Question:
It came up in the 9 vs 7 thread on the Minolta Mailing List where the statement the 7 AF’s faster than the 9/F5 came from, so here they are in case others are interested: http://www.silverace.com/AFspeeds.jpg 245KB file, about 2 minutes to download over a modem. JPEG chart contains the Popular Photography test results from their reviews of the Minolta 7, 600si, Nikon F5, F100, F80, EOS 7 and EOS 3. Manufacturer stated AF capabilities on incoming objects are also provided, taken from their brochures for the 7, 9 and EOS-1V. "Autofocus was amazingly fast– as fast, or in some cases, faster than anyone else’s." – Popular Photography quote on the Minolta 7. Basically, the 7 AF’s as fast or faster than the F5 across most EV ranges from low-light all the way up to super-bright EV; the 7 matches the incoming AF capabilities with a 300mm telephoto of the EOS-1V based on brochure statements. Popular Photography says it’ll match and beat the 9, depending on EV range, and has improved AF performance over all other older Minolta bodies. The EOS 7 is nowhere as fast, and belongs in a lower category of cameras; same goes for the Nikon 80 and even the 100 (which is slower than the F5 anyways). =Real life results will vary= depending on the particular lens and target you are using to test AF speeds (these were using either a fast 50mm lens or a 300mm telephoto), however, in general, such tests reflect the improvements in technology and design the newer 7 has over the older competing models. Not bad for a $600 category killer, esp. when it’ll at least keep up with the $2000+ F5 for the most part. d =)
Response:
It came up in the 9 vs 7 thread on the Minolta Mailing List where the statement the 7 AF’s faster than the 9/F5 came from, so here they are in case others are interested: http://www.silverace.com/AFspeeds.jpg 245KB file, about 2 minutes to download over a modem.
LOTS OF GOOD STUFF SNIPPED =Real life results will vary= depending on the particular lens and target you are using to test AF speeds (these were using either a fast 50mm lens or a 300mm telephoto), however, in general, such tests reflect the improvements in technology and design the newer 7 has over the older competing models. Not bad for a $600 category killer, esp. when it’ll at least keep up with the $2000+ F5 for the most part. d =)
Thanks for the informative post David. Where is the 7 available for $600 – any "reputable" places? Thanks again. Lewis I’ve set (anti-spam) controls to allow in only people on my list. If you want to be on my list contact me through the newsgroup. I regret the inconvenience. Thanks. Check out my photos at "LEWISVISION": http://members.aol.com/Lewisvisn/home.htm
Response:
It came up in the 9 vs 7 thread on the Minolta Mailing List where the statement the 7 AF’s faster than the 9/F5 came from, so here they are in case others are interested:
I’ve heard that Minolta is in deep shit because the Dynaxx 7 don’t sell as expected. People don’t give a rats ass about focus speed. People buy Nikon/Canon because the pros are using it. The arguments about focus speed, US IS etc is of no concern for the majority; they just use this argumenst to validate their camera choice. BTW Most modern camera have AF speed enough top focus on any subject you can possibly hold within the AF sensor(s)
Response:
It came up in the 9 vs 7 thread on the Minolta Mailing List where the statement the 7 AF’s faster than the 9/F5 came from, so here they are in case others are interested: I’ve heard that Minolta is in deep shit because the Dynaxx 7 don’t sell as expected. People don’t give a rats ass about focus speed. People buy Nikon/Canon because the pros are using it. The arguments about focus speed, US IS etc is of no concern for the majority; they just use this argumenst to validate their camera choice. BTW Most modern camera have AF speed enough top focus on any subject you can possibly hold within the AF sensor(s)
One could add that AF speed (as in how fast it aquires focus) isn’t complete without some kind of value on how *well* the camera aquires focus. A qick and dirty way to "win a benchmark test" is to simply degrade the precision of the sensing unit by allowing a large deadband of "acceptable, but not just right" focus. Ofcourse, I do not accuse Minolta for that trick, just point out a weakness in testing AF speed. — Anders Svensson
Response:
One could add that AF speed (as in how fast it aquires focus) isn’t complete without some kind of value on how *well* the camera aquires focus. A qick and dirty way to "win a benchmark test" is to simply degrade the precision of the sensing unit by allowing a large deadband of "acceptable, but not just right" focus. Ofcourse, I do not accuse Minolta for that trick, just point out a weakness in testing AF speed.
I agree. Both Canon and Minolta market focus speed on how fast the camera can spin through the helicoid; a totally usess parameter. Now would you by a manual focus lens with 3mm distance from infinity to close focusing and then brag about how fast you can focus? Focus speed as defined above is about gearing in the lenses. Minolta upgraded the gearing in the lenses and suddenly had the fastest focusing system. Real life performance is something totally different and mostly about the AF software.
Response:
I’ve heard that Minolta is in deep shit because the Dynaxx 7 don’t sell as expected.
Sounds like the sort of thing that would be said by a camera-store clerk who gets a bigger cut by selling another brand. Never mind that 35mm SLRs make up only a tiny percentage of any of the major makers’ sales numbers. People buy Nikon/Canon because the pros are using it.
In other words, "marketing". -j
Response:
People buy Nikon/Canon because the pros are using it.
People buy Nikon/Canon because *they hear* the pros are using them. In other words, "marketing".
Exactly! E.R. http://members.aol.com/ernreed If you aren’t spamming, avoid the junktrap
If you like this post and would like to receive updates from this blog, please subscribe our feed.