Sony to quit making DSLR's? am I late?

Shadowblade wrote in post #14073728
In other words, there's not much incentive for them to invest heavily in sensor R&D - except to have the next generation of sensor ready for when either the patent expires or Canon catches up, so that they can extend their lead even longer.

Right, so you agree that competition is a good thing. Having all camera companies using Sony sensors would be a bad thing. Our only hope for great strides in the future is that Canon will soldier on with its own sensor development.

Sony makes great cameras, and tends to have the more exciting and innovative technology, IMO. I shot with a borrowed Alpha 350 for a while, and it had instant live view already, with a movable screen, and that was several years ago. I wanted my own entry level DSLR and got a T2i, as that was the highest rated at the time, but if I were entering the game now, I would get an Alpha 77. Terrific camera. Super fast FPS, the best live view there is, good high ISO, image quality, and very cheap. With IS built into the camera you can use legacy minolta glass without worry, and they have an exclusive deal with Zeiss for a range of (quite pricy) glass. One doubt I have about getting the 5D3 is that I suspect that Sony's next FF will really be a game changer.

Mookalafalas wrote in post #14074663
I would get an Alpha 77. Terrific camera. Super fast FPS

The fast frame rate of the Sony EVF equipped cameras is nearly useless as you lose the ability to track motion between shots. The EVF just updates the view to the last shot you took while you are supposedly tracking for the next one. The wheels come off the cart pretty much immediately. This is totally different than the traditional blackout of an SLR. While blackout is a mild issue, between blackout periods I am looking at the image I'm about to shoot real time through the OVF. With the Sony system, I'm looking at what the image looked like 100ms ago as I'm trying to compose the next shot. This is a killer, and makes the 12 fps rate of the camera useful only for select things.

I've noticed other non-SLR cameras that come sporting high frame rates usually do so in a way that makes these high frame rates useless. The NEX-7 for example, can shoot something like 10 fps. But not if you want it to focus at the same time. With focus enabled, the frame rate is 4 fps.

I think these new technology cameras are very interesting and will serve some markets well, but a lot of them also have gaping flaws that mean dSLRs will serve other markets better too.

In case my explanations were not clear, dpreview gives a detailed explanation of the two major problems with the frame rates on the Sony A77 here:

I think peak frame rate is becoming another one of those 'specs' that sells cameras. But for the kinds of people and subjects that really want these frame rates, the implementation details of the Sony wreck the feature.

Yeah, the 12fps would only be useful in specific situations, but it does 8fps with full focusing, which I think is best in class for this level. Looking at the specs, it has a boatload of fun features, but I don't know how well they work (auto panorama and HDR, etc). Regular reviewers and just regular folks who buy them seem very enthusiastic, however, and I really like the Bionz processor Sony uses. They claim 150K shutter count, ridiculously high ISO and it has a 24MP sensor. Sony is very aggressive and ambitious. Their RnD budget must be something else. I think they are the top DSLR seller here in Taiwan, and I maybe in some parts of Europe (someone in a forum said in England, although I don't know if that is really true), too. If they keep building their glass up, and make the same jump in their next FF as they did going from the A550 to the A77, I think they will be breathing down the necks of Nikon and Canon.

Mookalafalas wrote in post #14074891
Yeah, the 12fps would only be useful in specific situations, but it does 8fps with full focusing, which I think is best in class for this level.

The 8 fps rate has the same laggy EVF problem as the 12 fps rate.

I'm not dogging on the camera, I think it is a nice mid-range body. But I know that 12 fps got a lot of people's attention and I bet most of them don't know that it isn't really usable for the kind of stuff that people tend to need fast burst rates for.

I'd also note that dpreview panned the high ISO noise characteristics of the A77 too.

In other words, this is not a $2000 1D Mark IV.

I see Sony creating two lines of cameras here that should really appeal to the bottom and middle of the existing SLR market. I see tons of people running around with SLRs these days who probably don't really appreciate the bulk but who find the limitations of most compact digital cameras to be too limiting.

These folks have the money for a nice camera, and to date all that they have found available are entry and mid-range dSLRs. The NEX line, the Alpha line and some of the m4:3rd stuff should start attracting these people.

Whoops, this just out today: sony has another DSLR, 12FPS, but with improved AF.
http://www.engadget.co​m …/sony-alpha-a57-official/
Like I said, they are hungry.

I dont know if I will ever take Sony seriously in the line of DSLRs. I think mainly misinformed amateurs go for Sony. They just seem more gimmicky in everything they do DSLR related... Oops, forgot, now DSLT???

If Sony play their cards right, they could effectively take over the entire landscape photography market - DSLR as well as medium format - with a single release, and cement their position in that market for years to come.

Sony has patented the Exmor sensor, giving its CMOS sensors dynamic range previously held only by CCD sensors. At the same time, these CMOS sensors retain the tradition CMOS advantages of high ISO performance, live view and lack of blooming. The DSLR sensors based on this technology, as used by Nikon, are the best in their class.

At the same time, Sony has an association with Zeiss. Zeiss makes superb optics, both for DSLRs and for medium-format systems.

Finally, Sony is a world leader in electronics, but isn't so good at the mechanical side of cameras. A mirrorless camera is an entirely electronic device, and, for landscapers, has the advantage of being smaller.

What Sony could do is release a mirrorless panoramic camera with a 24x72mm sensor (same aspect ratio as 617 film, or two 24x36mm sensors side-by-side) in the 70-100MP range. At the same time, release a range of Zeiss lenses designed for the system - 24mm, 30mm, 50mm, 100mm and 200mm would be a good set. Being mirrorless, the lenses need not be particularly large or heavy. It'd have the IQ of the iQ180, or 617-format film, while being more portable, more weather-sealed, with proper live view and autofocus.

It would effectively kill off Linhof, Horseman, Alpa and other medium-format field cameras in a stroke, put a serious dent in Nikon, Canon and Leica's armour, and cement Sony as a world leader in digital cameras. All by making what is essentially a scaled-up NEX-7.

professorman wrote in post #14076235
I dont know if I will ever take Sony seriously in the line of DSLRs. I think mainly misinformed amateurs go for Sony. They just seem more gimmicky in everything they do DSLR related... Oops, forgot, now DSLT???

Not only misinformed amateurs, Klaus over at Photozone, Gordon Lange at Camera Labs, the fellow at digital camera reviews, in fact, pretty much everyone in the evaluation business seems to (incorrectly?) think that Sony is thinking outside the box and applying innovation to the technological designs which so far have struggled to move outside the old SLR box...

Shadowblade wrote in post #14076299
If Sony play their cards right, they could effectively take over the entire landscape photography market - DSLR as well as medium format - with a single release, and cement their position in that market for years to come.

Sony has patented the Exmor sensor, giving its CMOS sensors dynamic range previously held only by CCD sensors. At the same time, these CMOS sensors retain the tradition CMOS advantages of high ISO performance, live view and lack of blooming. The DSLR sensors based on this technology, as used by Nikon, are the best in their class.

At the same time, Sony has an association with Zeiss. Zeiss makes superb optics, both for DSLRs and for medium-format systems.

Finally, Sony is a world leader in electronics, but isn't so good at the mechanical side of cameras. A mirrorless camera is an entirely electronic device, and, for landscapers, has the advantage of being smaller.

What Sony could do is release a mirrorless panoramic camera with a 24x72mm sensor (same aspect ratio as 617 film, or two 24x36mm sensors side-by-side) in the 70-100MP range. At the same time, release a range of Zeiss lenses designed for the system - 24mm, 30mm, 50mm, 100mm and 200mm would be a good set. Being mirrorless, the lenses need not be particularly large or heavy. It'd have the IQ of the iQ180, or 617-format film, while being more portable, more weather-sealed, with proper live view and autofocus.

It would effectively kill off Linhof, Horseman, Alpa and other medium-format field cameras in a stroke, put a serious dent in Nikon, Canon and Leica's armour, and cement Sony as a world leader in digital cameras. All by making what is essentially a scaled-up NEX-7.

Other companies could just buy these sensors and improve on them though like Nikon did with the D3X. Sony last released a full frame camera 4 years ago, so I think trying to take on a $50,000 IQ180 might be a bit premature.

Laudrup wrote in post #14077308
Other companies could just buy these sensors and improve on them though like Nikon did with the D3X. Sony last released a full frame camera 4 years ago, so I think trying to take on a $50,000 IQ180 might be a bit premature.

Premature? The technology is all there, if they wanted to do it. The only thing stopping them is commercial considerations.

Basically, in the last few years, the rate of technological development has far outpaced the commercial cycle. So companies are holding back on what is possible, in order to make some of their current technology still profitable in ten years time.

A CMOS-based MF sensor is much cheaper to make than a CCD. Basically any plant capable of making microprocessors and other nanoscale electronics can make one. In contrast, making a CCD requires specialised equipment.

Sell such a camera for $6k-$10k (body only) and Sony would immediately win over the entire landscape crowd, including those still shooting film at the moment, as well as those who have been waiting since the film days for a proper panoramic camera - something that, so far, has been distinctly lacking from digital lineups.

And other companies couldn't buy them if Sony doesn't want to sell them.

Trying to corner almost every market when they don't even have a professional support network for 35mm cameras, never mind MF cameras, not to mention the lead times for exotic glass and sheer capacity for Zeiss to research and develop all these lenses means these ideas are highly unlikely. Other companies make sensors as good or better than Sony, and other companies make lenses as good or better than Sony and Zeiss, so why would you buy it and not just buy a PhaseOne or Hasselblad when you have access to technical support, lots of digital backs and lenses?

phoenixheat wrote in post #14073135
I agree 100%.
Its kind of a shame too. I really wish I could get a 7D or D7000 with in cameras IS (Super Steady Shot).

I took this shot at 1/10th of a second going 50mph hanging out of a friends race spec Subaru STi (very stiff suspension) using a Sony A200.

you are driving a race spec car on the road?

and yes, id love a 7D with image sensor stabilization, but canon(nor nikon) will NEVER ditch their entire lens line up...

wait a second, in 1987..... ahhh i can only hope.


Also, i walked into a sony store yesterday, and they had an A900 on display(and the lovely lovely, LOVELY 16-35, and the 50 f1.4)

2-3 stops of stabilization on the 16-35 AND on the 50mm F1.4..... jesus man. i was feeling weak!

screw the telephotos, although sony's 50mm left a lot to be desired. I am pretty much whipped by the idea of autofocus F1.2

Laudrup wrote in post #14078823
Trying to corner almost every market when they don't even have a professional support network for 35mm cameras, never mind MF cameras, not to mention the lead times for exotic glass and sheer capacity for Zeiss to research and develop all these lenses means these ideas are highly unlikely. Other companies make sensors as good or better than Sony, and other companies make lenses as good or better than Sony and Zeiss, so why would you buy it and not just buy a PhaseOne or Hasselblad when you have access to technical support, lots of digital backs and lenses?

It's much easier to break into, and corner, a neglected market, than a highly competitive one.

The 35mm market is dominated by Canon and Nikon. If Sony tried to fight its way into this market, it would be starting in last place, without a strong collection of lenses to back it up, and no mechanical expertise for the reflex mechanism. In other words, a pretty dumb idea.

In contrast, there are no competitors in the MF panoramic market. The closest competitors are the Hasselblad X-Pan and Linhof 617, both of which are film cameras. The Hasselblad H4D and Mamiya MF DSLR bodies both lack wide-angle capability. Zeiss has many medium-format lenses which could easily be adapted to a new, 72mm-wide digital back.

With regards to sensor quality, Sony really has no competitors at the moment. Per sensor area, the Sony CMOS sensors even outperform the Phase One backs - crop a MF digital shot down to full-frame and put it next to a D3x shot and you'll see what I mean.