Pages: 1 [2]   Go Down

Author Topic: Nikon sensors by Sony?  (Read 24355 times)

Tony Beach

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 452
    • http://imageevent.com/tonybeach/twelveimages
Nikon sensors by Sony?
« Reply #20 on: December 28, 2009, 08:56:00 pm »

Quote from: aaykay
I think you are mixing and matching things to suit your argument.  For coming up with the 35%, you compared the D3X with its near-identical FX twin, the D3.  For coming out with the 300%, you compared the D3X with another model from a totally different class, the A900, when you had the D700 as an equivalent model (to the A900) to compare the D3X against.
No, the comparisons are cameras from different companies using similar sensors, cameras from the same company using different sensors, and cameras from different companies that cost about the same.  There are different explanations for why a D3x costs more than a D3, or a D3 costs more than a D700 or A900; but in the end the price of all of them boils down to one simple thing, they cost as much as the companies making them can get away with charging for them.

Quote
Bottomline, the D3X and the D3 are near identical, except for the sensor - like it or not.   The D3X has a MASSIVE increase in price over the D3 (in terms of 1000s of dollars), with the only discernible difference being the FX sensor employed. That 1000s of dollars of difference in price, did not arise out of thin air nor out of a desire by Nikon corp to be mean to their customer base.
If by "thin air" you mean the market, then yes it did.  Canon started out selling the 1DsIII for $8000, so for Nikon to offer an arguably better camera for less would be undermining both companies by provoking a price war neither wants to fight.  Sony's A900 isn't as capable, doesn't have as many pro lenses [where are the fast telephotos and T/S lenses] to use on it, etcetera; Sony probably could have sold the A900 and now the A850 for more, but Sony is using brute force to attempt to wrest some market share from Nikon and Canon.  Nikon can afford right now to ignore Sony and instead reap as much in profits from the D3x as they can -- and this has worked for Nikon because they are selling a lot of D3x cameras, reportedly more than they had anticipated.  Maybe Sony is selling more A900/A850 bodies (I don't know), but I'll bet Nikon is making more money off of their version of that sensor than Sony is making of their version of the same sensor.
Logged

aaykay

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 359
Nikon sensors by Sony?
« Reply #21 on: December 29, 2009, 04:13:04 pm »

Quote from: DarkPenguin
No, but they can pick the number of cameras they want to sell based on price.

Ah, probably true.  Words of wisdom from a fellow Minnesotan !  
Logged

aaykay

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 359
Nikon sensors by Sony?
« Reply #22 on: December 29, 2009, 04:20:13 pm »

Quote from: Tony Beach
Maybe Sony is selling more A900/A850 bodies (I don't know), but I'll bet Nikon is making more money off of their version of that sensor than Sony is making of their version of the same sensor.

No question that Nikon is making more money from every D3X they sell, than Sony is making from their A900/A850.  But whether that is good for the  consumers is a whole different thing.
Logged

Tony Beach

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 452
    • http://imageevent.com/tonybeach/twelveimages
Nikon sensors by Sony?
« Reply #23 on: December 29, 2009, 05:20:48 pm »

Quote from: aaykay
No question that Nikon is making more money from every D3X they sell, than Sony is making from their A900/A850.
I would go farther inasmuch as I suspect Nikon is making more money off the D3x model than Sony is making off both the A850 and A900 models combined.  I wouldn't be surprised if Nikon makes 10x as much off of each D3x they sell as Sony makes off of each A850/A900 they sell, and that Nikon sells more than 10% as many D3x cameras as Sony sells A850/A900 cameras.

Quote
But whether that is good for the  consumers is a whole different thing.
I'm not really happy about it because I really wanted to buy a reasonably priced DSLR with the D3x sensor in it, but I am mostly enjoying my A850.  [I say "mostly" about my A850 because is now on its way to Texas for service.  A most peculiar issue has arisen with dust and now cleaning fluid underneath the glass on the sensor.  The cleaning fluid appeared under the glass on Saturday and I'm refraining from commenting on it at length until the issue is resolved.  I will say though that the way the low pass filter is attached in front of the sensor appears to be the issue and that Nikon does not do it the same way -- this would be one more reason costs are different between the cameras.]  I think that having three companies working on sensors independently of one another could be a good thing as it might allow for three distinct approaches, whereas the Sony/Nikon collaboration could conceivably cause compromises in either or both company's priorities.

I think what would be really good for consumers would be a modular system that allows the photographer to select the best sensor for their purposes.  Not only would this be good for the photographer, but I think it would be good for the company that does it too.  Personally, I would buy two bodies and could easily imagine having three or four sensors to put in them (high resolution, B&W, IR, and high ISO with lower resolution).  OF course, such a modular system would need to be better sealed than what I'm seeing in my current A850 body, but both of these issues are topics for another thread.
« Last Edit: December 29, 2009, 05:21:41 pm by Tony Beach »
Logged

aaykay

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 359
Nikon sensors by Sony?
« Reply #24 on: December 29, 2009, 05:50:19 pm »

Quote from: Tony Beach
I'm not really happy about it because I really wanted to buy a reasonably priced DSLR with the D3x sensor in it, but I am mostly enjoying my A850.  [I say "mostly" about my A850 because is now on its way to Texas for service.  A most peculiar issue has arisen with dust and now cleaning fluid underneath the glass on the sensor.  The cleaning fluid appeared under the glass on Saturday and I'm refraining from commenting on it at length until the issue is resolved.  I will say though that the way the low pass filter is attached in front of the sensor appears to be the issue and that Nikon does not do it the same way -- this would be one more reason costs are different between the cameras.]

Having now had my A900 since October 2008 (over a year now), I have not had even a whisper of a problem.  Have carted it along across the US, to Europe, South Asia (extremely humid/wet conditions) et al and the camera has never misbehaved in any way, shape or form.  The lenses too have been exemplary.  I would say that this theme is pretty much valid across the hundreds of Sony A900 users on the dyxum forum (and also the several on this forum).

Wonder if there is some difference in the build quality between the A900 and the A850, even though your case is the first I ever heard, where such a situation has happened with a FF Sony camera. Hope it gets fixed soon.

Logged

Tony Beach

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 452
    • http://imageevent.com/tonybeach/twelveimages
Nikon sensors by Sony?
« Reply #25 on: December 29, 2009, 07:19:16 pm »

Quote from: aaykay
Having now had my A900 since October 2008 (over a year now), I have not had even a whisper of a problem.  Have carted it along across the US, to Europe, South Asia (extremely humid/wet conditions) et al and the camera has never misbehaved in any way, shape or form.  The lenses too have been exemplary.  I would say that this theme is pretty much valid across the hundreds of Sony A900 users on the dyxum forum (and also the several on this forum).
If I had it to over again, I would have bought an A900 last January.  Nonetheless, I'm liking the A850 very much, except for this one dust/moisture issue.  If Sony resolves it without any issues, then I will be singing their praises.  I've heard that Sony is very good about service; unfortunately, my experiences with Nikon service are on the negative side (which was one more reason for me to adopt the Sony system for my high resolution DSLR).

My copy of the CZ24-70/2.8 is also headed to Texas.  From 24mm to about 28mm the extreme corners are not good at all (no matter how much I stop the lens down).  Again, I'm maybe a little unlucky with quality control, although the lens issue is less unheard of than the camera issue (I've never heard of the problem I experienced with the camera ever happening to anyone before).

Quote
Wonder if there is some difference in the build quality between the A900 and the A850, even though your case is the first I ever heard, where such a situation has happened with a FF Sony camera.
I wonder that myself, but I think I was just unlucky.  Iliah Borg wrote somewhere that he's seeing more variance in the spectral responses of the A850 than he sees in the A900, so I think this is a QC issue.  I'm very happy with the image quality I'm getting from the A850, so I may end up getting an A900 next year as I want a back-up and prefer to have two cameras when shooting so I can minimize lens changes.

Quote
Hope it gets fixed soon.
Thanks, I'm optimistic right now and expect to have the camera back by the middle of January.  Like I said before, I'm refraining from discussing this at length as I want to wait to hear what Sony has to say about this and will be including the service experience as part of the overall assessment my copy of the A850.
Logged

aaykay

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 359
Nikon sensors by Sony?
« Reply #26 on: December 29, 2009, 11:36:28 pm »

Quote from: Tony Beach
My copy of the CZ24-70/2.8 is also headed to Texas.  From 24mm to about 28mm the extreme corners are not good at all (no matter how much I stop the lens down).  Again, I'm maybe a little unlucky with quality control, although the lens issue is less unheard of than the camera issue (I've never heard of the problem I experienced with the camera ever happening to anyone before).

Wow, you seem to have really grabbed hold of the short straw.    

The CZ 24-70 has been my workhorse all along and if anything, the wider-end in particular, is exemplary.   The good thing about the Carl Zeiss lenses is that when there is an optical issue, they replace the entire optical module, which in turn comes directly from Zeiss.  The mechanicals (outer casing, SSM unit etc) are from Sony, the optical components (the glass) are from Zeiss and the final assembly happens in a Japanese Sony plant.  

If you notice, there are 2 serial#s in every one of these Zeiss lenses.  One is the unique Zeiss serial# and the second one is the separate and unique Sony Serial#.  One other person who had an issue with one of his Zeiss lenses, was surprised to note that after the repair, the Sony serial# of the lens he received back, remained the same, while the Zeiss serial# changed.  In other words, the entire optical unit got replaced with a new one, while the outer mechanicals were from the unit that was sent out for repair.

Logged

Tony Beach

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 452
    • http://imageevent.com/tonybeach/twelveimages
Nikon sensors by Sony?
« Reply #27 on: December 30, 2009, 12:49:16 am »

I know we're going way OT here, but oh well.  I would note though that a sensor is part of the entire system, so the quality of optics and the service that backs it all up are every bit as important as the sensor itself (sometimes those ancillary issues are even more important).

Quote from: aaykay
Wow, you seem to have really grabbed hold of the short straw.  
Seems that way.  My copy of the Nikkor 70-200/2.8 VR isn't the greatest either (still a fine lens).  My experience sending it back to Nikon was alarming as they charged me $400 for unseen damage (apparently caused by a minor drop), when it came back the lens still had edge issues (and I'm talking about on DX cameras!), but having banged the lens around some more I'm not going to bother sending it back to them again because I don't want to spend another $400 for another unsatisfactory repair.  Now it's Sony's turn to wow me.

Quote
The CZ 24-70 has been my workhorse all along and if anything, the wider-end in particular, is exemplary.
Other than the extreme corners at the widest end, I've been very impressed with the lens.  If it comes back performing as good at the wide end as it performs from 35mm to 50mm, I will be beside myself.

Quote
The good thing about the Carl Zeiss lenses is that when there is an optical issue, they replace the entire optical module, which in turn comes directly from Zeiss.  The mechanicals (outer casing, SSM unit etc) are from Sony, the optical components (the glass) are from Zeiss and the final assembly happens in a Japanese Sony plant.
Interesting, and thanks for sharing that information.

Quote
If you notice, there are 2 serial#s in every one of these Zeiss lenses.  One is the unique Zeiss serial# and the second one is the separate and unique Sony Serial#.  One other person who had an issue with one of his Zeiss lenses, was surprised to note that after the repair, the Sony serial# of the lens he received back, remained the same, while the Zeiss serial# changed.  In other words, the entire optical unit got replaced with a new one, while the outer mechanicals were from the unit that was sent out for repair.
I can't check this as I sent the lens out yesterday.  OTOH, I just picked up my CZ135/1.8  and darned if it doesn't have two different serial numbers on it.  BTW, my 135/1.8 is bitingly sharp wide open in the center and is so sharp edge to edge by f/4 on the full frame of the A850 that it simply knocks my socks off -- so I was not so unlucky with that one.
Logged
Pages: 1 [2]   Go Up