Sony's strategy?

[abe_hollander]

I haven't lost my way around the forums, but I thought this was really interesting, and I can think of a few posters who

would have some opinions about this...

 

http://www.16-9.net/sony_in_2008.html

[miserere_mei]

Interesting... It's like reading Pentax's strategy...only backwards :-s

 

I've always said (and often been blasted for it) that Sony had some *very* nice lenses in its line-up. I often take a look and salivate at their offerings. Then I look at the prices and my mouth goes immediately dry :-)

[michael_kuhne]

Well, during the 90's, Minolta certainly DID develop a camara model that attracted pros and other serious users- and my favorite pro model of the time, the Maxxum 9. Highest shutter speed, flash sync, and virtually every feature one could need in a battle-ship built body.

 

A wise thing, really, to round out their lens line then bam!- walk right in with an advanced body.

[mountainvisions]

The Maxxum was a great Pro DSLR. Really great. It supposedly also boasted the fastest AF.

 

Minolta was a good company, it put it's eggs in one basket too many times and got burned.

 

People on this forum are begging for Pentax to go all in at once, but sometimes it's better to test the water before jumping in. Minolta is the best example of the ALL IN strategy going bad!!

[mountainvisions]

Ok, having read the article now (mostly, as I am still working and trying to go home sometime tonigh).

 

I have to say, I am not sure how it is opposite of Pentax? Pentax had a nice array of shorter lenses (12-100mm) for about 3-4 years now, produced the overspected K10D, but in typical Pentax fashion left us wanting more for a body.

 

I've always said, Pentax now has the lenses, where is the body? The Limiteds just look foolish on a K10D (and not that it's not a great camera, but it's not a camera on caliber of the limiteds).

 

So I wonder if Pentax is just filling out it's lens lineup while it works on the body most of us want!!!

 

That said, I'm ok with waiting, as it gives me time to get more glass! I'm still 1 limited short, and about to be 2 limiteds short when the 15mm comes out!!

[miserere_mei]

Justin, I said this was the opposite of Pentax because when they came out with the K10D there were many holes in their lens line up. There still are, but certainly far fewer than than in late 2006.

[miserere_mei]

than than than than...

 

I wish we had an edit button...

 

Justin, you better hurry up before Pentax release a 135mm Ltd :-)

 

Yeah, I don't think they'll do that either.

[mountainvisions]

I figured that was what you meant.

 

Of course the K10D and a D3/1D type body are two separate things.

 

Sony's idea was to create a pro lens lineup and cap it with a tip top of the line body.

 

Pentax idea was to create an E-3/D300 type body with lots of holes in the lineup.

 

Personally I think the K10D with holes was more attractive than the A900 with holes!!

 

However, I think the guy on the article was wrong (well, assumed wrong), Sony in fact did just fill the A900 with

pixels rather than balance detail with high ISO noise and DR.

 

While Sony might be putting together a pro lineup, I really don't see them stealing market share from Canikon. I

agree with the author that it seems to be more of a ploy to get people with disposable income to drop some cash

on a high end (nearly top end) pro caliber system, more so than to steal market share!.

 

BTW, I actually liked the 135mm focal length on film. Very interesting short-mid tele, good for a lot of stuff.

 

I had a JC Penny KA that was pretty good for some time, before returning it to my Dad. I think Cosina made it.

 

I also used a K 135 for some time. Both were 2.8s and nice sized!

 

So I guess I'd like to see a 90mm 2.8 Limited now that you mention it!

[miserere_mei]

I think Sony is a marketing machine, not a product company. In my head there is a difference :-) The way for them to make money is to court the rich amateur, not the pros. There are a lot more rich amateurs than there are pros! The A900 is nicely priced, but like the guy says, the lenses are pricey. I'm not sure why rich amateurs would go for Sony and not for Canikon if lenses are similar prices (and bodies too). I think Sony should have priced themselves between Pentax and Canikon. But what do I know.

 

As for the A900's performance, Michael Johnston was very impressed with its resolution and didn't find the high-ISO performance crap at all. I know there are dissidents, but I trust the man's opinions on equipment.

 

I also like 135mm on film, mostly for portraits. I have a Cosina 135mm f/2.8 that is serving me well; if it had a P/KA mount I would use it on digital too, as I also have a Cosina 200mm f/4 that I like on film for stealth candid portraits. On digital I can just use the Sigma 70-300mm APO which is f/4 at 135mm (though not quite as sharp). But back to 135mm on film... I've been requesting a DA* 90mm f/2 for a long time. I wouldn't complain if it were a Ltd, but the problem is it's too close to the 77 Ltd, which is why I gave up waiting and just bought the 77 Ltd. If Pentax ever release a 90mm, I'll re-evaluate my position.

 

But back to Sony: Maybe Sony want to attract the new pros entering the market. If they can provide attractive lenses and good bodies, maybe new pros will consider them. I wouldn't be surprised if we soon start seeing Sony ads with a pro or two endorsing the system. They'll be young, handsome fellows, of course. Maybe even throw in a female fashion photographer to show girls like Alpha mounts too.

[mountainvisions]

I can't disagree. Although, the A900 is barely on par with the 5D in noise, almost 5 years post 5D release...is

that really that good? Or just OK? And the A900 isn't sealed, while every single other top line DSLR/SLR from

Nikon and Canon since the F4 has been! (but then I've noted more or at least a large portion of "pro" DSLR

shooters use the unsealed 10/20/30/40/50D series than the 1D series).

 

The only question to ponder is how many times can the wheel be reinvented?

 

I mean, lets face it. in terms of shear ability to capture whatever the photographer dreams, the 1Ds/1D and D3

pretty much do it and without breaking a sweat.

 

What can Sony offer to make people eschew the white lenses, and Nikon mystique? Afterall, just like the Yankees,

Nikon lives on mystique and aura, and Canon lives on photos of it's lenses filling the sidelines of every major

sporting event!

 

Hard to argue with either selling point to an incoming independent professional with a limited budget!

[les_lammers]

I just looked at the A900 and unless you are well heeled $$$ wise it and the lenses are quite expensive.

They are still digital products and as such will not have the duability, longevity or repairability of a manual camera. I though I read that the A900 was sealed?

 

24MP's will require a LOT of memory. But hey, if it is what you want......

 

Like Justin, I would like to see a nice small 12 -14 MP weather sealed body.. that does it all. :- )

 

Leica has some really nice stuff but it too is a niche for the rich. It sure is fun to dream.....even if I could afford it the gear would not make me a better photographer. What you see in your mind matters more than the gear you use.