johnctharp
Offline
• • • • •
Upload & Sell: Off
|
 p.3 #14 · New FE 24-105 f/4. How good? | |
Gary Clennan wrote:
By the time Nikon/Canon arrive in "full force", mirrorless will be so advanced I'm not sure they will ever catch up. I hope I am wrong but Nikon/Canon completely missed the boat on this one.
Nearly all of Sony's 'advancement' has been down to having the economy of scale to push sensor technologies. Nikon, Fuji, the MFT system and now medium format cameras have all benefited- even Canon, in their Powershot line!
However, while Sony has been very good about pushing readout speeds and cleaning up lower ISOs, they've also (inexplicably, from my perspective) been challenged with their mirrorless UI and ergonomics. Having used Canon, Sony, and Fuji mirrorless, I'm genuinely surprised that Sony hasn't been able to replicate the touchscreen functionality in their latest A7R III- that Canon had in their first EOS-M. This isn't groundbreaking stuff, this is stuff that just makes sense, and Sony ignored it.
The A7R III is a marked improvement, of course, and the camera that might get me to jump and skip the 5D IV, once I get a chance to compare stuff like speed of operation and flexibility under stress.
RobCD wrote:
I'd guess that there are very few Sony users that don't have quite a bit of experience with Canon or Nikon or both either currently or previously. So with that said most people choosing to use Sony understand the "perfected" semi-professional lines and yet have reasons to use Sony.
Sure! I see a lot of them in the Canon forums and alt forums as well as here in the Sony forum- and out and about at photography meets too. Many also shoot Nikon!
Sony has rather effectively levered two technologies- their leading sensor capability and IBIS- alongside their traditional (also inherited from Minolta) lens design prowess to really build their mirrorless system.
The A9 is a great example of their efforts to be sure. However, their technology, bleeding edge as it is, isn't perfect and shouldn't be expected to be. There's still a reason to use a D5 or 1D X II, or a D850 or 5D IV over an A7.
RobCD wrote:
And your statement about DSLTs doesn't make sense. Sony still has the DSLT cameras and yet which cameras are people buying? If they wanted the 'perfected" DSLRs or if they wanted the DSLTs they would be buying those. You might prefer one over the other but your preference doesn't agree with the market from what I can see. That doesn't mean that Sony can't keep improving while maintaining the size and weight advantage but if you are suggesting that Sony scrap the A7x size and replace it with DSLR sized cameras then that is a recipe for failure. I could see Sony adding a larger body to E mount at some point to satisfy those that want it but that will at best complement the lineup of smaller cameras. Some people just have to accept the fact that there is a big market out there for the A7x sized cameras and until Nikon or Canon proves they can do it better then in a similar sized body then there is really nothing you can use in the Nikon or Canon lineups to show Sony how it should be done. The Nikon and Canon mirrorless cameras are mostly textbook examples of how not to do it. It is Nikon and Canon that need to catch up in my opinion....Show more →
People aren't buying DSLTs because Sony was playing an ineffective third-hat with respect to the market; nothing really to do with the technology or the handling, both of which were and are excellent. The A77 II and A99 II are both standout cameras. Hell, I personally looked closely at their DSLTs alongside entry-level Canon and Nikon DSLRs, and wound up choosing against Sony for what seem like today pretty silly reasons, but also potentially enlightening: I wanted to dig further into photography, and Sony's lenses were just plain expensive. Canon's were (and are) the cheapest, though also the oldest (and yet still rather effective even on the 50MP 5DsR).
Now, my comment that you quoted concerning DSLTs makes perfect sense: compare the A7R I to the contemporary semi-pro top-seller, Canon's 5D III. You get a much better sensor in the A7, that's more flexible in challenging exposure circumstances, and you get the ability to adapt just about any lens made due to the mount's dimensions, but not much else. Next to the A99, the first A7 cameras were horrific to use in terms of ergonomics, UI, speed of operation, focus speed, battery life, and that A7R I shutter could wake the dead!
Sony's already come a long way with the A7R III- but again, my point is that they were already there and competing well in practice if not in terms of sales with the A77 and A99.
[and no, I make no suggestion that Sony abandon mirrorless and attempt to repenetrate the photography market with their DSLT line; my hope is that they continue to push the limits with their E-mount cameras!]
bjornthun wrote:
"Nikon arrive in full force." Read Thom Hogan's articles about the system camera market in general and Nikon in particular. Nikon has a lot of issues to address and currently they aren't arriving anywhere in anything near full force. Their market share is 21.6% currently, not a lot more than Sony. When Nikon goes mirrorless, they will find a lot of competitors with well developed lens lines, Fuji, m43 and Sony.
Canon is better off than Nikon and will be Sony's real worry.
Personally I hope we could move away from Canon and Nikon's vrtual duoploy, toward a situation with more manufacturers and more healthy competition in the system camera market. ...Show more →
Nikon has a lot of issues, but they also have a legacy that will translate very well to mirrorless- actually, it already has, with their 1-system. They even got adapters to their DSLR lenses right, something that Sony still hasn't managed to do!
As for their market position- I honestly couldn't tell you, and Thom Hogan may very well be right. I hope he's wrong, and I hope Nikon nails full-frame mirrorless. They always seem to get better performance out of Sony's sensors than Sony themselves do, and they have too many great lenses that have yet to be properly adapted to FE the way Canon's have been  . But just like Canon, as it was with Sony before, they only need to get it right once, and I have faith that Nikon will be able to distill their excellent DSLR design into a mirrorless system quicker than Sony has brought the attributes that make their DSLTs so effective down to their E-mount line.
mttran wrote:
C/N is in their catch 22 games. Unless they announce to drop their DSLR races today; otherwise, they will not be ready for "full force" ff MILC in another 5 or longer years and by that time they shall be so behind from other manufacturers. So don't bother to up high our expectation. Do you know how hard to build a MILC system to beat their own DSLR and others MILC to death? it is not going to happen with their business model.
I agree mirrorless for Canon and Nikon is a catch-22, that's well put- but I also know that they've both been hard and heavy at researching and patenting technologies for mirrorless systems. Nikon's 1-system was seriously impressive especially for not rolling Sony sensors (and that might have helped them if they did, like Canon is doing with their Powershots...), and Canon's DPAF tech is just flat out amazing, even if they haven't gotten the raw speed up to Sony's (and MFT, really) standards yet.
So while I agree on the basic point that they'd essentially be sacrificing their brand cachet by jumping into mirrorless with both feet, as they both have obviously yet to do, I still feel that they'll be able to do it pretty quick based on their respective efforts so far, and that Sony really needs to keep up their hard work in terms of sensor development, camera refinement, and lens design and production if they wish to hold onto the gains they've made.
|
]