Why are there so many entry level cameras?

[darrencf]

With regards to your question in the title, "why are there so many entry level cameras?", I think its because Sony probably know most professionals won't drop their entire system (camera and all their lenses) to switch to Sony. Its not that the system is inferior but rather, the seller will make a great lost selling all the existing gear at a second hand price.

It makes much more sense to increase the market share on entry level cameras because some of these people will eventually upgrade to the pro systems.

With regards to most of the people in your locality, they were probably influenced by their friends who are using Nikon or Canon. Over here, its not uncommon to see Sony users anymore. I personally know a few other professionals who are using Sony systems as well.

[bfitzgerald]

Can't say I agree with some comments flying around here.
You can't increase market share on lower budget end products unless you are competitive. I know I'm overly critical of Sony but can anyone think of any reason to buy an entry level (A290/390 or older A230 etc etc) unless you had a bag of A mount lenses lying around?
Sony just does not have the pull of Canon or Nikon and must simply try harder in this segment.

The current offering are not appealing, under featured and targeted to only one type of user..complete novice p&s one. I would imagine their entry level sales are pretty weak. Even more so as price cutting/clearance sales on the A500/550 and A450 pushing the prices down.

Pro end has nothing at all to do with it.

[peterottaway]

I very much suspect Barry that the vast majority of buyers for entry level SLRs have no idea about what the technical specifications of the cameras they buy mean as specifications, let alone what they actually mean in practice. It's only after the camera has been bought that some go on to be enthusiasts.

CCD vs CMOS, ovf vs evf etc aren't decision makers. Its what is available,how much, how much does it weigh, does it fit into my hands comfortably etc that will sell. And sure Canon and Nikon are well known camera brands but Sony is a BRAND. It has been unfortunate that in some major markets their so called sales staff couldn't organise the proverbial p*** up in a brewery. And in some like Australia they keep on thinking that they can sell at almost twice the US price and no-one will notice.

[bfitzgerald]

Sony is brand and well known but it has significantly less pull in the camera industry outside cybershot land.
Which is why they have to put more effort into their products even lower end. They had it fairly well nailed down in the A200-350 era a few improvements and tweaks and they were looking strong enough.
But nope, they threw it all away and downgraded the entire line-up.
Some folks do look at spec some don't but you where Sony had a decent line up (that at least seemed to sell well) back in 2008, they don't in 2010 and that's all that matters.

I would not suggest any user at any skill level look at the A290 or A390 models, they lack even the most basic functions to get a let a new user develop their skills or interest. There is no reason to consider them when other makers have better offerings.

[alphaomega]

And I am seeing more and more people with Sony DSLRs here in Scotland. Sony have problems meeting demand and have delayed introductions of cameras. They are investing billions of yens in new fab facilities. They have just got their first Gold Award from DPReview. Samsung have become a me too with their NX100. I agree that Sony have introduced too many intro DSLRs. Did not make sense to me, but they are selling or they would not have capacity problems. Their strategy to focus on new entries and then build up to enthusiast and possibly later prof. is probably as good as it gets for them in their position. Don't tell them they should have continued to pursue Minolta strategies and policies. Had they been any good Sony would not have had to come to the rescue as the "White Knight". Sony have made mistakes but I think they are now on the up and people such as Barry should really just migrate to Pentax or Nikon. they will get good cameras there with excellent Sony sensors. And per their own pronouncements Nikon can get better results from Sony's sensors. What about purchasing a D7000? Must be a snip at £1 less than £1100.00 body only, but you get a free bag and a 8Gb SDHC card for free. I would go for the A580 with same sensor for around half of the Nikon. Probably will next year although really I don't need it. My A700 and A550 are perfectly good and I even have a A350 in reserve.

[bfitzgerald]

You can't compare a D7000 with an A580 entirely different types of cameras.
We're talking about entry level bodies here and even Nikon seem to have worked out they needed up start making them a bit more interesting.

[twm47099]

Don't tell them they should have continued to pursue Minolta strategies and policies. Had they been any good Sony would not have had to come to the rescue as the "White Knight". .

Actually, they are/were following the Minolta strategy (the strategy or releasing lots of entry level cameras that don't have many basic features).

My first Minolta Af camera was the XTsi (Dynax 505 Super Plus or something like that). It was the top of the line consumer camera - no DOF-P, no MLU, one dial, no P-shift. It sounds very much like the A500/A550.

It made great shots, but it also almost caused me to leave Minolta because I couldn't do things I had done with my manual cameras.

tom

[bfitzgerald]

The film 5 was in many ways (bar the grip) a better camera than the 505si super. So at least some of the complaints sank in. Bar MLU it's got just about everything else you might want for a camera of it's cost rather well featured really nailed down DOF preview, has P shift and ratio control for wireless too. The 4 was less interesting lacking some basic stuff and really not much cheaper, and critically (for me anyway) no HSS for flash.

No need for Sony to repeat these lessons, the film 5 was a far more appealing camera than the film 4 and it's on ebay in much larger quantities than the 4 as well. Bottom line is it sold much better .

The 5 has some neat touches too the quick bracketing is clever (why this never made it to digital is a mystery) The "P" button is a good idea and again I'm not sure why this never made it across to entry bodies..very useful for some users and fast too. What makes me wonder is why Sony try to repeat the many model strategy that didn't work back then for Minolta?

The 500/550 and 450 Sony models would make decent enough entry models, in fact their prices are falling (as expected) I've seen the A450 going for £330 odd with a kit lens at one retailer. It's always relative with these things..at their higher price and so called "mid range" I think they were lacking basic bits you might expect. At knock down prices possibly worth looking at for an inexpensive additional body..maybe that is. Pay less complain less..though they could have put more effort into that range.

[Greg Beetham]

I think the main 'strategy' problem Minolta had was not being in a position financially too afford to build a sensor fab, I would have still bought their cameras though even if they had continued on being a sensor generation behind the opposition in the mad MP race, because as I have shown, the last digital SLR that KM made can still hold it's head up just fine in general photography, even today. If I was doing commercial work for print magazines, studio portraiture, glamour, architectural-scenic type output then I would want a large image file camera and expensive lenes and accept it's large memory footprint and high battery usage. It just seems a paradox when a company like Sony puts a pro grade large file sensor into a consumer body that has had some mostly standard user controls removed, or are missing.
But I guess if they made a 10 or 12MP cmos seperately for the consumer models with todays technology those would then have more latitude and high ISO performance than the 14 and 16MP prosumer models would....hmmm that might start an MP race in reverse, wouldn't that be fun...the huge debate wars that would kick off along the lines of 'how come our expensive camera can't do what the el-cheepo one does' haha
Greg

[alphaomega]

Ref Greg Beetham's comments above I think that the sensor Mp race is an interesting one to follow. Canon released their G11 with 10Mp (a reduction from the G10) and Panasonic have just released their LX5 with 10Mp (same as the LX2 and 3) Olympus' new E-5 still has "only" 12Mp. I doubt if Canon will exceed their 18Mp in their 550D and 7D. Sony have upped the ante and moved towards Canon with their new 16Mp (rated as good as the Canon 18Mp by DPReview). It will be interesting to see if Sony will match Canon in their rumoured A77 or stay with 16Mp. There is some levelling off. I think there is a realisation that the max. usable Mp levels have been reached without compromising on IQ with NR eliminating sensor size gains. As Agorabasta has said there are so many other aspects that still need to be improved.

[twm47099]

The film 5 was in many ways (bar the grip) a better camera than the 505si super. So at least some of the complaints sank in. Bar MLU it's got just about everything else you might want for a camera of it's cost rather well featured really nailed down DOF preview, has P shift and ratio control for wireless too. The 4 was less interesting lacking some basic stuff and really not much cheaper, and critically (for me anyway) no HSS for flash.

No need for Sony to repeat these lessons, the film 5 was a far more appealing camera than the film 4 and it's on ebay in much larger quantities than the 4 as well. Bottom line is it sold much better .

The 5 has some neat touches too the quick bracketing is clever (why this never made it to digital is a mystery) The "P" button is a good idea and again I'm not sure why this never made it across to entry bodies..very useful for some users and fast too. What makes me wonder is why Sony try to repeat the many model strategy that didn't work back then for Minolta?

The 500/550 and 450 Sony models would make decent enough entry models, in fact their prices are falling (as expected) I've seen the A450 going for £330 odd with a kit lens at one retailer. It's always relative with these things..at their higher price and so called "mid range" I think they were lacking basic bits you might expect. At knock down prices possibly worth looking at for an inexpensive additional body..maybe that is. Pay less complain less..though they could have put more effort into that range.

I agree that the 9,7,5 (and 600si) were a new direction for Minolta. Unfortunately, too late, and they had missed out on some key lens technologies (IS and USM). Their financial woes, in part stemming from the Honeywell suit, and the Vectis debacle (their second DSLR in a non-alpha compatible Vectis mount - duh) made it difficult for them to recover.

Regarding the lower end models (QTsi, 3, 4, and 3L), Minolta remarked in one of their annual reports that they were going to concentrate less on the lower end, because although they may have sold more, the profit margin was so much less they weren't money makers. And based on forum postings from those days, they also didn't inspire entry level users to stay with Minolta for upgrades but to leave for other brands. As I mentioned, I almost left due to dissatisfaction with what the "si" series offered. If Canon hadn't crippled their entry and enthusiast level cameras (Rebel 2k and Elan 7) by removing spot metering (something I really liked on my XTsi), and if Minolta hadn't released the Maxxm/Dynax 7 when they did, I would have been gone.

tom

[Mark K]

I have been thinking that if single model will penetrate the market and success, why should their be so many others? iPhone is a good example and Nikon's other models/ Canon's are the same.

I really hope the A55/A33 will reverse this situation.
It has been never a success for a new dSLR user to grab a Sony's camera A1xxA2xxA3xx.
Even the last A550 is very short lived.

Let us look at current Nikon's D7000 with review of their launch of D70, D200 etc. There has been always new and uexpected features, and ground breaking progress to feed user's satisfaction.
Nex 3/5 is successful because of the same reasons.