The Forgotten Minolta - The Dynax 60 (Maxxum 70)
We'd like to give a Big thanks to Barry Fitzgerald for contributing this review!
In 2004, Minolta launched their last two film bodies. With the popularity of digital increasing year on year, and with falling prices, it seemed unlikely that there would be a strong demand for a high end 35mm film SLR. In the end, we got a mid range, and an entry level low cost SLR. A logical choice, considering the market position of film.
Enter the last two models, the Dynax 60 (Maxxum 70), and the Dynax 40. The 60 is the far better featured of the two cameras, and the one that is the subject of this article. And it is probably the one that would most interest most users. The Dynax 40 probably shares the same shutter mechanism, both rated to 1/2000s, but lacks many other features, and most notably, has very limited viewfinder information, with no indication of aperture and shutter speed. It's was clearly aimed at the super budget film body market. Though in its favour, it does offer the user the full PASM modes (something lacking on the previous budget offering, the 3L which was programmed AE, and scene mode AE only)
The camera was available in two kits. Single lens kit f3.5-5.6 28-100mm (D), or with a two lens featuring the former, but an additional f4.5-5.6 75-300mm (D ) in the bundle. Retail prices were around £299 for the twin lens kit.
A return to "classic design", almost...
Minolta classified the camera below the film 7, but above the Dynax 5. It's overall specifications share much with the 5, with the notable exceptions of slower flash sync speed (1/90s v 1/125s), and a reduced shutter of 1/2000s; nevertheless, it added some features, including a more robust construction, twin top plate dials, brought the AF point count up to the level of the film 7, and a few prior features including DMF (direct manual focus).
But the key area that stands out, is a return to what many consider defined Minolta cameras, handling. You won't mistake the Dynax 60 for a 7 body, it has less controls, switches missing, and the build whilst good, isn't in the same overall class, nor will you get that amazingly good pentaprism viewfinder, at this price, we are firmly into pentamirror land.
What you do get, is an interesting design mix, that in some ways, is superior to previous offerings in this class.
The 60 & 5, up close...
The 60 looks unlike previous Minolta film bodies, though bears some resemblance to the 600si Classic, released back in 1995. Specifications wise, the 60 shares much with the Dynax 5, the popular 2001 model, but there are a few differences between the two models.
Here are the key features of both cameras compared:
Advantage
Disadvantage
| Feature | Dynax 60 | Dynax 5 |
|---|---|---|
| Viewfinder Magnification | x70 | x75 |
| Eye Start AF with grip sensors | No | Yes |
| No. of Auto focus points | 9 (8 line, 1 cross type) | 7 (6 line, 1 cross type) |
| Top shutter speed | 1/2000s | 1/4000s |
| DMF (direct manual focus) | Yes | No |
| Wireless Ratio Flash | No | Yes |
| Flash Guide no. (ISO 100) | 16 | 12 |
| Twin Top Plate Dials | Yes | No, Single |
| Dioptre Correction | Yes | No |
| Flash sync speed (on board) | 1/90s | 1/125s |
| Remote | RC-3 only | RC-3 (date-model), Wired |
| Metering Modes | 14 segment, CW, Spot | 14 segment, spot |
| Construction | Metal/Plastic | Plastic |
| Optional Battery pack (4xAA) | No | Yes (BP-200) |
Both cameras trade blows on the table. Each showing stronger and weaker points. The viewfinders are close on both, the magnification difference is not particularly noticeable, as we are on full frame 35mm both have somewhat larger viewfinders than budget level Digital APS SLR's. Minolta seemed to have lost interest in eye start autofocus at this stage, even the later digital models did not feature it. The only possible surprise, is the 1/2000s top shutter speed, and lower flash sync, likely due to parts being shared with the lower end 40 model.
Wireless ratio flash also exits the camera, as does a socket for a wired remote cable. There is no battery pack available either, power is from 2x CR2 lithium batteries only.
But what you lose, you gain in other areas, such as centre weighted metering, a 9 point autofocus system, up from 7 points, DMF makes it over from the film 7, the on-board flash increases in power up to Gn 16, for spectacle wearers you have at at last dioptre correction, and the build gets a boost with a metal top plate.
What features matter to the user, will depend largely on your subject, and shooting style. The 60 is not a direct replacement to the 5, but a different offering..sharing some similarities. Many of the improvements/limitations, are down to personal taste, in fact some will be put off with the slower top shutter speed, and flash sync alone. The appeal of the 60, lies in a few subtle tweaks, and to a large part down to handling and design..
Great job Barry
Its nice to see this up here and read it again completed like this. Appreciate you again contributing this article here.
Carl
excellent Maxxum 70 Review
Thanks Barry, I enjoyed this very much, well done and extremely informative.
I'm actually a big fan of the Dynax 5, owning three, I still prefer it to the Maxxum 70 - though I can't say I've done more than handle Carl's...maybe I'd change my mind once I used it for real.
However my main use is for carrying it around out in the mountains someplace with a prime on it, so I enjoy the lighter weight. They're also generally a bit cheaper to replace. Beyond that so long as the spot meter and the multi-segment are accurate I'm happy.
Regardless to me they're both such neat cameras, great fun to use.
Great Review
The review is excellent, Barry as done a great job. My guess is that Dynax 60 was developed after Konica acquired Minolta, this shows on this camera, some things that where standard on 5 series was removed on this body, making it less interesting for me than the older cameras.
The 7D received the AF mechanism from the Dynax 60, and we all know it was slower then the 7.
Carl, can we expect a Dynax/Maxxum 9 review from you ?
I think the 5 is also a
I think the 5 is also a great camera, I have one of those too. As noted, there are pros and cons to the feature set with the 5 and 60 compared side by side, maybe the edge goes to the 5 on some specs, but the 60 is the better handling camera IMO. A BP-200 battery pack adds a lot to the feel of the 5, without it the grip is a tad on the small side being honest. I would call it a draw between the two cameras.
I agree the 7 sets the benchmark for AF performance with film minolta bodies. I have no evidence to support the idea that the 7d got a direct transplant of the 60's AF unit, I would think it most unlikely, as one is APS-C, and one FF. I have few complaints with the 60 regarding AF, it isnt as good as the 7 film, but really, it is not far off of it. I have no idea where it was suggested the 5d and 7d got the AF unit off this model, both of those probably have different ones (due to costs), and the only thing they share is the 9 point based system, which the 7 also has. Until someone rips apart a 60, 5d, 7d..we will likely never know...but I certainly am happier with the AF of this film body, compared to the 5d.
Not used a 9 for a long time, and I currently do not have one..maybe Carl would like to do a review on that ;-)
Well, just maybe so :)
With as many digital cameras and lenses that have crossed my path since January, I would really like to indulge a project like that, since it would be more personal "sharing" than a serious review. The Maxxum 9 has been highly regarded by so many that I would probably be re-iterating much of what has already been said, nevertheless I believe another article for this camera couldn't hurt, if anything as a tribute. Have a few things to finish up before I start seriously considering doing that review however.
In the meantime maybe we can get Barry/Eric/Andrew to do a Maxxum 7 review too :)
Carl
The 7D AF it's not a direct transplant
but rather based on the Dynax 60, this is just my guess base on some discussions I saw, in the early days of 7D release, of course the size must be smaller for APS-C.
Just for fun a link to Peter Ganzel Pbase 7D and 7 AF sensors www_pbase.com/pganzel/image/83500679 no 60 to compare :)
Nicely done Barry.
Nicely done Barry, a good solid review. Makes me wanna shoot some film ;-)
Andrew
DMF on (D) lenses only?
On the Dynax 7, A100 and A700, I can use DMF on non-(D) lenses. In fact, all my lenses (except the Sony 18-70mm kit lens) are non-(D) ones. :D
The 60/70 does not support
The 60/70 does not support DMF on non D lenses. It simply does not appear on the lcd as an option. It does when a D lens is mounted on the camera. I have no idea why this is, but that is the situation.
The 5/7d can also use DMF with non D lenses.
On the off chance anyone is
On the off chance anyone is interested, there is an alternative review on the net, but it is in Czech
Translated here:
http://translate.google.com/translate?u=http://www.fotoaparat.cz/article/7187/1&hl=en&ie=UTF-8&sl=cs&tl=en
I have received a number of
I have received a number of emails directing my attention to an interesting debate on a well known internet camera forum. The subject is discussing why I apparently have "let the Dynax 60" off lightly in a number of areas..and why I have been critical of the entry series from Sony for lacking a number of features. Most notably MLU or mirror lock up, when this model does not have MLU.
I'll clarify a few things with this post here.
I have and continue to hold the belief that MLU is a valuable and important feature. It would be better if the Dynax 60 had it. My overall score of 8/10 I believe reflects a fair overall judgement on the camera. Had the 60 had MLU, flash exposure compensation and a few other features (wired remote etc) I would likely have improved the score to reflect that.
My comments regarding MLU as not a common feature at this price point and around the time of release are based on looking at competitor models near to that time and price. MLU isn't found on most models in this price range on 35mm film bodies at that time.
One example here is a Canon and the specifications can be seen here:
http://photonotes.org/cgi-bin/camera-lookup.pl?camera1=*&camera2=*&camera3=*&camera4=*&camera5=eos300v
Other models such as the Nikon F65 were at a similar price point.
I based my overall conclusion having compared the 60 to models such as these. I believe that the Dynax 60 is overall (not in all cases but many), better specified than most rivals. Obvious pro points are a 9 point AF system v the 7 or 5, spot metering which is also absent on both (the 60 does not restrict choice of metering mode in certain modes either), 3fps is again beating out it's rivals. The 60 also has a more powerful built in flash and IMO a better overall design and handling. In particular the easy selection of camera setting via the left hand dial.
It's also important to remember that the 60 does have some features not present on the current entry range of Alpha models (A2xx/A3xx and A5xx). These are DOF preview, DMF (MF after AF has finished) The 60 also has a lens release lock on/off option..which is not present on any current production A mount body. Program shift is not on the entry Alpha bodies either, even the A5xx range, nor do you have options for "AF or release" priority..a choice of AF illumination time of 0.3 or 0.6 seconds. The lower entry Alphas do not have a flash raise button or even an AEL button which makes the use of spot and CW metering far less useful. Exposure compensation is 3 stops on the 60 and 2 stop on the digital Alpha models. Not all of these points will bother users..but my criticism of the missing features on some of the Alpha range I feel are valid.
The 60 does not have MLU and it should..but this is a camera that costs very little to buy. You can pick one up new on ebay for far less than even the cheapest DSLR on the market. Second hand it's purchase price is very inexpensive. Compare this to the price of an A5xx model and you can see how the "bang per buck factor" comes into play. The 60 was not that expensive even brand new at first release..far less than an A5xx model now. To my mind it is far more obvious to compare so called mid range DSLR's with both their current rivals on the market and the models that came before them. Comparing the A5xx range to the A100 and Km5d (which were at the same price point) and it's clear why I hold those views.
Of course some might start to look at film bodies made in the 1990's and suggest things are not so bad in 2009/2010. Over a period of time more advanced features tend to trickle down to even lower end bodies.. within reason of course. The simple fact is the A5xx range are the only upper entry mid range digital DSLR's on the market that do not have MLU. The 60 was actually better featured than rivals in many ways..hence it's positive review. 2004 was back then..this is 2010. It's not entirely shocking to expect an improvement in basic core features over the years. So in closing I can forgive some weaker points on the 60 based on "v rivals at the time" and "cost". When you pay more you expect more and I believe many reviewers take this into account.