Home

Please support mflenses.com if you need any graphic related work order it from us, click on above banner to order!
SearchSearch MemberlistMemberlist RegisterRegister ProfileProfile Log in to check your private messagesLog in to check your private messages Log inLog in

Minolta SRT100X vs SRT101
Post new topic   Reply to topic
Home   Film SLR / TLR Cameras
View previous topic :: View next topic  


PostPosted: Mon Jun 10, 2024 7:35 pm    Post subject: Minolta SRT100X vs SRT101 Reply with quote
Hi all,

New here but been around cameras for nearly 50 years. Just recently started playing with film again and looking at an SRT100X with Minolta 35-70 f3.5 for a very reasonable sum from my local camera shop.

Its somewhat confusing what the difference is between the 100x and the 101. I know the 100X doesn't have a self timer (which doesn't bother me as I really shouldn't be in front of any camera lens) but what else is missing?

Thanks all.


PostPosted: Tue Jun 11, 2024 9:37 am    Post subject: Reply with quote
Welcome to he forum!

The SR-T 100X was introduced in 1977 and was the successor of the SR-T 100b, and as such it is a very late (last) model in the SR-T series of cameras.

Compared to the much earlier SR-T 101 (1966) as far as I know the differences are:

The 100X has no self-timer, the 101 does
The 100X has no mirror lock-up, the 101 does
The 100X doesn't show the chosen shutter speed in the finder, the 101 does

On the other hand the SR-T 101 doesn't have a hot-shoe for the flash but only a couple of flash-sync cable contacts, whereas the 100X has a flash hot shoe.


PostPosted: Sat Jun 15, 2024 2:01 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
RokkorDoctor wrote:
Welcome to he forum!

The SR-T 100X was introduced in 1977 and was the successor of the SR-T 100b, and as such it is a very late (last) model in the SR-T series of cameras.

Compared to the much earlier SR-T 101 (1966) as far as I know the differences are:

The 100X has no self-timer, the 101 does
The 100X has no mirror lock-up, the 101 does
The 100X doesn't show the chosen shutter speed in the finder, the 101 does

On the other hand the SR-T 101 doesn't have a hot-shoe for the flash but only a couple of flash-sync cable contacts, whereas the 100X has a flash hot shoe.


Thanks for the info!
Given none of those particularly matter to me I'm tempted to get the SRT100X with 35-70 (yes it's the final version).


PostPosted: Sat Jun 15, 2024 4:47 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
Vintage_Photographer wrote:

Thanks for the info!
Given none of those particularly matter to me I'm tempted to get the SRT100X with 35-70 (yes it's the final version).


Well, since they are at your local camera shop and the shutter works without batteries, I would simply try both of them and see which one has the best/most consistent shutter feel and accuracy. At an average 55~ish years old those shutter curtain cylinder springs can get a bit gummed up.

Or, if the price is good just go for the 100X mostly for the 35-70 lens (although a good condition 35-70/3.5 isn't very expensive by itself).


PostPosted: Sat Jun 29, 2024 6:13 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
RokkorDoctor wrote:
Vintage_Photographer wrote:

Thanks for the info!
Given none of those particularly matter to me I'm tempted to get the SRT100X with 35-70 (yes it's the final version).


Well, since they are at your local camera shop and the shutter works without batteries, I would simply try both of them and see which one has the best/most consistent shutter feel and accuracy. At an average 55~ish years old those shutter curtain cylinder springs can get a bit gummed up.

Or, if the price is good just go for the 100X mostly for the 35-70 lens (although a good condition 35-70/3.5 isn't very expensive by itself).


So today I came home with an SRT100X and 35-70 f/3.5 Macro lens.

It's in immaculate condition and just been serviced.
Best of all the camera shop charges £70 for a service and I only paid £95 for it with 12 months warranty so pretty pleased with that.

Now to run a roll of Delta 100 through it and see how it behaves.

Already tried the lens on my X-E2 (with adapter) and very pleased with the sharpness and bokeh.


PostPosted: Sat Jun 29, 2024 6:13 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
RokkorDoctor wrote:
Vintage_Photographer wrote:

Thanks for the info!
Given none of those particularly matter to me I'm tempted to get the SRT100X with 35-70 (yes it's the final version).


Well, since they are at your local camera shop and the shutter works without batteries, I would simply try both of them and see which one has the best/most consistent shutter feel and accuracy. At an average 55~ish years old those shutter curtain cylinder springs can get a bit gummed up.

Or, if the price is good just go for the 100X mostly for the 35-70 lens (although a good condition 35-70/3.5 isn't very expensive by itself).


So today I came home with an SRT100X and 35-70 f/3.5 Macro lens.

It's in immaculate condition and just been serviced.
Best of all the camera shop charges £70 for a service and I only paid £95 for it with 12 months warranty so pretty pleased with that.

Now to run a roll of Delta 100 through it and see how it behaves.

Already tried the lens on my X-E2 (with adapter) and very pleased with the sharpness and bokeh.


PostPosted: Sat Jun 29, 2024 7:40 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
Like 1


PostPosted: Mon Jul 01, 2024 7:14 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
Just picked up another lens for the Minolta - this time a 75-200 f/4.5 which was cheap enough that if it's rubbish it doesn't matter!

Only £20 so I'm ok with that.


PostPosted: Mon Jul 01, 2024 7:18 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
Vintage_Photographer wrote:
Just picked up another lens for the Minolta - this time a 75-200 f/4.5 which was cheap enough that if it's rubbish it doesn't matter!

Only £20 so I'm ok with that.


Some of those slow old zooms have nice rendering for portraiture towards the shorter end at wide open.

-D.S.


PostPosted: Thu Jul 18, 2024 12:55 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
Doc Sharptail wrote:
Vintage_Photographer wrote:
Just picked up another lens for the Minolta - this time a 75-200 f/4.5 which was cheap enough that if it's rubbish it doesn't matter!

Only £20 so I'm ok with that.


Some of those slow old zooms have nice rendering for portraiture towards the shorter end at wide open.

-D.S.


Not only at the shorter end! I actually quite like taking portraits around at 200mm focal length. The Minolta 4.5/75-200mm actually is a quite capable zoom - it outperforms pretty much any vintage 2.8/135mm at f=135mm, including the Zeiss CY Sonnar 2.8/135mm. Of course it's heavier, larger and much slower, though ...

I think you have a pretty nice set to start with, and I wish you good luck Wink

S


PostPosted: Thu Jul 18, 2024 10:04 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
stevemark wrote:
Doc Sharptail wrote:
Vintage_Photographer wrote:
Just picked up another lens for the Minolta - this time a 75-200 f/4.5 which was cheap enough that if it's rubbish it doesn't matter!

Only £20 so I'm ok with that.


Some of those slow old zooms have nice rendering for portraiture towards the shorter end at wide open.

-D.S.


Not only at the shorter end! I actually quite like taking portraits around at 200mm focal length. The Minolta 4.5/75-200mm actually is a quite capable zoom - it outperforms pretty much any vintage 2.8/135mm at f=135mm, including the Zeiss CY Sonnar 2.8/135mm. Of course it's heavier, larger and much slower, though ...

I think you have a pretty nice set to start with, and I wish you good luck Wink

S


Sadly the 75-200 was full of fungus and I wasn't prepared to keep it so it went back and was replaced by a Tokina 70-210 which I picked up for just £2.99 plus postage.
Whilst not perfect it has no haze or fungus but isn't particularly sharp wide open at any focal length. For the money it'll do for now though.
Post new topic   Reply to topic
Home   Film SLR / TLR Cameras
Page 1 of 1