DSLR back for my Dynax 5 ?
Discussion
I have a Minolta Dynax 5 that my OH bought me a few years ago. Due to impending surgery and enforced "taking it easy" i thought i'd take some more photos and try and learn some more skills.
What digital back can i get to work with my existing lenses ? Is it just the 5D and 7D i'm looking at on ebay or can i use a current Sony model ?
My main photography is wakeboarding and snowboarding with some holiday stuff and happy snaps. I guess a back with fast shutter speed and minimal lag is what i'm after ?
Thanks in advance
Derek
What digital back can i get to work with my existing lenses ? Is it just the 5D and 7D i'm looking at on ebay or can i use a current Sony model ?
My main photography is wakeboarding and snowboarding with some holiday stuff and happy snaps. I guess a back with fast shutter speed and minimal lag is what i'm after ?
Thanks in advance
Derek
honest_delboy said:
can i use a current Sony model ?
I believe so, but wait until a Sony owner comes along to be sure. They often seem to buy s/h Minolta lenses from eBay so it bodes well.(NB What you're looking for is not a 'digital back' (which is a few steps further up the scale), but a 'DSLR body')
Yes, I think you can use any Sony SLR.
The maximum shutter speed and shutter lag will probably be the same or very similar across the range and shouldn't be a major consideration. The autofocus performance and the frame rate are more important for sports photography, although modern SLRs are very good and I'm sure any of the current Sony range would be suitable.
Obviously the more expensive models will have better performance, more advanced features and probably slightly better build quality, so have a look at them and decide how much you want to spend.
The maximum shutter speed and shutter lag will probably be the same or very similar across the range and shouldn't be a major consideration. The autofocus performance and the frame rate are more important for sports photography, although modern SLRs are very good and I'm sure any of the current Sony range would be suitable.
Obviously the more expensive models will have better performance, more advanced features and probably slightly better build quality, so have a look at them and decide how much you want to spend.
May be worth pointing out - unless you have an existing significant investment in lenses, then you need not limit your search to Sony (Konica/Minolta) bodies - you can move to Canon, Nikon or Pentax if those suit you better.
That being said, Sony alpha cameras are very highly regarded, so you wouldn't be doing badly if your lenses are compatible.
That being said, Sony alpha cameras are very highly regarded, so you wouldn't be doing badly if your lenses are compatible.
Minolta lenses mount on sony (alpha) bodies, they bought (Konika)Minoltas camera business and took over the dSLR line.
Unless you have quite a few or expensive/good lenses I wouldnt make that a key thing in choosing a body though, as digital bodies often have a different field of view (crop factor) - unless you spenda lot (full frame). Also new lenses tend to be better (especialy for digital due to coatings etc)
Canons 5D is full frame butnot great for sports, 7D is crop and great for sports.
Unless you have quite a few or expensive/good lenses I wouldnt make that a key thing in choosing a body though, as digital bodies often have a different field of view (crop factor) - unless you spenda lot (full frame). Also new lenses tend to be better (especialy for digital due to coatings etc)
Canons 5D is full frame butnot great for sports, 7D is crop and great for sports.
I really would rather reuse my existing lenses, i do understand this limits me but i'm ok with this.
Done some digging...
Minolta 5D
Continuous-advance rate: 3 frames per second (approx.), Max. 5 frames (RAW), max. 3 frames (RAW+JPEG)
Minolta 7D
Continuous advance(approx.) Max. 9 frames (RAW / RAW+JPEG),max. 12 frames (JPEG, L-EXTRA-FINE), max. 15 frames (JPEG, L-FINE)
My current camera is 3 FPS so i guess i don't gain much with the 5D? How does RAW and JPEG afect things?
Thanks for all the replies so far.
Done some digging...
Minolta 5D
Continuous-advance rate: 3 frames per second (approx.), Max. 5 frames (RAW), max. 3 frames (RAW+JPEG)
Minolta 7D
Continuous advance(approx.) Max. 9 frames (RAW / RAW+JPEG),max. 12 frames (JPEG, L-EXTRA-FINE), max. 15 frames (JPEG, L-FINE)
My current camera is 3 FPS so i guess i don't gain much with the 5D? How does RAW and JPEG afect things?
Thanks for all the replies so far.
RAW is like a negative, it has no processing applied. So no colour/contrast/sharpening and also no white balance (though the one in camera is recorded and applied by default usualy). Its also lossless, all the information is retained, no (compression) artifacts.
Usualy 12(as in the minolta bodies) or 14 bit per channel colour depth (RGB). Larger and more difficult to process.
JPG is like a print, detail is lost , artifacts are created (depending on quality), white balance adjustability is lost, dynamic range is lost (and its 8bit per channel).
Most (on here) shoot raw though theres good arguments for shooting jpg sometimes.
As for the 2 Minolta bodies they are qite old, so will be poorer to the equivelant Sony bodies on sale now.
Usualy 12(as in the minolta bodies) or 14 bit per channel colour depth (RGB). Larger and more difficult to process.
JPG is like a print, detail is lost , artifacts are created (depending on quality), white balance adjustability is lost, dynamic range is lost (and its 8bit per channel).
Most (on here) shoot raw though theres good arguments for shooting jpg sometimes.
As for the 2 Minolta bodies they are qite old, so will be poorer to the equivelant Sony bodies on sale now.
Unless you regularly shoot very high speed action stuff, I wouldn't worry about the frames per second stuff.
I've never, ever, needed or cared about how many frames I can shoot in a second, or the size of my buffer (fnarr fnarr).
Edit to add - as above, forget the Minolta stuff - get a Sony Alpha if you want to keep your existing lenses. Same sensors as Nikon, with stabilisation built in to the bodies. Excellent cameras all round.
Trouble is, Zeiss lenses are EXPENSIVE!!!!
I've never, ever, needed or cared about how many frames I can shoot in a second, or the size of my buffer (fnarr fnarr).
Edit to add - as above, forget the Minolta stuff - get a Sony Alpha if you want to keep your existing lenses. Same sensors as Nikon, with stabilisation built in to the bodies. Excellent cameras all round.
Trouble is, Zeiss lenses are EXPENSIVE!!!!
Edited by _dobbo_ on Saturday 7th November 21:53
I've had a 7D since 2005 and it is a lovely robust bit of kit - it's a digital version of the Dynax7 really. There are lots of Sony Alpha bodies about at good prices both used and new. The one downside of a 5D/7D is they only have a 6MB sensor which struggles a bit if you want to print big. I recently brought one of the last A700s to get a bigger sensor - the new A500 series just wasn't pro enough for me and the next bodies up are a huge jump in price.
I have a good range of Minolta pro lenses which is why I have stayed with this range of camera, they do make some excellent lumps of glass!
To the OP, look at the A200, A300/A350 bodies as they are a generation on from the 5/7 - the 7 will take a lot of knocks and moisture though.
I have a good range of Minolta pro lenses which is why I have stayed with this range of camera, they do make some excellent lumps of glass!
To the OP, look at the A200, A300/A350 bodies as they are a generation on from the 5/7 - the 7 will take a lot of knocks and moisture though.
All Minolta brand autofocus lenses will work on the Sony Alpha range of DSLRs. Most Sigma, Tamron and Tokina lenses made to fit Minolta AF cameras will work on the Sony Alpha, a few are not detected by the camera and need re-chipping (if the chip is available). Check www.dyxum.com which lists pretty much every single lens ever made to fit the Minolta / Sony AF mount and notes which ones don't work.
Something like the A200 or A300 will do very nicely as a first DSLR. I started with the A300, have an A700 now as I wanted 5fps.
Something like the A200 or A300 will do very nicely as a first DSLR. I started with the A300, have an A700 now as I wanted 5fps.
Holy thread resurrection batman!
I bet you were all waiting with baited breath to hear what i bought....
After losing my job and other woes i finally went out and got a Sony A33. Not used it much yet but very pleased with the results so far. Will post a pic when i have a sec.
Couples of Q's (I know at least one chap on here uses Sony)
Flash - Just about to purchase a HVL-F42Am opinions?
Memory - blimey, paid £85 for Sandisk 16Gb SDHC from jessops. Ebay have lots of cheap ones but are some of them fakes? Any rec's?
I'm doing a wedding next month, but i'll make another thread for that.
I bet you were all waiting with baited breath to hear what i bought....
After losing my job and other woes i finally went out and got a Sony A33. Not used it much yet but very pleased with the results so far. Will post a pic when i have a sec.
Couples of Q's (I know at least one chap on here uses Sony)
Flash - Just about to purchase a HVL-F42Am opinions?
Memory - blimey, paid £85 for Sandisk 16Gb SDHC from jessops. Ebay have lots of cheap ones but are some of them fakes? Any rec's?
I'm doing a wedding next month, but i'll make another thread for that.
Cards and batteries can be a huge rip-off in shops. Plenty of places on the web. Cards in general are very reliable. You only need a fast-write one (ie expensive) if you do an awful lot of shooting on continuous drive or have a HD movie function. And you may end up with one that your camera can't write to fast enough to justify.
Speed is stamped on the card, either say 133X or 20MB/sec (You multiply the `x` figure by 1.5 to get an approximate speed in MB. And if you bump into the person who came up with that system, I'd like a quiet word...).
So a 10MP camera working at 4 frames/sec will be eating around 40MB of memory per second (duh
). These go first into the buffer, and are then written to the card. So your buffer size is important. Once it fills, the camera will stop until the files have been written, which can be annoying. So try shooting in short bursts of three or four frames. I reckon that a 133x will do for most things. Go up to 266x and you're laughing.
Speed is stamped on the card, either say 133X or 20MB/sec (You multiply the `x` figure by 1.5 to get an approximate speed in MB. And if you bump into the person who came up with that system, I'd like a quiet word...).
So a 10MP camera working at 4 frames/sec will be eating around 40MB of memory per second (duh
). These go first into the buffer, and are then written to the card. So your buffer size is important. Once it fills, the camera will stop until the files have been written, which can be annoying. So try shooting in short bursts of three or four frames. I reckon that a 133x will do for most things. Go up to 266x and you're laughing.Gassing Station | Photography & Video | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff