Minolta Vectis SLR owners?

[varjag]

Anyone here in possession of this doubly evil (SLR *and* APS) device? I would greatly appreciate some data on the body: its thickness, mirror size by the short side, if possible approx film to plane distance, and diameter of bayonet opening.

Was looking at those the other day (they sell for pennies on ebay), with vague idea to retrofit a M or LTM mount on one..

 

[--]

Anyone here in possession of this doubly evil (SLR *and* APS) device?

I do not own it any longer but I used to have a Vectis S-1 with different lenses including the AF! mirror reflex lens and the surprisingly good macro lens. It is a very durable body, good weather proofing and apart from the flash jumping out by iselft when under anything but Sahara's glaring sun :bang: the handling was not bad. If you have big hands it is probably not for you, though.

It had to go, finally, because its most important feature - the panoramic format - simply does not deliver a quality worth anything 🙁. I must admit the prices have left me with a desire to re-buy simply because it was a camera that gave me a lot of joy 🙂 and I (collecting cameras) would like to have it under the wings :angel: again.

I had one APS film corrupt from an unknown magnetic source so be aware where you put your film and/or camera with film in. And scanning is not so easy - you must have a special adaptor to your scanner (if you want to).

For me it was a typical under-rated Minolta product and if you do not venture into the panoramic format the picture quality is not that bad.

Cheers
Karspoul

 

[Kim Coxon]

I do have one. It acts as a backup for the RD3000 (triple evil it's a DSLR!)
I also have the full range of lenses from the 17mm to the 400mm. The lenses were actually very underated and are very good performers. The image quality from the S1 is about the same as from half frame.

I will try and measure it this weekend. However, the whole system reies on the electrical contact between body and lens so I am not sure just how feasible it would be.

Kim

Anyone here in possession of this doubly evil (SLR *and* APS) device? I would greatly appreciate some data on the body: its thickness, mirror size by the short side, if possible approx film to plane distance, and diameter of bayonet opening.

Was looking at those the other day (they sell for pennies on ebay), with vague idea to retrofit a M or LTM mount on one..

 

[varjag]

Karspoul, Kim, thanks!

Kim, yes, it is electronic all through.. the back seems to have more buttons than my keyboard. My line of thinking was salvaging the circuit sans step motor from its lens (to fool camera that it's mounted), then switch body to MF and aperture priority. It may well turn out to be dead end though.

 

[Dr. Strangelove]

It had to go, finally, because its most important feature - the panoramic format - simply does not deliver a quality worth anything 🙁.
Karspoul

I wonder why people insist on using the bogus panoramic format on APS cameras. The full frame (for IX240 film) 16:9 APS-H (or HDTV) is perhaps not "panoramic" in the strict meaning of the word, but its still considerably wider than the 3:2 of 35 mm film, APS-C and 35 mm half-frame. It allows for many interesting compositions that you can't do with 35 mm film.

To say it bluntly, the APS system is APS-H. Panoramic and APS-C are just bonuses. APS-C of course is useful of people shots, but I never use the panoramic format. If you want panorama, get a real 35 mm or 120 film panoramic camera or use digital and stitch.

 

[--]

I wonder why people insist on using the bogus panoramic format on APS cameras. ... To say it bluntly, the APS system is APS-H. Panoramic and APS-C are just bonuses. APS-C of course is useful of people shots, but I never use the panoramic format. If you want panorama, get a real 35 mm or 120 film panoramic camera or use digital and stitch.

Absolutely - and I think that most people did actually use it as such in the many small cameras one saw in the last few years before digital compacts became payable.

That said, for me it was an introduction to the panoramic format I really came to love and which I now entertain through an Xpan and a Panasonic LX2. Secondly, the Vectis actually got my photo interest, that had vaned a bit, on stereoids again. So I have a few good reasons to be happy about APS.

I had one more disaster with an APS film though. I had another (Canon Ixus) camera and dropped it from 1 meter onto a stone floor (not recommended). Despite the Ixus' steel coat the camera was ruined and it was impossible to get the film out. A few days mountain trekking pictures was lost that way 🙁

 

[NIKON KIU]

Uhhhhhh....
I have one(keeps head down and quickly exits)

Kiu

 

[Dr. Strangelove]

Uhhhhhh....
I have one(keeps head down and quickly exits)

Kiu

One is coming in the mail soon... I just purchased it, with 22-80 mm zoom. Using APS these days is somewhat crazy, but I really like the 16:9 APS-H full frame format. Some people say that you can always crop from 3:2 (35 mm, digital SLR except 4:3 system) frame, but for me at least it is difficult to get good composition without seeing it when I take the picture. I know that Ansel Adams and many pros regularly cropped and still crop their 6x6 cm frames to some other aspect ratio in the darkroom, but I suppose I am not quite on their level of pre-visualization yet 😱

Currently the only APS cemera I have is a Konica Revio Z3 P&S, and even though it's pretty good for a zoom P&S camera, an SLR is of course much better for serious use and the lens is probably much better as well.

 

[Dr. Strangelove]

Posted some pictures of my "new" S1 to the "Show us your SLR ..... WHAT?" thread. I will also try to measure the dimensions you needed, varjag.