FAQ FAQ  Forum Search   Events   Register Register  Login Login

Topic ClosedA850 manual out in HK offical site

Page  <1 910111213 46>
Author
Hoffy View Drop Down
Senior Member
Senior Member

Joined: 30 December 2006
Country: Australia
Location: Australia
Status: Offline
Posts: 2056
Direct Link To This Post Posted: 02 August 2009 at 02:32
The thing that I think people tend to forget, that while Sony did buy an existing SLR operation, they were hardly at the forefront of DSLR technology (where did Minolta go wrong, considering that they released one of the first DSLR's many moons ago?). Canikon had the runs on the board way before the a100 was released.

I am actually quite happy that Sony have only gone down a certain route only when they can do it the way they want to do it, such as live view.

The other thing that keeps on suprising me, more so then the MP race of the prior 4 years, is the High ISO race. Seriously, and look at the photos that you take, do many photogs take images often above ISO800? I would be very happy if Sony produced a camera with a range of ISO 50 to ISO 1600, extendable to ISO25 and ISO3200.

But I am probably weird...

Edited by Hoffy - 02 August 2009 at 02:32
 



Back to Top
mz-n10 View Drop Down
Senior Member
Senior Member

Joined: 12 June 2009
Status: Offline
Posts: 390
Direct Link To This Post Posted: 02 August 2009 at 02:34
what is the problem with the a850? sure it is a crippled a900 but the 5dii is a crippled 1dsiii minus grip.

are we just complaining because the a850 isnt crippled enough to justify the a900? cause as a consumer, i could careless if the a900 dies off and i can pick up an a850 for 5-600 less.
a900|a200|M70-210f4|M50f1.4|S17-80|∑28-80|24-70Z|T17-35|Samyang 14|Samyang85f1.4
Back to Top
JoeinLA View Drop Down
Senior Member
Senior Member

Joined: 12 July 2008
Status: Offline
Posts: 281
Direct Link To This Post Posted: 02 August 2009 at 02:36
The more I noodle around with this move, the more I'm thinking it's kind of smart.

A great camera that's already been paid for. Why not release a cheaper, more accessible version down market? I can't believe an A9xx will be released for quite a while, and they can sell both versions based on whether you want the 100% OVF and the 5 FPS.

The D300s isn't really an upgrade to the D300, and it will probably cost more; so if you had a choice of upgrading via the Nikon path or the Sony path, it seems like the Sony path would be better.

My only concern is that Sony plays the price game and not the quality game. As long as Sony can remain competitive with Canikon offerings, I guess it makes sense to gain market share by pushing already developed technology downmarket.

OK. that's 3 posts in just a few hours, so I'll shutup now. We'll all be clapping or crying when the price is released.
If anyone cares:Nikon D3S|1424|2470|70200|85 1.4|No Skills:Smugmug JoeinLA
Back to Top
roweraay View Drop Down
Senior Member
Senior Member

Joined: 09 May 2008
Country: United States
Location: Ohio
Status: Offline
Posts: 4049
Direct Link To This Post Posted: 02 August 2009 at 02:36
Originally posted by mtiller mtiller wrote:

I think the A900 will remain for a while (probably 12 months) and Sony use the A850 to build market share. The 900 will be there if you want the 5 FPS and 100% viewfinder. Yes I think it will be replaced with a higher spec camera, I don't think it's soon.


If the A900 has to remain, after the release of the A850, IMHO, it will have to have some significant upgrades (via firmware or whatever), to provide a clearer distinction between itself and the A850, that goes well beyond the 3FPS vs 5FPS and 100%VF vs 98%VF....and of course the expected several hundred $ price difference.

Now, what we do know is that the A900 packs a FAR higher firepower in core electronics than the upcoming A850 (dual-Bionz, far higher spec in the data pipeline architecture etc to enable its 5FPS with a 25MP sensor), than the surface specs reveal. The A900 data electronics are in the $8000 Canon 1DSMKIII or Nikon D3X class than the lesser products like the Canon 5DII or Nikon D700, even though nobody has provided enough credit to the A900 for it. The A850 has truly become a member of its "class" of cameras, in terms of electronics specifications, with comparable firepower as the Canon 5DII etc.

Can some of that extra electronics and processing firepower in the A900 (over the A850) be harnessed to provide something significant (Video etc) over the A850 via firmware ? It very well might involve pulling rabbits from a hat, to pull it off but without such upgrades into the current A900, I doubt it would retain enough viability to remain in the model lineup. JMHO, of course.
A1/135f1.8GM/20f1.8G/35f1.4GM/Sigma85f1.4DGDN/24-70/2.8GMII/70-200/2.8GMII/Sigma14-24f2.8DGDN/200-600G
Back to Top
PhotoTraveler View Drop Down
Senior Member
Senior Member

Joined: 30 September 2005
Location: United States
Status: Offline
Posts: 6356
Direct Link To This Post Posted: 02 August 2009 at 02:38
Well, nothing left to do now but wait.   
Back to Top
Serdar A View Drop Down
Emeritus group
Emeritus group

Joined: 29 January 2009
Country: United States
Location: Ridgeland, MS
Status: Offline
Posts: 7154
Direct Link To This Post Posted: 02 August 2009 at 02:38
Originally posted by roweraay roweraay wrote:

Precisely ! And you are in one of the key groups that Sony is specifically targeting with the A850.

I believe more potential A700 replacement buyers will consider buying a $2k A850 by spending an extra $400-$600 than potential A900 buyers who will buy A850 instead and save $600. I was getting ready to order an A5XX as soon as it was released, but this new development got me thinking.
 



Back to Top
kiklop View Drop Down
Admin Group
Admin Group
Dyxum owner

Joined: 14 July 2005
Country: Croatia
Location: Rovinj
Status: Offline
Posts: 10564
Direct Link To This Post Posted: 02 August 2009 at 03:12
Originally posted by aarif aarif wrote:


But don't you think that if the images both raw and jpg were exactly like the images out of the D3x in all ISOs which is basically the same sensor that things would have been different and more photogs would have been attracted to the A900.

I know what you mean and yes, basing my personal opinion on my experiences but also on findings on some persons i highly regards, Sony could do better.
On the other hand i need to be honest; IQ is not the primary concern i have with a900; sure i find it embarrassing a bit that Nikon somehow manages to utilize Sony sensors better but my main complains toward a900 are of different nature that may be even harder to improve in a reasonable timeframe than the IQ alone.
Originally posted by Hoffy Hoffy wrote:

I'm interested to see that you like the A850 Kiklop.

What i like (and a lot) is the fact that many may afford a FF DSLR now. I'm a highly sensitive person to this things and i'm sad seeing great photographers (many of them among us, here on dyxum) not being able to justify the price for a tool. While a850 will not be for everyone's pocket it is still a move toward this goal and i'm even excited about it.
On the other personal (selfish) note, i can understand and share most of the opinions from persons like Aarif or Mark (vbpholaw) but i invested in a second system )and i'm very happy with it) and that's the one i do expect to improve and grow more in directions to suit my needs.
Originally posted by Hoffy Hoffy wrote:


   From most of your posts that I have read since the fist leaks of the a900, I have really wondered why you continue to maintain an interest in Sony and the alpha mount at all.

Oh, i guess there are rational reasons (like quite big a-mount lens line-up that i still have or in body stabilization which is just great to have), semi rational ones (like being part of this friendly community) and irrational ones (for example, i always preferred to be against the current :))
Originally posted by Hoffy Hoffy wrote:


Sony, unfortunately are damned if the do, damned if they don't. From what I can see with the latest releases is 1 thing. Making cameras that are accessible to the market as opposed to those that are innovated.

And that's what i can't figure out; Sony was an innovative company for many things, we can still see some miniatures in this respect (LV as implemented in low end cameras, swivel mechanism of HVL58 which is so simple and new) but they didn't proven to be inovative enough with a-system IMHO.

Edited by Kiklop - 02 August 2009 at 03:15
Back to Top
roweraay View Drop Down
Senior Member
Senior Member

Joined: 09 May 2008
Country: United States
Location: Ohio
Status: Offline
Posts: 4049
Direct Link To This Post Posted: 02 August 2009 at 03:21
Originally posted by aarif aarif wrote:

But don't you think that if the images both raw and jpg were exactly like the images out of the D3x in all ISOs which is basically the same sensor that things would have been different and more photogs would have been attracted to the A900. they made the same mistakes again as they did in the the A700 IMHO


I know of several dozen Nikon shooters on LL and such, who were VERY tempted to pick up the A900 and a few lenses. After the release of the D3X however, they simply went with Nikon.....too much "investment" in Nikon gear, to go with another system.

Photographers who buy dSLR gear, don't buy into another totally different system, just because a new body comes along in a competing system.
A1/135f1.8GM/20f1.8G/35f1.4GM/Sigma85f1.4DGDN/24-70/2.8GMII/70-200/2.8GMII/Sigma14-24f2.8DGDN/200-600G
Back to Top
douglasf13 View Drop Down
Senior Member
Senior Member

Joined: 25 September 2007
Location: United States
Status: Offline
Posts: 1730
Direct Link To This Post Posted: 02 August 2009 at 03:42
Yeah, there is more to IQ than noise. We all know that Iliah Borg owns both the D3x and A900, and he prefers the A900's output in most situations, because of it's superior color response, which has the trade off of more amplification/noise.

Sony has the risk of alienating shooters, like Kiklop, with its simple, strait forward designs, but there is a large community of A900 users that don't mind it.
----
douglasferling.com
NEX-5, Hasselblad V, Leicaflex SL, Hipstamatic (former A900, A700, A100 owner.)
Back to Top
aarif View Drop Down
Senior Member
Senior Member

Joined: 21 September 2005
Country: United Arab Emirates
Location: Dubai
Status: Offline
Posts: 5506
Direct Link To This Post Posted: 02 August 2009 at 03:50
Originally posted by roweraay roweraay wrote:

I know of several dozen Nikon shooters on LL and such, who were VERY tempted to pick up the A900 and a few lenses. After the release of the D3X however, they simply went with Nikon.....too much "investment" in Nikon gear, to go with another system.

Photographers who buy dSLR gear, don't buy into another totally different system, just because a new body comes along in a competing system.



What exactly I mean is they did not do justice to the sensor by its output unlike the Nikon D3X, if its Output was on par with the D3X they would have gotten much better reviews and more photogs would have been attracted to it specially considering its price.

Just by reading many forums cause I shoot with many cameras do you know how many threads I've read about people with extensive Canon gear buying Nikon D700/D3 (not just thinking about it) so yes they do if the product is tempting enough (and I don't mean just price)

Edited by aarif - 02 August 2009 at 03:52
Back to Top
mdecorte View Drop Down
Groupie
Groupie

Joined: 08 August 2006
Location: United States
Status: Offline
Posts: 45
Direct Link To This Post Posted: 02 August 2009 at 04:25
I wonder if there's more to this than we've been told. When the a300 came out everyone was surprised that at the A350 too. Same with the a330. It doesn't seem real intuitive that sony would keep the a850 and a900 at the same time. Maybe there's an a950 that they didn't leak? Who knows maybe something to keep Red at bay.

Also what about the FF 16MP camera? Last heard the 500/4 is still coming out and Sony doesn't have a camera to go with it.

We might not all agree with all of Sony's marketing decisions but nobody can say that they haven't made a lot of smart decisions and will likely keep it up.

I'm waiting for the FF 16MP & 500/4 over here.
Michael

a700, Tamron 300/2.8, Sigma DG 70-200/2.8, Minolta 50/1.4, Tamron 17-50/2.8, Peleng 8mm, Tamron 1.4x & 2.0x
Back to Top
samjackson View Drop Down
Senior Member
Senior Member

Joined: 27 September 2007
Country: Australia
Location: Australia
Status: Offline
Posts: 373
Direct Link To This Post Posted: 02 August 2009 at 04:49
This is great news!! high megapixel, cheap (fingers crossed) FF (A850) which leaves space in the FF range for the machine gun A800 to slot in underneath. . . hopefully!
Samsung EX1 | Sony A700 | Sony A850
Carl Zeiss 24-70mm f/2.8 | Sony 70-200mm f/2.8G | Sony 100mm f/2.8 | Rokinon 85mm f/1.4
HVL-F58AM - HVL-F42AM
Back to Top
momech View Drop Down
Senior Member
Senior Member

Joined: 27 August 2006
Country: United States
Location: United States
Status: Offline
Posts: 2934
Direct Link To This Post Posted: 02 August 2009 at 05:22
Wow; I go out of town for 1 day and look what happens.

My $.02; I don't like what Sony's doing even though it's a strategy that could ensure their viability in the marketplace.
I started buying Canon gear last year for sports/wildlife, etc.; intending to keep my Sony bodies and Zeiss/G glass for everything else. So I really have no need for a new Sony body with better FPS or AF system, etc. But this decision seems to undercut the best positive accomplishment they made since entering the DSLR field: the A900. Like I said, I can see some reason for it, but I think it's also going to give them the reputation for being the "cheap" (and not in a good way) camera company. And no A700 replacement? I like my A700. But, like others have said, it's initial problems really gave Sony a black eye. And, as others have noted, there really haven't been any technical improvements (outside of the LV) in the Sony line up. They're looking somewhat "clueless" from that standpoint. And Sony's supposed expertise in video imaging/electronics was one of the things that seemed able to breathe life into a system that appeared to be dying. To me, this situation bears an eerie resemblance to the problems that killed Minolta.
Yes (also like Minolta) there are the lenses. But that didn't save Minolta. And, quite frankly, I'm wondering how long a company like Zeiss will want to remain associated with a "cheap" "clueless" Sony.
Back to Top
roweraay View Drop Down
Senior Member
Senior Member

Joined: 09 May 2008
Country: United States
Location: Ohio
Status: Offline
Posts: 4049
Direct Link To This Post Posted: 02 August 2009 at 06:29
Originally posted by aarif aarif wrote:

Just by reading many forums cause I shoot with many cameras do you know how many threads I've read about people with extensive Canon gear buying Nikon D700/D3 (not just thinking about it) so yes they do if the product is tempting enough (and I don't mean just price)


Yes, these specific users who bought the D700/D3 are impressed by the bodies but even more importantly, they are impressed by the *Nikon system*. Nikon's flash technology is currently without peer, in any system. Pretty much whatever you want to do, Nikon has a product that will meet your needs. You need great ultra-wides ? Nikon has them. You need great long teles ? Nikon has them. You need lenses for everyday use ? Nikon has them. You need portrait lenses ? Nikon has them in several flavors. You need T/S lenses ? Nikon has some very tempting ones. Are you a Macro shooter ? Nikon has a variety to pick from....and so on. The performance of the AF in the bodies or the metering advances are just icing on the cake.

Sony/Minolta does not YET have such an extensive system, that would tempt a hard-core Nikon or Canon shooter to drop his/her gear and come over, even if, a newly released Sony body may be tempting. Very little to do with mere IQ. A wildlife shooter simply does not have anything credible in the Sony lens lineup - yet, if one discounts the new 70-400G. An architectural photographer, looking for T/S lenses, will need to mortgage his house and buy some of those stupendously expensive MF Zeiss lenses fitted for the Alpha mount....none available from Sony themselves - yet. And the list of holes in the system goes on.

My personal needs are 100% met by the A900 and the lenses I have but I am not the typical Canon/Nikon shooter, looking to change systems into literally UNKNOWN territory, by going with Sony. Nikon is a KNOWN commodity in the world of dSLRs.

Bottomline, just because a highly attractive body comes out from Sony, a potential purchaser may not automatically buy into the Sony system, unless he is a portrait shooter or any such discipline that is fully covered by the Sony "system". They may be tempted a bit but to take the leap into the UNKNOWN, takes a very brave soul.

I am a prior Canon DSLR shooter but Sony was not an unknown to me, since I already had the DSC-R1 and the Sony V3 with me at the time. When Sony announced the CZ lenses (85 and 135), after buying the KM camera assets, I took really careful notice and that is where my switch originated. I am not the typical Canon shooter, however, who would prefer to commit Harakiri than be seen with Sony gear.
A1/135f1.8GM/20f1.8G/35f1.4GM/Sigma85f1.4DGDN/24-70/2.8GMII/70-200/2.8GMII/Sigma14-24f2.8DGDN/200-600G
Back to Top
Dyxum main page >  Forum Home > Equipment forums > Camera Talk > A-mount full frame Page  <1 910111213 46>

Forum Jump Forum Permissions View Drop Down



This page was generated in 0.094 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.