Release Date of A900 revealed

I keep seeing this topic pop back up on the latest 10 forums, and I click on it expecting info on Release Date of A900 revealed, only to find more arguing about what the name might be, even though nobody knows for certain. Should speculation be under a different topic heading?

Regardless what the naming is going to be, I'm pretty certain it is already set in stone, and our opinions will mean very little. (But I hope it's a girl....)

Edited by PBnbaByJ - 29 August 2008 at 22:03

Frankly it doesnt matter what numbering scheme you use time moves on and you get tripped up. Canons line is all screwed up with 400D, 450D, 1000D all tripping over each over in price. This is further complicated as the 40D price continues to spiral down. Now the Nikon D90 comes along which would normally be a competitor to the 450D but price and features pitches it directly at the 40D. In addition to this, Sony has recently dropped the price on the A700 to $1100 so its competition is no longer the potential D300 buyer, but really the D90 purchaser. Nikon is left out of this confusion - remember they are still selling the D200 as new - at exactly the same price as the D90.

What I see is that with cameras moving from a 5-8 year model cycle to a 1-2 year cycle and with the ability to very quickly migrate technology between platforms any kind of hierarchical numbering system quickly gets confused with overlapping pricing and capabilities.

Frankly, if I were a product planner I'd be tempted to give up on numbering systems and just use names linked to body style as canon has done for its rebels for so long. Take a leaf out of car manufactures and realise that people will pay for a highly specced small body if that what they need or for a low spec big body if that suits them.   

IMHO it is a heritage to be very proud of indeed.
I wish their design would resemble the 7D and the analog dynax range.

Kiklop wrote: And AFAIK a900 is written under the black tape found on preproduction units. I would be very surprised if the name will be any different.

I think it's a real shame if they call it the A900. I think it was a mistake to use A700 as well. Sony is not Minolta. Enough of the heritage is there for people who want to look for it - the grip, eyestart etc. Calling the cameras after the Minolta naming conventions just fuels endless, bogus continuity arguments. There's been a lot of this in the past, with people bemoaning the 'loss of the knobs' (Nothing to do with Sony, knobs were brought in by Minolta after the relative failure of the Xi design aesthetic) and predicting the launch of an A500. There isn't room between the A700 and the A350 for another camera, and if the A350 was called the A500, or the A700 was called the AS67X, people wouldn't be talking about it.

Edited by RubberDials - 29 August 2008 at 15:28

I'm excited about seeing the new body at Photokina, but I'm REALLY interested in seeing the new lenses as well. I'm particularly interested in seeing the telephotos given my interest in Wildlife photography.

Mark

actually I'm more excited about new lenses. I would love to see new, good and reasonable priced 35mm lens (something similar to old 35mm/F2). Existing 35mm/F1.4 is a bit too expensive for me.

P.S. I am dreaming...

And AFAIK a900 is written under the black tape found on preproduction units. I would be very surprised if the name will be any different.