Switch to English Language Passer en langue française Omschakelen naar Nederlandse Taal Wechseln Sie zu deutschen Sprache Passa alla lingua italiana
Members: 70,498   Posts: 1,543,103   Online: 1040
      
Page 2 of 5 FirstFirst 12345 LastLast
Results 11 to 20 of 49
  1. #11

    Join Date
    Apr 2011
    Location
    Berkeley, CA
    Shooter
    35mm
    Posts
    97
    I am not worrying, I am trying to learn.
    Quote Originally Posted by parkpy View Post
    just shoot, man. Quit worrying about what others think of your equipment.

  2. #12
    M.A.Longmore's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2009
    Location
    New York
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    1,849
    Images
    15
    Quote Originally Posted by Vsanzbajo View Post
    I am not worrying, I am trying to learn.
    .
    Learn, By Doing !

    Ron
    .

  3. #13
    guitstik's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2010
    Location
    Eads TN.
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    1,098
    Images
    66
    Ther are those that espouse the Nikons and Canons as professional and you see that reflected in the price on fleaBay. The commonly held, but wrong, idea was that Minoltas were built as consumer models. They did have inexpensive cameras and lenses but one can not deny that the majority of what they put out was well constructed, well thought out and in most instances, well in advance of anything that either Canon or Nikon had. Take for instance the SR-7, first in camera meter. Minolta also had the first camera to allow for metering in camera while the aperture was wide open and connected to the shutter making for "more inspiration and less perspiration" when taking a shot.
    Thy heart -- thy heart! -- I wake and sigh,
    And sleep to dream till day
    Of the truth that gold can never buy
    Of the bawbles that it may.

    www.silverhalidephotography.com

  4. #14

    Join Date
    Sep 2007
    Location
    Richmond VA.
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    6,834
    Both are good, it is the person behind the camera that makes the difference!

    Jeff

  5. #15
    guitstik's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2010
    Location
    Eads TN.
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    1,098
    Images
    66
    Amen
    Thy heart -- thy heart! -- I wake and sigh,
    And sleep to dream till day
    Of the truth that gold can never buy
    Of the bawbles that it may.

    www.silverhalidephotography.com

  6. #16

    Join Date
    May 2006
    Location
    Aurora, IL
    Shooter
    35mm
    Posts
    1,954
    I don't own an FM3a but I do own an FE and an FM. I also own a XD-11. I believe the FM3a is similar to the FE but with more features plus the mechanical shutter when in manual mode. May be it's just me but I definitely like the FM3a better than the XD-11. In fact I would rather have either the FM or the FE than the XD-11.

  7. #17
    PhotoJim's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2005
    Location
    Regina, SK, CA
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    2,221
    There's nothing at all wrong with Minolta's MD gear.

    That having been said, one real advantage of the Nikon - all things otherwise equal (which I don't think they are; I think the FM3a is a few notches better on account of its shutter) is that you can still buy new Nikkors easily. True, some no longer have aperture rings but many do.
    Jim MacKenzie - Regina, Saskatchewan, Canada

    A bunch of Nikons; Feds, Zorkis and a Kiev; Pentax 67-II (inherited from my deceased father-in-law); Bronica SQ-A; and a nice Shen Hao 4x5 field camera with 3 decent lenses that needs to be taken outside more. Oh, and as of mid-2012, one of those bodies we don't talk about here.

    Favourite film: do I need to pick only one?

  8. #18
    Ralph Javins's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Location
    Latte Land, Washington
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    832
    Quote Originally Posted by Vsanzbajo View Post
    I am no expert, I am 39 years old. I only used film when I was really young. I started film 3 months ago. I have acquired, a Minolta SRT 101, a Minolta Xd 11, and a Nikon FM3A that a friend offered. I started with Minolta because that is what my dad had when I was a kid. Like I said I am no expert I want to see what people really think. I want to see if I have a valid judgement or not. I am just starting this film adventure.
    Good morning, Vsanzbajo;

    The stimulus for my making a response to your question was a posting by another. There was a reference to Nikon having more lenses available for the Nikon FM3A.

    How many different lenses are needed to meet your needs, and your desires? Are you and your local bank manager on a first name basis with greetings exchanged when you walk into the building? While I do agree that Nippon Kogaku K. K. (Nikon) did make more different lenses than did Chiyoda Kogaku Seiko K. K. (Minolta), the lens list from Minolta is not meager; it consists of single focal length lenses in twenty-six (26) different focal lengths, many of which have lens designs with different lens maximum apertures in that focal length. These range from a 4.0/7.5mm 180 Degree Circular Fisheye to the 11/1600mm RF Mirror lens (my preferred focal length for nice photographs of the full moon). I have 20 of those focal lengths in my Minolta lenses here, and I have two 35mm lenses with different lens maximum apertures in addition to those listed by Dennis Lohmann in his exhaustive Minolta lens list.

    Nikon did go down to a 2.8/6mm 220 Degree Circular Fisheye, and they went up to an 11/2000mm Mirror. I did see one of the long mirror lenses offered for sale recently for only $35,000.

    There are Nikon cameras and lenses here also, including The 1960s Nikon Project which does include eight (8) non-AI lenses from 24mm to 300mm in that kit. There are others.

    Realistically, how often will any of us really need the lenses at the extreme ends of the lens ranges offered by any of the manufacturers? Most of us will be using a lens from probably 24 mm up to 200mm or 300mm for just about 99.5% or more of the photographs we will be taking. For me, the Minolta 21mm, 20mm, 17mm, and 16mm focal length lenses are special purpose lenses that I have taken out mainly to see what they do. I have used the ROKKOR 4.0/17mm WA one time to get a landscape I wanted. Turning to the longer lenses, just getting a long lens onto a moving bird is a challenge. When you get to 500mm, you begin to see just how much the air refracts and moves around, which really plays havoc with trying to get a clear photograph of a distant subject. You develop a real appreciation for weather, and the times of the day when you will be able to take that kind of a photograph.

    Do not worry about the number or range of lenses available to us from any of the major manufacturers. All of them have us covered in the range we will be using.
    Enjoy;

    Ralph Javins, Latte Land, Washington

    When they ask you; "How many Mega Pixels you got in your camera?"
    just tell them; "I use activated silver bromide crystals tor my image storage media."

  9. #19
    guitstik's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2010
    Location
    Eads TN.
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    1,098
    Images
    66
    I knew I liked you Ralph, well said. And on a side note if you happen to want to get rid of a 1600mm let me know and whom I shall have to bump off.

    Word of the day: Catadioptric
    Thy heart -- thy heart! -- I wake and sigh,
    And sleep to dream till day
    Of the truth that gold can never buy
    Of the bawbles that it may.

    www.silverhalidephotography.com

  10. #20

    Join Date
    Aug 2010
    Location
    Atlanta, GA
    Shooter
    35mm
    Posts
    824
    Quote Originally Posted by Vsanzbajo View Post
    No I am not getting rid of any of the two. I am just amazed on the quality of the Minolta cameras. In my opinion the Minoltas are very comparable to the best of Nikon. Even tough they are different cameras, their quality is incredible. I never expected Minolta to compete with Nikon, but they sure do.
    The Minoltas are exceptional in a lot of respects particularly in the context of it's date of release. The XK's (1972) features were not matched (let alone exceeded) till the F3's (1980) release. It wasn't till the FA (1983) that Nikon added Shutter priority auto exposure included in the XD-11 (1977). The much touted smooth film advance of the F3 due to 11 ball bearings has nothing on the Minolta XE-7. The buttery smoothness of the XE-7 has to be experienced!

    Nikon and Minolta produced some outstanding product with features that even today are unmatched. The fact that they work perfectly is a testament to their design and workmanship.

    BTW, have you tried any of the others like Canon, Olympus and Pentax? They also produced some outstanding light tight boxes and glass . . .

Page 2 of 5 FirstFirst 12345 LastLast


 

APUG PARTNERS EQUALLY FUNDING OUR COMMUNITY:



Contact Us  |  Support Us!  |  Advertise  |  Site Terms  |  Archive  —   Search  |  Mobile Device Access  |  RSS  |  Facebook  |  Linkedin