. c) try to keep your rambling disserations to under 2500 characters... some of us have much to do and dissecting a Novela is no fun.

I will say this, (pay attention Peter)... fresh from the box, you cannot beat the X700 or 570. (i like the 570 more)... Brand new these cameras kicked but all over the competition. Canons are a different animal, and one i dont like (you assume i never used them?) Nikons are nice, but i have much investment in a wide array of MD and MC lenses) Pentax is just not my cup of tea.

Now sigmund... be nice and play well with others... the world wont always agree with you, but theer may be some who dont find it impossible... and there will be (you, apparently) others who have decided well before they know much about the people they discredit, that they will NOT agree with and individual regardless..

Nice.
 
M

mike_lachance

Peter,

I'll this 2nd edition to my initaila response, as you saw fit to do a point by point, lets be fair here... ready? deep breath? exhale? good...

"... and no one knows I even have a camera 'cause it's so small and inconspicuous. And accurate.And reliable.And quiet!And light weight!And SMALL! ;-) .. can't do that with an XK -- too bad!"

Sure can... are you the bench mark of all the above? I see. I recently shot a candid of a couple in a courtyard... no one noticed.... I was using a Hasselblad 500C/M anything but small, and quiet. Now, now, peter....

"As noted statesman Winston Churchill is reported to have said, perhaps not in so many words, "Honesty is nice, but accuracy is better." Mike, you have a basis for judging your own experience. Experience with ... 3 ... cameras?"

Assumption! at least 7 minolta, 3 or 4 Canons, a Rollie, a Hasselblad, several Pentax, a Nikon, a Chinon, a Petri, a Bolex (16mm), many many Kodaks from 1915-1975, and countless other cameras... sheesh!

"You have no basis for judging any experience other than your own,"

True, with the exceptions of others who have shared with me their experiences, from which i can make clear judgements,... unless of course they have all been lying to me... part of a vast Anti-Minolta conspiracy... I think ive read about this conspiracy....

"...and certainly NO basis for judging entire factory productions over dozens of years!"

Never made such a judgement... had less to do with "factory production" and much to do with long-term wear, combined with lack of maintanance and type of use. All these factors are things that should be engineered into design... not production.

"However, to witness 2,000+ other experiences, we can all visit the MUG Minolta User's Groups now on Yahoo! Groups, as mentioned earlier in this thread."

So True... and to think, Ive ruined your track record of omniscient perfection by simply agreeing with you... my apologies... you'll have to start over.

"NOTE: I am 100% confident that you and I are NEVER going to agree, nor are we going to change each other's minds."

Ha.

"My only hope is to counteract the apparent or supposed "authority" of your comments so other people have an opportunity to asses your comments in some perspective"

So, you are more of an "authority" than I? Is this official? If i cann minolta will they point me to you first? Are you the X-Series Answer-man? ummm.... No. And niether am i, and i do not purport to be...

"Mike, I think you have had legitimate experiences with cameras that were NOT appropriate for you in substantial ways. I'm glad you found another Minolta camera that apparently pleases you."

???? As if the only camera that can please you is a Minolta? And whats this? Since when was teh 570, or 700 not appropriate for my needs? Why would i shoot the damn things for 20 years? (i can give exact dates if your undies get in a bunch over that) Many Minoltas have pleased me.

"However, just because you found a few cameras to be inappropriate for your own photographic purposes does NOT say anything about those cameras, and certainly does NOT say anything about those cameras for any one else!"

Not sure who you are talking about, as Ive never stated these fine cameras were inappropriate to "my needs" or anything else as subjective as that. Hellooo?

"And, I offer to everyone willing to read this far into the thread that the cameras you walked away from are PERFECTLY appropriate for thousands (millions?) of other people whose photographic experiences may or may not correspond to yours."

Not sure who you are talking about, as I did not "walk away" from any Minolta camera... on the contrary, i stuck with them for 2 decades, and only switched models after consistent problems began occuring with the mechanical operations of these models. Several cameras, of like age, all exhibiting the same failures, where NO failures occured for previous 10-15 years.

"Sorry you had some bummer experiences. Shame you can't send to me the cameras you left behind. I'd love to have the chance to appreciate them. I hope they are serving someone else well."

Nope, sold em.. they areserving others well indeed. most likely for parts.

"You are being presumptive, Mike."

Arn't we all...

"All my Minolta service manuals show steady, consistent improvement in Minolta cameras throughout their production, especially such long lived models as the Minolta X-series cameras. It stands to reason that the one's that died in your hands may be different than the ones that live on in other people's hands."

huh? were mine made by aliens on the moon?

"Sorry, but regardless of how all encompassing you think your experiences are for the rest of us, you are really only speaking for yourself, NOT the entire production line of Minolta X-series cameras, nor other people's experiences!"

and likewise, regardless of how all encompassing you think your experiences are for the rest of us, you are really only speaking for yourself, NOT the entire production line of Minolta X-series cameras, nor other people's experiences!

Awww. walk the walk peter. Are you a "do as i say not as i do'er"?

"CLA Cleaning, Lubrication and Alignment will NOT fix a problem with a weak design and could not have prevented failure due to supposed stress from a motor drive accessory."

huh? Ok, Peter, thats just the silliest thing ive ever heard. CLA will indeed fix a problem with weak design. It is akin to keeping your car maintained. If you never change the oil it WILL fail. Seems to me, quite simply so, that the X700/570 just need a bit more lubrication that other like aged cameras. The design is great, but just not as great as i could be when it comes to long-term lubrication. Shall we open our eyes or our minds?

The rapid action of a motor-drive (any motor drive) will put more stress on the moving parts, just as a car engine run at 6000 rpm will be more likely to wear or fail than one run at 1200 rpm.

"What you have absolutely no reference to are ... the thousands (millions?) of Minolta X-series cameras that ain't got no problem, and your indictment of the whole line just makes no sense."

and likewise, what you have no reference to are the thoudands (millions?) of Minolta X-series cameras that have been thrown into the trash heap or sold off to pawn shops.. never to be reported or discussed again.... or disassembled for parts... and your indictment of the whole line as perfect (except the ones Ive owned?) just makes no sense.

"Think of it this way - what's the world's most popular car...."

Think of it this way, WHO CARES.

"And while I'm speaking of cars, ..."

Im falling asleep.

"I don't think your logic survives much scrutiny, sorry."

I don't think your scrutiny survives much logic, sorry.

"Finally, I imagine there are far fewer MD1s out there than X-series cameras that fit them, and many X-series cameras don't fit the MD1, so it's a moot point to say they would ALL fail if "abused" by strapping on an MD1 if the MD1 won't even fit!"

Who said this?

"Mike quoted a bunch of unreferenced Internet comments on supposed failures of Minolta cameras."

In that regard, you, yourself, are completely unreferenced.

And your point?

Im not here to make points, merely state what I have experienced, and what my experienced have lead me to believe. Whether you agree with my beliefs is entirely up to you.

"None of the stories from the MUG support your argument."

mmmmmm... ok. right.

"Funny, none of the quotes you supplied support your argument either!"

English Reading Comprehension 101. I suggest you take a course at University.

"n fact, te ONLY quote you offered regarding the MD1 is from a Minolta Authorized Servicer who comments on user abuse, NOT camera failure."

Thats just plain silly.

" hope you or at least others may see how their own camera gear choices may be different and appropriate for them, and my camera gear choices may be different and appropriate for me."

Very well put. Once more, (sorry) I agree. The X700 and X570 were both EXTREMELY well suited to all of my needs.

"Mike, you can ONLY make your sharing here personal."

what a cop-out statement. If you are insulting you are insulting... doesnt take me to "validate" rude behavior, nor does it take me to validate shallow and narrow minded behavior... if the shoe fits, baby..

"you are the only person in the world who has any insight into the honesty and accuracy of your awareness of your own personal experiences."

So very true.

"I am only trying to help (a) ward off anyone thinking you speak for anyone else's experience but your own, and (b) perhaps direct you into heightened awareness of your own experiences upon revisiting them (if you could get your broken cameras back and get them fixed, eh?)."

Who are you, Dr. Phil? get off it Peter... thats the most absurd thing ive ever heard regarding the X700 in my life!

"And, I have nothing against you personally..."

Just publicly? Ha!

hence the silliness of suggesting that you experienced me as not "calm" when all you experienced was your own interpretation of my written words, your own reading of my written words!

Literal. You do seem to be a bit off your rocker. Part of a Pro-Minolta Jihad damning those who speak ill of the Earth-God Minoltalah. Crazy baby, crazy.

"Mike, I only have a problem with your reasoning, and with your vicious, inaccurate, out of context, unreferenced quotes."

One of us must show reasoning, in that regard, I accept this.
 

peterblaise

Well-Known Member
Hi Mike,

Thanks for reconsidering your original comments that "based on your experience of 3 Minolta X-series cameras, Minolta X-series cameras with cloth shutters would be subject to abuse by fitting a Minolta Motor Drive 1 to them" -- apparently you no longer feel that is an appropriate statement.

My work is done!

This thread has closure!

People reading these archives here now have a balanced perspective from which they may make their own decisions.

Thank you!

----------------------------------------

> Mike R. Lachance wrote:

> ... I think the [Minolta] X-Series was the best SLR line of the 1990's [note - the Minolta X-series 35mm SLR camera systems have been in constant production for 30 years from the 1970's through the 1980's, 1990's and on into current 2000's]. Hand down. I loved my [Minolta X-]'570, and was extremely proud to own the [Minolta X-]700. If not for the love of my first [Minolta X-]'570 i would not have bought the second, nor the [Minolta X-]700 ... the [Minolta X-]700 was produced in such large numbers as to saturate it's market ... Again, a great product, recognized and bought by the masses [professionals, too] ... I will say this ... fresh from the box, you cannot beat the [Minolta] X[-]700 or [X-]570. (i like the [Minolta X-]570 more) ... Brand new these cameras kicked but all over the competition ...

----------------------------------------

Click!

Love and hugs,

Peter Blaise Monahon Minolta Vivitar Tamron Fujifilm Ilford Kodak Adobe Hewlett Packard et cetera Photographer peterblaise@yahoo.com
Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!
Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!
 
M

mike_lachance

Peter, please do not pretend to "quote" me with your interpretation of what you wish i had said. if you quote someone, than have the decency to actually quote them with their own words.... as....

"My advice, don't run a motordrive on Minolta cloth shutter SLRs (especially the X-700, X-570 and X-370)... Although the drives are great performers, the abuse they inflict on the shutter springs and internal film advancing systems within the cameras is too much for them to handle. "

In this i am indeed only refrring the the X700/570 with the MD-1, on aged, non CLA'd cameras, as discussed subsequently.

"I have owned (2) X-570s and an X-700. The first X-570 i bought new in 1984 and it served faithfully for 16 years before i retired it. This camera was used and abused and took all the punishment i could muster, with the exception being, not once did I ever attach an MD-1 motor drive to this '570. "

And this is very true... doesnt even include all the other Minoltas Ive used but didnt own.

"The second X-570 and subsequent X-700 were both in great shape and well taken care of. With these two cameras, i used the MD-1 and within 15 months both cameras failed. Same problem. Shutter lock up due to binding advance mechanism and shutter interlock. Such failures are common on X-Series cameras only if they are used with the motor-drive! "

Perhaps a bit presumptious at the end, but nonetheless, the statement is based on valid personal experience, not assumption. I would adjust this to add, simply, "... when cameras are aged and not CLA'd or serviced for age-related problems, i.e., worn, magnets, inadequate/aged lubricants, etc etc)"

'This is unfortunate, as I LOVE the MD-1, from a performance standpoint, the MD-1 is worth every penny. From a practical standpoint, it is a death wish for your X-Body. "

Again, perhaps a bit presumptious at the end, but nonetheless, the statement is based on valid personal experience, not assumption. I would adjust this to add, simply, "... when cameras are aged and not CLA'd or serviced for age-related problems, i.e., worn, magnets, inadequate/aged lubricants, etc etc)"

"I am now the happy owner of a beautiful XK from 1974. Now this is a camera that will take a beating and remain a fully functional tool."

So true.

So Peter... You have issues, it is too bad you cannot STAND to have anyone defire you relation to "God's Camera" I think ceratin things in life need a little perspective... in this case the 700/570 DOES indeed have some age-related issues. When you accept this you might find a bit more inner peace within yourself. You seem to preach alot of "tolerance" and such feel-good thingies on your website. Seems you may be in need of some tolerance training yourself. As you completely refuse to accept that ALOT of people have found the 570/700 failing in the mechanical competency area. Doesnt mean they were not awesome cameras... (you seem to gloos over every statement of praise i have made for the cameras)... you only dwell on disproving my opinion (and that of countless others) that the cameras have a serious design flaw.

We disagree on that, youve made your views (and apparently those of others) made, and ive made mine (and those of others) made.

There is no "converting" or "changing opinions here. Especially in light of nothing more than the ramblings of a discontent internet user who doesnt like to hear dissenting opinions from his own. Nope. This 'ole machine dont run like that. Let the people use my info and your info to help base their OWN decisions. Try less to "destroy" those who disagree with you. I never tried that with you. I never disagreed with your praise of these cameras. I feel this illustrates a clear difference between us.

Quite Clear.
 

peterblaise

Well-Known Member
[Note - I am soooo grateful that:

(a) this thread was resolved immediately in the first 2, even 4 posts (thank you, Hung!), so only those who like self inflicted pain are even reading down this far, and,

(b) since this is w-a-y down the thread, I imagine it's impact on the general population of Minolta XG-M camera and Minolta Motor Drive 1 users will be scant at best!

By this far, most people could have been shooting 1, maybe 2 rolls of film, and maybe even have gotten them developed and printed by now ... and the reason we are going on, and on, and on ... I guess it's like an avalanche, eh? Well, back into the fray!]

Peter Blaise writes (in response to Mike R. Lachance's TWO posts ago - Mike got one up on me with a one-two punch before I could finish this response!):

Oh, you slay me, Mike [Michael R. Lachance (Mike_lachance)]! I apparently am not the only one who likes to read their own words over the Internet! ;-)

Point by point ...

... when I mentioned removing the Motor Drive from my Minolta X-700 and fitting the camera into my fanny pouch and thereby being inconspicuous, and I suggested that you can't do that with a Minolta XK, I was referring to the ever popular Minolta XK Motor where the motor doesn't come off! While, like you, I also have been inconspicuous with my other cameras, even one's that are quite large by comparison, the ability to hide such a capable camera a tiny pouch was my point. I'm quite sure anyone with a ruler can measure the size difference between a stripped down Minolta X-700 and an unstrippable Minolta XK Motor and know what I mean. Which camera is smaller - Minolta X-700 or Minolta X-1/XK/XM Motor?

... YOU mentioned your experience with "only" 3 Minolta X-series cameras before your statement regarding the entire line. We both have used lots of other cameras, but none of those experiences inform us to accurately assess the entire Minolta X-series production lines.

... I'm NOT offering my views of my experiences as "authority" in any other way than I am the "author" of my views. I'm offering my views of my experiences as ... as my views of my experiences. That's all. I also point out: that's all anyone can do here, including you, in spite of anyone's intentions or desires to speak for anything or anyone other than our own views of our own experiences. Since none of us is the "author" of the Minolta production lines, we probably cannot speak as "authoritative" concerning them. However, I hope you understand my comment about finding incremental production improvements revealed in the Minolta services manuals in my possession.

... I understood you to say that you had 3 Minolta X-series cameras fail, you attributed those failures to a conflict between what you believe to be an insubstantial cloth shutter design versus what you believe to be an abusive motor drive design, and you then moved to a Minolta XK and did not have those problems. If that is not the impression you were trying to send, please resend.

... a CLA does not include replacing parts, nor upgrading assemblies to later designs if the manufacturer has improved them. I read your comments to say you believe that the Minolta X-series with cloth shutters has a design weakness that fails due to stress from a motor drive. Subsequently I read you to say that you believe all X-series cameras have a limited number of shutter operations before needing relubrication, not that they have a mechanical design flaw. Well, then, by your reasoning, if someone uses a Minolta X-series without a motor drive yet shoots a lot of pictures, won't they reach that supposed "need relubrication" limit anyway? And if that same someone uses a motor drive yet does not shoot a lot of pictures, won't they not reach that supposed "need relubrication" limit as soon as their pervious experience without the motor drive? What about environmental influences such as hot, warm, cool, or cold temperatures, and high or low humidity, and film thickness friction and film canister friction, and so on? Maybe aggressive rewinding speed plays a part. Maybe weak or strong battery power in the motor drive also plays a part. Can anyone think of additional variables influencing camera wear? And, are you implying that a Minolta XK Motor camera does NOT have a limited number of shutter operations before it might need relubrication?

... regarding cars, for ex&le, if I change the oil a lot or a little, it does NOT change the reliability of a weak plastic thermostat housing design. Back to cameras: so, if you feel the Minolta X-series has a mechanical design flaw, then that corresponds to my automotive oil-change versus thermostat-housing analogy, where frequent or infrequent maintenance has no influence over failure due to unrelated design flaws. Apparently now you are saying the cameras that failed for you merely needed lubrication, and did not have a mechanical design flaw. Good!

... As I mentioned:

"... I have Nikon, Olympus, Canon, Yashica, Contax, Pentax and so on, along with my hard working Minolta collection. I am not easy to please, and Minolta uniquely pleases me ..."

... Why would you ask me if Minolta is the ONLY camera that please me? Obviously (to me, by my own testimony above) it is not. However, as I say somewhere else on the web:

---------------------------------------

"Since the 1920's, Minolta Japan, and it's factories around the world have been making fine cameras of many types with many names and model numbers marketed around the world and into outer space.

Photographers have found Minolta cameras uniquely:

- easy to use;

- reliable;

- affordable to purchase, maintain, expand and upgrade;

- uncompromising in their picture producing quality;

- well balanced all around."

---------------------------------------

... I believe that's why we are here at minoltainfo.com - to discuss our Minolta experiences, and only to discuss our other camera brand experiences when they are relevant.

Click!

Love and hugs,

Peter Blaise Monahon Minolta Vivitar Tamron Fujifilm Ilford Kodak Adobe Hewlett Packard et cetera Photographer peterblaise@yahoo.com
Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!
Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!
Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!
Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!


... now on to my next response to your last response to my last response to your response before that to my ... ARGH!



;-)
 

peterblaise

Well-Known Member
Peter Blaise writes:

Hi Mike R. Lachance,

... I think we are talking about different things.

... you seem to think using a Minolta Motor Drive 1 is sure suicide for the camera to which it is attached:

> Mike R. Lachance wrote: "... My advice, don't run a motor drive on Minolta cloth shutter SLRs ... the abuse they inflict on the shutter springs and internal film advancing systems within the cameras is too much for them to handle ... Such failures are common on X-Series cameras only if they are used with the motor-drive! ..."

... I and others not only disagree, based on our own experience, but think it self defeating to own something for a purpose and then not use it for that purpose.

... I think that "common" does not mean "likely" or "unavoidable", especially for a camera that (a) has so many more numbers of units out there over many years that haven't failed, and (b) is getting old anyway. If it breaks, fix it, and use it again, and again, and again. If you don't use it out of fear of breaking it, it might as well be broken anyway, so why even own it or complain that people who do own it are asking for trouble?

... you suggest that I am ignoring your praise of Minolta gear, yet I quoted a large body of your praise. Here once again:

> Peter Blaise wrote that Mike R. Lachance wrote: "... I think the [Minolta] X-Series was the best SLR line of the 1990's [note - the Minolta X-series 35mm SLR camera systems have been in constant production for 30 years from the 1970's through the 1980's, 1990's and on into current 2000's]. Hand down. I loved my [Minolta X-]'570, and was extremely proud to own the [Minolta X-]700. If not for the love of my first [Minolta X-]'570 i would not have bought the second, nor the [Minolta X-]700 ... the [Minolta X-]700 was produced in such large numbers as to saturate it's market ... Again, a great product, recognized and bought by the masses [professionals, too] ... I will say this ... fresh from the box, you cannot beat the [Minolta] X[-]700 or [X-]570. (i like the [Minolta X-]570 more) ... Brand new these cameras kicked but all over the competition ... "

... you say I ignore reports of Minolta camera failure, yet I mentioned hundreds of failure reports on the MUG. Here once again:

> Peter Blaise wrote: "... Join [MUG on Yahoo! Groups] ... ~2,000 Minolta X-series users who can share lots of stories of ... failure WITHOUT DENIGRATING AN ENTIRE LINE OF CAMERAS ... Failures, lots of failures in the archives there - yet no one claims that the entire line of X-cameras is incapable of proper function ..."

... perhaps neither of us is clear on who said what anymore? Regardless, perhaps we can leave it at:

- YOU recommend people not use a Motor Drive 1.

- I recommend it highly as delivering the features and benefits it promises.

Click!

Love and hugs,

Peter Blaise Monahon Minolta Vivitar Tamron Fujifilm Ilford Kodak Adobe Hewlett Packard et cetera Photographer peterblaise@yahoo.com
Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!
Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!
 

arizona

Member
Guys, could you please exchange your emails and continue your "discussion" in private. Last few posts have to do more with your egos than with photography.

Thanks.
 

tgoldy

Member
Hello,

I have always used my X-700 with motor and with the high-speed. Today maybe 65,000 shoots... Never problems...

Thierry
 
Top