Go Back   Steve's Digicams Forums > Digital SLR and Interchangeable Lens Cameras > Sony Alpha dSLR / Konica Minolta dSLR, Sony SLT

Thread Tools Search this Thread
Old Oct 31, 2004, 2:29 AM   #1
Junior Member
Join Date: Sep 2004
Posts: 10

I currently have a Canon Digital Rebel,and I'm trying todecide whether tobuythe new Minolta 7D for the antishake or to start investing in Canon lenses and upgrade the body eventually. So my question is whether the antishake is really worth having. I know that having the antishake in the body will save money compared to buying image stabilized lenses, but is it necessary to have antishake in every lens? Being able to lower the shutter speed won't help me if I'm taking indoor pictures of kids at birthday parties, for example. The kids will still be blurry because they're moving around.

WhatI really want to get into in the the future is nature photography, such as landscapes andanimals.Woulda tripod be good enough or would the anitshake be a major benenfit?

I want you todo your bestto talk me into buying the Minolta, with lots of examples of how the antishake will help me.

Sci is offline   Reply With Quote
Sponsored Links
Old Oct 31, 2004, 7:41 AM   #2
Senior Member
NHL's Avatar
Join Date: Jun 2002
Location: 39.18776, -77.311353333333
Posts: 11,567

As I see it there's a cost benefit in integrating the anti-shake in the body... You only pay for this feature once! The cost of the EF 70-200 f/2.8 IS USM for example will more than finance for this camera. :idea:

It's effectiveness is debatable on moving subjects however. Like you said it's not good at taking pictures of kids running indoor regardless of which system you pick.
The antishake is quite useful actually for landscape if you take pictures of sunrises and sunsets or inside churches (people don't run as much in church)

You won't be able to take pictures of flying birds, but once they've landed under the shade of branches the IS may be useful again... if they don't move :?

IMO the 1st thing everyone has to overcome is 6Mp vs 8Mp...
NHL is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Oct 31, 2004, 8:32 AM   #3
Senior Member
Join Date: Jul 2004
Posts: 1,724

I have experienced many times photographing wildlife where antishake would have made a huge difference. I have a lot of shots where the low light made for settings impossible to hold the camera still enough. In my opinion, it is a VERY valuable asset. so much so, that as I look for a suitable upgrade from my 7i, I am narrowing my choices to models that have it. Best regards,

KENNETHD is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Nov 5, 2004, 9:49 AM   #4
Senior Member
Join Date: Mar 2004
Posts: 120

If you're taking long telephoto shots I'd regard IS as essential. I wouldn't buy a camera without it and I'm very disappointed that Olympus seem to have forgotten about this feature on the 4/3 system. BIG mistake.

Obviously you can get Canon IS lenses, but they are very expensive and as NHL says, if you get more than one IS lensyou're paying for it twice. If you only want one long lens, maybe it doesn't matter. But the Minolta still seems the better bet. They don't seemto be charging a lot for the feature.
Technophile is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Nov 13, 2004, 7:17 AM   #5
Senior Member
Join Date: Jul 2004
Posts: 1,724

Just revisiting this topic...and thought I'd add something. I agree with NHL, 8MP vs 6MP has got to be a major blunder on KM's part. They must have had serious problems to overcome with this camera, not to have brought it out sooner. As it stands now, I'd call it a day late and a dollar short. The notion that they offer a bonus warranty and sweeten it further with $150 credit, tells me they know this. Anti shake with every lense is a definate plus, and maybe there isn't THAT much difference in pixel real estate between 6MP and 8MP. But as we go forward into 10MP and beyond, 6MP is really going to look even more like yesterday's news. Pixel count isn't everything. Neither is horsepower in cars. But the guy who has it gets the bragging rights, like when in the ads on TV someone points a finger and says...got a hemi in that thing? Best regards,

KENNETHD is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Feb 9, 2005, 12:08 PM   #6
Senior Member
bernabeu's Avatar
Join Date: Jan 2005
Posts: 990

The color reproduction of KM's CCD is 48bits deep!

I have zoomed to the equivalent of a 1200mm lens from a 200 on camera and made acceptable 8x10 prints
bernabeu 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 2:47 PM.