Minolta SRT-101 vs. Canon AE-1 Program

[Coopersounds]

I have and use both cameras, i prefer the feel of the canon in my hand. Both can be good.

 

[Dirk]

I had both and vote for the AE-1 Program. Lighter, smaller, auto exposure, brighter viewfinder, interchangeable focusing screens. If that stuff is more important to you than the better looks (especially in black) and more solid feel of the 101, the choice is clear.

 

[Pioneer]

I can recommend John Titterington for repairs/CLAs of classic SLRs very highly.

I agree. He took my SRT 102 and made it the smoothest operating camera I own, bar none, and I own some good ones.

 

[CMur12]

It is good to have both. Which I do.

(Discussing SR-T 101 and SR-T 102, with their different focusing screens.)

I do, too. My favorite overall is the 102, but there are times that I really like the 101 with it its finer micro-prism center and fine-focusing collar.

Re: the Canon AE-1 Program. Someone gave me one of these, but I don't use it. I have no use for Program mode, I'm not much inclined to use Shutter-Priority automation, and the manual mode in this camera is awkward. Of these three modes, the Shutter-Priority mode would work best for me, but I just don't like how this camera works.

- Murray

 

[leicapixie]

I have been gifted the Canon Ae-1P, 50mm,28mm,35~105 True zoom.
Since then more gifts, Ae-!,AV-1.
They are all good.The lenses are excellent.
Using the system has been fun and reliable.
More than I can say about my esteemed RF!
I also have Minolta, nice but not great.
So vote for Ae-1P.

 

[Pioneer]

I have not voted since I've not used the Canon AE-1. But it is my belief that, unless someone can come up with a way to fix them, any camera that requires electronics to operate is on borrowed time unless the manufacturer still supports it.

I have had two very nice cameras die completely because of electronic problems, a third is showing some problems with the LED display screen and a focus motor died on a fourth.

If you have any electronic camera, use it and enjoy it.

BTW - I love the color rendering of the Minolta glass. Like a lot of manufacturers, not every lens that they built is head of the class. But they are all very nice and will produce great photographs for you if you do your part.

 

[Moto-Uno]

I find concerns about repairs to these 35mm cameras somewhat of a non issue . Why , well 'cuz none of them can't be replaced for less than a C note ( or 1/2 that ) . Nice as they are , these are not valuable devices anymore . 🙂 Peter

 

[gavinlg]

I'm going to go against the grain here and say the canon is a better system. The lenses especially are better. Minolta has a very good 58mm f1.2, but thats about it. The 35mm f1.8 is beat by canons 35mm f2 (concave element), the 24's are beat by canons 24mm f1.4L, and the 85's are beat by canons 85mm f1.2L. Even the 58mm f1.2 at least equalled by canons 50mm f1.2L.
The canon bodies may be electronic but they're no fuss and very reliable.

After using a few modern minolta primes, I was rather disappointed with their optical quality. Their reputation is far overhyped. The bodies are quite nice though.

Nearly 6 years on I still hold this opinion even after using the Minolta X system and MD lenses for the last year or so. Minolta lenses are overrated and canon FD lenses are far underrated.

 

[Pioneer]

I'm going to go against the grain here and say the canon is a better system. The lenses especially are better. Minolta has a very good 58mm f1.2, but thats about it. The 35mm f1.8 is beat by canons 35mm f2 (concave element), the 24's are beat by canons 24mm f1.4L, and the 85's are beat by canons 85mm f1.2L. Even the 58mm f1.2 at least equalled by canons 50mm f1.2L.
The canon bodies may be electronic but they're no fuss and very reliable.

After using a few modern minolta primes, I was rather disappointed with their optical quality. Their reputation is far overhyped. The bodies are quite nice though.

I did not know that Canon produced the L Series lenses in FD mount, which I understand that the AE-1 uses.

Learn something new everyday.

Though I do think that Minoltas optics are far better than gavinlg is giving credit for I may have to dig around and find some of these FD L Series lenses for myself.

 

[sleepyhead]

I did not know that Canon produced the L Series lenses in FD mount, which I understand that the AE-1 uses.

Learn something new everyday.

Though I do think that Minoltas optics are far better than gavinlg is giving credit for I may have to dig around and find some of these FD L Series lenses for myself.

I recently bought a Canon 24mm f/1.4 FD L lens, been using it on my Leica SL. I know what a great lens is, for example the Leica 28mm Summicron ASPH.

My estimation of the Canon FD 24/1.4 so far is that it is good at f/1.4, and very good at f/2 and beyond. (But it never achieves the biting microcontrast of the 28mm ASPH.) It hardly vignettes at f/1.4 which is interesting, and it is more than sharp enough for my purposes from f/2 on. It focuses down to 1 foot, and costed me 1/6 of a SECOND HAND Leica 24mm Summilux (!).


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk