What is the count in the entire world? Maybe 50 posters

[Greg Beetham]

Oh well, I should have learned my lesson by now, it was put together by dpr wasn't it? Sony UK specifications tell a slightly different story.http://www.sony.co.uk/product/dsi-body/ ... nicalSpecs
Greg

[bfitzgerald]

Alright Barry, now you're either just griping, or comparing apples to oranges.

The A100 had a price of $899 US when it hit the market in 2006, I don't know what the 5D went for. Neither can hold a candle to my 350 in image performance, and the newer sensors will give even more. If you're doing 4x6 prints at low ISO you're not going to notice, but give me hi-res photos at ISO 400 or 800 and I'll blow yours away.

On top of that there are numerous other improvements, noise, focus accuracy and speed, LV, not an essential, but I've found it nice at times in both macro work and in using it as a waist level viewfinder.

The 580 gives back some of your missing features, and sacrifices 3% in the viewfinder over the 5D. That with 1.6 times the MPs, GPS and higher FPS (2 features I know you're not looking for, but the times, they are a changin'). And all of this for a body only price of $799 US.

You want to tell me again what a bargain that A100 was? Maybe you bought it as it was going out, and got a deal, but in 2 years I bet I can get a 580 for around $600.

This is where you blow it for so many of us, Barry, you cant ignore all the advancements and complain that one missing minor feature makes the camera less than what you had back in the day.

Dusty

You are kidding me right? At ISO 400/800 the 5d is far less noisy than the A350. And as if 6mp is only good for 6x4" prints..come now you are in some fantasy land here. You would not dare use an A350 at ISO 1600 yet I would not even think twice about it on the KM. It's got it's faults but really..your points seem rather obscure to say the least. It is what it is a 2005 DSLR that's good at low light has 6mp (which is actually ok for me) and has some quirks like a ropey LCD and it could have better AF and speed.

Sure AF speed improved but my A200 is not as accurate for lower light AF wise.

One missing or minor feature? Seriously we got DOF preview back (gasp), MLU and the lens release lock. How amazing is that? It's not it's just putting back stuff they should never have removed. Times have moved on..2005 was then..2010 is now and Sony just don't stack up. 5d was cheaper than the A580 as well. A100 was not appealing to me as the sensor was not as good as the 6mp 5d.

No DMF
No "proper" NR control on jpegs
No real customisation (major issue for me)
No AEL spot toggle
No direct access to WB

0.80x VF is only acceptable on bottom entry models. It's another compromise for the fast AF live view (which I honestly don't care about one bit) Where are all these advancements?

[bfitzgerald]

Oh well, I should have learned my lesson by now, it was put together by dpr wasn't it? Sony UK specifications tell a slightly different story.http://www.sony.co.uk/product/dsi-body/ ... nicalSpecs
Greg

Greg never use DPR they copy/paste and get things wrong (well sometimes)

On your points MLU is back (evidently) and DOF preview. And sure they have their swanky consumer things slapped in there like sweep panorama, live view fast and normal. Not bad..ok reasonable.

Until you work out you can't even adjust the Auto ISO limit, P shift is missing (found on my decade old cheap film body), Sony have yet to discover in camera raw development or filters etc..no deal breaker but a bit behind the times, still stuck with the 0.7 bracketing and I'll ponder if they actually bothered to put an ISO display in the VF.

Small steps with Sony very small.

[Greg Beetham]

Yep Barry that's the last time I'll trust their listed specifications.
Thing is though my argument is still valid for the A33-A55 that does use the small battery, it's even worse for those cameras as they have the extra power drain of the EVF over the A560-A580 models. It is amazing that after all this time there is still no ISO in the viewfinder, and the bracket is still at a max of .7 one would think it wouldn't be too hard to increase the selection to include 1 full stop as well, at least.
Greg

[bfitzgerald]

The battery point is valid on the A33/55 models I'd say you would want 2 spare batteries for those models. The capacity is too low really esp as the drain is far higher with constant sensor/evf use.

Maybe compact users won't care others might.

The bracketing issue is a contradiction as they offer HDR jpeg shots (and they look decent) but raw shooters are left out to dry. This isn't a deal breaker for me just a minor point. ISO in the VF I have not seen the A580 VF or user manual so I have no idea what the story is there. It's annoying no questions. If you look over the A55 reviews you'll see the same issue again complete lack of customisation in most areas. I'll assume the same for the OVF models.

There are a lot of small points I find annoying and that's what bothers me most. It's not "one or two" issues or niggles but a whole host of stuff that adds up. Very frustrating indeed.

[peterottaway]

With a smaller lighter camera you will get lesser performance,fact of life. What is questionable is the price gouging that Sony is indulging in. Having said that I think it unlikely that I will shoot more than 200 or so photos at any one time.

But then again the Nikon D7000 is going to use a brand new battery rather than the $40 EL-3e used by the D90,D300 and D700 amongst others.Those of you considering buying the A560/580 will be able to use same battery as theA500/A550 A700/A850/A900.

Sometimes you win sometimes you loose. Some of us regard a glass as half full, some don't.

[alphaomega]

Barry, You are very tenacious in your criticism of Sony. They can do nothing right. And yet, as I listed somewhere else, the NEX5 occupies sales slots 5 and 6 and A77 slot 7 in its class of cameras in Japan. First time Sony have achieved that. I am convinced that Sony will do well with their new lines. The younger generation have grown up with EVF and other electronic wizardry and they will embrace minaturisation like NEX and A33/55 and presumably A77. You have picked a loser as general for your picture. You should have picked General Grant. He was equally tenacious in pursuing Lee and company and he won. I think you are representing a very small minority and Sony have their eyes on quantity rather than top end users. These are already heavily into CAN/NIK. Maybe a new FF camera with a 30/32Mp sensor of high quality might bring some of the (non sporting) professional users over, but I am not sure it will be many.

[Greg Beetham]

Didn't someone say that quite a few Nikon pro's also bought an A900 and a few Ziess lenses, maybe because the price of the D3x was so high I guess.
Greg

[bfitzgerald]

I picked Stonewall Jackson as I admired his guts and ability to hold his ground even in difficult conditions. This also reflects upon my own views with A mount.
I would not describe him as a loser, nor General Lee..both made mistakes but both are greatly admired for their tactical and military abilities (far more than any Union commander) They fought a hard campaign and ultimately lost mostly due to limited resources.

Sony on the other hand are the George B. McClellan of the civil war..commanding huge resources but unable to direct them effectively towards their rivals/competitors.

But yes you are right as we have seen throughout history some of the most gifted commanders have lost..even legends such as Hannibal the Carthaginian General who was probably one of the most gifted commanders of all time. As somebody who emailed me just now said..you can fight many brave battles and win spectacular victories, but ultimately lose the campaign. Hannibal was one who did this, and the Confederate army another..but you can leave the field with your head high knowing you tried

A company is only as good as it's leader or the direction it heads in. Toru Katsumoto is IMO at best somewhat incompetent..at worst he is completely unable to understand the needs of enthusiast/serious users. Thus I shall happily retire from the field knowing I have at least tried to get stuff sorted out and improved. I can't make things happen on my own nor can any posters..but we did try.

Personally I think those who stood ground and raised points did Sony a favour..we did the leg work for them, if they were ill advised enough to ignore it..that's their own fault.

[Dusty]

You have picked a loser as general for your picture. You should have picked General Grant. He was equally tenacious in pursuing Lee and company and he won.

Now you've go off the reservation and caused me to defend Barry!

Jackson was one of the best Corp commanders on either side. Lee said that the reason he lost at Gettysburg was "Jackson is not here."

I admire Grant, live less than 20 miles from his homestead, and have gotten to tour inside his old log cabin. He was amazing in many ways. However, the South lost for one reason - they didn't fight to win. They only fought to preserve their right to succeed from the Union. (A right they used for the wrong reason).

By the time the South had decided to make a push at the North to force them into peace talks, it was too late. There were 3 times the people in the north and nearly 10 times the industrial capacity. Also, most of those southern plantation owners goods were shipped in Yankee ships, so they had no real navy.

Stonewall Jackson re-defined warfare by being the first to realize and put into practice the fact that assuming a defensive position and forcing the enemy to come to you to get slaughtered was the way to win battles, not by making massed charges.

Had Jackson been at Gettysburg and convinced Lee (as he usually did) to dig in and let the enemy come to them, the outcome would have been different. (Most military historians believe.) That would have opened up the way for Lee to either encircle Washington, moved on Baltimore or on Philadelphia. Either of those moves may have caused the North to sue for peace, and changed world history. (For that reason I'm very glad the North won.)
[/rant]

Dusty

[alphaomega]

Thanks Dusty for the history lesson. Often the counter-attack is the best option if you are the weaker party. Let the enemy run at you and then strike back when they have run out of steam. Not a Stonewall Jackson invention. Lee was honourable but picked the dis-honourable job when he was offered to lead the Unionist Army by Pres. Lincoln. He could have stood against slavery if he wanted to and so could Stonewall Jackson. I would probably pick an image of Sherman or Patton though. Patton said never give up an area already taken as it will just cost more lives taking it again. Keep going forward and disorient the enemy. Sherman did something like this as well.

Greg Beetham said

Didn't someone say that quite a few Nikon pro's also bought an A900 and a few Ziess lenses, maybe because the price of the D3x was so high I guess.
Greg

As I recall there were quite a number of Nikon users who praised the A900 on DPReview. Coincidentally I came across this old entry on Sonyalpharumors http://www.sonyalpharumors.com/ft5-the- ... th-34-8mp/ and as it says Sony has a 34.8Mp FF sensor in development. I expect that at some stage they will release a FF "killer" of Canon 1D series and some larger sensor MF cameras with a FF DSLR with just such a sensor. I have never believed that Sony would withdraw from FF considering the continued release of FF lenses. Just wait and see.

[Greg Beetham]

Hmm that'll be interesting for studio, landscapers/commercial photographers if Sony go there with FF, they'll be getting into Leica S2 territory (uses a larger than FF sensor 45x30mm @ 37.5MP) but with most likely a smaller body (S2 160x120x80 1410g), (A900 157x117x82 928g). The only obvious thing missing from the Sony lens lineup is any equivalent studio type leaf shutter lenses that can sync at 1/500sec. (leaf shutters don't disturb the body as much as FP shutters either). But at a guess the Sony A9 would be a fraction of the price of a Leica S2.
One would have to be prepared to be comfortable with huge image files though.
Greg

[Contrast]

As someone desperate to move on to a better camera than my a350 I thought I'd add my view on all this. For me Sony do not currently have a camera that meets my needs. What is interesting in what they have done recently is HDR -very impressive on the nex 5, as is Panorama. I wouldn't say panorama is likely to be a purchase maker or breaker though. The pellicle mirror is good too, but not combined with EVF which I can't get along with at all. That leaves GPS, a superb move, but hardly essential. What lets Sony down? no new "full feature" FF/Pro camera, and relatively low MP (for new models) on the smaller sensor cameras. Regarding shutter speed, the Canon 7d looks an all round better performer. For me, all Sony slr do not have the clearest or brightest LCD screens either.

I've been following DPreview.com on Photokina 2010 and really there isn't a lot coming out at all. Nikon release yet another APS-C, (- doesn't light my fire). I am keen to see what the 46MP Sigma SD1 can do when released next year even if it is less than FF sensor. This announcement coupled with Canons ability to demonstrate 50 and 120mp sensors I think is a strong indicator that we are in for a rapid change in cameras in the next 18 months to two years. Whilst I am quite aware MP isn't the "be all and end all", Sony really aren't putting out anything attention grabbing. For the next few months at least I'd guess the newer Nikon are going to be the hot sellers along with a steady stream of 5d and 7d buyers. I am very impressed by the drive, presence, and motivation that Nikon have in the DSLR market, that I certainly believe so far Sony have lacked. As it stands, I won't buy Nikon, purely because they don't have a camera model I really want. I probably won't buy Sony even if they do come out with a new model, because they feel too "niche", owning Sony DSLR is more effort than dominant brands. I can't just walk into any number of stores and take my pick of lenses or cable or hot shoe adapters etc. I have to mail order everything, unseen, untried, purely on web review.

[Contrast]

You are kidding me right? At ISO 400/800 the 5d is far less noisy than the A350.

Agreed, the a350 is dreadful for noise at anything other than ISO 100/200. I took some shots outdoors with my 100/f2.8 macro lens yesterday at ISO 400 f11 of a spiders web. Despite chimping the shots and thinking they were fine (which opens up another issue about the LCD quality),- soon as downloaded onto my PC (Raw to IDC and photoshop) the noise is obviously dreadful. I will have to do the shots over once the wind drops and hope the spider rebuilds. ISO noise is on my top 4 list for wanting to change camera.

[peterottaway]

Not trying put words into your mouth but you are obviously unhappy and have all ready defined that what Sony and Nikon offer is not for you. I suggest that you simply find the best deal on a Canon that suits you and move on.

Long,messy and bitter breakups are best avoided.