Go Back   Steve's Digicams Forums > Digicam Help > What Camera Should I Buy?

Thread Tools Search this Thread
Old May 26, 2006, 6:53 AM   #1
Join Date: Nov 2005
Posts: 31

Hi All,

I currently have a Maxxum 5D, good camera, but it lacks certain pro features such as not having individual controls (need to use menus), doesn't have a PC socket, and it's not the fatest at focusing.

I've been looking at the S3 Pro, looks great, don't see many people using it though. I'm also concerned about the write speed of RAW files. If I were to use this to take wedding shots of say a bride coming down the aisle, then I'd take at 1 frame per 3 secs. My understanding is that a RAW can take 14secs to write on this camera and that would limit me to a 3 or 4 shot capacity before I'd have to stop.

Also considering the Eos 30D, looks great but not as pro looking as the S3, and it's about £200 more in the UK to buy. Good thing here is that Canon have more lens options than Nikon.

Lastly, been thinking of going from my 5D to the 7D as I can use all of my lenses and accessories. This would be an option, though I think I could recoup most of the cost of my current kit as a lot was S/hand and minolta lenses and spares have gone mad on ebay. My reservation here is that I'm not happy with the Sony cahngeover and as such I've lost faith in the brand.

Can anyone help with some opinions here for the types of photography I'm looking for? to recap, i want to be able to:

1. shoot weddings at 1 frame every 3 secs without filling the buffer in say 10 shots.

2. Use studio lighting for portraiture.

3. It to work well in low light using say a F1.7 50mm

4. Focus on the subject fast and accurately. (5D focusing can often be soft).

Thanks all
Adambrae is offline   Reply With Quote
Sponsored Links
Old May 26, 2006, 9:59 AM   #2
Senior Member
E.T's Avatar
Join Date: Jul 2003
Posts: 921

Adambrae wrote:
I've been looking at the S3 Pro... My understanding is that a RAW can take 14secs to write on this camera and that would limit me to a 3 or 4 shot capacity before I'd have to stop.
For standard dynamic range RAWs it can buffer six of them, for Fuji's "wide dynamic range" (extra dynamic range only in highlights) that's three shots.
And writing speed seems to be very slow for dSLR:

Lastly, been thinking of going from my 5D to the 7D as I can use all of my lenses and accessories.
That would be quite natural choise if you already have Minolta AF lenses. 7D appears to have ten RAW buffer, also writing speed seems to be very good.

As bonus you would get stabilization "to every lens", it doesn't help with moving targets but with stationary targets like landscapes and architecture it would work well.

And Sony bought KM's camera business because they want seriously into dSLR market. Apparently KM's dSLR department is going to continue work under Sony, also Sony announced intentions for making own lenses for Minolta's AF mount so it won't be dead end in any case.
(also Sony sure has money for development and big advertising department so amount of success in markets is still quite big joker)

And as general thing these dSLRs have "crop factor" of about 1.5 because sensor is smaller than 35mm film so you have to take that into account when looking lenses.
E.T is offline   Reply With Quote
Old May 26, 2006, 11:55 AM   #3
Join Date: Jun 2003
Location: Savannah, GA (USA)
Posts: 22,367

The 7D would give you more external controls and a better viewfinder compared to your 5D. It's also got a larger buffer.

Your 5D can actually write to media faster though. The 5D can buffer 5 photos shooting in raw, and can write to media at 1 raw frame per second after the buffer is full, using a fast card like a Sandisk Extreme III.

You can find some performance tests for both the 5D and 7D here:


But, the AF speed shouldn't be any different. AFAIK, the AF sensor assembly is the same.

According to tests performed by PopPhoto, the KM 5D's AF system was able to focus faster and in lower light (focuses in -1 EV light), compared to the other entry level DSLR models they tested (comparing the KM 5D, Canon Rebel XT, Olympus Evolt E-500 and Nikon D50).

They said this about it:

The 9-zone AF system is the fastest of this group and works down to EV –1, very dim light indeed.

They clocked it as follows in various light levels. It's my understanding that a 50mm f/1.4 is the lens most commonly used by them to test DSLR AF performance.

Konica Minolta Maxxum 5D AF Speed: EV 12: 0.32 sec; EV 10: 0.33 sec; EV 8: 0.41 sec; EV 6: 0.57 sec; EV 4: 0.59 sec; EV 2: 0.86 sec; EV 1: 0.87 sec; EV 0: 0.93 sec; EV -1: 1.85 sec.

The closest competitor in the Autofocus Area was the Nikon D50. The other models were left a bit behind, especially in very low light (even the Rebel XT couldn't lock focus in light lower than 0 EV, and it took over 2 seconds to lock focus there). Your 5D focuses faster in only half that much light (EV 0 is twice as bright as EV -1).

There can be a significant difference in AF speed, depending on the lens, lighting and subject. If you use a dim lens, the camera's AF sensors won't be able to see as well to focus. For example, a lens like the Konica Minolta 18-70mm DT kit lens is down to f/5.6 by the time you're at 35mm with it. In contrast, a lens like the KM 28-75mm f/2.8 can maintain a constant f/2.8 aperture throughout it's focal range.

Since an AF lens always focuses at the largest available aperture, the AF sensors would get 4 times as much light using a lens like the 28-75mm f/2.8 versus the 18-70mm DT kit lens by the time you zoom in muich (f/2.8 is 4 times as bright as f/5.6).

In addition to optical quality (which can impact AF) and brightness (which will impact AF), you also see difference in gearing between lenses. Some lenses may require more revolutions to make changes in focus distance compared to others. This impacts AF speed. For example, most macro lenses focus slower, because they're geared towards finer focus adjustments (as well as being able to focus closer, which means they are designed for a larger range of close to far).

If you're getting soft focus, it could be your lenses, technique or camera body (out of calibration). Out of calibration bodies are not that common with the 5D. But, it does happen.

A common technique for checking AF accuracy is to use a good prime (for example 50mm f/1.7), and place some DVD cases or books staggered closely together at different distances from the camera. Then, focus on the one in the middle and make sure it's sharpest. If the one immediately behind it is sharper, you've got backfocus. If the one immediately in front of it is sharper, you've got front focus. Manufacturers can calibrate a body that's not focusing correctly. You can also find some focus calibration test targets along with instructions for checking AF.

Lenses can also have a problem (not reporting correct information to the camera body that it needs to make judgements on how far to turn the focus motor for final focus adjustment). This is relatively uncommon with Minolta lenses, but you see some 3rd party lenses with compatibility issues from time to time.

But, chances are, it's something else. For example, leaning after locking focus, subject moving after you've locked focus, focusing on wrong part of subject when you have a shallow DOF (for example, a person's body versus their eyes), trying to use center focus and reframing which can cause backfocus in some conditions, using a lens that's soft at wider apertures (most lenses are sharper 2 or 3 stops down from wide open and a soft lens can make it harder for the AF sensors to see), etc.

Here is an article explaining why recomposing can cause focus errors:


You may want to post some samples of problem photos in the KM DSLR forum, and see if members can comment on what could be going wrong.

As a general rule, I always select the focus point closest to my subject's eyes to minimize reframing, and I've gotten excellent results this way with decent lenses, even in ridiculously low light.

In one of the local restaurants here with live music, light is so low I need to underexpose 1/3 stop just to get shutter speeds up to 1/8 second shooting with my Minolta 100mm f/2 wide open at f/2 and ISO 3200, and I can still lock focus using an outside focus point (albeit with some difficulty).

If you're bound and determined to go another direction and want good AF and shooting performance, the Canon EOS-30D would probably be your best bet out of the other models you're looking at. It's got a good AF system, decent size buffer, fast frame rate, etc. But, your lens selection will be just as important (if not more important) for any model you consider, especially in less than optimum lighting.

JimC is offline   Reply With Quote
Old May 27, 2006, 6:30 AM   #4
Join Date: Nov 2005
Posts: 31

Thanks to you both for your replies. I should probably stick with the Minolta, but there are a few things that have made me disheartened with it, mostly due to the Sony changeover.

I really Cannot understand why they couldn't have transitioned the transfer better. Why not continue manufacture under the minolta name until Sony is up and running? I guess that's why i don't run a multi-national corporation.

Thanks again guys. I'm still tempted by the S3 as I tend to do more 'people' photography and it's tones are great. It's also a killer price just now.
Adambrae is offline   Reply With Quote
Old May 27, 2006, 6:42 AM   #5
Join Date: Jun 2003
Location: Savannah, GA (USA)
Posts: 22,367

The Fuji is a nice camera. I think that they should have upgraded the body to attract more users looking for better camera performance.

It's also got good Dynamic Range. But, your KM 5D is no slouch in this area. The tone curve used for it's jpeg images leaves a bit to be desired. But, shooting in raw, it's pretty hard to beat unless you go with the Fuji S3 Pro.

The Konica Minolta Maxxum 5D even outperforms the Canon EOS-1Ds Mark II for Dynamic Range shooting in raw and converting with Adobe Camera Raw (overexposing with both to achieve best DR), according to Dave Etchells' results with Imatest:


The EOS-1Ds Mark II is Canon's most expensive professional Digtal SLR (current street price of about $7000 if you shop around), with a sensor the size of 35mm film. You can get a KM 5D for less than 1/10 the cost of the Canon (and the Fuji is far less expensive, too).

Of course, you don't get anti-shake with the Fuji, and if you're shooting in low light often, it's a nice feature to have, especially since it works with any lens, including bright primes.

JimC is offline   Reply With Quote

Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off

All times are GMT -5. The time now is 4:13 AM.