Pages: [1]   Go Down

Author Topic: Present state of the camera market?  (Read 3906 times)

Dan Wells

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1044
Present state of the camera market?
« on: January 18, 2016, 02:51:27 am »

Camera sales keep declining, although at least serious camera sales have flattened out (cheap compacts keep taking a beating)! Who's going to survive, who's going to rearrange, and who's gone? At least my prediction is that our survivors over the next five years are Canon, Nikon, Sony and Fuji. I'm not sure about Olympus, and we'll lose Panasonic (but they'll transfer their most popular models to their own video camera division, who'll keep selling them and making successors that are ever more of movie cameras). Pentax will go away, and that loss will be mourned by many who no longer own one, but remember them well. Hasselblad will go, and that will be a widely felt loss as well. Leica will probably survive, but may become less and less relevant to people who use cameras to take pictures - they may even make a model that omits the sensor(not a film camera either), but has especially beautiful craftsmanship for the collector market :( Phase One will probably soldier on, losing two competitors and probably gaining one (see below) - their software will keep them going even if the back business dries up. .Samsung will leave the camera market entirely (apart from phones), if they haven't already, and Sigma will no longer make bodies, although they'll continue their successful lens line (what? Sigma once made camera bodies???) - nobody will notice either one  :D

Just my opinions - please chime in!

The Survivors:

Canon and Nikon (treated together, because they're actually in similar positions).

In the professional market (the press plus weddings, events, fashion and other things you hire a photographer for, plus photographers employed internally by everybody from universities to the White House) their duopoly is too darned powerful to break, because of things like odd lenses that sell in the hundreds of units per year. Those lenses are far too expensive for a new contender to develop. They'll keep on making iterative versions of fairly conservative DSLRs, and they'll keep selling to people for whom they're a business expense. Most people who buy a D5 or a 1Dx have a big investment in glass, and are reluctant to move, especially to a system that doesn't offer everything they are used to. A LOT of Canon and Nikon pro gear is also owned by the media... If somebody (and note you can't spell "somebody" without three of the four letters from SONY) wanted to take a shot at this market, they'd need to put a lot of money into lens and system development, as well as pro service. They'd also have to offer something (most likely video) that makes pros sit up and take notice ...

Among the artistic photo market (a combination of people who make their living from photography, but by teaching or selling prints/books, rather than by being hired to photograph plus people who don't make money, but spend a lot of time with their cameras), Canon and Nikon are facing a serious threat from Fuji and Sony. Artists can often call some of their equipment a business expense, but they are more willing to work around a system limitation than the New York Times is. Few Canons or Nikons have as much "soul" as a good Fuji, and artists love to put 100 year old lenses on their Sonys. Canon and Nikon still have loyalty here, and Nikon in paricular seems to throw them a bone from time to time. The relatively slow, ultra high resolution D800/D810 series is selling to a few pros (fashion, etc.), but also to a lot of artistically inclined landscape and architectural photographers.

For serious hobby photographers (not making money, not obsessed, but enjoy it), a Canon or a Nikon is the default choice. The A6000 doesn't feel like quite enough camera, the A7II may be too expensive, especially with its pricey lenses (if it's not, it's a logical choice), and they may or may not have seen a Fuji (if they have, they may well own one). Hobbyists shoot all four "survivors" as well as Panasonic and Olympus, and will probably continue to do so, but Canon and Nikon can keep big shares here without too much effort.

While the default choice for family photographers and beginners just getting into it is Nikon or Canon (a D3300 for $400 is a GREAT deal, and a near-perfect student camera), they'd better watch out for Sony's cheap bodies with great sensors. If Sony ever learns to make a sensible lens lineup, they'll be a threat. This is also the group where Thom Hogan's perennial comment about real cameras needing to be simpler and connect to Facebook and friends better makes the most difference. People want to post pictures of their kids, and they want it to be simple. They'll use a damned iPhone with 5 stops of dynamic range because it's social. Nobody cares if the EOS-5D mkIII can send to Facebook through a cell phone (anyone who has one would edit the CR2 before posting anyway), but if the next Rebel does, it'll sell a lot of bodies! If Sony beats Canon and Nikon to this, they may lose a lot of (low-margin, but some of them will be back for more) entry-level DSLR sales.

Sony:
Sony is in an odd position in the camera market, because one side of Sony sells sensors and other hardware not only to the other side of Sony, but also to Nikon, Fuji, Pentax and Phase One (not to mention their big customer, Apple). Sony profits from the whole camera market going up (and they almost don't care if you buy an A7rII or a D810 - they make a lot of money on the sensor either way - they'd prefer you DIDN'T choose an EOS-5Ds , though)... They also have a pretty good camera body business and a rather disorganized lens business. They have a presence in three of the four market segments I looked at for Nikon and Canon, and designs on all four.

They really don't have much of a foothold in a lot of sides of the professional business, not because they haven't got the bodies for it, but because of lenses. Many professional assignments require lenses Sony just doesn't have, and third-party adapters complicate getting the shot, when you have to get it the first time, every time. There ARE professional segments where the A7 series, especially the mk II bodies, are breaking in, but it'll take a lot of work to get at the duopoly there, and I'm not sure Sony wants to commit the time and effort to the lenses that would be required, for an uncertain return (or even understands the lens market well enough to do that). The A7rII is a stunning performer with adapted lenses, including retaining autofocus and stabilization, so I'd suspect that Sony will back into the pro market more through adapters (especially once more really high-quality adapters start showing up) than through really building that kind of a system from scratch. If I were the president of Sony, and I wanted to break into the pro market, I'd do two things (not saying they actually will). First, I'd put out highly reliable first-party Canon and Nikon mount adapters (right there, they'd grab a bunch of pros who prefer, say, a Canon 24-70 but a Nikkor 70-200 - only an A7rII can shoot BOTH lenses at native performance). Second, I'd just BUY Carl Zeiss (Sony could afford it) and tell them "you now make our pro lenses - go crazy, and we don't care if they are 50% more expensive than Canon or Nikon, or even 100% - we have adapters for that - if people don't like the price, they're welcome to buy the Canon and stick it on their Sony body". Just get Zeiss to make a really top-end "trinity", some great primes, and the best series of telephotos out there. If Sony has the best bread and butter pro lenses out there, plus adapters to deal with fisheyes and the 600 mm the newspaper already owns, they'll start grabbing market share if anyone can. Once they start fixing the lens issue, they might look at an A9 body, but their bodies are much better than their lenses right now.

They have more of a presence in the art market than the fast-paced pro market, and fixing the lens issues on the FE side would help there, too. They have a few good to great lenses, a few mediocre ones, and a bunch of holes (including a portrait lens?!?!).

To attract hobbyists, they still need FE lenses at the high end, but maybe different FE lenses... In addition to better lenses, they need more reasonably sized and priced lenses (and a telephoto lens, which everyone's clamoring for). They also need a body or two (other than remaindered original A7s) to fill the gaping  hole between a $500 kit with a cheap lens and a terrific $1800 body that wants a $1200 lens. If one or more of those bodies are APS-C (as they should be), they also need APS-C lenses other than garbage made out of the bottom of Coke bottles. They actually have FOUR versions of an 18-200 f3.5-6.3 travel zoom (old, new,power zoom and a silver version, one of which is identical to a fifth lens sold by Tamron), plus two separate cheapie standard zooms and three poorly regarded very low-end primes. Even the Zeiss standard zoom (NOT counted as one of the cheapie zooms - it's $1000) is not especially well regarded. There are a couple of nice primes and a decent ultrawide zoom, but that's about it! Their APS-C cameras are generally not great bodies, but "as little body as we can do to house this wonderful sensor".

The family photo/beginner/student market is the one place where Sony isn't crying out for lenses (their 16-50 power zoom, while optically poor, is at least truly tiny, and makes for interchangeable lens cameras that fit in pockets and purses). As a university photography teacher, I'd still rather see a student show up with a D3300 or a Rebel (or if they really want to impress their photo teacher, an X-E2 or X-T10 with its intuitive controls) than any APS-C Sony, due to the limited control those bodies offer, not to mention a VIEWFINDER (I don't care about EVF vs DSLR, but, dear students, please show up with a VIEWFINDER of some sort...). The A6000 is better, but it's only at the low end because of clearance sales (it's really a hobbyist camera, and it's missing things there). Most of the low end of the market isn't students, however, and Sony can easily leverage their consumer electronics experience to make "Hogan's camera" for the cell phone generation. My brothers have little kids, and I know that they'd start taking pictures with CAMERAS instead of phones if the cameras offered great sharing (probably via wireless tether to a phone). Sony's in a better position to do this than either Nikon or Canon...

Fuji:
I think Fuji may actually be in the best position in the camera market right now! They aren't about to sell 10 million cameras per year (Canon's close, Nikon and Sony would like to), nor do they want to. They have a very nice, profitable business selling somewhat shy of half a million X series cameras per year, including mirrorless and a couple of high end fixed lens models, and they'd like to sell a million some day (their X series business is growing at 30% per year, almost all of it profitable high-end cameras). Their camera business is run by PHOTOGRAPHERS - Ueno-san, who designed the X-Pro 2, is a Hasselblad Master when he's not designing cameras for Fuji.

The jewel in their crown is the best lens line in the business (and the third most comprehensive, giving ground to Canon and Nikon ONLY at the extremes - fisheyes, long, fast primes and tilt/shift lenses). If you want a great Fuji portrait  lens, choose from a 56mm f1.2 (remember it's APS-C - it's an 85mm equivalent), the same lens with a unique apodizing filter for spectacular bokeh, a 60mm macro (an older lens, but still sound), a 90mm f2 (if you like a longer portrait lens), a Zeiss 50mm or two f2.8 zooms with portrait settings! They have 20+ lenses, beautifully selected, and only two of them are "cheapies" (Fuji calls them XC lenses, while the rest are XF) - even the two most plebian XF lenses. an 18-55 standard zoom and 18-135 travel zoom, are good lenses a significant cut above most similar lenses (I've owned both, still have the 18-135, and would prefer either to ANY Sony APS-C lens, and many of the FE lenses), and most of the XF lenses are gems as good as anything from any maker. The other advantage of their lenses is that they are all designed for digital, and designed for the sensor size Fuji uses.

The old complaint about Fuji was "fantastic lenses, really nice bodies to use, but that old 16 MP sensor holds them back (it was introduced on the Nikon D7000 way back in 2010)". Well, Fuji's X-Trans magic made it punch above its weight, but it WAS getting old. Last Friday, Fuji released the first camera with their new 24 MP X-Trans III sensor, certainly (from early reviews) the best APS-C sensor on the market, and capable of putting a scare into 24 MP full frame sensors. It's a variant of the popular (and excellent) Sony 24 MP sensor that turns up on Sony's own cameras as well as numerous Nikons and Pentaxes but it's a generation or two newer than any other version on the market, with lower noise and more dynamic range, THEN Fuji puts their X-Trans filter on it...

For professional use, Fuji is missing a couple of things - one is the "edges" of a lens lineup. They finally got around to putting out a telephoto lens (a 100-400 zoom that initial accounts say is AT LEAST as good as the new Nikon and Canon offerings in the same range), but they still have no fast primes longer than a 90. A fast 200 mm (f2.0 or f 2.4), the existing 1.4x converter and a new 2x converter would go a long way here. I'm inclined to believe a fisheye and a couple of tilt-shift lenses are less likely than that 200 (or something like it), because the market's too small. There IS a Rokinon fisheye, and who cares that it's manual focus (when do you focus a fisheye, anyway), or that it distorts (aren't fisheyes supposed to do that)? They're also missing a video-oriented body, but the hints at the X-Pro 2 introduction were almost comically thick... Fuji rep : "The new sensor has the fastest readout on the market" (hint) "and our brand new processor is fast enough to handle 4k60p easily" (hint, hint), "but we decided not to do 4k on the X-Pro 2 at introduction, because it's a camera primarily for still photographers" (hint, hint, hint) - still photographers who do video occasionally are going to like an upcoming firmware update for their X-Pro 2, AND there's a real hybrid camera coming...

Fuji's biggest weakness for pro use is their flash system (what flash system)? They finally showed a prototype flash that wasn't completely embarrassing (it seems kind of like a Nikon SB-700 or the new version of the Canon 430), but without a release date. Even once it's on the market, they still need a top-end flash above it, one below it (one of their existing little flashes would do, if it worked with the wireless signals from the new flash), a commander (unless the "little flash" was smart enough to double as one), and perhaps a ringlight.

They are in exceptionally good shape in the art and hobby markets (nothing digital has the soul of a Fuji body or lens), apart from the flash system, and only care about the beginner market where it is composed of students and new hobbyists - there, they lose out somewhat by not having an attractive cheaper option. They couldn't care less about the family photo market, preferring half a million profitable cameras to more at a loss...
« Last Edit: January 18, 2016, 02:57:59 am by Dan Wells »
Logged

Dan Wells

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1044
Re: Present state of the camera market?
« Reply #1 on: January 18, 2016, 02:52:25 am »


The "changers"

Panasonic:
Panasonic is selling a bunch of cheap (and relatively undistinguished) consumer mirrorless bodies that don't sell especially well, plus a couple of much higher-end bodies with a strong video focus (which sell well in an odd market). Panasonic ALSO has a very well known professional video camera business, ranging from $1000 to more than $30,000 (there are a few models that are "price by phone only" at B+H). The obvious solution is to give the mostly-video cameras to the video camera folks and discontinue the cheapies. It might take a little messing with dealer networks, because some still camera dealers who don't handle the Panasonic video line may want to keep selling the GH4 &co.

Olympus:
Olympus has a sensor problem, and it's worse than the one Fuji had. They make some great bodies, many featuring a "hand of God" image stabilizer, and one with durability rarely seen in anything lighter than a Nikon D5. There are also some wonderful lenses in their mixed lineup, and their bodies also take Panasonic lenses (some nice ones there, too). The lineup (counting Olympus and Panasonic together) is about as comprehensive as Fuji's, although less beautifully organized. The problem is that their sensor is a couple years BEHIND the old Fuji sensor, and can be beaten by some compact cameras. There doesn't seem to be a significantly improved sensor on the horizon, either, and the small Micro 4/3 size makes it tricky. Unless Olympus gets themselves a sensor worthy of their bodies and lenses BEFORE Fuji propagates their new one beyond a single $1700 body OR Sony makes some sense out of their lens lineup, I fear Olympus will be relegated to the low end of the market, which is not where their nice bodies and lenses compete best...

Leica:
WHAT is Leica doing? How many different lines are they putting out, largely with a lens or two each? A huge percentage of their profits come from collector editions, from which they could omit the sensor and nobody would ever discover it... They have never really introduced a modernized M (how about a full frame camera that combined Fuji's hybrid viewfinder (but with the mechanical rangefinder) with Sony's A7rII sensor (M mount, of course). I'm not sure what of theirs sells how many units? Is their S "almost medium format" system significant at all - if it is, they should add a higher-end sensor option. How many M cameras made for photography do they sell (exclude collector models)? The M line has a special place, but everything else is confusing...

Phase One:
The king of image quality - also the most expensive camera anyone will ever take a picture with (some collector Leicas enter Phase territory, but nobody buys a Phase to sit it on a shelf).  Will they survive the increasing image quality of the folks on their tail? How about Pentax using the same sensor for 1/3 the price (nobody has more to gain from Pentax exiting stage right than Phase, and they'd better hope that Fuji isn't waiting in the wings stage left with a medium format system)?

The Losers
Pentax:
Too bad - they've introduced a ton of interesting DSLRs, generally somewhat cheaper than a comparable Canon or Nikon, with weather resistance extending much farther down the line, and a great feature or two in each one. They've also shaken up the medium format market with a couple of cameras that sell for a LOT less than anyone else's. Unfortunately, they just can't seem to get any traction, except possibly with the medium format stuff (which does seem to sell, by MF standards). I don't think they can keep that going without the APS-C DSLRs to cannibalize parts from? I'd be surprised to see them still trying in a couple of years, and it'll be sad for all of us who learned on a K-1000 when they go.

Hasselblad:
Another venerable brand probably gone, and this one's their own fault. WHAT were they thinking when they rebranded Sony bodies, complete with cheap lenses? A Hasselblad with a $100 lens??? Their core medium format system seems to be losing ground to Phase One, who seem to get sensors faster, and the Phase One body is now more sophisticated (that used to be the other way around). They are rapidly cutting prices on medium format gear, and MAYBE they can compete with Pentax well below Phase One's pricing (or have the low end of medium format to themselves if Pentax leaves and Fuji decides not to enter the medium format market). Maybe they can survive there, and I wish them luck - it would be sad to see them go.

Sigma:
I don't expect to ever see another Sigma body (I don't mean no new introductions - I just plain don't expect to see one again. The only place I ever have is at PhotoPlus, under glass. How few did they sell? I've never had a student turn up with one, I've never even been in a dealer that noticeably carried them on display (and I've visited B+H in person a couple of times). They'll keep making lenses, and I hope they give Sony a hand in the FE-mount business...

Samsung:
I actually HAVE seen a Samsung camera "in the wild" - I had a student turn up with one of their lower-end mirrorless bodies a few years ago. It was no fun to use - controls lifted right off a PHONE! Image quality was just fine for a $400 camera, but it was a much bigger pain than a D3300 or a Rebel, more like a less common version of a cheap Sony APS-C body. The NX1 is supposed to be a joy to use, with a great sensor, but there are only a couple of decent lenses.
Logged

BernardLanguillier

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 13983
    • http://www.flickr.com/photos/bernardlanguillier/sets/
Re: Present state of the camera market?
« Reply #2 on: January 18, 2016, 04:18:46 am »

Some feedbacks on the loosers:

- Sigma: agree that there won't be more DSLRs, but I expect them to continue improve the SDx series that has a very important following,
- Pentax: Ricoh is a profitable company and it seems that they like having a camera division. They are about to launch a FF DSLR. I don't see them dropping out in the next 3 years. I am 99% sure they will announced also a new MF body in the coming weeks relying on the new Full size Sony CMOS, possibly with super resolution capability (they have this technology already in production on smaller sensor DSLRs). The 645Z arguably makes the best usage of the 50mp Sony sensor, I wouldn't be surprised if Pentax were able to extract more from the 100mp part also.

On top of that, all it would take would be a couple of modern leaf shutter lenses and they would make a very deep dent into P1 business.

Cheers,
Bernard

Abdulrahman Aljabri

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 307
    • http://www.aljabri.com
Re: Present state of the camera market?
« Reply #3 on: January 18, 2016, 04:36:38 am »

Interesting read, thanks for sharing.
Logged
MY SITE: AL

ctz

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 223
Re: Present state of the camera market?
« Reply #4 on: January 18, 2016, 12:18:07 pm »

The stuff of LuLa.

Yet another milestone in camera punditry.

(y)
Logged

Dan Wells

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1044
Re: Present state of the camera market?
« Reply #5 on: January 18, 2016, 12:50:51 pm »

On Pentax medium format, wouldn't they lose a bunch of their newer lenses by adopting the big sensor? I thought they'd designed several for the 1.3x crop, and were somewhat stuck waiting for Sony to update the crop sensor. I was surprised when we got the 100 MP big sensor, instead of something around 75 MP in the same size as the current 50 MP sensor, but I guess Phase really wanted it (perhaps to screw Pentax?). I agree completely on the modern leaf shutter lenses. If they released a body under $10,000 (which is where I'd guess they'd put it - $9995) with that big 100 MP sensor and two or three modern leaf shutter lenses, not only is Phase worried, a certain part of the top of the DSLR market is as well.

 Also, how long is Ricoh going to be willing to lose money on the DSLRs (even if they are making money on medium format, that requires the money-losing APS-C business as a source of parts - they'd have Phase One's low volume problem otherwise)? Would Ricoh be interested in having an esoteric little business kind of like Fuji's - keep a couple of nice DSLRs in the line to use some great lenses, plus medium format (but stop trying to compete in the "family photo" market)?

Also, what happens to Pentax (and Fuji?) if Fuji decides to jump into medium format? I see them as likely to do Pentax pricing, not Phase pricing. I'd guess electronic Texas Leicas, not SLRs, because Fuji was always mostly non SLR in medium format (apart from possibly the heaviest SLR ever mass produced, the GX680). Do Pentax and Fuji split the market, leaving Phase and Hasselblad out? Does Phase manage to differentiate themselves enough to keep charging 3-4 times as much? Does Fuji sell mostly as an alternative to full frame, not traditional MF? Pentax already does to an extent - Pentax 645Z buyers are as likely to also consider a D810 or a 5DsR as anything from Phase One.
Logged

lowep

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 568
    • http://sites.google.com/site/peterlowefoto/
Re: Present state of the camera market?
« Reply #6 on: January 18, 2016, 10:01:55 pm »

The stuff of LuLa.

Yet another milestone in camera punditry.

What else  :o  unless you joined this forum because you like reading the ads?
Logged

Paulo Bizarro

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 7393
    • http://www.paulobizarro.com
Re: Present state of the camera market?
« Reply #7 on: January 19, 2016, 04:22:09 am »

My ideas are more simplistic and pragmatic:

1. Canon and Nikon still dominate, and will continue to do so, the pro-market, and a big part of the low end and "enthusiast" market. Even in a receding market.

2. Sony and Fuji seem to be the most successful players in the "mirrorless" segment. Mostly in the "enthusiast" market. After all, not many have money to buy a 3500 EUR A7RII, or a 1600 EUR XPRO2... a mirrorless system, even m4/3 ones, can be even more expensive than a FF SLR system...

lowep

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 568
    • http://sites.google.com/site/peterlowefoto/
Re: Present state of the camera market?
« Reply #8 on: January 19, 2016, 11:46:29 am »

The craic.

 :P maybe lula ought to start a band - like this one?
Logged

armand

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 5540
    • Photos
Re: Present state of the camera market?
« Reply #9 on: January 19, 2016, 11:55:58 am »

Many seem to dismiss Olympus despite the fact they look quite appealing. Heck, I've been considering getting one every other month for years now and when I got into Fuji it was a really close call settled by handling their bodies at that time, X-E1 vs EM-5 (and the lack of quality zooms at that time, same problem Nikon had).

My local camera shop doesn't carry Olympus (only Panasonic) as they think it will go bankrupt, for at least 2 years now. Yet they seem to be still going strong with good high end bodies and very compelling zooms.
« Last Edit: January 19, 2016, 01:24:56 pm by armand »
Logged

razrblck

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 482
  • Chill
    • Instagram
Re: Present state of the camera market?
« Reply #10 on: January 19, 2016, 12:13:04 pm »

Olympus had really nice cameras even back in the 4/3 era, but they lacked lenses for a long time and going wide was extremely expensive (outside of the kit lenses). They rectified this with the m4/3 system and their OM-D line is selling quite well here.
Logged
Instagram (updated often)

Theodoros

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 2454
Re: Present state of the camera market?
« Reply #11 on: January 20, 2016, 04:39:05 pm »

Logged

James Clark

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 2347
Re: Present state of the camera market?
« Reply #12 on: January 20, 2016, 06:03:30 pm »

The stuff of LuLa.

Yet another milestone in camera punditry.

Why be dismissive and rude?
Logged

lowep

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 568
    • http://sites.google.com/site/peterlowefoto/
Re: Present state of the camera market?
« Reply #13 on: January 21, 2016, 11:03:27 am »

Why be dismissive and rude?



I´m not sure what I enjoyed most - Dan´s prognosis or Klaban´s craic. Thanks to both
« Last Edit: January 21, 2016, 11:06:45 am by lowep »
Logged

jrp

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 322
Re: Present state of the camera market?
« Reply #14 on: January 21, 2016, 05:23:14 pm »

Leica seems to be teaming up with Panasonic if the Q and SL are anything to go by.  Their sensors are not up to Sony standards, but they are not bad.  The M lenses are still unchallenged on a weight-performance basis.  Pricing is, however, an issue is volume, rather than profitability, is the measure of success, as the OP seems to advocate.

The Sony lens mess is slowly clearing: they do have an 85mm Zeiss (Tamron?) Batis lens for portraiture and more Batis / Loxias will surely emerge.  The underlying issue is, however, that the A7 system is supposedly designed to not rely on precise lens assembly tolerances.  The result is that even their high quality lenses have high sample variation, which on high Mpx sensors leads to sub-optimal results.  The Sony bodies also have thicker sensor cover glass than would be ideal for some older, wider (Leica) lenses.  Sony also seem to be losing their compactness priority; recent lenses are as big as DSLR lenses.

But none of this will dislodge Canikon for particular tasks, no matter how good the SIgma lenses for the wider market close the gap.

Two other features will distinguish the players. A support network, for the pros, and better integration with the Apple / Microsoft / Android ecosystems for the rest.
« Last Edit: January 21, 2016, 05:28:46 pm by jrp »
Logged

ErikKaffehr

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 11311
    • Echophoto
Re: Present state of the camera market?
« Reply #15 on: January 21, 2016, 06:44:43 pm »

Hi,

Sony has 2 mm of cover glass like Nikon or Canon, 4/3 has 4 mm and Leica M9 has 0.8 mm.

Best regards
Erik

Leica seems to be teaming up with Panasonic if the Q and SL are anything to go by.  Their sensors are not up to Sony standards, but they are not bad.  The M lenses are still unchallenged on a weight-performance basis.  Pricing is, however, an issue is volume, rather than profitability, is the measure of success, as the OP seems to advocate.

The Sony lens mess is slowly clearing: they do have an 85mm Zeiss (Tamron?) Batis lens for portraiture and more Batis / Loxias will surely emerge.  The underlying issue is, however, that the A7 system is supposedly designed to not rely on precise lens assembly tolerances.  The result is that even their high quality lenses have high sample variation, which on high Mpx sensors leads to sub-optimal results.  The Sony bodies also have thicker sensor cover glass than would be ideal for some older, wider (Leica) lenses.  Sony also seem to be losing their compactness priority; recent lenses are as big as DSLR lenses.

But none of this will dislodge Canikon for particular tasks, no matter how good the SIgma lenses for the wider market close the gap.

Two other features will distinguish the players. A support network, for the pros, and better integration with the Apple / Microsoft / Android ecosystems for the rest.
Logged
Erik Kaffehr
 
Pages: [1]   Go Up