jorgen_udvang Posted February 1, 2008 Share Posted February 1, 2008 "Odds are, we'll see the new sensor in a Nikon or Pentax body before a Sony body." For Nikon, that may well be the case, but I doubt that Pentax has a body that will fit an FF sensor, and even if they had, they don't have the lenses below 100mm to back it up. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
david_glick1 Posted February 1, 2008 Share Posted February 1, 2008 "i would never buy a camera with the name "sony" on it." - this is a very short-sighted statement and is exactly the reason Sony has an uphill battle. My read is that most serious photographers (professional or advanced amateur) have had "Canon or Nikon" pounded into their heads for so long that even if Sony releases a technically superior and cost effective product, it still won't be immediately taken seriously. It will probably take several generations of cameras, and a slow trickle of new photographers or family jumpers outputting high quality results for Sony to gain any credibility with the serious photography market. This will take time ? Canon and Nikon didn?t build their brands in a few years. And even though Sony is starting with the Minolta heritage (which in my opinion is the only thing giving them much credibility with that typical serious photographer at all right now), they have to convince people that they?re still ?photographers? and not a bunch of home theater nuts. On the other hand (and as someone who thought long and hard about choosing a family to start investing in and settled on the Alpha mount), I think their strategy is excellent. It appears as though they?re focusing on the consumer market first ? as well they should. Get some of those people in the door and some of them will grow to be more serious. Arguably, that?s how any camera brand builds their large loyal base ? no one picks up their first camera and just starts shooting professionally. This will take time. In my mind, the full frame sensor is way more important as a carrot than a real professional camera right now. When new photographers who think they might want to be professional or advanced in the future are thinking about which family to choose, the ideal that they may some day end up in the top-line of full frame > $4,000 or $5,000 bodies has to weigh on their decision. The new body will help convince these people that Sony is serious and will have something for them down the road when that time comes. While those folks are getting better, Sony can refine their flagship and hopefully bring over some of the established pros as well. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
KenPapai Posted February 1, 2008 Share Posted February 1, 2008 Sony has a good chance of passing Nikon in the DSLR market but nearly zero chance of catching Canon. Like others have said, I'd buy a Sony video cam but never a Sony still camera. I couldn't care less what Sony does, or 'Zeiss'; only if Nikon pauses too often or Canon stands still for three years with no innnovation, does Sony even have a tiny chance of being a player in this field. Sony certainly will do well in the dReb Canon and low-end Nikon entry level area, but it's not gonna have much carryover into the serious, non toy camera bodies. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
lex_jenkins Posted February 1, 2008 Share Posted February 1, 2008 "...this is a very short-sighted statement and is exactly the reason Sony has an uphill battle." Brand consciousness isn't the issue. Pragmatism is. My first SLR was a brand new Miranda Sensorex. Within a few years they were out of business. My second was a Ricoh. Guess what? My third? Minolta. My fourth? Olympus. Ask me again why I switched to Canon and Nikon. Sony is squandering its resources trying to compete head to head in the serious dSLR field. And don't think that they can't go bankrupt just because they seem to have deep pockets. Every major corporation today - *every* one - is mortgaged to the hilt and gambling with money they don't own. Nothing wrong with risk, that's the nature of business. But this is a dumb gamble. Especially given Sony's recent history of mistakes, quality control problems, tentative gestures and misjudgement. I'll give you another example: At one point Sony could have owned the portable radio field. Hell, they *did* own it. They made the finest portable shortwave radios. I still have the ICF-2010, the first model to feature a synchronous detector, which later became expected of any top flight radio. This model was developed because an individual Sony engineer consulted with an expert in the radio field to learn what users wanted. (I'm wondering who they consulted about this dSLR project?) Then they dropped the sync detectors (altho' availability of AM stereo components was an issue). Then they dropped the ball completely and China picked it up and ran with it, stealing the market with sub-$100 sets. Remember when Sony owned the TV market, with the Trinitron sets being considered the standard for the mid-price market? Where is Sony now in the TV market? Floundering. Instead of a Sony made CRT, my NEC monitor uses a Mitsubishi aperture grille CRT. Sony could own the digital video market if they put their efforts toward it, especially by improving the quality of still captures from video and making the interface easy enough to pick out that one perfect frame out of tens of thousands. It's no risk to predict that this will turn out to be the worst and costliest mistake in Sony's history. The smartest move they could make is to perfect the sensor and market it to an established SLR maker. Failing that, the next big player will be a Chinese company that hasn't even been created yet. It'll either buy Sony's technology for pennies on the dollar, or simply steal it. Five years from now the camera equivalent to Eton, Degen or Kaito will own the road Sony is paving. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
steven_moseley1 Posted February 1, 2008 Share Posted February 1, 2008 Hi, Re this:"You seem to be forgetting that Sony is in bed with Zeiss, has been for a long time, and already has several Zeiss primes in their lineup" Actually there are a grand total of TWO Zeiss/Sony lenses...the ZA 85/1.4 and ZA 135/1.8....hardly "several". If Sony ARE serious about the pro market, then Zeiss better work overtime with lots of new lenses and quickly, which they are not exactly famous for. Releasing just the Zeiss 21/2.8 in Sony mount and little else would hardly persude many to switch to Sony...if any at all. The pro world does not revolve around one lens, no matter how good it is... cheers Steve.M. (Contax user) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sandysocks Posted February 1, 2008 Share Posted February 1, 2008 Lex, maybe Sony is thinking like you are. Maybe they plan to be the next big Chinese company. The timing seems to suggest that they are interested in the emerging Chinese market in general and the summer olympic games in particular. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
lex_jenkins Posted February 1, 2008 Share Posted February 1, 2008 That's entirely possible. While the Chinese economy is doing relatively well their consumer base may not (yet) have entrenched ideas about what brand a "serious" camera should be. If Sony plans to target mostly markets outside of the U.S. and Europe they may succeed. Not sure about the timing, tho'. Some indicators about the Chinese economy are iffy - apparently they're pressuring their oil industry in a way that doesn't quite mesh with free market practices. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
petemillis Posted February 1, 2008 Share Posted February 1, 2008 Lex "Remember when Sony owned the TV market, with the Trinitron sets being considered the standard for the mid-price market? Where is Sony now in the TV market? Floundering. Instead of a Sony made CRT, my NEC monitor uses a Mitsubishi aperture grille CRT. " I think one big reason for Sony starting to flounder here is that people are finally realising that the perception of high quality from Sony is just BS that has enabled them to charge so much more than anyone else for so many years. They still try and sell LCD TVs for at least 50% more than the comparable JVC or Panasonic product. But it just ain't working and I wonder if this is partly due to the popularity of internet now where victims of poor quality products now tell others so quickly - it's much easier now to find out how reliable, or not, something really is. Some people are brand name victims still. My mother has bought Sony stuff that has failed just outside warranty - she then replaces it with another Sony product at great cost. When she had video cameras and a stills camera fail - all Sony - knackered CCDs - she passed them on to me. It took me (in the UK) no time at all to find out that in the US Sony had issued a recall. But was there any publicity about it here? No. Did the camera dealers here know about it? No. They didn't give a stuff about the people who had failed CCDs - if they cared they would have publicised the recall. They seemed to just sit back happy in the knowledge that most of the people who experienced a CCD failure just out of warranty would just replace the camera with another Sony product. I ended up calling Sony who directed me to some vague page on their UK website mentioning a recall - and I go the camera repaired FOC. But why weren't the dealers told? Obviously because they just wanted the dealers to tell the customers that their equipment was out of warranty and nothing could be done. and then sell the customer another Sony product. If something goes wrong, then fair enough. If the recall is issued and widely publicised then I'd be happy that the manufacturer was doing all they could. But when they keep quiet - well, it just stinks. And I will now steer clear of any camera, or TV, of DVD player etc with the name "Sony" unless something really special happens to make me happy with them! But if a Sony sensor finds it's way into a camera that I want, then I'll just deal with it! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
joseph_wisniewski Posted February 1, 2008 Share Posted February 1, 2008 Ken "Sony has a good chance of passing Nikon in the DSLR market but nearly zero chance of catching Canon" Didn't Nikon sales pass Canon in 2007? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
johan_de_groote Posted February 1, 2008 Share Posted February 1, 2008 Maybe they can combine it with some blu-ray or betamax tech, use an atrac raw format, recycle the exploding batteries for laptops and if they use the same materials for putting the sensor together as they did with the ccd's a few years ago it will be a smaching hit. Sony isn't a pro company, it is a mass consumer company. They make stuff by the boatload all the rest be damned. Megalomania to the hilt and a heavy case of not-invented-here syndrome. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
KenPapai Posted February 1, 2008 Share Posted February 1, 2008 "Didn't Nikon sales pass Canon in 2007?" Did they? I don't know. In toy entry level bodies maybe, still, I doubt it, but those don't matter all that much. Those things are cranked out and snapped up by the gazillions. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jorgen_udvang Posted February 1, 2008 Share Posted February 1, 2008 Sony can pass anyone if they do their homework, and if they do that selling "toy cameras" doesn't really matter. They would rather sell 10 million "toy cameras" than 100,000 pro models. Fact is: they'll probably do both. Although Sony has made their fair share of mistakes, and will probably do so in the future as well, it's still one of the strongest brands in the world, and it's still one of the world's biggest electronic manufacturers. And one more thing: they have been one of the strongest players in the professional video market for 30-40 years. Not many mistakes there. There are more than 2 Sony/Zeiss lenses btw. There's a 16-80-something zoom, and they just launched a 24-70mm f/2.8. I even think I've forgotten a couple. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
anson_ko Posted February 3, 2008 Share Posted February 3, 2008 besides lack of lenses, USM motor, I am surprised that no one mention about the flash system. Sony inherits Minolta flashes and the flash mount is different from the main stream flash mount. I used to have Minolta and it's pain in the xxx. Also, someone mentioned 21mm Distagon. ok, I agreed that lens is superb. If one already has a Nikon or Canon body, buy an adaptor with that lens and you start shooting. There is no reason to invest into another system IMO. Even if I am new to DSLR and I am thinking to get into the pro DSLR, I rather to get something with track record instead of hoping they will have superb lenses in the future. To much risks and unknowns. Sony has to have something extra-ordinary performance and price in order to convince the pros to switch. Being Mega-pixel king alone won't do it. They have to have a complete system. We will see in a few years. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
david_glick1 Posted February 3, 2008 Share Posted February 3, 2008 "We will see in a few years." - Perhaps the most true statement of them all. They'll either become a major third player, or fall flat on their face. I don't see much middle ground for Sony. Once thing's for sure, you can't fault them for not coming out guns blazing... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ilkka Posted February 4, 2008 Share Posted February 4, 2008 I can't understand these comments. Many seem to be saying that no matter what Sony does, it can never make a profit in DSLRs, and it can not be a serious player. So it should just give up. Nikon was not much of a player couple of years ago but has stepped up a lot since then. If Sony makes 8-10 different DSLRs, some with full frame sensors, it will benefit all photographers, also those who use Canon and Nikon equipment. Only Canon company would benefit if Sony throws in the towel, Canon photographers would suffer dearly from it. It really makes no difference whether you think Sony is a consumer company making toys (even though they are big in pro TV and movie industry), or if you never buy a Sony product. Sony has a chance to be a big player in this industry if they are serious, and they seem to be. That would benefit every photographer with better products, more competition, and lower prices, and I am all for it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
lex_jenkins Posted February 4, 2008 Share Posted February 4, 2008 "Nikon was not much of a player couple of years ago but has stepped up a lot since then." The problem with that analysis is that it's inaccurate. Any conclusion derived from it will be equally inaccurate. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jamespjones Posted February 5, 2008 Share Posted February 5, 2008 on the point of Zeiss lenses - Sony lists a new Zeiss lens on their site, 24-70mm f2.8 (swm or whatever their motor is called). So, Zeiss and Sony are stepping to the plate. James PhotographyRI Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
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 accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now