[philbaum]

Noticed this statement from an intereview on dpreview:

Photokina 2014: Sony interview - 'we still need to create more lenses': Digital Photography Review

[IMG][/IMG]

Looks like its a shark's pond out there regards sensors. Canon makes their own sensors, Samsung makes their own, Nikon subcontracts to Sony and at least one other maker, and Pentax has bought from Samsung before and now Sony. Does Sony manipulate the selling of sensors to give their camera division an advantage. Short answer: Yes

---

Last edited by philbaum; 10-02-2014 at 10:13 AM.

[Adam]

Thanks for sharing this! I think the tidbit about sensors is hardly surprising (I thought that was common knowledge at this point?). In any case, I also think it's interesting to see how hard they're trying with the QX series, and that it's actually selling. Sony's doing a great job of preparing for the future.

[VisualDarkness]

Looks like its a shark's pond out there regards sensors. Canon makes their own sensors, Samsung makes their own, Nikon subcontracts to Sony and at least one other maker, and Pentax has bought from Samsung before and now Sony. Does Sony manipulate the selling of sensors to give their camera division an advantage. Short answer: Yes

I don't think manipulating the sensors is the right word for it, probably more like using the newest tech only in their cameras for maybe one or two models.

---------- Post added 10-02-14 at 09:30 PM ----------

If they were actively manipulating sensors for external sales to be worse than their own internal ones it should show in the products but it doesn't.

In their SLT they probably test new tech to minimize the cost the SLT has on light transmission, that may explain a part why their cameras are relatively expensive at launch as new sensor tech cost money at the start of production. For the A7 series they are now experimenting with three different sensor tech and provides something that the other brands don't have. When the distance between what they got on the table and what other have to offer shrinks they may start selling the old sensors externally and begin with the next generation tech themselves.

[philbaum]

@Visual Darkness - the phrase i used was "manipulating the selling of sensors". They certainly are doing that - what other word would you use?

There's the case of Boeing in American History. At one point, Boeing was making the planes via the parent company, making the engines and operating their own Transport airlines. Due to American anti-trust legislation in 1934, Boeing was broken up into Pratt & Witney Engines, United Airlines and 2 different airplane manufacturers. William Boeing was so disheartened by the politics of the situation that he retired that year and died not long thereafter, IIRC.

Microsoft has similarly not played nice in the marketplace, in controlling the operating systems of many computers, and then favoring their own brands of software in the operating system and thru bundling software with the operating system. In the world marketplace of today, its much harder to control monopolies due to the number of countries involved. Its even difficult to enforce what international laws there are, such as copyright.

Sony has to be careful with their sensor policies, if they become too noxious, then other companies will just switch to another sensor manufacturer or influence governments to take punitive action against Sony. There's a precedent there with Russia banning the Nikon D600, with some rumoured politics going on. (Its not that the D600 matters, its the threat of similar actions for other cameras) Another example might be where Toyota customers experienced some uncontrolled speeding in their cars, and the US Congress called in the CEO to answer questions. Why would he care what the US Congress said - well they sell a lot of cars in the US and Toyota has manufacturing plants in the US.

I'm not saying Sony is a bad company, but corporations are out to make money - thats what they do. Its actually useful for an "open market place" for Samsung to succeed with their camera project. Kodak couldn't succeed at it, perhaps Samsung will do better. the NX-1 is an impressive camera.

---

Last edited by philbaum; 10-02-2014 at 12:54 PM.

[6BQ5]

I don't think Sony is manipulating anything. They create the technology and they are free to do whatever they want with it. Since they are trying to promote themselves as a camera brand its only natural that they get first pick of their own work. Why would they put their top notch sensors in a competitors system before their own? They don't seem to be actively colluding with anyone like Microsoft.

Also, don't forget that the sensor is just one piece in the image making chain. There is glass before that and lots of firmware after it.

[jrpower10]

Not sure I agree this is manipulation of sensor sales. Sony is in the difficult position of selling parts to their competitors in the camera market, and I don't think it's manipulation to have a policy of them using their technology first, then allowing outside sales (and I'm sure Nikon gets 2nd crack, being their biggest sensor customer). This happens all the time in other businesses. If it's truly disadvantaging other camera makers, then they can always take the Canon route and make their own, or partner with someone like Samsung. I agree, though, that more competition is healthy.

[DeadJohn]

"Manipulation" of a market has negative connotations. Sony is doing nothing wrong if they reserve a sensor for their own cameras, then sell that tech to other camera manufacturers after some time passes.

[MPrince]

Does Sony manipulate the selling of sensors to give their camera division an advantage. Short answer: Yes

Manipulate is the wrong word. Of course they take advantage of the fact that they manufacture sensors. Why wouldn't they? Wouldn't you? Don't you use your skills and talents to your advantage?