Sign in with
Sign up | Sign in
Your question

Can't decide - Nikon vs. Konica Minolta

Last response: in Digital Camera
Share
Anonymous
September 2, 2005 1:44:57 PM

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital.slr-systems (More info?)

I'm about to make the jump from my Canon S1-IS digital point-and-shoot to a
DSLR model, but I'm torn between the Nikon D70s (with the 18-70mm AF-S DX
f/3.5-4.5G lens) and the Konica Minolta Maxxum 7D, with a KM 28-100mm AF
f/3.5-5.6 lens.

My father-in-law recently bought a D70s. I have used it a little, and I
quite like it. But from what I've read, the 7D seems to be more camera. It's
a little more expensive. I have no experience with Konica equipment, hence
the reason for my post.

I'm open to suggestions or points to consider. I'm no professional, but I
have enjoyed using my 35mm SLR for the past 5 years (a 15 year old Yashica
FX-3). I plan to use a new DSLR primarily for shooting my kids (with the
camera, not with a gun) and perhaps a little outdoor/nature photography.
What are your thoughts on how these two lenses compare?

Any advice is appreciated.
Anonymous
September 2, 2005 2:17:59 PM

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital.slr-systems (More info?)

Morgan,
Many answers sent will be biased by those who think the camera THEY
bought for THEMSELVES is the only one suitable for everyone else to
buy, and they will denigrate the other brands!!! Figure out which
features matter to YOU. Figure out which camera handles best in YOUR
HANDS. Listen to 'features argument' not about Brand, which will be
biased (no one likes to look stupid so they have to justify what they
have already purchased)!!!
The Nikon lens goes wider angle (equivalent to 27mm wide angle on
35mm film), but the Minolta goes to longer telephoto (about 150mm on
35mm film). So which is more important TO YOU? I like to shoot
interiors when I travel to Europe (fabulous churches, castles and
museums) so I would choose the one with a wider lens as standard. But
maybe you need to shoot soccer photos of your son/daughter with a
longer lens like the Minolta has! But don't use that as the sole
selection criteria, since you can always get additional lenses in the
focal lengths you need! As for relative ease of use, the DSLRs are
all so automated that they can serve as expensive point-and-shoots, so
don't let that deter you from the D70...it can be used similarly to the
Minolta in auto-everything mode!
Consider what type of battery each takes (proprietary form factor
or generic AA, etc.) Consider the type of memory each camera takes
(commonly found CF), or slightly more difficult to find or more
expensive other package) Consider how easy is it for you to find some
accessories for that camera in local stores, where you can go to try
things out, and consider how readily you can buy accessory items on the
web when you local store does not stock them.
Anonymous
September 2, 2005 6:24:34 PM

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital.slr-systems (More info?)

Morgan Perry wrote:
> I'm about to make the jump from my Canon S1-IS digital
> point-and-shoot to a DSLR model, but I'm torn between the Nikon D70s
> (with the 18-70mm AF-S DX f/3.5-4.5G lens) and the Konica Minolta
> Maxxum 7D, with a KM 28-100mm AF f/3.5-5.6 lens.

The Konica includes image stabilisation in the body, which may be
attractive after what you have been used to on the Canon S1-IS. Don't
Konica offer a lens with a wider angle than 28mm ( I assume that's 43mm
equivalent). 43mm may be restricting for indoor photos of children.

David
Related resources
Anonymous
September 2, 2005 7:17:56 PM

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital.slr-systems (More info?)

Morgan Perry <mptran @ morganperry.com> wrote:
>
> I'm about to make the jump from my Canon S1-IS digital point-and-shoot to a
> DSLR model, but I'm torn between the Nikon D70s (with the 18-70mm AF-S DX
> f/3.5-4.5G lens) and the Konica Minolta Maxxum 7D, with a KM 28-100mm AF
> f/3.5-5.6 lens.
>

For one, the lens is better with the Nikon. Another, I believe the
Nikon has more useful features. Lastly, I think Nikon has a better
reputation and is doing better business. Clearly the Nikon lens has a
wider low end. The zoom ratio on the 28-100 is a little high (more than
3x). Further, the Nikon lens has AF-S, which you will love! It is
quite and fast. You can grab it and focus manually if you desire ...
while in autofocus mode! The optics are very good. My comment about
the zoom ratio above 3x may not really apply in the low focal lengths,
but who can say [definitely the 18-70 has more than 3x as well]?

> My father-in-law recently bought a D70s. I have used it a little, and I
> quite like it. But from what I've read, the 7D seems to be more camera. It's
> a little more expensive. I have no experience with Konica equipment, hence
> the reason for my post.

I am curious to see what "more" it has to offer. I can say I have been
VERY happy with the D70.

--
Thomas T. Veldhouse
Key Fingerprint: 2DB9 813F F510 82C2 E1AE 34D0 D69D 1EDC D5EC AED1
Spammers please contact me at renegade@veldy.net.
Anonymous
September 2, 2005 9:56:33 PM

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital.slr-systems (More info?)

IMHOP the differences between cameras is a wash.
Minolta and Nikon each have their advantages.
I have a D70 because I have used Nikons for years and have a big investment
in Nikon lenses.
I heartily endorse the D70, particularly if you want to use the RAW format
in order to see what a dSLR can really accomplish.
If you want to stay with JPEG you may be happier with a camera that has a
fixed lens, is smaller and easier to handle. Many are quite sophisticated
and some (this will incite flame wars) are even superior, because they are
more usable by the individual consumer, to dSLRs if you are satisfied with
JPEG images.
Anonymous
September 2, 2005 11:50:46 PM

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital.slr-systems (More info?)

"Morgan Perry" <mptran @ morganperry.com> wrote:

> I'm about to make the jump from my Canon S1-IS digital point-and-shoot
> to a DSLR model, but I'm torn between the Nikon D70s (with the 18-70mm
> AF-S DX f/3.5-4.5G lens) and the Konica Minolta Maxxum 7D, with a KM
> 28-100mm AF f/3.5-5.6 lens.

Do yourself a favor... go to a good camera store and see how nicely an
inexpensive Pentax DSLR is at home in your hands :^)

--
Anti-Spam address: my last name at his dot com
Charles Gillen -- Reston, Virginia, USA
Anonymous
September 3, 2005 4:48:10 PM

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital.slr-systems (More info?)

David J Taylor wrote:

> Morgan Perry wrote:
>> I'm about to make the jump from my Canon S1-IS digital
>> point-and-shoot to a DSLR model, but I'm torn between the Nikon D70s
>> (with the 18-70mm AF-S DX f/3.5-4.5G lens) and the Konica Minolta
>> Maxxum 7D, with a KM 28-100mm AF f/3.5-5.6 lens.
>
> The Konica includes image stabilisation in the body, which may be
> attractive after what you have been used to on the Canon S1-IS. Don't
> Konica offer a lens with a wider angle than 28mm ( I assume that's 43mm
> equivalent). 43mm may be restricting for indoor photos of children.

Yes, 18-70mm 3.5-6.5DT. Afaik its the Kit-Lense of thhe 5D, and might be a
better choice.
Anonymous
September 3, 2005 9:29:02 PM

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital.slr-systems (More info?)

David J Taylor wrote:

> Morgan Perry wrote:
>
>>I'm about to make the jump from my Canon S1-IS digital
>>point-and-shoot to a DSLR model, but I'm torn between the Nikon D70s
>>(with the 18-70mm AF-S DX f/3.5-4.5G lens) and the Konica Minolta
>>Maxxum 7D, with a KM 28-100mm AF f/3.5-5.6 lens.
>
>
> The Konica includes image stabilisation in the body, which may be
> attractive after what you have been used to on the Canon S1-IS. Don't
> Konica offer a lens with a wider angle than 28mm ( I assume that's 43mm
> equivalent). 43mm may be restricting for indoor photos of children.

Aside from the lovely 20mm f/2.8 K-M have two 17-35mm lenses that are
both very good. One is very expensive, the other slightly slower and
quite reasonable in price.




--
-- r.p.e.35mm user resource: http://www.aliasimages.com/rpe35mmur.htm
-- r.p.d.slr-systems: http://www.aliasimages.com/rpdslrsysur.htm
-- [SI] gallery & rulz: http://www.pbase.com/shootin
-- e-meil: Remove FreeLunch.
Anonymous
September 3, 2005 9:33:54 PM

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital.slr-systems (More info?)

Thomas T. Veldhouse wrote:

>>My father-in-law recently bought a D70s. I have used it a little, and I
>>quite like it. But from what I've read, the 7D seems to be more camera. It's
>>a little more expensive. I have no experience with Konica equipment, hence
>>the reason for my post.
>
>
> I am curious to see what "more" it has to offer. I can say I have been
> VERY happy with the D70.

I'm sure you have been. But the 7D is simply better all 'round.

-Anti shake in-camera for all lenses.
-Much better controls and control layout
-Larger and higher density monitor
-Better range of ISO speeds

One thing I wish the 7D had that the D70 has, is 1/500 sync speed. A
minor point, but a point.

Cheers,
Alan


--
-- r.p.e.35mm user resource: http://www.aliasimages.com/rpe35mmur.htm
-- r.p.d.slr-systems: http://www.aliasimages.com/rpdslrsysur.htm
-- [SI] gallery & rulz: http://www.pbase.com/shootin
-- e-meil: Remove FreeLunch.
Anonymous
September 3, 2005 9:37:39 PM

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital.slr-systems (More info?)

Morgan Perry wrote:

> I'm about to make the jump from my Canon S1-IS digital point-and-shoot to a
> DSLR model, but I'm torn between the Nikon D70s (with the 18-70mm AF-S DX
> f/3.5-4.5G lens) and the Konica Minolta Maxxum 7D, with a KM 28-100mm AF
> f/3.5-5.6 lens.
>
> My father-in-law recently bought a D70s. I have used it a little, and I
> quite like it. But from what I've read, the 7D seems to be more camera. It's
> a little more expensive. I have no experience with Konica equipment, hence
> the reason for my post.
>
> I'm open to suggestions or points to consider. I'm no professional, but I
> have enjoyed using my 35mm SLR for the past 5 years (a 15 year old Yashica
> FX-3). I plan to use a new DSLR primarily for shooting my kids (with the
> camera, not with a gun) and perhaps a little outdoor/nature photography.
> What are your thoughts on how these two lenses compare?
>
> Any advice is appreciated.


With the 7D you get anti-shake and a larger monitor. Not to mention a
very complete set of controls on the body of the camera that all but
obviate menu diving.

The 17-35 f/var from K-M is very nice; not sure about the 28-100, but
that's a pretty decent range for general photography.

The 18-70 from Nikon is an interesting range of FL's as well. If you
think you'll be doing more wide angle shots, that's a good choice.

Cheers,
Alan.

--
-- r.p.e.35mm user resource: http://www.aliasimages.com/rpe35mmur.htm
-- r.p.d.slr-systems: http://www.aliasimages.com/rpdslrsysur.htm
-- [SI] gallery & rulz: http://www.pbase.com/shootin
-- e-meil: Remove FreeLunch.
Anonymous
September 3, 2005 11:25:22 PM

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital.slr-systems (More info?)

Thanks to all who commented. Your input was valuable.

After much deliberation and a trip to a local camera store (I was able to
handle both cameras for a few minutes each) I finally made my pick. It was a
close race, but I finally chose the D70s. My final decision was mostly based
on the fact that I've heard nothing but praise for the Nikon's 18-70mm lens.
Having not been able to find much info on the KM lens, I was a little
uneasy. The camera store I visited did not have the 18-100 in stock, so I
couldn't see it. Of the 4 KM lenses they had, none were what I would
consider "reasonably priced." So, given the wide selection of new and used
lenses available for the Nikon (staggering compared to KM lense choice and
availbility), I figured I would have a much easier time to locate additional
lenses at a reasonable price when the time comes.

Thanks again.








"Morgan Perry" <mptran @ morganperry.com> wrote in message
news:tt6dnZ2dnZ2-HBfpnZ2dncjKhd6dnZ2dRVn-y52dnZ0@storm.ca...
>
> I'm about to make the jump from my Canon S1-IS digital point-and-shoot to
> a DSLR model, but I'm torn between the Nikon D70s (with the 18-70mm AF-S
> DX f/3.5-4.5G lens) and the Konica Minolta Maxxum 7D, with a KM 28-100mm
> AF f/3.5-5.6 lens.
>
> My father-in-law recently bought a D70s. I have used it a little, and I
> quite like it. But from what I've read, the 7D seems to be more camera.
> It's a little more expensive. I have no experience with Konica equipment,
> hence the reason for my post.
>
> I'm open to suggestions or points to consider. I'm no professional, but I
> have enjoyed using my 35mm SLR for the past 5 years (a 15 year old Yashica
> FX-3). I plan to use a new DSLR primarily for shooting my kids (with the
> camera, not with a gun) and perhaps a little outdoor/nature photography.
> What are your thoughts on how these two lenses compare?
>
> Any advice is appreciated.
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
Anonymous
September 4, 2005 11:15:56 AM

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital.slr-systems (More info?)

"Alan Browne" <alan.browne@FreeLunchVideotron.ca> wrote in message
news:D fd4rr$mi1$1@inews.gazeta.pl...
> Thomas T. Veldhouse wrote:
>
>>>My father-in-law recently bought a D70s. I have used it a little, and I
>>>quite like it. But from what I've read, the 7D seems to be more camera.
>>>It's a little more expensive. I have no experience with Konica equipment,
>>>hence the reason for my post.
>>
>>
>> I am curious to see what "more" it has to offer. I can say I have been
>> VERY happy with the D70.
>
> I'm sure you have been. But the 7D is simply better all 'round.
>
> -Anti shake in-camera for all lenses.

Big deal, lots of photos get taken without and some of them are actually
pretty good.

> -Much better controls and control layout

If that is the sort of layout you want, if not then it isn't.

> -Larger and higher density monitor

Good but not that important.

> -Better range of ISO speeds

The main ones are there and work well.

>
> One thing I wish the 7D had that the D70 has, is 1/500 sync speed. A
> minor point, but a point.

Very minor, many only sync at lower speeds, 5D for example.

>
> Cheers,
> Alan
>
Anonymous
September 4, 2005 4:27:04 PM

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital.slr-systems (More info?)

Pete D wrote:

> "Alan Browne" <alan.browne@FreeLunchVideotron.ca> wrote in message
> news:D fd4rr$mi1$1@inews.gazeta.pl...
>
>>Thomas T. Veldhouse wrote:
>>
>>
>>>>My father-in-law recently bought a D70s. I have used it a little, and I
>>>>quite like it. But from what I've read, the 7D seems to be more camera.
>>>>It's a little more expensive. I have no experience with Konica equipment,
>>>>hence the reason for my post.
>>>
>>>
>>>I am curious to see what "more" it has to offer. I can say I have been
>>>VERY happy with the D70.
>>
>>I'm sure you have been. But the 7D is simply better all 'round.
>>
>>-Anti shake in-camera for all lenses.
>
>
> Big deal, lots of photos get taken without and some of them are actually
> pretty good.

Certainly a big deal and thanks for highlighting that. ;-)

With Canon and Nikon to get this you have to buy the individual IS/VR
lenses that have the facility. With Maxxum you get it with the camera
for all the lenses you already have and will buy in the future. So yes,
it is not only "Big" but a "good" deal too. So you can shoot at slower
ISO's and longer shutter speeds.

>>-Much better controls and control layout
>
>
> If that is the sort of layout you want, if not then it isn't.

You have to use it to understand it. You literally forget that there
are menus... you simply don't need them for all but a few special
situations. (BTW: most any review in most any magazine points out the
superior Minolta control layout ... and this goes back to models like
the 800i, Maxxum 9 and Maxxum 7 to name a few).

>
>
>>-Larger and higher density monitor
>
>
> Good but not that important.

Not according to a few friends of mine who use D70/D70s and flipped when
they saw my monitor.

>
>
>>-Better range of ISO speeds
>
>
> The main ones are there and work well.

Until you want shallower DOF (and forgot the ND) or a high speed low
light shot (and don't care about the noise).

>>One thing I wish the 7D had that the D70 has, is 1/500 sync speed. A
>>minor point, but a point.
>
>
> Very minor, many only sync at lower speeds, 5D for example.

I meant minor for the OP. Not minor for me.
For studio shooting with studio flash, having the highest possible sync
speed is important for absolutely crisp shots and for reducing the
exposure of high ambient light where not needed in the image (but needed
for crisp manual focusing). MF cameras such as Hasselblads's sync at
1/500 and others (some Pentax lenses, IIRC) at 1/1000. It is a minor
point to most SLR shooters but an important point to me as I do do a lot
of studio shots. And no, HSS does not at all cut it.

Cheers,
Alan

--
-- r.p.e.35mm user resource: http://www.aliasimages.com/rpe35mmur.htm
-- r.p.d.slr-systems: http://www.aliasimages.com/rpdslrsysur.htm
-- [SI] gallery & rulz: http://www.pbase.com/shootin
-- e-meil: Remove FreeLunch.
Anonymous
September 5, 2005 1:57:13 AM

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital.slr-systems (More info?)

Alan Browne <alan.browne@FreeLunchVideotron.ca> wrote:

> You have to use it to understand it. You literally forget that there
> are menus... you simply don't need them for all but a few special
> situations. (BTW: most any review in most any magazine points out the
> superior Minolta control layout ... and this goes back to models like
> the 800i, Maxxum 9 and Maxxum 7 to name a few).

I had a brief chance to use one of the Minolta DSLRs. It feels like an
old-school camera that just happens to be digital. Kind of weird (in a
good way). Canons feel like computer peripherals to me. Low-end Nikons
(like the D70) are somewhere in between. Pro Nikon bodies are *almost*
as "camera-like" as the Minolta, but not quite; still too many "press
this while turning this other thing" functions, which isn't necessarily
bad, but it's not quite as zen, or something.

--
Jeremy | jeremy@exit109.com
Anonymous
September 5, 2005 1:24:40 PM

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital.slr-systems (More info?)

"Alan Browne" <alan.browne@FreeLunchVideotron.ca> wrote in message
news:D ff78j$ivf$1@inews.gazeta.pl...
> Pete D wrote:
>
>> "Alan Browne" <alan.browne@FreeLunchVideotron.ca> wrote in message
>> news:D fd4rr$mi1$1@inews.gazeta.pl...
>>
>>>Thomas T. Veldhouse wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>>>>My father-in-law recently bought a D70s. I have used it a little, and I
>>>>>quite like it. But from what I've read, the 7D seems to be more camera.
>>>>>It's a little more expensive. I have no experience with Konica
>>>>>equipment, hence the reason for my post.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>I am curious to see what "more" it has to offer. I can say I have been
>>>>VERY happy with the D70.
>>>
>>>I'm sure you have been. But the 7D is simply better all 'round.
>>>
>>>-Anti shake in-camera for all lenses.
>>
>>
>> Big deal, lots of photos get taken without and some of them are actually
>> pretty good.
>
> Certainly a big deal and thanks for highlighting that. ;-)

LOL , luckily you can turn it off though.

>
> With Canon and Nikon to get this you have to buy the individual IS/VR
> lenses that have the facility. With Maxxum you get it with the camera for
> all the lenses you already have and will buy in the future. So yes, it is
> not only "Big" but a "good" deal too. So you can shoot at slower ISO's
> and longer shutter speeds.
>
>>>-Much better controls and control layout
>>
>>
>> If that is the sort of layout you want, if not then it isn't.
>
> You have to use it to understand it. You literally forget that there are
> menus... you simply don't need them for all but a few special situations.
> (BTW: most any review in most any magazine points out the superior Minolta
> control layout ... and this goes back to models like the 800i, Maxxum 9
> and Maxxum 7 to name a few).

His father in law will likely not appreciate it nor will the OP.

>>
>>
>>>-Larger and higher density monitor
>>
>>
>> Good but not that important.
>
> Not according to a few friends of mine who use D70/D70s and flipped when
> they saw my monitor.

Yes well, hardly something to get flippy about. My 2" hi res screen is very
good also, still only give it a good.

>
>>
>>
>>>-Better range of ISO speeds
>>
>>
>> The main ones are there and work well.
>
> Until you want shallower DOF (and forgot the ND) or a high speed low light
> shot (and don't care about the noise).

This is marginal at best. You must change your mind a lot. The D70s goes up
to 3200 anyway. And I never forget the ND.

>>>One thing I wish the 7D had that the D70 has, is 1/500 sync speed. A
>>>minor point, but a point.
>>
>>
>> Very minor, many only sync at lower speeds, 5D for example.
>
> I meant minor for the OP. Not minor for me.

I am sure you did.

> For studio shooting with studio flash, having the highest possible sync
> speed is important for absolutely crisp shots and for reducing the
> exposure of high ambient light where not needed in the image (but needed
> for crisp manual focusing). MF cameras such as Hasselblads's sync at
> 1/500 and others (some Pentax lenses, IIRC) at 1/1000. It is a minor
> point to most SLR shooters but an important point to me as I do do a lot
> of studio shots. And no, HSS does not at all cut it.

Not sure the OP actually has a studio yet?? Anyway 500th is still good
enough I think.
>
> Cheers,
> Alan
>
> --
> -- r.p.e.35mm user resource: http://www.aliasimages.com/rpe35mmur.htm
> -- r.p.d.slr-systems: http://www.aliasimages.com/rpdslrsysur.htm
> -- [SI] gallery & rulz: http://www.pbase.com/shootin
> -- e-meil: Remove FreeLunch.
September 5, 2005 1:24:41 PM

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital.slr-systems (More info?)

Pete D wrote:
> "Alan Browne" <alan.browne@FreeLunchVideotron.ca> wrote in message
> news:D ff78j$ivf$1@inews.gazeta.pl...
>
>>Pete D wrote:
>>
>>
>>>"Alan Browne" <alan.browne@FreeLunchVideotron.ca> wrote in message
>>>news:D fd4rr$mi1$1@inews.gazeta.pl...
>>>
>>>
>>>>Thomas T. Veldhouse wrote:
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>>>My father-in-law recently bought a D70s. I have used it a little, and I
>>>>>>quite like it. But from what I've read, the 7D seems to be more camera.
>>>>>>It's a little more expensive. I have no experience with Konica
>>>>>>equipment, hence the reason for my post.
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>I am curious to see what "more" it has to offer. I can say I have been
>>>>>VERY happy with the D70.
>>>>
>>>>I'm sure you have been. But the 7D is simply better all 'round.
>>>>
>>>>-Anti shake in-camera for all lenses.
>>>
>>>
>>>Big deal, lots of photos get taken without and some of them are actually
>>>pretty good.
>>
>>Certainly a big deal and thanks for highlighting that. ;-)
>
>
> LOL , luckily you can turn it off though.
>
>
>>With Canon and Nikon to get this you have to buy the individual IS/VR
>>lenses that have the facility. With Maxxum you get it with the camera for
>>all the lenses you already have and will buy in the future. So yes, it is
>>not only "Big" but a "good" deal too. So you can shoot at slower ISO's
>>and longer shutter speeds.
>>
>>
>>>>-Much better controls and control layout
>>>
>>>
>>>If that is the sort of layout you want, if not then it isn't.
>>
>>You have to use it to understand it. You literally forget that there are
>>menus... you simply don't need them for all but a few special situations.
>>(BTW: most any review in most any magazine points out the superior Minolta
>>control layout ... and this goes back to models like the 800i, Maxxum 9
>>and Maxxum 7 to name a few).
>
>
> His father in law will likely not appreciate it nor will the OP.
>
>
>>>
>>>>-Larger and higher density monitor
>>>
>>>
>>>Good but not that important.
>>
>>Not according to a few friends of mine who use D70/D70s and flipped when
>>they saw my monitor.
>
>
> Yes well, hardly something to get flippy about. My 2" hi res screen is very
> good also, still only give it a good.
>
>
>>>
>>>>-Better range of ISO speeds
>>>
>>>
>>>The main ones are there and work well.
>>
>>Until you want shallower DOF (and forgot the ND) or a high speed low light
>>shot (and don't care about the noise).
>
>
> This is marginal at best. You must change your mind a lot. The D70s goes up
> to 3200 anyway. And I never forget the ND.


The KM 7D also provides ISO up to 3200


>
>
>>>>One thing I wish the 7D had that the D70 has, is 1/500 sync speed. A
>>>>minor point, but a point.
>>>
>>>
>>>Very minor, many only sync at lower speeds, 5D for example.
>>
>>I meant minor for the OP. Not minor for me.
>
>
> I am sure you did.
>
>
>>For studio shooting with studio flash, having the highest possible sync
>>speed is important for absolutely crisp shots and for reducing the
>>exposure of high ambient light where not needed in the image (but needed
>>for crisp manual focusing). MF cameras such as Hasselblads's sync at
>>1/500 and others (some Pentax lenses, IIRC) at 1/1000. It is a minor
>>point to most SLR shooters but an important point to me as I do do a lot
>>of studio shots. And no, HSS does not at all cut it.
>
>
> Not sure the OP actually has a studio yet?? Anyway 500th is still good
> enough I think.
>
>>Cheers,
>>Alan
>>
>>--
>>-- r.p.e.35mm user resource: http://www.aliasimages.com/rpe35mmur.htm
>>-- r.p.d.slr-systems: http://www.aliasimages.com/rpdslrsysur.htm
>>-- [SI] gallery & rulz: http://www.pbase.com/shootin
>>-- e-meil: Remove FreeLunch.
>
>
>


--
jer
email reply - I am not a 'ten'
Anonymous
September 5, 2005 6:12:24 PM

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital.slr-systems (More info?)

On Fri, 2 Sep 2005 09:44:57 -0400, "Morgan Perry" <mptran @
morganperry.com> wrote:

>
>I'm about to make the jump from my Canon S1-IS digital point-and-shoot to a
>DSLR model, but I'm torn between the Nikon D70s (with the 18-70mm AF-S DX
>f/3.5-4.5G lens) and the Konica Minolta Maxxum 7D, with a KM 28-100mm AF
>f/3.5-5.6 lens.

Why not go with the leader in DLSR's and get a Canon? A year ago I
considered the D70 (Had owned Nikon film gear ) and decide that Canon
had the best system now and for the future.


*************************************************************

"I believe that all government is evil,
in that all government must necessarily make war upon liberty...

From "Mencken's Creed"
H.L. Mencken (1880 -1956)
Anonymous
September 6, 2005 12:57:40 AM

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital.slr-systems (More info?)

>
> The KM 7D also provides ISO up to 3200

Yes but I am sure not spending that much on a 6 MP camera that has noise
issues.
Anonymous
September 6, 2005 12:16:23 PM

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital.slr-systems (More info?)

Pete D wrote:
>>The KM 7D also provides ISO up to 3200
>
>
> Yes but I am sure not spending that much on a 6 MP camera that has noise
> issues.

What? Less noise than the D70 is a problem?

http://www.dpreview.com/reviews/konicaminolta7d/Samples...



--
-- r.p.e.35mm user resource: http://www.aliasimages.com/rpe35mmur.htm
-- r.p.d.slr-systems: http://www.aliasimages.com/rpdslrsysur.htm
-- [SI] gallery & rulz: http://www.pbase.com/shootin
-- e-meil: Remove FreeLunch.
Anonymous
September 6, 2005 10:49:42 PM

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital.slr-systems (More info?)

On 9/6/05 5:16 AM, in article dfk1aj$c1r$1@inews.gazeta.pl, "Alan Browne"
wrote:

> Pete D wrote:
>>> The KM 7D also provides ISO up to 3200
>>
>>
>> Yes but I am sure not spending that much on a 6 MP camera that has noise
>> issues.
>
> What? Less noise than the D70 is a problem?

Speaking as a Nikon D70s owner who has already taken hundreds of pictures, I
can suggest to all of you that the "noise" issue is bogus. My son uses a
Canon D20. Both cameras take incredibly good pictures under all lighting
conditions....no matter what the technowonks keep saying....

PC
Anonymous
September 7, 2005 10:30:41 AM

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital.slr-systems (More info?)

"Proconsul" <nospam@nospam.com> wrote in message
news:BF439546.702B%nospam@nospam.com...
>
>
>
> On 9/6/05 5:16 AM, in article dfk1aj$c1r$1@inews.gazeta.pl, "Alan Browne"
> wrote:
>
>> Pete D wrote:
>>>> The KM 7D also provides ISO up to 3200
>>>
>>>
>>> Yes but I am sure not spending that much on a 6 MP camera that has noise
>>> issues.
>>
>> What? Less noise than the D70 is a problem?
>
> Speaking as a Nikon D70s owner who has already taken hundreds of pictures,
> I
> can suggest to all of you that the "noise" issue is bogus. My son uses a
> Canon D20. Both cameras take incredibly good pictures under all lighting
> conditions....no matter what the technowonks keep saying....

Yes, thanks P, we know that, we were having a bit of a joke. Only the Oly
E300 has this problem.
Anonymous
September 7, 2005 11:40:53 PM

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital.slr-systems (More info?)

On 9/6/05 11:30 PM, in article
lOvTe.25369$FA3.24549@news-server.bigpond.net.au, "Pete D" wrote:

>
> "Proconsul" <nospam@nospam.com> wrote in message
> news:BF439546.702B%nospam@nospam.com...
>>
>>
>>
>> On 9/6/05 5:16 AM, in article dfk1aj$c1r$1@inews.gazeta.pl, "Alan Browne"
>> wrote:
>>
>>> Pete D wrote:
>>>>> The KM 7D also provides ISO up to 3200
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Yes but I am sure not spending that much on a 6 MP camera that has noise
>>>> issues.
>>>
>>> What? Less noise than the D70 is a problem?
>>
>> Speaking as a Nikon D70s owner who has already taken hundreds of pictures,
>> I
>> can suggest to all of you that the "noise" issue is bogus. My son uses a
>> Canon D20. Both cameras take incredibly good pictures under all lighting
>> conditions....no matter what the technowonks keep saying....
>
> Yes, thanks P, we know that, we were having a bit of a joke. Only the Oly
> E300 has this problem.

Enjoy your joke - but it remains true that the "issue" of noise is mostly
irrelevant....:) 

PC
Anonymous
September 8, 2005 12:01:37 PM

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital.slr-systems (More info?)

>>>>> Yes but I am sure not spending that much on a 6 MP camera that has
>>>>> noise
>>>>> issues.
>>>>
>>>> What? Less noise than the D70 is a problem?
>>>
>>> Speaking as a Nikon D70s owner who has already taken hundreds of
>>> pictures,
>>> I
>>> can suggest to all of you that the "noise" issue is bogus. My son uses a
>>> Canon D20. Both cameras take incredibly good pictures under all lighting
>>> conditions....no matter what the technowonks keep saying....
>>
>> Yes, thanks P, we know that, we were having a bit of a joke. Only the Oly
>> E300 has this problem.
>
> Enjoy your joke - but it remains true that the "issue" of noise is mostly
> irrelevant....:) 
>
> PC

You are indeed correct but all the Canonites will continue to tell you that
all Canons are sooooooooooooo much better than every other camera, I
personally get a bit sick of it so "take the piss" so to speak occasionally.

Cheers.

Pete
Anonymous
September 8, 2005 12:01:38 PM

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital.slr-systems (More info?)

On 9/8/05 1:01 AM, in article
BdSTe.26278$FA3.20234@news-server.bigpond.net.au, "Pete D" wrote:

>
>
>>>>>> Yes but I am sure not spending that much on a 6 MP camera that has
>>>>>> noise
>>>>>> issues.
>>>>>
>>>>> What? Less noise than the D70 is a problem?
>>>>
>>>> Speaking as a Nikon D70s owner who has already taken hundreds of
>>>> pictures,
>>>> I
>>>> can suggest to all of you that the "noise" issue is bogus. My son uses a
>>>> Canon D20. Both cameras take incredibly good pictures under all lighting
>>>> conditions....no matter what the technowonks keep saying....
>>>
>>> Yes, thanks P, we know that, we were having a bit of a joke. Only the Oly
>>> E300 has this problem.
>>
>> Enjoy your joke - but it remains true that the "issue" of noise is mostly
>> irrelevant....:) 
>>
>> PC
>
> You are indeed correct but all the Canonites will continue to tell you that
> all Canons are sooooooooooooo much better than every other camera, I
> personally get a bit sick of it so "take the piss" so to speak occasionally.

I "hear" that....:) 

I had always hoped that this forum would provide a venue where interested
users could share useful information and provide insight. Instead, it seems
to be a place where a gang of puerile wonks come to parade their "superior"
knowledge and to ask a never-ending series of incredibly stupid questions.
Add to that the silly arguments about whose artistic abilities are better
than whose and one grows weary of reading the verbal excreta of idiots......

The Canonites are simply engaged in blinding repeating the nonsense they
collect and circulate among themselves. They typify the modern definition of
"validation", i.e., one lies and the other swears to it. Then two other
apply the same logic to the opposing view. Mindless, stupid and totally
unproductive.

As I said earlier, my son has a Canon D20 and I have a Nikon D70s. If
reality is your guide, none of the other cameras currently being offered
that are "comparable", are worthy of mention in a sane discussion of "entry
level" DSLRs...! Every expert will attest to the fact that those two cameras
are leading the pack by a wide margin. As I also said, both the Canon and
the Nikon take incredibly good pictures - no matter what standard ISO is
used. Before I bought, I compared 14x20 prints made from both cameras -
nobody without a microscope who counted pixels could have told the
difference, Both were of exceptional quality, sharpness and color balance.

The truth is that the choice is largely one of personal preference. My son
likes the "feel" of his Canon and while he takes good pictures with my
Nikon, he PREFERS his Canon. Similarly I like the "feel" of my Nikon better
although I've taken some great pictures with his Canon.

Given the above, it's a "Ford" or "Chevrolet" argument and while the
discussion of differences and why one person prefers one over the other can
be interesting, rational folks don't dive over the cliff like Canonites nor
remain silent as do most Nikonites. That fact alone gives one a clue as to
who selects which camera and why.....:) 

Maybe the nature of this venue will change and the moronic technowonks will
go back to the Planet Zog from whence they came and a rational discussion
will yet ensue....

We can always hope......:) 

PC
Anonymous
September 8, 2005 7:04:06 PM

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital.slr-systems (More info?)

Morgan Perry wrote:
> I'm about to make the jump from my Canon S1-IS digital point-and-shoot to a
> DSLR model, but I'm torn between the Nikon D70s (with the 18-70mm AF-S DX
> f/3.5-4.5G lens) and the Konica Minolta Maxxum 7D, with a KM 28-100mm AF
> f/3.5-5.6 lens.
>
> My father-in-law recently bought a D70s. I have used it a little, and I
> quite like it. But from what I've read, the 7D seems to be more camera. It's
> a little more expensive. I have no experience with Konica equipment, hence
> the reason for my post.
>
> I'm open to suggestions or points to consider. I'm no professional, but I
> have enjoyed using my 35mm SLR for the past 5 years (a 15 year old Yashica
> FX-3). I plan to use a new DSLR primarily for shooting my kids (with the
> camera, not with a gun) and perhaps a little outdoor/nature photography.
> What are your thoughts on how these two lenses compare?
>
> Any advice is appreciated.

Konica-Minolta is not doing well, and may exit the digital SLR business.
If you go with Canon or Nikon, you'll be assured of a wide variety of
lenses and accessories, as well as an upgrade path. The D70s is an
excellent choice.
Anonymous
September 8, 2005 9:05:56 PM

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital.slr-systems (More info?)

SMS wrote:

>
> Konica-Minolta is not doing well, and may exit the digital SLR business.
> If you go with Canon or Nikon, you'll be assured of a wide variety of
> lenses and accessories, as well as an upgrade path. The D70s is an
> excellent choice.

That line is getting a bit old. There are no signs othere than petty
attacks like that above that K-M are on an exit path ... esp. while
releasing new lenses and a DSLR ( 5D ). For most shooters, K-M have an
exemplary line of glass.

The choices of Canon and Nikon are, of course, not bad. But it would be
harmful to everyone if the adice to buy there only were heeded.

Cheers,
Alan.


--
-- r.p.e.35mm user resource: http://www.aliasimages.com/rpe35mmur.htm
-- r.p.d.slr-systems: http://www.aliasimages.com/rpdslrsysur.htm
-- [SI] gallery & rulz: http://www.pbase.com/shootin
-- e-meil: Remove FreeLunch.
Anonymous
September 8, 2005 9:15:53 PM

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital.slr-systems (More info?)

Proconsul wrote:

> Speaking as a Nikon D70s owner who has already taken hundreds of pictures, I
> can suggest to all of you that the "noise" issue is bogus. My son uses a
> Canon D20. Both cameras take incredibly good pictures under all lighting
> conditions....no matter what the technowonks keep saying....

The point wasn't to state categorically that noise is or is not an
issue; simply that the statement that Pete D put up was wrong (whether
meant truly or in jest).

Noise is an issue in some cases, though in the "sweet spots" that most
people tend to shoot (lots of light, comfortable ISO setting, not very
deep graduated shaddows, small prints (10 x 8)), then it is a non-issue.

For some photos I did in a bar (dimly lit stage) with available light
with fast glass, there was no usable speed/ISO setting that didn't
result in high noise even in a small (5x7) print. A friend, shooting
similar quality glass and a 20D fared no better, FWIW.

Cheers,
Alan.


--
-- r.p.e.35mm user resource: http://www.aliasimages.com/rpe35mmur.htm
-- r.p.d.slr-systems: http://www.aliasimages.com/rpdslrsysur.htm
-- [SI] gallery & rulz: http://www.pbase.com/shootin
-- e-meil: Remove FreeLunch.
Anonymous
September 8, 2005 9:15:54 PM

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital.slr-systems (More info?)

On 9/8/05 2:15 PM, in article dfq9ma$7gs$1@inews.gazeta.pl, "Alan Browne"
wrote:

> Proconsul wrote:
>
>> Speaking as a Nikon D70s owner who has already taken hundreds of pictures, I
>> can suggest to all of you that the "noise" issue is bogus. My son uses a
>> Canon D20. Both cameras take incredibly good pictures under all lighting
>> conditions....no matter what the technowonks keep saying....
>
> The point wasn't to state categorically that noise is or is not an
> issue; simply that the statement that Pete D put up was wrong (whether
> meant truly or in jest).

With specific reference to one statement by one person, you are correct.
However, my contention was/is that the incessant petty sniping about ISO
from so many has grown tedious - not to mention irrelevant if one wishes to
take good pictures....

> Noise is an issue in some cases, though in the "sweet spots" that most
> people tend to shoot (lots of light, comfortable ISO setting, not very
> deep graduated shaddows, small prints (10 x 8)), then it is a non-issue.

I would suggest that noise is an issue in a very tiny majority of cases
where one wishes to take photos where there is virtually no light. Under
normal conditions or using flash, it's irrelevant.....

> For some photos I did in a bar (dimly lit stage) with available light
> with fast glass, there was no usable speed/ISO setting that didn't
> result in high noise even in a small (5x7) print. A friend, shooting
> similar quality glass and a 20D fared no better, FWIW.

I agree, but your example supports my view. The Canonites will insist that
the fact that the 20D can use ISO 100 while the Nikon D70/D70s can only use
ISO 200 indicates an IMMENSE superiority for the Canon. In fact, it's an
irrelevancy. When the light is bad, OTOH, quality deteriorates no matter
what ISO your camera can utilize or what medium you use. Film has the same
problem - use higher ISO film and graininess (noise) increases. Again, so
what? Why do some have to beat that dead horse endlessly?.....:) 

As you've earlier stated, quite clearly and intelligently, your problem
would/could be solved by getting more light into the camera whether by
increasing available lighting or using a lens with a larger aperture. In any
event, ISO settings aren't relevant except in a minor way.....:) 

PC
Anonymous
September 8, 2005 11:07:57 PM

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital.slr-systems (More info?)

Proconsul wrote:

> I had always hoped that this forum would provide a venue where interested
> users could share useful information and provide insight. Instead, it seems


It is up to the various contributors to supply higher signal than noise,
and to ignore what they consider noise.

Cheers,
Alan.


--
-- r.p.e.35mm user resource: http://www.aliasimages.com/rpe35mmur.htm
-- r.p.d.slr-systems: http://www.aliasimages.com/rpdslrsysur.htm
-- [SI] gallery & rulz: http://www.pbase.com/shootin
-- e-meil: Remove FreeLunch.
Anonymous
September 8, 2005 11:07:58 PM

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital.slr-systems (More info?)

On 9/8/05 4:07 PM, in article dfqg8c$rq3$1@inews.gazeta.pl, "Alan Browne"
wrote:

> Proconsul wrote:
>
>> I had always hoped that this forum would provide a venue where interested
>> users could share useful information and provide insight. Instead, it seems
>
>
> It is up to the various contributors to supply higher signal than noise,
> and to ignore what they consider noise.

I agree and have tried to do as you suggest - but I see nothing wrong with
speaking up when the idiots get too vocal......:)  Letting the children play
without supervision is always a mistake - when the children (of whatever
age) get out of control, the grownups need to act......:) 

PC
Anonymous
September 9, 2005 1:04:57 AM

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital.slr-systems (More info?)

"Proconsul" <nospam@nospam.com> wrote in message
news:BF459998.71BF%nospam@nospam.com...
>
>
>
> On 9/8/05 1:01 AM, in article
> BdSTe.26278$FA3.20234@news-server.bigpond.net.au, "Pete D" wrote:
>
>>
>>
>>>>>>> Yes but I am sure not spending that much on a 6 MP camera that has
>>>>>>> noise
>>>>>>> issues.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> What? Less noise than the D70 is a problem?
>>>>>
>>>>> Speaking as a Nikon D70s owner who has already taken hundreds of
>>>>> pictures,
>>>>> I
>>>>> can suggest to all of you that the "noise" issue is bogus. My son uses
>>>>> a
>>>>> Canon D20. Both cameras take incredibly good pictures under all
>>>>> lighting
>>>>> conditions....no matter what the technowonks keep saying....
>>>>
>>>> Yes, thanks P, we know that, we were having a bit of a joke. Only the
>>>> Oly
>>>> E300 has this problem.
>>>
>>> Enjoy your joke - but it remains true that the "issue" of noise is
>>> mostly
>>> irrelevant....:) 
>>>
>>> PC
>>
>> You are indeed correct but all the Canonites will continue to tell you
>> that
>> all Canons are sooooooooooooo much better than every other camera, I
>> personally get a bit sick of it so "take the piss" so to speak
>> occasionally.
>
> I "hear" that....:) 
>
> I had always hoped that this forum would provide a venue where interested
> users could share useful information and provide insight. Instead, it
> seems
> to be a place where a gang of puerile wonks come to parade their
> "superior"
> knowledge and to ask a never-ending series of incredibly stupid questions.
> Add to that the silly arguments about whose artistic abilities are better
> than whose and one grows weary of reading the verbal excreta of
> idiots......
>
> The Canonites are simply engaged in blinding repeating the nonsense they
> collect and circulate among themselves. They typify the modern definition
> of
> "validation", i.e., one lies and the other swears to it. Then two other
> apply the same logic to the opposing view. Mindless, stupid and totally
> unproductive.
>
> As I said earlier, my son has a Canon D20 and I have a Nikon D70s. If
> reality is your guide, none of the other cameras currently being offered
> that are "comparable", are worthy of mention in a sane discussion of
> "entry
> level" DSLRs...! Every expert will attest to the fact that those two
> cameras
> are leading the pack by a wide margin. As I also said, both the Canon and
> the Nikon take incredibly good pictures - no matter what standard ISO is
> used. Before I bought, I compared 14x20 prints made from both cameras -
> nobody without a microscope who counted pixels could have told the
> difference, Both were of exceptional quality, sharpness and color balance.
>
> The truth is that the choice is largely one of personal preference. My son
> likes the "feel" of his Canon and while he takes good pictures with my
> Nikon, he PREFERS his Canon. Similarly I like the "feel" of my Nikon
> better
> although I've taken some great pictures with his Canon.
>
> Given the above, it's a "Ford" or "Chevrolet" argument and while the
> discussion of differences and why one person prefers one over the other
> can
> be interesting, rational folks don't dive over the cliff like Canonites
> nor
> remain silent as do most Nikonites. That fact alone gives one a clue as to
> who selects which camera and why.....:) 
>
> Maybe the nature of this venue will change and the moronic technowonks
> will
> go back to the Planet Zog from whence they came and a rational discussion
> will yet ensue....
>
> We can always hope......:) 

PC,

Firstly, welcome to the world of unmoderatered newsgroups, sure there are
plenty of idiots here, bit of filtering or ignoring will fix that.

What you say is correct, they all take great photos, the main difference is
in the handling. Personally I have neither Canon or Nikon but like some of
both (not the 300D or the 350D mind you although they certainly take
perfectly good photos). I am certainly driven by what I can afford as a
father of four and am really happy that my D-SLR will use pretty much any
lens ever made with a suitable adapter and will meter properly and take
perfectly good/great/fantastic shots, perhaps I cannot blow the shots up to
the size of a bus but then again I don't need to.

Cheers.

Pete D
!