MX

Tony. I haven't seen any Minox MX review, except a short description at last year Oct issue of Shutterbug. Spec wise it is a focusing Minox, but with only one speed 1/100 sec. which is good for outdoor shooting, or travel. I am thinking of get one to play with, as I quite often use 1/100 speed. A fully automated Minox does exist, it is Minox LX/TLX. It is a bit steep as a starter. Minox C is a good altermative, you can get one probably for less then $150 from eBay ( Minox C was sold in Toronto for about C$200- $250 ). It has focusing lens, the same as the one on flag ship TLX, with build in meter, and it takes wonderful pictures. If you look hard enough at swap meets, you may scoop up a Minox LX at wonderful price. AS for popular priced MX+ ECX, I doubt Minox marketing department has that kind of plan, unless they want to under cut themselves :) Many Minoxers like ECX very much too, they said the new Minar lens is visibly better than the one on EC.

On second thought, I think it may not be diffcult for Minox to come out with as focusing ECX. However, I think it might not be a unit focusing lens, which would make the camera as big as Minox TLX hence defeat the purpose; one the other hand, front element focusing can be very compact, either through a sliding switch like the one on MX or a front element with ring. Looking at Minox ECX, The protruding silver circle in front of the lens, IMO, looks very much like a dummy lens ring; my guess is, Minox may be test the market to see how user react to the idea of something stickout. So far the reaction is mixed. If Minox can make a front element focusing ECX and sells for about $400, ( $100 over non focusing ECX ), I certainly will buy one. Tony has a good idea !

Minox MX: glass fibre reinforced body, dimension 8.4 x 3.4 x 2.1 cm closed. Shutter 1/125 fixed speed, focusing lens 3 element 2 group MINOX (?) lens, manual focus from 1 meter to infinity. Weight 55 g. 4X grey filter attachment. Minox MX flash.

For depth of field table of Minox MX camera, see "Minox 8x11 DOF" thread.

According to insider who has seen pictures taken with Minox MX, it is a good picture taker. My educated guess is, at around 1 meter range, Minox ECX excels with its sharper lens. But beyound 2 meter, particular from 3 to infinity range, MX may have an edge if focused properly.

Three element 2 group was quite popular from 1900 to 1920. Bausch & Lomb's Semi-Rectilinear lens and Aldis lens by Hugh L Aldis of Dallmeyer were all three element two group lens. The Aldis lens had front cemented doublet and a rear biconvex element separated by airspace. 3 element 2 group lens is considered to be a special form of triplet. With modern computer aided design technique and modern glasses, a 3 element two group lens can provide good performance, for example the 3 element 35mm/f3.5 of Olympus mju-1 P&S 35mm camera is sharp and contrasty.

Minox EC/ECX excels at people pictures, as these are taken around 6 feet. Because that is where the lens is fixed focus at. For landscape pictures, EC/ECX is still can deliver sharp 4x6" landscape pictures , even though for far objects, its resolution is about 45 lpmm. A good compact 35mm camera with 3 element focusing lens usually has reolution of 70 -80 lpmm. A well manufactured small format lens is always has higher resolution then a 35mm lens with same angle of view, due to scale effect. So my educated guess is the focusing MX lens should at least have a resolution of 75 lpmm. Such a resolution from MX should provide sharp 5x7" landscape shots. For landscape shots, of course, it is best to focus the lens at infinity, following the advice of Dr. Harold Merklinger ( see discussions in thread 'hyperfocusing vs infinity focusing ). Minox MX should be able to deliver good 5x7" people AND landscape pictures when focused right.. ECX delivers good 8X10" people pictures, good 4x6" landscapes. Each as its own strength and limitation.

This new MX camera looks very much like the Fuji 007 sold only in Japan, I believe, and several Acmel models. Some of these have two shutter speeds, and some, including the 007 have light meter windows next to the lens for auto-exposure, as well as focusing. The 007 also may have a faster lens from what I have been able to gather on it. Why has Minox produced (or sub-contracted?) a lowball version of this camera without the auto-exposure? Check the Sub Club for photos/specs of these other Acmel derivatives. A puzzlement: the flash mount is identical to the EC. The MX flash has an exposure control eye. It will not work with any other Minox. WHY?!! Minor internal mods may have resulted in a better flash than we currently have for the EC, ECX and all of the classic metal Minoxes.

I own an Acmel MD since years and it looks exactly the same as Minox MX. And the flash too. I never try to do pictures with this one so I can't say anything about image quality.

Examples of photos from MX

photos taken with MX