Talk:Konica Minolta

message: Was it a loss or gain, sell the camera department to Sony, if look back from 2009?  —Preceding unsigned comment added by Lynxlea (talk • contribs) 10:41, 29 May 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Why KM retreat from camera industry? 

message: Minolta make copiers, Konica make film.  I'm sure there are many other things too.  Minolta make the glass for their own lenses which is why the coulour balance of the optics is matched.  Perhaps I can put something about the 9000 at some point. Rich Farmbrough 23:48, 24 Sep 2004 (UTC)
thread_title:  Not just cameras 

message: They (Konica) also supply us (and I imagine many others) with chemicals to develop BW film.  Not really a concern with photobugs, but most of the printers (your daily newspaper or classifieds for instance) still use CTF which relies on this support (massive amounts of BW film, like at least 1200 sq ft of film a week).  I don't see how they would give up a steady revenue stream like that (several thousand dollars a month from print customers).  We'll see... --drew1718 08:12, 22 September 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Re: Re: Not just cameras 

message: This discussion covers very recent history of Minolta.  Minolta did not begin with the XD series camera by any means.  The SRT series is really the camera that broke through the consumer market.  And then there is the Leica connection to explore.  There are also the great Autocords and screw mount leica copies that aren't even touched on.  (And I haven't even mentioned my personal favorite, the absolutely fabulous XK (XM or X-1 in other parts of the world.)  I don't mean to minimize Minolta's contribution to the autofocus revolution - but there is a long history that shows how they got to such a dominant position in the 1980's. --Anon
The article needs breaking up into sections. I would suggest:
#Brief intro
#Early history. (which will include  TLRs and Leica copies etc)
#First SLRs (SRTs etc)
#Leica Collaboration (small section)
#The Xs (all the manual focus SLRs)
#Autofocus (perhaps in two sub-sections)
#Digital
#Compact cameras (of which Minolta has always had a big share of the market)
#Other optical projects (planetariums etc)
It isn't an ideal solution, since it wouldn't be strictly chronological. And it would require re-writing the article, but at the moment it is a little bit all over the place. Any objections? Comments? --Monk Bretton 00:51, 12 Feb 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  Earlier history please 

message: I think it will be pretty complex to deal with Konica and Minolta (long) history in the same article. Ericd 18:06, 20 Jun 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  Move it back to Minolta 

message: I believe that most of this page should be reverted to a "Minolta" page, and a separate "Konica" page created, with references to the "Konica Minolta" page for the current company, which doesn't have much of a history yet.
Konica has always been a strong R&D photography company with many breakthrough products, while Minolta was the largest camera company in the world, & always focused on mass market cameras and marketing.  Each has a strong history that should be addressed.
Cranialsodomy 02:45, 10 September 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: I second this suggestion.  Both Konica and Minolta are companies that are fully deserving of their own articles to address their respective histories and where appropriate product lines.  - Webgeer 07:46, 30 September 2005 (UTC)

text: Thirded.  Since the histories of Konica and Minolta did not join until relatively recently, the article would have to be effectively treated in three parts in any case (one for each, one for the merged entity).  Let's keep Konica Minolta for the history of the post-merger company and the activities of the present-day entity, and deal with the histories and products of Konica and Minolta separately.  I may start this work sometime soon. —Morven 15:32, 17 October 2005 (UTC)

text: Disagree - Konica and Minolta are now one, it's just going to take a while to get used to that. By all means have seperate Konica and Minolta pages saying they merged, look at KM now, but it's only going to confuse people to have a load of different pages about what is now the same thing. --Guru Chris 11:14, 18 October 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: I suggest looking at Mercedes-Benz and Chrysler Corporation.  These have not been merged into DaimlerChrysler.  I think Morven's suggestion is ideal.  Currently the article has one linear history, pretty much just covering Minolta's camera history.  I'm not sure how Konica's history could even be merged into that article.  I had suggested separate headings for Minolta's history and Konica's history, but someone seems to have eliminated that concept. -- Webgeer 10:12, 26 October 2005 (UTC)
replies: text:  I have begun a separate Konica page, where the pre-merger history and products of Konica can be described.  Once that is done, I plan to work on Minolta; after that, I intend to remove most pre-merger history from Konica Minolta and deal with its post-merger history and products. —Morven 20:05, 6 November 2005 (UTC)
replies: text:  Now created a separate Minolta page and moved most of the pre-merger stuff to there, reducing confusion/complexity.  Much copyediting and improvement still needed. —Matthew Brown (T:C) 13:36, 29 November 2005 (UTC)

text: I agree. With separate articles it is easier to keep the histories of the individual companies straight. ShutterBugTrekker (talk) 22:29, 4 April 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Break up page 

message: There's just been a suggestion at Talk:Konica and Talk:Minolta to re-merge the whole lot. I think it's a bad idea, and have said so at length on Talk:Konica. -- Hoary 00:52, 6 September 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I agree. With separate articles it is easier to keep the histories of the individual companies straight. ShutterBugTrekker (talk) 22:29, 4 April 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: Re-merge? (Please don't.) 

message: The following is clearly not in encyclopedia style. Charles Matthews 12:48, 23 November 2005 (UTC)
thread_title: Material cut from the page

message: Is the Dai Nippon that will purchase the Odawara factory Dai Nippon Printing? Fg2 00:27, 8 December 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Dai Nippon 

message: I see someone has taken this out of the Photographic catagory - which makes some sense in that they have exited that business in favor of something called "imaging", but I wonder if they should still show their anyway, after all ANSCO is still in that catagory even though they were merged with GAF in the 60's and quit the photography business in the early 70's?  cmacd 14:08, 12 January 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Photographic company catagory 

message: I notice that Minolta has a let's-merge-this template that directs people to discussion here. But there's no discussion here. Well, there is much earlier discussion above of what a good idea it would be to separate KM, K, and M into three articles.
I'm not the person who proposed a re-merger, and I'm strongly against it: see my comment on Talk:Konica. -- Hoary 00:56, 6 September 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I also oppose that merger. While the article on the merged company ought to include some info on these two companies prior to the merger, we should still have the separate articles to delve more deeply into these companies' separate histories. ShutterBugTrekker 21:20, 6 September 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: You're right, both companies have had long histories apart. Merging would make about as much sense as it would to merge Horace Smith and Daniel Wesson. ShutterBugTrekker 23:06, 14 September 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Merge from [[Konica]] and [[Minolta]]?

message: ===Konica Minolta Healthcare Americas, Inc ===
Offering Digital Radiography, Ultrasound Imaging, Healthcare IT Solutions and Service-based solutions to hospitals, imaging centers, clinics and private practices. Headquartered in Wayne, NJ with facilities in NC, IL, FL and Brazil.
Konica Minolta Healthcare Americas, Inc., formerly known as Konica Minolta Medical Imaging USA, Inc., is a business unit of Konica Minolta, Inc., with global headquarters in Tokyo, Japan. Konica Minolta Healthcare provides product and service based solutions across the USA, Canada and Latin America.
LGiordano (talk) 15:07, 2 March 2017 (UTC)
thread_title: some proposed changes

message: Offering Digital Radiography, Ultrasound Imaging, Healthcare IT Solutions and Service-based solutions to hospitals, imaging centers, clinics and private practices. Headquartered in Wayne, NJ with facilities in NC, IL, FL and Brazil.
Konica Minolta Healthcare Americas, Inc., formerly known as Konica Minolta Medical Imaging USA, Inc., is a business unit of Konica Minolta, Inc., with global headquarters in Tokyo, Japan. Konica Minolta Healthcare provides product and service based solutions across the USA, Canada and Latin America.
LGiordano (talk) 15:07, 2 March 2017 (UTC)
thread_title: Konica Minolta Healthcare Americas, Inc 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified one external link on Konica Minolta. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20090527124725/http://findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_m0EIN/is_2000_Sept_13/ai_65188612/ to http://findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_m0EIN/is_2000_Sept_13/ai_65188612
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 16:56, 7 May 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified