theSuede Offline Upload & Sell: Off
|
If I was Sony, I'd see the RX1 or one of the smaller NEX bodies as a very good starting platform. Now they have (some) of the body tooling, they have (almost all of) the electronics mainboard and ancillaries already payed for - why not take that free resource and run with it?
To keep the compact body, a zoom would only be possible with the APS sensor. To get sufficient quality, even if you restrict the zoom to a very narrow range as 25-50/2.8 - it would be enormous on the RX1 body.
To see the possible dimensions for an APS type camera, a standard 60mm Gauss/Ultron is about the size you need to get an 18-50 working with reasonable quality.
One thing I'm really looking forward to is the differentiation the manufacturers will need to be "better than the smart camera". This will quite probably increase the market segment size of the "high quality compact", a segment I very much like.
......................................
And I do wish large companies (not just camera companies) would continually upgrade existing models in stead of constantly spraying the market with new, badly tested, cheap constructions. Like Leica, but without their totally over the top money-grabbing scheme.
Getting a good basic formula, and then gradually changing bits of it as better possibilities evolve makes a product stable and it also lowers costs - while having the built-in possibility of increasing quality and decreasing production reconfigurations.
Like the NEX'es. Why a new body every time? Why a new mainboard shape every time?
"Normal customers" just buy what's in the store, and even 1-2 gen old cameras of that type is way over what most people need regarding quality. The nutters (like me and maybe others here) can run out and always be updated as soon as something new arrives.
Unfortunately modern human culture doesn't work that way, in general we need to be fed NEWSNEWSNEWSNEWS all the time if we are to spend money. Never mind quality, longevity or long term owning costs.
|