To give up my Minolta or not

[balap]

I have a Minolta x300s and over the years have accumulated some accessories incl a motor wind, a Promaster 60-300mm zoom lens, another Fujiyama super wide macro apart from the original 35-70mm lens that came with my camera.
Here is the dilemma I am in, I need to move into a better camera :
1. Should I move to a better Minolta SLR or a Minolta Digital SLR - are there any trade in possibilities in the market here in Singapore ?

2. Should I give up Minolta and pick another brand SLR or digital SLR - again any trade in possibilities ?

I had bought this camera in 1996 and accessories over the next 2-3 years from then, I feel it is time to change and also what ever I pick up now, hope it lasts atleast another 5 years or so.

Any help / suggestions or pointers welcome,
Thanks

[yeocolin]

Maybe you should ask yourself the question- why do you need to upgrade your camera in the 1st place?

Many photographers, especially those in Europe, be it young or old, are toting around with manual cameras, rangefinders passed down from their fathers. I hope it isn't the peer pressure that is encouraging you to change to a newer camera/system.

Check out here for more minolta info: http://www.konicaminoltaphotoworld.com/photoworld.php

[XXX Boy]

It should be much more useful to upgrade your photographic skill rather than keep upgrading camera equipments.
Nowadays it become a very unhealthy trend of 'photographer' change cameras every here and now. Total waste of money and I really doubt that they really love photograhy and really into it or they are 'playing' with cameras?
It is just really funny to notice in some forum that some people already start to discuss about upgrading their Fujifilm S2pro to S3pro when it come out.
Spend more time taking more pictures with your existing equipment! A manual camera is the best way of picking photographic skill rather than relying in fully automatic cameras.

[clive]

wait for d7 to come out then give it a try

if by then u dont like then u can always give up minolta

[deslim27]

Originally Posted by balap I had bought this camera in 1996 and accessories over the next 2-3 years from then, I feel it is time to change and also what ever I pick up now, hope it lasts atleast another 5 years or so.

If you can another film SLR camera, no one can guarantee you that your favourite film will still be available 5 yrs down the road, or at least the ease of getting one. If you can a digital SLR, I think it will be become dinosaur before 5 yrs, but doesn't mean you can't use it anymore of course.

Since you have a chance for fresh start again, switch from MF to AF. I think you can take this opportunity to do some research on the currently systems available in the market, consider your special needs (if any), else most major brands should able to meet your requirement.

If possible, postpone your decision till Oct. Expecting new waves of cameras from many manufacturers by then, include Minolta 1st DSLR with Anti-Shake - 7D.

Cheers!
Des

[Picard]

Pardon me but I thought I'd never hear the name of the Minolta X300 again. It is a basic but good camera that started me onto photography some 20 years ago. I had many many wonderful moments with that humble but rugged machine but alas...when I went abroad I sold it for a Dynax 8000i...thereafter I felt that Minolta wasn't making much of a headway in photography unlike Nikon and Canon. Before returning to Singapore I sold it and converted the entire system to a Nikon. Yes...it was an expensive exercise but I have no regrets - seems like Minolta is still not getting it's act together. Pity....they are a good photographic company. Now I'm a proud owner of the Nikon D70 and have never looked back but then again, I would not have gone forward if it were not for the X300.

Heed the advice of those who posted before me. You've gotta know what you need the camera for. But having said all that, digital photography has come a long way and if you are just a normal guy with an avid interest in photography then going digital will definitely improve your skills by leaps and bounds. For one, you won't be too worried about cost of film and processing. Then, you get to see your results instantly, then take again if you're unhappy about it. Furthermore, the metadata provided by the camera helps you to improve as you adjust the exposure.

Sadly though...as I said...looks like Minolta doesn't have much of a following and lead in Singapore. BTW, I sold my X300 and Dynax 8000i whilst in Australia, the market there is wider and gives you a better price for your equipment. Over here...don't bother, people may just sell it on consignment for you and in the mean time it gets push further and further into the shelf space - not exactly a dignified way to go for a good camera.

I wish I'm a teenager again, picking-up photography in a time like this, with digital and all then...I'm sure I'd hang on to my X300. Having said all that, it is and will always be to me a humble, simple but damn good a camera to me.

Long live simplicity.
Cheers!

[balap]

Thanks for the suggestions so far. 2 things why I am thinking to change are actually :

1. Lenses - as deslim27 points out I need to switch from MF to AF, it is getting difficult to get lens and more importantly dont know how long it would be around to be serviced etc. Pl let me know if my impressions are correct on this one or I am being stupid

2.To shoot more and experiment with less $ -given the $ and time taken for using film camera I am tempted to think I will do more with digital SLR.

Makes sense ? or wrong reasons based on your experience....

[deslim27]

Originally Posted by balap 1. Lenses - as deslim27 points out I need to switch from MF to AF, it is getting difficult to get lens and more importantly dont know how long it would be around to be serviced etc. Pl let me know if my impressions are correct on this one or I am being stupid :

I'm not quite sure your point here.. Anyway, Minolta MF lenses are not compatible with AF body, you've to buy new lens for the new camera.

Originally Posted by balap 2.To shoot more and experiment with less $ -given the $ and time taken for using film camera I am tempted to think I will do more with digital SLR. Makes sense ? or wrong reasons based on your experience....

Many commented that they actually very much more with digital than with film. Faster turnaround, flexible and easier post processing..

You've to workout the total for both film and digital based on your likely usage for the next 3 years and see whichever is cost effective. Be mindful, that going digital is not just buying a digital body, post process can cost quite a bit, like good PC/Monitor, memory card, storage : CD-RW writer, HDD, printer, paper, ink blah blah..

Just my 0.01.

[wingless84]

i'm not so sure about the "Brand superiority" issue, however. I mean, everyone has reasons to support their claim that one brand is better than another, but i think that film photography has come to a point where, for 99%-100% of the photos you are ever going to take, all you need are basic functions and a good understanding of your equipment. That's more important, really, than flashy functions and whatnot that define the "high end" cameras. What matters more is that you're comfortable with what you're using and that you are happy with the results.

if one brand has served you well, why not stick with the brand anyway? furthermore, konica-minolta does really have mid-range cameras (think Dynax 7 or 60) that are value for money. Ultimately, as with all cameras, the lens is far more important than the body.

if you shoot often enough, (i think there's a thread in CS somewhere with the exact calculations) switching to a digital workflow might indeed be more cost-effective and serve you better in the long run. That doesn't mean, however, that you should abandon film entirely, ya

[dkw]

Originally Posted by balap Thanks for the suggestions so far. 2 things why I am thinking to change are actually : 1. Lenses - as deslim27 points out I need to switch from MF to AF, it is getting difficult to get lens and more importantly dont know how long it would be around to be serviced etc. Pl let me know if my impressions are correct on this one or I am being stupid 2.To shoot more and experiment with less $ -given the $ and time taken for using film camera I am tempted to think I will do more with digital SLR. Makes sense ? or wrong reasons based on your experience....

It partly depends on your current level of skill. If you are an amateur with some basic knowledge of photography, and keen to continue improving, I tell you going digital is THE BEST FAVOUR you can do for yourself. It allows instant feedback, you have EXIF data to see what settings you shot, you can edit in photoshop to see what effects you like (and adopt them next time you shoot), you can try different perspectives AFTER you shoot. It has just become sooooo much easier to learn photography. I've learnt much more in the last 8 months shooting DSLR than I did in the 8 years before that shooting film.

Since I started following digital photography forums regularly about a year ago, I have seen some folk who started out as real beginners (1st SLR), and in a space of that year become soooo incredibly good that they even got published in their local magazines. I kid you not, there are at least 2 examples I have seen. To have done it with film would have taken a lot longer (if at all!), and probably would have been ruinously expensive.

As for current systems, you can probably get well started for about $2.2-2.4K or so (cam, couple of lenses, cards etc.). The current DSLR makers are Canon, Nikon, Fujifilm, Pentax, Kodak and Olympus. K-M have got one lined up but goodness knows when that will become available. At this time, only Canon and Nikon offer DSLR bodies under $2K. I shoot Canon personally, but the Nikon D70 is also a very capable system.

Dun wait already.....join the club!