Ad
Ad
Ad
Pages: « 1 ... 3 4 [5]   Bottom of Page
Print
Author Topic: Sony NEX system - Full-frame too on the way ?  (Read 24815 times)
ziocan
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 427


« Reply #80 on: August 05, 2010, 10:33:55 PM »
ReplyReply

Quote from: BJL
Yes: my phrasing was poor; I just meant that Pentax no longer makes any 35mm format [36x24mm] SLR's that use those lenses "as intended". Likewise, Sony's 35mm format lenses would still be usable on Sony's APS-C format DSLRs. My point was only that the existence of a good collection of 35mm format lenses is not a sufficient reason for Sony [or Pentax] to keep making 35mm format SLRs.

Aside: Pentax did announce its intention to make 35mm format DSLRs, using the same 6MP Phillips/Dalsa sensor as Contax used in its ill-fated DSLR, but then Pentax abandoned than plan, presumably because it was decided that it would not be profitable, and this decision was made despite Pentax having a fairly good 35mm format lens system.
Although you have a made a good point that sales of lenses are not a good reason enough to keep producing FF sensors if they are not cost effective, I would not set the example of Pentax, Contax and Rolley which are companies of the size of a small subsidiary of Sony. And probably despite Sony having only 10% (probably more as today) of the DSLR market, all the 3 companies combined may not have been able to sell the same amount of lenses Sony alone is selling today.
Again when Pentax decided of not doing the FF DSLR body was at the time when sensor technology was not as advanced and cost effective as today. They also had to outsource the sensor.

Sure that all those ff lenses would work very well on cropped sensors and are actually sold mostly to APS-c customers, therefore I can agree that a FF body is not necessary for sony. (nikon was pretty successful for 5/6 years previous having a FF body). Yet having a valid flagship FF product as Sony and Nikon have today, probably still help to sell more APS-c cameras.

Imo, the main reason of the small success of the a900/a850 (and D3x) was that they came to the market 1 year after the 1Ds3.
FF DSLR customers  were already tied to Canon from the previous 5 years, the majority were a lot of Nikon and MF film switchers (including myself), most of us had already bought the 1ds3 which was not worth to be replaced with cameras that were pretty similar.
« Last Edit: August 05, 2010, 10:36:59 PM by ziocan » Logged
ziocan
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 427


« Reply #81 on: August 05, 2010, 10:47:27 PM »
ReplyReply

Quote from: douglasf13
While not being professional in the sense of having something akin to CPS, Sony does provide many professional landscape, wedding, fine art and studio photographers with fullframe camera bodies.  As for "professional" build, the A900 certainly competes.
There is this stereotype that the a900 cannot be used outside of studio by: wedding, fashion and advertising photographers, but In my experience this is not the case.
The a900 can be safely used up to 1600 iso for commercial printing (magazine spreads not even showing a bit of grain) and with some precautions up to 3200iso.

You probably have noticed that. while being in every way a much better camera, the a900 suffered a bit from Kodak 14n syndrome and some diehard Canon users have often compared the a900 to the Kodak.
there is nothing more wrong than that comparison.

I went from using the 1ds 1 and 2, to the A900, and I do not miss them one bit. actually I would be disappointed if I had to go back to Canon for still photography. ( still use 7d and 5d with zeiss lenses for filming).
Logged
Fritzer
Full Member
***
Offline Offline

Posts: 211


« Reply #82 on: August 11, 2010, 01:30:28 PM »
ReplyReply

 While not being professional in the sense of having something akin to CPS, Sony does provide many professional landscape, wedding, fine art and studio photographers with fullframe camera bodies.  As for "professional" build, the A900 certainly competes.

My apologies, I didn't mean to be depreciating; professional camera systems for me are the ones that I can rent, buy and have repaired in any major city in the world, with little or no delay.
Logged
ziocan
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 427


« Reply #83 on: August 12, 2010, 03:04:26 AM »
ReplyReply

My apologies, I didn't mean to be depreciating; professional camera systems for me are the ones that I can rent, buy and have repaired in any major city in the world, with little or no delay.
You cannot rent a Leica or Hasselblad in any major city of the world.....

Though you cannot rent a Sony, a part for NY and few other places, you can get it repaired with little or not delay practically everywhere.
Logged
Fritzer
Full Member
***
Offline Offline

Posts: 211


« Reply #84 on: August 12, 2010, 05:26:13 AM »
ReplyReply

You cannot rent a Leica or Hasselblad in any major city of the world.....

Though you cannot rent a Sony, a part for NY and few other places, you can get it repaired with little or not delay practically everywhere.


Well, most commonly rent departments of the bigger pro photo stores carry Hasselblad, Mamyia, Canon, Nikon and Sinar, the typical work horses , with an assortment of lenses and accessories .

Let's say you give your producer an equipment list, for a shoot in another country, in most cases there will be no problem getting extra bodies, lenses, batteries etc. for the systems listed above.

Logged
Pages: « 1 ... 3 4 [5]   Top of Page
Print
Jump to:  

Ad
Ad
Ad