DPR Forum

Welcome to the Friendly Aisles!
DPRF is a photography forum with people from all over the world freely sharing their knowledge and love of photography. Everybody is welcome, from beginners to the experienced professional. Whether it is Medium Format, fullframe, APS-C, MFT or smaller formats. Digital or film. DPRF is a forum for everybody and for every format.
Enjoy this modern, easy to use software. Look also at our Reviews & Gallery!

Why Sony / Minolta at all?

You wrote:

"... fixed focal digital SLR that covers a 28 to 200 range ..."

I'm sure you meant:

"... fixed LENS digital SLR that covers a 28 to 200 range ..."

Peter Blaise

Minolta Tamron et cetera Photographer

In love with my 28-300mm AND my 19-35mm on 35mm film! (Okay, and a 17mm for 90° shots from the corner of a room)

... also in love with the quick turnaround on local photo labs, and NOT having to process and print my own proof prints - ink is, what, $14,000 a gallon? ;-)
 
Joe, there is a rumour that Minolta will annouce it's DSLR at PMA next month, to launch in September. I have to say this suits Minolta, whose PR is about as credible as comical Ali's.

I think that this is the last chance for Minolta. If they don't launch the DSLR this year, their credibility as an SLR manufacturer is gone. By next year the the £800 DSLR will be a £500 and the SLR market will be digital.

As for pros not using DSLR, you only have to look at the next press photo pack to see that they virtually all use DSLRs. The landscape photographers will be the last to change to DSLR, but I reckon in 5 years film will be an expensive hobby a a serious level.

As for being "very carefull" with DVD's. Um have you ever touched a negative? A slide?
 
... also in love with the quick turnaround on local photo labs, and NOT having to process and print my own proof prints - ink is, what, $14,000 a gallon? ;-)

What is the logic is spending £1000 on cameras and lenses, and then using cheap film and local labs?
 
You wrote:

"... Unless you have spoken directly to Minolta ... At the moment all we have is another rumor. There have been rumors around for the last 3 years. If one was cynical you could say that this suits Minolta, as we keep loyal to the brand ..."

No.

Herbert Kepler is the world's most influential Minolta Photographer, heck, probably the world's most influential photographer, statistically, period.

Herb is the one whom Minolta turns to for marketing confirmation, and when Herb says, in print, that Minolta shared their plans with him, we have good reason to trust.

When Herb published this in Popular Photography magazine, it ain't no rumor anymore.

True, it ain't shippable product, either, but even the pre-announced "future" Nikon D-70 could disappear before shipment, so nothing is real until you can buy it.

W-a-y back ... Herb, by the way, advised Minolta to go with the auto focus Minolta AF 7000 and dump the manual focus Minolta X-600 back in the early 1980's.

My how the world of photography has changes as a result. ;-)

THIS is what the "Konica Minolta hear$ you loud and clear. $tart $aving for next $eptember for a killer D$LR!" comment is all about (note the added $$$!).

Click!

Love and hugs,

Peter Blaise Monahon

Minolta Vivitar Tamron Fujifilm Ilford Kodak Adobe Hewlett Packard et cetera Photographer

peterblaise@yahoo.com

http://www.peterblaisephotography.com/

http://www.minoltaphotography.com/

("if" one was cynical indeed! "if"?!?)

=8^o
 
What is the logic for thinking that expensive = high qualities or super-standard qualities, and so-called "cheap" (which I did NOT mention) = low qualities or sub-standard qualities?

Every Leica shooter could (and might) look down upon us "lowly Minolta" shooters and say what you said - "What is the logic in spending all that money on a ... Minolta?!?"

So-called "cheap" film my be far superior and overkill for some of my own personal photographic needs, and yet, the most expensive film may be inferior for other of my own photographic needs.

What works for you?

Cheap and expensive have nothing to do with it.

Appropriateness is all.

I find the qualities of some film and some of the local photo labs to be appropriate in their results and cost for some of my photographic goals, and the qualities of some digital home brew prints to be inappropriate in results and cost for some of my photographic goals.

What works for you?

I have more than 200 photo labs within 10 miles of my home, and probably 1,000 within 20 miles, so "cheapness" is a byproduct of competition, and the appropriate "qualities" I receive are a byproduct of my careful comparison shopping and developing a relationship with the photo lab people, and inspecting what I expect to get the results I prefer.

Look, we're all Minolta Photographers here, why bash each other?

Why not just ask questions, like:

"Oh, you prefer local photo labs? Is there more about that for you?"

Then you might learn what is MY experience.

Conversely, I might ask you:

"Oh, you prefer ...? Is there more about that for you?"

And I might learn what is YOUR experience.

Neither of us is right or wrong, especially for the other!

On topic, though, as I write on my http://groups.yahoo.com/group/minoltaphotography/ group:

"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."

... and that is MY experience.

"Why Minolta at all?" for you?

"Why Minolta at all?" for everyone else?

Looking forward to all our responses, and thoroughly enjoying the responses so far,

Click!

Love and hugs,

Peter Blaise Monahon

Minolta Vivitar Tamron Fujifilm Ilford Kodak Adobe Hewlett Packard et cetera Photographer

peterblaise@yahoo.com

http://www.peterblaisephotography.com/

PS - Go out and shoot something - and bring it back alive! ;-)
 
Response [2]

> marc venton (Travis) wrote:

> What is the logic is spending £1000 on cameras and lenses, and then using cheap film and local labs?

Hi marc venton (Travis),

Who said they spent "... £1000 on cameras and lenses ..." and then used "... cheap film and local labs ..."?

I don't recall that comment on any earlier post. Is there more about that for you?

Click!

Love and hugs,

Peter Blaise Monahon

Minolta Vivitar Tamron Fujifilm Ilford Kodak Adobe Hewlett Packard et cetera Photographer

peterblaise@yahoo.com

http://www.peterblaisephotography.com/

Hey, stay tuned for Response [3] .. there is apparently MORE about this for me!!! =8^o

... such as, are non-local labs the preferred mode? Aren't even THEY local to SOMEBODY?

And [4] ... I got a NEW IN THE BOX Minolta 24mm AF lens AND camera for~US$12 - who's spending £1000?!?

And [5] ... I get my film FREE, who's paying for film?

And [6] ... and [7] ... and so on!!!

;-)
 
Cheap is the word used universally to indicate cost. Quality in conjunction with the word low or good or high etc indicates how good something is. My local minilab develops and prints 35mm film cheaper than the one in the supermarket.the quality is as good if not better than the supermarket. I accept that cheap film will "probably" be inferior in some ways to the latest offering from Kodak,Fuji,Konica etc but if utilised within its correct working parameters it will probably produce good results. I believe that rather than asking why spend £1000 on equipment and then use cheap film and processing you should consider why spend £1000 on equipment and only use a few rolls of film per year.some people have Christmas shots at the beginning and end and summer shots in the middle of their film. Better,in my opinion,to spend less on equipment and more on results. Must get back to work michael
 
>>What is the logic for thinking that expensive >>high qualities or super-standard qualities, >>and so-called "cheap"


Because mainting high standards in processing and printing costs more money than mass producing negs and prints. Because Fuji and Kodak and Ilford spend time and money researching how to make better film. Because Provia and Kodacrome are industry standards. I could go on, but's it's pretty obvious stuff really.

>>Every Leica shooter could (and might) look >>down upon us "lowly Minolta" shooters and say >>what you said.

I don't even know what a Leica shooter is. The issue is about photography, not brand. The only real comparison you can make here is between lens quality on Leica and Minolta. Minolta's G lenses are top quality, so there is no particular advantage in a buying a Leica.

>>So-called "cheap" film my be far superior and >>overkill for some of my own personal >>photographic needs, and yet, the most >>expensive film may be inferior for other of my >>own photographic needs.

The second part of the statment is unlikely, unless you specialise in grain of effects photography. It may be inferior in that it costs you more money.


>>Cheap and expensive have nothing to do with it.

I'm afraid they do when you sell you photographs or make large and exhibition prints.


>>I find the qualities of some film and some of >>the local photo labs to be appropriate in >>their results and cost for some of my >>photographic goals, and the qualities of some ?>>digital home brew prints to be inappropriate >>in results and cost for some of my >>photographic goals.

Without knowing what you are doing, this is a moot point.




>>Look, we're all Minolta Photographers here, >>why bash each other?

It's nothing to do with bashing anybody. I am more than happy for people to work with film and 50 year old cameras. But there is little point in trying to criticise the digital process in order to justify the film one. Or in trying to defend Minolta for letting down their customers.

I am not a "minolta" photographer. I don't care about the brand name, it ain't going to take better pictures, I want quality and a range of equipment which is up to date and competes with Canon and Nikon. Otherwise why bother with buying Minolta equipment.


It's not about me, it's about quality of the labs. If you have found a pro-quality lab in London which charges half of what the others do, please let me know. I will be there like a shot.
 
>>Herbert Kepler is the world's most influential >>Minolta Photographer, heck, probably the >>world's most influential photographer, >>statistically, period.

The world's most infulentual photographer. I don't think so. Salgado, Ritts, Webber, Bailey, Lantin, Woolf, Waite etc. PUt their names into the internet, you get thousands of hits. Rather than two pages.


>>When Herb published this in Popular Photography magazine, it ain't no rumor anymore.

I'm afraid it's rumour until Minolta confirm it. Today Pracitical Photography called up the Minotla UK office (after I discussed an article with them) and the Minolta office still refused to say anything either way. It's conjecture, and unless they are prepared to go in print it would be best not to give people the illusion that it's definate.

>>True, it ain't shippable product, either, but >>even the pre-announced "future" Nikon D-70 >>could disappear before shipment, so nothing is >>real until you can buy it.

It's totally different. Nikon has announced the product. Minolta refuses to say anything.


THIS is what the "Konica Minolta hear$ you loud and clear. $tart $aving for next $eptember for a killer D$LR!" comment is all about (note the added $$$!).

I'm sorry. If you have any further information, about the nature of the product and the price you shoudl be candid with it rather than illuding.
 
Back
Top