Lotusm50 wrote:
Highly unlikely. It is probably just an inexpensive lens produced by either ex-Minolta or Tamron for Sony. It is most-likely not a "great' lens, but an "adequate" one, given its 250 euro (VAT inclusive) price.
If the price comes to 220-230 euro, it may not be F1.8 but still cheaper than any 85mm AF prime solution regardless the brand. It is also light and compact. It certainly isn't very fast aperture and focusing design. But lets wait and see how it performs, primarily wide open and as they say 'center to corner'.
no idea but i would be surprised if they were much different from each other since the medium format market is shrinking. Hasselblad has the higher end of the market and Mamiya the lower end. Hasselblad has the slightly higher brand power. i don't know how that plays out except that this chart implies that Hasselblad's total sales are less.
here are similar but differently referenced figures from Macquarrie. they are calendar year numbers and so don't match the JPM numbers except possibly for Canon. also, the rounding appears to be different. the relative rankings and the trends are the same though. Panasonic is the fastest growing DSLR manufacturer, Sony isn't making its predicted 20% market share when they bought Konica Minolta and isn't likely to, and Nikon has lost market share vs. Canon. just before the takeover, Pentax had once forecast that they would take 10% market share as the reason why they could go it alone and the market collectively disbelieved them. the market was right. there is no indication that they will even hold their current market share and every indication that Panasonic will pass them to become the world's 5th largest DSLR manufacturer by unit sales in the next year. as a side note, the Macquarrie report reiterates my point, that BCN market shares apply only to Japan and have historically not translated to the rest of the world.
Its great to have a handle on whats happened brand versus brand in past 3 years.
HerbChong wrote:
no idea but i would be surprised if they were much different from each other since the medium format market is shrinking. Hasselblad has the higher end of the market and Mamiya the lower end. Hasselblad has the slightly higher brand power. i don't know how that plays out except that this chart implies that Hasselblad's total sales are less.
here are similar but differently referenced figures from Macquarrie. they are calendar year numbers and so don't match the JPM numbers except possibly for Canon. also, the rounding appears to be different. the relative rankings and the trends are the same though. Panasonic is the fastest growing DSLR manufacturer, Sony isn't making its predicted 20% market share when they bought Konica Minolta and isn't likely to, and Nikon has lost market share vs. Canon. just before the takeover, Pentax had once forecast that they would take 10% market share as the reason why they could go it alone and the market collectively disbelieved them. the market was right. there is no indication that they will even hold their current market share and every indication that Panasonic will pass them to become the world's 5th largest DSLR manufacturer by unit sales in the next year. as a side note, the Macquarrie report reiterates my point, that BCN market shares apply only to Japan and have historically not translated to the rest of the world.
sebboh wrote:
unfortunately, the argument thom makes, that i've heard from numerous people before, is that the cost to make FF sensors will never undergo the order of magnitude drop that is necessary to reach the price point that allows it to be placed in low end dslrs. the cost of producing such a big chunk of silicon is not dropping at anywhere near the rate of the cost of producing pieces of silicon that are not required to be a fixed size.
If that were the case, then MFD cameras wouldn't be as cheap as they are now, they'd be the same price or more, right? So the cost of sensor production must be going down. Or the fail rate must be going down, thus overall production goes up.
adamdewilde wrote:
If that were the case, then MFD cameras wouldn't be as cheap as they are now, they'd be the same price or more, right? So the cost of sensor production must be going down. Or the fail rate must be going down, thus overall production goes up.
no, inability to get around the problem of needing to produce a giant piece of silicon does not imply that prices won't drop. once sunk costs and development costs are recovered the prices are often dropped and any manufacturing process has room for increases in efficiency. it is just that main source of decreased costs in other electronic parts (miniaturization) cannot be used over the most important part of the product. moore's law does not help sensor design much, and has a decreasing effect as sensor size goes up.
Thom added more today to his blog. I didn't know that the 24MP sensor Sony makes for Nikon D3x is the only one they make for Nikon. I thought they made more for Nikon. He also thinks there will not be a D700X with the Sony sensor and no D4x with some new higher pixel count FF sensor. Just a new 18MP high-iso performance sensor for the D4. Hard to believe Sony is one and done with their FF sensor and that Nikon is not going to compete with Canon on the next round of highest MP count FF DSLR's with some D4x.
Sony had a bad 2009 and was shaping up for a worse 2010 until the NEX's launched. Pentax did badly in 2007-2008 but sales strengthened starting in mid-2008 with the K-m and continuing through 2009, especially after the K-x hit the market. The K-x has been a massive success for Pentax and came right at the same time that it was becoming obvious that Sony's second-generation A2x0/A3x0 series were a spectacular flop.
Unfortunately it's hard to find hard numbers for outside of Japan. What I've run across indicates that North American rankings are similar to Japan overall, but with Sony having done better in 2007-2008, in particular due to the success of the A700 and the first generation of A2x0/A3x0 bodies....Show more →
Sony are adamant they will replace the much liked A700 and they need to do so sooner rather than later. The current offerings in APS-C are mediocre on the whole and they have dropped the ball.
The fact the D300 and D700 are now getting close to 3 years old and not even a peep of replacements, other than wild speculation could mean Sony is the one holding things up. If Sony and Nikon split on sensors, can Nikon develop a FF and APS-C replacement and can they get them out soon? A one stage Nikon were touting LBCAST big time, but it was a one off and only 4MP. Would they revive this.
Did Thom have any comments about Nikon's plans for life without Sony. I always assumed eventually Sony would want to compete more seriously against Nikon and would not give them their best tech indefinitely. Early on when Sony was establishing itself it makes sense it sell as many sensors as you can, but when you have products directly competing, it makes little sense IMO.
Anyway it seems strange they would drop FF when they go to the trouble of releasing 2 FF lenses.
Added: Oh I had forgotten Nikon did the D700, D3 sensor, Sony only did the D3x sensor.
Given Nikon's statement a few months ago new cameras would tread a middle path between noise and resolution, then Thom's statement about a future D4 being 18MP makes entire sense. However, with it almost certain Canon will release a 30-32MP 1Ds IV, Nikon will cede the top market again as they will have no D3x replacement, and Canon will have no competition and surely this means a $9K price tag. Still a lot cheaper than MF (well maybe not the new Pentax)
