Photoclubalpha

classiccameras wrote:I'm beginning to lose brand 'loyalty'

I already did. My brother called me 2 days ago to ask which DSLR he should buy - tired of the phone/point & snap pics and finds it too troubling to look for film and developing these days. I told him to go with Nikon. Sony no longer has a DSLR, and I'm just not a Canon fan. Pentax barely exists, and he can't find them in his small town. m4/3 just isn't too easy to find there, either. I hope he tosses me his old Maxxum lenses!

Dusty

I guess your not a fan of Sony Alpha SLT cameras, strictly not an SLR but operates in the same way. I'm tempted to look at M4/3, I love the Pentax OVF but their lenses are over priced for the performance they give IMHO. Nikon is a safe bet where ever you are in the world, but I guess that applies to Canon as well.

classiccameras wrote:I'm beginning to lose brand 'loyalty'

I never had it. Ever.

classiccameras wrote:I guess your not a fan of Sony Alpha SLT cameras, strictly not an SLR but operates in the same way. I'm tempted to look at M4/3, I love the Pentax OVF but their lenses are over priced for the performance they give IMHO. Nikon is a safe bet where ever you are in the world, but I guess that applies to Canon as well.

I'm not a fan of SLT either but I either had to get used to it or try changing mounts again. I stuck with it but still prefer an optical finder for many subjects.

I'm not going to venture into Nikon land again after my disaster AF experiences despite liking quite a bit about the maker. Pentax offer a lot of bang per buck on bodies and features some of them are well designed and thought out the company has some excellent ideals (in some ways a similar company to Minolta). Lenses are not nearly the same though I ended up going mostly third party optics with K mount..

I still grab a Canon from time to time and yes I still wonder what on earth people see in them. The ergonimics are odd, handling isn't really my cup of tea I can't stand them and just do not get on with them at all. Anti MInolta design it's really very obvious. Any time someone has handed me a Canon I've cringedI can lay my hands on anything loaner bodies and top end lenses but have not bothered (not really needed for most jobs). Brand loyalty doesn't exist like it used to, it's just the practical side. I need somewhere to put my A mount lenses that's it pretty much. When all the cards are down I just need to take photos and couldn't really care that much about how I get that.

classiccameras wrote:I'm beginning to lose brand 'loyalty'

I think manufacturers are counting on people like you in order to sell more cameras...

bfitzgerald wrote:I would tend to agree the level of quality from images is probably at a point where there are no obvious reasons for most to upgrade. I didn't make the move to FF partly because I think I am satisfied with what I can get, though I might take a look at a cheaper body later on.

I think that, what is holding back the whole market is not camera technology, but the output: how do you show your photographs. 4K is nice, but cameras already produce more pixels that 4K can reproduce (take apart color spaces 4K screens can reproduce) and, if you want to print, no printing system really goes beyond 300 or 400 dpi -they are milking the same cow on that side also, for many, many years.
We don't know yet what's the next thing on output. The best Sony can do is producing this new GM lens with accent on the resolution, not just thinking on the next 50 or more MP sensor, but also what they are trying to sell us for showing those photos.

So where does it go from here, I agree about the G lenses if you can afford them. I like Pentax K mount for the reasons Barry pointed out,
Plus they must feel they have a future bringing out all these new DSLR's inc FF
I guess you mean brand hopping pako, I have certainly been guilty of that ever since my first DSLR a Olympus E-510, which I kept for nostalgia.

I guess you mean brand hopping pako, I have certainly been guilty of that ever since my first DSLR a Olympus E-510, which I kept for nostalgia.

classiccameras, no brand hopping here. I went from Minolta to Sony when the A700 with 16-80 Zeiss zoom came out and stayed except for Panasonic LX2/3 & 5 until Sony came out with their RX100 series. Had great faith in Sony's ability and consider myself vindicated.
As I stated earlier I am now at the point where I cannot see me spending money moving from my RX100M3/A6000 position. They are more than good enough for what I need to do and are light in the bag as well. The same applies to my lenses. Great.
Not sure when other users reach the same point and simply replace when current equipment breaks down for good. I see the Sony A7 iterations as attempts to entice professionals and enthusiasts who have the money to continue the upgrade process due to insatiable pixel peeping desire. The other segment is surely the pro's who desire lighter but capable equipment for out of studio work (well paid). I think that the A7r series and now the Hasselblad X1D mirrorless fall into this category. Reference Pako's

no printing system really goes beyond 300 or 400 dpi

, I have no less than two Epson P50 colour printers of some vintage. Using Jet Tec inks I can get A4 that is sharp enough for my purposes. The prints are really very good. Cannot do proper B/W printing as lacks the extra grey cartridge, but then I don't need B/W. Can't see why I should update.

pakodominguez wrote: I think that, what is holding back the whole market is not camera technology, but the output: how do you show your photographs. 4K is nice, but cameras already produce more pixels that 4K can reproduce (take apart color spaces 4K screens can reproduce) and, if you want to print, no printing system really goes beyond 300 or 400 dpi -they are milking the same cow on that side also, for many, many years.
We don't know yet what's the next thing on output. The best Sony can do is producing this new GM lens with accent on the resolution, not just thinking on the next 50 or more MP sensor, but also what they are trying to sell us for showing those photos.

Actually, I was just thinking the other night when I was watching my HD TV, that the level of detail on the faces was taking away from the experience! The close-ups showed ever pock-mark and pore and detracted from the show.

Now, when I come to cameras, I want the fine detail because I can then use cropping instead of zooming to get what I want.

Dusty

Agree Dusty, Sony Sensor production is down because of problems in that part of the world, and that affects, Nikon, Pentax, Olympus and of course Sony. I love my A6000, but the lens choice or at least affordable ones sucks. I just wish they would stop this stupid pixel race and give us a more complete system on the E mount APS-C. If you notice, no more 3rd party E mount lenses have come out, all we have are 3 Sigma primes and a Tamron zoom and a couple of Samyang wide primes, I think they are holding fire as there is some uncertainty in the market for E mount and times are hard for investment.

classiccameras wrote:I'm beginning to lose brand 'loyalty'

I lost it. Used my Nikon D7200 extensively at the recent airshow and I am happy with the results. Mind you my trusty old A99 is still a benchmark to beat.

Did you read DxO test on the Nikon D7200, they said it was best sensor they have tested, and I think its a Sony sensor.

Opinions seem to vary between Sony and Toshiba. Personally I have no idea but I will say that the noise performance is just a little better than the A77II. I am however struggling a little with the colours in LR. Totally different characteristics.

Nikon images look different not that this is a bad thing they just do at least I found that. For want of a better word more "yellow" dominant. I'm sure if you tweak the images the look can be pretty close.

Back to cameras and despite the industry struggling I don't see it as a dead end. I do expect some more "victims" or rather a few more makers pull out. You can't sustain growth in a declining market with too many models and makers.

Remember though decline isn't always death. Steve Jobs touted the iPad as the "new era" in computing and declared the desktop would be replaced.
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/technology/2 ... -happened/

It's almost ironic that he was horribly wrong as tablet sales tanked (across the board at all levels) whilst smart phones dominated. PC's are still around as are notebooks, phones did hit cameras at the low end and there is no question about that. I take a few shots with mine, but it's not a replacement for the proper stuff I have. I can check my emails and do stuff online with my phone, but a computer is far more productive and the place to do more serious work be it photos video or whatever you do. Likewise the more serious cameras will have a place and find their user base, makers just need to think more about future models and look again at pricing. Said it many times cameras are hugely overpriced for what they are, and they are a techology product. All tech becomes cheaper over time

I bought 3 A-mount lenses this year and that is all I ever intend to buy. -- I've waited 15 years to have the cash for them, and figured retirement was the moment to give myself gifts. One was a Sigma. I don't intend to every buy another one. Some of lenses are from the 1980s when I had a Minolta 9000. (its in the closet).

There are more that I would like, but unless I see a new A-mount camera I will never spend another penny on anything from sony.