Call for Sony Evangelists...

[Raven Falls]

If you're a member there, you might want to pop over to this site and check out this thread (http://www.photozo.com/forum/viewtopic.php?t=45165).

One of the members announces that he's considering the A200, and a whole bunch of Canikon types rush in to warn him not to do so, because the Sony simply doesn't have any good lenses, and that he should stick to "real" cameras like Canon or Nikon. In other words, the exact same ignorance and prejudice we have to fight against every day. By the current posts, he's thanking everyone for warning him and assuring them he's "definitely decided against getting the Sony."

I posted a rebuttal, along with one other member, but I could use some backup here...

[Dr. Harout]

Hi and welcome Raven Falls.
Don't worry, people are struggling cause they are beginning to fear from Sony. If it were a mediocre camera no one would persuade against the purchase, no one would even care (except from just mentioning as not a right choice...), but since it is Sony, the fear is getting bigger and bigger.
Relax and enjoy this forum.

[Raven Falls]

I see my call did not go unheeded. Two very good replies...including one from DK that was as thorough, balanced, and knowledgeable as I could imagine. It made the Canikon "authorities" on the thread look pathetic.

Keep up the good work!

[Raven Falls]

Don't worry, people are struggling cause they are beginning to fear from Sony. If it were a mediocre camera no one would persuade against the purchase, no one would even care (except from just mentioning as not a right choice...), but since it is Sony, the fear is getting bigger and bigger.

Perhaps, but one thing I have learned from the "computer wars" of the old days is that one of the crucial elements is for supporters of a given format to take on the role of "evangelists," and take up arms against the ignorant prejudices that would convince people that everything was the "same as it ever was," and therefore the old response (stick with the tried-and-true brands) remained the best one.

Without such evangelism, Apple (to name the most prominent example) would have been merely a memory decades ago.

Put it this way: the original poster in that thread was someone who is in Sony's ideal target market -- a photo enthusiast who is not already tied to a given platform. This is the best chance Sony has to land him as a lifetime customer. If, as was happening before, members of that board were able to convince him to dismiss Sony out of hand ("I've just looked up the A200. I really don't think it would be your best bet. First off, the lens selection is poor. There are very few lenses available for it, and they are much more expensive than lenses for a Canon or Nikon." "if you go with Sony, the best glass is not available"), and he goes with Canon or Nikon, he's "bought into" that platform and the chances of ever getting him to switch are slim at best.

Now, repeat that a few thousand times, and you see what the Alpha line is up against. We might all believe that Sony is in this for the long haul, and might be convinced that it will be introducing bodies and lenses that would impress anyone, but the fact is that few enthusiasts with a large investment in one platform are going to switch just because of new and impressive gear alone, unless they're already feeling highly dissatisfied with their own equipment and its manufacturer, which rarely happens. (And that isn't just about Sony -- how many heavily-invested Canon owners switch wholesale to Nikon, or vice versa?) So grabbing as many "new adopters" as possible is critical...and losing them because the same old same old from Canikon fans went unanswered is something that, if tolerated, might mean the eventual failure of the Alpha line...just as, had Apple supporters not become energetic evangelists for that product, we might all still be using MS-DOS boxes.

[Greg Beetham]

Sorry bud, I think camera brands and systems stand or fall on their merits (Sony / KM have plenty), and it's up to the respective brand too promote their system effectively so that consumers are well advised, personally I don't think it's my job to "defend" any brand. I had a look at the link and it looks like you have it covered anyway.
Greg

[bonneville]

Sorry bud, I think camera brands and systems stand or fall on their merits (Sony / KM have plenty), and it's up to the respective brand too promote their system effectively so that consumers are well advised, personally I don't think it's my job to "defend" any brand. I had a look at the link and it looks like you have it covered anyway.
Greg

I have to agree with this. I did take a look but after I read DK's contribution I thought .... "follow that"

[Raven Falls]

DK wrote two very good posts there, which made the ignorance of the "conventional wisdom" peddlers all-too-evident.

All the more amusing, therefore, was the moderator's rationale in locking the thread: that "we" (apparently the long-term posters whose sole reasoning was chanting the "no lenses for Sony" mantra) "know the OP best," and therefore know what cameras he should buy (and, more importantly, which one he should reject out-of-hand). In other words, "we already know what's best -- don't confuse us with the facts."

[Raven Falls]

Sorry bud, I think camera brands and systems stand or fall on their merits

I agree wholeheartedly -- by which it follows that I am opposed to attempts by fanboyz of other brands to short-circuit the process through simple repetition of provably-false misinformation without a strong attempt being made to counter the lies.

I would have had no quarrel with a reasoned argument as to why the A200 would not be best suited to that person's desires. (In a bit of irony, I've taken a lot of heat at DPReview's Sony forum for arguing that feature reductions on the A200/300/350 series make them unsuitable for serious landscape photographers.) But simply brushing it off with "Sony? They have no lenses." (or "Just trust us, you want a real camera like a Nikon or Canon instead.") is something that needs to be argued whenever it comes up -- not because the Alpha system can't stand on its own merits, but because such mendacious "conventional wisdom" repeated over and over (and do I even have to recall Dr. Goebbels's maxim here?) prevents it from even being considered so that it can be judged "on its own merits."

[Greg Beetham]

Yes Raven Falls I have too agree that the slightly condescending opinions of the Canon and Nikon guys can be irritating at times, especially that some consistantly overlook tha AS/SSS bonus you get by buying a Sony DSLR as well as almost nil redundancy in AF lenses (Minolta thru Sony), often at the same time overlooking shortcomings in their respective systems as well, it's just that my crusader spirit sort of got drained a bit by Sony not bothering too respond to my questions on the Minolta Macro flash system they botched, Macro with flash at night is a passion of mine, (Sony chose too discontinue the Ring flash component of the Macro flash system and replace it with a stupid copy stand ring LIGHT, good for taking photos of stamps and watches but pretty much useless out in the field), sooo accordingly I thought, Sony can look after itself they obviously don't need my help.
Greg

[Raven Falls]

As you can see I guess he did not want a full blown brand fight including facts, and pictures, in his forums. Not my best post ever, but I was looking to have a little fun with a couple of those guys.

Well, since the moderator later e-mailed one of the participants in the debate to tell him "Sony makes great TV's and that is as far as I would go with them," I would have to say that the fanboyism of that site begins at the top.

Incidentally, a telling "brand poll" in that forum taken last year revealed that 68% of them use Canon, 25% use Nikon, a whopping 1% use Sony (although it must be up to around 2-3% with the influx of us Sony Evangelists over the past couple of days ) and 0% Konica Minolta. Just an idea of what Sony is up against...

[aster]

Hi,

Since the mention of other forums that made it their everyday-business to bash Minolta&Sony Dslr camera systems on this forum, I had to go over there and read what the so-called opposition had to write about Sony. No relevant information and definitely no will to investigate before making a judgement call. But I never worried with such people's 'opinions',.. ever... I never had the chance to use a Minolta camera system mysself and my jump-start came with the Sony cameras and I made my own solid decisions all the while some professional Nikon Dslr camera users tried strongly to change my mind with statements like "Nikon is better, they have lots of good lenses for professional coverage", or "no professional will be that much of a professional if the equipment is not of Nikon systems". There are some Canon users that I know but they were less opposing or biased than the Nikon users. Their negative input never bothered me for once because they also were the type of people who would not be spending the time to research before making their final decision. Meeting new technologies eye-to-eye, and with no biased reserves to obstruct the view demands a couragous heart and a lot of wisdom to handle the truth with a civil attitude.

I always belived that Sony would eventually fill all the gaps that may be appearing now and then as new dslr bodies are hitting the markets. It's still a very young enterprise, but significantly solid in its dedication to bridge all missing parts that perfects a good system. I have my full confidence in them that emerging of any Sony dslr camera system will always be good news for all markets.

And to please the opposition with their own allegations a little perhaps, we as a family own a couple of Sony tv's of various sizes which have been with us long enough to make us buy newer generations of Sony tv's or visual systems in the long run. They never let us down...

None of us should worry what 'willing-ignorance' is doing to the credibility of such ill-prone people!
Life will be better and more of a happily chiming Sony adventure. Literally...

Have a great day all,
Yildiz

[David Kilpatrick]

Our oldest Sony Trinitron TV celebrates its 34th birthday this year. It still works; Shirley bought it art a staff discount when she was a salesperson for Dixons in Sheffield. We move over to digital reception only this year, and it will be of no use as a TV - just a historic product. Sony has the same model on display in their reception exhibition for the European HQ.

David

[Raven Falls]

We move over to digital reception only this year, and it will be of no use as a TV - just a historic product.

Don't they offer converter boxes for older analog sets over there the way they do this side of the pond?

[aster]

Our oldest Sony Trinitron TV celebrates its 34th birthday this year. It still works; Shirley bought it art a staff discount when she was a salesperson for Dixons in Sheffield. We move over to digital reception only this year, and it will be of no use as a TV - just a historic product. Sony has the same model on display in their reception exhibition for the European HQ.

David

Sounds very much like the Sony trinitron my mother bought years years ago, which is still running and is about to achieve a record of its own right. And never once required a repair or even a maintenance check. Just gets dusted now and again with the rest of the furniture and equipment...

I use it regularly for lunch hour newscasts...good colour, ...good sound...

[David Kilpatrick]

We move over to digital reception only this year, and it will be of no use as a TV - just a historic product.

Don't they offer converter boxes for older analog sets over there the way they do this side of the pond?

This set is the original Trinitron (12?)14 inch from 1973 onwards. The tuning is UHF, and we no longer have UHF transmissions (not for many years). I do not think digital adaptors will feed a UHF aerial tuner either. I just tried it, in case anything at all comes through, but the entire tuning spectrum is white noise.

David