Maxxum 7D rebate

G

Guest

Guest
Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital.slr-systems (More info?)

Konica Minolta is now offering a $200 mail-in rebate on the purchase of a 7D
between 3/14/04 and 7/30/05. Darn, I purchased mine in November 2004.

Fred

--
We're Fulltimers and proud of it!

View our photos online at:
http://community.webshots.com/user/famueller
 

Jer

Distinguished
Jan 12, 2004
669
0
18,930
0
Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital.slr-systems (More info?)

Fred & Sandra Mueller wrote:

> Konica Minolta is now offering a $200 mail-in rebate on the purchase of a 7D
> between 3/14/04 and 7/30/05. Darn, I purchased mine in November 2004.
>
> Fred
>


Seems odd a rebate would already be offered for a relatively recent
product. <shrug>

--
jer
email reply - I am not a 'ten'
 
G

Guest

Guest
Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital.slr-systems (More info?)

On Sun, 20 Mar 2005 01:17:22 GMT, "Fred & Sandra Mueller"
<fmueller@earthlink.net> wrote:

>Konica Minolta is now offering a $200 mail-in rebate on the purchase of a 7D
>between 3/14/04 and 7/30/05. Darn, I purchased mine in November 2004.
>
>Fred

Judging by some reviews, it's going to take more than that
to make it sell against better product from Canon and Nikon.
-Rich
 

Slack

Distinguished
Jan 10, 2005
136
0
18,630
0
Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital.slr-systems (More info?)

On Sat, 19 Mar 2005 18:31:47 -0800, Jer <gdunn@airmail.ten> wrote:

> Fred & Sandra Mueller wrote:
>
>> Konica Minolta is now offering a $200 mail-in rebate on the purchase of
>> a 7D between 3/14/04 and 7/30/05. Darn, I purchased mine in November
>> 2004.
>> Fred
>>
>
>
> Seems odd a rebate would already be offered for a relatively recent
> product. <shrug>
>

Slow sales?
--
Slack
 
G

Guest

Guest
Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital.slr-systems (More info?)

Jer wrote:

>
> Seems odd a rebate would already be offered for a relatively recent
> product. <shrug>

It came out in Sept. It's now 6 months into it. Similar price cuts
and rebates happened to Canon and Nikon, IIRC, whether officially or on
the street.

Further, I have a feeling that the 7D is moving slowly (if steadilly) as
K-M users have been trained to be patient by K-M's long march to the
line with the 7D. Now that the initial bunch of buyers has dried up,
they need to reach out to the holdouts.

Per dpreview, K-M have reported pretty bad financial results (in the
black, but not black enough) although this is pinned to a different
entitiy than the camera group. This may put pressure on reducing
inventories across the board.

Cheers,
Alan


--
-- r.p.e.35mm user resource: http://www.aliasimages.com/rpe35mmur.htm
-- r.p.d.slr-systems: http://www.aliasimages.com/rpdslrsysur.htm
-- [SI] gallery & rulz: http://www.pbase.com/shootin
-- e-meil: there's no such thing as a FreeLunch.
 
G

Guest

Guest
Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital.slr-systems (More info?)

RichA wrote:

> Judging by some reviews, it's going to take more than that
> to make it sell against better product from Canon and Nikon.

?

This camera is more camera than the D70 in several respects, and despite
the 6 MP, compares favourably to the 20D. See the dpreview review.

This camera will not make converts of Nikon or Canon users who have a
lot of lenses. It won't attract many new customers due to the high
price. The camera is aimed principally at Minolta glass owners like myself.

K-M will likely introduce a pared down version as a "5D" or something
similar. A-S might get sacrificed in that version. In short, they need
a sub $1,000 (incl kit lens) if they are to break in new sales.

I don't know if they have the balls to do a 9D in full frame. I suspect
not. But if they could at least increase the pixel count to the 10 - 12
MP range and improve the sync speed, in a couple years, I would be happy.

Cheers,
Alan

--
-- r.p.e.35mm user resource: http://www.aliasimages.com/rpe35mmur.htm
-- r.p.d.slr-systems: http://www.aliasimages.com/rpdslrsysur.htm
-- [SI] gallery & rulz: http://www.pbase.com/shootin
-- e-meil: there's no such thing as a FreeLunch.
 
G

Guest

Guest
Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital.slr-systems (More info?)

"RichA" <none@none.com> wrote in message
news:96rp315ak4rdkin3h2f18klvnd4q1s7mf8@4ax.com...
> On Sun, 20 Mar 2005 01:17:22 GMT, "Fred & Sandra Mueller"
> <fmueller@earthlink.net> wrote:
>
>>Konica Minolta is now offering a $200 mail-in rebate on the purchase of a
>>7D
>>between 3/14/04 and 7/30/05. Darn, I purchased mine in November 2004.
>>
>>Fred
>
> Judging by some reviews, it's going to take more than that
> to make it sell against better product from Canon and Nikon.

It does appear they need to get well under $1000 to have a chance with those
customers who do not already have KM lenses.
 
G

Guest

Guest
Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital.slr-systems (More info?)

Anti-shake is nice, but a $20 monopod accomplishes the same, if not better
results.
They need to release a truly competitive product to even have much appeal to
the Minolta community. I am not excited about spending $1300 (after rebate),
just to see my $600 85mm portrait lens turn into a cheap 135mm APS
appendage. And the 6MP resolution! Pocket digicams do better these days!

>
> It does appear they need to get well under $1000 to have a chance with
those
> customers who do not already have KM lenses.
>
>
 
G

Guest

Guest
Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital.slr-systems (More info?)

Happy Traveler wrote:

> Anti-shake is nice, but a $20 monopod accomplishes the same, if not better
> results.
> They need to release a truly competitive product to even have much appeal to
> the Minolta community. I am not excited about spending $1300 (after rebate),
> just to see my $600 85mm portrait lens turn into a cheap 135mm APS
> appendage. And the 6MP resolution! Pocket digicams do better these days!


Nice trolling, if complete BS.

A-S (like VR or IS) is up to the photog to use or not use as may be
appropriate to the situation).

Detail?
http://www.aliasimages.com/images/KM7D/ColBill_SM.U.jpg

Full size: (2.5 MB) http://www.aliasimages.com/images/KM7D/ColBill_FD.U.jpg
be sure to view at 100%.

(Or a smaller crop from same:
http://www.aliasimages.com/images/KM7D/ColBill_FD.U.C.jpg )

100 f/2.8 macro @ f/8.

Pocket cams? With tiny sensors? I can only conclude that you have no
idea what you're talking about.

Cheers,
Alan.


--
-- r.p.e.35mm user resource: http://www.aliasimages.com/rpe35mmur.htm
-- r.p.d.slr-systems: http://www.aliasimages.com/rpdslrsysur.htm
-- [SI] gallery & rulz: http://www.pbase.com/shootin
-- e-meil: there's no such thing as a FreeLunch.
 

Jer

Distinguished
Jan 12, 2004
669
0
18,930
0
Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital.slr-systems (More info?)

Alan Browne wrote:
> Jer wrote:
>
>>
>> Seems odd a rebate would already be offered for a relatively recent
>> product. <shrug>
>
>
> It came out in Sept. It's now 6 months into it. Similar price cuts
> and rebates happened to Canon and Nikon, IIRC, whether officially or on
> the street.
>
> Further, I have a feeling that the 7D is moving slowly (if steadilly) as
> K-M users have been trained to be patient by K-M's long march to the
> line with the 7D. Now that the initial bunch of buyers has dried up,
> they need to reach out to the holdouts.
>
> Per dpreview, K-M have reported pretty bad financial results (in the
> black, but not black enough) although this is pinned to a different
> entitiy than the camera group. This may put pressure on reducing
> inventories across the board.
>
> Cheers,
> Alan
>
>


Well, as Slack pointed out and your own post, slow sales (slower than KM
likes) would seem to make the most sense, not that I've kept up with
them. I suppose one could say I'm a contributing factor to that angle.
Now that a rebate has entered the ring, coupled with all this KM glass
I still have (along with the film backs), I'll admit I may help them
turn things around by a count of 1.

--
jer
email reply - I am not a 'ten'
 
G

Guest

Guest
Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital.slr-systems (More info?)

On Sun, 20 Mar 2005 11:17:19 -0500, Alan Browne
<alan.browne@freelunchVideotron.ca> wrote:

>Happy Traveler wrote:
>
>> Anti-shake is nice, but a $20 monopod accomplishes the same, if not better
>> results.
>> They need to release a truly competitive product to even have much appeal to
>> the Minolta community. I am not excited about spending $1300 (after rebate),
>> just to see my $600 85mm portrait lens turn into a cheap 135mm APS
>> appendage. And the 6MP resolution! Pocket digicams do better these days!
>
>
>Nice trolling, if complete BS.
>
>A-S (like VR or IS) is up to the photog to use or not use as may be
>appropriate to the situation).
>
>Detail?
>http://www.aliasimages.com/images/KM7D/ColBill_SM.U.jpg
>
>Full size: (2.5 MB) http://www.aliasimages.com/images/KM7D/ColBill_FD.U.jpg
>be sure to view at 100%.
>
>(Or a smaller crop from same:
>http://www.aliasimages.com/images/KM7D/ColBill_FD.U.C.jpg )
>
>100 f/2.8 macro @ f/8.
>
>Pocket cams? With tiny sensors? I can only conclude that you have no
>idea what you're talking about.
>
>Cheers,
>Alan.

How's the Minolta for this;
One thing that really bugs me is the control of lack of control over
chromatic aberration that most cameras still exhibit. Whether it's
due to the CCD (doubtful) or the lens design, it's a pain. In Paint
Shop Pro 9 there is a function that removes it, and it works pretty
well, but you can only compensate for that bright-dark edge chromatic
aberration that sees the purple fringe attached to the edge. When it
bleeds over into the dark areas of the image (tree branches against
the sky) there isn't much you can do. Until they really start using
a lot more fluorite or fluorite-glass composites (like FPL-53) in
lenses (expensive, in any case) this problem will keep showing up.
-Rich
 
G

Guest

Guest
Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital.slr-systems (More info?)

RichA wrote:

> On Sun, 20 Mar 2005 11:17:19 -0500, Alan Browne
> <alan.browne@freelunchVideotron.ca> wrote:
>
>
>>Happy Traveler wrote:
>>
>>
>>>Anti-shake is nice, but a $20 monopod accomplishes the same, if not better
>>>results.
>>>They need to release a truly competitive product to even have much appeal to
>>>the Minolta community. I am not excited about spending $1300 (after rebate),
>>>just to see my $600 85mm portrait lens turn into a cheap 135mm APS
>>>appendage. And the 6MP resolution! Pocket digicams do better these days!
>>
>>
>>Nice trolling, if complete BS.
>>
>>A-S (like VR or IS) is up to the photog to use or not use as may be
>>appropriate to the situation).
>>
>>Detail?
>>http://www.aliasimages.com/images/KM7D/ColBill_SM.U.jpg
>>
>>Full size: (2.5 MB) http://www.aliasimages.com/images/KM7D/ColBill_FD.U.jpg
>>be sure to view at 100%.
>>
>>(Or a smaller crop from same:
>>http://www.aliasimages.com/images/KM7D/ColBill_FD.U.C.jpg )
>>
>>100 f/2.8 macro @ f/8.
>>
>>Pocket cams? With tiny sensors? I can only conclude that you have no
>>idea what you're talking about.
>>
>>Cheers,
>>Alan.
>
>
> How's the Minolta for this;
> One thing that really bugs me is the control of lack of control over
> chromatic aberration that most cameras still exhibit. Whether it's
> due to the CCD (doubtful) or the lens design, it's a pain. In Paint
> Shop Pro 9 there is a function that removes it, and it works pretty
> well, but you can only compensate for that bright-dark edge chromatic
> aberration that sees the purple fringe attached to the edge. When it

I've had one strange aberation to date. A thin, OOF branch against
overexposed snow. The color of the branch is a deep red. (I didn't
work these over, just a resize and light sharpen with USM):

Blownout version (green in branches):
http://www.aliasimages.com/images/KM7D/PICT0981X.jpg

Exposure corrected:
http://www.aliasimages.com/images/KM7D/PICT0982X.jpg

> bleeds over into the dark areas of the image (tree branches against
> the sky) there isn't much you can do. Until they really start using

Here's a shot against the sky. JPG save was at large size, but lowest
res as RAW was on too...
http://www.aliasimages.com/images/KM7D/PICT0958X.jpg

> a lot more fluorite or fluorite-glass composites (like FPL-53) in
> lenses (expensive, in any case) this problem will keep showing up.

So far no real problems, but I'm still under 100 frames...

Cheers,
Alan


--
-- r.p.e.35mm user resource: http://www.aliasimages.com/rpe35mmur.htm
-- r.p.d.slr-systems: http://www.aliasimages.com/rpdslrsysur.htm
-- [SI] gallery & rulz: http://www.pbase.com/shootin
-- e-meil: there's no such thing as a FreeLunch.
 
G

Guest

Guest
Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital.slr-systems (More info?)

Jer wrote:

> I still have (along with the film backs), I'll admit I may help them
> turn things around by a count of 1.

Given my experience with the camera with esp. the 100 f/2.8 and 80-200
f/2.8 you won't be sorry. I'm not totally enthuses with the 28-70 /2.8
results so far, but this ain't bad:
http://www.aliasimages.com/images/KM7D/BirchBarkSnow.jpg

Cheers,
Alan



--
-- r.p.e.35mm user resource: http://www.aliasimages.com/rpe35mmur.htm
-- r.p.d.slr-systems: http://www.aliasimages.com/rpdslrsysur.htm
-- [SI] gallery & rulz: http://www.pbase.com/shootin
-- e-meil: there's no such thing as a FreeLunch.
 
G

Guest

Guest
Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital.slr-systems (More info?)

On Sun, 20 Mar 2005 07:30:56 -0800, Happy Traveler <happy_traveler@abc.net>
wrote:
> And the 6MP resolution! Pocket digicams do better these days!

The 7D's pixels are much larger than the pixels in a pocket digicam.
This makes for less noise and greater dynamic range.

ISO 400 is as high as the Olympus 8080 goes, and it's quite noisy.
I haven't used a 7D, but I would guess that ISO 400 images from it
look a lot better, even with 2 few megapixels.

--
Ben Rosengart (212) 741-4400 x215
Sometimes it only makes sense to focus our attention on those
questions that are equal parts trivial and intriguing.
--Josh Micah Marshall
 
G

Guest

Guest
Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital.slr-systems (More info?)

Alan Browne wrote:

> So far no real problems, but I'm still under 100 frames...
1000
 
G

Guest

Guest
Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital.slr-systems (More info?)

RichA wrote:
> On Sun, 20 Mar 2005 11:17:19 -0500, Alan Browne
> <alan.browne@freelunchVideotron.ca> wrote:
>
>> Happy Traveler wrote:
>>
>>> Anti-shake is nice, but a $20 monopod accomplishes the same, if not
>>> better results.
>>> They need to release a truly competitive product to even have much
>>> appeal to the Minolta community. I am not excited about spending
>>> $1300 (after rebate), just to see my $600 85mm portrait lens turn
>>> into a cheap 135mm APS appendage. And the 6MP resolution! Pocket
>>> digicams do better these days!
>>
>>
>> Nice trolling, if complete BS.
>>
>> A-S (like VR or IS) is up to the photog to use or not use as may be
>> appropriate to the situation).
>>
>> Detail?
>> http://www.aliasimages.com/images/KM7D/ColBill_SM.U.jpg
>>
>> Full size: (2.5 MB)
>> http://www.aliasimages.com/images/KM7D/ColBill_FD.U.jpg be sure to
>> view at 100%.
>>
>> (Or a smaller crop from same:
>> http://www.aliasimages.com/images/KM7D/ColBill_FD.U.C.jpg )
>>
>> 100 f/2.8 macro @ f/8.
>>
>> Pocket cams? With tiny sensors? I can only conclude that you have
>> no idea what you're talking about.
>>
>> Cheers,
>> Alan.
>
> How's the Minolta for this;
> One thing that really bugs me is the control of lack of control over
> chromatic aberration that most cameras still exhibit. Whether it's
> due to the CCD (doubtful) or the lens design, it's a pain. In Paint
> Shop Pro 9 there is a function that removes it, and it works pretty
> well, but you can only compensate for that bright-dark edge chromatic
> aberration that sees the purple fringe attached to the edge. When it
> bleeds over into the dark areas of the image (tree branches against
> the sky) there isn't much you can do. Until they really start using
> a lot more fluorite or fluorite-glass composites (like FPL-53) in
> lenses (expensive, in any case) this problem will keep showing up.
> -Rich

I've run some 4000 shots on my 7D with several different lenses and have
yet to see an obvious example of chromatic aberration; used to get it
fairly frequently on my older Sony CD1000.

The thing I'm having problems with (also saw it on my film 9xi's) is
that adding a polarizer often results in profound image degradation.
Almost like the filters are not threading properly and sitting at an
angle other than perpendicular to the light path, but they don't appear
to be off kilter when eyeballing them on the lens.

Tiffen circulars all, not sure what to do other than buy a couple new
ones to see if I just got a bad batch back in 1993. Also considering a
Cokin polarizer since I already have a Cokin P system - any thoughts
from folks on the Cokin polarizer?

Thanks,

Bob ^,,^
 
G

Guest

Guest
Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital.slr-systems (More info?)

On Sun, 20 Mar 2005 17:33:46 -0500, Alan Browne
<alan.browne@freelunchVideotron.ca> wrote:

>RichA wrote:
>
>> On Sun, 20 Mar 2005 11:17:19 -0500, Alan Browne
>> <alan.browne@freelunchVideotron.ca> wrote:
>>
>>
>>>Happy Traveler wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>>>Anti-shake is nice, but a $20 monopod accomplishes the same, if not better
>>>>results.
>>>>They need to release a truly competitive product to even have much appeal to
>>>>the Minolta community. I am not excited about spending $1300 (after rebate),
>>>>just to see my $600 85mm portrait lens turn into a cheap 135mm APS
>>>>appendage. And the 6MP resolution! Pocket digicams do better these days!
>>>
>>>
>>>Nice trolling, if complete BS.
>>>
>>>A-S (like VR or IS) is up to the photog to use or not use as may be
>>>appropriate to the situation).
>>>
>>>Detail?
>>>http://www.aliasimages.com/images/KM7D/ColBill_SM.U.jpg
>>>
>>>Full size: (2.5 MB) http://www.aliasimages.com/images/KM7D/ColBill_FD.U.jpg
>>>be sure to view at 100%.
>>>
>>>(Or a smaller crop from same:
>>>http://www.aliasimages.com/images/KM7D/ColBill_FD.U.C.jpg )
>>>
>>>100 f/2.8 macro @ f/8.
>>>
>>>Pocket cams? With tiny sensors? I can only conclude that you have no
>>>idea what you're talking about.
>>>
>>>Cheers,
>>>Alan.
>>
>>
>> How's the Minolta for this;
>> One thing that really bugs me is the control of lack of control over
>> chromatic aberration that most cameras still exhibit. Whether it's
>> due to the CCD (doubtful) or the lens design, it's a pain. In Paint
>> Shop Pro 9 there is a function that removes it, and it works pretty
>> well, but you can only compensate for that bright-dark edge chromatic
>> aberration that sees the purple fringe attached to the edge. When it
>
>I've had one strange aberation to date. A thin, OOF branch against
>overexposed snow. The color of the branch is a deep red. (I didn't
>work these over, just a resize and light sharpen with USM):
>
>Blownout version (green in branches):
>http://www.aliasimages.com/images/KM7D/PICT0981X.jpg
>
>Exposure corrected:
>http://www.aliasimages.com/images/KM7D/PICT0982X.jpg
>
>> bleeds over into the dark areas of the image (tree branches against
>> the sky) there isn't much you can do. Until they really start using
>
>Here's a shot against the sky. JPG save was at large size, but lowest
>res as RAW was on too...
>http://www.aliasimages.com/images/KM7D/PICT0958X.jpg
>
>> a lot more fluorite or fluorite-glass composites (like FPL-53) in
>> lenses (expensive, in any case) this problem will keep showing up.
>
>So far no real problems, but I'm still under 100 frames...
>
>Cheers,
>Alan

The second snow-branch shot looks fine, detail is restored to the
snow. The tree against the sky shows no aberrations.
-Rich
 

Jer

Distinguished
Jan 12, 2004
669
0
18,930
0
Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital.slr-systems (More info?)

Alan Browne wrote:
> Jer wrote:
>
>> I still have (along with the film backs), I'll admit I may help them
>> turn things around by a count of 1.
>
>
> Given my experience with the camera with esp. the 100 f/2.8 and 80-200
> f/2.8 you won't be sorry. I'm not totally enthuses with the 28-70 /2.8
> results so far, but this ain't bad:
> http://www.aliasimages.com/images/KM7D/BirchBarkSnow.jpg


Thanks for the followup, Alan, looks as though you and I have had
similar tastes in glass. I also have a 135 f/2.8 that has a lot of
portrait miles on it, so my curiosity will be adding a few more. I'll
have to see if my local shop has a 7D available for adoption this week.


--
jer
email reply - I am not a 'ten'
 
G

Guest

Guest
Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital.slr-systems (More info?)

Jer wrote:

> Alan Browne wrote:
>
>> Jer wrote:
>>
>>> I still have (along with the film backs), I'll admit I may help them
>>> turn things around by a count of 1.
>>
>>
>>
>> Given my experience with the camera with esp. the 100 f/2.8 and 80-200
>> f/2.8 you won't be sorry. I'm not totally enthuses with the 28-70
>> /2.8 results so far, but this ain't bad:
>> http://www.aliasimages.com/images/KM7D/BirchBarkSnow.jpg
>
>
>
> Thanks for the followup, Alan, looks as though you and I have had
> similar tastes in glass. I also have a 135 f/2.8 that has a lot of
> portrait miles on it, so my curiosity will be adding a few more. I'll
> have to see if my local shop has a 7D available for adoption this week.

Shooting portraits with the 100 f/2.8 (on the 7D) is difficult at best
in my small studio (living room), unless you have lots of room the 135
is going to be quite difficult.

Is that 135 the STF? A lens long on my lust list.

Cheers,
Alan

--
-- r.p.e.35mm user resource: http://www.aliasimages.com/rpe35mmur.htm
-- r.p.d.slr-systems: http://www.aliasimages.com/rpdslrsysur.htm
-- [SI] gallery & rulz: http://www.pbase.com/shootin
-- e-meil: there's no such thing as a FreeLunch.
 
G

Guest

Guest
Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital.slr-systems (More info?)

I just purchased the 28-75/2.8 D using my rebate ($150 since I bought
it in Dec). It should arrive in a few days. Would you happen to know,
other than FL, what the difference between this new lens and your 28-70
is? I would have thought it was the G optics, but Adorama lists the
28-75 as a G lens also. Could be a typo I suppose. B&H only says it's a
D lens.

Also, I'd think the 85/1.4 would be a good portrait lens for the 7D. Of
course, KM lists it as discontinued, so finding one...

Mike