Model line-up strategy

[stevecim]

I have no idea how accurate that list is. All I have seen is the A200 on ist or 2nd for ages prior to the new A2xx-3xx models coming out. So I imagine it was a decent seller. (aka ain't broke, don't fix it!)

Every company talks about a "new untapped market" and "huge sales" Panasonic did with the G1, but what do we see? Traditional DSLR's topping the sales charts and by significant margins. I don't buy Sony's smaller lighter sell more, any more than I did Panasonic's, maybe to some people..but they should be setting sales records if this huge market want these cameras!

Don't recall Sony ever saying the step from PnS to Pns DSLR was a huge market. On paper there is very little differance between the A200 and A230 rather than a new model it's more like a "refresh" same guts but different case, I think Sony should have made some improvements on the inside has well and maybe the got the case wrong, but at least they tried to be different.

Never debated the A5xx models make for decent A3xx replacements, which makes you wonder why we have 3 entry models, surely a mistake on the part of Sony?

totally agree here, 3 low end models is to much, I would have dropped the 10MP sensor and made the A230 with a 14MP sensor , which would have given them the cheapest 14MP camera in the market and I would have renamed the A380 to A250 which would have made it clear that it is a live View version of the A230 and not a replace for the A350, An 14MP A230 with a few extra software teaks would would have seen has a real replacement for the A200, or better yet they should have used the 12MP sensor of the A500, That way the will recover the development cost quicker having 3 models sharing the same sensor and they could have still sold the A200 has an extra cheap 10MP camera for 6 more months and they have killed off the last of the bad high iso cameras, 1 less thing for reviewers to complain about.

What the A5xx series is not, are well featured mid level models (which some expected)

Again I agree, I feel the biggest problem is the naming of the models because prople are used to Minolta naming we all expect model 5xx should be higher then model 3xx cameras . If Sony had named the A500/A550 A310/A360 then it would have been clear that they are replacements to A300/A350 not newer mid-level models


Hence my remarks, I continue to feel Sony's model line up is ill advised,
Ill named with too many entry models,Yes not enough real differences, and their apparent abandonment of decent optical finders worries me more than anything. Where did you get this from? the A230 has the same view finder has the A200, A330/A380 are the same has the A300/A350 and the A500/A500 seem to be an improvent on the A300/A350. We have yet to see the A700 replacement, you will have to agree it's not the A5XX models and the A850/A900 have the best OVF of any current camera (so I'm told) In your mind you still think of the A330/A380 has replacements for the A300/A350 in stead of upgrades for the A200 and you think the A5XX should be a level above the what the A300/A350 becuase the Minolta 5xx where a level above 3xx/4xx cameras. Sony's naming is what stuffed up everyones thinking

[bfitzgerald]

My comments aka optical finders: 4 out of the 5 new models have compromised finders based on Sony's implementation of fast AF live view. Whilst I find the 0.83 mag acceptable for lower level models, I do feel that the time has come for improvements in this area. Esp since the 0.83 mag came from the km5d, a camera released in 2005. Also I would add, the AF system, is simply getting on a bit, and a single cross sensor is fine for lowest levels, but not "a step up" (note new pentax model with many cross sensors)

I see a place really for just one low level entry model, LV or not..nobody minds, dump the other 2 (you can debate which ones) These new A5xx models, should be just one..and higher entry level (aka D5000 500d level etc) I would expect something A700 wise around £1000 odd, and I would bring in an A600 series..which would be a mini A700 with most of that generations features (you can call this the real A500 series number wise), leaving an enhanced A700 one for semi pro APS users.

So it goes beyond names alone and numbers. I ignore what Sony label them as A2/3/5 etc.

[stevecim]

I can agree with most of that, but the D5000 only has a x.78 VF, does not seem to be affecting it's sales to badly. from general chat, it seems that the A200 focus system is better than the A100, some say the A300/A350 is slightly better than the A200, We all can agree the A700 with it's double 2.8 Cross sensor is better than then A1xx/A2XX/A3XX/A5XX (I don't think the A5XX have the 2.8 cross sensor) and Some reviewers say the A900 has the most accurate AF preformance of any current DSLR. Clearly Sony have been improving on the AF system, the current system has 9 user selectable AF points and 10 focus assist points plus the double cross 2.8 (for the A700,A850,A900) dosn't that make it a 20 point focus system. you can't serious say that the current focus module is the same has used in the A100. I have seen no reviews that say Sony AF preformance is so bad and so far behind Nik/Can?
I sure there are people here that know more than me have Sony improved the AF system for the original one used in the A100? Is the Sony Af system that useless compare to Nik?can?

[KevinBarrett]

the A700 with it's double 2.8 Cross sensor is better than then A1xx/A2XX/A3XX/A5XX (I don't think the A5XX have the 2.8 cross sensor)

Actually, the a700, a850 and a900 don't have double f/2.8 cross sensors. They have a double cross sensor, sensitive to f/5.6 and larger apertures, and a single horizontal f/2.8 sensor through the middle of it. The f/2.8 sensor isn't sensitive to lenses with maximum apertures smaller than f/2.8, so having only an f/2.8 sensor at the center (cross, double cross, or otherwise) would render the center focus point useless for most lenses.

[bfitzgerald]

Tricky subject.
I don't think Sony are rated badly on AF performance overall. I would put Nikon ahead though (D300 I tried was mighty impressive) Canon are fast, but accuracy an issue. A200 is fast..good light very speedy, low light it's the slowest AF body I have (downgraded EV0 spec??) I still don't trust the A200 with AF 100%, it's that oversized central AF sensor, that can lock onto a background, and ignore what's under the AF point. Saying that, it's no worse than the 450d which misses as well.

I do think it's time to update things though, been nearly 10 years since that 9 point AF system was brought out. I would have expected the A5xx series to have had a new AF system, and an AF assist light.

[stevecim]

Tricky subject.
I still don't trust the A200 with AF 100%, it's that oversized central AF sensor, that can lock onto a background, and ignore what's under the AF point.

I would have expected the A5xx series to have had a new AF system, and an AF assist light.

this happens to me a lot with the A350, it drives me mad, seems to happen more with my Sigma 18-50mm DC in anything but the brightest sun slight, I've given up trying to take photos indoors with flash. Can cheap and nasty lenses affect AF? I'm thinking about getting A CZ16-80 if I was sure it would help with the AF
I've never had a body with a AF assist light (film or Digital) how useful is it? out to what range to they help?

[bfitzgerald]

I don't believe cheap lenses have anything to do with it at all, it's just the AF system itself.
I have no firm proof, but I believe Sony enlarged the central AF point, possibly as they are entry models. It is def bigger than any of my other bodies, 5d, 5 film, 7 film, 60 etc etc. None of them have the same behaviour as the A200. You can get used to it, but its a PITA. For close and accurate focus, you can shift away from the middle near towards the edge of the spot metering circle, really it's way bigger than it shows in the VF.

I had a job yesterday, taking some shots for a magazine in a shop (shop promotion type thing!), nothing too tricky..few portraits and product/general shots etc. I took the 5d with me, and I took about 80 shots overall, 2 of those was out of focus (I used the 50mm a lot). If I had taken the A200 you can increase that number significantly. 5d is not speed demon, and weaker for tracking, but it's mostly accurate AF wise, A200 leaves something to be desired in that dept, I have to take extra shots to be sure I have things covered.

[David Kilpatrick]

Sony has not enlarged the central AF point between the 5D and 200, but they did reduce the spot metering area. The circle for spot metering in the 7D/5D almost encroaches on the first left and right focus points, while it remains well clear of them and much smaller and tighter on the 200-350 series. The cross sensor for AF fills pretty much the diameter of the spot circle in the 200, it does not fill the circle shown in the 5D because the circle is larger - not because the AF point is smaller.

David

[bfitzgerald]

David you are right, I had not noticed this before, the spot metering circle is indeed smaller in the VF on the A200. However I have again just checked the AF, and the A200 can get a lock on outside the central AF square, the 5d does not appear to have this issue, nor any of my other film bodies. This can cause a real problem for some focus situations, esp when the subject has some depth, I find it tends to lock on at or near the edge of the AF square, rather than in the middle. All 3 A200 bodies, and an A350 I tried did the same.

My only conclusion is that in real world use, the A200 is more prone to missing the AF point in "some" situations. The sluggish low light performance for AF might be explained by the sensitivity of the AF system being EV0, rather than EV-1 on many previous Minolta bodies. Good light the A200 is very fast and pretty good at tracking, def notably faster than the 5d. In low light it's accuracy is questionable. 50mm f1.7, it's a struggle using that lens with the A200, less so the 5d, and it rarely is an issue with a 5 or 60 film body, even wide open they nail it most times.

[stevecim]

On my low end 3xi and mid range 600si film bodies the 50mm 1.7 hardly ever missed AF but on the A350 indoors it seems to miss quite a lot. When using spot focus a Lot of times it seems to want to focus on a small amount of texture on a back wall even though someones head is take up 98% of the centre circle.

here is an example



In this photo I lowered my self so that I was level with Nathan head and made sure his head took up all the centre circle but still it focused on the small piece of brick work nearly 10m behid him. I could not even see the brick work in the small A350 OVF

[David Kilpatrick]

The tiny dot in the centre is NEVER the focus area on any camera - it's just an indicator. It shows where the cross-sensors cross. Actually, the cross is made up from 'lines' which are just as long as the other 'line' sensors, so the area is senses is always more or less like a circle the same diameter as the length of a line sensor.

The f/2.8 double cross sensor is even bigger in the A700 - the entire centre spot metering area must be considered as active when using it.

David

[bfitzgerald]

Regardless of the technical discussions about where the AF point exactly is (and I dispute it should be that far off of what is indicated) Having used the A200 for nearly a year, and fair bit, it's very obvious that there is an issue on the central AF point, and it does have a tendency to lock onto background subjects. Not a deal killer, just something you need to keep an eye on.

Something has changed because all the other bodies seem to be more accurate and far less likely to encounter this problem. And the A200 is the only one that seems to be able to lock outside the small AF indicator, none of the others do this..