No Sony SLRs any more, ever.

Started Sep 13, 2012 | Discussions thread
Piginho
Regular MemberPosts: 305
Like?
Re: No Sony SLRs - they might want to reconsider...
In reply to TrojMacReady, Sep 14, 2012

TrojMacReady wrote:

Piginho wrote:

TrojMacReady wrote:

They have stated so in interviews. And it's a fact that the mirrorbox and large prisms (as found above entry level) are some of the if not the most expensive parts in these cameras. Very labor intensive, as is the critical alignment of these parts. Also, the SLT's don't require metering sensors since that's done directly off the main sensor as well.

So because Sony have stated so in interviews, that makes it true?

You can think they lied and use the tinfoil hats while coming up with other theories (it's by far the most plausible one to me as well).

I'm not familiar with the tinfoil hats expression, maybe because I'm in the UK, or maybe I've lead a sheltered life. Anyway, it's not beyond the realms of possibility that a manufacturer would either lie, or exaggerate, surely.

More likely they're are trying to drive the market in this direction as they clearly have a lead and their competitors aren't really in the game yet, hoping to steal some market share.

They're not really in a position to drive the market with market shares nowhere near the big 2 apart, let alone combined. Theyt are however in a position to differentiate by combining some of its core strengths.

Maybe I should have said pull, or draw the market then. BTW, do we have any definitive info on market share of the main manufacturers? I would agree about differentiation also, but with the caveat that SLT/EVF is not necessarily a core strength. If CaNikon have such a large market share with OVF, we could just as easily conclude that this aspect of differentiation is a weakness.

To a point I would agree with you about costs of prisms, mirror box etc., however, you imply that the set up is labour intensive. I would suggest that with the manufacturing tolerances that Sony have proven themselves capable of (I mean, 24Mp on an APS sensor!) this doesn't need to be labour intensive.

24MP on an APS-C sensor is nothing special, just look at the 1 inch sensor with a density that's the equivalent of about 65MP on APS-C, not to mention compact sensors with double that density still. That's mostly machine work, from what I've seen classic DSLR's in these classes still have a lot of hand work to them and that's also what I referred to with labour intensive.

The point that I was making is that Sony know how to make things with very, very tight tolerances, thus reducing the level of hand built skill required. All you have done by mentioning even higher sensor densities, is to enhance my point. If components are manufactured to tight enough tolerances, you merely assemble the components with little need for adjustment. BTW, when were you last in a Sony DSLR/DSLT factory?

How much glass is there in a prism, compared to an entry level kit zoom lens? Again, prisms don't have to be that expensive. Also a prism is a lot simpler than a 16 element cheap kit zoom!

Apples and oranges.

It's easier to manufacture a nail than a screw, but both can be made of the same material and use the same amount. You could also say apples and oranges about this, but it doesn't take a genius to know that it's a lot cheaper to make nails than screws.

Sorry, call me a cynic, but Sony are trying to hype up SLT/EVF, because they think that they will benefit in the long run. The irony to me, is that it may just work, because the vast majority of the consumer market will probably take to this technology, especially if it allows some bells and whistles that they don't get elsewhere.

Most of you on here thinks it's the best thing since sliced bread! Well give me a nice thick slice of freshly baked bread, with decent butter any day.

Most see the benefits for them. And you're free to follow your own preferences, wherever they lead you.

if you'd read all of my posts in this thread, particularly my first one, you'd know that I see the benefits of EVF. It's just that for me they don't outweigh the drawbacks. I say again, each to his own. I don't believe that people who prefer OVF to EVF should be spoken down to by people who think that they've seen the light.

What's more, even if in Sonyworld, EVF is becoming predominant, mostly due to bloody-mindedness by Sony IMHO, in the world at large OVF is still king and the assertion of most EVF fans that have posted here, that CaNikon will also have to follow this route and that all cameras will end up EVF, has no basis in fact. Of course, time will tell, but I don't believe that this is in any way analogous to the film/digital situation. It was inevitable that film would at some point be overtaken by digital. The same cannot be said for EVF over OVF.

Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
Post (hide subjects)Posted by
Keyboard shortcuts:
FForum PPrevious NNext WNext unread UUpvote SSubscribe RReply QQuote BBookmark post MMy threads
Color scheme? Blue / Yellow