Maxxum 7 or Canon T90?

[rbiemer]

Earlier this year I bought a Maxxum 7 and 50mm/f1.7 lens as a replacement for my EOS Elan IIe. Sold all my EF lenses as well.
And the 7 has been very nice to use. I haven't got any other lenses for it (yet).

Late this past summer, I picked up a Canon T90 and a 50/f1.4 lens at a pretty good price. And that camera is also very nice to use. Didn't intend to add to that set but a couple of weeks back I was given an AE-1p and four lenses; 28/f2.8, 50/f1.8, a 35-70 zoom and a 75-200 macro zoom.

BUT...I really do not want two SLR set ups and am having a bit of trouble deciding which one to keep. I can see some advantages and some disadvantages to both of the cameras and am not seeing any obvious "winner" here.:bang:

• Both FD and Minolta lenses are/can be good performers.
• The 7 is rather newer and may not need service as soon as the T90 might.
• Neither camera is going to be my main user and my intent is to use the SLR for macro; it seems, at first look, that the FD lens choices are a bit less expensive.
• One thing I do miss from the EOS camera is the ease of using LTM lenses on it as macro lenses--I quickly found an EOS to LTM adapter--I have seen a few, uncertain quality, adapters for the Maxxum but haven't looked yet for FD to LTM adapters so I don't know if one or the other will be easier to do this with.
• Auto or manual focus doesn't matter much to me.
• Both cameras are battery dependent but the T90 uses AA batteries.

Which one would you keep?
Any thoughts or suggestions would be very much appreciated as a way for me to clarify my choices!
Thanks, y'all!
Rob

 

[Ko.Fe.]

Which one I would, actually, keeping?
EOS film camera with dedicated AF macro lens on it.

Lots of SLRs and glass are given away today due to no use, but might be irrelevant...

 

[sevo]

The big difference is up- vs. downward compatibility. There are no current (nor indeed past digital or AF) FD mount cameras, while A-mount (digital) cameras still are being made (and A-mount lenses are fully adaptable to E-mount). On the other hand, there are no mechanical/long term serviceable bodies with A-mount, while Canon made a few rock solid all mechanical cameras. Pick your priority...

 

[aoresteen]

Just use both. I would use the Minolta with the 50mm and the Canon with the 28mm or the long zoom. I'd carry them both.

When you decide what the next lens you need, buy the best one at the best price you can for either system.

I often carry a Contaflex Rapid with the 50mm Tessar and an OM-1 or a Leica body with a 21mm to 28mm wide angle lens. It's quicker to change cameras than to change lenses.

 

[Vics]

I've just been setting up cameras for Thanksgiving, i.e. loading them all with Tri-X and fresh batteries. Among them is a Maxxum 7000 I recently bought from KEH for $10, to which I'm adding the 35 to 70mm zoom, and the 2800AF flash. Should be the perfect party cam! Someday I may use all this Maxxum glass, 24, 50, 35-70, 100-200, on a Sony digicam, so I'm keeping it all.

 

[rbiemer]

Which one I would, actually, keeping?
EOS film camera with dedicated AF macro lens on it.
Lots of SLRs and glass are given away today due to no use, but might be irrelevant...

I did enjoy using the Elan but when it broke, I decided to try some other cameras--in fact I had been thinking about that for a while--and finally decided on the Maxxum 7.

The big difference is up- vs. downward compatibility. There are no current (nor indeed past digital or AF) FD mount cameras, while A-mount (digital) cameras still are being made (and A-mount lenses are fully adaptable to E-mount). On the other hand, there are no mechanical/long term serviceable bodies with A-mount, while Canon made a few rock solid all mechanical cameras. Pick your priority...

All good points and that's where I'm kind of stuck; I am not seeing a decisive advantage (or disadvantage) to one over the other...

Just use both. I would use the Minolta with the 50mm and the Canon with the 28mm or the long zoom. I'd carry them both.

When you decide what the next lens you need, buy the best one at the best price you can for either system.

I often carry a Contaflex Rapid with the 50mm Tessar and an OM-1 or a Leica body with a 21mm to 28mm wide angle lens. It's quicker to change cameras than to change lenses.

I mostly prefer to carry one camera and lens and very occasionally another lens in my pocket. But your second paragraph (my emphasis added) makes quite a bit of sense to me.
Doesn't get me to one system but I suppose I can live with that.

Or, it may be a better way for me to decide. Pick the lens(es) I really want, irrespective of which mount and then once I have that figured out, use the other camera and lens(es) to cover some or all of the cost...except that my desire to get down to one SLR system is not some "purist" hairshirt exercise but to simply to reduce the amount of stuff I have to store.
And I really do like each of the two cameras,

I've just been setting up cameras for Thanksgiving, i.e. loading them all with Tri-X and fresh batteries. Among them is a Maxxum 7000 I recently bought from KEH for $10, to which I'm adding the 35 to 70mm zoom, and the 2800AF flash. Should be the perfect party cam! Someday I may use all this Maxxum glass, 24, 50, 35-70, 100-200, on a Sony digicam, so I'm keeping it all.

Tomorrow I'm heading to my parents home to start my prep for turkey day (I'll be cooking for a couple dozen of us) and have packed a camera and three lenses. The Bessa R and a 21, 50, and 75. I used to bring something "easier" to hand to folks if they wanted to shoot some photos but haven't had to do that for a few years since the folks that are so inclined all have either a digital P&S or use their phones.

Thanks for your thoughts and suggestions, folks!
Rob

 

[Iestrada]

The Minolta AF glass is all the reason I need in the world. They even come with a red dot on them.

Here is the reason why:
http://sites.google.com/site/seevve/historical-perspective-on-minolta-lens-design-philosophy

 

[Samouraï]

The Minolta AF glass is all the reason I need in the world. They even come with a red dot on them.

Here is the reason why:
http://sites.google.com/site/seevve/historical-perspective-on-minolta-lens-design-philosophy

This is amazing. Would it be worth putting together a Minolta AF kit for use with Sony cameras? I'm considering the Sony A7 or A7r, and was wondering if (with the sony adapter), a set of these Minoltas would be beautiful, color-matched, unique, (and cheap). Or would I be better off using old Leica rangefinder glass. Or even just standard FE-mount glass.

 

[Chris101]

I hated Minolta cameras, for reasons that are complex and psychological. Oh, and they feel like a shoebox to me. I liked some FD Canon cameras, but the T90 was not one of them. It's ugly, and I am too embarrassed to use one in public for fear I will be spotted. So it's a toss-up.

I guess I'd go with the Canon, as I could always get a better body. I say the same thing when I look in the full-length mirror.

ps, all FD lenses I've used have treated me well. Part of my mental block prevents me from taking good pictures with Rokkors.

 

[Iestrada]

Samourai that is a very good question. Over at Dyxum the users have been busy doing some testing with various lenses. I am unsure if legacy Minolta lenses have been tested and what the results might be. Pay Dyxum a visit and see for yourself.

http://www.dyxum.com/dforum/emount-full-frame_forum59.html

 

[Jack Conrad]

I hated Minolta cameras, for reasons that are complex and psychological. Oh, and they feel like a shoebox to me.

ps, all FD lenses I've used have treated me well. Part of my mental block prevents me from taking good pictures with Rokkors.

Interesting. I feel the same aversion toward Canon camera's
and lenses that you do with Minolta's. For me, Canon is like poking myself in the eyes, while Rokkor is more a soothing relief. 🙂 Purely psychological, of course.

 

[zuikologist]

Interesting. I feel the same aversion toward Canon camera's
and lenses that you do with Minolta's. For me, Canon is like poking myself in the eyes, while Rokkor is more a soothing relief. 🙂 Purely psychological, of course.

Interesing reading, thanks for sharing.

 

[shadowfox]

I hated Minolta cameras, for reasons that are complex and psychological. Oh, and they feel like a shoebox to me. I liked some FD Canon cameras, but the T90 was not one of them. It's ugly, and I am too embarrassed to use one in public for fear I will be spotted. So it's a toss-up.

I guess I'd go with the Canon, as I could always get a better body. I say the same thing when I look in the full-length mirror.

ps, all FD lenses I've used have treated me well. Part of my mental block prevents me from taking good pictures with Rokkors.

Chris, it's rare that you and I don't agree on cameras 🙂

I love the high-end Maxxum like 7 and 9, the controls makes more sense to me.

And I like the T90, in a 1980's-Mr. Roboto-vibe kinda way 😀

 

[farlymac]

I look at it this way. How many lenses do you plan to add to the system, and any spare bodies? You have a Minolta with one lens, versus a Canon with four lenses.

A second Canon body could be a T-70 or T-50 if you didn't want to haul around another T-90. Or even any of the A series bodies if you are looking at needing the motor drive feature.

And because of the use with digital cameras, the Minolta A mount lenses are up in price. So it's going to cost you more to replace the Canon gear with Minolta.

Granted, Minolta lenses are supposed to be very good, but I've had some duds. And used AF lenses these days can be problematic due to rough use (or even lack of use), so finding a good copy may be difficult.

So, it's basically AF versus Non-AF. Your choice, whatever works for you.

PF

 

[Samouraï]

Samourai that is a very good question. Over at Dyxum the users have been busy doing some testing with various lenses. I am unsure if legacy Minolta lenses have been tested and what the results might be. Pay Dyxum a visit and see for yourself.

http://www.dyxum.com/dforum/emount-full-frame_forum59.html

Thanks for the link.

 

[aoresteen]

The Minolta AF glass is all the reason I need in the world. They even come with a red dot on them.

Here is the reason why:
http://sites.google.com/site/seevve/historical-perspective-on-minolta-lens-design-philosophy

Interesting article. One thing is that Minolta did release an M mount camera even though the article said that they didn't:

1. The Leica CL (made by Minolta but sold as a Leica)

2. Minolta CLE. Had an M mount and sold as a Minolta.

 

[Takkun]

Very interesting link indeed.
My personal preference: I used to work the used desk at a camera store, and while some of the Maxxum cameras were impossible to figure out and use for me, I fell in love with the Maxxum 7 and 9, which I felt bordered on perfection for UI on an AF camera. I was also predisposed to the prime lenses, which I thought just had a certain sparkle to them.

But like someone else said: if you've already gotten yourself entrenched into the FD system, it might be best to stick with that. That's why I've stuck with Nikon for 10 years...

 

[rbiemer]

Thanks for all the ideas/suggestions and the various links, folks!
I think that what I am going to do is to keep both cameras and set one up fairly specifically for macro and the other for the occasional travel use.
Which means: Canon T90 as the macro system and the Maxxum 7 as the walking around/travel kit.

I have spent some time looking at the Dyxum site linked above, and at another site about Canon FD lenses ( www.canonclassics.com ) and also looking at prices of the lenses and other stuff I'd like to have and I think it will end up with me buying two zoom lenses for the 7--probably a 17 (or 19) to 35 and a 24 to 105--and then setting up the T90 as mainly for macro stuff.

As well, finding an affordable adapter to use my LTM lenses with the T90 proved to be much easier.

Now I just need to re-stock my film supply and start budgeting for the "new" lenses, etc!😀
Thanks, y'all for helping me clarify my thinking about this.
Rob