Should Sony stop production of Full Frame?

Do you think Sony should stop production?

  • YES

    Votes: 39 32.5%

  • NO

    Votes: 81 67.5%
  • Total voters
    120
33L said:
bodies should not be whats in question. Its the system as an overall element.
i shoot a 5DII, its a basic full frame very few bells and whistles.
comparing the systems shows that some people are not gonig to see a difference but those that want fast glass (1.2/1.4) on all their portrait glass cant use the sony system as its not there yet. the long telephotos are not there yet!
if im not mistaken their flash mounts only untril recently couldnt be used with 3rd party triggers making things expensive.

dont get me wrong i know photographers that produce stunning images with sony kit, most of them are wanting to jump ship though to push their photography through the wider range of equipment offered elsewhere.
Click to expand...

Have Canon got a 135/1.8? An budget 500 with AF? AF zeiss lenses? Stabilised 35, 50, 85 and 135 primes?

The hotshoe argument is just not an issue. £5 for an adapter.
 
LCPete said:
Only Canon make a 4 stop IS 100mm macro (2 stops at 1:1) as well as the MPE 65
Click to expand...
Have they got stabilised 30mm, 50mm, 60mm, 70mm, 90mm, 105mm, 150mm, 180mm & 200mm macros? All these are available on Minolta AF/Sony Alpha. There is also a Minolta 1-3x available s/h.
Tbh Minolta had a better, fuller Macro system before Canon did.

Yes, there are still things that Canon &/or Nikon have that aren't yet available for Alpha but generally they are relatively niche & expensive products & not relevant for 95%+ of users. For those that have the need & funding for those products a) they know it & b) those solutions dictate the body.
& of course our system does have it's own USPs - AF Zeiss, 135 STF, 500 AF Reflex & a far wider range of lenses when you consider a stabilised system incl. lots of wider aperture lenses that become stabilised on Sony bodies (iirc neither Canon or Nikon has anything stabilised wider than f2 & I believe that there is only 1 of those - everything else is f2.8 or greater). We have quite a few 1.4 options that become stabilised not to mention f1.7/1.8 & there is a Sony patent for a 50/1.2 which of course would become stabilised on an Alpha.
 
Last edited:
33L said:
bodies should not be whats in question. Its the system as an overall element.
i shoot a 5DII, its a basic full frame very few bells and whistles.
comparing the systems shows that some people are not gonig to see a difference but those that want fast glass (1.2/1.4) on all their portrait glass cant use the sony system as its not there yet. the long telephotos are not there yet!
Click to expand...

I have 35/1.4, 50/1.4, 85/1.4 and 135/1.8 lenses for my Sony. All can be bought new, all autofocus.

What I can't get is a 400/2.8, not that I want one or could afford one.
 
FF whats that? Systems, I dont know anything about them. Would I ever see myself moving from Sony, I dont see any reason to. I,m no expert, just a chap who loves to take pictures, and if I say so myself, am really happy with my little collection of cheppo lens and a basic A450 but thats about as deep as my pockets will allow. Oh I did start off with a Canon 400D, but really did not like it so went Sony.
 
as mentioned earlier, i think Sony's biggest problem will be if they dedicate everything to the SLT system and forget SLR.
i hate the EVF with a passion, and my job selling kit is made very very difficult when it comes to Sony products as customers see it too.
i own an A700, and have regular use of an A850 & A900.
i own Sony lenses 28-75 2.8, 70-200 2.8, 500 f8 reflex.
i own Minolta 28 2.8, 50 1.7, 70-210 f4.
i have regular use of Sony lenses 24-70 2.8 Zeiss, 300 2.8, 100 2.8 macro, 24 f2 Zeiss, 135 1.8 Zeiss (best lens i've used!), 35 1.4

all of this is plenty for me to get what i want, and even without the lenses i borrow i have plenty of choice.
i also have full use of all the Canon & Nikon kit, but the only reason for me to move away from Sony is the SLT system.
if i move to Nikon, the only one i would want is a D3s << superb!!
 
SussexBlue said:
Did you have to go back a year to dig this up just for that comment :thumbsdown:
Canikon, should be worried, Sony are leading the field in technology, A77 coming out very soon and a new full frame in 2012 and that will be something special :thumbs:
Click to expand...

Believed there will be two new alpha Full Frames cameras using the Sony's newest Sensors in 2012/2013.

I am not a fan of having the movie mode in the dslr camera and that is why I chooses the a900.

:)
 
Last edited:
heidfirst said:
Have they got stabilised 30mm, 50mm, 60mm, 70mm, 90mm, 105mm, 150mm, 180mm & 200mm macros? All these are available on Minolta AF/Sony Alpha. There is also a Minolta 1-3x available s/h.
Tbh Minolta had a better, fuller Macro system before Canon did.
Click to expand...

will have to agree to differ :) I believe that in lens stablisation is better, the Canon 100mm IS is unique with being effective at 1:1:)
 
LCPete said:
the Canon 100mm IS is unique with being effective at 1:1:)
Click to expand...
no, it's not - in-body is effective at 1:1 as well.
where the 100 L IS Macro is unique is in compensating for rotational & shift shake as well (although I have my doubts about how big a problem that actually is).
 
Last edited:
onomatopoeia said:
I certainly want them to continue as I want a FF camera eventually and I don't want to give up my lenses.
Click to expand...

Me too... Although I only have my kit lens at the moment (my 70-300mm tamron broke, 1:2 macro). But I'm looking to invest in a flash and portrait/macro lens and later on a higher entry level; maybe the a77? Then a FF; hopefully they will release a beast just in time for me.

Alpha's are a bit like marmite aye... Someone on another forum admitted he didn't like them because they weighed less and the shutters had a cheap sound to them.:bonk:

Saying that sony is limited is the wrong word to use I think. Less variety to offer but they cover everything else in some way or form unless anyone can particularly point out something? I can only wish that they carry on with their efforts and give me all the gear I need!

...I could have cried when I saw pictures on the news of a huge Sony distribution centre being burnt down; all those quality goods:bang::(:shake:

Also I think that many of the most commonly used lenses on the Sony are from Tamron and Sigma, which I should think are also very commonly used on Canikon's...
 
Last edited:
mastertrinity said:
There have been hundreds of rumours going around that Sony might stop Full Frame to concentrate on APS-C and the NEX series.
Click to expand...

This is something I suspected would happen, they came into the market with the goal of becoming the number two player in the dslr market and seemed to think that pro shooters were just going to abandon their current systems and swap over, based on a saving of a few hundred pounds on a high end body.

I don't think they really ever grasped the fundamentals of the dslr market, so them pulling out of the upper end (and eventually the whole market) wouldn't come as a great surprise.
 
Flash In The Pan said:
This is something I suspected would happen, they came into the market with the goal of becoming the number two player in the dslr market and seemed to think that pro shooters were just going to abandon their current systems and swap over, based on a saving of a few hundred pounds on a high end body.

I don't think they really ever grasped the fundamentals of the dslr market, so them pulling out of the upper end (and eventually the whole market) wouldn't come as a great surprise.
Click to expand...

So the fact that Sony said they'd replace the a850 and a900 over a year ago hasn't changed your view? All this stems from Thom Hogan's claim that Sony would stop FF production last year. Since then they've opened a new sensor plant, released at least 4 new cameras and several new lenses (most for FF). Clearly, Hogan is just a sock puppet.
 
Flash In The Pan said:
This is something I suspected would happen, they came into the market with the goal of becoming the number two player in the dslr market and seemed to think that pro shooters were just going to abandon their current systems and swap over, based on a saving of a few hundred pounds on a high end body.

I don't think they really ever grasped the fundamentals of the dslr market, so them pulling out of the upper end (and eventually the whole market) wouldn't come as a great surprise.
Click to expand...
As mentioned this all seems to have come from Thom Hogan's musings but with no evidence to back it.
I enjoy reading Thom as he seems to have a good grip on the business argument side of things which a lot of fanbois seem to ignore (because 0.1% of the market wants something is not usually a good business case to make it! :p) but Sony have said that there will be further FFs & having publicly said that it would be unlike the Japanese not to follow through.
 
Something to look forward to, at least you haven't got a new camera thrown at you every year lol
 
I've never owned a Sony product, and really don't know very much about them, but I can't think of any reason why they should stop making FF cameras. Its their decision, and I daresay it'll be dictated by market forces, unless they have another agenda.

There were a lot of SLR manufacturer back in their glory days. Most of them disappeared, which was a pity in many ways. Competition and choice are good.
 
MartynK said:
I've never owned a Sony product, and really don't know very much about them, but I can't think of any reason why they should stop making FF cameras. Its their decision, and I daresay it'll be dictated by market forces, unless they have another agenda.

There were a lot of SLR manufacturer back in their glory days. Most of them disappeared, which was a pity in many ways. Competition and choice are good.
Click to expand...

Like you, I've never owned a Sony camera either and can't see that I ever will (but never say never) but I hope they continue FF production as it gives more choice in that sector and I wouldn't want to see existing Sony users left high and dry.

I can't understand the attitude of certain brand users who seem to almost will another brand to fail, there must be some deep-rooted insecurity issues involved somewhere. If they think the Sony system is limited or deficient in some other way the answer is simple, don't use it. However, don't knock the system or those that do use it, it's just personal preference.

Also, I get fed up when a system other than Canon or Nikon is being discussed and it is dismissed with the comment, "Ah, but it wouldn't be any good for weddings." Believe it or not, but not every photographer (or even every "pro") does weddings.

Personally, I hope Sony go from strength to strength and, as you say Martyn, it's their decision. More competition and choice must be good for everyone. :)
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top