The Amazing Sony A1/A7/A9/APS-C & Anything else welcome Mega Thread!

twist said:
Sony need to realise they havent made a Leica. At the rate they churn cameras out its the furthest thing from high end.
Click to expand...

I think they know they're not Leica as they're not charging Leica prices.

I mean high end as in aiming at people who'd buy a FF DSLR and quality lenses territory and not aiming at someone who'd buy a 500D (or whatever the entry level is) and 18-50mm f3.5-5.6 kit lens territory.

Maybe they are charging too much, maybe they are making large margins on the lenses? Who knows? Brands aiming to be high end brands tend to be expensive and I assume that the Zeiss relationship is as much about credibility and the badge as anything more tangible. I'm sure that Sony are capable of buying in the expertise (pick up phone, phone Sigma) to design truly great lenses without the help of Zeiss but they chose to enter into this partnership and charge lots of dosh.

I think we're stuck with this for now. I hope it changes and we get some nice compact and good enough lenses at more reasonable prices but until that happens we are where we are.
 
rodd1000 said:
I don't think thats Sonys plan, why bundle it with a budget kit lens if it's target audience is high end? To be honest I don't think Sony really have a plan.
Click to expand...

God knows.

Apart from the kit lens where are the other cheapies though... and the prime lenses seem to be largely high end with only the 28 and arguably the 35mm f2.8 not being quite so offensive.

Just my thoughts and if they didn't set out to make a higher end system why the involvement of Zeiss and the expensive primes...
 
This is the point, why release the cheapest full frame camera on the market, supported by a decent budget kit zoom, then attempt to prop it up with very high end, sometimes over priced glass. It's a very confused system.
 
woof woof said:
God knows.

Apart from the kit lens where are the other cheapies though... and the prime lenses seem to be largely high end with only the 28 and arguably the 35mm f2.8 not being quite so offensive.

Just my thoughts and if they didn't set out to make a higher end system why the involvement of Zeiss and the expensive primes...
Click to expand...

Because they already have a relationship with Zeiss (A mount), so for them it was probably the easiest move. Plus nobody else in terms of 3rd party is/was interested
 
rodd1000 said:
This is the point, why release the cheapest full frame camera on the market, supported by a decent budget kit zoom, then attempt to prop it up with very high end, sometimes over priced glass. It's a very confused system.
Click to expand...

Sony has a track record of doing some really sill things, especially proprietary accessories. But that applies further than just their imaging dept.
 
rodd1000 said:
This is the point, why release the cheapest full frame camera on the market, supported by a decent budget kit zoom, then attempt to prop it up with very high end, sometimes over priced glass. It's a very confused system.
Click to expand...
Same reason that Gillette will sell you a razor cheap, and then sell you expensive blades, printer manufacturers sell cheap printers and super expensive refills, Sony and Microsoft sell their consoles below cost price, etc. Getting you to buy into a system is 80% of the battle, and most people won't sell up and change systems just because the lens they want is £1-200 more than they'd like it to be.

TBH, Son'y strategy makes sense to me. For people where price is a major concern there's always the crop range, and hey most people who buy interchangeable lens camera don't even buy any lenses beyond what came in the box. Besides, if you want a full frame mirrorless, you've got no other choice.

Sony are playing the long game - as mirrorless tech improves and more and more pros/enthusiasts become disenfranchised with DSLRs - hey there's Sony with an established system and a ton of high quality lenses. Nobody is even competing in this market sector, and they're ensuring that if someone even tries, they'll have to put in a monumental effort just to get close. And those pros - in the long term - are the key to the rest of the market. How many people buying Nikon/Canon DSLRs did so because they were genuinely the best option for them? Not as many as those who did so because it's what they see the pros on TV use, or the guy that shot their wedding, or what their photography enthusiast friend recommended because that's what he uses.

To my mind, the only real mistakes they've made so far are not making the 24-70mm sufficiently better than the 28-70mm, and not coming out with a longer fast portrait lens (85mm+ f2 or better) much much sooner, especially considering that that's one of the areas where mirrorless has a real advantage over DSLRs - ideally coming out alongside the 16-35mm
 
twist said:
Because they already have a relationship with Zeiss (A mount), so for them it was probably the easiest move. Plus nobody else in terms of 3rd party is/was interested
Click to expand...

But my point in part is why have a relationship with Zeiss at all when Sony could IMVHO make lenses as good without giving Zeiss a penny. Could it be the badge? I think so and you only need a badge if you're expecting to get an advantage you can trade on and to me clearly Sony see a marketable advantage in an association with Zeiss and his must be a part of a strategy to (mostly) aim at the higher end of the market and charge more.

If we see cheaper and possibly less good lenses I wonder if they'll be badged Zeiss. My guess is that the Zeiss name will appear on lenses costing more than the Sigma 50 and 85mm f1.4's and if we see lenses of the type and quality of the Sigma's they'll not carry a Zeiss badge and instead they'll be Sony, or indeed Sigma. I hope it happens but I don't know when.
 
woof woof said:
But my point in part is why have a relationship with Zeiss at all when Sony could IMVHO make lenses as good without giving Zeiss a penny. Could it be the badge? I think so and you only need a badge if you're expecting to get an advantage you can trade on and to me clearly Sony see a marketable advantage in an association with Zeiss and his must be a part of a strategy to (mostly) aim at the higher end of the market and charge more.

If we see cheaper and possibly less good lenses I wonder if they'll be badged Zeiss. My guess is that the Zeiss name will appear on lenses costing more than the Sigma 50 and 85mm f1.4's and if we see lenses of the type and quality of the Sigma's they'll not carry a Zeiss badge and instead they'll be Sony, or indeed Sigma. I hope it happens but I don't know when.
Click to expand...

Of course they could, perhaps its a leveling out kind of thing in terms of profits, sell cameras cheaper but use lenses to make up for the shortfall, after all, in order to take full advantage of the system you will need the lenses. Sony have been rebadging lenses for ages, most of the A mount stuff is just Minolta/Tamron design in a new skin.

I dont think they will be badged Zeiss, they will follow the A mount trend and go with G. Id think lenses that are the quality of the new ARTs will be designated Zeiss, not G. Part of the reason I left Sony, I have invested in A, E and FE mount, Id say the most frustrating experience was with waiting for E mount lenses and now its the same thing with FE mount. I got bored, bought high quality MF lenses at high cost to try make up for the lack of AF lenses and the system never worked for me. Now, Ill wait, been bitten to many times and lost a lot of money on the way.
 
Last edited:
Ah, I understand your position a little better.

It's disappointing about the A mount but I suppose Sony thought that they had to try something different as they weren't getting enough market share. Maybe the same will happen with FE, who knows but Sony aren't the only ones to kick users in the nuts so in some ways you have to take changing mounts and shifting technologies on the chin. As I've mentioned before, my sister bought a Samsung DSLR and I always envied the build and quality as I thought it put my Canons to shame but Canon are still here and knocking out DSLR's and Samsung are... different these days. Sad but true and the only other thing to do is stick with Nikon or Canon as they're unlikely to offer any radical change unless there is a seismic shift beyond what we've seen so far, accepting past debacles like the dropping of FD.

Not sure that I agree with you over the rebadging of Minolta et al as to me the association with Zeiss is a different thing and is more about association with a prestigious German manufacturer and the badge rather than any lack of ability of Sony to come up with the goods themselves or buy in some worthy expertise perhaps with a less prestigious name. I may be wrong but that's how I see it.

I do agree with the whinges about the price of the lenses but maybe I'm just a little more sympathetic and as Ray so elegantly put it maybe Sony are playing the long game and one day it'll all make sense and maybe we'll even see some cheaper lenses. Until then even if I do end up paying £2k over the odds I'm into CSC's now and for me there's no going back no matter how cheap a really good DSLR system is because I just don't like using them any more.
 
woof woof said:
Ah, I understand your position a little better.

It's disappointing about the A mount but I suppose Sony thought that they had to try something different as they weren't getting enough market share. Maybe the same will happen with FE, who knows but Sony aren't the only ones to kick users in the nuts so in some ways you have to take changing mounts and shifting technologies on the chin. As I've mentioned before, my sister bought a Samsung DSLR and I always envied the build and quality as I thought it put my Canons to shame but Canon are still here and knocking out DSLR's and Samsung are... different these days. Sad but true and the only other thing to do is stick with Nikon or Canon as they're unlikely to offer any radical change unless there is a seismic shift beyond what we've seen so far, accepting past debacles like the dropping of FD.

Not sure that I agree with you over the rebadging of Minolta et al as to me the association with Zeiss is a different thing and is more about association with a prestigious German manufacturer and the badge rather than any lack of ability of Sony to come up with the goods themselves or buy in some worthy expertise perhaps with a less prestigious name. I may be wrong but that's how I see it.

I do agree with the whinges about the price of the lenses but maybe I'm just a little more sympathetic and as Ray so elegantly put it maybe Sony are playing the long game and one day it'll all make sense and maybe we'll even see some cheaper lenses. Until then even if I do end up paying £2k over the odds I'm into CSC's now and for me there's no going back no matter how cheap a really good DSLR system is because I just don't like using them any more.
Click to expand...

I think Samsung is the company to watch, their lens lineup is growing steadily with good offerings and the NX1 looks brilliant, but I think its expensive (shouldve taken a hit on the profits and sold more to grow their user base). They are also looking into future sensor technology and they have massive amounts of cash for R&D. Canikon will sit around and wait, theyve kind of perfected the cameras and lens system they sell so they can just watch the money roll in. They'll wait till the other manufacturers have perfected the few remaining niggles of mirrorless tech and then start using that tech and producing their own, the world isnt entirely convinced by mirrorless just yet so they can afford to do so.

If Sony are playing the waiting game they should stop releasing so many different models of cameras and concentrate their efforts on lenses. At the moment they are playing the same game they did with NEX/E mount, except that they are releasing very expensive lenses instead of no lenses at all. If I were in your shoes Id also be shooting FE, it makes sense, it also makes sense for a lot of casual photographers and landscape photographers, but I need rapid AF and I have very specific requirements for FL, aperture, lighting, triggers etc.
 
Last edited:
Yes, for me it's a Godsend as I get a CSC with the advantages that brings and I get to play with old lenses at their original FoV and get the focus aids and WYSIWYG etc plus I get good quality AF lenses for when I need to be quicker about it... when I'm with my GF.

I might actually buy an A6000 as I like having a smaller system and I love the constant preview and auto ISO is manual exposure mode which Sony has and MFT does not have. So, I might just end up being completely Sony, a nightmare for you but they seem to be offering what I want in both FF and a smaller CSC package.
 
woof woof said:
Yes, for me it's a Godsend as I get a CSC with the advantages that brings and I get to play with old lenses at their original FoV and get the focus aids and WYSIWYG etc plus I get good quality AF lenses for when I need to be quicker about it... when I'm with my GF.

I might actually buy an A6000 as I like having a smaller system and I love the constant preview and auto ISO is manual exposure mode which Sony has and MFT does not have. So, I might just end up being completely Sony, a nightmare for you but they seem to be offering what I want in both FF and a smaller CSC package.
Click to expand...

I bought the A5100 for the wife, very good camera, sometimes I wish it had an EVF but she doesnt want the bigger form factor of the A6000 so its ideal. AF on both is the same and its VERY good, shame they couldnt add it to the Sony As, maybe in the near future. The A6000 is pretty much a bargain now imho and the lens are finally decent enough to make a system.
 
twist said:
I think Samsung is the company to watch, their lens lineup is growing steadily with good offerings and the NX1 looks brilliant, but I think its expensive (shouldve taken a hit on the profits and sold more to grow their user base). They are also looking into future sensor technology and they have massive amounts of cash for R&D. Canikon will sit around and wait, theyve kind of perfected the cameras and lens system they sell so they can just watch the money roll in. They'll wait till the other manufacturers have perfected the few remaining niggles of mirrorless tech and then start using that tech and producing their own, the world isnt entirely convinced by mirrorless just yet so they can afford to do so.

If Sony are playing the waiting game they should stop releasing so many different models of cameras and concentrate their efforts on lenses. At the moment they are playing the same game they did with NEX/E mount, except that they are releasing very expensive lenses instead of no lenses at all. If I were in your shoes Id also be shooting FE, it makes sense, it also makes sense for a lot of casual photographers and landscape photographers, but I need rapid AF and I have very specific requirements for FL, aperture, lighting, triggers etc.
Click to expand...
Then get a a7 and use a Canon or nikon dslr. Best of both worlds
 
jonneymendoza said:
Then get a a7 and use a Canon or nikon dslr. Best of both worlds
Click to expand...

I have run 2 various systems alongside a few times but the catch is why have 2 cameras and the associated lenses, accessories and costs when 1 can do it all and do it all incredibly well. If anything, Id probably have a DSLR and an X100t, not 2 systems.
 
twist said:
I have run 2 various systems alongside a few times but the catch is why have 2 cameras and the associated lenses, accessories and costs when 1 can do it all and do it all incredibly well. If anything, Id probably have a DSLR and an X100t, not 2 systems.
Click to expand...
No need mate.

You are likely to use a a7 for Snapshots or landscape. Can use adapters to use existing dslr lenses and when you need af grab your dslr and start laughing.

For us canon uses it makes sense as the dynamic range is s***.

If the 5ds had superior dynamic range then the a7r. I'd be all over that.

I still use my 5d3. The a7s accompanies my 5d3 brilliantly
 
jonneymendoza said:
No need mate.

You are likely to use a a7 for Snapshots or landscape. Can use adapters to use existing dslr lenses and when you need af grab your dslr and start laughing.

For us canon uses it makes sense as the dynamic range is s***.

If the 5ds had superior dynamic range then the a7r. I'd be all over that.

I still use my 5d3. The a7s accompanies my 5d3 brilliantly
Click to expand...

But why would I do that when I have my D750 and that does it all, Im not bothered by the extra 250g weight of the camera when I have all the lenses I could possibly need and get the performance I want all the time. Me getting what I want from the A7 means a £1200 on a camera and another £1500 on a FE 35 1.4 and then for me theres compromise when I use it. For me personally, thats £2700 wasted.
 
twist said:
But why would I do that when I have my D750 and that does it all, Im not bothered by the extra 250g weight of the camera when I have all the lenses I could possibly need and get the performance I want all the time. Me getting what I want from the A7 means a £1200 on a camera and another £1500 on a FE 35 1.4 and then for me theres compromise when I use it. For me personally, thats £2700 wasted.
Click to expand...
Yea but if u was shooting canon it makes a bit of sense.
 
jonneymendoza said:
Yea but if u was shooting canon it makes a bit of sense.
Click to expand...

Still dont think so, thats an awful lot of money and compromise for a littel bit of extra DR. Id just buy a Nikon if I wanted DR and high ISO that much, which I did.
 
Last edited:
twist said:
But why would I do that when I have my D750 and that does it all, Im not bothered by the extra 250g weight of the camera when I have all the lenses I could possibly need and get the performance I want all the time. Me getting what I want from the A7 means a £1200 on a camera and another £1500 on a FE 35 1.4 and then for me theres compromise when I use it. For me personally, thats £2700 wasted.
Click to expand...

Then why are you even bothering with the A7 series? Live with your DSLR and be happy.

The A7 and MFT and the rest make sense to me because I started off with compact film cameras and only bought a 35mm SLR much later and from that point on I've always had two "systems." One for ultimate quality and another more compact one for occasions when I thought that a SLR was too much but I've never really been happy with the bulk and weight and sheer in your faceness attention grabbing hugeness of modern DSLR's and lenses and hence my move to smaller stuff.

It's only in very recent years that IMVHO the quality of the smaller systems has become acceptable and now I can have not only smaller kit for ultimate quality but also quality kit for occasions when my best camera is still too big and obtrusive.

To be honest I think that the quality of the best smaller systems is such now that for the hobbyist who doesn't need mega frame rates, top of the range focus tracking or a million and one accessories they're probably more than good enough and all I get extra over MFT or Sony A6000 series is FF and a stop or so dynamic range and higher ISO performance. For me it's worth it because I'm retired and comfortable and I can afford to have the luxury kit which gives me 1% more image quality than an A6000 would give but for most people I can accept that an A7 doesn't make a whole lot of sense if they're willing to live with an A6000 or a conventional DSLR.
 
Last edited:
woof woof said:
Then why are you even bothering with the A7 series? Live with your DSLR and be happy.

The A7 and MFT and the rest make sense to me because I started off with compact film cameras and only bought a 35mm SLR much later and from that point on I've always had two "systems." One for ultimate quality and another more compact one for occasions when I thought that a SLR was too much but I've never really been happy with the bulk and weight and sheer in your faceness attention grabbing hugeness of modern DSLR's and lenses and hence my move to smaller stuff.

It's only in very recent years that IMVHO the quality of the smaller systems has become acceptable and now I can have not only smaller kit for ultimate quality but also quality kit for occasions when my best camera is still too big and obtrusive.

To be honest I think that the quality of the best smaller systems is such now that for the hobbyist who doesn't need mega frame rates, top of the range focus tracking or a million and one accessories they're probably more than good enough and all I get extra over MFT or Sony A series is FF and a stop or so dynamic range and higher ISO performance. For me it's worth it because I'm retired and comfortable and I can afford to have the luxury kit which gives me 1% more image quality than an A6000 would give but for most people I can accept that an A7 doesn't make a whole lot of sense if they're willing to live with an A6000 or a conventional DSLR.
Click to expand...

Thats exactly what Im doing Alan. Like I said previously, when the A series develops into something I feel can replace my DSLR then Ill do that. Ive already said all of the rest in fewer words, for some there are clear advantages, for me, not enough yet but I am watching and waiting and really hope they can sort out their range of lenses as I think that effects most more than anything else.
 
twist said:
Still dont think so, thats an awful lot of money and compromise for a littel bit of extra DR. Id just buy a Nikon if I wanted DR and high ISO that much, which I did.
Click to expand...
Little? Switching to nikon is far more expensive! I'd need to replace all my canon gear vs just buying a tiny adapter for a a7 camera and call it a day like I did
 
woof woof said:
Then why are you even bothering with the A7 series? Live with your DSLR and be happy.

The A7 and MFT and the rest make sense to me because I started off with compact film cameras and only bought a 35mm SLR much later and from that point on I've always had two "systems." One for ultimate quality and another more compact one for occasions when I thought that a SLR was too much but I've never really been happy with the bulk and weight and sheer in your faceness attention grabbing hugeness of modern DSLR's and lenses and hence my move to smaller stuff.

It's only in very recent years that IMVHO the quality of the smaller systems has become acceptable and now I can have not only smaller kit for ultimate quality but also quality kit for occasions when my best camera is still too big and obtrusive.

To be honest I think that the quality of the best smaller systems is such now that for the hobbyist who doesn't need mega frame rates, top of the range focus tracking or a million and one accessories they're probably more than good enough and all I get extra over MFT or Sony A6000 series is FF and a stop or so dynamic range and higher ISO performance. For me it's worth it because I'm retired and comfortable and I can afford to have the luxury kit which gives me 1% more image quality than an A6000 would give but for most people I can accept that an A7 doesn't make a whole lot of sense if they're willing to live with an A6000 or a conventional DSLR.
Click to expand...
Mate nearly all my studio gear work on my a7s. It's a myth how u have to replace your canon studio gear!
 
jonneymendoza said:
Little? Switching to nikon is far more expensive! I'd need to replace all my canon gear vs just buying a tiny adapter for a a7 camera and call it a day like I did
Click to expand...

Not sure how you figure that. Canikon gear is valued pretty much the same so switching is easy and doesnt cost much more, add an A7s at £1250 on top of your Canon stuff and youre still worse off. So now you have a Canon and lenses you feel compromises on DR/ISO, so you buy another camera to make up for that to use your Canon lenses in MF, so you lose out on the AF of the Canon, which is another compromise. If it works for you thats great. You asked about my usage though and I explained that to you.
 
jonneymendoza said:
Mate nearly all my studio gear work on my a7s. It's a myth how u have to replace your canon studio gear!
Click to expand...

Why would you use an A7s in the studio? Low pixels, lower DR at low ISO. Jonney I had my Sony gear before you so I know what does and doesnt work with my other gear.
 
jonneymendoza said:
Mate nearly all my studio gear work on my a7s. It's a myth how u have to replace your canon studio gear!
Click to expand...

I sometimes think I should have kept some of my DSLR lenses and used them via adapters but it's water under the bridge now.
 
Looks like we might be in for a surprise with the upcoming A7R II, 56/59mp!!! [emoji50] (9K)
5-axis IBIS
Body like A7 II
Better AF / Tracking
Improved RAW

http://www.eoshd.com/2015/04/update...ull-resolution-is-9440x6300-59mp/#prettyPhoto

Looking at the photo, the Sony Zeiss 55mm f1.8 doesn't seem to have any issues resolving on to a 56/59mp sensor.

Could be fake but the actual Zeiss Batis photo is also at the high resolution [emoji39]

http://www.sonyalpharumors.com/sr4-did-zeiss-just-leak-the-sony-a7rii-with-56-megapixel-sensor/
 
Last edited:
If this is the rumoured 50mp camera I wonder if they'll still do a 36mp as I think the 36mp A7r was the best seller wasn't it? If it was will a 50mp be the new best seller or would people prefer to still have a 36mp camera?
 
Ermmm I'm happy with 24mp, in fact I would settle for a 12mp A7S, just want Sony to get their A6000 AF system working in the FF sensors [emoji106]
Imagine what kind of CPU/RAM/Storage you'd need to work with 36/56mp RAW files.
 
Last edited:
Yes, I'm happy with my A7 and it's the best camera I've ever had but I'm sure I read that the A7r was the best seller.
 
woof woof said:
Yes, I'm happy with my A7 and it's the best camera I've ever had but I'm sure I read that the A7r was the best seller.
Click to expand...
I think the A7S is the real money maker for Sony above the A7R.
I am still not 100% sold on the new MKII body design/size/weight etc so pretty happy with my A7. :)
 
chrism_scotland said:
I suspect we might see 2, a refreshed A7rii and then the rumoured A9 which likely is where the 50-60mp would sit..
Click to expand...

This would be the best way forward mmmm perhaps two A9 models, one high resolution which would have to sacrifice fps and AF performance and one say 12/24mp with high ISO and high speed AF & fps.

A9 and A9X :D

Think Nikon D4S any beyond performance wise [emoji41]
 
Last edited:
An A7rII and a 50mp (A9?) is what I expected and what the rumour sites had betted on before.
 
Wonder if they'll release a catalogue of very expensive niche lenses to go with the new higher res cameras?

Oh wait...they already did that :D
 
I think Ill go with 36MP A7rii with the same sensor trickery Olympus is using in the EM5ii to make the extra MP.

5-axis IBIS - duh!
Body like A7 II - duh!
Better AF / Tracking - Better as in A7ii 'better'
Improved RAW - Hopefully
 
twist said:
Would love to see that but in reality I highly doubt it. They dont even have pro AF on their pro level SLT, the A99.
Click to expand...
Yep I imagine so, can still dream though [emoji106][emoji2]
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top