The future Alpha 99

Specifically for the discussion of the A-mount DSLR range
Forum rules
No more than three images or three external links allowed in any post or reply. Please trim quotations and do not include images in quotes unless essential.
User avatar
Atgets_Apprentice
Grand Caliph
Posts: 356
Joined: Wed Jul 20, 2011 3:02 pm
Location: Glasgow, Scotland

Re: The future Alpha 99

Unread post by Atgets_Apprentice »

bfitzgerald wrote: Right now I think Sony are just trying anything and everything, in a hope that something sticks.
Everything and anything, apart from the right thing.

(Giving people real world products at real wallet prices)
XG-1, XD-5, XD-7, X-500, XG1n, X300, 7000i, 700si, 800si, 500si Super, 600si, Dynax 5, KM 7D, a100, a200, a300, a580. And another 600si.....
alphaomega
Viceroy
Posts: 1196
Joined: Mon Aug 18, 2008 11:20 pm

Re: The future Alpha 99

Unread post by alphaomega »

Frankly it does not matter how Barry Fitzgerald continues with his lines of argument. We do not know the essentials, which apply to every manufacturer, namely capacity and return on investment. Sony only have so much capacity. Apart from the SLT they make the NEX (or whatever they are called now. Can't keep up with all the changes in designations) and the RX lines as well as now R7/7r. It could well be that their production lines are working at full capacity and they see no need to discount, whereas CAN/NIK may have excess stocks and free capacity. Sony will probably try and balance max price possible with keeping production going at above 80/90% capacity. We simply do not know and for all his photographic knowledge Barry simply does not know of the exact production/price matrix Sony are pursuing. Personally I am convinced of one thing, namely Sony could not win a direct fight against CAN/NIK on "me too DSLRs". If you cannot beat them at their own game invent a new game and become the leader. I agree with Barry that Win7 is stable. Having said that my version of Vista is not bad either with the most recent updates.
User avatar
Greg Beetham
Tower of Babel
Posts: 6117
Joined: Sun May 27, 2007 3:25 pm
Location: Townsville, Qld. Australia
Contact:

Re: The future Alpha 99

Unread post by Greg Beetham »

Sony bought the KM body div. ostensibly for a purpose; maybe it was to become a contender in the field of making photographic system cameras and continuing on with the one they obtained, or maybe it was to gain access to the expertise of building still camera ILC’s and ultimately come up with a mount of their own, the E-mount.

Whatever the motive actually was there was only one way Sony could ever seriously counter Canon and Nikon; and that was to become a photographic company like those are and offer a complete system (with either mount) that works properly in a broad range of applications.
Their sensors might have improved but the ‘photographic system’ part isn’t convincing.

If you look at the functionality of Sony cameras now, how do they stack up doing various things, like astrophotography for instance, would you be absolutely confident that what is captured is the same as what is actually there, or how would they compare doing macro with flash either in a lab or on location, or microphotography, or in a studio situation? There are things the A-mount can do quite well of course but If you were a photographer comparing systems would you consider the Sony system in all of the above applications equal in performance and functionality to that which can be obtained from Nikon or Canon?

I’m not talking about Sony duplicating Canon’s lens list tomorrow, but after about seven years with Sony in charge of a former high class camera system how well does the system function as a whole now? Better than before or worse?
Would knowledgeable counter staff in a reputable camera store anywhere be inclined to recommend the Sony A-mount system as an equivalent to the Nikon or Canon systems for all kinds of photographic pursuits without having to worry about a customer coming back complaining about something that doesn’t operate as expected?

As far as I’m concerned there is a reason why DSLR’s sell well, it’s not because people think that DSLR’s a ‘pro’ cameras, it’s because DSLR’s from Nikon and Canon are part of a system and their systems work as expected (and for those shopping for a camera information from all directions reflect that expectation).
Not doing the ‘same’ as Nikon or Canon is often given as an excuse for not offering a photographic system the works properly, but that excuse doesn’t work for me and I bet it doesn’t work for potential users of the A-mount system either.
The other suggestion I see often after the explanation is offered that Sony innovates much better than Nikon or Canon and that those who want an OVF and a system that works in the old fashioned way (i.e. properly) should go and buy a Nikon or a Canon.

And that’s what has been happening apparently, this article reckons Sony interchangeable lens camera sales have declined by 35% http://www.eoshd.com/content/11409/cons ... ad-5-years but they forecast good sales for the 7’s which is good.
Did the new hotshoe influence the Sony downtrend? Who knows but it certainly wouldn’t have helped, it would be viewed by quite a few as more fragmentation of a photographic system. I expect that change has made it even less likely that camera store owners/workers would recommend Sony, many places would now be stuck with third party i-shoe accessories that no longer fit directly onto new Sony cameras.

In any case it seems the photography market is dissolving into niches now, and the DSLR market looks like it’s shrinking down into one of the niches too, maybe 4/3rds will take over at some point as the leading system, or become the largest niche, nothing would surprise me these days.

I’ve often wondered who is in charge at Alpha headquarters, is it anyone who knows about photography? Or is even interested in photography itself? its only idle curiosity, I guess it doesn’t really matter, the camera market is going south and who knows where it will finish up but I’d like the A-mount to stick around for a while, who knows maybe Sony might venture briefly into my niche sometime before the lights go out, while there’s life there’s hope…right?
Greg
Ps my Win7’s are stable too, its adobe text and graphics that suck in Win7, where they didn’t under Vista.
alphaomega
Viceroy
Posts: 1196
Joined: Mon Aug 18, 2008 11:20 pm

Re: The future Alpha 99

Unread post by alphaomega »

Fine Greg, but you are not addressing the real issue I brought up, namely are Sony working at full capacity and, therefore, do not need to discount? So what about the DSLR OVF adherents if Sony do not need their business? Who knows?
It is fair enough to critizise Sony for their inconsistency. I am personally confused about their lines and names. On the other hand I have a series of cameras and lenses that perform well and cater for all my requirements. I am sure I am not the only satisfied customer. (RX100, NEX-5N/6 and A550/580). All excellent cameras for different uses. I think things are settling down a little now with a unified software system, a new shoe and continuation of Alpha mount as well as E mount. Time will show how they fare but I repeat that we do not really know how well they fill their production capacity and whether this has an impact on their pricing. Who will discount if you don't have to to sell what you can make? As I have learnt, the key to good business is to sell what you can make and charge what the market will pay and get out if that will not enable you to make money.
User avatar
Greg Beetham
Tower of Babel
Posts: 6117
Joined: Sun May 27, 2007 3:25 pm
Location: Townsville, Qld. Australia
Contact:

Re: The future Alpha 99

Unread post by Greg Beetham »

Alphaomega, I don’t know about Sony’s production capacity, how much of it they use when making a model production run, or how they decide how many of a given model to make, or how they assess how well a given model will sell, it could be a suck it and see operation for all I know, Sony seem to be very fond of the ‘pre-order’ system they have, maybe they have some guideline production percentage based on pre-orders but one would think that the more they sell the more they can afford to trim the margin, up to a point.

Historically as far as I know Canon and Nikon used the US as a lower margin break even type market, discounting in the US has been the norm for as long as I can remember, I suspect that is to get the model established and the whole supply chain for a model to ‘break even’ in the shortest time possible, they rest of the world seems to be where they make more margin, or at least the prices are usually quite a bit higher outside the US (different exchange rates and tax make a difference too).

Sony seemed to initially get in there and get their hands dirty in the US market, trying to play the same game, sort of, with plenty of ‘consumer grade’ bodies being shipped to the so called big box stores but they then seemed to back away from that scene, even putting restrictions on those places offering discounts and competing between one another and capping prices on the internet and so on. Now the retail presence in the US is diminished and they appear to depend on repeat business via web announcements and emails to previous registered customers, they also like Facebook and Twitter and I think U-tube as well, they seem to avoid TV because of the immense costs involved in TV advertising.

In any case we don’t know how much margin Sony sets on a model, I saw someone claim it could be lots more than we previously thought, maybe as much as 100% above estimated production cost for production qty. x. If that’s the case they have plenty of room to move, but then it doesn’t matter how much margin they have on a model if it don’t sell and discounting down to low margin early in a run would be fraught with peril I imagine, it would signify a fail for a model I think.

Sony seem also to have switched their strategy with the A-mount, now they seem to be making more of a thrust at the middle and upper middle model strata area compared to back when they made all those small reduced featured DSLR intro models, I don’t think they really replaced the intro SLT’s either, (the A58 was probably a better camera than the A37), but they did make the horrendous A3000 E-mount SLR look alike for whatever unknown purpose, maybe it was a test camera, just to see if there was any life left in that area, but I don’t know how they would ever find out with that camera, it would be a self-fulfilling prophecy…none.

So aside from some nimble guesswork I really don’t know a whole lot about how Sony’s marketing and production process works, or doesn’t work as the case may be.
Greg
classiccameras
Viceroy
Posts: 1044
Joined: Sun Oct 21, 2012 9:33 am

Re: The future Alpha 99

Unread post by classiccameras »

Greg, my local Jessops, well I call it local, its 20 miles away said the A58 is selling very well to first timers due to its price and 20mp sensor. No body seems bothered about the plastic mount amongst the newbies. The manager of the store is a big Sony SLT fan and user.
User avatar
Greg Beetham
Tower of Babel
Posts: 6117
Joined: Sun May 27, 2007 3:25 pm
Location: Townsville, Qld. Australia
Contact:

Re: The future Alpha 99

Unread post by Greg Beetham »

Well sure thing Pete, there’s room for all kinds of dealers in the world, and there are really good points about the A-mount…still, like as you say the colours are the best available, the AF even in the SLT’s is very good, the exposure system is excellent and there is not a lot of shutter debris that collects on the sensor, some but not a huge amount.
But despite that Sony E & A-mount sales have deteriorated worldwide on a par with Fuji, down 35%, according to the above article, a much worse performance than Canon or even Nikon with their D600 shutter debris debacle, and it’s doubly worse because Sony didn’t have much of a market percentage to begin with.
The 7’s might help the E-mount and the new cameras for the A-mount might help as well, if they fix the flash issues and ditch the SLT mirror without affecting performance that is.
What is the likelihood of that happening…realistically? :roll:
Greg
classiccameras
Viceroy
Posts: 1044
Joined: Sun Oct 21, 2012 9:33 am

Re: The future Alpha 99

Unread post by classiccameras »

Not a lot Greg, I have a feeling SLT will stay, I could be wrong, but we will probably see some major refinements anyway. For average Joe, the Sony SLT cameras are more than enough and can out perform their Canikon counterparts, especially IQ.
Since I started using my A37 and 57 for landscape with some decent glass, I have been very impressed, even the 18-55 kit lens Mk 2 exhibits some excellent IQ and stands head and shoulders above Canikon kit lenses may be with the exception of the Nikkor 18-105. Sony just do not play to their strengths. It was mass negativity from the photographic media and photographers that helped kill off 4/3, Olympus more or less admitted this in not so many words.
I would hate to see the same happen to Sony.
User avatar
bfitzgerald
Subsuming Vortex of Brilliance
Posts: 3996
Joined: Fri Sep 26, 2008 10:48 pm

Re: The future Alpha 99

Unread post by bfitzgerald »

There are specific and general observations to make for the photographic industry.
Overall it's in decline, absolutely no doubt about it. Though I will say it was an artificial bubble to start with.

The article above is ok but it's too simplistic, with an attention grabbing headline. There are many causes to the decline, it's far from just smart phones.
Consumer DSLR's won't be dead in 5 years, but there will be less of them with longer update periods. The entire industry is going to have to settle down to what is was 20 years ago and more.
You had your 35mm compact users who hadn't a lot of interest in SLR's or more advanced products. 2013 these users have normal compact and yes some don't bother as they have smartphones. Many don't update often because there isn't a lot of point in doing that, bar breaking their camera or it dying. Same as film times people used their cameras for years and years. 35mm compact makers didn't have 20 models (at the peak of the industry some had near that) they had 3 or 4.

Hobbyists, more serious users and above went for 35mm SLR's, but again back in ye film days update periods were more like 5 years rather than 1 year. It's not sustainable for camera makers on 1-2 year update cycles. MF was more specialised so was LF and rangefinder users, but enough of a market for a few makers to compete in.

I simply see things going back eventually to much slower updates, less manufacturers. We shall see who rides the storm out.
There isn't one single reason for decline but many. "Good enough" is one..why bother buying more cameras if you have stuff that works for you, over saturation of the market (ie lots of products and tons of stuff second hand around), current economic market which has been pretty poor for 5 years or so (had to impact things eventually), other devices that capture images (phones, tablets etc)

The photo industry is just one of many having problems. I wouldn't feel entirely safe if I were working as a journalist for a newspaper, they've been in decline for many years now. Streaming services threaten normal broadcast TV as consumers want to watch what THEY want to WHEN they want to, not follow some schedule on a TV. We've had many changes over the years, the way media is shared is a huge one...the internet.

Rarely do things entirely kill something else. Sometimes something else comes along.
The typewriter was a revolution in it's day..can you even buy one today? I've seen only a few electronic ones for sale. The word processor (ie basic pc) started to kill it, then when computers because much cheaper (esp laptops) RIP for that product. But the newspaper industry survived the onset of TV..it might have a harder time with the internet..but I don't doubt it will survive but as a smaller operation. Same for TV as streaming services take over the mainstream, and probably kill DVD rental..broadcast TV is likely to stick around, but just be a lot less relevant to most people. VHS killed the cinema in the 80's as people didn't go any more. But now people decide they like the cinema again so they're back in business. Things can change over time.

I can get all the news and information I need online..do I need a newspaper or TV?
As for Sony they're taking a gamble that there will be growth in full frame, and they seem to be banking that will take off as will mirror less. It should be interesting to see how the others respond. As for A Mount I will only say this, if Sony didn't want to compete with Canikon, they should not have bought it off KM in 2006.
classiccameras
Viceroy
Posts: 1044
Joined: Sun Oct 21, 2012 9:33 am

Re: The future Alpha 99

Unread post by classiccameras »

Come back KM.
peterottaway
Imperial Ambassador
Posts: 600
Joined: Wed Nov 12, 2008 9:24 am
Location: Northam, Western Australia

Re: The future Alpha 99

Unread post by peterottaway »

classiccameras wrote:Come back KM.
Ah well 'tis the season for nostalgia.

KM got out because they couldn't play the game anymore. I suspect it was more than the money, it was the lack of quality vision over quite a few years. When you have to buy in much of the technology for your future, then you really need to be running on all cylinders and lucky as well.
User avatar
bfitzgerald
Subsuming Vortex of Brilliance
Posts: 3996
Joined: Fri Sep 26, 2008 10:48 pm

Re: The future Alpha 99

Unread post by bfitzgerald »

Maybe KM screwed themselves with the first black frame problem, whilst not everyone sent them in..it could have been quite costly for service. Costly to the point of ooops make no profit on the 5d or 7d.

No idea, but it surely hit them.
peterottaway
Imperial Ambassador
Posts: 600
Joined: Wed Nov 12, 2008 9:24 am
Location: Northam, Western Australia

Re: The future Alpha 99

Unread post by peterottaway »

Minolta suffered greatly from that blatant home town ruling with Honeywell. But although like Kodak they had early digital cameras such as the RD 175, it didn't seem to kick them along into a new era.

Minolta had its place in the old way of doing things.But doesn't seem to have been able to make a fresh start in time to establish a visible digital presence.

So even before the black frame problems, it had become rather difficult for them.
classiccameras
Viceroy
Posts: 1044
Joined: Sun Oct 21, 2012 9:33 am

Re: The future Alpha 99

Unread post by classiccameras »

I should imagine no one with any sense would enter into digital camera manufacturing these days, its far too risky.
User avatar
Greg Beetham
Tower of Babel
Posts: 6117
Joined: Sun May 27, 2007 3:25 pm
Location: Townsville, Qld. Australia
Contact:

Re: The future Alpha 99

Unread post by Greg Beetham »

Yeah the FFB thingy, I’ve even seen one from the A100 now and then, I also have seen the odd one from the KM5D and even a strange dark blue one, the photo was there but everything was coloured blue…Frankly I think it’s a storm in a teacup, I haven’t seen one from either camera for a long time now and they both work just fine.
As long as you start them up once a week and fire off a couple of shots they don’t have any problems, it’s only when you leave them for a long time and they have a low battery charge that you are likely to get a FFB, and even then what’s the big deal? The next shot is fine anyway.

As far as KM goes I think read somewhere they did the sums at the time with the partnership deal they were supposed to have with Sony and came to the conclusion there wasn’t enough in it for two. I’m a bit hazy on it now but they did a deal with Sony where apparently Sony paid 72Million USD for the body division and also took over outstanding warranties, (Sony also fixed the FFB issue) also I remember seeing somewhere that Sony agreed to maintain the i-shoe and compatibility for a set period of time so that KM’s previous customers weren’t left in the lurch, that period of grace has expired about a year and a half ago now I think.
KM retained the optical division and made lenses for Sony as required by Sony.

When it comes to Sony and SLT’s, you really can’t blame Sony entirely for continuing on with them I guess, people supported Sony making them by buying them, but then it wasn’t as if there was a choice either, you had a choice of DSLT or DSLT if you wanted an A-mount camera.
I half suspect Sony discontinued DSLR’s so they didn’t compete with DSLT’s, just think what would happen if there was a fully developed DSLR (not a token gesture keyhole VF one) that had no systemic glitches competing with DSLT’s which unfortunately do have slow start-up times, delays with flash and high battery consumption etc.
Some people would choose the DSLR I’m sure, but I have no idea how many would.
I hope Sony knows what it is doing with the rumoured mirrorless A-mount, maybe they won’t worry too much if it doesn’t work quite as well as the E-mount, but A-mount owners/users will I’m sure, I suppose if the A-mount mirrorless doesn’t sell very well Sony might well draw the conclusion that the A-mount is an old system design that is too difficult to modernise.
Greg
Post Reply

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Bing [Bot] and 20 guests