The future Alpha 99

[Neonsquare]

I was amazed by the threads at dpr on the Df topic it even went as high a 45% of clicks and I don’t recall any camera doing that before, by comparison what did the A7-A7r generate? I think from memory they briefly touched around 12% but the Df went on and on for many days, near a week I think, pretty damn good for a misfire Barry.

I wouldn't count too much into the dpr click rates. There have been reports that e.g. the A7/A7r were artificially low because of some "database problem" (according to an admin). Even when putting such reports aside - just being a hot discussed topic on dpr doesn't actually mean that the Df is actually a good idea. It could equally well be that it is an unbelievably bad product of one of the leading vendors. I personally think the Df is neither fish nor fowl.

[Greg Beetham]

I wouldn't count too much into the dpr click rates. There have been reports that e.g. the A7/A7r were artificially low because of some "database problem" (according to an admin). Even when putting such reports aside - just being a hot discussed topic on dpr doesn't actually mean that the Df is actually a good idea. It could equally well be that it is an unbelievably bad product of one of the leading vendors. I personally think the Df is neither fish nor fowl.

I have no idea if the dpr 45% click rate on the Df is/was valid or not, but like I say I have never seen another camera do that, there were a huge number of concurrent threads all maxing out within a day, when has a camera had seven or eight threads all going at the same time and all full of non-stop activity, and as soon as one thread maxed out there were more starting up? Sometimes there were two or three maxed threads at once.

I remember when the A99 came out it didn’t generate much interest on the click rate list, in fact I don’t think it even made it onto the list, I’m not sure why that would be, was it because it was an SLT or was it because it was a Sony camera?
Again I have no idea if the dpr list is/was accurate or not, that’s the way it was; at the time I remember thinking it was odd for a new FF to have generated so little interest; it’s not as if there is a new FF released every other day.

A new FF usually generates interest from lots of people who don’t actually use that brand themselves, in addition to those who do.
As far as the Df being a good idea goes, I would say that if it sells well at that price it was an excellent idea, in fact if it sells well at that price it’s the idea of the century.
Greg

[peterottaway]

It will be more than the idea of the century, it will be the miracle of the century. Or there are a lot of silly old baby boomers out there. The production run will probably exceed the Leica M sales for the year, but I'm not going to venture much higher. Perhaps it's intended as a special complimentary run as a reward to those avid buyers with 30 or more years of unflinching Nikon purchases to their name.

I was looking up one of the HK stores I sometimes do business with, the Df could be mine for only AUD 3299. My usual store in Australia is offering an A7r for AUD 2399.

[classiccameras]

Every thing comes down in price eventually Greg, I can't see the Df being any different. For the dyed in the wool Nikon fans, its going to be the holy grail, well to some who can remember those 35-mm days or the retro rebels.

I could never get my head round why Sony brought out two identical cameras, one with no AA filter and one with. On the test pics, there was some obvious moire from the 7r, but I could not see a dramatic improvement in IQ.
They need to be under £1000 to get my interest.
The Df will sell but not in huge numbers, it won't be the cameras that brings in their bread an butter profits.
Pete

[Greg Beetham]

It will be more than the idea of the century, it will be the miracle of the century. Or there are a lot of silly old baby boomers out there. The production run will probably exceed the Leica M sales for the year, but I'm not going to venture much higher. Perhaps it's intended as a special complimentary run as a reward to those avid buyers with 30 or more years of unflinching Nikon purchases to their name.

I was looking up one of the HK stores I sometimes do business with, the Df could be mine for only AUD 3299. My usual store in Australia is offering an A7r for AUD 2399.

Hmmm I see the LAEA4 is around $350 AU delivered to the door; I think realistically you would have to include the price of the A-mount adaptor with the price of the A7r unless you want to update your lens inventory with a bunch of FE’s, which brings the price of same up to $3600-$3650 roughly (with no AS, but still around $650 cheaper than the Df), and at those prices it’ll be a miracle if I were to buy either one, this little ol baby boomer will watch from a safe distance.
Greg

Ps yes that’s quite true Pete, you are well advised to wait and see what develops with the price, and especially how things are travelling with glitches and bugs. I see on a few still remaining Df topics that quite a few have pre-ordered, not even waiting; of course that’s the spirit the camera manufacturers like, people getting right in there before even any comprehensive reviews are done.

[peterottaway]

I must admit that I am interested in something like the A7r and the reports on the quality of the CZ 35 together with its size and weight. If the follow on lenses are up to this standard then I have some serious thinking to do.

At the same time if Sony are going to release an A99 replacement or update with the 36 MP sensor at a price up to the cost of the D800 I will probably go for that instead. Even though my shelf is groaning under the weight of my legacy glass, it is probably what is offered in the way of new prime lenses that will push my decision one way or the other. I have enough zooms to cover almost any possible circumstance but I have been rediscovering the joy of quality primes.

[bfitzgerald]

Don't bank on a 36mp SLT costing the price of a D800, currently the A99 has been out over a year and is about the same price (D800 on cashback currently)
Knowing Sony a 36mp SLT will cost well over £2000, even if they discount the A99 it's still not going to be that appealing even at -£500.

Don't expect good prices from Sony if they can charge £1000 for a 1" sensor bridge camera, they'll happily charge lots for SLT cameras. I don't think they have a grip on prices at all, but then the best strategy is to simply ignore their overpriced offerings. I doubt the A77 update will be priced that well either, expect £1200+

Some other maker will do a more affordable FF, by which time we'll be discussing the next rumours of the demise of A mount

Gregg is right by the time you add the cost of the adaptor to the A7 models, they're expensive enough, losing IBIS is not something that adds to the appeal either. That's why E mount is scrubbed off the list for me no IBIS= Not interested

[peterottaway]

I specified cost as per D800 deliberately as that is the maximum I am prepared to pay. The A850 still satisfies most of my needs.And even though the 12 MP sensor on my Nikon D700 does fall short of delivering everything many of my lenses can deliver, I have no real complaints.

As to costing, we have had this discussion before. Relative UK, US and Australian prices are different and so sense of value can be different in various countries.

As neither of these cameras is getting any younger I am thinking of updating whilst I have the money in the bank. I spent 2011 and 2012 establishing a new house with all those little extras that cost so much more than you anticipate and just replaced the 1991 car with a new model. So I have been thinking that I deserve a little indulgence courtesy of the Australian Tax Office giving and not taking.

And I may consider the Nikon D610 a reasonable camera, none of Nikons recent efforts including lenses have made me want to rush out buy. If I don't buy a Sony A or E camera then the only alternative that interests me is a Blackmagic video camera.

[bfitzgerald]

I'd be very cautious on Nikon but it's up to you on that one.
This is one of the problems Sony has, because they're oblivious to prices and release models and uncompetitive/unappealing rates they tempt users to look at other makers.
I can't see anything happening with the A99 this year price wise, you might want to hold out for the new year when they might drop it down a decent bit.

I personally don't see it ever at a level of the D610..just based on it's price trend in the last 12 months.
Now there is some potential to slap the 24mp sensor into a plastic body and forget this sealing/dual cards and other bits and make the price much more attractive. That might work, "if" Sony have thought of it. I doubt they have, just throwing ideas around myself.

Honestly I'd stick to the A850. Not sure if you have an APS-C body..but the price difference APS-C to Full frame is a price not worth paying IMHO at the moment. But you have your own budget, either way I'd sit it out over Christmas and see what happens next year.

[Atgets_Apprentice]

I could never get my head round why Sony brought out two identical cameras, one with no AA filter and one with. On the test pics, there was some obvious moire from the 7r, but I could not see a dramatic improvement in IQ.

If they had made one body with a switchable filter, then they wouldn't have been able to charge extra for the body with something less in it. Work out that logic. Take something out, and charge more...

[Neonsquare]

I have no idea if the dpr 45% click rate on the Df is/was valid or not, but like I say I have never seen another camera do that, there were a huge number of concurrent threads all maxing out within a day, when has a camera had seven or eight threads all going at the same time and all full of non-stop activity, and as soon as one thread maxed out there were more starting up? Sometimes there were two or three maxed threads at once.

Yes - my guess is that it was a mixture of different aspects. Nikon - like Canon do not very often bring new products like this. Most of the time it is just a new Mark of an old product. The higher the price the lower the product refresh rate. The Df is undoubtedly something "new" and it is a higher priced model. That are two points on the "sensation"-scale. Then comes the trendy "retro"-Effekt: Nikon does retro. Then the "puristic" aspect - with the Df Nikon tries to promise some kind of "back to the roots" of photography. There are a lot of photographers which still do not like creating video clips. A camera explicitly without video looks like being made particularly for them - even if it is not much more like a marketing gag. Actually I'm not surprised about the Buzz the Df generates. There are much more people generally interested in "things nikon". So why are there some many discussions on it? Because its a very controverse product: Its a new, high price Nikon product which actually technically seems to fit a quite small group of customers. If it is sold well, then only because of this retro/puristic marketing blub and not because of any intrinsic values.

I remember when the A99 came out it didn’t generate much interest on the click rate list, in fact I don’t think it even made it onto the list, I’m not sure why that would be, was it because it was an SLT or was it because it was a Sony camera?
Again I have no idea if the dpr list is/was accurate or not, that’s the way it was; at the time I remember thinking it was odd for a new FF to have generated so little interest; it’s not as if there is a new FF released every other day.

We can only guess. I personally think that the buzz about cheap full frame coming with the 6D and D600 generated much more interest than another higher priced full frame model vom Sony. Count in that many people were unimpressed by the specs. Its DxO-Rating is lower (people believe in this faithfully), FPS slower than the A77, EVF not "revolutionary" improved. Video "not good enough". Don't get me wrong - I think the A99 is a very nice camera. Like the A77 it had something like a slow start after the first disappointments of unfulfilled SAR-rumors fade away and people start to see what is actually good about it.

If you look at the RX1 - it was a positive surprise. Similarily the RX100. I think the judges are still out on the A7/A7r. It generated quite a lot of positive buzz. The A7 was cheaper than anyone thought the "full frame NEX" could be. The image quality seems to be really good. On the other side: The AF did not impress and the problems with some rangefinder lenses add to the doubts about it. But it actually _seems_ to sell well. I see a lot of people here on german boards which preordered. And there seems to be a unusually high rate of switchers. The idea to switch from D800 to A7r for landscape and architectural photography seems to be quite common. One reason is using the Canon TS lens using the metabones adapter on the A7r and still being able to use the grown Nikkor lens portfolio.

A new FF usually generates interest from lots of people who don’t actually use that brand themselves, in
addition to those who do.

Yes - thats true. Apart from dpreview my gut feel says that the A7/A7r generate more buzz than the Df. I was on a local camera trade show here these days and the Sony booth was CROWDED the whole day while the 5 Nikon guys stood there alone polishing lenses. I never seen a Sony camera produce that kind of buzz. Even people who have many reasons not to need one tried to find reasons allowing them to buy that thing. Its nearly "appleesque".

As far as the Df being a good idea goes, I would say that if it sells well at that price it was an excellent idea, in fact if it sells well at that price it’s the idea of the century.
Greg

Yes - in a business sense you're right. We will have to wait if this product actually grows some customer base or if it is just DOA like the Nikon One. My personal guess is that the Df will not be successful.

[Atgets_Apprentice]

Producing a product that is "Apple-esque" isn't necessarily a good thing.

Apple are mostly hype, and over-rated. You just have to look at the sheep at their product launches & releases.

[Neonsquare]

@Atgets_Apprentice
For what it's worth: I disagree with the statement of Apple products being mostly hype and over-rated. I'm using both generic PC and Windows and several Macs on a daily base the last 12 years. All my Macs (iMacs, MacBooks, Minis) are and were reliable and solid tools. (writing this on a 15" MBP Retina). I've several mac based business partners and customers - all of them are very satisfied professionals. One doesn't have to like the Apple Store marketing buzz to like the products itself - which are very well built and well designed (which I mean in a functional sense and not just "look&spec" like some other vendors).

What I actually meant with "appleesque" is the effect, that a product has something with it that you just want it. The A7/A7r seem to trigger a nerve here. This should not be understood as a sign that the A7/A7r are not "useful" - it just means they may be not useful to anyone wanting to buy them.

[bfitzgerald]

Apple are a mixed bag, they have slick appealing products with superb marketing. But I have to be honest most of their stuff is overpriced by some margin. I'm not saying it's not decent, but I know the cost of pc parts and you do pay the Apple tax big time on those products. As for the other stuff tablets/phones etc, they're good..though they cost less to make than some think.

Apple succeed because they have mastered the art of making products people desire, and that are simple and easy to use design wise (they are very good at that part of it)
Where they fall down at times are the practical aspects of their design (things like not using front ports because it spoils the look etc, or not allowing access to replace batteries-aka Apple repair cash cow) I admire them in some ways for their commercial success, but I'm not falling for it My pc's have all been very reliable, that's because I use good quality components, in many cases parts that are of higher quality than you will find it an Apple product.

The popularity of Apple in some ways is a turn off, this annoys some of the old school Mac fans who like the niche aspect of the company in the early days. Let's be honest an iphone isn't a symbol any more because almost everyone has one!

The DF is nothing more than a cynical cash in attempt with a nod to a retro top plate. I think the price is absolutely ridiculous (in my region) And it's not well thought out (over cluttered by far) It has nothing at all to do with "back to basics" photography zero..it's just pure marketing and nothing more.

[classiccameras]

My Brother in law who works on one of the Sunday broad sheets uses Apple and he said most of the news paper and the printed media world use Apple.
I could never get on with Apple myself mainly because some of the down load programmes I use on Microsoft are not compatible or are unavailable.
This is not to say Apple is no good, but it seems to be the chosen system for the publishing trade.

Just on a lighter note, did you know that the Apollo moon missions used an Apple Mother board for their main on board computer.