Luminous Landscape Forum
Equipment & Techniques => Cameras, Lenses and Shooting gear => Topic started by: shadowblade on April 09, 2015, 01:57:51 pm
-
http://www.sonyalpharumors.com/sr2-first-very-wild-rumors-abotu-the-april-23-products-a-mount-and-rx/ (http://www.sonyalpharumors.com/sr2-first-very-wild-rumors-abotu-the-april-23-products-a-mount-and-rx/)
It's not a rumour from a known or reliable source, but, if true, this would probably rank among the dumbest things Sony has done.
Sony's success in digital photography doesn't rest with its A-mount, but with its E-mount. The full-frame A-mounts were not a success, especially among professional users - Sony just doesn't have the lens lineup to back it up, nor do they have the demonstrated long-term commitment to photography to persuade people to sell their Canon and Nikon systems to move to Sony. The E-mount, however, allows them to easily poach users from other systems - and, with the A7r especially (and, to a lesser extent, the A7s), they have done so even among professional shooters with significant investments in other systems.
A new, high-resolution, full-frame A-mount won't win over anyone, due to the requirement to invest in an entirely new lens system and due to the limited range of the lineup. A new E-mount would be much more likely to be a success and to cause Canon some pain, particularly with regards to sales of the 5Ds.
-
Maybe this sentence will turn out to be significant -- "And E-mount stuff will be announced soon after in May!"
-
Maybe this sentence will turn out to be significant -- "And E-mount stuff will be announced soon after in May!"
I'd guess that'd be the A7rII, with the same 36MP sensor as the first version. It would be pretty unlikely for them to unveil a 36MP A7rII and 50MP E-mount A9 at the same time.
Sony should just consider A-mount dead and buried and concentrate on E-mount. An adapter exists for backward compatability, anyway.
-
I'd guess that'd be the A7rII, with the same 36MP sensor as the first version. It would be pretty unlikely for them to unveil a 36MP A7rII and 50MP E-mount A9 at the same time.
Sony should just consider A-mount dead and buried and concentrate on E-mount. An adapter exists for backward compatability, anyway.
Sorry I can't agree the form factor is just too small handling suffers greatly as well as much reduced battery life. Only one E mount body has IBIS all A mount bodies do.
I've no interest in E mount the adapter is expensive and has limited AF abilities (ie it's dated) adds bulk and you'd need a few of them to run multiple bodies, the non screw driven body has horribly slow AF even with in lens motors it's a waste of time really.
The greatest strength of A mount is the vast collection of superior Minolta lenses around at bargain prices AF and stabilised all for peanuts E mount just can't offer that appeal. Also the optical compromises with native E mount lenses are significant vignetting and distortion are far bigger problems due to the short sensor to lens distance. The mount has been going 30 years it would be insanely stupid to abandon it. But Sony do need to put more effort into A mount E mount is a non starter for users such as myself it's just not attractive at all except the low priced A7 bashing around.
-
The E-mount, however, allows them to easily poach users from other systems - and, with the A7r especially (and, to a lesser extent, the A7s), they have done so even among professional shooters with significant investments in other systems.
That's great for users, but terrible for Sony because the business model of interchangeable lens cameras is mostly to make money selling lenses...
Cheers,
Bernard
-
That's great for users, but terrible for Sony because the business model of interchangeable lens cameras is mostly to make money selling lenses...
Can't sell lenses if you don't get bodies into people's hands. Compatibility with legacy lenses got many photographers into the Leica S system; once they have the body they can buy the lenses. IMHO it's a good strategy for a new system.
-
Sorry I can't agree the form factor is just too small handling suffers greatly as well as much reduced battery life. Only one E mount body has IBIS all A mount bodies do.
I've no interest in E mount the adapter is expensive and has limited AF abilities (ie it's dated) adds bulk and you'd need a few of them to run multiple bodies, the non screw driven body has horribly slow AF even with in lens motors it's a waste of time really.
The greatest strength of A mount is the vast collection of superior Minolta lenses around at bargain prices AF and stabilised all for peanuts E mount just can't offer that appeal. Also the optical compromises with native E mount lenses are significant vignetting and distortion are far bigger problems due to the short sensor to lens distance. The mount has been going 30 years it would be insanely stupid to abandon it. But Sony do need to put more effort into A mount E mount is a non starter for users such as myself it's just not attractive at all except the low priced A7 bashing around.
I don't care about form factor in a slow-shooting landscape camera (and a 50MP camera can't be anything but that). Small is good, so that I can carry it long distances. It's not like I'm holding it up to my face anyway, and I'd be shooting it by remote release.
If it were to come in an SLR-sized model, it had better do double duty for wildlife, like the 5Ds and D810 can.
-
That's great for users, but terrible for Sony because the business model of interchangeable lens cameras is mostly to make money selling lenses...
Cheers,
Bernard
For Canon and Nikon, yes.
Sony's imaging division makes its money selling sensors and cameras, not lenses.
You can't sell lenses to people who don't buy your cameras in the first place. And forcing them to buy a whole new lens system from a half-baked lineup with many missing links is a great way to discourage people from buying your cameras.
-
I agree that Sony found with the a7x series pretty much the only way to increase their marketshare, partialy thanks to the hesitations of Canon on the sensor side, but is it a money making strategy?
Cheers,
Bernard
-
I agree that Sony found with the a7x series pretty much the only way to increase their marketshare, partialy thanks to the hesitations of Canon on the sensor side, but is it a money making strategy?
Cheers,
Bernard
The A-mount certainly isn't.
Not only would Canon and Nikon users have to buy into a completely different and incompatible system, but E-mount users would have to do likewise. In short, it would be a huge disincentive to all potential users to switch.
Considering that the vast majority of Sony shooters use E-mount models (the NEX-series crop cameras and the A7 series) it would be a losing strategy.
Much better to abandon A-mount (keeping the A-to-E adapter for legacy lenses) and concentrate on E-mount, allowing the use of third-party lenses while slowly building up the lineup and quality of Sony-Zeiss lenses to match that of Canon and Nikon's professional lines.
-
Well, I am going to be very curious about any upcoming A7r successor. This may seem naive, but it would be wonderful if Sony made E-to-Nikon and E-to-Canon adapters that had good communication with Canon and Nikon electronics, something better than the Metabones. I would like to have a high-resolution, high-dynamic-range option for my Canon kit.
-
Sony has the resources to continue their strategy of throw a bunch of s…tuff at the wall & see what sticks. If they think the A mount has life left in it they'll behave accordingly. We shall see…
I try not to get too worked up about what any brand does or doesn't do.
-Dave-
-
Sony has the resources to continue their strategy of throw a bunch of s…tuff at the wall & see what sticks. If they think the A mount has life left in it they'll behave accordingly. We shall see…
As a happy customer owning 2 of their cameras and living litteraly a few hundred meters away from one of their main research facilities in Tokyo, I only wish them well, but if you have been following a bit the business situation of the Sony group, you must be aware that their ability to invest in non immediately profitable business lines is now close to zero.
There are clearly encouraging signs compared to 3 years ago, mostly in the gaming and banking business, but the company is still a very sick giant. They may in fact have gone bankrupt by now without their financial activities which is IMHO not something a consumer electronic company must be very proud of.
Cheers,
Bernard
-
As a happy customer owning 2 of their cameras and living litteraly a few hundred meters away from one of their main research facilities in Tokyo, I only wish them well, but if you have been following a bit the business situation of the Sony group, you must be aware that their ability to invest in non immediately profitable business lines is now close to zero.
I have to admit I haven't paid much attention to Sony's numbers recently. I've judged them by their product lines & marketing behavior. If they are deep in it financially they'd surely be wise to do things differently. Of course this doesn't mean they are wise.
-Dave-
-
Hi,
I am pretty sure that A9 will be FE-mount. It is very feasible that sony makes a high res A-mount but I would be pretty sure that camera would be called A99.
Sony would be crazy to release an A-mount camera that is "better" than the FE-series. FE-mount seems to be selling well and A-mount is marginal.
Best regards
Erik
-
Remember that most "rumors" on that site are translated from Japanese to Italian to English by somebody that doesn't know Japanese and is somewhat marginal in English. He uses Google Translate to translate from Japanese to Italian and then tries to turn it into regular Italian and then uses his school taught English supplemented with Google translate to go from Italian to English. "Lost in Translation" comes to mind ;)
I admire his patience and dedication to doing this but it is very common for things to get lost or mis-stated in that double translation.
-
April 23 -- We'll know soon enough.
-
The A-mount certainly isn't.
Not only would Canon and Nikon users have to buy into a completely different and incompatible system, but E-mount users would have to do likewise. In short, it would be a huge disincentive to all potential users to switch.
Considering that the vast majority of Sony shooters use E-mount models (the NEX-series crop cameras and the A7 series) it would be a losing strategy.
Much better to abandon A-mount (keeping the A-to-E adapter for legacy lenses) and concentrate on E-mount, allowing the use of third-party lenses while slowly building up the lineup and quality of Sony-Zeiss lenses to match that of Canon and Nikon's professional lines.
I've no data to know what's shifting or not but I suspect that the post earlier is correct E mount is doing pretty well with bodies, but lenses really they're badly priced most of them and I see DSLR users picking up a body to use with an adapter not investing heavily in the system. If Sony did drop A mount I would not throw money at E mount I'd abandon it entirely I'm not alone in that thinking either the adapter route is not really a satisfactory solution for some users. E mount does not offer what I'm looking for at all
Dumping a 30 year mount will do untold damage to Sony as well as alienate many customer it would not be in their interests to do so. Sony's inability to tackle the Canikon dominance is their own fault they had a wonderful opportunity but didn't invest enough in IBIS and the potential cost savings on lenses with that. E mount won't be any different it's not going to wipe out the top 2 makers either. A lot of users won't even consider E mount no matter how many lenses they have and so far a lot of them have been horribly priced and not as good optically as you might expect. It's very naive to think that shifting strategies all the time works it just doesn't Canon are so heavily entrenched it's near impossible to move them esp from the pro market that's not going to change either. The E mount flurry will fade away and it will be another third placed system something A mount is already at right now.
The growth is simply not there. Dumping A mount won't help Sony bar annoy some long term users who will never trust the company ever again. Even observers will be very cautious about investing in their products Olympus moved from OM mount and the effects of that are still felt today some users won't entertain the company at all based on that alone, then the dumping of 4/3 for micro 4/3 did even more damage. Changing mounts is commercial disaster in big letters users hate it and there really is no need.
-
I personally hope it's an A Mount body. I have been waiting for this camera.
I have both a Pentax 645z system and a Sony Nex6 system and the Nex is hard to use in the cold due to the small buttons etc and I see the A7 series as no different.
However I love the EVF and in body IS and loved the A99 but never bought one.
Don't forget also that Sony announced that they are updating the A mount 16-35/2.8 and 24/70/2.8 so I would say that they are on the horizon now as is a new A mount.
Sony has all the lenses up to 500/4 and 70-400, with the exception of TS lenses they are most certainly a choice for any Canon/Nikon user.
I was waiting for the 5ds to come out and now that it is, I will be investing in Sony A mount instead as it offers what I want that the others don't, Sony just get it, especially in their camera bodies.
Scott
-
Sorry I can't agree the form factor is just too small ...
I feel you pain about potentially orphaned SLR lenses, since most of my best and most expensive lenses are Four Thirds SLR lenses, now reduced to manual focus only on my EM5, but nothing about a mirrorless system or a shallower lens mount _forces_ the body to be smaller; it just opens up that possibility, and a lot of customers seem to like it that way.
Right now, my ideal is downsizing in most places, but having a deep hand-grip with room for lots of controls and to hold a nice big battery, and to help when carrying the camera with a long lens attatched. Accessory grips, with or without room for extra batteries, are one possible compromise.
-
Canon changed mounts in 87 and they are doing ok. So it can be done. And for Sony to take customers from the Canikons they will have to overcome the entrenchment of old lenses. With E mount and adapters the can attract users from any system. Makes a lot of sense to me at least.
-
Canon changed mounts in 87 ...
Indeed, and Minolta did the same in 1985 when it changed to "A-mount", and for similar reasons: the transition to auto-focus was a good opportunity to ditch some historical baggage and redesign the lens-camera interface around modern realities, 1980's version. Doggedly sticking with 1980's state of the art in lens-mount design choices is a bit like sticking with that other great innovation of the '80's, the audio CD.
-
It would probably make sense for Sony to release an FE mount a9r with killer features (true 16 bits DR 50 mp sensor, sensor stabilzatin, sensor shit super resolution, still significantly improved EVF, weatherproof and none of the small glitches of the a7r) at a price point ensuring they make a healthy profit on the body alone.
My guess is therefore a 3,500+ US$ price point.
Another alternative would be to release more exclusive FE Zeiss lenses both compact and of the highest quality. The 50mm f1.8 is there, the 35mm f1.4 seems to deliver on the image quality front, maybe not on the compactness yet. Those should be no compromise designs at a high margin price point.
Price is IMHO not relevant as it seems that many of the strongest promoters are 50+ years old man will sufficient cash looking for a light solutions not compromising quality. At least it seems tobe the target demographics here at LL.
Cheers,
Bernard
-
Indeed, and Minolta did the same in 1985 when it changed to "A-mount", and for similar reasons: the transition to auto-focus was a good opportunity to ditch some historical baggage and redesign the lens-camera interface around modern realities, 1980's version. Doggedly sticking with 1980's state of the art in lens-mount design choices is a bit like sticking with that other great innovation of the '80's, the audio CD.
A lens mount is a lens mount there is nothing new in more recent mounts they are all bayonet. Contacts have been added, very little has changed E mount offers nothing new in lens mount design. Though it does bring more problems to the table with native lenses which suffer more due to the closeness of the lens to the sensor.
Adapters are fine but they are not quite the panacea some suggest, and even if Sony bagged a lot of users they'll bring their own glass and invest little in Sony lenses thus as we've discussed already most of the profits are in the lenses not the bodies. There won't be any pain my end I paid peanuts for most of the lenses I own and had a free ride with IBIS too, I can't match that with another maker. Some folks just don't get it not everyone digs mirrorless I'm in the process of dumping my X mount gear it's nice enough but offers nothing I can't do with A mount for less cost, and with every lens stabilised Fuji just can't match that despite an interesting sensor. Handling wise the smaller bodies just don't cut it for what I want to do, in the end I decided like a lot of SLR users I was just better off with a good quality premium compact for those days I don't want to take the bigger bodies out.
It might work for some people I get that, but as the only choice it sucks plain and simple. If I were a travel photographer I might dig micro 4/3 quality is good some nice (smaller) lenses too. I can get that. E mount offers a smaller body and bigger lenses I already have a lens collection there is no point buying another one. Very few users I know dumped their SLR gear many ignored ILC's entirely and some bought a body to play with adapters. That's not moving people to mirrorless it's selling them a body. Don't expect Canon or Nikon to dump their mounts either not going to happen.
-
A lens mount is a lens mount there is nothing new in more recent mounts they are all bayonet. Contacts have been added, very little has changed E mount offers nothing new in lens mount design.
You are somehow overlooking one significant an often discussed detail in lens mount design: the 1980's requirement that the A-mount be deep enough to accommodate the SLR viewfinder system, and the added flexibility in both lens and body design that the far shallower E-mount allows. It does seem though that Sony has done a poor job so far of offering the smaller, lighter zoom lenses that many people like to use with smaller, lighter mirrorless bodies -- even if using bigger, faster lenses at other times.
-
A lens mount is a lens mount there is nothing new in more recent mounts they are all bayonet. Contacts have been added, very little has changed E mount offers nothing new in lens mount design. Though it does bring more problems to the table with native lenses which suffer more due to the closeness of the lens to the sensor.
Adapters are fine but they are not quite the panacea some suggest, and even if Sony bagged a lot of users they'll bring their own glass and invest little in Sony lenses thus as we've discussed already most of the profits are in the lenses not the bodies.
That's for Canon and Nikon - established players who have been continuously in the camera business for decades - not Sony, which has only been on the scene for a few years.
You can only sell lenses if people are using your bodies and moving completely over to your system.
There won't be any pain my end I paid peanuts for most of the lenses I own and had a free ride with IBIS too, I can't match that with another maker.
You're one of the lucky few, then.
How do you expect Sony to get someone who has tens of thousands of dollars worth of Canon or Nikon gear to dump it all and switch over to them, when their lens choices are so limited? Sure, Minolta had some, but those are essentially ancient lenses designed for the film era which won't hold up to a modern 50MP sensor.
In both the Canon and Nikon lineups, there are some standout lenses in each system that make a compelling case for buying at least a foothold in them - TS-E lenses, 200-400L and the supertele 500/600/800L for Canon if you're into wildlife, 14-24 for Nikon. I can't say the same for A-mount.
Some folks just don't get it not everyone digs mirrorless I'm in the process of dumping my X mount gear it's nice enough but offers nothing I can't do with A mount for less cost, and with every lens stabilised Fuji just can't match that despite an interesting sensor. Handling wise the smaller bodies just don't cut it for what I want to do, in the end I decided like a lot of SLR users I was just better off with a good quality premium compact for those days I don't want to take the bigger bodies out.
No-one's forcing you to use mirrorless.
For landscape work, I hate the SLR form factor. Most of it is dead weight - all I really need is the sensor and the LCD. I never used the viewfinder.
Obviously, for wildlife/action, it's a different story.
It might work for some people I get that, but as the only choice it sucks plain and simple. If I were a travel photographer I might dig micro 4/3 quality is good some nice (smaller) lenses too. I can get that. E mount offers a smaller body and bigger lenses I already have a lens collection there is no point buying another one. Very few users I know dumped their SLR gear many ignored ILC's entirely and some bought a body to play with adapters. That's not moving people to mirrorless it's selling them a body. Don't expect Canon or Nikon to dump their mounts either not going to happen.
Canon and Nikon already have established places in the photography world. Sony needs to carve its own niche, and it's not going to do so by aping the big players and trying to muscle in on the SLR business with a system which, for all intents and purposes, is identical, except with a poorer lens selection and no proven track record in photography. No-one's going to dump their current lenses just to buy into a new system which is more-or-less the same and has no guarantee of being around in ten years' time. Mirrorless is that niche - Sony does it better than anyone else, and they would be able to do it even better if they can get past the fixation on 'mirrorless' meaning 'small' and just build a capable, high-performance camera, with the emphasis on the 'performance' part rather than the 'small' part.
Mirrorless doesn't mean small. Mirrorless just means no mirror box and pentaprism, and an electronic viewfinder. I would welcome it if they built a full-size (but not necessarily full-thickness or SLR weight, because mirrorless doesn't need the thickness for the mirror box or the weight of the pentaprism setup) mirrorless body which emphasised performance rather than small size. This fixation on size rather than functionality has been the biggest problem with mirrorless and why it's having difficulties breaking into the professional world (apart from non-action usage). From video cameras, we know that viewfinder lag can be reduced to only a few milliseconds (unnoticeable) instead of the few hundred milliseconds of current mirrorless cameras, which are restricted to low-power processors due to their small size restricting them to weak batteries. And AF systems and processors have, similarly, been slow, because power restrictions h. With a full-size camera containing a decent battery (e.g. with current video cameras, most of which are mirrorless). these restrictions don't exist.
Build this camera and they can gradually encroach on Canon's and Nikon's ground while they build up their lens collection and their photography credentials. You're selling them bodies now, many of which are being used with their old lenses (which is possible on E-mount and thus lowers the barrier and disincentive to switching), but, as your lens lineup grows, you're also slowly selling them lenses. Eventually, when their current lenses are old and have outlived their purposes (i.e. when the current 70-200L II is seen in the same light as the ancient 70-200 f/2.8 without IS, or the even older 80-200) they will have no problems switching across to your now-large and diverse lens lineup, since their previous equipment will have served its useful purpose and they won't just be dumping it for a new, untried system that does pretty much the same job.
-
You are somehow overlooking one significant an often discussed detail in lens mount design: the 1980's requirement that the A-mount be deep enough to accommodate the SLR viewfinder system, and the added flexibility in both lens and body design that the far shallower E-mount allows. It does seem though that Sony has done a poor job so far of offering the smaller, lighter zoom lenses that many people like to use with smaller, lighter mirrorless bodies -- even if using bigger, faster lenses at other times.
They've also done a poor job of offering the larger, more capable lenses to take maximum advantage of the highly-capable full-frame mirrorless bodies. The A7s has the best low-light capability of any camera out there, but there are no E-mount f/2.8 zoom lenses, and not many even wider primes, to make a true low-light monster. The A7r has unsurpassed image quality in terms of resolution and DR, but there's no really great UWA for landscapers, no tilt-shifts for architectural and landscape photographers and no decent full-frame macro. At the moment, it can only sell bodies because it doesn't have the lenses to back it up - to use the system professionally, you pretty much need third-party lenses, unless your work is restricted to a select range than uses only a few common, not-too-long and not-too-wide focal lengths.
-
I've no data to know what's shifting or not but I suspect that the post earlier is correct E mount is doing pretty well with bodies, but lenses really they're badly priced most of them and I see DSLR users picking up a body to use with an adapter not investing heavily in the system. If Sony did drop A mount I would not throw money at E mount I'd abandon it entirely I'm not alone in that thinking either the adapter route is not really a satisfactory solution for some users. E mount does not offer what I'm looking for at all
Dumping a 30 year mount will do untold damage to Sony as well as alienate many customer it would not be in their interests to do so. Sony's inability to tackle the Canikon dominance is their own fault they had a wonderful opportunity but didn't invest enough in IBIS and the potential cost savings on lenses with that. E mount won't be any different it's not going to wipe out the top 2 makers either. A lot of users won't even consider E mount no matter how many lenses they have and so far a lot of them have been horribly priced and not as good optically as you might expect. It's very naive to think that shifting strategies all the time works it just doesn't Canon are so heavily entrenched it's near impossible to move them esp from the pro market that's not going to change either. The E mount flurry will fade away and it will be another third placed system something A mount is already at right now.
The growth is simply not there. Dumping A mount won't help Sony bar annoy some long term users who will never trust the company ever again. Even observers will be very cautious about investing in their products Olympus moved from OM mount and the effects of that are still felt today some users won't entertain the company at all based on that alone, then the dumping of 4/3 for micro 4/3 did even more damage. Changing mounts is commercial disaster in big letters users hate it and there really is no need.
I own both A-mount and E-mount full-frame cameras. I would say that Sony is carefully negotiating the transition from A-mount to E-mount to maximize the number of existing A-mount users who will eventually switch over. I think they will continue to support the A-mount lenses and provide full capability adapters on the E-mount as long as the E-mount lens catalog is incomplete. Sony says it'll continue to produce A-mount cameras but if the auto-focus on the E-mount ever reaches the level that Canikon presently provides I believe Sony will curtail further A-mount camera production and confine support to lens adapters.
Regards,
John
-
2 comments I have no idea what Sony plan but I'd be unlikely to invest in their E mount system if they dumped A mount the form factor doesn't suit me handling wise that's a major problem and one which is often overlooked I'd rather invest in Nikon or Canon.
Second point the so called smaller lenses never happened not even remotely the only ILC maker to have small lenses (comparatively) is micro 4/3, bar the odd pancake prime that's turned up. In fact some of the newest lens designs are big even compared to SLR sized lenses this is further compounded we've time warped back to the 70's in handling and ergonomics it's a step backwards not an improvement small bodies with big lenses doesn't work very well.
As for the old crusty Minolta lenses all I can say is use a few and be surprised they're well up to modern sensors many of the lenses and all are stabilised which is a massive advantage. The only shame is Sony didn't have the foresight to put more resources into A mount. My ancient Minolta glass has far nicer rendering than the Fuji X lenses I had not even close the lens designers knew how to deliver on that area.
Lots of observers from outside but inside the circle many A Mount users just don't really care much about E mount, most SLR users don't really dig ILC some small number switch are very vocal about it but represent a minority of buyers.
-
2 comments I have no idea what Sony plan but I'd be unlikely to invest in their E mount system if they dumped A mount the form factor doesn't suit me handling wise that's a major problem and one which is often overlooked I'd rather invest in Nikon or Canon.
Second point the so called smaller lenses never happened not even remotely the only ILC maker to have small lenses (comparatively) is micro 4/3, bar the odd pancake prime that's turned up. In fact some of the newest lens designs are big even compared to SLR sized lenses this is further compounded we've time warped back to the 70's in handling and ergonomics it's a step backwards not an improvement small bodies with big lenses doesn't work very well.
As for the old crusty Minolta lenses all I can say is use a few and be surprised they're well up to modern sensors many of the lenses and all are stabilised which is a massive advantage. The only shame is Sony didn't have the foresight to put more resources into A mount. My ancient Minolta glass has far nicer rendering than the Fuji X lenses I had not even close the lens designers knew how to deliver on that area.
Lots of observers from outside but inside the circle many A Mount users just don't really care much about E mount, most SLR users don't really dig ILC some small number switch are very vocal about it but represent a minority of buyers.
Barry:
Based on what Sony has already done and the way their customer base is developing I would say their future will be e-mount. Based on what you've stated, you will be shifting to Canon or Nikon when that happens. Then the good news for you is that because Minolta lenses are still usable via adapters on present Sony e-mount cameras you will be able to sell your Minolta lenses for at least some amount. This value can then be used to buy Canikon gear. So at the least you should be grateful to Sony for buying Minolta. If they hadn't those lenses would be worth essentially nothing.
Regards,
John
-
2 comments I have no idea what Sony plan but I'd be unlikely to invest in their E mount system if they dumped A mount the form factor doesn't suit me handling wise that's a major problem and one which is often overlooked I'd rather invest in Nikon or Canon.
Is it the E-mount, or the form factor?
What if they released a full-sized E-mount camera with the functionality and length/width of an SLR - only that, instead of a mirror box and pentaprism, it contained an EVF? It would weigh less, too, despite having the same length and width and ergonomics - the lack of mirror box and heavy pentaprism means it would be thinner and lighter, even if you kept the grip the same for handholding.
The biggest mistake made with mirrorless has been to design and sell them around small size rather than functionality. A full-sized version with all the added features that an EVF and lack of mirror allows would be fantastic. The miniature cameras made so far compromise on too many aspects of performance for shooting anything other than landscapes/architecture (where they essentially function as digital backs) and you still need full-size lenses anyway if you want to take the best possible photos.
-
A big pro body would have users expecting DSLR level performance so I think using the mirrorless technology to make cameras smaller is one way of offering something the DSLR cannot compete with. As technology matures (AF, EVF etc) time will come when a pro body mirrorless makes more sense and can go head to head with Canikon.
-
As for the old crusty Minolta lenses all I can say is use a few and be surprised they're well up to modern sensors many of the lenses and all are stabilised which is a massive advantage. The only shame is Sony didn't have the foresight to put more resources into A mount.
Barry:
I don't disagree at all that some of the Minolta lenses are excellent. I have a Minolta 200mm F4 Macro that is not only an amazing macro lens but a damn fine 200mm of any type. The 135 f1.8 was probably designed by Minolta with Zeiss's help or blessing before Sony bought Minolta. It's an outstanding lens. And being able to continue to use both of these lenses on e-mount is why I think Sony should be commended.
Regards,
John
-
A big pro body would have users expecting DSLR level performance so I think using the mirrorless technology to make cameras smaller is one way of offering something the DSLR cannot compete with. As technology matures (AF, EVF etc) time will come when a pro body mirrorless makes more sense and can go head to head with Canikon.
Sony will never be able to go head to head with Canon or Nikon they had a chance with A mount couldn't see how to develop it properly (everyone else could)
Nothing will be any different with E Mount, they just don't quite get it (don't really listen to feedback don't use firmware to fix problem in a timely manner) very capable of making a good sensor and they have good ideas they can't finish it properly though
I can use A mount lenses on any ILC body there is nothing to tie users to E mount not really. Heck even the E mount bodies with a built in flash can't support wireless via an on-board flash there are more reasons than one to say Sony have not really developed the platform to competitive levels. I'd consider any dropping of A mount to be a strong signal to avoid Sony in the future many users will feel the same way it would do the company untold damage why invest in E mount if that will disappear over time too. Once bitten..
As it is I don't think that will happen because it would be deeply unpopular, but Sony have to do a lot more work with A mount that's for sure
-
Mount changes can't be compared. At the Time Canon changed mounts, lenses held a higher position in the priority than they do now. Most 3rd party lenses were crap and the body didn't really bring as much to the table as it does now. Today, the body sets the performance ceiling on the output and there are some good 3rd party lenses. That is Canon's problem today. They have great lenses and a great line up of lenses, but their bodies are limited to 3-5 years ago quality when released. Don't get me wrong, a mount without lenses people want and need won't work, but it is a lot easier to entice someone to come on board if you are already offering a better quality output in a smaller/lighter package.
I never say never, because I don't want to end up like the CEO of RIM ("We don't need to innovate; we have the best product in the market!" Bye Bye Blackberry!)
-
Yesterday I got to play a bit with an A7ii and a new Sony/Zeiss 35/1.4. Lovely lens. But also too freakin' big IMO for the camera it was mounted on. Which leads me to wonder if the upcoming A9, or whatever it gets called, will be a larger camera.
-Dave-
-
Yesterday I got to play a bit with an A7ii and a new Sony/Zeiss 35/1.4. Lovely lens. But also too freakin' big IMO for the camera it was mounted on. Which leads me to wonder if the upcoming A9, or whatever it gets called, will be a larger camera.
-Dave-
It's no different to a large telephoto with an SLR. You hold it by the lens rather than the body, or you use it on a tripod.
Although the new lens is an E-mount lens, so hopefully that suggests the A9 will be E-mount too.
-
It's no different to a large telephoto with an SLR. You hold it by the lens rather than the body, or you use it on a tripod.
It's a *35mm* lens. Way too big for situations where I use a non-zoom of that focal length. YMMV, of course. I'll stick with the f/2.8.
-Dave-
-
I've heard the new 28mm is a real keeper.
Eduardo
It's a *35mm* lens. Way too big for situations where I use a non-zoom of that focal length. YMMV, of course. I'll stick with the f/2.8.
-Dave-
-
It's a *35mm* lens. Way too big for situations where I use a non-zoom of that focal length. YMMV, of course. I'll stick with the f/2.8.
-Dave-
It's no different to a large telephoto with an SLR. You hold it by the lens rather than the body, or you use it on a tripod.
I mostly agree about how to handle bigger lenses, but when using those lenses, I have come to want a deeper hand-grip than many mirror-less camera offer, for things like briefly supporting most of the weight as I move my left hand along the lens, and to more comfortably carry the camera at my side as I walk. With most lenses, such a grip still would not protrude as far forward as the lens, so there is little real loss in compactness. (And as a bonus, there is room for a bigger battery and more, bigger buttons and dials!)
The Olympus E-M1 has moved a bit in this direction (so that some complain that it is too big!), perhaps in concert with Olympus adding some bigger, faster lenses to its MFT offerings: see the image from http://cameralabs.com/reviews/Olympus_OMD_EM1/ :
(http://cameralabs.com/reviews/Olympus_OMD_EM1/images/Olymous_OMD_EM1_top_400.jpg)
So maybe the upper end of the mirrorless market is moving beyond selling primarily on low size and weight, and start presenting itself as providing superior tools for some (not all!) photograph usage -- particularly in comparison to "APS-C" format SLRs with their often cramped OVFs.
-
I mostly agree about how to handle bigger lenses, but when using those lenses, I have come to want a deeper hand-grip than many mirror-less camera offer, for things like briefly supporting most of the weight as I move my left hand along the lens, and to more comfortably carry the camera at my side as I walk.
My own objection to the new Zeiss 35/1.4 has little, if anything, to do with handling. It's much more about the negatives of sticking a fat, honkin' piece of glass in peoples' faces. The A7r + 35/2.8 make a nifty, unobtrusive urban pic-taking combo. For other purposes no doubt the f/1.4 will excel.
-Dave-
-
I mostly agree about how to handle bigger lenses, but when using those lenses, I have come to want a deeper hand-grip than many mirror-less camera offer, for things like briefly supporting most of the weight as I move my left hand along the lens, and to more comfortably carry the camera at my side as I walk. With most lenses, such a grip still would not protrude as far forward as the lens, so there is little real loss in compactness. (And as a bonus, there is room for a bigger battery and more, bigger buttons and dials!)
I'm quite the opposite. I find the huge grips on the 5D3 and D800, not to mention the D4s and 1Dx, to be too hard to hold and get a good grip on. Which is probably why why I tend to hold cameras by the lens. The smaller grip on the A7r is much easier to hold. Wish it had more dedicated control buttons, though - I don't like multifunction buttons or delving through menus to do things.
Maybe interchangeable, screw-in primary grips would be a good idea.
The Olympus E-M1 has moved a bit in this direction (so that some complain that it is too big!), perhaps in concert with Olympus adding some bigger, faster lenses to its MFT offerings: see the image from http://cameralabs.com/reviews/Olympus_OMD_EM1/ :
(http://cameralabs.com/reviews/Olympus_OMD_EM1/images/Olymous_OMD_EM1_top_400.jpg)
So maybe the upper end of the mirrorless market is moving beyond selling primarily on low size and weight, and start presenting itself as providing superior tools for some (not all!) photograph usage -- particularly in comparison to "APS-C" format SLRs with their often cramped OVFs.
That's a good sign.
I would think landscapes/architecture/studio first, then general photography, then, lastly, sports and action (which will probably coincide with the widespread adoption of 8k video cameras, which will require mirrorless technology to work and render the distinction between action cameras and video cameras moot, since they will both have the same resolution and frame rate).
-
Maybe interchangeable, screw-in primary grips would be a good idea.
Yep! Like the add-on grips available for some; I am thinking of getting the one that is available for my E-M5.
On possible spreading adopito of mirrorless; I thing this is spot-on:
... landscapes/architecture/studio first, then general photography, then, lastly, sports and action (which will probably coincide with the widespread adoption of 8k video cameras, which will require mirrorless technology to work and render the distinction between action cameras and video cameras moot, since they will both have the same resolution and frame rate).
The point about video driving sports towards mirrorless is interesting -- I suspect that video will become so dominant for sports photography (and maybe all news photography) that Canon, Sony and Panasonic will try to drive news and sports coverage towards using 4K or 8K "video first" tools like the XC10, developing the ability to deliver frame grabs good enough for web-sites, newspapers and magazines.
-
Yep! Like the add-on grips available for some; I am thinking of getting the one that is available for my E-M5.
On possible spreading adopito of mirrorless; I thing this is spot-on:The point about video driving sports towards mirrorless is interesting -- I suspect that video will become so dominant for sports photography (and maybe all news photography) that Canon, Sony and Panasonic will try to drive news and sports coverage towards using 4K or 8K "video first" tools like the XC10, developing the ability to deliver frame grabs good enough for web-sites, newspapers and magazines.
Functionally, there's no difference between an 8k video camera and a 32MP action camera capable of shooting 25fps. You'd still need to change shutter speed and ISO depending on whether you wanted to capture stills or video (1/40 for smooth video, 1/500 or faster to freeze action for stills) but it's still the same camera.
-
Sony's best strategy for entering the pro camera market isn't to push the A-mount, but to play the long game and develop the E mount.
Mirrorless bodies (which may not necessarily be small) will displace SLRs. It's only a matter of time - maybe 5 years, maybe 10 years, but certainly within the forseeable future. The turning point will likely be 8k video.
Pushing the A-mount would be like entering the high-end SLR market 20 years too late. Instead, it would be better to concentrate on developing a comprehensive and high-end stable of E-mount lenses - everything from f/2.8 zooms to tilt-shifts, to UWAs, to supertelephoto lenses - while keeping ahead in mirrorless technology. Engineer the lenses not just for current E-mount cameras, but with the resolution needed to handle future bodies and the motor speed and power for lightning-fast AF when the bodies and their power supplies can keep up. Then, when technology catches up and the first truly action-capable mirrorless bodies hit the shelves, Sony will become dominant overnight, with a stable of high-end, suitable lenses, while Canon and Nikon would be stuck with a stable of lenses designed for SLRs (with a flange distance longer than needed for mirrorless) and years behind in mirrorless technology.