 Heather Harpel |
Upgrading My Camera I have had a Minolta Dimage Z2 for about a year now. I love it and have taken some good photos with it. However, I am already thinking about upgrading. I am looking at the Minolta Dimage A2 and just wondered if anyone had feedback or advice they could give. I am hoping to go into portrait photography in the future, so those are the kind of photos I take most often, although I am having fun trying some Macro photos, and am thinking about experimenting with still life. One thing I like about the A2 is the 8 mega pixels, I definitely want to print my photos large, like up to a 16x22. I also want to use my camera occasionally for action shots and zoomed in photos, so I also like the idea of the Anti-Shake. (One thing I don't like about the Z2 is how blurred my photos can be when zooming in on a subject.) I am primarily looking at Minolta because I like their Z2 so well. Also, it's the only digital I've used, and I am a beginner with photography, so I don't know anything about other brands. (I don't remember what brand my 35mm was that I had before.) However, I see most BetterPhoto members seem to use Canon, Nikon, or Fuji, not many people seem to use Minolta. I also bought a book about Digital Portrait Photography, and in the whole book they never once said anything about Minolta cameras. I worry that Minolta is not a good brand, or there are much better brands out there. So I am open to suggestions about all digital cameras. Price wise I would like to stay around $800. I might be able to go as high as $1000, but that is definitely it, I can't afford anything more expensive than that. I would rather keep it close to $800, though, if I can get a good camera for that amount. Also, I am a beginner, so I don't want anything to hard to learn to use.
|
|
|
|
||
|
Kerry L. Walker |
Minolta is not a good camera. It is a great camera. Please understand that it is not the quality of the equipment that drives sales. It is the desire to emulate the pros and the pros mainly use Nikon and Canon. The pros do not use Nikon and Canon because they are better camera (and they are great cameras). They use Nikon and Canon because these two companies make pro caliber cameras (meaning durability) and they each have a huge line of lenses and accessories. In the larger cities, the pros can rent a lens (mostly Nikon and Canon) that they may need for a specific purpose but don't need often enough to buy it. For the average amateur and advanced amateur (any many pros) Minolta and Pentax have all they need. The reason the book you read didn't say much about Minolta digital cameras is because Minolta is very new to the digital SLR market. That doesn't mean what they have isn't good. As an aside, you probably don't see many people using Leica cameras either. Leica invented 35mm photography (created a camera to use 35mm film from the movie industry). Leica cameras are great cameras and are practically the only platform for the finest lenses money (a lot of it at that) can buy. Mont people don't use them because they can't afford them. Just because a camera is not mentioned a lot does not mean it isn't a good camera. If you like Minolta, buy one. I have a couple of old Minoltas and I love them.
|
|
|
|
||
|
Kerry L. Walker |
Back in the dark ages, when I first started in photography, very few pros used Canon. Canon has made great srides in this market. Most used Nikon and quite a few used Minolta. Since the, Minolta (and Pentax) chose to concentrate on the amateur market while Nikon, who sold ONLY pro cameras under the Nikon name chose to integrate their Nikon line and the Nikormat line (their old consumer camera line) into the Nikon line to take advantage of the Nikon name in the consumer market. Canon decided to enter the pro marker with a vengeance and has done well, both with their product line and their advertising. In the last few years, both Minolta and Pentax have re-entered the pro line with new, pro oriented bodies. They won't catch up with Nikon and Canon but they will do well.
|
|
|
|
||
|
John C. Schwentner |
Hi, I also have the dimage z-2. Ive seen the canon eos 20 and compared the pictures. I cant tell the difference till I get up to a huge enlargement. The diference will be mainly that if you want huge dnlargements, but keep in mind that little minolta has features for the money not found anywhere. One feature you will lose is the ability to see instant picture in the viewfinder. also the lens on that z-2 while not as fine as a big Canon, is very advanced in the digital camera field. Ive looked at all of them but Im keeping the z-2. A eos 20 is great, but then you have to stop and change all those lenses out all the time, while the z-2 will go 38mm to 380mm just the way it is with a great lens, and it has about the fastest start up time of all of them slr's included. also you can get a wide angle for it and adapter for all the standard filters. You cant beat it for the money, and even though some call it a point and shoot, it is much better than that. I know Im in love, but this z-2 is the best all-around thing I have ever seen. Its always ready to go, and I miss no shots because of set up
|
|
|
|
||
|
Heather Harpel |
Thanks so much, Kerry and John. I do feel better about Minolta now, since I am not looking for a professional camera, not yet at least. :o) I think I will stick with Minolta. I have enjoyed my Z2, so I will probably like the other cameras they offer. I was looking at the A2, but now I think I will go with the A200, it has a couple more features that I like. Now it's just a matter of saving up for a few months. Either that, or convince my husband to use the tax refund for a new camera. He wants a new TV. :o)
|
|
|
|
||
|
Kerry L. Walker |
If you do decide to upgrade to a professional camera, don't count Minolta out. They are again making professional bodies. They recently entered the digital SLR market with their Maxxum 7D, based on the chassis of the Maxxum 7. This body is one step down from their pro line Maxxum 9 but is equivalent in construction to most of the offerings of Canon and Nikon. The manufacturers don't seem to be too concerned about producing all metal bodies for digital camera, probably because most people upgrade whenever there is an increase in the MP of the processors. With film cameras, this is not necessary as the upgrades come in the film itself, so many pro grade film cameras are available with an all metal chassis. As regards Minolta lenses, they are some of the best around. Sure, you can buy a cheap one and it won't be the best but that is true for Canon and Nikon too.
|
|
|
|
||
|
This old forum is now archived. Use improved Forum here
Report this Thread |
||