Minolta AF-Tele Super

How strange it feels to realise that back in my teenage years, I just wanted to have all the Nikons in the world because they were the “best” cameras. Minoltas were…ok-ish… whatever.  Now, 20 years on, I have 5 Minoltas and not even one Nikon (the L35AF is been sold), I am a sucker for my 9xi and I would love a XD-11 too. Makes me wonder how these cameras where advertised/promoted by the photography magazines I used to buy back then.  Anyway, contrary to what you might expect, I will start this review with a little bit of Leica history.

Back in the mid-seventies, Leica realised that if they wanted to keep up with the rapid developments on the SLR field, they needed to acquire the Know-How of the Japanese electronics industry. Their Leicaflex series, although mechanical masterpieces, they started to look dated when you compared them with cameras such as the Olympus OM’s, Canon’s AE-1 or the Minolta’s XE series. A joint venture between Minolta and Leica was seen as beneficial to both companies. Leica will acquire the technology for the electronic parts of their future cameras and Minolta will find out more about Leica’s optical department. Their first joint effort was the Leica/Minolta CL followed by the Leica R3 a camera based on Minoltas XE-series. R-3’s successor, the R-4 was a black spot on Leica’s reputation. All serial numbers starting with 153xxx and 154xxx suffered with problems on their electronics. Later versions were rectified and the R5 that followed was a very nice and reliable camera based on Minolta’s XD-11 chassis and electronics. By the end of the seventies, the Minolta-Leica partnership was cooled off. Leica produced the fully mechanical R-6 and R-6.2 followed by the electronic R7 based on Minolta’s XD series and then their partnership was over.

Or wasn’t? Well, it seems that Leica did use some of Minolta’s OEM’s cameras and the AF-Tele Super was one of them. Actually, there is the Leica AF-C1 which is identical to the Minolta. I’ve seen some pictures on the internet, even their boxes are the same.  There are some minor cosmetic differences but their bigger difference is the price tag. I bought mine for £3.50 while the Leica will probably fetch 20x more money.

The lens and the two flash buttons

The AF-Tele Super comes from the distant 1988. Back then, all compact cameras were less compact than you might think, just smaller than a SLR but it is roughly the same size as my Leica IIc with the Elmar attached. First impressions are good. Good quality plastic and with battery it weights pretty much the same as the Canon EOS 300v without the lens. Fit and finish are excellent.  A few buttons here and there – one for the wide/tele lens, and two for disabling and enabling the flash. Unfortunately it is not very ergonomic, the flash is always on auto and if you want to disable it, then you need to keep the “Flash Off” button pressed while you take the picture. Same procedure if you want flash on. Why Minolta? Why? Reminds me a lot of Nikon’s approach to the L35AF where you had to keep the flash down in order not to engage it. Anyway, we have to keep in mind that ergonomics back at that time were having their teething problems – these were their first days of the All-Singing-All-Dancing-AF-Compact cameras.

At 38mm the lens delivers excellent detail

The camera has a dual lens, a 38mm f/2.8 and a 80mm f/5.6. I wasn’t able to find more info about the design of the lens but I’ve got a feeling that it is a Tessar design 4 elements in 3 groups and with the addition of a teleconverter it becomes a 80 f/5.6. I might be wrong though – if you have any more info, send me an email and I will update it. How does it perform? At the 38mm, it reminds me a lot the Mju-1, although the pictures seem to be more contrasty with good detail up to the corner of the frame. At the 80mm the results are a bit flat and there is a drop on the detail recorded (that is why I suspect the use of a teleconverter). Anyway, the 80mm is not a focal length that I enjoy working with so I will ignore it – I just shot a couple of pics out of curiosity mostly.

 

The feature that pleasantly surprised me the most was the AF. This is -by far- the fastest AF I’ve seen on a compact. It focuses instantly and accurately, no waiting, no messing about.  The only problem is that the camera does not have infinity focus mode so be careful when you shot through windows.  The AF-Tele Super offers AF-lock, just keep the shutter button pressed and recompose. In my sample the shutter button feels a bit too sensitive; it is very easy to trip the shutter while holding it down. Shutter speeds range from 1/8 sec to 1/400sec. Another very interesting thing is the exposure system. Of course the system is not a TTL one but it seems to be able to detect backlit scenes and enable the flash.  All pictures came out correctly exposed too – school perfect for Minolta on this department too!

Any complains? Well, yes, quite a few really. First of all, the ergonomics. There should be an option to have the flash permanently disabled rather than having to keep the button pressed all the time. Another thing is the battery, it uses a 2CR5 which is quite expensive to get. No manual ISO setting either – only DX. Size is also quite big but you get used to it. Did I mention the ergonomics?

There is a hidden bonus with cameras of this vintage. They don’t go to power-saving mode after a while. My Fuji DL Supermini does and so did the Samsung ECX-1 where suddenly you would discover that the camera is sleeping when you needed to use it instantly.  Another good thing with my sample:  It belonged to a lady who obviously spayed a lot of perfume on the carrying case – no more this FSU-like smell in my wardrobe from the Zenit-12XP / FED-3b (those who have a FSU camera know what I am talking about) – now everything smells like lilies and lavender and I-don’t-know-how-else-to-describe-it perfume….

Conclusion.

If there is one thing that makes this camera stand out of the crowd, that's its consistency. There are only a few compacts that I can remember of, that gave me 36 pictures all correctly focused and well exposed. There would always be at least one picture that was a bit blurry or the exposure would have been tricked by backlight. But not the Minolta AF-Tele Super  - it passed all tests. It might not be up to Fuji’s or Nikon’s L35AF optical department but its consistency is, which makes this camera feel reliable and that is more important. I’ve read numerous comments on the internet from users who had both the Minolta and the Leica and they ended up selling the Leica for cash while keeping the Minolta as there was no difference in performance.

If you come across this camera on a car boot sale/thrift shop, don’t ignore it!


The manual can be found (here)