Sony Alpha a850 Leaked?

[KenjiS]

http://www.dyxum.com/dforum/a850-manual-out-in-hk-offical-site_topic50084_page1.html

Interesting, to sum up, think of it as a trimmed down a900, same sensor, but only 3fps and a smaller viewfinder..

Maybe a few other things that i just am not getting at the moment, im not too up on Sony stuff..

Rumors say this could retail around $2,000....I'd say $2200, it would be absolutely pants on-head stupid for Sony to place it at $2500 or so....and $2000 is too low for Sony to go, Remember Sony is going with a 2-3-5-7-8-9 strategy a la Minolta for bodies...we're waiting on the 500 and 700 series bodies as well as the 800 series body....with the price of the high end 3-series bodies [Around $850] I'd place the 500 series at $1000 and a 700 series at about $1400-1500 [Of course a850 implies there could also be an a800 in here as well...]

Of course unlike Nikon, who chooses to shoot between Canon's models, Sony seems to be just attacking -everybody- :)

$2,200 for a FF camera with similar spec to a 5D Mark II..The high ISO performance is likely complete **** but still....I could see it being a legitimate landscape/portraiture camera [Sony does have a fantastic 85 f/1.4 and 135 f/1.8...also the 16-35 f/2.8 and 24-70 f/2.8 despite being overpriced are very good lenses]

Who here is wagering that Canon waits for this to drop for about $2200 and then Canon releases the 7D which uses the same sensor from the old 1Ds Mk II coupled with new advanced processing algorithms for $1800....

Part of me would wager the 7D may even have higher FPS than the 5D II...I dont see why it couldnt :) [Except the 5D II would then need replacement, but who says that wont happen sooner than we all think?]

[form]

Canon hasn't done anything unpredictable or homerun-like in a while, and they haven't introduced any new lines since the 5D unless you consider the new lower rebel variants.

Why should they change their strategy now by giving consumers what they want (better ISO in xxD series, improved AF systems in non-1D series)? They haven't been putting the middle-range consumer anywhere near the front of their priority list for a long time. I say Canon will stay obtuse as long as they can.

[MR do little]

[Sony does have a fantastic 85 f/1.4 and 135 f/1.8...also the 16-35 f/2.8 and 24-70 f/2.8 despite being overpriced are very good lenses]


Well the ZA 135/1,8 unmatched by both Nikon and Canon both optically and when it comes to build. ZA 85/1,4 is on pair with the rest of the 85 from both C & N.

The 24-70/2,8 beats both Canon and Nikon and the build is nicer, even though not on the same level as the ZA primes. (rubber zoom/focus rings)


The 16-35/2,8 Zeiss is nice as well, but have tough competition in both the Canon 16-35, and of course the unsurpassed Nikkor 14-24/2,8.

As for being overpriced, as with everything else price is relative.

Ill take the optical and build of the 135/1,8 ZA and the 24-70/2,8 ZA over any Canon/Nikon offering any day of the week.

Thats just me though. ;)

As for the new Camera, anything under the A900 is of no interest to me, i rather see a pro body from Sony with intergrated grip. But more importantly what Sony need in terms of a camera is a camera like the D700, and for more pro users they need to step up when it comes to pro support programs like CPS/NPS.

Kindest

[timbop]

Well the ZA 135/1,8 unmatched by both Nikon and Canon both optically and when it comes to build. ZA 85/1,4 is on pair with the rest of the 85 from both C & N.

The 24-70/2,8 beats both Canon and Nikon and the build is nicer, even though not on the same level as the ZA primes. (rubber zoom/focus rings)


The 16-35/2,8 Zeiss is nice as well, but have tough competition in both the Canon 16-35, and of course the unsurpassed Nikkor 14-24/2,8.

As for being overpriced, as with everything else price is relative.

Ill take the optical and build of the 135/1,8 ZA and the 24-70/2,8 ZA over any Canon/Nikon offering any day of the week.

Thats just me though. ;)

As for the new Camera, anything under the A900 is of no interest to me, i rather see a pro body from Sony with intergrated grip. But more importantly what Sony need in terms of a camera is a camera like the D700, and for more pro users they need to step up when it comes to pro support programs like CPS/NPS.

Kindest

riiiigght

[MR do little]

Expected response i guess...

You have experience with the mention glass above ?

I have, despite i dont shoot or own Canon i have alot of colleagues who do. I happens to know two guys who converted the 135/1,8 to EF mount...


Again its easy to dismiss things due to inexperience or lack of knowledge.

Cheerio!

[KenjiS]

Expected response i guess...

You have experience with the mention glass above ?

I have, despite i dont shoot or own Canon i have alot of colleagues who do. I happens to know two guys who converted the 135/1,8 to EF mount...


Again its easy to dismiss things due to inexperience or lack of knowledge.

Cheerio!

I'm curious about the 135 f/1.8 conversion, Did they retain aperture control or is it stuck wide open?

I love the 135 f/1.8's shots but I wouldnt dump Canon to get it....[it is tempting though :)]

[MR do little]

Hi Kenji!

I'll try to find the mail/link that was sent to me. It was DIY on high level... worth the effort according to them who have done it though.

Dosent make much sense to drop a whole system because of one lens. :-)

Did i say the 135/2L is crap ? No not all, im just saying that optically the 135/1,8 has an edge, the build in my opinion is much prefered as it is all metal with no rubber.Wich reminds me of the feel of all my lenses for Nikon.. :-)

I didnt drop Nikon, i added the A900 with some great glass for studio work(read in good light), and thus far iv been more then impressed.

Sony has a few lenses going for them, and of course the A900. Still have alot to work on, lens lineup is far from complete, and their flash system is a long shot from being impressive.

[KenjiS]

Hi Kenji!

I'll try to find the mail/link that was sent to me. It was DIY on high level... worth the effort according to them who have done it though.

Dosent make much sense to drop a whole system because of one lens. :-)

Did i say the 135/2L is crap ? No not all, im just saying that optically the 135/1,8 has an edge, the build in my opinion is much prefered as it is all metal with no rubber.Wich reminds me of the feel of all my lenses for Nikon.. :-)

I didnt drop Nikon, i added the A900 with some great glass for studio work(read in good light), and thus far iv been more then impressed.

Sony has a few lenses going for them, and of course the A900. Still have alot to work on, lens lineup is far from complete, and their flash system is a long shot from being impressive.


I thought their pro flash was cool, At least in concept that tilting head idea means you dont need a big cumbersome stroboframe....

And I loved the ergonomics of the a700, The a700 and a900 are good bodies, Their new entry level stuff...Eh...very EH..

Also ill say their vertical grips deserve praise, Those things are a work of art!

And I agree..the 70-400 despite looking absolutely hideous is supposedly a good league above my 100-400 optically and despite the absurd price the 300 f/2.8 is also supposedly the best out there...And as you mentioned, the 24-70 is pretty damn good, and they have the 85 f/1.4 and 135 f/1.8 going for them as well...And I admit I would probubly love to have one of Sony's 70-300 Gs in my lineup too, That thing looks like a great walkabout lens...

My big complaint against Sony is that the a700 is VERY long in the tooth right now and their noise performance is still strongly lacking, Also their support and service make me very nervous given some friends experience with other Sony products [A lot of "Well you must have done something, We're not gonna fix it" kind of BSing out of warranty work]

Oh and I hope to god Sony quits with the design trend they're on with the a230/330/380, The ergonomics are terrible, the menus are terrible, the interface is terrible, the viewfinder is appalling and the IS in the a330 i tried didnt work very well [I distinctly remember the a700 i tried a while ago not being as bad as this was..] or perhaps it had something to do with my grip on the camera not being as secure as on the Rebel or the Nikon I was comparing it with....Either way they definately lost about 5 points right there for ruining some of the best feeling bodies on the market...

[MR do little]

Well 58AM is good looking and have a innovative design wich beats both Canon and Nikon, problem is it lacks brains and "connectivity"

Yes Sony support is not even on pair with Canons and Nikons consumer service at the moment, only in one country have they started a "pro service" (thats what they like to call it anyway)

If they want to make any headroom with the pro market, they need to establish a service equal to that of Canon and Nikon.

While the new design of the entry level camera may not appeal to me, i certainly see why Sony chose it, average person probably think it looks quite slick, the UI is nice for beginners.

I very much doubt that Sony will keep this design thru its lineup though. .-)

Kindest

[manipula]

riiiigght

:roll:

Everything he said is entirely correct.

[MR do little]

Kenji:

http://www.fredmiranda.com/forum/topic/727900

[timbop]

Did i say the 135/2L is crap ? No not all, im just saying that optically the 135/1,8 has an edge, the build in my opinion is much prefered as it is all metal with no rubber.Wich reminds me of the feel of all my lenses for Nikon.. :-)


I see, so the fact that they put rubber over the metal af ring to make it grippier is a negative? I've not shot with the sony 135/1.8, but I have personally shot the 135L and frankly I don't see how the images from it could be "improved" in any perceptible way. The AF is blazing fast, accurate, and the lens is in every way a "10". I have no experience with Nikon's variant, but perhaps that is the lens you are thinking of when you say that Sony's is better?

[KenjiS]

I see, so the fact that they put rubber over the metal af ring to make it grippier is a negative? I've not shot with the sony 135/1.8, but I have personally shot the 135L and frankly I don't see how the images from it could be "improved" in any perceptible way. The AF is blazing fast, accurate, and the lens is in every way a "10". I have no experience with Nikon's variant, but perhaps that is the lens you are thinking of when you say that Sony's is better?

Nikon doesnt really have a 135mm f/2 like Canon's, theirs is a DC Nikkor which is closer to the 135 f/2.8 SF or Sony's 135 f/2.8 STF

Anyways, thats really cool Dolittle, sadly he hasnt gotten the aperture thing worked out yet..seems like you dont have much room to work with on a Sony conversion..Thus making things really difficult...

Tempts me to butcher an old minolta lens or two as a prototype however ;)

[MR do little]

I see, so the fact that they put rubber over the metal af ring to make it grippier is a negative? I've not shot with the sony 135/1.8, but I have personally shot the 135L and frankly I don't see how the images from it could be "improved" in any perceptible way. The AF is blazing fast, accurate, and the lens is in every way a "10". I have no experience with Nikon's variant, but perhaps that is the lens you are thinking of when you say that Sony's is better?

YMMV of course, again i base this on experience with all these lenses mentioned. I dont like rubber, and i appreciate the fact the 135/1,8 Zeiss doesnt have any rubber or plastic. Then again i most likley have a very diffrent taste, and i shoot with all metal lenses on my Nikon and appreciate mechanical build and precision.

If your happy with the 135/2 L thats great, and by no means is it a poor performer. Still dosent change the fact the 135/1,8 ZA is superior optically, and have a more solid build. (just compare the lens hoods.. ie.)


Nikons 135/2 DC is a great lens apart from the gimmic feature, wich makes it a pain to QC and alot of them comes off the mark out the box(focusing that is) The 135/2,8 (4,5) STF is a very special lens and (Minolta design) nothing Canon have or Nikon comes close to what it can do, its a niche lens and comes with a penatly, it eats light.


Your first response sadly echos that of many users who for some reason feel the need to "defend" their brand. Its very comon on the internet, and pretty much all brands have their fair share. Eventhough i must say i never met a group of more "hostile" and "clueless" (lack of experience and knowledge) as the Sony crowd, simply amazing to see what kind of responses and emails i got when i started shooting Sony and participate on their forums.

In your defence i guess its hard to think that already good lens can be "better", and how a Sony lens perform isnt that relevant to Canon owners. The thread was however about Sony gear thus my input.

Eitherway, enjoy whatever gear you use.

Kindest

[KenjiS]

Come now guys, Lets keep this civil please..

I disliked the texture on Sony's lower end zooms and that, but i never held any of their higher end lenses sadly :*(

And Nikon builds most of their stuff like a tank, I'd say that most of their consumer stuff is built a lot better than Canon's consumer stuff in general, Especially the DX Nikkors vs the EF-S lenses...

I dont have much brand bias myself, Dont find a use for it...

Personally, Taking lenses out of the equation, my absolute favorite body at the moment is the D300....

Add lenses back in and....The body and system for me likely is the D300, with a 10-20 f/3.5 Sigma[or the 10-24 Nikkor], 16-85 VR Nikkor, and the 150-500 Sigma plus the 105mm f/2.8 VR Micro-Nikkor....As well as a Sigma 50mm f/1.4 [or maybe the new Nikkor] and a 70-200 f/2.8 VR II and sometime in the future a 300 f/2.8 VR with ....i think its the TC-14 and TC-20 teleconverters...

Why? Because right now I'm praying on the 60D upgrading the AF of the xxD line, I want a 10-20mm f/3.5 Sigma [if i chose to upgrade my wide zoom] a....lens that nowone makes for Canon that would equate to a 15-75 IS[Which my Tamron 28-75 is sorta half-assedly filling in for], and my 100-400..which i find im wishing was a little longer sometimes...I also want a Sigma 180mm f/3.5 macro, Sigma 50mm f/1.4 and sometime in the future a 70-200 f/2.8 IS and a 300 f/2.8 IS with 1.4 and 2x teleconverters...

Keep in mind the 5D and 1D series are nice bodies and certainly tempting, But they dont strike me as the bodies for me personally...

Why dont i switch? I'm unconvinced at the moment and id rather have the cash to buy in all at once, Selling my stuff only after i've completely swapped...Even then im not entirely sure about it...So im sitting with what i have for now letting it all mull over in my head some

[HappySnapper90]

My guess is the a900 is not selling well and sony is replacing it with a cheaper model to make more money off it. Knowing sony, it'll sell for no less than $2500 and the a900 will be discontinued. sony realized they are not in the position to make pro spec'd cameras because their customer base has few pro photographers willing to buy pro gear from sony. sony will have to settle for the amateur market and leave pro gear to Canon and nikon.

Nikon doesnt really have a 135mm f/2 like Canon's, theirs is a DC Nikkor which is closer to the 135 f/2.8 SF or Sony's 135 f/2.8 STF


Sony has a Carl Zeiss 135 f1.8 for the sony mount in case you did not know and it's a fairly new lens within the past 18 months.

[tango_28]

Sony is coming with the A950 to replace the A900.

[KenjiS]

Sony has a Carl Zeiss 135 f1.8 for the sony mount in case you did not know and it's a fairly new lens within the past 18 months.

Oh i know that ,we were discussing it slightly beforehand which is when the Nikkor came up

But the DC Nikkor is a special effect portrait lens like the Sony STF or the Canon SF lens....not just a quick 135mm telephoto :)

[Wild Style]

Come now guys, Lets keep this civil please..

I disliked the texture on Sony's lower end zooms and that, but i never held any of their higher end lenses sadly :*(

And Nikon builds most of their stuff like a tank, I'd say that most of their consumer stuff is built a lot better than Canon's consumer stuff in general, Especially the DX Nikkors vs the EF-S lenses...

I dont have much brand bias myself, Dont find a use for it...

Personally, Taking lenses out of the equation, my absolute favorite body at the moment is the D300....

Add lenses back in and....The body and system for me likely is the D300, with a 10-20 f/3.5 Sigma[or the 10-24 Nikkor], 16-85 VR Nikkor, and the 150-500 Sigma plus the 105mm f/2.8 VR Micro-Nikkor....As well as a Sigma 50mm f/1.4 [or maybe the new Nikkor] and a 70-200 f/2.8 VR II and sometime in the future a 300 f/2.8 VR with ....i think its the TC-14 and TC-20 teleconverters...

Why? Because right now I'm praying on the 60D upgrading the AF of the xxD line, I want a 10-20mm f/3.5 Sigma [if i chose to upgrade my wide zoom] a....lens that nowone makes for Canon that would equate to a 15-75 IS[Which my Tamron 28-75 is sorta half-assedly filling in for], and my 100-400..which i find im wishing was a little longer sometimes...I also want a Sigma 180mm f/3.5 macro, Sigma 50mm f/1.4 and sometime in the future a 70-200 f/2.8 IS and a 300 f/2.8 IS with 1.4 and 2x teleconverters...

Keep in mind the 5D and 1D series are nice bodies and certainly tempting, But they dont strike me as the bodies for me personally...

Why dont i switch? I'm unconvinced at the moment and id rather have the cash to buy in all at once, Selling my stuff only after i've completely swapped...Even then im not entirely sure about it...So im sitting with what i have for now letting it all mull over in my head someI am with you on this one. I started doing event photography and in low light situations the xxD series AF system is horrible. I have been thinking long and hard about going Nikon. I am really hoping The announcements from Canon this year can step up to the plate and answer Nikon's challenge. Other wise my gear is going on the chopping block and I am switching back to Nikon.

[KenjiS]

I am with you on this one. I started doing event photography and in low light situations the xxD series AF system is horrible. I have been thinking long and hard about going Nikon. I am really hoping The announcements from Canon this year can step up to the plate and answer Nikon's challenge. Other wise my gear is going on the chopping block and I am switching back to Nikon.

Well supposedly Canon's stuff is next week..and there IS supposed to be the 60D anouncement

So not too long to wait

-edit- or Sept 1...even still, not too long to wait :)

[tango_28]

It's msrp is 2k, I wonder what the street prices is going to be.

[KenjiS]

It's msrp is 2k, I wonder what the street prices is going to be.

2k most likely

Sony doesnt deviate from MSRP and doesnt really like its dealers to deviate from MSRP either...

$2k for a full frame camera seems like a good deal, and the a850 certainly looks like a good full frame camera to me..

The 500 and 550 though....Eugh...Just...Wow..Sony screwed the pooch on them :/

[Skippy29]

and $2000 is too low for Sony to go,

Whoops

[KenjiS]

Whoops

Yes indeed, I know :)

Ah well..

I'm really uncertain on whether or not its gonig to translate into sales...

Why? On Nikon $300 more buys you the D700, yes it has half the resolution but its also acclaimed as being very -very- good...

Here on the Canon side you can get a 5D classic for $1200-1500...And again, a camera thats acclaimed as being -very- good

The problem is most people interested in Full Frame already called their systems, and to switch systems is difficult, Switching systems to a newcomer whos still a bit green is even harder

Also i must say Sony's 28-75 f/2.8 is complete ^&#$ at $800, Seriously, WTF are they thinking? For the record its the Tamron 28-75 with a Sony badge on it...you're paying TWICE the price for it...