Future of A mount

[classiccameras]

I recently got a A-37 and kit lens, I will look around on the used sites for Minolta/Konica lenses including Sigma and Tamron, early days as money is tight presently. The A37 with only 16000 actuations was £109 including kit lens. You have to be careful with used pro end cameras as they could have had a severe life and high mileage. I certainly don't want anything bigger than the A37. M/4/3 has not been dismissed yet and is currently on the back burner for future consideration. Sony are pushing E mount hard and I see a few out on the street, but my local camera store has a window full of second hand early A7 cameras, Possibly trade ups or what.

[bfitzgerald]

The reason I passed on the A37/55 bodies is the different battery they use. The 55 has GPS built in which is useful to have
I'm OK with the A57 for size if I want to travel lighter; the A58 whilst it's not exactly mind blowing - is acceptable for a cheaper camera and plenty around for low prices - I'd take a 57 over the 58 myself as the buffer is much larger and the LCD is better.
Usual budget set up is the Tamron 17-50mm tons around and a good lens, mix in the tele Minolta's which are also silly cheap. I used the 100-200mm F4.5 a fair bit - worked much better with group AF for runners.

I just have no idea what people should get if they have nothing at all. I look at the new mirrorless lenses and the prices are just awful, even for F4 lenses. So little interest there bar adapting lenses maybe. I can't say any of them are appealing, at the moment.
The original A7 has the weedy battery as does the A7II - not cameras I would have a lot of interest in

The problem Sony has is users like myself who are not tempted, granted might not be tons of us around. Still they have nothing to offer us except " more snazzy features", most of which can't be used with the LEA4 adapter! So back to what I said a s/h A Mount body makes more sense. I don't know what will happen later on, perhaps they will design better bodies or make a more appealing adapter. I doubt micro 4/3 is cheaper to buy into even s/h v A Mount - but I have not looked in depth at their prices

[classiccameras]

If you look around for M/4/3 Cameras and lenses on the used market you could build a reasonably priced small kit, However, Micro 4/3/ lenses are under performers mainly Olympus at the budget end and grossly over priced at the high end, neither Olympus or Panasonic have managed to fill the middle ground with useful focal lengths and good performers at affordable prices and 3rd party manufactures have shied away from making any M/4/3 zooms

There is no equivalent to a cropped 18-135, which would be so useful. My Sony 18-135 was a great walkabout lens and covered most of my photography. There are virtually no 3rd party lenses other than the 3 Sigma primes either in E mount or M/4/3, but they are superb performers for under £200.

However, my quest is small and light, and I don't like E mount, its off the radar as far as I'm concerned. Most modern cameras from all the brands are stuffing them with features you are probably never going to use, E mount takes the biscuit. My little Olympus EM-10, nice as it is was a pain to use, it was small and fiddly, menus buried in sub menus which were frustrating to navigate. Its now at my local store for a commission sale. Sony A37/57 menus were great to navigate and equally easy are the Panasonic cameras which are now on my short list. Your right about A mount being cheaper to buy into, plus a vast choice of both Minolta and Sony lenses, bit like the Canon and Nikon used market. We shall have to see how things transpire in all mounts

[bfitzgerald]

I had a quick look and they seem to have some OK priced shorter focal length primes on micro 4/3. Some of the zoom lenses seem oddly expensive (12-100mm F2.8 £1000+, 12-40mm F2.8 etc etc)
Think it's a general trend I've seen last couple of years - very heavy price increases on lenses across the board. At one time I thought crop formats would be cheaper, and they should be for obvious reasons. Looking at say Fuji X, they only have a couple of XC budget zooms, everything else works out more expensive if you compare it to equivalent full frame lenses (ie focal length/speed). Some of the primes are not too bad, anything fast ish - is a lot more expensive than the DSLR lenses were (think the cheaper 35/50mm primes always were very affordable)

Sigma have a bunch of new lenses, all are big/huge, heavy and expensive - not my thing at all massive primes even at shorter focal lengths. Tamron also went more upmarket - they no longer really make budget lenses in my books, they just look better value as the E Mount native ones are so pricey. Last I looked lens shipments were also down, aka CIPA numbers. No doubt the squeeze is hitting OEM and third party makers, so their response is to pump up prices more to try to make up the losses.

My response is not to buy new lenses ;-D Had some great bargains, and will continue to dig around to pick up a few more gems at knock down prices. It's a used market for certain, that's where the value lies - the few people who buy new gear are a minority nowadays. I'd wager 2020 won't be any better, and it might even get worse for the next few years.

[classiccameras]

I think Sony are trying to ween people off A mount but softly softly catchee Monkey, they will cease bringing out new A mount models, so if your a big Sony fan you may transfer over which is what they want, but not for me you can keep E mount.

I'm still wondering why there are no more 3rd party m/4/3 lenses, Sigma, Tamron and the others must think there is still a market for their lenses in cropped and FF but as you say they are really no longer a budget option. Most lens makers are pre occupied with lenses more suitable for video work, but its been somewhat at the expense of the stills shooter. Every thing these days is multi purpose but not necessarily good at everything.

[bakubo]

I'm still wondering why there are no more 3rd party m/4/3 lenses, Sigma, Tamron and the others must think there is still a market for their lenses in cropped and FF but as you say they are really no longer a budget option.

m4/3 3rd party lens makers:

Sigma
Tamron
Voigtländer
Samyang
Rokinon
Kowa
Kodak
Tokina
Venus Optics
Kamlan
Zonlai
Opteka
Meyer Optik Goerlitz
SLR Magic
YI
Lensbaby
Zhongyi
Yasuhara
Jackar
Holga
Zeiss
Handevision

A useful website with a list (not sure if it is complete though):

http://hazeghi.org/mft-lenses.html

A little knowledge is a dangerous thing.

[bakubo]

I'm still wondering why there are no more 3rd party m/4/3 lenses, Sigma, Tamron and the others must think there is still a market for their lenses in cropped and FF but as you say they are really no longer a budget option.

m4/3 3rd party lens makers:

Sigma
Tamron
Voigtländer
Samyang
Rokinon
Kowa
Kodak
Tokina
Venus Optics
Kamlan
Zonlai
Opteka
Meyer Optik Goerlitz
SLR Magic
YI
Lensbaby
Zhongyi
Yasuhara
Jackar
Holga
Zeiss
Handevision

A useful website with a list (not sure if it is complete though):

http://hazeghi.org/mft-lenses.html

A little knowledge is a dangerous thing.

Also, there are AF adaptors from Metabones and Viltrox which allow Canon AF lenses to be used with AF. Some are just adapters and some are focal length reducing/aperture speed increasing adaptors.

https://www.metabones.com/products/?c=micro-43-system-2

[classiccameras]

Thanks for the info, many names I have never heard of and are not in my local camera stores either, On line is a wonderful thing but

[bakubo]

I'm still wondering why there are no more 3rd party m/4/3 lenses, Sigma, Tamron and the others must think there is still a market for their lenses in cropped and FF but as you say they are really no longer a budget option.

m4/3 3rd party lens makers:

Sigma
Tamron
Voigtländer
Samyang
Rokinon
Kowa
Kodak
Tokina
Venus Optics
Kamlan
Zonlai
Opteka
Meyer Optik Goerlitz
SLR Magic
YI
Lensbaby
Zhongyi
Yasuhara
Jackar
Holga
Zeiss
Handevision

A useful website with a list (not sure if it is complete though):

http://hazeghi.org/mft-lenses.html

A little knowledge is a dangerous thing.

Also, there are AF adaptors from Metabones and Viltrox which allow Canon AF lenses to be used with AF. Some are just adapters and some are focal length reducing/aperture speed increasing adaptors.

https://www.metabones.com/products/?c=micro-43-system-2

I left Laowa off the list. There may be others too.

[Dusty]

I think Sony have scored an own goal with the E mount system, the market is shrinking for E mount because of cost...

The market is shrinking. Period. Canon and Nikon are not doing better.
Cellphones are "good enough" for what most people need.
More resolution is always good, but 61 MP is not "that thing" that will make people buy a new camera.
I don;t know what "that thing" is. Apparently the manufacturers don't know either.

Well, let's figure it out. Most people are P&S type people, so phones do well enough. They also have certain advantages in today's social media world - the ability to do an immediate post to your favorite site. And the built in GPS tags the location as well. All that in a very compact format.

For the Enthusiast or Pro, we need interchangeable lenses, the ability to manage DOF, shutter speed, aperture, WB, ISO, RAW and attachable/remote flash. And a tripod socket! More resolution, better dynamic range, and high ISO all help a lot.

Camera bodies should be durable, weather sealed on higher end models, and have the ability to attach a vertical grip.

Some of what's missing on the DSLRs that's included in all the phones is GPS and wireless connectivity. Most models are making you pay extra for that, via some kludge module you have to hang on to your camera body. Why?

If I can marry a phone module into the body of my DSLR, I can do what my wife does - take a good pic, and instantly share it to everyone. Actually, I can take a great pic, since I have so much more control over it, and do the same. Or I can take a pic, run it thru an online app that puts bunny ears, etc on everyone, and post that. Not all pics are always serious!

My first camera was a Kodak 126 Instamatic when I was 8. I then moved up to simple but adjustable roll film camera, and then my Dad's old Argus C3 he bought on R&R in Japan during the Korean War. (Still have it!) When I wanted to get serious, I bought an XG-M, and went on from there.

What changed? Cont'd below...

[Dusty]

Early digital couldn't compete with film, but I had a few cheap models so that I didn't have to scan photos and load them to the web. Of course, even though the internet was becoming a thing - I used to run a dial in BBS, if anyone remembers them - it was slow, we were working with bad graphics cards and monitors that only gave us a flavor of reality, and it was all on the desktop.

When the internet became, fast, vast, portable and ubiquitous, the world changed. Then we had MySpace, then Facebook, Pinterest and a host of other things so that everyone wanted to put pictures of everything they did - "OMG! I just ate the worlds best bagel at Barry's Bagel Barn! Here's a pic." - instantly online.

TMI for me, but some people's life is so boring that it's all they have to be relevant.

DSLRs leave us out of that world. I don't want to post everything I do right away - especially if I'm shooting a wedding, but some things I do. Some things are important to post right away for various reasons, like immediate relevancy, advertising, information, etc. Today's phones give us that, today's DSLRs leave us behind. Today's DSLRS give us such great quality, today's phone cameras aren't too far behind. In fact, I'd venture to say that they are a lot better than the first DSLRs that were out there, in a lot handier physical format.

My wife recently went on a trip and complained that her iCloud was nearly full. She had 200 GB of photos and videos from the last 3 years. A lot were stuff she no longer wanted, but 3/4 of them are keepers for her. The point is - photography for the masses has changed, the reasons for it, the need for speed to post, the need to tweak for crazy fun, etc, and DSLRs of today don't allow us to do what much cheaper phones and tablets do, so that market can't meet the needs of the consumers, and will shrink until they allow us to do it all .

/rant off

Dusty

[classiccameras]

Good rant Dusty, I still go out on field trips with my Minolta SLR loaded with reversal ( Fujichrome ), No zooms to talk of back in the day, and what was around was pretty average, just a bag full of primes, I still get a kick out of remembering how to use a manual 35-mm SLR,
The whole industry is in decline, and now the Mobile/cell phone is the biggest photographic user group in the world. This must be one of the main reasons camera sales are dropping. I could never really see the reason for sending pictures onto social media or to friends of me and my partner having a meal in a restaurant, or whatever we are doing, why?

[bakubo]

Some of what's missing on the DSLRs that's included in all the phones is GPS and wireless connectivity. Most models are making you pay extra for that, via some kludge module you have to hang on to your camera body. Why?

If I can marry a phone module into the body of my DSLR, I can do what my wife does - take a good pic, and instantly share it to everyone. Actually, I can take a great pic, since I have so much more control over it, and do the same. Or I can take a pic, run it thru an online app that puts bunny ears, etc on everyone, and post that. Not all pics are always serious!

I have the following cameras that can connect wirelessly to a phone using the respective company's Android/Apple app:

Olympus PEN-F
Olympus E-M10II
Sony RX100
Panasonic TX1 (ZS100/TZ100 outside Japan)

I used the Olympus app a few times while in Japan using my 6.2" phone and it works, but it is bothersome getting the connection each time and transferring a photo or photos. Also, it will only transfer jpegs. And perversely it will not pull out and transfer the big embedded jpeg inside of each raw. I usually shoot raw, especially when I am traveling, and I don't want to shot raw+jpeg just for the off chance that 1 out of 1000 photos I might want to transfer to my phone so I can email it or post on Facebook.

I have tried the Sony and Panasonic apps, but for both of them I was never able to figure out how to connect. Followed all the instructions, but clearly I was doing something wrong and I haven't tried again recently.

All of the apps and the way to connect is just a pain in the butt. I don't want to have to sit down at a table with camera and phone and tediously go through all the steps of just transferring a single photo to post on Facebook. With a phone when I take a photo using it and want to post it on Facebook I am usually standing right there and with ease can do it. Should be the same with camera + phone. Not fooling around with the camera and phone establishing a connection, etc. The companies need to create much easier to use apps that you can set up to connect automatically to your camera so that you just pull your phone out of your pocket, start the app, and immediately have access to the photos on the phone. I can't see why that should be so difficult. Are there any camera company apps that can do this? Why can't 3rd parties make an app that will work with all the cameras and do it all better, faster, and easier?

[bfitzgerald]

Early digital couldn't compete with film, but I had a few cheap models so that I didn't have to scan photos and load them to the web. Of course, even though the internet was becoming a thing - I used to run a dial in BBS, if anyone remembers them - it was slow, we were working with bad graphics cards and monitors that only gave us a flavor of reality, and it was all on the desktop.

When the internet became, fast, vast, portable and ubiquitous, the world changed. Then we had MySpace, then Facebook, Pinterest and a host of other things so that everyone wanted to put pictures of everything they did - "OMG! I just ate the worlds best bagel at Barry's Bagel Barn! Here's a pic." - instantly online.

TMI for me, but some people's life is so boring that it's all they have to be relevant.

DSLRs leave us out of that world. I don't want to post everything I do right away - especially if I'm shooting a wedding, but some things I do. Some things are important to post right away for various reasons, like immediate relevancy, advertising, information, etc. Today's phones give us that, today's DSLRs leave us behind. Today's DSLRS give us such great quality, today's phone cameras aren't too far behind. In fact, I'd venture to say that they are a lot better than the first DSLRs that were out there, in a lot handier physical format.

My wife recently went on a trip and complained that her iCloud was nearly full. She had 200 GB of photos and videos from the last 3 years. A lot were stuff she no longer wanted, but 3/4 of them are keepers for her. The point is - photography for the masses has changed, the reasons for it, the need for speed to post, the need to tweak for crazy fun, etc, and DSLRs of today don't allow us to do what much cheaper phones and tablets do, so that market can't meet the needs of the consumers, and will shrink until they allow us to do it all .

/rant off

Dusty

Phones are the ultimate "pocket computer"
I remember back in the 90's seeing how things were developing on compact computers. Psion had a few very compact, then we had the Palm PDA. Used both at the time quite interesting devices. Then the iPhone came out (Apple were not the first with a touch screen, but they did do it better than anyone else). Everything changed
The phone became many things but mostly a computer. So it was natural progression for it to be a Swiss army knife of devices. Cameras started out super low res and awful, now they are getting pretty good even on budget models.

I don't think cameras will ever be the same again. Whilst the connectivity would have helped - for the mass market the death of cameras was quite easy to predict. Doubt it would be much different even with mini pc type functions built into the cameras. So as you say we're left with enthusiasts and working shooters; much much smaller market.

Cameras won''t go away, but it's not sustainable the current situation. Too many makers, way too many models - and tons of s/h stuff which has over saturated the market. Now we have the new buzz words such as "computational photography" and "AI". I'm not against making things easier, but who the hell wants a perfect shot every time? (grin)

Cameras are in danger of being the next CD/DVD. Sure I still have some around, does anyone buy them though? Not so many
Phones have their own problems too, I touch type so for serious typing a touch screen isn't good - hence I use my desktop often to do "real work". We do live in a mobile world, people are glued to them - it's almost scary people in groups yet having a problem holding a conversation. We're so connected not that many people are really talking anymore

[classiccameras]

I saw a notice over the bar in a pub, saying We Don't Have Wi Fi, Talk To Each Other