Sony A900 discontinued?

[bensonga]

B&H Photo lists the A900 as a discontinued model.....

Any thoughts on whether it's successor will have an OVF or is this the end of the line?

An A99 with EVF doesn't interest me.

Gary

 

[Bill_Green]

I have no inside information, but I would be pretty shocked if the A99 is an optical viewfinder. I'm not buying anything until it is out and people get some testing time on it, but I think if you are looking for a new A900 it is called the D800e. Unfortunately, it doesn't take legacy Sony lenses.

 

[docmoore]

Nor the colors.....


Bob

 

[bensonga]

Nor does the D800 have in-body image stabilization.....which would be nice to have for my Leica R lenses.

I've been thinking about an A900 for quite awhile.....probably time to make a decision.

Gary

 

[gurtch]

B&H Photo lists the A900 as a discontinued model.....

Any thoughts on whether it's successor will have an OVF or is the end of the line? An A99 with EVF doesn't interest me.

Gary

I agree. I have an A900 with many Zeiss, Sony, and Minolta lenses. I recently got an NEX 7, and I can use all my lenses via an adapter...this sold me on the NEX 7 light weight travel camera. But the EVF is a big dissapointment for me. I would like Sony to come out with a FF body using the 36MP sensor, and old fashioned mirror, pentaprism finder. The A900 is the best FF digital camera I have ever used, and I owned Canon 1DS, 1DSII and 1DSIII.
Dave in NJ

 

[Bill_Green]

Nor does the D800 have in-body image stabilization.....which would be nice to have for my Leica R lenses.

I'm not convinced this is such a big deal in real world use. If you shoot a lot with longish lenses and slow shutter speeds without a tripod, it might help, but I can definitely see a very subtle softening of the image if left on. It has saved me a few times, but I turn it off as soon as I can.

 

[fotografz]

I'm not convinced this is such a big deal in real world use. If you shoot a lot with longish lenses and slow shutter speeds without a tripod, it might help, but I can definitely see a very subtle softening of the image if left on. It has saved me a few times, but I turn it off as soon as I can.

Just curious, what would cause any softening of the image from leaving the in-body IS on?

I never turn it off, and the images are sharp all the time. Motion can blur any focal length, not just long lenses.

-Marc

 

[fotografz]

I have no inside information, but I would be pretty shocked if the A99 is an optical viewfinder. I'm not buying anything until it is out and people get some testing time on it, but I think if you are looking for a new A900 it is called the D800e. Unfortunately, it doesn't take legacy Sony lenses.

Or any AF Zeiss ZA lenses either.

-Marc

 

[emr]

Reading a recent interview I get the feeling that Sony sees SLRs as something that will be dropped as soon as SLTs are good enough. And that will be sooner than later.

Or how do you native English speakers interpret this?

DE: The SLT models--the Translucent Mirror cameras--have been another huge success for Sony, they've really brought new capabilities that didn't exist previously for SLRs. Do you see any future for SLRs within the Sony product line? Another way to say it is: is there any reason to make a non-SLT?

MW: From an industry standpoint, those with a lot of investment in moving-mirror, optical viewfinder technology, SLRs, would certainly say that there are plenty of reasons. (laughs) I think that it's really more a matter of time. I think that what our SLT cameras have done, is they have shown what can be done with the technology, and have suggested what can be done with each iterative improvement in the core device technology. I think that the first generation of SLT cameras was well-received, but enthusiasts would say that it was a great idea, but it wasn't good enough. The viewfinder wouldn't be good enough, the picture quality may not have met their expectations. But I think that with the second generation of SLT, we demonstrated that with improvement of the core device technology, that we could realize a camera that was very much within the consideration-set of even enthusiasts, and we're committed to further developing the core devices on which Translucent Mirror technology is dependent, and as we improve the devices, I think that the advantages--the fundamental advantages--can become just that more appealing, and whatever advantages that conventional moving-mirror SLRs have could become less appealing. But I think it really is dependent upon further developing the devices to the point where it's at least as good as... and then the other advantages really come to the fore. I'd say we're getting pretty close. Obviously there are some purists who would disgree, and we respect their opinion, and it's because we respect their opinion that we continue to develop the core devices. It's hard to imagine that 10 years from now, cameras will operate the way they did 60 years ago. Some would disagree with that, and we respect their opinion, but... 10 years is a long time, five years is a long time.

Sony interview: Ten years from now, will mirror-based cameras be a distant memory? - Imaging Resource

 

[fotografz]

Reading a recent interview I get the feeling that Sony sees SLRs as something that will be dropped as soon as SLTs are good enough. And that will be sooner than later.

Or how do you native English speakers interpret this?



Sony interview: Ten years from now, will mirror-based cameras be a distant memory? - Imaging Resource

Well, this is clearly the hand-writing on the wall as far as Sony is concerned. Makes sense in the longer-term game plan. If Sony wants to dominate the market eventually, then the way to do it is change the game, and be so far out front with the new technology that other current leaders become followers.

What is indicated here is Sony isn't going to relent ... and each step in EVF will be better than the last, until only the most stubborn OVF lovers will have to admit it ain't all that bad.

In the meantime, take care of those A900s and A850s, because they seem to be the end of an era.

Funny, when I see all the comparisons of the D800 to Medium Format and Canon 5D-IIIs, I'd personally like to see one against the A900 ... my bet is that A900 not only will hold its own, I believe the color will still blow away the Nikon

The only thing I do not like with the discontinued A900/850, is that Sony will no longer issue any firmware updates to further refine the camera's abilities. So, you better like it the way it is.

-Marc

 

[GrahamB]

The only thing I do not like with the discontinued A900/850, is that Sony will no longer issue any firmware updates to further refine the camera's abilities. So, you better like it the way it is.

-Marc

I've been very happy with my a850 sine '09. What firmware change are you pining for?

To the OP, having used the a77 for the past 5 months, I don't know that I'd be interested in replacing my a850 unless Sony uses an EVF on the next full frame. Focus peaking and spot magnification have made manual focus lens use a joy. In low light conditions, I find it faster to manually focus my AF glass using peaking. The WYSIWYG exposure, histogram, and level overlays are just gravy.

Graham

 

[johnnygoesdigital]

The A900 was probably the most useful camera i've owned. The prism was the best and brightest, and the 24mm distagon f/2, is outstanding! I personally don't like any EVF, thus no nex-7, but the translucent mirror has potential in terms of sharp, fast fps scenarios. The smooth shutter in the A900 is something I admired too.

 

[fotografz]

I've been very happy with my a850 sine '09. What firmware change are you pining for?

To the OP, having used the a77 for the past 5 months, I don't know that I'd be interested in replacing my a850 unless Sony uses an EVF on the next full frame. Focus peaking and spot magnification have made manual focus lens use a joy. In low light conditions, I find it faster to manually focus my AF glass using peaking. The WYSIWYG exposure, histogram, and level overlays are just gravy.

Graham

One could only hope for a tweak in higher ISO performance ... which has happened on a couple of different existing camera's I've owned.

-Marc

 

[Bill_Green]

Just curious, what would cause any softening of the image from leaving the in-body IS on?

I never turn it off, and the images are sharp all the time. Motion can blur any focal length, not just long lenses.

-Marc

I have no idea, but take a look at iris detail with it on and off. Might just be my camera. I don't have enough understanding of how it works to comment intelligently, I can just mention what I see on mine. I was about to dump the camera before I got the idea to turn the SSS off and it made all the difference.

 

[Braeside]

Bill, I'm pretty sure your A900's SSS is faulty. I have tested mine after you mentioned this a while ago and it does not exhibit that effect. I think Mike at TOP had to exchange his first A900 for a similar fault with the SSS.

 

[fotografz]

Bill, I'm pretty sure your A900's SSS is faulty. I have tested mine after you mentioned this a while ago and it does not exhibit that effect. I think Mike at TOP had to exchange his first A900 for a similar fault with the SSS.

Just for kicks, I just tested my two A900s, and neither exhibit the effect Bill mentioned ... in fact quite the opposite.

-Marc

 

[GrahamB]

It's recommended to turn off SSS for tripod work, and also for fast shutter speeds. Here's an essay by Thom Hogan on the subject (obviously talking about lens stabilazation, but I would think it applies to body too).Nikon VR explained

 

[Hank Graber]

Finally having an excellent optical finder on a DSLR was what attracted me to the A900.

But if I was in Sony's shoes the strategy fotografz outlines is where my development dollars would be going. Like the change from RF to SLR it's just a matter of time before it's good enough to displace optical finders across the board. That will open up all kinds of possibilities for what the image capture device of the future looks like.

 

[philip_pj]

Sony are pretty savvy, despite what one reads in the more excitable fora. They naturally wish to extrapolate the A77 to full frame, aided by more development time on EVF.

But - APS-C DSLRs need better viewfinders than the typical OVF, and are therefore a natural for EVF. They are also about half the cost of full frame and can be updated into a more rapid product cycle. Full frame cameras from what we might now call 'the big three' are a 3-4 year cycle, so there are two good reasons for Sony to think hard about which way to go with the new full frame camera(s).

If user resistance to EVF is strong - and any at all is unhelpful to sales/marketing - Sony will lose momentum in that segment of the market. I think they are far from decided on their course of action and may well produce one of each kind, with a justifiable RRP differential.

Today on the rumour site, lifted from a Dyxum post:

'..there is a significant division of opinion within Sony. The higher ranks want to leave OVF behind and press on with EVF only. But the staff who are closer to that actual market are strongly objecting to complete abandonment. And I was told that in the coming months Sony will release two top tier, Nine level cameras, one with an OVF and the other with an EVF.'

I am another very happy A900 person with many manual lenses, my subject matter and habits means mine has many years of life left in it.

But a 36Mp OVF with peaking and zoom focus would be highly desirable for the AA and pro user segments. Bear in mind that Sony think nothing of model proliferation, as witnessed in the past year or two in APS-C cameras, making the dual camera EVF/OVF strategy quite possible, even likely.

5-10 years is an eon in sales terms...for evidence, look at 2002.

 

[emr]

sonyalpharumors | Blog | (SR4) A99 prototype has an "All Cross 102 point AF" !

A rumor about the A99 prototype. Sonyalpharumors seems to think that A850/900 were the last Sonys with an OVF.