My New Flagship

[nikkortorokkor]

The best camera that I ever owned is undoubtedly my brassy old Nikon F3, foolishly let go in a fit of travel-induced poverty some 9 years ago and still missed. Unfortunately, common sense tells me that even though F3s are going for a relative song these days, I still can't afford the lenses. My quest then, has been to find a camera that gives the same solid feel as the F3, but without the price penalty. Buying new has not proven successful, anything I can afford feels like a toy by comparison.

Enter the Minolta XE-1 (XE-7 in the US, XE in Japan).



Bought in useable condition for NZ$101, including postage, the XE gives me everything the F3 did. Well, nearly.

Here's an initial impression:

plusses
A nice amateur kit of body + 5 primes and 1 zoom has cost me about the same as a well used F3 body would
Rokkor Glass
Copal/Leitz electronic shutter - some say this is the quietest SLR ever, period.
Solid reputation for reliability amongst those who know
Minolta CLC metering
The best aperture preview system in the business - it can be locked on or off, just like the old SRT 101. Moreover, the meter continues to read accurately with the preview locked on: the XE can be used as an AE, non-auto diaphragm camera!
Cheap, mechanical 'backup body': the SRT 101 is readily available.
Full viewfinder information: aperture and speed.
mechanical B and X that can be used if the batteries failed

Minuses
Ergonomics - The XE is good ergonomically, but I think it'll take much longer to become an extension of my eye the way the F3 did. There are just some baffling little things like the on off switch, which is on the back of the top plate, just below the winder. Fair enough, it's in a good spot, except that it switches up for off. Thus, to turn the camera on when it's at your eye, you need to lift your thumb off and pull te lever down. If it worked the other way you could,ve rubbed your thumb up the back of the body, switched the camera on and been ready to wind in one motion, as it is you need to loosen your grip twice to perform this operation.
Top speed of 1/1000 versus the Nikon's (and Minolas own pro-level XK's) 1/2000
No mirror lockup (despite having a viwefinder blackout curtain)
No motor drive and a more limited system than the huge Nikon system. For me, this ain't a problem - I don't use MDs anyway and I can't afford all that lovely Nikon gear, but for the late 70s pro, the XE could've been a bit limited.
No interchangeable prism, or even interchangeable focussing screen.
The finder is slightly dimmer than best of the era (including Minolta's own XK).

In some ways, the XE illustrates to me the marketing savvey amassed by Nikon and the opportunities missed by the innovators at Minolta. The XE had most of the important features of the F3: robust construction, electronic shutter, AE, a (single speed) mechanical shutter that could be used sans batteries, and all launched six years before the F3 (1974 versus 1980). In fact, if all those grumpy retrogrouches who groused about the F3's avant guard electronics in 1980 had bothered to look over at Minolta, they'd have realized that they wern't so avant guard after all, and had already been proven reliable by Minolta/Copal/Leitz.

But the XE wasn't a pro body, it was marketed as something for the enthusiast consumer. A big, heavy, expensive, amateur camera with an electronic shutter, just what the world was screaming for in 1974. Olympus begged to differ, and so did the buying public! Nikon, meanwhile, took the same basic ingredients as the XE, wrapped it in Giorgetto Giugiaro's gorgeous ergonomics, added pro features like motordrive, TTL flash, interchangeable prisms and mirror lockup, integrated it with their already extensive system and wunderba! An iconic camera is born. XE production run, 1974 - 1977. F3 Production run, 1980 - 2001!

Meanwhile, this (very) amateur photographer is very happy with his XE 1 based kit.

[kiev4a]

I must amitthe only thing I know about Minolta is what I've seen on this forum, but that's a very good-looking outfit you've put together.

Like youI'm not much for motor drives. I have the MD4 for my F3HP but have had it on the camera exactly once!

Thanks for your views on the F3. Since I'm shooting mostly digital I think from time to time I ought to sell the F3. But they aren't fetching much now and I'm sure if I sold it I would kick myself for the next five years.

[Randy]

I present to you, with help from my Lovely assistant Zelda, my Minolta XE-7.

[GeneW]

Michael, I've never owned any Minolta SLR gear, but your XE-1 (and Randy's XE-7), are really attractive looking machines. I've heard that the XE series was outstanding and that Rokkor lenses rank right at the top. Beautiful gear!

I acquired an F3HP a couple of years ago and really like using it. I know what you mean about it's becoming a part of you.

Gene

[Dave]

Michael -- I own a raft of Minolta equipment, from SR-1s to an X-570 with three XD11s, many of the SRT models between. I also own the Nikon F thru the Nikon F5. I have a number of lenses for the Minoltas. I think they are wonderful! Most of them have been purchased from the auction site for a pittance. The only one which I purchased new was an XD-5 in about 1976. They have been essentially trouble-free, great to handle and easy to carry on trips. Of all, if I had to choose one, it would be either the XD11, the XD5 (a sort of junior XD11), or an SRT 202.

Good luck with your "flagship."

Dave

[nikkortorokkor]

Wayne, don't sell that F3!

As Jason Schneider of Shutterbug put it:
'Without a doubt it fits the hands better than any of its pro SLR contemporaries (and many current film and digital SLRs as well) thanks to its ergonomic handgrip and slim, comfortably rounded contours. Its ball-bearing manual wind mechanism is one of the smoothest in any 35mm SLR and there’s a reassuring click when the perfectly shaped lever completes its winding action.'

I think Jason put his finger right on it. I think that the tactile satisfaction of making an image with an F3 is difficult to beat.

Gene, I don't know which is more beuatiful, Zelda or that Black XE-7!

For the non Minolta-philes out there, the Japanese XE and the 'rest of the world' XE-1 were silver and black while the US market XE-7 was black only.

Also, for those that are interested in yet another commercially unsuccessful Minolta technical tour de force, check out the XK/XM, the pro-body parent of the XE. You'll be startled, and perhaps just a bit baffled why Minolta couldn't quite woo the pros away from their Nikons. Here is Antony Hands' loving, partisan ode to Minolta's real 70s flagship:

www.rokkorfiles.com/XK.html

[Just Plain Curt]

Cool Minoltas one and all. While I have 6 XG series, an X370, X-7A, 7 SRT series and a pair of Maxxum 5000's, I still like my old SR-1 best. Now I've gotta try and get an XE or XK.

[craigh]

I found the XK to be a bit too bulky. Minolta should have followed Canon's lead & place the meter in the body instead of the prism. However, I always like the smooth shutter release.

Craig

[Peter S.]

I never got the chance to see an XK in reality. I presume it is just as big as the XE - and then I have to say, that I much prefer the smaller XD. Smoothness of operation and precision of machining are about equal between XD and XE (presumeable also holds for the XK).

And yes, Rokkor glass is very good - and heavily underrated. And there is no serious option to go digital with it.

Best regards
Peter

[nikkortorokkor]

craigh said:

I found the XK to be a bit too bulky. Minolta should have followed Canon's lead & place the meter in the body instead of the prism. However, I always like the smooth shutter release.

Craig

Interesting to get an actual user's impression. I must amit that the the XK and especially the XKM, with its built in motor drive, looks like an ancestor of my least favourite camera concept, the 90s era pro 35mm, which seemed to be about as big and intimidating as the pressman's old speed graphic, and as far from a compact, discreet, non intimidting 35mm roots as one can get.

Mind you, that doesn't seem to bother the paperazzi hanginging outside some celeb's home, 300/2.8 USM at the ready!

[SidW]

Michael, I used one of those for twenty years and enjoyed every minute. Interchangeable viewfinders - I thought that was a thing of the 1950s and 1960s. Like most SLRs today (all?), Minolta had a right angle viewfinder and a magnifying viewfinder that slipped over the eyepiece. You mentioned the Leitz connection - they cooperated on the R1 (I believe it was) and Minolta sold the XE for a few years and then dropped it, it was after all Leitz's baby.

[drako]

XE ... I'm sold! Would love I did get a chance to handle an XK at a local camera shop last month. Even though the place has a solid reputation for their repair shop, this specimen wasn't in working order. I've had an eye for one of these since the late 70's so, even if it wasn't working, just playing with this monster was a fantasy come true. I remain on the lookout for a pristine XK Motor.

[Just Plain Curt]

After a few years of searching (because I passed on one locally years back that was too pricey) I finally scored a Beseler Topcon Super D. Now I just need to bide my time till it arrives. Next on my list is either a Nikon FM2, original F or an XE/XE-7 Minolta, then enough SLR's for a while.

[nikkortorokkor]

As I've started using the XE I'm finding it very reassuring and familiar to use. Like SidW, I'll never need or want interchangeable finders.

The XE only lasted till '77, when it was superceeded by the XD, which had the same OM1 influenced dimensions as other late 70s SLRs. It also had another Minolta technical coup, aperture and shutter priority on the one body. Despite this, some users still confess to preferring the big old XE. I guess that's one of the indefinable things that happen with all tools.

I've read and read and read about the Minolta/Leitz hookup: there is a lot of disinformation out there coming from both camps of fans. The most reliable source tells me that the R3 was launched in '76 and has a different metering system and brighter prism than the XE, otherwise they are mechanically the same. Leica users say that the R3 (which was built both in Germany and Portugal) feels better in the hand straight away than the XE -somehow it has that Leica precision magic. I won't say this is balony, I've never held an R3 and besides, I'm as biased as the next fella. However, the XE and my other 70s Minolta masterpiece, the odd little Hi-Matic E rangefinder, both have a fit and feel that oooze quality. Better than any other Minolta I own. (6 in all).

Shutter noise. The XE is s'posed to be the quitest SLR ever. I sat mine down with an SRT 101, XG9 and my very clunky Phenix DC701 and tripped the shutter on each. I coudn't pick much of a difference. But get te XE out into the field, take a few pictures and the quiet, beautifully damped mirror does become evident. I think this may be the secret of the XE's success amongst its loyal fans. The clunk/shake of my briefly owned Cosina Clone Oly OM2000Sp and the very similar Phenix really grate on my nerves. The XE's Copal/Leitz CLS shutter and smooth mirror breed confidence. While I have plenty of rangefinders to throw in my bag when I ride the bus into town, I find myself reaching for the XE and a couple of lenses despte the bone crunching weight.

Curt, you have a fine eye. Good luck for the chase.

[Dan Vincent]

My first Minolta was an XE-7. I needed a camera to do an article for a radio control model magazine and did a lot of research on cameras at that time (1976) and had boiled it down to Nikon or Canon as they seemed to be the hot pro cameras.

I told the editor I had decided on Nikon or Canon and he suggested I also look at Minolta as he had seen many article submissions and was amazed at how great Minolta pictures were when you consider the equipment and lenses were about half the price of the big two.

I bought the XE-7 and after several Nikon users said "Wow, what kind of camera are you using?" I never had to be ashamed of carrying a Minolta around my neck in a sea of Nikon & Canon users.

My XE-7 has gone through countless rolls of film over the years and it still works today.

Every one looks at the XK as the "Holy Grail" for Minoltas but I bought one and found it heavy, bulky and no way as easy to use as the XE-7. My XK was set on a tripod and used for indoor type shots.

I also picked up a chrome body XE-1 that seems to work smoothly but I have yet to shoot a roll of film in it.

For a favorite Minolta I would have to give the XD series a slight advantage because of lighter weight, more compact, ability to add a motor drive or winder and it's very bright viewing screen.

At work, some of us used to compare photographs and one fellow had a fantastic Nikon system but he told me he liked the skin tones on faces in my pictures and showed me how his Nikon pictures all had a slight pink tint to faces.

One day someone broke into his car and stole his beautiful Nikon and lenses. He asked me what would be my "Dream" Minolta camera as he was thinking about buying a Minolta with the insurance money from the Nikon stuff as he was very impressed with my pictures.

I told him it would be a black Minolta XD-11 and that's exactly what he bought. He told me later on that he was very happy with the XD-11 and was getting fantastic results from the Minolta lenses.

Shutter Noise:
Back in the '70's shutter noise became a problem in court-rooms and a standard was set for SLR noise.

The rule was no SLR could be used that made more noise than a Leica M series rangefinder.

The only cameras that passed the test were the Minolta XE-7, Fujica 705 and Olympus OM-1.

A local camera dealer used to ask me to fire the shutter on my XE-7 because he couldn't believe how quiet it was. Some of the higher priced cameras he sold sounded like someone dropping a piece of plate glass.