The issue was that, together with the mirror mechanism, was loud, as loud as the SR and way louder than the XD. Now, what I did not care about, was the cloth shutter. The chrome, silver version that I had was so well build that one could confuse it for a metal body. I must add that the camera was in fact a plastic fantastic, but a well made one. So, a big and bright viewfinder which was a joy to focus with. To add more, the X500 sported a beautiful viewfinder, I think with 95% coverage (unlike the 92% of the majority cameras of the same era) with a x o.90 magnification. Also at hand was the exposue lock button, a feature that was not to pread among other camera manufacturers (not even the XD had it).
Everything was at the reach of my finger, well, apart the DOF preview button that I very rarely used. It just fitted my hand perfectly like no other Minolta (or Pentax) did. What I liked the most ? Well, number one is the ergonomics. Minolta X500 – All rights reserved (c) Cosmin Munteanu Besides this, the two were 99% identical.
#X700 minolta camera manual#
It showd the actual shutter speed and the recommended shutter speed acording the amount the light hitting the camera’s exposure meter’s sensor (in manual mode). More, the X500 had a feature that was not present in the X700: you could set the right exposure time without taking your eye from the viewfinder. Because I never use P, program mode, the x700 was not so interesting to me. It is the brother of the more popular X700. The first Minolta that I got and the last that I sold was the X500 (X570 in the US ?). Minolta SRT 100x – All rights reserved (c) Cosmin Munteanuįinally here we are at the one camera, Minolta camera that I liked the most but I ended up selling it, together with the entire system.
#X700 minolta camera series#
Bigger, like the Spotmatiks or the Pentax K series cameras, the SRT was a reliable camera with only one minus: the obsolete battery it used to power the lightmeter (although it had nothing to do with the camera’s ability of taking pictures). The workhorse among Minolta cameras was the SR mechanical series cameras. As small as the XD, it had automatic exposure (aperture priority) just like Pentax’s MG but with the posibility of manual override but a cloth curtain shutter. The XG series was what a Pentax MG would be. Minolta had of course a cheaper, entry level SLR too. Minolta XG2 – All rights reserved (c) Cosmin Munteanu But unlike Canon, XD featured a way quieter vertical travel metal shutter not a cloth curtain.
The XD had exposure modes that I think only Canon introduced a year later on the A1: manual mode, aperture priority and shutter priority. I paired the XD with the Rokkor 45mm f:2,o, an excellent lens, small, kinda pancakekish. The XD had a common pedigree with the Leica R4 being (as it was its predecessor, the XE and Leica R3) the product of a joint-venture of the two (Minolta & Leica). I liked very much the XD7 (XD11 in the US), a “full metal” quite compact answer to Olympus’ OM-2. Minolta gave me mixed feelings, about the same as the camera I will talk shortly. Pentax ME Super & Minolta XD7 – All rights reserved (c) Cosmin Munteanu Besides K-Pentax mount cameras, F-Nikon and M42 screw mount ones, I once tried Minolta’s SR/MC/MD system. As mentioned in a not so old article, I had some experience with a number of 35mm film cameras.
0 kommentar(er)
