Sony's new Full-Frame A-850

[KayakPhotos]

It appears that Sony is gunning for the 5D Mark II. They just released a smaller version of the A900 with a full-frame sensor and most of the features of its larger sibling except for a smaller coverage (98%) viewfinder and slower fps speed. What surprised me the most was the absence of any type of movie mode or live view! I think that Sony has previously had the best version of live view, so it would have been neat to see what they did with a movie mode using their two sensor approach to focusing. I think this missing feature will keep the camera from truly competing with the 5D Mark II. Plus, it sounds like there will be a lot of in-camera noise reduction going on which will probably render less detail than the images of the 5D Mark II. This is just speculation though....

Here's a link (http://www.dpreview.com/news/0908/09082705sonya850.asp)

[jacobsen1]

I agree on the movie mode and liveview, quite surprising coming from sony.
but at $2k MSRP, with an expected lower street price.... That's just above a D300 or a bit more over a 50D for 24mp and full frame. Sigma also supports that mount so there are some very good lens alternatives for not too much money (Sony's better lenses rival Ls in price!).

[WT21]

I am just an amateur, but I really want to go FF. I hope Canon responds to this soon, or I may be looking at moving systems. Alternatively, if prices simply drop, that'll work for me as well :-)

[WT21]

I agree on the movie mode and liveview, quite surprising coming from sony.
but at $2k MSRP, with an expected lower street price.... That's just above a D300 or a bit more over a 50D for 24mp and full frame. Sigma also supports that mount so there are some very good lens alternatives for not too much money (Sony's better lenses rival Ls in price!).

"That's just above a D300"

Good point. In some ways this might harm Nikon (already bleeding cash, and already trying to convince people to switch systems) worse than Canon.

[jacobsen1]

They just released a smaller version of the A900.

BTW, it's not smaller looking at the specs physically. Not sure if you meant little brother smaller or not. ;)

so it's just the viewfinder going to 98% (which is what canon does anyway) and 3fps -vs- 5fps but a larger/deeper buffer (just because it fills it slower) for ~$700 less, if not more (current a900 prices at $2700, the a850 has a MSRP of $2k but might sell for less). That's a 25% price reduction w/o much loss in specs.....

[robojack]

Great news, but too bad considering even Sony's A900 has been pretty horrible above ISO 400.

[jacobsen1]

yeah, but they've traded ISO for MP with insane DR. INSANE:
http://www.dpreview.com/reviews/sonydslra900/Samples/DR/sonyA900-ISO200_wedge.png
http://www.dpreview.com/reviews/CanonEOS5D/Samples/DynRange/Wedges/IMG_9967_wedge.png
http://www.dpreview.com/reviews/CanonEOS5DMarkII/Samples/Dynamic_Range/5D2_NR-Std_ISO100_wedge.png
http://a.img-dpreview.com/reviews/CanonEOS5D/Samples/DynRange/Wedges/VI7H5290_wedge.png
http://www.dpreview.com/reviews/NikonD700/samples/dr/d700_ISO200_9952_wedge.png

that's JPEG, but in RAW the a900 (and D700) both get MUCH better. Canon's only get slightly better.

depending on what you shoot, the sony's are amazing cameras (studio/landscape) for the money. Too bad, for me, that I shoot BOTH landscapes AND candids with ISOs jacked....

[picturecrazy]

$2000? Are you kidding me? The 5D2 already seemed overpriced compared to the D700, and now this makes it look worse. This is going to really shake up the scene. Prices are going to drop fast methinks. If canon/nikon don't respond, Sony will scoop up all the new photographers and canon/nikon will be left with all the old boys like us.

[calvinnju]

Just sold my good old 5D, and the 5D MKII kit will arrive this Friday. But I am seriously considering jumping ship. A 24MP full frame at 2000...Wow! Let's wait to see what 7D will look like. It might not be a full frame though...

[roanjohn]

I am praying that the 7D will be full frame............... praying, praying.

[jacobsen1]

Let's wait to see what 7D will look like. It might not be a full frame though...

I am praying that the 7D will be full frame............... praying, praying.

I'm with you guys, but the rumor guys all think canon rumors is right with in spec'd at 1.6. We'll know Tuesday morning, but it's looking like the 7D will be a baby 1 series (sports) and the 5Dii is the baby 1Ds. :cry:

[gnnbtrn]

Just sold my good old 5D, and the 5D MKII kit will arrive this Friday. But I am seriously considering jumping ship. A 24MP full frame at 2000...Wow! Let's wait to see what 7D will look like. It might not be a full frame though...

I've been there. Came to Canon from Minolta.
To me the price of the system played a big role. Sony's top lenses are more expensive then Canon's.

[gnnbtrn]

I don't care if Cannon issue 7D tomorrow or for Christmas. it is more important to me that the prices will drop for existing models.

[HappySnapper90]

yeah, but they've traded ISO for MP with insane DR. INSANE:
http://www.dpreview.com/reviews/sonydslra900/Samples/DR/sonyA900-ISO200_wedge.png
http://www.dpreview.com/reviews/CanonEOS5D/Samples/DynRange/Wedges/IMG_9967_wedge.png
http://www.dpreview.com/reviews/CanonEOS5DMarkII/Samples/Dynamic_Range/5D2_NR-Std_ISO100_wedge.png
http://a.img-dpreview.com/reviews/CanonEOS5D/Samples/DynRange/Wedges/VI7H5290_wedge.png
http://www.dpreview.com/reviews/NikonD700/samples/dr/d700_ISO200_9952_wedge.png

that's JPEG, but in RAW the a900 (and D700) both get MUCH better. Canon's only get slightly better.
...

I think DPR's test of that was when NR or DRO could not be turned off. The a900 does not have significantly more DR than other cameras similar to it.

I am praying that the 7D will be full frame............... praying, praying.

Nope. www.canonrumors.com have it 95% being aps-c.

[bobbyz]

I am praying that the 7D will be full frame............... praying, praying.

I am with you though I will prefer 1 series AF over FF.

[mikeassk]

There have been a lot of shortcomings in the newest canon's compared to the competition. I would expect the 7D to rise above. If it were full frame that would be awesome.

[jacobsen1]

I think DPR's test of that was when NR or DRO could not be turned off. The a900 does not have significantly more DR than other cameras similar to it.

look at the ACR best -vs- canon's. It's still ahead. So is the D700. Sony has a wonderful camera here for not much money. Take of your brand blinders and recognize it for what it is. Yes it SUCKS at high ISOs, but they traded that for 24mp and DR. All that for <$2k!?

You know who should be really nervous here if Sony's lenses improve or are good and people find out? The medium format guys, they only shoot at 800 and under anyway!!!!

[wickerprints]

$2000? Are you kidding me? The 5D2 already seemed overpriced compared to the D700, and now this makes it look worse. This is going to really shake up the scene. Prices are going to drop fast methinks. If canon/nikon don't respond, Sony will scoop up all the new photographers and canon/nikon will be left with all the old boys like us.

I don't usually disagree with your posts but this one seems, shall we say, melodramatic to say the least?

If the 5D2 were truly overpriced, why is it that I've seen so many people walking around with them? They are freakin' everywhere. Canon can't make enough to sell--they're constantly on backorder and new batches get snapped up right away.

If you think that a company with single-digit (or at most, low double-digits) dSLR market share is going to be able to influence the pricing on the rest of the market, or even exert enough economic pressure to cause people to flock to their system...you need to rethink. At the 5D2/D700/A850 level, people don't select cameras based on the body only. They look at the whole system. Yes, people do switch from time to time. But then you're talking about gearheads who spend more time obsessing about getting the best and latest, rather than taking good pictures. And to switch to Sony, with their limited lens lineup (yeah so you can use old lenses, big deal), to save $700 is not only short-sighted but a waste of time. And new consumers aren't likely to jump straight to the A850 level. They are much more likely to have come from the prosumer level, with prior experience with the mid-range bodies and lenses.

Sony isn't going to scoop up anything except perhaps their own arrogance. They don't have the loyalty of the pro segment. They bought their way into the game from Minolta. Most consumers are invested in the system they chose. A few hundred in savings now (offset by the time and cost of selling off used gear) is not enough to make people switch. If Sony really wants to compete, they should be putting out amazing lenses at 20-40% lower prices than Canon, expand their range. That would make a dent, not a camera body that will be superseded in 2 years.

That's why Canon is as popular as it is. Their lens lineup is mature, they are pioneers of lens technology (if not optical design), and while their glass may not be as tack sharp as rarefied brands like Zeiss, they generally know how to satisfy professional demands. When's the last time you saw Zeiss make a 50/1.2 or 400/2.8 AF lens?

[jacobsen1]

How long until people start saying that the video mode on the 5Dii cost $700 though. :confused:

[picturecrazy]

I don't usually disagree with your posts but this one seems, shall we say, melodramatic to say the least?

If the 5D2 were truly overpriced, why is it that I've seen so many people walking around with them? They are freakin' everywhere. Canon can't make enough to sell--they're constantly on backorder and new batches get snapped up right away.

If you think that a company with single-digit (or at most, low double-digits) dSLR market share is going to be able to influence the pricing on the rest of the market, or even exert enough economic pressure to cause people to flock to their system...you need to rethink. At the 5D2/D700/A850 level, people don't select cameras based on the body only. They look at the whole system. Yes, people do switch from time to time. But then you're talking about gearheads who spend more time obsessing about getting the best and latest, rather than taking good pictures. And to switch to Sony, with their limited lens lineup (yeah so you can use old lenses, big deal), to save $700 is not only short-sighted but a waste of time. And new consumers aren't likely to jump straight to the A850 level. They are much more likely to have come from the prosumer level, with prior experience with the mid-range bodies and lenses.

Sony isn't going to scoop up anything except perhaps their own arrogance. They don't have the loyalty of the pro segment. They bought their way into the game from Minolta. Most consumers are invested in the system they chose. A few hundred in savings now (offset by the time and cost of selling off used gear) is not enough to make people switch. If Sony really wants to compete, they should be putting out amazing lenses at 20-40% lower prices than Canon, expand their range. That would make a dent, not a camera body that will be superseded in 2 years.

That's why Canon is as popular as it is. Their lens lineup is mature, they are pioneers of lens technology (if not optical design), and while their glass may not be as tack sharp as rarefied brands like Zeiss, they generally know how to satisfy professional demands. When's the last time you saw Zeiss make a 50/1.2 or 400/2.8 AF lens?

I never said people are going to switch to sony. I really don't think established people will. But people who are starting and looking to get serious now have a really affordable and capable offering from a third company, instead of just the two powerhouses. And at a price point $700 cheaper, it looks very attractive for people who aren't already heavily invested in one system, or not invested at all.

Yes, I agree that many people who buy their first cam buys something like a Rebel or D5000. But if they get the bug and decide to get serious, they also consider the 'other company' before making their big investment. (seriously, a rebel/kit lens is hardly an investment for someone wanting to go pro) Now it's the 'other companies' that people will consider. And to get a pro featured full frame body for $2000? You can't tell me that won't be a popular choice.

The 5D2 is selling well because there are so many established people who want it and have been waiting for it. But put the D700, 5D2, and A850 infront of someone making their first dive into a body for professional use, the 5D2 is VERY FAR from a slam dunk win.

I fully stand by my previous statement. I do not believe it is melodramatic at all.

[WT21]

I don't usually disagree with your posts but this one seems, shall we say, melodramatic to say the least?

If the 5D2 were truly overpriced, why is it that I've seen so many people walking around with them? They are freakin' everywhere. Canon can't make enough to sell--they're constantly on backorder and new batches get snapped up right away.

If you think that a company with single-digit (or at most, low double-digits) dSLR market share is going to be able to influence the pricing on the rest of the market, or even exert enough economic pressure to cause people to flock to their system...you need to rethink. At the 5D2/D700/A850 level, people don't select cameras based on the body only. They look at the whole system. Yes, people do switch from time to time. But then you're talking about gearheads who spend more time obsessing about getting the best and latest, rather than taking good pictures. And to switch to Sony, with their limited lens lineup (yeah so you can use old lenses, big deal), to save $700 is not only short-sighted but a waste of time. And new consumers aren't likely to jump straight to the A850 level. They are much more likely to have come from the prosumer level, with prior experience with the mid-range bodies and lenses.

Sony isn't going to scoop up anything except perhaps their own arrogance. They don't have the loyalty of the pro segment. They bought their way into the game from Minolta. Most consumers are invested in the system they chose. A few hundred in savings now (offset by the time and cost of selling off used gear) is not enough to make people switch. If Sony really wants to compete, they should be putting out amazing lenses at 20-40% lower prices than Canon, expand their range. That would make a dent, not a camera body that will be superseded in 2 years.

That's why Canon is as popular as it is. Their lens lineup is mature, they are pioneers of lens technology (if not optical design), and while their glass may not be as tack sharp as rarefied brands like Zeiss, they generally know how to satisfy professional demands. When's the last time you saw Zeiss make a 50/1.2 or 400/2.8 AF lens?

It's not just about $700 (which, btw, makes it 25% cheaper than the 5dmkii) and not just about lenses. LuminousLandscape's a900 review seems to claim that the basic lenses are covered in the Sony system (according to LL, only TSE and 400m+ zooms are missing). Also, it claims IQ is the same up to ISO800. It also positions the Alpha900 (presumably the same as the a850) as being easier to use in terms of menus, etc. and having a MUCH better VF.

Maybe it's all true, maybe not. But it certainly attracts attention to the Sony. Add to that sensor IS, so you can use a wider array of lenses with IS, and then if you are moving crop to FF, you might be switching lenses ANYWAY (ditching EF-S, etc.)

People are already moving Canon to Nikon. This is yet another choice. Will the Alpha a850 cripple Canon? Not likely immediately, but it does weaken Canon's claim as the only FF option, and now lately one of two. Now it's one of three, which dilutes the market.

On market share -- you have to start somewhere. Only time will tell, but dismissing competitors based on low market share is really the short sighted view. I'm sure Google's search when it started was only a fraction of Yahoo's.

[Skippy29]

This is going to do wonders for the For Sale forum.

[wickerprints]

I never said people are going to switch to sony. I really don't think established people will. But people who are starting and looking to get serious now have a really affordable and capable offering from a third company, instead of just the two powerhouses. And at a price point $700 cheaper, it looks very attractive for people who aren't already heavily invested in one system, or not invested at all.

Yes, I agree that many people who buy their first cam buys something like a Rebel or D5000. But if they get the bug and decide to get serious, they also consider the 'other company' before making their big investment. (seriously, a rebel/kit lens is hardly an investment for someone wanting to go pro) Now it's the 'other companies' that people will consider. And to get a pro featured full frame body for $2000? You can't tell me that won't be a popular choice.

The 5D2 is selling well because there are so many established people who want it and have been waiting for it. But put the D700, 5D2, and A850 infront of someone making their first dive into a body for professional use, the 5D2 is VERY FAR from a slam dunk win.

I fully stand by my previous statement. I do not believe it is melodramatic at all.

Your response makes no logical sense. If you agree that most people who enter the dSLR market do not go immediately to the 5D2/D700/A850 level, then these people go buy something more modest. That means the impact of the A850 on this segment is small. If you also agree that people won't switch systems for this body, then who exactly is going to buy it? Those who have purchased a lower-model Sony? That's not a lot of people.

You keep forgetting that 80% of the dSLR market buys Canon or Nikon. Sony is a bit player and you ignored my previous point, which is that at the level of the A850, the consumer knows--or will soon find out--that the glass is more important, in terms of service support, image quality, price, and variety. And Sony's variety sucks. Their lenses are overpriced.

[jacobsen1]

hey wicker, consider this. I have over ~$8k "invested" in canon gear right now. My 5Dii just drowned and I have an insurance check in hand. I'm considering the a900/850 along with the D700 and 5Dii again. Some of us aren't stuck on brands for whatever reasons and look for the best tools for the job. The sony has great DR and is an awesome camera if you don't need the high ISOs. Factor in sigma lenses which ARE established and you can get a killer, budget, FF landscaping rig over there for MUCH less than with Nikon or Canon.

My biggest holdup with the sony? I know *that* sensor will be in a D700x eventually. So if I like what I see there, why not get a D700 now and wait for the D700x when it eventually drops? This gives me a FF 8fps option AND a 24mp FF option. Canon only gives me one of the two.

[picturecrazy]

Your response makes no logical sense. If you agree that most people who enter the dSLR market do not go immediately to the 5D2/D700/A850 level, then these people go buy something more modest. That means the impact of the A850 on this segment is small. If you also agree that people won't switch systems for this body, then who exactly is going to buy it? Those who have purchased a lower-model Sony? That's not a lot of people.

You keep forgetting that 80% of the dSLR market buys Canon or Nikon. Sony is a bit player and you ignored my previous point, which is that at the level of the A850, the consumer knows--or will soon find out--that the glass is more important, in terms of service support, image quality, price, and variety. And Sony's variety sucks. Their lenses are overpriced.

Can you not make the distinction between "established, heavily invested" and "not-established and not-invested/barely invested" (i.e. rebel and kit lens). Anyone looking to get SERIOUS into photography will likely not see a $700 rebel investment as a SET IN STONE path already walked down with no chance of return.

[wickerprints]

It's not just about $700 (which, btw, makes it 25% cheaper than the 5dmkii) and not just about lenses. LuminousLandscape's a900 review seems to claim that the basic lenses are covered in the Sony system (according to LL, only TSE and 400m+ zooms are missing). Also, it claims IQ is the same up to ISO800. It also positions the Alpha900 (presumably the same as the a850) as being easier to use in terms of menus, etc. and having a MUCH better VF.

The A850 does not have a 100% VF, so no, it is not the same as the A900, before anyone has even bought one to see.

Second, there are LOT more than the TSE and 400+ that are missing in the Sony lens lineup. No super-fast primes, no super-fast zooms. There are many, many people out there for whom the lack of such lenses, including super-teles, is a dealbreaker. No lens IS means no stabilized image in that supposedly bright, beautiful VF.

Make of it what you will. I don't really care since I'm not interested in Sony dSLRs. But the impact on overall market prices will be minimal, if any. That is my prediction.

[lukeap69]

picturecrazy seems to bash 5D and 5D II whenever oppurtunity presents itself. I personally do not look at brand. I also have Minolta film cameras and A lenses and A200. Where Sony is not desirable at the moment is their lenses. They are expensive and cannot be found normally available on camera stores unlike canon or nikon.

[sportsshooter50]

Also keep in mind that the largest markets are in the crop camera arena. I think for now the full frame market is for a different group of buyers. This group realizes that investment in lenses is most important since quality lenses will generally outlast digital bodies. And of course, lenses compatible with full frame bodies fall in that lens category and are not cheap.

In time, all DSLRs may have full frame sensors with varying low light capability. As manufacturing techniques for sensors and shutters get better and less costly, so will the costs of full frame bodies.

Also,I think the 5DMKII compares with the A900. And the 5DMKII has video, which I use quite often. Canon may have another body in store to compete with the new Sony.

[wickerprints]

Can you not make the distinction between "established, heavily invested" and "not-established and not-invested/barely invested" (i.e. rebel and kit lens). Anyone looking to get SERIOUS into photography will likely not see a $700 rebel investment as a SET IN STONE path already walked down with no chance of return.

You keep ignoring my reasoning, so I'll keep ignoring yours. If you want to go with Sony, I'm not going to miss you. Bye.

[Redfire_Cobra]

How long until people start saying that the video mode on the 5Dii cost $700 though. :confused:

I don't think the video mode on the 5DII is increasing the price by $700.00, but if Canon decides to ditch the video and decrease the price of the 5DII by $700.00 I will be one of the first in line to get one.....

[J_TULLAR]

Yea my turn offs from sony is ergonomics and menu system, availability,noise,and some damn expensive lenses(but worth it from what Ive seen).

[Todd Lambert]

This is strictly my opinion, but I don't think this will do squat to affect the 5D2 or even the Nikons... It's a Sony. Period.

I wouldn't touch anything made from Sony with a ten-foot pole. That said, the people that do like Sony will most likely be happy with this. I just don't think you're going to see any Canon or Nikon folks jump ship for it.

[J_TULLAR]

This is strictly my opinion, but I don't think this will do squat to affect the 5D2 or even the Nikons... It's a Sony. Period.

I wouldn't touch anything made from Sony with a ten-foot pole. That said, the people that do like Sony will most likely be happy with this. I just don't think you're going to see any Canon or Nikon folks jump ship for it.

TROOF :cool:

[brownbugger]

The pricing by Sony is very attractive , Perhaps canon will reduce prices ? Unlikely immideately ..infact the lens prices have been going up steeply.

[MR do little]

Sony isn't going to scoop up anything except perhaps their own arrogance. They don't have the loyalty of the pro segment. They bought their way into the game from Minolta. Most consumers are invested in the system they chose. A few hundred in savings now (offset by the time and cost of selling off used gear) is not enough to make people switch.

Got to love that cocky attitude...

[MR do little]

I wouldn't touch anything made from Sony with a ten-foot pole.

Now this is interesting, may i ask for the reason?

Is it the ergonomics ?(assuming you tested a A900) the price ? or any other limitations/deficiency that makes you treat them like the plague ?

Or is it simply because the label says Sony and not Canon ?

Im not arguing the fact that Sony is to small to have any major impact on either Nikon or Canon. And while we wont see people jump ship, it certainly is possible that people might consider "adding" Sony to their arsenal.

Eventhough many of you dislike Sony like the plague.

[lukeap69]

Problem with Sony is not only the lens availability and price. One is the hotshoe. It is proprietary to Minolta/Sony so it is not easy to find flash triggers that is compatible. Their top of the line flash does not even have pc sync port which presents another problem. My colleague has been very frustrated looking for workarounds so he can make his flash work with CTR-301P even with hotshoe adapter.

Having said that, A850 is very tempting and since I have few Minolta AF lenses and few flashes.

[picturecrazy]

You keep ignoring my reasoning, so I'll keep ignoring yours. If you want to go with Sony, I'm not going to miss you. Bye.

I'm definitely gonna lose sleep over this. You hurt my feelings. :p

And good grief, where on earth did I say I wanted to go with Sony? You're reading things that just aren't there.

And this isn't strictly about the 5D2. This will also certainly make people look twice at buying a D300/D300s/D700 because the price is so close.

I'm just saying it's gonna shake up the distribution of systems chosen among new pros. You can call it whatever you want (like 5D2 bashing) but that's all I was saying. There is a new, competent, and VERY AGGRESSIVELY PRICED player on the market. I could CARE LESS about what established people are using. I was NEVER TALKING about them.

[Skippy29]

And while we wont see people jump ship

I would say you're right about existing Canon owners. But it's not about jumping off the Canon ship, it's about new DSLR buyers never getting to it in the first place now.

[picturecrazy]

Problem with Sony is not only the lens availability and price. One is the hotshoe. It is proprietary to Minolta/Sony so it is not easy to find flash triggers that is compatible. Their top of the line flash does not even have pc sync port which presents another problem. My colleague has been very frustrated looking for workarounds so he can make his flash work with CTR-301P even with hotshoe adapter.

Having said that, A850 is very tempting and since I have few Minolta AF lenses and few flashes.

This sure didn't stop hoards of people from buying canon cameras and canon flashes. The average purchaser isn't a strobist.

[J_TULLAR]

I'm definitely gonna lose sleep over this. You hurt my feelings. :p

And good grief, where on earth did I say I wanted to go with Sony? You're reading things that just aren't there.

And this isn't strictly about the 5D2. This will also certainly make people look twice at buying a D300/D300s because the price is so close.

I'm just saying it's gonna shake up the distribution of systems chosen among new pros. You can call it whatever you want (like 5D2 bashing) but that's all I was saying. There is a new, competent, and VERY AGGRESSIVELY PRICED player on the market. I could CARE LESS about what established people are using. I was NEVER TALKING about them.

yea I think sony just made a game changer due to price and FF... Honestly if I were looking I would much rather have a FF for 2k than a 1.5/6 crop for 2k.

[MR do little]

Problem with Sony is not only the lens availability and price. One is the hotshoe. It is proprietary to Minolta/Sony so it is not easy to find flash triggers that is compatible. Their top of the line flash does not even have pc sync port which presents another problem. My colleague has been very frustrated looking for workarounds so he can make his flash work with CTR-301P even with hotshoe adapter.

Having said that, A850 is very tempting and since I have few Minolta AF lenses and few flashes.

Well lets not forget its not until recently that Canon added pc sync port to their flagship model, wich still LACKS a optical slave cell btw...

While Canon is ahead Sony when it comes to flash system, they are still far from perfect and is still playing catchup to Nikon when it comes to flash system.

Have your friend tested this ?

http://www.gadgetinfinity.com/product.php?productid=16892

[picturecrazy]

I would say you're right about existing Canon owners. But it's not about jumping off the Canon ship, it's about new DSLR buyers never getting to it in the first place now.

It's not gonna change too much now or in the near future. But if Sony keeps providing great options and great prices, they will slowly but surely gain market share as new pros make their choices year after year.

The complacency of the thought that Canon and Nikon have nothing to worry about echos the thoughts of the big three long ago when cheap Toyotas and Datsuns appeared on these shores. Short term, it didn't make much of a dent. Long term, the big three are suffering under their own arrogance.

[jacobsen1]

No super-fast primes,

the 35mm 1.4 and 85mm 1.4 don't count? How about a 50mm 1.4? Sigmas 20, 24 and 28mm 1.8s? The 135 1.8? :rolleyes:

no super-fast zooms.

2.8s not fast enough for you? sony 16-35, sigma's HSM 24-70 & 70-200 all covered?

There are many, many people out there for whom the lack of such lenses, including super-teles, is a dealbreaker. No lens IS means no stabilized image in that supposedly bright, beautiful VF.

first off the sony's have IN CAMERA IS. I know it's not as good on the long ends, but it's there FOR EVERY LENS YOU'LL MOUNT ON IT, EVEN FAST PRIMES!!!!! As for the super teles, I doubt anyone shopping for a budget FF camera is concerned about that market. IF THEY WERE TO BECOME interesting, anyone buying a lens worth as much as a car can surely sell their old sony stuff, take a small loss, and then get to the canon.

[MR do little]

I would say you're right about existing Canon owners. But it's not about jumping off the Canon ship, it's about new DSLR buyers never getting to it in the first place now.

I highly doubt that a A850 from sony will be the camera "new" buyers is aiming for, its the entry level system they will go for. But as i said, Sony improving their offering increse the chances of people "adding". Quite a few pro's i know did just that last year with the A900.

[MR do little]

Ben

Somtimes the passion makes you blind i guess... :-)

[lukeap69]

This sure didn't stop hoards of people from buying canon cameras and canon flashes. The average purchaser isn't a strobist.

You are right. But the canon flashes not having pc sync port can easily be adapted with a cheap adapter to have the pc sync. You can buy an adapter for Sony flash also but it will not surely work.

I am speaking of experience with Sony system which I also have. So if you have not tried this, you do not know the frustrations of some Sony dslr owners like myself.

[picturecrazy]

You are right. But the canon flashes not having pc sync port can easily be adapted with a cheap adapter to have the pc sync. You can buy an adapter for Sony flash also but it will not surely work.

I am speaking of experience with Sony system which I also have. So if you have not tried this, you do not know the frustrations of some Sony dslr owners like myself.

Oh, I am sure you have serious frustrations with this. And that is 100% valid. I have my issues with my canon stuff too. But this is just not a deal breaker for most purchasers. If you're going off camera, many people buy cheap manual flashes anyhow.

[lukeap69]

Well lets not forget its not until recently that Canon added pc sync port to their flagship model, wich still LACKS a optical slave cell btw...

While Canon is ahead Sony when it comes to flash system, they are still far from perfect and is still playing catchup to Nikon when it comes to flash system.

Have your friend tested this ?

http://www.gadgetinfinity.com/product.php?productid=16892

Yes. It works with Canon or Nikon flash but NOT with the flash trigger.

[MR do little]

Arnold what have you tried, and what didnt work ?

I agree that the old Minolta shoe is of evil and offer no advantages, however the Sony adapter works for just about any high quality radio trigger, such as pocketwizard,skyport etc.

[wickerprints]

the 35mm 1.4 and 85mm 1.4 don't count? How about a 50mm 1.4? Sigmas 20, 24 and 28mm 1.8s? The 135 1.8? :rolleyes:

No 14/2.8, 24/1.4, 50/1.2, or 85/1.2. Those are some very popular lenses!

2.8s not fast enough for you? sony 16-35, sigma's HSM 24-70 & 70-200 all covered?

Sigma's offerings aren't quite in the same league as the Canons, you must admit... 24-70/2.8L and 70-200/2.8L IS are amazing lenses.

first off the sony's have IN CAMERA IS. I know it's not as good on the long ends, but it's there FOR EVERY LENS YOU'LL MOUNT ON IT, EVEN FAST PRIMES!!!!! As for the super teles, I doubt anyone shopping for a budget FF camera is concerned about that market. IF THEY WERE TO BECOME interesting, anyone buying a lens worth as much as a car can surely sell their old sony stuff, take a small loss, and then get to the canon.

Yes, there are advantages to in-body IS, I certainly don't dispute that. But in-lens IS has distinct advantages, too. It's not cheap, sure. But it does mean you have a stable viewfinder for composition (extremely nice), and you have IS that is specifically designed for the focal length you are using.

Even though I'm not going to get a super-tele any time soon, I did buy with that in mind for the future. Some people like myself don't buy the 1-series because they're simply too bulky for my small hands. I don't use or need a vertical grip. I looked carefully at the various offerings and it's clear to me that there are some really very unique lenses in Canon's lineup that simply can't be found anywhere else. The short flange focal distance also means EOS bodies can use other system lenses if needed, but not vice versa. So for me, it really comes down to versatility and not so much price. I can tolerate paying somewhat more up front, if I know I am less restricted for doing so.

[MR do little]

Yes. It works with Canon or Nikon flash but NOT with the flash trigger.

So what exactly cant he get to work.

1.getting a radio trigger working on camera ?

2.Connecting a radio trigger to a sony flash off camera ?

Kindest

[Skippy29]

I highly doubt that a A850 from sony will be the camera "new" buyers is aiming for, its the entry level system they will go for. But as i said, Sony improving their offering increse the chances of people "adding". Quite a few pro's i know did just that last year with the A900.


To clarify, I'm talking about the thousands of people that move up from compacts to DSLRs every year. When you make that jump, that's when you commit to a system more seriously and look to see what that brand has from entry level all the way up to Pro. I think Sony is going to be taking a noticably larger segment of that transition market from here on out. We'll see. But all we know for sure is Canon is not what it once was as far as market share, and will probably never be again. Or Nikon for that matter.
Just too many other viable options out there now, which is great I think.

[MR do little]

Sigma's offerings aren't quite in the same league as the Canons, you must admit... 24-70/2.8L and 70-200/2.8L IS are amazing lenses.

24-70/2,8ZA is just about the best corrected midrange zoom you can get your hands on. The Sony 70-200/2,8 isnt anything short of either Nikon or Canons equivalents.

[J_TULLAR]

24-70/2,8ZA is just about the best corrected midrange zoom you can get your hands on. The Sony 70-200/2,8 isnt anything short if either Nikon or Canons equivalents.

[/QUOTE]

ziess makes Great lenses !!!

[MR do little]

To clarify, I'm talking about the thousands of people that move up from compacts to DSLRs every year. When you make that jump, that's when you commit to a system more seriously and look to see what that brand has from entry level all the way up to Pro. I think Sony is going to be taking a noticably larger segment of that transition market from here on out. We'll see. But all we know for sure is Canon is not what it once was as far as market share, and will probably never be again. Or Nikon for that matter.
Just too many other viable options out there now, which is great I think.

Actually the average joe wich is the "thousands" is not aiming for pro lineup, they go with what they know and have seen people use wich is Canon and Nikon (when it comes to dslr)

So i wouldnt be on it, still Sony is doing well for being such a small player as they are at this point. Competition is always a good thing. :-)
Kindest

[J_TULLAR]

Actually the average joe wich is the "thousands" is not aiming for pro lineup, they go with what they know and have seen people use wich is Canon and Nikon (when it comes to dslr)

Kindest

and generally leave it on auto mode lol.

[bobbyz]

Problem with Sony is not only the lens availability and price. One is the hotshoe. It is proprietary to Minolta/Sony so it is not easy to find flash triggers that is compatible. Their top of the line flash does not even have pc sync port which presents another problem. My colleague has been very frustrated looking for workarounds so he can make his flash work with CTR-301P even with hotshoe adapter.

Having said that, A850 is very tempting and since I have few Minolta AF lenses and few flashes.


I was shooting with a person about 2 weeks ago and he was suing sony FF camera. And he couldn't get the pocket wizard to work with his camera. He had to put some kind of thing in between his hot shoe and PW Plus II.

[wickerprints]

I was shooting with a person about 2 weeks ago and he was suing sony FF camera. And he couldn't get the pocket wizard to work with his camera. He had to put some kind of thing in between his hot shoe and PW Plus II.

"Suing," as in filing a lawsuit, or "using?" :shock:

Because if he's suing over a hotshoe, that's kinda taking it a bit too far LOL :D

[Todd Lambert]

I was shooting with a person about 2 weeks ago and he was suing sony FF camera. And he couldn't get the pocket wizard to work with his camera. He had to put some kind of thing in between his hot shoe and PW Plus II.


I'd be suing them too! :p

I don't like Sony for a variety of reasons, namely the way the treat customers and their decisions on formats and being so damn proprietary with everything. This has gotten better recently, but not because of their own desires - if Sony had their way, you'd be buying a new format of memory card for every single camera they make. They cant easily get away with this mode of operandi anymore, so that is why they've changed, but it has nothing to do with making the lives of consumers more easy, I assure you.

My stance against Sony is not so much the quality(or lack of, in a lot of cases) as it is the principle of supporting a company that is/has been harmful to choice, product expansion and customer loyalty.

That said, I do think this move continues to move down the road to my prophesy I made when I first got on these boards: Within the next few years (this is a bit flexible either way due to the market) all cameras made will be Full Frame. The e-fs mount will become a sideline option for those who need faster FPS or as a legacy mount. That's it. All new DSLRs will be Full Frame.

The price for Full Frame is dropping. Sony is pushing this agenda right along with Canon and Nikon. It's only a matter of time until the price gets to the point where FF will become the primary option.

[gnnbtrn]

Arnold what have you tried, and what didnt work ?

I agree that the old Minolta shoe is of evil and offer no advantages, however the Sony adapter works for just about any high quality radio trigger, such as pocketwizard,skyport etc.

Let me disagree, I have used Minolta flashes and liked the locking mechanism better than standard hot-shoe, which is hundred years old. No lose contacts or slipping flash units. Once it is Clicked! it is solid.

Also, I was able to trigger any Minolta flash with the built-in.

The shape of the new shoe, of course, is a problem, but there are adaptors available on the market.

[MR do little]

So it has nothing to do with the actual products, its more about your personal feelings regarding the "company" Sony.

Got it.

I dont really care about much more then the performance of the products and if its suitable for me, if was to to reason the same way and base my purchases on it my son wouldnt own a Xbox due to my feelings towards Microsoft...:-)

[gnnbtrn]

I'd be suing them too! :p

I don't like Sony for a variety of reasons, namely the way the treat customers and their decisions on formats and being so damn proprietary with everything. This has gotten better recently, but not because of their own desires - if Sony had their way, you'd be buying a new format of memory card for every...

Apple is a little different from Sony in this aspect to be completely honest :lol::lol::lol::lol::lol::lol:
How long of a stick you need you to touch apple?

[jacobsen1]

Ben

Somtimes the passion makes you blind i guess... :-)

QFT.

[MR do little]

Let me disagree, I have used Minolta flashes and liked the locking mechanism better than standard hot-shoe, which is hundred years old. No lose contacts or slipping flash units. Once it is Clicked! it is solid.

Also, I was able to trigger any Minolta flash with the built-in.

The shape of the new shoe, of course, is a problem, but there are adaptors available on the market.

By all means. :-)

But let me tell you that my SB-900 fits more securely with no play whatsoever compared to my Sony HVL-58AM. While the locking "action" is nice, its by no means faster or more secure then the current solution Nikon has.



There are more then one thread regarding the Minolta shoe getting "loose" so while it was a smart move back in the day when both Canon and Nikon flashes lacked as far as locking mechanism goes, its outdated and offers just about nothing today (not over Nikon anyway)

For most people the hotshoe its not a dealbreaker, anyone who wants to use PW or any other radio trigger on camera use the FS-HS1AM, or buy a 3rd party adapter like gadgetinfinity.

For people who want to connect a PW to their Sony flash (or Canon flash below the 580EX II) use custom cable from flash zebra or similar.

Hopefully Sony will phase out the Minolta shoe in the future.

Kindest

[Todd Lambert]

So it has nothing to do with the actual products, its more about your personal feelings regarding the "company" Sony.

Got it.

I dont really care about much more then the performance of the products and if their suitable for me, if was to to reason the same way and base my purchases on it my son wouldnt own a Xbox due to my feelings towards Microsoft...:-)

Yes, and I said so, it is my opinion... It is based on many things that to me are as valid, if not more than whether or not the viewfinder is 99% or only 98%.

I have conviction and my choices show that (as much as I can). I detest WalMart more than any other company on the face of the planet, and I refuse to give them my money. I avoid WalMart at all costs, if I can.

Apple is a little different from Sony in this aspect to be completely honest :lol::lol::lol::lol::lol::lol:
How long of a stick you need you to touch apple?

Yes, you're right.. Apple has done a few of these stupid tricks as well. However, Apple has also been much more of a pioneer for choice and innovation than Sony or MS has. Apple pushed open technologies such as USB (name one USB device in existence before Apple came out with the iMac) - but again, they've done stupid stuff as well, such as display port. I am one of the first to call Apple out on BS moves, believe me.

[MR do little]

Apple is a little different from Sony in this aspect to be completely honest :lol::lol::lol::lol::lol::lol:
How long of a stick you need you to touch apple?

QFT!! LMAO.

[WT21]

You keep ignoring my reasoning, so I'll keep ignoring yours. If you want to go with Sony, I'm not going to miss you. Bye.

you're defensiveness makes you sound like a fanboi.

[gnnbtrn]

By all means. :-)

But let me tell you that my SB-900 fits more securely with no play whatsoever compared to my Sony HVL-58AM.
.....

Hopefully Sony will phase out the Minolta shoe in the future.

Kindest

I did not even know Nikon flashes can be used on Canon:o:o:o

If it was a Minolta's mistake to change their hot shoe, it will be another mistake to change it back. a lot of ppl still using Minolta flashes

[SwitchBlade]

Yes, you're right.. Apple has done a few of these stupid tricks as well. However, Apple has also been much more of a pioneer for choice and innovation than Sony or MS has. Apple pushed open technologies such as USB (name one USB device in existence before Apple came out with the iMac) - but again, they've done stupid stuff as well, such as display port. I am one of the first to call Apple out on BS moves, believe me.

Apple had nothing to do with USB IIRC, it was Intel, IBM and MS. Apple tried to bring out their own proprietary system called Firewire (Ieee 1394), which hasn't done so well as USB.

I think people view Sony all wrong, they see it as one big company, when it isn't so much in reality. It's like lots of separate companies under one big umbrella, which is why they can be market leaders in technology/design/etc in one market, yet bargain basement trash in another where they trade on the branding in the sectors where they make good products.

Sony aren't making bad SLRs, they might have been if they started from scratch rather than buying Minolta, but the gear I've played with seems ok to me. People buy that brand based off the fact that their Bravia TV is stunning and their Walkman is awesome so they "trust" Sony to make a good product, people new coming through the door will no doubt have that colour their judgement. I see that in the car audio arena where Sony's products are shocking. What with producing a competitively priced good range of bodies Sony stand a good chance to build market share IMHO.

[wickerprints]

you're defensiveness makes you sound like a fanboi.

And personal attacks are against forum posting rules. Have a nice day.

[Todd Lambert]

Apple had nothing to do with USB IIRC, it was Intel, IBM and MS. Apple tried to bring out their own proprietary system called Firewire (Ieee 1394), which hasn't done so well as USB.

I think people view Sony all wrong, they see it as one big company, when it isn't so much in reality. It's like lots of separate companies under one big umbrella, which is why they can be market leaders in technology/design/etc in one market, yet bargain basement trash in another where they trade on the branding in the sectors where they make good products.

Sony aren't making bad SLRs, they might have been if they started from scratch rather than buying Minolta, but the gear I've played with seems ok to me. People buy that brand based off the fact that their Bravia TV is stunning and their Walkman is awesome so they "trust" Sony to make a good product, people new coming through the door will no doubt have that colour their judgement. I see that in the car audio arena where Sony's products are shocking. What with producing a competitively priced good range of bodies Sony stand a good chance to build market share IMHO.


Yes, Intel invented USB...(I wasn't claiming Apple did) but it was completely non-existent in the PC market before Apple decided to use it on the Bondi Blue iMacs - in fact, ditching everything and making it the standard - quickly the entire PC market followed Apple and we have USB today, due in most part, because of Apple. Firewire is a great standard, and was quite open in spec, only that Apple was stupid and charged licensing for it - which ultimately killed it for the masses. Yet, it was Sony who again tried to re-name, re-structure, etc.. naming/marketing Firewire as "iLink".

[wickerprints]

Apple had nothing to do with USB IIRC, it was Intel, IBM and MS. Apple tried to bring out their own proprietary system called Firewire (Ieee 1394), which hasn't done so well as USB.


This is sort of true, but it's misleading how you've characterized the history of these interfaces because there's no context provided for why they exist.

IEEE 1394 slightly predates USB 1.0, but although they came out around the same time, they were designed with very different goals in mind. FireWire was from the outset designed for high data throughput for devices such as external drives. USB was designed primarily as a replacement for peripherals such as mice, keyboards, printers, etc. that did not have high data bandwidth requirements. Only until much later with USB 2.0 did USB start to reach the same bandwidth capabilities as FireWire--and 2.0 might not even exist were it not for Apple's early adoption of the USB standard in place of ADB.

The reason why Apple promoted both interfaces is simple: FireWire was the only way to get high performance for multimedia applications, but it was expensive and overkill if you just wanted to hook up your keyboard. They included USB so that they could have better interoperability with third-party devices--that had not even come to market!--which was an important decision for Apple's very dire economic position at the time. But it is nevertheless a fact that Apple was the first major hardware maker to put USB on the market, and they are a major reason why it succeeded. They did not develop it, but they did adopt it.

FireWire's lack of popularity has been due to licensing issues as well as cost. That's definitely Apple's fault. As devices continue to increase in bandwidth requirements, IEEE 1394 is losing ground to USB and to some extent, eSATA. It's not a bad interface--far from it; it is in many ways technologically superior to USB. But to characterize the two as competing in some way is not quite accurate, because they were never originally designed for the same things.

[wickerprints]

Yes, Intel invented USB...(I wasn't claiming Apple did) but it was completely non-existent in the PC market before Apple decided to use it on the Bondi Blue iMacs - in fact, ditching everything and making it the standard - quickly the entire PC market followed Apple and we have USB today, due in most part, because of Apple. Firewire is a great standard, and was quite open in spec, only that Apple was stupid and charged licensing for it - which ultimately killed it for the masses. Yet, it was Sony who again tried to re-name, re-structure, etc.. naming/marketing Firewire as "iLink".

Are you my long-lost twin? LOL :D

Betamax. DAT. MiniDisc. Memory Stick. UMD. Shall I go on?

[Todd Lambert]

Are you my long-lost twin? LOL :D

Betamax. DAT. MiniDisc. Memory Stick. UMD. Shall I go on?


LOL!

Exactly, and please, no... do not go on... :cry:

[SwitchBlade]

IEEE 1394 slightly predates USB 1.0, but although they came out around the same time, they were designed with very different goals in mind.

Didn't realise that Firewire was older. Did know it was higher data rate than USB 1 though, which was why USB2 came about. I also remember some old mobos I've got which have 25pin d-sub "USB" connectors, which I assume date from the pre-ratified standard.

All companies make proprietary products and license them out, it's just how the market receives them that makes a difference, look at CD for Phillips and Blu-Ray now for Sony.

[MR do little]

I did not even know Nikon flashes can be used on Canon:o:o:o

If it was a Minolta's mistake to change their hot shoe, it will be another mistake to change it back. a lot of ppl still using Minolta flashes

Well i wouldnt know, i dont own anything with a Canon logo on. ;)

Yes the change will not be painless.

Kindest

[roanjohn]

I think we can all agree that Sony showed some chutzpah by introducing a full frame 24 mpx image stabilized camera for under $2000. For a company that started infiltrating the DSLR market just a few years ago, I think they are heading towards the right direction in a very fast pace, satisfying both amateur and pro users. They don't slack when it comes to lenses either, 24-70 , 135 f1.8!!! (Canon/Nikon don't have this!) - 35 and 85 f1.4??!!! Drool worthy!! So if they continue in this manner, they might be part of the big 2 (C&N).

[HappySnapper90]

To clarify, I'm talking about the thousands of people that move up from compacts to DSLRs every year. When you make that jump, that's when you commit to a system more seriously and look to see what that brand has from entry level all the way up to Pro.
Yes the far greater majority of those thousands moving up from P&S camera never go beyond their entry level model and a kit lens or a 2 kit-lens combo.
and generally leave it on auto mode lol.
Yes, true. Again the far greater majority of dSLR users are on auto mode, just like P&S users. Enthusiasts are another things whom are not the majority of dSLR users - believe it!

[bobbyz]

I think we can all agree that Sony showed some chutzpah by introducing a full frame 24 mpx image stabilized camera for under $2000. For a company that started infiltrating the DSLR market just a few years ago, I think they are heading towards the right direction in a very fast pace, satisfying both amateur and pro users. They don't slack when it comes to lenses either, 24-70 , 135 f1.8!!! (Canon/Nikon don't have this!) - 35 and 85 f1.4??!!! Drool worthy!! So if they continue in this manner, they might be part of the big 2 (C&N).

I think the lenses are way more expensive. I was looking at Sony 300mm f2.8, it is like $6k, I can get canon IS one for $4100. And that is the longest sony lens I guess. No superteles like 400mm f2.8, 500/600mm f4 IS. Even 70-200mm f2.8 is more than $2k.

[mikeassk]

I think the lenses are way more expensive. I was looking at Sony 300mm f2.8, it is like $6k, I can get canon IS one for $4100. And that is the longest sony lens I guess. No superteles like 400mm f2.8, 500/600mm f4 IS. Even 70-200mm f2.8 is more than $2k.

Very true bobby,
But when a used 1D/ 1DII can be had for around 1K ( the only Canon bodies worth using on those lenses) then it makes it easier to consider a dual system.
Sony Alpha series mounts the BEST 24-70mm ever made in this world. I can speak from experience. It is unbelievable. The peanut gallery can chime in all they want about Canon "normal" length primes, which also are not the best, but most affordable for the quality.

Sony is attacking a void in the market, and they are being smart about it.

[MR do little]

I think we can all agree that Sony showed some chutzpah by introducing a full frame 24 mpx image stabilized camera for under $2000. For a company that started infiltrating the DSLR market just a few years ago, I think they are heading towards the right direction in a very fast pace, satisfying both amateur and pro users. They don't slack when it comes to lenses either, 24-70 , 135 f1.8!!! (Canon/Nikon don't have this!) - 35 and 85 f1.4??!!! Drool worthy!! So if they continue in this manner, they might be part of the big 2 (C&N).

Spot on Roan.

While Sony dont have "broad" lineup (lenses) as Nikon and Canon they certainly have some really good lenses.

All you mentioned, apart from the 35/1,4 wich is outdate and isnt much to write home about.

Another thing they have (from Minolta) is the 135/2,8 (4,5) STF wich neither Nikon or Canon matches.

Lenses are more expensive, not hard to understand if you used the lenses mentioned above...

But of course this dont go for every lens in the lineup, one should not forget that the sales volume Sony has is tiny in comparison to Nikon and Canon.

Time will tell if Sony makes the right choices for them self and get so big that they at one point can compete with "lowering" their prices (especially on glass)

Whats kind of amusing is that many of you get all defensive, most of you who has "strong" opinions of both Sony as a company and about their products (along with a cocky attitude) has zero experience with either the lenses or the cameras.

Sometimes the passion is a strong as the ignorance.

Competition (regardless of who it comes from) is good for the endusers dont forget that.

[tango_28]

I think the lenses are way more expensive. I was looking at Sony 300mm f2.8, it is like $6k, I can get canon IS one for $4100. And that is the longest sony lens I guess. No superteles like 400mm f2.8, 500/600mm f4 IS. Even 70-200mm f2.8 is more than $2k.

I got my Sony 70-200 f2.8 for $989.00 at Circut City, Normal street price is around $1600.00

[Todd Lambert]

Paul, you're absolutely right.. competition is good for us, the consumer - no doubt about it.

And I think many of us have lots of experience with Sony products, including their cameras - I think you're making assumptions. You like to make catchy little phrases about ignorance when you seem to ignore or at least downplay anyone's differing thoughts about a product/company that you seem so hellbent on supporting or protecting. I'd call that passion pretty ignorant too. You almost seem like you have an agenda in pushing Sony, do you own stock or something?

[MR do little]

And I think many of us have lots of experience with Sony products, including their cameras - I think you're making assumptions. You like to make catchy little phrases about ignorance when you seem to ignore or at least downplay anyone's differing thoughts about a product/company that you seem so hellbent on supporting or protecting. I'd call that passion pretty ignorant too. You almost seem like you have an agenda in pushing Sony, do you own stock or something?

So Todd tell me how many frames do you have under your belt with a FF sony dslr and pro grade lenses ?

I wouldn't touch anything made from Sony with a ten-foot pole.



This makes me assume not many, but of course your more then welcome to share your experience the good and the bad.

As for the experience with non dslr Sony products, its like saying i know how a Canon camera/lens perform because i have Canon inkjet...

Your conviction makes you unable to sepparate diffrent products within a company, its like me refusing to buy a Canon camera casue i hate Canon fax machines...

I have no agenda pushing Sony, i do however have alot more experience working with Sony cameras/lenses then you do, that i know.

[Todd Lambert]

Boy, you're really good at making assumptions, aren't you?

For your information, I haven't used a newer Sony DSLR for more than about an hour or so. I have used countless other Sony digital cameras and of course I've used countless other Sony items. I have used Minolta stuff before on and off but it was a long time ago.

This is enough for me to have formed an opinion about the company, their products and whether or not they are for me, which I clearly stated "in my opinion, they are not".

Why is your opinion any more valid than mine? You come off as someone with an axe to grind for anyone who states that they don't like the same product as you, or drive the same car, or part their hair on the same side as you.

So, you feel differently about Sony products than most others here, great! You made several posts to support your opinion which is also great. But why do you continue to berate, belittle or talk down to people who simply have a differing view from yours? Why do you feel it is your duty to right the wrongs of any comments made in this thread, especially when people were simply expressing their opinions, just like you?

I'm done with this thread, unsubscribing as soon as I post this. Thanks for the lively conversation and I hope that we can continue to discuss things in the future with a little less holier-than-thou attitude.

Cheers!

[MR do little]

If thats how you evaluate gear for your needs, by all means.

I didnt went into a store toying with a coolpix to see if the D2X was for me, nor did i toy with the Nikon D60 and thought i knew how the D3 performed.

The A900 (and now the A850) shares just about nothing from the Minolta cameras, except for the mount.. and flash hotshoe.


Your opinion is as valid as mine or anyone elses, however i asked you specifically what you disliked about Sony dslrs (in this case the FF cameras from Sony) and your response was that it was more about how you felt about Sony as a company, in other words you judge Sony cameras based on your opinion of Sony as a company and their history and not on actual experience of the products or how they perform.

We simply disagree on most parts, and i have awful hard time following your reasoning.

Take care.

[bobbyz]

Very true bobby,
But when a used 1D/ 1DII can be had for around 1K ( the only Canon bodies worth using on those lenses) then it makes it easier to consider a dual system.
Sony Alpha series mounts the BEST 24-70mm ever made in this world. I can speak from experience. It is unbelievable. The peanut gallery can chime in all they want about Canon "normal" length primes, which also are not the best, but most affordable for the quality.

Sony is attacking a void in the market, and they are being smart about it.

Agree.

[Todd Lambert]

I didn't say I was evaluating the A850 when I made my comment about not liking Sony and I don't evaluate products based on feelings. I do business with companies based on previous transactions, how the company treats it's customers, and what decisions it makes in the market.

For these reasons, I would not touch anything that Sony sells. I made that pretty clear in my second post. I made a pretty blanket statement that I did not like Sony (not based on the A850). You (rightfully) questioned me about it, and I responded with the reasons why I don't like Sony as a company, not the A850. I am not a fan of Sony cameras nor any Sony products that I've come in contact with. This is a very valid reason and one that you cannot argue because you're not me or have the same experience that I've had.

That should have ended this little charade, but you keep insisting that you know more(which you probably do), and insinuating that people who have a differing opinion than yours, are ignorant, calling them "blind", etc..

You're trying to make assumptions about things that you couldn't possibly know and you're making statements that are rather insulting to those who do not tow the Sony line as you do and I'm (rightfully) calling you on it, plain and simple - Call it my "cocky attitude" if you want.

[robojack]

Very true bobby,
But when a used 1D/ 1DII can be had for around 1K ( the only Canon bodies worth using on those lenses) then it makes it easier to consider a dual system.
Sony Alpha series mounts the BEST 24-70mm ever made in this world. I can speak from experience. It is unbelievable. The peanut gallery can chime in all they want about Canon "normal" length primes, which also are not the best, but most affordable for the quality.

Sony is attacking a void in the market, and they are being smart about it. I'm curious, what is it about Sony's 24-70mm makes it the best in this world, in your opinion?

[mikeassk]

I'm curious, what is it about Sony's 24-70mm makes it the best in this world, in your opinion?

It is not a Sony, Sony mounts it.
It is a Zeiss Vario-Sonnar.

The build quality is better than Canons, by a mile. The IQ is better than canons, quite noticeably. It does cost more so no free lunch on this one.

[MR do little]

I didn't say I was evaluating the A850 when I made my comment about not liking Sony and I don't evaluate products based on feelings. I do business with companies based on previous transactions, how the company treats it's customers, and what decisions it makes in the market.

No in this case you didnt evaluate them at all, you just dislike them because they have a Sony logo on them.


For these reasons, I would not touch anything that Sony sells. I made that pretty clear in my second post. I made a pretty blanket statement that I did not like Sony (not based on the A850). You (rightfully) questioned me about it, and I responded with the reasons why I don't like Sony as a company, not the A850. I am not a fan of Sony cameras nor any Sony products that I've come in contact with. This is a very valid reason and one that you cannot argue because you're not me or have the same experience that I've had.
You can dislike them all you want, but it has nothing to do with how the actual products perform, wich is the basis wich most people use when they judge a product.


That should have ended this little charade, but you keep insisting that you know more(which you probably do), and insinuating that people who have a differing opinion than yours, are ignorant, calling them "blind", etc..

You obviously took offence, because i find it rather odd to disregard products just because there is a certain label on it.

Yes i called out a person as being "blind" due to the fact he didnt have a clue as to what lenses Sony has in their lineup.



Second, there are LOT more than the TSE and 400+ that are missing in the Sony lens lineup. No super-fast primes, no super-fast zooms.


His attitude was also very cocky... (not that im suprised) for someone who dont know what he talks about.
Sony isn't going to scoop up anything except perhaps their own arrogance.



You're trying to make assumptions about things that you couldn't possibly know and you're making statements that are rather insulting to those who do not tow the Sony line as you do and I'm (rightfully) calling you on it, plain and simple - Call it my "cocky attitude" if you want.

And what assumptions is that Todd ? That you dont like Sony cameras simply because it has a logo that say Sony on them ?

Or the fact that you never shot with any Sony equivalent to the Canon gear you shoot with ?

Im calling people out who pretend to know something (not refering to you) and to people who write off Sony cameras simply beacuse they are Sony....

Im pretty sure that most people would object on here if i told them i wouldnt touch a Canon camera/lens because it has a Canon logo on them..

[robojack]

In any case, hopefully this announcement by Sony will convince Canon to substantially drop the ludicrous prices of their current 5D line (MK I and MK II). That, or create a cheaper FF camera, which the 7D is appearing NOT to be (1.6x crop instead...sigh).

[J_TULLAR]

well with the high demand for canons 5dmkII I dont see them dropping prices any day.

[MR do little]

No i dont think the A850 wont affect any prices in the near future.

(I bought my A900 brand new last xmas for less then what the A850 retails for now... :-) )

Its a step in the right direction though, eventhough i would think Sony would be better off offering a D700 equivalent, less mp and better noise performance.

Kindest

[gnnbtrn]

No i dont think the A850 wont affect any prices in the near future.


:mad::mad::mad: I hoped in vain :mad::mad::mad:


(I bought my A900 brand new last xmas for less then what the A850 retails for

What is your lens selection for Sony/Minolta?

[MR do little]

I use the Zeiss 135/1,8 and Zeiss 24-70/2,8

[lukeap69]

whoa! very nice lenses. I've tried them both and love them!

[reng2009]

It appears that Sony is gunning for the 5D Mark II. They just released a smaller version of the A900 with a full-frame sensor and most of the features of its larger sibling except for a smaller coverage (98%) viewfinder and slower fps speed. What surprised me the most was the absence of any type of movie mode or live view! I think that Sony has previously had the best version of live view, so it would have been neat to see what they did with a movie mode using their two sensor approach to focusing. I think this missing feature will keep the camera from truly competing with the 5D Mark II. Plus, it sounds like there will be a lot of in-camera noise reduction going on which will probably render less detail than the images of the 5D Mark II. This is just speculation though....

Here's a link (http://www.dpreview.com/news/0908/09082705sonya850.asp)

The lack of Live View and movie mode doesn't bother me. There are significant drawbacks to using Live View -- it eats up battery life, and it generates heat in the sensor which can cause noise and colour problems. If used sparingly, Live View can be useful under certain circumstances, but in general, and esp. without an articulated LCD, its usefulness is limited. Ditto for video.

My 40D has Live View but I doubt I'll be using it much, if at all.

Much has been made of the high ISO noise of the A900/A850, but in practice, image quality is pretty good up to 800 ISO, and usable at 1600 ISO. Thus, if I wanted to go full frame on a budget, I'd willingly give up my 40D and lenses, and switch over to Sony. The A850 is a marvel.

Plus, I love those gorgeous Vario-Sonnar lenses! Nothing comparable in the Canon L series. Worth the price premium, IMHO.

[gnnbtrn]

I use the Zeiss 135/1,8 and Zeiss 24-70/2,8

I have never tried Zeiss lenses, but old minolta "G" 85mm was my favorite

[HYBEagle]

ha, $2000 for a FF with Leica lens, good bye canon.

[tkbslc]

ha, $2000 for a FF with Leica lens, good bye canon.

Which Leica lenses can you get for Sony?

$2000 is for body only. With the Zeiss standard 24-70 f2.8 I would run about $3600 total and still suck at high ISO compared to Nikon and Canon. Great studio or landscape camera, though.

[MR do little]

Its like saying for the money you pay for for a 5DMK II you get a good high iso camera, that still sucks when it comes to build and AF....

The A900/A850 certainly isnt any highiso speed demons, and i personally belive that Sony would gain alot more to offer a FF camera like the D700, lower mp, and better high iso performance instead of the A850. (wich no doubt is a excellent camera for the money, but its not really a hole Sony needs to fill)

Canon dont have this either, many where hoping that the 7D would be just that...

Diffrent tools for diffrent job simple as that.

[tkbslc]

Its like saying for the money you pay for for a 5DMK II you get a good high iso camera, that still sucks when it comes to build and AF....


I think a lot of people DO say that about the 5Dmk2! :)

[MR do little]

Well "sucks" isnt a absolut term, so it doesnt tell us much now does it.