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: Bruce on 12 May 2010 12:56 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. When you think of it, the digital market is maturing in very much the same way as the 35mm film market did. We will end up with DSLRs and mirrorless digital interchangeable-lens cameras using the same high quality sensors - just as 35mm SLRs and 35mm rangefinder cameras used the same film and gave comparable image quality to each other.
From: Bruce on 12 May 2010 14:52 On 12 May 2010 13:02:56 GMT, Chris Malcolm <cam(a)holyrood.ed.ac.uk> wrote: > >Because almost all A-mount lenses require a camera body motor to drive >the lens AF, which the NEX bodies don't have. But there are new >A-mount lenses, and more coming, which have their own focus >motors. Which should be able to autofocus on a NEX body via the >A-mount adapter. The Alpha lens to NEX body adapter is important because it will allow Sony to stop making Alpha DSLRs while still offering ongoing support to people with Alpha and Minolta lenses. There has clearly been a lot of investment in NEX at a time when investment in Alpha DSLRs and lenses has been curtailed. The writing is on the wall. For Alpha, the end is nigh.
From: Bowser on 12 May 2010 16:17 On Wed, 12 May 2010 07:26:14 +0100, "David J Taylor" <david-taylor(a)blueyonder.co.uk.invalid> wrote: >"Bruce" <docnews2011(a)gmail.com> wrote in message >news:ls9ju5h1ek3180qh00npobort9q2nsc34k(a)4ax.com... >[] >> The Four Thirds lens mount would be of no use whatsoever with an APS-C >> size sensor. And given Sony's massive (and currently underused) >> capacity for producing APS-C size sensors, there would be no sense in >> opting for anything smaller. >> >> Indeed, the better overall IQ, lower noise and enhanced control of >> depth of field are such strong assets of APS-C compared to Four Thirds >> that it would be sheer madness to throw them away by going for a >> smaller sensor. > >Well, it's an other Sony own-brand special I, for one, won't be >considering. A 4/3 sensor and micro-4/3 lens mount would have much more >sense, making the package more balanced, perhaps allowing room for an EVF, >and allowing the customer a much greater choice of lenses. The camera >doesn't even have a built-in flash! Normally, I'd agree and say that Sony is once again trying to rule the world with a proprietary item. But we're used to proprietary lens mounts, aren't we? This camera is really interesting, for me anyway. Smaller and lighter than a m4/3 with a larger sensor? Hmmm..... We'll see when the tests are in. Yes, I've seen the two out now, but they're not great tests.
From: Bruce on 12 May 2010 21:20 On Wed, 12 May 2010 09:03:19 +0100, "David J Taylor" <david-taylor(a)blueyonder.co.uk.invalid> wrote: >"nospam" <nospam(a)nospam.invalid> wrote in message >news:120520100244498107%nospam(a)nospam.invalid... >[] >> they're not part of the 4/3rds consortium and i doubt they could be >> even if they wanted to. > >That's a pity, as it could reduce Sony's development costs as well as >lowering costs to customers, and provide them with a greater range of >lenses at launch. No, it would *increase* Sony's development costs. Going into an already well-established market where they would have to invest in new sensors *and* new lenses would be commercial madness. Sony already has a surplus of APS-C sensor production and the lenses can be simple adaptations of those that are already mass produced for APS-C DSLRs - why do you think the kit zoom lens is a very familiar 18-55mm? It would make no sense whatsoever to abandon those huge commercial advantages and go for an inferior, smaller format. >Their loss, me thinks. Disagree 100%. For Sony to adopt Micro Four Thirds would be suicide.
From: David J Taylor on 13 May 2010 02:08
"Bruce" <docnews2011(a)gmail.com> wrote in message news:0btku5dnv5eg5esh5q7sm9uivailf8prpp(a)4ax.com... > On Wed, 12 May 2010 09:03:19 +0100, "David J Taylor" > <david-taylor(a)blueyonder.co.uk.invalid> wrote: > >>"nospam" <nospam(a)nospam.invalid> wrote in message >>news:120520100244498107%nospam(a)nospam.invalid... >>[] >>> they're not part of the 4/3rds consortium and i doubt they could be >>> even if they wanted to. >> >>That's a pity, as it could reduce Sony's development costs as well as >>lowering costs to customers, and provide them with a greater range of >>lenses at launch. > > > No, it would *increase* Sony's development costs. Going into an > already well-established market where they would have to invest in new > sensors *and* new lenses would be commercial madness. > > Sony already has a surplus of APS-C sensor production and the lenses > can be simple adaptations of those that are already mass produced for > APS-C DSLRs - why do you think the kit zoom lens is a very familiar > 18-55mm? It would make no sense whatsoever to abandon those huge > commercial advantages and go for an inferior, smaller format. > > >>Their loss, me thinks. > > > Disagree 100%. For Sony to adopt Micro Four Thirds would be suicide. I don't agree with your points, but I do see the login in them. It will be interesting to see what happens with time. Will these unbalanced, flash-less, viewfinder-less, expensive(?), and proprietary cameras be more successful than micro-4/3? Will they be any more successful than the DSC-R1? Cheers, David |