Check out this full frame Sony Camera.

http://billycane.multiply.com/journal/

seen it, and why is this under the Nikon section? And why does your title say D3 vs. Alpha?

it doesn't have a pentaprism.

BenV wrote:
seen it, and why is this under the Nikon section? And why does your title say D3 vs. Alpha?

+1

Don't get this thread.

BenV wrote:
seen it, and why is this under the Nikon section? And why does your title say D3 vs. Alpha?

Presumably because this Sony would be aiming at the D3 or its rumoured sensor.

And that raises a question - Where does Nikon get its sensor chips? Isn't it Sony? If Sony is pushing into this sort of high-end market where they'll going head-to-head with Nikon, does this put a strain on that relationship?

BTW, another link

BenV wrote:
seen it, and why is this under the Nikon section? And why does your title say D3 vs. Alpha?

Because in the 3rd sentence of the article they compare the Alpha 900 to the D3! Seems logical enough to me.

William, you really have to do a better when you start threads. I also have no idea what you're wanting. Are you looking for a discussion? Did you just want to share the link? Help us out here.

Peter, Nikon designs the D3 sensor, and fabs it somewhere else, probably by Sony, but not necessarily. A large number of Nikon cameras in the past have used Sony designed/fabbed and Nikon tweaked sensors in them. I think that's a good idea personally. It's too costly to develop and fab all your own sensors, and better to just buy from a reliable source whenever possible.

Too bad Sony DSLRs (imho anyway) are really ugly. As mentioned in the article, a tool's aesthetics matter to me a bit.

I do like the Clear body camera, there were occasionaly clear bodied film cameras ( Opaque in the film path of course! ) Kind of fun to see the internal workings. They should make 100 or so clear bodies for collectors and someone who wants something completely different!

Super SteadyShot does not do it for me, sounds too, well, just toooo. The added on grip looks like it is begging for a redesign

The Zeiss lenses probably perform great, but a blue Zeiss sticker on the side does not do it for me either.

I am just not motivated to consider switching from D300 to Sony, even tho Sony is no Baloney. I am more motivated for the middle of the line Nikon at 24 jigawatts.

- Joe

plnelson wrote:
And that raises a question - Where does Nikon get its sensor chips? Isn't it Sony? If Sony is pushing into this sort of high-end market where they'll going head-to-head with Nikon, does this put a strain on that relationship?


They are most definitely fabbed by Sony. I think it was Tom Hogan who dissected a dead D300 and said it was labeled "Sony" on the back of the sensor.

I don't see it as putting a strain on their relationship. It's possible that with this camera finally going public there's nothing stopping Nikon at this point from unveiling a D3x. Whereas before when the A900 was under wraps there might have been an agreement between the companies that the A900 was to be unveiled first or some such thing. Who knows though

I don't see a lot of pro's dropping big cash on a Sony DSLR when they know a Nikon equivalent is coming and there's the 1DsMkIII from Canon as well. I would imagine Sony might try to undercut the prices of their competition and leverage their ridiculous corporate muscle to sell the A900 for less of a profit than Nikon or Canon are getting out of their equivalent cams. If they could sell it a substantial discount that might be enough to lure in budget conscious semi-pro's and well healed amateurs who don't have an investment in another system. Thus giving Sony a foot in the door of the high end market and creating future interest.

Man that thing is ugly, so are the blocky and blue Zeiss lenses for it, IMHO. It reminds me of a Pentax 67 without any of the classical appeal.

Louis, it has a pentaprism. The illustrations at the bottom of the link are for the A350 Live view system, not the A900.

jamach, that vertical grip is very similar to the A700's which is the best designed grip out there. The grip has full control in the vertical position, and the axis of the lens remains same relative to horizontal position. This camera is basically production ready (except they've added a strap slot to the grip.

As far as price, some of you may be interested in this link:

http://www.dyxum.com/dforum/forum_posts.asp?TID=30876&PN=1

nice price, the d3x is supposedly the same price as the d3...

Thanks Douglasf13, but the Sony baloney is too good for this old photog, I will stay with my Nikon or a new one a while longer, customers think I am a real photog because I have a Nikon, so that helps business.

Thanks for keeping me in mind tho

- Joe

Yeah, this Sony won't be a competitor to the D3x. It should have similar IQ, but less tech gadgets and build, and at a lower price.

I understand, jamach. This camera probably isn't enough for most pros to switch, but we'll see. It's interesting, a lot of medium format shooters out here in LA are actually giving my Sony a look, because of my Zeiss lenses, whereas they would not normally be interested in Canon or Nikon. Guess it depends on your market and client.

A rumour on the price of the A900 = around USD3k, & €3k here in Europe

http://www.dyxum.com/dforum/forum_posts.asp?TID=30876

Bring it on, I reckon. Good competition, and maybe Nikon will release a D10 (full frame D80 type camera... sorry , ran out of model numbers. )

looks like its made out of legos...

It is also a matter of what lenses you might like to use. I would like to try the Sony 135mm F2.8 STF with a T-stop of F4.5 for some great Bokeh except for the fact it won't fit on a Nikon body.

Surprised the a pro camera has an auto mode.

Im not sure I like the detachable grip.

Don't diss the Sony/Minolta grip until you've tried it. Looks wierd at first but handles brilliantly. That grip places your hand at the same relative position to the lens as when you're shooting normally, making for better handling.

Note the A900 will be more comparable to a FF D300 than a D3 or D3X, good but basic pro-level body without the size, all-out performance or indestructibility of a single-digit Nikon. Very high resolution though, but likely inferior noise control to what the D3X will have (Sony's noise control is good, but not quite there yet)

This is the real Canon 5DmII killer, similar cost and size, better build, better controls, faster AF, higher resolution and the Zeiss and G-series lenses are killer.

And yes, the silly point prism hump does look funny. A popup like the earlier Maxxum 9 and 9xi would have made more sense as Sony doesn't currently offer an IR flash commander like the SU-800.

Yeah, this isn't a D3 level camera. Think D300 with a Canon 1Ds III level sensor.

Why the great support for the Sony camera. You guys react to any criticism of the camera, you think the Sony/Minolta camera should be in its own forum?

gee whiz, it's ugly and the grip sucks, check out the Sony forum now

Also, I was after that 135 sft lens when Minolta was selling it, pictures I saw taken with it had a special quality

- Joe

Yep it's ugly, I mean reaaaal ugly (IMO of course). Yep I would have to buy a bunch of new expensive lenses to use one. As curious as I am, nope it's not going to happen.

I am partial towards Nikon but not a brand bigot. I have something against Sony as a company but there are some things they just can't be beat, I just try not to buy Sony whenever there is a reasonable alternative.

This all adds up to, highly unlikely I will be using a Sony DSLR anytime soon if ever.

For those that enjoy/support the Sony brand DSLR, I am glad you find it a suitable tool and by no means do I discount it as non legitimate product. It's just not a legitimate/practical consideration for me at this time.

just my thoughts on it, hope you can understand my perspective on the issue.

Rene