Got a tip for us?
Let us know
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
Who wants a Sony 25 megapixel DSLR?
- Thread starter iSamurai
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
Its the chicken and the egg situation.
Nobody is going to buy Sony cameras unless they produce a good camera worth buying, but Sony are not going to make said camera if nobody buys them.
So by dissuading people from buying Sony because other people question their commitment will only make Sony realise that their cameras are not selling, thus canceling their efforts and prove to those that their heart wasn't really in making cameras.
I however hope they continue to push out more cameras, show they are willing to enter the market and stay in it so that it keeps the pressure up on the big 2.
Nobody is going to buy Sony cameras unless they produce a good camera worth buying, but Sony are not going to make said camera if nobody buys them.
So by dissuading people from buying Sony because other people question their commitment will only make Sony realise that their cameras are not selling, thus canceling their efforts and prove to those that their heart wasn't really in making cameras.
I however hope they continue to push out more cameras, show they are willing to enter the market and stay in it so that it keeps the pressure up on the big 2.
Is that likely though or just a dream request? I don't know much about the Nikon lens mount being used by other companies other than with Fuji.
When Kodak made DSLRs they were Nikon mount and there was also Canon mount.
My DSLR is a 14MP FF Kodak I bought used not long ago because I never wanted crop.
Kodak made their camera with a Nikon mount. If Sony used a Nikon or Canon mount (that ain't gonna happen), it would probably help sales of their dSLRs (which is why it ain't gonna happen).
Bottom line, though...there's nothing special about the Nikon mount. It's no better than than Canon's, and even no better than Pentax.
Kodak DSLRs use the Nikon mount. Kodak was one of the first companies to make a DSLR. THey beat both Nikon and Canon .
It is very common to use a Nikon 35mm manual focus lens for 35mm motion picture work. 35mm movie film uses the APS-C (or DX) frame size just like digital because the movie film travels vertically.
Why not just standardize on the Nikon mount? Wouldn't it be great if there was only one lens mount.
Way back when SLRs first started the camera makers did not make lenses. I have a German made Exacta SLR. built in the 1950s It predates any of the Japanese SLRs. Back then you bought a camera from Exacta or Contax or voitlandr and then went to Carl Ziess, some other company for optics. My Exacta has a Ziess "biotar" 50mm f/1.8 lens.
The mount to sensor/film distance isn't as optimal as Canons (which is why you can adapt Nikkors to go on a Canon but not visa versa. The whole generic mount thing was tried (T-mount) in the past and failed. What impetus do Canon and Nikon have to do it? They lose customer lock-in, and the small-percentage market share companies all gain share. Between them, Nikon and Canon have about 85-90% of the market locked up, and there are 3-4 companies fighting over what's left- their shareholders would kill the boards that allowed that to happen.
I was just looking through some ads for Medium Format digital cameras.
22 Megapixel seems to be where they are .... and around $10,000 ( for the one I saw )
I'd give my first born for one of those ... but was told he is too old!
Mamiya ZD and ZD Digital Back ( 22 Megapixel ) were announced in 2004, so really a 20+ Megapixel Camera shouldn't be big news anymore.
http://www.dpreview.com/news/0409/04092902mamiya_zd.asp#specs
I for one can see a need for massive pixel count.
22 Megapixel seems to be where they are .... and around $10,000 ( for the one I saw )
I'd give my first born for one of those ... but was told he is too old!
Mamiya ZD and ZD Digital Back ( 22 Megapixel ) were announced in 2004, so really a 20+ Megapixel Camera shouldn't be big news anymore.
http://www.dpreview.com/news/0409/04092902mamiya_zd.asp#specs
I for one can see a need for massive pixel count.
The 25 MP will do nothing but clog your hard drive with huge files. RAW files fom the Nikon D300 @12MP are piggy enough.
If they really want to make use of those 25MP, Sony should market an affordable medium format rangefinder, like a digital Mamiya 6.
If they really want to make use of those 25MP, Sony should market an affordable medium format rangefinder, like a digital Mamiya 6.
I suppose you would, as long as the vast majority of the camera buying public was also buying a Sony DSLR
Seriously, your responses are some of the lamest I've heard regarding the topic! Not trying to start a fight, it's just an observation.
SLC
Why is that, because we all still have 100mb Hard drives or something?
Aren't you contradicting what you said in the first quote? It sounds like 25mp will do nothing but clog up our drives but won't if they made a medium format version, you're not making any sense. Do you know how expensive it would be to make such a sensor at MF size (take a clue from Phase One or Hassleblad)? People are already assuming this SLR is going to cost a bomb as it is.
I suppose you would, as long as the vast majority of the camera buying public was also buying a Sony DSLR
Seriously, your responses are some of the lamest I've heard regarding the topic! Not trying to start a fight, it's just an observation.
SLC
My, my. I'm sorry I can't bring myself to like the Pentax "system" more. No doubt it would eliminate your insults.
I don't want to start an argument, but SLC Flyfishing does have a bit of a point. Your post is so full of misinformation that I was going to post a reply to it, but thought others would probably do it.
First off, Sony is known for good cameras, the A-100 got good reviews when it came out, the A700 got even better reviews than the A100, Canon and Nikon have made some stinker cameras in the past too you know! Sony P&S cameras are arguably the best out there (at least for many users) and before anyone jumps on me for saying that, I know that P&S cameras have very little to do with DSLR's, but Sony knows how to make a good product. They've got full access to Minolta's tech, which by the way was nothing to sneeze at. In the 35 mm days Minolta were a very strong contender in the market and I'd wager that their system was as useful and certainly as complete as any. They've got a nice selection of pro quality glass and now so does Sony (G series) and the financial resources to do basically anything they want! Someone on here was moaning that Sony is an electronics company and not a camera company, well so is Canon. Also, digital SLR's are almost entirely electronics devices, the sensors and AF system etc are just the type of thing that Sony will excel at. Sony is one of the best electronics companies out there, and they have the backing of Zeiss on their lenses, that's a formidable combination if you ask me!
So while you are correct in saying that they need to prove themselves in the camera market (as far as DSLR's are concerned anyway), I have a feeling that this new line of cameras is how they intend to do so.
Just what are the criteria that you have for a company to "Prove themselves" in the camera market anyway, do they have to sell more than Canon? That may happen one day, but the installed base of professionals right now is heavily invested in Canon and Nikon so that will take years to do, let's not discount them after only 2. I for one am glad to see another company aiming directly at the top end of the Canon/Nikon monopoly! It's better for everyone involved in the end, unless you hold stock in one of the big two. For the rest of us, it means that now Pentax will see the need to follow suit, and Canon and Nikon will have to step up their game a bit just to stay ahead. How can that be seen as anything but a win win situation?
And for the record (someone mentioned that Sony's build quality stunk), the Sony A700 is built just as well as the Canon 40D or the Nikon D300, the A100 felt just as flimsy as a Canon Digi-Rebel in my mitts! Maybe a little less sturdy than a Nikon D40. I suspect that this new FF camera will be just as sturdy (and heavy) as a Canon 1D camera or the Nikon D3.
SLC
I've always felt that they are the best, not because I think everything by Sony is the best, just because they had the features I actually use, and they took great photographs for what they are.
For the record, I'm a Nintendo guy when it comes to video game systems and haven't owned a Sony Playstation since the first one came out and it was the only system with Grand Turismo. I'm an Apple guy when it comes to computers. I'm a pioneer guy with respect to TV's. And I'm a Pentax guy with respect to cameras. In fact I don't think I have any Sony products under my roof except for a video camcorder that was given to me as a wedding gift.
But I do respect them, they make some great stuff and there's no denying that. Who makes a better P&S camera anyway, why am I dreaming in saying that?
SLC