"From The Mind of Minolta"

Who doesn't remember that advertising slogan from the 80's and 90's? At that point, the originally created firm of Nichi-Doku Shashinki Shoten (or Japanese-German Camera Shop) was at their peak having surpassed both Canon and Nikon to become number 1 in the critical American market during this time! They were riding high. The company had been innovative for quite some time, being the first Japanese manufacturer to adopt the bayonet mount as well as full aperture through-the-lens (TTL) metering. Then in the late 70's being the first "multi-mode" SLR camera manufacturer with the XD-11 (U.S.) that is now the standard "PASM" (Program, Aperture, Shutter, Manual) modes that's seen on virtually every "advanced" camera on the market today. They were considered so advanced at the time, that it was Minolta whom Leitz turned to in the 70's when they felt the need to integrate electronics into their equipment, and the "Leica CL" was even made by Minolta in Japan. Something unheard-of at that juncture paving the road for future German-Japanese cooperative efforts such as the Sony-Zeiss, Kyocera-Zeiss/Contax, Matsushita (Panasonic)-Leitz, and Cosina-Zeiss/Voigtlander cooperative efforts seen today. 

So, what happened? I'm not going to get into all the details, but let's just say that arguably the most advanced of the Japanese camera/electronics (Laser printer, copiers, etc.) companies didn't move as quickly as the other major players (Nikon, Canon) in the transition to digital photography. Even the 2003 merger with another industry major player, Konica failed to revive it and ultimately ended up with the 2006 sell-off of most of Minolta's photography assets to Sony. But we're not here to discuss the demise of Minolta, but what it means to the frugal photographer of today.

If you are a photographer of a certain age, you've probably owned a Minolta (maybe even have one sitting up in a closet somewhere). Whether it was one of the famed SR-T series or one of the market dominating Maxxums, you know that they were eminately useable pieces of equipment and top notch optics. So questions concerning the brand have nothing to do with quality. 

.....which brings us to the Konica-Minolta Maxxum 7D (what a mouthful) of 2005/6. This camera was essentially a digital adaptation of the Maxxum 9i, 35mm film camera. In the world of early 2000s, it was a highly thought of "system" camera just short of the professional Nikon and Canons. What we would today call "pro-sumer" equipment. Again, I'm not going to do a review, for which I'd recommend dpreview.com, I will say that it was very well thought of at the time. There were many excellent optics available as well as other systems equipment, but the really innovative feature was the very first application of sensor-shift technology to ameliorate ever-present camera shake. Although generally considered to not be as effective as in-lense reduction as used by ,Panasonic, Canon and Nikon, it tends to be less expensive and applicable across the board on any lens attached. As such it has been commonly adopted by virtually all other makers of advanced, interchangeable lens cameras. 

This camera was not only advanced, but; as the British would say, "a serious bit of kit"! Like other top level DSLRs there's a magnesium chassis, and controls to beat the band.

If you don't believe me; take a look at the back! This is what I'd imagine Batman's camera to look like (including all the rubberized control surfaces). Virtually all the contemporary reviewers of the day commented that it looked intimidating, but extraordinarily easy to learn and operate since the plethora of buttons keeps the user from having to delve into the menu system to operate it. This is pretty much the opposite from the norm for most cameras of today.

Although this camera was very advanced and the center of an elaborate and proven system it was ultimately unsuccessful in the marketplace. First of all, it was a top level prosumer camera aspiring to be the equivilent of the Nikon D200 and Canon 30D at time when those that level of equipment had moved on to 8Mp sensors. However, it's pricing (due to it's build) put it squarely in the upper range in cost of production. Really the "little brother" 5D was better positioned to be successful. Unfortunately, it's late arrival to the game also put them behind the proverbial 8-Ball since many had already bought into a "system" and therefore were not pre-disposed to switch after investing in a particular lens mount. Worse yet, by the time that this camera came to the marketplace in any numbers, it wasn't the D200 and 30D that it was competing against, but the looming introduction of the 12Mp D300 and 40D which came on the seen in first half of 2007! So, with the handwriting on the wall, and the situational of being more than one generation behind, Minolta made the inevitable decision to sell off to the only company with the resources to catch up.....Sony.

What caused all the retrospective examination of the Minolta and the Maxxum 7D? "$275 OBO", that's what! As always, I was scanning the local Craig's List ads to see if there were any good deals out there in my area. And down the in the Photography and Video section was an ad for a Minolta Maxxum and two Sigma lenses. Of the Sigma lenses (18-125, 70-300) of that generation, the less said the better, although the 18-125mm should be OK. I guess someone could use the other one until they can afford something better, the generic lenses of that type and age whether they be the original maker (Tamron, Sigma typically) or an importer such as Quantaray, aren't very good. But, back to the original thought: really, this advanced of a camera, of this build quality, with lenses so that you can use it immediately for........$275 OBO!!! I'd bet that the "OBO" means that he'll take $250. If you are the least bit concerned with the 7D's 6 megapixels, you guys know that my stance is that 6Mp is perfectly useable, especially for entry level. Remember that for our Alaska trip a few years ago, I took a 6Mp Nikon D70 and was very happy with the images it gave me (when I did my job).

A couple of last thoughts. No; it was not a "one-off" situation. I checked eBay and the mid-$200s pricing is in fact what that camera is selling for right now. Also, if you are the slightest bit concern at buying into a "dead-end" system, remember that it wasn't killed off, but taken over by Sony, so not only can you buy brand new Sony lenses, flashes etc., but even upgrade to using legendary Zeiss glass that are now made for that mount!

If I had random extra money, I'd have already snapped this thing up!
 

Rebirth of the Nikon "E" Lenses

Way back when I was in high school (seemly eons ago), the then king of all things professional photography, Nikon, decided to dabble in the lower end of the amateur market. Yes, I'm well aware that they had the Nikkormats, and even the ill-fated/short-lived Nikkorex out for a decade or more, but for those of use who had priced the Nikkormats in those years, they were simply "slightly less expensive" Nikons, and not really competitors of the Pentax, Olympus, and Fujicas that sold in far larger quantiies. By the later part of the 70's, the handwriting was already on the wall in the form of the wildly successful Canon AE-1. Between it and the Olympus OM-1, and misc. clones such as the Pentax MX, ME, it was obvious the the highly lucrative advanced amateur market was clearly headed toward compact, electronics oriented camera with a LOT more plastic in the build. While many consider the 70's the decade that the Japanese SLR reached it's pinnacle, the same could also be said of the "third party" glass manufacturer, with the "Big Three", Tamron, Sigma and Tokina, not only reaching acceptability, but dominance in some sectors of the market. Included with them were the brands created by marketing consortiums such as Vivitar, Soligar and even the "house brands" such as Cambron (Cambridge Cameras), and Spiratone. 

In 1979 Into this high-speed, high-profit and highly volatile part of the market steps, Nippon Kogaku of Tokyo, otherwise known as Nikon, with (for them) a revolutionary product line; the "E" Series. This would be based on the "beginner" camera the EM, which was wildly different than anything the Nikon had ever done before. It was mostly plastic, mostly automatic and aimed at a part of the market that they hadn't attempted entry since the ill-fated Nikkorex 35 of 1960....and some would argue that even those weren't aimed at the beginning photographer either. 

 As would be typical Nikon, they didn't just bring out a camera, but an entire system, complete with a flash, motor winder and several lenses designed to not only complement the small size and light weight of the EM, but the price-point as well. In order to accomplish that in those days of the brass helical focusing mechanism, Nikon designed in (gasp) quite a bit of structural plastics in the construction! At that point in time, coming from Nikon it was a shock and these lenses were routinely panned in the press and snubbed by most users. Over their production run, not nearly as many of these lenses were produced as one would think given the price and the Nikon glass that they contained. It would have been a very sad end to some very decent lenses had not a weird thing happen on the way to technology's dumpster, ........AUTOFOCUS, then DIGITAL PHOTOGRAPHY. What the.........?!!?

By the late 80's, auto-focus was sweeping all before it's onslaught on the photographic landscape, and as a part of that, it became evident that focusing via motors could not be accomplished efficiently using the traditional helical mechanism. There was simply too much drag. So, virtually all modern lens use the pin-in-slot method, though much more efficient, doesn't give that satiny smooth mechanical feel of the traditional manual-focus lens. 

Then digital photography happened, and a number of weird things converged together to create a strange set of circumstances. With APS-C sized sensors, or smaller such as 4/3rd, Micro 4/3rd, older lenses designed to deal with a "full-frame" 35mm were quite often found to be very sharp since you were only using the center of the glass. Then it was found that these lenses could easily be used on many cameras through an inexpensive adapter. This made the old Nikon lenses especially popular since: 1. they were some of the best glass, and 2. the relatively long back-spacing requirement allowed them to be easily adapted. This is especially true for the so-called "mirrorless" cameras such as the various Micro 4/3rd and the Sony Nex (although there are many more).

This combined with the advent of DSLR based video, has caused a boom in the "old" manual focus lens market. Many lenses that were considered inferior whether by perception or actual comparison of their time have become popular....which brings me back to the Nikon "E" Series. Ultimately, it's been found that they are not only highly competent, but given their compact size and low weight they make a good physical match for modern digital cameras. Even their focusing action is seen as comparatively smooth compared to modern autofocus lenses used in manual mode!

For me personally, it began with my slightly odd obsession with the "pancake" lens. I've always liked them in an "ugly duckling" sort of way and have thought that a slightly "wide" focal length would be perfect for my "street-shooter" project. However, the price has always been an issue. If I was somebody else, I'd probably just shell out the $500 or so that it cost to buy the Cosina made Voigtlander SL II, 20mm or 28mm lenses. And neither is the priginal "pancake", Nikon 45mm/f2.8 that I've previously written about. Of course the updated 45mm "P" of 2001-2006 has attained collectors status (~$600+ range), they are nowhere close to the budget of a frugal person of any kind.

Therefore, back to the "E" lenses. They seem to have been made over most of the 80's. There was of course the 50mm/f1.8, as well as the very typical range of 28mm, 35mm, 100mm, 135mm as well as a few zooms, 35-70mm, 70-150mm and 70-210mm. Some of them have even attained a mythical status (eg. 70-150mm). As it happens, I actually have one of them, a 50mm/f1.8 which came attached to the a broken EM that I traded for, which I've tried out on my D300. And let me tell ya; it's not an accident that it's often referred to as a "pancake" lens. It balances oddly on the D300 which is a big camera (especially with the MB-D10 attached), but it has the linkages to meter with the old AI lenses. However, what I REALLY liked was that lens attached to the D50 "Plastic Fantastic" camera! Wow, it is super-compact and easy to handle! Two problems though: 1. 50mm equals 75mm on my DX sensor'd cameras, and 2. it doesn't meter on the camera that I'd really like to use it on. What to do?

What you can see here if you look closely on the mount of this old Nikkor 80-200mm zoom is electronic contacts from modern AF mount. Apparently you can buy these things in kit form complete with a jig that helps you to correctly attach them to the mount of an old lens which allows it to send the lens data to the modern Nikon DSLRs! About $50.

So, what all this amounts to is a nice little project shaping up. I need to chase down a 28mm Nikon "E" Series lens (~$50 or so), add a "chip" and get the equivalent of a 42mm lens in a very compact form attached to a compact camera, thus creating a "do-it-yourself" street-shooter.