No more than three images or three external links allowed in any post or reply. Please trim quotations and do not include images in quotes unless essential.
I don't buy the DSLR failure, simply because it's not about the DSLR's. It's about the system. That is why A Mount didn't do "really well". I can't say I know if it was a complete disaster, I don't think it was. Clearly the it was neglected, never got the investment in deserved, had far too many missing/old Minolta lenses (some good, some less so), many lenses remained screw drive never updated either. Around 2013/2104 A mount was on the back burner, buried by Sony - minimal interest. So no question market share slid or was on the dive around 10 years ago.
Prior to that no, they never were near Canikon, but they were way ahead of Pentax (who are still making cameras). You can't get near the big players if your system is lacking.
Look at what Sony did with E Mount, how much they put into it - everything. Vast number of lenses, including many which were obvious A mount never turned up ones (cough 70-200mm F4, cough 85mm F1.8 etc etc big list). Tons of marketing, huge "influencer" hype. DPReview also part of the Sony hype machine (sadly), trying to convince us just how much difference mirrorless makes. Yes Sony have done well with E Mount, are we surprised with what they threw at it? If Sony put half that effort into A Mount, it would have been able to rival Canikon or get closer. People can enjoy their "Next best thing", many of us will have fun picking up the cut price bargains they dump onto the used market down the road
Unlike Olympus who capitalised on the old OM camera heritage with the 4/3 and M/4/3 systems and I might add quite successfully, some thing Sony failed to do with Minolta, the Minolta legacy did not seem as important to Sony, they had an attitude "We Know best" after swallowing up Minolta. Olympus used legacy to their advantage.
Canikon and to a lesser extent Pentax have always been Amateur Photographer magazines favourites, they have been and still are to a point DSLR supporters. Yes, E mount successful but just look at the number of models they brought out over the years, each one having Mk 1 2 3 etc editions. My local camera shop has a window full of used E/FE mount cameras and look at the on line sites too
Although I have a Canon M5 and an old 650D ( soon the be sold ) I'm still a DSLR fan.
That's 2 years into DSLR, to get 17% share is quite good really. I believe that was off the back of the A200-350 cameras mostly. What happened after this doing quite well success? This is what happened (sigh...)
https://fioria.us/press/announcing-sony ... -and-pink/
And the rest is history, Sony just wiped out their entry DSLR line up in one swoop. The lack of live view hindered the A700/900 cameras, Sony never made a live view pentaprism camera, just pentamirror ones, which compromised the viewfinder quality/size.
Sony made too many mistakes
https://www.dpreview.com/forums/thread/ ... t-37077703
But hey gotta keep those hand bag buyers happy...
I really think Olympus would have been far better off resurrecting the OM mount stuff (the original OM mount). OM4Ti, and others - make yourself a more affordable Leica, job done would have been a cult hit/following. Share the mount, have an OVF and EVF option. I'd buy 3 of them
Today's words are "in camera raw development"
Some useful things on this camera. Being able to develop from Raw, still something that cannot be done on any Sony camera I'm aware of.
Nikon also have a not much talked about picture controls, you can customise this in camera or via the pc/mac software. It's quite useful I have already made up 3 profiles one B&W and a few colour ones. It has a range of parameters that are not on some cameras. Much is talked about on Fuji's film simulations, this seems just as useful to me. I can get some nice in camera jpegs, or develop from raw to these presets.
I remember years ago I complained about Sony's lack of customisation, and limited options for setting up the camera. It's true they have made obvious improvements, yet still no in camera raw developing or retouching. This also have time lapses, focus shift (will try this more but again Sony don't have it from what I can see), interval timer all built in. Fair to say some things like adjusting the CW metering circle size (or setting it to just average) isn't high up my list of important things, nor is the ability to fine tune the metering, or the many WB options (this has multiple AWB settings for keeping warm/realistic/cool). You can also adjust NR on video 3 levels too!
It's about being able to tweak things how you want, not what you are stuck with. And you can do that very deeply on this camera. Once it's set up, I can also save my menu settings to card for back up! Once the camera is set up, I don't really need to dive into the main menu often at all. It's a time saver long term. The completely silent shutter is also something no A Mount camera had, you can bang away there on studio/still life shots and not worry about hammering the mechanics of the camera. Useful
I think Sony were just covering up the noise with NR. Didn't like the A200 much either or the A57 jpegs. The A99 was quite good, a big improvement, A6300 was also decent. For some reason the A77II didn't seem as good jpegs as the A99 even with NR turned down. The look from Nikon is quite different, and I think I am liking it more than the Sony look, I have much more control over it too. It's more subtle tonality, I notice this even on the raw files. Not that I was unhappy aka A99, that could kick out nice images. According to DPR it's 2 stops off the Nikon roughly, and the A99II also trails the 24mp camera. I don't need 40+mp or the extra weight of a D850 etc. or similar body. I never have been megapixel driven, it's just a non issue 24mp is way more than I ever need
So far do I miss the EVF? No, not at all. It is useful for some things, yet it comes with it's own limitations. I do miss the Minolta 80-200mm HS APO G, that was a great lens - I can get something close to that, at a much higher cost though. I've not yet worked out what the best option is. I don't really miss the A99, or the A77/77II cameras I had. The A99 was the best of that bunch - I was never into the SLT concept at all. I don't understand those who say they can never go back to an OVF, having used an EVF. I found it took a long time to get used to an EVF, but it's so liberating and detailed the view of an OVF I'm amazed I put up with such a low res/dim viewfinder for so many years!
Lack of sensor IS, that would have been great. The low light is so far ahead of what I was using, it's much less of an issue. I will get some more VR/IS lenses to compensate. The Sigma 105mm OS is about as effective as in body IS. To date no regrets, a very good all rounder this camera, in terms of IQ, performance OVF and live view and video quality is excellent. The digital video IS is extremely effective, with a slight 1.1x crop, it's far more stable than any Sony digital IS. Certainly usable with hand held shooting. If I had enough cash I'd buy 2 more D780's
I could use the supplied EFS adapter but I'm trying to keep weight and size down. My decision was to stay small but retain the APS-C crop the M5 ticks this box. I am not into taking moving action, just landscapes, general photography and classic car shows etc.
I must admit I did agonise for a while on this decision, but time to move on.
I recently found out from DPreviews that the M5 which I have is a Canon 80D in a smaller body.
My old 650D with a EFS 18-55 kit lens, a EFS 15-85 and a EF 28-135 is now up for sale, and reluctantly the A58 and Minolta lenses will follow.
My old Olympus E-510 with the 14-54 stays, first digital I bought and is now worth nothing, so its a keeper as it still works fine
I completely lost interest in Sony and A Mount after what happened, I sort of knew I was quite unhappy about the whole thing. Perhaps I could have stuck it out, maybe I should have - yet it was almost inevitable. Left a very bad taste in my mouth, and their adapter crippling just cemented that.
I have a few things left to sell, including the A57, and some lenses/flashes. I have 2 x KM5d's an 18-70mm, the 50mm F1.7 and the 100-200mm F4.5, I am not sure what I'll do with them. I might use them. I do still have the 30mm Macro, which is a very useful lens. Yet I see no real point in keeping much around, bar nostalgia. It's a huge regret that Minolta sold out to Sony. I would no question still be using Minolta to this day. I just have to try to get close to that Minolta vibe/experience. My old Minolta dealer went Nikon, so did I.
I can't understand Canon, with the R7 and R10, I can understand the R7 being a FF mirrorless with FF sensor, but the R10, APS-C cropped sensor but with a FF mount, I should think to build a system for either of these will be costly.
In a way moving over to Nikon is quite a logical move if you look at the bigger picture, no pun intended.
Sony only ever looked after profits, not the customers, they dictated the trend which would be more lucrative for them, also they thought following a trend in the industry, where every one was shrinking the products and they didn't want to get left behind
The golden days are long gone, in terms of volume. Sony are big into courting review sites/influencers/press - once you get past the hype machine it's not nearly as exciting. I can only call them out on what they did/say, or rather didn't say on A Mount. Says a lot about how they view customers.
Canon are trying to replicate their DSLR line up, the R7 is sort of a Canon 7DII, except it's plastic build as the R6. I'm not sure if it matters, but honestly I'm not impressed with Canon's cost cutting (90D also has the same plastic feel body). Price is about what you expect, I wouldn't buy one but maybe some will wildlife shooters? R10 isn't that interesting, I suppose that's their new 900D type camera. It seems awful expensive for entry level IMO. Then again all we hear is from all makers, they want higher margins/ignore lower end products. They really think a grand is now entry level.
I think it's a huge huge mistake, because some people are still interested in photography even with phones around, many don't or won't spend a grand on a camera. If they ignore the 400-500 price point, the sales that are left will be used gear, meaning 0 profits.
I'm not sure what Nikon will do, personally I don't find their APS-C stuff in MILC interesting at all, and this new Z30 will probably not change that. I think they'd be far better off doing some budget FF bodies, and re-vamping the other FF bodies. I am merely hoping Nikon carry on a bit with at least a few DSLR's. I'd wager Canon might keep a couple going too, but the others I'm not so sure about.
Whatever happens I'm sticking it out now with what I have, the more people that offload this gear - should eventually drive prices down quite heavily. And I'm all for those bargains!
Sony have more or less made the transition to E/FE mount, but not so attractive prices. I really don't know what to make of these 2 new Canon mirrorless cameras with FF mounts, I'm struggling to find the logic and price justification. As you say the magic price point for a DSLR is/was 400 - 500, well, that's changing to nearer a grand now. The vast majority of Canon's sold globally were in this older price bracket.
I still like DSLR cameras, Nikon in particular had a very attractive range of entry level/consumer DSLR's which were very compact and their mid range were excellent. My mission was to go small and light which was the Canon M5, ( it's a Canon 80D in a smaller body except for the mirror ) My M5 is so easy to use even though its small everything is to hand. Is there a future for the M5 type of camera, my camera shop seems to think there is because its the only micro compact MILC Canon make and they won't want to leave that club. If I ever went back to a DSLR is would be a Canikon whichever gets the best reviews for spec and price.
I'm wondering if they will all eventually transition to mirrorless. Amongst all this turmoil in the camera industry, Micro 4/3 does not have the headache of all this change and cost, Pentax are very quiet on this and one wonders if Ricoh have something up their sleeve, I personally don't think Pentax has the money/resources to change.
Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 3 guests