KM 5D or nikon D50?

[drew_viii]

hello guys, bout to buy my own dslr camera now, but still confuse on which one to buy hehe... well bit excited but i really want to have a good DSLR camera... but of course, for a starter photographer, i need to get something cheap but nice... so been looking through the net and now ive narrowed down to 2 choices, konica mnolta 5D or the nikon D50? both are good cameras based on the reviews,and i love both cameras, but still having dilemmas, well, ive considered the canon rebel xt or 350D but its out of budget... do you guys think its worth for the wait to get the 350D? ooopss getting out the topic, well need your opinion guys... thank you :)

[coldrain]

All DSLR's are quite good. The EOS 350D/XT is good to, with its own advantages. If the 150$ or so it costs more is a problem, are you sure you should get a DSLR? A DSLR only performs good with good lenses, and you probably need more than one lens. So, just the body price is not all.
Canon does have a great lens line up, from Canon itself and from Tokina/Tamron/Sigma, and it comes with good RAW conversion software... Nikon charges 100$ extra for theirs, KM's RAW conversion software is not so great so you will have to look around which suits the KM best.

[George Riehm]

hello guys, bout to buy my own dslr camera now, but still confuse on which one to buy hehe... well bit excited but i really want to have a good DSLR camera... but of course, for a starter photographer, i need to get something cheap but nice... so been looking through the net and now ive narrowed down to 2 choices, konica mnolta 5D or the nikon D50? both are good cameras based on the reviews,and i love both cameras, but still having dilemmas, well, ive considered the canon rebel xt or 350D but its out of budget... do you guys think its worth for the wait to get the 350D? ooopss getting out the topic, well need your opinion guys... thank you :)

The nice part about deciding on a dSLR is that you can't make a wrong decision. With Konica Minolta closing their doors you might be able to find some good deals.

Like Canon, there are a lot of very nice lens choices for Nikon and Minolta from 3rd party and internal sources. If you can get past the 350D's ergonomics then it is a marginally better choice for overall image quality, but I doubt that you would notice it, even on an 8 x 10 print.

[drew_viii]

woah i see... tnx for your suggestions guys, well ive decided to save my money for a month to get my canon rebel xt or canon eos 350D, by the im located in london, so we call canon 350D not rebel xt...

bad thing here is there not a lots of good deals of canon around here in london, most of the prices are the same, but you could get some extra packages like free tripods and bags etc with the same price, so thats what im doing now, researching which shops has the best deal... ive look on this shop at ebay.co.uk digirev, thye have good free stuffs and good price, well they normally charged you extra 50 to 60 pounds for the shipping and insurance, so generally its almost the same on the market price.

[capedeci]

dont buy the 350d if you dont want to turn pro and spend thousands on lenses.

KM5D offer IS at no extra cost on all lens, slower performance, but not really noticeable probably, and have choices of all in one 18-200 lenses, given that the body give IS to them, its perfect for beginners.

[coldrain]

dont buy the 350d if you dont want to turn pro and spend thousands on lenses.

KM5D offer IS at no extra cost on all lens, slower performance, but not really noticeable probably, and have choices of all in one 18-200 lenses, given that the body give IS to them, its perfect for beginners.
What sillyness is that? You have to pay more for pro lenses with Minolta, IF they have an equivalent lens anyway. Pro does not mean IS, and there are a lot of lenses for a Canon (or Nikon) that Minolta does not have an equivalent lens for.

So, just as it is fine for you to choose a KM, it is finer for others to choose a Canon EOS 350D. Just like I did. With a bit better image quality.

[beachluvr]

With Konica Minolta closing their doors you might be able to find some good deals.

It would probably be a big surprise to Konica Minolta to hear they are "closing their doors" Careful what you say ...

Also not true about the "good deals", those who know what they are getting are scrambling to buy up the remaining cameras with the Konica Minolta name before there is a big Sony logo plastered over it. Street prices for the few remaining cameras has gone through the roof for both bodies and lenses.

[capedeci]

What sillyness is that? You have to pay more for pro lenses with Minolta, IF they have an equivalent lens anyway. Pro does not mean IS, and there are a lot of lenses for a Canon (or Nikon) that Minolta does not have an equivalent lens for.

:confused: sorry if I misunderstand ur post (im not English sepaker), but I think you misread my post? I said "if" u dont want to go pro and spend lots in lenses, then buy minolta. (As in minolta, we can get all in one lens added with IS, which is a very nice solution for newbies and casual hobby). Then 'if' u want to go more 'pro' then go to canon, as you can buy many L lenses which are better.

[coldrain]

It would probably be a big surprise to Konica Minolta to hear they are "closing their doors" Careful what you say ...

Also not true about the "good deals", those who know what they are getting are scrambling to buy up the remaining cameras with the Konica Minolta name before there is a big Sony logo plastered over it. Street prices for the few remaining cameras has gone through the roof for both bodies and lenses.
Well, KM IS closing their doors on the SLR part. That they will continue making lenses is something else. That Sony will make DSLR's with Minolta mount too. You will not see a 5D and/or 7D with Sony logo. What you will see is new DSLR cameras from Sony with KM mount and KM moving sensor technology.

I fail to see what is wrong with what George said, he meant the camera part, not the industrial optics or any other part.

[beachluvr]

I fail to see what is wrong with what George said, he meant the camera part, not the industrial optics or any other part.

There are companies who go out of business and their parts availability/tech support/compatibility standards all disappear. In KM's case that is not true. As far as being a viable company, they are still strong and definitely in business. As far as support for their products and technology, they took great pains to transfer that responsibility to one of the largest electronics companies in the world. They already had a long-term working relationship with Sony (who also makes image sensors for many other "name" brand cameras like Nikon). I don't expect Sony to rebadge the 5D or 7D, they were already nearing end-of-life. Perhaps they will introduce the 9D as-is with a Sony logo on it.

The point is that there are tons of people buying the 7D and 5D because they recognize they are class leaders and they believe Sony's acquisition will assure support and compatibility for many years to come.

Then there are people who are scared that KM went out of business. I've seen a few people at other sites who are desparately trying to sell their KM cameras because they think they are screwed. I think it's important not to fester those misconceptions. If a KM camera is the right choice for someone they will likely get just as much support as someone who chooses a Nikon or Canon.

Remember, Nikon just exited most 35mm cameras and a couple years ago they got out of low end digital cameras (yes, that's right, that "Nikon" logo on their point-and-shoots is by license to some company, or companies, that are not even part of Nikon).

[capedeci]

really? that licensed company must be pretty good, wonder why they didnt establish a new brand...

[coldrain]

The point is that there are tons of people buying the 7D and 5D because they recognize they are class leaders and they believe Sony's acquisition will assure support and compatibility for many years to come.

Whoever thinks that the 7D and 5D are class leaders is confused. You may well like the 7D for its user interface, or the 5D and 7D for their IS in body, but what they are not are class leaders.

One can not lead a class with the worst image quality of DSLRs. I know you will contest this, but you will not base your opinion on facts. In terms of image quality, the EOS 20D and 5D are for instance class leaders. In terms of completeness the Nikon D200 is a class leader. In terms of entry level image quality, the EOS 350D and D50 are the class leaders. In terms of RAW software, Nikon and Canon are the class leaders. In terms of choice of good lenses, Canon and Nikon are class leaders. In terms of low noise, the EOS 20D and 5D are class leaders. In terms of artifact freeness of JPEGS Olympus and Pentax are class leaders.

Besides the UI and the AS, KM has nothing over their competitors. So, that you choose that because of that is fine, but don't go on saying they are better than the others, they simply are not.

[coldrain]

really? that licensed company must be pretty good, wonder why they didnt establish a new brand...
No, not really...they are Nikons.

[beachluvr]

No, not really...they are Nikons.

You are correct, the "Nikon" brand name is stamped on them but they're not made by Nikon. It may surprise you that Zeiss does not "make" the optics for Sony and that Leica does not "make" the lenses for Panasonic. And that Sony makes CCD sensors for Canon, Fuji, Minolta, Nikon and other products.

[beachluvr]

One can not lead a class with the worst image quality of DSLRs.

It's best to try to keep opinions on forums like this unbiased and unopinionated. Broad sweeping statements like that are not only untrue but do a huge disservice to people who may feel uncomfortable with the plethora of choices in digital cameras. I for one would like to know your source for such a statement, it directly conflicts with opinions from DCRP, DP Review, Steve's Digicams, LetsGoDigital, DC Views, Megapixel, etc. plus more owner reviews than I can count at CNET, Amazon, Bizrate, etc.

The reality is most people do think the D5 and D7 are viable contenders. Since the CCD is made by Sony, who also makes chips for many other popular names like Nikon and Canon, it would be hard to believe they purposely make a "bad" chip for KM (especially since they just took over much of their technology).

Reality is that Nikon, Canon, Olympus, Pentax, etc. all make fine cameras and that any assertion that KM has the "worst image quality" is ridiculous, especially from the owner of Canon's lowest end DSLR. Nearly every post of yours mentions RAW quality. That is a professional feature that most sub-$1000 DSLR users will never (and maybe should never) use. It's is not even in the top 20 things to look for in evaluating an entry level camera.

Comparing the 7D and 5D to the EOS20D, D200 and Canon 5D doesn't make any sense. Comparing it to the others is completely subject to opinion, as many of the paid professional reviewers have see-sawed between them in terms of image quality (I have never seen a review that calls KM bad), noise (most reviews give it glowing compliments), body construction (usually rated as class leader), lenses (hard to argue with someone who believes Canon and Nikon lenses are "better" than Minolta ... that's EVERY lens ever made???).

Let's leave the opinions at home and the facts to the professional reviewers and offer fair feedback to people who ask valid questions. These are all good cameras ... good photographs are taken by people, not equipment.

[erichlund]

Nearly every post of yours mentions RAW quality. That is a professional feature that most sub-$1000 DSLR users will never (and maybe should never) use. It's is not even in the top 20 things to look for in evaluating an entry level camera.

Let's leave the opinions at home and the facts to the professional reviewers and offer fair feedback to people who ask valid questions. These are all good cameras ... good photographs are taken by people, not equipment.
D70s is under $1000, but it's best used in RAW. In fact, it's jpgs are often, and with some justification, criticized. Not that the user cannot compensate.

Frankly, every dSLR owner should at least strive to understand how to use RAW to their advantage. If they then choose not to use it, that's OK, but all the cameras have it, and to ignore it because it's "pro" is to throw away capability. Understanding RAW can lead to better use of jpg. For instance, in RAW, you can change white balance in post processing, so you can see what different white balance settings have on a given photo situation. Knowing this, you can more confidently apply the correct settings when shooting jpg, where if you get the white balance wrong, you have to make direct color corrections (much harder to do).

An example: A sunset. What's the correct white balance setting? It's not auto. That will compensate for the warm light and give you a dull, flat sunset. No, daylight is the correct starting point. The normal daylight setting is for a slightly cool, nearly neutral light, which will cause the camera to warm things up a tiny bit, so the warm sunset will be enhanced. Of course, this is just a starting point. It would also be good to bracket white balance about such a shot, enabling choice of the best white balance. If you never experiment with RAW, then you have to get this sort of information somewhere else, like here or a book or class (or the school of hard knocks).

Then there's the fact that RAW gives advantages in most cameras in bits of data per pixel. This doesn't increase dynamic range, that's a sensor and processing issue, but it does increase the gradations of color between white and black, which can lead to more accurate colors.

Of course, you have to be willing to get the software to use RAW processing. The software provided with Nikon and KM cameras is pretty pathetic. KM, you pretty much have to go third party. Nikon has a couple alternatives, View and Capture. View is fair and free. Capture is very good and a one time purchase. Canon, from what I understand, provides at least decent RAW software. I don't know about the other brands.

Why did I go into all this? Because you passed your OPINION on RAW, clearly without any clear understanding of how valuable it is specifically to the new dSLR user. The example I gave is clearly for a person learning to use the camera. The pro already knows how to set up a sunset.

[George Riehm]

It would probably be a big surprise to Konica Minolta to hear they are "closing their doors" Careful what you say ...

Also not true about the "good deals", those who know what they are getting are scrambling to buy up the remaining cameras with the Konica Minolta name before there is a big Sony logo plastered over it. Street prices for the few remaining cameras has gone through the roof for both bodies and lenses.

Announcing that you are shutting down the camera and photo business units and transferring IP, systems, and business responsibility to Sony sure sounds like they are closing their doors to me. The phrase may or may not be taken litterally, but the meaning is clear. The KM OA group (copiers, etc.) may still be going, but the entire phtography business unit is gone. In a year or two it will be as if it never existed.

People paying a premium for these cameras prove that PT Barnum was right. What they are getting is a discontinued brand, of average quality. Hardly collectors items.

In closing, I would expect the Sony branded models to be every bit as good (and hopefully better) than the KM branded dSLR's.

[coldrain]

You obviously have a problem reading, especially where your own choice of camera is concerned. Your knee jerking reaction is not very factual.

It's best to try to keep opinions on forums like this unbiased and unopinionated. Broad sweeping statements like that are not only untrue but do a huge disservice to people who may feel uncomfortable with the plethora of choices in digital cameras. I for one would like to know your source for such a statement, it directly conflicts with opinions from DCRP, DP Review, Steve's Digicams, LetsGoDigital, DC Views, Megapixel, etc. plus more owner reviews than I can count at CNET, Amazon, Bizrate, etc.
Which of these "professional" reviews compared cameras side by side? Probably only dpreview. Owners "reviews"? Get real, owners opinions maybe.

The reality is most people do think the D5 and D7 are viable contenders. Since the CCD is made by Sony, who also makes chips for many other popular names like Nikon and Canon, it would be hard to believe they purposely make a "bad" chip for KM (especially since they just took over much of their technology).
Viable contenders? Mostly a good alternative for minolta lens owners. With IS in the body, its plus point. Bad chip? The 6.1 mp Sony is not as good as Canon's 8.2 and 8.0mp sensors, and the results from KM, Nikon and Pentax with it vary wildly. In colour accuracy, resulting resolution, artifacts, white balance accuracy, contrast, file size. If you want to think the sensor is the only factor, be my guest.

Reality is that Nikon, Canon, Olympus, Pentax, etc. all make fine cameras and that any assertion that KM has the "worst image quality" is ridiculous, especially from the owner of Canon's lowest end DSLR. Nearly every post of yours mentions RAW quality. That is a professional feature that most sub-$1000 DSLR users will never (and maybe should never) use. It's is not even in the top 20 things to look for in evaluating an entry level camera.
Why especially from "the owner of Canon's lowest end DSLR"? Now THAT is a ridiculous remark. And since you seem to read a lot, you must know they often come to the conclusion the 350D comes very close the the 20D.

Comparing the 7D and 5D to the EOS20D, D200 and Canon 5D doesn't make any sense.
The KM 5D, no. The KM 7D, most certainly. The KM 7D was introduced at about the same time as the 20D, for about the same price, and targeting the same group as the 20D and Nikon D100 (advanced amateur/semi pro).
The D100 got succeeded with the D200, so still a valid arguement. The 5D is targetted to the same group, but with an expensive (and great) full frame sensor. That they had to downprize the 7D drastically to get it sold, does not change that.

Comparing it to the others is completely subject to opinion, as many of the paid professional reviewers have see-sawed between them in terms of image quality (I have never seen a review that calls KM bad), noise (most reviews give it glowing compliments), body construction (usually rated as class leader), lenses (hard to argue with someone who believes Canon and Nikon lenses are "better" than Minolta ... that's EVERY lens ever made???).
I never said every lens from Nikon and Canon is better, I just said that they have more good lenses available, something that is hard to dispute.


Let's leave the opinions at home and the facts to the professional reviewers and offer fair feedback to people who ask valid questions. These are all good cameras ... good photographs are taken by people, not equipment.
Your feedback was that KM's were class leaders. That makes YOUR feedback not fair, even silly.
Want facts from professional reviewers? Ok.

Foto Magazin Sept. 2005
Comparing semi pro cameras, with high quality zoom lenses from the respective manufacturer.
Canon EOS 20D: 83.9 points in lab test.
KM 7D: 70.5 points in lab test.
Olympus E1: 69.3 in lab test.

The older E1 (5mp) scores almost the same as the 7D!!

Even more telling, they tested the entry level cameras too, but with their respective kit lenses. Two entry level cameras with the same sensor scored better in their points system than the KM 7D with a better lens:
Nikon D50: 75.3 points in lab test.
Pentax *istDS: 72.3 points in lab test.

KM 7D class leading indeed :rolleyes:

Foto Magazin feb. 2005
20D, 7D, S3 Pro, E-300, *istDS tested. Only camera where they mentioned a downside about picture quality in the minus point list: KM 7D. It exhibits a slight moire and artifact tendency with critical motives.

KM 7D class leading indeed :rolleyes:

Color Foto nov. 2005
Compared 14 DSLR's, tested with single focal lenght macro lenses from the respective companies.
In their lab test point system, this is how they rated (ISO 100 or 200/ISO 400):
Canon EOS 300D: 50/43.5
Canon EOS 350D: 54/48
Canon EOS 20D: 54/49

KM 5D: 48/42.5
KM 7D: 48/42

Nikon D50: 53.5/48
Nikon D70: 54/48.5
Nikon D70s: 54/47.5

Olympus E-300: 50/38.5

Pentax *istD: 48/40
Pentax *istDL: 47.5/44.5
Pentax *istDS: 49/47

Sigma SD10: 45.5/49

Of course the point systems used can be debatable, but on the whole they do give a good idea of how each camera performs. I am the last person to say KM DSLR's are crap. You seem to think I have said that. But I only rebuted your ridiculous claim that KM is class leading. They are anything but class leading, except in IS in body, if one finds that the most important aspect of a DSLR.

If you would actually read my posts, not just from today, but more often, you would know I am not negative about KM. I am just not a KM fan boy like how you are acting on the moment. I know that Sony's 6.1mp chip is not the greatest of all sensors in DSLR's today, and that both Pentax and Nikon get more out of it on the whole. I know that the lens selection for KM is rather small, and the really good lenses from KM are few and far between. Sure, the body of the KM 7D impresses me, its a nice concept. It is also a lot heavier and larger than the entry cameras, and that can be seen as a downside for a lot of people. And also not unimportant, it is an energy slurper... it uses 60 watts (the KM 5D 47.2 watts) where the 350D uses 13.3 watts, the Pentax *istDS uses 22.3 watts and the D50 uses 37 watts.

KM 5D & 7D, class leading indeed :rolleyes:
All in all, it is your posts that are biased and opinionated.

[beachluvr]

Actually I totally agree with every word about RAW. It's not my opinion that it's a bad thing, on the contrary it is something very important and should be used where ever appropriate. It would be wonderful for the new DSLR user to gain as much insight into the technique as well as the art of photography as possible.

My point, and I apologize if I didn't make it clear, is that there are many good DSLR cameras in the market, ranging from about $700 with lens to well over $5000. None of them are inherently "good" or "bad", excellence in photography is not determined by the hardware. Utilizing RAW capture is not something that a new user of a low-priced DSLR will normally (or maybe should normally) be doing while shooting pictures of the kids, the dog, vacations, hobbies, and the myriad things people who are not purists, techies or semi-pro photographers will shoot.

Read the requests for help in this forum ... a large number of them are confused about buying their first camera and telling them that one brand sucks and another is "best" is just wrong. Telling them a feature like VR/AS is not valuable for those one-in-a-lifetime kids pics is just the opposite of what they need to hear is wrong. Telling them that one camera brand should be chosen over another because of how its RAW mode is managed is wrong. Oh, by the way, I do believe KM offers a "professional" version DiMage Master just like Nikon does ... their website lists it for $199. I haven't used the Lite version of DiMage Master so I don't know if it's RAW tools are good or bad. Buying such software and/or PhotoShop is likely not something someone who buys a $700 camera wants to do.

The whole reason there IS a category of DSLRs that cost more than $1000 is for those people who have a need to worry about jpg artifacts and post-processing and fine details of coloremetry. Remember there are people who don't even have a DSLR, let alone the latest version of Adobe PhotoShop.

[capedeci]

hey hey, is KM really that bad? Actually what made KM lost to the contenders? Can you justify please? Is it speed, image quality, etc.? But I love IS, even the 33000$ hasselblad came with no IS, so I still cant use it anyway

You obviously have a problem reading, especially where your own choice of camera is concerned. Your knee jerking reaction is not very factual.


Which of these "professional" reviews compared cameras side by side? Probably only dpreview. Owners "reviews"? Get real, owners opinions maybe.


Viable contenders? Mostly a good alternative for minolta lens owners. With IS in the body, its plus point. Bad chip? The 6.1 mp Sony is not as good as Canon's 8.2 and 8.0mp sensors, and the results from KM, Nikon and Pentax with it vary wildly. In colour accuracy, resulting resolution, artifacts, white balance accuracy, contrast, file size. If you want to think the sensor is the only factor, be my guest.


Why especially from "the owner of Canon's lowest end DSLR"? Now THAT is a ridiculous remark. And since you seem to read a lot, you must know they often come to the conclusion the 350D comes very close the the 20D.


The KM 5D, no. The KM 7D, most certainly. The KM 7D was introduced at about the same time as the 20D, for about the same price, and targeting the same group as the 20D and Nikon D100 (advanced amateur/semi pro).
The D100 got succeeded with the D200, so still a valid arguement. The 5D is targetted to the same group, but with an expensive (and great) full frame sensor. That they had to downprize the 7D drastically to get it sold, does not change that.


I never said every lens from Nikon and Canon is better, I just said that they have more good lenses available, something that is hard to dispute.


Your feedback was that KM's were class leaders. That makes YOUR feedback not fair, even silly.
Want facts from professional reviewers? Ok.

Foto Magazin Sept. 2005
Comparing semi pro cameras, with high quality zoom lenses from the respective manufacturer.
Canon EOS 20D: 83.9 points in lab test.
KM 7D: 70.5 points in lab test.
Olympus E1: 69.3 in lab test.

The older E1 (5mp) scores almost the same as the 7D!!

Even more telling, they tested the entry level cameras too, but with their respective kit lenses. Two entry level cameras with the same sensor scored better in their points system than the KM 7D with a better lens:
Nikon D50: 75.3 points in lab test.
Pentax *istDS: 72.3 points in lab test.

KM 7D class leading indeed :rolleyes:

Foto Magazin feb. 2005
20D, 7D, S3 Pro, E-300, *istDS tested. Only camera where they mentioned a downside about picture quality in the minus point list: KM 7D. It exhibits a slight moire and artifact tendency with critical motives.

KM 7D class leading indeed :rolleyes:

Color Foto nov. 2005
Compared 14 DSLR's, tested with single focal lenght macro lenses from the respective companies.
In their lab test point system, this is how they rated (ISO 100 or 200/ISO 400):
Canon EOS 300D: 50/43.5
Canon EOS 350D: 54/48
Canon EOS 20D: 54/49

KM 5D: 48/42.5
KM 7D: 48/42

Nikon D50: 53.5/48
Nikon D70: 54/48.5
Nikon D70s: 54/47.5

Olympus E-300: 50/38.5

Pentax *istD: 48/40
Pentax *istDL: 47.5/44.5
Pentax *istDS: 49/47

Sigma SD10: 45.5/49

Of course the point systems used can be debatable, but on the whole they do give a good idea of how each camera performs. I am the last person to say KM DSLR's are crap. You seem to think I have said that. But I only rebuted your ridiculous claim that KM is class leading. They are anything but class leading, except in IS in body, if one finds that the most important aspect of a DSLR.

If you would actually read my posts, not just from today, but more often, you would know I am not negative about KM. I am just not a KM fan boy like how you are acting on the moment. I know that Sony's 6.1mp chip is not the greatest of all sensors in DSLR's today, and that both Pentax and Nikon get more out of it on the whole. I know that the lens selection for KM is rather small, and the really good lenses from KM are few and far between. Sure, the body of the KM 7D impresses me, its a nice concept. It is also a lot heavier and larger than the entry cameras, and that can be seen as a downside for a lot of people. And also not unimportant, it is an energy slurper... it uses 60 watts (the KM 5D 47.2 watts) where the 350D uses 13.3 watts, the Pentax *istDS uses 22.3 watts and the D50 uses 37 watts.

KM 5D & 7D, class leading indeed :rolleyes:
All in all, it is your posts that are biased and opinionated.

[beachluvr]

hey hey, is KM really that bad? Actually what made KM lost to the contenders? Can you justify please? Is it speed, image quality, etc.? But I love IS, even the 33000$ hasselblad came with no IS, so I still cant use it anyway

Capedeci

No the KM cameras are not bad, to the contrary they have many happy owners. It can be compared to something like Mac computers vs Windows. Neither is bad nor good but each camp seems to hate the other. I bought my 5D for a specific reason and I haven't used it yet, I just received the lens today. I truly belive that in-camera anti-shake is brilliant and it appears to be ticking the other brand-loyal users off royally. Otherwise for anything a normal person would do with a camera in its price range both the 5D and 7D lead their class in several features and represent a great value in the market.

Oh, and I can't believe when one of the largest electronics companies in history chooses to acquire the technology of Konica Minolta over all others that KM "lost". It sounds more to me like we all "won".

[coldrain]

Capedeci

No the KM cameras are not bad, to the contrary they have many happy owners. It can be compared to something like Mac computers vs Windows. Neither is bad nor good but each camp seems to hate the other. I bought my 5D for a specific reason and I haven't used it yet, I just received the lens today. I truly belive that in-camera anti-shake is brilliant and it appears to be ticking the other brand-loyal users off royally. Otherwise for anything a normal person would do with a camera in its price range both the 5D and 7D lead their class in several features and represent a great value in the market.

Oh, and I can't believe when one of the largest electronics companies in history chooses to acquire the technology of Konica Minolta over all others that KM "lost". It sounds more to me like we all "won".
You do have a problem reading, don't you?
It is YOU who gets pissed off royally when someone dares to say KM does not lead their class. And it is your unfunded arguements which actually make no sense that irritates others, and it has nothing to do with what camera they own.
And there you go again, with your "class leading". KM does not lead any class, except that they have put IS in the body. And KM did lose, they could not sell their cameras to enough customers to keep themselves viable. Not only in the DSLR market but also in the compact digital market.

First Konica and Minolta were both players in the digital camera market. They merged because they did not do well, and that merger did more bad than good, especially when they introduced a DSLR (finally... they were much too late, most pro Minolta SLR users had already switched to Canon DSLR's and Nikon D1's). The two brand name did not go down well, they maybe should have kept the DSLRs with just the Minolta name.

That Sony needs a mount system with available lenses is the reason Sony went to cooperate with KM. Not because KM is the best, but because KM is the only one available. That KM agreed has to do with the state of their business. Not that they wanted to make a deal with one of their biggest competitors, but because they were not doing so well.

For KM DSLR owners, yes, it is a good thing that Sony took KM's SLR part over. But that is for the future, not the past, the Minolta SLR user base has in big numbers switched to Canon and Nikon. Which is not too bad for KM DSLR owners, some good 2nd hand lenses are to be found for very little.

And btw, you can't compare this to "windows versus macinthosh" at all. That is the most silly remark you have made. The reason mac vs pc debate has always been there is because the mac is the better system where windows is the biggest system, always sparking a debate since big equals best to most.
But again, KM really is not the best. It is just one of the players on a level playing field, and it has plusses (IS in body) and minusses (its software, its lens spectrum), just as other makes have their plusses and minusses. Well, You know the list, I typed one up in a former post. Sorry that we do not all agree with that the camera you bought is "the best", but that is no reason for such biased fanboy posts from you.

And since you appear not to read I will type it again: I have never said that the KM 5D or 7D are bad. I totally understand why someone would choose one, for a number of reasons. But are they class leading? NO they are not.

[beachluvr]

=The 6.1 mp Sony is not as good as Canon's 8.2 and 8.0mp sensors, and the results from KM, Nikon and Pentax with it vary wildly

I’m at a loss here. With 1394 posts here at this forum I would hope coldrain would know that more megapixels does not equate to a better picture. For a complete education on the subject of megapixels see Ken Rockwell’s excellent and very professional articles at kenrockwell.com/tech/mpmyth.htm

Ken’s site will help people like coldrain get over being a camera measurebator and look at the big picture. Who exactly quantifies that Canon’s sensor is so good and KM, Nikon and Pentax “vary wildly”?????

One can not lead a class with the worst image quality of DSLRs

I don’t believe in trashing cameras just because I’m not familiar with the brand. I think they are all decent pieces of equipment, but the real art is in the mind and eye of the photographer, not the technology of the equipment. I believe Nikon, Canon, Konica/Minolta, Olympus, Pentax and the other brands are all quality brands. When I find a camera a leader in certain classes it is because of specific features not found in other cameras at the same price range … not that it is the best camera ever made or that it even scores consistently higher on EVERY measurable than its competition.

Owners "reviews"? Get real, owners opinions maybe

As far as “opinions”, after 1394 posts I find it hard to believe everything coldrain has shared is “fact” not “opinion”. I find it very counter-productive to use this forum to say things like “worst image quality of DSLRs” when professional reviewers have fairly discussed the pros and cons of each brand and found them to each be class leaders in their respective rights and many have raved about KM’s image quality.

It is hard to have any credibility in anyone who doesn’t respect Konica Minolta’s heritage of design quality and product excellence. To laugh at KM owners because they didn’t chose the same brand as him is not very open minded. I doubt all of those KM buyers agree that KM cameras have the “worst” image quality.

you must know they often come to the conclusion the 350D comes very close the the 20D

Coldrain may be well meaning, but to equate his 350D to the legendary 20D is just sad, they are nowhere near the same class of camera. For all the talk about processing RAW images and sniffing his nose at the superior technology that VR/AS brings us, it shows him as a very frustrated beginner who wants very hard to play in the big leagues. Coldrain, dude, your “opinion” is equal to each and every person on this forum no more or less … the number of times you have posted here just means you have a lot of free time on your hands, not that you have any particular professional insight beyond the rest of us.

I could, but won’t because I simply don’t have the free time to spend all day posting in this forum, rebut coldrain’s carefully chosen quotes bashing the KM brand name with other quotes from online reviewers who call his preferred brand “cheap and plastickey”. I’ll let the reviews speak for themselves. I also have MUCH more faith in people who have actually paid real hard-earned cash who love their KM cameras and I would never think of dissing their thoughtful and meaningful reviews.

So once again, for the record, my “opinion” is as follows:

Best camera brand regardless of price: Nikon

Brand I have owned all of my life: Nikon

Brand I chose for MY personal needs as my latest purchase: Konica Minolta 5D

Why: #1 reason – I’m open minded to change. Also, best value for price, excellent picture quality, low noise, excellent ergonomics, brilliant in-camera anti-shake (which apparently really ticks off other brand loyal users who wish they got it first), legendary lenses, best in class build quality (reviewers have called the D50 and 350D “plastickey”), and amazingly user-friendly controls.

Bottom line: The 5D for ME was the best value in its class and fit what I want from an everyday DSLR camera. It may not be best for everyone, no brand is. It is lacking almost nothing compared to the more expensive sub-$1000 brands, but brings more value to the table than most of them.

[coldrain]

You REALLY have a problem reading, don't you???? Nearly all that I say you pull out of context, or misinterpret. Stop being so ridiculous.

No where did I write that megapixels equates better. I stated that the SENSOR is better. Learn to read, silly man.

I posted test results, which you only too happy ignored. They SHOW how widely the results vary from KM, Nikon and Pentax, and that DOES mean your former statement about that the D50 and the 5D which use the same sensor can not be different in image quality is just plain silly. I also gave areas the different cameras are VERY different in, even through the use the same Sony sensor. But you just like to ignore what is said and pick out parts of lines and go on and on. Silly.

You like to keep pointing out how crap the Canon EOS 350D is, because it feels "plasticy" and it is "the cheapest Canon". Great arguements. A camera's first and foremost objective is to make images. And it is true that the 350D and 20D are nearly indistinguishable in image quality, except in ISO 800/1600. That I chose my camera for its image quality and its compactness and light weight for traveling, will probably mean nothing to you. Fact is that the 350D is quite superior in image quality to the KM 5D (and I have posted test results about that, if you want them in detail you can have them).

About Konica Minolta's herritage, it does not HAVE herritage. Minolta does. NOT KM. And that they made quite good products in the past, does not mean anything about today. And again, where did I say KM makes crap products????? My goodness, you are being ridiculous. IF Minolta had a better lens lineup in the past, they would not have lost to Canon and Nikon as they have. But, they just do not have that kind of lineup, and so the pro's have all gone.

Your class leading remark was not about ONE erea, but it was about many things. Well, guess what: the 350D and 50D are class leaders where it matters most: IMAGE QUALITY.

If you want the numbers, again, you can have them.

Of course KM buyers will not agree that their camera has the "worst" image quality. It is not exactly the most reliable group to ask, is it? Because I bet they do not also have a D50 or 350D/20D so they can actually BASE their opion on something. Well, if you want more detailed comparative results, you can have them.

Who is sniffing their nose about VR/AS???? You weird guy. Your whole nonsense started about your 18-200 lens, remember? It was about a Nikon 18-200VR, KM's 18-200 (the Sigma is better... you should have gotten the Sigma).And I said it is nice that they have IS on the long end, but I would prefer a 70-300 lens with IS because IS matters most in tele ranges.

And if you must know, while KM introduced the first AF camera in 1985, Canon was so smart to put the Motor inside the lens, not the body, so they could offer better motor technology with new lenses. They also are the ones who first introduced IS, I have no idea why you try to use VR/AS arguements against Canon.

So, I have no idea what you base your opinions on. You even say the best brand is Nikon to you, but WHY? The best image quality is not from Nikon.
So what makes best? Just compare a Canon 5D to a Nikon D200 sometime, you will be surprised of the difference in image quality. Of course, they are not comparable cameras. And of course the D200 is a very nice camera with a lot of good features. BUt you are the one typing up nonsense, ranting, trying to put me down by misquotes, with the fact that I have a 350D, and with all in all just a very low level of debate. Learn to read, stop flaming. Thank you.

[capedeci]

chill down man :)

im the one started about 18-200 with stabilizer is very attractive to me. Dont have to be attractive to other. But KM is the lowest cost alternative for this range.

KM5D + 18-200 = IS = 1000 dollars
Nikon D50 + 18-200VR = IS = 1500 dollars
Canon XT + Sg 18-200 = no IS = 1100+ dollars
Canon XT + 17-85IS + 70-300IS = IS +Better range + quality + 2000+ dollars

thats why I love KM, I dont have much money, and I also cannot feel thatKM have worse image quality unless they are compared side by side. It looks good alone;)

I dont buy it yet, but someone tell me about the quality of images, its good right? while not the best, it should be good?

just for comparison, I say pictures from my Sony W1 &F717 "very good"

and please any of you dont confuse me as either "coldrain" or "beachluvr", i think in your debate you sometime raise my statements as one of them's. I'm just about to buy KM, and is still very cool :)

[beachluvr]

*LOL* as I quote Capedeci "chill down man"

Open forums can definitely bring out some strong opinions from those individuals predisposed to certain brands.

Take coldrain … while I have repeatedly tried to educate him that PEOPLE not cameras make quality photographs, and that all cameras are decent, with each being a class leader in their own particular areas, coldrain continues to insist that his sub-$1000 model is somehow superior. I hope no one buys into that. As I have bought a particular camera and lens combination for MY particular need, buy what YOU need not what some other user feels is best in his or her opinion. That is rule #1. Is my choice of camera the best for me or anyone else? I don’t even know that myself since I haven’t used it, I only feel for me it is a great value and offers some class leading features. Nope, nowhere did I say my choice is the best camera or the best in class. Seems some forum members may be ready for stronger glasses and need to slow down and read what I say. It may also be advisable to stick to topic and refrain from name calling and profanity. I am neither silly, nor ridiculous. Flaming won’t distract from a reality-based dialogue.

I know coldrain will try to rain on my parade yet again and try to twist that into me somehow saying that the KM 5D is the best camera on the market or is best in its class. Nope, didn’t say that either, and who cares if I did! Just that it has features that are class leading. Nikon has some too. Pentax has some too. Olympus has some too. Sheesh, even Canon has some although there seem to be some real users who are pretty down on Canon lately.

I haven’t written my opinions on MY camera yet, since I haven’t used it. Being a Nikon person it was quite a transition for me to try a totally new and unexplored brand … but then again I am 100% open minded. If I hate it after using it, I will tell you my honest feelings. One thing I have never been is a shill for any particular brand of anything. Money is just too hard to come by to not choose the best value I can when I buy something.

As much as I hate to waste the time, I have to totally disagree with coldrain that the opinions of people who actually OWN a brand of camera are meaningless. When I shop for anything I put more faith in people who have parted with their hard-earned cash than a commercial reviewer. Not that I have any problem with reviewers, I read the big 4 digital camera online reviewers every day … it’s part of my professional career. When I’m ready to make a purchase decision I weigh users, reviewers and my own brain … and even take into account extremely biased people who are in love with one-and-only brand. The bottom line is, unlike any of them, I choose what is best for ME for MY needs. Funny, but it seems the most valuable reviews seem to end up being the consensus of people who actually own a product.

So, if anyone thinks that a KM 5D may be the right choice for them, head over to the Amazon, Circuit City, Best Buy, Bizrate, etc websites to get a shot at separating reality from opinion and don’t be afraid to read what actual 5D users think. I’ll be posting my own “review” here after I get a chance to see if my latest digital camera is any good.

Meanwhile, while coldrain’s opinion of the D5 is “the worst image quality of DSLRs”, Jeff Keller who owns this website and forum and is one of the most respected digital camera reviewers in the world says “Overall I'd rate the Maxxum 5D's photo quality as "excellent" … the Konica Minolta Maxxum 5D is an excellent value (coincidentally same thing I said)… image quality was a bright spot for the 5D. Photos were well-exposed, with vivid colors and low noise levels. The camera controls noise well at high ISOs, so you'll still be able to get at least a small print out of photos taken at ISO 800 and above.”

Jeff also has some negatives for the 5D (something coldrain conveniently left out of his worship for his brand). No camera is perfect, so try the ones you’re interested in, read the reviews and don’t be swayed by things that have nothing to do with why YOU want and need a camera.

[coldrain]

capedesi, I never disputed your reasons for liking the KM 5D, and I have often told people on this board that it is a fine choice. I just am disputing statements made by beachlvr.

I am sure you will have a very nice camera in the KM 5D.
I see that Sigma now is offering the 18-200 for KM too. Maybe that is also worth to look at, the KM is designed by Tamron I believe, and the Sigma is a bit better in certain areas (sharpness, contrast, CA) than that Tamron.

I have not been able to find an informative test of the 18-200 from KM yet.

Have fun with your new camera :)

[beachluvr]

thats why I love KM, I dont have much money, and I also cannot feel thatKM have worse image quality unless they are compared side by side. It looks good alone;)

I dont buy it yet, but someone tell me about the quality of images, its good right? while not the best, it should be good?

Hey Capedeci - good luck with your new 5D. There are not a lot of reviews on it, but this site has one of the most comprehensive. Read what Jeff has to say, and note that he feels the 5D's photo quality is "excellent". I bought the KM 18-200 lens mainly because I was a little unsure the Tamron/Sigma lenses would be fully compatible with Anti Shake and the distance sensing system for the strobe. You can find it at Amazon for $409 which is competitive with the Sigma lens, just a few dollars more. I just got the lens today and haven't played too much with the camera, but from what I can see so far the build-quality is very nice and I took a handheld shot of the crescent moon after dark and the anti-shake was pretty cool. I'll continue to post updates. If you chose the 5D you are definitely NOT buying a bad camera, and as you say you can get the body AND 18-200 lens for under $1000 (my total cost was about $960 delivered).

Ciao

[gary_hendricks]

I'd say the Nikon D50 is a better choice.

Why so? Because the compared to KonicaMinolta and Canon models, the Nikon D50 has very low noise - even at high ISOs.

The D50 is very quick to focus in automatic mode, controls are easy to use, shot to shot time is wonderful. Battery life, which often seems to be an issue with digital cameras, is not with the D50.

One shortcoming with the D50 is that while the two included kit lenses are quite good, neither makes a good general purpose lens. The 18-55 mm is often too short, and the 55-200mm one is often too long, so you need to swap lenses a lot.

Of course, you can pick up a third lens in the future that ranges from say 28 mm to 200 or 300 mm.

Hope this helps. :)

[beachluvr]

I'd say the Nikon D50 is a better choice.

Why so? Because the compared to KonicaMinolta and Canon models, the Nikon D50 has very low noise - even at high ISOs.


All very valid and lucid points Gary. I was very close on my own decision between brands and I have a natural tendency to lean toward Nikon because I have owned many and have several top quality Nikon lenses.

Many of the reviewers rate the Konica Minolta quite good for noise at high ISO (including this site). They also make the point that KM's Anti Shake gives the user the option of not having to go to a higher ISO. Jeff Keller says of the KM 5D "I didn't start to notice any loss in details until ISO 400, and even then it was very slight. You don't get major detail loss until ISO 1600 and especially ISO 3200, though you should be able to squeeze smaller-sized prints out of those images with a little help from noise reduction software. "

But no doubt they are all good choices and class leaders in their own right.

Here's a site that compares the Nikon D50 and Konica Minolta 5D directly and seems to be relatively unbiased. The reviewer hits on many of the important points to consider:

http://www.digital-slr-guide.com/minolta-5d-vs-nikon-d50.html

[beachluvr]

Hi

Here is a professional review that compares the KM 5D to the Nikon D50. It seems those two models are getting a lot of attention and being compared to each other:

http://www.digital-slr-guide.com/minolta-5d-vs-nikon-d50.html

[capedeci]

thanks, I'm now on 90% towards the 5D, but havent bought it, because I'm still raising the money.

KM's wireless flash and using the onboard flash as the master also attracts me.

Actually, I was leaned to the nikon + 18-200VR back then, but finally chosen to pass it, because of the expensive total cost. Its over $1500, and I still need flash and memory card, which could bring the cost to almost $2000.

With the KM, I can get a cheaper Sigma 18-200 for $350, so the total cost of camera + lens is around $1100. BUT, considering the kit lens already covers an exellent range (18-70) probably I can wait before getting the Sigma, and live with the kit for a while.

With the D50, I cannot live with the kit, as it is 18-55 without IS.

As for 350D, I've bought it, and decided to sell them quickly. This is the camera which I found that I cannot live without IS, all pics are blurry for me. Back then, I got this quite complete package:
-350D + kit
-Flash 430ex
-CF 2GB
-Sigma 18-200
-Canon 50mm F1,8
Costs slightly over $1600, and the pictures I get didnt satisfy me, its too difficult for me to take pictures in available light indoor (i got bad hands). Then I considered the 17-85IS, which is still not enogh range, I also consider getting the 17-85IS first, then 6 month later Ill get the 70-300IS. But thinking the cost of the 17-85IS alone, is $570 here, and.... the KM, with the Kit lens pretty much covers that range, and costs me only $700, so I consider that extra $130 gave me a KM 5D body and AS to all lenses. If I want tele, then the Sigma 70-300 is only $130 and AS too when attached in 5D. Moreover, I loved 18-200 VR in canon, with the KM, I could get it easily with Sigma, only around 350 dollars.

So the main recent is that KM5D is an OK camera, with uncomparable value when talking about IS capability. I'm no rich, so I chose the best value, cannot get the best quality.

Thats it, I'm happy with my decision on switching to KM, which annoys many canon fans. But the money havent returned to me yet, so I cannot go out and buy the KM.

[coldrain]

capedesi, start reading what i actually wrote, and quit reading what that idiot is saying. I have not said you have made a bad decision, I have told many posters on here the KM 5D is a fine camera, and if it suits your needs, that you should not worry about getting one.

This ridiculous idiot beachluvr is just typing bullshit, no canon owner is angry at you for choosing a KM 5D, most certainly not this one.
beachluvr is just the worst kind of flame poster who does not read and likes to misinterpret, and my guess is he is doing that on purpose.

Ah well... if that makes him feel like man, I am happy for him.

And I truely hope you will have a lot of joy from your KM 5D, capedesi!

[coldrain]

Hi

Here is a professional review that compares the KM 5D to the Nikon D50. It seems those two models are getting a lot of attention and being compared to each other:

http://www.digital-slr-guide.com/minolta-5d-vs-nikon-d50.html
haha, how professional a review.

[capedeci]

capedesi, start reading what i actually wrote, and quit reading what that idiot is saying. I have not said you have made a bad decision, I have told many posters on here the KM 5D is a fine camera, and if it suits your needs, that you should not worry about getting one.

This ridiculous idiot beachluvr is just typing bullshit, no canon owner is angry at you for choosing a KM 5D, most certainly not this one.
beachluvr is just the worst kind of flame poster who does not read and likes to misinterpret, and my guess is he is doing that on purpose.

Ah well... if that makes him feel like man, I am happy for him.

And I truely hope you will have a lot of joy from your KM 5D, capedesi!

thats the fellas at dpreview got offended by my switch :) my switch to them is like i said 'canon sucks, km rocks'. but its not that

i just need AS ;)

[beachluvr]

I don't remember if I told you, but the KM 18-200 DT lens is being sold at Amazon for $409. That is not much more than the Sigma and you can be sure it works 100% with all of the features of the camera. I was considering the Sigma but they won't put it in writing that their lens is 100% compatible with a camera, just that the mount will fit. I know the Sigma is a good lens but for $50 more you can get one that you can be assured was designed for your camera.

[capedeci]

KM Lens in my country is 550, while the sigma is 350...

its quite a lot

so its tough to decide

[beachluvr]

capedesi, start reading what i actually wrote, and quit reading what that idiot is saying. This ridiculous idiot beachluvr is just typing bullshit, no canon owner is angry at you for choosing a KM 5D, most certainly not this one .... And I truely hope you will have a lot of joy from your KM 5D, capedesi!

Reality: While I have talked kindly of all major brands, a read of coldrain's posts make him sound like a shill for Canon.

Reality: Coldrain comes on Jeff Keller's forum and disputes a particular camera's picture quality. Jeff says "Excellent" while coldrain says "worst" but won't back it with facts. Coldrain's opinion on other professional reviewers is to say "haha" Hmmmm, who to believe?

Reality: I own a 5D, coldrain does not. He has his opinion, I have the camera.

Reality: I am attempting to help someone from an owner's viewpoint. Coldrain laughs at owners opinions. His Senior Membership gives him the right to be an authority on every subject. Of course, no one else may have an opinion on "his" forum.

Reality: I have attempted to answer inquires honestly, backed with fact and expressed my opinion when appropriate. Coldrain's response is to call me names laced with profanity.

Reality: "the person who can't be wrong about anything" continually mis-spells Capedeci's name. My apologies to Capedeci on behalf of anyone who cares for the importance of accuracy.

Also, my apologies to anyone reading the diatribes as quoted above. I'll be around to share my opinions on anything I'm familiar with ... and will let you know if I'm in unfamiliar territory. No more desire to get dragged into coldrain's sad world *CLICK* let's get on with talking about cameras instead of personal attacks.

[beachluvr]

KM Lens in my country is 550, while the sigma is 350...

its quite a lot

so its tough to decide

I think Amazon sells worldwide but I'm not sure of that. $200 is a big difference and you wouldn't go wrong with the Sigma name. Hopefully someone will give you return privileges if there is any incompatibility. If you get the Sigma would you kindly let us know? Information on that lens, particularly for the KM mount, is a little difficult to find right now.

[coldrain]

Foto Magazin Sept. 2005
Comparing semi pro cameras, with high quality zoom lenses from the respective manufacturer.
Canon EOS 20D: 83.9 points in lab test.
KM 7D: 70.5 points in lab test.
Olympus E1: 69.3 in lab test.

The older E1 (5mp) scores almost the same as the 7D!!

Even more telling, they tested the entry level cameras too, but with their respective kit lenses. Two entry level cameras with the same sensor scored better in their points system than the KM 7D with a better lens:
Nikon D50: 75.3 points in lab test.
Pentax *istDS: 72.3 points in lab test.

KM 7D class leading indeed

Foto Magazin feb. 2005
20D, 7D, S3 Pro, E-300, *istDS tested. Only camera where they mentioned a downside about picture quality in the minus point list: KM 7D. It exhibits a slight moire and artifact tendency with critical motives.

KM 7D class leading indeed

Color Foto nov. 2005
Compared 14 DSLR's, tested with single focal lenght macro lenses from the respective companies.
In their lab test point system, this is how they rated (ISO 100 or 200/ISO 400):
Canon EOS 300D: 50/43.5
Canon EOS 350D: 54/48
Canon EOS 20D: 54/49

KM 5D: 48/42.5
KM 7D: 48/42

Nikon D50: 53.5/48
Nikon D70: 54/48.5
Nikon D70s: 54/47.5

Olympus E-300: 50/38.5

Pentax *istD: 48/40
Pentax *istDL: 47.5/44.5
Pentax *istDS: 49/47

Sigma SD10: 45.5/49


You do not even know what profanity is. Sad sad character.

[Jeff Keller]

Can we refrain from the personal attacks please?