Archived posting to the Leica Users Group, 1996/08/15
[Author Prev] [Author Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] [Author Index] [Topic Index] [Home] [Search]
>At 03:20 PM 8/14/96 EDT, you wrote:
>You better look at Minolta again. They have very competent pro level
>equipment. Just because pros are a bunch of sheep and only use Nikon, Canon
>and Leica (in that order of numbers used with anything else a far behind
>tiny percentage) doesn't mean they can't be used for pro work. They make a
>very fine SLR body with OTF TTL that's wireless, and very fast focusing that
>would give most Canon and Nikon cameras (except the EOS1n and F5) a run for
>the money. They have an 80-200 2.8, 300 2.8, 85 1.4, 35 1.4 etc., etc.
>
>
>==================
>Eric Welch
>Grants Pass Daily Courier
No thanks, Minolta have done nothing to make me consider their equipment a
worthwhile expense over the long run. Just because they have the lenses
(and some of the Minolta line are VERY good) does not make them a reliable
tool. Minolta have a high defect rate in new cameras and the construction
quality is simply not good enough. The cameras do not last with heavy use
under serious conditions.
Now, if your picture taking happens within 20 miles of the nearest
seven eleven and you have an employer to replace all your dead bodies, I
could see you considering such a beast but not if you absolutely have to
depend on your equipment.
As for all pro photog's being "a bunch of sheep", well you said it
not I.
J.Redfern