minolta x-700 photos

**cyberspider** · 03-18-2010 12:38 PM

here are some from my minolta x-700 film camera sorry for the rubbish scanner
they look better in the hand

**Rol_Lei Nut** · 03-18-2010 01:49 PM

What are you looking for, aesthetic feedback?
IIRC, you want to sell your pictures as postcards?

You live in a nice area (where, if I may ask? I'm just back from a 10 day camping/trek in the Scottish Western Isles, BTW), but landscape photography is largely about light and composition.
For the first, you need to be patient and/or lucky, the second you can vasty improve through study (a good book, looking at great nature photographs or even paintings).

Good luck with your pursuits!

**Ric Trexell** · 03-18-2010 01:52 PM

The X-700 is a great camera, I have two of them and one I bought new in 1986 I think it was. I still use it. Your files though are too big for a dial up connection. If you want to see pics by any camera, go to Flicker and enter in something like 'taken with a Minolta X-700' and you will see pics from other 700 photographers. My camera has been in the shop once in those nearly 25 years. I have started using medium format though as the eyes are having trouble seeing through that little viewfinder on a 35mm camera. Also, my Mamiya RB67 doesn't require anything electronic so I feel they will work for many years. Since the X-700 is no longer made, parts will be hard to find in the coming years. Great camera though and mine have paid for themselves in doing some weddings and just the satisfaction of the pictures I have. I have one blown up to a 24X30 and it is super sharp. Ric.

P.S. I'm 58 and have to realize that if the cameras last me 20 years, that is probably all I will ever need.

**tkamiya** · 03-18-2010 01:56 PM

Based on your last post, I am guessing you are looking for feed back on quality of the image.

I am guessing you scanned 4x6 lab print by a consumer scanner. I am also guessing, the surface of your print was "matt" type. If that is the case, this is pretty much all you can do.

I see the image is little muddy and lacks sharpness. Matt surface isn't really good for scanning especially when prints are small. I also had a personal experience where lab I used weren't maintaining machines/chemicals very well and prints came back not so clear. Trying to scan this makes it look worse.

If your print looks oK in person, I wouldn't worry about it too much. Sorry I can't be more help.

**cyberspider** · 03-18-2010 01:57 PM

i resized to 800 pixels sorry about size

**jamesgignac** · 03-18-2010 03:01 PM

Thanks for showing off some work - I agree you're in a lovely location for photography

In terms of the scanning you can always work on that later if you wish or at least build up an arsenal of photoshop skills to try to have your digital image look more like your print. My first advice though is to keep at it - and if you DO end up venturing into black and white and processing your own negatives & printing please keep us posted!

I think the shots look great - but yes it takes some effort to look past the 'scaniness' & the 'consumer lab printiness' of the image - the compositions themselves look very promising so keep it up.

**Excalibur2** · 03-18-2010 05:56 PM

As a suggestion:- Why don't you have your negs developed and put on a CD, then you can post the JPGs here...if you are in the UK, Tesco will develope and put up to 37 shots on a CD all for £2 erm sometimes with a few dust spots added for free.

**viridari** · 03-18-2010 07:32 PM

I'm going to risk drawing the ire of many but at least it will make the thread more entertaining to watch.

For those who say the X-700 is a great camera, what makes you say that?

When my father gave me his X-700 and lenses last year, I was excited and blew off several rolls of film. What I got back was bland & mushy like what we see in the OP.

I don't often shoot 135 but my experience in that format is largely with low end Canon EOS gear (Rebel bodies & plastic consumer lens bodies). My results with Canon gear are consistently in a different league from the best results that I've gotten from the Minolta kit.

Every now and then I see something acceptable out of an X700 but the overwhelming majority of what I've seen from my own X700 and from the various Flickr groups have been underwhelming.