but they do have 1.4, 1.8 and 2.0 primes. again, me miss something?
=)
(aside: wonderful about the a850. it's like when the 300D hit -- this will be game changing, as soon as sony satisfies the prime marms with 1.2 lenses.)
Yes, the Sony lens selection is certainly narrower. I suppose it depends on what you use / need. For me 50/1.4, 24-70/2.8 and 70-200/2.8 is pretty much what I require, and Sony have fantastic examples of all three: all of them with IS, of course. But Canon has great lenses in these ranges, albeit without IS on the 24-70, as well as many other lenses I may want if my needs change.
The big news is the price. It's a great deal at $2k.
One seemingly small thing: the A900 did not have permanent display of ISO in the viewfinder, and I can't see that the 850 does either. This is the one thing that really bugs me on my 5D, which of course is 'fixed' on the Mk2.
abam wrote:
wonderful about the a850. it's like when the 300D hit -- this will be game changing, as soon as sony satisfies the prime marms with 1.2 lenses.
Something like the Zeiss 60 Jahre Edition with AF would be great - if unaffordable by mere mortals
personally i'd give up the 12fps and way prefer option 1 since I'd only need to drag one camera around and I could get all the advantages other than the 12fps all at once, in the two cam setup sometimes you might want more than 4fps AND FF FOV + SNR and #1 also costs a lot less which brings us to....
why should be release a 3D for $3100-$3400 when we can force them into $2700+$2200=$5900 and protect 1 series better at the same time
however, thing is i think more people would go $3100-$3400 then $5900 (of course some would rather go either just $2700 or $2200 than $3400 granted and maybe the total numbers would work out better for them, maybe it makes sense but I wonder what happens if a D700x comes soon and what if it is $3000....)
and who knows maybe BB pricing was way off and the new 7D is not $2200-$2700 but $1600. Still a lot more costly 5D2+7D than one 3D though, but maybe vaguely bearable for some.
Pelao wrote:
Yes, the Sony lens selection is certainly narrower. I suppose it depends on what you use / need. For me 50/1.4, 24-70/2.8 and 70-200/2.8 is pretty much what I require, and Sony have fantastic examples of all three: all of them with IS, of course. But Canon has great lenses in these ranges, albeit without IS on the 24-70, as well as many other lenses I may want if my needs change.
The big news is the price. It's a great deal at $2k.
One seemingly small thing: the A900 did not have permanent display of ISO in the viewfinder, and I can't see that the 850 does either. This is the one thing that really bugs me on my 5D, which of course is 'fixed' on the Mk2. ...Show more →
This will definitely put some pressure on Canon and Nikon. There are many out there (including MR apparently),who are happy enough with Sony's lens selection.
I find it interesting that so many here seem to persistently claim that a FF camera like this couldn't be offered at this price because of the sensor cost, but here it is.
Yeah. Sony is being very aggressive in pricing their bodies - especially more evident in the a850. I think they are most likely on par with Canon/Nikon/Olympus in the amateur/pro-sumer level just because they are Sony but lacks credibility on the "PRO" market........... so why not lure some PROs who can afford to dabble on a different system by introducing a cheap full frame camera............. this might set a better stage when they finally introduce something to rival the 1Dxx and Dx series of C/N.
This will definitely put some pressure on Canon and Nikon. There are many out there (including MR apparently),who are happy enough with Sony's lens selection.
I find it interesting that so many here seem to persistently claim that a FF camera like this couldn't be offered at this price because of the sensor cost, but here it is.
Well, the be fair, MR qualified this by saying that the selection was OK for HIS purposes.
no the flash master on D300s was NOT a misfire... it was a MISFIRE for canon to EXCLUDE it from the 5DmkII which was released ONE YEAR after D300.
Canon is so darn reactionary & stagnant it's PATHETIC.
thw2 wrote:
So, flash master on the D300s was a misfire? Bird photographers welcome the 1.6x crop and high fps.
The 50D had poor sales.
If the 7D is priced a lot more than the D300s, then I agree it's a total misfire. There's a big market of Canon shooters out there waiting for a camera like the D300s. I'm sure they are not willing to pay that kind of dough for the 7D.
Glen_C wrote:
no the flash master on D300s was NOT a misfire... it was a MISFIRE for canon to EXCLUDE it from the 5DmkII which was released ONE YEAR after D300.
Canon is so darn reactionary & stagnant it's PATHETIC.
Was it really a "misfire" to omit flash master capabilities in the 5DmkII (a body without on board flash capabilities and clearly geared towards landscape shooters) or is it just ensuring that Canon gets additional revenue on ST-E2 sales from those people that actually use it. Can you give us any numbers on how excluding master flash capabilities from the Canon 5DmkII hurt Canon's revenue? So you call releasing a prosumer camera with an almost identical FF sensor to the 1Ds flaggship at 1/3rd the price - best in class at time of release by a wide margin - pathetic and stagnant?
I'm far from being a Canon fanboy but pardon me if I can't seem to follow your perception or opinion.
timbop wrote:
Do you mean the camera's built-in as master? Yes, it would have been nice but since I have the st-e2 now, it's no biggie for me personally
I should probably mention that the MT-24EX also cost around the same as a 580EXII + ST-E2.
michael49 wrote:
I find it interesting that so many here seem to persistently claim that a FF camera like this couldn't be offered at this price because of the sensor cost, but here it is.
Agree.
But look at the specs. I'm very curious - is this really what the 'affordable FF' crowd is hoping/wishing for?
I mean a small (plastic?) FF body with 3 fps ?
George.ML wrote:
Agree.
But look at the specs. I'm very curious - is this really what the 'affordable FF' crowd is hoping/wishing for?
I mean a small (plastic?) FF body with 3 fps ?
There are going to be some tough tradeoffs if people are expecting a FF body from Canon at or under 2K. Just look at the 5DII--great sensor, great size, not so great AF. Again offering a lot in one department and completely limiting another. FWIW I can't see Canon releasing another line of FF bodies, specifically a cheaper line and if they do you can bet it will be underwhelming.
I feel the 5D will remain Canon's entry level full frame offer. They will just keep lowering the price to keep it competitive, I am sure there is currently a huge margin for Canon in the 5dmk2.
As always Canon do 'just enough' with their cameras.
No doubt if the 1dMk4 remains at APS-H format it will be more to do with protecting the 1Ds full frame cash cow than satisfying customer demand.
Canon could knock out a $2000 Full frame camera with excellent AF, 5fps, video, etc right now if it needed too. But it doesn't so it won't.
Well done Sony for keeping the market competitive.
