Q&A with the SLT Development Team

[Mike-Photos]

Thanks for the thought on the ringflash question there Barry, but even if Kevin does ask it, I'll bet all they say is 'we will check on this and get an answer for you' ...........and that's the last you'll ever hear of it.

Like everything in business, the answer to whether Sony makes a ringflash boils down to numbers. Can they sell enough of them to make it profitable?

Sony has Minolta's books. They know exactly which products were profitable and which were not.

There seems to be a sentiment among some users that if Minolta made something, Sony needs to do the same.

How'd that work out?

Some people would also like to see Sony make a real ringflash with a circular flash tube - not just two sidelights covered by a ring of plastic - big enough to fit on 77mm lens threads not just the macros. The numbers might not be there to support the profitability of either request, let alone both. It's important to note that "numbers" relates to actual sales - not the number of times the same person asks for the same thing.

Hi Brian
They released the twin flash model, which I reckon is even more specialised, and they left off the ability to link the Minolta ring flash to the controller. Then they probably saw very disappointing sales of the twin flash, and maybe they decided there was no business there. Shot themselves and us in the foot.

[bfitzgerald]

It's a lot more than being sentimental. Minolta had it nailed down in a lot of areas..Sony seem to be struggling to match them in some cases actually going backwards.
You can't pick and choose in the DSLR business, you either have a complete system that appeals to even specialist users or you don't have a system at all.
I'm sure Canon sell far more 50mm f1.4 lenses than they do with their TS-E 24mm f/3.5 L II. Regardless the point remains a DSLR system has to be full and broad, matching the needs of many users and more specialist ones too.

Sony might want to only produce more profitable lines, they might want to make the DSLR business cybershot ish as much as possible. Brian knows only too well that Sony's main rivals can't afford to pick and choose. That's why they dominate the market, and not Sony.

[Greg Beetham]

Like everything in business, the answer to whether Sony makes a ringflash boils down to numbers. Can they sell enough of them to make it profitable?

Sony doesn't HAVE to make a complete ringflash from the ground up controller and all, all they had to do is produce the one KM already had, one controller and two flashhead kits for it, the twinflash and the ringflash, if poor little churchmouse Minolta could manage too design it, make it, and sell it, why couldn't big powerful rich Sony manage too copy it?

Sony has Minolta's books. They know exactly which products were profitable and which were not.

There is undoubtedly lots of accessories that don't sell hand over fist, so that argument is worthless, it's about the perception of having a complete system of functional accessories, and Sony's idea of deleting something that is functional and replacing it with some klutzy light of their own is also useless.

There seems to be a sentiment among some users that if Minolta made something, Sony needs to do the same.

Minolta was actually a real camera company with a long history of making cameras and related photographic equipment, they did actually know a thing or two about how too make cameras and accessories believe it or not.

How'd that work out?.

How did what work out?

Some people would also like to see Sony make a real ringflash with a circular flash tube - not just two sidelights covered by a ring of plastic - big enough to fit on 77mm lens threads not just the macros. The numbers might not be there to support the profitability of either request, let alone both. It's important to note that "numbers" relates to actual sales - not the number of times the same person asks for the same thing.

I've not heard of that request before, all most people want is for Sony to fix the Macro flash system back the way they found it.
Greg

[BrianSmith]

It's a lot more than being sentimental. Minolta had it nailed down in a lot of areas..Sony seem to be struggling to match them in some cases actually going backwards.

Really? And Minolta dropped out of the camera business, why?

You can't pick and choose in the DSLR business, you either have a complete system that appeals to even specialist users or you don't have a system at all.
I'm sure Canon sell far more 50mm f1.4 lenses than they do with their TS-E 24mm f/3.5 L II. Regardless the point remains a DSLR system has to be full and broad, matching the needs of many users and more specialist ones too.

Sony might want to only produce more profitable lines, they might want to make the DSLR business cybershot ish as much as possible. Brian knows only too well that Sony's main rivals can't afford to pick and choose. That's why they dominate the market, and not Sony.

Nikon waited a long time before releasing their tilt/shift lenses and fast wide primes. Once they did, they priced the well above Canon because that was the price they needed to be be in order to be profitable. If research didn't show their users would pay that price point, those lens never gets made.

Canon waited a long time to improve their lens quality because until Nikon and Sony joined them in full-frame they didn't have any competition. They still have no match for Sony's Zeiss glass.

[BrianSmith]

Minolta was actually a real camera company with a long history of making cameras and related photographic equipment, they did actually know a thing or two about how too make cameras and accessories believe it or not.

I'm aware of Minolta's history in the camera business. My first camera was a Minolta SRT-102 that I bought when I was a 16 year-old high school student shooting for the local newspaper.

[bfitzgerald]

Really? And Minolta dropped out of the camera business, why?

You tell me Konica merger, financial issues who knows exactly why. If you're trying to tell me they made poor photographic products I simply won't believe you. Maybe you need to refresh your memory I would suggest a nice film 7 or 9 from ebay and come back here then nit pick. It will be a very short list of niggles I can assure you, and yes there are some of course.

Products made for photographers by photographers. I simply don't care about "soccer mom" not in the slightest bit. NEX may well be a soccer mom product I am certain it has great potential if only it had hit the hands of somebody that had an interest in photography..and knew how to design a user interface.

Back to the T/S lenses these are a niche specialist area just a simple example of offering something that is far from mass market or a huge volume seller. The ring flash is nowhere near as specialist nor that hard to address. But a company has to be willing to accept they need to improve. Sony are very slow to respond to users needs in many areas.

Sony have little impact in the pro sector either most folks I talk to are Canon or Nikon and nothing else, the occasional Pentax one is around though fairly rare.. They are not consistent enough, nor do they portray the right "attitude" to establish themselves in this sector.

[BrianSmith]

Why do you not give users a choice about noise reduction on jpegs, such as Pentax or Nikon very low NR levels or high to suit the users taste?

On the a55 this is Menu>Record Menu 3>High ISO NR>Choose: Auto or Weak

Weak = Very Low

[BrianSmith]

Really? And Minolta dropped out of the camera business, why?

You tell me Konica merger, financial issues who knows exactly why. If you're trying to tell me they made poor photographic products I simply won't believe you.

I didn't say poor products but some may not have been profitable. There's a difference.

Maybe you need to refresh your memory I would suggest a nice film 7 or 9 from ebay and come back here then nit pick. It will be a very short list of niggles I can assure you, and yes there are some of course.

If I still wanted to shoot film, I'd dust off my Mamiya RZs. Progress happens...

Products made for photographers by photographers. I simply don't care about "soccer mom" not in the slightest bit. NEX may well be a soccer mom product I am certain it has great potential if only it had hit the hands of somebody that had an interest in photography..and knew how to design a user interface.

Better to design cameras for the people who actually buy them.

Back to the T/S lenses these are a niche specialist area just a simple example of offering something that is far from mass market or a huge volume seller. The ring flash is nowhere near as specialist nor that hard to address.

The ringflash could come back. It will depend on the number of people willing to buy one. Once again, Sony knows all the KM sales numbers and profit margins.

[Dr. Harout]

...Sony have little impact in the pro sector either most folks I talk to are Canon or Nikon and nothing else, the occasional Pentax one is around though fairly rare.. They are not consistent enough, nor do they portray the right "attitude" to establish themselves in this sector.

Barry, I recommend looking at Brian's website, you'll be amazed of what a Sony A900 + Zeiss can do...

[BrianSmith]

...Sony have little impact in the pro sector either most folks I talk to are Canon or Nikon and nothing else, the occasional Pentax one is around though fairly rare.. They are not consistent enough, nor do they portray the right "attitude" to establish themselves in this sector.

Barry, I recommend looking at Brian's website, you'll be amazed of what a Sony A900 + Zeiss can do...

Thanks, Doctor.

My fellow Sony Artisan's are a few more great examples:

David McLain http://www.davidmclain.com
Matthew Jordan Smith http://mjs-exp.com
Andy Katz http://www.andykatzphotography.com
Cristina Mittermeier http://www.cristinamittermeier.com
Me Ra Koh http://www.merakoh.com

[bfitzgerald]

I'm sure Brian would take great shots with any brand of camera or even a kit lens. On a photographic level I respect him.
However..
I'm puzzled as to why he feels the need to defend Sony on some of these points. Batting for the wrong team IMO as end users have expressed a need it is up to the company to provide that. It's a simple as that really. BTW the ring flash is not on my must have list, far from it really have no need for one for my type of shooting. But I'll support users who want to see this area sorted out, they have made a very logical case and a strong one.

As for other products Sony come along with maybe NEX will be a hit for them, but it's still a camera with a problem handling wise. I doubt the film 7 or 9 sank Minolta either..they made their mistakes but they did get there handling and design wise.
All the above are interesting photographers, but they are sponsored by Sony.

[BrianSmith]

My experience with Sony has been very positive.

I'm actually in the camp who'd like a ringflash - though one of the one's who prefer a true ringflash and one that supports the 77mm thread size so it can be used on all the Zeiss glass. But I also don't expect Sony to make it just because I want it. It will get made if they can sell if for a profit.

The same was true when the CZ 24/2 was in development. I lobbied for a 24/1.4. Sony could have made that but it would have been closer to the size and weight of the 135/1.8 as opposed to the size of the 85/1.4 and close in price to Nikon's 24/1.4. Nikon might be able to sell enough at that size and weight, but since I don't hear a lot of request for "heavier" or "more expensive" from Sony users on the forums, Sony may have correctly judged the market.

[agorabasta]

Brian,

The problem with your logic is that the more or less complete system simply must have certain parts included/available. And it doesn't matter if some of those parts are not as profitable as the other ones. It's the whole system that has to be profitable. At times a part that sells at a loss may make the whole system more attractive so that it sells better, thus covering that loss with greater profit from increased sales of other more profitable parts of the same system.

P.S. And those more profitable parts need not necessarily be the bodies/lenses, it could be proprietary batteries - the most profitable items per piece sold

[Greg Beetham]

Brian,
I find it very difficult too believe that Sony discovered in Minolta's 'books' that the twinflash flash head set sold to such a great extent more than the Ringflash head set for the 1200 controller that they could safely delete the Ringflash component and remove the socket for it from the controller and just sell the Twinflash only.
But then why offer an alternative for the Ringflash after doing that? An alternative that is not even remotely as good and costs twice as much as the original Ringflash head.
The only conclusion that I for one can reach is, Sony already had the LED Ringlight and battery box on the books and thought it would be a really good idea to get rid of the Minolta designed Ringflash that would take sales away from their Ringlight. No serious Macro shooter is going to buy a LED Ringlight in preference too a far superior Ringflash if offered the choice of one that just plugs into the existing Twinflash controller, so, exit stage left for the Ringflash head.
Greg

[BrianSmith]

Oligarch,

I'm not certain that raising the price of proprietary batteries is a suggestion you want to pass along...