Don't Worry ? Be Happy ?

For discussion of the E and FE mount mirrorless system
peterottaway
Imperial Ambassador
Posts: 600
Joined: Wed Nov 12, 2008 9:24 am
Location: Northam, Western Australia

Re: Don't Worry ? Be Happy ?

Unread post by peterottaway »

It is a point of debate as to whether cameras such as the A7 is a small camera or really should classed as a normally sized camera. Now if your normal day job is shooting surfing or pro sports at a distance with a 600 / 4.0 or the like, then you do need a hefty high FPS camera with battery pack and a selection of heavy duty monopods and tripods.

But for the "normal' of us out there, I would think it doesn't matter that much. Even when I am shooting with my 70-400 I can handhold if really necessary, but it usually goes on a carbon fibre tripod. I still have my Nex 7 and A77 which of course act as a natural extender or I can use the A7r in crop mode when it is needed. And carrying a smaller, lighter camera over some distance of broken ground and back again is easier.

It may look odd and the A7r with battery grip is ergonomically better than the Nex 7 but it doesn't affect your shots in itself.
Vidgamer
Imperial Ambassador
Posts: 527
Joined: Wed Jun 11, 2008 3:37 am

Re: Don't Worry ? Be Happy ?

Unread post by Vidgamer »

bfitzgerald wrote: I'm not seeing a shortage of mirrorless models for people to look at. Nobody can really complain about that.
A few months ago, there were a lot of complaints on DPR about the newer A7 models -- maybe Sony would no longer make the Nex-5 series or even the 6 or 7 series cameras with their smaller, rangefinder form factor. So, yes, you can worry (it's not a complaint) about that. Even so, I was not really serious above, just showing that it is easy to have an alternative point-of-view. The point is, I don't think it is written in stone that this or that camera design will be around forever, and if Sony feels that a certain model style is selling, it may disappear, and that would include the current mirrorless styles. Of course, in the case of the "rangefinder style" Nex cameras, it turned out to be a non-concern, as the A6000 showed that Sony is still interested in making such cameras. Sony is still making SLT cameras as well.

The bottom line is that any form factor can go away if a manufacturer feels that it does not sell well, and I thought we got through agreeing that SLR cameras and thus form factors are still more popular than ILCs in the US and Europe? Why would it be more likely that Sony would drop the more popular style?

What if the form factor remains and you simply drop the mirror from an SLT camera? Now you have both the existing (bulky :mrgreen: ) style and it's "mirrorless."

I can remember reading years ago about people worried about the SLR going away, or at least as far as Sony was concerned. As long as there's a market for it, it should be there, although if it becomes a niche product, it would be more expensive. It seemed from my reading that the bigger concern was that Sony was not building a complete system (or at least as complete as Canikon), with things like ring flashes and tilt/shift lenses, or even the huge catalog that Minolta had. I don't think we can expect Sony to have that level of depth. If you need that, I'd go Canikon.
Photography never was one glove fits all, I'm not looking for huge bulky cameras, nor do I need tiny ones. There is a middle ground where some of us like to be.
This is all a difference in point-of-view. I'd say that virtually all DSLRs/DSLTs are bulky and not a "middle ground". The middle ground is like the size of most rangefinder and even Minolta SLR cameras over decades, and that's the A7.

Once you get rid of the mirror, a lot of things are possible, such as the RX1.
Anyway I fail to see the point of a tiny body and a massive lens

http://www.sonyalpharumors.com/more-inf ... s-xlr-kit/
The A7 is "tiny"? That's just silly. If anything, it's slightly larger than what I'd want.

As for that lens, it's for videography. Are you saying that there's no point in videographers using that lens? Or that they must arbitrarily use an A99 when the A7s would work better? I'm not sure what your concern is.

In the end, it's the results that count, not the thunk of the mirror slap.
User avatar
bfitzgerald
Subsuming Vortex of Brilliance
Posts: 3996
Joined: Fri Sep 26, 2008 10:48 pm

Re: Don't Worry ? Be Happy ?

Unread post by bfitzgerald »

Yes results count and so does offset micro lenses done properly on a full frame sensor.
From what I've seen so far you're in for a much harder time on a full frame ILC than you are a DSLR, those corners really suffer...and distortion is a serious issue on some lens design.

It's time to realise that just pulling a mirror out and putting a lens closer to the sensor has it's own set of compromises
Of course you could increase the rear element to the sensor with an adaptor, but there are issues here too (AF for one)

There is a mistaken assumption that everyone who uses a DSLR type camera wants some beast of a camera EOS 1DX style a monster to carry weight and size. I don't need to explain the very significant differences in size even among DSLR's, so you won't get very far lecturing me on that side of things. I find my film 7's the perfect size (even gripped) not too big, not too small. They are far smaller than some cameras..and as for small I have owned the smaller Pentax DSLR bodies and frankly whilst I got on ok with that, they were a bit small for me.

Simply bashing out a camera with a small body and raving about the "small" appeal isn't very useful. We use cameras with our hands, you can only get so small before it gets not very good handling or not that comfy. There certainly is a middle ground of not small but not huge DSLR's that a lot of people are quite happy with.

If people want to push small, push "smaller price" :mrgreen: And let's stop pretending that ILC's are perfect and have no disadvantages at all
It's not results that count, but what people want..and many buyers in Europe and the USA are not that interested in mirrorless. Camera makers are because they want to cut costs, if you knew the out of factory cost of an A7, you'd probably collapse with shock. I bet it's far far less than most imagine.
peterottaway
Imperial Ambassador
Posts: 600
Joined: Wed Nov 12, 2008 9:24 am
Location: Northam, Western Australia

Re: Don't Worry ? Be Happy ?

Unread post by peterottaway »

All I can say is that with the D700, A850 and A77 I have personally hit the limits with size and weight and that is without grips.When I add my Minolta 80-200 / 2.8 and it is more than I really want to be throwing around. On a different subject I never saw any reason to upgrade to the expensive 70 - 200 models.
Vidgamer
Imperial Ambassador
Posts: 527
Joined: Wed Jun 11, 2008 3:37 am

Re: Don't Worry ? Be Happy ?

Unread post by Vidgamer »

bfitzgerald wrote:Yes results count and so does offset micro lenses done properly on a full frame sensor.
From what I've seen so far you're in for a much harder time on a full frame ILC than you are a DSLR, those corners really suffer...and distortion is a serious issue on some lens design.
Do the corners really suffer on the A7? Softer corners on a zoom don't imply a sensor problem.

The Nex-7 (not FF) had some problems with wider angle lenses, particularly old rangefinder lenses. Early reports are that the new A6000 do not have these problems. I recently read a nice comparison on DPR. Corners are better, and no more purple shift. In this case, on the Nex-7, it was a limitation of the sensor when combined with a close lens. Looks like Sony has cracked that problem.

I never experienced the same issues with my Nex-6 or 5 for that matter, although I didn't try using legacy rangefinder lenses.

As a contrast, what happens when using wide-angle rangefinder lenses on an SLR? ;-)
It's time to realise that just pulling a mirror out and putting a lens closer to the sensor has it's own set of compromises
It has its own set of challenges. Challenges worth solving.

You have to realize that having a mirror has its own compromises (including mirror vibration needing mirror lock-up for increasingly high resolution).
Of course you could increase the rear element to the sensor with an adaptor, but there are issues here too (AF for one)
If you use an SLR lens with an adapter, which will have more distance to the sensor, it will have more opportunity for better results with digital sensors (or at least the Nex-7), but if you use the Sony EA2 or EA4 adapter, you get the SLT AF, so no AF issues there.

If designing an e-mount lens, the manufacturer can choose to have the rear element as close or far away as they want with AF.

There are examples of mirrorless cameras doing fine with compact lenses. For an extreme example, look at the RX1, with a lens rear element nearly touching its FF sensor. This is a case where the camera and lens are designed together, as a complete system. In that case there will less compromise than taking a 40 year old lens and trying to adapt it to a Nex-7, but the compromise will be even less with an A7.
There is a mistaken assumption that everyone who uses a DSLR type camera wants some beast of a camera EOS 1DX style a monster to carry weight and size. I don't need to explain the very significant differences in size even among DSLR's, so you won't get very far lecturing me on that side of things.
Straw-man argument -- I didn't say every DSLR owner wanted the largest DSLR size. Even an entry-level camera like the T4i is larger than I would want. I don't think you stated what size you considered to be a "middle ground", although I thought you were originally comparing against the A7, which means to me looking at larger FF cameras.
I find my film 7's the perfect size (even gripped) not too big, not too small. They are far smaller than some cameras..and as for small I have owned the smaller Pentax DSLR bodies and frankly whilst I got on ok with that, they were a bit small for me.

Simply bashing out a camera with a small body and raving about the "small" appeal isn't very useful. We use cameras with our hands, you can only get so small before it gets not very good handling or not that comfy. There certainly is a middle ground of not small but not huge DSLR's that a lot of people are quite happy with.
It's useful to me if size is an important factor for me. Small size is not an important factor for you, and for many others, so using DSLRs is fine.

I find that I really like the handling even of the smaller 5-series, the way I can hook my fingers around the grip, and dangle it from a wrist strap. It makes a nice travel camera.
If people want to push small, push "smaller price" :mrgreen:
The A3000 is less than the entry-level DSLRs. :P That's what mirrorless can do to the price. What do you want, a free camera?

It's great that entry-level DSLRs have come down in price (perhaps subsidized by the rest of the system?), but I'm not sure that higher-end DSLRs are so great in price. If you're still comparing the A7, compare its price against FF alternatives, and see which is smaller in price as well as size.

At any rate, I'm not interested in Nex cameras for their price as much as for giving top IQ in a compact package.
And let's stop pretending that ILC's are perfect and have no disadvantages at all
I've often said that if you don't care about size or weight (maybe even cost), you might as well use a DSLR -- established systems, top quality, etc.

However, the disadvantages of ILCs are diminishing quickly, and in some ways there are advantages even beyond size. AF is actually pretty good from multiple brands. EFCS means no more "shutter-shock", nor is there mirror-slap.

Where there are compromises, you want the compromises to be in places that matter less. Areas that you want less compromise are things like the sensor quality, and Sony is top-notch there. Go to DxOMark and see.
It's not results that count, but what people want..and many buyers in Europe and the USA are not that interested in mirrorless. Camera makers are because they want to cut costs, if you knew the out of factory cost of an A7, you'd probably collapse with shock. I bet it's far far less than most imagine.
You could say that about many items, that the "factory cost" is a lot less than the selling price. When selling retail, there's the store's markup, the manufacturer's markup, but a computer device is more than just the electronics -- there's also a cost in developing the software. As a software developer, I notice that people often forget that there's a cost there.

The bottom-line is that the A7 is less expensive than other FF cameras.

I want mirrorless cameras to cost less and for that cost savings to be passed along. Whether or not that is happening is debatable. :-) A-mount cameras are better deals when you include the costs of lenses, particularly with the availability of so many used lenses. For long focal lengths, I often use an a-mount lens, so it's not like the Nex can't take some advantage there, although it's not ideal. For one thing, the overall price has to factor in an adapter.

So, I agree that for some uses, it may be cheaper to go with a DSLR system, but I'll stick with my E-mount. The more comfortable size, weight, and handling, as well as superior OSS, combine to make a really nice package, ideal for travel and still obtaining top-quality results.
User avatar
bfitzgerald
Subsuming Vortex of Brilliance
Posts: 3996
Joined: Fri Sep 26, 2008 10:48 pm

Re: Don't Worry ? Be Happy ?

Unread post by bfitzgerald »

I can only go on what I've seen and a lot of M mount users got pretty worked up about shoving some nice glass on a much cheaper than Lecia body.
That go kinda ripped up when the results came in, esp with wider angle lenses.

It seems the Leica bodies have much better optimised offset micro lenses (the results looked far better from what I saw) With the E mount FF bodies even taking the lens right down yielded some pretty poor results. I know myself even using older rangefinders and compacts on 35mm that you get compromises, more fall off, weaker edge/corner performance, distortion seems more an issue (maybe the lens design)

In a cruel twist of fate you probably will get better performance using 35mm SLR system lenses on E Mount than you likely will FE mount lenses. It might pick up some other mount users just on that, but what really matters if if Sony can sell their own lenses (which is where the profits really are) The jury is out on that one, some of the Sony primes seem good on FE mount (from what I see) but they're not wide angle nor that fast, the zooms seem less impressive to date (some say the 70-200mm f4 is good, and it should be for the asking price)

It's too early to say where FE is going, or where everyone else is too. You can't really compare the crop sensors to the FF ones though, clearly the smaller sensors will suffer far less from the full frame ones regarding vignetting, corner performance etc etc, but likely somewhat more than a crop DSLR

Of course makers want more profits, but they have to understand that getting people to buy the bodies..and then selling them the lenses is the way to go. Shoving stuff out like the A3000 isn't going to go a lot when Canon sell their own budget DSLR for the same price.
I had hoped Sony would sit down and think about things a bit more, and genuinely try to do the best you can for each price segment.

You have to be honest and say ook the A6000 isn't bad, but it's hardly going to make most Canikon users drop their systems, purely to buy a camera which is smaller. Maybe the FF take will work for Sony, but it's a more niche market right now.
peterottaway
Imperial Ambassador
Posts: 600
Joined: Wed Nov 12, 2008 9:24 am
Location: Northam, Western Australia

Re: Don't Worry ? Be Happy ?

Unread post by peterottaway »

Barry we don't know how large the markets are in terms of production, income derived or profit. What we do know is that by introducing the Nex range and the FF cameras then Sony has made sales that it wouldn't have otherwise. How many of those sales were totally "new " as opposed to substituted sales I don't think even Sony knows with any certainty.
alphaomega
Viceroy
Posts: 1196
Joined: Mon Aug 18, 2008 11:20 pm

Re: Don't Worry ? Be Happy ?

Unread post by alphaomega »

Don't know much about camera/lens technicalities so I just look at what I bring home at 100% to see if Alamy will pass the images. So I was out on Saturday and had to use my NEX-6 with the 55-210 E Zoom to photograph what I could see of the new Queensferry Crossing. The images at 100% looks like normal view. What a lens. Then had to photograph a new building in Glasgow. Very tight and had to use my NEX-6 with the 10-18 E zoom. What a lens. Much better than my Tamron 10-24 A zoom, not withstanding the lens distance. Advantage should be with the Tamron based on some of the above comments. So the NEX-6 and both lenses are first class. So I don't need to worry and can remain happy.
alphaomega
Viceroy
Posts: 1196
Joined: Mon Aug 18, 2008 11:20 pm

Re: Don't Worry ? Be Happy ?

Unread post by alphaomega »

Another reason why I don't worry about Sony and actually is quite happy is that with my RX100 and NEX-6 in particular I have not had to use RAW images for quite a while and to same HDD space I only use Jpeg Fine now. No need for PS Lightroom now. Rarely have to even look at CA as in camera removal. Most images just need Auto Tone and a little bit of Shadow/Highlight and Contrast. All done in 16 bits. I really feel sorry about those who worry about Sony and cannot accomplish their photography without having to look at competitors.
Vidgamer
Imperial Ambassador
Posts: 527
Joined: Wed Jun 11, 2008 3:37 am

Re: Don't Worry ? Be Happy ?

Unread post by Vidgamer »

bfitzgerald wrote:I can only go on what I've seen and a lot of M mount users got pretty worked up about shoving some nice glass on a much cheaper than Lecia body.
That go kinda ripped up when the results came in, esp with wider angle lenses.

It seems the Leica bodies have much better optimised offset micro lenses (the results looked far better from what I saw) With the E mount FF bodies even taking the lens right down yielded some pretty poor results. I know myself even using older rangefinders and compacts on 35mm that you get compromises, more fall off, weaker edge/corner performance, distortion seems more an issue (maybe the lens design)
I have not kept up enough on what Leica lenses are doing on the A7 and A7r, but if that was my thing, I'd wait to see which model worked well with which lenses before jumping in. In the previous generation, the Nex-7 handled such lenses worse than the other, lower-resolution sensors. There have been many fine results from the 16mp sensors, though. It's not like you couldn't get good results from rangefinder lenses if you wanted, it's just that the 24mp sensor was a step too far. Something about the sensor design didn't work well for that application. You could use the 24mp sensor with native e-mount lenses such as the 24mm/1.8 and have some of the best results in the camera world. It's not as if there is no use for the Nex-7 because it is not optimal for wider-angle Leica lenses.
In a cruel twist of fate you probably will get better performance using 35mm SLR system lenses on E Mount than you likely will FE mount lenses.
Probably not. For example, the 55/1.8.

You know, this kind of reminds me of David K. testing the 16mm/2.8 and finding the corners soft, then comparing with his selection of legacy SLR lenses and coming to the conclusion that they really aren't any better, and in some cases worse. (If I recall correctly...)
It might pick up some other mount users just on that, but what really matters if if Sony can sell their own lenses (which is where the profits really are)
What if Sony, perhaps unlike some other brands or camera styles, can actually make a profit on the camera itself? I suspect this is one of Sony's strategies for a long time.
The jury is out on that one, some of the Sony primes seem good on FE mount (from what I see) but they're not wide angle nor that fast, the zooms seem less impressive to date (some say the 70-200mm f4 is good, and it should be for the asking price)
Compared to what? Certainly, if a particular brand seems to be a better deal, buy it. With any system, you need to know which lenses are good or not so good, pricing, etc. Sony has only begun the FE line, but I think it's a good start.

The zooms seem OK, but for the price, it seems a shame that the corners at wide angles aren't better, but they still seem pretty good overall.

I think the FE cameras (and lenses) are probably attracting those who wanted to get into FF, but it was a bit pricey in other brands. Of course, Sony users can be tempted into it as well, so I don't see it as primarily stealing users from other brands, but why not?
It's too early to say where FE is going, or where everyone else is too. You can't really compare the crop sensors to the FF ones though, clearly the smaller sensors will suffer far less from the full frame ones regarding vignetting, corner performance etc etc, but likely somewhat more than a crop DSLR
If it's a longer lens or a SLR-like retrofocus design, then there shouldn't be any differences compared to a DSLR with the same sensor.
Of course makers want more profits, but they have to understand that getting people to buy the bodies..and then selling them the lenses is the way to go.
I think Sony has been in the game for long enough to know how it works.
Shoving stuff out like the A3000 isn't going to go a lot when Canon sell their own budget DSLR for the same price.
But the A3000 has sold for less!
I had hoped Sony would sit down and think about things a bit more, and genuinely try to do the best you can for each price segment.

You have to be honest and say ook the A6000 isn't bad, but it's hardly going to make most Canikon users drop their systems, purely to buy a camera which is smaller. Maybe the FF take will work for Sony, but it's a more niche market right now.
The FF (FE) seems to be a very niche market. Hard to speculate on the future of cameras just on that segment.

I thought they were doing a pretty good job of targeting different price segments, but with this latest round, I think they decided that they really had to be more competitive on price, thus the low-ball A3000, and the really aggressive A6000 pricing.

But as for the A6000 not selling to Canikon users, then who is the intended purchaser? Someone who wants the AF speed and image quality of an SLR in a smaller package. Is there no one like that in your mind? Is it so crazy that someone would like something they can slip into a jacket pocket but still is a great camera?

I never wanted a DSLR, it was simply what I needed to get the image quality I wanted. Now I can get that IQ in a smaller package -- why do I need the DSLR? This makes perfect sense to me.
User avatar
bfitzgerald
Subsuming Vortex of Brilliance
Posts: 3996
Joined: Fri Sep 26, 2008 10:48 pm

Re: Don't Worry ? Be Happy ?

Unread post by bfitzgerald »

Depends what you are doing.
It's impossible to know what everyone's needs are.

I don't have a problem with smaller system cameras, but I can't really see any advantage for myself in losing IBIS, not having a native mount (ie an adaptor)
I still have my smaller compact (for when I do need a small camera) I have a superzoom bridge for when I don't want to take anything bar that.

Do I need anything else?
If I were being dead honest, were it not for the requirement right now to have an SLR system. I'd probably just use one camera (either a premium compact or a bridge model) and be ok with that. I got some pretty nice shots on my FZ-5 years ago..albeit limited in lower light.

I could do a lot of the stuff I do with A mount with mirrorless, but size isn't a problem for me. A lighter bag is always welcome, but my solution is don't try to take too much with you :mrgreen: I don't really get the concept of mirrorless, I think most people would simply buy a compact. Even if you were fairly serious about wanting good image quality, an RX100 is far cheaper than an A6000. I suspect most would go for the cybershot. If ILC makers are trying to get people to move over from heavily invested SLR systems, I think a lot of people don't feel that's worth doing. And even those who do are quite unlikely to sell their entire inventory of lenses and replace them with the native lenses on mirrorless

I think the concept is somewhat flawed from the word go. The universal mount appeal (with limitations and adaptors) is a bit like Gillette razors taking Wilkinson sword blades..I'm obviously going to go with the somewhat more affordable WS blades. Even if I did go ILC, I'd keep a large number of lenses and whatever mount I went to they're not going to be selling me a whole bunch of new optics. I'm all up for choice but how these makers expect to drive lens profits, I think they've missed something obvious here.
alphaomega
Viceroy
Posts: 1196
Joined: Mon Aug 18, 2008 11:20 pm

Re: Don't Worry ? Be Happy ?

Unread post by alphaomega »

Even if you were fairly serious about wanting good image quality, an RX100 is far cheaper than an A6000. I suspect most would go for the cybershot.
Based on comments above this quote, Barry Fitzgerald can cleary still handle a weighty bag. Not so with me any longer. I use my RX100 a lot, but sometimes it will not do. The other day I was out doing some Alamy photography and needed a telephoto lens in the morning and wide angle in the afternoon. The RX100 stayed at home and my NEX-6 handled the job with my 55-210 E mount morning and 10-18 E mount in the afternoon. Both are excellent lenses and stabilised. All packed in a light bag you could carry a whole day without difficulty.
User avatar
bfitzgerald
Subsuming Vortex of Brilliance
Posts: 3996
Joined: Fri Sep 26, 2008 10:48 pm

Re: Don't Worry ? Be Happy ?

Unread post by bfitzgerald »

The Tamrac bag is only heavy if you load it up.
Nobody makes you try to fit every lens you own in one bag for every task.

I could shove the A57 and 17-50mm in a holster bag and put my MAS belt on with just the beercan on it. Not that heavy at all covers quite a range and I'm ok in low light too. Or you could use an UWA instead of the Tamron your choice
And for the times I need mega range and a one hit wonder the Fuji I picked up does quite well enough.
Vidgamer
Imperial Ambassador
Posts: 527
Joined: Wed Jun 11, 2008 3:37 am

Re: Don't Worry ? Be Happy ?

Unread post by Vidgamer »

bfitzgerald wrote:Depends what you are doing.
It's impossible to know what everyone's needs are.
Who said that we need to know what everyone's needs are? Some of us are interested in the smaller cameras because they're smaller and lighter. Whether or not this is a large group doesn't matter -- it's enough to justify the making of smaller, quality cameras.
I don't have a problem with smaller system cameras, but I can't really see any advantage for myself in losing IBIS, not having a native mount (ie an adaptor)
I still have my smaller compact (for when I do need a small camera) I have a superzoom bridge for when I don't want to take anything bar that.

Do I need anything else?
Well, you gain OSS. Better for video. Oh, and you gain video, something I missed when I used my DSLR.

If an RX100 were available several years ago, I wonder if I would have bought a DSLR? Essentially, I wanted a better camera, but not necessarily a DSLR. Of course, there were advantages to the DSLR, and I have enjoyed using long lenses and got good results. But, I can now get most of the advantages in a smaller package. If I didn't want a smaller camera, I would have stuck with the DSLR (potentially getting a DSLT?).

But now, there's even less compromise, with the newer cameras.
If I were being dead honest, were it not for the requirement right now to have an SLR system. I'd probably just use one camera (either a premium compact or a bridge model) and be ok with that. I got some pretty nice shots on my FZ-5 years ago..albeit limited in lower light.
Well, that's it, isn't it? It just needs to be good enough. My problem was that I could tell that my small-sensor cameras just weren't cutting it. The dynamic range wasn't large enough, and when light got a tad low, it was just trouble. They could have just made a bridge camera with a larger sensor and small form-factor and I would have been happy with that. But it didn't seem to exist several years ago. It was like the camera manufacturers all got together and decided that making entry-level DSLRs at the same price as the high-end compact/bridge cameras meant that noone wanted the smaller cameras and would all just pick the DSLR.
I could do a lot of the stuff I do with A mount with mirrorless, but size isn't a problem for me.
I think it's simple -- just stick with a-mount. Nothing wrong with that. Except for some esoteric details such as light loss from SLT and mirror-shock, there's not a compelling advantage to switch to mirrorless aside from size and weight.
A lighter bag is always welcome, but my solution is don't try to take too much with you :mrgreen: I don't really get the concept of mirrorless, I think most people would simply buy a compact. Even if you were fairly serious about wanting good image quality, an RX100 is far cheaper than an A6000. I suspect most would go for the cybershot. If ILC makers are trying to get people to move over from heavily invested SLR systems, I think a lot of people don't feel that's worth doing. And even those who do are quite unlikely to sell their entire inventory of lenses and replace them with the native lenses on mirrorless
My lens collection is rather modest, and I can make occasional use of them with the adapter, so I'm not too worried about inventory loss. It could be tough for someone who's had a-mount for a couple of decades. I think Sony is happy to sell A-mount cameras if people will buy them.

The RX100 II is $700, on sale at Amazon (normally $750). The A6000 is $800. I wouldn't call the RX100 "far cheaper". Or you and I have a far different opinion on the meaning of far cheaper. ;-) Now, the old model RX100 is cheaper, but then so is the Nex-6 (both older models).

If someone off the street were to ask me about what camera they should get, but they wanted better than typical quality photos, I'd steer them to the RX100 before Nex or DSLR. Fortunately these days there are even more compact alternatives.
I think the concept is somewhat flawed from the word go. The universal mount appeal (with limitations and adaptors) is a bit like Gillette razors taking Wilkinson sword blades..I'm obviously going to go with the somewhat more affordable WS blades. Even if I did go ILC, I'd keep a large number of lenses and whatever mount I went to they're not going to be selling me a whole bunch of new optics. I'm all up for choice but how these makers expect to drive lens profits, I think they've missed something obvious here.
I think Sony didn't realize how brilliant the Nex concept was. They kind of figured it out quickly, though. A lot of us appreciate the smaller size that doesn't compromise performance too much.

As for selling lenses, it is a bit of a racket how they make money. But, in the end, it's up to us to decide how we want to spend our money. When I had an A-mount camera, I didn't buy any Sony lenses. For E-mount, I've bought multiple Sony lenses. Go figure.
Vidgamer
Imperial Ambassador
Posts: 527
Joined: Wed Jun 11, 2008 3:37 am

Re: Don't Worry ? Be Happy ?

Unread post by Vidgamer »

bfitzgerald wrote:The Tamrac bag is only heavy if you load it up.
Nobody makes you try to fit every lens you own in one bag for every task.

I could shove the A57 and 17-50mm in a holster bag and put my MAS belt on with just the beercan on it. Not that heavy at all covers quite a range and I'm ok in low light too. Or you could use an UWA instead of the Tamron your choice
And for the times I need mega range and a one hit wonder the Fuji I picked up does quite well enough.
I have an even smaller holster bag for my Nex-6 and kit lens (almost doesn't fit with the Sigma 30!), and I can keep an extra lens in a pocket.

I hope you aren't suggesting the Tamron 17-50mm as a compact and lightweight lens! This lens is just silly when attached to a Nex camera. It's, like, 1.5 pounds! It's ridiculous. And why is it even f2.8? It has soft corners. Anyway, I really like this lens on my A100. After a couple of hours, though, it kinda weighs heavy on my neck. Maybe other people are OK with 2.5 pounds around the neck all day, but this is a strong motivation for why the Nex appealed to me. Combine that with being a tourist and having to deal with the camera. With a small camera, I can just stuff it in a pocket, jacket, or a really small bag, and it's less obtrusive.

Nothing wrong with having a Fuji or any other small camera for times where you want to pack light. We also have a small Sony P&S for when we just need something smaller.
Post Reply

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 3 guests