[OniFactor]

The Sony line puzzles me... They make an ok entry level (a100-200) an awful midrange (a700) and now an ugly beast of a camera in this mockup.

Has anyone tried to shoot the A700? You can't see the AF points when you switch them because they are so tiny, the UI is ok, but too hard to figure out how to switch the essentials like AF points and base modes. The noise reduction CANNOT be turned off and makes the images look like water colors from ISO 3200 and above. Not too mention its AF is fast but very inaccurate in low-light unless you only use the center point, which is pointless for what I shoot.

This beast of a camera has only one camera in it's competition and thats the Canon 5D and with the lack of any reasonably priced full frame lenses I don't see how this camera will succeed. You'd have to buy only the Zeiss stuff to compete with Canon and thats only a handful of lenses. Sure it has what 22MP, but at what cost? I think that Sony really has to make a perfect sensor for this to sway any pros to the Sony camp because the 5D, 1Ds series and Nikon D3 are perfectly proven full-frame cameras with a large assortment of lenses and abilities.

Pentax does not need something like this, but rather an above the K20D model with same sensor but further refinements and feature sets. Make the camera functional and people will shoot it. Make the camera look like a computer and the tech geeks will buy it cause it says Sony and fills their lust for buttons.

BTW, I can see why no other sony has a top LCD... that thing looks like crap and a half.

lol, you're the first person to mention the LCD. it's actually just a sticker, since this is a mock up, and not a working model. i'm assuming the final version will be better.. plus, that'd mean they'd be at f/1.8 on a 25-70 zoom lens

[séamuis]

yep that thing looks like typical sony... I'm not impressed.

[ankit]

The Sony line puzzles me... They make an ok entry level (a100-200) an awful midrange (a700) and now an ugly beast of a camera in this mockup.

Has anyone tried to shoot the A700? You can't see the AF points when you switch them because they are so tiny, the UI is ok, but too hard to figure out how to switch the essentials like AF points and base modes. The noise reduction CANNOT be turned off and makes the images look like water colors from ISO 3200 and above. Not too mention its AF is fast but very inaccurate in low-light unless you only use the center point, which is pointless for what I shoot.

This beast of a camera has only one camera in it's competition and thats the Canon 5D and with the lack of any reasonably priced full frame lenses I don't see how this camera will succeed. You'd have to buy only the Zeiss stuff to compete with Canon and thats only a handful of lenses. Sure it has what 22MP, but at what cost? I think that Sony really has to make a perfect sensor for this to sway any pros to the Sony camp because the 5D, 1Ds series and Nikon D3 are perfectly proven full-frame cameras with a large assortment of lenses and abilities.

Pentax does not need something like this, but rather an above the K20D model with same sensor but further refinements and feature sets. Make the camera functional and people will shoot it. Make the camera look like a computer and the tech geeks will buy it cause it says Sony and fills their lust for buttons.

BTW, I can see why no other sony has a top LCD... that thing looks like crap and a half.

I prefer the Sony UI to Pentax or Canon or even Nikon any day. Also, dont forget that beauty is in the eye of the beholder - I find the Sony cameras very nice too look at, and more the buttons the better imo. I for one am really looking forward to this camera. I guess only time will tell if it succeeds or fails.

[ftpaddict]

BTW, I can see why no other sony has a top LCD... that thing looks like crap and a half.

I actually had the same thought, but was afraid to say it.

[*isteve]

i'm not sure how much it's going to cost, but i'm sure it'll be fairly reasonable. it'll be meant to contend with pro segment cameras, D3, 1Ds, stuff like that, it's not marketed to entry level consumers.. their 3 entry level SLRs are (the 200, 300, 350)
it's going to be full frame, i think, and that's also a small asian woman's hands on it, so it's kind of misleading on size, i should've pointed that out.
actually, i quite think this camera is going to be all that the spec sheets make it out to be. i don't know if you've used an A700, but the UI is as smooth as butter, the ergonomics are decent (they've got minolta blood in them, so they better be!), and.. well.. they've got the money to throw at getting it perfect in R&D.

Canon and Nikon own 99% of the professional SLR market and their FF cameras still account for a minute fraction of sales (even the 5D). Sony OTOH have no installed pro user base and no professional backup and support of the type that makes the big two successful, namely the ability to rent or buy just about anything from a pro centre anywhere in the world at short notice.

So, no pro will buy Sony. So that leaves the folks who want to look like they are pro. But they buy what the pros have so no luck there either.

I used Minota gear for 10 years, analogue and digital. I liked their stuff despite the silly proprietary hotshoe and the extravagant cost of their decent glass. They even had a sort of pro camera in the Dynax 9 which nobody bought because the 7 was so good (oops - bad omen?).

Now they are owned by Sony. They have in body AS (good) but most lenses have no HSM (bad) but they have Zeiss (good) even if the kit lens is decidedly average (bad) and most of their long FF lenses are very expensive and hard to find. Their AF is supposedly fast but it lags behind the leaders by some margin in terms of sophistication.

The A700 probably fits my hand better than any other SLR on the market, the interface is nice (I prefer Pentax but perhaps Sony is #2) and its IQ is OK, but it was totally overshadowed by the D300 - even though it does almost everything the same for a lot less and has the same sensor.

But I could forgive all that if they had not hired the styling department from Fisher Price or Tonka Toys to design the "family look" for the Alpha range. We have fugly styling, big orange graphics, shiney plastics and speed stripes. It may be a luxury product on paper but it screams cheap with every curve and seam.

Much as I loved my Minoltas, I would not touch a Sony with a bargepole, and few amateurs in the miniscule tiny incredibly negligable market for cameras over $3000 will buy an A900, because Sony arent the brand they want to buy, Minolta genes or not. If you are in that market you buy Canon or Nikon or Leica or you are really serious you buy MF.

Pentax are well out of it. The D300 is the camera of the year, and thats the one thats got everyone's attention, not the D3 or the 1DS mk 3 (came in with a wimper) and not the new Sony. If Canon produce a 5D upgrade it will get a flutter of attention, perhaps by those same well heeled amateurs that would not buy a Sony and a few pros who wouldnt dream of bothering with a 1DS3.

So a tehnical tour de force it may be, just like the Dynax 9, but I reckon it will sell in about the same numbers. Ie not much.

[lithos]

Aye, they do have Minolta blood in them. I really don't think that Sony would've gotten into the SLR market had they not picked up the sad, shattered hulk of one of the biggest camera companies.

Didn't the Konica-Minolta DSLR's go for the "button for everything" philosophy?

The fact that they've got Carl Zeiss lenses in 'em is kinda...meh. Marketing decision, pure and simple. I'm sure CZ's getting a nice big kickback from them.

What really makes me sad is that a company that's been in the game all of about five minutes is already cameras with as good, if not better, features than what Pentax is cranking out.

Sure, no pros'll buy it. Not this generation of pros, at least, or even maybe the next. The current pros will want something they can trust and rely on - a more traditional camera company.

It'll appeal to the nerds, the technoyuppies, the skivvie-wearing Wired subscribers. That's what Sony is - the fall-back brand for those who want something but are utterly shattered to find Apple doesn't make it.

Sad but true. And being expensive, with this demographic, is a plus, as there's nothing more gratifying to 'em than conspicuous consumption. These guys mightn't have a clue, but these are the guys to sell to. But these're the guys who will go on to be "pro" photogs, at least in the terms of income and maybe even fame.

And then these ******s will be what people think of as photogs in the future...

I don't deny that it'll be a good camera.

[Canada_Rockies]

Does that include Sony Tax™?

It's a good grip. The more buttons, the merrier, I say. But what grips like these need is a "Hold" button, like on any portable CD player, that stops any buttons on the grip from working when you don't want them.

that's what the on/off switch is for on the D-BG2 grip.

[ftpaddict]

Didn't the Konica-Minolta DSLR's go for the "button for everything" philosophy?

The fact that they've got Carl Zeiss lenses in 'em is kinda...meh. Marketing decision, pure and simple. I'm sure CZ's getting a nice big kickback from them.

It'll appeal to the nerds, the technoyuppies, the skivvie-wearing Wired subscribers. That's what Sony is - the fall-back brand for those who want something but are utterly shattered to find Apple doesn't make it.

1. I like that philosophy. No more diving into menus. Have everything you need at the touch of a button. Isn't that what modern technology is striving for?
2. Carl Zeiss only license the name. They play no role in manufacturing the lens, other than the occasional quality control. But since Sony has no heritage in the world of serious photography, they needed a name that stood out; for their lineup of pro lenses.
3. Imagine a sleek, white camera, full of blue lights and a scrollwheel, with built-in iPod and memory and non-removable battery. the iShot.

[Buddha Jones]

HDMI!!! Of all the uselessness to put on a camera, HDMI!! This is the opitomy of Gadget Pr0n.

[ftpaddict]

HDMI!!! Of all the uselessness to put on a camera, HDMI!! This is the opitomy of Gadget Pr0n.

But of course! No self-respecting photographer could do without his high-definition output. Computer monitors are overrated, IMO.

That was very tongue-in-cheek

[lithos]

1. I like that philosophy. No more diving into menus. Have everything you need at the touch of a button. Isn't that what modern technology is striving for?
2. Carl Zeiss only license the name. They play no role in manufacturing the lens, other than the occasional quality control. But since Sony has no heritage in the world of serious photography, they needed a name that stood out; for their lineup of pro lenses.
3. Imagine a sleek, white camera, full of blue lights and a scrollwheel, with built-in iPod and memory and non-removable battery. the iShot.

1. I figure if I can learn to operate an input device consisting of over 100 individual buttons using eight fingers and two thumbs - here's a hint: I'm using this very device right now, as I type - I can figure out how to use say, thirty or so buttons with a coupla fingers and a thumb.

2. I'm tempted to throw out the term..."prostituting itself." Of course, Sony's got bloody "Zeiss" "glass" on their "camera-"phones.

3. You need to swap the vowels in that name.

HDMI!!! Of all the uselessness to put on a camera, HDMI!! This is the opitomy of Gadget Pr0n.

I know. Well, Kodak killed of Azo and Agfa's dead, who the hell prints stuff anymore? C'mon - we didn't spend another 7 grand on Sony plasma screens! And how cool will it look when you plug that thing into your 180" LCD!

[Timbuctoo]

I kind of disagree. I don't think it looks to bad and the lots of buttons idea comes from the KM7D which had heaps but each button had a function that made the in camera menus hardly needed. It was a very comfortable camera to shoot with but a bit heavy. This new camera and the A700, even the A100 & 200 etc have a lot of buttons and they are easy to use cameras. The new Sony will also work well with many of the Full Frame Minolta lenses and the range is similar to Pentax. Those lenses and I own a few are equal to anything Canon has they just don't have USM/SSM. I think that many will buy this camera if they can afford it and It'll be a decent competitor to the Nikon D3 if they get the noise control sorted.

I bought the Pentax K10D because it is the only camera for the price that has a weatherproof body and in Darwin that's a standard requirement.

I think the K20D looks great and the next body if it has faster AF will be almost the perfect camera. Lots of interesting times ahead.

Tim H

[falconeye]

It's all clear then:

Pentax owns the market for a FF camera which isn't a beast for all but studio photography. Only a Pentax FF will rival a Leica M8 some day. Good to know

[kenyee]

HDMI!!! Of all the uselessness to put on a camera, HDMI!! This is the opitomy of Gadget Pr0n.

I think it'll be really useful if you can find a portable DVD player that takes HDMI in...high res preview on a larger display would be very useful IMHO...
If you do this w/ the current K10D's composite out, you only get a measly 480i (so really 240 lines of resolution with roughly 600ish pixels wide)-:

[clawhammer]

honestly I kinda like the idea of replicating the buttons on the grip. reaching the 4-way controller on my K10D+ D-BG2 in vertical orientation (to select a focus point) is a pain. I also really like the idea of lowering the shutter button on the grip so that it is in the same position relative to the lens as the normal shutter button is. It does make for a rather large grip, but it seems to me that this could be like the experience I had with the game cube controllers when they first came out. They looked rather odd and uncomfortable, but after playing for a while I came to appreciate their form.