If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below. |
|
|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
#1
|
|||
|
|||
Minolta vs Nikon??
|
#2
|
|||
|
|||
Minolta vs Nikon??
You mean where 75% of all the photographers use Canon?
-- http://www.chapelhillnoir.com home of The Camera-ist's Manifesto The Improved Links Pages are at http://www.chapelhillnoir.com/links/mlinks00.html A sample chapter from my novel "Haight-Ashbury" is at http://www.chapelhillnoir.com/writ/hait/hatitl.html "Tom" wrote in message ... In article , David Manzi (Bowzer) wrote: My basis for opinion is that I've never seen a pro using a Minolta. They need excellent quality optics, bodies that don't break down and can take a beating. Trust me, if Minoltas were "as good" as Nikons, pros would be using them. I agree with you Bowzer. Minolta can't touch Nikon. Just take a look at the Olympics. |
#3
|
|||
|
|||
You mean where 75% of all the photographers use Canon?
-- http://www.chapelhillnoir.com home of The Camera-ist's Manifesto The Improved Links Pages are at http://www.chapelhillnoir.com/links/mlinks00.html A sample chapter from my novel "Haight-Ashbury" is at http://www.chapelhillnoir.com/writ/hait/hatitl.html "Tom" wrote in message ... In article , David Manzi (Bowzer) wrote: My basis for opinion is that I've never seen a pro using a Minolta. They need excellent quality optics, bodies that don't break down and can take a beating. Trust me, if Minoltas were "as good" as Nikons, pros would be using them. I agree with you Bowzer. Minolta can't touch Nikon. Just take a look at the Olympics. |
#4
|
|||
|
|||
Minolta vs Nikon??
In article ,
"Tony Spadaro" writes: You mean where 75% of all the photographers use Canon? Am I right in assuming that the choice is probally down to who makes the most useful lenses the size of the hubble space telescope and possbily image stabalised lenses? -- http://www.petezilla.co.uk |
#5
|
|||
|
|||
In article ,
"Tony Spadaro" writes: You mean where 75% of all the photographers use Canon? Am I right in assuming that the choice is probally down to who makes the most useful lenses the size of the hubble space telescope and possbily image stabalised lenses? -- http://www.petezilla.co.uk |
#6
|
|||
|
|||
In article ,
"Tony Spadaro" writes: You mean where 75% of all the photographers use Canon? Am I right in assuming that the choice is probally down to who makes the most useful lenses the size of the hubble space telescope and possbily image stabalised lenses? -- http://www.petezilla.co.uk |
#7
|
|||
|
|||
"Peter Chant" wrote in message
... In article , "Tony Spadaro" writes: You mean where 75% of all the photographers use Canon? Am I right in assuming that the choice is probally down to who makes the most useful lenses the size of the hubble space telescope and possbily image stabalised lenses? -- http://www.petezilla.co.uk That and supply the photogs with equipment at either no cost or at a discount. Nikon and Canon's efforts at pro support far outstrip Minolta's, which may have more to do with why you don't see many high visibility pros using Minolta cameras. Minolta makes a 300mm f2.8 and 600mm f4, an 70-200 f2.8, lacking only the ubiquitous 400mm f2.8 to fully equal the offerings from Canon and Nikon. Since Canon is the only one to offer IS in long teles, that would put Minolta and Nikon on a pretty even footing. And anyone who's ever handled a Maxxum9 will attest that it is fully as tank like as the 1v and F5... -- Skip Middleton http://www.shadowcatcherimagery.com |
#8
|
|||
|
|||
"Peter Chant" wrote in message
... In article , "Tony Spadaro" writes: You mean where 75% of all the photographers use Canon? Am I right in assuming that the choice is probally down to who makes the most useful lenses the size of the hubble space telescope and possbily image stabalised lenses? -- http://www.petezilla.co.uk That and supply the photogs with equipment at either no cost or at a discount. Nikon and Canon's efforts at pro support far outstrip Minolta's, which may have more to do with why you don't see many high visibility pros using Minolta cameras. Minolta makes a 300mm f2.8 and 600mm f4, an 70-200 f2.8, lacking only the ubiquitous 400mm f2.8 to fully equal the offerings from Canon and Nikon. Since Canon is the only one to offer IS in long teles, that would put Minolta and Nikon on a pretty even footing. And anyone who's ever handled a Maxxum9 will attest that it is fully as tank like as the 1v and F5... -- Skip Middleton http://www.shadowcatcherimagery.com |
#9
|
|||
|
|||
|
#10
|
|||
|
|||
|
|
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
Nikon Coolscan V vs Minolta DiMAGE Scan Elite 5400 | Fausto | Digital Photography | 1 | July 15th 04 10:59 AM |
MF Scanners - Nikon Coolscan 9000 v Minolta Scan Multi Pro? | Rod | Medium Format Photography Equipment | 3 | May 9th 04 11:15 PM |
Nikon 8000 demo unit vs. Nikon 8000 refurb vs. Nikon 9000 | JR | Medium Format Photography Equipment | 2 | April 10th 04 05:40 PM |
Nikon 8000 vs. Nikon 9000 vs. Minolta Scan Multi Pro | JR | Medium Format Photography Equipment | 1 | April 4th 04 09:04 AM |
Canon vs Nikon vs Minolta | Craig KB8FGC | APS Photographic Equipment | 14 | January 5th 04 03:24 PM |