Photoclubalpha

This camera will not let you off cheaply, that is for sure.

I did the quick math on this, in the USA ... and if you swallow really fast, you might not choke.

α900 camera body . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . $2999.99
HVL-F58AM flash . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . $499.99
VG-C90AM Vertical grip . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . $349.99
NP-FM500H extra battery (for the VG grip) . . . $69.99
4-yr "Anti-drop" insurance policy . . . . . . . . . $349.00

And the sub-total is . . . . . $4268.96 ... and I know you were thinking about that new lens, too, but let's forget that for now ... this is just getting the camera together for use with ANY lens!

If you go ahead and purchase these items locally (around here), you have a 10% sales tax to tolerate ... another $426.90 and we're at an impressive price tag of -> $4695.86!

I guess Christmas just might be a little light, this year, huh? I'm sorry, but this is just a little too rich for even me. Perhaps, after 6-months, the price will begin to drop like it did with the A700. Why they didn't allow the VG-C70AM to work with this unit is beyond me. Having to buy the VG-C90AM just seems like the engineers got lazy or SONY got greedy. Anyway, if you can pony up and buy this one ... nice going. Can I ask: What stocks are you playing?

Well, my last "salary" was a whopping $580... so, no A900 for me in a while

(really looking forward to a real paycheck in about two weeks)

For me it wouldn't be quite so bad.

I don't want the grip, I already have four batteries, and I get to subtract whatever I can get for my 11-18 mm as I already have a full-frame 17-35 mm. All my other lenses are full frame also.

As for the flash, that's an independent decision. For now, my ancient 360PX, in manual mode, works pretty good.

And your batteries will do 850 shots per charge on the A900, compared to 750 on the A700. How they did that with two processors and huge files, is anyone's guess - but they made the entire camera 20% lighter internally than the A700, it only weighs 850g overall with weathersealed mag alloy body - splashproof gaskets on every button...

Get out that wallet!

David

You've got it already.....haven't you David

DonSchap wrote:This camera will not let you off cheaply, that is for sure.

I did the quick math on this, in the USA ... and if you swallow really fast, you might not choke.

α900 camera body . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . $2999.99
HVL-F58AM flash . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . $499.99
VG-C90AM Vertical grip . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . $349.99
NP-FM500H extra battery (for the VG grip) . . . $69.99
4-yr "Anti-drop" insurance policy . . . . . . . . . $349.00

And the sub-total is . . . . . $4268.96 ... and I know you were thinking about that new lens, too, but let's forget that for now ... this is just getting the camera together for use with ANY lens!

If you go ahead and purchase these items locally (around here), you have a 10% sales tax to tolerate ... another $426.90 and we're at an impressive price tag of -> $4695.86!

I guess Christmas just might be a little light, this year, huh? I'm sorry, but this is just a little too rich for even me. Perhaps, after 6-months, the price will begin to drop like it did with the A700. Why they didn't allow the VG-C70AM to work with this unit is beyond me. Having to buy the VG-C90AM just seems like the engineers got lazy or SONY got greedy. Anyway, if you can pony up and buy this one ... nice going. Can I ask: What stocks are you playing?

Plus 70-400 G SSM ..................... $1500 (Ok make it $1499.99)
16-35 Zeiss .............................

Now the savings. I'll put aside one USD/day and that will make around 6000 days, doesn't it?

DonSchap wrote:This camera will not let you off cheaply, that is for sure.

I did the quick math on this, in the USA ... and if you swallow really fast, you might not choke.

α900 camera body . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . $2999.99
HVL-F58AM flash . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . $499.99
VG-C90AM Vertical grip . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . $349.99
NP-FM500H extra battery (for the VG grip) . . . $69.99
4-yr "Anti-drop" insurance policy . . . . . . . . . $349.00

And the sub-total is . . . . . $4268.96 ... and I know you were thinking about that new lens, too, but let's forget that for now ... this is just getting the camera together for use with ANY lens!

I don't think Sony is targeting people thinking this way anyway. They are targeting rich amateurs, fine-art, landscape, studio photographer -event/wedding and portrait photographers can use it, but I don't think we are the main target.

I'll get that camera anyway. I had been waiting for a FF camera since ever (I love wide angles, not extreme wide angles...) and I'll get it because I know I'll be happier with this camera, even if the A700 already give me what I need (but the sensor size)

I think saying "it's too expensive" doesn't help you, nor us, for change Sony's prices. I think there will be a natural progression for less expensive FF cameras in a near future. If you can not afford it now, just wait for the next year's Christmas tree...

Regards

Dr. Harout wrote:
Plus 70-400 G SSM ..................... $1500 (Ok make it $1499.99)
16-35 Zeiss .............................

Now the savings. I'll put aside one USD/day and that will make around 6000 days, doesn't it?

you need or you want the 70-400? You shotting sports and/or nature?
the Tamron 200-500 (a fine lens, even if not that bright) cost 800 US$: http://www.adorama.com/TM200500MAX.html
I think the 17~35 will work fine on the A900, and you can get it for about 300 US$

David Kilpatrick wrote:And your batteries will do 850 shots per charge on the A900, compared to 750 on the A700. How they did that with two processors and huge files, is anyone's guess - but they made the entire camera 20% lighter internally than the A700, it only weighs 850g overall with weathersealed mag alloy body - splashproof gaskets on every button...

Get out that wallet!

David

Sony is green!
They have to offer now a recycling plan for older digicam (photo and video) and we will make photography an environmental friendly activity for once!

pakodominguez wrote:

Dr. Harout wrote:
Plus 70-400 G SSM ..................... $1500 (Ok make it $1499.99)
16-35 Zeiss .............................

Now the savings. I'll put aside one USD/day and that will make around 6000 days, doesn't it?

you need or you want the 70-400? You shotting sports and/or nature?
the Tamron 200-500 (a fine lens, even if not that bright) cost 800 US$: http://www.adorama.com/TM200500MAX.html
I think the 17~35 will work fine on the A900, and you can get it for about 300 US$

I knew it, I knew that someone will wake me up, and that from a fellow alpha-ist

Dr. Harout wrote:

pakodominguez wrote: you need or you want the 70-400? You shotting sports and/or nature?
the Tamron 200-500 (a fine lens, even if not that bright) cost 800 US$: http://www.adorama.com/TM200500MAX.html
I think the 17~35 will work fine on the A900, and you can get it for about 300 US$

I knew it, I knew that someone will wake me up, and that from a fellow alpha-ist

Hey Doc,
do you remember that song: "we are family..."
voila!
I think that, for people who are not ready to invest 3000 on the A900, better to start investing on good glasses for the next less expensive FF camera.

Yes it's a very attractive camera, with a very nice set of features and doesn't appear too be overloaded with flimflam, the only problem is the price...might have too wait a while.
The really good thing is, with an FF cam all the FF lenses revert back too normal again...you have to like that, that APS-C 1.5X crop gets to be a pain sometimes.
David, did you happen too hear anything on the 24-105 f4 G SSM ?
Greg

David Kilpatrick wrote:And your batteries will do 850 shots per charge on the A900, compared to 750 on the A700. How they did that with two processors and huge files, is anyone's guess - but they made the entire camera 20% lighter internally than the A700, it only weighs 850g overall with weathersealed mag alloy body - splashproof gaskets on every button...

Get out that wallet!

David

Please stop!

Not counting all the pain in the... ehem... (place you sit) when your wife finds out about the calculation you're doing

David Kilpatrick wrote:And your batteries will do 850 shots per charge on the A900, compared to 750 on the A700. How they did that with two processors and huge files, is anyone's guess - but they made the entire camera 20% lighter internally than the A700, it only weighs 850g overall with weathersealed mag alloy body - splashproof gaskets on every button...

Get out that wallet!

David

Not sure how they squeezed the batteries more thoroughly, but the weight could be due to more extensive use of magnesium alloy.

Anyway, sure, I could put all this on the Visa...and be condemned to a lifetime of debt and loath the camera for it every time I look through the viewfinder.