 |
 | Home | Contact Us | FAQ | Search & Site Map | Link to Us |
 | Sign In | Join | Other 45 Sites in Network |
| PhotoKB HomeDiscussion Groups Digital Photography Digital PhotoDSLR CamerasZLR CamerasPoint & Shoot CamerasFilm Photography 35 mmLarge FormatMedium formatDarkroomFilm and LabsOther EquipmentPhoto Technique Nature PhotographyPeople PhotographyTechnique GeneralGeneral Photo Topics General TopicsAustralian PhotographyUK PhotographyDirectoryPhoto Clubs |
Photo Forum / Digital Photography / DSLR Cameras / August 2005Pricing the Maxxum 5D
I was surprised when my local store told me the Maxxum 5D would be CAD$1099 with kit lens and available in a couple weeks. That comes to about US$900. ... includes anti-shake. Very good deal for Minolta lens owners. I've threatened my SO with it, but she's happy in film land. Cheers, Alan.  Signature-- r.p.e.35mm user resource: http://www.aliasimages.com/rpe35mmur.htm -- r.p.d.slr-systems: http://www.aliasimages.com/rpdslrsysur.htm -- [SI] gallery & rulz: http://www.pbase.com/shootin -- e-meil: Remove FreeLunch. Hi there, I am new to DSLR world and currently using Canon S2 IS. I visited Henrys this weekend to find out Maxxum 5D and they say don't touch that thing and go buy a Rebel XT. Why everbody is against Minolta other than the obvious limited lens selection > Hi there, > [quoted text clipped - 5 lines] > Why everbody is against Minolta other than the obvious limited lens > selection Henry's has a a few pompous a.ses working for them. I have gained many customers in Ottawa because of their sales associates attitude. One customer that we got went to Henry's for a simple $400 P&S camera, and she was shrugged off. She walked down the street to us, spent her money left happy, two days later her friend came in and bought the same camera. That pompous a.s has pretty well given us about 6 customers in the last 2 weeks, that I know about, these are people who made a point to mention how good our service was. Henry's does sell the 7D, the 5D hasn't shipped yet but the Canadian price is set at $1,099.99 probably $1,200 at Henry's. So for a sales person to make a claim such as; "don't touch that thing" sounds like the salesperson is only concerned for his Canon spiffs. Try another store is my advice. What company do you work for, because I want to buy a D70s, but have also wondered about how much of a deal Henry's will give me? >>Hi there, >> [quoted text clipped - 21 lines] > > Try another store is my advice. > What company do you work for, because I want to buy a D70s, but have > also wondered about how much of a deal Henry's will give me? Henry's (toronto) has become over priced in the last few years. They are almost as bad as L.L.Lozeau in Montreal (talk about over-priced: L.L.Lozeau in Montreal). Did I mention that L.L.Lozeau in Montreal are OVER PRICED on damned near everything? they want (on special Sekonic sponsored sale) CAD$700 for the L-558 meter. Oh, well, off to B&H it is (US$500) They want $3,300 for the Coolscan 9000 ED. (Oh, well, off to B&H it is [US$2000]) Etc. (This is as much Nikon's fault as Lozeau. Nikon are a bunch of A-holes when it comes to the North American Market. Canadians pay hard.) Simon's in Montreal is very good, not miraculous on price. Laplante in Laval can be haggled a bit (no mail order, however). Cheers, Alan Signature-- r.p.e.35mm user resource: http://www.aliasimages.com/rpe35mmur.htm -- r.p.d.slr-systems: http://www.aliasimages.com/rpdslrsysur.htm -- [SI] gallery & rulz: http://www.pbase.com/shootin -- e-meil: Remove FreeLunch. >> What company do you work for, because I want to buy a D70s, but have >> also wondered about how much of a deal Henry's will give me? [quoted text clipped - 19 lines] > Cheers, > Alan Let me mention my two current favourites (in Canada that is): Cameracanada.com in London Ont. and Thecamerastore.com in Calgary AB. Excellent service from both (when shopping Canadian) However always check KEH and B&H first. Bob Ottawa, Galaxy Camera. D70s w/18~70 $1549.99 > What company do you work for, because I want to buy a D70s, but have > also wondered about how much of a deal Henry's will give me? [quoted text clipped - 24 lines] >> >> Try another store is my advice. > Henry's has a a few pompous a.ses working for them. I have gained many > customers in Ottawa because of their sales associates attitude. I'll say! They're not all in Ottawa either. I got shafted on a purchase from their eBay website which quite clearly indicated $CAN, but they hit me for $US. I paid, but never purchased from them again. >Hi there, > [quoted text clipped - 5 lines] >Why everbody is against Minolta other than the obvious limited lens >selection Dealers are probably against Konica Minolta for offering a DSLR that was far too expensive for them to have any chance of selling. By the time Konica Minolta woke up , and the price became more realistic, the potential market had already deserted to other brands. The Maxxum/Dynax 5D is too little, too late. Despite the anti-shake feature, which must add $$ to the cost of manufacture, it has to compete on price at the low end of the market with well established and highly regarded DSLRs from Canon, Nikon, Pentax and Olympus, two of which have 8 MP, which is of considerable appeal to people buying entry-level DSLRs. Dealers want manufacturers to offer cameras that will sell well without the dealers having to make a great effort to persuade people to buy them. Konica Minolta does not fit that description. The alliance with Sony is also a concern. Both companies have major structural problems and are essentially weak. Two weak members in joint venture makes for a weak joint venture. Konica Minolta/Sony is probably doomed to failure, and dealers know that. That should tell you all you need to know about using Henry's comments as a purchasing reference. Pick the person you talk to at Henry's very carefully and then be very skeptical of their advice. For sure don't use it as the major input to your buying decision. Always verify elsewhere. Bob > Hi there, > [quoted text clipped - 5 lines] > Why everbody is against Minolta other than the obvious limited lens > selection I would be tempted to send the info to Ian Landry, President of Henry's as people like that are not helping. Wait belay that order, it's helping me ;) > That should tell you all you need to know about using Henry's comments as > a purchasing reference. Pick the person you talk to at Henry's very [quoted text clipped - 11 lines] >> Why everbody is against Minolta other than the obvious limited lens >> selection > Hi there, > [quoted text clipped - 5 lines] > Why everbody is against Minolta other than the obvious limited lens > selection If you shop carefully in that lens selection you will do as well, if not better for many lenses, than in Canon, Nikon and the others ranges. Those in stores who try to steer you away are most likely "brand addicts" ... eg he probably shoots Canon himself. And ask him, "Well, gee whilikers, what Canon has in-camera anti-shake?" And he'll reply, "Well, you have to buy the 'IS' lenses to get that..." Everything's a tradeoff. Minolta offer more camera / dollar than most. And for what most photographers need, more than enough lens choice. Cheers, Alan Signature-- r.p.e.35mm user resource: http://www.aliasimages.com/rpe35mmur.htm -- r.p.d.slr-systems: http://www.aliasimages.com/rpdslrsysur.htm -- [SI] gallery & rulz: http://www.pbase.com/shootin -- e-meil: Remove FreeLunch. >Hi there, > [quoted text clipped - 5 lines] >Why everbody is against Minolta other than the obvious limited lens >selection That's the best reason to be against any DSLR a limited lens selection. The reason to have any interchangeable lens camera is the ability to get the lenses you need for what you are shooting. ********************************************************** "A combat photographer should be able to make you see the color of blood in black and white" David Douglas Duncan Speaking on why in Vietnam he worked only in black and white http://www.hrc.utexas.edu/exhibitions/online/ddd/ > That's the best reason to be against any DSLR a limited lens > selection. The reason to have any interchangeable lens camera is the > ability to get the lenses you need for what you are shooting. Has not affected me in the least. I have 6 Minolta lenses that more than cover my needs. They more than cover the needs of most photographers. 5 of the lenses I have are far out of the budget of most people purchasing a camera. It's a non issue in reality, if a great theoretical stone to throw against Minolta. They have a great range of lenses, just not as many as Nikon and Canon. And of course, I didn't need to go to any IS/VR lenses. My Max 7D has in camera anti-shake for all lenses. Signature-- r.p.e.35mm user resource: http://www.aliasimages.com/rpe35mmur.htm -- r.p.d.slr-systems: http://www.aliasimages.com/rpdslrsysur.htm -- [SI] gallery & rulz: http://www.pbase.com/shootin -- e-meil: Remove FreeLunch. >>Hi there, >> [quoted text clipped - 9 lines] > selection. The reason to have any interchangeable lens camera is the > ability to get the lenses you need for what you are shooting. That's what I looked at all the way back when I bought a film SLR. At the time, Canon had the lens I wanted (28-105), Nikon did not, with the closest being a 35-135. It was not until a few years later than Nikon had their 24-140, which was no good, and apparently was discontinued, and it was six years later when Nikon came out with their very good 28-105 equivalent. Despite all that, Minolta does have a good selection of lenses, so as long as the buyer isn't looking for pro lenses, I don't see the problem with the 5D. Certainly it's a heck of a lot better choice than the Olympus E300, which has a dearth of lenses. > Despite all that, Minolta does have a good selection of lenses, so as > long as the buyer isn't looking for pro lenses, eh? 5 of my 6 Minolta lenses are pro. And Minolta offers a bunch more pro lenses. Signature-- r.p.e.35mm user resource: http://www.aliasimages.com/rpe35mmur.htm -- r.p.d.slr-systems: http://www.aliasimages.com/rpdslrsysur.htm -- [SI] gallery & rulz: http://www.pbase.com/shootin -- e-meil: Remove FreeLunch. >>>Hi there, >>> [quoted text clipped - 21 lines] >with the 5D. Certainly it's a heck of a lot better choice than the >Olympus E300, which has a dearth of lenses. Exactly, I went with Canon because of the L glass. It will be on many camera bodies over the years. I also avoid the EF-S lenses because I plan to go to FF even if I have to pay out 8k. ******************************************************** "A nice man is a man of nasty ideas." _Introductions to History of the Reformation_ Jonathan Swift 1667-1745 > Exactly, I went with Canon because of the L glass. It will be on many > camera bodies over the years. I was actually leaning toward a Nikon SLR (8008S) at first, because Nikon had much better flashes back in the early 1990's. But they were far behind Canon in the lens mechanics, even though they were just as good in terms of optics. Also, Nikon's selection of mid-range lenses (better than the low end junk, but not as good as the pro lenses) was more limited at the time, though they've since caught up. > I also avoid the EF-S lenses because I plan to go to FF even if I have > to pay out 8k. Yeah, I was feeling the same way, but I got the EF-s 10-22 anyway, figuring I can sell it if I don't want it anymore. Amusingly, I see used Canon lenses selling on Craigslist.org for MORE than you can buy them for new, and apparently they are actually selling for these prices. One seller got very upset when I pointed out this fact. >Despite all that, Minolta does have a good selection of lenses, so as >long as the buyer isn't looking for pro lenses, I don't see the problem >with the 5D. Complete and utter nonsense. Konica Minolta has an excellent range of lenses, including pro lenses. Several are optically superior to their Canon equivalents. But a lying Canon shill wouldn't know that. >Certainly it's a heck of a lot better choice than the >Olympus E300, which has a dearth of lenses. Complete and utter nonsense. Olympus Minolta has an excellent range of Zuiko lenses, including pro lenses. Several are optically superior to their Canon equivalents. But a lying Canon shill wouldn't know that. Tony Polson wrote: >>Despite all that, Minolta does have a good selection of lenses, so as >>long as the buyer isn't looking for pro lenses, I don't see the problem [quoted text clipped - 11 lines] > to their Canon equivalents. But a lying Canon shill wouldn't know > that. Those lying bastards, they told me it was Konica Minolta. ;) Signaturejer email reply - I am not a 'ten' >> Complete and utter nonsense. Olympus Minolta has an excellent range >> of Zuiko lenses, including pro lenses. Several are optically superior >> to their Canon equivalents. But a lying Canon shill wouldn't know >> that. > > Those lying bastards, they told me it was Konica Minolta. ;) I guess there was another merger that we didn't hear about yet. In any case, Minolta does have a good range of lenses, Olympus does not. > Those lying bastards, they told me it was Konica Minolta. ;) I love my Konisonolta! >> Those lying bastards, they told me it was Konica Minolta. ;) > > I love my Konisonolta! It could have been Minolta-Konica ... Monica for short ;) > It could have been Minolta-Konica ... Monica for short ;) Does it come with a blue dress? :-) Toa > That's the best reason to be against any DSLR a limited lens > selection. The reason to have any interchangeable lens camera is the > ability to get the lenses you need for what you are shooting. > David Douglas Duncan Limited? Check here http://www.bhphotovideo.com/bnh/controller/home?O=NavBar&A=search&Q=&ci=9266 9 pages. That's NINE pages of lenses available for the Minolta SLR DigiCam range. Something like 20 lenses per page Insufficient choice? Gimme a break Toa >> That's the best reason to be against any DSLR a limited lens >> selection. The reason to have any interchangeable lens camera is the [quoted text clipped - 10 lines] > >Insufficient choice? Gimme a break This is all immaterial to me, as I don't use the K/M cameras. However, I had to check out what you were indicating. Your URL was selecting lenses from *all* manufacturers for the KM bodies. If I restrict it to KM-only lenses, we wind up with only four pages. And your twenty lens per page turns out to be only ten per page, with double entries for each lens -- one "imported" (grey market) and one "USA", with different prices for each (of course). A total of 36 unique lenses (exclusive of "gray"ness. :-) Not really bad. Even some of the third-party lenses seem to be available in both a "USA" and "import" version, though far from the whole list, so the number of unique lenses per page is higher. FWIW The third-party lenses included in the list are from: Phoenix Sigma Tamron Tokina Vivitar Obviously, some are more desirable than others, but I really only count the lenses for a camera from the manufacturer. The others are ways to save some money, or to fill out possible gaps in the maker's own line. Enjoy, DoN. SignatureEmail: <dnichols@d-and-d.com> | Voice (all times): (703) 938-4564 (too) near Washington D.C. | http://www.d-and-d.com/dnichols/DoN.html --- Black Holes are where God is dividing by zero --- >>>That's the best reason to be against any DSLR a limited lens >>>selection. The reason to have any interchangeable lens camera is the [quoted text clipped - 45 lines] > Enjoy, > DoN. Well, my new 17-35mm f/2.8-4(D) KM badged lens is actually a Tamron under the hood. Not that there's anything wrong with that. Signaturejer email reply - I am not a 'ten' > Your URL was selecting lenses from *all* manufacturers for the > KM bodies. If I restrict it to KM-only lenses, we wind up with only > four pages. Correct. But that's still lots of lenses plus oodles more from other manufacturers. > Obviously, some are more desirable than others, but I really > only count the lenses for a camera from the manufacturer. The others Your choice. That's a whole different argument as to whether after-market lenses are up to standard with OEM ones SignatureToa #1614 DV#2, and Blondie #1617 DV#52 '86 VN750 - '89 SR250 - '86 Connie Ulysses #4328 VRA #746A Zen #204 AZVROC(h) TW#18 Scurrilous Auckland, New Zealand http://homepages.paradise.net.nz/~hasl Newbie info and Newsgroup Tips to be found at http://homepages.paradise.net.nz/~hasl/VROClinks.htm > A total of 36 unique lenses (exclusive of "gray"ness. :-) This is correct. Counting lenses by B&H pages is certainly a new twist, but it's really only two pages when you take out the double entries, and look only at lenses from the manufacturer. This line of reasoning reminds me of some of the Mac advocates that state "the Mac has plenty of software." True of course, but if the application software you need isn't available for the Mac, it's really immaterial that there are lots of applications available that you don't need. >Why everbody is against Minolta other than the obvious limited lens >selection Is the lens selection really so limited? I seem to recall several new K-M lenses being announced recently. >>Why everbody is against Minolta other than the obvious limited lens >>selection > > Is the lens selection really so limited? > > I seem to recall several new K-M lenses being announced recently. KM has 28 OEM lenses, several being APO, several are 2.8 long teles, and two APO teleconverters DT lenses AF DT Zoom 11-18mm f/4.5-5.6 (D) AF DT Zoom 18-70mm f/3.5-5.6 (D) AF DT 18-200mm f/3.5-6.3 (D) W/A lenses AF 16mm F/2.8 Fisheye AF 20mm F/2.8 AF 24mm F/2.8 Macro lenses AF 50mm F/2.8 Macro AF 100mm F/2.8 Macro AF 100mm F/2.8 Macro Standard lenses AF 50mm F/1.7 AF 50mm F/1.4 Zoom lenses AF ZOOM 17 - 35mm F/2.8 - 4 (D) AF 100-300mm f/4.5-5.6 (APO D) AF ZOOM 28 - 75mm F/2.8 (D) AF 24-105mm F/3.5-4.5 (D) AF 20-35mm F/3.5-4.5 AF 28-100mm f/3.5-5.6 AF 70-210mm f/4.5-5.6 II AF 17-35mm F3.5 AF 75 -300mm F/4.5-5.6 AF 100-400mm F/4.5-6.7 (APO) AF 70-200mm F/2.8 G (D) SSM Teleconverters AF 1.4X Tele Converter (APO D) AF 2X Tele Converter (APO D) Tele lenses AF 85mm F/1.4 AF 200mm F/2.8 (APO) AF 300mm F/2.8 (APO G) AF 300mm F/4 (APO G) AF 400mm F/4.5 (APO G) AF 600mm F/4 (APO G) Doesn't look limited. Third party lenses like Tamron, Sigma et al also exist. And they are all AS. >>> Why everbody is against Minolta other than the obvious limited lens >>> selection [quoted text clipped - 52 lines] > Doesn't look limited. Third party lenses like Tamron, Sigma et al also > exist. And they are all AS. Including my Bigma! Now, if they could just add a bionic arm assist so I could heft the beast... >>>Why everbody is against Minolta other than the obvious limited lens >>>selection [quoted text clipped - 52 lines] >Doesn't look limited. Third party lenses like Tamron, Sigma et al also >exist. That's a good list, for sure. >And they are all AS. True. ;-) > I was surprised when my local store told me the Maxxum 5D would be > CAD$1099 with kit lens and available in a couple weeks. That comes to [quoted text clipped - 8 lines] > Cheers, > Alan. I did like the 5D when I had the sample in my hands a few weeks ago, it should do well in the market. We will sell it in Ottawa at $1,099.99 with the 18~70mm kit lens. KM's warehouse is packed with them all ready to go, awaiting Japan HQ to say send them out. >>I was surprised when my local store told me the Maxxum 5D would be >>CAD$1099 with kit lens and available in a couple weeks. That comes to [quoted text clipped - 13 lines] > the 18~70mm kit lens. KM's warehouse is packed with them all ready to go, > awaiting Japan HQ to say send them out. So said my local store. I may buy one as a backup. Oh, screw that, I'm looking at a 500CM kit tomorrow. Cheers, Alan Signature-- r.p.e.35mm user resource: http://www.aliasimages.com/rpe35mmur.htm -- r.p.d.slr-systems: http://www.aliasimages.com/rpdslrsysur.htm -- [SI] gallery & rulz: http://www.pbase.com/shootin -- e-meil: Remove FreeLunch. Assuming that the picture quality is roughly that of the Nikon D50 (~6.3 megapixels) and can shoot RAW, and has an 18-70mm kit lense roughly comparable to a D70s, AND has the anti-shake in body, I think this camera can do very well. I picked a Rebel XT about 5 mos back and am very happy with the camera, but all things being equal PLUS having anti-shake built-in, I'd have picked the 5D. The canon 17-85 IS lense is around $900 canadian... you could get roughly the same performance WITH a camera body givne your pricing for the 5D configuration. (All things being equal, we don't know about the quality of the lense yet). PS I couldn't bring myself to buy the 17-85...i replaced my Sigma 18-50 (3.5-5.5) with the 18-135 as an all-purpose lense at half the price of the 17-85. Almost a 7x zoom on a walk around lense, not too shabby. No IS, but I don't think I'll miss it too much to be honest, i'll be using the mid-range mostly. |
Reply to this Message |
 Sign In
 Join
 My Latest Posts My Monitored Threads My Blog My Photo Gallery My Profile My Homepage Start New Thread Enable EMail Alerts Rate this Thread
|
©2009 Advenet LLC Privacy Policy - Terms of Use
This website includes both content owned or controlled by Advenet as well as content owned or controlled by third parties.