fredmiranda.com

Moderated by: Fred Miranda

New fredmiranda.com Mobile Site

New Feature: SMS Notification alert

New Feature: Buy & Sell Watchlist

FM Forums | Sony Forum | Join Upload & Sell

1 2

4 end

Archive 2017 · Fascinating Sony Interview at IR

Steve Spencer
Offline
• • • • • • •
Upload & Sell: On

p.3 #1 · Fascinating Sony Interview at IR

GMPhotography wrote:
I hope so Steve but I got a longer list too. Lol

Seriously they need to get past 85 I think we all agree here plus they need to give us some F2 glass like a 28,35,20/21,100 and the list goes on . Rumored 16-35 GM than they get there trio. Love to see a tilt/Shift 24 or 21

Well I think we will see the 16-35 f/2.8 GM and 135 f/2/1.8 GM this year. We also got the 100 f/2.8 STF GM. I think we won't be getting any other GM glass this year.

It seem likely there could be a Sony/Zeiss, however, but it looks like it won't be the 35 f/1.8 that many of us would like. I really don't have a clue what it could be. If I had to guess I would say it will be a 20 f/2.8. You have your Firin, but I suspect you would at least consider turning it in for a 20 f/2.8 Sony/Zeiss.The other possibility is a 100 f/2. There isn't a Sony/Zeiss longer than 55mm right now and a blend of the Zeiss Contax/Yashica mount 100 f/2 and the Minolta 100 f/2 could be spectacular. It would also pair well with either the 50 f/1.4 or the 55 f/1.8. I don't think we will see both these lenses, but we might well see one of them.

Then there are the G lenses. It looks like we will get a 100-400 zoom, and I am guessing a 200mm and I would think a 200 f/2 with the announcement of the likely new camera and also a promise of a 400 f/2.8 coming next year.

And finally just plain Sony. We already got a nifty 85 f/1.8. Will they make something else? The 35 f/2 is a candidate, but I don't think so. I think a higher level lens will come in that spot next year.They have filled out the budget category quite well with the 28 f/2; 50 f/1.8, and 85 f/1.8, and the 50 f/2.8 macro. A nice set of basic lenses for people getting into the system. What they ought to do is release a new version of the 50 f/1.8 with a better AF motor, but I don't think they will do that until next year or the year after.

So for 2016 that would mean 3 GM lenses; a Sony/Zeiss; 2 G lenses perhaps; and a very nice plain Sony. That is still a good pace of development, but you still aren't going to get all the lenses you are hoping for.

By the way, I do think we will finally get the 28 Loxia later this year, and I think the 20/21 and 100 f/2 will be addressed this year or next, but 35 continues to be a sore spot. Personally, I would love a 35 f/1.8 GM and I think they just may do that next year--even if it is wild guess on my part. A very well corrected and sharp lens right from f/1.8 that had lovely bokeh, would easily be worth $1,200 to me; especially if they kept it small with decent AF. If that comes out next year, then I can be patient. There are still more lenses needed however: a 24/25 f/1.4 anyone? tilt shift? More long lenses?But even without these lenses I think the system is getting pretty robust and I think by the end of this year the system will be pretty well developed.

Mar 18, 2017 at 06:45 PM

Matt Grum
Offline
• • •
Upload & Sell: Off

p.3 #2 · Fascinating Sony Interview at IR

DavidBM wrote:
On Nikon Rumors it says the whole interview has been removed from the IR site!

I wonder if there was a misunderstanding and it was supposed to be embargoed until an announcement?

Apparently a commenter from SAR messaged Dave Etchels and got the following in reply:

"Big-time snafu on my part, apologies to everyone... :-(
I'd said I'd give them a look before posting to make sure I got everything right (we typically do a good bit of paraphrasing, to make the Japanese English read smoothly, take out verbal tics, even on my end, etc), but then then completely spaced on it, thanks to 13 hours of jet lag and 3+ weeks of major sleep deprivation leading up to it (I'd been in Japan with a very busy schedule for 2 weeks before jetting off to Thailand).
Probably no big changes, but **extremely** rude on my part, after saying I'd send it to them first :-( It'd be bad enough if I did this with a US exec, but an even bigger affront for the Japanese. I feel really bad, both for the Sony people and also for our readers. I thought that replacing the interview with a place-holder would only make an even bigger deal out of it. Maybe I should have done that, but still think this way is probably better overall. No path forward that's actually good, just hoping for the least-bad. I'm hoping everyone will give us a break on this, not read more into it than there is.
Bottom line, a huge screw-up on my part; apologies all around. We should have an updated version posted Monday or Tuesday, after they've had a chance to look at it and get back to us. So sorry, to everyone, thanks for understanding... :-("

Mar 18, 2017 at 07:33 PM

Holger
Offline
• • • •
Upload & Sell: Off

p.3 #3 · Fascinating Sony Interview at IR

snapsy wrote:
Repost of my comments on NR regarding its story about Sony's plan to no longer sell its camera sensors to third-parties:

I believe this may be a misinterpretation of Tanaka's answer. I think he was referring to Sony's vertical R&D integration and how that adds value to their company by not having to rely on technology from other companies, whose pace of development may be slower. This becomes more apparent when you read the follow-up question+answer:

DE: So Sony's invested billions of yen in sensors...
KT: Yes.
DE: ...that applies to many areas, and now for cameras, you can draw on that. So it's...Show more →

I think so, too. To much speculation here going on without knowing details. Doesn't help at all.
As Thom Hogan says: "What he's saying is that a smaller separate company at Sony (Imaging) can dictate what a larger company at Sony (Semiconductor) can sell to whom. This would mean no Sony sensors to Apple, no Sony sensors to Canon (1"), Fujifilm, Nikon, Olympus, Panasonic (1"), and Pentax/Ricoh, among others that Sony Imaging competes with. As we can see from the latest announced cameras, Sony Semi is still selling sensors to all comers. Moreover, Sony Semi is fabbing Nikon-designed sensors, as well, these days. The day that Sony Semi starts saying "no" to outside customers, is the day that their projection of capturing 80%+ of the camera market sensor production dies, and with it, their very expensive fab investments.
Now, it very well may be that Sony Imaging has some sensor design capability that's their own and it is being added to some Exmors, and thus is acting the same way Nikon was acting with Sony Semi, but I don't think what Tanaka-san implies and what the Sony fansites are inferring is at all correct. For instance, what you add in the Stacked layer can be very specific and dictated by customer, I'm sure. Indeed, from what little I know about upcoming Nikon products, I'm pretty sure what you said isn't true."

Mar 18, 2017 at 07:59 PM

GMPhotography
Offline
• • • • • • •
Upload & Sell: Off

p.3 #4 · Fascinating Sony Interview at IR

I see absolutely nothing wrong if Sony says we are first now in using the latest sensors in our boxes and restrict those sensors for 3rd party vendors. I feel they hurt there own brand of cameras giving it to Nikon first when they did the D800. This is business and a competitive one at that.

Mar 18, 2017 at 08:39 PM

snapsy
Offline
• • • • • •
Upload & Sell: On

p.3 #5 · Fascinating Sony Interview at IR

Someone on NR posted that this isn't a new policy for Sony - the poster found a Q+A dpreview did with Sony back in a 2014. Here's the relevant question and answer from that interview:

Q: Sony sensors can be found in cameras from several different manufacturers. How does your sensor business work?

A: When we make sensors we put them in several categories. [At any given time] one category of sensors is reserved purely for Sony cameras - we don�t sell them to other companies. Like the sensor in the A7S. But once we�ve enjoyed this advantage we might sell them on later, after some time has passed. This is the second category. The third category of sensors is completely generic - the sensors are created for use internally and to sell externally, to anybody. China or Taiwan or wherever.

Source:
https://www.dpreview.com/articles/0661793352/photokina-2014-sony-interview-we-still-need-to-create-more-lenses

Mar 18, 2017 at 09:46 PM

rbf_
Online
• • •
Upload & Sell: Off

p.3 #6 · Fascinating Sony Interview at IR

GMPhotography wrote:
I see absolutely nothing wrong if Sony says we are first now in using the latest sensors in our boxes and restrict those sensors for 3rd party vendors. I feel they hurt there own brand of cameras giving it to Nikon first when they did the D800. This is business and a competitive one at that.

They have marketed themselves as being an independent imaging sensor business unit and a camera system business unit with different goals. The imaging sensor business unit to be an impartial third party supplier of sensors to any camera business and the camera system business unit to showcase their new technology for a period and sell innovative camera systems & compete in the marketplace just like everyone else. Giving Nikon the sensor first likely bought them trust that they were not a monopolist but rather an honest 'business partner'. Now they have the majority of the industry using their sensors given the *maybe* reasonable blackout period for new architectures after having gained such trust. Others have likely dropped their investment in sensor technology. Now Sony comes out as monopolist who tricked everyone and can never be trusted again. Not a good story to me man...

Mar 18, 2017 at 10:22 PM

pizdets17
Offline
• • • •
Upload & Sell: Off

p.3 #7 · Fascinating Sony Interview at IR

Its all good, they will become the new Proctor and Gamble of the sensor business. I am ok with that considering how good their crap is.

Mar 18, 2017 at 10:38 PM

mogul
Offline
• • • • •
Upload & Sell: On

p.3 #8 · Fascinating Sony Interview at IR

Mar 18, 2017 at 11:36 PM

rbf_
Online
• • •
Upload & Sell: Off

p.3 #9 · Fascinating Sony Interview at IR

mogul wrote:
Sony can do what it wants under the confines of making a profit which normally means making as many customers happy as possible. I wouldn't worry too much, Sony has many old sensors sitting on the shelf.

Knowing full well how Intel built it's CPU monopoly vs. proprietary CPU vendors we will see how that works out in the long run

Hurting your own customers wasn't part of the winning formula

Mar 18, 2017 at 11:52 PM

charles.K
Offline
• • • • • •
Upload & Sell: Off

p.3 #10 · Fascinating Sony Interview at IR

rbf_ wrote:
They have marketed themselves as being an independent imaging sensor business unit and a camera system business unit with different goals. The imaging sensor business unit to be an impartial third party supplier of sensors to any camera business and the camera system business unit to showcase their new technology for a period and sell innovative camera systems & compete in the marketplace just like everyone else. Giving Nikon the sensor first likely bought them trust that they were not a monopolist but rather an honest 'business partner'. Now they have the majority of the industry using their sensors given...Show more →

I do agree. With intellectual property and patent law, there is a fine line. Patents grant a monopoly on the premise of protection for 7 years based on disclosing the "trade art". With Sony having developed unique sensors on the premise of being independent and then deciding to withhold for a period will not go down well with other manufacturers. I very much doubt this is the real situation as there would be numerous agreements in place supplying Sony sensors to a wide range of industries not only the immediate camera manufacturers as we perceive here.

Sony's benefit here is the ability to supply new sensors within the industry at a premium reflecting the added cost of their R&D. The camera market is no longer the large market segment it was a few years ago. Should Sony decide to go alone in keeping their sensors, the market very quickly adapts and there maybe better sensors already developed just waiting for existing agreements to expire

Mar 19, 2017 at 12:06 AM

DavidBM
Offline
• • • • •
Upload & Sell: Off

p.3 #11 · Fascinating Sony Interview at IR

rbf_ wrote:
They have marketed themselves as being an independent imaging sensor business unit and a camera system business unit with different goals. The imaging sensor business unit to be an impartial third party supplier of sensors to any camera business and the camera system business unit to showcase their new technology for a period and sell innovative camera systems & compete in the marketplace just like everyone else. Giving Nikon the sensor first likely bought them trust that they were not a monopolist but rather an honest 'business partner'. Now they have the majority of the industry using their sensors given...Show more →

The split into different business units is only a year old, and there was no talk about impartiality. It was all about lines of financial responsibility and how to maximise profit.

The thing also to remember is that from the point of view of the sensor side of Son's business, the camera sensors are small fry indeed. It's all industrial sensors, and phones, phones, phones. If HQ tells them to provide certain sensors only to Sony imaging, they aren't going to care. That being said, I doubt that was what the interviewee really meant (which is why it wasn't in my initial summary).

Mar 19, 2017 at 12:13 AM

rbf_
Online
• • •
Upload & Sell: Off

p.3 #12 · Fascinating Sony Interview at IR

charles.K wrote:
I do agree. With intellectual property and patent law, there is a fine line. Patents grant a monopoly on the premise of protection for 7 years based on disclosing the "trade art". With Sony having developed unique sensors on the premise of being independent and then deciding to withhold for a period will not go down well with other manufacturers. I very much doubt this is the real situation as there would be numerous agreements in place supplying Sony sensors to a wide range of industries not only the immediate camera manufacturers as we perceive here.

Sony's benefit here is the...Show more →

I don't know Japanese or international contract law at all but I could see serious lawsuits here given the previous information I've been presented; information I used as a rationale as to whether buying a camera system & lenses with a Sony sensor in it was "safe" or not. It's hard to see how they can pull this off, a lot of lawyers would have to have been asleep...

But I will note the following:

1) Fuji was promised an APS-C sensor with 4k video operating within a certain thermal range which was not delivered after a lengthy delay to the introduction of XP2 which I was waiting for. It was also reasonably believed to be a BSI sensor since the bigger sensor had it in the A7rii. Fujifilm was forced to redesign both XP2 & XT2 due to these failures to deliver in-spec product by Sony. It resulted in over 6 months delay maybe even a year.

2) miniMF sensors do not have phase detect AF even though it is obvious for a long time now that anyone buying a digital camera would want them due to better performance. Sony claims that none of their MF customers asked for them soon enough even though they had them on their FF sensors knowing their value full well. Suspect at best.

I've long suspected Sony was not really living up to their word in regards to their business practices and ethics. Something this 'admission' clearly reinforces to me.

Mar 19, 2017 at 12:25 AM

Holger
Offline
• • • •
Upload & Sell: Off

p.3 #13 · Fascinating Sony Interview at IR

rbf_ wrote:
I don't know Japanese or international contract law at all but I could see serious lawsuits here given the previous information I've been presented; information I used as a rationale as to whether buying a camera system & lenses with a Sony sensor in it was "safe" or not. It's hard to see how they can pull this off, a lot of lawyers would have to have been asleep...

But I will note the following:

1) Fuji was promised an APS-C sensor with 4k video operating within a certain thermal range which was not delivered after a lengthy delay...Show more →

Sony-Semiconductors is fabbing Nikon-designed sensors. That is part of their business model. You need the knowledge to design such a sensor in the first place, though. Nikon has the knowledge, since many of their flagship sensors are Nikon-designed and they used other manufacturers, too (Toshiba, now part of Sony and Reneses). Others were bought (like D750 and D8xx). I cannot imagine Sony to stop this procedure. However, I suspected problems in the future, so prepared a switch and with the Canon 5div I rpelaced my Nikon gear with Canon. I am pretty happy so far. Now with Sony and Canon used by us, independent sensor makers, I am pretty confident to get nice future technology independently.

Mar 19, 2017 at 04:12 AM

retrofocus
Offline
• • • • • •
Upload & Sell: Off

p.3 #14 · Fascinating Sony Interview at IR

Bespoked wrote:
I always thought Nikon made Sony look bad when they took the 36mp sensor and had it produce a better image, more DR, nicer colours etc.

They also sold an old big DSLR for about the same money to many, many more people, so I don't blame Sony if they won't give their sensors to Nikon first or even at the same time in the future.

At the time when the D800 was released, Sony wasn't a big player within this camera sector yet. Sony had to bundle up with a known camera manufacturer to show their capability in regard to sensor technology. Both Nikon and Sony hit Canon very hard and kicked Canon off the FF sensor throne which they kept since the 5D MkII. Next hit from Sony was two years later with the introduction of FF mirrorless with the same 36 MP sensor still beating what Canon had to offer at the time sensor-wise.

Sony's success was a good mix of strategic planning, luck, and innovation: bundling up with Nikon for market penetration with their sensors at the time and the luck that Canon remained dormant with better FF sensor development for a long time. Innovation came in with introducing the first affordable FF mirrorless camera system.

Now times have changed, Canon sort of matched with their high MP FF sensor, and there are other mirrorless players (even most of them are cropped sensor based). And Nikon might also go the mirrorless (FF?) road on its own soon. There is no need to Sony to bundle up with another - now competitive - manufacturer anymore.

Problem with this is in the end for the consumer: Sony has a sort of monopoly which the consumer has to pay for with increased price tags.

Mar 19, 2017 at 08:32 AM

GMPhotography
Offline
• • • • • • •
Upload & Sell: Off

p.3 #15 · Fascinating Sony Interview at IR

Well said. Present day Sony has added all OEMs of MF to there list like Phase, Hassy, Pentax etc. so this need to support Nikon while Sony cameras have grown by a large margin that Nikon is no longer as big of a customer. Plus now they are more competitive between Nikon and Sony. Sony wants there own sensor for Sony cams so they can grow market share and have the edge in technology. They will still sell to Nikon but not the same sensors as what Sony is using.
If your in business this makes total sense. Why give away the farm.
retrofocus wrote:
At the time when the D800 was released, Sony wasn't a big player within this camera sector yet. Sony had to bundle up with a known camera manufacturer to show their capability in regard to sensor technology. Both Nikon and Sony hit Canon very hard and kicked Canon off the FF sensor throne which they kept since the 5D MkII. Next hit from Sony was two years later with the introduction of FF mirrorless with the same 36 MP sensor still beating what Canon had to offer at the time sensor-wise.

Sony's success was a good mix of strategic planning,...Show more →

Mar 19, 2017 at 08:40 AM

rbf_
Online
• • •
Upload & Sell: Off

p.3 #16 · Fascinating Sony Interview at IR

I think where it gets sticky is that Sony has separated their imaging sensor business into it's own corporate entity and setting themselves up to be the "Intel of image sensors". This includes building a bunch of fabs to support global scale manufacturing and entering into many contracts with clients and customers that are competing with the separate business entity that is Sony digital cameras. Also a customer. Sony imaging sensors and the parent company have been making lots of money on the sales of all imaging sensors regardless of what brand body they were put in and has over built their fab capacity to support far more than any one customer. There's likely lots of contract language dealing with the impartiality of the imaging sensor business that could get messy for them. On the other hand the up front capital to build all those fabs is immense and loss of many major customers would carry a huge price tag. I don't think you can look at this as one business entity as it's not. I don't think they can just "change their minds" on a whim.

Edited on Mar 19, 2017 at 09:31 AM · View previous versions

Mar 19, 2017 at 09:20 AM

GMPhotography
Offline
• • • • • • •
Upload & Sell: Off

p.3 #17 · Fascinating Sony Interview at IR

rbf_ wrote:
I think where it's gets sticky is that Sony has separated their imaging sensor business into it's own corporate entity and setting themselves up to be the "Intel of image sensors". This includes building a bunch of fabs to support global scale manufacturing and entering into many contracts with clients and customers that are competing with the separate business entity that is Sony digital cameras. Also a customer. Sony imaging sensors and the parent company have been making lots of money on the sales of all imaging sensors regardless of what brand body they were put in and has over...Show more →

What we don't know is if these contracts are up with lets say Nikon. Im sure Sony does not want to break up these existing contracts but going forward they will set up new contracts and if Nikon buys in than thats the deal. There is nothing wrong with this. Times have changed since the D800. Be it Sony as a big sensor manufacture that does have pretty much the whole market than Nikon has to make a decision to buy or not. But good luck finding another high tech CMOS sensor in full frame to buy.

I would not say on a whim either as we do not know whats in place with contractual agreements. Obviously Sony does not want to get sued over breaking contracts so it SOUNDS like these contracts have expired. But we do not know that for sure.

Edited on Mar 19, 2017 at 09:31 AM · View previous versions

Mar 19, 2017 at 09:28 AM

snapsy
Offline
• • • • • •
Upload & Sell: On

p.3 #18 · Fascinating Sony Interview at IR

retrofocus wrote:
At the time when the D800 was released, Sony wasn't a big player within this camera sector yet. Sony had to bundle up with a known camera manufacturer to show their capability in regard to sensor technology. Both Nikon and Sony hit Canon very hard and kicked Canon off the FF sensor throne which they kept since the 5D MkII. Next hit from Sony was two years later with the introduction of FF mirrorless with the same 36 MP sensor still beating what Canon had to offer at the time sensor-wise.

Sony's success was a good mix of strategic planning,...Show more →

Sony has billions of dollars invested in CMOS plants. They don't sell nearly enough cameras themselves to support that kind of production and capital structure, even with the large volumes of smartphone sensors they sell.

Mar 19, 2017 at 09:29 AM

GMPhotography
Offline
• • • • • • •
Upload & Sell: Off

p.3 #19 · Fascinating Sony Interview at IR

snapsy wrote:
Sony has billions of dollars invested in CMOS plants. They don't sell nearly enough cameras themselves to support that kind of production and capital structure, even with the large volumes of smartphone sensors they sell.

Thats very true but they can dictate on who and what they are selling to what customer as well. Your a small business lets say and you make rubber ducks to sell online, are you going to sell to another company that is your competitor that same product that may sell it for cheaper and run you out of business. Probably not but you will sell it to consumers. Now lets go back and say you do sell it to your competitors for a profit are you going to give them something not as fancy fancy lets say or sell them the same thing. As a business and competitor Im not going to sell them the fancy dancy rubber duck. Im going to sell them the lessor product so it does not compete with my brand.

Mar 19, 2017 at 09:36 AM

rbf_
Online
• • •
Upload & Sell: Off

p.3 #20 · Fascinating Sony Interview at IR

GMPhotography wrote:
What we don't know is if these contracts are up with lets say Nikon. Im sure Sony does not want to break up these existing contracts but going forward they will set up new contracts and if Nikon buys in than thats the deal. There is nothing wrong with this. Times have changed since the D800. Be it Sony as a big sensor manufacture that does have pretty much the whole market than Nikon has to make a decision to buy or not. But good luck finding another high tech CMOS sensor in full frame to buy.

I would not...Show more →

There is a lot we don't know as I'm sure there's mountains of contracts in many different languages here. I'm also mystified by why he would make such comments or whether it was just a mistranslation but the fallout could be huge. Sony's global image sensor business is likely many times larger than their mirrorless ILC business ever hopes to be. ILC as a market has been shrinking and many are actually losing money. Imaging sensor businesses are big money because of smartphones and other small imaging devices. To risk the imaging sensor business for the benefit of the ILC business would not even make sense.

Mar 19, 2017 at 09:42 AM

1 2 3 4 end
FM Forums \| Sony Forum \| Join Upload & Sell 1 2 3 4 end