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
The GetDPI Photography Forum
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 hate to be the one bringing you bad news
- Thread starter edwardkaraa
- Start date
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
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.
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.
I know that certain other systems have say 2-3 prime lens options in several of the Focal lengths but the question is, as a user, how many primes do you need, in say the 50mm or 85mm or 135mm FL ? I get the job done with one of each. :thumbup: I am more than happy with the options that Sony currently has (bodies, lenses, flashes), for most of what I am doing currently. I would like to have a 35/2 (and not want their current 35mm f/1.4G), a newer 50/1.4 (than the current 50mm f/1.4) etc but those are not show-stoppers for me.
Now if you are looking for options to shoot say high-speed action sports and things along those lines, then yes, Sony does not have any equipment that is made specifically for that purpose - at least not yet (even though there may very well be some surprises during Photokina). Tilt/shift lenses are also another gap of theirs but all-in-all, considering that they had a failing camera business (the old Konica-Minolta organization) unexpectedly dropped onto their lap, and it has just been a short 4 years since then, I am willing to give them some slack on not having as well rounded an equipment lineup as seasoned market leaders.
mjm6
Member
A gold star for Hans...
I have a minor in architectural history, so visiting the Library and Florence last year was a highlight of my life. That shot was taken at ISO 6400, and it looks great in color.
I've got a few great images from the Library, but none of them are probably recognizable to most people without a serious concentration on the details.
This one was processed with the older Lightroom V2, but the newer version really clears the color noise up almost perfectly, and it retains a feeling of grain (which I like a lot) due to the high speed.
---Michael
I have a minor in architectural history, so visiting the Library and Florence last year was a highlight of my life. That shot was taken at ISO 6400, and it looks great in color.
I've got a few great images from the Library, but none of them are probably recognizable to most people without a serious concentration on the details.
This one was processed with the older Lightroom V2, but the newer version really clears the color noise up almost perfectly, and it retains a feeling of grain (which I like a lot) due to the high speed.
---Michael
edwardkaraa
New member
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.So with the introduction of the 24/2, Sony still has to give us 9 more lenses
dhsimmonds
New member
I understand that Sony are the market DSLR leaders in many Eastern Europe countries. I doubt if the sales numbers are as high as similarly sized countries in the West, but it is interesting that these rapidly advancing countries are not influenced by the N & C mantra of other countries. In other words they are not so label conscious unless they can make the labels!
Jorgen Udvang
Subscriber Member
Sony is probably suffering quite a bit from Minolta's sinking popularity the last 10 years. Where I live, used Minolta lenses are a common as hen's teeth, which means I would have to buy everything new. Since most of my Nikon lenses are five years or more, the difference in price is substantial, and the cost of changing would easily surpass the price of a D3X. Actually, the A900, the 24-70 and the 70-200 would bring me there already, and then I would have to add macro, portrait lens, long telephoto, wide/angle, backup body, extra batteries etc.....
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.
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.
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.
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.
edwardkaraa
New member
Here are some good rumors:
http://www.sonyalpharumors.com/sr3-sony-g-200mm-f2-0-lens-and-zeiss-28mm-f1-4-in-2011/
http://www.sonyalpharumors.com/sr3-sony-g-200mm-f2-0-lens-and-zeiss-28mm-f1-4-in-2011/
Terry
New member
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
Jorgen Udvang
Subscriber Member
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 comment further up about Sony being market leader in some East European countries is interesting. For my use, Sony would probably be the best alternative, and I would probably have bought an A900 and an A700 if I was to start from scratch. But I ain't
Jorgen Udvang
Subscriber Member
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/
Anybody needs an extra kidney
edwardkaraa
New member
LOL I thought soForget what I wrote above. If this rumour is true, I'll sell whatever is needed and change :ROTFL:
Anybody needs an extra kidney
but don't sell that kidney yet. Even if the rumor is true, don't expect the lenses to be available anytime soon...
C
chals
Guest
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)
Last edited:
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/
Marc
douglasf13
New member
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'm not saying it's impossible, but I don't think it'll be soon, and I also don't think the lenses would be as small as one would hope. At the end of the day, we have an all new mount with lenses designed for its image circle, so the NEX is fullframe...it's just that fullframe means a 23.5x15.5 sensor in this case, and I think that is a suitable trade off in regards to system size.
edwardkaraa
New member
I think Chals means mirrorless alpha mount body with EVF. I do think this will be the future for all existing mounts.
douglasf13
New member
Well, don't I need to drink a bit of coffee this morning! Sorry about that.
I could surely see mirrorless A mount, fullframe cameras. The question would be how Sony deals with the registration distance. Do they just keep the space there in the camera to make it compatible natively with A mount lenses, or do they shrink the registration distance and provide an adapter? The tough thing about the latter is that Sony would need to design new 35mm lenses with shorter registration distances to work natively, and having 4 separate lens lines sounds odd to me (Alpha, Alpha DT, NEX, and the new mirrorless 35mm lenses.) I would think that they would just keep the same registration distance as the current A mount, and that wouldn't lead to smaller lenses or cameras.
I could surely see mirrorless A mount, fullframe cameras. The question would be how Sony deals with the registration distance. Do they just keep the space there in the camera to make it compatible natively with A mount lenses, or do they shrink the registration distance and provide an adapter? The tough thing about the latter is that Sony would need to design new 35mm lenses with shorter registration distances to work natively, and having 4 separate lens lines sounds odd to me (Alpha, Alpha DT, NEX, and the new mirrorless 35mm lenses.) I would think that they would just keep the same registration distance as the current A mount, and that wouldn't lead to smaller lenses or cameras.
edwardkaraa
New member
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...
Eoin
Member
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.
douglasf13
New member
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...