Sony crushes the price/build-quality barrier
in [Digital Cameras]
|
Prev: Movado Certa Ladies Watch 0605616
Next: Here Comes the 3-D Camera: Revolutionary Prototype Films World in Three Dimensions
From: bugbear on 12 May 2010 09:36 Chris Malcolm wrote: > It's the beginning of the end for DSLRs in general. But it's not going > to be a sudden death. They'll run in parallel until there's no longer > any advantage to the reflex mirror technology. Yes - they'll never quite die, they'll just occupy a smaller and smaller niche. BugBear
From: David J Taylor on 12 May 2010 09:47 "Bruce" <docnews2011(a)gmail.com> wrote in message news:qgrku5t9ucgf48kr9iq0hka9pouhcsfrcd(a)4ax.com... [] > You have completely missed the point. The APS-C sensor has > significant advantages over Four Thirds. Sony would be throwing those > advantages away and committing commercial suicide by making 'just > another Micro Four Thirds camera' in a market that is already well > supplied with high quality product. > > Far better to explore a new market where the competition (Samsung and > Sigma) both have flawed product on offer. > > Also, Sony already makes APS-C size sensors in huge quantities and > there is a surplus of capacity because of the commercial failure of > the Alpha range of DSLRs. Why abandon the resulting economies of > scale only to enter a market that is already supplied, making sensors > that are markedly inferior to APS-C? It would be madness. From Sony's viewpoint, it may seem sensible, but I don't think it's best for the consumer. The difference between APS-C and 4/3 is marginal, and given a couple of years advance in sensor technology 4/3 will be capable of covering an even greater ISO, range, and perhaps a sufficiently great ISO range for the majority. >>The camera doesn't even have a built-in flash! > > > Two Olympus Micro Four Thirds models also lack a built-in flash. But > I agree, it seems a strange omission. Naturally, it opens up a market > for accessories with a proprietary interface that Sony will seek to > exploit. > > No-one so far has remarked on the weird appearance of the NEX > hardware. The lenses are huge compared to the bodies. The bodies are > minimalist and almost featureless. The user interface is very > unconventional. It's what I was alluding to with "a better balanced package" - add in that EVF and flash, and use the smaller 4/3 sensor and lenses. > I wonder who these cameras will appeal to - I use a Panasonic Lumix > GF1 as 'the camera I always have with me', and I would welcome an > alternative with better image quality and more control over depth of > field. Even though I have been using a Sony DSC-R1 for several years > now, and have been very happy with it, I am not sure that I could live > with a Sony NEX camera. It is just too weird. > > Let's see what Nikon brings to the "mirrorless DSLR" table. ;-) ... and Canon, as well. From what you say, it sounds as if we'll get two more incompatible systems, rather than the benefits the 4/3 and micro-4/3 could have produced for the consumer. At least, I hope my Nikon DX lenses will fit! Cheers, David
From: Mark L on 12 May 2010 11:13 On Wed, 12 May 2010 14:36:16 +0100, bugbear <bugbear(a)trim_papermule.co.uk_trim> wrote: >Chris Malcolm wrote: > >> It's the beginning of the end for DSLRs in general. But it's not going >> to be a sudden death. They'll run in parallel until there's no longer >> any advantage to the reflex mirror technology. > >Yes - they'll never quite die, they'll just occupy a smaller >and smaller niche. > > BugBear Like the 8x10 view-camera, its glass plates, wet-baths, and covered wagon to carry it all, might only appear at a Buckskinner's Rendezvous celebration once a year, owned by just one person in that state. Fondly cherished by those who enjoy trying to preserve the past for its novelty factor.
From: Bruce on 12 May 2010 11:51 On Wed, 12 May 2010 14:47:51 +0100, "David J Taylor" <david-taylor(a)blueyonder.co.uk.invalid> wrote: >"Bruce" <docnews2011(a)gmail.com> wrote in message >news:qgrku5t9ucgf48kr9iq0hka9pouhcsfrcd(a)4ax.com... >[] >> You have completely missed the point. The APS-C sensor has >> significant advantages over Four Thirds. Sony would be throwing those >> advantages away and committing commercial suicide by making 'just >> another Micro Four Thirds camera' in a market that is already well >> supplied with high quality product. >> >> Far better to explore a new market where the competition (Samsung and >> Sigma) both have flawed product on offer. >> >> Also, Sony already makes APS-C size sensors in huge quantities and >> there is a surplus of capacity because of the commercial failure of >> the Alpha range of DSLRs. Why abandon the resulting economies of >> scale only to enter a market that is already supplied, making sensors >> that are markedly inferior to APS-C? It would be madness. > >From Sony's viewpoint, it may seem sensible, but I don't think it's best >for the consumer. The difference between APS-C and 4/3 is marginal The difference between APS-C and 4/3 definitely isn't marginal. It is the same difference as between APS-C and full frame. In each case, there is a whole f/stop difference in depth of field, which is very significant for creative photographers. >given a couple of years advance in sensor technology 4/3 will be capable >of covering an even greater ISO, range, and perhaps a sufficiently great >ISO range for the majority. The majority? The majority of camera owners shoot atrocious snapshots of their children, pets and cheap package holidays. You don't even need the quality of 4/3 for that. A $100 point and shoot is overkill.
From: Bruce on 12 May 2010 12:53
On 12 May 2010 13:07:53 GMT, Chris Malcolm <cam(a)holyrood.ed.ac.uk> wrote: >In rec.photo.digital Bruce <docnews2011(a)gmail.com> wrote: >> On Tue, 11 May 2010 05:53:14 -0700 (PDT), RichA <rander3127(a)gmail.com> >> wrote: >>>Metal bodies! At low prices! With APS sensors! >>>http://dpreview.com/previews/sonynex5/page2.asp > >> Sony has a large surplus capacity to produce APS-C sized sensors and, >> given the extremely slow sales of Sony Alpha DSLRs, this new NEX range >> will soak up some of that surplus. > >> Sony might hope that the NEX range will not impact greatly on sales of >> Alpha DSLRs, however it is almost certain that the exact opposite will >> be the case. Certainly in Japan, where Micro Four Thirds sales have >> been very much at the expense of the sales of Four Thirds DSLRs.. > >> There is of course a stark contrast between the very large investment >> that Sony has clearly poured in to the NEX range, and the comparative >> lack of recent investment by Sony in the Alpha DSLR range. > >> We have already seen Fujifilm, Panasonic and Samsung abandoning their >> DSLR ranges in favour of high quality mirrorless cameras. My >> prediction is that Sony will soon follow suit. > >> This is the beginning of the end for Alpha DSLRs. > >It's the beginning of the end for DSLRs in general. But it's not going >to be a sudden death. They'll run in parallel until there's no longer >any advantage to the reflex mirror technology. Sony has a particular problem in that its Alpha range of DSLRs is not selling in significant numbers. The Alpha DSLRs are apparently losing Sony very large amounts of money. Investment in the range has been cut back with several planned new lenses postponed or cancelled. So the demise of Sony DSLRs will probably be quicker than with other brands that aren't losing money to anything like the same extent that Sony is. On a more general point, the mass market may well move away from DSLRs and towards mirrorless interchangeable-lens cameras, but professionals and keen amateurs will stay with DSLRs for some years to come. The mass market never needed DSLRs, but their greatly improved image quality (over P&S digicams) wasn't available in a compact body until Micro Four Thirds came along. |