New Minolta digital cameras now available for sale on Amazon

A reader sent me this link to Amazon's website with three new Minolta compact cameras:

Here are the specifications of the Minolta M35Z model:

  • Lens: 35x optical zoom; 25-873mm; f3-5.9
  • Image Sensor: 1/2.3 CMOS; 4768x3516 pixels
  • Auto Focus: Auto, Macro, Super Macro
  • Shutter: Mechanical, Optical Stabilization
  • Pixels: JPEG: 20mp, 8mp, 5mp, 3mp
  • ISO Sensitivity: Auto; 125, 200, 400, 800, 1600, 3200, 6400
  • LCD Monitor: 460K 3" HVGA
  • Flash Strobe: Pop-up; .5-7.5mm; Guide no. 7
  • Continuous Shooting: Endless Burst (High) / Endless Burst (Standard) / Pre-shooting / Sporty Burst 60 / Sporty Burst 120 / Smart Selector
  • White Balance Control: Auto / Daylight / Cloudy / Tungsten / Fluorescent / Custom
  • Scene Modes: 24 Unique scene modes
  • Special Features: Panorama shooting / Face detection / Multi-frame shooting / HDR / Time Lapse / Burst
  • Recording Media: SD / SDHC / SDXC / Maximum: 64GB
  • I/O Ports: Micro USB, USB 2.0, Microphone, Stereo Speakers
  • I/O Radio: WiFi, Bluetooth 4.0
  • Power: NP-120; 3.7v, 1700mAh
  • Dimensions: 5.03 x 3.38 x 3.58 in. / 5.88 oz.
  • Compatible Devices: Windows 7/8/10; Mac OS 10.8/10.9/10.10

Specifications comparison of other similar cameras:

A quick online search indicates that the Minolta brand is currently owned by Elite Brands who also owns/distributes the Rokinon and Samyang brands. On the dedicated Minolta website there are a total of four digital cameras listed (one of them is a car camcorder):

Update: the new Minolta digital cameras are also available for sale at Adorama.

This entry was posted in Konica Minolta. Bookmark the permalink. Trackbacks are closed, but you can post a comment.
  • tyger11

    So this is the Minolta in name only. Minolta’s assets were sold to Konica, and the resulting Konica-Minolta was sold to Sony, which became the basis for A-mount, right? (Could be off on that last point.) So where did these cameras come from – rebadged from some third-tier cameramaker nobody outside China has ever heard of, I’m guessing.

    • Zos Xavius

      Sony didn’t care about the Minolta name and didn’t want to pay the extra price for it. As far as I know Konica still owns the Minolta name. They are still in business as Konica-Minolta. Sony just bought their imaging division basically. Yes these are rebadged generic OEM cameras. Pentax sold a few recently as well. I think these are also the same as the Kodak bridge cameras that are currently being sold. Image quality is fairly poor IMO. I believe JK Imaging is the one behind these. Or at least that is the company that licenses that Kodak versions.

      • tyger11

        Yeah, with a 1/2.3″ sensor, these are obviously junk. Maybe if they were about $50, they might be worth giving to your kid to play with. Maybe. I’d think an older real brand castoff would still be better, probably by a lot. This is for people who don’t know anything about cameras, but remember the name Minolta from the old days. Pretty sad state of affairs; the Minolta name deserves more respect than this. I still fondly remember my Maxxum 7000i from the film days. *sigh*

      • So the question is why? Do they hope that somebody will buy this camera just because of the name? I don’t get it. How can they make money on those cameras in 2017?

        • ZMWT

          They are corporate gifts, like keychains, bottle openers, coasters, napkins, pencils, shirts, etc. Cost them nothing to make. Konica’s corporate gifts include cheapo cameras with the retro name they own.

          • mikew

            Dont give him ideas

        • Zos Xavius

          Because hardly anyone is producing point and shoots or bridge cameras and there is still a small market for that.

        • Zos Xavius

          They are basically scraping the bottom of the barrel here much like Kodak (JK Imaging)

      • 1741

        I’ve just seen some motor racing on tv in america an one team is sponsored by konica-minolta albeit a small sponsorship, they still use the blue minolta logo

    • MB

      That is peaty incorrect … Konica and Minolta merged to form a new company because neither has done too well at a time … merged company actually bares Minolta logo so one could (wrongly) assume that Minolta acquired Konica and not vice versa…
      Both companies were in photography business over many years but also started producing office equipment such as copiers etc … and decided to sell the entire camera business to Sony because it wasn’t profitable enough, as a result many mostly Konica employs were laid off …
      Also Konica was film, photo chemicals and labs producer before merger (actually they were oldest photo materials manufacturer in the world at a time even older than Kodak), and that business was also closed …
      Effectively they have done well exiting from photo business in time and before even further decline in recent years and concentrating on more profitable products …

      • Athanasius Kirchner

        Good history, but I must strongly disagree on your appraisal of the sale of the imaging division to Sony – they couldn’t have picked a worse time to do it! There was still a decade of ridiculous growth ahead of them, a rising tide that truly floated all boats.
        If they had sold in 2012, that would’ve been pure genius. But as it stands, they chose the worst possible moment to divest themselves from their stills camera assets.

        • spam

          Minolta sold early for sure, but they were already too late with their dSLRs. Canon and Nikon totally dominated the market. Pentax was basically in the same position, but tried anyway.

          Excellent cameras btw, but too late and too small market share and they’ve never been able to recover. Even a company like Sony who took over A-mount and tried couldn’t gain market share.

          Now, with the E-mount Sony might have a chance since Canon and Nikon don’t seem to take mirrorless seriously – yet.

          • Athanasius Kirchner

            I agree that it was impossible for them to overtake Nikon but, as the third largest DSLR manufacturers, to me it’s obvious that they could’ve made some interesting profits during the golden decade of digital. Sony inherited that third place and, while they still haven’t managed to grow larger, it’s obvious that there was money to be made in DI.

  • Dima135

    It’s hard to watch.
    Such a cool brand, now used for cheap oem noname ultra-zooms.
    I had many cameras of this brand: X700, X370, dynax 5. 7000. Their lenses also leave pleasant memories. AF 50 1.7 . beercan, rokkor 58 1.2 , 55 3.5 macro. This is a legend which, together with the pentax and nikon, stood at the dawn of SLR era. And further up to the previous decade, they helped develop a market.

    • tyger11

      Minolta invented AF, IIRC, with the first Maxxum. Groundbreaking brand, now reduced to this. Gah. Depressing.

      • TurtleCat

        They introduced it. Leica invented it, didn’t think they could do anything with it, sold it to Minolta who made it work. And then Minolta screwed things up and lost to Canon and Nikon.

        • Athanasius Kirchner

          Nope, Honeywell invented it, and then Minolta copied the basic PDAF principle from them. Then Honeywell sued KM to kingdom come, and that in part explains why they sold their assets to Sony years later.

    • a4

      I had always deep respect for K-M cameras. And their scanners!
      This is sad, indeed…

    • 1741

      My favorite film era brand, x700, 7000 an my all time fav the 9000 with motordrive an 12x aa battery pack

      • Dima135

        12 AA ? have a photo? I did not know about this

        • 1741

          No don’t have a photo, the autowinder took 4x AA batteries and the motordrive took either a rechargeable pack or the AA pack which is what i used, it only cost £3 for the batteries back then tho it was more to do with getting then extra cheap as i was on very good terms with the guys who worked at the shop i bought all my gear from, they would lend me almost any lens i needed over a weekend free of charge, oh the good old days

      • Ric of The LBC

        still have my X700

        • 1741

          Was/is a great camera an even better with the motordrive

        • Jorge Teves

          Good for you!

          • Ric of The LBC

            I KNOW, right?! Pretty awesome!

          • Jorge Teves


      • Orville

        I had that beast and made many nice images with it! Also had the AF4000 flash with handgrip that attached to the camera via a detachable, wired baseplate. Off-camera flash was easy and accurate with that rig!

        • 1741

          That flash and the grip i used as a studio type flash setup was very good, used it on a commission i got to take pics of a parrot, attached it on a tripod an got superb results

    • Spy Black

      The first SLR I ever saw was an SRT-101 in ’73, which sparked my interest in 35mm photography.

  • ZMWT

    For a moment I thought I travelled back in time, or opened a cached HTML from 2003! But then, this is what happened to Minolta, and will soon happen to Pentax, also ‘owned’ and mismanaged by a copier company like Konica; name reduced to plastic zooms sold with detergent boxes. Horrible fate indeed.

    • SkumleRafte

      You got your konica history wrong mare

      • Kunzite

        It’s just an excuse for his usual Pentax bashing. Truth is irrelevant.

        • ZMWT

          Acerbic as usual? I am bashing Ricoh and their managing incompetence, but not Pentax. Pentax, like Minolta, is a plundered asset.

          • Kunzite

            Dyslexic? You’re not very competent at… insulting.
            That you’re trying to spread FUD about Pentax is so obvious that it’s not even up to debate.
            That you have to lie to get your FUD, it’s simply sad.

      • ZMWT

        Konica bought Minolta. I witnessed the deal. Then shortly after Minolta’s camera and optics tech ended being sold to Sony. It was something similar to Hoya first overtakes Pentax, then Ricoh comes in and takes what’s left of it, because Hoya would not bother with it. Konica too got part of Minolta it did not want and could not manage, claiming financial difficulties, so it sold it to Sony. Exact same story.

        • SkumleRafte

          Konica and Minolta merged, non of them bought the other, besides Konica was one of the oldest companies in the industry Konica’s history is older than Kodak. I think to say that Konica Fu”ed up Minolta is very wrong, they teamed up and failed together. And even failing is depending on how you look at it, I bet they got a pretty good deal for the “E mount” but then goes enthusiasm down the drain… so yeah…

          And whats your deal with Pentax/Ricoh? Ricoh is probably the best that could happen for Pentax, Hoya was not gonna lead anywhere. And Ricoh has a very long tradition for brand caring so I bet they are in safe hands. Pentax was and never will be a mainstream Brand.

          • Kunzite

            Indeed; the Minolta and Pentax stories are different, and they’re different than how ZMWT is presenting them.
            Even the end result is very different – the camera division started by Minolta and eventually sold to Sony is doing quite well on the MILC market.

  • next thing you know this becomes a killer camera. lmfao. that be crazy

  • TurtleCat

    They should have used the classic Minolta logo. It was so much cooler than this thin font rendering.

  • wonderdude

    We should probably wait for the DXO scores to be released before bashing these fine-looking machines 😉

  • Licheus

    I hate you, Sony.

    • lol 🙂

    • ZMWT

      You can blame Konica too. But, sad truth is that a very few companies could survive the transition from film to digital, becase that period of instability was used by predators to come in, spread fear, and plunder the assetts.

      • Licheus

        Unfortunately I like Konica even better. Still own many of the M-Hexanon lenses, their final swan song. I’d even blame Minolta for the demise of the Hexars (which unlike the Sony G and now the G Masters, are never to be seen again), but what good for since both are long dead?

        People in other thread had already pointed out you got the Konica-Minolta merge wrong…think about it.

  • D800GUY

    Generic as hell.

  • Dang cringefest.

    Also, ‘Yashica’ has uploaded another teaser… ‘soon on Kickstarter’ they said. Probably means another name ruined by golddiggers. No doubt it will be overpriced hyped up crapgh that for some reason hit their target mark in 24hr and collect even more in the month after as hipsters feel they can’t miss out…

  • Mistral75
    • Zos Xavius

      B&H has a notorious history for just rebranding stuff.

  • Mistral75

    There is even a Praktica version of the underwater Minolta MN20WPZ / Coleman Optics C30wpz Xtreame, the Praktica Luxmedia WP240.

    For the ‘Ostalgics’ I presume…

    • Lol, is this new? Praktica is also back to life? Re-badged of course, but still… I do not remember covering this on the blog.

      • Mistral75

        Since January 2016 apparently:

        Warranty & Returns


        Unfortunately, if you placed your order before December 2015 your warranty is no longer valid. Your product was manufactured by the previous owners of PRAKTICA and they have seized production.

        If you placed your order after January 2016 please follow the below steps:


        PRAKTICA International Ltd
        55 Station Approach
        HA4 6SL
        United Kingdom

        In most territories, the trademark belongs to:

        20 Fulmer Drive
        Gerrards Cross
        Buckinghamshire SL9 7HJ
        United Kingdom

        In some countries, it still belongs to Pentacon GmbH Foto- und Feinwerktechnik.

  • Back to top