Mirrorless rumours

[bfitzgerald]

Henry is more into the micro 4/3 stuff which I suppose suits his travel lighter needs (and I understand that) OM-D had a play but I found it not so comfy for my hands maybe a gripped one would suit better.
3 series is too small for me, problem isn't so much with a smaller lens like a normal prime or small zoom, but bigger heavier lenses (not massive ones but more weight) then add a flash on top it isn't ideal for me. 5 series is fine for me size wise, bar the film 5's which are a bit too small (helped with the battery pack though) a gripped film 7 is just fine too and a good size without the grip, and the D90/7000 was similar in size to that which suited me fine.

I was surprised at the size of an A77 with a grip it's getting on for too big for me (it's fine without the grip) not tried an A99 but again I think the grips are just too massive on these models and should be more streamlined.

Size is quite subjective, but I'm not sure I need a travel light system camera. Hence I'm more likely to go for a premium compact for this type of shooting.
Will be interesting to see what model range Sony have next year and if they offer again the more compact A3xx models or make a dual dial 6 series model with a grip option that's not too big.

[waardij]

according to sonyalpharumours.com, the a99 has exceeded the sales forecast of Sony itself. apparently not everyone think them to expensive.

[bfitzgerald]

One has to wonder how low the bar was set? And it's a rumour site too.
I doubt very much the A99 has done that well in my region it is clearly overpriced.

[Atgets_Apprentice]

Just read this on SAR, re: "a79"

http://www.sonyalpharumors.com/sr3-spec ... pe-camera/

[bfitzgerald]

32mp on an APS-C sensor, that is a bit OTT in my view.
Problem is likely the price, even if I can get along with the EVF part of this (and at the moment I've mixed feelings here), and they have improved the EVF (as expected)
Quite likely Sony will bash this out at £1100 if not more looking at their price scale lately. That's too much for any APS-C model in my view.

[Atgets_Apprentice]

The one thing that SHOULD keep the price sensible (OK, I know Sony and sensible don't go together), is the lack of mirrors, moving or pellicle. That is a cost that no longer has to be considered, and as plenty other manufacturers have mirrorless technology already, it isn't as if Sony are having to spend a fortune doing the R&D from scratch. OK, the silly sensor & the 4mp EVF will cost, but other than that, it's technology that is already out there.

[bakubo]

The one thing that SHOULD keep the price sensible (OK, I know Sony and sensible don't go together), is the lack of mirrors, moving or pellicle. That is a cost that no longer has to be considered, and as plenty other manufacturers have mirrorless technology already, it isn't as if Sony are having to spend a fortune doing the R&D from scratch. OK, the silly sensor & the 4mp EVF will cost, but other than that, it's technology that is already out there.

That was the often stated rationale for eliminating the OVF and prism: it would lower costs for Sony which would result in less expensive cameras. Some have said that it doesn't seem like it has worked out that way though.

[bfitzgerald]

It might well lower costs, less parts, less critical alignment (bar sensor obviously), quicker manufacture time. It's not panned out that way so far not with the SLT range.
If anything the SLT A58 proved Sony's desire to cut costs even more than anyone expected with plastic mounts, and removing the IR remote and wired remote sensor, and cutting the buffer down considerably.

I don't expect the next A77 to be cut down, but I'd not be surprised if it's even more than the A77 at launch it could even be £1200 odd. If they go down this uber pixel race road again on APS-C I hope they have the sense to offer lower resolutions similar to Canon's s/m raw options. 32mp will eat file space big time and it well beyond what most would ever want or need, even detail hard core folks would be hard pushed to be moaning about 24 as lacking for big print sizes.

I've said before though I just don't see Sony eating into the big 2 with their strategy. RX100 II proves Sony will increase prices on some products, no reason to assume the new A mount range will be any different. Problem is by the time the A79 is out, the 70d will probably be under a grand, and the D7100 will be likely £700 odd. Over £1000 APS-C just isn't going to work IMO, not anymore FF will take that spot. Let's hope they don't make the same A99 price gouge blunder next time around.

[classiccameras]

To quote one colloquial saying, Sony have lost the plot big time.

They should abandon their futile attempts at trying to stay up with Canikon and produce cameras that are innovative, high end performances, very competitive prices, good reviews. but above all be that bit of greener grass that Canikon owners can jump on to after they jump ship.

[bakubo]

It might well lower costs, less parts, less critical alignment (bar sensor obviously), quicker manufacture time. It's not panned out that way so far not with the SLT range.

How do you know it hasn't panned out? It probably has lowered costs for Sony. The selling price of the cameras does not have to reflect Sony's cost savings. It probably doesn't.

[bfitzgerald]

Well I'm considering my options as I always do ponder on these things. I'm just not sure I really want to go deeper into the system, depends where Sony take things. I've quite mixed feelings about the EVF aspect. I suppose we'll see soon enough where Sony are going. Some makers tend to discount the bodies and sell them pretty cheap, like Pentax (but quite pricey for their own brand lenses) Nikon have no problems dropping prices heavily as well. Canon tend to try to hold higher prices but are not scared of aggressive price cuts on older models. So far Sony seem quite reluctant to drop prices.

I bet if I totted up all the stuff I have and what I'd get selling it off I might be able to get a 6d or something like that. It is tempting to a degree.
If Sony making SLT was only to increase their own margins, then what's the point? They've failed to challenge Canikon in any serious way..so selling less bodies and losing A mount users to the top 2 might well have cost Sony more long term profits as these users are no longer around to buy Sony stuff.

You have to take a strategic look at this. I could safely say if Sony sold the A99 for £1300 odd (about what it should cost) they might double their sales and potential profits on lenses would shoot up significantly. Sony are not leica, if they think they are then they really are living in a bubble.

[alphaomega]

Barry Fitzgerald wrote

You have to take a strategic look at this. I could safely say if Sony sold the A99 for £1300 odd (about what it should cost) they might double their sales and potential profits on lenses would shoot up significantly. Sony are not leica, if they think they are then they really are living in a bubble.

I seem to recall that I read somewhere that Sony had made or exceeded their sales target for the A99. Maybe that also meant they kept their A99 production line going as planned. My experience from 40 years in business is that this is the best way of making your money. Reducing the price to increase production most often means less profit oveall.
There is a lot of dissatisfaction clearly with Sony with regard to pricing/specs.
I can understand that although I am quite satisfied with my A580/550 for "heavy" use, NEX6/5N for "medium" use & RX100 for anytime use. Don't even consider looking at other brands.
It might be worthwhile waiting to see what Sony have up their sleeve. SAR is busy with the rumour machine and now suggesting that three APS-C and two FF Amount cameras in 2014 as well as the NEXes already mentioned.

http://www.sonyalpharumors.com/sr3-thre ... e-in-2014/

I for one will only consider something that provides for a greater dynamic range as the current cameras are adequate.
http://www.dpreview.com/news/2013/07/23 ... hotography
I have become a "satisficer" according to the definitions in this write-up.

[bfitzgerald]

Nobody knows how modest the A99 sales target was
I'd very much doubt it's sold very well in Europe, maybe somewhat better in the USA. I would put money down right now it's not made any dent in the FF market for the other makers.
Point here is.. it's the system they are selling. If you halve your profit and sell twice as many just on bodies alone you'd be in the same place, mix in the "zeiss buyers" and other sales and clearly you've made more money overall.

It's a bit like that old phrase "can't see the wood for the trees"
The extreme end of that is what Wiki calls "Freebie marketing"
Sometimes a maker will sell a loss leader to get the item out there such as printers, knowing the cheap cost of a printer will encourage someone to buy it (very affordable), but really they make the money on the ink sales. Sony have done this with Playstation before sell it below cost to get units out there and market share, then make the money later in production (when costs are less) and reap the sales on games.

The camera business isn't quite like that (I don't expect any maker to sell below cost), but I think many of us can see an opportunity for Sony to grab a decent slice of market share with competitive and lower cost bodies. They can then make more money on accessories and lens sales. That's my take. I don't know why Sony suddenly woke up and decided they are now a premium camera maker, even Samsung worked out that despite having loads of cash they never had a hope in hell of going anywhere in the camera business, so they now seem to sell very low cost NX bodies. They know their place shall we say.

Anything over mid range pricing for Sony is suicide in the longer term, they might actually be losing market share (least in the EU)
Danger for Sony is trying to maintain higher prices and they don't gain over rivals, more a niche side/bit player. That can work ok for some makers, long term it's a dangerous game to play. I still say, and taking into account the views of many folks I know..almost all consider the EVF as something they are not willing to pay more for, it's considered an inferior offering in a product of this type, that is folks the stumbling block Sony don't understand (I'm not arguing there are not advantages to it, but saying basically people don't care or want the EVF it's not a sales winner for most buyers)

I really don't see things changing much for Sony, big mp count or not..nice spec and features, higher prices can't see it taking off.

[Birma]

I am so far down the route of being a "maximizer" I fear there is no hope! I'm pretty sure there are a few others around here that have got it just as bad as me .

I'm pretty sure the A79, or what ever it is called, will be around the £1000 mark just like 77 was. They may have saved money on that OVF but they needed to for all of that cool video tech in the camera - those stereo microphones don't come for free you know!

[bfitzgerald]

Yes but will they have the sense to remove that silly video 1.8x crop? Speaking to some video shooters that killed their interest in Sony straight away before anything else.
I don't shoot video a lot just the odd clip, but I was astonished Sony made such a blunder