Ken Rockwell SLAMS the A55

[bakubo]

Sony has proven to be very bad at supplying accessories and fixing things that needed fixing, they also have missed the boat with numerous opportunities, the A700 was one, it could have put Sony on the map as a serious camera maker, but Sony snatched defeat from the jaws of victory there as well; releasing such an important camera with a bad NR in RAW engine was mind boggling, the D300 followed just a few months later with a very similar sensor and had no such defect...

Actually, the D300 was announced on 2007/8/23 and the A700 on 2007/9/6 so the D300 was actually a bit before the A700. Don't recall about availability of the two cameras though.

[twm47099]

...This is made worse by the cost of advertising. A typical trade magazine/consumer magazine page costs a major name like Sony between £500 and £1000 in the UK (which is the lowest value advertising market in Europe, in fairness - costs in Holland or Germany for example are around four times that of Britain). In the USA advertising costs thousands of dollars and sometimes tens of thousands per insertion, not hundreds or at the most thousands.

David,
I agree about the cost of advertising. But these were direct multi-page mailings by Sony. All they had to do was put another photo and some text into the large expanse of 'Black space" and borrow one camera (per Sony store) from Sony Style to display.

Even when NEX was first released in the US, the Sony Store had 2 displayed, but on the back side of the alpha / handycam display which is in the darkest back corner of the store. At least they have moved the NEX to the front of the display (at the back of the store). The cybershots and now the Handicams are much more prominently displayed (on the way to the video games).
tom

[2tallpaul]

But does it also depend how Sony is perceived in camera buying public mind when compared with there rivals.

In the publics mind canon nikon etc make cameras-Sony makes playstations and tv's.

Some shop staff don't exactly help matters either.

How do you demonstrate to the public that a580 is a better camera than a canon 60d and a a55 is better camera than a nikon 5000

Regards

Paul

[Greg Beetham]

Actually, the D300 was announced on 2007/8/23 and the A700 on 2007/9/6 so the D300 was actually a bit before the A700. Don't recall about availability of the two cameras though.

Going by when dpr did the review on both, Dec19 2007 for the A700, Mar12 2008 for the D300, it seems Nikon had a delay in production/availability of their camera.
Greg

[bfitzgerald]

Is the A580 better than a 60d though? The A55 might well be better than the D5000 in many respects.
I think they were about 6 months late with the A700 had it hit the market at that time (beating rivals) and no bionz NR issues I think it would have done notably better. As it is the non appearance of the A700 MkII did serious damage IMO to the potential growth.

[Greg Beetham]

Maybe Sony realized their limitations and gave up on making serious cameras. It seems they struggle to do anything right, look at the inception of the CZ16-80 DT lens as a case in point, I don't think they could have engineered a worse pr debacle if they tried, Sony can do em without even raising a sweat.
Greg

[bfitzgerald]

I heard a few things how accurate no idea but I got the impression that the A700 did not meet the sales expectations of Sony. Not saying it was a terrible seller just it fell quite a bit short of what they expected volume wise. I also heard the R1 was a complete and total flop which is surprising esp when you look at the price of that Carl Zeiss lens on it's own. I know I did encourage a few folks to look at the R1 (people who were thinking about DSLR etc) Every one of them hated the design and look of it to the point of no return.

This might explain why Sony was not keen to do a new A700 model. I'm sure DK has some kind of take on this one too.

[Greg Beetham]

Maybe the A700 did fall short of expectations, who knows, with Sony's marketing or lack thereof, I wouldn't be surprised. Thing is Sony needed to put the A700 out there that was fault free in any major way so no reviewer could criticize it unduly, as for sure a wannabe serious camera manufacturer is going to be subjected to intense scrutiny no question. The sad story was Sony did not manage to do that, too maybe our loss.
Greg

[2tallpaul]

Compared to a d300, the a700 (even with nr fixed) did not stand a chance as they created a me too product.

If/when the a700 replacement comes thru it got to be at least a 7d killer and more- no more software cock ups, nothing must be compromised - accessories to meet enthusiasts demand ie better macro flash- something that alpha users can be proud of owning.


We can live in hope but I suspect we will be underwelmed- I hope not

Paul

[2tallpaul]

Compared to a d300, the a700 (even with nr fixed) did not stand a chance as they created a me too product.

If/when the a700 replacement comes thru it got to be at least a 7d killer and more- no more software cock ups, nothing must be compromised - accessories to meet enthusiasts demand ie better macro flash- something that alpha users can be proud of owning.

We can live in hope but I suspect we will be underwelmed- I hope not

Paul

[Greg Beetham]

Yes I live in hope also, that Sony can build an A750? with pretty much the same body/interface as the A700, but leave no stone unturned so it's beyond reproach, to my mind it doesn't 'have' to be a D400 beater, it just has to have no glitches, question is, can Sony DO that?
And yes I agree the accessories like the Macro flash should have been fixed long ago.
Greg

[bfitzgerald]

It appears though the A750 is now going to be the A77 SLT. That changes thing a bit..in some ways possibly for the better, in others maybe not. I'd say it will be fairly predictable what it will be an emphasis on even higher FPS, more video goodies, better EVF etc etc.
But for stills shooters they might want a more rounded experience. Cameras only get so exciting..as far as the DSLR market there are some capable bodies out there right now.

I speak only for myself but I am not the type of shooter who values video that much and high fps is not a requirement. If Sony place an over emphasis on those areas they might appeal strongly to some at the expense of others. That sums up right now how the current SLT models stack up. We all have different needs it seems the other makers take a more balanced approach.

[alphaomega]

Barry Fitzgerald wrote

I also heard the R1 was a complete and total flop which is surprising esp when you look at the price of that Carl Zeiss lens on it's own. I know I did encourage a few folks to look at the R1 (people who were thinking about DSLR etc) Every one of them hated the design and look of it to the point of no return.

I actually bought an R1 partly because at that time nobody provided "built in" sensor cleaning in DSLRs and partly because of the CZ lens covered most of my requirements. I would say that the R1 had two major flaws. The NR at ISO over 200 was grim and the EVF appalling. The small 2" screen was quite manouverable but too small to be of any use. The images at ISO 100 or 200 were great though. I think that 10Mp CCD was a forerunner for the one ending up in A100 and later models.

[alphaomega]

Barry Fitzgerald wrote

Cameras only get so exciting..as far as the DSLR market there are some capable bodies out there right now.

That is true. The choice is wide and the cameras capable. Just look at the latest full DPreview of the Pentax K5. It gets a Gold Award. The Sony 16Mp sensor is doing well and supporting some capable cameras such as A55, A580, D7000 and now K5. Something for everybody. Sony have widened the choices with their SLT innovation. Sony have produced a sensor that can match Canon's 18Mp one. Time will show who wins the FF sensor battle.

[David Kilpatrick]

I think that 10Mp CCD was a forerunner for the one ending up in A100 and later models.

It wasn't a CCD it was CMOS, and it was the forerunner of the 12 megapixel CMOS used by the Nikon D2X, having the same pixel architecture just a 1.7X factor instead of a 1.5X factor. That line of development ended with the D2Xs and Sony went in a slightly different direction for the EXMOR 12 megapixel CMOS of the A700, D300.

David