Go Back   Steve's Digicams Forums > Digital Cameras (Point and Shoot) > Konica Minolta

Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Old Jan 16, 2005, 6:15 PM   #11
Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2004
Posts: 51
Default

Hi there,

I don´t think it´s a question of KM-bashing, but rather a question of elektronic-bashing. For example - on top of my computer-cupboard there stands a Pentax MX (my first "real six-string") and it works perfectly well - after close to 30 years.

I don´t believe that any one of today´s cameras will last that long - do you?

Apart from that, my A2 works perfectly well, too - after I had it repaired and maybe a little "tweaked" by KM´s European Service Center 3 weeks after I bought it.

Greetings from Bavaria,

Wolfie








wolfie is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Jan 16, 2005, 8:54 PM   #12
Member
 
DeanB's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2004
Posts: 96
Default

'Brand Repair History' fromCONSUMER REPORTS

Please correct me if I'm wrong,but I believe the 'Consumer Reports'magazine is only available in the U.S. and Canada. I am a member/subscriber. Consumer Reports is a non-profit organization, "whose mission is to work for a fair, just, and safe marketplace for all consumers and to empower consumers to protect themselves" Theypublish a monthly magazine and have their own website [ http://www.consumerreports.org ]. NO advertising is allowed. CR doesresearch, studies and surveys on various types of consumer products (autos, appliances, electronics, etc.) and they publish their findingsin their magazine and website. Unfortunately, for complete access to their website, one must first be a member/subscriber. For a more accurate and detailed description of CR, click on the following linkto see theirMission Statement :arrow:http://www.consumerreports.org/main/...=1105921778108

In November of last year (`04) the CR magazine had alarge section in it on digital cameras. In that section there was an article titled "Brand Repair History". I will summarize that article as best I can, as follows:

The information in the article was based on reader responses to CR's 2004 Annual Questionnaire. The digital camera section of that questionnaire was limited tocameras bought new between 2001 & 2004. The results of that questionnaire included 167,000 digital cameras. This article summarized those findings and reported on "the percentage of digital cameras that had been repaired or developed a serious problem that wasn't repaired".

Thelist of companies that follows, starts in order ofthose that had the fewest repairs and serious problems. Those companies listedlast had the most repairs/problems with their digital cameras:

#1 Sony / #2 Panasonic / #3 Canon / #4 Olympus / #5 Fuji -Fujifilm / #6 Casio / #7 Nikon / #8 JVC / #9 Hewlett-Packard / #10Minolta / #11 Kodak / # 12 Pentax / #13 Toshiba.

Sony had the best record, with only ~ 2.5% repairs and serious problems. Toshiba had the worst record, with ~ 10% repairs and serious problems. Minolta was well down in thebottom half of thelist, with ~ 7% repairs and serious problems.

Again, these results are based on 167,000 digital cameras bought between `01 & `04. This should be a good guide for us, as this is a very large sample, andin this threadwe are onlyconcerned with recent history.

Dean
DeanB is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Jan 16, 2005, 11:09 PM   #13
Administrator
 
Join Date: Jun 2003
Location: Savannah, GA (USA)
Posts: 22,378
Default

DeanB wrote:
Quote:
Which brings up another thought;should we not also consider posting another thread; "Konica Reliability"?:roll::lol:
FWIW, I've had a Konica KD-510z since July 2003. It goes with me everywhere (well -- I don't shower with it). ;-)

It lives ina pants pocket most of the time, and I've even quit worrying about not having other items (keys, etc.) in the pocket with it. It's been dropped a time or two, banged around quite a bit, and has taken over 6 thousand photosso farwithout anything breaking. The body, buttons, lens, etc. (and even the exposed LCD display)are still in mint condition. It's a tough little camera. In the review of the older KD-500z, Steve said this (which is one of the reasons I bought the newer KD-510z when it was introduced):

Quote:
The KD-500Z is physically identical to its 4-megapixel sibling, the KD-400Z except for the darker body color. It employs the same high quality Hexanon 3x optical zoom lens and state of the art image processing hardware in a very durable stainless steel body. This is a camera that can go anywhere and survive the trip no matter how many times you sit on it or bang it around in a suitcase.
http://www.steves-digicams.com/2003_...d500z_pg5.html

Now, does that mean that they don't break? Nope.... I've seen about a half dozen instances of failures withmodels in this series (including the Minolta G500/G600 models)reported on various forums (a rare s0042 error that appears to be a lens mechanism failure of some type - probably QC related since it appears to occur very early after someone gets one when I've seen users report it).

But, I see early failures of different types reportedby users of other manufacturer's products, too.



JimC is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Jan 17, 2005, 12:47 AM   #14
Member
 
DeanB's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2004
Posts: 96
Default

JimC wrote:
Quote:
DeanB wrote:
Quote:
Which brings up another thought;should we not also consider posting another thread; "Konica Reliability"?:roll::lol:
OOPS! It looks like Iput my smiley-faces in the wrong place. They were intended to laugh at my question, not Konica reliability. Sorry 'bout that. Apologies to all, including Konica Fan and Moderator, Mr. JimC.


Quote:
JimC Wrote:
"FWIW,I've had a Konica KD-510z since July 2003. It goes with me everywhere (well -- I don't shower with it). ;-) . . . "
So what's wrong?! Why don't you shower with your 510z? I shower with my camera once a month, whether I need it or not! :lol:


************************************************** ************************************************** *******


JimC Also Wrote: " . . . But, I see early failures of different types reportedby users of other manufacturer's products, too. . . . "

Good point, and more food-for-thought for us!

Thanks Jim!

Dean
DeanB is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Jan 17, 2005, 8:26 AM   #15
Administrator
 
Join Date: Jun 2003
Location: Savannah, GA (USA)
Posts: 22,378
Default

DeanB wrote:
Quote:
JimC wrote:
Quote:
DeanB wrote:
Quote:
Which brings up another thought;should we not also consider posting another thread; "Konica Reliability"?:roll::lol:
It looks like Iput my smiley-faces in the wrong place. They were intended to laugh at my question, not Konica reliability.


Actually, I was chuckling when I typed it. I figured that nobody would expect someone with a Konica to reply. :-)

Like it or not guys... I think that quality leaves something to be desired on many (if not most) new products. Customer Service could use some improvement, too. But, ifquality was better, we'd be complaining about the prices. ;-)

With rapidly changing models in the Digital Camera market, with manufacturers churning them out on high speed assembly lines, gone are the days where your camera can double as a hammer (unless you're willing to spend the "big bucks"). So, I'd treat them as a precision instrument instead.





JimC is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Jan 17, 2005, 2:54 PM   #16
Senior Member
 
Catbells's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2004
Posts: 874
Default

Here's an interesting discovery whichI stumbled across at PC World:



Full details here http://www.pcworld.com/reviews/artic...5,pg,12,00.aspbut nothing specifically was mentioned of Minolta
Catbells is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Jan 17, 2005, 3:02 PM   #17
Senior Member
 
Catbells's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2004
Posts: 874
Default

And at PC Magazine it suggests that Minolta has slipped to D. See http://www.pcmag.com/article2/0,4149,1213541,00.aspfro their report.


Catbells is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Jan 17, 2005, 4:02 PM   #18
Member
 
BoneDaddy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Posts: 61
Default

It's a bit worrying to see that Minolta was the ONLY brand to have a significantly below average rating for units needing repairs in the past 12 months, in that last survey.

Could this be due to new suppliers providing inferior parts and components?

Keep in mind that of the 213 people that responded for Minolta in the first year, 100 or more of them could've been A2 owners complaining of focusing issues. How far back does this survey go? Which camera models are being included in these numbers? The short answer: we just don't know. There just isn't enough information in this survey to make a real determination.

Interesting...
BoneDaddy is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Jan 18, 2005, 7:36 AM   #19
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Posts: 851
Default

My experience with Minolta cameras...

I bought a D7 when it first came out. I liked the camera, it produced very good photos, had great ergonomics and was much smaller than my Nikon F2. BUT, the autofocus sucked. It really was totally unreliable. In AF mode, I was lucky to get 20 or 25% of my photos properly focused. So I used the camera almost exclusively in manual focus mode. This also gave the camera a much faster response time, so that was a plus.

Well after a couple of years of fairly heavy use, the zoom ring broke. It turned out to be just a cheap piece of plastic. I sent the camera back to Minolta for repair. It cost me over $200 for the repair, but Minolta replaced my old and very used D7 with a brand new D7i. The D7i seems to be quite a bit faster than the old D7, but AF is still a problem. Not nearly as bad as the old D7, but not anywhere near 100% accuracy either. I would probably say it's closer to 75% now. A big improvement over my old D7, but still lacking.

A friend of mine boulght a D7i when it came out and after about a year or so, it failed. As in it just ceased to work. This was an electronic problem, not mechanical, like mine. He sent it off to Minolta for repair, which they did at no charge. Now, the camera has failed again. Same symptom.

I also have a Minolta G500. This is a great little camera. It just keeps on going and going and going (knock on wood).

I have had my Nikon F2 since the 70's and I have shot thousands of rolls of flm with it and it has never let me down, plus it is still ready to go into action should I need it. I just don't think ANY of the digital cameras (including the dSLRs) have anything close to the reliability of the old film cameras. I consider them all (dSLRs included) to be disposable consumer goods.

Declan
amazingthailand is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Jan 18, 2005, 2:04 PM   #20
Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Posts: 43
Default

Ok I got my Dimage z1 back again today (The Eight-teenth of January),. I sent it back to the Authorized Repair Center back on the Seventh of January.ExactlyNine Working Day's (inc. Satuday), in total Eleven Day's all told. Those Guys do pretty quck work. So (for me) the turnaround time was acceptable. Konica Minolta Cleand the junk off the inside of my lenes and fixed the one Dead Pixel however the one Hot?!?! White Pixel (onthe LCD) was still there.

So on the whole of it I'm pleased with Konica Minolta's Service Center. Ijust wishI'd didn't have to use it so damnd soon though. If they did indeed cure all the ailments of this Camera (includeing the Switch-finder LCD), Then this would be a very decent Camera for the Money Well here's hopeing for the best...
Michael R. Habel is offline   Reply With Quote
 
Reply


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 5:17 AM.