Archived posting to the Leica Users Group, 2004/09/04
[Author Prev] [Author Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] [Author Index] [Topic Index] [Home] [Search]I wonder if you can recall what was lacking in the XK system? It certainly was not an array of finders, screens, diopters, bulk film back, intravalometer, battery packs, motor drive, macro tubes, bellows, copy stand, or lenses from fish-eye to 500mm. Here is an early system map to help you remember: <http://www.mir.com.my/rb/photography/hardwares/classics/minoltaxk/htmls/xksystem.pdf> I would rewrite your laste sentence to read "Bad mouthing [those who know what they are talking about] is not cool. " Sam S Henning Wulff wrote: > At 3:15 PM -0500 3/17/04, Sam wrote: > >> Dan, I cannot agree with you more than if I wrote your words. I've >> used Minolta cameras off-and-on since the XG-M. I defy anyone to tell >> which lens took which slide on a light table. I have no plans on >> going digital in the near future, but as the talk is mostly digital >> these days it's hard not to become involved. As I hear talk about >> this or that camera a voice runs almost continually through my mind >> saying, "Minolta has that" or "Minolta did it first" or "Minolta does >> it cheaper" or "Minolta does it better." I've never heard one good >> reason not to use a Minolta based on the product itself. Its glass is >> as good as any. No, they do not use batteries more than other >> digitals. There might be individual models that ate batteries more >> than is normal, but that can be said for every camera maker. Minolta >> is the most deserved but ignored camera maker on the planet because >> its name is not Nikon, or, more recently, Canon. From the wonderful >> XK to the innovative auto focus Maxxum 7000 to the breathtaking >> Maxxum 9, their cameras have always been top rank. The only reason >> Milolta has not broken the "professional" camera barrier is becasue >> photographers are gutless winnies who follow the pack more then >> lemmings. They have got to be the most fearful people on earth. If >> they find the wherewithall to break out of their shaking shells they >> will find the new Konica Minolta line to be among the best in the world. >> >> I say this with the greatest respect for the talents of the >> professional photographers here, if not their courage to be innovative. >> >> Sam S > > > > That has got to be one of the biggest loads of rubbish posted here > lately! > > The reason that Minolta has not been one of the main 'professional' > cameras (and I put that in quotes as professional in this context > means photojournalism and sports only) is that the _SYSTEM_ has been > lacking. They had the XK for a while, but the lens selection and depth > of system accessories at any one time has always been well below that > of Nikon and Canon. > > If the cameras and lenses offered by Minolta meet your needs, fine. Go > for it. It is as professional as any other system in that regard. > However, the Minolta system never met my needs, and therefore I never > considered Minolta. Minolta never had the lenses I needed or wanted, > while Nikon and lately Canon, did. > > Bad mouthing professionals without understanding the basics is not cool. > -- To unsubscribe, see http://mejac.palo-alto.ca.us/leica-users/unsub.html