Jump to content

What's wrong with Sony?


focusnpose

Recommended Posts

<p>Hi all. In the past I have used Minolta point and shoots and about a year or so ago, my husband bought me a Sony a200. I thought it was great! I love my camera and thinking of upgrading to a more advanced Sony but everytime I go to the camera shops to buy supplies and equipment I am asked, "What are you shooting with?" The first time, I got a response of, "I'm sorry to hear that." What's up with that? When I mention Sony a200 I get these looks and the whole attitude of the saleperson changes. Now, I am afraid to say what I have cause I am not taken seriously by the camera stores. I really love my camera. Am I missing something here? I recently worked a fashion show and in passing, a guy says, " You should really consider a Nikon". I asked him why and he said, "Cause Nikon is the best out there." I'm an amateur so I dont have Nikon bucks. I know its time to step up to a more professional camera. I shoot events, weddings, portraiture and could use the upgrade but why not Sony? <br>

Any response or recommendations would be appreciated. I would hate to go out here and spend all my money on a camera simply cause it's the trendy thing to do. <br>

Help!</p>

Link to comment
Share on other sites

<p>The real question is not "what's wrong with sony" but "why do you care what other people think about your choice of equipment?"</p>

<p>If you are using your camera to produce images you like and your clients like, then why do you feel the need to justify your equipment choice to other photographers?</p>

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

<p>You camera guys was obviously a Nikon dealer, not Sony. Sony offers very professional equipment and stunning Zeiss lenses for pro's, so don't let them sway you at all. If you're happy with your images, that's all that counts. And when you're ready to upgrade, there's a clear path of Sony cameras to do so - all the way up to the professional A900</p>
Link to comment
Share on other sites

<p>People are easily led by hype. They need to reinforce their purchases or believe in what they are selling by any means possible, so they knock products they have little familiarity with. Right now it is a Nikon/Canon camera world out there. They are both good company's and offer good products. Minolta got tired of swimming against the tide and went on to greener pastures. Sony is kind of slouching along where Minolta was. Over the years Minolta offered great innovations and pro quality cameras and they still could not compete with the cannikon mindset. If you want to shoot Sony, go for it. There is really so little difference in the top camera lines that it is not worth worrying about.</p>

<p>That aside, I would never buy a thing from a camera store that had that attitude because is shows ignorance and intolerance.</p>

Link to comment
Share on other sites

<p>Don't let anyone sway you, if you're happy with your results with sony equipment stick with it. At first I had the same experience when I told a salesman I shot with an A100. I still go to that store but now only to try out new equipment b/4 I buy somewhere else. I found a new retailer who is more customer orientated. I now own an A700 and a few decent sony lens, 11-18mm w/a, minolta 50mm 1.7, 70-200mm and 70-400mm. Find a new retailer who knows how to treat a customer. If you upgrade you would be very satisfied with the A700 (great camera). </p>
Link to comment
Share on other sites

<p>The next time some snooty Nikonian comes at you with that attitude, remind him that Nikon gets many of the sensors for its high-end cameras from Sony, and they're also used in the Alpha line of cameras (some with minor spec differences). Remind them also how Nikon is raping D3X owners who pay over $8K for a camera that has a Sony sensor, the same sensor as Sony's $3K A900. You simply can't tell me there's $5K in difference between the two.</p>

<p>Remember this; there are way too many camera people out there who are brand snobs, and many fall into the Nikon/Canon camps. These elitists are the same kind of folks as high-end audiophiles; the kind of people that think $800 oxygen-free speaker wires really make an audible difference in the sound quality, or that little spiked feet under your $10,000 Krell amplifier contribute to sonic clarity. In the end, image quality comes down mostly to optics and the skill of the photographer.</p>

Link to comment
Share on other sites

<p>LaDon-nothing is wrong with Sony and don't let any 'salesman' (whose personal agenda may be quite different than yours) or brand elitist tell you that there is. Over the years, I have used Minolta, Pentax, and Nikon equipment and they all performed wonderfully; I only changed out of a desire to try something different and not because of dissatisfaction with what I was already using. As a Nikon user for the past 25 years, I can tell you not to hesitate to use a Sony or a Canon,etc if it is comfortable to use, has the features you want, and gives you the results you want. As has so often been said before, most of what you end up with will depend on you and not your brand of camera. Get your new more advanced Sony and enjoy it and don't let 'them' spoil it for you. Happy Shooting! cb :-)</p>
Link to comment
Share on other sites

<p>Nikon's best sensors are Sony. Sony lenses are designed by Minolta people and Zeiss people. They hired a huge crew of engineers and designers from Minolta when they bought out their camera business, and Minolta has a long history of great innovative camera designs. And nobody's going to say Sony doesn't know how to do electronics.</p>

<p>But you don't need me to tell you that because you have a Sony and you know it's a great camera.</p>

<p>Everybody feels strongly about some camera brand or other but in truth these systems have far more similarities than differences. If you want a higher end camera for professional uses you can go the A700 for APS-C or the A900 for 35mm full frame, and laugh at the Nikon users who bought a D300 or D3X for way more money (and got pretty much the same cameras).</p>

<p>The camera sellers sell Canon and Nikon so of course in their professional capacity they sneer at Sony. Also, a lot of them aren't all that smart.</p>

Link to comment
Share on other sites

<p>Let me second Andrew's statement about the Zeiss glass, as well as all the millions of fine Minolta and third party lenses available for this platform. It's just one more bragging point that Sony shooters have when the brand snobs look down their nose at you.</p>
Link to comment
Share on other sites

<p>I think it is more about Canon and Nikon being established professional lines in the sense of broad support, many lenses, rental, loan and repair programs for working photographers, etc. Olympus seems to me consumer-oriented in digital SLRs. It is up to Sony and Pentax to steer their courses, now.</p>
Link to comment
Share on other sites

<p>There's nothing wrong with Sony. The first salesman was wrong for his comment, as you had shown a preference for Sony. If I were you, I'd have told him that he was abad salesperson, and I would have spoken to his boss. My friend who owns a camera store, makes it a point to never put down a line (even if he doesn't sell it. He doesn't sell Sony.) Instead, he would inquire as to why the person likes a brand, and then point out how another brand is better. That's salesmanship.</p>

<p>As for that guy who says 'Nikon is the best', you might want to point out that Sony makes most of the sensors for Nikon.</p>

<p>Sony is still new to theDSLR game, even though they have many ex-Minolta engineers working for them. In time, they will bethe equal of Canon/Nikon.</p>

Link to comment
Share on other sites

<p><em>"These elitists are the same kind of folks as high-end audiophiles; the kind of people that think $800 oxygen-free speaker wires really make an audible difference in the sound quality, or that little spiked feet under your $10,000 Krell amplifier contribute to sonic clarity."</em><br>

Uh, yeah it kinda does. I mix concerts and have been doing sound for over 30 years. Cabling is your lifeline. And you get what you pay for. For home systems (even in some venues), raising the speakers off the floor does increase clarity if you don't have a solid, non reverberating base structure that throws things off. But don't just take my opinion, check out the magazine I write for and see what's out there in the very high end of audio. It's free too. www.tonepublications.com</p>

Link to comment
Share on other sites

<p><em>"These elitists are the same kind of folks as high-end audiophiles; the kind of people that think $800 oxygen-free speaker wires really make an audible difference in the sound quality, or that little spiked feet under your $10,000 Krell amplifier contribute to sonic clarity."</em><br>

Uh, yeah it kinda does. I mix concerts and have been doing sound for over 30 years. Cabling is your lifeline. And you get what you pay for. For home systems (even in some venues), raising the speakers off the floor does increase clarity if you don't have a solid, non reverberating base structure that throws things off. But don't just take my opinion, check out the magazine I write for and see what's out there in the very high end of audio. It's free too. www.tonepublications.com</p>

Link to comment
Share on other sites

<p>There is a lot of snobbery out there in regards to brands. It's not just salespeople -- I have experienced photographers treating Sony users like second-rate amateurs, even though they should know better than to judge someone based on the brand of equipment they use. Canon/Nikon is like an old-boys club, and sad to say it, this prejudice can impede on networking when you meet other photographers.</p>
Link to comment
Share on other sites

<p>Don't always believe what you hear, do some research. http://ricksfotos.wordpress.com/</p>

<h2 id="post-58"><a title="Permanent link to Sony Sensors Better than Canon." rel="bookmark" href="http://ricksfotos.wordpress.com/2009/07/06/sony-sensors-better-than-canon/" title="Permanent link to Sony Sensors Better than Canon.">Sony Sensors Better than Canon.</a></h2>

<p><small>Posted in <a title="View all posts in DSLR" rel="category tag" href="http://en.wordpress.com/tag/dslr/" title="View all posts in DSLR">DSLR</a> , <a title="View all posts in Uncategorized" rel="category tag" href="http://ricksfotos.wordpress.com/category/uncategorized/" title="View all posts in Uncategorized">Uncategorized</a> with tags <a rel="tag" href="http://en.wordpress.com/tag/a-mount/">A mount</a> , <a rel="tag" href="http://en.wordpress.com/tag/a700/">a700</a> , <a rel="tag" href="http://en.wordpress.com/tag/canon/">canon</a> , <a rel="tag" href="http://en.wordpress.com/tag/dslr/">DSLR</a> , <a rel="tag" href="http://en.wordpress.com/tag/rick-eselgroth/">rick eselgroth</a> , <a rel="tag" href="http://en.wordpress.com/tag/sonyminolta/">sony/minolta</a> on July 6, 2009 by reselgroth</small></p>

 

 

<p>Sony SLR sensor ranks below Nikon, above Canon<br /> <img title="sensor" src="http://ricksfotos.files.wordpress.com/2009/07/sensor.jpg?w=300&h=232" alt="sensor" title="sensor" width="300" height="232" /><br>

Three midrange Sony SLRs now are included in DxO Labs’ measurements of image sensor performance, and the Alpha A700 proves to be reasonably competitive.<br>

Sony’s A700, which costs about $1,100 with an 18-70mm lens, has a score of 66.3 on the test, which calculates how well the sensor handles color, a range brightness and darkness, and low-light shooting. That puts it behind the top-scoring camera with a comparably sized sensor, the Nikon D90, almost ties it with the Pentax K10D and Nikon D300, and gives it a a few points’ lead over Canon’s 40D and 50D.<br>

Meanwhile, the A200 scores 62.9 and the A300 an even 64, according to the DxOMark Sensor test results that were updated Tuesday. A five-point difference makes a difference of about 1/3 stop in exposure, DxO says, meaning that a higher-scoring camera can attain the same raw image quality as a rival even though the higher-scoring camera is using a faster exposure or higher ISO.<br>

DxO Labs, a French company, makes a business of measuring camera image quality, developing technology for image-processing hardware and software, and selling software to convert the raw files produced by higher-end cameras into less flexible but more convenient formats such as JPEG. The DxOMark score measures sensor performance based on the raw file, a foundation for overall image quality but only a facet of a camera’s overall performance.<br /> Almost all cameras must ‘demosaic’ data from the image sensor, which records light in a checkerboard pattern of red, green, and blue light, to produce a JPEG image.<br>

Almost all cameras must ‘demosaic’ data from the image sensor, which records light in a checkerboard pattern of red, green, and blue, to produce a JPEG image.<br /> (Credit: DxO Labs)<br>

The company postponed scoring the A700 because until the newer version 4.0 of its firmware, the camera performed noise-reduction processing on the green light captured by the sensor before generating the raw file. DxO frowns upon cameras reducing noise before the raw file is produced, in part because it misses out on steady improvements in software such as Photoshop that can convert raw images.<br>

DxO’s scores haven’t been met with universal acclaim. In response to some criticisms and in an attempt to dispel some confusion, DxO has published a boiled-down DxOMark Sensor explanation.<br>

For example, the company has this to say about sensor resolution, an issue that arose when comparing medium-format cameras with large, high-resolution sensors to high-end SLRs: “DxOMark Sensor and resolution are two independent metrics of sensor performance. As a consequence, just because camera A has more pixels than camera B (and thus sees more details) does not mean that its raw DxOMark Sensor score will be better. So before comparing cameras with DxOMark Sensor, it is important to first determine the resolution you are looking for.”</p>

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

<p> It is interesting that recently i went to a pro photographer who advertizes in a magazine to be taught. He is a nikon user and there is no doubting the quality of his work. However, he was saying things like yes zeiss is good but they are now made in Japan and virtually said they were junk. He said my A900 does not have a connection for studio lighting which it does. I won't be going back to him</p>
Link to comment
Share on other sites

<p>I'm proud to shoot with a Sony Alpha 700. In fact, I liked the camera so much, I bought 2 of them! I shoot professionally (travel & wildlife photos). Everyone has a favorite brand. I tried out a Nikon before I bought my Sony but prefered the Sony. That doesn't mean one is better than the other, it just that, for me, I really preferred the Sony. The model makes a huge difference. The difference between the Sony alpha 100 and 700 will blow you away! There is an AMAZING difference in sharpness, "pop", and clarity! I would've never believed there could've been such a big difference.<br>

My photos are selling well and creating business for my travel agency, so I guess the camera must be doing the job... (with a little help from me, I hope)! :)<br>

Julie Roggow</p>

Link to comment
Share on other sites

<p>I am amazed at how shallow some people are in boosting their own egos by boasting about what particular brand of equipment they use in their hobby. I see the same thing in photography: Nikon vs Canon vs Sony vs Leica vs..... And I see it in ham radio: Kenwood vs Yaesu vs Icom vs Ten Tec vs.... You get the idea.</p>

<p>The bottom line is that your equipment is merely your tools used to produce your art. Whether your tools are Snap-On or Craftsman or Stanley really doesn't matter - it's what results you can produce with the tools you are comfortable with and have at hand. I love my 7D, but sometimes get out my old Nikon FE and load it up with TMax for variety. Don't let the pretentious brand-name snobs bother you. Just get out there and create. If a shop treats you that way, shop somewhere else.<br>

Paul Blum</p>

Link to comment
Share on other sites

<p>Nikon and Canon are, like others said, well established. They have the support structure professional photographers need. Are they actually better than Minolta/Sony.....no. I owned Minolta gear for 20 some years. Some of the best lenses I ever owned were Minolta. But Minolta took so long to go digital with their SLRs I moved over to Canon. Still own my Minolta XE7 tho.<br>

Ignore the salesman's condensending attitude....tell him to stuff it, actually. I would. And then go ahead and buy what you want. If he can't give you the info you need on Sony stuff, go someplace that can. Make sure the store owner knows of your dissatisfaction tho.....that goes a long way in putting salesmen in their place.</p>

Link to comment
Share on other sites

<p>I think there is another issue here and it has nothing to to with the inherent quality of the different brands. Sony is a large diversified electronics manufacturer. It sells its items to retailers only in very large quantities. Small camera stores and small camera store chains can't possibly order Sony's products in the minimum quantities Sony requires. Sony is just not in the business of supporting small retailers. Some manufacturers, like Oympus, make it possible for smaller stores to both order its products and to sell them at a competitive price with some profit. Digital cameras have such a short product life cycle and suffer from such fast depreciation that no small business could afford to be stuck with too many of last month's models. </p>
Link to comment
Share on other sites

<p>Well, Sony claims in its latest <a href="http://www.sony.net/SonyInfo/IR/library/ar.html">annual report</a> that they've sold three times as many dslrs compared to last year so it seems their plan is working! Even if some sales staff would prefer otherwise. I have no idea whether Sony imposes minimum volumes on DSLR orders from small stores, but one would hope they don't just apply the same distribution strategy for their still very young foray into the DSLR market as what they do for their bread and butter = point & shoots/camcorders, playstations, TVs, pcs, dvds etc.</p>
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
×
×
  • Create New...