![]() |
|
|||||||
| Front Page News Latest happenings and developments. |
|
|
|
|
Thread Tools |
|
|
#1 |
|
Senior Member
Join Date: Jan 2002
Location: BB
Posts: 2,622
|
"Feeding back the voice of the customer for the current product, the
high performance which improves efficiency * functional * operativity substantially it is the large aperture lens. We loaded the ultrasonic motor for the first time as a lens of this corporation." Taken from : http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Minolta/message/44028 ![]() Last edited by ninelives; 19th March 2002 at 05:28 PM. |
|
|
|
|
#2 |
|
Member
Join Date: Mar 2002
Posts: 1,274
|
Hehehehe... they're making progress, but they're just about 15 years behind Canon. (300/2.8L USM in 1987)
|
|
|
|
|
#3 |
|
Senior Member
Join Date: Jan 2002
Location: BB
Posts: 2,622
|
ermm, u thought they can't make USM 15 years ago?
reason is because Minolta motor is in the body and not the lens. hence, they can sell better lens at cheaper rate. minolta user don't have problem with AF speed even those there is no motor in the lens, because their motor in the body is big.big mean faster. any engineer here? Last edited by ninelives; 19th March 2002 at 09:32 PM. |
|
|
| Sponsored Link |
|
|
#4 | |
|
Member
Join Date: Jan 2002
Location: Lion City
Posts: 708
|
![]() |
|
|
|
|
|
#5 | |
|
Senior Member
Join Date: Jan 2002
Location: BB
Posts: 2,622
|
wat about nikon and canon? is usm much expensive than non-usm? |
|
|
|
|
|
#6 | |
|
Member
Join Date: Jan 2002
Location: Lion City
Posts: 708
|
![]() |
|
|
|
|
|
#7 | |
|
ClubSNAP Admin
Join Date: Jan 2002
Location: ClubSNAP
Posts: 2,030
|
I think the only reason that Minolta didn't put any motor in its lenses is because of the way its camera system was designed, i.e. no real need for an additional motor in the lens itself. |
|
|
|
|
|
#8 | |
|
Senior Member
Join Date: Jan 2002
Location: BB
Posts: 2,622
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
#9 | |
|
ClubSNAP Admin
Join Date: Jan 2002
Location: ClubSNAP
Posts: 2,030
|
Corrected it liao.. |
|
|
|
|
|
#10 |
|
Member
Join Date: Mar 2002
Posts: 1,274
|
Personally, I love USM lenses. It's good to see some competition to Canon, else they will be sitting on their laurels doing nothing.
Tried some body driven lenses (28-105 Nikkor and 70-300 Nikkor) on a friend's F90x, but after using USM lenses, it is a pain to use non-USM lenses, specially the noisy body driven Nikkors. The point is not really whether the motor is in the body or the lens, but the advantage USM motors have : they are absolutely silent, very fast, silky smooth operating and allow full time manual focusing. It would be great to see Minolta come up with some low end affordable consumer range USM lenses like Canon's 24-85, 28-105, 20-35, etc. Nice, fast and affordable, and most people can afford these. Any idea about compatibility with existing bodies, or are they going to mess it all up like Nikon? |
|
|
|
|
#11 | |
|
Senior Member
Join Date: Jan 2002
Location: BB
Posts: 2,622
|
Well.......... |
|
|
|
|
|
#12 | |
|
Member
Join Date: Mar 2002
Posts: 1,274
|
Some details there, but it is in Japanese. Yeah, it's a shame that their top of the line camera won't work with the SSM lenses. It is very strange, since the SSM lenses listed are all pro f/2.8 zooms and a 300/2.8, which are more likely to be used by pros with a Dynax 9. Looks like they are going the Nikon way ![]() |
|
|
|
|
|
#13 |
|
Member
Join Date: Jan 2002
Posts: 1,539
|
I'm not sure if anyone here would agree with me, but just entertain me for a while.... USM is not faster than screwdriver lenses all the time, but USM gives the impression of faster AF due to the lack of sound... what do you guys think ?
__________________
36frames Wedding Photography - http://www.36frames.com rueyloon - http://www.rueyloon.com |
|
|
|
|
#14 | ||
|
ClubSNAP Admin
Join Date: Jan 2002
Location: ClubSNAP
Posts: 2,030
|
)PS: Do note that some of the gibberish are there because of their Japanese names.
|
||
|
|
|
|
#15 | |
|
ClubSNAP Admin
Join Date: Jan 2002
Location: ClubSNAP
Posts: 2,030
|
The screwdriver lens setup with its complex linkage is inefficient and loud. This is because the same camera motor (read:generic) is used to move all types of lenses, however large or small. Hence, this motor (not optimized for specific lenses, unlike those lenses with USM, AF-S), will be either too slow (when coupled with a big lens), or waste too much power (when coupled with a tiny lens). In your case, you'll have to use both the non AF-S & AF-S versions to see for yourself. The sound is still there, just alot more muted in comparison. |
|
|
|
|
|
#16 | |
|
Senior Member
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: Perth Australia
Posts: 2,331
|
AF Nikkors that are IF designs have less glass and weight to push around than the non IF versions which leads to a noticable AF response improvement. However the mechanical linkage on the Nikon body is demonstrably slower than an AFS lens on the same body. The older non D lenses that I've tried are also more sluggish compared to the later D series, indicating Nikon may have changed the internal gearing ratio of the drive system. Judicial use of focus limiting improves AF focus speed, but it also improves the AFS lens speed so the performance ratio remains similar. There are also major differences in the internal motors of various bodies, the F4 and F5 have far more powerful motors that focus faster than the, F70 etc. Reference: Field testing involving a direct comparison between: F4s, F5, F70 bodies, 80-200/2.8 AF-D (one ring), 80-200/2.8 AFn-D (two ring), 80-200/2.8 AFS lenses tested plus 28-70/3.5-4.5 and 28-70/2.8 AFS using min-focus to infinity and moving targets
__________________
The Ang Moh from Hell |
|
|
|
|
|
#17 | |
|
Member
Join Date: Mar 2002
Posts: 1,274
|
See if you can get your hands on an 85/1.8 USM or a 100 f/2 USM. Use it with ANY Canon EOS and see how fast it focuses. I haven't seen any screwdriver lens come close to that speed. |
|
|
|
|
|
#18 |
|
Senior Member
Join Date: Jan 2002
Location: BB
Posts: 2,622
|
Below is copied from yahoo-minolta group :
The difference is between USM and non-USM simply that a USM motor uses piezoelectric effect to move the focus, whereas the non-USM lenses use more conventional electric motors, albeit so-called arc-form.. ____ Is that right???? |
|
|
|
|
#19 | |
|
Member
Join Date: Mar 2002
Posts: 208
|
Dunno abt Minolta but Canon older lenses use AFD arc form drive motor. But it is probably different with screwdriver blade motor in body rite? Another diff is with USM you can use AF and MF at the same time without switching. means in AF mode you can still turn the MF ring and focus manually at the same time. You wont damage the AF mechanism at all. If try this with conventional lens by mistake, then AF mechanism is screwed. |
|
|
|
|
|
#20 | |
|
ClubSNAP Admin
Join Date: Jan 2002
Location: ClubSNAP
Posts: 2,030
|
However, do note that while turning the focusing ring of lenses with micro USM (with AF activated) has no effect on the focusing part, it will not damage the motor either. (Although I don't suggest you do it too often. ) |
|
|
|
![]() |
| Bookmarks |
| Thread Tools | |
|