Sony Mirrorless (a little whine)

[george_doumani]

<p>As a convert from Canon EOS to Sony mirrorless I have a few small grips with Sony that I am sure a few of us can understand.</p>

<p>Firstly, STOP RELEASING CAMERA'S THAT ARE 80% DEVELOPED. The frantic rate at which Sony is releasing new models is a little ridiculous. The value of ones investment simply tumbles to a point where a first generation version is almost a paper weight once the up spec'd newer version is released. If it took Sony only 12 months to develop all this new technology something tells me that that technology was already available at the time of release of the first version but "keeping a few tricks up ones sleeve" seems to be financially more rewarding for them. Focus speed and accuracy combined with low light performance always seem to be the draw-cards. Consumers will get tired of being cheated by such ridiculously short longevity of expensive pieces of equipment. In this regard Canon is way more loyal to their customers (or are they simply apathetic?).</p>

<p>Secondly, for those of us who do invest relatively early in a product line SUPPORT US WITH UPDATES that can improve the user experience of these cameras. As an RX1 owner I have never seen a single update. I love this camera. It could however be even easier to love with some OS updates that would try and address some basic issues (focus speed for example - even a few % quicker would help). Not a single update has ever been issued for this camera as it seems Sony is too busy trying to develop newer models. I also own an A7II which is also neglected now as the A7RII has been released. Why aren't A7II owners given access to uncompressed RAW as the soon to be released update for the A7SII and A7RII will allow. Such poor style Sony.</p>

<p>I take my hat off to Sony for pushing the boundaries in terms of product development. If they expect brand loyalty in return from their new customers they really must start to listen to and support them. I still find myself looking at used Canon 5D mkIII's for this very reason. When I invested with Canon I knew I wasn't getting a cutting edge photographic tool. I knew I was getting a photographic tool that would not be superseded in a matter of months and a tool that would operate as it should. Sony seem completely ambivalent in helping their existing customers because their main focus is on bringing new products to the market.</p>

[Ed_Ingold]

<p>There was an update for the A7Rii last month, v1.10, which improves the grain appearance at high ISO, increases the number number taken continuously at 5 fps, and resolves some focusing issues. The next update, 2.00, is due on October 19, which offers uncompressed RAW files as an option instead of the current lossy compression.</p>

<p>Nikon is about as sparse as Sony with respect to firmware updates. If I recall correctly, only one was issued for the D3. Apple updated iOS 9 twice in the day following its introduction. Is that good service or poor planning?</p>

<p>Sony will probably offer the same upgrade for uncompressed RAW in the A7ii, and perhaps other models as well.</p>

<p>I kept my A7ii as a backup when I got the A7Rii. However it is so noisy by comparison, even shutter for shutter, that I can't use it with good conscience in many situations. (In fact, it's no louder than a Leica M, long considered the gold standard for quiet operation.) The image quality remains superb, and the resolution is more than adequate for publication. Other than the new RAW option, there is no practical upgrade needed on the A7ii that I can think of (the shutter is what it is, and silent running is not possible with that particular sensor).</p>

[GerrySiegel]

Who can plumb the mind state of Sony. Perhaps some hackers in North Korea? As a consumer electronics company it is used to a new TV design every year I surmise. As invesments, only the lenses are the thing we can count on. Mirrorless or MILC bodies are in a stage of gestation since their introduction less than 10 years ago. Users of Olympus have to sit and wait for new models longer than they feel they should. But maybe you have discovered one of the benefits of hanging in with the Canon and NIkon crowd. Sony has been criticised before for offering a buffet of things. I am thinking some in the corporation are shouting as well. I personally like their designs. And the use of phase and contrast detection and their investment in sensor development. But I can feel your pain as they say.

[SCL]

<p>Just a quick comment....unless you are in the business of buying and selling gear for a profit, don't think of buying photo gear as an investment...that implies that you expect your purchase to appreciate in value against some benchmark over time. In fact, t is the purchase of a tool which is expected to depreciate like most tools, photography and everything else. But I do agree that the depreciation for most consumer based digital gear is disapppointing as it is so rapid. That's the price we all pay for significant R&D and rapid subsequent advances in technology.</p>

[george_doumani]

<p>thanks for the input guys.</p>

<p>@Edward. I have not heard of any likelihood that the uncompressed RAW will be available on anything but the newly announced RX1R II, A7RII and the A7SII. I guess this is Sony's way of saying if you want that then spend up (again)?</p>

<p>@Gerry. I personally like the Sony design as well (although the firmware / OS may be a slight mess). The on sensor capabilities in terms of focus tracking etc far outweigh anything a mirrored camera can come close to. Combine that with the small size and it's a win / win. I just wish they wouldn't keep dropping new models every 6 months and neglect the previous models which, let's face it, with some firmware updates have the ability to last a little longer in terms of their relevance as photographic tools.</p>

<p>@Stephen. The only camera I have ever sold that I turned a profit on was my Leica M6TTL. Besides that I am not that naive to expect a digital camera to appreciate in value. I understand that all digital cameras would depreciate significantly after 1 day of use let alone 1 year. It's the speed of the release of the newer models that's irritating. Why release a camera in the first place that is only half baked? Sony knew from day 1 that the A7R had a shutter that banged louder than a barn door, suffered poorly in low light and was poor to focus (in comparison to most DSLR's) yet they released it knowing that consumers would jump at it (I didn't because it was obvious to me that shutter slap was a no go) full well knowing a version II was just around the corner. Why release it in the first place? That is simply wrong on so many levels (not to mention "sustainability"). </p>

[david_smith110]

<p>Sony isn't releasing new cameras that are half baked, or 80% done as you say George. I think it is more of an issue that Sony is just developing new technologies, implementing them and bringing them to market at a much more lightning speed then what the industry, or we consumers, are accustomed to seeing. Case in point...</p>

<p>The NEX 7 was announced in <strong>Aug of 2011</strong>. This is the camera that really launched Sony into the serious mirrorless market and let both the corporation and us consumers understand what was capable with this new product. Now here we are in <strong>Oct of 2015</strong>, <em>just over 4 years later</em>, and in that relatively short time Sony has both created the full frame mirrorless market and dominated it with model after incredible model of capable machines. </p>

<p>Again, in just a four year timespan we have NEX 7, NEX 6, a6000, a7, a7R, a7s, a7II, a7rII, a7sII, RX1R, RX1RII featuring such innovative techs as IBIS, better and better EVF's, BSI sensor, pop up EVF's, stupidly high ISO to see in the dark, variable low pass filters, etc, etc...</p>

<p>On the other hand, it took Canon <em><strong>5 YEARS</strong> </em>to go from 7D to 7D mk II, with only some minor improvements. </p>

<p>I will take Sony's rapid pace of innovation, development, and market delivery any day of the week instead of waiting years for the same camera to be released with minor improvements. I bought my NEX 7 soon after it was released and used it for years until the a7 came out. I then bought that model and I am still happily using my a7 to this very day. At some point you simply need to find the right tool you need to create your photography and then just go use it. Use the crap out of it. Use it till the buttons fall off and only then go replace it when you absolutely need to or when it is limiting you from getting the shots you need for either yourself or your client. I will be the first to admit that my a7 is a much better camera then I am a photographer. Heck, so was my NEX 7. And my Minolta XE-7. And my Yashica Electro. You see where I am going with this?</p>

<p>Don't worry about new cameras. Shoot what you got. If it isn't working then sell it and move on. Your right, you wont get near what you paid for it. Price of doing business I suppose. But I would much rather have a development pace that outstrips the used market any day. That way when my a7 finally gives up I can go buy an a7II for a cheap price because the a7III or IV will already be out.</p>

<p>Smart photogs shoot behind the curve. Unless you are a pro photog and absolutely need the latest and greatest to stay competitive. Then just budget for it. :)</p>

[AJG]

<p>I'm with David--buy the tool that works for you and ignore the new models until you can't make the pictures that you want/need to make. There will always be newer and better cameras and lenses around the corner, but they aren't always that much of an improvement.</p>

[eric_arnold]

<p>i think the OP has a viable point. yes, Sony has flooded the mirrorless market with camera bodies. no, they have not issued firmware updates which have consistently improved old cameras a la Fuji. yes, their native lens lineup has not rolled out at the same pace as their bodies. in tech sectors, it's common to use early adopters as beta-testers, which means the consumer has to decide for themselves is the product mature enough, and does it have feature X or feature Y i need? sometimes that means jumping on board and upgrading with each product cycle, other times, it means staying put until the system is sufficiently ripe. where you are on that curve depends on your individual preferences. even if you need the "latest and greatest" for pro work, that doesn't mean the Sony system is right for you. there's no 2.8 native zooms for either the E or FE lens lineup, so right there, that's going to stop a lot of pros from buying into the system. The EVF blacks out and cant really do focus tracking, so the A7 bodies arent great for sports. Who are they great for? video shooters, resolution junkies, legacy lens users. Without a full lens lineup and bodies which are as capable in every way as pro DSLRs, it's misleading to even assume Sony is going for pros, and probably more correct to say they are going for the advanced amateur/enthusiast market. i dont know that there is a "pro" landscape market, and i also don't know that a $3300 fixed-lens compact like the RX1 would be more likely to be found in a pro's bag than a $600 Rocoh GR. </p>

<p> </p>

[Lou_Meluso]

<blockquote>

<p>Why release a camera in the first place that is only half baked?</p>

</blockquote>

<p>I'm missing your "half-baked"point. I bought the A7 when it was fairly new. A number of bodies have come after it. There is nothing half-baked about my A7. Nothing. It's a wonderful shooter. Other cameras have new features, but that doesn't change the fact the A7 is a wonderful shooter. <br>

It just your perception, I think, because other camera makers traditionally have much longer time between models. You want irritating, I was one of the folks waiting forever, it seemed, for the underwhelming Canon 7DII to come out. A total let down and spendy to boot. It put a very bad taste in my mouth for Canon. Give me rapid development any day.<br>

<br>

And about that half-baked A7r, did you happen to make notice of Nikon's and Canon's early attempts at mirrorless, or autofocus or digital cameras in general? Not world beaters with tons of "flaws" yet they had the audacity to release them because they KNEW consumers would just gobble them up. How dare they sell us half baked cameras and take your money and then have the gall to later release better versions. I'm feel aggrieved by this. Well, not too badly, because like you I know better than to buy a camera that has issues that I might not like. No, no forget that, I'm pissed anyway with just the idea of an imperfect camera got released and only a year or so later it got replaced. IT SHOULD HAVE TAKEN LONGER! Those sneaky Sonyites surely had a plan to put one over on us. </p>

<p>Yet here's the ironic part that I can't explain. Some of those rubes that bought those early, imperfect versions, including the flawed A7r, somehow, happened to make some of the most beautiful images ever with them. How dare they display their remarkable talent with non-ideal equipment. The world just isn't fair, I suppose.<br>

</p>

[david_smith110]

<blockquote>

<p>i think the OP has a viable point. yes, Sony has flooded the mirrorless market with camera bodies. no, they have not issued firmware updates which have consistently improved old cameras a la Fuji.-</p>

</blockquote>

<p><br /> <br /> Eric, you may see it as flooding the market, but it's hardly so dramatic. Sony is just releasing a lot of greatly innovative cameras and then not resting on their laurels. They just keep their engineers noses to the grindstone and keep releasing more improved products. Kudos to them. And as for the firmware thing....I kinda get tired of hearing about this. Not from you personally but you just see it all over the web. Heres the deal, at NO POINT does Sony, or any other manufacturer, guarantee you a firmware update. When you buy a product like a digital camera today you are buying that camera <em>as it is, right there sitting in the box on the shelf. </em>It is the modern internet society that has somehow come to EXPECT our cameras to be updated with the latest and greatest features via an update when the manufacturers make no claim this will be the case. Is it a neat and cool thing when it happens? Oh sure, anyone likes getting a little extra for free. But we shouldn't EXPECT it. And keep in mind, Fuji is the odd duck when it comes to updates. They are AWESOME at updating old cameras with more functionality and I would love if the other makers had the same philosophy.<br>

But its obvious that they DONT. At this point in the game, with Sonys record being what it is on updates, I pity anyone who is surprised that their Sony camera is not receiving any type of post support via firmware updates. <em>This just isn't in the Sony corporate culture. </em>People need to accept that if they choose to use Sony cameras. When I buy a camera I am honestly not factoring in if somewhere down the line the maker is going to make my camera better. I am buying it as it is for the purpose I have in mind. And I'm not going to be butt hurt if they release a new camera with new functions and don't retro upgrade mine to that spec.</p>

<p>Firmware upgrades shouldn't be expected, but should be savored if they happen. End of story.</p>

<p>As for that whole Sony's aren't for pros schtick...well that doesn't fly either. Not that you did it so much in your post, but I get tired of people posting that Sony makes a great 'consumer' camera. This is the talk of forum warriors. If a pro is using a camera to deliver images then the camera in his hand is a pro camera. There are plenty of pro shooters who have made the switch to Sony or use Sony gear in addition to other brands. You wont hear about all of them because they are out there in the real world making money and working and not crowing about on forums that they made the switch. Well, some of them have I suppose, but many more haven't said a word.</p>

<p>Here is a great article listing a few pro photogs who made the jump to Sony.<br /> http://ilovehatephoto.com/2015/07/15/who-are-the-professional-photographers-who-switched-to-the-sony-a7-series/</p>

<p>Serge Ramelli<br /> Michael Shainblum<br /> Will Chao<br /> Edward T.<br /> Christian Marcel<br /> Brian Smith<br /> David Mclain<br /> Trey Ratcliff</p>

[GerrySiegel]

We are perhaps not as knowledgable of what it takes to upgrade the firmware in a model to know what is possible. I understand that my MAC and my Quicktime and my Firefox are constantly pestering me to upgrade this and upgrade that. Olympus is introducing a comprehensive upgrade package next month on its top model to grant some of the benefits that have already been slipped into a newer generation of slightly lower end models. To prop up the sales and to keep customers from feeling left out just as some Sonyites must feel. Yet this came as a shock to many owners, including myself. I look forward to its features which are small individually but logical as a whole. Since these machines are little computers it is fair to expect at least a few firmware issuances. But I consider that a bennie not a mandate to the company...perhaps they will however get your message.

That said, I think the historical context comments above show that Sony has been one heck of an innovator. Won a real following, rivaling Fujisan I am thinking lately... Even building some nice albeit costly lenses, mounts confuse me I hope they have stabiliized on a mount, guess so by now. Yeah sure. If I needed full frame I would look to them first. And some good used ones would do fine --g--

[george_doumani]

<p>Wow this topic really seems to have ruffled some feathers. I get where you are all coming from, particularly the part about committing to a photographic tool and using it until the buttons fall off and upgrading only when that tool does not allow you to capture the frames you desire. That has always been a constant philosophy that photographic corporations (mainly digital) do not like. Let's not forget however that Sony is a corporation. I take my hat off to them for pushing the envelope here with the innovation. They designed the cameras so many of us lusted after. Yet, they are a corporation and their main objective is and remains to be to make as much money as possible. Has that premise changed? Yes yes yes... Canon, Nikon and Olympus and Fuji etc etc are also in that same business of making money. What I am trying to say I will outline with 2 tangible examples below.</p>

<p>Example 1) Why has the A7II been excluded from the update to allow uncompressed RAW? I am no technician BUT my ASSUMPTION here is that this omission is a deliberate ploy by Sony management to persuade the people who own an A7, A7R or A7S or A7II to upgrade to a newer model. Given that their investment was most likely within 1 - 2 years of this firmware update I find that kind of grotesque. It seems to me the sensors are built to capture in 14 bit yet Sony deliberately sacrificed speed over image quality in an attempt lure as many DSLR fans across as quickly as possible and once they sold all of there existing glass tell them they must upgrade to a newer model in order to take advantage of full image quality. THAT SIMPLY IS POOR ON SO MANY LEVELS. This is pure computing which (I assume) all of the above mentioned models are physically capable of delivering.</p>

<p>Example 2) I have become obsessed with Eye AF on my A7II. It truly has truly revolutionised my workflow. Hats off to Sony for such on sensor technology and combined focusing algorithms. It however only works with static subjects in AF-S mode. Wait.... when the A7RII is released now it is available in AF-C mode. What? Again it seems logical to me the original technology existed 12 months ago for this little computer to track a subject (which it did via AF-C) and simultaneously for it to focus on an eye (in single focus mode) how come suddenly 12 months later it can track an eye? This is again (and an assumption) IMO a software related feature and one that could easily be implemented via a firmware upgrade YET IT IS NOT. It seems if you would like this feature Sony would like you to upgrade the to very expensive A7RII. Is that feature hardware related people?</p>

<p>Now for everyone who is shouting "good on you Sony for pushing the Canon's and Nikon's of this world", fully agreed BUT if they are to survive in this market they must be loyal to their new converts by way of a commitment to not simply shut the door in their faces as a newer better model is just around the corner. I know loads of people holding off on Sony because of this reason. I jumped on after having such a great experience with my RX1 (the camera I always dreamt of - yet again could have been so much better by way of a few small updates which never appeared). The technology is at an early stage. I know that. Developments will start to be less incremental as the science of what is actually possible is challenged. DSLR's hit that point years ago as the race for resolution seems to be the only thing Canon and Nikon are interested in developing. Sony could crush them with a firmer commitment to developing a wider and faster range of FE optics (as opposed to newer bodies) and most of all a bigger commitment to satisfying the existing customer base by way of upgrading existing models via firmware. They refuse to listen it seems.</p>

<p>Kindly reread the last 2 sentences in that last paragraph.</p>

[Ian Taylor]

<p>Sony is getting a lot more right than wrong. I am switching over to the A7R2 for most of my work after twelve years of working with Canon. It's a game changing camera. I know that they will come out in four months with something 'better', but I don't care. <br>

I have also been using the Fuji XT1 on jobs this year. The last firmware update almost made it a new camera. </p>

[bebu_lamar]

<p>I think the problem is you. You want to have latest and greatest and Sony kept you from doing that.</p>

[george_doumani]

<p>"I think the problem is you. You want to have latest and greatest and Sony kept you from doing that."</p>

<p>Do you call the ability to capture RAW uncompressed images on a 1700€ camera "the latest and greatest"?</p>

<p>If you are a weekend warrior shooting with your Canon Rebel and plastic kit lens then that would be of no issue. I am not. Allowing users of previous versions to have access to what they capture at a full bit rate is not in my eyes unreasonable. That is just one example. </p>

<p>Why is everyone rushing in defence of Sony? They are a corporation and they answer to one group of people. Their shareholders (not us, their customers).</p>

[bebu_lamar]

<p>No matter how good or how bad the camera is, the new version is the latest and if the new version is better it's the greatest. Sony kept introducing new model so you can't afford to always have the latest and greatest. There is nothing wrong with the original A7 is it? If there is then why did you buy it in the first place?<br>

I am not defending Sony at all. I don't buy their cameras but in this case I think that you think all of their cameras are great when they were introduced but then soon later they have new ones and you feel bad.</p>

[george_doumani]

<p>This is NOT about the latest and greatest gear. This is about Sony NOT consolidating the loyal people who switched systems and whom are disenchanted with the fact that basic requirements are being addressed on the current cameras but not their own (1 - 3 year old models). This issue with uncompressed RAW has been brought up again and again and finally Sony took notice but only in their new range. How is that about the latest and greatest? I am not interested in 4K video, I am not interested in resolution higher than circa 20mp BUT I am interested in the best image quality available given the constraints of the hardware. The hardware is more than capable but Sony is intentionally dumbing down previous models in an attempt to flood the market with new products. It is obvious!</p>

<p>Furthermore if you read the post from the start I do not or never have owned an A7 I have the A7II. I knew they would screw people with the first breed (which they did) within a matter of a few months and they have done nothing to make these people feel better by way of any substantial improvements in terms of a firmware upgrade. The A7 is a great camera but with that focus system and mirror slap I could see it was not anything I was interested in. Horses for courses. </p>

<p>As far as me thinking all of Sony cameras are great until the a new one is released. NO! I bought the A7II after conducting much research. Try and shoot this camera with a harsh backlit sky and work with those RAW files and you will see what I mean. POSTERIZATION! Worse than anything I have seen come out of a Canon Raw file. This could be addressed with the flick of a switch by Sony but NO! You need to spend up to get full bit rate. That is unfair.</p>

[eric_arnold]

<blockquote>

<p>you may see it as flooding the market, but it's hardly so dramatic. </p>

</blockquote>

<p>isn't it though? we are talking about three separate sensor platforms -- 1", APS-C, and Full-frame, two of which require different lens mounts. </p>

<blockquote>

<p>Sony's aren't for pros schtick...well that doesn't fly either. </p>

</blockquote>

<p>doesn't it? how so? no 2.8 zooms does limit your market regardless of how much you want to argue otherwise. and how many of those shooters you named shot pro sports? im not saying more pros wont eventually migrate to sony is they can build out there lenses and address things like EVF blackout, but i hardly think its worth debate that an incomplete system is more complete than it actually is. </p>

[Ed_Ingold]

<p>In their announcement of the October 19th firmware upgrade, Sony mentioned that it would be extended to other A7 cameras as well, without being specific. At very least, I would expect the A7ii to be included. If there are no hardware issues, the older A7's should be there as well.</p>

<p>The major selling point of the model II was the in-body image stabilization. That's not going to be an add-on, nor is the silent shutter, due to the way the A7 and A7R sensors are sampled. Imagine the disappointment of early Leica M8 adapters, who found your blacks came out brown due to infrared sensitivity. Leica's "upgrade" was to suggest the use of hot mirror filters.</p>

<p>We all like the idea of the latest technical innovations, but with limited resources they remain unrealized. Whatever we are using was purchased with certain capabilities in mind. Until those needs are no longer met, the reasons to upgrade are more mental than otherwise. For me, the A7Rii represented ... silence, so heads don't turn when I shoot in a quiet place. I'll take the resolution, though, but I'm still learning how to take advantage of it (back to schlepping a tripod and manual focus).</p>

[david_smith110]

<blockquote>

<p>isn't it though? we are talking about three separate sensor platforms -- 1", APS-C, and Full-frame, two of which require different lens mounts.</p>

 

</blockquote>

<p>And whats your point? If this is your criteria for flooding the market then ALL camera manufacturers are guilty of it. Lets look at Canon for instance... APS-C, APS-H (What?), Full Frame, EOS M, compact cameras, cinematography cameras.....dang, cant say Sony is the only one doing that.</p>

 

<blockquote>

<p>no 2.8 zooms does limit your market regardless of how much you want to argue otherwise. and how many of those shooters you named shot pro sports?</p>

 

</blockquote>

<p>So let me get this straight. Your definition of a pro shooter is someone who needs 2.8 zooms and shoots sports? Pu-lease. Did you even look at the article I posted? Did you SEE the artistic and gorgeous photographs those guys are creating? Who cares if they don't shoot sports? They are PROFESSIONAL photographers making money creating images for clients.</p>

<p>Seriously Eric, I don't imagine many, if any at all, sports photographers are using Sony mirrorless gear right now. Because this wouldn't be the right tool for the job. You bringing this up as a negative is akin to a bunch of people dong some really fancy wood work and using a certain type of screwdriver to install screws a certain way and then you walk in and criticize them about their tool of choice because this screwdriver is no good at hammering 16 penny nails.</p>

<p>Whaaaa...?</p>

<p>As for your comment about an incomplete system....Sony FF mirrorless is just over two years old. How can the system be anything but incomplete. In all reality Sony should be praised for cranking out the amount of gear that they have been able to in such a short time. Here are some bullets points to sum this up.</p>

<p>• Sony has come out with some great gear in a very short time<br>

• They get a lot of criticism from people who are butt hurt about this for some reason<br>

• Easy solution...don't worry what is in my hand. Worry what is coming out of <em>your</em> camera</p>

<p>Eric, are you a pro photographer? Did you purchase Sony gear and now it is holding you back? I'm just trying to understand your comments.</p>

[Allen Herbert]

<p>Its all about selling stuff that's what they are in business. Yes, faster auto focus, superior low light performance, better image quality...that is what we want....using any lens on their cams a leap for mankind.</p>

<p>But, a big but. All those old time folk....they got there without any of that stuff.</p>

<p>Just a thought.</p>

[david_smith110]

<p>George, believe it or not but I can understand your frustration on the many points you have listed. I actually was going to start another thread in response to this one entitled "Sony Mirrorless (a little cheese to go with that whine). But I didn't want to detract from you post in any way. :)</p>

<p>But one of the things you posted made me do a little research because I see this come up a lot on forums as well.</p>

<blockquote>

<p>Sony could crush them with a firmer commitment to developing a wider and faster range of FE optics (as opposed to newer bodies)</p>

</blockquote>

<p>What we need to remember here, and it is easy to forget in the internet age of up to the minute reporting and unboxing videos and the like, is that Sony mirrorless FF cameras have been out for right at 2 years. That's it...only TWO YEARS. The argument often made is that they have released waaayyyy to many bodies and not focused on the lenses. I believe this opinion to be fundamentally flawed for a couple of different reasons. Heres why.</p>

<p>First of all in that time frame Sony has brought out 3 different cameras which are exactly alike in form factor but radically different in mission statements. To the untrained eye there is not difference between the a7, a7r and a7s. But we photographers know that this is completely untrue. The cameras serve completely different needs and while there is some overlap Sony has done a remarkable job in maturing a camera line that serves many different photographers in many ways. By using the same body design and form factor they are able to keep prices low and use the same parts across multiple bodies. All the goodie parts that make these models different are hidden on the inside, namely the sensor. Kudos to Sony for doing a really good job with this.</p>

<p>Now in that same time period they have updated the cameras in meaningful ways. Each model now has a Mk II version and is improved because of this. So viewed in this light, they really haven't released way to many bodies. In two years they have released 3 cameras, and then upgraded and improved them. I personally like that time frame vs what some other companies were doing for a while. It seemed like for the longest time Canon and Nikon were playing a game up one upmanship on who could take the longest to come up with the most boring camera upgrade. I find Sonys alacrity in this refreshing.</p>

<p>The second thing I would like to point out is a little bit of history. If you go back on the Canon Museum website (which I did) and look at the lenses Canon released in the first two years of the EOS system (from March of 87 to March of 89) you will see a total of 21 lenses pushed out the door by Big Red. Not bad by all accounts.</p>

<p>Now look at the lenses released by Sony up to this point in the same time frame. Off the Sony website I see a total of 11 lenses. Ok, so that is not quite up to what Canon did in the same time. But wait, if you count the lenses that partner Ziess has released, the Loxia and and Batis lenses, well you now have another 5 lenses. That brings the total up to 17. Now this is looking a little closer. So just counting Sony and major partner Ziess we really aren't that much off of what Canon did in its first two years. And keep in mind, Canon was on a mission during the late 80's. They had completely changed mounts from the FD system which A LOT of pros were using and they were in crunch time trying to satisfy the pro market and get them to switch. Quite of few of those lenses released in those two years are those big, white, fast bazookas you see at all the sporting events.</p>

<p>Now where things get really interesting is when you add in the dedicated third party lenses for FE in those same years. My research shows 5 Samyang, 2 Mitakon, 1 Venus optics (really cool wide angle macro) and 1 Lensbaby. So now we have another 9 lenses to Sonys total. Now what I don't have info for is just how many third party lenses were released in the first two years of the EOS mount. But I cant imagine the market was flooded with them. Lets just say without hard numbers these two totals are acutally probably pretty close now.</p>

<p>But....and here is what all the Sony haters will poo poo every time you mention it, but with the A7's you can use adapters to mount up just about any lens ever made. "Oh but WAIT" the detractors will say "those don't really count. You loose all types of functionality with those old lenses. No PRO would EVER DO THAT! You cant count those..." and so on and so forth.</p>

<p>Go look at flickr. Go look at 500px. Go listen to podcast about photography. There are tons and tons of beautiful images made on a7 cameras using adapted lenses from all points in history, from all over the world. When you count all the lenses that can be adapted to the a7 system the number becomes simply staggering. Hundreds....thousands of lens options are available for photographers to use creatively and with which to produce art.</p>

<p>Because isn't that why we shoot? To create beautiful images? Some get paid for it, some don't. But at the end of the day we are all here (I hope) to create wonderful imagery, and not focus to much on the distractions of gear.</p>

<p>I'm sorry you feel so much frustration toward Sony right now. My advice would be to mount up an old lens and go shoot. :)</p>

[Karim Ghantous]

<p>I have two Sonys ATM. The A7 is one. I have not yet used it to its full potential. I'd rather buy what Sony is doing than what DSLR makers are doing.</p>

<p>I do agree that Sony needs to be a touch more refined in a few areas. Fair enough. E.g. the first A7 bodies did not really handle RF lenses that well. The later bodies certainly do.</p>

<p>Pick your compromises. I'd rather the compromises in the A7 than in a DSLR. Most people probably would if they tried both. We're coming to a point where the A7 series will be able to replace DSLRs for everything - and we can't get there with slow paced development.</p>

<p>With digital cameras, the old paradigms don't work. In fact, they're the naphthalene of paradigms. Leica's newest camera, the M-A, is basically an M4 with some improvements. That's fantastic. I love it. But it's a film camera. You can do that with film cameras. Sony has done digital photographers a huge, huge favour, and I thank them immensely.</p>

[eric_arnold]

<blockquote>

<p>Lets look at Canon for instance... APS-C, APS-H (What?), Full Frame, EOS M, compact cameras, cinematography cameras.....dang, cant say Sony is the only one doing that.</p>

</blockquote>

<p>not an equivalent comparison because Canon has legacy lenses already. this is an amateurish argument to make.</p>

<blockquote>

<p>Seriously Eric, I don't imagine many, if any at all, sports photographers are using Sony mirrorless gear right now. </p>

</blockquote>

<p>so sports pros dont count as pros? lol.</p>

<blockquote>

<p>I'm just trying to understand your comments.</p>

</blockquote>

<p>lol. well let me know when you figure them out. </p>

[david_smith110]

<p>Yup, still trying to understand your comments Eric, but this last post is all over the place. I hope you choose to re-enter the dialogue in a meaningful way.</p>