A800 under $2K Initial List Price - FF or APS-C?

[A1000]

The super steady shot is as complex as image stabilization in one lens. That however makes the camera expensive, plus other machanical and optical parts. Otherwise it is just a very simple box with little little electronics in it. It certainly is electronically less complex than a better cell phone. If Sony would get rid of the OV and SSS, making the stabilization electronic, would use plastic lens mount and touch screen interface, and would just use processors, etc. already developed for another camera, they could sell the FF for the same price as A200. It could have one button labeled "I" for idiot, to make it all automatic, and another button labeled "S" for stupid - it would be the shutter button. They could sell thhis camera for 500 list, with profit. They could have similar APS-C camera list for $250, and it too would sell with profit. I wonder which company, in these economic times, will start doing so. For most people these I-S button cameras would be as good for taking pictures as A900, plus it would be less confusing, even Sonolta would be able to master it, but I'm sure that he would one day venture all the way to the touch screen - to take pictures of fish and his relatives' house, so he could span this board again with some new masterpieces.

[peterottaway]

It is a very different industry I know - some years ago a senior executive a large Australian wine company was being asked about a rash of takeovers and bank appointed receivers at the boutique end of the wine industry.

His comment was that small firms had no hope of competing with the larger companies because of the economies of scale, for a large company the total difference in cost between the companies lowest cost brands and the high end was less than 50 cents a bottle.

[Dusty]

We all have to remember to go back to this thread when the actual camera comes out, to see where our speculations met, exceeded or came nowhere close to the actual product.

Dusty

[bakubo]

Under $2k FF 24 MP would grab my attention, but what would we be losing from the a900?

A couple of things that come to mind that could be left off the A900 to get an A800 price down are a less than 100% vf and fewer fps. Add a built-in flash though.

Don, I was either just lucky or Sony saw my post and said, "I think he's on to something!"

[bossel]

I am sure (as DK has hinted) that the manufacturers will try and hike prices. One way of doing this would be new improved models with a higher initial price and a tardier and slower price reduction as the models mature.

Another way would be to increase lens prices and rip-off European customers!! Ops - they're already doing that, these clever guys. Just checked the 70-300G it's now aound $1400 in Europe Do I really need a new zoom?

[fastson]

Ok this is very spooky. Either A1000 works for Sony or he has very good contacts.

A800 reserved for FF = Came true
Using the same sensor = Came true
New FF camera for under 2k = Remains to be seen
A800 for 1.5k = Remains to be seen, but I hope so!

[stevecim]

I maybe the only one, but I would be happy to have the a350 sensor in a A700 type body I would not buy a 16MP FF, my current glass only just works on a APS sensor it would never handle FF and once I crop a 16MP FF to get the same FOV has I get on APS I would be left with a much lower res image

[Dusty]

We all have to remember to go back to this thread when the actual camera comes out, to see where our speculations met, exceeded or came nowhere close to the actual product.

Dusty

Well, it has arrived. Under $2k. What were you right or wrong about in your speculation?

Dusty

[bakubo]

A couple of things that come to mind that could be left off the A900 to get an A800 price down are a less than 100% vf and fewer fps. Add a built-in flash though.

My only speculation was a smaller vf and slower fps. I was also hoping for a built-in flash though.