HansAlbert
New member
I'll give a gold star to the first person who can name the building!
Well, it's Michelangelo's Laurentian Library (Biblioteca Medicea Laurenziana) in Florence, the Room of the Tribuna di Elci
Great to see you here. Join our insightful photographic forum today and start tapping into a huge wealth of photographic knowledge. Completing our simple registration process will allow you to gain access to exclusive content, add your own topics and posts, share your work and connect with other members through your own private inbox! And don’t forget to say hi!
I personally have not heard such a complaint from Sony. Where did you hear it ?The problem with Sony is that, from one side, they complain that their FF cameras are not selling well,
I think for quite a few genres of photography, the Full-frame lens lineup that Sony currently has, is doing the job admirably. If they release an ultra-wide prime (say a 14mm or a 16mm or an 18mm), I will sell off my Zeiss 16-35 f/2.8 and get that, since I notice that the primary use of my ultra-wide zoom is at its wider end and a prime will serve the job just fine.but from the other side, they do not develop lenses to close the gaps in the line....
Yep, you are right, Sony never complained in a public statement, so my wording is not very accurate. However, as you say, a lot is being said on the forums, and I personally have first hand information from Sony sales people both in Thailand and the Middle East saying that Sony management is very disappointed with the sales numbers of the A900, and even more so with the A850, that they thought would be a killer.I personally have not heard such a complaint from Sony. Where did you hear it ?
I have however heard a lot of forum talk along those lines, clearly not sourcing their information from any real Sony sources. Just saying.
In fact, Sony very smartly covers the entire 16-400mm range with only 3-4 zooms, so if you like to use zooms, there is absolutely no gaps in the line up. For those who like using high quality primes, there is still a lot of work to be done. The 24/2 has just been announced and it is long overdue. Before this announcement, Sony did not offer any high quality primes below 85mm, leaving a huge gap (14mm to 50mm) unfilled. One can easily put several primes here: 14 - 18 - 21 - 24 - 28 - 35 - 50. There is also no high quality 1:1 macro in the line up. The Sony 100 while not bad is not a top performer. Again, over 135 FL, there are practically no primes (well there is the ridiculously priced 300/2.8 ) but I think Sony needs to introduce at least two good primes, a 200/2.8 and a 300/4. Anything above that would be too specialized and I personally wouldn't care about it.I think for quite a few genres of photography, the Full-frame lens lineup that Sony currently has, is doing the job admirably.
The good lenses cost about the same as their Nikon equivalents didn't price up the Cannons.If Sony management is disappointed, they need to look back and analyse their ambitions and what they were willing to offer. Believing that photographers wouldn't notice that their good lenses weren't cheap would be too optimistic, and if that was what they thought, they need to do their homework better next time. Much better.
You are right of course. The problem is that most potential customers for the A900 and Zeiss lenses already have many (most?) of the lenses they need for Nikon or Canon. The resale value of those lenses will in most cases (I believe) be a fraction of what a new one would cost, regardless of brand. If I change a lens now and then because the old one gets worn out or whatever, it's not a big problem, but changing everything in one go is rather expensive.The good lenses cost about the same as their Nikon equivalents didn't price up the Cannons.
Zeiss 16-35 $1900
Nikon 16-35 $1100
Nikon 14-24 $1800
Zeiss 24-70 $1500 (can be cheaper w/body)
Nikon 24-70 $1700
Zeiss 85 f1.4 $1370
Nikon 85 f1.4 $1200
Forget what I wrote above. If this rumour is true, I'll sell whatever is needed and change :ROTFL:Here are some good rumors:
http://www.sonyalpharumors.com/sr3-sony-g-200mm-f2-0-lens-and-zeiss-28mm-f1-4-in-2011/
LOL I thought so but don't sell that kidney yet. Even if the rumor is true, don't expect the lenses to be available anytime soon...Forget what I wrote above. If this rumour is true, I'll sell whatever is needed and change :ROTFL:
Anybody needs an extra kidney
Now a 200/2G is something I could use for my weddings ... especially if it works well with the 1.4X (280/2.8)! It provides reason for a 35mm DSLR over my MFD kit.Here are some good rumors:
http://www.sonyalpharumors.com/sr3-sony-g-200mm-f2-0-lens-and-zeiss-28mm-f1-4-in-2011/
I doubt here will be a 35mm NEX anytime soon. Sony themselves say that it would require mount changes to do such a thing, and the problems with angled light at the edges of the sensor forces me to think that, if a 35mm NEX did happen, the lenses will be quite a bit larger than M lenses. It would also be odd, because the current NEX lenses' image circle doesn't cover a 35mm sensor, so they'd have to release all new lenses from scratch.I think the coming Fullframe Sonys will be mirrorless and based on the NEX design. But larger due to EVF and weathersealing, battery-capacity and so on. Todays Zeiss primes and Zooms can be used via an adapter with focusmotor. New lenses will be smaller, like older Pentax and Leicas. At least I hope so, I sold my a900 with all my lenses. (using NEX5 and zoom now)
I am soooo glad I decided to move to Sony at the time I did. There were significant savings to be had by buying in the UK from within the Euro zone. Almost parity €1 = £1 where it normally was €1 = £0.70. That coupled with the fact that most UK stock had obviously forward bought at the old exchange rate made the whole offer very attractive........
The A850 looked like a tempting entrance ticket (not to speak about the A700, which they have more or less given away lately), but saving $1,000 on the body doesn't help much when the total investment is in the area of 10,000. While Sony's pricing, at least for top end bodies, has been aggressive, it hasn't been enough for many who need to start up with a more or less complete kit, myself included. It's so much easier to stay with what I have, filling up with a new lens or body now and then, than forking out the equivalent of a small car in one go........
I agree. I was answering in regards to chalms' size assumptions.I think there are more advantages to such system than size alone. Think full time LV, no AF front/back focusing, AF points anywhere on the screen, video, face recognition, smile detection...