FAQ FAQ  Forum Search   Events   Register Register  Login Login

what is the future of A mount?

Page  <1 4546474849 52>
Author
Miranda F View Drop Down
Senior Member
Senior Member

Joined: 11 January 2014
Country: United Kingdom
Location: Bristol
Status: Offline
Posts: 3101
Post Options Post Options   Quote Miranda F Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 21 March 2018 at 11:03
Originally posted by neilt3 neilt3 wrote:

Originally posted by kefkafloyd kefkafloyd wrote:

Touchscreen is fine to have as an additional option to buttons and controls, but it shouldn't be the sole option.


O.K as long as there is a "Disable touchscreen " option .
Buttons only for me , thanks you .

+1
Miranda F & Sensorex, Sony A58, 5d, Dynax 4, 5, 60, 500si/600si/700si/800si, various Sony & Minolta lenses, several Tamrons, lots of MF primes and *far* too many old film cameras . . .
 



Back to Top
PMac View Drop Down
Senior Member
Senior Member

Joined: 12 April 2007
Country: Australia
Location: Melbourne
Status: Offline
Posts: 2142
Post Options Post Options   Quote PMac Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 21 March 2018 at 13:43
Originally posted by Photosopher Photosopher wrote:

I just had a premonition that a77III is soon to come with full frame and a7III specs... but with SLT of course.

Not the game changer than EMount a7III is considered, but definitely would infuse AMount with some much needed attention and I bet generate enough sales to justify the production.

Market... cornered.


Thats a really interesting idea - every survey of the camera market says that whatever is left is moving up the cost curve.

What would people think of a $2000usd ff a77iii?
We are all going to die but at least we can go down swinging
Back to Top
kefkafloyd View Drop Down
Senior Member
Senior Member

Joined: 04 July 2006
Country: United States
Location: Massachusetts
Status: Offline
Posts: 2439
Post Options Post Options   Quote kefkafloyd Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 21 March 2018 at 14:20
It should really be called the a88, IMO.
Back to Top
Cliff View Drop Down
Senior Member
Senior Member

Joined: 01 November 2006
Country: United States
Location: Richmond Va
Status: Offline
Posts: 691
Post Options Post Options   Quote Cliff Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 21 March 2018 at 14:21
A77 has been APS-C and a99 ff. Don't think that's likely to change. But, I do like the idea of an a77iii with a7iii specs in APS-C and mirrorless. Ditto with a99iii with a9 specs and an R model with a larger sensor too.

I'd also like to see them as native E mount with bundled LA-EA5 that would focus both SSM and screw drive A mount lenses. That's convergence that extends the future of A mount for a long, long time.

That would also give CaNikon users a migration path that lets them keep their old glass in a body size they like. That could easily include preprogrammed sets of button options that emulate common CaNikon setups. That would let them work in familiar ways too.    

Add a series of LA=Exxx adapters and Sony could open conversion paths for all comers large and small. SLR and mirrorless in a choice of body sizes, Pentax, Fuji...
ContaxRF, Min7000i, Sony A100, A65, Nex5T, A7ii, A6500. 2 many lenses, mostly ordinary Minolta & 3rd party A, MC/D, other mf, vintage Vivitars & cats, LA-EA2,3,4 E16-50&55-210mm
Back to Top
mike77 View Drop Down
Senior Member
Senior Member

Joined: 26 February 2011
Country: Austria
Status: Offline
Posts: 595
Post Options Post Options   Quote mike77 Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 21 March 2018 at 19:38
Originally posted by sybersitizen sybersitizen wrote:


That doesn't make any sense. The restriction to the central area of the frame applies to dedicated PDAF. OSPDAF can work independently and does not have those same limits (though it does have some limits).


That is actually what I was saying l.

Originally posted by sybersitizen sybersitizen wrote:


One significant reason why E-mount can have much more extensive OSPDAF coverage across the frame is that CDAF takes over from OSDPAF in that system for final accuracy; and E-mount lenses were designed from the beginning to work well with CDAF. The vast majority of A-mount lenses were never designed to do that, and they do not work well with it.


This does not explain why adapted lenses (e.g. Sigma/Canon on the MC-11) work remarkably well. They have not been designed for CDAF, either.

Originally posted by sybersitizen sybersitizen wrote:


If Sony removes the SLT mirror and tries to make an A-mount body with only OSPDAF points covering the whole frame, it will have problems unique to A-mount because of the (so far) essential role CDAF plays.


See above. Yes, it may introduce some problems unique to A-mount, for some lenses. But better than throwing the lens into the trash, isn't it? I just don't see Sony offering SLT tech in the long run. Personal opinion: it's unify, or die.
A99, NEX-C3, HVL-F43M, more than enough glass (A, E, M42, MD)
Back to Top
sybersitizen View Drop Down
Senior Member
Senior Member

Joined: 04 August 2006
Country: United States
Location: California
Status: Offline
Posts: 14033
Post Options Post Options   Quote sybersitizen Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 21 March 2018 at 20:35
Originally posted by mike77 mike77 wrote:

This does not explain why adapted lenses (e.g. Sigma/Canon on the MC-11) work remarkably well. They have not been designed for CDAF, either.

The MC-11 supports motorized lenses only, right? There's that difference, which seems to be pretty significant where CDAF is concerned.

Originally posted by mike77 mike77 wrote:

Yes, it may introduce some problems unique to A-mount, for some lenses. But better than throwing the lens into the trash, isn't it?

I would greatly prefer those not to be the only two options where screw-drive lenses are concerned.

I just don't see Sony offering SLT tech in the long run. Personal opinion: it's unify, or die.

Duly noted. Personal opinion here: Maintain full backward compatibility without performance loss or don't bother.
 



Back to Top
mike77 View Drop Down
Senior Member
Senior Member

Joined: 26 February 2011
Country: Austria
Status: Offline
Posts: 595
Post Options Post Options   Quote mike77 Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 21 March 2018 at 23:45
Unfortunately, we're running in circles about the screw-drive lenses. The final adjustments via CDAF are an optional step for higher accuracy. If the lens can't do it - omit that step. No blocker. After all, it's not being done with off-sensor PDAF, either.

What other options do you believe will become available that will maintain full backwards compatibility? Of course that would be the most desirable option.

LA-EA5 (mirrorless adapter with motor)? Same thing.
Keep using LA-EA4? Indeed a third option, but not attractive in a few years.
Long-term evolution of SLT tech? Unlikely IMHO but of course possible. Sony would have to spend R&D resources on a new off-sensor PDAF module for each new generation of cameras.

A99, NEX-C3, HVL-F43M, more than enough glass (A, E, M42, MD)
Back to Top
sybersitizen View Drop Down
Senior Member
Senior Member

Joined: 04 August 2006
Country: United States
Location: California
Status: Offline
Posts: 14033
Post Options Post Options   Quote sybersitizen Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 22 March 2018 at 02:03
Originally posted by mike77 mike77 wrote:

Unfortunately, we're running in circles about the screw-drive lenses. The final adjustments via CDAF are an optional step for higher accuracy.

You wanted full frame AF coverage, remember? CDAF doesn't seem to be optional for that in E-mount-land. I get the impression that it's essential. If it's not essential, why is it there?

If you're saying you think CDAF won't be essential for full frame AF coverage in A-mount-land, I can't disagree because I don't know.

What other options do you believe will become available that will maintain full backwards compatibility? Of course that would be the most desirable option.

I honestly don't care how backwards compatibility is maintained as long as it is maintained without degrading the kind of performance I enjoy at present. I make that requirement #1, then removing the mirror is fine if requirement #1 is met. This is what separates me from others who simply begin by saying Sony, please remove the mirror.
Back to Top
LAbernethy View Drop Down
Senior Member
Senior Member

Joined: 25 November 2015
Country: Canada
Location: Ajax, Ontario
Status: Offline
Posts: 1053
Post Options Post Options   Quote LAbernethy Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 22 March 2018 at 02:19
Originally posted by Miranda F Miranda F wrote:

Originally posted by neilt3 neilt3 wrote:

Originally posted by kefkafloyd kefkafloyd wrote:

Touchscreen is fine to have as an additional option to buttons and controls, but it shouldn't be the sole option.


O.K as long as there is a "Disable touchscreen " option .
Buttons only for me , thanks you .

+1

+1
Back to Top
jackal2008 View Drop Down
Newbie
Newbie

Joined: 08 March 2018
Country: Canada
Status: Offline
Posts: 18
Post Options Post Options   Quote jackal2008 Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 22 March 2018 at 04:56
Originally posted by Photosopher Photosopher wrote:

I just had a premonition that a77III is soon to come with full frame and a7III specs... but with SLT of course.

Not the game changer than EMount a7III is considered, but definitely would infuse AMount with some much needed attention and I bet generate enough sales to justify the production.

Market... cornered.


option 1, throw in the a7iii sensor in a77ii and make it full frame camera, call it a88
option 2, update la-ea4 to the a77ii af module, call it la-ea6
option 3 add motor to la-ea3, call it la-ea5

any of these product will make me very happy.
Back to Top
beautiophile View Drop Down
Senior Member
Senior Member

Joined: 11 December 2014
Country: Vietnam
Location: HCM City
Status: Offline
Posts: 189
Post Options Post Options   Quote beautiophile Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 22 March 2018 at 06:19
Originally posted by sybersitizen sybersitizen wrote:


I honestly don't care how backwards compatibility is maintained as long as it is maintained without degrading the kind of performance I enjoy at present. I make that requirement #1, then removing the mirror is fine if requirement #1 is met. This is what separates me from others who simply begin by saying Sony, please remove the mirror.

+1
D7D, M7D, A57 ~ 16-80ZA
Alpha 7, Dynax 3, A99 ~ Min 17-35G, 24-85, 28f2, 100Macro; SAL50F14. SAL70300G
F20AM, F42AM, F58AM.
Back to Top
overeema View Drop Down
Senior Member
Senior Member

Joined: 07 September 2008
Country: Netherlands
Status: Offline
Posts: 309
Post Options Post Options   Quote overeema Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 22 March 2018 at 09:18
Originally posted by sybersitizen sybersitizen wrote:

---snip---
I honestly don't care how backwards compatibility is maintained as long as it is maintained without degrading the kind of performance I enjoy at present. I make that requirement #1, then removing the mirror is fine if requirement #1 is met. This is what separates me from others who simply begin by saying Sony, please remove the mirror.

Sony already did remove the mirror: it is called E-mount .
If you want to mount A-mount lenses on E-mount camera's you have the LA-EA3 and LA-EA4. Yes, I would want a LA-EA5 (LA-EA3 + screw drive AF-motor), a LA-EA4ii (with the AF-system of the A77ii, and potentially a LA-EA6 to make certain features of a future advanced A-mount camera available on E-mount.

Edited by overeema - 22 March 2018 at 09:25
minolta owner since 1969; A350-SAL1680Z-SAL70300G-Tamron60F2-Minolta100F2-Minolta35105-Minolta28135-Minolta50F1.7; NEX6-SELP1650-SELP18105G (and some minolta MC/MD glass )
Back to Top
whiteheat View Drop Down
Senior Member
Senior Member

Joined: 26 September 2011
Country: Australia
Location: Altona Meadows
Status: Offline
Posts: 952
Post Options Post Options   Quote whiteheat Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 22 March 2018 at 10:31
Originally posted by sybersitizen sybersitizen wrote:


I honestly don't care how backwards compatibility is maintained as long as it is maintained without degrading the kind of performance I enjoy at present. I make that requirement #1, then removing the mirror is fine if requirement #1 is met. This is what separates me from others who simply begin by saying Sony, please remove the mirror.

You know you make me laugh :) Let's just take a quick moment to think about that statement: "This is what separates me from others who simply begin by saying Sony, please remove the mirror." Me thinks this 'separation' of yours is to say the least a simplistically artificial one. How so? Well, it implies that all those 'others' who apparently just (and only do so) keep bemoaning the presence of our ever present SLT mirror and wish to the heavens that Sony would remove it, that somehow they would then not care if all their legacy lenses suddenly failed to work or work properly. It is like you are making this distinction because they, these others, then also do not add, "....of course we want all our legacy stuff that used to work with our SLT body to continue working in the new sans SLT mirror A mount body." Don't you think it is implicit in their requirements of the SLTless body that all their A mount glass continues to function at least as good as it did before, even if they don't explicitly state it? So, in reality they are no different to you in this respect.
Nothing is as it first appears.
Back to Top
Atom Ant Oz View Drop Down
Senior Member
Senior Member

Joined: 02 September 2016
Country: Australia
Location: Melbourne
Status: Offline
Posts: 154
Post Options Post Options   Quote Atom Ant Oz Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 22 March 2018 at 10:33
Originally posted by jackal2008 jackal2008 wrote:

Originally posted by Photosopher Photosopher wrote:

I just had a premonition that a77III is soon to come with full frame and a7III specs... but with SLT of course.

Not the game changer than EMount a7III is considered, but definitely would infuse AMount with some much needed attention and I bet generate enough sales to justify the production.

Market... cornered.

option 1, throw in the a7iii sensor in a77ii and make it full frame camera, call it a88
option 2, update la-ea4 to the a77ii af module, call it la-ea6
option 3 add motor to la-ea3, call it la-ea5

any of these product will make me very happy.

I'd take an α77iii or α88, and I still want an α99ii.

What doesn't interest me is a LA-EAx to ease my transition away from A-mount. When the A-mount has passed its use-by date, then I'm more likely to feel neglected or even betrayed by Sony rather than grateful for the E-mount option - which means Sony would start at a disadvantage.
A99ii | A77ii + 10-20 | 16-105 | 24-70Z | 24-105D | 70-200G | 100-300 APO D | 70-400G | 20/2.8 | 28/2.8 | 35/1.8 | 50/1.4 | 135/2.8 | 300/4
A6500 + 10-18 | 16-70Z | 18-135 | 70-200/4G | 28/2
Back to Top
Dyxum main page >  Forum Home > Equipment forums > Camera Talk > A-mount full frame Page  <1 4546474849 52>

Forum Jump Forum Permissions View Drop Down



This page was generated in 0.109 seconds.

Monitor calibration strip

Dyxum.com - Home of the alpha system photographer

In memory of Cameron Hill - brettania

Feel free to contact us if needed.