Quote:
|
While I shoot Nikon, and it's always done the job quite well for me, I do have to admit that Canon does make an excellent camera. And I agree, they must be doing something right, or why would so many people buy them.
|
A long time ago, in a galaxy far, far away, I bought a Minolta 101 from a guy selling stuff from the back of a truck. I was only a high school student then, but the simplicity of that camera and the ease of control launched a lifelong passion with photography and darkrooms.
With Minolta's line up of mouth-watering lenses it became the perfect alternative to overpriced Nikons. That 101 traveled with me all over the United States, down the rapids of the Colorado River, to the Mountains in the Teton Wilderness and sandy beaches of Florida's coast it was always reliable and damn near unbreakable.
Because the control of exposure, focus and depth of field was not automatically handled by a bunch of micro processors, I was forced to learn about such things and rolling film on spool in the dark completed part of my photography education. That Minolta 101 still works like a top some 35 years latter. If it weren't for the digital revolution that 101 would still be hanging around my neck. (By the way, in those days it was R. Fredrick Smith who was publishing a Glamour instruction book, I know because I own it. It sits right next to my new copy of "Garage Glamour") ;-)
While Cannon, Olympus, Nikon, Pentex ALL make great cameras the biggest difference in ownership is "MARKETING". If Nike would have bought Minolta 30 years ago, many here would have Minolta's hanging around their necks and they would still be in business. Instead Sony bought them and to me, that just brings up vision of the "betamax", ugghh. I don't know how well Sony will do with Minolta but one things for sure, it will be an uphill climb to win the loyalty of Nikon and Cannon owners because that is who their new A1 targets.
We are furiously loyal to the products we purchase, especially cameras and equipment.