Minolta SRT-101 vs. Canon AE-1 Program

Minolta SRT-101 vs. Canon AE-1 Program

  • Total voters
    105
F

Film noob

Newbie
Local time
12:47 PM
Joined
Apr 4, 2012
Messages
8
So I just purchased both of these cameras the Canon SLR camera comes with a 35-70mm zoom lens. The Minolta SRT comes with a flash, Minolta 50mm, 135mm and Soligor 200mm lens. Both of these cameras I hardly know anything about, but was told they are both great cameras. Undoubtably better than my Argus C3 with the stock 50mm lens with a broken aperture speed dial. I was wondering if anyone had some good info or tips on my new cameras/lenses. I'm going to be using black and white film and enlarging/processing my own fiber based paper. Thanks for the help ahead of time. You guys are the best!
 
The Canon has an integrated circuit for exposure calculation that fires the shutter electronically. So, in theory, it may be a more sophisticated camera. But ask any camera repair shop and they will tell you that once the chip in the AE-1 dies, there are no replacements to be had.

Conversely, the Minolta SRT-101 is a simpler mechanical camera body with match-needle TTL metering that's dependent on its operation from an old mercury cell battery. But the shutter fires mechanically, meaning that in lieu of the correct battery you can use an external handheld meter and set the camera manually.

This is not to say that the mechanical Minolta is any more reliable than the Canon, it's just that in the case of needing repair donor parts from other Minolta bodies can often suffice, whereas that's not necessarily the case with dead chips in the Canon.

-Joe
 
If you appreciate fine mechanical objects, then you will prefer the SRT-101. Not to mention the fact that you will be using some superb Minolta prime optics. Zoom lenses from the Canon FD era usually won't hold a candle to a Minolta (or Canon FD) prime lens.
 
JoeV is correct on the canon. They just die or some just drain the battery really fast and become a paper weight. The Minolta primes are also excellent far better than the equivalent canon primes. If you can find one for a decent price the 58mm 1.2 will knock your socks off.
 
stompyq said:
........The Minolta primes are also excellent far better than the equivalent canon primes.......
Click to expand...

Far better? Care to show us some evidence to prove this assertion? And I don't mean anecdotal evidence or personal opinion.

Jim B.
 
The A series Canons, quite competent and well made though they are, are electronic and so subject to the availability of circuit boards. Also, I've never been a fan of the fiddliness of trying to use the depth of field preview on these cameras.

The Canon lenses are top rate. The Rokkors don't cede anything to them, however, and the Rokkors are known for really nice out of focus effects.
 
Mackinaw said:
Far better? Care to show us some evidence to prove this assertion?
Click to expand...

If this forum existed circa 1985, we'd have ourselves a nice Minolta vs. Canon flame war :D

Instead, the SLR producers with the best SLR lenses have long disappeared (Contax, Leica, and to a lesser degree Minolta & Olympus), and we are left with the companies that always had the largest marketing budget (not the best gear).

(he ducks) :D:D
 
One other question I had was if there were any of you that could point me in the right direction for tips with the lenses. I would like to be semi prepared befor they arive in the next few days. With the C3 All I can use is the sunny f.16 rule, as I have not purchased a light meter. But what I read maybe a light meter may be a bad idea. As they take the refection of light from an object, and can degrade quite quickly. As you may be able to tell I am fairly new to all of this as my name entails...
 
I wrote this in another thread this past weekend. Just my personal opinions of a couple lenses.

The 50/1.7 like similar lenses from all makers is the bread and butter, simple good lens. Top notch in my book are the MD W.Rokkor-X 24/2.8 and 35/1.8. Both lenses were developed during Minolta's period of cooperation with Leitz. The 24 has a shared optical formula with the R 24/2.8. The MD Rokkor-X 50/1.4 (55mm filter ring) is my favorite SLR fast 50. I am a fan of the 100mm focal length over 135, and the MC Tele Rokkor-X 100/2.5 is the one in my kit. The MC 58/1.2 is just full of great character, and the MC 85/1.7 is similarly attractive. The MC 58/1.4 is a very good lens too.
Click to expand...
 
"I can recommend John Titterington for repairs/CLAs of classic SLRs very highly."

I agree, what a great guy. I have him set up my SRTs with the standard 1.35 volt and use a converter, because I find the meter is more accurate, specifically more linear across its scale than with the regular adjustment for 1.5v alkaline.
 
Personal opinion........I feel the Rokkor and Rokkor-X lens beat the Canon manual focus lens.

I also find it interesting that many Canon users are buying Rokkor-X lens and converting them to Canon mount

I am a long time srT user. I just bought 2 more off eBay..

The Canon AE-1 and AE-1 Program just doesn't feel right in the hand.. Too much plastic....and that %$*&**@## Canon squeak!!!!!!!!!!!!
 
Film noob said:
So I just purchased both of these cameras
Click to expand...
If you have both of them, shoot Delta 100 with all the lenses, develop in Beutler and you will see what is going on right on your prints. With lenses of that age there is no way to say, that Rokkor 50 will beat the rest. It should, but who can be sure it is still pristine internally. I shoot only with lenses of that vintage; FD, SR, Pentax, Yashica, M42 and met quite a few with no visible damage, but internally not OK. Only a good test will show it's worth.
 
Primes

Primes

I think that any prime lens from that era was far better than those early zooms. Were Minolta primes better than Canons? I won't stick my nose into that fight, definately get it broken.
 
Either one are good cameras, I have had and used several of each. I have never had an issue of reliability in the dozen or so AE1 Program cameras I have used, all have worked regardless of their physical appearance. The AE1 is susceptible to a squeaky mirror problem, but this is not difficult to fix. Not all Canon zooms are bad, the difference in IQ between a zoom and a prime is small enough that most people would never notice the difference. There are also many FD lenses to choose from.

Even though I think the AE1 is a great camera, I prefer the Minolta SRT series. I have a couple of black paint SRT 101 and Super cameras. I love the style of their design, and their simple mechanical operation. I just wish there were more lenses available for the SRT.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom